Calculation of cost-optimal levels of the minimum energy ......Calculation of the global cost...

Calculation of cost-optimal levels of the minimum energy performance requirements of buildings and building elements

Hotel buildings

Study conducted by:

DGEG (Directorate-General for Energy and Ecology) and ADENE (Portuguese Energy Agency)

http://www.google.pt/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http://www.moxy-events.com/events/default.asp?idCat=EVENTS&idContent=1AD63ED0-0DD2-49AD-A8BD-E780740DDB8B&ei=Gy64VJ7tHMb8UpTBgJgL&bvm=bv.83829542,d.d24&psig=AFQjCNETleIEMYztI9x4VGUvuQZKjQB14A&ust=1421442960025346

http://www.google.pt/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http://formacao.aeportugal.pt/docs/aep-formacao-newsletters/newsletter-da-forma%C3%A7%C3%A3o---dezembro-2012.html?sfvrsn=8&ei=yS24VNWbA4HEUsXMgNgP&bvm=bv.83829542,d.d24&psig=AFQjCNEmq0TBsO_yjeIrMp3pFxpKFKBr6w&ust=1421442892031131

Working Group Information Sheet:

ADENE - Rui Fragoso, Nuno Clímaco

DGEG - João Bernardo, Cristina Cardoso, Ricardo Aguiar

Market suppliers were also involved in producing this study.

E-1

CONTENTS

E. HOTEL BUILDINGS ..................................................................................................................... 4

I. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 4

II. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 4

II.1 ENERGY EFFICIENCY RATIO - EER ............................................................................................ 4

II.2 GLOBAL COST – MACROECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE ....................................... 6

III. HOTEL BUILDINGS .................................................................................................................. 9

III.1 HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS ........................................................................................ 11

III.1.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF REFERENCE BUILDING ...................................................................... 11

III.1.2 SELECTION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES AND USE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY

SOURCES, VARIANTS AND PACKAGES ................................................................................. 17

III.1.2.1 Building Solutions ...................................................................................................... 17

III.1.2.2 Ventilation .................................................................................................................. 19

III.1.2.3 Lighting ....................................................................................................................... 20

III.1 2.4 Energy Systems ........................................................................................................... 21

III.1.2.5 Solar Thermal ............................................................................................................. 22

III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic ...................................................................................................... 26

III.1.3 Determination of annual primary energy demand ........................................................... 28

III.1.3.1 Simulation model ........................................................................................................... 28

III.1.3.2 Variants and Energy Efficiency Indicators ................................................................. 29

III.1.3.3 Subcategory HO1-L, HO2-P, HO3-Fa, HO4-Fu Results ................................................ 35

III.1.4 Global cost calculation – Subcategories HO1L, HO2P, HO3Fa, HO4Fu ............................. 41

III.1.4.1 Macroeconomic Calculation HO1-Lisbon ................................................................... 41

III.1.4.2 Macroeconomic Calculation HO2-Porto .................................................................... 42

III.1.4.3 Macroeconomic Calculation HO3-Faro ...................................................................... 44

III.1.4.4 Macroeconomic Calculation HO4-Funchal ................................................................. 45

III.1.4.5 Global Costs of The Variants – Financial And Macroeconomic Analyses ................... 47

III.1.5 COST-OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................ 51

III.1.5.1 Subcategory HO1-Lisbon ............................................................................................ 51

III.1.5.1.1 Photovoltaic – HO1 – L. .......................................................................................... 54

III.1.5.1.2 Reference EER – HO1 – L ........................................................................................ 54

III.1.5.2 Results subcategory HO2–P (Porto) .......................................................................... 55

E-2

III.1.5.2.1 Photovoltaic – Porto (HO2) .................................................................................... 58

III.1.5.2.2 Reference EER – HO2-P .......................................................................................... 58

III.1.5.3 Subcategory HO3–Fa (Faro) results .......................................................................... 59

III.1.5.3.1 Photovoltaic – Faro (HO3-Fa) ................................................................................. 62

III.1.5.3.2 Reference EER – HO3-Fa ........................................................................................ 62

III.1.5.1 Subcategory HO4-Funchal .......................................................................................... 63

III.1.5.4.1 Photovoltaic – HO4 – Fu......................................................................................... 66

III.1.5.4.2 Reference EER – HO4 – Fu ..................................................................................... 66

III.1.5.5 Considerations................................................................................................................ 67

III.1.6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN COST-OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE LEVELS AND

REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ 67

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 72

ANNEX E-1 description of the BUILDING SOLUTIONS ................................................................. 75

NEW Hotel buildings ................................................................................................................... 76

Ventilated façade .................................................................................................................... 76

Aluminium and glass curtain façade ....................................................................................... 77

ETICS ........................................................................................................................................ 78

Double brick wall ......................................................................................................................... 79

Wall of volcanic slag concrete blocks .......................................................................................... 80

Horizontal roof - insulation from outside with false ceiling .................................................... 81

Floor over garage .................................................................................................................... 82

Intermediate Floor Flooring with Air Vent .............................................................................. 83

EXISTING Hotels........................................................................................................................... 84

Single Wall - No Thermal Insulation ........................................................................................ 84

Single Wall - Internal Thermal Insulation ................................................................................ 85

Horizontal roof with no Thermal Insulation ............................................................................ 86

Floor Ground Floor No Thermal Insulation ............................................................................. 87

ANNEX E-2 VENTILATION system ................................................................................................ 90

NEW HOTELS ........................................................................................................................... 91

General aspects ....................................................................................................................... 91

Minimum fresh air flow requirements .................................................................................... 92

‘Rooms Zone’.......................................................................................................................... 92

‘Horizontal Circulation Zone’ ................................................................................................. 92

E-3

‘Lifts and Stairwells Shaft Zone – Vertical Connections’ ........................................................ 92

‘Ground floor – General Services’ .......................................................................................... 93

‘Lower ground floor – Garages’ ............................................................................................. 93

Mechanical Ventilation System ............................................................................................... 93

ANNEX E-3 LIGHTING................................................................................................................... 95

NEW Hotel buildings ................................................................................................................... 96

ANNEX E-4 COSTS AND USEFUL LIFE OF THE SOLUTIONS ......................................................... 106

NEW-BUILD OFFICE SPACE .................................................................................................... 107

General aspects ..................................................................................................................... 107

Cooling system ...................................................................................................................... 109

ANNEX E-5 COST OF ENERGY and CO2 emissions ...................................................................... 111

ANNEX E-6 Domestic hot water heating SYSTEMS ................................................................... 115

HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS ............................................................................................. 116

ANNEX E-7 SENSITIVITY STUDIES Hotel Buildings – New-Builds ............................................... 125

Analysis of the influence on the thermal demand of different opaque façade solutions .... 126

E-4

E. HOTEL BUILDINGS

I. BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to apply, to hotel buildings and their elements in Portugal, the comparative methodology for calculating cost-optimal levels of minimum energy performance requirements, as set out in Directive 2010/31/EU [1] and supplemented by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 244/2012 [2]. This will also verify whether the current energy performance requirements and their expected evolution are no more than 15 % lower than the results of the cost-optimal performance calculations.

II. METHODOLOGY

II.1 ENERGY EFFICIENCY RATIO - EER

The nominal primary energy needs of the buildings were determined based on a whole building

energy simulation, using the EnergyPlus program [4]. This model is accredited by the ASHRAE

140 standard, and satisfies the requirements of RECS (Regulation on the Energy Performance of

Commercial and Services Buildings) [5], taking into account the following aspects prescribed by

Directive 2010/31/EU on the Energy Performance of Buildings (Recast):

Actual thermal characteristics of the building, including its internal partitions:

i) thermal capacity;

ii) insulation;

iii) passive heating – direct gain solutions;

iv) passive cooling strategies: activation of shading devices, whenever incoming solar

radiation on the façade exceeds 300 W/m2;

v) thermal bridges, in simplified format;

Heating installation and hot water supply, including their insulation characteristics –

according to the study shown in Annex E-6;

Air-conditioning installations;

Natural and mechanical ventilation;

Built-in lighting installation;

The design, positioning, and orientation of the building, including outdoor climate;

Indoor climatic conditions, including design;

Internal loads;

Local solar exposure conditions;

Electricity systems based on energy from renewable sources; the calculation in this

study having been made based on the study shown in Annex E–7.

E-5

The models adopted allow the simulation of more than one thermal zone, to account for the

effect of the thermal mass of the building solutions, to differentiate internal loads and establish

the respective time profiles (occupancy, lighting, and equipment), to control the temperature

inside the thermal zones and operate cooling systems.

The reference buildings were characterised for the different thermal zones and, as established in

RECS [5], in terms of measurements, elements making up the building envelope, cooling systems

and internal gains resulting from occupancy, lighting, equipment and their respective

occupancy, operation and utilisation profiles.

The thermal heating and cooling requirements are obtained from the simulation model, as well

as the heating, cooling, ventilation, and lighting energy consumption. The thermal requirements

are converted into final energy requirements using a simple annual calculation based on the

expressions (1) and (2), with all networks and fittings considered to be properly insulated in

accordance with RECS obligations. Lighting energy consumption (Elighting, electricity) and ventilation

energy consumption (Eventilation, electricity), are obtained directly from the simulation program. This

energy consumption is then affected by the final energy to primary energy conversion factors,

according to the expressions (5), (6) and (7) and the factors indicated in Table II.1 [6]. The

equivalent CO2 emissions are determined based on the expression (4).

𝐸ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔,𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔/𝐶𝑂𝑃 𝑑𝑒𝑚.

(kWh.year) (1)

𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔,𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔/𝐸𝐸𝑅 𝑑𝑒𝑚.

(kWh.year) (2)

𝐸𝐸𝑅 = 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑆 + 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑇 − 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑛

(kWhEP/m2.year) (3)

𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐹𝐶𝑂2𝐸𝐸𝑅

(kgCO2/m2.year) (4)

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑆 =1

𝐴𝑝∑(𝐸𝑆,𝑖. 𝐹𝑝𝑢,𝑖)

𝑖

(kWhEP/m2.year) (5)

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑇 =1

𝐴𝑝∑(𝐸𝑇,𝑖. 𝐹𝑝𝑢,𝑖)

𝑖

(kWhEP/m2.year) (6)

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑛 =1

𝐴𝑝∑(𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑛,𝑖. 𝐹𝑝𝑢,𝑖)

𝑖

(kWhEP/m2.year) (7)

The terms used in these expressions represent:

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑆 , energy consumption for the purposes of calculating the building’s energy

classification (space heating and cooling, including humidification and dehumidification;

ventilation and pumping in cooling systems; heating of hot water and swimming pools;

internal lighting);

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑇, means energy consumption not counted for the purpose of calculating the

building’s energy classification (ventilation and pumping not associated with thermal

load control; cooling equipment; dedicated and occasional use lighting);

E-6

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑛, determined based on electrical and thermal energy production from renewable energy sources, 𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑛,𝑖, only including electrical energy destined for own consumption

and export, and thermal energy actually used or capable of being used in the building or in neighbouring buildings via thermal energy networks;

𝐸𝑆,𝑖, energy consumption per energy source i for type S uses, (kWh/year);

𝐴𝑝, useful internal floor area, (m2);

𝐹𝑝𝑢,𝑖 , useful energy to primary energy conversion factor, which reflects the overall

performance of the primary energy transport and conversion system;

𝐹𝐶𝑂2, primary energy conversion factor for CO2 emissions;

𝐸𝑇,𝑖, energy consumption per energy source i for type T uses, (kWh/year);

𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑛,𝑖, energy production per energy source i, from renewable sources for consumption,

calculated according to the relevant applicable rules.

Table II.1 – Final energy into primary energy conversion factors and CO2 emissions [6]

Fpu

(kWhEP/kWh)

FCO2

(kgCO2/kWhep)

Electricity, regardless of origin

(renewable or non-renewable)

2.5 0.144

Diesel 1.0 0.267

Natural gas 1.0 0.202

LPG 1.0 0.170

Renewable 1.0 0.000

Source: (Ministerial Implementing Order (extract) No 15793-D/2013 [6]

II.2 GLOBAL COST – MACROECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE

Calculation of the global cost expressed in net present value [2]. The global costs in this study of

cost-optimal levels took into account the 20-year lifecycle costs of operation, and used

2014 as the starting year for the calculation.

As regards macroeconomic analysis, the costs of investment, maintenance, replacement, energy

consumption and CO2 emissions are included, while all applicable taxes, VAT, fees and subsidies

are excluded.

The calculation of the global cost, Cg (), will be determined, from a macroeconomic

perspective, according to the expression (8):

j

ficdiai

Ig jVjCjRjCCC )()()()(()( ,,,1

(8)

where:

, calculation period of 20 years;

J, measure adopted;

E-7

CJ, initial investment costs for measure or set of measures j;

C a,i (j), annual cost during year i for measure or set of measures j;

V f,T (j), residual value of the measure or set of measures j at the end of the calculation period

(in relation to the starting year τ0);

Rd(i), discount factor for year i, based on discount rate r.

In the financial calculation, the macroeconomic analysis costs are included, excluding CO2 costs,

and all costs arising from taxes, fees and subsidies are included, in line with the expression (9),

i.e. at this stage only VAT is added.

j

,fdi,a

1iIg

)j(V)j(R)j(C()( CC (9)

Annex D-4 shows the investment costs, maintenance costs, replacement costs and service life

relating to the variants/solutions adopted in this study. The labour costs are included in these

figures. Given the current lack of fiscal incentives, the difference between the macroeconomic

and financial analyses centres on the application of VAT to the products and services.

This study did not consider the costs of disposal, which are normally amortised by the waste’s

individual value.

The cost of greenhouse gas emissions, defined as the monetary value of the environmental data

(sic) caused by CO2 emissions related to energy consumption in the building, is based on the

binding minimum values set out in the EU ETS, found in Annex II of the Regulation [2]. In the

case of electricity production from renewable sources, only the element corresponding to own

consumption is considered, as prescribed in national legislation.

With regard to replacements of cooling systems, the service life was based on the standard [7] and on other technical information, as detailed in Annex E-4.

In the course of this comparative study, the two approaches are analysed, even though the

macroeconomic perspective is adopted, for the average energy and CO2 prices scenario, and the

discount rate of 3%, following the sensitivity analysis presented in Chapters III.1.4 and III.2.4.

Comparative methodology framework:

a) Estimated economic life cycle of 20 years;

b) Discount factor of 3%;

c) The costs associated with energy carriers, products, systems, maintenance costs,

operational costs, and labour costs (Annex D-4, D-5);

d) Primary energy factors (Table II.1);

e) Energy price evolution foreseen for all energy carriers (Annex D-5);

f) Starting year for the calculation, 2014;

g) Initial investment costs, utilisation cost, costs of energy, costs of greenhouse gas emissions

(macroeconomic analysis);

Comment [MNSM(1]: Translator's Note: This should probably be "the monetary value of the environmental damage caused by…". Probable typing error in original Portuguese ('dados' (data) where it should probably be 'danos' (damage))

E-8

h) When determining the global cost of a measure/package of measures/variant, the following

parameters are omitted:

i. Costs that are the same for all assessed measures/packages/variants;

ii. Costs related to building elements that have no influence on the energy performance of

a building.

i) The residual value will be determined by a straight-line depreciation of the initial investment

or replacement cost of a given building element until the end of the calculation period

discounted to the beginning of the calculation period.

With regards to the stipulations in paragraph (h)(i), for example where maintenance costs are

the same for all solutions analysed, their value may be omitted.

E-9

III. HOTEL BUILDINGS

The selection and subsequent analysis focused, in a second phase, on new and existing Hotel Buildings:

1. Hotel Buildings (HO)

The reference buildings adopted for Hotel Buildings (HO) correspond to virtual buildings, defined

based on Energy Certificates (EC) within the database of the Energy Certification System

Management Body for Buildings in Portugal (SCE), at Portuguese Energy Agency – ADENE [8].

The number of Energy Certificates analysed is indicated in Table III.1.

Table III.1 – Number of Energy Certificates Analysed

Type Total Number Buildings Total Area (m2)

Hotel Buildings 56 176 660

The survey identified the most commonly utilised features for each parameter relevant to

energy performance, per construction period: built area, form factor, heat transfer coefficient of

the elements of the building envelope, glazed areas, lighting, technical systems and energy

carriers.

In service buildings, for the two categories, three distinct periods were generically established,

and New-Builds and Existing Buildings built prior to 1990 were analysed [8]:

New-builds after 2006, after 2006 (sic);

Buildings built between 1990 and 2006;

Existing buildings built before 1990.

For new-builds, with regards to the building solutions and efficiency of the energy systems, the

reference solutions of the Regulation on the Energy Performance of Commercial and Services

Buildings (RECS) of Decree-Law No 118/2013 of 20 August 2013 [3] and of Ordinance No 349-

D/2013 [5], as amended by Ordinance No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016 were considered.

With regards to the geographic location and, consequently, the climate analysed, the

geographical distribution of the two categories of buildings and their respective climatic

conditions were taken into account.

For Hotel Buildings (HO), the study is carried out for the city of Lisbon, capital of Portugal, the

country’s largest city (around 480 000 inhabitants and 2 million living in the Greater Lisbon

area); for the city of Porto, located in the Norte region and the country’s second largest city

(approximately 210 000 inhabitants and 1.3 million living in the Greater Porto area); and also for

the cities of Faro (approximately 65 000 inhabitants) and Funchal (approximately 225 000

inhabitants), due to the fact that these last two cities are major tourist centres with a substantial

number of hotel buildings. The city of Lisbon has the highest number of hotel buildings, where

Comment [MNSM(2]: Translator's Note: This should probably be 'before 2006, after 2006'

E-10

currently there are over 1 864 hotel units, and it is estimated that in the city of Porto there are

around 680 units, while in Funchal around 290 and Faro close to 60.

The reference buildings as laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 244/2012

Annex I, 1 (4), are established on the basis of subcategories of buildings, differentiated by

climatic zones and by age, requiring different building solutions and technical systems. The

survey identified the most commonly utilised features for each parameter relevant to energy

performance, per construction period: built area, form factor, heat transfer coefficient of the

elements of the building envelope, glazed areas, lighting, technical systems and energy carriers.

In the analysis of hotel buildings, four subcategories of buildings were analysed, according to the

terminology adopted in the following table:

Subcategory Location

(Climatic Zone)

Elevation

(m) Season

HO1-L Lisbon (I1-V3) 54

New > 2006 HO2-P Porto (I1-V2) 100

HO3-Fa Faro (I1-V3) 145

HO4-Fu Funchal (I1-V2) 380

This report seeks to follow the reporting template found in Annex III of the Delegated Regulation, covering the following topics:

Establishment of Reference Buildings;

Selection of energy efficiency measures and use of renewable energy sources, variants and packages;

Identifying annual primary energy demand;

Calculation of the global cost for each reference building;

Cost-optimal levels of performance;

Comparative analysis between cost-optimal levels and regulatory requirements.

The Annexes set out the elements supporting the options and the whole building simulation

studies carried out, with a view to determining the energy demand for heating and cooling, and

ventilation and lighting consumption.

E-11

III.1 HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS

III.1.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF REFERENCE BUILDING

The reference building adopted, as stated, corresponds to a virtual building, defined based on

Energy Certificates (EC) within the database of the Energy Certification System Management

Body for Buildings in Portugal (SCE) at the Portuguese Energy Agency – ADENE [8].

With regards to the geographic location and, consequently, the climate analysed [9], the

geographical distribution of buildings was taken into account, and four subcategories of climate

were selected, to cover the Lisbon, Porto, Faro and Funchal areas Table III.2.

Table III.2 – Subcategory of New Hotels Reference Building, location [9]

Hotel Buildings – HO (New > 2006)

Subcategory Location HDD

(oC)

M

(months)

ext,v (1)

(oC)

Elevation

(m) Season

HO1-L Lisbon (I1-V3) 978 5.1 22.3 54

New > 2006 HO2-P Porto (I1-V2) 1 260 6.2 20.9 100

HO3-Fa Faro (I1-V3) 987 4.8 23.1 145

HO4-Fu Funchal (I1-V2) 618 3.2 20.2 380

HDD – Heating Degree-Days; M – heating season duration; ext,v average outdoor temperature in the cooling season (June to September); average elevation; construction period.

Table III.3 describes the geometric characteristics of the reference building. It should be noted

that in this reference building, the glazed portion of the façades is 21 % (Figure III.2); under RECS

it is 30 %.

North-east View of the Model South-east View of the Model Figure III.1 – Axonometric Projections of the Reference Building for New Hotels

E-12

Figure III.2 – Geometric Model and Typical Rooms Zone Floor Plan Key: sul = south

E-13

Figure III. 3 – Geometric Model and Ground Floor Plan

Table III.3 – Hotel Buildings - Reference Building Geometry: HO1, HO2, HO3 and HO4 (New > 2006).

Geometry:

HO1-L, HO2-P, HO3-Fa, HO4-Fu Quantity Unit Description

Orientation N/S/E/W

(Rooms Floor 1 to 5) x 5 = total

Ground Floor

Garage

Total

(993.28) x 5 = 4 966.4

993.28

993.28

6 952.96

m2 Decree-Law No 118/2013, sum of the floor area of all

thermal zones of the building or fraction, with

consumption of electrical or thermal energy

measured by the interior of the elements delimiting

the thermal zones of the exterior and each other

(with consumption recorded on the meter,

regardless of the operation and existence of a

cooling system). The garage was considered for

establishment of the boundary conditions

Length × Width ×

Height

77.6 x 12.8 x

20.0

m x m x

m

Heated/conditioned space length

south-oriented façade

Number of floors 7 5 Rooms Floors; 1 floor for communal services; 1

parking floor (covered)

S/V (surface-to-volume) ratio 0.187 m2/m

3 The allocated floor area of b=0 was considered

Façade area: North, South,

East, West

904 m2 Value for each orientation

Window area over façade area:

North, South, East, West

21 %

The building solutions were established based on information in the Energy Certificates included

in the SCE database, and the values applicable to new buildings defined in RECS (Table III.4 and

Table III.5). This information identified building solutions in terms of their thermal properties

and, in the case of glazed spans, also in terms of g-value with and without solar protection.

Table III.4 – Hotel Buildings: building solutions for new-builds.

Building Elements

Categories Categories

HO1-HO2-HO3-HO4 New (> 2006)

New RECS

Average U-value of walls (W/m2o

C) 0.75 0.70

Average U-value of roof (W/m2o

C) 0.99 0.50

Average U-value of floor (W/m2o

C) 0.63 0.50

Average U-value of spans (W/m2o

C) 3.09 4.3

Linear thermal bridges (W/m

oC)

Total length (a) (d)

Average value

Thermal inertia It (kg/m

2)

external walls internal walls el. Horizontal

(b) 222

(average)

Type of Solar Protection Device (c) (f)

Building Elements

Categories Categories

HO1-HO2-HO3-HO4 New (> 2006)

New RECS

Average g-value Glazing 0.56 0.20

Glazing + shading 0.31 0.20

E-14

(a) Calculated by applying global increase, at 5 % of heating demand (b) Information not available; (c) Information not available; (d) Not applicable; (e) Same as (b); (f) Not applicable.

Table III.5 – Hotel Buildings: system for subcategories HO1-HO2-HO3 and HO4.

Technical Systems HO1-HO2-HO3-

HO4 (New > 2006)

New RECS

Comments

Ventilation Air circulation (a)

Mechanical ventilation, pollutant removal efficiency of 0.8 (Table I.01); air flow corresponding to prescriptive method [Flow = 16 m

3/person in

rooms (Table I.04); Flow = 3 m3/m

2 of

area in other zones (Table I.05)]; SFP=1500 W/(m

3/s)

Heat recovery (a) None

Efficiency of Heating System 3.18 3.0

Efficiency of Cooling System 3.24 2.9

Domestic hot water - -

(a) Information not available;

(b) VRF (46 %); CHILLER (14 %);

(c) VRF (58 %); CHILLER (18 %);

The occupancy and utilisation profiles of the hotel buildings were based on the following elements:

Ground floor of the reference building – where all communal areas were installed – in accordance with RSECE (Decree-Law No 79/2006 of 4 April 2006), as presented in Table III.6;

Floors 1 to 5 – room zones– according to an average found at three actual hotels (Hotel Fénix /Lisbon, Hotel Turismo/Braga, Hotel Atlântico/Azores). Data obtained from hotel building energy audit in which INETI participated, dated February 1999, as presented in Table III.7.

Table III.6 – Hotel Buildings: Utilisation profile for the Ground Floor [10].

HO1L – HO2P – HO3Fa – HO4Fu (New > 2006) and New RECS

Occupancy

profile

For every day of

the week

Winter period

21 Dec – 20 Mar

Spring Period

21 Mar – 20 Jun

Summer period

21 Jun – 20 Sept

Autumn Period

21 Sept – 20 Dec

Use of

Ground

Floor

0 h – 6 h 55 % 95 % 90 % 100 %

6 h – 7 h 40 % 75 % 75 % 70 %

7 h – 8 h 30 % 50 %

55 % 45 %

8 h – 9 h 40 %

9 h – 10 h 20 % 30 % 20 % 25 %

10 h – 11 h

40 % 11 h – 12 h

35 %

30 % 30 %

12 h – 14 h 45 % 40 %

14 h – 15 h 35 %

15 h – 16 h

30 %

40 % 25 % 35 %

16 h – 17 h 50 % 35 % 45 %

17 h – 18 h 55 % 40 % 50 %

18 h – 19 h 35 % 60 % 45 % 60 %

19 h – 20 h 45 % 75 %

55 % 75 %

20 h – 21 h 50 % 60 %

21 h – 22 h 55 %

85 % 70 % 85 %

22 h – 23 h 95 % 80 % 100 %

E-15

23 h – 24 h 90 %

Table III.7 – Hotel Buildings: Usage profile of room zones.

HO1L – HO2P – HO3Fa – HO4Fu

(New > 2006) and New RECS

Occupancy profile For every day of the week Total annual period

1 January – 31 December

Utilisation of Rooms

Floors (1-5)

0 h – 6 h 75 %

6 h – 7 h 65 %

7 h – 8 h 55 %

8 h – 9 h 40 %

9 h – 11 h 20 %

11 h – 15 h 10 %

15 h – 16 h 20 %

16 h – 19 h 40 %

19 h – 21 h 50 %

21 h – 22 h 70 %

22 h – 24 h 75 %

Table III.8 describes the internal conditions in terms of: lighting and equipment; and Table III.9 describes the occupants’ internal conditions with regards to legislation (RECS). Figure III. 4 identifies the thermal zones of the rooms referred to in Table III.9.

Table III.8 – Hotels: internal conditions – Internal Gains/Lighting and equipment.

HO1L, HO2P,

HO3Fa and

HO4Fu

Unit Description / Observations

Maximum lighting

power density 8.8 W/m

2

LPD max value, RECS

‘Rooms’ LPD=3.8 W/(m2.100 lx) and Em=200

lx

Maximum lighting

power density 3.07 W/m

2

LPD max value, RECS

‘Circulation zone’ LPD=3.8 W/(m2.100 lx) and

Em=100 lx

Specific electric power

of electric equipment

9 W/m2

Values established for this study, Room

zones

10 W/m2

Values established for this study, Communal

zones, Ground Floor

E-16

Table III.9 – Hotels: internal conditions – Internal Gains/occupants.

HO1L-HO2P-HO3Fa-HO4Fu HO1L, HO2P, HO3Fa and

HO4Fu

Unit

Thermal gain due to

occupants

Ground Floor 10 m

2/occupant

120 W/occupant

Rooms Floors – North Zone 8

Total number of

occupants/envisag

ed zone

Rooms Floors – South Zone 16

Rooms Floors – East Zone 12

Rooms Floors – West Zone 8

Gain/occupant for all rooms

0h-8h 70 W

W/occupant 8h-23h 100 W

23h-24h 70 W

Figure III. 4 – Thermal Zones considered Plan of Floors 1 to 5 (Rooms) Key: Zona Quartos Norte = North Rooms Zone; Zona Quartos Oeste = West Rooms Zone; Zona Quartos Este= East Rooms

Zone; Zona Quartos Sul = South Rooms Zone

E-17

III.1.2 SELECTION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES AND USE OF RENEWABLE

ENERGY SOURCES, VARIANTS AND PACKAGES

Improving the energy performance of the reference building focuses on measures concerning

the building envelope and the equipment and energy sources/carriers for the heating, cooling,

lighting and ventilation systems.

The set of measures/packages/variants studied therefore focuses on variations as regards the

elements that affect buildings’ energy performance. The use of local energy production from

renewable sources equipment was also to be evaluated in terms of optimal cost.

The systematisation of packages of measures aimed at increasing the buildings’ energy

performance gave rise to the variants described in the following list, focusing on the following

technical and technological aspects:

Opaque building envelope, as regards the building solutions and thicknesses of thermal

insulation;

Glazed spans, types of glazing, frame and shading devices;

Passive cooling strategies: activation of shading devices, whenever incoming solar radiation

on the façade exceeds 300 W/m2;

Heating and cooling systems (conditioned buildings);

Lighting: lighting system with fluorescent and LED lamps;

Systems using renewable energy sources:

Solar thermal for domestic hot water;

Solar photovoltaic systems;

III.1.2.1 Building Solutions

The building solutions (Table III.10) for the building envelope were selected in order to evaluate

the solutions currently used in new office buildings.

With regards to the opaque building envelope, the analysis focused on the following solutions

[11]:

Ventilated Façade (FV03; FV02; FV03);

Curtain façade (FC01; FC02; FC03);

ETICS (ET01; ET02; ET03);

Double air brick wall (PD01; PD02; PD03);

Volcanic Slag wall (FE01; FE02; FE03) – only used in the case of Funchal.

All building solutions are set out in Annex D-1 to this report.

Table III.10 – New hotels: Heat transfer coefficient for exterior façade walls.

Solution/façade U (W/m

2K) – thickness of thermal insulation (cm)

01 02 03

Ventilated Façade / FV 1.3 – (0) 0.70 – (2.5) 0.40 – (7)

Curtain façade / FC 1.6 – (0) 0.70 – (3) 0.40 – (7)

E-18

ETICS / ET 1.3 – (0) 0.70 – (3) 0.40 – (7)

Double wall / PD 1.1 – (0) 0.70 – (2) 0.40 – (7)

Volcanic Slag Façade / FE 1.2 – (0) 0.67 – (3) 0.39 – (7)

Note: The figures in parentheses are the size category of the thermal insulation thickness.

With regard to the horizontal elements of the building envelope (roofs and floors), horizontal

roof solutions with bulk slab for 3 thicknesses of extruded expanded polystyrene (XPS) were

analysed, corresponding to the values listed in Table III.11 and Table III.12.

Table III.11 – New hotels: Heat transfer coefficient for external roof.

Solution U (W/m

2oC) - XPS (cm)

C01 C02 C03

External horizontal roof 0.9 – (2.0) 0.50 – (5.0) 0.3 – (10.0)

Table III.12 – New hotels: Heat transfer coefficient for floor over garage.

Solution U (W/m

2oC) - XPS (cm)

P01 P02 P03

Floor over garage 1.0 – (2.0) 0.50 – (5.0) 0.3 – (10.0)

With regards to the glass building envelope, the analysis concerned the following solutions:

W01 - Frame with clear single glazing

W02 - Frame with clear double glazing

W03 - More insulating frame with clear double glazing

W04 - Frame with low double glazing, green colour

W05 - Frame with low double glazing, green colour

These types of spans were evaluated adopting the following solar protection: internal protection blinds in medium colour (IS), metallic venetian blind external protection in medium colour (ES).

The glazed spans are characterised in terms of the heat transfer coefficient (Uw) [11], the

glazing’s g-value (g,vi) and global g-value with solar protection activated (gT) for both types of

shading:

with internal protection (Table III.13) [12];

with external protection (Table III.14) [12];

Table III.13 – Hotels: glazed span solutions with internal protection in medium-colour opaque curtains.

Glazed Spans Uw

(W/m2o

C),

glazing’s g-value

g,vi

g-value with indoor shading device (IS) gT

W01 – Wooden frame with clear single glazing 4.3 0.861 0.44

W02 – Aluminium frame with clear double glazing

3.3 0.747 0.46

W03 – PVC frame, revolving window, with clear double glazing

2.5 0.747 0.46

W04 – Thermal-cut aluminium frame with low- 2.9 0.207 0.10

E-19

emission double glazing

W05 – Thermal-cut aluminium frame with low-emission double glazing

2.9 0.138 0.06

Table III.14 – Hotels: glazed span solutions with external protection from blinds in medium-colour veneer.

Glazed Spans Uw

(W/m2o

C),

glazing’s g-value

g,vi

g-value with external shading device (ES) gT

W01 – Wooden frame with clear single glazing

3.4 0.861 0.14

W02 – Aluminium frame with clear double glazing

2.7 0.747 0.09

W03 – PVC frame, revolving window, with clear double glazing

2.1 0.747 0.09


2.8 0.207 0.02


2.8 0.138 0.01

III.1.2.2 Ventilation

The ventilation systems were selected in order to evaluate solutions currently used in new hotel

buildings [13], namely:

Ventilation solution with mechanical extraction and air supply via the ceiling (pollutant

removal efficiency of 0.8) - (VM);

Ventilation solution with mechanical extraction and air supply and heat recovery with 60%

efficiency (pollutant removal efficiency of 0.8) - VM-HR;

The option of solely Natural Ventilation was not considered, as it was deemed that the

reference hotel was of a four-star category, where this option is never seen.

It is assumed that there may be two occupants in each room, and that there is an extraction of

45 m3/hr in each sanitary facility.

The corridor and stairwell area is assumed to be used sporadically, and may have ventilation

through air transferred from the rooms.

The building materials are predominantly (over 75 %) materials with low emissions of pollutants,

and a minimum flow of fresh air of 2 m3/(h.m2) must be guaranteed.

.

E-20

Table III.15 indicates the minimum flows of fresh air to be assumed in the Rooms zone.

In the stairwell and lift shaft zone, a fresh air flow rate of 2 m3/(h.m2) is assumed, as shown in

Table III.16.

Table III.15 – Minimum flow of fresh air in the rooms zone

South North East West Total/floor Total

Nbr of rooms 8 4 6 4 22 110

Flow rate (m3/h) 360 180 270 180 990 4 950

Table III.16 – Minimum flow of fresh air in the circulation zones

Total/floor Total

Horizontal circulation 336.00 m3/h 1680 m

3/h (0.67h

-1)

Stairwell and Lifts Shaft

(Volume 6 floors = 1 375 m3)

137.52 m3/h 825.12 m

3/h (0.60h

-1)

Annex E-2 contains additional information on the ventilation systems.

III.1.2.3 Lighting

The lighting systems were selected in order to evaluate solutions currently used in new office

buildings [14], namely:

Fluorescent lighting solution with T8 bulbs;

Lighting solution with LED lamps;

The establishment of the lighting systems requirements, as well as the power densities, is based

on RECS and the EN 12464-1 and EN 15 193 Standards. The lighting systems were designed to

ensure an average illumination of 200 lx in the Rooms zones and 100 lx in the circulation and

horizontal circulation zones. The lighting system is detailed in Annex D-3.

RECS requires the adoption of DALI systems in zones near the façade, whereby the availability

factor FD=0.9 is adopted. In the circulation zones, the existence of motion-sensing switching is

assumed (in compliance with RECS), whereby FO=0.8 is adopted.

Table III.17, Table III.18 and Table III.19 provide a summary of the lighting systems adopted. In

the case of detailed technical study on lighting in the rooms zone with T8 fluorescent lighting,

E-21

LPD/100lux of 6.7 (7, W/m2) can be achieved. In this paper, a more conservative LPD/100lux

value of 1.9 (9.5 W/m2) has been adopted.

Table III.17 – ‘Rooms Zone’ - lighting.

System

Lighting Power Density LPD of the

solution

FD×Fo Adjusted LPD of

the solution

W/m2 (W/m

2)/100 lx - (W/m

2)

Fluorescent (a)

8.3 6.6 0.9×0.8 7.2

LED (a)

6.5 2.5 0.9×0.8 5.6

(a) – As specified in Annex E-3

Table III.18 – ‘Circulation Zones’ - lighting.

System


solution


the solution

W/m2 (W/m

2)/100 lx - (W/m

2)

Fluorescent (a)

3.6 2.8 1.0×0.8 2.8

LED (a)

2.1 1.6 1.0×0.8 1.6


Table III.19 – ‘Common Zones – Ground Floor’ - lighting.

System


solution


the solution

W/m2 (W/m

2)/100 lx - (W/m

2)

Fluorescent (a)

9.5 1.9 1.0×0.8 10.0

LED (a)

6.5 1.3 1.0×0.8 8.0


III.1 2.4 Energy Systems

The cooling systems [5] were selected in order to evaluate solutions currently used in new office

buildings, namely:

Cooling system with chiller heat pump and air-convectors inside

VRV type cooling system. Independent cooling per floor was assumed

Cooling system with Rooftop and air-convectors inside

In Table III.20 below, the systematised solutions for simulated energy systems for heating and cooling are shown.

E-22

Table III.20 – New hotels:

Type of system Item designation COP EER

Chiller – Reference System HO-S0 3.00 2.90

Chiller/ Heat pump HO-S1 3.24 2.94

VRF HO-S2 4.31 4.36

Rooftop HO-S3 3.96 2.78

III.1.2.5 Solar Thermal

Pursuant to the Regulation on the Energy Performance of Commercial and Service Buildings

(RECS) and the respective requirements set out in Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-

D/2013 of 2 December 2013, as amended by Ministerial Implementing Order No. 17-A/2016 of

4 February 2016, Article 8, ‘Regardless of the type of system to be installed for preparation of

DHW, it must always include solutions for drawing on thermal solar energy, whenever there is a

roof area available[...]’.

Accordingly, it was confirmed that the available area on the roof was compatible with the

requirements for the installation of solar panels for domestic hot water (DHW) heating, and it

was confirmed that this option was feasible. The existence of a solar panel system for DHW, as

shown in Figure III.5 was also assumed.

E-23

Figure III.5 – Distribution of areas for Equipment locations on the roof: HVAC, solar collectors for DHW and photovoltaic panels.

Thus, pursuant to the applicable legislation referred to above, the energy requirements for the preparation of domestic hot water, Qa, are estimated using the following equation:

kWh/ano

3600

187,4 TCQ

aqs

a

Where:

Qa = Global Energy needed for the preparation of DHW, [kWh/year];

Caqs = Annual Consumption of DHW, (l/year);

ΔT = Increase in temperature required for the preparation of DHW [◦C].

E-24

Pursuant to the relevant legislation referred to above, the fraction of the Energy Efficiency Ratios relating to use of Domestic Hot Water (DHW) is calculated based on the following expression

k ka

aka

ia

QfE

,

,

,

Where:

Qa = Energy needs for DHW [kWh/year];

fa,k = Fraction of energy needs for DHW supplied by system k;

ηa = Efficiency of system K;

i = energy source i

Table III.Table III. 21 presents an overview of the values used to calculate the fraction of the EER in relation to DHW.

Table III. 21 – Values assumed in the calculation of the fraction of the EER in relation to DHW.

Variable Valued used

Number of people in the hotel rooms = 220 people

Average Occupancy Rate = 0.75

Average Total of people using the rooms = 165 people

Average consumption per person = 40 litres

Ground floor consumption = 15% x Rooms Consumption

Annual Consumption of DHW in the rooms, (l/year) = 165 people x 40l/person x 365 days:

Cdhw = 2 409 000

Litres/year

Annual Consumption of DHW throughout the building (l/year) = 165people x 40l/person x 365days

x 1.15:

Cdhw = 2 770 360

Litres/year

Increase in temperature required for the preparation of DHW

ΔT = 35◦C

Global Energy needed for the preparation of DHW

[Qa= (Caps x 4.187 x ΔT) / 3 600]

Qa = 112 272.50 kWh/year

E-25

Table III. 22 – Useful energy for DHW

Solutions for DHW (kWh/year)

EERRef 112 272

EERpr – HO1-L 77 425

EERpr – HO2-P 71 972

EERpr – HO3-Fa 81 263

EERpr – HO4-Fu 59 632

E-26

III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic

As seen in the previous section, even after the installation of a solar thermal system, there is still

roof area available for the installation of a photovoltaic system. This solution has become

increasingly desirable. On the one hand, given the very significant decrease in the price of

photovoltaic panels, due to gains in both production costs and in conversion efficiency: in the

region of €8.5 – 6.7/W installed in 2007, to €3.5–2.0/W today, i.e. a fall of around 60 % 1. In

addition, in the meantime, small-scale electricity production (even for self-consumption) has

been regulated, cf. Decree-Law No 153/2014 of 20 October 2014. This provides a clear

regulatory framework, including the possibility of selling part of the production when it is not

being fully utilised in the building associated with the installation.

Building facilities account for high electricity consumption in hotels: particularly cooling

systems, followed by lighting, lifts and the electrical equipment in each room, among other

applications. This means that the electricity generated by a photovoltaic system would be

almost completely absorbed in the building itself. In principle, the installation of a photovoltaic

system would also be advantageous, given the current price levels and the high availability of

solar radiation in almost all regions of the country.

To explore the quantitative aspects of this solution, the following assumptions were made. As

outlined in Figure III.5, there is an area of 544 m² available on the roof of the reference building.

For circulation and in particular to avoid shading, around one third of this area, i.e. 180 m²,

could be effectively utilised. Assuming a typical 40º inclination for the photovoltaic modules,

around 235 m² of module surface could therefore be installed.

Following previous cost-optimal studies for offices, polycrystalline silicon technology appears to

be suitable and representative of the systems available on the market, although other

technologies may also be used. Using a typical commercial module, this results in a system with

a rated power of about 19 kW.

An electricity consumption profile for the building was defined according to Figure III. 6,

constant for all months and days of the week, corresponding to 3.2 MWh per day, or 1 170

MWh per year. Note that the exact definition of the profile is not critical, since the power

required in the daytime (i.e. when there is photovoltaic production) may be substantially higher

than the system’s rated power. This is indeed the case: approximately 19 kW vs peak

consumption of 250 kW.

1 E.g. The Power to Change: Solar and Wind Cost Reduction Potential to 2025 . IRENA – International Renewable Energy Agency, June 2016. Available at: http://www.irena.org

E-27

Figure III. 6 – Total consumption profile of the reference hotel.

Simulations were produced with the current standard simulation tool for solar systems within

the Building Energy Certification System, the SCE.ER (Renewable Energy Certification) software

of the DGEG, and the reports issued by the software are attached as an annex. With the

dimensioning completed, as foreseen, the entire production of the system is absorbed by the

building. Although if it was used with a variable consumption profile, it is probable that on some

occasions, a very small part could be introduced into the network.

The results are summarised in Table III. 23 and confirm the benefit of installing photovoltaic

systems, even in cloudier climates, such as that of Funchal. In particular, it enables primary

energy savings of between 7.8 and 13.2 kWh/m² per year. Thus, when there is space available

on the hotels’ roofs, in principle the installation of a photovoltaic system will form part of all

cost-optimal solutions.

Table III. 23 – Analysis of the performance of photovoltaic panel systems.

Zone perfor-mance ratio

Production Ratio of

final energy EER (primary

energy)

MWh per year

kWh / kW installed

kWh / m² installed

kWh/m² per year

kWh/m² per year

HO1-L,

Lisbon 90 % 29.1 1 538 108 4.88 12.2

HO2-P,

Porto 90 % 26.5 1 405 99 4.44 11.1

HO3-Fa,

Faro 89 % 31.4 1 663 117 5.27 13.2

HO4-Fu,

Funchal 89 % 18.6 985 69 3.12 7.8

E-28

III.1.3 DETERMINATION OF ANNUAL PRIMARY ENERGY DEMAND

III.1.3.1 Simulation model

In the application of the dynamic simulation method for determining EER, the conditions set

out in Table III.24 were respected.

Table III.24 – Simulation conditions [5].

Climate data CLIMAS-SCE - Software for the National Buildings Certification System (SCE): http://www.lneg.pt/servicos/328/2263

Glazed spans Interior blinds in medium-colour veneer and exterior Venetian blinds of medium-colour metallic veneers, activated whenever incoming solar radiation on the façade exceeds 300 W/m

2

Thermal zoning

Floor -1 = Parking, Ground Floor = General Services (Reception, Catering, Kitchen, Laundry etc.). Floors 1-5 = Rooms. On each rooms floor, 4 thermal zones (North, South, East and West), separated by horizontal circulation,

Time profiles Room zones, shared time profiles for occupancy, lighting and use of equipment and other separate time profile for the central zone

Indoor temperature Interval between 20oC and 25

oC due to having cooling system

Fresh air Value of fresh air flow corresponding to the minimum flow value determined by the prescriptive method

Cooling systems

- Fresh airflows introduced into the thermal zones, taking into account the efficiency of ventilation, characteristics of the equipment and with continuous operation during the period of occupancy of the rooms and ground floor; - Cooling systems: Switched on and off whenever the indoor air temperature falls below 22

oC or above 23

oC, or depending on the thermal loads of the building or

the usage times of the room zones; - The efficiency of the equipment was not profiled on the basis of their curve properties or seasonal outputs

The reference EER ratio was determined following the assumptions set out in Ministerial

Implementing Order No 349-D/2013, as amended following Ministerial Implementing Order

17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016, with the aspects set out in Table III.25 being notable:

http://www.lneg.pt/servicos/328/2263

E-29

Table III.25 – Simulation conditions for determining 𝑬𝑬𝑹𝒓𝒆𝒇, Ministerial Implementing Order

No 349–D, as amended by Ministerial Implementing Order No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016 [5].

Climate data CLIMAS-SCE - Software for the National Buildings Certification System (SCE): http://www.lneg.pt/servicos/328/2263

Surround - Opaque elements: reference heat surface transfer coefficients reference Table III.4 – and in which the adopted solutions are described in Chapter II (wall - ET02; roof - C01,

floor- P02) and absorption coefficient = 0.4 (light colour - Glazed spans: reference heat surface transfer coefficients for glazing and constant g-value in Table E-1.39 and area of glazed span equal to 30 % of the façade area.

Heating and/or cooling – space cooling

Class B compression chiller heat pump units Cooling: EER = 2.9 Heating: COP = 3.0

Ventilation - Fresh air flow values per space, determined using the prescriptive method, and use of an exclusively mechanical ventilation system, with a ventilation efficiency of 0.8; - Minimum fresh air flow of 3 m

3/(h.m

2) due to the fact the building’s materials are

materials with low emissions of pollutants (more than 80%); - Absence of free cooling systems, heat recovery, variable air flow systems or other energy efficiency solutions for cooling.

Lighting 8.8 W/m2

in the room zones, 3.07 W/m2 in circulation zones and 11.44 W/m

2 on the

ground floor, allowing for the absence of lighting control systems due to occupancy, natural light or other energy efficiency solutions for lighting.

DHW Renewable energy system installed for DHW – Natural gas boiler with efficiency of 89 %, according to tables I.07 and I.19 of Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-D/2013 of 2 December 2013, as amended by Ministerial Implementing Order No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016

All other characteristics and solutions of the building not specified in the table must be the same as those used to determine the EER for the building model (thermal zoning, time usage profiles and internal gains, internal thermostatic temperatures (20 oC and 25 oC). The indicator EER ref includes the following two elements of the following general expression:

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑓,𝑆 + 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑓,𝑇 (10)

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑓,𝑆 corresponds, for the reference conditions (Table III.25), to type S consumption

(space heating and cooling, including humidification and dehumidification; ventilation and

pumping in cooling systems; heating of hot water and swimming pools; indoor lighting, from

2016 it will also include outdoor lighting; lifts, stairs and travellators), whereby term 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑟𝑒𝑓,𝑇

corresponds to uncontrolled consumption.

III.1.3.2 Variants and Energy Efficiency Indicators

The subcategories HO1-L, HO2-P, HO3-Fa and HO4-Fu were simulated for the combinations of

solutions described in Chapter III.1.2.1, with numerous combinations also having been

simulated for that purpose (around 10 000 in the case of new builds). Because of the wealth of

information, this makes it impossible to illustrate all solutions packages, and thus a

representative number of the different situations is presented.

The influence of the exterior wall type (ETICS façade, Curtain Façade, Double Wall and

Ventilated Façade) was initially analysed, as documented in Annex E-7. From this study, it was

http://www.lneg.pt/servicos/328/2263

E-30

concluded that the four external wall solutions, for the same levels of thermal insulation,

generated similar energy performance, so that the results can be expressed as a function of

thermal insulation thickness. As indicated in Annex E-4 (costs of the solutions), the best

performing solution (U.EUR) is the ETICS solution; and this is the one adopted in the

subsequent study.

Table III.26, Table III.27, Table III.28 and Table III.29 identify some of the solutions packages

analysed in subcategory HO1-L, subcategory HO2-P, subcategory HO3-Fa and subcategory

HO4-Fu.

The variants selected were shared by all four subcategories of building, so that they could be

compared with each other, where:

NV0 corresponds to the reference building solutions advocated in RECS for new

buildings and the other variants, as will be confirmed subsequently, will correspond to:

NV1 cost-optimal energy variant;

NV2 lower cost variant.

With the remainder, the aim is to perform a comparative analysis of the solutions described in

Chapter III.2:

NV3 Alternative solution to the NV1 ventilation solution – mechanical without heat

recovery vs mechanical with heat recovery;

NV4 Alternative solution to the NV1 lighting solution – fluorescent lighting vs LED

bulbs;

NV5 to NV9 More efficient cost-optimal solutions for the different types of glazing

studied, maintaining the positioning of solar protection from the outside;

NV10 to NV14 More efficient cost-optimal solutions for the different types of glazing

studied, maintaining the positioning of solar protection from the inside;

NV15 to NV17 levels of thermal insulation – sets of solutions with minimum, average

or maximum grouped thicknesses;

NV18 to NV20 differ from each other in the cooling system, based on the other

solutions of the V2 variant (optimal);

NV21 variant with greater energy performance – lower energy demand in winter and

summer;

NV22 variant with higher level of thermal insulation in construction terms (opaque

building envelope and glazed spans);

NV23 and NV24 respectively correspond to the V1 variants without solar panels for

DHW, and integrating photovoltaic modules.

E-31

Table III.26 – Variants and HO1-L solutions packages.

Variants

And Packages Floor Wall Roof Glazed spans

Solar

Protection

Lighting Ventilation Cooling System

DHW PV

NV0-HO1-L (Base)

P02 ET02 C02 W04 Interior Fluor. Without

Recov.

Default

– HO-S0 Boiler 0

NV1-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With

Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV2-HO1-L P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without


NV3-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without


NV4-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior Fluor. With












NV10-HO1-L P01 ET01 C02 W01 Interior LED Without

Recov. VRF With Solar 0

NV11-HO1-L P01 ET01 C02 W02 Interior LED Without


NV12-OF1 P02 ET02 C03 W03 Interior Fluor. Without


NV13-HO1-L P02 ET02 C03 W04 Interior Fluor. With


NV14-HO1-L P02 ET02 C03 W05 Interior Fluor. With


NV15-HO1-L P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without











Recov. Rooftop With Solar 0






Recov. Chiller Boiler 0


Recov. Chiller With Solar 12.2

E-32

Table III.27 – Variants and HO2-P solutions packages.

Variants

And Packages Floor Wall Roof

Glazed

spans

Solar

Protection Lighting Ventilation

Cooling

System DHW PV

NV0-HO2-P

(Base) P02 ET02 C02 W04 Interior Fluor.

Without

Recov.

Default –

HO-S0 Boiler 0

NV1-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV2-HO2-P P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without


NV3-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without


NV4-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior Fluor. With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0






NV10-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W01 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0



NV13-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W04 Interior LED Without


NV14-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W05 Interior LED Without






NV19-HO2-P P01 ET01 C02 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0

NV20-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without


NV21-HO2-P P01 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0


NV23-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller Boiler 0

NV24-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 11.1

E-33

Table III.28 – Variants and HO3-Fa solutions packages.

Variants


Solar

Protection Lighting Ventilation

Cooling

System DHW PV

NV0-HO3-Fa


Without

Recov. Default Boiler 0

NV1-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV2-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without


NV3-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without


NV4-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior Fluor. With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV5-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W01 Exterior Fluor. With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0





NV10-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C02 W01 Interior LED Without






NV13-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W04 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV14-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W05 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV15- HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior LED Without





NV19-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C02 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0

NV20-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without


NV21-HO3-Fa P01 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0


NV23-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller Boiler 0

NV24- HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 13.2

E-34

Table III.29 – Variants and HO4-Fu solutions packages.

Variants


Solar

Protectio

n

Lighting Ventilation Cooling

System DHW PV

NV0-HO4-Fu


Without Recov.

Default Boiler 0

NV1-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0

NV2-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without Recov.

Chiller With Solar 0


NV4-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior Fluor. Without Recov.


NV5-HO4-Fu P01 F01 C02 W01 Exterior LED Without Recov.



NV7-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W03 Exterior LED Without Recov.




NV10-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W01 Interior LED Without Recov.










NV15- HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without Recov.









VRF With Solar 0


Rooftop With Solar 0

NV21-HO4-Fu P01 FE03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0



NV23-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller Boiler 0

NV24- HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar

7.8

E-35

III.1.3.3 Subcategory HO1-L, HO2-P, HO3-Fa, HO4-Fu Results

The simulations carried out for the cities of Lisbon (subcategory HO1-L), Porto (subcategory

HO2-P), Faro (subcategory HO3-Fa, and Funchal (subcategory HO4-Fu) identified the results

that will be presented in Chapter V for the packages of variants. Table III.30, Table III.31, Table

III.32 and Table III.33 show the results of some of the selected variants, and it is possible to

conclude an energy analysis for the two (sic) cities as follows:

1. Application of thermal insulation with substantial role on the roof;

2. Glazing solutions with low g-value and external solar protection correspond to the

lowest energy consumption;

3. The cooling requirements are always much higher than the heating requirements;

4. The cooling requirements are significantly reduced when using LED bulbs (reductions

of between 22 % (Funchal) and 15 % (Lisbon) compared to the reference solution);

5. Of the cooling systems studied, the solution offering the lowest energy consumption is

the VRF System [HO-S2 solution, Table III.20];

6. The cooling solution with the lowest global cost for the cities of Lisbon, Porto and Faro

has a Chiller-type heat pump [HO-S1 solution, Table III.20], while for the city of Funchal

the solution with the lowest global cost is a VRF system [HO-S2 Solution, Table III.20];

7. The ventilation system solution with heat recovery is the solution with lowest energy

consumption;

8. For the cities of Lisbon, Porto and Faro, the ventilation system solution with the lowest

global cost is a heat recovery solution, while for the city of Funchal it is a solution

without heat recovery.

Comment [MNSM(3]: Translator's Note: This should probably be 'four' cities rather than 'two'

E-36

Table III.30 – Energy needs: subcategory HO1-L.

Variant

Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use

(kWh/m2)

Energy

produced

Energy

supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary

energy

reduction

Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWhep/m2) (%)

NV0-HO1-L

(Reference) 65 800 78 150 26 320 31 260 7 110 17 920 17 289 18 917 0.000 173.60 26.10 0 %

NV1-HO1-L 31 395 99 345 12 558 39 738 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 137.86 20.20 -20.59 %

NV2-HO1-L 57 285 144 455 22 914 57 782 3 896 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 163.53 23.89 -5.80 %

NV3-HO1-L 64 645 96 778 25 858 38 711 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 140.65 20.60 -18.98 %

NV4-HO1-L 29 130 104 053 11 652 41 621 6 536 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 147.70 21.61 -14.92 %

NV5-HO1-L 31 818 106 883 12 727 42 753 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 140.55 20.58 -19.04 %

NV6-HO1-L 31 395 99 345 12 558 39 738 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 137.86 20.20 -20.59 %

NV7-HO1-L 28 505 99 978 11 402 39 991 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 137.18 20.10 -20.98 %

NV8-HO1-L 43 750 73 438 17 500 29 375 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 132.86 19.48 -23.47 %

NV9-HO1-L 45 723 70 158 18 289 28 063 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 132.35 19.40 -23.76 %

NV10-HO1-L 59 485 137 823 23 794 55 129 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 133.19 22.68 -23.28 %

NV11-HO1-L 58 110 128 643 23 244 51 457 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 130.76 22.16 -24.67 %

NV12-HO1-L 45 183 103 495 18 073 41 398 3 896 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 145.86 21.58 -15.98 %

NV13-HO1-L 28 160 78 165 11 264 31 266 6 536 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 138.59 20.30 -20.17 %

NV14-HO1-L 29 928 74 360 11 971 29 744 6 536 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 137.84 20.19 -20.60 %

NV15-HO1-L 57 285 144 455 22 914 57 782 3 896 15 130 17 289 5 926 0.000 143.14 23.89 -17.55 %

NV16-HO1-L 48 180 100 468 19 272 40 187 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 136.82 20.05 -21.19 %

NV17-HO1-L 26 615 70 845 10 646 28 338 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 126.69 18.59 -27.02 %

NV18-HO1-L 31 395 99 345 12 558 39 738 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 137.86 20.20 -20.59 %

NV19-HO1-L 64 858 98 400 25 943 39 360 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 125.39 20.69 -27.77 %

NV20-HO1-L 64 645 96 778 25 858 38 711 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 139.78 20.60 -19.48 %

NV21-HO1-L 29 330 67 028 11 732 26 811 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 116.55 18.52 -32.86 %

NV22-HO1-L 26 615 70 845 10 646 28 338 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.000 126.69 18.59 -27.02 %

NV23-HO1-L 31 395 99 345 12 558 39 738 6 536 11 555 17 289 18 917 0.000 150.85 22.82 -13.11 %

NV24-HO1-L 31 395 99 345 12 558 39 738 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 926 0.485 136.64 19.71 -21.29 %

E-37

*- Including garage ventilators (uncontrolled Type T constant consumption)

Table III.31 – Energy needs: subcategory HO2-P.

Variant

Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use

(kWh/m2)

Energy

produced

Energy

supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary

energy

reduction

Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWhep/m2)

NV0-HO2-P

(reference) 85.88 66.05 34.35 26.42 7.11 17.92 17 289 18.92 0.00 176.12 26.46 0 %

NV1-HO2-P 47.09 79.29 18 836 31 714 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 136.79 20.32 -22.33 %

NV2-HO2-P 82.07 114.33 32 826 45 731 3 896 15.13 17 289 6 841 0.00 161.84 24.07 -8.10 %

NV3-HO2-P 42.53 83.46 17.01 33 382 6 536 15.13 17 289 6 841 0.00 145.74 21.59 -17.25 %

NV4-HO2-P 89.29 74.08 35 715 29 631 3 896 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 141.45 21.13 -19.69 %

NV5-HO2-P 47.74 85.86 19 094 34 344 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 139.23 20.67 -20.95 %

NV6-HO2-P 47.09 79.29 18 836 31 714 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 136.79 20.32 -22.33 %

NV7-HO2-P 43.25 80.17 17 301 32 067 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 135.91 20.18 -22.83 %

NV8-HO2-P 62.57 55.69 25 029 22 275 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 133.54 19.89 -24.17 %

NV9-HO2-P 65.00 52.74 25 998 21 094 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 133.29 19.86 -24.32 %

NV10-HO2-P 45.81 114.54 18 322 45 815 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 148.39 22.00 -15.75 %

NV11-HO2-P 43.69 106.68 17 474 42 671 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 145.06 21.51 -17.64 %

NV12-HO2-P 38.71 110.78 15 484 44.31 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 144.92 21.48 -17.72 %

NV13-HO2-P 60.14 61.39 24 056 24 555 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 134.73 20.05 -23.50 %

NV14-HO2-P 64.70 53.74 25 881 21 494 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 133.54 19.89 -24.18 %

NV15-HO2-P 46.80 117.54 18 721 47 014 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 149.71 22.20 -14.99 %

NV16-HO2-P 27.99 86.76 11 197 34 702 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 133.44 19.77 -24.23 %

NV17-HO2-P 39.74 54.73 15 894 21 891 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 126.17 18.74 -28.36 %

NV18-HO2-P 47.09 79.29 18 836 31 714 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 136.79 20.32 -22.33 %

NV19-HO2-P 47.59 80.64 19 035 32 256 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 124.83 20.41 -29.12 %

NV20-HO2-P 89.29 74.08 35 715 29 631 3 896 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 139.08 21.13 -21.03 %

NV21-HO2-P 42.84 51.32 17 135 20 526 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 117.00 18.72 -33.57 %

NV22-HO2-P 39.74 54.73 15 894 21 891 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.00 126.17 18.74 -28.36 %

NV23-HO2-P 47.09 79.29 18 836 31 714 6 536 11 555 17 289 18.92 0.00 148.87 22.76 -15.47 %

NV24-HO2-P 47.09 79.29 18 836 31 714 6 536 11 555 17 289 6 841 0.441 136.35 20.32 -22.58 %

E-38


Table III.32 – Energy needs: subcategory HO3-Fa.

Variant

Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use

(kWh/m2)

Energy

produced

Energy

supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary

energy

reduction


NV0-HO3-Fa

(reference) 76.89 100.37 25.63 34.61 7.11 17.92 17 289 18.92 0.00 175.91 26.43 0.00 %

NV1-HO3-Fa 29.64 105.02 11 855 42.008 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 138.60 20.44 -21.21 %

NV2-HO3-Fa 53.89 153.58 21 557 61 433 3 896 15.13 17 289 5 282 0 164.94 24.35 -6.24 %

NV3-HO3-Fa 61.84 104.41 24 734 41 762 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 141.73 21.01 -19.43 %

NV4-HO3-Fa 27.54 109.82 11 016 43 928 6 536 15.13 17 289 5 282 0 148.52 21.87 -15.57 %

NV5-HO3-Fa 29.99 112.93 11 994 45 171 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 141.40 20.85 -19.62 %

NV6-HO3-Fa 29.64 105.02 11 855 42.008 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 138.60 20.44 -21.21 %

NV7-HO3-Fa 26.91 105.39 10 762 42 155 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 137.88 20.33 -21.62 %

NV8-HO3-Fa 41.82 79.68 16 728 31.87 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 133.74 19.77 -23.97 %

NV9-HO3-Fa 43.82 76.55 17 527 30 619 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 133.29 19.71 -24.23 %

NV10-HO3-Fa 56.06 146.83 22 424 58 731 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 133.81 22.83 -23.93 %

NV11-HO3-Fa 54.80 137.36 21.92 54 944 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 131.35 22.30 -25.33 %

NV12-HO3-Fa 50.25 140.44 20.1 56 174 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 131.00 22.24 -25.53 %

NV13-HO3-Fa 39.48 86.95 15 793 34 778 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 135.49 20.02 -22.98 %

NV14-HO3-Fa 43.41 77.97 17 362 31 187 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 133.65 19.76 -24.03 %

NV15-HO3-Fa 56.19 149.03 22 475 59 612 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 134.35 22.95 -23.63 %

NV16-HO3-Fa 16.36 110.55 6 542 44 219 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 136.38 20.08 -22.47 %

NV17-HO3-Fa 25.45 75.50 10 179 30 199 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 127.27 18.77 -27.65 %

NV18-HO3-Fa 29.64 105.02 11 855 42 008 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 138.60 20.44 -21.21 %

NV19-HO3-Fa 29.88 106.73 11.95 42 691 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 125.14 20.54 -28.86 %

NV20-HO3-Fa 61.84 104.41 24 734 41 762 3 896 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 141.13 21.01 -19.77 %

NV21-HO3-Fa 28.11 71.81 11 245 28 724 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 116.72 18.72 -33.65 %

NV22-HO3-Fa 25.45 75.50 10 179 30 199 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0 127.27 18.77 -27.65 %

E-39

Variant

Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use

(kWh/m2)

Energy

produced

Energy

supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary

energy

reduction


NV23-HO3-Fa 29.64 105.02 11 855 42 008 6 536 11 555 17 289 18.92 0 152.24 23.20 -13.46 % NV24-HO3-Fa 29.64 105.02 11 855 42 008 6 536 11 555 17 289 5 282 0.525 138.08 20.44 -21.51 %


Table III.33 – Energy needs: subcategory HO4-Fu.

Variant Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use (kWh/m

2)

Energy produced

Energy supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary energy

reduction

Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m

2) (kWhep/m

2)

NV0-HO4-Fu (reference)

56.28 58.84 18.76 20.29 7.11 17.92 17 289 18.92 0.00 157.84 23.83 0.00 %

NV1-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 2925 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 123.23 18.43 -21.93 %

NV2-HO4-Fu 31.01 91 0375 12 404 36 415 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 140.24 20.88 -11.15 %

NV3-HO4-Fu 12 9975 74.45 5 199 29.78 6 536 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 126.70 18.86 -19.73 %

NV4-HO4-Fu 32 865 67 7425 13 146 27 097 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 132.88 19.81 -15.81 %

NV5-HO4-Fu 34 865 70 13 946 28 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 125.33 18.74 -20.60 %

NV6-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 2925 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 123.23 18.43 -21.93 %

NV7-HO4-Fu 32 805 64 645 13 122 25 858 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 122.88 18.37 -22.15 %

NV8-HO4-Fu 51.59 38 5375 20 636 15 415 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 119.79 17.98 -24.11 %

NV9-HO4-Fu 54 245 35 645 21 698 14 258 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 119.63 17.96 -24.21 %

NV10-HO4-Fu 33.05 85 135 13.22 34 054 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 129.92 19.40 -17.69 %

NV11-HO4-Fu 32 575 77 6175 13.03 31 047 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 127.22 19.00 -19.40 %

NV12-HO4-Fu 29 045 80.99 11 618 32 396 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 127.27 19.00 -19.37 %

NV13-HO4-Fu 49 8425 41.32 19 937 16 528 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 120.20 18.03 -23.85 %

NV14-HO4-Fu 54.18 36.09 21 672 14 436 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 119.76 17.98 -24.13 %

NV15-HO4-Fu 31.01 91 0375 12 404 36 415 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 140.24 20.88 -11.15 %

NV16-HO4-Fu 20 1425 79 1025 8 057 31 641 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 132.82 19.77 -15.85 %

NV17-HO4-Fu 33 765 45.11 13 506 18 044 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 125.46 18.73 -20.51 %

E-40

Variant Energy needs

(kWh/m2)

Energy use (kWh/m

2)

Energy produced

Energy supplied by

source

Primary energy

(kWh/m2.year)

Primary energy

reduction

Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m

2) (kWhep/m

2)

NV18-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 2925 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 123.23 18.43 -21.93 %

NV19-HO4-Fu 35 505 64 453 14 202 25 781 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.000 113 783 18 491 -27.91 %

NV20-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 2925 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.00 122.96 18.43 -22.10 %

NV21-HO4-Fu 13 2675 46 088 5 307 18 435 6 536 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.000 111 011 17 462 -29.06 %

NV22-HO4-Fu 33 765 45.11 13 506 18 044 3 896 15.13 17 289 8 912 0.00 125.46 18.73 -20.51 %

NV23-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 2925 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 18.92 0.00 133 237 20.45 -21.75 %

NV24-HO4-Fu 35 445 63 293 14 178 25 317 3 896 11 555 17 289 8 912 0.310 122 920 18 431 -21.12 %


E-41

III.1.4 GLOBAL COST CALCULATION – SUBCATEGORIES HO1L, HO2P, HO3FA, HO4FU

III.1.4.1 Macroeconomic Calculation HO1-Lisbon

The results of the sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal levels of performance on the discount

rate, energy and CO2 costs, and costs of the building solutions financial and macroeconomic

calculation for the subcategory HO1-L building, for the chiller/heat pump cooling system

(HO-S1) can be found in Table III. 34, and for the VRF air-conditioning system (HO-S2) in Table

III. 35.

Different scenarios were considered for the discount rate: 1.5 % and 3 %, and also for energy

price inflation – according to current trends – of 0 %, 1 % and 2 %. Regarding carbon costs, a

low-cost scenario was always assumed, given current trends that are closest to these values.

As these tables show, it can be seen that the scenario corresponding to the discount rate of

3 %, and an energy price inflation of 1 % corresponded to the values closest to the averages

resulting from all scenarios considered, and it was therefore assumed that adopting these

values would be sensible for the purpose of evaluating cost-optimal performance.

Table III. 34 - Subcategory HO1-L. Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S1)

Sensitivity analysis, HO1 – Lisbon Cooling Energy System = HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump)

Discount factor

Energy costs inflation

Initial Cost (€/m2)

Prim. Energy Consumption (KWhEP/m2)

Global cost (€/m2)

Macroeconomic Cost (€/m2)

Discount rate = 1.5%

Inflation, energy cost = 0%

161.24 137.86 384.60 398.40


161.24 137.86 402.96 416.77


161.24 137.86 423.55 437.35

Discount rate = 3%


161.24 137.86 392.04 405.84


161.24 137.86 410.40 424.20


161.24 137.86 430.98 444.78

E-42

Table III. 35 - Subcategory HO1-L: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S2)

Sensitivity analysis – HO1-L, Lisbon Cooling Energy System = HO-S2 (VRF)

Discount factor




Cost-optimal solution





125 394 186.40 392 527 405 104


125 394 186.40 409 248 421 825


124.88 187.24 427 967 440 493

Discount rate = 3%


125 394 186.40 399 962 412 539


125 394 186.40 416 683 429.26


124.88 187.24 435 402 447 928

III.1.4.2 Macroeconomic Calculation HO2-Porto



calculation for the subcategory HO2-P building, for the chiller/heat pump cooling system

(HO-S1) can be found in Table III. 36, and for the VRF air-conditioning system (HO-S2) in Table

III.37.







values would be sensible in order to evaluate cost-optimal performance.

E-43

Table III. 36 - Subcategory HO2-P: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S1)

Sensitivity analysis – HO2-P, Porto Cooling Energy System = HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump)

Discount factor








160.33 137.41 383 386 397 181


161 243 136 793 401 704 415 439


161 243 136 793 422 163 435 898

Discount rate = 3%


160.33 137.41 390 821 404 616


161 243 136 793 409 139 422 874


161 243 136 793 429 598 443 333

Table III.37 - Subcategory HO2-P: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S2)

Sensitivity analysis – HO2-P, Porto Cooling Energy System = HO-S2 (VRF)

Discount factor









187 239 124 828 392 907 405 464


187 239 124 828 409 584 422 141


187 239 124 828 428 276 440 833

Discount rate = 3%


187 239 124 828 400 342 412 899


187 239 124 828 417 019 429 576


187 239 124 828 435 711 448 268

E-44

III.1.4.3 Macroeconomic Calculation HO3-Faro



calculation for the subcategory HO2-P (sic) building, for the chiller/heat pump cooling system

(HO-S1) can be found in Table III.38 and for the VRF cooling system (HO-S2) in Table III.39.








Table III.38 - Subcategory HO3-Fa: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S1)

Sensitivity analysis – HO3-Fa – Faro Cooling Energy System = HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump)

Discount factor








161 243 138 601 385 401 399 252


161 243 138 601 403.84 417 691


161 243 138 601 424 508 438 359

Discount rate = 3%


161 243 138 601 392 836 406 687


161 243 138 601 411 275 425 126


161 243 138 601 431 943 445 794

Comment [MNSM(4]: Translator's Note: This should probably be HO3-Fa

E-45

Table III.39 - Subcategory HO3-Fa: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (HO-S2)

Sensitivity analysis – HO3-Fa – Faro Cooling Energy System = HO-S2 (VRF)

Discount factor









187 239 125 143 392 793 405 319


187 239 125 143 409 459 421 985


187 239 125 143 428 139 440 665

Discount rate = 3%


187 239 125 143 400 228 412 754


187 239 125 143 416 894 429.42


187 239 125 143 435 574 448.1

III.1.4.4 Macroeconomic Calculation HO4-Funchal



calculation for the subcategory HO2-P (sic) building, for the chiller/heat pump cooling system

(HO-S1) can be found in Table III.40 and for the VRF cooling system (HO-S2) in Table III.41.



low-cost scenario was always considered, given current trends that are closest to these values.





Comment [MNSM(5]: Translator's Note: This should probably be 'HO4-Fu'

E-46

Table III.40 - Subcategory HO4-Fu: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (H0-S1)

Sensitivity analysis, HO4-Fu – Funchal Cooling Energy System = HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump)

Discount factor








159 489 123 231 363 677 376 16


159 489 123 231 380 214 392 696


159 489 123 231 398 748 411.23

Discount rate = 3%


159 489 123 231 371 112 383 595


159 489 123 231 387 649 400 131


159 489 123 231 406 182 418 665

Table III.41 - Subcategory HO1-L: Sensitivity analysis of cost-optimal solutions (H0-S2)

Sensitivity analysis – HO4-Fu, Funchal Cooling Energy System = HO-S2 (VRF)

Discount factor









185 845 113 783 376 973 388 525


185 845 113 783 392 264 403 816


185 845 113 783 409 403 420 955

Discount rate = 3%


185 845 113 783 384 408 395.96


185 845 113 783 399 699 411 251


185 845 113 783 416 838 428.39

E-47

III.1.4.5 Global Costs of the Variants – Financial and Macroeconomic Analyses

Based on the methodological principles set out above, Error! Reference source not found.,

Table III.43, Table III.44, Table III.45 present the results concerning the global cost of the

solutions indicated in Table III.26, Table III.27, Table III.28 and Table III.29.

Table III.42 – Global cost, macroeconomic analysis: subcategory HO1-L.

Variant Initial

investment

cost (2014)

(EUR/m2)

Running costs

20 years

(maintenance +

replacement)

(EUR/m2)

Energy

costs

20 years

(EUR/m2)

Cost of

greenhouse gas

emissions 20

years

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

financial

analysis

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

macroeconomi

c analysis

(EUR/m2)

NV0-HO1-L 168 856 46 722 246 868 17 836 462 446 480 282

NV1-HO1-L 161 243 38 125 211 031 13 803 410 399 424 202

NV2-HO1-L 176 022 92 777 219 025 14 323 487 824 502 147

NV3-HO1-L 160 404 38 125 215 254 14 078 413 783 427 861

NV4-HO1-L 158 409 29 534 225 928 14 772 413 871 428 643

NV5-HO1-L 158 066 57 338 215 109 14 069 430 514 444 582

NV6-HO1-L 161 243 38 125 211 031 13 803 410 399 424 202

NV7-HO1-L 173.95 38 125 210 006 13 737 422 081 435 818

NV8-HO1-L 173 315 38 125 203 461 13 311 414 901 428 212

NV9-HO1-L 175 221 38 125 202 694 13 262 416.04 429 302

NV10-HO1-L 179 412 101 368 203 962 13 344 484 742 498 086

NV11-HO1-L 182 588 82 155 200 291 13 105 465 034 478 139

NV12-HO1-L 187 989 29 534 223 149 14 591 440 672 455 263

NV13-HO1-L 188 192 29 534 212 142 13 876 429 868 443 743

NV14-HO1-L 190 098 29 534 211 009 13 802 430 641 444 443

NV15-HO1-L 176 022 92 777 219 025 14 323 487 824 502 147

NV16-HO1-L 189 908 38 125 209 459 13 701 437 492 451 194

NV17-HO1-L 195 779 38 125 194 118 12 704 428 022 440 726

NV18-HO1-L 161 243 38 125 211 031 13 803 410 399 424 202

NV19-HO1-L 186.4 38 125 192 158 12 577 416 683 429.26

NV20-HO1-L 167 947 38 125 213 944 13 993 420 016 434 009

NV21-HO1-L 221 223 38 125 178 775 11 707 438 123 449 829

NV22-HO1-L 195 779 38 125 194 118 12 704 428 022 440 726

NV23-HO1-L 149 454 37 433 235 715 15 597 422 601 438 198

NV24-HO1-L 153 767 47 196 192 175 13 756 393 138 406 894

E-48

Table III.43 – Global cost, macroeconomic analysis: subcategory HO2-P.

Variant

Initial

investment

cost (2014)

(EUR/m2)

Running costs

20 years

(maintenance +

replacement)

(EUR/m2)

Energy costs

20 years

(EUR/m2)

Cost of

greenhouse gas

emissions 20

years

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

financial

analysis

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

macroecono

mic analysis

(EUR/m2)

NV0-HO2-P

(reference) 168 856 46 722 250 346 18 083 465 924 484 070

NV1-HO2-P 161 243 38 125 209 771 13 735 409 139 422 874

NV2-HO2-P 149 111 92 777 247 704 16 201 489 592 505 793

NV3-HO2-P 158 409 29 534 224 125 14 668 412 068 426 736

NV4-HO2-P 160 404 38 125 216 817 14 193 415 346 429 539

NV5-HO2-P 158 066 57 338 213 459 13 975 428 864 442 838

NV6-HO2-P 161 243 38 125 209 771 13 735 409 139 422 874

NV7-HO2-P 173 950 38 125 208 433 13 648 420 508 434 156

NV8-HO2-P 173 315 38 125 204 854 13 415 416 293 429 708

NV9-HO2-P 175 221 38 125 204 466 13 390 417 812 431 202

NV10-HO2-P 154 254 101 368 227 328 14 876 482 951 497 827

NV11-HO2-P 157 431 82 155 222 288 14 549 461 875 476 423

NV12-HO2-P 170 138 82 155 222 074 14 535 474 368 488 902

NV13-HO2-P 169 503 82 155 206 653 13 532 458 311 471 844

NV14-HO2-P 171 409 82 155 204 844 13 415 458 408 471 823

NV15-HO2-P 152 784 101 368 229 338 15 007 483 491 498 497

NV16-HO2-P 190 747 38 125 204 694 13 405 433 566 446 971

NV17-HO2-P 195 779 38 125 193 686 12 689 427 589 440 279

NV18-HO2-P 161 243 38 125 209 771 13 735 409 139 422 874

NV19-HO2-P 160 328 38 125 210 703 13 795 409 156 422 951

NV20-HO2-P 167 947 38 125 213 242 13 961 419 315 433 275

NV21-HO2-P 221 223 38 125 179 801 11 787 439 149 450 936

NV22-HO2-P 195 779 38 125 193 686 12 689 427 589 440 279

NV23-HO2-P 149 454 37 433 232 717 15 402 419 604 435 006

NV24-HO2-P 153 766 47 196 191 085 13 692 392 046 405 738

E-49

Table III.44 – Global cost, macroeconomic analysis: subcategory HO3-Fa.

Variant

Initial

investment

cost (2014)

(EUR/m2)

Running costs

20 years

(maintenance +

replacement)

(EUR/m2)

Energy costs

20 years

(EUR/m2)

Cost of

greenhouse gas

emissions 20

years

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

financial

analysis

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

macroecono

mic analysis

(EUR/m2)

NV0-HO3-Fa

(reference) 168 856 46 722 250 055 18 062 465 633 483 695

NV1-HO3-Fa 161 243 38 125 211 907 13 851 411 275 425 126

NV2-HO3-Fa 149 111 92 777 251 793 16 444 493 681 510 125

NV3-HO3-Fa 160 404 38 125 216 645 14 159 415 174 429 332

NV4-HO3-Fa 158 409 29 534 226 931 14 828 414 874 429 702

NV5-HO3-Fa 158 066 57 338 216 143 14 126 431 547 445 673

NV6-HO3-Fa 161 243 38 125 211 907 13 851 411 275 425 126

NV7-HO3-Fa 173 950 38 125 210 821 13 780 422 896 436 676

NV8-HO3-Fa 173 315 38 125 204 548 13 373 415 988 429 361

NV9-HO3-Fa 175 221 38 125 203 871 13 329 417 216 430 545

NV10-HO3-Fa 179 412 101 368 204 661 13 380 485 441 498 821

NV11-HO3-Fa 182 588 82 155 200 931 13 138 465 674 478 812

NV12-HO3-Fa 195 295 82 155 200 401 13 103 477 851 490 954

NV13-HO3-Fa 169 503 82 155 207 199 13 545 458 857 472 402

NV14-HO3-Fa 171 409 82 155 204 408 13 364 457 972 471 336

NV15-HO3-Fa 178 857 101 368 205 471 13 433 485 696 499 129

NV16-HO3-Fa 190 747 38 125 208 547 13 633 437 419 451 052

NV17-HO3-Fa 195 779 38 125 194 745 12 735 428 648 441 383

NV18-HO3-Fa 161 243 38 125 211 907 13 851 411 275 425 126

NV19-HO3-Fa 187 239 38 125 191 530 12 526 416 894 429 420

NV20-HO3-Fa 167 947 38 125 215 743 14 100 421 815 435 915

NV21-HO3-Fa 221 223 38 125 178 784 11 698 438 132 449 830

NV22-HO3-Fa 195 779 38 125 194 745 12 735 428 648 441 383

NV23-HO3-Fa 149 454 37 433 237 815 15 734 424 702 440 436

NV24-HO3-Fa 153 767 47 196 192 923 13 800 393 886 407 686

E-50

Table III.45 – Global cost, macroeconomic analysis: subcategory HO4-Fu.

Variant

Initial

investment

cost (2014)

(EUR/m2)

Running costs

20 years

(maintenance +

replacement)

(EUR/m2)

Energy costs

20 years

(EUR/m2)

Cost of

greenhouse gas

emissions 20

years

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

financial

analysis

(EUR/m2)

Calculated

Global Cost –

macroecono

mic analysis

(EUR/m2)

NV0-HO4-Fu

(reference) 168 856 46 722 225 057 16 284 440 635 456 919

NV1-HO4-Fu 159 489 38 125 190 035 12 482 387 649 400 131

NV2-HO4-Fu 149 111 92 777 215 782 14 156 457 670 471 826

NV3-HO4-Fu 157 151 57 338 198 897 13 058 413 386 426 445

NV4-HO4-Fu 156 655 29 534 204 652 13 432 390 841 404 273

NV5-HO4-Fu 156 312 57 338 193 217 12 689 406 867 419 556

NV6-HO4-Fu 149 111 92 777 215 782 14 156 457 670 471 826

NV7-HO4-Fu 172 196 38 125 189 497 12 447 399 818 412 265

NV8-HO4-Fu 171 561 38 125 184 829 12 144 394 515 406 659

NV9-HO4-Fu 173 467 38 125 184 581 12 128 396 173 408 300

NV10-HO4-Fu 152 500 101 368 200 164 13 141 454 033 467 173

NV11-HO4-Fu 155 677 82 155 196 071 12 875 433 903 446 777

NV12-HO4-Fu 168 384 82 155 196 158 12 880 446 697 459 578

NV13-HO4-Fu 167 749 82 155 185 445 12 184 435 349 447 533

NV14-HO4-Fu 169 655 82 155 184 780 12 141 436 590 448 730

NV15-HO4-Fu 149 111 92 777 215 782 14 156 457 670 471 826

NV16-HO4-Fu 187 074 29 534 204 556 13 426 421 164 434 590

NV17-HO4-Fu 192 105 29 534 193 415 12 702 415 054 427 756

NV18-HO4-Fu 149 111 92 777 215 782 14 156 457 670 471 826

NV19-HO4-Fu 185 845 38 125 175 729 11 552 399 699 411 251

NV20-HO4-Fu 167 032 38 125 189 620 12 455 394 777 407 232

NV21-HO4-Fu 221 223 38 125 171 532 11 279 430 88 442 159

NV22-HO4-Fu 192 105 29 534 193 415 12 702 415 054 427 756

NV23-HO4-Fu 147.7 37 433 209 046 13 864 394 178 408 042

NV24-HO4-Fu 153 763 47 196 173 229 12 452 374 188 386 640

E-51

III.1.5 COST-OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE

III.1.5.1 Subcategory HO1-Lisbon

This chapter presents the baseline study results and their respective cost-optimal levels. In the

sensitivity analysis, a macroeconomic analysis is adopted.

Figure III.7 and Figure III.8 present the results for subcategory HO1-L, for the HO-S1 and HO-S2

cooling systems respectively, with a discount rate of 3 %, a 1 % rate of energy cost inflation

and low carbon costs.

Figure III.7 – Cooling Results HO-S1, – HO1-L.

Key to figures III.7 and III.8:

Pacotes de Medidas (Chiller) – Lisboa Packages of Measures (Chiller) – Lisbon;

IEERef 173,6kWh/m2.a EERRef 173.6kWh/m2.y

Custo Macro-Económico [€/m2] Macroeconomic Cost [€/m2]

Consumo Nominal [kWh/m2.ano] Nominal Consumption [kWh/m2.year]

E-52

Figure III.8 – Cooling Results HO-S2, – HO1-L.

Table III.46 sets out the cost-optimal solutions of the reference building with VRF and

Chiller/heat pump systems.

Table III.46 – Lisbon cost-optimal solutions (HO1-L) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).

HVAC Mechanical Ventilation

Floor Wall

Roof (insul. thick. (insul. thick.

Uw gv Shading Lighting LCC

(EUR/m2)

Thickn. (kWhep/m

2)

% relative

to regulat.

mins

HO-S0 Without

heat recovery

P02 ET02 C02 W04 0.15 Interior Fluor. 480.28 173.59 -

HO-S1 Chiller

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C03 (0.10 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 424.20 137.86 -21 %

HO-S2 VRF

Without heat

recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C02 (0.07 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 429 260 125.39 -28 %

HO-S2 VRF

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C02 (0.07 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 429 263 124.88 -28 %

Analysis of the cost-optimal solutions reveals that in terms of the building envelope’s thermal

quality, the cost-optimal solutions appear to be the lower level of thermal insulation analysed

(2 cm) in the floor in contact with the garage (lower level of insulation analysed), in the walls

with no thermal insulation and in the glazed spans (2.7 W/m2.K), while on the roof, the

thermal insulation differs in the HO-S1 system solution (Uroof,opt = 0.3 W/m2.K) from the HO-S2

E-53

system solution (Uroof,opt= 0,5 W/m2.K) and the glazed spans with colourless shading applied

from the outside.

The cost-optimal solution for the HO-S1 type system (Chiller/heat pump) shows a difference of

-21 % compared with the solution imposed by the regulatory minimums, while the cost-

optimal solution for the HO-S2 system (VRF) shows a difference of -28 % compared with the

same reference solution.

The graphs shown in the following figures represent the results obtained for the respective

groups of solutions:

Figure III.9 – Fluorescent lighting and ventilation with no heat recovery, i.e. the HO-S1

system, which corresponds to the cost-optimal solution for Lisbon;

Figure III.10 – LED lighting and ventilation with heat recovery, i.e. the HO-S1 system,

which corresponds to the cost-optimal solution for Lisbon.

Figure III.9 – Subcategory HO1-L: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation with no heat recovery.


Lisboa - Ventilaçao Sem Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao Fluorescente

Lisbon - Ventilation Without Heat Recovery, Fluorescent Lighting

EER ref

E-54

Lisboa - Ventilaçao Com Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao LED

Lisbon - Ventilation With Heat Recovery, LED Lighting

IEERef 173,6kWh/m2.a EERRef 173.6kWh/m2.y

Custo Global Macro-Económico [€/m2] Global Macroeconomic Cost [€/m2]

Consumo Nominal pacotes de soluçoes [kWh/m2.ano]

Nominal Consumption packages of solutions [kWh/m2.year]

Figure III.10 – Subcategory HO1-L: LED lighting, Ventilation with heat recovery.

III.1.5.1.1 Photovoltaic – HO1 – L.

Chapter III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic, explains that the integration of photovoltaic systems on

the roof, in absolute terms leads, for the Lisbon climatic zone, to an EER improvement of 0.485

kWh/m2.year. This means reductions of around 0.88 % of primary energy.

III.1.5.1.2 Reference EER – HO1 – L

The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]:

EERRef = 173.60 kWep/m2.year

E-55

III.1.5.2 Results subcategory HO2–P (Porto)



Figure III.11 and Figure III.12 present the results for subcategory HO2-P, for the HO-S1 and HO-

S2 cooling systems respectively, with a discount rate of 3 %, a 1 % rate of energy cost inflation


Figure III.11 – Cooling Results HO-S1 (Chiller with heat pump) – HO2-P.


Pacotes de Medidas (Chiller) – Porto Packages of Measures (Chiller) – Porto

Pacotes de Medidas (VRF) – Porto Packages of Measures (VRF) – Porto

IEERef 176.12 EERRef 176.12




E-56

Figure III.12 – Cooling Results HO-S2 (VRF) – HO2-P.

Error! Reference source not found. systematises the cost-optimal solutions of the reference

building with HO-S2 (VRF) and HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump) systems.

Table III.47 – Porto cost-optimal solutions (HO2-P) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).


Floor Wall



(EUR/m2)

Thick. (kWhep/m

2)

% relative

to regulat.

mins

HO-S0 Without

heat recovery


HO-S1 Chiller

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C03 (0.10 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 422.87 136.79 -22 %

HO-S2 VRF

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C02 (0.07 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 422.95 124.83 -29 %

Analysing the cost-optimal solutions, it can be seen that in terms of the building envelope’s

thermal quality, the cost-optimal solutions appear to be the lower level of thermal insulation

analysed (2 cm) in the floor in contact with the garage (lower level of insulation analysed), in

the walls with no thermal insulation and in the glazed spans (2.7 W/m2.K), while on the roof,

the thermal insulation differs in the HO-S1 system solution (Uroof,opt = 0.3 W/m2.K) from the HO-

S2 system solution (Uroof,opt= 0,5 W/m2.K) and the glazed spans with colourless shading applied

from the outside.

E-57











Figure III.13 – Subcategory HO2-P: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation with no

heat recovery


Porto - Ventilaçao Sem Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao Fluorescente

Porto - Ventilation Without Heat Recovery, Fluorescent Lighting

Lisboa - Ventilaçao Com Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao LED

Lisbon - Ventilation With Heat Recovery, LED Lighting

IEERef 176.12kWh/m2.a EERRef 176.12kWh/m2.y




E-58

Figure III.14 – Subcategory HO2-P: LED lighting, Ventilation with heat recovery.

III.1.5.2.1 Photovoltaic – Porto (HO2)

Chapter III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic explains that the integration of photovoltaic systems on the

roof, in absolute terms leads, for the Lisbon climatic zone, to an EER improvement of 0.442


III.1.5.2.2 Reference EER – HO2-P

The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]


E-59

III.1.5.3 Subcategory HO3–Fa (Faro) results



Figure III.15 and Figure III.16 present the results for subcategory HO3-Fa, for the HO-S1 and

HO-S2 cooling systems respectively, with a discount rate of 3 %, a 1 % rate of energy cost

inflation and low carbon costs.

Figure III.15 – Cooling Results HO-S1 (Chiller with heat pump) – HO3-Fa.

Key to figures III.15 and III.16

Pacotes de Medidas (Chiller) – Faro Packages of Measures (Chiller) – Faro

Pacotes de Medidas (VRF) – Faro Packages of Measures (VRF) – Faro





E-60

Figure III.16 – Cooling Results HO-S2 (VRF) – HO3-Fa.


building with HO-S2 (VRF) and HO-S1 (Chiller/heat pump) systems.

Table III.48 – Faro cost-optimal solutions (HO3-Fa) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).


Floor Wall



(EUR/m2)

Thick. (kWhep/m

2)

% relative

to regulat.

mins

HO-S0 Without

heat recovery


HO-S1 Chiller

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C03 (0.10 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 425.13 138.60 -21 %

HO-S2 VRF

With heat recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C02 (0.07 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 429.42 125.14 -29 %

Analysing the cost-optimal solutions, it can be seen that in terms of the building envelope’s

thermal quality, the cost-optimal solutions appear to be the lower level of thermal insulation

analysed (2 cm) in the floor in contact with the garage (lower level of insulation analysed), in

the walls with no thermal insulation and in the glazed spans (2.7 W/m2.K), while on the roof,

the thermal insulation differs in the HO-S1 system solution (Uroof,opt = 0.3 W/m2.K) from the HO-

E-61

S2 system solution (Uroof,opt= 0,5 W/m2.K) and the glazed spans with colourless shading applied

from the outside.







Figure III.17 – Fluorescent lighting and ventilation with no heat recovery, i.e. the HO-

S1 system, which corresponds to the cost-optimal solution for Lisbon;



Figure III.17 – Subcategory HO3-Fa: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation

with no heat recovery


Faro - Ventilaçao Sem Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao Fluorescente

Faro - Ventilation Without Heat Recovery, Fluorescent Lighting

Faro - Ventilaçao Com Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao LED

Faro - Ventilation With Heat Recovery, LED Lighting





E-62

Figure III.18 – Subcategory HO3-Fa: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation

with no heat recovery

III.1.5.3.1 Photovoltaic – Faro (HO3-Fa)

Chapter III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic, explains that the integration of photovoltaic systems on

the roof, in absolute terms leads, for the Lisbon climatic zone, to an EER improvement of 0.52


III.1.5.3.2 Reference EER – HO3-Fa

The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]


E-63

III.1.5.1 Subcategory HO4-Funchal



Figure III.19 and Figure III.20 present the results for subcategory HO1-L, for the HO-S1 and HO-

S2 cooling systems respectively, with a discount rate of 3 %, a 1 % rate of energy cost inflation


Figure III.19 – Cooling Results HO-S1, – HO4-Fu.

Key to figures III.19 and III.20

Pacotes de Medidas (Chiller) – Funchal Packages of Measures (Chiller) – Funchal

Pacotes de Medidas (VRF) – Funchal Packages of Measures (VRF) – Funchal





E-64

Figure III.20 – Cooling Results HO-S2, – HO4-Fu.


building with VRF and Chiller/heat pump systems.

Table III.49 – Funchal cost-optimal solutions (HO4-Fu) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).


Floor Wall



(EUR/m2)

Thick. (kWhep/m

2)

% relative

to regulat.

mins

HO-S0 Without

heat recovery

P02 FE02 C02 W04 0.15 Interior Fluor. 456.19 157.84 -

HO-S1 Chiller

Without heat

recovery

P01 (0.02)

FE01 (0.00)

C02 (0.05 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 400.13 123.23 -22 %

HO-S2 VRF

Without heat

recovery

P01 (0.02)

ET01 (0.00)

C01 (0.05 m)

W02 2.7

0.75 Exterior LED 411.25 113.78 -28 %

Analysing the cost-optimal solutions, it can be seen that in terms of the thermal quality of the

building envelope, the cost-optimal solutions appear to be the lower level of thermal

insulation analysed (2 cm) in the floor in contact with the garage (lower level of insulation

analysed), in the walls with no thermal insulation and in the glazed spans (2.7 W/m2.K), while

on the roof, the thermal insulation differs in the HO-S1 system solution (Uroof,opt = 0.5 W/m2.K)

from the HO-S2 system solution (Uroof,opt= 0.5 W/m2.K), the latter corresponding to the lowest

E-65

cost solution. For the glazed spans, the cost-optimal solution is colourless glazing with shading

applied from the outside.











Figure III.21 – Subcategory HO4-Fu: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation with no heat recovery

(HO-S1 system – Chiller/ Heat pump).


Funchal - Ventilaçao Sem Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao Fluorescente

Funchal - Ventilation Without Heat Recovery, Fluorescent Lighting

Funchal - Ventilaçao Com Recup. Calor, Iluminaçao LED

Funchal - Ventilation With Heat Recovery, LED Lighting





E-66

Figure III.22 – Subcategory HO4-Fu: LED lighting, Ventilation with heat recovery (HO-S1 system

– Chiller/ Heat pump).

III.1.5.4.1 Photovoltaic – HO4 – Fu.

Chapter III.1.2.6 Solar Photovoltaic explains that the integration of photovoltaic systems on the

roof, in absolute terms leads, for the Lisbon climatic zone, to an EER improvement of 0.31


III.1.5.4.2 Reference EER – HO4 – Fu

The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]:


E-67

III.1.5.5 Considerations

For the four climates analysed, Lisbon (HO1-L), Porto (HO2-P), Faro (HO3-Fa) and Funchal

(HO4-Fu), the general findings were found to be similar for the same new hotel building,

varying only in quantitative terms in the cases of Lisbon, Porto and Faro. There are a few more

substantial differences in the case of Funchal, associated with the fact that it is a climate

where summer takes on particular significance.

The results show that the main needs are cooling, lighting and ventilation. In terms of building

solutions, the need for thermal insulation on the external roof is evident, except in the case of

Funchal, where the roof requires lower insulation values. This also varies depending on the

type of system used.

It should be noted that the differences in the global and macroeconomic cost of the solutions

found to be optimal are sometimes very small. This is demonstrated in Table III.46 for the VRF

solutions, with or without heat recovery.

The best glazed span solution, for all the opaque building envelope variants and thermal

insulation levels analysed, is glazing with a g-value of 0.75 and external solar protection

(𝑔𝑇 = 0.07) activated whenever incoming solar radiation on the façade is greater than

300 W/m2, as prescribed in the legislation. The model adopted for the reference building and

the variants considered do not focus on conducting sensitivity studies on the ratio between

the span area and the façade area, nor the use of lighting technology calculation programs

aimed at reducing artificial light by making use of natural light. This study established the

minimum solutions for energy consumption and their respective costs.

III.1.6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN COST-OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE LEVELS

AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

The comparative analysis between cost-optimal performance levels and the prevailing

requirements under Decree-Law No 118/2013 of 20 August 2013 determining the difference

(%) between the two levels is established according to:

% Difference = (cost-optimal performance level [kWh/m2.y] – current minimum performance requirements [kWh/m2.y]) / cost-optimal performance level [kWh/m2.y]) x 100%

Table III.50 – Comparative table for new hotel buildings.

Optimal

Solutions

Cost-optimal performance [kWh/m

2.y]

Current minimum performance requirements [kWh/m

2.y])

Difference

(%)

E-68

HO1-L / HO– S1 137.86 173.60 -20.58

HO2-P / HO – S1 136.79 176.12 -22.33

HO3-Fa / HO – S1 138.60 175.91 -21.21

HO4-Fu / HO – S1 123.23 157.84 -21.93

HO1-L / HO– S2 125.39 173.60 -27.77

HO2-P / HO – S2 124.83 176.12 -29.12

HO3-Fa / HO – S2 125.14 175.81 -28.86

HO4-Fu / HO – S2 113.78 157.84 -27.91

Justification for the difference:

The reference hotel building was constructed based on averages obtained from Energy Certificates found on the ADENE database. Based on these databases, it was also found to be the most frequent hotel typology for four-star hotels.

It was therefore assumed that in four-star hotels ventilation is always mechanical. Therefore, only different alternatives between mechanical ventilation with heat recovery or without heat recovery were studied.

In the different solutions for systems with HO-S1, a Chiller-type system with heat pump for heating (COP = 3.24; EER=2.94); and HO-S2, a Variable Refrigerant Flow/VRF system (COP = 4.31; EER= 4.36), deviations were found, between the cost-optimal solutions and the solution based on the regulatory limit, of around -25 %. The differences observed can be justified by the fact that:

as regards the glazed spans, the cost-optimal solution corresponds to glazing with a g-value of 0.75, with external solar protection, i.e. , 𝑔𝑇 equal to 0.07, while the g-values of the glazed spans accepted for the reference building, for the cities of Lisbon and Faro (V3) are 0.15, and for the cities of Porto and Funchal (V2), they are equal to 0.20.

in terms of the opaque building envelope, the cost-optimal solutions present different results scenarios:

o the roof has a level of thermal insulation greater than the reference solution, in the cases of Lisbon, Porto and Faro – in this evaluation, a medium-colour roof was considered. For Funchal, the roof is at the reference solution level, even with no insulation requirements, when an HO-S2 type system is used. Although not the cost-optimal solution, the solution with the greatest energy performance is always that with the highest level of insulation in the roof;

o As regards the walls and floor, the level of thermal insulation of the cost-optimal solutions is always lower than that of the reference solutions used to calculate the reference EER and a light-coloured wall – the cost-optimal solutions appear to be, in all cases, construction solutions without insulation. Although not the cost-optimal solution, the solution with the greatest energy performance is always that with the highest level of insulation in the wall;

o With regards to the floor, it can be seen that cost-optimal levels always point to solutions with no insulation. Moreover, the introduction of insulation into the floor also translates into inferior energy performance;

E-69

as regards the cooling systems, the cost-optimal solutions show a COP and EER higher than the reference values (COP=3.0, EER=2.9) for all four cities. The cost-optimal solutions appear to be Chiller-type systems with a heat pump (HO-S1), although solutions with VRF (HO-S2) offer, in most cases, very similar performance levels.

The type of ventilation should be heat recovery for the following cases: HO-S1 Lisbon, HO2-Porto and HO3-Faro, in the case of the HO-S1 system and for the HO-S2 system, but in the case of the HO-S2 system in Lisbon, the difference in cost is marginal, as evidenced in Table III.46

In the case of Funchal, the type of ventilation system used must always be without heat recovery, due to the reduced impact of heating needs in this kind of climate.

As can be seen in Table III. 51, the reference lighting power densities (LPD) in the EER

calculation are much higher than those currently available for hotel building solutions, where

the desired levels of lighting can be satisfied with much lower LPDs.

Table III. 51 – Lighting Power Density

Thermal Zones Type of lighting

LPD – EERPr

(W/m2) LPD – EERRef

(W/m2)

Room zones Fluorescent 7.2

8.8 LED 5.6

Circulation zones Fluorescent 2.8

3.8 LED 1.6

Ground floor Fluorescent 9.8

11.48 LED 7.6

Plan to reduce non-justifiable gaps

In terms of revising how the reference solutions to be considered when determining the

reference EER for the forecasting methods are defined, the following provisions are proposed

for Hotel Buildings:

The obligation to adopt ventilation systems with heat recovery for mainland climates, but not

in the case of the autonomous region climates of the Azores and Madeira, since the results

show that the cost-optimal solution for this scenario is the solution offering ventilation with no

heat recovery. This is on account of the type of climate, as cooling needs are of greater

importance than in the mainland territory scenarios analysed.

E-70

Table III. 52 shows the new EERRef values for the use of ventilation systems with heat recovery

being mandatory.

Table III. 52 – Proposal for improved use of heat recovery

EERRef with current values

[kWh/(m2.year)]

EERRef with mandatory heat recovery

[kWh/(m2.year)/%]

HO-Lisbon 173.60 171.14 / -1.42

HO-Porto 176.12 170.98 / -2.91

HO-Faro 175.91 173.18 / -1.55

Lighting solutions that require greater efficiency in artificial lighting Table III. 53 shows the

new maximum values for lighting power density (lpd/m2.100lux) and Table III. 54 shows the

results obtained for the reference EER of the scenarios studied, using these same values;

Table III. 53 – Proposal for improving the Artificial Lighting parameters

Values used in the simulations

Applicable Regulatory Values (LPD=W/m2/100Lux)

EERRef with current values (W/m2)

EERRef with proposed

values (W/m2)

Highest performing

solution (LED)

Current New proposed

values

Rooms zone 8.8 6.5 5.6 3.8 2.8

Circulation zones

3.07 2.26 1.6 3.8 2.8

Ground Floor 11.48 8.8 7.6 3.4 2.6

Table III. 54 – Evaluation of new parameters proposed for Artificial Lighting

EERRef with current values

[kWh/(m2.year)]

EERRef with proposed values

[kWh/(m2.year)/%]

Highest performing solution (LED)

[kWh/(m2.year)/%]

HO-Lisbon 173.60 161.73 / -6.83 156.46 / -9.80

HO-Porto 176.12 164.67 / -6.49 159.57 / -9.39

E-71

HO-Faro 175.91 163.97 / -6.78 158.67 / -9.78

HO-Funchal 157.84 145.96 / 7.52 140.71 / -10.85

Table III. 55 shows the new EERRef values for the scenario of the two proposed measures for

altering the regulations being implemented in Hotel Buildings. It also shows the new

percentages of the differences to the construction configurations of cost-optimal levels

resulting from the construction solutions for the new reference EERs.

Table III. 55 – Verifying compliance with Article 5 of Directive 2010/31/EU (EPBD recast), considering the adoption of the proposed new measures.

EERRef with

current values kWh/(m2.year)

EERRef with proposed

amendments kWh/(m2.year)

EERPrv Cost-optimal solution

kWh/(m2.year)

Difference between cost-optimal EERpre and new EERRef (%)

HO-Lisbon 173.60 158.08 137.86 -12.79

HO-Porto 176.12 158.31 136.79 -13.59 %

HO-Faro 175.91 160.02 138.60 -13.39

HO-Funchal(a) 157.84 145.96 123.23 -15.57 % (a) In the case of Funchal, only one alternative measure was evaluated, because ventilation

without heat recovery did not prove to be the cost-optimal solution, or the one with the best performance.

According to the results, a reduction in minimum requirements for wall and floor insulation

could be considered, provided situations that may damage the quality of the construction, due

to condensation occurring within these buildings elements, are safeguarded against.

According to the results, it can be seen that the option with the most stringent requirements

for roofing may be pertinent.

E-72

REFERENCES

[1]- Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (recast)

[2] – Commission Delegated Commission (EU) No 244/2012 of 16 January 2012 supplementing Directive 2010/31/EU

[3] – Decree-Law No 118/2013 of 20 August 2013, as amended by Decree-Law No 194/2015 of 14 September 2015

[4] – ENERGY PLUS dynamic simulation program; url: https://energyplus.net

[5] - Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-D/2013 of 2 December 2013, as amended following Ministerial Implementing Order 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016.

[6] Decision (excerpt) No 15793-D/2013 ‘Publication of useful energy and primary energy conversion factors to be used to determine annual nominal primary energy demand.’

[7] - EN 15 459: 2006, Energy Efficiency for Buildings — Standard economic evaluation procedure for energy systems in buildings

[8] - ADENE Energy Certification System. http://www.adene.pt/sce

[9] - Decision (excerpt) No 15793-F/2013 of 3 December 2013 ‘Publication of the parameters for climatic zoning and respective data’.

[10] – Decree-Law No 79/2006 of 4 April 2006, Regulation on Cooling Systems in Buildings (RSECE)

[11]– Pina dos Santos, C., Matias, L., Coeficientes de Transmissão Térmica de Elementos da Envolvente dos edifícios, ICT Informação técnica, edifícios –ITE 50, LNEC (2006) [Heat Transfer Coefficients of Building Envelope Elements, ICT Technical Information, buildings].

[12] - Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-K/2013 of 2 December.

[13] - Pinto, A. - Estudo sobre Cálculo dos Níveis Ótimos de Rentabilidade dos Requisitos Mínimos de Desempenho Energético dos Edifícios e Componentes de Edifícios [Study on the calculation of cost-optimal levels of minimum energy performance requirements of buildings and building elements]. Contribuições para o estudo dos edifícios de escritórios: Construção Nova [Contributions to the study of office buildings: New-Builds]. Lisbon: LNEC, 2014. REPORT 473/2014 – DED/NAICI.

[14] – Ramalho.A – Iluminação dos Escritórios: método do fluxo luminoso [Lighting office buildings: luminous flux method].

[15] – Ricardo Aguiar, Contribuição para o desenho de medidas de melhoria de edifícios de serviços no contexto do Sistema de Certificação de Edifícios [Contribution to the design of measures to improve service buildings in the context of the Building Certification System], LNEG, 18 December 2014

[16] - Brandão de Vasconcelos, A. B. - Construção energeticamente sustentável [Energy-sustainable

construction]. Metodologia de apoio à decisão em intervenções de reabilitação de edifícios [Methodology supporting decision-making in building renovation works]. Lisbon, IST/LNEC, December 2014. Provisional version of doctoral thesis underway at LNEC (National Laboratory for Civil Engineering) under the IST/LNEC agreement.

https://energyplus.net/

http://www.adene.pt/sce

E-73

ANNEXES

E-75

ANNEX E-1 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING SOLUTIONS

E-76

NEW HOTEL BUILDINGS

In conducting this study, the building solutions described below were adopted. The

characteristics of the glazed spans can be found in Table III.4. The thermophysical properties of

the materials are based on ITE 50 data. Light-coloured external surfaces are assumed.

Ventilated façade

Table E-1.1 – Ventilated façades, FV01

Ventilated Façade - FV01 dj Rj

(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)

Ceramic tiling and heavily ventilated vent - Rar = 0 m

2.ºC/W

External surface thermal resistance, Ser= Isr - - 0.13

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05

Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir

0.13

Total resistance Rt (m2.K/W) 0.83

Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2.ºC) 1.2




Highly ventilated vents - Rar = 0 m2 ° C / W 0.00

External surface thermal resistance, Ser = Isr 0.13

Mineral wool thermal insulation (35-100 kg/m3) 0.025 0.040 0.63

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13

Total resistance Rt 1.45

Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.7




Highly ventilated vents - Rar = 0 m2 ° C / W 0.00

External surface thermal resistance, Ser = Isr 0.13

Mineral wool thermal insulation (35-100 kg/m3) 0.070 0.040 1.75

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13


Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2.ºC) 0.4

E-77

Aluminium and glass curtain façade

Table E-1.4 – Ventilated façades, FC01

– Curtain façade -FC01 dj Rj


Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04

Glazing 0.008 1.000 0.01

Air space with 20 cm 0.18

Mineral wool (35-100 kg/m3) 0.000 0.040 0.00

Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.01 0.430 0.05


0.13



Table E-1.5 – Ventilated façades, FC02

Curtain façade - FC02 dj Rj



Glazing 0.008 1.000 0.01


Mineral wool (35-100 kg/m3) 0.030 0.040 0.75

Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13



Table E-1.6 – Curtain façades, FC03

Curtain façade - FC03 dj Rj



Glazing 0.008 1.000 0.01


Mineral wool (35-100 kg/m3) 0.070 0.040 1.75

Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13



E-78

ETICS

Table E-1.7 – ETICS façades, ET01

ETICS - ET01 dj Rj



Rendering 0.01 1 300 0.01

Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.000 0.040

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05

Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04


Heat transfer coefficient, U

(W/m2.ºC) 1.3

Table E-1.8 – ETICS façades, ET02

ETICS - ET02 dj Rj



Rendering 0.010 1 300 0.01

Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.030 0.040 0.75

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




(W/m2.ºC) 0.7

Table E-1. 9 – ETICS façades, ET03

ETICS – ET03 dj Rj



Rendering 0.010 1 300 0.01


Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




(W/m2.ºC) 0.4

E-79

DOUBLE BRICK WALL

Table E-1. 10 – Double wall façades, PD01

Double wall - PD01 dj Rj



Rendering 0.015 1 300 0.01

Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Air vent (25 mm to 300 mm) 0.18

Mineral wool (35-100 kg/m3) can be EPS 0.000 0.040 0.00

Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13







Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27



Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13







Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27



Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


0.13



E-80

WALL OF VOLCANIC SLAG CONCRETE BLOCKS

Table E-1.13 - Façades of Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks, FE01

Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks, FE01 dj Rj



Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02

Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.000 0.040

Volcanic Slag Concrete Block 0.300 0.45

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05



(W/m

2.ºC) 1.5


Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks – FE02 dj Rj



Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02



Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05



(W/m

2.ºC) 0.7


Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks – FE03 dj Rj



Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02



Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05



(W/m

2.ºC) 0.4

E-81

Horizontal roof - insulation from outside with false ceiling

Table E-1. 16 – Roof with false ceiling, C01

Roof - C01 dj Rj



Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03

Thermal insulation (XPS), self-protected slabs (integrated mechanical protection)

0.020 0.037 0.54

Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.14 0.04

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08

Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2.0 0.08

Air vent 0.300 0.16

Plasterboard (750- 1000 kg/m3) 0.012 0.25 0.05

Upward surface internal thermal resistance, Sir 0.10




Roof - C02 dj Rj





0.050 0.037 1.35

Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.14 0.04

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08


Air vent 0.300 0.16



Total resistance Rt 1 912


E-82


Roof - C03 dj Rj





0.100 0.037 2.70

Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.14 0.04

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08


Air vent 0.300 0.16





Floor over garage

Table E-1.19 – Floor over garage with raised floor, P01

Floor – PO1 dj Rj


Surface thermal resistance, Ser=Sir 0.17

Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08

Floor screed materials ? 0.030 1 300 0.01

Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.020 0.037 0.54

Laying screed 0.050 1 300 0.04

Glazed ceramic/stoneware (2 300 kg/m3) 0.015 1 300 0.01

Downward surface internal thermal resistance, Sir

0.17


Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 1.1


Floor – P02 dj Rj







Downward surface internal thermal resistance, Sir 0.17



E-83


Floor – P03 dj Rj








0.17



Intermediate Floor Flooring with Air Vent

Table E-1.22 – Intermediate flooring

Intermediate flooring dj

(m) (W/m.ºC)

PVC 0.003 0.17

Particle board and tiling of raised floor 0.038 0.17

Non-ventilated air vent (0.16 m2ºC/W) 0.200

Floor screed materials 0.050 0.25

Concrete 0.150 2.00

Non-ventilated air vent (0.16 m2ºC/W) 0.300

Plasterboard 0.012 0.25


E-84

EXISTING HOTELS

The building solutions used to study existing offices are described below. The thermophysical

properties of the materials are based on ITE 50 data. Light-coloured external surfaces are

assumed.

Single Wall - No Thermal Insulation

Table E-1.23 – Single Wall – PS

Single Wall – PS dj Rj



Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05

Internal surface thermal resistance, siR 0.13



(W/m2.ºC) 1.3

Single Wall - External Thermal Insulation

Table E-1.24 – Single Wall, PS-ES 01

Single wall – PS-IE 01 dj Rj



Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02


Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




(W/m2.ºC) 0.7

Table E-1.25 – Single Wall, PS-ES 02

Single wall – PS-IE 02 dj Rj



Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02


Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52

Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05



E-85


(W/m2.ºC) 0.4

Single Wall - Internal Thermal Insulation

Table E-1.26 – Single Wall – PS

Single wall – PS-II 01 dj Rj



Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52


Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




(W/m2.ºC) 0.7

Table E-1.27 – Single Wall, PS-II 02

Single wall – PS-II 02 dj Rj



Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02

Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52


Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




(W/m2.ºC) 0.4

E-86

Horizontal roof with no Thermal Insulation

Table E-1.28 - Horizontal roof, COB

Roof – COB dj Rj




Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08


Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05

Upward surface internal thermal resistance, SiR 0.10



Table E-1.29 – Horizontal roof External Thermal Insulation

Roof – COB-IE 02 dj Rj





Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08


Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




Table E-1.30 – Horizontal roof External Thermal Insulation

Roof – COB-IE 03 dj Rj





Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01

Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08


Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05




E-87

Floor Ground Floor No Thermal Insulation

Table E-1.31 – Flooring ground floor, PAV

Floor – PAV dj Rj


Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04




Downward surface internal thermal resistance, Sir 0.17



Ground Floor Flooring Internal Thermal Insulation Table E-1.32 – Flooring ground floor, P01

Floor – P01 dj Rj








0.17



Table E-1. 33 – Flooring ground floor, P02

Floor – P02 dj Rj








0.17



E-88

Intermediate Floor Flooring without Air Vent

Table E-1. 34 – Intermediate floor flooring

Intermediate flooring dj

(m) (W/m.ºC)

Floor tile 0.015 1.30

Laying screed 0.05 1.30

Reinforced concrete 0.200

Floor screed materials 0.050 0.25

Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000

Stucco 0.02 0.430

Building solutions for reference EER

To simulate building solutions whose heat transfer coefficient values correspond to the values

listed in

Table E-1.35, the solutions described in Table E-1.36, Table E-1.37, Table E-1.38 and Table E-

1.39 were established.

Table E-1.35– Reference surface heat transfer coefficients of opaque elements and glazed spans for commercial and service buildings, Uref [W/(m

2.ºC)] contained in Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-D/2013, as amended by

Ministerial Implementing Order No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016, Table I.09 [5].

Climatic zone

Mainland Portugal

Current zone of the building envelope I1 I2 I3

Exterior or interior vertical opaque elements 0.70 0.60 0.50

Exterior or interior horizontal opaque elements 0.50 0.45 0.40

Exterior glazed spans (windows and doors) 4.30 3.30 3.30

Autonomous Regions

Current zone of the building envelope I1 I2 I3

Exterior or interior vertical opaque elements 1.40 0.90 0.50

Exterior or interior horizontal opaque elements 0.80 0.60 0.40

E-89

Exterior glazed spans (windows and doors) 4.30 3.30 3.30

Table E-1.36 - Walls for Reference Existing Offices building.

Wall (PSref) d λ R



Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05

Brick 0.22 0.220 0.52


Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02



(W/m

2.ºC) 0.7

Table E-1.37 - Roof for Reference Existing Offices building

Roof (COBref) d λ R



Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05


Shape layer 0.100 1 300 0.08

Sealing (asphalt) 0.005 0.700 0.01


Porous concrete 0.035 1 300 0.03



(W/m2.ºC) 0.5

Table E-1.38 - Ground floor flooring for Reference Existing Office building

Floor (PAVref) d λ R



Floor tile 0.015 1 300 0.01

Laying surface 0.050 1 300 0.04





(W/m2.ºC) 0.5

Table E-1.39 – g-value of the reference glazed spans for commercial and services buildings, contained in Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-D/2013, Table I.10 [5].

E-90

ANNEX E-2 VENTILATION SYSTEM

Climatic zone V1 V2 V3

g-value of the glazing (without shading devices) 0.25 0.20 0.15

E-91

NEW HOTELS

General aspects

The reference hotel building is made up of one floor for reception and shared services

(reception, lounge areas, dining hall, kitchen, laundry room etc.), and five floors for bedrooms

and a non-living space used as a garage and for storage. The bedrooms floor is made up of the

bedroom zones, with horizontal circulation leading to the various bedrooms and structures for

stairwells (which in case of fire should remain enclosed), which also include the lifts, both

(stairs and lifts) making up the building’s vertical connection, as shown in the layout in Figure

E-2.1 and specifications in Table E-2.1. It is assumed that the reference hotel buildings always

have a mechanical ventilation system, never considering the possibility that the ventilation

needed for air removal is carried out using natural means only.

Figure E-2.1 – Floor type (HO1L – HO2L – HO3Fa – HO4Fu) Key: Cf. Figure III. 23

Table E-2.1 - areas of the thermal zones on the bedrooms floors

South Rooms

North Rooms

East Rooms

West Rooms

Horizontal circulation

Stairwells Total/floor

Area (m2) 306.72 103.68 233.28 105.12 175.72 68.76 993.28

E-92

Minimum fresh air flow requirements

‘Rooms Zone’

In the bedrooms, it is assumed that the occupants are undertaking activities such as sleeping,

and thus a minimum air flow of 16 m3/h is necessary. In the bedrooms, there is no

requirement for fresh air flow to dissipate the building’s pollution load.

In the sanitary facilities, it is necessary to ensure extraction of a flow rate of 45 m3/h, if there is

continuous extraction, or of 90 m2/h if the extraction is intermittent.

In the bedrooms, it is assumed that there is continuous extraction of 45 m3/h from the sanitary

facilities. Mechanical air supply or extraction via the ceiling is assumed, with a ventilation

efficiency of 0.80.

Table E-2.2 – Minimum flow of fresh air in the rooms zone

South North East West Total/floor Total

Nbr of rooms

8 4 6 4 22 110

Flow rate (m3/h)

360 180 270 180 990 4 950

‘Horizontal Circulation Zone’

For the horizontal circulation zone, the following is assumed:

Continuous mechanical extraction of a flow of 2 100 m3/h;

Continuous mechanical air supply at a rate of 2 100 m3/h, with pre-heating or pre-

cooling of the air.

‘Lifts and Stairwells Shaft Zone – Vertical Connections’

The lifts and stairwells shaft is ventilated in the same way for the three ventilation systems, and it is not necessary to detail this for comparative analysis. This ventilation is simulated by establishing a constant flow, 24 hours a day, of 0.6 h-1.

E-93

‘Ground floor – General Services’

The ground floor is ventilated in the same way for the three ventilation systems, and it is not necessary to detail this for comparative analysis. This ventilation is simulated by establishing a constant flow, 24 hours a day, of 0.5 h-1.

‘Lower ground floor – Garages’

The lower ground floor is ventilated in the same way for the three ventilation systems, and it is not necessary to detail this for comparative analysis. This ventilation is simulated by establishing a constant flow, 24 hours a day, of 2.0 h-1.

Mechanical Ventilation System

It is assumed that ventilation of the bedrooms and of the corridor is provided by an air handling unit (AHU) located on the roof. The AHU has class G4 and F7 filters in the air intake, class G4 filters in recirculated air, and a building envelope with 50 mm thermal insulation panels. It is assumed that the AHU pre-treats the air by heating to 20 ◦C in cold periods, and by cooling the air to 21 ◦C during hot periods. Rectangular-sectioned galvanised steel pipes, with 30 mm thermal insulation (λ=0.04 W/(m.K)) and with a vapour barrier are assumed. In the external sections, the thickness of the thermal insulation is 40 mm. The main outlet pipe of the AHU will have a 0.5 m2 section, while floor 1 will have a section of around 0.1 m2. The pipes must be equipped with access doors, with sealing and thermal insulation. We will have an AHU with pre-heating/pre-cooling with a heat pump, and we will also have the possibility of pre-heating/pre-cooling with water. In the heat recovery scenario, the AHU will have a module with a regenerative heat exchanger with an efficiency of 60 %. There will also be a by-pass to this heat recovery unit.

Table E-2.3 – Fresh Air Flows – New Hotels.

Flow/infiltration Mechanical ventilation

Ground Floor Floors (1-5)

Flow of air supply 2 311 m3/h 7 370 m

3/h

Flow of extracted air 2 311 m3/h 7 370 m

3/h

Air infiltration 230 m3/h 730 m

3/h

Supply 2 541 m3/h (Rph = 0.51 h

-1) 8 100 m

3/h (Rph = 0.54 h

-1)

Table E-2.4 – Consumption/power of AHU ventilators

AHU Air supply

(m3/h)

Extraction

(m3/h)

Air supply

(kW)

Extraction

(kW)

SFP

(W/(m3/s))

System without heat

recovery

Ground Floor 2 311 2 311 0.51 0.33 512

Floors 1-5 7 370 7 100 1.60 1.00 780

E-94

(Bedrooms)

System with heat

recovery

Ground Floor 2 311 2 311 0.79 0.61 1 225

Floors 1-5

(Bedrooms) 7 370 7 100 2.50 1.93 1 220

Table E-2.5 – Comparison of solutions with the reference regulatory values

Solution RECS

1 Jan 2016

Mec Vent Without Heat Recov.

Mec Vent With Heat Recov.

Ground Floor

Bedrooms Ground Floor

Bedrooms

SFP (W/(m3/s)) 1 500 512 780 1 225 1 220

Maintenance:

In maintenance, the replacement of the F7 filters once a year, twice a year for G4 filters, and

cleaning of the pipes once every 10 years, was provided for.

Ventilation solutions for calculation of the reference EER

Table E-2.6 shows the reference values used to calculate the EERRef, which were calculated

based on the prescriptive method.

Table E-2.6– Reference flow rates under the prescriptive method (Ministerial Implementing Order No 353-A/2013 of 4 December 2013, as amended by Ministerial Implementing Order No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016).

Regulatory condition

Regulatory Flow rate (m3/hour)

Energyplus program flow rate

(m3/s)

South Rooms 8 bedrooms –

40 m3/h 320.0 0.089

East Rooms 6 bedrooms –

40 m3/h 240.0 0.067

North and West Bedrooms

4 bedrooms – 40 m3/h

160.0 0.044

Horizontal circulation (175.72 m2) 80,0

372,175 2 m

658.95 0.183

Vertical circulation (412.56 m2) 80,0

356,412 2 m

1 547.10 0.430

Ground Floor (924.52 m2) 80,0

352,924 2 m

3 466.95 0.963

E-95

ANNEX E-3 LIGHTING

Directorate-General for Energy and

Geology

E-96

NEW HOTEL BUILDINGS

Background

The Regulation on the Energy Performance of Commercial and Service Buildings (RECS)

imposes several requirements on lighting systems, specifically:

- The lighting systems must comply with the EN 12464-1 and EN 15 193 standards;

- The maximum illumination values must not exceed, by more than 30 %, the values stipulated

in the EN 12464-1 standard.

- The power density installed must not exceed the value indicated in Table I.28 of Ministerial

Implementing Order No 349-D/2013, as amended by Ministerial Implementing Order

No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016. For Hotel Buildings, the following values are adopted:

in Circulation Zones, value close to LPD/100lux = 3.8 (W/m2),

for indoor car parks, the value is LPD/100lux = 3.4 (W/m2),

in Bedrooms, value close to LPD/100lux = 3.8 (W/m2),

in communal areas of hotels, such as Restaurants and the Foyer, LPD/100lux = 3.4

(W/m2).

The base solution recommended for the office designed to enable comparison between

fluorescent and LED lighting is detailed below, taking into account its influence on heat gains

and on energy consumption in the context of the study on cost-optimal performance. These

solutions do not aim to validate the LPD/100 lux requirements [5].

Luminous Flux Method

The luminous flux method consists of establishing the luminous flux (lumens) quantity required

for a given enclosed area, based on the type of activity undertaken, the colours of the walls

and ceiling, and the type of bulb/light fixture chosen.

This method is based on the following formula:

Φ = E . S / (d . μ)

relating the luminous flux (Φ) to illumination (E) and the surface area to be illuminated (S).

Not all the luminous flux emitted by the bulbs reaches the surface area to be illuminated, since

part of it is lost through absorption to the light fixtures, the walls, ceilings, furniture (working

coefficient - μ) and due, with time, to the dirtiness of the bulbs and light fixtures and to the

bulbs’ loss of power (depreciation coefficient - d).

Where:

Φ - total flux (lumens)

E – site’s indicated illumination (lx)

S - area to be illuminated (m2)

d - depreciation coefficient (-): 0.80 (normal)

μ - working coefficient (-)

K = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu

c = length of site (m)


Geology

E-97

l = width of site (m)

hu = useful height - height of the light fixture according to working plan (m)

‘Bedroom Zones’

Properties of the space and light fixtures.

In the reference hotel considered, the bedroom zones were defined according what is

expected for a hotel, taking into consideration that such rooms may have different dimensions.

A typical room was considered to be approximately six by five metres, so that the average

useful area is approximately 30 m2, as indicated in Figure E-3.1.

Figure E-3.1 - Typical bedroom configuration

Space 1 – Typical bedroom – It was assumed that the typical bedroom had dimensions of

5.1 x 5.1 m = 26 m2 + 4 m2 of sanitary facilities. This is equivalent to 30 m2 in total. Thus, in

terms of averages for the purposes of calculation, the following assumptions were made:

Length (c) = 6 m

Width (l) = 5 m

Height of the site (h) = 3 m

Hanging height of the light fixtures = 3.0 m

Working plan level = 0.80 m

Colour and reflection coefficients of elements of the building envelope in the internal spaces

Colour of the building envelope elements and of the working plan

Walls: white – reflection coefficient = 0.80

Ceilings: grey – reflection coefficient = 0.50

Working plan: brown – reflection coefficient = 0.30

Standard EN 12464-1 contains no specific information for hotel bedrooms, namely in the

section on lighting requirements for interior spaces in restaurants or hotel buildings (heading

5.2.3). It was therefore assumed that the recommended illumination for the bedrooms should

be 300 lux.


Geology

E-98

The lighting in the bathrooms, since they are used sporadically, was not considered for the

purposes of comparative energy simulation of this reference building.

Bulbs and light fixtures were selected, with two different lighting options – fluorescent and

LED, with the following properties:

Fluorescent lighting option – 6 sets of Lumilux T8 (OSRAM) bulbs and light fixture of

1.2 m fluorescent lamps, integrated electronic control gear QT-FIT8(EEI:A2) with 36 W

and with a luminous flux of 3350lm;

LED lighting option – 6 sets of LED lighting with similar properties of 28 W and a

luminous flux of 3350lm.

Figure E-3.2 - Light fixture. Utilisation factor

Application

‘Typical Bedroom’ - Space 1

The site’s ratio depends on the dimensions of the enclosed area: the narrower and taller a site,

the more light the walls will absorb. The wider the site, the less light it absorbs.

Site ratio (K)

KE1 = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu

c = length of site (m)

l = width of site (m)

hu = useful height - height of the light fixture according to working plan (m)

K = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu = (6.0 x 5.0) /((6.0 + 5.0) x (3.0-0.8)) = 1.2

Taking the value of K = 1.2, the working coefficient value will be μ = 0.60 (-)


Total luminous flux of the typical bedroom, Φbedroom = 6 x 3350lm = 20 100lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = Φbedroom x (d x μ ) / S = 20 100 lm x (0.80 x 0,60) / 30 m2 = 321

lux

This is greater than the minimum value of 200lux, considering comfort index value;


Geology

E-99

EERpr_Fluor = 36 W x 6sets = 216 W; (LPD simulation: 216/30 m2=7.2 W/m2)

LED bulbs

Total luminous flux of the typical bedroom, Φbedroom = 6 x 3350lm = 20 100lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = Φbedroom x (d x μ ) / S = 20 100 lm x (0.80 x 0,60) / 30 m2 = 321

lux

This is greater than the minimum value of 200lux, considering comfort index value

EERpr_Fluor = 28 W x 6sets = 168 W; (LPD simulation: 168/30 m2=5.6 W/m2)

EERRef = 3.80 x 321 / 100 x 0.80 (Fo) x 0.90(Fd) x 30 = 263.47 W; (LPD simulation: 8.80 W/m2)

Table E-3.1 presents a summary of results for the lighting conditions of the typical bedrooms of

the reference hotel.

Table E-3.1 - ‘Typical hotel room’ - lighting

System

Bulb/Light fixture Bedroom Adjusted LPD of the

solution

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) Number

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) W/m

2

(W/m2)/100

lux

Fluorescent 3 350 36 6 20 100 216 7.2 2.24

LED 3 350 28 6 20 100 168 5.6 1.7

According to Table I.28 of Ministerial Implementing Order No 349-D/2013, as amended by

Ministerial Implementing Order No 17-A/2016 of 4 February 2016, the maximum power

density for the bedrooms is 3.8(W/m2)/100lux, and it can be seen that:

In the case of fluorescent bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 2.24(W/m2) / 100lux,

and the lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 7.2 W/m2;

In the case of LED bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 1.74(W/m2) / 100lux, and the

lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 5.6 W/m2;

Taking into considering the maximum power density of 3.8(W/m2)/100lux, defined in

regulations, the power value that must be used to calculate the EER_reference must be

8.8 W/m2, given that (3.80 x 321.60) / 100 x 0.800 x 0.900 = 8.80 W/m2, corresponding

to a consumption per room of 264 W of lighting, assuming the existence of control

systems, occupancy and availability of natural lighting.

Circulation Zone – Space 2 – It was assumed that the horizontal circulation zone, subdivided

into two similar sections, one that runs along the North/South orientations and another along

the East/West orientations, have dimensions of 38 x 2m = 76 m2. Thus, in terms of averages for

the purposes of calculation, the following assumptions were made:


Length (c) = 38 m

Width (l) = 2.0 m



Geology

E-100


Working plan (view) = 1.2






Standard EN 12464-1, in the section on lighting requirements for interior spaces in restaurants

or hotel buildings, namely circulation corridors (heading 5.2.7), provides for a minimum value

of 100 lux for lighting.

Bulbs and Light fixtures



Fluorescent tube lighting option – 12 sets of light fixtures and bulbs (Philips TL-D

18 W/840 1SL/25) with 18 W and with a luminous efficacy of 75 lumens/Watt =>

luminous flux = 1350lm;

LED lighting option – 10 sets of LED lighting with similar properties, power = 12.5 W,

luminous flux = 1500lm (LED 2D4P 12.5 W/ECG/835/GR10q GE BX1/10).

Figure E-3.3 - Light fixture. Utilisation factor FBS261.

Application

Site ratio (K)

K = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu

c = length of site (m) = 38

l = width of site (m) = 2.0

hu = useful height (2.5 m) - height of the light fixture according to working plan (1.2 m) = 1.3

KES = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu = (38 x 2) /((38+2.0) x (1.3)) = 1.5


Total luminous flux of the typical bedroom, Φcirculation = 12 x 1 350lm = 16 200lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = Φcirculation x (d x μ) / S = 16 200lm x (0.80 x 0.64) / 76 m2 = 109lux

This is greater than the minimum value of 100lux, considering comfort index value;


Geology

E-101

EERpr_Fluor = 18 W x 12sets = 216 W; (LPD simulation: 216/76 m2 = 2.8 W/m2)

LED bulbs

Total luminous flux of the typical bedroom, Φcirculation = 10 x 1 500lm = 15 000lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = Φcirculation x (d x μ ) / S = 15 000lm x (0.80 x 0.64) / 76 m2 =

101lux

This is greater than the minimum value of 100lux, considering comfort index value

EERpr_Fluor = 12.5 W x 10sets = 125 W; (LPD simulation: 125/76 m2=1.6 W/m2)


Table E-3.2 presents a summary of results for the lighting conditions of the horizontal

circulation zones adjacent to the bedrooms of the reference hotel.

Note: For reasons of symmetrical distribution of bulbs in this space, it may be necessary to

adopt a number of light fixtures slightly higher or lower than that calculated.

Table E-3.2 – Horizontal Circulation Zone – lighting (FO = 0.8, Fd=1.0)

System


solution

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) Number

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) W/m

2

(W/m2)/100

lux

Fluorescent 1 350 18 12 16 200 216 2.8 2.60

LED 1 500 12.5 10 15 000 125 1.6 1.60



density for the horizontal circulation zones is 3.8(W/m2)/100lux, and it can be seen that:





Taking into considering the maximum power density of 3.8(W/m2/100lux, defined in

regulations, the power value that must be used to calculate the EER_reference must be

3.07 W/m2, given that (3.80 x 101.5) / 100 x 0.800 x 1.00 = 3.07, corresponding to a

consumption in the horizontal circulation zones of 233 W of lighting, assuming the

existence of control systems, occupancy and with no availability of natural lighting.


Geology

E-102

Communal Services Zone Ground Floor – Space 3 – According to the reference hotel concept

adopted, a communal services zone located on the ground floor was assumed, where all the

general functions of the Reference Hotel were established, with the exception of the

bedrooms (restaurant functions, reception and entrance, kitchen, laundry etc.). The average

definitions were therefore adopted. To avoid going into excessive detail, it was assumed that

the different functions are subdivided into compartments of 12.8 m x 10 m x 5 m (ceiling

height). In terms of averages, and for the purposes of calculation, the following assumptions

were therefore made:


Length (c) = 10 m

Width (l) = 12.8 m



Working plan (view) = 0.8






Standard EN 12464-1, in the section on lighting requirements for interior spaces in hotel

buildings, namely kitchens and conference halls (headings 5.2.2 and 5.2.6), provides for a

minimum value of 500 lux for lighting, in other types of communal services compartments such

as Reception (heading 5.2.1), or Catering zone (heading 5.2.5), a minimum of 300lux is

provided for. Thus, in terms of averages, for this entire zone, the minimum lighting comfort

value was adopted = 400lux.

Bulbs and Light fixtures



Fluorescent lighting option – 35 sets of Lumilux T8 (OSRAM) bulbs and light fixture of

1.2 m fluorescent lamps, integrated electronic control gear QT-FIT8(EEI:A2) with 36 W

and with a luminous flux of 3350lm;

LED lighting option – 35 sets of LED lighting with similar properties of 28 W and a

luminous flux of 3350lm.


Geology

E-103

Figure E-3.4 - Light fixture. Utilisation factor FBS261.

Application

Site ratio (K)

K = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu

c = length of site (m) = 12.8

l = width of site (m) = 10.0

hu = useful height (4.5 m) - height of the light fixture according to working plan (0.8 m) = 3.7

KES = (c x l) / (c + l) x hu = (10 x 12.8) /((10+12.8) x (3.7)) = 1.5


Total luminous flux of the typical bedroom, ΦGround_Floor = 35 x 3 350lm = 117 250lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = ΦGround_Floor x (d x μ) / S = 117 250lm x (0.80 x 0.64) / 128 m2 =

469lux

This is greater than the average recommended value of 400lux, considering average comfort

value

EERpr_Fluor = 36 W x 35sets = 1260 W; (LPD simulation: 1260/128 m2≈10 W/m2)

LED bulbs

Total luminous flux of the communal services, ΦGround_Floor = 35 x 3 350lm = 117 250lm

Luminance (lumen/m2=lux), E = ΦGround_Floor x (d x μ) / S = 117 2500lm x (0.80 x 0.64) / 128 m2 =

469lux

This is greater than the average recommended value of 400lux, considering average comfort

value

EERpr_Fluor = 28 W x 35sets = 980 W; (LPD simulation: 980/128 m2=8W/m2)


Table E-3.3 presents a summary of results for the lighting conditions of the communal services

zone on the ground floor of the reference hotel.

Note: For reasons of symmetrical distribution of bulbs in this space, it may be necessary to

adopt a number of light fixtures slightly higher or lower than that calculated.


Geology

E-104


Geology

E-105

Table E-3.3 - Communal Services Zone, Ground Floor - lighting (Fo = 0.8, Fd = 0.9)

System


solution

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) Number

Lum. Flux

(Lm)

Power

(W) W/m

2

(W/m2)/100

lux

Fluorescent 3 350 36 35 117 250 1 260 9.8 2.10

LED 3 350 28 35 117 250 980 7.6 1.63



density for the communal services zone on the ground floor is 3.4(W/m2)/100lux, and it can be

seen that:





Taking into considering the maximum power density of 3.4(W/m2)/100lux, defined in

regulations, the power value that must be used to calculate EER_reference must be

11.48 W/m2, given that (3.40 x 469) / 100 x 0.800 x 0.90 = 11.48 W/m2, corresponding

to an average consumption in the communal services zone on the ground floor of

1469.6 W of lighting, assuming the existence of control systems, occupancy and

availability of natural lighting.


Geology

E-106

ANNEX E-4 COSTS AND USEFUL LIFE OF THE SOLUTIONS


Geology

E-107

NEW-BUILD OFFICE SPACE

General aspects

In the analysis of the life cycle costs of the solutions, the values indicated in the following

tables were adopted. The values of the building solutions correspond to typical values found

on the LNEC costs database, corresponding to new works up until 2013 [16]. The data adopted

for the building solutions, investment costs, useful life and maintenance costs were adopted

from the doctoral study [16].

The costs of the systems, periods and installations are the result of budgets referring to new

builds from 2014, and which meet the specifications for the typology of the reference building

[5]. The service life of the systems and maintenance are based on the EN 15 459 [11] standard

and on the manufacturers’ technical information.

As mentioned in the methodological aspects of the comparative analysis, in the calculation of

the 20-year LCC, for each building solution/systems, for the least efficient solutions, cost 0 is

adopted (the value common to all solutions is omitted), with the more efficient solutions

evaluated only taking into account the cost differential. In the tables referring to the building

solutions for the opaque elements, the values refer to the solution area unit, and in the glazed

spans to the window unit. In the cooling, ventilation, lighting and photovoltaic systems, the

values refer to the reference building as a whole.

Table E-4. 1 - Roofs

Roof Material Insulation Cost

Investment €/m

2

Comments

Time Useful life

Maintenance Activities

Cost Maintenance

€/m2

C01 15 cm BA flagstone + sealing + slabs on

supports

XPS 20 mm

86.98 -

Same for all three

solutions and for over 20 years

Same maintenance

activities for all three solutions, meaning costs

are omitted

- C02 20 cm BA slab + sealing + tiles on

supports

XPS 50 mm

90.31 -

C03 20 cm BA slab + sealing + tiles on

supports

XPS 100 mm

95.80 -

Table E-4. 2 - Floor

Flooring Material Insulation Cost

Investment €/m

2

Comments

Time Useful life


Cost Maintenance

€/m2

P01

15 cm BA slab + ceramic tiles/hydraulic mosaic tiles

XPS 20 mm

117.00

-

Same for all three

solutions and for over 20 years

Same maintenance

activities for all three solutions, meaning costs

are omitted

- P02


XPS 50 mm

121.10

-

P03


XPS 100 mm

125.80

-


Geology

E-108

Table E-4. 3 - Façades and Walls

External walls Material Insulation Cost

Investment €/m

2

Comments Time

Useful life


Cost Maintenance

€/m2

ETICS

ET01 Brick

22 cm no

insulation 37.00

Wall 50 years,

ETICS 25 years*

Exterior painting (every 15 years)

including scaffolding

Interior painting (every 10 years)

17.00

6.00

ET02 Brick

22 cm EPS

30 mm 72.50

EPS 15-20 kg/m3

ET03 Brick

22 cm EPS

70 mm 76.80

Façade Curtain

FC01 Glass

8 mm Brick 11 cm

no insulation

374.00 -

40 years

Inspection (every 5 years)

General cleaning (every 20 years)


1.50

12.00

6.00

FC02

Glass 8 mm, Brick 11 cm

Mineral wool

30 mm 377.00 -

FC03

Glass 8 mm, Brick 11 cm

Mineral wool

70 mm 380.80

Mineral wool (35-

100 kg/m3)

Wall Double

PD01

Brick 11 mm +

Brick 11 cm

no insulation

53.00 -

50 years

Exterior painting (every 15 years) incl. scaffolding


17.00

6.00

PD02

Brick 11 mm +

Brick 11 cm

Mineral wool

20 mm 55.00 -

PD03

Brick 11 mm +

Brick 11 cm

Mineral wool

70 mm 59.80

Mineral wool (35-

100 kg/m3)

Façade Ventilated

FV01

External tiling+ Brick 22 cm

no insulation

77.00 Metallic ventilated

façade and

Mineral wool

(35-100 kg/m3)

40 years

Inspection (every 5 years)

Cleaning and

occasional replacement

(every 20 years)


1.50

17.00

6.00

FV02


Mineral wool

30 mm 80.00

FV03


Mineral wool

70 mm 83.80


Geology

E-109

Table E-4. 4 - Glazed spans

Spans Frame Glazing Cost

Investment (m

2)

Comments Time

Useful life


Cost Maintenance

€/m2

WO1 Wood Clear single

glazing 220

Sliding window with 2 sliding

plates 35 years

Painting (every 5 years) Replacement of

seals (every 10 years)

24

19

W02 Aluminiu

m, revolving

Clear double glazing

245 Sliding window with 2 sliding

plates 35 years

Replacement of seals

(every 10 years) 19

W03 PVC,

revolving

Clear double glazing

345 Sliding window with 2 sliding

plates 35 years


(every 10 years) 19

W04

Thermal-cut

aluminium,

revolving

Low double glazing and

(g= 0.207) 340


plates 35 years


(every 10 years) 19

W05

Thermal-cut

aluminium,

revolving

Low double glazing and

(g= 0.138) 355


plates 35 years


(every 10 years) 19

Table E-4. 5 - Solar protection

Solar protection

Description Cost Investment

€/m2

Comments Time Useful

life


Cost Maintenance

€/m2

ES Metallic venetian blinds in medium colour

100 - 20 years Annual

adjustment and cleaning

4.0

IS Blinds in medium-colour veneer 70 - 10 years

Annual adjustment and cleaning

2.0

Table E-4. 6 - Ventilation system

Ventilation Cost

Investment

(€)

AHU useful life (years) Maintenance (% investment)

Cost Maintenance

(EUR)

Comments

VM 48 857 AHU 20 years, Pipes, 30 years 3 % AHU, 2 % pipes 1 243 Maintenance includes

preventive maintenance and cleaning

VM-HR 59 893 AHU 20 years, Pipes, 30 years 3 % AHU, 2 % pipes 1 574

N 34 333 Ventilation grills 20 years,

pipes 30 years 2 % 910 VM - Mechanical ventilation; VM-HR, Mechanical Ventilation with heat recovery; N – natural ventilation

Cooling system

Since RECS has different specific requirements for new direct expansion systems and all-water

systems, the costs and the LCC analysis are determined differently for the reference building

with each of these systems. In this regard, the following table presents the cost increases

associated with improving the systems’ efficiency, omitting the same costs shared by all

solutions and incorrect comparisons of direct expansion systems with all-water systems.


Geology

E-110

Table E-4. 7 – Cooling system:

Cooling system Relative cost Investment

(€)

AHU useful life

(years)

Maintenance (%

investment)

Cost Maintenance

(€)

Comments

Direct expansion system

VRV-S0 (COP=3.21, EER=2.81)

0 20 (1) 0 Maintenance

includes periodic preventive

maintenance and cleaning

VRV-S1 (COP=3.3, EER=2.9)

2 133 20 (1) 635

VRV-S2 (COP=3.41, EER=3.01)

4 740 20 (1) 1 410

VRV-S3 (COP=3.61, EER=3.21)

9 480 20 (1) 2 821

VRV-S4 (COP=4.2, EER=3.8)

23 462 20 (1) 6 981

Water system

CH-S5 (COP = 2.8, EER = 2.7)

0 20 (1) 0 Maintenance

includes periodic preventive

maintenance and cleaning

CH-S6 (COP=3, EER=2.9)

2 485 20 (1) 1 479

CH-S7 (COP=3.3, EER=3.2)

6 214 20 (1) 2 588

CH-S8 (COP = 4.15, EER = 4.1)

52 316 20 (1) 14 827

(1): A value of 2 % was assumed for the maintenance cost of the external units, and 1 % for the internal units and

piping.

Table E-4. 8 - Lighting system

Lighting Cost/Investment

(€) Useful life

(years) Maintenance (%

investment) Cost/Maintenance

(EUR) Comments

LF 8 230.40 Light fixture 20 years,

bulb 8 years 1 % 82.30

Maintenance includes preventive maintenance and cleaning LED 25 121.45

Light fixture 20 years, 9.6 years

0.2 % 50.24

Table E-4. 9 - Photovoltaic system

Photovoltaic Cost

Investment

(€)

Useful life (years)

Maintenance (% investment)

Cost Maintenance

(EUR)

Comments

PV 45 kW / (23 %Roof cov.)

72 450 25 2 % 1 450 Maintenance includes


PV 18 kW / (23 %Roof cov.)

30 650 25 2 % 600 Maintenance includes



Geology

E-111

ANNEX E-5 COST OF ENERGY AND CO2 EMISSIONS


Geology

E-112

In the calculations, the values indicated in the Table below were adopted, where the costs of

electricity were based on information provided by the Directorate-General for Energy and

Geology, accounting for evolutions in marginal production costs scenarios. The CO2 costs and

their evolution follow the levels specified in the Delegated Regulation [2].

Table E-5.1 – Costs of electrical energy and CO2: Macroeconomic study.


Geology

E-113

Table E-5.2 – Costs of natural gas and CO2: Macroeconomic study.

In the study, the daily average value of 0.1597 EUR/kWh was adopted.

Key to tables:

Estudo macroeconomico Macroeconomic study

Electricidade Electricity

Gaz Natural Natural Gas

Alto High

Media Average

Baixo Low

Tecn. Ef. Preço Ref. Tech. Eff. Ref. Price

Tecn. Ef. Preço Bx. Tech. Eff. Low Price

Referencia Reference


Geology

E-114


Geology

E-115

ANNEX E-6 DOMESTIC HOT WATER HEATING SYSTEMS


Geology

E-116

HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS

The numerical simulation results obtained with the SCE.ER 1.5.1 software are summarised for

Domestic hot water (DHW) systems in hotel buildings, in the zones of Lisbon (HO1-L), Porto

(HO2-P), Faro (HO3-Fa) and Funchal (HO4-Fu). [15]

The solar systems are installed on the roof of the building, having estimated the maximum

space available as 1/3 of the nominal area; taking into account the separation between rows of

collectors, only 2/3 of that area will be usable. Thus, the maximum area on which thermal

modules can be installed will be around 2/9 (22 %) of the nominal area. This value was

rounded up or down, cf. Table E-6. 1.

Table E-6. 1 – Maximum photovoltaic installation area.

Typical nominal area Maximum installation area

1 296 m² 300 m²

Given the energy consumption of the building, the limiting factor of the dimensioning is the

available installation area, and does not depend on location. Therefore, the dimensioning was

guided by specifying a photovoltaic modules area as close as possible to the maximum

available area. For the remaining properties of the systems (inverter, losses), typical values

were used. Five module models were selected, to cover several technologies (amorphous

silicon, polycrystalline silicon, monocrystalline silicon and thin film CdS/CdTe), and varied

quality. In this study, the polycrystalline modules were adopted.

The optimal orientation of the collectors was investigated with the help of the Solterm 6 tool,

and a 35 ° inclination was obtained for Lisbon and Porto). (NB only fixed assemblies were

considered). Other parameters considered are indicated in Error! Reference source not

found..

Table E-6. 2 – Common features of photovoltaic solar system projects

losses - spectral variation 0.5 %

losses - dust and dirt 1.0 %

losses - interconnection of modules 0.002

malfunctions and maintenance [hours per year] 3

DC/AC inverter model Fronius IG 40

ventilators [kW/MWp] absent

Two scenarios for using the electricity produced by the PV system can be assumed. In the

scenario we will refer to as ‘microproduction’, illustrated in Error! Reference source not

found., all energy produced can be reintroduced into the network. Error! Reference source


Geology

E-117

not found. and Error! Reference source not found. summarise the numerical simulations

results for this scenario.

Domestic Hot Water (HO1-L) – Lisbon


Geology

E-118


Geology

E-119

Domestic hot water (HO2-P) – Porto


Geology

E-120


Geology

E-121

Domestic hot water (HO3-Fa) – Faro


Geology

E-122


Geology

E-123

Domestic hot water – Funchal


Geology

E-124


Geology

E-125

ANNEX E-7 SENSITIVITY STUDIES HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS


Geology

E-126

Analysis of the influence on the thermal demand of different opaque façade

solutions

As regards the vertical elements of the building envelope, a sensitivity analysis was carried out

to evidence the fact that it is not necessary to present all combinations of the recommended

variants for external walls.

Figure E-7 1, Figure E-7 2 and Error! Reference source not found. below represent the graphs

corresponding to the 12 combinations of external walls (4 types of solutions and three levels of

thermal insulation thickness), for the 5 types of windows with internal shading, and with

external shading (ES) and, where the thermal insulation level of the external roof and of the

floor over the garage was always maintained at a thickness of 2 cm.

Figure E-7 1 – External walls for the W01 glazing solution. Key to Figures E-7 1 and 2: Paredes

Exteriores = External Walls; Energia Primaria = Primary Energy

Figure E-7 2 – External walls for the W02 glazing solution.


Geology

E-127


For the clear single (W01) and double (W02 and W03) glazing solution, with g-values of 0.85

and 0.75 respectively, the above graphs reveal the importance of the positioning of the

shading device, and that for energy efficiency purposes, it should be applied via the span’s

exterior.

The behaviour of the four types of external walls, under the same conditions, is similar.

When using glazing with g-values of 0.19 and 0.13, the effect of positioning the shading device

is no longer decisive, as shown in Figure E-7 4 and Figure E-7 5.



Geology

E-128


The four external wall solutions (ETICs, ventilated façade, curtain façade, brick double wall), for

the same levels of thermal insulation, generated similar energy performance, so that, for

energy efficiency purposes, the results can be expressed as a function of the thickness of the

thermal insulation.

For glazed spans with g-values of 0.13 and 0.19, the positioning of the shading (internal vs

external) is no longer relevant.

Calculation of cost-optimal levels of the minimum energy ......Calculation of the global cost...

Documents

Transcript of Calculation of cost-optimal levels of the minimum energy ......Calculation of the global cost...