Search

In the European Union's Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, the energy efficiency goal for buildings is set in terms of primary energy use. In the proposal from the National Board of Housing, Building, and Planning, for nearly zero energy buildings in Sweden, the use of primary energy is expressed as a primary energy number calculated with given primary energy factors. In this article, a multi-dwelling building is simulated and the difference in the primary energy number is investigated when the building uses heat from district heating systems or from heat pumps, alone or combined with solar thermal or solar photovoltaic systems. It is also investigated how the global CO2 emissions are influenced by the different energy system combinations and with different fuels used. It is concluded that the calculated primary energy number is lower for heat pump systems, but the global CO2 emissions are lowest when district heating uses mostly biofuels and is combined with solar PV systems. The difference is up to 140 tonnes/year. If the aim with the Swedish building code is to decrease the global CO2 emissions then the ratio between the primary energy factors for electricity and heat should be larger than three and considerably higher than today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The traditional way of managing the supply and return water temperatures in a district heating system (DHS) is by controlling the supply water temperature. The return water temperature then becomes a passive result that reflects the overall energy efficiency of the DHS. A DHS with many poorly functioning district heating centrals will create a high return water temperature, and the energy efficiency of the DHS will be affected negatively in several ways (e.g., lower efficiency of the flue gas condenser, higher heat losses in pipes, and lower electricity production for a DHS with combined heat and power (CHP)). With a strategic introduction of low-grade heat customers, the return water temperature can be lowered and, to some extent, controlled. With the heat customers connected in parallel, which is the traditional setup, return water temperatures can only be lowered at the same rate as the heat customers are improved. The active management of some customers can lower the return water temperatures faster and, in the long run, lead to better controlled return water temperatures. Active management is defined here as an adjustment of a domestic heating system in order to improve DHS efficiency without affecting the heating service for the individual building. The opposite can be described as passive management, where heat customers are connected to the DHS in a standardized manner, without taking the overall DHS efficiency into consideration. The case study in this article shows possible efficiency gains for the examined DHS at around 7%. Looking at fuel use, there is a large reduction for oil, with 10–30% reduction depending on the case in question, while the reduction is shown to be largest for the case with the lowest return water temperature. The results also show that efficiency gains will increase electricity production by about 1–3%, and that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are reduced by 4–20%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]