beyond zero carbon housing - mark gillott
DESCRIPTION
A one day symposium on zero/low carbon sustainable homes took place at The University of Nottingham on the 24th October, 2012. The event offered professionals within the construction industry a unique opportunity to gain added and significant insight into the innovations, policies and legislation which are driving the construction of zero/low carbon energy efficient homes both here in the UK and elsewhere in Europe. It explored solutions to sustainability issues “beyond” the zero carbon agenda. BZCH followed on from the successful ‘Towards Zero Carbon Housing’ symposium the University hosted in 2007. This event is part of the Europe Wide Ten Act10n project which is supported by the European Commission Intelligent Energy Europe.TRANSCRIPT
Beyond Zero
Carbon HousingCarbon Housinge x p l o r i n g s o l u t i o n s t o s u s t a i n a b i l i t y i s s u e s
b e y o n d t h e z e r o c a r b o n a g e n d a
2 4 t h O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2 a t T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f N o t t i n g h a m2 4 t h O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2 a t T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f N o t t i n g h a m
D e p a r t m e n t o f A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d B u i l t E n v i r o n m e n t
©
Copyright NoticeCopyright NoticeAl l the mater ia l in these s l ides
may not be used or reproduced wi thout the
express permiss ion of the authors
Creative Energy Homes
Creative Energy Homes Professor Mark Gillott | May 2012
Mark Gillott
University of Nottingham
� Design
� Energy
� Users
� Technologies
� Water
� Climate Change
The Creative Energy Homes Site
George Green (1793-1841)
Nottingham
Scientist & Physicist
& user of wind
power as a miller
The Creative Energy Homes
The Tarmac
Masonry Homes
C r e a t I v e E n e r g y H o m e s - t h e s i t e
Tarm
ac
Ma
son
ry H
om
es
C r e a t I v e E n e r g y H o m e s - t h e s i t e
Tarm
ac
Ma
son
ry H
om
es
CODE 4
C0DE 6
Code 4 Code 6
88.7 88.7
Design Information
• Total heated floor area (m2)
4 2
1.2 <0.8
53 53
100 100
105 80
2 2
• Air permeability (m3/(m2.h) @50Pa
• Heat loss parameter
• Party wall E-WM-11 (dB Dntw +Ctr)
• Low e lighting (%)
• Water usage (l/p/day)
• Storage space for cycles
• Considerate contractor scheme
N/A
• Considerate contractor scheme
• Secured by design (Part 2)
• Lifetime homes compliant
• NHBC approved
The wall constructions?
Typical current Building Regs
(2006)
U-value 0.30 W/m2K
Code Level 4(44% C02 reduction)
U-value 0.19 W/m2K
Code level 6(Zero CO2)
U-value 0.15 W/m2K
298mm
U-value 0.30 W/m2K
353mm 365mm
103mm Facing brick
50mm clear cavity & 45mm
KingspanTW50
100mm Hemelite
Plasterboardon dabs
103mm Facing brick
50mm clear cavity & 100mm
KingspanTW50
100mm Hemelite
Plasterboardon dabs
215mm Durox Supabloc
13mm Lightweight Plaster
150mm EPS insulation & render finish
Wall constructions – external walls
U-value 0.19 W/m2K. U-value 0.15 W/m2K.
Wall constructions – separating wallWall constructions – separating wall
Separating wall – modifiedE-WM-11. 2 x 100mm Tarmac Hemelite blocks (1360 kg/m3), Hemelite blocks (1360 kg/m ), Isover 100mm RD Wall Roll.
Results of Acoustic test (PCT)Upstairs bedroom 60 dB Dntw +CtrDownstairs lounge 57 dB Dntw +Ctr
Health & Wellbeing – 4 creditsi.e. greater than 53 dB
Roof construction
• Asymmetric pitch trussed roof designed with an with the
long south facing elevation at a 22 degree angle
• Traditional roof coverings – felt, battens and concrete
tilestiles
• Incorporates sun pipe for daylight to stair wells
• U-value = 0.11 W/m2K
• Heat to both dwellings is provided by a highly efficient shared biomass boiler capable of generating up to 10 kW output.
Heating - biomass wood pellet boiler
generating up to 10 kW output.
• Fuel source is renewable, C02 neutral, indigenous wood pellets
• Individual controls and monitoring is designed to simulate a development with a district heating system.
• Boiler has a fully automated vacuum feed system requiring little operating knowledge or
maintenance.
Heating - biomass wood pellet boiler
Renewable Energy–solar hot water
• Hot water is provided by 2 roof
mounted flat plate solar mounted flat plate solar
thermal panels – 3.05m2
aperture area.
• Cylinder capacity of 210 litres
Renewable Energy – photovoltaic’s
• 22m2 of solar photovoltaic panels which
convert sunlight directly into electricity
via advanced semi conductorsvia advanced semi conductors
• Mounted on South facing elevation at
22 degrees to the horizon.
• Generate an output capability 3.75 kW
peak of electricity.
• The output is designed to offset the • The output is designed to offset the
total energy requirement for lighting,
pumps and domestic appliances.
Code 6Code 4Boiler flue
Monodraught Sun pipes
Tarmac Homes – Front ElevationTarmac Homes – Front Elevation
Solid aircrete wall, external insulation & render
Cavity brick and blockwork with partial fill cavity
Biomass pellet
Sun pipes over the stairs
partial fill cavityBiomass pellet boiler room
Solar hot water panels 22.0m2
photovoltaic panels
Code 4Code 6
Tarmac Homes - Rear ElevationTarmac Homes - Rear Elevation
Over-hanger roof to provide solar shading
panels
Biomass pellet
Solid aircrete wall, external insulation & render
Sunspace for winter passive solar gain
Biomass pellet store
Cavity brick & blockwork with partial fill
Air Tightness Test
Green Close 10
Average q50
Initial pressure test results – Green Close 10: 1.71 m3/m2/h @50Pa
Green Close 12: 2.95m3/m2/h @ 50Pa
Test
NumberTest Date
Pressurise
/Depressurise
Mechanical
Extracts Sealed
Mechanical Input
Vents Sealed
q50 Result M³
(hr*m²) @ 50
Pa
Average q50
Result M³
(hr*m²) @ 50
Pa
1 27/05/2011 Pressurise Y Y 1.371.45
2 27/05/2011 De-Pressurise Y Y 1.53
Green Close 12
Test Pressurise Mechanical Mechanical Input q50 Result M³
Average q50
Result M³ Test
NumberTest Date
Pressurise
/Depressurise
Mechanical
Extracts Sealed
Mechanical Input
Vents Sealed
q50 Result M³
(hr*m²) @ 50
Pa
Result M³
(hr*m²) @ 50
Pa
3 27/05/2011 Pressurise Y Y 1.741.97
4 27/05/2011 De-Pressurise Y Y 2.2
Heat Flux Monitoring
10.00
Mean Daily Heat Flux - Tarmac 10 & 12
Heat Flux Monitoring
-10.00
-8.00
-6.00
-4.00
-2.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12/0
3/2
011
14/0
3/2
011
16/0
3/2
011
18/0
3/2
011
20
/03/
20
11
22
/03/
20
11
24
/03/
20
11
26
/03/
20
11
28
/03/
20
11
30/0
3/2
011
01/
04
/20
11
03/
04
/20
11
05/
04
/20
11
07/
04
/20
11
09
/04
/20
11
11/0
4/2
011
13/0
4/2
011
15/0
4/2
011
17/0
4/2
011
19/0
4/2
011
21/
04
/20
11
23/
04
/20
11
25/
04
/20
11
27/
04
/20
11
29
/04
/20
11
01/
05/
20
11
03/
05/
20
11
05/
05/
20
11
07/
05/
20
11
09
/05/
20
11
11/0
5/2
011
13/0
5/2
011
15/0
5/2
011
17/0
5/2
011
He
at
Flu
x (
W/m
2)
Tarmac 10
Mean Daily
Heat Flux
12/0
3/2
011
14/0
3/2
011
16/0
3/2
011
18/0
3/2
011
20
/03/
20
11
22
/03/
20
11
24
/03/
20
11
26
/03/
20
11
28
/03/
20
11
30/0
3/2
011
01/
04
/20
11
03/
04
/20
11
05/
04
/20
11
07/
04
/20
11
09
/04
/20
11
11/0
4/2
011
13/0
4/2
011
15/0
4/2
011
17/0
4/2
011
19/0
4/2
011
21/
04
/20
11
23/
04
/20
11
25/
04
/20
11
27/
04
/20
11
29
/04
/20
11
01/
05/
20
11
03/
05/
20
11
05/
05/
20
11
07/
05/
20
11
09
/05/
20
11
11/0
5/2
011
13/0
5/2
011
15/0
5/2
011
17/0
5/2
011
Date
Tarmac 12
Mean Daily
Heat Flux
COMPARABLE HEAT FLUX DATA
Wingfield, J., Miles-Shenton, D., and Bell, M., 2009, Evaluation of the Party Wall Thermal Bypass in Masonry
Dwellings, Centre for the Built Environment, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds
CO-HEATING TESTS
3500
Tarmac 10 Co Heat Test Data (December 2010)
MVHR UNIT
y = 93.878 W/K
y = 108.35W/K
1500
2000
2500
3000
Tota
l Po
we
r (W
)
Tarmac 10 Co Heat - No MVHR
0
500
1000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Tota
l Po
we
r (W
)
Temperature Difference (Internal/External)
Tarmac 10 Co Heat - With MVHR
14.5 W/K associated with MVHR
POWER DATA: JUNE–AUGUST 2010T
arm
ac
10 E
ne
rgy
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n W
h
Ta
rma
c 10
En
erg
y
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n
Ta
rma
c 12
En
erg
y
Wh
Ta
rma
c 12
En
erg
y
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n W
h
TARMAC 10: JUNE - AUGUST 2010T
arm
ac
10 E
ne
rgy
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n W
h
Ta
rma
c 10
En
erg
y
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n
Ta
rma
c 10
PV
En
erg
y
Ge
ne
rati
on
Wh
Ta
rma
c 10
PV
En
erg
y
Ge
ne
rati
on
BIOMASS BOILER
� System failure March
20112011
� Pellet quality is critical
to performance
Debris in hopper led to � Debris in hopper led to
issues
BIOMASS BOILER
The BASF
Prototype House
The BASF Prototype House:The BASF Prototype House:
Energy Efficiency + Affordability
The BASF House Design Brief
• Energy efficient and to have as near as possible carbon zero emissions
• Affordable and economical design• Affordable and economical design
• Address the issue of shortage in skilled labour
• Address the issue of lack of available building land
• Offer heating and cooling solutions to ensure comfortable living• Offer heating and cooling solutions to ensure comfortable living
Key Features• Compact Form – detached, semi or
terrace
• Low cost for first time buyers
• MMC – construction speed with
Concept ICF Ground Floor
• MMC – construction speed with
less labour
SIPS first floor & roof Official Opening
PCM
Plaster Board
Key Features
Plaster Board
Energy &
Environmental
Monitoring
PCM Thermal
Mass
Biomass
Solar
Thermal
Ground Air
Heat Exchanger
Smart Home ControlsASHP
The BASF House:
terrace or semi detached units
The BASF House: Plans
The BASF House: Materials
(Rodrigues, 2009)
Images from BASF (www.house.basf.co.uk)
Performance Matters
Modelling Measurement Certification MonitoringModelling Measurement Certification Monitoring
Air Tightness Test
3.7 m3/hr/m2 @50PaTAS Energy Modelling
Below 15KWhr/m2/yr
Annual Power Profile
lighting
27%
17%
35%
lighting
Heating Ancillary
Power
White Goods
Cooking
17%
10%
11% Sockets
March 2010 – February 2011
Total Power Consumption – 3,816 kWh
%
437, 11%
Bedroom Sockets
Living & Dining Room Sockets
Kitchen mid-height SocketsKWh, %
Annual Power Profile
783, 21%
114,
3%253, 7%91, 2%
217, 6%80, 2%
1026, 27%
Kitchen mid-height Sockets
Fridge
Dishwasher
Washing Machine
Cooker Hob
Oven
Immersion Heater
Solar Kit
KWh, %
March 2010 – February 2011
Total Power Consumption – 3,816 kWh
3%
144, 4%
163, 4%68, 2%
266, 0.07172,
4%
253, 7%91, 2% Biomass Boiler
Earth-Air Heat Exchanger
Lighting Overall
BIOMASS BOILER replaced with ASHP (spring 2011)
Hoval’s Soilkit®
7.5m2 Solar Thermal
Hoval Solar
Thermal
Store
Panasonic’s 9kW Air-to-
water
Aquarea monobloc unit
System configuration of combined ASHP
and STC heating system
TemperaturesMonitoring period July 2011 to Feb 2012
The Sunspace
10
15
20
25
Te
mp
era
ture
(C
)
Mean Sunspace Temperature Data
Sunspace Temperature - Ground Floor
Sunspace Temperature - First Floor
0
5
10
Te
mp
era
ture
(C
)
Month
Sunspace Temperature - First Floor
Sunspace Temperature - Upper Level
External Temperature
Temperatures
Solar ThermalMonitoring period July 2011 to Feb 2012
Hot Water Monitoring period July 2011 to Feb 2012
ASHP (COP)
Coefficient of PerformanceMonitoring period July 2011 to Feb 2012
Mean COP for test period = 3.99
(Manufacturer suggested COP for 9KW system: 4.1 at temperatures above 7C and than 2.5 at
temperatures below -7C)
Solar
ThermalASHP Immersion
Hot Water
System Contribution for period July 2011 to Feb 2012
Thermal
STC 40% ASHP 59% Immersion 1%
N.B. Immersion only used for 6 days during the test period – on 4 days in December
this was due to routine system testing not user demand.
BASF Climate Control Micronal PCM
• Microencapsulated paraffin wax in Knauf
Gypsum boards
• 3kg of Micronal PCM per m2
• Melting/Solidifying temperatures: 23oC or 26oC• Melting/Solidifying temperatures: 23 C or 26 C
• Heat storage capacity of 110 kJ/kg (330kJ/ m2)
BASF’s Micronal microencapsulated PCM mixed in a gypsum board (Source: BASF Micronal Website www.micronal.de)
Knauf PCM SmartBoard 23 Enthalpy
(Rodrigues, 2009)
EAHE
EAHE Pre-Assessment
• Winter
• Summer
(Rodrigues, 2009)
The BASF House – EAHE On-site data5th of June
w
(Rodrigues, 2009)
PCM and EAHE
PCM follows temperature of living room
(Rodrigues, 2009)
The BASF House – PCM On-site dataMay, June, July and August
(Rodrigues, 2009)
PCM Further Investigation
The four sensors were
connected up to a data
logger which recorded
results from the four
sensors every 20 minutes
Hukseflux HFP01 Heat Flux Plates
sensors every 20 minutes
from the 16th July to the
2nd December 2011
18.00
Night and daytime internal temperatures for the summer months are fairly high and in the
operational zone of the PCM – they do not drop below the lower end of the phase change
zone (18 C)
This problem can be solved by providing adequate night time ventilation to allow the
temperature to drop below the solidification level in the summer
Additionally the monitoring data shows that the temperature exceeded 26 deg C in the
bedroom for 7.3% which means the PCM was not effective enough at reducing the internal
Graph showing the day and night time temperature and the
PCM and plasterboard heat flux from 16th July to 30th September
bedroom for 7.3% which means the PCM was not effective enough at reducing the internal
temperatures
Source: Ruth Howlett,
Temperature Regulation through the Utilisation of Phase Change Materials, UoN, Advanced Study Dissertation, Jan 2012
The BASF House in the Future
Base Case = on-site data
Case 2 = added EAHE
Case 3 = house in 2020Case 3 = house in 2020
Case 4 = house in 2050
Case 5 = house in 2080
CIBSE Overheating criteria:
Bedrooms should not exceed 25oC but
they do they should not be above they do they should not be above
26oC for more than 1% of the time.
Living rooms should not exceed 26oC
but if they do they should not be
above 28oC for more than 1% of the
time.(Rodrigues, 2009)
iSEC: intelligent Smart Energy Community
weatherelectricity grid
Green Close
energy usemicro-generation
monitoring
power
utilisation
occupancyenergy storage
monitoring
&
control
iSEC: intelligent Smart Energy Community
Source: Central Networks
•Optimum utilisation of local energy resources
•Community-wide demand-side participation
•Load levelling & reduced costs•Requirement to understand occupancy patterns for control and forecasting
E.ON International Research Initiative 2012
S W I T C H
Smart Wireless Intelligent Control in Homes
Responding to the national grid Responding to onsite generation
OUTREACH: PUBLIC TOURS (over 3000 visitors per year)
• Building performance evaluation needs to be far more widespread in order for industry to learn from their mistakes
• Monitoring systems need constant monitoring!
Conclusions
• Monitoring systems need constant monitoring!
• Where there is a lack of performance it is due to multiple reasons
• Need for education, training & dissemination
• A requirement for better modelling predictions in regulations and in-situ testing to verify as built performance
• A requirement for better modelling predictions in regulations and in-situ testing to verify as built performance
• Better control and use of demand side management technologies
More information at:
www.creative-energy-homes.co.uk
Find us on facebook