1 / 19

Marleen Spiekman

EU ASIEPI REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009 Comparing EP-requirements over Europe. Marleen Spiekman. ASIEPI has received funding from the Community’s Intelligent Energy Europe programme under the contract EIE/07/169/SI2.466278.

jiro
Download Presentation

Marleen Spiekman

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EU ASIEPI REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009 Comparing EP-requirements over Europe Marleen Spiekman

  2. 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). WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  3. Comparing requirement levels : 0,8 : E100 WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  4. Just compare kWh/m2! …? • Differences between Member States: • Climate conditions • Indoor conditions • Building practice • Building use • Assessment method: subsidiarity principle WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  5. IT LOOKS MORE EASY THAN IT IS !!! WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  6. 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 A Country B Comparison: Not only the types of fruits But also: if “apple A” is equal to “apple B” WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  7. Pilot studies ASIEPI • Pilot study 1: • Predefined: • dimensions (incl. windows) & orientation WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  8. WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  9. Results pilot study 1: Some interesting figures: WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  10. 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! WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  11. Results pilot study 1 CB = Condensing boiler NCB = Non-Condensing Boiler DH = District heating Nat. = natural ventilation Mech. = Mechanical ventilation Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  12. Pilot study step 2: preconditions • Heating & DHW system: • Combined Condensing boiler • Ventilation system: • Natural supply, mechanical exhaust • No additional solar collector or PV system WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  13. Results pilot study 2 CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  14. Items within EP requirement WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  15. 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. = 0,35 Case 2: Uav. = 0,35 Uav. = 0,35 Case 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 WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  16. Results pilot study 3 CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust NCB = Non- Condensing boiler WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  17. Pilot study Step 4 • Simple calculations • Result • DE: 53.000 MJ • BE: 56.000 MJ CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  18. Pilot study Step 4 • Simple calculations • Result • DE: 53.000 MJ ? 55.000 MJ ? • BE: 56.000 MJ ? 54.000 MJ ? Thermal bridges ?? Air tightness ?? CB = Condensing boiler Ns/Me = Nat.supply & Mech.exhaust WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

  19. : 0,8 : E100 ?? WP 2: Comparing EP-requirements in Europe

More Related