heat networks code of practice

Heat NetworksCode of Practice

Heat Networks

Heat Network Types

• Single Buildings

• New developments with multiple buildings

• Large energy users with multiple buildings

• Towns and cities

Future uptake of Heat Networks

• Potential to increase proportion of heat from heat

networks from 2% up to 14-43% by 2050.

• Seen as lowest cost option for meeting the energy

trilemma

• Stronger support from Government – Future of Heating

• Stronger policy support

• HNDU formation and funding for feasibility studies

and £320m for scheme development

• Scotland Heat Policy Statement

• 1.5TWh & 40,000 homes on heat networks by 2020

• Heat Network Partnership, Support Programme and

District Heating Loans Fund

Challenges for Heat Networks

• High capital costs and often relatively low levels of financial returns

• High risks

• Heat is an unregulated market so consumers not as well protected

• Lack of understanding and skills in key groups:

• Clients (developers, housing associations, local authorities)

• Engineers

• Commissioning agents

• Contractors

• Management agents

• Clients

Heat Networks Code of Practice

• Relatively limited experience in the UK

• Lack of established industry standards

• Address the problems being identified in some

new heat networks

• Formalise a design approach for all stages

• Provide a standard specification for

procurement bodies

• Set minimum standards for designs

• Provide a basis for certifying approved

professionals

• Improve consumer confidence in heat networks

• Support increase in heat network projects

Addressing the problems

• High heat losses

• High operating temperatures and high return

temperatures from connected buildings

• Overestimated heat demands, leading to oversizing of

plant, pipework and

• Issues with overheating within communal areas

• Customers facing higher bills

• Designers using inappropriate standards

• Poor commissioning

• Designs not optimising system (testing options against

lifetime performance and efficiency at part loads)

• Poor consumer experience

£CAPEX& £OPEX

CO2SAVINGS

Addressing the problems

Addressing the problems

Improving heat network viability

• Efficient system design can significantly reduce capital

and operational costs meaning lower costs to users,

higher financial returns and higher asset value.

• Capital cost savings:

• Avoiding oversized plant

• Optimising pipework lengths and sizes

• Operational cost savings:

• Reduced cost of heat losses

• Improved primary plant operation

• Reduced pumping costs

• Reduced maintenance fees and increased lifespans

Structure of the Code of Practice

Key goals of the Code of Practice

A: Correct sizing of plant & network

A: Correct sizing of plant & network

B: Low heat network losses

B: Low heat network losses

C: Low flow & return temperatures

D: Variable flow control principles

D: Variable flow control principles

E: Optimise low carbon heat sources

F: Manage risks & deliver quality

Efficient Heat Networks

Stage 1: Preparation and Briefing

Stage 1: Preparation and Briefing

Stage 2: Feasibility

Stage 2: Feasibility

Stage 3: Design

Stage 3: Design

Stage 4: Construction

Stage 4: Construction

Stage 5: Commissioning

Stage 5: Commissioning

Stage 6: Operation & Maintenance

Stage 6: Operation & Maintenance

Stage 7: Customers

Objectives and minimum standards

Initial use and feedback• Formally launched in July 2015

• Starting to see the Code of Practice used inspecifications and tenders

• Some clients have modified terms andrequirements to align with the HNCoP

• Possible requirement of future funding?

• Being used to define the industry standard andsupersede old and inappropriate standards

• CIBSE training programme:

• Over 200 people undertaken thecertification and introduction courses

• Around 100 officers from Local Authoritiesfunded by HNDU have received training

Next steps• CIBSE working group collecting and

assessing feedback from the industry(Code requirement 1.1.4) –www.cibse.org/CP1feedback

• Document will be updated andminimum standards will develop

• Formalise checking and verificationprocess

• Potential for further supportingguidance in specific areas

• Potential for rating scheme in thefuture

matthew.j.turner@aecom.com