Marleen Spiekman

1
Marleen Spiekman

• EU ASIEPI REHVA Seminar, May 14 2009
• Comparing EP-requirements over Europe

2
ASIEPI has received funding from the Communitys
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).
3
Comparing requirement levels

• 0,8
• E100

4
Just compare kWh/m2! ?

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

5
IT LOOKS MORE EASY THAN IT IS !!!
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
7
Pilot studies ASIEPI

• Pilot study 1
• Predefined
• dimensions (incl. windows) orientation

8
(No Transcript)
9
Results pilot study 1 Some interesting figures
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!
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
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

13
Results pilot study 2
CB Condensing boiler Ns/Me
Nat.supply Mech.exhaust
14
Items within EP requirement
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

16
Results pilot study 3
CB Condensing boiler Ns/Me
Nat.supply Mech.exhaust NCB Non-
Condensing boiler
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
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
19

• 0,8 E100

??