APPENDICES
THE LIFE CYCLE PERFORMANCE OF SUSTAINABLE RENOVATION CONCEPTS A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF WARMBOUWEN
CONTENT: TITLE: SUBTITLE:
MASTER THESIS THE LIFE CYCLE PERFORMANCE OF SUSTAINABLE RENOVATION CONCEPTS A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF WARMBOUWEN
NAME: STUDENT NUMBER:
J.P. VINK 0048267
UNIVERSITY: MASTER TRACK:
UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ENGINEERING
INTERNSHIP:
LOCAL COMPANY, AMSTERDAM
SUPERVISORS:
PROF.DR.IR. DR.IR. DRS.
DATE:
10/20/2010
1
J.I.M. HALMAN E. DURMISEVIC P. BOSWINKEL MRE MRICS
UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE LOCAL COMPANY
INDEX APPENDIX A - EVALUATION RESPONDENTS .............................................................. 3 APPENDIX B - INTERVIEWS .................................................................................... 4 APPENDIX C - MODEL APPLICATION........................................................................19 C1. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS .....................................................................................19 C2. INPUT MODEL ASPECTS .......................................................................................25 C2.1. LIFE CYCLE COSTS ................................................................................................ 25 C2.2. LIFE CYCLE YIELDS ................................................................................................ 30 C2.3. LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ............................................................................ 32 C2.4. QUALITY ........................................................................................................... 46 C2.5. ENERGY PERFORMANCE COEFFICIENT ............................................................................ 64
C3. RESULTS MODEL ASPECTS ...................................................................................67 C3.1. LIFE CYCLE COSTS ................................................................................................ 67 C3.2. LIFE CYCLE YIELDS ................................................................................................ 78 C3.3. LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ............................................................................ 79 C3.4. QUALITY ........................................................................................................... 84 C3.5. ENERGY PERFORMANCE COEFFICIENT ............................................................................ 85
C4. RESULTS MODEL ..............................................................................................87 APPENDIX D - CONSULTED EXPERTS AND USED DOCUMENTS ...................................92 APPENDIX E - BREEAM ASSESSMENT TOOL .............................................................95 APPENDIX F - GREENCALC ASSESSMENT TOOL ........................................................97 APPENDIX G - HISTORY OF LCA .............................................................................98 APPENDIX H - INSULATION VS ACCUMULATION .......................................................99 APPENDIX I - DEVELOPMENT OF WARMBOUWEN .................................................... 100 APPENDIX J - COMPETITIVE CONCEPTS ................................................................. 102 APPENDIX K - SOIL CONDITIONS ......................................................................... 108 APPENDIX L - BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE MODEL .................................................... 109 APPENDIX M - EVALUATION EXISTING MODELS ..................................................... 110 APPENDIX N - ELABORATION OF IMPROVEMENTS................................................... 112 APPENDIX O - TOOLKIT BESTAANDE BOUW CONCEPT #1113 .................................. 117 APPENDIX P - TRANSMISSION WARMBOUWEN ....................................................... 119 APPENDIX Q - SCENARIOS AND CODES ................................................................ 122 APPENDIX R - IMPACT OF FUNCTIONAL CHANGES .................................................. 123 APPENDIX S - ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................... 124 APPENDIX T - CASE STUDIES............................................................................... 135 APPENDIX U - WWS 2010 .................................................................................... 136 APPENDIX V - STAKEHOLDERS AT SUSTAINABLE RENOVATIONS.............................. 138
2
APPENDIX A - EVALUATION RESPONDENTS The selection criteria of the selected experts in this research are presented in paragraph 2.5, page 16 of the main report. The interviewed experts listed below were cooperative in this research by giving an interview, which shows that they were willing to share their information. The provided information by the experts has been compared with each other and with information from literature, which results in objective information about the subjects. The interviewed experts had specialist knowledge on at least one of the aspects because: -
Mr. Tielkes is a senior policymaker at housing corporation Stadgenoot. Therefore, he is directly involved in the development of a policy regarding the current housing stock and the development of a sustainable strategy to improve the current housing stock of the corporation. He has got a lot of expertise in the field of large scale housing improvement. As a result of his function he has got a lot of knowledge and a comprising view on the sustainable improvement of houses.
-
Mr. van Eeuwijk works on a day-to-day basis at the improvement and sustainable development of offices at ING REIM. Mr. van Eeuwijk has got a lot of knowledge in this field, especially on the financial aspects of sustainability.
-
Mrs. O. van Kampen is specialist on the execution of life cycle costs calculations at S&G en Partners, which is the company that developed the software tool LCC-Lite. Mrs. van Kampen gives lecture in the execution of life cycle costs calculations and has a lot of experience at executing LCC-calculations.
-
Mr. Mak is director of W/E Adviseurs, which is the company that developed the sustainability assessment tool “GPR Gebouw”. Mr. Mak has got a lot of expertise and knowledge in the field of several aspects of sustainability as environmental impact, energy performance, comfort and quality, and health.
-
Mr. Dansen is project manager of the Dutch Green Building Council. DGBC is an independent organization that strives after the lasting sustainable improvement of the built environment in the Netherlands and is responsible for the implementation the BREEAM assessment tool in the Netherlands.
-
Mr. van Kessel is partner at Local Company and is specialized in the economic feasibility of sustainable measures in commercial real estate. Mr. van Kessel has got a lot of experience in sustainable concept development.
-
Mr. Vandeginste has nine years experience in real estate development and real estate investment. In his career he has worked a lot in the field of sustainability and therefore, has a lot of knowledge in the field of the relation between sustainability and real estate development and real estate investment.
3
APPENDIX B - INTERVIEWS PHASE 1 – EXPLORATION OF THEORETICAL BACKGROUND In the first phase, expert interviews are executed to gather relevant information about important research subjects. These interviews are executed to contribute to the definition of the background of the research and to provide information about the research concepts. Figure 1 provides an overview of the selected experts in phase 1. Name I. Opstelten
Function Program manager energy in the built environment Ph. D. – energy infrastructure Program director Architect Partner
G. Abdalla P. Oei M. de Gier P. Boswinkel FIGURE
Company ECN University of Eindhoven InnovatieNetwerk/SIGN KBNG Architects Local Company
1 - SELECTED EXPERTS PHA SE 1
PHASE 2 – IDENTIFICATION FACTORS OF INFLUENCE In the second phase, expert interviews are executed to create a comprising view on the factors that have an influence on the performance of sustainable renovation concepts. Figure 2 provides an overview of the selected experts in phase 2. Name
Function
Company
P. Tielkens R. van Eeuwijk O. van Kampen J. Mak M. Dansen A. van Kessel P. Vandeginste
Senior policy maker Asset manager Life cycle costs specialist Director Project Manager Partner Acquisition and sales manager
Stadgenoot ING REIM S&G en Partners W/E Adviseurs Dutch Green Building Council Local Company ASR Real Estate & Capital Management
FIGURE
2 - SELECTED EXPERTS PHA SE 2
Also, interviews with involved experts at the renovation project “De Tempel” are executed to identify barriers for the practical execution of the renovation concept and to identify factors that influence the practical execution of the WarmBouwen concept. Figure 3 provides an overview of the selected experts. Name R. van der Veeken B. Hoogvliet D. van der Wal FIGURE
Function Real estate manager Project manager Real estate developer
Represents Municipality of The Hague (Tenant) Roodenburg (Installation company) Aurelius Monumenten (Owner)
3 - SELECTED EXPERTS PHA SE 2
IDENTIFICATION OF WARMBOUWEN CHARACTERISTICS To identify the characteristics of WarmBouwen, four experts are consulted. Figure 4 provides an overview of the consulted experts. Name P. Boswinkel M. Karthaus M. de Gier G. Verbaan FIGURE
4
Function Director Architect Architect Senior sectormanager bouwfysica
4 - CONSULTED EXPERTS FOR WARMBOUWEN
Company Local KBNG Architects KBNG Architects DMGR
FACTORS OF INFLUENCE This section provides information about the factors that are mentioned as a factor of influence by the executed expert interviews. EPC During the expert interviews that are executed to identify factors of influence on the life cycle performance of sustainable renovation concepts, the factor EPC is mentioned as a factor of influence by: -
A. van Kessel P. Tielkes J. Mak
Local Company Stadgenoot W/E Adviseurs
LCEI During the expert interviews that are executed to identify factors of influence on the life cycle performance of sustainable renovation concepts, the factor LCEI is mentioned as a factor of influence by: -
A. van Kessel J. Mak
Local Company W/E Adviseurs
LCC During the expert interviews that are executed to identify factors of influence on the life cycle performance of sustainable renovation concepts, the factor LCC is mentioned as a factor of influence by: -
R. van Eeuwijk A. van Kessel J. Mak P. Tielkes P. Vandeginste
ING REIM (Real Estate Investment Management) Local Company W/E Adviseurs Stadgenoot ASR
LCY During the expert interviews that are executed to identify factors of influence on the life cycle performance of sustainable renovation concepts, the factor LCY is mentioned as a factor of influence by: -
A. van Kessel P. Tielkes P. Vandeginste R. Van Eeuwijk
Local Company Stadgenoot ASR ING REIM
QUALITY During the expert interviews that are executed to identify factors of influence on the life cycle performance of sustainable renovation concepts, the factor Quality is mentioned as a factor of influence by: 5
A. van Kessel P. Tielkes P. Vandeginste J. Mak R. van Eeuwijk
Local Company Stadgenoot ASR W/E Adviseurs ING REIM
INTERVIEW R. VAN DER VEEKEN Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: In project: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Ronald van der Veeken Dienst Stedelijke Ontwikkeling – Gemeente Den Haag Representant van de gebruiker 12-04-2010 om 11.15h
Vraag 1: Is er een verschil tussen het ontwerpproces zoals dat bij de Tempel is geweest en het reguliere/traditionele bouwproces zoals u dat kent? -
-
-
-
-
Ja, er is zeker een groot verschil. Normaliter krijgt de gemeente als huurder een gebouw casco opgeleverd, waarna ze hun eigen voorzieningen er separaat in gaan brengen. Dat gaat dan weer met behulp van het doen van een aanbesteding. Er komt dan dus een Programma van Eisen voor de klimaatinstallaties. Daar huren ze dan een advisuer voor in die ze daarbij helpt (opstellen van een PvE), vervolgens wordt er een bestek gemaakt, waarna de aanbesteding volgt. De gemeente is dan dus opdrachtgever van de aannemers. Gemeente stuurt dan zelf op de geselecteerde aannemer/installateur. Aannemer levert op aan gemeente en vervolgens gaat gemeente een onderhoudscontract aan met de aannemer. Bij De Tempel heeft de eigenaar een sterke drang om duurzaam klimaatbeheersingssysteem toe te passen. Gemeente gaat hierin mee. Als eigenaar minder had aangedrongen op een A-label, had gemeente eerder gekozen voor een Clabel. De voorzieningen voor klimaatbeheersing is geen standaard W-installatie. Het is namelijk een geintegreerd geheel, zowel W, E als bouwkundig (wanden , vloeren etc). De gemeente heeft wel PvE geformuleerd, maar heeft geen ervaring met dit soort systemen. Adviseur worstelt er ook een beetje mee (geen ervaring). Gemeente heeft in dit geval dan ook functionele eisen geformuleerd, bijvoorbeeld: Geen tocht, binnentemperatuur moet tussen de 17-20 graden zijn. Normaal doet de gemeente dat niet. In dit geval gebeurt het wel, omdat er geen kennis is van de techniek. Gemeente vaart dus volledig blind op de expertise van het installatiebedrijf. Gemeente is dus ook geen opdrachtgever van het installatiebedrijf, want dat is de eigenaar. Daarom zie je in dit proces dat dingen heel snel gaan glijden in de tijd (veel tijdverlies) Dit komt omdat er zoveel partijen zijn betrokken die allemaal wat vinden en moeten doen, waardoor je makkelijk gaan glijden in de tijd. Dit heeft zeker te maken met het innovatieve systeem waar je mee te maken hebt. Ook voor het installatiebedrijf is dit moeilijk. Als je een “installed base” hebt van 30 projecten (30 projecten al afgerond) dat gaat het een stuk sneller en makkelijker. Ook voor bijvoorbeeld het installatiebedrijf. Extra moeilijk hier was het feit dat we te maken hebben met een monument. Dit brengt extra complexiteit met zich mee, omdat er eisen zijn aan het renoveren van een monument.
Vraag 2: Is het moeilijk voor de gemeente/huurder dat ze blind moeten gaan op de expertise van het installatiebedrijf? -
-
6
Nee, gemeente heeft het hier niet moeilijk mee. Je komt op een vertrouwensgebied terecht dan. Niet op de kennis en kunde van een installatiebedrijf. Dat komt ook met name door de wijze waarop Roodenburg hier mee om gaat. Hierdoor wordt vertrouwen gekweekt bij de gemeente. Aanvankelijk was er wel wat strubbeling tussen verschillende adviseurs. In de loop van de tijd groeiden verschillende partijen naar elkaar toe. Als een soort huwelijk. De rol van het installatiebedrijf is hier wel erg belangrijk in geweest. Door de instelling van de installateur, die zeer flexibel omgegaan is met allerlei zaken tijdens het proces, werd er vertrouwen gewonnen bij de gemeente. In dit proces is wel heel veel tijd nodig. En tijd staat gelijk aan kosten.
-
-
2e wat speelt is het bouwfraude verhaal. Wat speelt is dat overheidspartijen verplicht zijn om openbaar aan te besteden. In dit geval kan dat gewoon niet. De eigenaar wil namelijk persee met Roodenburg in zee en hij mag dat bepalen. Als gemeente kan je hem wel aanbesteden, maar er zijn niet veel bedrijven die dit kunnen. Er zijn maar een aantal bedrijven die geequipeerd zijn om dit soort producten uit te voeren. Op het kostenaspect is het wel heel erg moeilijk om dan de garantie te geven naar de accountants intern. Het is moeilijk om te bewijzen dat dit het beste product is voor de beste prijs. Wat ze wel kunnen doen is het geven van een iets grotere rol aan de installatieadviseur, zodat deze meer verantwoordelijkheden krijgt (dat is in dit geval dan ook gebeurd). Alle kostenaspecten worden, naast de interne accountants, ook goedgekeurd door van Toorenburg (adviseur). Engineerskosten zijn binnen dit project ontzettend hoog voor het installatiebedrijf. (=12%, logisch doordat het een nieuwe techniek is) Dat maakt het nog eens extra complex, omdat je met een bedrijf een deal maakt dat veel meer vraagt voor hun werkzaamheden dan normaal gesproken. Juist omdat je die goede verhouding hebt gerealiseerd met de betrokken partijen (installateur) is dat niet erg. De transparantie en eerlijkheid van de installateur is daarbij heel erg belangrijk. Mede door deze getoonde transparantie heb je veel vertrouwen.
Vraag 3: Wat is in uw ogen cruciaal op het gebied van de instelling van de betrokken partijen om tot een succesvolle realisatie van een project te komen? -
-
-
-
-
-
Ten eerste heb je daar projectmanagement voor nodig die daar goed mee omgaat. De rol van de opdrachtgever is heel belangrijk. Je moet de boel niet laten escaleren. In dit geval gedaan door Ronald van der Veeken en David van der Wal (huurder en eigenaar). Hebben samen gefungeerd als 2 koppige leiding. Dat ging goed. Het werd mogelijk om snel beslissingen te maken en dat was ook nodig. Daarnaast heb je vertrouwen in elkaar nodig. Daar is hard aan gewerkt in dit proces. RV noemt het teamgeest. Vergelijk het met een voetbalelftal: 11 goede spelers maken nog geen goed team. De vraag is of de projectleider(s) het team kunnen smeden en de angels eruit kunnen halen. In dit proces moeite geweest met adviseur vanuit huurder. Relatie adviseur huurder en adviseur eigenaar was niet heel goed. Maar in de loop van de tijd zijn de scherpe kantjes er af geraakt. Er kwam meer teamgeest en meer een instelling waarin mensen elkaar wilden helpen! Er is een belangrijke rol weggelegd voor de procesbewaker. Deze moet doorhebben wat er gebeurt. En: Moet overal een vinger aan de pols hebben v.w.b. de projectaspecten geld, tijd, organisatie etc. Een “wij gevoel” is belangrijk. Teamgeest moet je creeren. Vertrouwen moet je creeren. Open en eerlijkheid. Niet bang zijn om te zeggen als je iets niet weet. Zeg gewoon: moet ik nog even uitzoeken en horen jullie morgen. Dat is erg belangrijk voor het vertrouwen. Aannemer/installateur moet innovatief kunnen denken. Zeker in bouwbedrijven is dat heel moeilijk. In dit concept moeten betrokkenen heel innovatief / flexibel om kunnen gaan met klantwensen en ontwerpveranderingen.
Vraag 4: Wat zijn dingen in het proces die goed gegaan zijn en welke dingen hadden beter gekund? -
7
In sommige gevallen heeft de OG er iets te makkelijk over gedacht. Dat had beter gekund. In de 2e of 3e vergadering werd er al gesproken over deadlines en DO‟s etc. Terwijl we nog helemaal niet zo ver waren in het proces. Hierdoor kreeg je valse hoop. Je moet veel meer luisteren naar deskundigen over wat wel en niet kan. In het begin is het teveel gebeurd dat mensen te makkelijk de bal bij de installateur
-
-
neerlegden, terwijl de installateur dan zegt dat hij ook afhankelijk is van budget/architect/vergunning etc. Volgend project: veel meer tijd nemen voor voorbereidingstraject. Want aanbesteden hoeft niet (win je 3 maanden mee) Als alles duidelijk is en teamgeest is er, dan kunnen er snel beslissingen gemaakt worden. Het is onderschat hoe ingewikkeld het proces is.
Vraag 5: Wat was voor u het moeilijkst om mee om te gaan tijdens proces? -
-
Vond het over het algemeen niet moeilijk. Heeft al veel ervaring. Had soms wel wat ergernis. Ergenis in de zin dat mensen niet naar elkaar luisteren. Geen begrip voor elkaar hebben. Heeft heel lang geduurd totdat er een beetje teamgeest kwam en er beter werd geluisterd. Had zelf als procesbegeleider dat anders aangepakt. Eerder op inspringen als er niet goed geluisterd werd. Eerst een team creeren. De softe kant moet eerst op orde, voordat je aan project begint. Eerst organisatie opzetten. Organogram: hoe liggen de verantwoordelijkheden, wie legt verantwoording af aan wie? Hoe liggen comunicatielijnen en beslislijnen? Communicatiestructuur & beslisstructuur. De randvoorwaarden moeten duidelijk zijn voordat je aan het project begint.
Vraag 6: Zou dit project gelukt zijn als je een traditioneel proces als uitgangspunt neemt? - Nee, is onmogelijk. Het is onmogelijk om in dit geval als huurder te zeggen tegen de eigenaar: lever maar casco op. Want als de eigenaar dan oplevert, dan moet de huurder vervolgens alles weer gaan slopen om de installaties erin te krijgen. - Het zou een gigantische verspilling van geld zijn - Je hebt te maken met een geïntegreerde toepassing. Taak van levering en taak van gebruiker zijn niet los te trekken. - Daarnaast kan de huurder dit proces niet zelf ontwikkelen, omdat ze de kennis van het duurzame concept niet hebben. Deze kennis is nu door Phlip Boswinkel ingebracht. Vraag 7: Wat zou er gebeurd zijn als je niet direct vanaf het begin het duurzaamheidskarakter en WarmBouwen mee had genomen in het proces? - Als dit niet vanaf het begin er zo duidelijk op had gelegen, was het nooit in de mate waarin het nu toegepast is, toegepast. Zoals als eerder gezegd was de gemeente dan gegaan voor een standaard “label C” kantoor, zonder een innovatieve renovatietechniek als WarmBouwen. - In Tempel heeft eigenaar samen met huurder besloten tot het duurzame karakter van de tempel. Hierover was overeenstemming voordat het project begon. - De randvoorwaardelijke uitgangstpunten moeten voordat je start duidelijk vastliggen en daar moet overeenstemming over zijn. Vraag 8: Is er een verschil tussen de mate van vertrouwen in WarmBouwen tussen begin en einde van het project? - Is niet echt meer geworden. In het begin was bij een aantal partijen geen 100% vertrouwen in de kwaliteiten van het duurzame concept. Dat is niet meer geworden. - WarmBouwen is een visie geweest die gedefinieerd is vooraf. - Omdat je niet zeker weet wat de output van het systeem is, moet je altijd een bepaalde gereserveerdheid moet hebben t.o.v. het systeem. - Omdat het de eerste keer is dat een systeem wordt toegepast, ontstaat er twijfel over de kwaliteit ervan. Niemand weet eigenlijk of het werkt. Stel dat het concept al 10 keer succesvol is toegepast, dan is het vertrouwen in een techniek direct al een stuk beter.
8
INTERVIEW B. HOOGVLIET Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: In project: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Bryan Hoogvliet Projectleider – Roodenburg Installatiebedrijf Representant van installatiebederijf 19-04-2010 om 10.15h
Vraag 1: Is er een verschil tussen het ontwerpproces zoals dat bij de Tempel is geweest en het reguliere/traditionele bouwproces? -
-
-
-
-
Ja er is duidelijk een verschil met een regulier project. Bij de Tempel is het voornamelijk veel chaotischer verlopen dan in een regulier proces. Dat komt ook door onervarenheid van de conceptontwikkelaar en opdrachtgever. Dit wisten niet goed genoeg wat de bedoeling was. Een renovatieproject is altijd apart. Bij nieuwbouw kun je veel makkelijker een strakke planning maken en de installaties erin engineeren. Bij renovatie komt je altijd onverwachte dingen tegen. Dat vergt extra flexibilietit van de installateur. Tijdens dit proces moest we op een gegeven moment oppassen dat we het gebouw niet gingen overdimensioneren op het gebied van de installaties. Bij renovatieprojecten is het altijd moeilijk om een goede planning te maken. Vaak steken onvoorziene zaken de kop op. Hierdoor moet je als installateur veel zaken op de bouwplaats beslissen en oplossen. In een renovatieproces wordt meer gecoördineerd dan bij een nieuwbouwproces. Daar kun je zaken veel makkelijker duidelijk maken en kunnen betrokken partijen veel beter aan de slag zonder dat ze heel veel met elkaar meoten afstemmen en overleggen. In dit geval zal er veel overlegd moeten worden, omdat veel partijen snijvlakken hebben met elkaar. Het proces is een leerschool geweest voor iedereen. Ook bijvoorbeeld de opdrachtgever. Hij wist niet genoeg van het concept af en ook kwamen er op andere vlakken inhoudelijk zaken op hem af waar hij geen rekening mee had gehouden of kennis van had.
Vraag 2: Wat zijn dingen in het proces die goed gegaan zijn en welke dingen hadden beter gekund? - Wat de opdrachtgever aanvankelijk dacht dat de opdracht zou gaan worden, is anders gebleken. Het eindproduct is anders dan dat wat de opdrachtgever aanvankelijk in gedachten had. Dit heeft voor veel onrust en onzekerheid geleid. - De manier waarop het proces in de Tempel is aangepakt, geeft veel verstoring t.o.v. het reguliere proces. Er moet heel veel worden afgestemd. Adviseurs kunnen elkaar moeilijk vinden. Er is veel tijd nodig om vertrouwen in elkaar te krijgen. Het is gebleken dat veel oponthoud is ontstaat in dit proces. - Wat beter had gekund is een betere voorbereiding door de opdrachtgever. Omdat er bij de OG niet genoeg bekend was in het begin van het proces is veel tijd verloren gegaan in het vinden van een ieders rol en het bepalen van het eindproduct. Toen eenmaal het eindproduct duidelijk was en de verantwoordelijkheden en rollen verdeeld en duidelijk waren, ging het een stuk beter met het proces. - Als we ditzelfde proces nog een keer zouden moeten doen met de ervaringen die we als bouwteam nu hebben, dan had het een stuk beter gegaan. - De OG had meer moeten investeren in een duidelijk startpunt. De randvoorwaarden hadden duidelijker moeten zijn, zodat betrokken partijen weten wat het einddoel is. Dat was nu niet zo en dat zorgde voor veel vertraging en verstoring van het proces. Aan het begin van het proces had meer tijd uitgetrokken moeten worden voor het bepalen van het einddoel en het definiëren van verantwoordelijkheden en rollen in het proces.
9
Vraag 3: Wat was voor u het moeilijkst om mee om te gaan tijdens proces? -
-
Een paar keer in de clinch gelegen met adviseur van de gebruiker die moeite had met het concept dat neergezet werd. Het was moeilijk om alle neuzen 1 kant op te krijgen. Een installatiebedrijf zoals Roodenburg heeft standaardprocedures voor projecten. Bij renovatieprojecten zijn deze procedures anders dan bij nieuwbouw projecten, omdat renovatieprojecten gewoon een stuk minder voorspelbaar zijn. Er is een flexibelere rol nodig van de installateur dan bij nieuwbouwprojecten. Als er dan tijdens een renovatieproject zoals deze, ook nog eens gebruik gemaakt wordt van een innovatieve techniek, dan wordt het nog moeilijker om het proces te beheersen. Dit eist een nog flexibelere houding van de betrokken partijen. Ook van installateur dus.
Vraag 4: Zou dit project gelukt zijn als je het proces traditioneel insteekt? - Dit project had ook wel gerealiseerd kunnen worden als er een traditioneel proces gebruikt was, maar dan had het wel veel en veel meer tijd gekost. - Als je alles volgens de bestaande procedures binnen het bedrijf zou gaan doen, dan zou het niks worden. We hebben hier vaak dingen gedaan zonder dat daar formeel opdracht voor gegeven is. Normaal doe je alles volgens de bepalingen van het contract, omdat dat ook veel strakker geregeld is normaal gesproken. Nu was alles veel losser geregeld en werd er dus zo nu en dan werk verricht, zonder dat daar formeel een opdracht woor was. Het is dus wel nodig geweest om buiten de paden te gaan die we als bedrijf normaal gesproken kennen. Hadden we dat niet gedaan, dan was het niks geworden. - Als installatiebedrijf moesten we vertrouwen hebben in de andere betrokken partijen en voornamelijk onze directe opdrachtgever, omdat we werk moesten verrichten zonder dat daar een formele opdracht voor was. Vraag 5: Is WarmBouwen technisch haalbaar volgens u? - We hebben ons er als installateur wel echt in moeten verdiepen. Maar er staat nu wel een concept waar garantie voor wordt afgegeven. Wij hebben er als installatiebedrijf wel vertrouwen in dat het een werkend concept is. - Voor de installateur is er heel veel denkwerk aan vooraf gegaan in dit proces. We hebben te maken gehad met een innovatieve techniek in een renovatieproject. Daarvoor moeten de engineers en de mensen die het principeschema bedenken veel nadenken en zich verdiepen in de technieken die gebruikt worden in het project. - Door het aantrekken van ervaren en innovatieve aannemers van de gebruikte technieken is er een concept tot stand gebracht waar wij als hoofdaannemer onze garantie voor gaan afgeven. Binnen het bedrijf is er dus vertrouwen in de werking van het concept WarmBouwen. INTERVIEW D. VAN DER WAL Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: In project: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink David van der Wal Projectmanager Motonic Real Estate Representant van de eigenaar 10-05-2010 om 10.15h
Vraag 1: Is er een verschil tussen het ontwerpproces zoals dat bij de Tempel is geweest en het reguliere/traditionele bouwproces zoals u dat kent? -
10
Er zijn twee relevante zaken welke het project De Tempel anders maken dan een traditioneel project. Ten eerste is het een renovatieproject. Ten tweede wordt er een innovatief concept toegepast voor de klimaatinrichting van het gebouw.
-
-
Ook waren er in de project nog veel zaken onduidelijk toen er begonen werd met het project. Het was niet zo dat vooraf alles al bepaald kon worden. Het heeft redelijk wat voeten in de aarde gehad om het concept WarmBouwen te vertalen naar het pand. Normaal is dit niet heel ingewikkeld, maar doordat het een monument is dat gerenoveerd wordt en doordat er een innovatief concept wordt toegepast, was deze vertaalslag complexer dan gebruikelijk. In dit project was de organisatievorm niet leading. Het doel was leading en dat heeft ook vanaf het begin voorop gestaan. In een traditioneel proces zijn de verantwoordelijkheden gescheiden, in dit proces was de verantwoordeijkheid gedeeld. Het mooie hiervan is dat de gebruiker en de eigenaar hetzelde doel hadden en dus daarom wel goed moesten samenwerken. Dat gebeurde ook.
Vraag 2: Wat is in uw ogen cruciaal op het gebied van de instelling van de betrokken partijen om tot een succesvolle realisatie van een project te komen? - Het doel voor ogen houden is het belangrijkste. Dit vergt wel flexibiliteit en inlevingsvermogen van alle betrokken partijen. Vraag 3: Wat zijn dingen die goed gegaan zijn en welke dingen hadden beter gekund? - Soms was het proces best complex. Er waren zo nu en dan complexe, maar ook troebele omstandigheden waar mee om gegaan moest worden. In deze gevallen had er beter van tevoren met elkaar overlegd moeten worden wat de doelen/randvoorwaarden waren op het betreffende gebied. - Er zijn kleine geschillen geweest tussen de verschillende adviseurs. De adviseur van de eigenaar en adviseur van de gebruiker konden elkaar niet vinden in de standpunten. Vraag 4: Wat was voor u het moeilijkst om mee om te gaan tijdens proces? - Sommige betrokkenen zijn hun eigen subdoelen belangrijker gaan vinden dat het hoofddoel. Dat was moeilijk om mee om te gaan. - Er waren heel veel factoren die gemanaged moesten worden in dit proces. Dat maakte het erg complex (maar niet persee moeilijk) Vraag 5: Zou dit project gelukt zijn als je een traditioneel proces als uitgangspunt neemt? - Ja dat kan. Dan duurt het alleen veel langer. Dan gaat iedereen namelijk apart zijn stukjes inleveren. Belangrijker was: het stellen van een gemeenschappelijk doel. Hierdoor gaan partijen elkaar namelijk begrijpen en helpen. INTERVIEW P. TIELKES Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Patrick Tielkes senior beleidsmedewerker – Stadgenoot (WBC) 06-07-2010 om 11.00 uur
Vraag 1: Wat is het standpunt van Stadgenoot op het gebied van renoveren van de woningvoorraad? -
Er wordt zoals altijd gekeken naar de voorraad en in gevallen dat het nodig is, wordt onderhoud toegepast. Het concreet uitvoeren van renovatieprojecten ligt anders, want dan moet je ook gaan nadenken over het verplaatsen van bewoners.
Vraag 2: Wat vindt u van het life cycle performance model? Wat zouden factoren zijn die u graag opgenomen zou zien in het model? 11
-
-
-
-
-
-
Er zijn een heleboel belangrijke indicators in opgenomen. Dit model gaat veel verder dan de manier waarop we binnen stadgenoot op dit moment naar renovatie kijken. Bij beslismodellen wordt er voornamelijk veel minder goed gekeken naar de milieu impact van alternatieven. Vaak zijn de financiele haalbaarheid en de energieprestatie van de huizen wel in beeld, maar op een minder omvattende manier dan als ze in dit model zijn opgenomen. Ik mis de eigenschappen van de concepten die je tegen elkaar afzet. Wat zijn bijvoorbeeld de eigenschappen van de aspecten op het gebied van koeling en comfort? In mijn ogen moet je naar de LCC kijken, maar wel in samenhang met de daarbij behorende opbrengsten. Het gaat om financiele haalbaarheid, dat betekent dus dat je ook kijkt naar zaken als: Wat is het comfort en de duurzaamheid en welke impact heeft dat om mij maximale huurprijs? Wat is het risico van een concept. Etc. In het model wordt niks gezegd over kwaliteit van een renovatieconcept. Daar zou ik wat over willen weten. Hoewel het moeilijk is om dit aspect te onderzoeken en te kwantificeren, is dit geen reden om dit niet mee te nemen in het model. Voor Stadgenoot is de initiële investering ook van belang. Als de initiele investering laag is, is dit een minder grote barriere om tot uitvoering te komen, dan als de initiële investering hoog is. Wat is de impact van concepten op bewoners? Kan een concept toegepast worden, terwijl de bewoner er nog in zit, of moeten deze tijdelijk nieuw onderkomen hebben?
INTERVIEW R. VAN EEUWIJK Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Rutger van Eeuwijk Asset Manager – ING Real Estate Investment Management 07-07-2010 om 11.00 uur
Vraag 1: Wordt er geïnvesteerd in duurzaam vastgoed / het renoveren van vastgoed door ING REIM? - De vastgoed ontwikkelaars zijn begonnen met het doorvoeren van duurzaamheid in vastgoed. Bij nieuwbouw in de huidige markt is duurzaamheid een gegeven. Wordt altijd geintegreerd in het concept. Vraag 2: Wat is de martkontwikkeling m.b.t. renoveren? - Op dit moment komt de vraag naar duurzaamheid voornamelijk voort uit de wens van de klant/huurder. Veel bedrijven willen duurzaamheid uitstralen en werken aan dit imago door hun wens tot duurzaam renoveren of verhuizen naar duurzaam pand uit te spreken naar vastgoed belegger. Vraag 3: Wat vindt u van het life cycle performance evaluation model? Wat zouden factoren zijn die volgens u opgenomen zouden moeten worden? - Volgens mij zitten alle aspecten die van belang zijn voor een vastgoedbelegger erin. Bij vastgoedbelegger wordt voornamelijk gekeken naar de financiele haalbaarheid en het verwachte rendement op een investering. Dit is goed verwerkt in de life cycle costing module. - Kwaliteit van het gebouw en beleving bij de huurder zou je eigenlijk opgenomen willen zien in het model, want dit heeft zijn weerslag op de verwachte inkomstenstroom. Is echter heel erg moeilijk om te bepalen of te kwantificeren. Een oplossing zou kunnen zijn om een prijs/kwaliteit scoring op te nemen. - In de renovatie projecten die wij tot nu toe hebben doorgevoerd zijn we tegen hoge omvormingskosten aangelopen. Dit betekent dat er veel kosten gaan zitten in het verwijderen van het oude systeem voor warmte/koude en electriciteit en het aanbrengen van het nieuwe systeem. Blijkbaar brengt dit veel moeilijkheden met zich
12
mee. Ik zie deze kostenpost niet opgenomen in dit model, terwijl het er wel in zou moeten staan. INTERVIEW A. VAN KESSEL Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Arnout van Kessel Partner – Local Company 28-07-2010 om 14.00 uur
Vraag: Wat is de procedure van Local bij het opstellen van duurzame renovatie concepten voor opdrachtgevers - Als Local concepten opstelt voor haar opdrachtgevers, wordt er altijd eerst bekeken wat de ambitie van een opdrachtgever is. Dat wil zeggen, wat is het budget en waar ligt de focus van de opdrachtgever. Een opgesteld concept kan heel erg verschillen per ambitie niveau. De ambitie om van G naar A label te gaan, levert totaal andere renovatieconcepten op dan de ambitie om van G label naar C label te gaan na renovatie. - Wat heel belangrijk is bij duurzaamheid en daar focust Local zich ook altijd op, is het bedrijfseconomische gedeelte van duurzaamheid. Wij vinden duurzaamheid in vastgoed heel erg belangrijk, maar wel op een manier dat het bedrijfseconomsich verantwoord is. Dat kan ook, maar om dat te realiseren moet je wel goed de situatie analyseren, ambitie vaststellen, budget bepalen en slim gebruik maken van voorhanden zijnde middelen als subsidie en contracten. - Je moet kijken naar een gebouw en bepalen wat goed is. Op basis daarvan ga je dan de prestatie/ambitie bepalen op basis van een bestaande meetlat. Vraag: Wat vind je van het ‘performance evaluation model’ zoals dat nu is opgesteld? Wat kan hier aan verbeterd worden? - Dit model geeft grotendeels weer waar het om draait als je kijkt naar het evalueren van een duurzaam renovatie concept. Er zit duurzaamheid in op het gebied van milieu impact. Dit is een gebied dat nog vaak wordt overgeslagen, terwijl het wel degelijk van groot belang is en ook steeds belangrijker zal worden. - Ook de kosten zijn meegenomen in het model. Dat is erg belangrijk, want als duurzaamheid alleen maar geld kost, dan wordt het alleen toegepast door de groep mensen of opdrachtgevers die dat doen vanuit ideëel oogpunt. Door het inzichtelijk maken van de financiële voordelen van duurzaamheid, kun je ook mensen aanzetten tot renovatie die puur vanuit financieel oogpunt handelen. - De EPC is een belangrijk onderdeel van de duurzaamheidsprestatie van een renovatieconcept, omdat het de taal is waarin wordt gepsproken, als je het hebt over duurzaamheid in de woningbouw in Nederland. In bijvoorbeeld het nieuwe Woning Waarderings Stelsel voor sociale verhuur, worden punten toegekend aan de labelscore van een woning. Iedereen begrijpt waar je het over hebt als je het hebt over de labelscore van een woning. - Wat mist in mijn ogen in dit model is de kwaliteit die geleverd wordt door het toegepaste renovatieconcept. De geleverde kwaliteit zegt namelijk ook iets over de financiele haalbaarheid van een concept. Als je bijvoorbeeld de optie tot koelen hebt, is een gebouw meer waard, of kan een verhuurder een hogere huur vragen. Ook is het erg belangrijk of de toegepaste techniek te begrijpen en te bedienen is door de gebruiker. Ik zou een aspect kwaliteit toevoegen aan het model. Daarin zouden de subaspecten: Thermisch comfort, gebruikergemak (is het voor oudere mensen en minder technisch aangelegde mensen te begrijpen en te onderhouden?), mate van invloed van de gebruiker (een mens wil altijd een invloed kunnen uitoefenen op zijn directe omgeving. Dus bijvoorbeeld zijn de ramen te openen), toekomstbestendigheid (in welke mate sluit het concept aan bij ontwikkelingen die te verwachten zijn in de toekomst? Wat is de verwachte compabiliteit met toekomste technieken en 13
-
-
-
omstandiheden?) en flexibiliteit (in welke mate zijn wijzigingen in en buiten de woning door te voeren, zonder dat dit een invloed heeft op het renovatieconcept op het gebied van kosten, prestaties etc.) toevoegen. In het model zou je ook moeten spelen met de waarde van de woning. Dit zegt wat over de opbrengstenkant van een woning met een bepaalde toegepast concept. Immers, de kosten in relatie met de opbrengsten bepalen de financiele haalbaarheid van een concept. De oplossing die je kiest voor het renoveren van een gebouw, zegt iets over de waarde van je gebouw, want dit heeft een invloed op bijvoorbeeld de toekomstbestendheid De factoren die zijn opgenomen in het model zijn geen factoren die voor burgers herkenbaar zijn. Om het makkelijk begrijpbaar te maken voor iedereen, zou je kunnen kijken of je deze factoren op een manier kunt weergeven, waarop iedereen het begrijpt. Kijk een naar de Sphere van ARUP. Die hebben een spindiagram m.b.t. sustainability pijlers.
INTERVIEW J. MAK Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink John Mak Directeur W/E Adviseurs 13-08--2010 om 10.00 uur
Persoonlijke geschiedenis Heeft een bouwkundige achtergrond en is vanaf de jaren ‟90 werkzaam in de sector duurzaam bouwen. Zijn drijfveer is het vormen van de brug tussen kennis en de bouwpraktijk. Met de bouwpraktijk wordt bedoeld de architecten, ontwikkelaars, adviseurs & aannemers die een rol spelen in de huidige bouwkolom. Binnen W/E adviseurs streeft meneer Mak naar een organisatie waarin iedereen zich betrokken voelt. Mede daarom is W/E adviseurs ook een stichting, waarin de medewerkers zelf zeggenschap hebben over de te varen koers voor het bedrijf. In 1995 is W/E begonnen met het oprichten van GPR Gebouw in opdracht van de gemeente Tilburg. Gemeente Tilburg zocht destijds een middel om duurzaamheid te kunnen meten en te kunnen communiceren. GPR gebouw is een afgeleide van NPR (Nederlandse Praktijk Richtlijn) en staat voor Gemeentelijke Praktijk Richtlijn. GPR Gebouw wordt momenteel door veel gemeenten en commerciële partijen gebruikt. Op dit moment gebruiken ongeveer 150 gemeenten en 150 commerciële bedrijven de tool. Vraag: Kunt u wat vertellen over W/E en de geschiedenis van GPR Gebouw? W/E Adviseurs is een bedrijf waar 25 personen werkzaam zijn. Het bedrijf is bewust klein gehouden, omdat je dan het bedrijf mean en lean kan houden. Vraag: welke aspecten binnen GPR Gebouw zijn minder van toepassing op renovatie? En waarom is gekozen voor de huidige weergave ? - Aspecten als water, light & visual comfort, social safety zijn niet typische facetten die worden verbeterd door het toepassen van een renovatie. - Geluid is een van de grootste binnenmilieuproblemen in de Nederlandse woningsector. Zeker bij gestapelde woningbouw,veel (sociale) verhuur, dus corporaties hebben last van deze klachten. Is een veel meer gehoord probleem dan energielasten van de bewoners. - In GPR Gebouw is bewust geen weging van factoren meegenomen. Daarmee verlies je namelijk heel veel informatie die erg nuttig kan zijn. Elke opdrachtgever heeft namelijk andere belangen, daardoor verschilt het per opdrachtgever op welke aspecten hij de nadruk wil leggen, waar hij goed op wil scoren. Bij het toepassen van
14
-
-
-
-
-
vooraf bepaalde weegfactoren en het integreren van de deelscores per module in een eindscore, gaat op deze manier veel kostbare informatie verloren. Een enkele score kan je wel gebruiken binnen je model, maar dan moet je wel transparant zijn in hoe deze tot stand komt. Dus leg je weging uit en laat de onderbouwing van de eindscore ook zien. In de onderbouwing zit dan een boel informatie die interessant is voor opdrachtgevers. Primaire redenen om te renoveren zijn: o Energie (kosten) o Gezondheid Redenen om te renoveren zijn niet: o Milieu impact (LCEI) o Watergebruik De kwaliteit van een concept kun je voorspellen op basis van fysische randvoorwaarden. Specialisten met kennis van constructies kunnen op basis van hun expertise voorspellen wat de prestatie van een gebouw zullen zijn, gegeven de bouwkundige eigenschappen van een gebouw. GPR Gebouw is ontwikkeld, zodat de stakeholders in de bouwkolom er zelf mee aan de slag kunnen. Zo moet een architect zelf aan de hand van een GPR gebouw berekening die hij zelf heeft uitgevoerd, in 2-3 uur kunnen bepalen wat de eigenschappen van een gebouw zijn op de opgestelde modules.
Vraag: Waarom is het onderdeel kosten niet opgenomen in het model? - Kosten is echt een vak apart. - Daarnaast is het erg moeilijk om duurzaamheid en de invloed daarvan op de vastgoedwaarde in kaart te brengen. Er spelen een heleboel facetten een rol. Veel mensen zijn er van overtuigd dat de waarde van vastgoed stijgt, niet alleen als de energieprestatie van een gebouw hoger is, maar ook als andere kwaliteitsaspecten beter scoren. - Dit heeft bijvoorbeeld ook betrekking op het begrip waardebeleving. Dit is typisch een erg gevoelsmatig aspect van duurzaamheid, waarvan iedereen er eigenlijk wel van overtuigd is dat het een waarde heeft, maar waarvan het heel erg moeilijk is om deze waarde te kwantificeren of kapitaliseren. Vraag: Welke aspecten zouden volgens u moeten worden opgenomen in een performance evaluatie model voor renovatieconcepten? - De aspecten die zijn opgenomen in het GPR gebouw model. Dus dat zijn o Energieprestatie o Milieu impact o Kwaliteitsaspecten - De kosten zouden hier ook bij moeten, want om duurzaamheid breed toegepast te krijgen moet een concept financieel aantrekkelijk zijn om de partijen die vanuit financiële oogpunt handelen over de streep te kunnen trekken om duurzaamheid te implementeren. INTERVIEW P. VANDEGINSTE Interviewer: Geinterviewde: Functie: Interview gehouden op:
Jetse Vink Pieter Vandeginste Senior Acquisitie & Verkoopmanager 17-08-2010 om 13.30 uur
Persoonlijke geschiedenis Meneer Vandeginste is 9 jaar actief geweest als vastgoed ontwikkelaar (woningbouw) en is tijdens zijn loopbaan veel bezig geweest met duurzaamheid vanuit de ontwikkelaar. Hij is tijdelijk directeur geweest van een vastgoedontwikkelaar en werkt nu als acquisitie en verkoopmanager bij een vastgoedbelegger. In zijn huidige functie is hij bezig met de ontwikkeling van vastgoed vanuit de belegger. 15
Vraag: Kunt u wat meer vertellen over duurzaamheid in de vastgoedontwikkeling en de manier waarop u dat heeft zien veranderen tijdens uw loopbaan? - Tijdens mijn loopbaan zie ik de relatie tussen vastgoedontwikkelaar en vastgoedbelegger steeds nauwer worden. Een ontwikkelaar probeert tegenwoordig alle risico‟s die te maken hebben met de realisatie van een project neer te leggen bij de aannemer. Aan de andere kant probeert hij alle risico‟s die te maken hebben met de exploitatie neer te leggen bij de belegger. Ofwel, de rol van de vastgoedontwikkelaar wordt steeds kleiner. - De toegevoegde waarde van een ontwikkelaar wordt steeds minder, tenzij je als ontwikkelaar onderscheidend vermogen kunt leveren op een nichemarkt. Duurzaamheid is een voorbeeld van zo´n nichemarkt waar je je als ontwikkelaar op zou kunnen focussen en onderscheiden. Als je dat goed kan, heb je echt toegevoegde waarde in de kolom. Als je dit onderscheidende vermogen niet hebt, wordt je rol steeds kleiner. - In mijn optiek gaat het toevoegen van vastgoed een steeds minder belangrijke rol spelen in de gebouwde omgeving. Wat steeds belangrijker wordt is het vervangen van bestaande vastgoed, renovatie dus. Vraag: Op welke manier en naar welke aspecten van duurzaamheid wordt gekeken vanuit een vastgoedontwikkelaar / vastgoedbelegger? - Een belegger kijkt op twee manieren naar vastgoed o Wat is mijn directe marktrendement? (komt binnen via de huur) o Wat is mijn eindwaarde? (exit yield) - De huurinkomsten voor een belegger in de woningbouw wordt voornamelijk bepaald door het WWS. (Woningwaarderingstelsel) - Voor een belegger zijn kosten, opbrengsten en risico van belang. Kort samengevat zijn dat de enige drie factoren die een rol spelen in de wereld van een vastgoedontwikkelaar en vastgoedbelegger - De relatie tussen kosten en opbrengsten is erg belangrijk. Als je het hebt over duurzaamheid, kan een concept met hogere kosten, ook hogere opbrengsten genereren of minder risico leveren, waardoor het toch interessant is om voor het concept te kiezen dat hogere kosten kent dan alternatieven. - Persoonlijk denk ik dat de financiele kant van duurzaamheid het belangrijkte is. Kijk maar naar de auto mobiel industrie. Auto‟s als de Prius gingen pas super goed lopen toen er vanuit de overheid een subsidie werd verstrekt op de bijtelling van die wagens. Toen begon de auto populair te worden. Hieruit kun je afleiden dat de keuze voor deze auto niet voortkwam vanuit de duurzaamheidsgedachte, maar vanuit financiele overwegingen. Ditzelfde principe geldt ook voor woningen. Aanpassingen moeten door de gebruikers! In positieve zin voelbaar zijn in de portemonnee. Daar ligt de sleutel tot succes. Vraag: Wat vindt u van het opgestelde model en welke factoren zou u daar aan toe willen voegen? - EPC is in mijn ogen meer een randvoorwaarde. Niet zozeer een prestatie van een renovatieconcept. Ook is het geen goed communicatiemiddel, omdat niemand EPC snapt. Ik zou deze daarom, vanuit ontwikkelaars/beleggersoogpunt, niet opnemen in het model. - Module kwaliteit toevoegen - Life cycle opbrengsten opnemen in het model. Dan kun je namelijk financiele haalbaarheid in kaart brengen. Alleen kosten zegt te weinig over een concept. - Je zou kunnen kijken wat een bepaald renovatieconcept voor invloed heeft op de risico opslag voor stukken vastgoed in de portefeuille.
16
CONSULT M. DANSEN Interviewer: Geconsulteerde: Functie: Geconsulteerd op:
Jetse Vink Maarten Dansen Project Manager – Dutch Green Building Coucil 13-08-2010 om 13.30 uur
Vragen Wat vindt u van de opgenomen aspecten in het model? De basis doet me denk aan de NEN EN 15978, die nu in ontwikkeling is: EPBD, LCC, LCA. Ik vroeg me even af voor wie de tool is? Je spreekt over waardebepaling voor de eigenaar. In hoeverre is de LCA van materialen relevant voor een belegger? Of een particuliere eigenaar? Een LCA waarde van een product zegt weinig over de noodzaak tot renovatie. Zijn er aspecten die missen in het model? Denk hierbij aan risico analyses voor een woningportefeuille: voorzieningen in de buurt, openbaar vervoer, school, sportvereniging etc. Of kijk eens naar Politie Keurmerk Veilig Wonen of Woonkeur. Zijn er aspecten waarvan u denkt dat deze er niet in thuis horen, of beter op een andere manier weergegeven zouden moeten worden? Geheel afhankelijk van de doelgroep, zoals de genoemde LCA. Heeft u aanvullingen op de lijst van kwaliteitsaspecten die nu nog niet zijn opgenomen in bovenstaande lijst met aspecten die nog verwerkt zullen worden? Er ontbreken management aspecten, kwaliteitscontrole (commissioning, het niet goed inregelen veroorzaakt problemen zoals bekend: Vathorst), instructies voor de gebruiker (De gebruiker is erg belangrijk: Het goed instureren van de gebruiker kan al een energiebesparing opleveren van 50%: Centre for People and Buildings). Termische test / blowerdoor testen zetten druk op de aannemer en voorkomen koudebruggen. Hoe zou u de genoemde kwaliteitscriteria scoren? Om toch een vergelijking te kunnen maken tussen verschillende concepten? Concentreer je op de dingen die goed te kwantificeren zijn en hou de rest als wisselgeld. Heeft u tips voor mij m.b.t. Wat betreft die "financiele winsten" verwijs ik je graag naar het consumentenonderzoek 'Baat het niet, dan gaat het niet' waarvan verslag wordt gedaan in het NAW Dossier Consument en Duurzaamheid van april 2010. Dat betreft een grootschalig landelijk onderzoek naar markt en prijsacceptatie van energiezuinige woningen onder uiteindelijk (betreft immers een driefasenonderzoek, zowel kwalitatief als kwantitatief en oa gebaseerd op de Theory of the Planned Behaviour) verhuisgeneigde kopers van nieuwbouwwoningen. Onderzoek te downloaden via www.naw.nl/dossier Daarnaast is er nog een onderzoek van Annelinda van Eck over Willingness to Pay voor duurzame woningen (tu delft) En heeft Nils Kok en Dirk Brounen ook onderzoek gedaan naar de energielabels. Bekijk ook eens Neprom PRO feb 2010 nummer 15 “Zo wil ik wonen”. “Waarde creatie: hoe stuurbaar is het” (Kees Graaf, Frank van Dam en Anke Bodewes) De prijs van een plek, Ruimtelijk planbureau, apr 2006 www.pbl.nl Naar een woningmarkt voor en door bewoners, visie consumentgericht bouwen NVM sep 09.
17
RESULTS EXPERT INTERVIEWS For this research seven experts are interviewed to identify factors that influence the performance of renovation concepts. To create a comprising view on factors of influence on the performance of renovation concepts, experts that are active in different market sectors are interviewed. In this research experts are interviewed that are active in the sectors real estate development, real estate investment, social housing market, sustainability assessment sector, and sustainable development sector. The mentioned factors during the interviews are listed in figure 5. Respondent P. Tielkes (Housing corporation)
R. van Eeuwijk (Real estate investment) A. Van Kessel (Sustainable development)
J. Mak (Sustainability assessment)
P. Vandeginste (Real estate development) M. Dansen (Sustainability assessment)
O. van Kampen (life cycle costing) FIGURE
18
Mentioned factors of influence on the sustainable performance of renovation concepts - Financial feasibility (costs and yields) - Energy performance - Specifications of the concept - Comfort - Quality - Initial investment - Impact of concept on current tenants - Financial feasibility (costs and yields) - Change over costs are important in renovation projects - Quality - Environmental impact - Costs - Quality Comfort Future value Easy to use Influence of user Flexibility - Energy performance - Value for the dwelling (yields) - Energy performance - Health Acoustic comfort is currently very important - Environmental impact - User quality - Future value - Costs - Real estate value - Yields (primary and secundary) - Risk - Costs - Quality - Area facilities Public transport facilities School / sportclub - Management aspects Quality controle Regulating / settings of the system User instructions - Information about the integrated factors of a LCC calculation.
5 - MENTIONED FACTOR S OF INFLUENCE BY RESPO ND EN TS
APPENDIX C - MODEL APPLICATION This appendix provides an elaboration of the model application. The boundary conditions, model input, model output, and model results are successively elaborated.
C1. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS In this part of the appendix, information is provided about the input on the boundary conditions. The scope, reference building, scenarios for lifespan of building and scenarios for lifespan of elements/change rate of the house are elaborated. SCOPE In this assessment, 3 alternatives for the renovation are evaluated and compared. The selected alternatives are: 1. No renovation 2. Standard renovation 3. WarmBouwen renovation NO RENOVATION The renovation alternative no renovation is defined to evaluate whether or not it is effective to apply sustainability measures to houses at all. Characteristics of the „no renovation‟ alternative are stated in the bullets below. -
No constructive sustainability measures are applied No sustainable installation measures are applied No ventilation measures are applied Existing elements are replaced during the life cycle based on the lifespan of elements assumption.
STANDARD RENOVATION To determine the performance of the „WarmBouwen renovation‟ alternative with conventional renovation measures, a standard renovation alternative is defined. The standard renovation alternative as defined in this research is based on the doctoral thesis of Hoppe (2009). Figure 6 shows a table that describes different sustainability measures that can be applied at renovations, and to what extend each of these measures are applied in the Netherlands. In this research the standard renovation concept is composed by the current broadly applied measures in the Netherlands.
Energy measure
C oncrete measure
Private sector A*
Increased efficiency of heating system
A*
B **
C***
92%
93% 63%
82%
85%
58%
55%
43% 80%
30%
30%
21%
Floor on 1st floor
41%
37% 30%
11%
27%
42%
Roof
67%
73% 57%
37%
56%
72%
Facade
54%
53% 33%
45%
60%
52%
Windows
76%
74% 63%
54%
63%
76%
C rawling space
38%
36% 20%
10%
23%
37%
4%
22%
16%
<1%
<1%
<1%
Individual C Hsystem High-Efficiency boiler next to individual C H system
Insulation of facades
B **
Rental sector
C***
Decreased Insulation piping 42% 30% 15% losses for spaceheating and water heating Optimization use Balance 1% <1% <1% of ventilation ventilation on system request Renewable energy sources
Solar heat system 2%
1%
<1%
<1%
1%
<1%
Heat pump
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
PV-system
2%
2%
1%
<1%
1%
<1%
Energy saving lightning techniques
32% 23% 10% 25% 15% 6% Sensored outside lighting Energy saving 10% 10% 7% 10% 10% 10% lamps
*
Duplex house
**
Single family house
***
Multi family house
FIGURE
6 – ADOPTION OF SUST AIN ABLE
RENOVATION MEASURE S IN THE CURRENT HOUSING ST OCK
19
[ NL ]. ( H OP PE , 2009)
The standard renovation concept as defined in this research is equal to renovation concept #1113 from the report “Toolkit bestaande bouw - duurzame woningverbetering”. More information about concept #1113 is provided in Appendix O. Characteristics of the standard renovation alternative are stated in the bullets below. - Four constructive measures are applied. Roof insulation Façade insulation Floor insulation Double glazing - Two installation techniques are applied. High efficiency boiler Mechanical ventilation system (self-regulating grids) WARMBOUWEN RENOVATION The third renovation alternative that is selected for this assessment is the WarmBouwen renovation alternative. Characteristics of the WarmBouwen renovation alternative are stated in the bullets below. - Three constructive measures are applied Roof insulation Façade insulation Double glazing - Three installation techniques are applied Aquifer Heat pump Wall heating system More detailed information about the characteristics of the WarmBouwen concept is elaborated in paragraph 5.1 of the thesis.
REFERENCE BUILDING For the elaboration of the case, a reference house is selected. The renovation concepts are simulated on this reference building. To make information from the application of the model as generic as possible, a building is selected which is representative and common in the Dutch housing market. In the brochure „Voorbeeldwoningen bestaande bouw 2007‟, (SenterNovem, 2007) an overview is given of the current housing stock in the Netherlands. Figure 7 provides a graphical overview of the types of houses that are represented in the Netherlands, and to what extend these types of houses occur in the Netherlands. Building period < 1945 46-'65 66-'75 76-'79 80-'88 89-'00 Total Detached house > 150 m2 3% 2,2% 2,2% 7% Detached house ≤ 150 m2 5% 2,3% 1% 8% Semi detached house 6% 4,6% 2% 13% Row House 7,5% 10% 10,0% 2,5% 7,0% 5% 42% Maisonette 3% 1,4% 0,3% 5% Gallery flat 1,7% 3,2% 1,6% 7% Porch flat 7% 2,7% 1,4% 11% Flats remaining 3,4% 3,1% 1,1% 8% Total 47% 39,0% 14,6% 100% FIGURE
20
7 - HOUSING TYPES IN THE NETHERL AND S . SOURCE : SENTERNO VEM
Figure 7 points out that a row house is the most common type of house in the Netherlands. Therefore, this type of house is selected as the reference house in this research. If we look to the construction periods of row houses in figure 7, it can be said that especially between 1946 and 1975 a lot of these houses have been built. From the report „Voorbeeldwoningen bestaande bouw 2007‟ it can be derived that the energy performance of the row houses built between 1946 and 1965 is nearly the same as the energy performance of the row houses between 1966 and 1975. Figure 8 shows a picture of a typical Dutch row house.
FIGURE
8 - TYPICAL DUTCH ROW HOUSE
CONSTRUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS REFERENCE BUILDING Figure 9 presents the constructive characteristics of a row house, which is built between 1945 and 1965. These constructive characteristics are input for the determination of the energy performance coefficient of the house. Constructive aspects General Aspect Surface Orientation Awning
Value 95,8 N/S not present
Unity 2 [m ] front/back -
Transmission Aspect Ground level - floor Roof (slope) Front facade Glass type 1 - front facade Glass type 2 - front facade Back facade Glass type 1 - back facade Glass type 2 - back facade
Surface [m2] 42,5 55,5 17,2 5,1 3,4 17,2 5,1 3,4
U-value [W/m2K] 2,44 0,47 1,89 5,10 3,10 1,89 5,10 3,10
Infiltration Aspect Qv;10 characteristic
[dm3/s] 232,31
[dm3/s/m2] 2,425
Rc-value [m2K/W] 0,15 1,97 0,36 0,20 0,32 0,36 0,20 0,32
Thermal capacity Traditional - mixed heavy FIGURE
9- CON STRUCTIVE ASPECTS ROW HOU SE ( SENTERN OVE M , 2007)
INSTALLATION CHARACTERISTICS REFERENCE BUILDING Figure 10 provides information about the installation technical aspects of a row house without renovation. These aspects are input for the determination of the energy performance coefficient of the Installations house. Heating Aspect Heating system Type Type of emmission
Value individual central heating system efficiency boiler radiators
Cooling Aspect Type of cooling
Value no cooling
Warm tap water Aspect Heating system Classification of system
gas fired combi boiler n/a
Ventilation No ventilation Solar energy systems No solar energy systems FIGURE
21
10- IN STALLAT ION ASPECTS ROW HOU SE ( SENTERN OVE M , 2007)
LIFESPAN OF BUILDING The lifespan of a building after application of a sustainable renovation influences the performance of a sustainable renovation concept. If the lifespan of a house after renovation is short (e.g. 10 years), other renovation measures are interesting than if the lifespan of a house after renovation is long (e.g. 75 years). Therefore, three scenarios for the lifespan of a building after renovation are defined in this section. Figure 11 shows three definitions of functional time levels of buildings in case of new development. Functional time level of constructions Duffy 50-75 years Brand 30-300 years Building code New Zealind >50 years FIGURE
11 - FUNCTIONAL TIME LE VEL S OF BUILDING S ( DURMISEVIC , 2006)
Figure 11 shows that experts define different lifespan of buildings. In the report “Duurzaamheid loont”, Bijdendijk (2007) describes that the current social dwellings in the Netherland have an average lifespan of 50 years. For a comprising view on the life cycle performance of the renovation concepts that are evaluated in this research, different scenarios are elaborated. Figure 12 shows the scenarios for lifespan extension after renovation that are elaborated in this research. These scenarios are based on information from the report „Transformable Building Structures‟ (Durmisevic, 2006). Extension of the building's lifespan Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Extension is lower than expected
Extension is as expected
Extension is higher than expected
25 years FIGURE
50 years
75 years
12 - EXTENSIO N OF BUILDING ' S LIFESPAN AFTER RENO VATION
LIFESPAN OF ELEMENTS The functional lifespan of the applied elements of a renovation concept influences the sustainable performance of a renovation concept. To define this boundary condition, the elements of a system and their technical- and functional lifespan are analyzed. In the doctoral thesis „Transformable Building Structures‟, Durmisevic (2006) states that different building components and -systems have different degrees of durability. Figure 13 presents four components of a building with different degrees of durability.
FIGURE
22
13 - DEGREES OF DURABILIT Y OF BUILDING P ARTS
Durmisevic (2006) also states that due to all the present changes in the world, the requirements for houses and its functionalities also changes. Research by a housing corporation in Amsterdam points out that the changing sequence in dwellings is increasing. Figure 14 shows the pulse of change in dwellings (Rigo, 1999).
5 years
living room FIGURE
10 years
bedroom
15 years
kitchen
20 years
working room
25 years
bathroom
14 - PULSE OF CHANGE IN D WELL ING S
Figure 14 shows the change rate of different rooms in dwellings. Despite the technical status of different rooms in a house, changes are implemented during the life cycle of a house, which leads to an increase of costs and environmental impact. Thus, the technical durability of elements varies from the functional variability due to the change rate in dwellings. This concept also accounts for elements of renovation concepts. There is a difference between technical life span and functional life span. The functional life span is related to the use of a building or component while the technical life span is determined by its technical state (Durmisevic, 2006). For this research the functional life cycles of the implemented elements are relevant, because the functional life cycle determines the change rate and thereby the impact on the sustainable performance. It is hard to predict what the average functional life span of elements of the three different renovation concepts will be. Therefore, three scenarios are elaborated to provide a comprising view on the effect of flexibility and change rate on the costs and environmental impact of renovation concepts. Durmisevic (2006) describes different definitions of functional time levels of building components. Figure 15 gives an overview of these different definitions. Duffy's model Component Interpretation of component Shell Services Scenery Set
Main structure of the building cabling, plumbing, conditioning, vertical communications Partitions, ceilings, finishes Furniture
Component Site Structure Skin Services Space plan Stuff
Interpretation of component Urban location Foundation of load bearing elements Exterior finishing Heating, ventilation, airconditioning, communication, electrical wiring Interior lay out including vertical partitioning Furniture
Life span (years) 50-75 15-20 5-7 0
Brand's model Life span (years) eternal 30-300 20 7-15 3 0
Building code in New Zealand Component Interpretation of component Structure building elements such as floors and walls for structural stability Services with difficult acces and for hidden fixes Other fixings FIGURE
Life span (years) >50 >50 15
15- LIFE SPAN DEFINITIONS OF BUILDING ELEMENTS (DURMISEVIC, 2006)
It can be concluded that there is not a one-sided answer to the question: What is the functional life span of renovation elements? Therefore this research elaborates three scenarios for the life span of building element in the three alternative concepts for renovation.
23
Scenario 1: Functional lifespan of the elements is lower than expected & functional change rate is higher than expected. Scenario 2: Functional lifespan of the elements is as expected & functional change rate is as expected Scenario 3: Functional lifespan of the elements is higher than expected & functional change rate is slower than expected. The change rate of a building and lifespan of elements in the three selected renovation concepts are elaborated in figure 16. Functional lifespan of renovation elements Element
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
C hange rate of C hange rate of C onstructive elements dwelling: once in 5 dwelling: once in years. 10 years.
Scenario 3 C hange rate of dwelling: once in 20 years.
Lifecycle of installations Scenario 1 Scenario 2 No renovation
Element Boiler
10
15
Scenario 3 20
Standard renovation Boiler Mechanical ventilation
10 5
15 10
20 15
WarmBouwen renovation Heat pump Acquifer
FIGURE
10 25
15 50
20 75
16 - SCEN ARIO S FOR CHANG E RATES AND LIFE SPANS OF INSTALLAT ION ELEM ENTS
The impact of the lifespan of elements and functional changes on the life cycle performance of a renovation concept is determined by assuming a scenario change of the house. More information about this scenario change is provided in appendix R.
24
C2. INPUT MODEL ASPECTS This subparagraph elaborates the input that is used to determine the results of the identified factors of influence. The input on the aspects life cycle cost, life cycle yields, life cycle environmental impact, quality, and energy performance coefficient are successively elaborated. Assumptions that are made for determining the input of the model aspects are listed in appendix S.
C2.1. LIFE CYCLE COSTS This appendix provides information about the input parameters that are used to determine the performance on the factor „life cycle costs‟ of each alternative at the different defined scenario. To determine the output on the factor „life cycle costs‟, the software tool LCC-Lite, developed by S&G en Partners is used. FINANCIAL FACTORS INITIAL INVESTMENT
The initial investment that is required to execute the three renovation concepts are elaborated in this section. No renovation Element Radiator + piping Efficiency boiler Total FIGURE
Costs (€) 3500 (350*10) 2490 5990
Source Maat b.v. (expert consult) www.milieucentraal.nl
17 - INITIAL INVE STMENT NO REN OVATION
Standard renovation Element Radiator + piping High efficiency boiler Roof insulation Floor insulation Façade insulation Double glazing Ventilation system Total
Costs (€) 3500 (350*10) 3430 4913 1419 2432 2666 5961 24321
Source Maat b.v. (expert consult) www.milieucentraal.nl Toolkit bestaande bouw Toolkit bestaande bouw Toolkit bestaande bouw Toolkit bestaande bouw Toolkit bestaande bouw
WarmBouwen renovation Element Roof insulation Windows Aquifer Heat pump Wall heating system Total
Costs (€) 4913 2666 CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL
Source Toolkit bestaande bouw Toolkit bestaande bouw Case: Forteck “Krayenhoff” Case: Forteck “Krayenhoff” Case: De Tempel
OPERATING COSTS
The operating costs consist of the costs that are involved at energy use during the life cycle of the house. The yearly operating costs are described per alternative. The table below shows the input parameters that are used in the operating costs calculation. 25
Aspect Caloric value of gas Price of gas Price of electricity
Value 33,41 MJ/m3 0.61 €/m3 0.23 €/kWh
No renovation Aspect Heating Secondary heating energy Warm tap water Summer comfort Fixed costs for connection electricity grid Fixed costs for connection to gas grid Energy tax decrease Total
to
Standard renovation Aspect Heating Secondary heating energy Warm tap water Ventilation Summer comfort Fixed costs for connection electricity grid Fixed costs for connection to gas grid Energy tax decrease Total
to
WarmBouwen renovation Aspect Heating Secondary heating energy Warm tap water Summer comfort Fixed costs for connection electricity grid Energy tax decrease Total
to
Source nl.wikipedia.org www.lage-energierekening.nl www.lage-energierekening.nl
Energy source Gas Electricity Gas Electricity -
Used (MJ) 60858 4743 29247 441 -
energy
Costs (€)
-
-
180,21
-
-
-379,16 2014
Energy source Gas Electricity Gas Electricity Electricity -
Used (MJ) 24815 2243 18229 3095 1994 -
-
-
180,21
-
-
-379,16 1619
Energy source Electricity Electricity Electricity Electricity -
Used (MJ) 11296 969 13499 339 -
-
-
1111 303 534 28 237
energy
Costs (€) 453 143 333 524 127 237
energy
Costs (€) 722 62 862 22 237 -379,16 1526
MAINTENANCE COSTS
This section describes the yearly maintenance costs of elements in the renovation alternatives. No renovation Maintenance element Boiler
26
Costs (€) 141
Source Ministerie van EZ, 2009
Standard renovation Maintenance element Boiler Ventilator
Costs (€) 141 85
Source Ministerie van EZ, 2009 Forteck, Ontwikkelaars informatiemap, 2009
WarmBouwen renovation Maintenance element Heat pump Aquifer
Costs (€) 133 20
Source www.senternovem.nl A. van Kessel, Local Company
DISPOSAL COSTS
To determine the disposal costs, the assumption is made that the disposal costs for the three renovation concepts are equal (see assumption #5, appendix S). The end-of-life disposal cost of a house is not significantly influenced by the applied renovation alternative. The figure below shows the end-of-life disposal costs for the renovation concepts. Alternative Costs (€) Source No renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun Standard renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun WarmBouwen renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun CHANGE OVER COSTS
The changeover costs are equal to the disposal costs. The changeover costs of the three renovation alternatives are equal. The figure below shows the changeover costs for the renovation concepts. Alternative Costs (€) Source No renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun Standard renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun WarmBouwen renovation 1300 Mr. Steenbeek, Heijn Heun REPLACEMENT COSTS OF ELEMENTS
The replacement costs of elements of a renovation alternative during the life cycle of a house depend on two factors: 1. Lifespan of the building 2. Lifespan of elements For both of these factors, 3 scenarios are defined in this research (see appendix C1). To determine the replacement costs of elements for the three renovation alternatives on all scenarios, a time bar is made. To give more insight in the determination of the replacement costs of elements, one example of the time bar method is elaborated in this section. Example Scenario: -
2.2.2.x Standard renovation Lifespan of building: as expected (=50 years) Lifespan of elements/change rate: as expected
Figure 18 shows a time bar that indicates which elements are replaced during the life cycle of the house in scenario 2.2.2.x. Based on this time bar the replacements costs are determined and processed in the life cycle costs calculation. This calculation is executed
27
for each alternative in each scenario. The results from these calculations are described in appendix C3. A = Replacing boiler B = Replacing ventilator C = Replacing radiators D = Replacing windows E = Replacing walls
0
5
B C E
A
B C D E
10
15
20
A B C E
25
30
B C D E
35
40
A
45
50
t = 50 FIGURE
18 - LIFE CYCLE TIME BAR FOR DETERMINING REPLAC E MENT
For determining the replacement of radiators and interior walls, assumption #8 (see appendix R) is made. EXTERNAL FACTORS DISCOUNT RATE Year
Discount rates
2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005
FIGURE
28
1,45 1,45 1,45 1,77 1,77 1,77 2,22 2,22 2,74 3,47 4,99 4,99 5,36 5,36 5,36 4,59 4,59 5,19 5,19 5,42 5,42 4,62 4,62 4,62 4,36 4,36 4,36 3,7 3,7 4,08 4,08 4,08 4,08
Average % per year 2,52
5,09
4,94
4,10
2,84
Year
Discount rates
2005 2005 2004 2004 2003 2003 2003 2002 2001 2001 2000 2000 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1997
4,08 4,08 4,43 4,43 3,95 3,95 4,8 5,06 5,23 6,33 5,7 5,7 5,61 4,76 4,76 4,76 4,76 4,76 4,93 4,93 5,95 5,95 5,95 5,95 5,95 5,56
Total average discount rate Plus 100 points for calcution value
19 - DISCOUNT RATE EU
Average % per year
4,43 4,23
5,06 5,78 5,70 4,90
5,66
The average discount rate for funding in the model is determined based upon the discount rate that the European Union prescribes to governments. This discount rate kept up from 1997. Figure 19 shows the discount rates that have been determined by the European Union. The analysis show that the reference rate is 4,68. Depending on the use of the reference rate, the appropriate margins have still to be added. For the discount rate this means that a margin of 100 basis points has to be added (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legisl ation/reference_rates.html, 2010)
5,56 4,68 5,68
The discount rate that is defined for this research is: 5.68%.
DEVELOPMENT ENERGY PRICE
The development of the gas price and electricity price has an impact on the performance on the factor „life cycle costs‟ of a renovation concept. Therefore, the development of this factor is analyzed. For the calculation of life cycle costs in this research, the assumption is made that the development in future will be the same as the development between the years 1996 and 2009, which is analyzed in figure 20.
FIGURE
20 - DEVELO PMENT ENERGY PRIC ES . SOURCE : CBS
Figure 20 shows that the gas price in the Netherlands increased with 8% - 8,7% per year during the last fourteen years. An average household in the Netherlands uses about 1600 m3 gas. Therefore the percentage that is defined for this research is the average between the increase for a usage of 500m3 and a usage of 200 m3 (see figure 20). The average gas price increases with = 8.34% per year in the Netherlands. For the calculation of the average price increase of electricity in the Netherland the assumption is made that fifty percent of the Dutch electricity users use single rate electricity and the other fifty percent of the users use double rate electricity. The average electricity price increases with = 8.59% per year in the Netherlands. There is uncertainty about the development of the energy price. Therefore three scenarios are defined. These scenarios are defined based on the analysis above: Scenario 1: development is =5% per year (lower than expected) Scenario 2: development is =8% per year (expected) Scenario 3: development is =11% per year (higher than expected)
29
C2.2. LIFE CYCLE YIELDS The life cycle yields calculation is outside the scope of this research. However, in this section a suggestion for an approach is described. This suggestion is based on information from expert interviews with A. van Kessel & P. Vandeginste. To score renovation alternatives on the aspect of life cycle yields, a score must be determined for the factors that compose the life cycle yields. The factors that compose the life cycle yields are: -
Primary returns – rent Secondary returns – exit yield Risk
Primary returns To determine the approximate performance of the three renovation alternatives on the aspect of primary returns, the new “woning waarderingsstelsel (WWS)” is used. This new WWS will be implemented in 2011 in the Netherlands and is used to determine the score of a house. Based on this score a housing corporation determines the maximum rent for that house. The quality and energy performance coefficient of a house are factors that influence the score of a house, and thereby influence the rent and life cycle yields of a house. Appendix U shows an overview of the factors that influence the score of a house in the new “woning waarderingsstelsel” and provides more information about the new WWS. Figure 21 presents the score on primary returns of the three renovation alternatives that are defined in this research. Aspect of WWS 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 Total Rent per point (€) Rent Normalized scores FIGURE
Scores No renovation Standard renovation WarmBouwen renovation 70 70 70 7,5 7,5 7,5 9 9 9 8 32 40 4 4 4 8 8 8 4 4 4 12 12 12 10 10 10 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 122,5 146,5 154,5 4,5 551,25 0,79
4,5 659,25 0,95
4,5 695,25 1,00
21 - PRIMARY RETURNS BASED ON WWS 2010
Secondary returns Investments in real estate are written off in a certain period. The write off period depends on variables as level of investment, purpose of investment, nature of investment, etc. For sustainable renovation measures, which can be constructive as well as installation technical measures, it is plausible to assume that the average write off period of an investment is 20 years (Boswinkel, 2010). That means that the investments are written off at the moment that the houses are sold. However, renovated houses provide a higher level of quality and comfort and have a better energy performance, also at the moment of selling. Therefore, it can be assumed that the selling price, which determines the secondary returns, is influenced by the level of sustainability and quality. Figure 22 presents the assumption for the secondary return of the three renovation alternatives in the research. This assumption is based on the case study “De meerwaarde van vastgoed” , executed by G. Berkhout (2010). This case study points out that each label improvement (e.g. from label C to label D) results in 2% higher selling price.
30
Quality Energy label Assumed secundary returns FIGURE
No renovation Standard renovatoin WarmBouwen renovation 0,9 0,97 1 E B A+ 0,9
0,96
1
22 - SECOND ARY RETURNS BASED O N QUAL ITY AND EN ERGY PERFORMANCE
Risk Various risks play a role at the exploitation of a house. Analyzing these risks and determining the impact of the risks on the exploitation is outside the scope of this research. However, in the bullets below a first identification of risks is given. Based on these risks and the characterizations of the three evaluated renovation concepts in this research, an assumption is made for the performance on the aspect risks of each renovation alternative. Risks - Maintenance costs are higher than expected - Replacement costs are higher than expected - The percentage of debtors is higher than expected - The vacancy is higher than expected - System performance coefficient is lower than expected Based on these risks and the characterizations of the three renovation concepts, the score of each concept is expressed on a +/- scale. To determine a score, a plus results in +1 point, a zero results in +0 points, and minus results in -1 point. Thus, the performance of the three renovation alternatives is compared with each other. Based on the comparison a score is dedicated on each risk.
No renovation Risks Score Points Maintenance + 2 Replacement + 2 Debtors 0 1 Vacancy 0 System performance 0 1 Total points 6 Normalized score 0,86 FIGURE
31
23 - RISKS AT EXPL OITAT ION
Standard renovation Score Points 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0,29
WarmBouwen renovation Score Points 0 1 0 1 0 1 + 2 + 2 7 1
C2.3. LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT This appendix provides information about the input parameters that are used to determine the performance on the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ of each alternative on the different defined scenario. To determine the output on the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟, the software tool SimaPro, developed by PRé is used. ASSEMBLY MATERIALS
In this section, the materials that are applied during the life cycle of the three evaluated renovation alternatives are described. The quantities of materials and the accompanying unity are given. Appendix S describes the assumptions that are made in these calculations, and the processes that are required to produce the applied elements. Figures 24, 25 and 26 show the quantity of materials that is used during the whole life cycle of the house. The sources that provided input parameters for these figures are presented in appendix D. No renovation Component Central heating system
Elements Boiler
Materials Aluminum
Weight 6.5
Unity kg
Piping
Steel Cast iron Copper Aluminum PE Steel Steel
23 5 2 60 41 33 3.4
kg kg kg g/m g/m kg/m1 kg
Rubber Epoxy ABS Brass Single glass Sand-lime bricks Base plaster
0.645 0.126 0.045 0.15 11.25 750 1200
kg kg kg
Radiator Expansion barrel
Windows Internal walls FIGURE
Glass Wall
24 - QUANTIT IES „ N O RENO VAT ION ‟ ALTERN ATIVE
Standard renovation Component Central heating system
Elements Boiler
Materials Aluminum
Weight 6.5
Unity kg
Piping
Steel Cast iron Copper Aluminum PE Steel Steel
23 5 2 60 41 33 3.4
kg kg kg g/m g/m kg/m1 kg
Rubber Epoxy ABS Brass
0.645 0.126 0.045 0.15
kg kg kg kg
Radiator Expansion barrel
32
kg/m2 kg/m3 kg/m3
Windows Internal walls
Glass Wall
Ventilation
Ventilator
Roof insulation
Facade insulation Floor insulation FIGURE
Piping Insulation material Gypsum board Insulation material Insulation material
Double glass Sand-lime bricks Base plaster Steel ABS PE Steel Glass wool
22.5 750 1200 3 0.4 0.5 1.41 25
kg/m2 kg/m3 kg/m3 kg kg kg kg/m1 kg/m3
Gypsum PUR
800 28
kg/m3 kg/m3
PUR
28
kg/m3
Materials Cast iron Copper Barite Bauxite Bentonite Lead Chromium Manganese Nickel Silver Zinc Tin PVC Steel Steel Gypsum fibre board PIR PE Aluminum PE Double glass Glass wool
Weight 168.21 35.3 4.23 48.61 7.32 2.23 0.7 0.09 0.63 2.9 0.17 1.62 19.8 7930 24 21.5 30 35.2 60 41 22.5 25
Unity kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg/m1 kg/m3 kg kg/m2 kg/m3 kg/m3 g/m g/m kg/m2 kg/m3
Gypsum Sand-lime bricks Base plaster
800 750 1200
kg/m3 kg/m3 kg/m3
25 - QUANTIT IES ' STAND ARD RENO VAT ION ' ALTERN ATIVE
WarmBouwen renovation Component WarmBouwen system
Elements Heat pump
Aquifer
Piping
Wall heating system
Windows Roof insulation
Internal walls FIGURE
Pumps Gypsum board Insulation #1 Insulation #2 Piping Glass Insulation material Gypsum board Wall
26 - QUANTIT IES ' WARMBOUWE N RENO VATION ' ALTERN ATIVE
PROCESSING & MANUFACTURING
Appendix S described the processes that are required to produce the applied elements.
33
TRANSPORT
To determine the environmental impact due to transport of materials and elements, three transport scenarios are defined. The scenarios are defined, based on expert consults during the research. Three different transport scenarios have been defined for the determining the environmental impact due to transport of elements: Scenario 1: 200 km Scenario 2: 600 km Scenario 3: 1000 km Figure 27 presents the elements of the three renovation alternatives and the transport scenario that is assigned to each element. Element
Applied in alternative
Boiler Heat pump Expansion barrel Glass Piping Ventilator Piping (air) Roof insulation Gypsum board Floor insulation Facade insulation Aquifer piping Aquifer pumps Insulation #1 WB Insulation #2 WB Fixed wall elements Flexible wall elements
No renovation / Standard renovation WarmBouwen renovation No renovation / Standard renovation All All Standard renovation Standard renovation Standard renovation / WarmBouwen renovation Standard renovation / WarmBouwen renovation Standard renovation Standard renovation WarmBouwen renovation WarmBouwen renovation WarmBouwen renovation WarmBouwen renovation All WarmBouwen renovation
FIGURE
Transport Scenario 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 1 1
27- TRANSPORT SCE NAR IO S PER ELEMENT
Appendix S provides information about the selected lorry for transportation activities at the model application in this research.
34
ASSEMBLY – QUANTITY OF MATERIALS
The figures in this appendix section present the determined quantities of materials for the determination of the life cycle environmental impact, per scenario and per renovation alternative. Alternative x.1.1.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element
No renovation
Boiler
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
25 2 1 4 16 0 0 600 1000
200 Su bW eig ht Sub element s sub ( kg ) Boiler aluminium 1 2 initial 2 1 initial 3 2 initial 4 1,5 initial Boiler steel 1 12 initial 2 0,5 initial 3 1,5 initial 4 9 initial Boiler cast iron 5 initial Boiler copper 2 initial Piping (rest) 3,034 initial Piping aluminium 4,44 initial 495 initial Expansion barrel (rest) 1 0,215 initial
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
2
0,126
3 4
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
2 2 2 1
0,045 0,15 10,2 382,5 8093 389,68
Boiler aluminium
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 16 16 2 2 2 2 2 1 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
6 3 6 4,5 36 1,5 4,5 27 15 6 7,8884 11,544 1287 0,645 0,126 0,045 0,15 10,2 765 2 1 15 35,25 145,7 555 86 84 8093 389,68
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
12,69 145,83 21,96 6,69 2,1 0,27 1,89 8,7 0,51 4,86 504,63 105,9 1980 211 144 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 765 145,7 555 8093 389,68
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
35
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
C han T o t al g es weig ht T KM ' s 2 6 109,5 2 3 2 6 2 4,5 2 36 2 1,5 2 4,5 2 27 2 15 2 6 16 7,8884 11,6594 16 11,544 16 1287 772,2 2 0,645 6,6996
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
W eig ht ( kg )
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
28 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .1.1. Y
76,5 1696,54 109,5
11,6594 772,2 6,6996
153 10,8
21,15 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 1696,54 816,03
1314,6 144 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 153 29,14 111 1696,54
Alternative x.1.2.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element
No renovation
Boiler
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
25 1 1 2 8 0 0 200
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
36
C han g es per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 1
Boiler aluminium
0,042 per barrel
1
0,084
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
1 1 1 1
0,03 0,1 6,8 382,5 4046,5 194,22
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
4 2 4 3 24 1 3 18 10 4 5,4612 7,992 891 0,43 0,084 0,03 0,1 6,8 765 1,2 1 9 35,25 145,7 555 86 84 4046,5 194,22
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
8,46 97,22 14,64 4,46 1,4 0,18 1,26 5,8 0,34 3,24 336,42 70,6 1980 211 96 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 765 145,7 555 4046,5 194,22
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
Ventilator (rest)
1 2 3 4
1 2
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
T o t al weig ht T KM ' s 4 73 2 4 3 24 1 3 18 10 4 5,4612 8,07192 7,992 891 534,6 0,43 4,4664
0,042 initial
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
W eig ht ( kg )
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
600
Su bW eig ht Sub element s sub ( kg ) Boiler aluminium 1 2 initial 2 1 initial 3 2 initial 4 1,5 initial Boiler steel 1 12 initial 2 0,5 initial 3 1,5 initial 4 9 initial Boiler cast iron 5 initial Boiler copper 2 initial Piping (rest) 3,034 initial Piping aluminium 4,44 initial 495 initial Expansion barrel (rest) 1 0,215 initial
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
Wall elements Plasterwork
29 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .1.2. Y
76,5 848,14
73
8,07192 534,6 4,4664
153 6,72
21,15 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 848,14
544,02
1314,6 96 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 153 29,14 111 848,14
Alternative x.1.3.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element Boiler
Sub element s Boiler aluminium
No renovation
Boiler steel
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
25 1 1 1 4 0 0 200
600
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 1 0,215
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial
2
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
1
0,084
3 4
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
1 1 1 1
0,03 0,1 6,8 382,5 1316,5 63,18
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
4 2 4 3 24 1 3 18 10 4 4,2476 6,216 693 0,43 0,084 0,03 0,1 6,8 765 0,8 1 6 35,25 145,7 555 86 84 1316,5 63,18
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
8,46 97,22 14,64 4,46 1,4 0,18 1,26 5,8 0,34 3,24 336,42 70,6 1980 211 96 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 765 145,7 555 1316,5 63,18
Su bsu
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler aluminium
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
37
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
C han g es per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 1
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
Wall elements Plasterwork
30 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .1.3. Y
T o t al weig ht T KM ' s 4 73 2 4 3 24 1 3 18 10 4 4,2476 6,27816 6,216 693 415,8 0,43 4,4664
76,5 275,94
73
6,27816 415,8 4,4664
153 4,68
21,15 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 275,94
544,02
1314,6 96 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 153 29,14 111 275,94
Alternative x.2.1.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element
No renovation
Boiler
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
50 4 2 9 42 1 1 200
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
38
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
C han T o t al g es weig ht T KM ' s 4 10 182,5 4 5 4 10 4 7,5 4 60 4 2,5 4 7,5 4 45 4 25 4 10 42 15,777 23,3189 42 23,088 42 2574 1544,4 4 1,075 11,166
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
4
0,21
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
4 4 4 2
0,075 0,25 17 573,75 17503 843,6
Boiler aluminium
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
W eig ht ( kg )
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
600
Su bW eig ht Sub element s sub ( kg ) Boiler aluminium 1 2 initial 2 1 initial 3 2 initial 4 1,5 initial Boiler steel 1 12 initial 2 0,5 initial 3 1,5 initial 4 9 initial Boiler cast iron 5 initial Boiler copper 2 initial Piping (rest) 3,034 initial Piping aluminium 4,44 initial 495 initial Expansion barrel (rest) 1 0,215 initial
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 42 42 42 4 4 4 4 4 2 9 1 9 1 0 0 0 0
10 182,5 5 10 7,5 60 2,5 7,5 45 25 10 15,777 23,3189 23,088 2574 1544,4 1,075 11,166 0,21 0,075 0,25 17 1147,5 229,5 4 21,6 2 30 70,5 42,3 145,7 29,14 555 111 86 17,2 84 16,8 17503 3669,22 843,6
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
21,15 1360,05 243,05 36,6 11,15 3,5 0,45 3,15 14,5 0,85 8,1 841,05 176,5 3960 2629,2 422 240 240 739,6 147,92 12,694 6,25392 18,576 30,96 6,192 3,63 0,726 1147,5 229,5 145,7 29,14 555 111 17503 3669,22 843,6
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
Wall elements Plasterwork
31 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .2.1. Y
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
114,75 3669,22
Alternative x.2.2.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element
No renovation
Boiler
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
50 3 2 4 22 1 0 200
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
39
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
C han T o t al g es weig ht 3 8 3 4 3 8 3 6 3 48 3 2 3 6 3 36 3 20 3 8 22 9,7088 22 14,208 22 1584 3 0,86
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
3
0,168
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
3 3 3 2
0,06 0,2 13,6 573,75 8093 388,44
Boiler aluminium
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 22 22 22 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 1 4 1 0 0 0 0
8 4 8 6 48 2 6 36 20 8 9,7088 14,208 1584 0,86 0,168 0,06 0,2 13,6 1147,5 2 2 15 70,5 145,7 555 86 84 8093 388,44
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
16,92 194,44 29,28 8,92 2,8 0,36 2,52 11,6 0,68 6,48 672,84 141,2 1980 211 192 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 1147,5 145,7 555 8093 388,44
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
W eig ht ( kg )
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
600
Su bW eig ht Sub element s sub ( kg ) Boiler aluminium 1 2 initial 2 1 initial 3 2 initial 4 1,5 initial Boiler steel 1 12 initial 2 0,5 initial 3 1,5 initial 4 9 initial Boiler cast iron 5 initial Boiler copper 2 initial Piping (rest) 3,034 initial Piping aluminium 4,44 initial 495 initial Expansion barrel (rest) 1 0,215 initial
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
32 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO S X .2.2. Y
T KM ' s 146
14,3501 950,4 8,9328
114,75 1696,29
146
14,3501 950,4 8,9328
229,5 11,4
42,3 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 1696,29
1088,04
1314,6 192 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 229,5 29,14 111 1696,29
Alternative x.2.3.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element Boiler
Sub element s Boiler aluminium
No renovation
Boiler steel
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
50 2 2 3 16 1 0 200
600
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 1 0,215
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial
2
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
2
0,126
3 4
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
2 2 2 2
0,045 0,15 10,2 573,75 4046,5 194,22
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 16 16 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 3 1 0 0 0 0
6 3 6 4,5 36 1,5 4,5 27 15 6 7,8884 11,544 1287 0,645 0,126 0,045 0,15 10,2 1147,5 1,6 2 12 70,5 145,7 555 86 84 4046,5 194,22
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
12,69 145,83 21,96 6,69 2,1 0,27 1,89 8,7 0,51 4,86 504,63 105,9 1980 211 144 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 1147,5 145,7 555 4046,5 194,22
Su bsu
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler aluminium
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
40
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
C han T o t al g es weig ht T KM ' s 2 6 109,5 2 3 2 6 2 4,5 2 36 2 1,5 2 4,5 2 27 2 15 2 6 16 7,8884 11,6594 16 11,544 16 1287 772,2 2 0,645 6,6996
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
33 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .2.3. Y
114,75 848,14
109,5
11,6594 772,2 6,6996
229,5 9,36
42,3 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 848,14
816,03
1314,6 144 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 229,5 29,14 111 848,14
Alternative x.3.1.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element Boiler
Sub element s Boiler aluminium
No renovation
Boiler steel
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
75 7 3 14 68 2 1 200
Su bsu 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
41
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 68 68 68 7
Boiler aluminium
0,042 per barrel
7
0,336
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
7 7 7 3
0,12 0,4 27,2 765 28326 1359,5
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 68 68 68 7 7 7 7 7 3 14 2 14 2 0 0 0 0
16 8 16 12 96 4 12 72 40 16 23,665 34,632 3861 1,72 0,336 0,12 0,4 27,2 1530 6 3 45 105,75 145,7 555 86 84 28326 1359,5
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
33,84 388,88 58,56 17,84 5,6 0,72 5,04 23,2 1,36 12,96 1345,7 282,4 3960 422 384 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 1530 145,7 555 28326 1359,5
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
Ventilator (rest)
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
1 2 3 4
1 2
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
T o t al weig ht T KM ' s 16 292 8 16 12 96 4 12 72 40 16 23,665 34,9783 34,632 3861 2316,6 1,72 17,8656
0,042 initial
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial
C han g es
3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
W eig ht ( kg )
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215
600
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
34 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .3.1. Y
153 5937,01
292
34,9783 2316,6 17,8656
306 32,4
63,45 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 5937,01
2176,08
2629,2 384 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 306 29,14 111 5937,01
Alternative x.3.1.y (flexible walls) Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
75 7 3 14 68 2 1 200
600
1000
Fixed walls
WarmBouwen renovation
Element Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
Sub element s Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
Su bsu
W eig ht ( kg ) 4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 1 211 2 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
W eig ht ( kg ) 4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
C han g es per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
Wall elements Plasterwork
T o t al weig ht T KM ' s 33,84 2176,08 388,88 58,56 17,84 5,6 0,72 5,04 23,2 1,36 12,96 1345,7 282,4 3960 2629,2 422 384 384 739,6 147,92 12,694 6,25392 18,576 30,96 6,192 3,63 0,726 1530 306 145,7 29,14 555 111 28326 5937,01 1359,5
Flexible walls Su
WarmBouwen renovation
Element Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Flexible walls
FIGURE
42
Sub element s Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
Steel Gyspum board Glass wool Base plaster
bsu
W eig ht ( kg ) 4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 1 211 2 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555 478,66 316,68 21,84 5,46
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total initial initial initial initial
W eig ht ( kg ) 4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0 478,66 316,68 21,84 5,46
C han g es per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
T o t al weig ht T KM ' s 33,84 2176,08 388,88 58,56 17,84 5,6 0,72 5,04 23,2 1,36 12,96 1345,7 282,4 3960 2629,2 422 48 48 739,6 147,92 12,694 6,25392 18,576 30,96 6,192 3,63 0,726 1530 306 145,7 29,14 555 111 478,66 95,73 316,68 63,34 21,84 4,37 5,46 1,09
35 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .3.1. Y ( FLEXIBLE WALLS )
Alternative x.3.2.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element Boiler
Sub element s Boiler aluminium
No renovation
Boiler steel
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
75 4 3 7 40 2 1 200
600
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 1 0,215
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial
2
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
4
0,21
3 4
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
4 4 4 3
0,075 0,25 17 765 13456 645,84
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 40 40 40 4 4 4 4 4 3 7 2 7 2 0 0 0 0
10 5 10 7,5 60 2,5 7,5 45 25 10 15,17 22,2 2475 1,075 0,21 0,075 0,25 17 1530 3,2 3 24 105,75 145,7 555 86 84 13456 645,84
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
21,15 243,05 36,6 11,15 3,5 0,45 3,15 14,5 0,85 8,1 841,05 176,5 3960 422 240 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 1530 145,7 555 13456 645,84
Su bsu
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler aluminium
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
43
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
C han T o t al g es weig ht T KM ' s 4 10 182,5 4 5 4 10 4 7,5 4 60 4 2,5 4 7,5 4 45 4 25 4 10 40 15,17 22,422 40 22,2 40 2475 1485 4 1,075 11,166
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
1000
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
36 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .3.2. Y
153 2820,37
182,5
22,422 1485 11,166
306 18,12
63,45 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 2820,37
1360,05
2629,2 240 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 306 29,14 111 2820,37
Alternative x.3.3.y Life cycle: (years) Boiler/heat pump/pump/expansion barrel replacements Windows changes Ventilator changes Radiator/piping changes Piping (air)/ventilator roof unit changes Acquifer changes Distances alternatives (km)
Element Boiler
Sub element s Boiler aluminium
No renovation
Boiler steel
Piping Radiators Expansion barrel
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
75 3 3 4 24 2 0
Su bsu
200
600
W eig ht ( kg ) 2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 1 0,215
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler
Standard renovation
Radiators Expansion barrel
WarmBouwen renovation
Heat pump
Acquifer
Gypsum board Piping Insulation material 1 Insulation material 2 Glass Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Fixed walls
FIGURE
44
C han T o t al g es weig ht 3 8 3 4 3 8 3 6 3 48 3 2 3 6 3 36 3 20 3 8 24 10,316 24 15,096 24 1683 3 0,86
0,042 initial
0,042 per barrel
3
0,168
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
initial initial initial initial
0,015 0,05 3,4 191,25
3 3 3 3
0,06 0,2 13,6 765 5363 227,4
Boiler aluminium
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 3,034 4,44 495 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 145,7 555 86 84
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215 0,042 0,015 0,05 3,4 382,5 0,4 1 3 35,25 0 0 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 24 24 24 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 4 2 0 0 0 0
8 4 8 6 48 2 6 36 20 8 10,316 15,096 1683 0,86 0,168 0,06 0,2 13,6 1530 2 3 15 105,75 145,7 555 86 84 5363 227,4
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 739,6 12,6936 18,576 30,96 3,63 382,5 145,7 555
initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial initial total total total total total initial total total
4,23 48,61 7,32 2,23 0,7 0,09 0,63 2,9 0,17 1,62 168,21 35,3 1980 211 48 0 0 0 0 0 382,5 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
16,92 194,44 29,28 8,92 2,8 0,36 2,52 11,6 0,68 6,48 672,84 141,2 1980 211 192 739,6 12,694 18,576 30,96 3,63 1530 145,7 555 5363 227,4
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Boiler cast iron Boiler copper Piping (rest) Piping aluminium Expansion barrel (rest)
1 2 3 4
Ventilator (rest)
1 2
Ventilator steel Piping (air) Insulation material (roof) Gypsum board Insulation material (facade) Insulation material (floor) Fixed walls
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel
3 4
Expansion barrel steel Glass Ventilator
2 1 2 1,5 12 0,5 1,5 9 5 2 0,3034 0,444 49,5 0,215
per barrel per barrel per barrel per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
Boiler steel
Piping
W eig ht ( kg )
2
Expansion barrel steel Glass Fixed walls
1000
per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per boiler per change per change per radiator change per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per barrel per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork Heat pump (rest)
Heat pump cast iron Heat pump copper Acquifer (rest) Acquifer steel
Piping (rest) Piping aluminium
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2
per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per heat pump per acquifer per acquifer per pump change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change per change
Wall elements Plasterwork
37 - QUANTIT IES OF MATERI AL S , SCE NAR IO X .3.3. Y
T KM ' s 146
15,247 1009,8 8,9328
153 1118,08
146
15,247 1009,8 8,9328
306 12
63,45 29,14 111 17,2 16,8 1118,08
1088,04
1314,6 192 147,92 6,25392 6,192 0,726 306 29,14 111 1118,08
LIFE CYCLE ENERGY
Figure 38 shows the energy use of the three selected renovation alternatives during the whole life cycle of the house. This energy use is based upon the output from the energy performance coefficient calculation. Appendix C3.5 provides an overview of the output on the factor „energy performance coefficient‟. Scenario Alternative Energy use Energy use Energy use heat electricity gas (MJ) pump (MJ) (MJ) 25 years No renovation 129600 2252625 life span Standard renovation 183301 1076100 WarmBouwen renovation 32700 619875 50 years No renovation 259200 4505250 life span Standard renovation 366602 2152200 WarmBouwen renovation 65400 1239750 75 years No renovation 3228300 6757875 life span Standard renovation 549903 3228300 WarmBouwen renovation 98100 1859625 FIGURE
38 - LIFE CYCLE ENERGY USE OF ALTERNATIVE S
REPLACEMENTS
The environmental impact of the replacement of elements during the life cycle, are integrated in the calculations that are presented in the previous section “quantity of materials”. DISPOSAL Appendix S describes the assumptions that are made in the field of disposal scenarios for the applied elements of the renovation alternatives.
45
C2.4. QUALITY This appendix provides information about the input parameters that are used to determine the performance on the factor „quality‟ of each renovation alternative. To determine the output on the factor „quality‟, the software tool GPR Gebouw, developed by W/E Adviseurs is used. No renovation
FIGURE
46
39 - INPUT ON „ QU ALITY ‟ NO REN OVATIO N : SOUND
FIGURE
47
40 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' NO REN OVATIO N : AIR QUAL ITY
FIGURE
41 – INPUT ON „ QU ALITY ‟ NO REN OVATIO N : THERMAL COMFORT
FIGURE
42 – INPUT ON „ QU ALITY ‟ NO REN OVATIO N : LIG HT AND VISU AL COM FORT
48
FIGURE
49
43 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' NO REN OVATIO N : TECHN ICAL QUALITY
FIGURE
44 – INPUT ON „ QU ALITY ‟ NO REN OVATIO N : FUTURE FACILITIES
FIGURE
45 – INPUT ON „ QU ALITY ‟ NO REN OVATIO N : FLEXIBILIT Y
50
FIGURE
51
46 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' NO REN OVATIO N : EXPERIENC ED VALUE
Standard renovation
FIGURE
52
47 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : SO UND
FIGURE
53
48 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : AIR QUALITY
FIGURE
49 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : THE RMAL COMFORT
FIGURE
50 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : LIG HT AND VISUAL COM FORT
54
FIGURE
55
51 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : TECHNIC AL QUALITY
FIGURE
52 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : FUTURE FACILITIE S
FIGURE
53 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : FLE XIBILITY
56
FIGURE
57
54 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N : EXP ERIENCED VALUE
WarmBouwen renovation
FIGURE
58
55 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : SOUND
FIGURE
59
56 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : AIR QUALITY
FIGURE
57 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : THERMAL COMFORT
FIGURE
58 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : LIGHT AND VISUAL COM FORT
60
FIGURE
61
59 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : TECHNIC AL QUALITY
FIGURE
60 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : FUTURE FACILITIES
FIGURE
61 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : FLEXIBILITY
62
FIGURE
63
62 - INPUT ON ' QU ALITY ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VATIO N : EXPERIENC ED VALU E
C2.5. ENERGY PERFORMANCE COEFFICIENT This section shows the input parameters that are used to determine the energy performance coefficient of the three evaluated renovation alternatives. The software tool EPW is used to determine the energy performance coefficient of the three evaluated renovation alternatives. TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE
The technical performance of the three renovation alternatives are presented in the figures 63, 64 & 65 No renovation Constructive aspects General Aspect Surface Orientation Awning
Value 95,8 N/S not present
Unity 2 [m ] front/back -
Transmission Aspect Ground level - floor Roof (slope) Front facade Glass type 1 - front facade Glass type 2 - front facade Back facade Glass type 1 - back facade Glass type 2 - back facade
Surface [m2] 42,5 55,5 17,2 5,1 3,4 17,2 5,1 3,4
U-value [W/m2K] 2,44 0,47 1,89 5,10 3,10 1,89 5,10 3,10
Infiltration Aspect Qv;10 characteristic
[dm3/s] 232,31
[dm3/s/m2] 2,425
Rc-value [m2K/W] 0,15 1,97 0,36 0,20 0,32 0,36 0,20 0,32
Thermal capacity Traditional - mixed heavy FIGURE
63 - CONSTRUCTIVE CHAR ACT ERISTIC S ' NO RENO VATION ' ALTERN ATIVE
Standard renovation C onstructive aspects General Aspect Surface Orientation Awning
Value 95,8 N/S not present
Unity [m2] front/back -
Transmission Aspect Ground level - floor Roof (slope) Front facade Glass type 1 - front facade Glass type 2 - front facade Back facade Glass type 1 - back facade Glass type 2 - back facade
Surface [m 2] 42,5 55,5 17,2 5,1 3,4 17,2 5,1 3,4
U-value [W/m 2K] 2,44 0,47 0,77 1,60 1,60 0,77 1,60 0,77
Infiltration Aspect Qv;10 characteristic
[dm3/s] 232,31
[dm 3/s/m 2] 2,425
Rc-value [m 2K/W] 2,50 3,00 1,30 0,63 0,63 0,36 0,63 1,30
Thermal capacity Traditional - mixed heavy FIGURE
64 - CONSTRUCTIVE CHAR ACT ERISTIC S ' STANDARD RE NOVATION '
ALTERN ATIVE
64
WarmBouwen renovation The calculations of the transmission of the facades at the WarmBouwen renovation alternative are elaborated in appendix P. C onstructive characteristics General Aspect Surface Orientation Awning
Value 95,8 N/S not present
Unity [m2] front/back -
Transmission Aspect Ground level - floor Roof (slope) Front facade Glass type 1 - front facade Glass type 2 - front facade Back facade Glass type 1 - back facade Glass type 2 - back facade
Surface [m 2] 42,5 55,5 17,2 5,1 3,4 17,2 5,1 3,4
U-value [W/m 2K] 2,44 0,47 0,51 1,60 1,60 0,51 1,60 1,60
Infiltration Aspect Qv;10 characteristic
[dm3/s] 232,31
[dm 3/s/m 2] 2,425
Rc-value [m 2K/W] 0,15 3,00 1,97 0,63 0,63 1,97 0,63 0,63
Thermal capacity Traditional - mixed heavy FIGURE
65 - CONSTRUCTIVE CHAR ACT ERISTIC S ' WARMBOUWEN RENOVATIO N ‟ ALTERN ATIVE
INSTALLATION TECHNIQUES
The installation technical characteristics of the three renovation alternatives are presented in figures 66, 67 & 68. No renovation Installations Heating Aspect Heating system Type Type of emmission
Value individual central heating system efficiency boiler radiators
Cooling Aspect Type of cooling
Value no cooling
Warm tap water Aspect Heating system Classification of system
gas fired combi boiler n/a
Ventilation No ventilation Solar energy systems No solar energy systems FIGURE
65
66 - INST ALLAT ION TECHNIC AL CHARACTER ISTIC S ' NO RENOVATION ' ALTER NATIVE
Standard renovation Installations Heating Aspect Heating system Type Type of emmission
Value individual central heating system HR-107 boiler radiators
C ooling Aspect Type of cooling
Value no cooling
Warm tap water Aspect Heating system C lassification of system
gas fired combi HR/C W boiler 4,0
Ventilation Natural inlet, mechanical outlet Solar energy systems No solar energy systems FIGURE
67 - INST ALLAT ION TECHNIC AL CHARACTER ISTIC S ' ST ANDARD RENO VAT ION ' ALTERN ATIVE
WarmBouwen renovation Installations Heating Aspect Heating system Type Type of emmission
Value individual electrical heat pump source: soil wall heating system (T<=35°C )
C ooling Aspect Type of cooling
Value passive cooling with acquifer
Warm tap water Aspect Heating system C lassification of system
electrical heat pump, source: soil n/a
Ventilation No ventilation Solar energy systems No solar energy systems FIGURE
66
68 - INST ALLAT ION TECHNIC AL CHARACTER ISTIC S ' WARMBOUWEN RENOVATIO N ' ALTERN ATIVE
C3. RESULTS MODEL ASPECTS This subparagraph provides the output on the identified factors of influence of the performance evaluation model. In the next subparagraph “results model” the total performances of the alternatives are elaborated.
C3.1. LIFE CYCLE COSTS The tables and pie-charts provide information about the output per scenario for the three evaluated renovation alternatives. The tables and figures are used to determine the composition and contribution of the factor „life cycle costs‟ of the renovation alternatives. No renovation Tables Scenar io 1.1.1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.1.2 353 8% Initial investment boiler 262 6% Initial investment boiler radiators 3353 72% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 24 1% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 399 9% Costs for replacement of elements 4633 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.1.3 353 6% Initial investment boiler 262 4% Initial investment boiler radiators 4744 79% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 399 7% Costs for replacement of elements 6024 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 353 4% 262 3% 6914 84% 145 2% 24 0% 97 1% 399 5% 8194 100%
Scenar io 1.1.2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.2 .2 267 6% Initial investment boiler 262 6% Initial investment boiler radiators 3353 77% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 24 1% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 200 5% Costs for replacement of elements 4348 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.2 .3 267 5% Initial investment boiler 262 5% Initial investment boiler radiators 4744 83% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 200 3% Costs for replacement of elements 5739 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 267 3% 262 3% 6914 87% 145 2% 24 0% 97 1% 200 3% 7909 100%
Scenar io 1.1.3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.3 .2 247 6% Initial investment boiler 262 6% Initial investment boiler radiators 3353 80% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 24 1% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 85 2% Costs for replacement of elements 4213 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.1.3 .3 247 4% Initial investment boiler 262 5% Initial investment boiler radiators 4744 85% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 85 2% Costs for replacement of elements 5604 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 247 3% 262 3% 6914 89% 145 2% 24 0% 97 1% 85 1% 7774 100%
Scenar io 1.2 .1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .1.2 327 5% Initial investment boiler 211 3% Initial investment boiler radiators 4915 80% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 466 8% Costs for replacement of elements 6147 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .1.3 327 3% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment boiler radiators 10160 89% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 466 4% Costs for replacement of elements 11392 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 327 1% 211 1% 23898 95% 145 1% 5 0% 78 0% 466 2% 25130 100%
Scenar io 1.2 .2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .2 .2 254 4% Initial investment boiler 211 4% Initial investment boiler radiators 4915 84% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 236 4% Costs for replacement of elements 5844 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .2 .3 254 2% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment boiler radiators 10160 92% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 236 2% Costs for replacement of elements 11089 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 254 1% 211 1% 23898 96% 145 1% 5 0% 78 0% 236 1% 24827 100%
Scenar io 1.2 .3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .3 .2 214 4% Initial investment boiler 211 4% Initial investment boiler radiators 4915 86% Operating costs 145 3% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 127 2% Costs for replacement of elements 5695 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.2 .3 .3 214 2% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment boiler radiators 10160 93% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 127 1% Costs for replacement of elements 10940 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 214 1% 211 1% 23898 97% 145 1% 5 0% 78 0% 127 1% 24678 100%
FIGURE
67
69 - TABLES #1 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' NO REN OVATIO N
Scenar io 1.3 .1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .1.2 328 4% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment boiler radiators 6430 84% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 481 6% Costs for replacement of elements 7662 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .1.3 328 2% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment boiler radiators 19759 94% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 481 2% Costs for replacement of elements 20991 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 328 0% 202 0% 80492 98% 145 0% 1 0% 75 0% 481 1% 81724 100%
Scenar io 1.3 .2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .2 .2 247 3% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment boiler radiators 6430 88% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 247 3% Costs for replacement of elements 7347 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .2 .3 247 1% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment boiler radiators 19759 96% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 247 1% Costs for replacement of elements 20676 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 247 0% 202 0% 80492 99% 145 0% 1 0% 75 0% 247 0% 81409 100%
Scenar io 1.3 .3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment boiler radiators Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .3 .2 209 3% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment boiler radiators 6430 89% Operating costs 145 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 135 2% Costs for replacement of elements 7197 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 1.3 .3 .3 209 1% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment boiler radiators 19759 96% Operating costs 145 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 135 1% Costs for replacement of elements 20526 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 209 0% 202 0% 80492 99% 145 0% 1 0% 75 0% 135 0% 81259 100%
FIGURE
70 – TABLES #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' NO REN OVATIO N
Graphs Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Operating costs Maintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements
FIGURE
68
71 – GRAPHS #1 ' LIFE CYCLE CO STS ' NO REN OVATION
FIGURE
69
72 - GRAPHS #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' NO REN OVATIO N
Standard renovation Tables Scenar io 2 .1.1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.1.2 486 9% Initial investment boiler 262 5% Initial investment radiators 368 7% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 3% Initial investment facade insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 447 8% Initial investment mech. ventilation 2695 48% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 430 8% Costs for replacement of elements 5594 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.1.3 486 7% Initial investment boiler 262 4% Initial investment radiators 368 5% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 3% Initial investment facade insulation 264 4% Initial investment windows 447 7% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3814 57% Operating costs 233 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 1% Change over costs 430 6% Costs for replacement of elements 6713 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 486 6% 262 3% 368 4% 106 1% 182 2% 264 3% 447 5% 5558 66% 233 3% 24 0% 97 1% 430 5% 8457 100%
Scenar io 2 .1.2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.2 .2 367 7% Initial investment boiler 262 5% Initial investment radiators 368 7% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 3% Initial investment facade insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 447 9% Initial investment mech. ventilation 2695 52% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 181 3% Costs for replacement of elements 5226 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.2 .3 367 6% Initial investment boiler 262 4% Initial investment radiators 368 6% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 3% Initial investment facade insulation 264 4% Initial investment windows 447 7% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3814 60% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 181 3% Costs for replacement of elements 6345 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 367 5% 262 3% 368 5% 106 1% 182 2% 264 3% 447 6% 5558 69% 233 3% 24 0% 97 1% 181 2% 8089 100%
Scenar io 2 .1.3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.3 .2 340 7% Initial investment boiler 262 5% Initial investment radiators 368 7% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 4% Initial investment facade insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 447 9% Initial investment mech. ventilation 2695 53% Operating costs 233 5% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 59 1% Costs for replacement of elements 5077 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .1.3 .3 340 5% Initial investment boiler 262 4% Initial investment radiators 368 6% Initial investment roof insulation 106 2% Initial investment floor insulation 182 3% Initial investment facade insulation 264 4% Initial investment windows 447 7% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3814 62% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 59 1% Costs for replacement of elements 6196 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 340 4% 262 3% 368 5% 106 1% 182 2% 264 3% 447 6% 5558 70% 233 3% 24 0% 97 1% 59 1% 7940 100%
Scenar io 2 .2 .1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .1.2 450 7% Initial investment boiler 211 3% Initial investment radiators 296 5% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 2% Initial investment facade insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 360 6% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3951 60% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 492 8% Costs for replacement of elements 6538 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .1.3 450 4% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment radiators 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 1% Initial investment facade insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 360 3% Initial investment mech. ventilation 8168 76% Operating costs 233 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 492 5% Costs for replacement of elements 10755 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 450 2% 211 1% 296 1% 86 0% 147 1% 229 1% 360 2% 19210 88% 233 1% 5 0% 78 0% 492 2% 21797 100%
Scenar io 2 .2 .2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .2 .2 349 6% Initial investment boiler 211 3% Initial investment radiators 296 5% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 2% Initial investment facade insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 360 6% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3951 64% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 216 4% Costs for replacement of elements 6161 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .2 .3 349 3% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment radiators 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 1% Initial investment facade insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 360 3% Initial investment mech. ventilation 8168 79% Operating costs 233 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 216 2% Costs for replacement of elements 10378 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 349 2% 211 1% 296 1% 86 0% 147 1% 229 1% 360 2% 19210 90% 233 1% 5 0% 78 0% 216 1% 21420 100%
FIGURE
70
73 - TABLES #1 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N
Scenar io 2 .2 .3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .3 .2 295 5% Initial investment boiler 211 4% Initial investment radiators 296 5% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 2% Initial investment facade insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 360 6% Initial investment mech. ventilation 3951 66% Operating costs 233 4% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 93 2% Costs for replacement of elements 5984 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .2 .3 .3 295 3% Initial investment boiler 211 2% Initial investment radiators 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 86 1% Initial investment floor insulation 147 1% Initial investment facade insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 360 4% Initial investment mech. ventilation 8168 80% Operating costs 233 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 93 1% Costs for replacement of elements 10201 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 295 1% 211 1% 296 1% 86 0% 147 1% 229 1% 360 2% 19210 90% 233 1% 5 0% 78 0% 93 0% 21243 100%
Scenar io 2 .3 .1.1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .1.2 452 6% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment radiators 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 82 1% Initial investment floor insulation 140 2% Initial investment facade insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 343 4% Initial investment mech. ventilation 5169 67% Operating costs 233 3% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 505 7% Costs for replacement of elements 7709 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .1.3 452 2% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment radiators 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 82 0% Initial investment floor insulation 140 1% Initial investment facade insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 343 2% Initial investment mech. ventilation 15883 86% Operating costs 233 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 505 3% Costs for replacement of elements 18423 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 452 1% 202 0% 283 0% 82 0% 140 0% 224 0% 343 1% 64705 96% 233 0% 1 0% 75 0% 505 1% 67245 100%
Scenar io 2 .3 .2 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .2 .2 340 5% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment radiators 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 82 1% Initial investment floor insulation 140 2% Initial investment facade insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 343 5% Initial investment mech. ventilation 5169 71% Operating costs 233 3% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 227 3% Costs for replacement of elements 7319 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .2 .3 340 2% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment radiators 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 82 0% Initial investment floor insulation 140 1% Initial investment facade insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 343 2% Initial investment mech. ventilation 15883 88% Operating costs 233 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 227 1% Costs for replacement of elements 18033 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 340 1% 202 0% 283 0% 82 0% 140 0% 224 0% 343 1% 64705 97% 233 0% 1 0% 75 0% 227 0% 66855 100%
Scenar io 2 .3 .3 .1 Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Initial investment windows Initial investment mech. ventilation Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Costs for replacement of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .3 .2 288 4% Initial investment boiler 202 3% Initial investment radiators 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 82 1% Initial investment floor insulation 140 2% Initial investment facade insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 343 5% Initial investment mech. ventilation 5169 72% Operating costs 233 3% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 98 1% Costs for replacement of elements 7138 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 2 .3 .3 .3 288 2% Initial investment boiler 202 1% Initial investment radiators 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 82 0% Initial investment floor insulation 140 1% Initial investment facade insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 343 2% Initial investment mech. ventilation 15883 89% Operating costs 233 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 98 1% Costs for replacement of elements 17852 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 288 0% 202 0% 283 0% 82 0% 140 0% 224 0% 343 1% 64705 97% 233 0% 1 0% 75 0% 98 0% 66674 100%
FIGURE
71
74 - TABLES #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' STANDARD REN OVATIO N
Graphs Initial investment boiler Initial investment radiators Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment floor insulation Initial investment facade insulation Costs for windows Initial investment mechanical ventilation Operating costs Maintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements
FIGURE
72
75 - GRAPHS #1 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' STANDARD REN O VATION
FIGURE
73
76 - GRAPHS #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' STANDARD REN O VATION
WarmBouwen renovation Tables Scenar io 3 .1.1.1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.1.2 942 18% Initial investment heat pump 299 6% Initial investment acquifer 318 6% Initial investment wall heating system 368 7% Initial investment roof insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 2540 49% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 177 3% Replacement costs of elements 5185 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.1.3 942 15% Initial investment heat pump 299 5% Initial investment acquifer 318 5% Initial investment wall heating system 368 6% Initial investment roof insulation 264 4% Initial investment windows 3595 58% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 177 3% Replacement costs of elements 6240 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 942 12% 299 4% 318 4% 368 5% 264 3% 5238 66% 156 2% 24 0% 97 1% 177 2% 7883 100%
Scenar io 3 .1.2 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.2 .2 712 15% Initial investment heat pump 299 6% Initial investment acquifer 318 7% Initial investment wall heating system 368 8% Initial investment roof insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 2540 52% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 72 1% Replacement costs of elements 4850 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.2 .3 712 12% Initial investment heat pump 299 5% Initial investment acquifer 318 5% Initial investment wall heating system 368 6% Initial investment roof insulation 264 4% Initial investment windows 3595 61% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 72 1% Replacement costs of elements 5905 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 712 9% 299 4% 318 4% 368 5% 264 3% 5238 69% 156 2% 24 0% 97 1% 72 1% 7548 100%
Scenar io 3 .1.3 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.3 .2 659 14% Initial investment heat pump 299 6% Initial investment acquifer 318 7% Initial investment wall heating system 368 8% Initial investment roof insulation 264 6% Initial investment windows 2540 54% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 1% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 19 0% Replacement costs of elements 4744 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .1.3 .3 659 11% Initial investment heat pump 299 5% Initial investment acquifer 318 5% Initial investment wall heating system 368 6% Initial investment roof insulation 264 5% Initial investment windows 3595 62% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 24 0% Disposal costs 97 2% Change over costs 19 0% Replacement costs of elements 5799 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 659 9% 299 4% 318 4% 368 5% 264 4% 5238 70% 156 2% 24 0% 97 1% 19 0% 7442 100%
Scenar io 3 .2 .1.1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .1.2 873 14% Initial investment heat pump 269 5% Initial investment acquifer 256 5% Initial investment wall heating system 296 6% Initial investment roof insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 3724 72% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 2% Change over costs 192 4% Replacement costs of elements 6078 117% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .1.3 873 9% Initial investment heat pump 269 3% Initial investment acquifer 256 3% Initial investment wall heating system 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 7698 77% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 192 2% Replacement costs of elements 10052 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 873 4% 269 1% 256 1% 296 1% 229 1% 18107 88% 156 1% 5 0% 78 0% 192 1% 20461 100%
Scenar io 3 .2 .2 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .2 .2 678 12% Initial investment heat pump 241 4% Initial investment acquifer 256 4% Initial investment wall heating system 296 5% Initial investment roof insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 3724 65% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 77 1% Replacement costs of elements 5740 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .2 .3 678 7% Initial investment heat pump 241 2% Initial investment acquifer 256 3% Initial investment wall heating system 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 7698 79% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 77 1% Replacement costs of elements 9714 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 678 3% 241 1% 256 1% 296 1% 229 1% 18107 90% 156 1% 5 0% 78 0% 77 0% 20123 100%
Scenar io 3 .2 .3 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .3 .2 572 10% Initial investment heat pump 241 4% Initial investment acquifer 256 5% Initial investment wall heating system 296 5% Initial investment roof insulation 229 4% Initial investment windows 3724 67% Operating costs 156 3% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 25 0% Replacement costs of elements 5582 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .2 .3 .3 572 6% Initial investment heat pump 241 3% Initial investment acquifer 256 3% Initial investment wall heating system 296 3% Initial investment roof insulation 229 2% Initial investment windows 7698 81% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 5 0% Disposal costs 78 1% Change over costs 25 0% Replacement costs of elements 9556 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 572 3% 241 1% 256 1% 296 1% 229 1% 18107 91% 156 1% 5 0% 78 0% 25 0% 19965 100%
Scenar io 3 .3 .1.1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .1.2 877 12% Initial investment heat pump 257 4% Initial investment acquifer 244 3% Initial investment wall heating system 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 4872 68% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 196 3% Replacement costs of elements 7185 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .1.3 877 5% Initial investment heat pump 257 1% Initial investment acquifer 244 1% Initial investment wall heating system 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 14971 87% Operating costs 156 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 196 1% Replacement costs of elements 17284 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 877 1% 257 0% 244 0% 283 0% 224 0% 60987 96% 156 0% 1 0% 75 0% 196 0% 63300 100%
FIGURE
74
77 - TABLES #1 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' WARMBOUWEN RE NOVATION
Scenar io 3 .3 .2 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .2 .2 660 10% Initial investment heat pump 243 4% Initial investment acquifer 244 4% Initial investment wall heating system 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 4872 71% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 80 1% Replacement costs of elements 6838 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .2 .3 660 4% Initial investment heat pump 243 1% Initial investment acquifer 244 1% Initial investment wall heating system 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 14971 88% Operating costs 156 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 80 0% Replacement costs of elements 16937 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 660 1% 243 0% 244 0% 283 0% 224 0% 60987 97% 156 0% 1 0% 75 0% 80 0% 62953 100%
Scenar io 3 .3 .3 .1 Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Initial investment windows Operating costs M aintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .3 .2 559 8% Initial investment heat pump 230 3% Initial investment acquifer 244 4% Initial investment wall heating system 283 4% Initial investment roof insulation 224 3% Initial investment windows 4872 73% Operating costs 156 2% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 1% Change over costs 26 0% Replacement costs of elements 6670 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % Scenar io 3 .3 .3 .3 559 3% Initial investment heat pump 230 1% Initial investment acquifer 244 1% Initial investment wall heating system 283 2% Initial investment roof insulation 224 1% Initial investment windows 14971 89% Operating costs 156 1% M aintenance costs 1 0% Disposal costs 75 0% Change over costs 26 0% Replacement costs of elements 16769 100% Total LCC (per year)
Eur o % 559 1% 230 0% 244 0% 283 0% 224 0% 60987 97% 156 0% 1 0% 75 0% 26 0% 62785 100%
FIGURE
78 - TABLES #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' WARMBOUWEN RE NOVATION
Graphs Initial investment heat pump Initial investment acquifer Initial investment wall heating system Initial investment roof insulation Costs for windows Operating costs Maintenance costs Disposal costs Change over costs Replacement costs of elements
FIGURE
75
79 - GRAPHS #1 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' WARMBOUWEN R ENO VATION
FIGURE
76
80 - GRAPHS #2 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' WARMBOUWEN R ENO VATION
FIGURE
81 - GRAPHS #3 ' LIFE CYCLE COST S ' WARMBOUWEN R ENO VATION
Figure 82 provides an overview of the performance on the factor „life cycle costs‟ of the three renovation alternatives at all scenarios. Also, the normalized scores of the scenarios are elaborated in this figure. Scenarion number
Scenario
LCC - No Renovation
1
1.1.1
2
1.1.2
6025
0,70
6715
0,63
Normalized score 5187 0,81 6241 0,68
3
1.1.3
8195
0,51
8459
0,50
7885
0,53
4
1.2.1
4348
0,97
5229
0,81
4852
0,87
5
1.2.2
5740
0,73
6347
0,66
5906
0,71
6
1.2.3
7909
0,53
8091
0,52
7550
0,56
7
1.3.1
4214
1,00
5080
0,83
4745
0,89
8
1.3.2
5606
0,75
6198
0,68
5800
0,73
9
1.3.3
7775
0,54
7942
0,53
7443
0,57
10
2.1.1
6148
0,69
6539
0,64
6080
0,69
11
2.1.2
11393
0,37
10756
0,39
10054
0,42
12
2.1.3
25131
0,17
21799
0,19
20463
0,21
13
2.2.1
5844
0,72
6161
0,68
5740
0,73
14
2.2.2
11089
0,38
10378
0,41
9714
0,43
15
2.2.3
24827
0,17
21421
0,20
20123
0,21
16
2.3.1
5696
0,74
5985
0,70
5583
0,75
17
2.3.2
10941
0,39
10201
0,41
9557
0,44
18
2.3.3
24679
0,17
21244
0,20
19966
0,21
19
3.1.1
7662
0,55
7709
0,55
7186
0,59
20
3.1.2
20990
0,20
18423
0,23
17284
0,24
21
3.1.3
81724
0,05
67245
0,06
63300
0,07
22
3.2.1
7348
0,57
7320
0,58
6839
0,62
23
3.2.2
20676
0,20
18034
0,23
16937
0,25
24
3.2.3
81409
0,05
66855
0,06
62954
0,07
25
3.3.1
7198
0,59
7138
0,59
6670
0,63
26
3.3.2
20526
0,21
17853
0,24
16769
0,25
27
3.3.3
81260
0,05
66674
0,06
62785
0,07
FIGURE
€
Normalized score 5597 0,75
LCC - WarmBouwen Renovation
Normalized score 4634 0,91
€
77
LCC - Standard Renovation
€
82 – OVER VIEW OF NORMALIZ ED SC ORES REN OVATION ALTERN ATIVES
C3.2. LIFE CYCLE YIELDS In this section the output for the factor „life cycle yields‟ is elaborated. To determine the normalized scores for the life cycle yields of each renovation concept, the score per aspect of the yields is multiplied by a weigh factor. This weigh factor is determined based on a life cycle yields simulation, with an exploitation period of 50 years, and a selling price of the house of 250.000 euro´s. Figure 83 shows the life cycle yields simulation. 250.000
695/month t=0
t=50 Primary returns Secundary returns
FIGURE
83 – DCF CALCULATION FOR DETERMIN ING CO NTRIBU TION OF LCY FACTORS
Assumptions: Weigh factor risk = 5% Interest rate = 5,68% The simulation calculation points out that the discounted cash flow (DCF) of: - Primary returns = 137032 - Secundary returns = 12630 The weigh factors are: - Primary returns: (137032-12630)/137032 * 95% = - Secundary returns: 12630/137032 * 95% = - Risk:
86.3% 8.7 % 5%
Figure 84 shows the results of the calculations in the field of life cycle yields. The figure provides the performances of the three renovation alternatives on the factor „life cycle yields‟. No renovation
Standard renovation
WarmBouwen renovation
Normalized Weigh Normalized Weigh Normalized Weigh score factor score factor score factor Primary returns 0,79 0,863 0,95 0,863 1 0,863 Secundary returns 0,9 0,087 0,96 0,087 1 0,087 Risk 0,86 0,05 0,29 0,05 1 0,05 Total normalized score 0,80 0,92 1 FIGURE
78
84 - RESULTS LCY
C3.3. LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The figures in this section provide information about the output of the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ for the three evaluated renovation alternatives. The figures are used to determine the composition of the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ of the renovation alternatives. Tables
Scenario x.1.1.y
Aspect Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
x.1.2.y
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
x.1.3.y
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
FIGURE
79
Scores per renovation alternative Standard WarmBouwen No renovation renovation renovation 130 0,109 11,7 4,41 54,4 15,3 0 11,9 9,4 181
96,7 0,0702 16,8 5,95 62,7 16,8 0 7,86 14,1 132
52,4 0,0505 13,7 5,72 60,3 7,96 0 5,49 11,6 70,2
418 2 836 0,403 0,544
353 2 706 0,477 0,644
227 2 455 0,740 1
125 0,107 10,8 3,68 33,2 12,6 0 11,6 8,26 177
91,2 0,0685 15,8 5,22 41,4 14,1 0 7,53 12,9 129
48 0,0493 12,7 4,99 41,3 7,28 0 5,22 10,7 68,3
382 2 764 0,440 0,519
317 2 634 0,531 0,626
199 2 397 0,848 1
121 0,106 10,3 3,26 20,7 11,4 0 11,4 7,74 176
88,1 0,0676 15,4 4,79 28,8 12,9 0 7,36 12,4 127
45,8 0,0489 12,6 4,69 32,3 7,26 0 5,14 10,6 68
362 2 724 0,465 0,515
297 2 594 0,567 0,628
186 2 373 0,903 1
85 - OUTPUT ON LIFE CYCLE ENVIR ONMENT AL IMP ACT #1
Scenario x.2.1.y
Aspect Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
x.2.2.y
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
x.2.3.y
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
FIGURE
80
Scores per renovation alternative Standard WarmBouwen No renovation renovation renovation 261 0,217 23,3 8,92 113 30,3 0 23,8 18,6 362
187 0,134 29,5 10,8 124 31,4 0 15 24,6 254
119 0,0999 25,1 11 114 13,8 0 10,7 20,4 157
841 1 841 0,400 0,560
676 1 676 0,498 0,696
471 1 471 0,715 1
248 0,214 21,1 7,23 63,1 23,9 0 23 16 353
175 0,13 27,3 9,08 73,9 25 0 14,3 21,9 245
106 0,0968 22,8 8,48 70,1 11,8 0 9,12 18,4 146
756 1 756 0,446 0,520
592 1 592 0,569 0,664
393 1 393 0,857 1
243 0,212 20,3 6,56 43,6 21,8 0 22,8 15,1 351
170 0,129 26,5 8,41 54,4 22,8 0 14 21 243
101 0,0956 21,8 7,75 51,1 11,2 0 8,85 17,5 144
724 1 724 0,465 0,502
560 1 560 0,601 0,648
363 1 363 0,927 1
86 - OUTPUT ON LIFE CYCLE ENVIR ONMENT AL IMP ACT #2
Scenari o x.3.1.y
Aspect Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources
393 0,326 35 13,6 176 45,6 0 35,7 28 543
279 0,199 42,3 15,8 190 46,2 0 22,2 35,3 376
173 0,146 35 15,1 170 18,6 0 14,7 28,4 222
152 0,143 34,5 12,3 85,9 20,7 0 14,1 28,9 221
1270 0,67 847 0,398 0,533
1007 0,67 671 0,502 0,672
677 0,67 451 0,746 1
570 0,67 380 0,887 1,189
373 0,321 31,8 11 100 36,2 0 34,6 24,1 531
260 0,193 39 13,2 114 36,7 0 21,1 31,3 363
157 0,142 32 12,6 104 16,5 0 13,8 25,6 216
1142 0,67 761 0,442 0,506
878 0,67 586 0,575 0,658
578 0,67 385 0,874 1
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources
363 0,317 30 9,58 58,5 31,1 0 34 21,9 524
249 0,19 37,2 11,7 71,8 31,6 0 20,5 29,1 357
145 0,139 29,8 10,2 64,6 14,6 0 12,2 23,6 205
Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
1072 0,67 715 0,471 0,471
808 0,67 539 0,625 0,625
505 0,67 337 1 1
Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score x.3.2.y
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score Relative score
x.3.3.y
FIGURE
81
Scores per renovation alternative WarmBouwen Standard WarmBouwen (Flexible No renovation renovation renovation walls)
87 - OUTPUT ON LIFE CYCLE ENVIR ONMENT AL IMP ACT #3
Graphs Environmental impact caused by assembly Environmental impact caused by gas use (At concepts 3.x.x.x: EI caused by electricity use heat pump)
FIGURE
82
88 - OUTPUT GRAPHS ENVIRONM ENTAL IMPACT #1
Environmental impact caused by electricity use Environmental impact caused by disposal of elements
Environmental impact caused by assembly Environmental impact caused by gas use (At concepts 3.x.x.x: EI caused by electricity use heat pump)
FIGURE
83
89 - OUTPUT GRAPHS ENVIRONM ENTAL IMPACT #2
Environmental impact caused by electricity use Environmental impact caused by disposal of elements
C3.4. QUALITY Figure 90 provides information about the output of the factor „quality‟ for the three evaluated renovation alternatives. Weighting factor
No renovation
Standard Points renovatoin
WarmBouwen points renovation Points
Health Sound Air quality Thermal comfort Visual comfort
250 450 250 50
4,6 4,9 5,8 6
11,5 22,1 14,5 3,0
4,9 6,5 6,6 6
12,3 29,3 16,5 3,0
4,9 6,1 7,5 6
12,3 27,5 18,8 3,0
Technical quality
250
7,4
18,5
7,4
18,5
7,4
18,5
Future facilities Flexibility Experienced value Total score Normalized score
333 333 333
4,7 5,7 6 124,2 0,90
15,7 19,0 20,0
4,7 5,7 6 134,1 0,97
15,7 19,0 20,0
5,3 6,1 6,2 138,6 1
17,6 20,3 20,6
User quality Future value
FIGURE
84
90 - OUTPUT ON ' QUALITY '
C3.5. ENERGY PERFORMANCE COEFFICIENT The figures in this section provide information about the output of the factor „energy performance coefficient´ for the three evaluated renovation alternatives. No renovation
FIGURE
91 - OUTPUT ON ' EPC ' NO RENO VATIO N
Standard Renovation
FIGURE
85
92 - OUTPUT ON ' EPC ' STAND ARD RENO VATIO N
WarmBouwen renovation
FIGURE
93 - OUTPUT ON ' EPC ' WARMBOUWEN RENO VAT ION
Normalized score of alternatives:
Energy performance coefficient Normalized score FIGURE
86
No renovation
Standard renovation
2.22
1.23
WarmBouwen renovation 0.7
0.32
0.57
1
94 - NORMAL IZED SCORE OF THE REN OVATIO N ALTER N ATIVE ON ' E PC '
C4. RESULTS MODEL The output on each identified factor of influence for the three defined renovation alternatives is presented in the previous subparagraphs (see all defined scenarios in appendix Q). This output information is combined to provide the overall model output for each scenario. The model output is presented in this appendix. Application of the model results in a diagram as presented in the figures in this section. To optimize the comparability of this output, the diagram shows the normalized score of the evaluated alternatives. Hereby, the best score on each aspect is represented by the score 1. The scores of the other alternatives represent the normalized score. Hereby the alternative with the score 1 forms the norm and the score of other alternatives lies between 0 and 1. More information about the interpretation of these figures is provided in sub paragraph 4.2.5, page 52 of the main report.
FIGURE
87
95 - OVERALL MODEL OUTPUT #1
FIGURE
88
96 - OVERALL MODEL OUTPUT #2
FIGURE
89
97 - OVERALL MODEL OUTPUT #3
FIGURE
90
98 - OVERALL MODEL OUTPUT #4
FIGURE
91
99 - OVERALL MODEL OUTPUT #5
APPENDIX D - CONSULTED EXPERTS AN D USED DOCUMENTS In figure 100 the experts are listed that are consulted to determine input parameters for the model application. The experts are selected on their specific knowledge in the field of one of the performance factors of the model. Name O. van Kampen G. Verbaan S. Binnemars T. van de Merwe M. Toxopeus P. Boswinkel A. van Kessel M. Mol R. Loods Mr. van der Putten A. Ploegmakers
P. van Tilburg Mr. Martin M. Tipkerk J. Vink Mr. Riethorst Expert -name = unknownMr. Steenbeek J. Veldhuis H. de Jong FIGURE
92
Consulted about Parameters for life cycle costs calculations and executing LCC calculation with the LCC-Lite software Energy performance of the WarmBouwen concept Modelling in SimaPro / executing LCA calculations Assigning environmental impact to elements / executing LCA calculations Modelling in SimaPro / checking LCA parameters and defining recycle scenarios Input parameters for LCC calculations WarmBouwen Yearly average maintenance costs aquifer + determining input parameters for LCY calculations Composition of the pumps in an aquifer system (materials + weights) Composition of the other elements in an aquifer system (materials + weights) Composition of the elements in a boiler (materials + weights) Composition of the elements in a heat pump (materials + weights). Also consulted about the most suitable heat pump for the reference house of the research. Composition of the elements in a radiator (materials + weights) & dimensions of average radiator. Composition of the elements in a window (materials + weights) Composition of the elements in an expansion barrel (materials + weights) Composition of the elements in piping (materials + weights) Composition of the elements of the wall heating system WarmBouwen (materials + weights) Composition of the elements in a ventilation system (materials + weights) Costs for demolishing construction elements Costs for installation of radiators Costs for replacement of ventilators
100 - CONSULTED EXPERT S FOR TESTING THE MODEL
Company S&G en partners DGMR University of Twente University of Twente University of Twente Local Company Local Company Grundfos Nederland Mos b.v. Vaillant Stiebel Eltron
The heating company Saint Gobain Famco Viega RIHO Orcon Heijn Heun Maat b.v. Rucon
Figure 101 shows the literature, reports and product sheets that are used for determining the input for the model application. Name of document Ytong. „Binnenwanden - buitengewoon goed.‟
Owner Xella
Toolkit bestaande bouw – duurzame woning verbetering
BAM woningbouw/ SenterNovem/ Projectgroep DEPW Pré Consultants
SimaPro 7.1 Tutorial
bouwkostenonline.nl
Bouwkostenon line.nl
Life Cycle Assessment and External Environmental Cost Analysis of Heat Pumps Plannen en toepassen: Pexfit Fosta, Pexfit Plus PURSCHUIM
Rey et al.
Gipsplaten – Snel even anders
Isolava
Grundfos_SP 30-2
Grundfos
The SP system – Strenght all the way
Grundfos
Spiralo-buis SPB
Kennemer spiralo
Technische documentatie Ventilatie voor woningbouw Technische eigenschappen klimaatplaat
Orcon
Klimaatsysteem
RIHOTechniek
Ecotherm Baseline
Ecotherm
93
Viega Bison
RIHOTechniek
Subject Information about the composition of Ytong walls. These Ytong walls have been used as reference for the fixed internal walls in the renovation alternatives. This document has been used for the definition of the standard renovation concept and the costs of the measures that are applied in this concept. This tutorial manual has been used to learn the use of the SimaPro software. Also the tutorial is used to make the right assumptions during the execution of the Life Cycle Assessment. This website has been used to determine the costs of the construction of internal walls and the costs of the finishing of the internal walls. This document helped me to determine the composition and weights of included materials of a heat pump. This LCA listed all the materials that are applied in a heat pump. This list is used as reference for this research. This document provided all technical information about the piping that is used in dwellings for the transport of heat. This document provided the technical information about PUR foam. In this research PUR foam is applied as insulation material. This document provided the technical information about the gypsum board. In this research gypsum board is applied as an element of the roof insulation. This document provided a part of the technical information about the pumps that are used in aquifer systems. This document provided a part of the technical information about the pumps that are used in aquifer systems. This product sheet provided technical information about the tubes that are used for the transportation of air in a ventilation system. This document provided the technical information about the ventilation system. In this research a ventilation system is applied in the standard renovation concept. This product sheet provided technical information about the climate board that is applied in the WarmBouwen renovation. alternative This document provided technical information about the climate board that is applied in the WarmBouwen renovation alternative. This product sheet provided technical
ENVOY Silver
ENVOY
Voorbeeldwoningen bestaande bouw 2007
SenterNovem
Milieucentraal.nl
TNO-034-APD-200900179
Milieucentraal. nl nl.wikipedia.or g lageenergierekeni ng.nl TNO / Stiebel Eltron
Cbs.nl
Cbs.nl
Ec.europa.eu
European Union
Duurzaamheid loont
H. Bijdendijk
Regeling Warmtebesluit
Ministerie van Economische Zaken Forteck
nl.wikipedia.org lageenergierekening.nl
Ontwikkelaars informatiemap Offer RIHO
RIHO
Senternovem.nl
SenterNovem
FIGURE
94
information about the first insulation layer of insulation material that is used in the WarmBouwen renovation alternative for façade insulation. This product sheet provided technical information about the second layer of insulation material that is used in the WarmBouwen renovation alternative for façade insulation. For the selection of a generic house this document of SenterNovem has been analyzed. The document gives an overview of all the type of dwellings that are present in the Netherlands and into what extend. Based upon this document the reference house of this research has been selected. This document also provided technical and spatial information about the selected reference house. This website is consulted for the costs of boilers. This website is used to determine the caloric value of gas. This website is used to determine the current average gas price and electricity price in the Netherlands. This document provided technical information about the performance of the heat pump that is used as a reference in this research. This website is consulted to gather information about the development of the consumer price for gas and electricity in the Netherlands in the past. Based upon this information scenarios for this development are defined. This website was consulted to gain information about the average discount rate in Europe for the last years. Based upon this information an assumption is made for the discount rate that is used in this research. The report of Mr. Bijdendijk is used to determine the average lifespan of a building after completion. Based on this information scenarios have been put up for the lifespan of a building after renovation. This document is consulted to define the average yearly maintenance costs of a boiler. This document provided information about the average yearly maintenance costs of a ventilation system. This offer was used to determine to costs per m2 wallheating, which is applied in the alternative WarmBouwen renovation. This website is consulted to gain information about the yearly average maintenance costs of a individual heat pump.
101 - USED SOURCE S FOR INPUT MODEL CALC ULATION S
APPENDIX E - BREEAM ASSESSMENT TO OL This appendix provides an overview of the main aspects and sub aspects that are taken into consideration by the BREEAM sustainability assessment tool. -
Management Commissioning Construction site and surroundings Construction site impacts User guide Life cycle costing Combined credits Consultation Shared facilities Security Publication of building information The development as a learning resource Ease of maintenance
-
Health
Daylighting View out Glare control High frequency lighting Internal and external lightning levels Lightning zones & controls Natural ventilation Internal air quality Volatile organic compounds Thermal comfort Thermal zoning Acoustic performance
-
Energy Reduction of CO2 emissions Sub-metering of energy uses Energy-efficient external lighting Use of renewable energy Building fabric performance & avoidance of air infiltration Energy-efficient refrigerated and frozen storage Energy-efficient lifts Energy-efficient escalators and travelers Assurance of thermal quality of building shell
-
Transport Provision of public transport Proximity to amenities Cyclist facilities Pedestrian and cyclist safety Travel plan and parking policy Travel information point Deliveries and manoeuvring
95
-
Water
Water consumption Watermeter Major leak detection Sanitary supply shut off Water recycling Irrigation systems Vehicle wash
-
Materials Materials specification Reuse of building facade Reuse of building structure Responsible sourcing of materials Designing for robustness
-
Waste
Waste management on the construction site Recycled aggregates Recyclable waste storage Compost Finishing elements
-
Land use & Ecology Reuse of land Contaminated land Existing wildlife at the construction site Plants and animals as co-users of the plan area Long-term sustainable co-use by plants and animals Local wildlife partnerships
-
Pollution Refrigerant GWP – building services Preventing refrigerant leaks Refrigerant GWP – cold storage NOx emissions from heating sources Protecting building from floods Minimizing watercourse pollution Reduction of night time light pollution Noise attenuation
96
APPENDIX F - GREENCALC ASSESSMENT TOOL This appendix provides an overview of the main aspects and sub aspects that are taken into consideration by Greencalc. -
Material Foundation Facade Interior walls Floors Roof Installations Interior
-
Energy Building bounded use Constructive information Climate system Warm tap water Photo-Voltaic/windmills Lightning Equipment Corrections
-
Water
-
97
Facilities Sanitary Rain water Corrections
Mobility
APPENDIX G - HISTORY OF LCA This appendix describes the history and origination of the LCA principle. The history of the Life Cycle Assessment is described by SAIC (2006). In their report „Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Practice‟, the history of LCA is described as follows: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) had its beginnings in the 1960‟s due to concerns over the limitations of raw materials and energy resources. This started the interest in the cumulative account for energy use and the calculation of future resource supply and use. Later in the 1960‟s, global modeling studies published „The Limits to Growth‟ (Meadows et al., 1972) and „A Blueprint for Survival‟ (Goldsmith et al., 1972). These studies predicted the effects of the world‟s changing population on the demand for materials and resources. During this period, various studies were performed to estimate costs and environmental implications of alternative sources of energy. In 1969, researchers initiated an internal study for The Coca-Cola Company that provided the foundation for the current methods of life cycle inventory analysis in the United States. This comparison of different beverage containers resulted in quantified information about the raw materials and fuels needed for the manufacturing process for each container. In the early 1970‟s various other companies performed similar comparative life cycle analyses. The quantifying process of resources and environmental releases of products became known as REPA in the USA; Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis. In Europe this approach was became known as Ecobalance. Between 1970 and 1975, about 15 REPA‟s were performed. Through this period, a standard research methodology for conducting these studies was developed. From 1975 through the early 1980‟s, as interest in these comprehensive studies waned because of the fading influence of the oil crisis, environmental concerns shifted to issues of hazardous and household waste management. However, life cycle inventory analysis continued to be conducted. During this time, European interest grew due to the establishment of an Environment Directorate by the European Commission. Therefore, in Europe parallel approaches were developed. In 1988 solid waste became a worldwide issue. Therefore, LCA again emerged as a tool for analyzing environmental problems. The methodology for LCA again was being improved. The need to move to impact assessment has brought LCA methodology to another point of evolution (SETAC, 1991); (SETAC, 1993); (SETAC, 1997). Standardized LCA methodology came up due to concerns over the inappropriate use of LCA‟s. This standardization was developed by International Standards Organization (ISO) and was called ISO 14000 In 2002, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) joined forces with the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) to launch the Life Cycle Initiative, an international partnership. This initiative resulted in three programs that aim at putting life cycle thinking into practice and at improving the supporting tools through better data and indicators. The Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) program increases the quality and global reach of life cycle indicators by promoting the exchange of views among experts whose work results in a set of widely accepted recommendations.
98
APPENDIX H - INSULATION VS ACCUMULATION Appendix I describes that insulation is something else than accumulation. Once you have chosen for the path of insulation, you have abandoned the path of accumulation. This appendix elaborates the differences between these two principals in more detail. The information in this paragraph is provided by M. de Gier, KBnG Architects. Insulation literally means separating. That is exactly what has happened to the construction technology through the ages. In the current construction industry, the constructor creates a load bearing construction, the construction physicist wraps this construction with insulation and foils and at the end the architect designs an ethic skin to make the building representative. In this system interaction between the inside climate and outside climate can form a threat for the health of the user as well as the health of the construction. Cold bridges are spots where condensation takes place. This condensation, which is moisture, can result in mould. Mould is on its turn a causative agent and causes putrefaction. Putrefaction is not the only threat, because also frost forms a threat. Water expands when it freezes and thereby can form a threat for the stability of the construction. To prevent this from occurring, construction physicists do not only calculate the amount of insulation that is needed, but also calculate the amount of vapor in the construction. They prevent condensation in the building by wrapping up the building with vapor proof foils. To carry off the moisture that people produce, powerful mechanic ventilation is installed in buildings. The next development was the installation of a heat-regain system on the ventilation of the building, because a lot of heat is lost due to the mechanic ventilation. To increase the returns furthermore, a part of the air is reused, after getting the moisture out and filtering it. The question is whether the channels and filters for the ventilation are as healthy as they are stated to be. Most of the time insulation does not simplify construction. Insulation also does not make construction healthier, because additive technology has to provide a healthy inside climate. Principally there is nothing wrong with insulation. However, we should be aware of the fact that more insulation is not always better. The first centimeters of insulation have a big impact, but the more insulation is applied, the less impact the added insulation has got. The reason insulation is applied, is to reduce the loss of heat in a building, without too much increase of weight of the building. A brick wall has about the same insulation factor as one centimeter of rock wool, while the rock wool weighs almost 40 times less than the brick wall. Energy loss on itself is not necessarily negative. If a building gains as much energy as it loses, the energy loss is not a problem. In this case, you do have to be able to gain and store energy in the first place, and regain this energy when you need it. A roman church, as described in appendix I, is an example of a building that contains a lot of mass. This church stores a lot of energy in the summer and emits this energy in the winter. Due to the balance of these energy flows, it is not negative that there is an exchange of energy. The balance also causes slowness in the course of the temperature, which prevents a huge demand for the correction of the intern climate. Without accumulation of energy, a building follows the temperature of the environment, which changes not only by night and day, but also seasonal. Without accumulation, a lot of energy has to be added to heat the building when it is cold outside and to cool the building when it is warm outside.
99
APPENDIX I - DEVELOPMENT OF WARMB OUWEN This appendix describes the development process of WarmBouwen. Information is provided by M. de Gier, KBnG Architects. In history, when humans were not able to build houses yet, they tried to search for other kinds of residences that could protect them from environmental influences. The Eskimos for example built igloos to protect themselves against wind and cold. In other parts of the world humans lived in caves to protect themselves against wind, rain, heat and cold. These caves were a comfortable residence, because there was a constant temperature in the cave, the whole year long. This constant temperature was the result of the mass of stone, where the cave consisted of. After years this mass of stone adopted the average environment temperature of the climate they were situated in. In summer the cave provided cold and in the winter the cave provided heat. Although caves are not common in the Netherlands, the concept of a cave in the Netherlands is very interesting. The average environment temperature in the Netherlands is about 13 degrees Celsius. A cave in the Netherlands would provide a interior temperature of 13 degrees Celsius, the whole year. As mankind, we do not live in caves anymore, but still if we enter an old Roman church we experience the same principal: a constant temperature. The total mass of the residence is reduced significantly compared to a cave, and also windows have been placed, but the fluctuation of the temperature within the residence stays limited. The temperature of the church lies between twelve and fourteen degrees Celsius. Gothic churches are even thinner than Roman churches, the windows are bigger and the walls are less massive. But still the winter does not significantly influence the temperature within these buildings. The fluctuation of the temperature is still limited, again due to the mass of the building that reacts very slow on differences in temperature. The walls in the examples of the cave and the churches above absorb heat during the summer and emit this heat to the interior during the winter. This principal also works the other way around. In the winter the walls absorbs cold and emit this to the interior in the summer. In case of a tent, there is a totally different situation. A tent gives shelter against wind and rain, but does not provide a constant temperature. The mass of the tent is minimal, and therefore does not accumulate temperature. If the tent is situated in the Netherlands, the average temperature of the tent over a year is also thirteen degrees Celsius, but the minimum and maximum temperature of the tent is the same as the temperatures of the direct environment of the tent. This means that in winter the temperature can get below freezing point and in summer the temperature can rise above thirty degrees Celsius. The situation of the tent differs from the situation of the cave described above. A residence without mass results in a highly fluctuating interior temperature. A residence with mass results in a very constant interior temperature, without large fluctuations. In the course of past few the ages, constructions more and more transformed towards a tent concept instead of a cave concept. Humans have developed knowledge and insight in construction, and thereby have been able to build more and more efficient. This development in efficiency resulted in lighter constructions, because in lighter constructions, less mass has to be piled up. And less mass was considered to be better because mass is a problem in the Netherlands, due to the soft soil which cannot bear huge loads. This problem could be solved by using piles, but piling, and therefore mass, is expensive in the Netherlands. This is one of the reasons why construction in the Netherlands has become lighter during the years.
100
The cavity wall has been a very important development for the efficiency in the construction industry. Brick is not hundred percent waterproof, and therefore, moisture can come through a brick wall. The cavity wall ended this moisture problem. After the invention of the cavity wall, the insight of insulating the cavity wall came up. This insulation had the function to keep more heat inside the building to increase comfort of the building. New technologies made it possible to build lighter, and thereby more efficient. The disadvantage of this development is that the industry lost sight of accumulation of temperature. Nowadays, even the best insulated buildings follow the seasonal temperatures, the „tent principal‟. In winter this results in a comfort temperature that differs 20-25 degrees from the construction temperature. Without accumulation, without mass, the skin of a building follows the dominant temperature, which is the outside temperature. To preserve the comfort temperature inside the building, a lot of energy has to be put in, and a lot of energy is needed to keep the heat inside the building. In summer this system works the other way around. In summer it is very hard to lose the heat inside the building. The efficiency development in the construction industry has resulted in lighter constructions with more insulation, which results in a situation whereby constant regulation of the interior climate with heat or cold is required.
101
APPENDIX J - COMPETITIVE CONCEPTS This appendix provides insight in possible competitive concepts for WarmBouwen. A description and evaluation of the competitive concepts is provided. This evaluation provides information about the viability of the WarmBouwen concept compared to other possibilities for the sustainable renovation of houses. This elaboration provides more information on the relative advantage of WarmBouwen. The relative advantage is one of the characteristics of an innovation that influences adoption of the innovation. CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES Based on the doctoral thesis of Hoppe (2009), conventional sustainability measures for dwellings are defined. Hoppe describes various applied sustainable renovation measures and to what extend each measure is applied in the Netherlands. Figure 102 shows the results of the analysis of Hoppe. Hoppe explains the standard sustainable renovation measures as follows. (Hoppe, 2009) Insulation Classification: save energy Various insulation measures can be applied to decrease the need for energy in a house. Roofs, walls, and floors can be insulated. Also new windows can be applied with a better insulation value. To decrease the lost of heat during transport, piping can be insulated to improve efficiency of the system. High efficiency central heating system Classification: improving energyefficiency In the Netherlands natural gas is the most important source of energy. In about ninety percent of the Dutch houses, a central heating system based on natural gas is applied. The efficiency of the central heating system has been improved from 70% in the seventies until 100-107% nowadays.
Energy measure
Increased efficiency of heating system
C oncrete measure
Rental sector
A*
B **
C***
A*
B **
C***
92%
93%
63%
82%
85%
58%
55%
43%
80%
30%
30%
21%
Floor on 1st floor
41%
37%
30%
11%
27%
42%
Roof
67%
73%
57%
37%
56%
72%
Facade
54%
53%
33%
45%
60%
52%
Windows
76%
74%
63%
54%
63%
76%
C rawling space
38%
36%
20%
10%
23%
37%
4%
22%
16%
<1%
<1%
<1%
Individual C Hsystem High-Efficiency boiler next to individual C H system
Insulation of facades
Private sector
Decreased Insulation piping 42% 30% 15% losses for spaceheating and water heating Optimization use Balance 1% <1% <1% of ventilation ventilation on system request Renewable energy sources
Solar heat system 2%
1%
<1%
<1%
1%
<1%
Heat pump
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
PV-system
2%
2%
1%
<1%
1%
<1%
Energy saving lightning techniques
32% 23% 10% 25% 15% Sensored outside lighting Energy saving 10% 10% 7% 10% 10% lamps
*
Duplex house
**
Single family house
6% 10%
*** Multi family house FIGURE 102- AD OPTION OF ENERGY M EASURES CURRENT HOUSING ST OCK [ NL ], ( H OP PE , 2009)
Often, there is coherence between different sustainable renovation techniques. Therefore, frequently a combination of different measures is applied to create an effective combination of measures, which is also known as „whole building approach‟ (Hoppe, 2009). For example, if the facades of a house are insulated by renovation, the air permeability of these facades decreases. To prevent bad air quality and moisture problems from occurring, a ventilation system is applied. The ventilation system on its turn can also be executed in various ways. (Hoppe, 2009) In this research, the measures that are broadly applied in the Netherlands are defined as “standard renovation measures”. Figure 102 shows the adoption rate of the six most applied measures in the Netherlands. Within these six types of measures, a clear distinction can be made between measures that are broadly applied and measures that 102
are rarely applied in the Netherlands. Broadly applied “standard renovation” measures are: - High efficiency central heating system - Insulation of floor, walls (facade), roof, and windows - Insulation of piping The standard renovation measures listed above are the base for the definition of the “standard renovation concept”, which is elaborated in appendix C1. EVALUATION STANDARD RENOVATION MEASURES
This research points out that the relative advantage of standard renovation measures is less advantageous than the relative advantage of WarmBouwen, see Chapter 6. The compatibility of the standard renovation is better than the WarmBouwen renovation, because it is easier to apply the standard renovation measures than the WarmBouwen concept. The WarmBouwen concept can be considered as more complex than the standard renovation concept, which results in a better score of the standard renovation on the aspect of complexity. The score on trialability of the standard renovation concept and the WarmBouwen renovation concept are considered to be equal. The barrier to try the concepts in practice is equal. Lastly, WarmBouwen scores better on the aspect of observability. The transparency of the advantages is equal, but the WarmBouwen concept has is more advantageous to occupants of dwellings which makes it possible to communicate these advantages in a better way than at the standard renovation concept. CONCLUSION
WarmBouwen scores better on the characteristics relative advantage and observability. The score of the two concepts is equal on the aspect trialability. The standard renovation concept scores better on compatibility and complexity. INNOVATIVE CONCEPTS This subparagraph evaluates three possible alternatives for WarmBouwen. The three alternatives that are evaluated are considered to be highly sustainable. The goal of this subparagraph is to determine whether or not these concepts are competitive concepts for WarmBouwen in the field of large scale housing renovation. PASSIVE HOUSE The passive house concept is a development of the German “Passivhaus Insitut”. The concept consists of a thoroughly insulated house in combination with a good ventilation system that is provided with an effective heat regain system. This paragraph provides more information about the passive house concept. A building in which a comfortable interior climate can be maintained without an active heating and cooling system, is called a passive house (Adamson, 1987) & (Feist, 1988). A passive house heats and cools itself. (www.passiv.de) The passive house institute in Germany considers the features in figure 103 as basic features that distinguish passive house constructions (www.passiv.de) The passive house institute determined that the combined primary energy consumption of living area of a European passive house may not exceed 120 (kWh/m²) per year for space heating, hot water, and household electricity. (www.passiv.de) Feature Compact form and good insulation Southern orientation and shade considerations
103
Details All components of the exterior shell of the house are insulated to achieve a U-factor that does not exceed 0.15 W/m2*K Passive use of solar energy is a significant factor in passive house design
Energy-efficient window glazing and frames Building envelope airtightness Passive preheating of fresh air Highly efficient heat recovery from exhaust air FIGURE
Windows (glazing and frames, combined) should have U-factors that don‟t exceed 0.80 W/m2*K, with solar heat-gain coefficients around 50% Air leakage through unsealed joint must be less than 0.6 times the house volume per hour Fresh air can be brought into the house through underground ducts that exchange heat with the soil. Most of the perceptible heat in the exhaust air is transferred to the incoming fresh air. (Heat recovery rate over 80%)
103- BASIC FEATURE S OF PASSIVE HOUSE S , ( WWW . P ASSIV . DE )
EVALUATION PASSIVE HOUSE
This section evaluates the applicability of the passive house concept on the criteria of the concept, listed in figure 103. Compact form and good insulation In case of a renovation project, the form of the building has already been established at the development of the building. It is very hard to adapt the form of the building in a way that is economically feasible and technical feasible at the same time. At renovation projects there are only little things to do, to create a more compact form of the building. Creating a good insulation (passive house proof) is possible in a renovation project. However, it should be taken into account that it is not easy to improve the existing facades towards a U-factor of 0.15 W/m2*K maximum. If the insulation is added to the inside of the facades, a significant loss of living area will occur. If the insulation is added to the outside of the façade, a thick package of insulation must be added. The question is whether this can be done, without applying additional expensive constructive adaptations. Also the thick package of insulation has got a big influence of the ethics of a building and the public space around the building. Southern orientation and shade considerations Given the fact that an existing buildings is already built, nothing can be done on the aspect of orientation. Constructive adaptations can have a positive influence on shade considerations and the orientation issues, but these adaptations are hard and expensive to execute. Energy-efficient window glazing and frames It is possible to make adaptations on the aspect of windows and frames. In a renovation project it is no issue to change the windows and frames, although the building should facilitate the use of triple-glazing. Building envelope air tightness In the passive house concept, the air leakage is maximum 0,6 times the house volume per hour. In new development it is quite easy to seal joints, because they are still easily accessible. In case of renovation however, it is much harder to have access to these joints. Therefore, the costs and the difficulty to reach passive house values for air tightness are much higher than in case of new development. Passive pre-heating of fresh air Considering the fact that the pre-heating takes place in underground ductwork, it can be stated that this technique can be applied if there is space to apply the underground ductwork next to the building, instead of under the building. It depends upon the dimensions of the pre-heating system whether this can be applied in case of renovation projects.
104
Heat recovery from exhaust air using Heat recovery from exhaust air can be easily applied in new development as well as in renovation projects. This measure of the passive house concept forms no problem in renovation projects. CONCLUSION Generally, it can be said that the passive house concept is a concept that is developed for new development buildings. This makes this concept less suitable for the renovation of building. Therefore, the conclusion is that, although the passive house is an interesting and proven sustainable concept, the applicability of the concept on renovation projects is limited. The aspects that are easily applicable for renovation projects (energy-efficient glazing and heat recovery from exhaust air) are inferior to the aspects that are hard to apply in renovation projects (compact form and insulation, orientation, pre-heating of fresh air, and air tightness). HOUSE WITH PASSIVE SOLAR DESIGN A house with a passive solar design makes use of the sun‟s energy for the heating and cooling of living spaces. The building itself takes advantage of natural energy characteristics in materials and air created by exposure to the sun. The advantage of a passive design is that it is a simple design with few moving parts, which requires minimal maintenance and no mechanical systems. Common elements that are found in passive designs are operable windows, thermal mass and thermal chimneys. Operable windows are windows that simply can be opened and closed. Thermal mass refers to materials such as masonry and water that can store heat energy for extended time. Thermal mass prevents rapid temperature changes. Thermal chimneys create or reinforce the hot air rising effect to induce air movement for cooling purposes. (passivesolar.sustainablesources.com) Passive design is a proven concept and is practiced throughout the world. Passive design is known to produce buildings with low energy needs, reduced maintenance, and high comfort. The key aspects of passive design are: - Appropriate solar orientation - Use of thermal mass - Appropriate ventilation and window placement To be able to make an effective passive design, a designer should have specific understanding of a building site‟s: - Wind patterns - Terrain - Vegetation - Solar exposure A basic understanding of these issues can have a significant effect on the energy performance of a building. EVALUATION The passive solar design house is a concept with similarities to the passive house concept. However, the passive solar design focuses on reducing the amount of mechanical elements in the house, where the passive house concepts does integrates these mechanical elements. The text below evaluates the applicability of the passive solar design concept on the criteria of the concept. Appropriate solar orientation Given the fact that an existing building is already built, nothing can be done on the aspect of orientation. Constructive adaptations can have a positive influence on shade considerations and the orientation issues, but these adaptations are mostly hard and 105
expensive to execute. Adapting the solar orientation of a house is hard to execute in a renovation project. Use of thermal mass If you want to make use of thermal mass effectively, this aspect should be integrated into the design of a building before it is built. Is most cases it will be hard and costly to implement the use of thermal mass into the renovation of a house. Appropriate ventilation and window placement The ventilation of a building can be adapted into a certain extend. This is a measure that can be applied in renovation projects. The window placement on the other hand, is less easy to adapt in renovation projects. The window placement is determined at the development of the house. This can be adapted in a renovation project, but this will be costly. The question is whether or not this is cost effective on the long term. Cater to wind pattern, terrain, vegetation and solar exposure In case of a renovation project, it is plausible that the building has been built without taking the aspects of wind, terrain, vegetation and solar exposure into account from an energy efficiency point of view. To cater these aspects in a better way, constructive adaptations have to be implemented to the building during the renovation. This makes it hard to implement these measures on a cost effective way. CONCLUSION The basic principles of passive solar design houses are an appropriate solar orientation, taking advantage of thermal mass principle, an appropriate ventilation system and window placement, and taking the wind pattern, terrain, and vegetation into account. Most of these aspects are hard and costly to implement in a renovation project. Therefore, this concept is not suitable for large scale renovation of houses in the Netherlands. EARTH HOUSE The aim of an earth house is to live with the ground, instead of on the ground. A conventional house is built into the air, which results in the loss of heat and humidity. Also the exterior shell of a building loses lifespan as a result of environmental influences. An earth house uses the ground as an insulating blanket that protects the house from environmental influences like rain, wind, and low or high temperatures. (www.erdhaus.ch) Unique about the earth house concept is that it uses its surroundings as an advantage. The surroundings are not adapted to the building, but the house is shaped in order to preserve the natural environment. Figure 104 shows the principal of the earth house.
FIGURE
106
104- EARTH HOUSE PRINC IPAL ( WWW . ERDH AUS . C H )
According to www.erdhaus.ch, the earth house has the following advantages: Insulation Due to decreased heat losses in the facades of the house, energy savings for heating can go up to fifty percent. Therefore, an earth house can be considered to be highly CO 2 friendly. Air-permeability The specific architecture of earth houses make them nearly airtight. This results in draught free rooms, no structural damage due to humid, a high extend of controllability of the interior climate, and improved sound insulation. Soil-covered roofs The earth house uses the ground as insulation. The ground protects the house effectively from wind, rain, temperature and other environmental influences like natural abrasion. Due to the soil on top of the house, the temperature in summer stays low and the temperature in winter stays high. Sustainable usage of energy and renewable energy Due to the architecture of the house, it is particularly suitable for alternative heating systems. Air, ground, sun, and water can be used as an alternative heat source. CONCLUSION An earth house has got some unique advantages but is unsuitable as a renovation technique. By realizing an earth house, the construction should be suitable for the mass of the soil that comes on top of the house. It is clear that the construction of the existing houses in the Netherlands is not calculated upon this mass, and therefore is not suitable for bearing this load. Next to that, the earth house concept is only applicable for houses with a limited height and there should be enough space to wrap the building with soil and vegetation. Mostly, this space is unavailable at high density Dutch residential areas. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ALL CONCEPTS Standard renovation Progress on system change process (Dieleman) + C urrent adoption rate of innovation +/Relative advantage +/C ompatability + C omplexity + Trialability Observability +/Suitability for renovation ++
Passive Passive solar design house +/+/+ ++ + +/+ + + ---
Warm Earth house Bouwen +/+/-++ ++ + +/+ +/+ + -+
The table above shows an overview of the performance evaluation of the identified competitive concepts of WarmBouwen.
107
APPENDIX K - SOIL CONDITIONS Figure 105 shows the quality of the soil in the Netherlands regarding the applicability of an aquifer. The list below explains the meanings of the different colors on the map. Red: Pink: Orange: Yellow:
FIGURE
108
restriction areas, applying an aquifer is impossible. suitability for applying an aquifer is very good. suitability for applying an aquifer is good. suitability for applying an aquifer is moderate.
105 - SUITAB ILITY OF THE SOIL FOR AN AQU IFER . SOU RCE : TNO & IF
APPENDIX L - BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE MODEL Figure 106 provides a tree-breakdown-structure of the „life cycle performance evaluation model‟ that is depicted in section 4.2.1 of this research. Al the identified factors and subfactors of influence on the life cycle performance of renovation concept are integrated in the structure. Lifespan of elements Lifespan of building 1st level subfactors
Reference building Scope
Boundary conditions
Boundary factors
Life Cycle Performance
Life Cycle Yields
Life Cycle Environmental Impact
External factors
Risks
Assembly
Financial factors
Primary returns
Life cycle
Secondary returns
Disposal
Life Cycle Costs
Development energy price
Rent
Discount rate
Operating costs Maintenance costs
Exit yield
Energy Performance Coefficient
User health
Technical performance
Future value
Installation techniques
Materials
Sound
Ventilation
Air quality
Tap water
Thermal comfort
Space heating
Light and visual comfort
Space cooling
Energy use
Transmission
Energy use Replacement of elements
Energy use
Infiltration
Replacement of elements
Thermal capacity
Change over costs Replacement costs of elements
109
1st level subfactors
2nd level subfactors
Disposal costs
FIGURE
Main factors
Technical quality
Processing & manufacturing Transport
Initial investment
Quality
106 - BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE OF THE ' LIFE CYCLE PERFORMANCE EVALU ATIO N MODEL '
APPENDIX M - EVALUATION EXISTING MODELS This appendix provides an evaluation of the quality of the four analyzed sustainability assessment tools. GPR GEBOUW
GPR Gebouw is sustainability assessment tool that is recently updated. The factors that are taken into account in this tool are very useful for developing a performance evaluation model for sustainable renovation concepts because the tool is very complete and quantifies scores on the quality aspect. However, this tool also has some shortcomings. GPR Gebouw gives no indication of the financial performance of a renovation concept. Therefore, the sustainability score can give a distorted image of a concept. For several aspects that are considered in GPR Gebouw, it is not plausible that they will be influenced by renovation measures. It is improbable that house owners invest in aspects as water, social safety, and accessibility during a sustainable renovation. Thus, the GPR tool contains several factors that are improbable to be influenced by a sustainable renovation. For the development of a performance evaluation model for renovation concepts, several aspects can be used. For a comprising view on the sustainable performance of a renovation concept, a life cycle approach should be integrated in the performance evaluation tool. GPR Gebouw does apply a life cycle approach on the field of energy use of the building and the environmental impact. However, on the field of material use, processes and manufacturing, transport and the financial aspects, this tool does not integrate the life cycle approach. Next to that, the environmental impact of GPR Gebouw is only represented in CO 2 equivalents, while it is plausible that the focus in the field of environmental performance will change in the future. BREEAM
BREEAM is an extensive sustainability assessment tool. Many aspects are taken into account in this tool and all aspects are quantified to form an overall end score. This tool is very useful, but mainly for the assessment of new development of real estate. Another disadvantage of the tool is that only certified professionals are obliged to perform an assessment, which is expensive. A lot of factors that are taken into account in BREEAM are improbable to be changed by renovation measures. Large parts of the transport-, water-, waste-, land use & ecology-, and pollution modules are not affected by sustainable renovation measures for houses. Also, the tool takes costs into account into limited extend. For determining the environmental impact of the building, the total life cycle is not taken into account. Therefore, the sustainability score can give a distorted image of a renovation concept. Another disadvantage of this tool is that the assessment leads towards an amount of points. It is hard to deduce, which specifications lead towards the score. This makes it difficult for clients or homeowners to make a decision for a certain renovation concept based upon their specific stakes and interests. However, the tool does provide useful aspects that should be taken into account by a performance evaluation tool for sustainable renovation concepts. EPW
The EPW tool is the most widely applied sustainability assessment tool in the Netherlands. The Dutch government applies EPW requirements in their laws and regulations. This makes this tool a very important one in the Dutch market. EPW is a very useful tool for determining the sustainability performance of renovation concept in the field of energy (the Energy Performance Coefficient, EPC) because the tool and output are widely known and an assessment is easy to execute. However, the tool has its shortcomings on the other factors that influence the performance of renovation concepts. Although, the energy performance coefficient provides information about the operational 110
costs and operational environmental impact, a large part of these aspects is not taken into account. Also, the qualitative performance of renovation concept cannot be determined with EPW. GPR Gebouw and Greencalc are examples, whereby the EPW software is embedded, which make these tools more comprising than EPW. The execution of EPW results in a energy performance coefficient of a building. This EPC refers to the energy performance on the moment of evaluation. However, for a comprising view on the sustainable performance of a renovation concept, the life cycle of the building and its concept should also be taken into account. The life cycle approach is not integrated in the EPW tool. GREENCALC
Greencalc is the only tool that performs a life cycle assessment to determine the environmental impact of a building. On this aspect Greencalc is the most accurate and comprising tool. The EPC that is determined by EPW is embedded in the Greencalc software. Thus, Greencalc also takes the energy performance into account. The third module is water. Like described before, it is improbable that house owners invest in aspects as water usage when selecting a renovation concept. The shortcomings of the tool are the financial aspects and quality of a renovation concept, which are not taken into account.
111
APPENDIX N - ELABORATION OF IMPRO VEMENTS This appendix provides an elaboration of the impact evaluation of possible improvements of the WarmBouwen concept. The impact of the improvements is elaborated on the five main factors of influence on the live cycle performance. IMPROVEMENT 1 – GAS HEAT PUMP The first improvement of the WarmBouwen is replacing the electric heat pump by a gas heat pump. In the sections below, the impact of this improvement is elaborated. ELABORATION OF THE IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE
Assumptions that are # Field of impact of assumption 1 LCEI Gas used by heat pump
made at the elaboration are described in figure 107. Assumption Motivation
2
LCC
3
LCEI
The investment costs and technical lifespan of an individual gas heat pump are equal to these characteristics of an electric heat pump The environmental impact of the materials and processes that are required to produce the gas heat pump is equal to the environmental impact of an electric heat pump
FIGURE
The gas that is selected for use in a heat pump is “Heat, natural gas, at diffusion absorption heat pump 4kW, future/CH S”
This product matches the best with the situation in reality. The capacity of the heat pump in reality will be a little higher (approximately 7 kW). However, this product matches good with the real situation. The differences in dimensions and processed materials between the two types of heat pumps can be neglected. The differences in dimensions and processed materials between the two types of heat pumps can be neglected. Therefore, the environmental impact is assumed to be the same.
107 - ASSUMPTION S FOR IMPR O VEMENT GAS HE AT PUMP
EPC Figure 108 shows the effect of applying a gat heat pump instead of an electric heat pump. The efficiency of a gas heat pump is significantly lower than the efficiency of an electric heat pump. Therefore, the performance on EPC also decreases. EPC performance Effect on primary energy use (MJ) Apply gas heat pump +0.32 +14607 FIGURE
108 - EFFECT ON EPC OF GAS HEAT PUMP
The EPC of the WarmBouwen concept increases from 0,70 to 1,02 when if a gas heat pump is used for the production of heat and cold. LCC Initial operational costs: Aspect Heating Warm tap water Summer comfort Fixed costs for connection to electricity 112
Energy source Gas Gas Electricity -
Used energy (MJ) 18435 21936 339 -
Costs (€) 337 401 22 237
grid Fixed costs for connection to gas grid Energy tax decrease Total
-
-
180,21 -379,16 798
Figure 109 shows the impact of the application of the gas heat pump on the factor „life cycle costs‟. Initial operating Average yearly LCC costs WarmBouwen 1526 9714 WarmBouwen with 798 6041 solar systems FIGURE
109 - IMPACT O N LCC OF GAS HE AT PUMP
LCY The impact of the gas heat pump on the performance on the factor „life cycle yields‟ is depicted in figure 110. WarmBouwen renovation + gas heat pump
Primary returns Secundary returns Risk Total normalized score FIGURE
WarmBouwen renovation
Normalized Weigh Normalized Weigh score score factor factor 0,974 0,863 1 0,863 1 0,087 1 0,087 1 0,05 1 0,05 0,98
1,00
110 - IMPACT GAS HE AT PUMP ON LCY
LCEI The impact of the gas heat pump on the performance on the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ is depicted in figure 111. Scores
Scenario x.2.2.y
FIGURE
Aspect
WarmBouwen renovation
WarmBouwen renovation + gas heat pump
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources
106 0,0968 22,8 8,48 70,1 11,8 0 9,12 18,4 146
100 0,0879 21 7,84 69,9 14,9 0 10,7 17,6 147
Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score
393 1 393 0,990
389 1 389 1
111 - IMPACT OF GAS HE AT PUMP ON LCEI
Quality Applying a gas heat pump instead of an electric heat pump at the WarmBouwen concept does not influence the performance of the concept on the aspect quality. 113
IMPROVEMENT 2 – SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS The first improvement of the WarmBouwen is the application of solar energy systems. In the sections below, the impact of this improvement is elaborated. ELABORATION OF THE IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE
Assumptions that are made at the elaboration are # Field of impact Assumption of assumption 1 LCEI The weight of a solar Solar heating heating of 4 m2 system system is 32 kg. 2
LCEI Solar heating system
3
LCEI PV-cells
4
EPC PV-cells Solar heating system LCC Investment PVcells
5
4
LCC Investment solar heating system
FIGURE
The product that is selected for the solar heating system is “Solar collector glass tube, with silver mirror, at plant/DE S” The product that is selected for the PV-cells is “Photovoltaic panel, multi-Si, at plant/RER/I S” The orientation of the panels is south. The intitial investment for 3,9 m2 PV-cells is €2850. The intitial investment for 4 m2 solar heating system is €2500.
described in figure 112. Motivation This information is provided by M. Jansen, which is a specialist from solar energy company “Energieker”, Amsterdam. This product refers to an average solar heating system. For this evaluation the assumption is made that the evaluated system is an average system. This product corresponds best with the product that is offered by solar energy company “Energieker”, Amsterdam. Depends on the situation. This is the most desired orientation, which leads to the best performance This information is provided by M. Jansen, which is a specialist from solar energy company “Energieker”, Amsterdam. This information is provided by M. Jansen, which is a specialist from solar energy company “Energieker”, Amsterdam.
112 - ASSUMPTION S FOR IMPR O VEMENT SOLAR EN ERG Y SYSTEMS
EPC Figure 113 shows the effect of applying a 3,9 m2 PV-cell, and 4 m2 solar heating system to a WarmBouwen renovated house on the factor „energy performance coefficient‟. The effect of the solar heating systems is determined by calculations in the software tool EPW. 3,9 m2 PV-cell 4 m2 Solar heating system Total FIGURE
EPC performance -0.11 -0.14 -0.24
Effect on primary energy use (MJ) -4768 -6155 -10923
113 - EFFECT ON EPC OF SOLAR ENERGY SY STEMS
The EPC of the WarmBouwen concept decreases from 0,70 to 0,46 if the defined solar system are applied. LCC The impact of the solar energy systems on the performance on the factor „life cycle costs‟ is depicted in figure 114.
114
Initial operating costs: Aspect Heating Secondary heating energy Warm tap water Summer comfort Production PV-cell Fixed costs for connection to electricity grid Energy tax decrease Total
Energy source Electricity Electricity Electricity Electricity Electricity -
Used energy (MJ) 11296 969 7344 339 -4768 -
Costs (€)
-
-
-379,16 1065
Figure 114 shows the impact of the application of the defined solar Initial investment Initial operating costs WarmBouwen 22461 1526 WarmBouwen with 27811 1065 solar systems FIGURE
722 62 469 22 -305 237
systems. Average yearly LCC 9714 7771
114 - IMPACT OF SO LAR ENERGY SY STEMS O N LCC
LCY The impact of the solar energy systems on the performance on the factor „life cycle yields‟ is depicted in figure 115. WarmBouwen WarmBouwen renovation + solar renovation systems Normalized Weigh Normalized Weigh score factor score factor Primary returns 0,97 0,863 1 0,863 Secundary returns 1 0,087 1 0,087 Risk 1 0,05 1 0,05 Total normalized score 0,97 1 FIGURE
115 - IMPACT O N LCY OF SOLAR ENERGY SY STEMS
LCEI The impact of the solar energy systems on the performance on the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ is depicted in figure 116.
Scenario 3.2.2.y
FIGURE
115
Aspect
Scores per renovation alternative WarmBouwen WarmBouwen renovation renovation
Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources
106 0,0968 22,8 8,48 70,1 11,8 0 9,12 18,4 146
87,3 0,0686 21,7 8,2 70,1 11,8 0 7,32 17,6 119
Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score
393 1 393 0,872
343 1 343 1
116 - IMPACT OF SO LAR SY STEMS ON L IFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT
Quality Applying solar systems to the WarmBouwen concept does not influence the performance of the system on the aspect quality. IMPROVEMENT 3 – FLEXIBLE INTERNAL WALLS The third improvement of the WarmBouwen is the application of flexible interior walls. In the section below, the impact of this improvement is elaborated. Figure 117 provides the assumptions that are made at the elaboration. # Field of Assumption Motivation impact of assumption 1 LCEI The product that is selected for the steel The selected products Steel – of the flexible wall is “Chromium steel and processes match flexible walls 18/8, at plant/RER S” the products that are used in the flexible wall 2 LCEI The process that is selected for the steel system. The wall Steel – of the flexible wall is “Zinc coating, system that is used as flexible walls coils/RER S” reference wall is the “Lafarge E-11/75/100 3 LCEI The product that is selected for the +MW 30” wall. Gypsum board gypsum board of the flexible wall is – flexible walls “Gypsum plaster board, at plant/CH S” 4 LCEI The product that is selected for the glass Glass wool – wool of the flexible wall is “Glass wool flexible walls mat, at plant/CH S” 5 LCEI The product that is selected for the Base plaster – plasterwork for finishing the flexible wall flexible walls is “Base plaster, at plant/CH S” FIGURE
117 - ASSUMPTION S FOR IMPR O VEMENT FLEXIBLE INT E RNAL WALL S
ELABORATION OF THE IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE
LCEI The impact of the flexible interior walls on the performance on the factor „life cycle environmental impact‟ is depicted in figure 118. Scenari o x.3.1.y
Aspect Greenhouse Ozone layer Acidification Eutrophication Heavy metals Carcinogens Pesticides Summer smog Winter smog Energy resources Total Converting factor Total (converted) Normalized score
FIGURE
116
Scores per renovation alternative WarmBouwen WarmBouwen renovation (Flexible walls) 173 0,146 35 15,1 170 18,6 0 14,7 28,4 222
152 0,143 34,5 12,3 85,9 20,7 0 14,1 28,9 221
677 0,67 451 0,746
570 0,67 380 0,887
118 - LCEI OUPUT OF FLEXIBLE INTERN AL WALL S
APPENDIX O - TOOLKIT BESTAANDE BO UW CONCEPT #1113 This appendix provides information about concept #1113 of the „Toolkit bestaande bouw‟. This concept provided information about the investment costs for standard renovation measures in a house. Figures 119 and 120 present the pages from the „toolkit bestaande bouw‟ that are used in this research.
FIGURE
117
119 - OVER VIEW OF CONCE PT OF ' TOOLKIT BESTAANDE BOUW '
FIGURE
118
120 - OVER VIEW OF CO STS FOR STAND ARD MEASURES
APPENDIX P - TRANSMISSION WARMBOU WEN This appendix describes the calculation of the transmission value of a WarmBouwen wall. To be able to import WarmBouwen into EPW, which is the software tool that is used in this research to determine the energy performance coefficient of the renovation concepts, a transmission coefficient has to be calculated. For the WarmBouwen renovation concept a distinction is made between the emission of heat and and cold to the building and the influence of absorbing heat and cold during summer en winter, which is accumulated in the soil. For an accurate calculation of the effect of WarmBouwen, a dynamic calculation model has to be made, because it is impossible to calculate the accurate effect of WarmBouwen statically. VALIDATION OF THE CALCULATION METHOD For this research the effect of absorbing heat and cold is outside the scope of the calculation. Therefore, the outcomes of the calculations will probably by less sustainable than they are in reality. The calculation of the transmission of WarmBouwen has been presented to an expert of DGMR. The expert of DGMR states that the current calculation method of the effect of WarmBouwen for interior climate control is a reasonable calculation that represents the real situation. However, the consulted expert expects that it is plausible that the performance of the system is better than currently calculated with EPW. ASSUMPTIONS For determining the transmission of the water that flows through the WarmBouwen tubes, it is assumed that the tubes contain still standing water of twenty degrees Celsius. As a result, the value λ = 0.6 W/m*K is used for the calculation of the transmission of the WarmBouwen concept.
CALCULATION TRANSMISSION STEP 1: DETERMINING CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALL The construction of the wall consists of several layers. The specifications of the construction of the wall are depicted in the figure 121. Wall specifications - WarmBouwen
L1
L1: L2: L3: L4:
Outer brick layer Cavity Inner brick layer Alufoam
FIGURE
119
L2
L3
L5: Insulation L6: WarmBouwen Layer 1 L7: WarmBouwen Layer 2
121 – CROSS - SECTIO N OF A WARMBOU WEN WALL
L4 L5 L6
L7
STEP 2: DETERMINE TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF THE MATERIALS Figure 122 depicts a cross-section of the tubes that are used in the applied system for the emission of heat and cold. The technical information about the tube has been acquired from the producer of the tubes. 1.8 mm
Tube: UWHB – AKB leiding λ=0.43 W/m*K Water: t= 293 °K λ=0.60 W/m*K
8.4 mm
Gipsvezelplaat λ=0.32 W/m*K 1.8 mm FIGURE
122 - CROSS - SECTIO N OF THE PROCESSED TUBES
STEP 3: DETERMINE THE PROPORTIONS OF TUBES AND GYPSUM FIBER OF THE WARMBOUWEN LAYER. Figure 123 shows one square meter this layer, the proportions of tubes information about the WarmBouwen of the tubes is 100 mm. Therefore, 9
of the WarmBouwen layer. For the transmission of and gypsum fiber must be determined. Technical concept points out that the heart-to-heart distance meters of tubes is process per m 2 WarmBouwen.
The proportion of surface where tubes are processed is: 9 * 0.012 = 0.108 m 2 The proportion of surface covered with only gypsum fiber is: 1 - 0.012 = 0.892 m2 Front view of L5 & L6 of Wall Structure 1m
1m
WarmBouwen Tubes
· · · ·
FIGURE
120
123 – ONE SQUAREMETER OF W ARMBOUWEN WAL L
9 meter tubes processed per m2. (h.o.h. = 100 mm) Tubes: 12/1.8 mm. Surface of tube per m2: 9*0.012= 0.108m2 Surface of loam: 1-0.108=0.892m2
STEP 4: DETERMINE AVERAGE U-VALUE (W/M2K) OF WARMBOUWEN LAYER The next step in the process is to determine the average U-value of the layers 6 & 7 of the construction of the wall. Figure 124 provides these calculations. Layer 6 - WarmBouwen tubes & gypsumfiber Number 1 2 3 4
Layer Tube Water Tube Gypsumfiber
Layer 7 -Loam stucco
Thickness (m) λ (W/m*K) Rc (m2*K/W) 0,0018 0,43 0,004186047 0,0084 0,6 0,014 0,0018 0,043 0,041860465 0,006 0,32 0,01875 Rc_total U-total (W/m2*K) Part of total surface
Number Layer Thickness (m) λ (W/m*K) Rc (m2*K/W) 1 Gypsumfiber 0,018 0,32 0,05625
0,079 12,691 10,8%
Rc_total
0,056
U-total (W/m2*K) Part of total surface
17,77777778 89,2%
Calculation U-Average Layer 6 & Layer 7 Uaverage = (A1U1+A2U2)/(A1+A2)
Uaverage = (0,108*12,69 + 0,892*17,78) / (0,108+0,892) Uaverage :
17,23028
(W/m2*K)
A1
0,108
m2
Rcaverage :
0,0580
(m2*K/W)
U1
12,69
(W/m2*K)
λaverage :
0,6892112
(W/m*K)
A2
0,892
m2
U2
17,78
(W/m2*K)
FIGURE
124 - U - VALUE LAYERS 6 & 7
STEP 5: CALCULATION OF THE TOTAL TRANSMISSION VALUE OF A WARMBOUWEN WALL The last step is the calculation of the total transmission value of a WarmBouwen wall. These calculations are presented in figure 125. Calculation U-Value of the Wall structure Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
FIGURE
121
Layer Thickness (m) λ (W/m*K) Rc (m2*K/W) External surface n/a n/a 0,06 Brick Information from report 0,36 Cavity SenterNovem Brick (Standardized values for Alufoam 0,002 0,02 0,10 Insulation 0,03 0,023 1,30 WarmBouwen 0,018 0,69 0,03 Internal surface n/a n/a 0,12 Rc_total 1,97 (m2*K/W) U-total 0,51 (W/m2*K)
125 - TRANSM ISSION WARMBOU WEN WAL L
APPENDIX Q - SCENARIOS AND CODES Figure 126 provides an overview of all the scenarios with accompanying characteristics that are defined for this research. Scenario
C haracteristics
[1.1.1.1] [1.1.1.2] [1.1.1.3] [1.1.2.1] [1.1.2.2] [1.1.2.3] [1.1.3.1] [1.1.3.2] [1.1.3.3] [1.2.1.1] [1.2.1.2] [1.2.1.3] [1.2.2.1] [1.2.2.2] [1.2.2.3] [1.2.3.1] [1.2.3.2] [1.2.3.3] [1.3.1.1] [1.3.1.2] [1.3.1.3] [1.3.2.1] [1.3.2.2] [1.3.2.3] [1.3.3.1] [1.3.3.2] [1.3.3.3]
No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price
[2.1.1.1] [2.1.1.2] [2.1.1.3] [2.1.2.1] [2.1.2.2] [2.1.2.3] [2.1.3.1] [2.1.3.2] [2.1.3.3] [2.2.1.1] [2.2.1.2] [2.2.1.3] [2.2.2.1] [2.2.2.2] [2.2.2.3] [2.2.3.1] [2.2.3.2] [2.2.3.3] [2.3.1.1] [2.3.1.2] [2.3.1.3] [2.3.2.1] [2.3.2.2] [2.3.2.3] [2.3.3.1] [2.3.3.2] [2.3.3.3]
Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price
[3.1.1.1] [3.1.1.2] [3.1.1.3] [3.1.2.1] [3.1.2.2] [3.1.2.3] [3.1.3.1] [3.1.3.2] [3.1.3.3] [3.2.1.1] [3.2.1.2] [3.2.1.3] [3.2.2.1] [3.2.2.2] [3.2.2.3] [3.2.3.1] [3.2.3.2] [3.2.3.3] [3.3.1.1] [3.3.1.2] [3.3.1.3] [3.3.2.1] [3.3.2.2] [3.3.2.3] [3.3.3.1] [3.3.3.2] [3.3.3.3]
WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price
FIGURE
122
No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price No renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price
Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price Standard renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price
WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, low extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, expected extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, low functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, expected functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, low increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, expected increase of energy price WarmBouwen renovation, high extenstion of lifespan building, high functional lifespan of elements, high increase of energy price
126 - ALL DEFINED SCEN ARIO S
APPENDIX R - IMPACT OF FUNCTIONAL CHANGES Figure 127 shows two interior scenarios of the reference house that is selected for this research. The two scenarios are used to determine the number elements that are changed during the life cycle of a dwelling. Scenario 1
Scenario 2
1st Floor
2nd Floor
3rd Floor
FIGURE
127 - INTERIOR CHA NGE SCE NAR IO S
Assumptions that are made to calculate the number of radiators and amount of piping that is changed during the life cycle are: -
At the first change, the interior changes from scenario 1 to scenario 2. At the next interior change the interior changes back from scenario 2 to scenario 1. Radiators that are changed will be replaced by new radiators. Replaced radiators will be disposed.
Next to replacements due to functional changes within the dwelling, replacement of elements is caused by the expiration of the technical life span of elements. Figure 128 shows the technical lifespan of the elements that are used in the calculations of this research. Element Technical life span (years)
Piping Radiator Roof insulation Floor insulation Facade insulation Windows Wall heating system FIGURE
123
30 30 whole life cycle whole life cycle whole life cycle 20 whole life cycle
128 - TECHNIC AL LIFE SPAN OF ELEMENT S
APPENDIX S - ASSUMPTIONS #
1
Field of impact of assumption LCC & LCEI Fixed internal walls
Assumption
Motivation
The fixed internal walls are made of Ytong bricks, and finished with plasterwork. The reference house that is used in this research is unoccupied at the moment of renovation.
„Ytong bricks‟ is a product that is applied on large scale for non-constructive walls in houses. It is fast and easy to process.
2
LCC Specifications reference house
3
LCC & LCEI Start life cycle alternatives 1 &2
4
LCC & LCEI Piping WarmBouwen concept
5
LCC Disposal costs alternatives
The disposal costs of the three evaluated renovation concepts are equal.
6
LCC Change over costs
The change-over costs of the three evaluated renovation concepts are equal.
7
LCC Subsidies
In the calculations of this research, subsidies are not taken into account.
8
LCC & LCEI Change of
The house changes from scenario 1 to
124
At the start of the life cycle of the alternatives „No renovation‟ & „Standard renovation‟ new radiators, a boiler, and piping are required. The piping that is processed in the wall heating system of WarmBouwen has a technical life cycle that is equal to the life cycle of the building.
The calculations without costs for replacement of occupants, gives a better view on the costs of the renovation concept itself. In practice the situation can differ from the calculations made in this research, because occupants have to be taken into account. Is can be assumed that renovation of houses takes place after a significant period of exploitation. Therefore, it is most realistic to assume that new radiators and piping is required at the start of the life cycle. The piping that is processed in the walls has a minimal exposure to the environment. The chance on damage is nil, and the material is protected, longlasting, and not susceptible for erosion. Therefore it is realistic to assume that the lifecycle of this piping is the same as the life cycle of the building after renovation. It is assumed that the building is demolished after its lifecycle is ended. The end of life scenario is not affected by the applied renovation concept. Therefore, it is most realistic to assume that the disposal costs at the end of the life cycle of the building are equal for all three concepts. At the start of the life cycle, the existing installations have to be removed in case of all three renovation concepts. The existing installation, and the process of removing it, is equal for all the renovation concepts. Therefore, the costs of this process are also equal. It would give an unrealistic view on the situation. If a subsidy would be appointed to one or more renovation concepts in this research. For a clear and fair comparison, subsidies are not taken into account. (In practice, WarmBouwen would have a big chance on receiving a subsidy) To be able to determine the impact on the LCC and LCA of functional changes during
radiators
scenario 2 at the first functional change. At the second functional changes, the house changes back from scenario 2 to scenario 1.
9
LCC & LCEI Change of piping during life cycle
For each radiator that is changed during ht life cycle of a house, 7.4 meters of piping replaced.
10
LCC Energy price development
For the energy price development, three scenarios have been defined. The scenarios are average development per year. Defined scenarios: +5%, +8%, and +11%.
11
LCC & LCEI Extension of lifespan of building after renovation
For the extension of the life cycle of the building after renovation, three scenarios have been defined. Defined scenarios: +25 year, +50 year, and +75 year.
12
LCC & LCEI Change rate and functional lifespan of elements in houses
13
LCC Discount rate
Change rate scenarios: Scenario 1: once in 5 years functional change. Scenario 2: once in 10 years functional change. Scenario 3: once in 20 years functional change. The discount rate that is used in the LCC calculations of this research is: 5.68%
125
the lifetime of a house, 2 scenarios have been created. The assumptions is made that the house goes from scenario1 to 2 and backwards during its life cycle. The impact depends on the amount of functional changes during the lifecycle of the house. Appendix R shows the two defined scenarios. Appendix xx shows a calculation of the total amount of piping that is present in a house. The average amount of piping that is processed per radiator is 7.4 meter. Is is realistic that piping will be replaced if a radiator is changed. Therefore the assumption is made that every change of radiator, results in the replacement of 7.4 meters of piping. Appendix C2.1 shows a calculation of the energy price development in the past fifteen years. Based upon this analysis, the three scenarios are defined. Scenario 1: Development is lower than expected:+5% Scenario 2: Development is increasing as expected: +8% Scenario 3: Development is higher than expected: +11% Different experts have their ideas about the intended lifecycle of a building. For this research I have assumed that the life cycle of the building after renovation is equal to the life cycle that housing corporations define for buildings that are newly developed. This assumption resulted in the scenarios described in the previous column. Appendix C1 gives a more detailed motivation of the selected scenarios on this subject. For the determination of costs and environmental impact of elements of a renovation concept, 3 scenarios have been defined for the functional change rate en lifespan of elements of the three renovation concepts. In appendix C1, the functional lifespan of elements in the renovation concepts are described in more detail. For the determination of the discount rate, the average discount rate that the European Union prescribes for governments is analyzed. Based upon the average discount rate that is prescribed by the EU, the discount rate for this research is defined. The analysis of the discount rate of the EU is described in
14
LCEI Average transport distance of elements
Three different transport scenarios have been defined for the determining the environmental impact due to transport of elements: Scenario 1: 200 km Scenario 2: 600 km Scenario 3: 1000 km
15
LCEI Radiators
The average length of a radiator is 1.5 meter and is 0,60 meter high.
16
LCEI Efficiency boiler
The environmental impact of material that are processed in the efficiency boiler is equal to that of a high efficiency boiler
17
LCEI Single glazing
The assumption is made that single glazing is 50% of the impact of double glazing
18
LCEI Piping
The weight of the piping consists for 60% out of aluminum, and for 40% out of PE.
19
LCEI Radiators
A radiator consists for 100% out of steel
20
LCEI PIR-insulation
The environmental impact of PIR is equal to the environmental impact of PUR
126
appendix C2.1. To be able to determine the environmental impact of transport of elements in the renovation concepts, three scenarios have been defined. Based upon consults of experts and own estimations, each element is assigned to one of the three transport scenarios. Appendix C2.3 shows the input for the environmental impact calculations. This appendix describes the elements and their assigned transport classification. Radiators that have to heat large rooms like the living room, or the kitchen mostly are bigger than 1,5. Radiators in the bathroom or sleeping room mostly are smaller. Based upon this information the average length of radiators in a house on 1,5 meter per radiator is determined. The information about the radiators is determined by consulting an expert. (Mr. van Tilburg – The Heating Company) Although a high efficiency boiler may contain more elements, it can be said that the difference between a efficiency boiler and a high efficiency boiler is nil. Therefore, the assumption is made that the environmental impact of the two boilers is identical. Double glazing is nothing else than two layers of single glazing and a vacuum cavity that is filled with gas or air. Therefore, no difference is made between the impacts of the material of these two possibilities, but only the amount of glass differs. There is made a distinction in the production process for single and double glass. The specific gravity of aluminum = 2800 kg/m3 and of PE = 1000 kg/m3. Based on the technical information about this piping it is assumed that 65% of the piping consists of PE en 35% of aluminum. This calculation results in the weight partition of the piping: 60% aluminum, 40% PE. In practice a radiator consists for about 95-98% out of steel. The percentage that is caused by paint and synthetic material is neglected. The product PIR is not defined in the library of the used LCA software tool. Based on information from several websites life www.immoweb.be it can be assumed that that although the chemical composition of PIR and PUR differs slightly, the environmental impact is about the same.
21
LCEI Piping wall heating system
Per m2 wall heating system, 9 meters of piping is processed.
22
LCEI Façade insulation (cavity insulation)
The thickness of the cavity is assumed to be 10 cm.
23
LCEI Heat pump
24
EPC WarmBouwen
The composition and weights of materials of the heat pump are equated to the results that are determined in the scientific research by Rey et al. For determining the heat conductivity of a WarmBouwen façade, the influence of capturing heat and cold is neglected.
Assumptions made # Field of impact of assumption 25 LCEI Weight factors LCEI calculations
25
LCEI Transport specifications
Based upon technical information about the wall heating system of WarmBouwen, the amount of meters processed piping is calculated. The heart-to-heart distance of piping is 10 cm. This means 9 strokes of piping is processed per m2. This results in 9 m piping per m2. For determining the quantity of processed PUR in the cavity wall in the standard renovation concept, the thickness of the cavity is of influence. The assumption of the thickness of the cavity is made, based upon technical information of the reference house. The composition of the used heat pump in the WarmBouwen renovation concept is equal to the composition of the heat pump that is analyzed in the research: “Life cycle assessment and external environmental cost analysis of heat pumps” by Rey et al. This assumption is made based upon a consult of an expert, Mr. Verbaan – DGMR. For a precise determination of the energetic performance of a WarmBouwen wall, a 3D calculation must be made. This calculation is outside the scope of this research.
for the modeling in SimaPro (LCA tool) Assumption Motivation
For the determination of the environmental impact of the alternatives, the following weight factors are used: Greenhouse: 8 Ozone Layer: 5 Acidification: 5 Eutrophication: 5 Heavy Metals: 5 Carcinogens: 5 Pesticides: 5 Summer smog: 5 Winter smog: 5 Energy resources: 8 „Lorry 20-28 ton, fleet average/CHS‟ is selected for the transportation of materials and elements
Assembly in SimaPro 26 LCEI The aluminum that is selected Boilerfor the use in a boiler is 127
There are two factors that have a higher weight factor than the others: Greenhouse and Energy resources. This is because these two factors have an influence on the problems that are urgent and actual at this moment.
In the LCA software, different lorries are defined. For this research, the selected lorry is identical to the lorry that is used in the example calculations of the software tool. This aluminum is the aluminum that is produced for consumption
aluminum LCEI Process Boileraluminum
“aluminum, primary, at plant” The process that is selected for the production of aluminum in the boiler is “aluminum product manufacturing, average metal working”
28
LCEI Boiler – Steel
The steel that is selected for the use in a boiler is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
29
LCEI Boiler – Steel
30
LCEI Boiler-Cast iron
The process that is selected for the production of steel in the boiler is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working” The cast iron that is selected for the use in a boiler is “cast iron, at plant”
31
LCEI Boiler-Cast iron
The process that is selected for the production of cast iron in the boiler is “Drilling, conventional, cast iron”
32
LCEI Boiler-copper
The copper that is selected for the use in a boiler is “Copper, at regional storage”
33
LCEI Boiler-copper
The process that is selected for the production of copper is “copper product manufacturing, average metal working”
34
LCEI Piping-PE
The product that is selected for the part of the piping that is not made of Aluminum is “Polyethylene, HDPE, granulate, at plant”
35
LCEI Piping-PE
The process that is selected for the production of PE is “Extrusion, plastic pipes”
27
128
in Europe. This is the average process that is executed to produce aluminum into a final product. These final products are applied in the boiler. This data is specified on the market in Europe. The steel that is processed in boilers is stainless steel. Therefore, the chromium steel alternative is selected. The data of this product is specified on plant in the EU. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in boilers. The SimaPro library contains only one sort of cast iron. This is the average cast iron product that is used and produced in the EU. Therefore, this product is selected for this research. This is the average production process that belongs to the production of cast iron, if you want to create final products as an end product. This production process is the average technology. For the selection of copper, the most common sort of copper is selected. Copper at regional storage is the most common sort of copper that is used. Therefore, this type of product is selected This is the average process that is executed to produce copper into a final product. These final products are applied in the boiler. This data is specified on the market in Europe. The product sheet of the piping delivered the input for the selection of this product. In the library of SimaPro several types of PE are available. The profile of this product matches the product that is use for piping the most, because it is high quality and specified on production in the EU. The PE is processed in piping. The extrusion process changes the material from base product to end product, whereby the end product is suitable for the
36
LCEI PipingAluminum
37
LCEI PipingAluminum
38
LCEI PipingAluminum
The second process that is selected for processing the aluminum of the piping is ”Laser machining, metal, with CO2-laser, 4000W power”
39
LCEI Radiators
The steel that is selected for the use in the radiators is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
40
LCEI Radiators
41
LCEI Expansion barrel (rest)
42
LCEI Expansion barrel (rest
43
LCEI Expansion barrel – steel
The process that is selected for the production of steel in the radiators is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working” The products that have been selected for the production of the expansion barrel are: “Synthethis rubber, at plant”, “Epoxy resin, liquid, at plant”, “Acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene copolymer, ABS, at plant” and “Brass, at plant” The process that are selected for the „rest‟ materials in an expansion barrel are: “Thermoforming, with calendaring”, “Injection moulding”, and “Casting, brass” The steel that is selected for the use in the expansions barrel is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
44
LCEI Expansion barrel – steel
129
The product that is selected for the aluminum part of the piping is “Aluminum, primary, at plant” The first process that is selected for processing the aluminum of the piping is ”Sheet rolling, aluminum”
The process that is selected for the production of steel in the expansion barrel is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working”
processing in piping. This aluminum is the aluminum that is produced for consumption in Europe. Experts provided the information about this production process. Based upon this information the matching process from the SimaPro library is selected To finish the piping, the ends of the rolled sheets are lasered. This process is selected because it was about the average of all the laser processes. Next to that, it is assumed that the laser speed is 5cm/second, Based on this the electricity use for this process is determined. The steel that is processed in radiators is stainless steel. Therefore, the chromium steel alternative is selected. The data of this product is specified on plant in the EU. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in radiators. For all these products it accounts that is the average usual product that is applied in Europe. Therefore, these products are selected in this LCA.
These selection processes are needed to form the base materials that are applied in a expansion barrel into a final product that can be applied in the barrel. The steel that is processed in expansion barrels is stainless steel. Therefore, the chromium steel alternative is selected. The data of this product is specified on plant in the EU. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in boilers.
45
LCEI Single glazing
The glass that is selected for the single glass that is used in the concept “No renovation” is “Flat glass, coated, at plant”
46
LCEI Single glazing
47
LCEI Fixed internal walls
The process that is selected for the production of the single glazing is ”Tempering, flat glass” The brick that is selected for the fixed internal walls “Sandlime brick, at plant”
48
LCEI Finishing internal walls
The product that is selected for the finishing of the fixed internal walls is “Base plaster, at plant”
49
LCEI Double glazing
The product that is selected for the double glazing that is applied in the ´standard´ and ´WarmBouwen´ renovation concepts is “Glazing, double (2-IV), U<1.1 W/m2K, at plant”
50
LCEI Double glazing
51
LCEI Ventilator – rest
The process that is selected for the production of the single glazing is ”Tempering, flat glass” The products that are selected for the production of the ventilator (rest) are: “Acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene copolymer, ABS, at plant” and “Polyethylene, LDPE, granulate, at plant”
52
LCEI Ventilator – rest
130
The process that is selected for both of the products that are processed in ventilator-rest, the process “Injection moulding” is selected.
In the library of the SimaPro software there are only two types of flat glass selectable. This one is chosen, because it is more plausible that single glazing is coated these days, than uncoated. Before the glass can be applied, is has to be tempered first. Therefore, this process is added to the glass production process. For the internal walls the Ytong bricks are selected. These are sand lime bricks. There is no further processing needed, because the total production process from raw materials until finished end product are included in this product sheet. There are several types of plaster that can be selected in the SimaPro library. However, the base plaster is the most average and plausible type of finishing for the walls. Next to that, other types of plaster finishing wouldn´t make a big difference on the impact. Given the technical information from the renovation concepts, this type of glazing was the most suitable for determining the impact of double glazing, because the U-value of this product (1.1) matches the best with the type of glass that is really applied in the renovation concepts (U=1.6) Before the glass can be applied, is has to be tempered first. Therefore, this process is added to the glass production process. For all these products it accounts that is the average usual product that is applied in Europe. Therefore, these products are selected in this LCA. For the polyethylene it accounts that the quality of this type is defined as LDPE, because the quality does not have to be very high. To transform the base products into final products that can be used in the ventilator, the materials have to be moulded. Thefefore, this process is added to the production process for the elements of the ventilator.
53
LCEI Ventilator – steel
The steel that is selected for the use in the ventilator is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
54
LCEI Ventilator – steel
55
LCEI Piping (air)
The process that is selected for the production of steel in the ventilator is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working” The steel that is selected for the use in the piping of air is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
56
LCEI Piping (air)
57
LCEI Roof insulation material
58
LCEI Roof insulationGypsum board
The product that is used for the finishing of the roof insulation is “Gypsum plaster board, at plant”
59
LCEI Façade insulation material
The product that is selected for the insulation of the cavity wall in the „standard renovation‟ concept is “Polyurethane, flexible foam, at plant”
60
LCEI Floor insulation material
The product that is selected for the insulation of the floor in the „standard renovation‟ concept is “Polyurethane, flexible foam, at plant”
61
LCEI
The products that are selected
131
The process that is selected for the production of steel in the piping of air is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working” The product that is selected for the insulation of the roof is “Glass wool mat, at plant”
The steel that is processed in a ventilator is stainless steel. Therefore, the chromium steel alternative is selected. The data of this product is specified on plant in the EU. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in ventilators. The steel that is processed in the piping of air is stainless steel. Therefore, the chromium steel alternative is selected. The data of this product is specified on plant in the EU. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in piping of air. The technical information about the „standard renovation‟ concept provided the input for the selection of this material. In the library of SimaPro, the profile of this product matches the profile as defined in the concept. The end products are the rolls of glass wool that can be directly applied in the renovation concept. This is the standard product that is normally applied to finish roof insulation. The library of SimaPro contains one product type that matches the profile of the board as defined in the „standard renovation‟ concept. This product matches the profile from the technical information that is provided by the product sheet of the PUR that is used for the façade insulation. The flexible foam is selected, because it has to be brought into the cavity, which is not possible with rigid plates. This product matches the profile from the technical information that is provided by the product sheet of the PUR that is used for the floor insulation. The flexible foam is selected, because mostly the PUR gets sprayed onto the floor. These products have been
Heat pump (rest)
for the heat pump (rest) are: “Barite, at plant”, “Bauxite, at plant”, “Bentonite, at plant”, “Lead, at regional storage”, “Chromium, at regional storage”, “manganese, at regional storage”, “Nickel, 99.5 %, at plant”, “Silver, at regional storage”, “Zinc, at regional storage”, and “Tin, at regional storage” The process that is selected for the Heat pump (rest) materials is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working”
62
LCEI Heat pump (rest)
63
LCEI Heat pump – cast iron
The cast iron that is selected for the use in a heat pump is “cast iron, at plant”
64
LCEI Heat pump – cast iron
The process that is selected for the production of cast iron in the heat pump is “Drilling, conventional, cast iron”
65
LCEI Heat pump – copper
The copper that is selected for the use in a heat pump is “Copper, at regional storage”
66
LCEI Heat pump – copper
The process that is selected for the production of copper is “copper product manufacturing, average metal working”
67
LCEI Aquifer (rest)
The product that is selected for determining the impact of the aquifer (rest) is “Polyvinylchloride, at regional storage”
68
LCEI Aquifer (rest)
The process that is needed for the production of PVC piping is “Extrusion, plastic pipes”
69
LCEI
The product that is selected for
132
selected, based on estimations and assumptions. For most elements, the library of SimaPro provides only one product sheet. The product sheets that are provided by SimaPro are selected in these cases.
In the library no suitable processes for the most elements of the heat pump could be found. Most products are applied in very little amounts, and therefore the possible missing processes would not have a serious impact on the total renovation concept. The SimaPro library contains only one sort of cast iron. This is the average cast iron product that is used and produced in the EU. Therefore, this product is selected for this research. This is the average production process that belongs to the production of cast iron, if you want to create final elements as an end product. This production process is the average technology. For the selection of copper, the most common sort of copper is selected. Copper at regional storage is the most common sort of copper that is used. Therefore, this type of product is selected This is the average process that is executed to produce aluminum into a final product. These final products are applied in the boiler. This data is specified on the market in Europe. Expert information provided the composition of this element. The selected product sheet of SimaPro matches the defined material that is stated by the expert. Expert information provided the required process of this element. The selected process sheet of SimaPro matches the defined process that is stated by the expert. Expert information (Grundfos)
Aquifer steel
determining the impact of the aquifer - steel is “Chromium steel 18/8, at plant”
70
LCEI Aquifer steel
71
LCEI Wall heating system
The process that is needed for the production of Chromium steel piping is “Chromium steel product manufacturing, average metal working” The product that is selected for determining the impact of the wall heating system is “Gypsum fibre board, at plant”
72
LCEI Façade insulation 1
The first product sheet that is selected to determine the impact of the façade insulation at the WarmBouwen renovation concept is “Polyurethane, rigid foam”
73
LCEI Façade insulation 1
The process that is needed to create the rigid PIR plates is “Foaming, expanding”
74
LCEI Façade insulation 2
The second product sheet that is selected to determine the impact of the façade insulation at the WarmBouwen renovation concept is “Polyethylene terephthalate, granulate, amorphous, at plant”
75
LCEI Façade insulation 2
The process that is selected for the production of in second layer of insulation is “Fleece production, Polyethylene terephthalate” Life cycle in SimaPro 76 LCEI The product that is selected for Gas use gas use during the life cycle of during life the „no renovation‟ and 133
provided the composition of this element. The selected product sheet of SimaPro matches the defined material that is stated by the expert. This process is selected because it is specified to the EU, and it matches the product that is selected for the steel that is used in boilers. This product sheet matches with the technical information provided from the documents of the producer of the gypsum plates. The end product of this product sheet is a plate that directly can be applied in the renovation concept. The piping that is processed in the wall heating elements is the same piping as applied in the other renovation concepts. Information about this piping is described before. (Assumptions #33-37) Although the product that is applied is PIR instead of PUR it is assumed that the environmental impact of these two materials is the same. (see assumption #20). This product sheet was the most plausible for the applied material in practice. To harden the PIR foam into a rigid board, the expanding process is needed. Therefore, this process is selected in the production process of this insulation product. The technical information of the producer of this insulation material matches the best with the product that has been selected in SimaPro. Therefore, this material is selected as the second insulation layer of the façade insulation in the WarmBouwen renovation concept. This process matches the best with the selected product. Therefore, this process is selected in the LCA.
This product is selected because the boilers in the Netherlands use natural gas. Average boilers are
cycle
77
LCEI Electricity use during life cycle
78
LCEI Electricity for heat pump
„standard renovation‟ alternative is “Heat, natural gas, at boiler atmospheric nonmodulating <100kW” The product that is selected for the electricity use during the life cycle of the alternatives is “Electricity, low voltage, production NL, at grid” The product that is selected for the production of heat with the heat pump in the „WarmBouwen renovation‟ is “Heat, at heat pump 30 kW, allocation electricity”
Disposal in SimaPro 79 LCEI The product that is selected for Disposal of the main waste of the three elements alternatives is “Waste scenario/NL” 80 LCEI The materials stainless steel, Recycling of aluminum, cast iron, and materials copper are products that are recycled. 85% of the total weight of these processed materials gets recycled. During the recycling process, 25% quality of the material gets lost.
81
134
LCY Corresponden ce EI & EPC
The energy index of a house (EI) is equal to the energy performance coefficient (EPC).
about 25-35 kW. The selected profile matches with these specifications the best. This product corresponds with the electricity (grid) that is used in the Netherlands. This product matches the best with the original specifications of the heat pump installation. For the calculations it is assumed that the impact of 1 kWh energy use with a 30 kW heat pump is the same as with a 5 kW heat pump. This selected datasheet is valid for the total waste of NL. Therefore, it has been selected as waste scenario for this research. It is assumed that 85% of the present materials will be recycled because it is unrealistic to assume that all the processed metal in the alternatives can be captured and recycled. A part of the metal cannot be captured out. It is assumed that this part is 15%. The recycle process results in 25% quality loss of the material. This 25% is the average between a really efficient recycle process (5% quality loss) and a really inefficient recycle process (50% quality loss). The 25% quality loss has been validated by LCA expert Mr. Toxopeus (University of Twente) In reality the EI and EPC only corresponds at the score 1. (difference <5%). If the EI is higher or lower than 1, the difference can increase up to 1520% at scores that or much higher or lower than 1. This assumption is validated by expert G. Verbaan of DGMR.
APPENDIX T - CASE STUDIES This appendix provides the information about the cases that are analyzed in this research. CASE: DE TEMPEL (CONFIDENTIAL) -CONFIDENTIALCASE: DE KRAYENHOFF (CONFIDENTIAL) -CONFIDENTIAL-
135
FIGURE
129 - INPUT INFORM ATIO N FR OM CASE ' DE KRAYEN HOF F '
APPENDIX U - WWS 2010 Figure 134 and 135 provide characteristics of the new „woning waarderingsstelsel‟ that will be implemented in the Netherlands in 2011.
FIGURE
136
130 - NEW ' WWS ' #1
FIGURE
137
131 - NEW ' WWS ' #2
APPENDIX V - STAKEHOLDERS AT SUSTAINABLE RENOVATIONS This appendix describes the role and the required focus of involved stakeholders in a renovation project for the implementation of sustainable renovation applications. Central Government In a project specific situation the role of the central government is small unless the central government is involved as owner or user. The central government is responsible for the central subsidy distribution policy. This role is elaborated in more detail at the stakeholder „Subsidy distributor‟. The central government as a policymaker is responsible for appointing subsidies for sustainable renovation concepts and applications. Next to that, the central government should simplify the process of obtaining the licenses that are required to become eligible for subsidies in the flied of sustainable renovations. Also rules and legislation should not form barriers for the implementation of sustainable renovation measures. Province The characteristics of the stakeholder „Central Government‟ also account for the province. Only the influence of the province is on provincial level. Governmental water agency: The governmental water agency is responsible for the quality of the ground water and surface water. As a result, the governmental water agency can be involved in renovation projects, for example if an aquifer is applied. This instance can contribute by being clear at defining rules and regulations and by simplifying the process of obtaining licenses for the application of sustainable renovation techniques. Municipality The characteristics of the stakeholder „Central Government‟ also account for the municipality. Only the influence of the municipality is on municipal level. Prosperity agency The prosperity agency is can be a hindrance for the application of sustainable measures to existing buildings. To contribute to the implementation of sustainable measures, this instance could define exceptions in this field. For example, exceptions could be defined for adaptations to a protected building, if the adaptations have a certain level of sustainability. Landowner In case of a renovation project, the land owner mostly plays a minor role. Direct local residents and other involved residents The local residents can play an important role at the implementation of sustainable renovation projects. Complaints and protests against construction projects can form a major barrier for the execution of a project. It is hard to make a difference between sustainable renovation projects and regular projects regarding the chance on complaints and protests against the project. The project organization should focus on a clear and solid communication process with local residents to prevent complaints and protests. Future user The future user plays an important role at the implementation of sustainable renovation concepts. The future user should demand the implementation of sustainable measures into a far-reaching degree at renovation projects. To compensate the investment of the owner, the future user should be willing to pay an increased rental price. This increased rental price is compensated by decreased energy costs. If the future users do not
138
demand a certain level of sustainability at a renovation, the project developer is not triggered to come up with innovative and sustainable solutions. Project developer A project developer can play an important role at the implementation of sustainable applications at renovation projects. However, the developer should be triggered and challenged by other involved parties, to invest in sustainability at the development process, for example the future users. The current market does not challenge a project developer to implement sustainability at renovation projects. However, there is a big interest in challenging the project developer to invest in sustainability, because the project developer has the capacity to make major investments and has the capacity to focus on long term profits. Long term profits fit with sustainability principals, and a long term focus is essential for the successful application of sustainability. Architect The architect can have a major influence on the degree of sustainability that is implemented at renovation projects. The architect translates requirements and wishes into the redesign of a building. If the architect has a strong focus on the implementation of sustainability aspects, this can result in a design which caters to sustainability aspects into higher extend. The architect should be triggered by project developers and future users to implement sustainability aspects in the redesign of buildings. In other words, owners should demand a certain degree of sustainability to trigger the architect. Contractor & Constructor The contractor and constructor are responsible for the execution of the renovation project. This makes them an important player in the field of implementation of sustainability aspects. The executing parties should have the skills to apply sustainable measures the way they are meant to be applied. To make sure that the designed sustainability measures are applicable, it is important that the contractor and constructor communicate with other involved parties like the architect, the project developer, consultants, and future users. Also, these stakeholders should be willing to be flexible and studious to develop their sustainable skills. Consultants Consultants can have an important role at the implementation of sustainability aspects. Currently, there is only minor knowledge in the market about the implementation of sustainability at renovation projects. Consultants are experts that are able to help a project organization with the definition of sustainable ambitions, contracts, financial impacts, and practical issues. The sustainability consultant should be involved in an early phase of renovation projects. Consultants must be willing to be flexible and to think out of the box. Financial consultant The financial consultant should be able to provide consult that fits with the requirements of the applied sustainable measures. The financial consultant should be able to think creatively and out of the box to overcome the financial barriers that arise from the current financial system. Environmental organizations In a project specific context, environmental organizations do not have the capability to have a significant contribution on the implementation of sustainability measures at renovation project. Subsidy distributor The subsidy distributor is responsible for simplifying the process of obtaining a subsidy for sustainable renovation measures. However, this may not be at the cost of the justice of the system. 139
