Comparative analysis of heating systems in terms of flexibility in sustainable buildings

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

2nd International Joint Conference on Innovative Solutions in Construction Engineering and Management: 16th Lithuanian-German-Polish colloquium and 6th meeting of EURO working group Operational Joint Research in Sustainable Development andinCivil Engineering 24 May- 2nd 2nd International Conference on Innovative Solutions Construction Engineering and International Workshop on flexibility in sustainable construction, ORSDCE 2017, 24-26 April Management: 16th Lithuanian-German-Polish colloquium and 6th meeting of EURO working Poznan-Puszczykowo, Poland group Operational Research 2017, in Sustainable Development and Civil Engineering 24 May- 2nd International Workshop on flexibility in sustainable construction, ORSDCE 2017, 24-26 April 2017, Comparative analysis ofPoznan-Puszczykowo, heating systems Poland in terms of flexibility in

buildings Comparative analysis sustainable of heating systems in terms of flexibility in sustainable buildings Roman Milwicza*Jerzy Pasławskib

a Piotrowo 5, 61-138 Poznań, b Poland Poznan University of Technology,

a,b

Roman Milwicz *Jerzy Pasławski

a,b

Poznan University of Technology, Piotrowo 5, 61-138 Poznań, Poland

Abstract Dynamic Abstract changes in the economy of natural resources and their impact on the volatility of energy prices is forcing engineers to pay attention to flexible and sustainable management in the construction industry. Limitation of energy consumption is governed by the Technical [1]. More restrictive rules were madeimpact in 2014, and planned for 2021. Another document, which Dynamic changesConditions in the economy of natural resources and their on2017 the volatility of energy prices is forcing engineers to regulate the to building is management European Union 2010/31/EU [24]. The of authors to demonstrate the pay attention flexibleperformance, and sustainable in thedirective construction industry. Limitation energyseeks consumption is governed importance of testing various[1]. solutions for heating a single familyinbuilding on the of life cycle Another in terms document, of cost, solution by the Technical Conditions More restrictive rules were made 2014, 2017 and basis planned for 2021. which flexibility andbuilding environmental impact. is TheEuropean analysis is preceded by an 2010/31/EU introduction [24]. to the The LCCauthors analysisseeks and key in the regulate the performance, Union directive to milestones demonstrate system life cycle. A very important factor the analysis is the operating timeonofthe thebasis systems, which vary depending on the importance of testing various solutions forinheating a single family building of life cyclemay in terms of cost, solution solution. time horizon also generates the difficulty of predicting changes in to both prices asand well the usage of flexibilityLong and environmental impact. The analysis is preceded by an introduction theenergy LCC analysis keyasmilestones in the building. This is why the next point will beinthethe issue of flexibility as well as theof ability to adapt which to changing needs, conditions system life cycle. A very important factor analysis is the operating time the systems, may vary depending on and the costs. Both aspects be presented as components of sustainable solution approach based on the balance between economy, solution. Long time will horizon also generates the difficulty of predicting changes in both energy prices as well as the usage of the ecology and Thenext aimpoint of the study is to compare the available systems single family housing in the lightand of building. Thiscomfort. is why the will be the issue of flexibility as wellheating as the ability to for adapt to changing needs, conditions aspectsBoth of sustainable construction andasmodular construction of single – family housing. The on analysis was aimed at introducing costs. aspects will be presented components of sustainable solution approach based the balance between economy, the subject defining theaim direction further ecology andand comfort. The of the of study is toresearch. compare the available heating systems for single family housing in the light of aspects of sustainable construction and modular construction of single – family housing. The analysis was aimed at introducing © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. the subject and defining the direction ofscientific further research. Peer-review under responsibility of the committee of ORSDCE 2017. * Corresponding author. Tel.: 00 48 605 201 199; E-mail address: [email protected] * Corresponding author. Tel.: 00 48 605 201 199; 1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. E-mail address: [email protected] Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ORSDCE 2017. 1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ORSDCE 2017. 1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ORSDCE 2017. 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.11.024

2

Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski/ Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

© Ltd. Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89 2017 The Authors. Published by ElsevierRoman Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ORSDCE 2017.

83

Keywords: sustainable building, adaptability, flexiblity, life cycle cost, renewables

1. Introduction Sustainable buildings require optimally fitted system of heating. In Polish climate most energy of the building in life cycle is dedicated to heating that is why authors decide to make comparison between heating systems in Poland. In comparison one can find innovative system and traditional based on coal. Investigation touches sustainability aspects: environment, user comfort and economy. The goal was to check weather concerns about sustainable energy efficient solutions are justified and shows profit from implementation of modern systems. 2. Sustainability Sustainable development is one of the most crucial aspects in the contemporary World. The main idea is to keep balance between user comfort, economical aspect with the limited impact on environment. Many regulations like ISO standards namely ISO 14000 family [2-5] all courtiers can follow the instructions with ease. This trend helps to take attention from economic aspects and notice environmental issue. The crucial aspects in environmental aspect are listed below:  Exhaustion of resources  Depletion of the ozone layer  Creating smog  Eutrophication  Climate change Thank to massive and rapid changes new technologies are introduced in global scale and become available for regular client. One of the biggest development can be observed in photovoltaic panels making it competitive system for building heating in Polish climate. That is why authors decide to take it into consideration. 3. Adaptability Sustainability depends on many aspects especially in changeable environment. One of the means of improving sustainability is long life of the product. Because of that it is so important to design products that could adapt to changing conditions. The system needs to provide the opportunity to change if it is design for long service time. The possibility do adjust to changeable needs is called adaptability and one can find diverse definition of the term in the literature. In the housing heating context the most important seems to be the ability to change volume, function or performance [6], ease of response to the changed conditions [7], presence of less common but more dramatic changes [8]. On the other hand, adaptability of buildings means to remain ready for change in order to respond the needs or reduce the mismatch [9]. Considerable theoretical and practical dissertation can be found in the book Adaptable Architecture [10]. Another important analyses are based on existing buildings subjected to continue adaptation process. Investigation concerns British terraced houses, blocks of flat in Sweden and office buildings with open space designed for self-development based on open plan idea. Model which helps in receiving a feedback from the user is presented in Kelly and Smith paper [11]. Another authors emphasis the need to design facilities to enable adaptation: “If the building does not support (technologically and technically) change and reuse you have only the illusion of sustainable construction [12]. This is an extensive analysis of the literature with the attempt of creation a holistic definition of adaptability. Interesting in terms of flexibility is looking for the answer the question: how to design once, but for a long time [13] Also doctoral dissertation of Manewa takes into account economic aspects of the adaptation of the of buildings [14]. According to Schmidt et al. [15] ability to adapt can be divided into several categories Fig.1.:

Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

3

Roman Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89

84

availability scalability

reusability

adaptability movability

flexibility

refitability

Fig. 1. Types of adaptability

4. Case study Due to big energy consumption in housing sector in Poland Authors propose and investigate the flexibility in single – family housing [25, 26]. The idea is based on phased house construction starting form small house with potential of future enlargement. One of the aims of the paper is to check which system is applicable for mentioned way of construction. Authors have chosen eight different source of heating energy mostly used in Poland, namely: 1. Electricity 2. Electricity +PV 3. Heat pump 4. Heat pump + PV 5. Pellet 6. Oil 7. Natural gas 8. Coal At the beginning the comparison was conducted from the sustainability point of view, environment, user comfort and economy. Each branch was divided into additional three aspects to make clearer what was taken into account in comparison, additionally authors added short description of each aspect. The growing role in modern civil engineering of mentioned aspect can reflect in scientific papers. Multi – criteria analysis for construction material solution in single – family housing in Lithuania [16], Multi - criteria evaluation of heating choices for a new sustainable residential area in Finland [17]. The second phase shows the economical comparison of each option from the economical point of view in life cycle in diverse time horizon. The last aspect shows the possibility of application in multi – phased house construction. The sustainable aspects from the first phase of the comparison are listed with brief explanation of comparison criteria. 4.1. Environment   

CO2 , emission Contamination of air, water and soil, Natural resources.

In the first aspect of carbon dioxide emission, authors took into account only the level of gas production during the usage phase. Second aspect, contamination of the environment takes into account total life cycle of the

4

Roman Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89 Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski/ Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

85

system, usage and production. Third aspect concerns operational phase, because of major participation in natural resources usage. The goal is to emphasize the necessity of the end of fossil fuel era. 4.2. User comfort   

Service and maintenance, Auxiliary space, Possibility of implementation.

To compare the comfort of the heating system authors decided to concentrate on aspects connected with energy supply needed to maintain work of the system. This aspect is included in first point and rating of each system can differentiate significantly i.e. electric heating with heating wires allows user to control temperature in each room independently has low inertia, moreover it needs no refilling or maintenance, on the other side coal boiler serves limited option of regulation of temperature and needs to be refill a few times a month. Second aspect treats the case of auxiliary space for heating system. Some systems do not need any additional space (no boiler) other small space and can be install in bathroom or kitchen other due to fuel type need space for it and due to dust or noise generation need additional room. The last aspect shows possibility of implementation of the system. Authors found two main boundary conditions: first is legal aspect connected with urban planning and limitation of used fuel conditions. Second is more connected with geographical conditions and availability of types of fuel e.g. gas or direct sun light. 4.3. Economy   

Initial cost, Maintenance cost, Sensibility to price changes.

Costs were divided into two types: initial and maintenance cost. First one can generate the need of additional cost of loan interest in case of insufficient initial capital, but may significantly decrease maintenance costs. Mechanism works also in opposite direction. The third aspect depends mainly on energy demand. The bigger demand the higher sensibility to price changes and the bigger risk and uncertainty. Basing on fossil fuels carries a high risk of uncertainty; on the other hand renewables offers greater independence e.g. by reduction of energy usage in heat pump (efficiency 350-500%) or photovoltaic panels and energy self sufficiency. 4.4. Gathered data Above described aspects were gathered in Table 1. and evaluated together to compare with system could be treated as a sustainable source of heating. Moreover it can lead to conclusions why some heating systems are more popular than others. The ratings are given on the basis of gather information and are presented only to show direction of further research. Table 1. Rating of compared heating systems Environment

User comfort Auxiliary space

Economy

CO2

Contamination of air, water and soil

Natural resources

Service

Electricity

1

1

1

4

Electr.+PV

4

3

3

4

3

3

1

4

3

Heat pump

2

2

2

4

2

3

1

2

3

HP + PV

4

4

3

2

1

3

1

4

4

Pellet

4

3

3

3

2

2

4

4

2

Oil

2

2

1

3

2

2

3

2

0

4

Possib. of implement.

Initial cost

Usage cost

Sensibility

4

4

0

0

Roman Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89 Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

86

5

Natural gas

2

2

1

3

3

1

3

3

1

Coal

1

0

1

1

1

1

4

4

3

0 - very bad, 1 – bad, 2 – neutral, 3 – good, 4 – very good

The data is presented on the radar sheme (Fig.2.) to show how each type of heating respond to the sustainability aspect. On The N-E side of the sheme Environmental aspect is localized, on the N – User comfort and on the W part Economic aspect could be find. The goal is to make as big as possible shape, the bigger shape, the more advantages each solution can offer. Received results for each heating source can have various shape. The more round the shape is, the more sustainable it is. The result leaning towards some aspects can also lead to conclusion and justify its popularity or abundance. Electricity sensibility usage cost

4 3 2 1 0

Electricity +PV

CO2 contamination of air, water and soil natural resources

inital cost

service

possib. of implementation

auxaliary space

sensibility

usage cost

4

CO2

2 0

inital cost

CO2 contamination of air, water and soil

2 usage cost

natural resources

0

service

inital cost possib. of implementation

Heat pump(HP) sensibility

4

auxaliary space

HP + PV

contamination of air, water and soil natural resources

sensibility usage cost

4 3 2 1 0

CO2

auxaliary space

inital cost

service

possib. of implementation

Pellet

usage cost

inital cost possib. of implementation

natural resources

service

possib. of implementation

sensibility

contamination of air, water and soil

4 3 2 1 0

auxaliary space

Oil

CO2 contamination of air, water and soil natural resources

service auxaliary space

3 sensibility 2,5 2 1,5 1 usage cost 0,5 0

CO2

inital cost possib. of…

contamination of… natural resources service auxaliary space

6

Roman et al.Procedia / Procedia Engineering (2017) 82–89 Roman Milwicz, JerzyMilwicz Pasławski/ Engineering 00 208 (2017) 000–000

Natural gas 3

sensibility

2 1

usage cost

0

inital cost

CO2

Coal contamination of air, water and…

sensibility usage cost

natural resources

4 3 2 1 0

CO2 contamination… natural resources

inital cost

service

possib. of implementation

87

service

possib. of…

auxaliary space

auxaliary space

Fig. 2. Comparison of costs for different sources of energy and heat demand

The results shows that the most sustainable sources of energy are: Electricity +PV, HP+PV and Pellet. The main drawback of first two heating system is high initial cost. System powered by pellet offer much lower initial cost and parallel low cost maintenance. Natural gas has also good result; the main disadvantage of this source is limited availability to vicinity of bigger agglomeration. Electricity is mainly dedicated to building of seasonal use. The lowest score gain coal but in fact it is treated as the best solution in suburban areas. To make comparison clearer authors decided to add simplified economical analysis of the cost in each phase in two different time horizon. The scheme shows initial and maintenance cost. To make the case more general schemes shows the correlation for three houses of different energy demand Fig.3. General data of considered options included in comparison is presented in Table 2. More sophisticated work has been done by Serbian scientists [18]. Energy demand 4000 kWh/year

40000 PLN

initial cost

20000

10 years

0

electricity electricity heat pump heat pump +PV + PV

PLN

pellet

oil

natural gas

coal

20 years

Energy demand 9000 kWh/year

100000

initial cost

50000 0

PLN

10 years

electricity electricity heat pump heat pump +PV + PV

pellet

oil

natural gas

coal

Energy demand 15 000 kWh/year

200000

initial cost

100000 0

20 years

10 years electricity electricity heat pump heat pump +PV + PV

pellet

oil

natural gas

coal

20 years

Fig. 3. Comparison of costs for different sources of energy and heat demand

We can expect rise of fuel cost, so it seem to be rational to invest in efficient solutions. Good alternative for coal due

Roman Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89 Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

88

7

to the scheme can be pellet (compressed saw dust) its price, maintenance, and additional is comparable coal powered systems but its environmental impact is three time smaller. Table 2. Rating of compared heating systems Initial cost* Type of heating

[kWh/y ear] 4000

Electricity Electricity +PV Heat pump Heat pump + PV Pellet Oil Natural gas Coal

[kWh/ year] 9000

[kWh /year] 15000

Energy price PLN/kWh

Annual cost of heating [PLN/year] [kWh/ [kWh/ [kWh/ year] year] year] 4000 9000 15000

Annual discount rate

Annual price increase

[%]

[%]

0

0

0

0,54

2160

4860

8100

6

5

33000

55000

55000

0,02

80

180

300

6

5

23000

31000

39000

0,14

560

1260

2100

6

5

37000

45000

50000

0,02

80

180

300

6

5

15000 15000 12000 12000

17000 17000 13000 13000

18000 17000 14000 15000

0,19 0,26 0,25 0,14

760 1040 1000 560

1710 2340 2250 1260

2850 3900 3750 2100

6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5

*Cost of heating device (Radiators and additional devices excluded)

4.5. Implementation in multiphase house construction The last thing Authors would like to present is the possibility of implementation in changeable conditions i.e. flexibility potential of each system. Four aspects of flexibility will be compared within two ranges of the size of change: minor (mi) and major (ma). The comparison is the set as a preparation for more extensive investigation based on multicriteria analysis, that is why Authors decided to present the results on three grade rating comparison. Table 3. presents results. Table 3. Flexibility rating of compared heating systems

Electricity Electricity +PV Heat pump Heat pump + PV Pellet Oil Natural gas Coal

Change of capacity mi ma 1 1 1 0 0 -1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1

Cost of change mi ma 1 1 1 -1 0 -1 1 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 1 1

Workload mi ma 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 -1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0

Diff. Fuel options mi ma -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

mi- minor change, ma- major change, -1- negative 0 – neutral, +1 positive

Comparison shows that electric heating with heating wires many flexible advantages, but it do not cooperate with other systems based on hot water heating systems. The main problem with extension of the system is in regular heating big workload of plumbing works. Another problem is connected with limited heating capacity of the boiler; Authors suggest additional heat capacity of a boiler in the building. 5. Conclusions One can observe trend towards sustainable buildings, main obstacle of implementation seem to be high initial cost and little knowledge of society and specialists. People need to have long-term examples. Maintenance free systems require higher initial investment but in the 20-year time horizon can be comparable or even more attractive

8

Roman Milwicz et al. / Procedia Engineering 208 (2017) 82–89 Roman Milwicz, Jerzy Pasławski/ Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

89

than conventional fuels such as gas or oil, moreover sustainable heating system are less sensible to fuel prices fluctuations. To sum up authors would like to list the observations: Conventional sources of energy: + Require less initial investment; - Require service; - Sensitive to price changes. Energy efficient solutions: - Require bigger initial investment; + Low energy consumption; + Environment friendly; + User friendly. Authors see the need to in-depth investigation in the field of sustainability due to the ISO codes and adaptability. The paper will help to promote sustainable heating especially in housing sector in Poland emphasizing economical profits and independence form fuel market changes. Authors are preparing further investigation based on the comparison analysis from the point of view of adaptability based on more than 100 metric characteristics prepared and checked by many investigations [19-23]

References [1] Prawo Budowlane art. 32 ustawy z 7 lipca 1994 r. – Prawo budowlane (Dz.U. z 2006 r. Nr 156, poz. 1118 z późn.zm.) [2] PN-EN ISO 14021:2002/A1:2012 [3] PN-EN ISO 14041:2002 [4] PN-EN ISO 14044:2009 [5] PKN-ISO/TR 14062: 2004 [6] J. Douglas, Building adaptation. 2nd ed. Great Britain, Elsevier Ltd. 2006 [7] R. Kronenburg, Flexibile Architecture that responds to change. Laurence King Publishers. London 2007 [8] A. Leaman, B. Bordass, Flexibility and Adaptability. In designing better buildings, Macmillan, S., Spon Press. 2004, 145-156 [9] A. Friedman, The adaptable house: Designing homes for change. McGraw-Hill. New York 2002 [10] R. Shimdt III, S. Austin, Adaptable Architecture theory and practice Routledge Taylor & Francis Group,Abingdon 2016 [11] G,Kelly, R. Schmidt III, A. Dainty, V. Story, Improving feedback through matching architectural values, Paper to be presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Association of Researchers for Construction Management conference, Bristol, UK, 5-7 SeptembeR 2011 [12] W. Croxton., , Disassembly and Deconstruction, Architectural Record, 2003 [13] T. Schneider, J. Till, Flexible Housing: The Means to the End. ARQ: Architectural Research Quarterly,2005, 9(3/4), 287-296. [14] R. Manewa, Economic Considerations for Adaptability in Buildings PhD Thesis, https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/9457, Loughborough, 2012 [15] R. Schmidt, T. Eguchi, S. Austin, A. Gibb, What is the meaning of adaptability in the building industry. http://adaptablefutures.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/11/Schmidt-et-al.-2010b.pdf [16] V. Motuziene, A. Rogoza, V. Lapinskien, T.Vilutiene, Construction solutions for energy efficient single-family house based on its life cycle multi-criteria analysis: a case study, Journal of Cleaner Production 112 (2006), 532-54,1 [17] K. Kontu, S. Rinne, V. Olkkonen, R. Lahdelma, P. Salminen, Multicriteria evaluation of heating choices for a new sustainable residential area, Energy and Buildings 93 (2015), 169-179, [18] V. M. Turanjanin, B. S. Vucicevic, M. P. Jovanovic, Different heating systems for single family house Energy and Economic Analysis, Thermal Sience 20 (2016), 309-320, [19] K., Beadle, A. Gibb, S. Austin, A. Fuster, P. Madden, Adaptable futures: setting the agenda in Proceedings of the 1 st I3CON International Conference, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, 14-16 May. (2008), [20] S.,Conejos, C.Langston, J. Smith, AdaptSTAR model: A climate-friendly strategy to promote built environment sustainability, Habitat International, (2013) Vol. 37, pp. 95- 103, [21] N. Davison, A.G. Gibb, S.A. Austin, C.I. Goodier, P. Warner, The multispace adaptable building concept and its extension into mass customisation, in Proceedings of the Adaptables 2006 – International Conference on adaptable building structures, Eindhoven, The Nederlands, 3-5 July 2016, [22] T. Eguchi, R. Schmidt III, A. Dainty, S. Austin, A. Gibb, The cultivation of adaptability in Japan, Open House International (2011), Vol. 36 No. 1., [23] A. Fuster, A. Gibb, S. Austin, K. Beadle, P. Madden, Adaptable buildings: three non-residential case studies, in Proceedings of the CIB Changing Roles: New Roles; New Challenges conference, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 5-9 October 2009. [24] DIRECTIVE 2010/31/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings [25] R. Milwicz, P. Nowotarski, Influence of multiphase flexible timber frame house construction on housing affordability Procedia Engineering 122 ( 2015 ) 158 – 165 [26] R. Milwicz, J. Pasławski, Multiphase construction in single family housing. Case study, Technical Transactions 4/2017, 115-121