Marleen Spiekman

Marleen Spiekman

EU ASIEPI REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009

Comparing EP-requirements over Europe

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe2

ASIEPI has received funding from the Community’s Intelligent Energy Europe programme under the contract EIE/07/169/SI2.466278.

The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Communities. Neither the European Commission nor the authors are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

The contribution of CETE de Lyon to the ASIEPI project is funded in part by the French ministry for ecology, energy, sustainable development, and spatial planning (MEEDDAT).

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe3

Comparing requirement levels

: 0,8

: E100

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe4

Just compare kWh/m2! …?

• Differences between Member States:• Climate conditions• Indoor conditions• Building practice• Building use• Assessment method: subsidiarity principle

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe5

IT LOOKS MORE EASY THAN IT IS !!!

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe6

In short: compare the baskets…

Imagine a basket with the typical measures needed to fulfil the national minimum requirements

• For a common reference building

Country ACountry B

??

Comparison:

Not only the types of fruits

But also: if “apple A” is equal to “apple B”

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe7

Pilot studies ASIEPI

• Pilot study 1:• Predefined:

• dimensions (incl. windows) & orientation

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe8

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe9

Results pilot study 1: Some interesting figures:

Member State Floor area [m2] Volume [m3] Loss area [m2]

PL 129 229

NL 129 246

FI 128 248

DK 152 277

CZ 129 349 281

DE 153 480 293

ES 129 295

BE 487 296

FR 123 310

IT 138 314

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe10

Consequence of different measures

• Annual energy use: 75.000 MJ

• France: 123 m2 610 MJ/m2

• Germany: 153 m2 493 MJ/m2

Almost 1/4e

more!

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe11

CB = Condensing boiler NCB = Non-Condensing Boiler DH = District heating

Nat. = natural ventilation Mech. = Mechanical ventilation Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust

Results pilot study 1MS Uaverage Heat.

syst.Cool. syst.

DHW syst.

SolarColl.

Vent. syst.

Heat recov.

DK 0,38 CB CB Nat.

PL 0,50 CB CB Nat.

CZ 0,48 NCB NCB Nat.

ES 0,80 (yes) (yes)

DE 0,55 CB CB yes Ns/Me

BE 0,48 NCB NCB Ns/Me

FR 0,43 NCB NCB Ns/Me

IT 0,66 NCB

FI 0,33 DH DH Mech. 30%

NL 0,41 CB CB Mech. 95%

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe12

Pilot study step 2: preconditions

• Heating & DHW system:• Combined Condensing boiler

• Ventilation system:• Natural supply, mechanical exhaust

• No additional solar collector or PV system

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe13

CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust

Results pilot study 2MS Uaverage Heat.

syst.Cool. syst.

DHW syst.

SolarColl.

Vent. syst.

Heat recov.

DK 0,36 CB CB Ns/Me

PL 0,40 CB CB Ns/Me

CZ 0,48 CB CB Ns/Me

ES 0,80

DE 0.47 CB CB Ns/Me

BE 0,54 CB CB Ns/Me

FR 0,56 CB CB Ns/Me

IT 0,70 CB

FI 0,25 CB CB Ns/Me

NL Not possible

CB CB Ns/Me

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe14

heating demand

heating systems

cooling demand/ summer comfort

Cooling system DHW Fans Lighting

NL yes yes (yes) (yes) yes yes default

FI yes no no no no no no

ES yes no yes no no no no

IT yes yes no no no no no

DK yes yes (yes) (yes) yes yes no

FR yesyes, partly

default (yes)(yes, partly

default?) yes yes yes

BE yes yes (yes) (yes) default yes no

PL yes yes (?) (?) yes ? no

CZ yes yes (yes) (yes) yes yes yes

DE yes yes (yes) (yes) yes yes no

Items within EP requirement

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe15

Consequences

• Heating system not included in all MS:• Case 1: house with non-condensing boiler• Case 2: same house with condensing boiler• Case 3: same house with heat pump

Example (fictive figures!!): DK FI

Case 1: Uav. = 0,20 Uav. = 0,35Case 2: Uav. = 0,35 Uav. = 0,35Case 3: Uav. = 0,50 Uav. = 0,35

Conclusion, based on: • case 1: EP requirement in DK more strickt as is FI• case 2: EP requirement in DK as strickt as is FI• case 3: EP requirement in DK less strickt as is FI

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe16

CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust NCB = Non- Condensing boiler

Results pilot study 3MS Uaverage Heat.

syst.Cool. syst.

DHW syst.

SolarColl.

Vent. syst.

Heat recov.

DK 0,36 0,32 CB NCB CB NCB Ns/Me

CZ 0,48 0,43 CB NCB CB NCB Ns/Me

ES 0,80 CB NCB CB NCB

DE 0.47 0,42 CB NCB CB NCB Ns/Me

BE 0,54 0,42 CB NCB CB NCB Ns/Me

FI 0,25 CB NCB CB NCB Ns/Me

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe17 CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust

Pilot study Step 4

MS Uaverage Heat. syst.

Cool. syst.

DHW syst.

SolarColl.

Vent. syst.

Heat recov.

DE 0.47 CB CB Ns/Me

BE 0,54 CB CB Ns/Me

• Simple calculations

• Result• DE: 53.000 MJ• BE: 56.000 MJ

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe18 CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust

Pilot study Step 4

MS Uaverage Heat. syst.

Cool. syst.

DHW syst.

SolarColl.

Vent. syst.

Heat recov.

DE 0.47 CB CB Ns/Me

BE 0,54 CB CB Ns/Me

• Simple calculations

• Result• DE: 53.000 MJ ? 55.000 MJ ?• BE: 56.000 MJ ? 54.000 MJ ?Thermal bridges ??

Air tightness ??

REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe19

??

: 0,8 : E100