Part L 2017, turning 40 years of building energy conservation on its head. Marc Ó Riain, NZEB Retrofit Researcher April 2016

Transcription

1 Part L 2017, turning 40 years of building energy conservation on its head Marc Ó Riain, NZEB Retrofit Researcher April 2016

2 Part L 2017, turning 40 years of building energy conservation on its head 1973 OIL CRISIS 1975 FIRST ZERO ENERGY BUILDING 1988 PASSIVE HOUSE 1997 KYOTO PROTOCOL AGREED % OF ALL NEW BUILDS A-RATED DRAFT IRISH BUIILDING REGULATIONS STATUATORY BUILDING REGULAITONS CURRENT NON- DOMESTIC BLDG REGS REVISED BUILDING REGULAITONS FOR NZEB PAGE 2

3 ST Oil Crisis 51 per barrel per barrel 1974 International Energy Agency forms 1975 The worlds First Zero Energy House in Copenhagen 1976 Lo-cal House Illinois, USA Super-Insulation U-Values (W / m 2 K) Roof 0.17 Walls 0.03 Floor 0.07 Windows 0.37 ACH 1 Saskatchewan Conservation House, Canada HRV, Triple glazing U-Values (W / m 2 K) Roof 0.02 Walls Floor 0.05 Windows 0.37 ACH PRINCTON HOUSE DOCTORS DISCOVERY OF THERMAL BRIDGING TWIN RIVERS RETROFITS 86% home heating efficiency using: insulation air tightness ND Oil Crisis $117 per barrel THATCHER REAGAN Project Independence North Sea and Alaska Oil Exploration $25 per barrel 1986 CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR DISASTER 1997 KYOTO PROTOCOL SIGNED 2002 EU Energy Performance Directive 2008 Financial Crisis $150 per barrel 2010 EU Energy Performance Directive Recast 2012 NZEB Cost Optimal defined 2015 COP 21 Aggreement signed % OFF target Ireland Planning & Development Act, K Irish Attic Insulation Grants 44K Irish Attic Insulation Grants Irish Statutory Building Regulations k Better energy home grants 2006 Building Energy Ratings 2007 Building Energy Ratings k Warmer home grants 2011 IRISH Cost Optimal NZEB Calculations 2013 RETROFIT Grants collapse by 90% 2016 Irish draft building regulations 1976, Minor revision to retrofit standards, U-Values (W / m 2 K) Roof 0.40 Walls 0.60 Floor 0.60 U-Values (W / m 2 K) Roof 0.35 Walls 0.60 Floor PAGE 3

4 PAGE 4

5 We are where we are! The scope for GHG emission abatement through retrofit 1% New Building Stock annually 99% Existing Building Stock Paulou, J. et al., Financing the energy renova9on of buildings with Cohesion Policy funding., p.102. PAGE 5

6 PAGE 6

7 We are where we are! A trebling of Energy conservation policy is needed (2010) ECOFYS & Fraunhofer (2010) PAGE 7

8 THE SEAI have also said: 50% of all new dwellings are A-rated btween The transposition of EPD 2010 (recast) ushered in improved mandatory building energy regulations for new buildings (Part L2011), leading to the construction of A- rated homes as a standard. These standards increased building complexity, moving architectural practice away from backstop elemental values and overall heat loss methods. Central Sta9s9cs Office, Quarter 4 the busiest quarter for Building Energy Ra8ng assessments in 2015, Cork. PAGE 8

9 Well, in the context of A collapse of incentives in Home Energy Grants. 100,000 Wow! we did great here, lets do it again! 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 10, Better Energy Warmer Homes Scheme grants collated statistics (SEAI 2016). PAGE 9

10 THE SEAI have also said: A trebling of Energy conservation policy is needed (2016) SEAI, Ireland s Energy Targets, Dublin. PAGE 10

11 Is future retrofit policy likely to achieve these targets?

12 There is a massive gap! The number of homes and businesses being upgraded for improved energy efficiency needs to treble SEAI 2016 Building Energy Improvements represent more than 50% of total savings requriements

13 External demand is falling Collapsed Oil Prices PAGE 13

14 Yet inefficiencies exist Mitigating energy production distribution losses is one way to reduce emissions PAGE 14

15 The policy Gap Regulated Energy versus Unregulated energy Energy Performance Directive Product Energy Labelling Directive PAGE 15

16 Yet inefficiencies exist Reducing building energy demand and fabric transmission losses is another way to reduce emissions PAGE 16

17 We need to learn lessons So what is best practice? PAGE 17

18 1 st Zero Energy v House 1974 Two super- insulated air9ght buildings with insulated roof (0.14 W/m 2 K), walls (0.10 W/m 2 K) shaded double glazed windows (3.1 W/m 2 K) glazed atrium. PAGE 18

19 G e r m a n - I r i s h P a s s i v e H o u s e a n d E n e r g y E ff i c i e n t B u i l d i n g s C o n f e r e n c e Developing Zero energy Housing Low Cal House v 1976 Super- insulated Double Wall Op9mised window openings on the south face 0.82 Overhangs Shading factor, maximising solar radia9on gain in winter 1 ACH PAGE 19

20 Saskatchewan Conservation v House 1977 double- wall construc9on R40 walls, R60 azc, triple glazed windows windows with shu[ers, no basement, a crawl space with R20 in the floor system, and a very 9ght air / vapour barrier PAGE 20

21 This all informed the Passive House Standard Site Renewable Energy Energy Demand Reduction PAGE 21

22 1st Principle of Low energy Buildings REDUCE DEMAND THROUGH CONSERVATION ZERO ENERGY AUGMENT THE BALANCE WITH SITE RENEWABLES PAGE 22

23 Net Present Value Buildings have a lifespan, they age! Therefore the value of capital investment reduces over a period of time. At any point in time, this is the net present value.

24 What is Cost Optimal? EU Cost Optimal Guidelines 2012 Cost Optimal is the lowest cost point of capital investment, plus operational cost, adding in the externalities of carbon emissions, and subtracting the remaining net present capital value at the end of a calculation period. Also, the cost-optimal calculation exercise has to be designed in such a way that differences in air quality and comfort are made transparent. European Parliament, Guidelines accompanying Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 244/2012 of 16 January 2012, Brussels.

25 What is Cost Optimal? Standing Charges: Motor tax: 390. Insurance: 939.Driving Licence: Deprecia9on: 2,501. Interest on capital: 189. Garage/Parking: 4,006. NCT: 18. AA subscrip9on: 149. Total: 8, Opera=ng Costs Petrol: 2,014. Oil: Tyres: 288. Servicing: 352. Repairs: 1,059. Total: 3, That s 11, Besides initial investment costs and running costs, periodic replacement costs are the third cost driver European Parliament, Guidelines accompanying Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 244/2012 of 16 January 2012, Brussels.

26 A New engine just wont do!

27 Replacement Cost This means if a building has a 40 year lifespan, it requires 2 replacements of service solutions (lighting, ASHP, controls, PV), plus the cost of a fabric retrofit

28 Irish Building Regulation comparisons PAGE 28

29 For Ireland Cost Optimal NZEB retrofit recommends EE1 standards (non-domestic) In terms of energy conservation through fabric heat loss, this is the worrst possible standard (of the 4 options) PAGE 29

30 Irish Cost Optimal NZEB retrofit strategies & packages Cost Optmal calculations considered 225 packages for each building (3 fabric options, 3 services options, 5 heating options and 5 PV roof coverage options. For all building retrofits they recommended EE1 and service package 3 PAGE 30

31 Irish Cost Optimal NZEB retrofit for Naturally ventilated buildings For Naturally ventilated offices this means 20% PV, energy efficient lighting with sensor control, no air tightness and no improved theermal bridging PAGE 31

32 Irish Cost Optimal NZEB retrofit for Naturally ventilated buildings PAGE 32

33 Irish Cost Optimal NZEB New Build PAGE 33

34 Irish DEC Ratings Is a naturally ven=lated New office building going to make an A3 ra=ng at 52 KWh/m 2 /yr regulated energy demand? Highly unlikely when plug loads have been shown to represent 50% or an addi=onal 52 KWh/m 2 /yr in low energy buildings. PAGE 34

35 A comparison of Elemental performances PAGE 35

36 PAGE 36

37 Outcomes for Retrofit Irish Cost Optimal Retrofit Calculations : have not valued the whole building have not allowed for replacement of services have not acknowledged the existing building s net present value have not used representative public reference buildings have not made transparent the impact of any package on thermal comfort have only valued the payback of the elements, this biasing towards services retrofits have recommended no improvements to fabric standards in Part L 2017 are likely to change retrofit strategies towards active systems based approaches despite 40 years of best practice.

38 What is the GAP? The UK in contrast have recommended similar standards for retrofit as they have for new build, based on the same EU guidelines. In Ireland the difference between this low intensity regulation and a higher intensity would appear to be 9% Given that all the costs would not appear to be captured or compliant with EU cost optimal guidelines, potentially, like the UK, more intensive regulations may be cost optimal. Why do we care? It will impact market demand for NZEB retrofit and best practice! This impacts our ability to meet GHG targets and avoid fines. We know that services based solutions like ASHP, PV and more efficient lighting will not stop the leaks and we will still be throwing heat energy out though the envelope.

39 Outcomes for New Build Irish Cost Optimal New Build Calculations : are comparable to Part L for Dwellings 2011 recommend ASHP include significant improvements in elemental U values Are generally comparable to the UK recommendations

40 Do Architects think they are ready for NZEB? O Riain, M. Survey of 150 Building Design Professionals in Ireland. PAGE 40

41 Fundamentals Zero Energy Retrofit ÓRiain-Correia/dp/ ?ie=UTF8&keywords=zero %20energy %20retrofit&qid= &ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1 Marc Ó Riain