Carbon Benchmark for Czech Residential Buildings Based on Climate Goals Set by the Paris Agreement for 2030
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Setting the Benchmark
2.2. Description of the Case Study Building
2.3. Calculation Method for GHG Emissions and Boundary Conditions
- foundation,
- waterproofing layers,
- compacted fill, backfill material (imported from the place outside the building),
- vertical and horizontal construction elements, including overhanging structures,
- roof construction,
- roof deck,
- staircase,
- railing,
- internal partitions,
- nonbearing cladding,
- finishes,
- final floor covering,
- windows and doors,
- thermal and acoustic insulation.
3. Results
3.1. GHG Emissions of the Case Study Building Designed in the Usual Fashion
3.2. Measures Proposed to Reduce GHG Emissions of the Initial Design
- M1: Change in temperature zoning—nonresidential premises converted to unheated or only semiheated.
- M2a: Reduction of heat losses—thermal insulation of external structure based on the U-values required for passive houses by ČSN 730540 (external walls 0.18 W/m2K, roof 0.15 W/m2K, windows 0.71 W/m2K, doors 1.50 W/m2K), optimization of thermal couplings (0.02 W/m2K).
- M2b: Reduction of heat losses—thermal insulation of external structure based on the U-values recommended for passive houses by ČSN 730540 (external walls 0.12 W/m2K, roof 0.10 W/m2K, windows 0.55 W/m2K, doors 1.50 W/m2K), maximum optimization of thermal couplings (0.02 W/m2K).
- M3a: Reduction of embodied emissions—choice of environmentally friendly products and materials (sand–lime bricks for wall structures and reinforced concrete prestressed hollow panels for ceiling structures).
- M3b: Reduction of embodied emissions—choice of environmentally friendly products and materials (timber structure: two-by-four system).
- M4: Low-emission heat—choice of low-emission source/energy carrier (wood biomass boiler).
- M5: Lighting—installation of energy-saving fluorescent and LED luminaires.
- M6: Mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (efficiency 77%)—reduction of heat losses by ventilation, utilization of waste heat.
- M7: Vacuum solar collectors—use of solar energy for preheating of DHW (80 m2).
- M8a: Photovoltaic panels—use of solar energy to cover electricity demand (30 m2), 5.4 kWp, system efficiency 15%, south-facing 35°.
- M8b: Photovoltaic panels—use of solar energy to cover electricity demand (50 m2), 9.0 KWp, system efficiency 15%, south-facing 35°.
3.3. Variant Sets of the Improvement Measures
- S1 (M1, M4, M5): S1 was a combination of basic measures with minimum changes in the functioning of the building or changes in the design (biomass boiler, efficient LED lighting, and decrease of the internal temperature in the main corridors). The measures were aimed at reducing the amount of operational GHG emissions.
- S2 (M1, M3a, M4, M5, M7): S2 complemented the previous option S1, with an emphasis on reducing the share of embodied GHG emissions using a construction system in the form of sand–lime bricks for wall structures and reinforced concrete prestressed cavity panels for ceiling structures. The variant was also supplemented by a system of vacuum solar collectors used for the preparation of DHW (80 m2, south facing 35°, combined with accumulation tank 4500 L).
- S3 (M1, M2a, M3b, M4, M5, M6, M7): S3 combined the proposed measures with an emphasis on the low-energy performance of the building. All constructions met the required heat transfer coefficient values for passive buildings; thermal couplings and bridges were optimized to minimum values. The technical systems were supplemented by a forced equilibrium ventilation system with heat recovery. The construction system was newly designed as a timber building in a two-by-four system in the form of a prefabricated wooden frame filled with thermal insulation. The ceiling construction was a wooden beamed ceiling.
- S4 (M1, M2a, M3b, M4, M5, M6, M7, M8a): S4 was based on a combination of the measures mentioned in S3. In addition, a system of photovoltaic panels was used for reducing electricity consumption that would be increased by forced ventilation systems and solar collector pumps.
- S5 (M1, M2a, M3b, M4, M6, M7, M8a): S5 was based on a combination of the measures mentioned in S4, with the difference that the heat source was the original gas condensing boiler.
- S6 (M1, M2b, M3b, M5, M6, M7, M8b): S6 was built on S5 to meet the emission requirement while maintaining the original heat source in the form of a gas condensing boiler (S5 did not meet the emission requirement). The combination of measures was based on S5 with a few fundamental differences. The envelope structures were designed for the lowest values of the recommended values Upas,20 for passive buildings according to ČSN 73 0540-2. The thermal couplings were reduced as much as possible. The photovoltaic (PV) modules were used to cover the consumption of electrical energy for the operation of forced ventilation, auxiliary energy, lighting, and parts of the hot water production. The surpluses were fed to the energy grid (although we did not consider these surpluses in the operating emission balance). Compared to the previous variants, the total area of the panels increased to 50 m2.
3.4. GHG Emissions of the Proposed Variants
4. Discussion
4.1. GHG Benchmarks for Buildings
4.2. Uncertainties in the Case Study
4.3. Applicability of the GHG Emission Reduction Strategies from the Case Study
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Masson-Delmotte, V.; Zhai, P.; Pörtner, H.-O.; Roberts, D.; Skea, J.; Shukla, P.R.; Pirani, A.; Moufouma-Okia, W.; Péan, C.; Pidcock, R.; et al. Global Warming of 1.5 °C An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C Above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty Summary for Policymakers; Science Officer Science Assistant Graphics Officer Working Group I Technical Support Unit, Ed.; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; ISBN 978-92-9169-151-7. [Google Scholar]
- Rogelj, J.; Popp, A.; Calvin, K.V.; Luderer, G.; Emmerling, J.; Gernaat, D.; Fujimori, S.; Strefler, J.; Hasegawa, T.; Marangoni, G.; et al. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018, 8, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD/IEA. Perspectives for the Energy Transition: The Role of Energy Efficiency; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2018. Available online: https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Perspectives%20for%20the%20Energy%20Transition%20-%20The%20Role%20of%20Energy%20Efficiency.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2019).
- European Commission Buildings. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/buildings (accessed on 10 April 2018).
- United Nations. Buildings and Climate Change: Summary for Decision Makers; UNEP DTIE: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. The Paris Agreement; United Nations/Framework Convention on Climate Change: Paris, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Boardman, B. Examining the carbon agenda via the 40% House scenario. Build. Res. Inf. 2007, 35, 363–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koo, C.; Hong, T.; Kim, J.; Kim, H. An integrated multi-objective optimization model for establishing the low-carbon scenario 2020 to achieve the national carbon emissions reduction target for residential buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bürger, V.; Hesse, T.; Quack, D.; Palzer, A.; Köhler, B.; Herkel, S.; Engelmann, P. Klimaneutraler Gebäudebestand 2050; Umweltbundesamt: Dessau-Roßlau, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Bürger, V.; Köhler, B.; Engelmann, P.; Palzer, A. German Energiewende–different visions for a (nearly) climate neutral building sector in 2050. Energy Effic. 2017, 12, 1271–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lupíšek, A. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Operation of Czech Building Stock and Potential for Their Reduction. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zacà, I.; D’Agostino, D.; Congedo, P.M.; Baglivo, C. Assessment of cost-optimality and technical solutions in high performance multi-residential buildings in the Mediterranean area. Energy Build. 2015, 102, 250–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haase, M.; Andresen, I.; Gustavsen, A.; Dokka, T.H.; Grete Hestnes, A. Zero Emission Building Concepts in Office Buildings in Norway. Int. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban Dev. 2011, 2, 150–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moschetti, R.; Brattebø, H.; Sparrevik, M. Exploring the pathway from zero-energy to zero-emission building solutions: A case study of a Norwegian office building. Energy Build. 2019, 188–189, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lützkendorf, T.; Hájek, P.; Lupíšek, A.; Immendörfer, A.; Nibel, S.; Häkkinen, T. New trends in sustainability assessment systems-based on top-down approach and stakeholders needs. Int. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban Dev. 2012, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollberg, A.; Lützkendorf, T.; Habert, G. Top-down or bottom-up?—How environmental benchmarks can support the design process. Build. Environ. 2019, 153, 148–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmermann, M.; Althaus, H.-J.; Haas, A. Benchmarks for sustainable construction: A contribution to develop a standard. Energy Build. 2005, 37, 1147–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoxha, E.; Jusselme, T.; Brambilla, A.; Cozza, S.; Andersen, M.; Rey, E. Impact Targets as Guidelines Towards Low Carbon Buildings: Preliminary Concept; PLEA: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- IEA EBC Annex 72-Assessing Life Cycle Related Environmental Impacts Caused by Buildings. Available online: http://annex72.iea-ebc.org/ (accessed on 19 October 2019).
- ETH Zürich 71st LCA Forum—Environmental Benchmarks for Buildings: Needs, Challenges and Solutions. Available online: https://video.ethz.ch/events/lca/2019/spring/71st.html (accessed on 19 October 2019).
- Fehn, K.L. Supporting, Challenging, Advising: Building Policy in the Light of Climate Change. In Sustainable Built Environment D-A-CH Conference 2019 in Graz-Book of Abstracts; Passer, A., Lützkendorf, T., Habert, G., Kromp-Kolb, H., Monsberger, M., Eds.; Verlag der Technischen Universität Graz: Graz, Austria, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Chandrakumar, C.; McLaren, S.J.; Dowdell, D.; Jaques, R. A top-down approach for setting climate targets for buildings: The case of a New Zealand detached house. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 323, 012183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollberg, A.; Lützkendorf, T.; Habert, G. Using a budget approach for decision-support in the design process. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 323, 012026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pálenský, D. Klimaticky Neutrální Bytový Dům; Czech Technical University in Prague: Prague, Czech Republic, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- UN Environment. Emissions Gap Report 2018; United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2018; ISBN 978-92-807-3726-4. [Google Scholar]
- Bastianoni, S.; Pulselli, F.M.; Tiezzi, E. The problem of assigning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 49, 253–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Höhne, N.; den Elzen, M.; Escalante, D. Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: A comparison of studies. Clim. Policy 2014, 14, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steininger, K.; Lininger, C.; Droege, S.; Roser, D.; Tomlinson, L.; Meyer, L. Justice and cost effectiveness of consumption-based versus production-based approaches in the case of unilateral climate policies. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 24, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steininger, K.W.; Lininger, C.; Meyer, L.H.; Muñoz, P.; Schinko, T. Multiple carbon accounting to support just and effective climate policies. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statista World Population-Forecast until 2100. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/262618/forecast-about-the-development-of-the-world-population/ (accessed on 1 October 2019).
- Lupíšek, A. Potenciál Úspor Emisí Skleníkových Plynů ČR Pomocí Rekonstrukcí Budov; Cezch Technical University in Prague – University Centre for Energy Efficent Buildings: Buštěhrad, Czechia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Vonka, M.; Bureš, M.; Hájek, P.; Havlík, F.; Hodková, J.; Křelinová, V.; Lupíšek, A.; Mančík, Š.; Pavlů, T.; Pečman, J.; et al. SBToolCZ Pro Bytové Domy, 1st ed.; Czech Technical University in Prague—Faculty of Civil Engineering: Prague, Czech Republic, 2013; ISBN 978-80-01-05125-2. [Google Scholar]
- Vonka, M.; Hajek, P.; Lupisek, A. SBToolCZ: Sustainability rating system in the Czech Republic. Int. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban Dev. 2013, 4, 46–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hodková, J.; Lupíšek, A.; Mančík, Š.; Vochoc, L.; Žd’ára, T. Envimat.cz-Online Database of Environmental Profiles of Building Materials and Structures. In Environmental Software Systems: Frameworks of Environment; Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011; pp. 272–279. [Google Scholar]
Month | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. of days (-) | 31 | 28 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 31 |
Ext. temp. (°C) | −1.3 | −0.1 | 3.7 | 8.1 | 13.3 | 16.1 | 18.0 | 17.9 | 13.5 | 8.3 | 3.2 | 0.5 |
Irr. north (MJ/m2) | 29.5 | 48.2 | 91.1 | 129.6 | 176.8 | 186.5 | 184.7 | 152.6 | 103.7 | 67.0 | 33.8 | 21.6 |
Irr. south (MJ/m2) | 123.1 | 184.0 | 267.8 | 308.5 | 313.2 | 272.2 | 281.2 | 345.6 | 280.1 | 267.8 | 163.4 | 104.4 |
Irr. east (MJ/m2) | 50.8 | 91.8 | 168.8 | 267.1 | 313.2 | 324.0 | 302.8 | 289.4 | 191.9 | 139.3 | 64.8 | 40.3 |
Irr. west (MJ/m2) | 50.8 | 91.8 | 168.8 | 267.1 | 313.2 | 324.0 | 302.8 | 289.4 | 191.9 | 139.3 | 64.8 | 40.3 |
Irr. horizon (MJ/m2) | 74.9 | 133.2 | 259.9 | 409.7 | 535.7 | 526.3 | 519.5 | 490.3 | 313.6 | 203.4 | 90.7 | 53.6 |
Original State | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GHG Emission-Saving Measures | |||||||
M1 Change in temperature zoning | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |
M2a U-values required for passive housing | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |||
M2b U-values recommended for passive housing | |||||||
M3a Sand–lime bricks, prestressed concrete floor structures | ✔ | ||||||
M3b Timber structure | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |||
M4 Biomass boiler | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |||
M5 LED lighting | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |
M6 Mechanical ventilation with heat recovery | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |||
M7 Vacuum solar collectors 80 m2 | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ||
M8a PV panels 5.4 kWp, 30 m2 | ✔ | ✔ | |||||
M8a PV panels 9.0 kWp, 80 m2 | ✔ | ||||||
U-Values of the Building Envelope (W/m2K) | |||||||
External wall (heated area) | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.12 |
External wall (unheated area) | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.38 |
External wall—plinth (unheated area) | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.38 |
Floor above unheated ground floor | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.16 |
Floor on the ground | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.45 |
Roof | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.10 |
Windows | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.55 |
Entrance door | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 |
Overhead doors (garages) | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 |
Thermal couplings | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.00 |
Original State | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Embodied GHG Emissions (t CO2e) | |||||||
Foundations | 58.1 | 58.1 | 58.1 | 64.6 | 64.6 | 64.6 | 64.6 |
External walls | 64.9 | 64.9 | 63.0 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 37.1 |
Internal walls | 52.0 | 52.0 | 41.6 | 13.5 | 13.5 | 13.5 | 13.5 |
Horizontal structures | 216.2 | 216.2 | 156.2 | 99.0 | 99.0 | 99.0 | 103.1 |
Other components | 32.4 | 32.4 | 32.4 | 69.1 | 69.1 | 69.1 | 69.1 |
Total | 423.5 | 423.5 | 351.2 | 279.5 | 279.5 | 279.5 | 287.4 |
Annual Energy Consumption (MWh/a) | |||||||
Heating | 69.9 | 80.7 | 80.7 | 38.6 | 38.6 | 34.1 | 16.6 |
Domestic hot water | 28.4 | 31.3 | 29.3 | 29.3 | 29.3 | 27.7 | 27.7 |
Vacuum solar collectors | 0.0 | 0.0 | −12.3 | −12.3 | −12.3 | −12.5 | −12.3 |
Mechanical ventilation | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 |
Lighting | 2.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
Photovoltaic panels | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | −3.2 | −3.2 | −7.4 |
Auxiliary energy | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.7 |
Total | 101.7 | 114.2 | 100.3 | 59.7 | 56.5 | 50.2 | 28.6 |
Operational GHG emissions (t CO2e/a) | 33.36 | 5.35 | 5.57 | 5.30 | 3.25 | 16.87 | 10.45 |
Annualized embodied GHG emissions (t CO2e/a) | 8.47 | 8.47 | 7.02 | 5.59 | 5.59 | 5.59 | 5.75 |
Total annual GHG emissions (t CO2e/a) | 41.8 | 13.8 | 12.6 | 10.9 | 8.8 | 22.5 | 16.2 |
Compliance with target 28.3 t CO2e/a (target 2.0 °C) | X | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ |
Compliance with target 17.2 t CO2e/a (target 1.5 °C) | X | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | X | ✔ |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pálenský, D.; Lupíšek, A. Carbon Benchmark for Czech Residential Buildings Based on Climate Goals Set by the Paris Agreement for 2030. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216085
Pálenský D, Lupíšek A. Carbon Benchmark for Czech Residential Buildings Based on Climate Goals Set by the Paris Agreement for 2030. Sustainability. 2019; 11(21):6085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216085
Chicago/Turabian StylePálenský, David, and Antonín Lupíšek. 2019. "Carbon Benchmark for Czech Residential Buildings Based on Climate Goals Set by the Paris Agreement for 2030" Sustainability 11, no. 21: 6085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216085