Bedre termisk komfort med beton
Thermal advantages of concrete – a European study
26
Jesper Sand Damtoft Aalborg Portland Group
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Need for cooling 25
Comfort zone
Indoor temperature
24 23 22
High thermal mass
21
Low thermal mass
20 19 Need for heating 18 0
Research and Development Centre
1
6
12
Time of day
Source: CEMBUREAU 2006 Research and Development Centre
18
24
2
1
Energy advantage of concrete
Sample residential building Predicted net energy use for heating
Region
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Results:
kWh/m2,year
• “Light” buildings consume 2-9% more energy than “heavy” buildings • In office buildings the difference is 7-15% • Difference in cooling energy even higher: up to 20% for dwellings and 25% for offices
Mean monthly temperature Oct-Apr
Solid
Lightweight
Diff.
%
Cº
Polar circle
128,7
133,4
4,7
3,7%
-7,9
Northern Europe
66,7
70,7
4
6,0%
1,1
Northern Europe coastal
53,1
57,4
4,3
8,1%
3,4
UK
37,6
43,1
5,5
14,6%
5,9
Benelux
42,2
48,8
6,6
15,6%
5,6
Central Europe
49,2
53,3
4,1
8,3%
3,8
Alpine
60,6
65,9
5,3
8,7%
1,4
Mediterranean
8,0
12,2
4,2
52,5%
12,1
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Literature study, calculations on theoretical and reel buildings, using 5 different calculating tools in several European climates
Consolis tool Source: CEMBUREAU 2006 Research and Development Centre
3
Research and Development Centre
4
2
Effect of window orientation, theoretical dwelling building
Theoretical office buildings 80
Difference Light/Solid
Cooling
70
Heating 60
51,5
56,5
9,7
Stockholm
VIP+
E/W
64,5 11,3*
66,9 13,2*
3,7 16,5*
Stockholm
VIP+
S
54,5 12,4*
60,1 15,0*
5,3 20,3*
Würzburg
TCasa
E/W
60,3
61,7
2,4
Würzburg
TCasa
S
54,1
56,0
3,5
Denmark
Be06
E/W
47,3 3,4*
48,0 4,3*
1,2
40 30 20 10 0 Madrid light
S
Madrid solid
Consolis
Würzburg light
Stockholm
50
Würzburg solid
6,0
Brussels light
70,7
Brussels solid
66,7
Cambridge light
%
E/W
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Light
Consolis
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Solid Stockholm
Cambridge solid
Energy use for heating/cooling kWh/m2,year
Stockholm light
Orientation of windows
Stockholm solid
Programme
kWh/m2
Climate
VIP tool Research and Development Centre
5
Research and Development Centre
6
3
Effect of concrete on cooling energy
Theoretical office buildings 12
Energy use for heating/cooling kWh/m2,year Solid
Light
%
Stockholm
VIP+
E/W
50,0 13,1*
54,1 15,9*
7,3 20,7*
Stockholm
VIP+
S
37,4 14,5*
41,9 18,3*
12,0 26,3*
38,0 3,4*
43,6 4,3*
14,6
Denmark
Be06
E/W
10
Difference Light/Solid
Cooling energy. kWh/m2,year
Orientation of windows
8 62%
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Programme
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Climate
Increased night ventilation Constant ventilation
6 44% 4
2
0 London solid
Research and Development Centre
7
London light
Research and Development Centre
8
4
Energy prices
Utilising the energy advantage
2 1,9
Gas 1,8
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Consumer price index
Relative price
1,7 1,6 1,5 1,4 1,3 1,2 1,1 1 1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Research and Development Centre
2006
9
Source: CEMBUREAU 2006 Research and Development Centre
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
• Exposed concrete parts, e.g. coffered floor slabs, and night ventilation, e.g. under-floor ventilation, to provide free passive cooling during daytime. • Use of free cooling in an air conditioning system by the use of hollow core concrete slabs through which air is distributed. • Use of precast concrete elements as outer walls to provide very low transmission losses and excellent air-tightness. • Use of water-cooled slabs containing pipework linked to the heating and cooling system.
Electricity
10
5
Realised and potential energy savings
Possible energy savings • Reduce energy consumption and CO2 emission related to cooling by 75-80% • Reduce heat consumption and related CO2 emission by 35-50% • Reduce the energy for ventilation and related CO2 emission by 35-50% • Use of renewable supply sources, i.e. seawater, ground water, air and solar energy
14000
12000
Life cycle energy use [kWh/m2]
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
10000
Normal 15% Energy saving
8000 30% Energy saving 6000
4000
2000 Production 0 1,00
11,00
Operation 21,00
31,00
41,00
50 51,00
Demolition 61,00
71,00
81,00
91,00
100 101,00
Life span [years]
Source: Cowi 2006
Research and Development Centre
11
Research and Development Centre
12
6
Realised and potential energy savings 100
80 70
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Klik for at redigere teksttypografierne i masteren
Relative energy use (%)
90
Demolition Operation, 50 years Total production Building frame
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Light building
Concrete building
Potential savings
Research and Development Centre
13
Research and Development Centre
14
7
