3.4 Results – Effects of the optimisation packages on reference case level This chapter presents the results on package level and discusses them. We calculated the energy savings and payback periods per single optimisation measures (see annex). The majority of the single measures have a payback period of less than 5 years for all reference cases (e.g. thermostatic valves, boiler and pump adjustments, night setbacks or room air temperature control for ventilation and occupancy and daylight control for lighting). Subsequently, we calculated the effect when single measures are applied in a package: as described before we assumed a Get the basics right and a High performance package. The packages are composed of a selection of single measures as described in the chapters before (the exact compilation of the packages can be found in the annex). As we are aware there is a lot of discussion going on around the savings potential of thermostatic radiator valves (TRV), for this specific measure we’d like to highlight, how we handled it, also in comparison to other well-known studies. The aim is to create an adequate understanding of the savings that are calculated in the present study and how they compare to the results of other studies. The explanations given here for TRV may also be applicable to other measures investigated in this study, as differences between studies usually stem from different baselines, underlying assumptions and objectives. Excursus self-acting thermostatic radiator valves (TRV) We briefly discuss the difference between the EUnited valves study [ECOFYS, 2016a]43, the Hirschberg study [Hirschberg, 2016]44 and the present study. More information, including on electronic thermostatic radiator valves (eTRV) and a summary table of the main differences is presented in the annex (see Annex 2, chapter 6.2.2). Regarding the EUnited valves study, the key difference of the two studies is that the EUnited Valves compares the potential energy savings if a simple manual radiator valve (SRV) is exchanged by a thermostatic radiator valve (TRV), plus additional hydronic balancing in 50% of the cases. The present study compares the exchange of a thermostatic radiator valve before 1988 (with rather imprecise 2 K control) with just installing standard thermostatic radiator valves, i.e. without additional savings from manual hydronic balancing. The selection of a TRV before 1988 as reference case is assumed to be a good proxy for the “EU average” radiator valve (see chapter 3.2.1). Regarding the Hirschberg study the key difference is the calculation approach and the baseline. Hirschberg compares different operation modes and simulates the energy savings for different scenarios by using a dynamic thermal simulation software. The present study uses a normative approach based on reference buildings. 43 The full study is available upon request from either Ecofys or Danfoss A/S. 44 The full study is available upon request from either Ecofys or Danfoss A/S. UENDE16827 28
Print
Download PDF file
