titel van de presentatie - hanze€¦ · innovatieve energie concepten (iec’s) r.a. alberts...

ERIC 2013 19 September Ramon A. Alberts MSc [email protected]

Carbon Footprint reduction potential Innovative Energy concepts Historical Buildings

PROJECT ENERGETIC RESTORATION

19-09-2013 /ERIC 2013 / Research ER-IEC/ Ir. R.A.Alberts/ 2

• Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen

• Hanze Research Centre NoorderRuimte

• Theme Sustainable Building

• SIA RAAK MKB Project

• North of the Netherlands

• 2 years of research

• 4 themes : 5 colleagues

• > 40 participating enterprises, owners and governmental organisations

• > 50 participating students

• > 25 case study projects

• Ramon Alberts

• Researcher/teacher

• EDGAR/CO2-impurities

K-F.I.T Beslis Computer Model

• Karakter

Cultuur historische waarde; Architectuur- en Kunsthistorische waarde; Situationele en Ensemblewaarde; Gaafheid en Herkenbaarheid, en; Zeldzaamheid

• Functie Type; Functie en; Gebruik

• Ingreep Toelichting?

• Type Afmetingen; Constructie; en Extra (bv lambriseringen, orgel e.d.)

Resultaat: in termen van energiewinsten


Presentation Content

• Research question • Research set up ETR-IEC • Research Methodology • Case study building RUG Groningen • Case study building Justice Leeuwarden • Results

Research Question ER-IEC

• What is the Energy- and CO2-emission reduction

potential of Innovative Energy Concepts in Historical

Buildings and how can this potential be shown to the

stakeholders, like architects, owners, users and third

parties of Historical Buildings?


Research Setup ER-IEC

19-09-2013 /International Final Conference Energetic Restoration/

/ Research ER-IEC/ Ir. R.A.Alberts/ 5

Research ER

Case Studies

T. v.d. Schoor

HG-Research

Energy

Characteristics

B. Boschma

Sustainable Project

Management

M.C. Vieveen

Companies

-Deerns

-Degin

-Rijksgebouwendienst

-RUG

-Urban climate Architects

-Van Ruysdaal Glas

-Bomar

-Grontmij

-Heymans Servicebouw

Research Question

Innovatieve Energie Concepten (IEC’s)

R.A. Alberts

Results

-Reports

-Data

-Graph’s

-Conclusions

IEC’s

-Trias Energetica 1

-Trias Energetica 2

-Trias Energetica 3

Building Simulation

Software

-Vabi-Elements

-H.E.N.K.

Casestudy Buildings

-RUG, Groningen

-PvJ, Leeuwarden

-Villa Schouwenburg

-Villa Zeist

Students

-L. Claassens

-J.A.P. Schamper

-E.A. van Veen

• Energy data aquisition per Historical Building

• Modeling the Historical Building in Building Simulation Software ( BSS) to determine the Status Quo energy consumption

• Modeling many Innovative Energy Concepts (IEC’s), according to the Trias Energetica to determine the Energy Consumption per separate IEC

• Modeling combinations of IEC’s in the BSS to determine:

1. Scenario A: Pay Back Time < Technical Life Time; Minimum CO2-emission reduction

2. Scenario B: Pay Back Time ≈ Technical Life Time; Medium CO2-emission reduction

3. Scenario C: Pay Back Time > Technical Life Time; Maximum CO2-emission reduction

• Modeling the scenario’s in the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, listed in the Dutch MJA3-regulations to determine the Carbon Footprint reduction potential of existing IEC’s in Historical Buildings


Research Methodology Ramon Alberts

Trias Energetica 1( Reduction of Energy Use):

• Wall-, Roof-, Ground-isolation; 70-100-150 [mm] PUR/ Rockwool

• Window: Single-/ Double glazing, Foil, HR+/++/+++

• Sun protection systems, Shutters

Trias Energetica 2( Production of Sustainable Energy):

• Solar: PV, BIPV, Solar collectors

• HP(Heat Pump): Air-Air, Air-Water, Water-Water, Gas Absorbtion

• CHP( Combined Heat Power)

• Wood Pellet CH( Central Heating)

Trias Energetica 3( More efficiënt use of Fossil Energy):

• Floor Heating

• Cooling/ Fan coil units/ Condensor

• Zone HVAC(Heating, Ventilation and Cooling)

• Lighting: HF-TL, Led

• Domotica: Area-, Presence- and Condition- Control


Innovative energy Concepts

Case Study Building RUG/ Groningen

• RUG- State University Groningen; Faculty of Literature; Boteringenstraat 23-25; Groningen; Previous

House with the 13 Temples; Rebuild in 1710; Rococo embellishments 1756; Restoration 1964


Case Study Building RUG/ Groningen

• Building geometry model of the RUG-building in Vabi-Elements


RUG Faculty of Literature

Utilities Energy use (E) Primary Energy use (Epri)

CH4 = 26.959[m3/y] 855 (83%) [GJ/y] 1082 (65%) [GJ/y]

Elek. = 49.240 [kWh/y] 177 (17%) [GJ/y] 585 (35%) [GJ/y]

H2O = 219 [m3/y] - -

Total Energy 1.032 (100%) [GJ/y] 1.667 (162%) [GJ/y]

Total Energy/ m2 (GFA) 510 (100%) [MJ/m2.y] 824(162%) [MJ/y.m2 (GFA)]

Total CO2/ m2( GFA) 39 (100%) KG(CO2)/m2(GFA)

GFA=Gross Floor Area = 2.022 [m2]; NFA=Net Floor Area = 1.484 [m2]; 1 [kWh] = 3,6 [MJ] => 11,9( factor 3,3) [MJ(pri.)]

1 [m3 CH4] = 31,7 [MJ] => 44,5( factor 1,3) [MJ(pri.)


Status Quo RUG-building Ramon Alberts

Trias Energetica reduction unit Percentage

1.1-Wall-isolation CH4 = -6.740 [m3/j] (-25%) gas year total

1.2-Roof-isolation CH4 = -1.500 [m3/j] (-5,5%) gas year total

1.3-Window-isolation CH4 = -3.000 [m3/j] (-11%) gas year total

1-Totaal (TE-1) CH4 = -11.240 [m3/j] (-38%) gas year total

1-Reduction (TE-1) ∆E(pri.) = -383 [GJ(pri)/y] (-23%) E(pri. tot)/y

2.1-CH( wood pellets) E(p) = -428 [GJ(pri)/y] (-25%) E(pri. tot)/y

2.2-PV-roof E(PV) = -160 [GJ(pri)/y] (-10%) E(pri. tot)/y

2-Reduction (TE-2) ∆E(pri.) = -588 [GJ(pri)/y] (-35%) E(pri. tot)/y

Tot. Result (TE) ∆E(pri.)= -971 [GJ(pri)/y] (-58%) E(pri. tot)


IEC’s for RUG-building Ramon Alberts


Simulation results RUG/IEC’s Ramon Alberts

Description Entity Unit Reduction

1-Tot Energie Reduction ∆E(pri.) = -971 GJ(pri.)/y (-58%) E(pri.t)/y

2-Remaining Pri. Fossil Energy E(pri.) = 696 GJ(pri.)/y (42%) E(pri.t)/y

3-Remaining Pri. Fossil Energy per m2 (BFA)

E(pri) = 344 E(pri) = 104

MJ(pri)/m2.y kWh(pri)/m2.y

(33%) E(pri.t)/y.m2(BFA)

4-Carbon Footprint CO2(fossil)=10 Kg(CO2)/y.m2(GFA)

(26 %)

4-After Energetic Restoration the building complies till 2030 with the Dutch MJA3- regulations

5-Heritage values are hardly compromised

6-User comfort rises

7-IEC’s Investment Pay Back Times are within the Technical Life Times of the IEC’s

Case Study Building Justice/Leeuwarden

• Palace of Justice; Wilhelminaplein 1; Leeuwarden; Design City architect Thomas Romein; Neo-

Greece Style; Build from 1846-1852; Renovated in 2013.



• Building geometry model of the Palace of Justice in Vabi-Elements


Energy data Building of Justice

.


Building model

Primairy Electricity use

Primairy Gas use

Total primairy Energy use

Total primairy CO2-emissie

[-]

MJ (fossil)/y MJ (fossil)/y MJ (fossil)/y kg Co2 (fossil)/y

History 2011 Energy Data

2.737.130 (42%)

3.846.392 (58%)

6.583.522 (100%)

312.752

First Model 2.547.379

(49%) 2.688.608

(51%) 5.235.987

(100%) 239.141

Model without cooling

2.849.998 (43%)

3.723.526 (57%)

6.573.525 (100%)

305.973

Default model with cooling

5.593.972 (59%)

3.932.589 (41%)

9.526.561 (100%)

419.276

Building simulation of IEC’s Palace of Justice


Energy

production

plus cooling

Primairy

Electricity

use

Primairy

Gas

use

Primairy

Wood pellet

use

Total primairy

Energie

use

Totale

primaire CO2-

emission

[-]

MJ (fossil)/y MJ (fossil)/y MJ (fossil)/y MJ (fossil)/y in kg CO2

(fossil)/y

CH-unit

5.358.931

(58%) 3.932.589

(42%) 0 (0%)

9.291.520

(100%) 410.532

Air-water HP

5.590.176

(92%) 4.473.382 (8%) 0 (0%)

6.063.558

(100%) 233.375

Water-water HP

4.785.561

(99%) 41.205 (1%) 0 (0%)

4.826.767

(100%) 180.236

Gasabsorption

HP

3.351.579

(55%) 2.782.824

(45%) 0 (0%)

6.134.403

(100%) 274.116

CHP-unit

1.319.570

(20%) 7.928.807

(80%) 0 (0%)

6.609.236

(100%) 474.865

Wood pellet CH

5.358.931

(93%) 0 (0%) 432.585 (7%)

5.791.516

(100%) 203.505

• .

Scenario simulation Palace of Justice

.


Vabi-Elements Simulation results of Scenario’s in Palace of Justice

Primairy Electricity use

Primairy Gas- Wood pellet use

Total Primairy Energy use

Total primairy CO2-emission (Carbon Footprint of IEC’s)

units MJ (fossil)/m² (GFA)•Y

MJ (fossil)/m² (GFA)•Y

MJ (fossil)/m² (GFA)•Y

kg CO2 (fossil)/m² (GFA)•Y

History 2011 563,4 (49%) 791,8 (98%) 1355,2 (69%) 64,4( 75%)

Default model 1151,5 (100%) 809,5 (100%) 1961,0 (100%) 86,3(100%)

Scenario A 374,7 (33%) 102,7 (13%) 477,4 (24%)

23,1(27%)

Scenario B -45,7 (-4%) 91,1 (11%) 45,4 (2,3%)

6,3(7,3%)

Scenario C -60,6 (-5%) 91,1 (11%) 30,5 (1,6%)

5,7(6.6%)

GFA=Gross Floor Area = 4558[m2]; NFA=Net Floor Area = 3897[m2]; 1 [kWh] = 3,6 [MJ] => 11,9( factor 3,3) [MJ(pri.)]

1 [m3 CH4] = 31,7 – 35,2[MJ] => 44,5( factor 1,3) [MJ(pri.)

Wood pellets[kg] => 18 [MJ (pri.)]( with:1,98{( 11%)MJ] Fossil Energy and 16,02( 89%)[MJ] Renewable Energy

Scenario simulation Palace of Justice

.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

En

erg

y U

se F

oss

iel,

Su

sta

inab

le [

%E

(19

90)]

Jaar [-]

Kyoto Protocol: Dutch MJA3-regulation

2005: - 15%

CO2-emission

1990: reference

100%

CO2-emission

2020: - 45%

CO2-emission

2030: -65%

CO2-emission

2050: 100%

CO2-emission!

Fossil Energy reduction

Fossil CO2 reduction

Sustainable Energy production


MJA3: Scenario A



MJA3: Scenario B


• Red- Primary Fossil Energy

• Green- Sustainable Energy

• Black- Fossil CO2-emission


MJA3: Scenario C


Results ER-IEC

. Building Fossil Energy Primary Energy CO2-emission

[MJ/m2(GFA).y] [MJ(pri)/m2(GFA).y] Kg(CO2)/m2(GFA).y

RUG

Status Quo 510(100%) 824(100%) 39(100%)

Scenario B 165(33%) 344(42%) 10(26%)

Pal. Justice

Status Quo 970(100%) 1961(100%) 86(100%)

Scenario A 194(20%) 477(24%) 23(27%)

Scenario B 26(3%) 45(2%) 6,3(7,3%)

Scenario C 10(1%) 31(2%) 5,7(6,6%)


Thank You for your attention Any questions?

titel van de presentatie - hanze€¦ · innovatieve energie concepten (iec’s) r.a. alberts...

Documents