calculation of cost-optimal levels of the minimum energy ......calculation of the global cost...
TRANSCRIPT
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)
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
W04 – Thermal-cut aluminium frame with low-emission double glazing
2.8 0.207 0.02
W05 – Thermal-cut aluminium frame with low-emission double glazing
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
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)
3.6 2.8 1.0×0.8 2.8
LED (a)
2.1 1.6 1.0×0.8 1.6
(a) – As specified in Annex E-3
Table III.19 – ‘Common Zones – Ground Floor’ - 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)
9.5 1.9 1.0×0.8 10.0
LED (a)
6.5 1.3 1.0×0.8 8.0
(a) – As specified in Annex E-3
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:
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
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
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV3-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV4-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior Fluor. With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV5-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W01 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV6-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV7-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W03 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV8-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W04 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV9-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W05 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
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
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV12-OF1 P02 ET02 C03 W03 Interior Fluor. Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV13-HO1-L P02 ET02 C03 W04 Interior Fluor. With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV14-HO1-L P02 ET02 C03 W05 Interior Fluor. With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV15-HO1-L P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV16-HO1-L P02 ET02 C02 W03 Exterior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV17-HO1-L P03 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV18-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV19-HO1-L P01 ET01 C02 W02 Exterior LED Without
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV20-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without
Recov. Rooftop With Solar 0
NV21-HO1-L P01 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV22-HO1-L P03 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV23-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With
Recov. Chiller Boiler 0
NV24-HO1-L P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With
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
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV3-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV4-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior Fluor. With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV5-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W01 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV6-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV7-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W03 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV8-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W04 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV9-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV10-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W01 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV11-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV12-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W03 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV13-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W04 Interior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV14-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W05 Interior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV15-HO2-P P01 ET01 C01 W01 Interior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV16-HO2-P P02 ET02 C02 W03 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV17-HO2-P P03 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV18-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
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
Recov. Rooftop With Solar 0
NV21-HO2-P P01 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV22-HO2-P P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller 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
And Packages Floor Wall Roof Glazed spans
Solar
Protection Lighting Ventilation
Cooling
System DHW PV
NV0-HO3-Fa
(Base) P02 ET02 C02 W04 Interior Fluor.
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
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV3-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without
Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
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
NV6-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV7-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W03 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV8-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W04 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV9-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV10-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C02 W01 Interior LED Without
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV11-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C02 W02 Interior LED Without
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV12-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C02 W03 Interior LED Without
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
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
Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV16-HO3-Fa P02 ET02 C02 W03 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV17-HO3-Fa P03 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV18-HO3-Fa P01 ET01 C03 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
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
Recov. Rooftop With Solar 0
NV21-HO3-Fa P01 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV22-HO3-Fa P03 ET03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller 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
And Packages Floor Wall Roof Glazed spans
Solar
Protectio
n
Lighting Ventilation Cooling
System DHW PV
NV0-HO4-Fu
(Base) P02 ET02 C02 W04 Interior Fluor.
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
NV3-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV4-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior Fluor. Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV5-HO4-Fu P01 F01 C02 W01 Exterior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV6-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV7-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W03 Exterior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV8-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W04 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV9-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. Chiller With Solar 0
NV10-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W01 Interior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV11-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Interior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV12-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W03 Interior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV13-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W04 Interior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV14-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W04 Interior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV15- HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C01 W01 Interior Fluor. Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV16-HO4-Fu P02 FE02 C02 W03 Exterior Fluor. Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV17-HO4-Fu P03 FE03 C03 W05 Exterior Fluor. Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV18-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C02 W02 Exterior LED Without Recov.
Chiller With Solar 0
NV19-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C01 W02 Exterior LED Without Recov.
VRF With Solar 0
NV20-HO4-Fu P01 FE01 C03 W02 Exterior LED Without Recov.
Rooftop With Solar 0
NV21-HO4-Fu P01 FE03 C03 W05 Exterior LED With Recov. VRF With Solar 0
NV22-HO4-Fu P03 FE03 C03 W05 Exterior Fluor. Without Recov.
Chiller 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
*- Including garage ventilators (uncontrolled Type T constant consumption)
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
Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWhep/m2)
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
Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Ventilation* Lighting Equipment DHW (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWhep/m2)
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 %
*- Including garage ventilators (uncontrolled Type T constant consumption)
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 %
*- Including garage ventilators (uncontrolled Type T constant consumption)
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
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161.24 137.86 402.96 416.77
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
161.24 137.86 423.55 437.35
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
161.24 137.86 392.04 405.84
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161.24 137.86 410.40 424.20
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
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
Energy costs inflation
Initial Cost (€/m2)
Prim. Energy Consumption (KWhEP/m2)
Cost-optimal solution
Global cost (€/m2)
Macroeconomic Cost (€/m2)
Discount rate = 1.5%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
125 394 186.40 392 527 405 104
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
125 394 186.40 409 248 421 825
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
124.88 187.24 427 967 440 493
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
125 394 186.40 399 962 412 539
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
125 394 186.40 416 683 429.26
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
124.88 187.24 435 402 447 928
III.1.4.2 Macroeconomic Calculation HO2-Porto
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 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.
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 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
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%
160.33 137.41 383 386 397 181
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161 243 136 793 401 704 415 439
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
161 243 136 793 422 163 435 898
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
160.33 137.41 390 821 404 616
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161 243 136 793 409 139 422 874
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
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
Energy costs inflation
Initial Cost (€/m2)
Prim. Energy Consumption (KWhEP/m2)
Cost-optimal solution
Global cost (€/m2)
Macroeconomic Cost (€/m2)
Discount rate = 1.5%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
187 239 124 828 392 907 405 464
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
187 239 124 828 409 584 422 141
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
187 239 124 828 428 276 440 833
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
187 239 124 828 400 342 412 899
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
187 239 124 828 417 019 429 576
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
187 239 124 828 435 711 448 268
E-44
III.1.4.3 Macroeconomic Calculation HO3-Faro
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 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.
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 in order to evaluate cost-optimal performance.
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
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%
161 243 138 601 385 401 399 252
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161 243 138 601 403.84 417 691
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
161 243 138 601 424 508 438 359
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
161 243 138 601 392 836 406 687
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
161 243 138 601 411 275 425 126
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
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
Energy costs inflation
Initial Cost (€/m2)
Prim. Energy Consumption (KWhEP/m2)
Cost-optimal solution
Global cost (€/m2)
Macroeconomic Cost (€/m2)
Discount rate = 1.5%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
187 239 125 143 392 793 405 319
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
187 239 125 143 409 459 421 985
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
187 239 125 143 428 139 440 665
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
187 239 125 143 400 228 412 754
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
187 239 125 143 416 894 429.42
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
187 239 125 143 435 574 448.1
III.1.4.4 Macroeconomic Calculation HO4-Funchal
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 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.
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 considered, 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 in order to evaluate cost-optimal performance.
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
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%
159 489 123 231 363 677 376 16
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
159 489 123 231 380 214 392 696
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
159 489 123 231 398 748 411.23
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
159 489 123 231 371 112 383 595
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
159 489 123 231 387 649 400 131
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
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
Energy costs inflation
Initial Cost (€/m2)
Prim. Energy Consumption (KWhEP/m2)
Cost-optimal solution
Global cost (€/m2)
Macroeconomic Cost (€/m2)
Discount rate = 1.5%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
185 845 113 783 376 973 388 525
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
185 845 113 783 392 264 403 816
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
185 845 113 783 409 403 420 955
Discount rate = 3%
Inflation, energy cost = 0%
185 845 113 783 384 408 395.96
Inflation, energy cost = 1%
185 845 113 783 399 699 411 251
Inflation, energy cost = 2%
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.
Key to figures III.9 and III.10:
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)
This chapter presents the baseline study results and their respective cost-optimal levels. In the
sensitivity analysis, a macroeconomic analysis is adopted.
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
and low carbon costs.
Figure III.11 – Cooling Results HO-S1 (Chiller with heat pump) – HO2-P.
Key to figures III.11 and III.12:
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
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]
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).
HVAC Mechanical Ventilation
Floor Wall
Roof (insul. thick. (insul. thick.
Uw gv Shading Lighting LCC
(EUR/m2)
Thick. (kWhep/m
2)
% relative
to regulat.
mins
HO-S0 Without
heat recovery
P02 ET02 C02 W04 0.15 Interior Fluor. 484.07 176.12 -
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
The cost-optimal solution for the HO-S1 type system (Chiller/heat pump) shows a difference of
-22 % compared with the solution imposed by the regulatory minimums, while the cost-
optimal solution for the HO-S2 system (VRF) shows a difference of -29 % 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.13 – 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.14 – LED lighting and ventilation with heat recovery, i.e. the HO-S1 system,
which corresponds to the cost-optimal solution for Lisbon.
Figure III.13 – Subcategory HO2-P: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation with no
heat recovery
Key to figures III.13 and III.14:
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
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]
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
kWh/m2.year. This means reductions of around 0.32 % of primary energy.
III.1.5.2.2 Reference EER – HO2-P
The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]
EERRef = 176.12 kWep/m2.year
E-59
III.1.5.3 Subcategory HO3–Fa (Faro) results
This chapter presents the baseline study results and their respective cost-optimal levels. In the
sensitivity analysis, a macroeconomic analysis is adopted.
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
IEERef 175.91 EERRef 175.91
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]
E-60
Figure III.16 – Cooling Results HO-S2 (VRF) – HO3-Fa.
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.48 – Faro cost-optimal solutions (HO3-Fa) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).
HVAC Mechanical Ventilation
Floor Wall
Roof (insul. thick. (insul. thick.
Uw gv Shading Lighting LCC
(EUR/m2)
Thick. (kWhep/m
2)
% relative
to regulat.
mins
HO-S0 Without
heat recovery
P02 ET02 C02 W04 0.15 Interior Fluor. 483.70 175.91 -
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.
The cost-optimal solution for the HO-S1 type system (Chiller/heat pump) shows a difference of
-22 % compared with the solution imposed by the regulatory minimums, while the cost-
optimal solution for the HO-S2 system (VRF) shows a difference of -29 % 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.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.18 – LED lighting and ventilation with 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
Key to figures III.17 and III.18:
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
IEERef 175.91kWh/m2.a EERRef 175.91kWh/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]
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
kWh/m2.year. This means reductions of around 0.37 % of primary energy.
III.1.5.3.2 Reference EER – HO3-Fa
The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]
EERRef = 175.91 kWep/m2.year
E-63
III.1.5.1 Subcategory HO4-Funchal
This chapter presents the baseline study results and their respective cost-optimal levels. In the
sensitivity analysis, a macroeconomic analysis is adopted.
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
and low carbon costs.
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
IEERef 157.84 EERRef 157.84
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]
E-64
Figure III.20 – Cooling Results HO-S2, – HO4-Fu.
Error! Reference source not found. systematises the cost-optimal solutions of the reference
building with VRF and Chiller/heat pump systems.
Table III.49 – Funchal cost-optimal solutions (HO4-Fu) (3 % discount rate and low CO2 costs).
HVAC Mechanical Ventilation
Floor Wall
Roof (insul. thick. (insul. thick.
Uw gv Shading Lighting LCC
(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.
The cost-optimal solution for the HO-S1 type system (Chiller/heat pump) shows a difference of
-22 % 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.21 – 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.22 – LED lighting and ventilation with heat recovery, i.e. the HO-S1 system,
which corresponds to the cost-optimal solution for Lisbon.
Figure III.21 – Subcategory HO4-Fu: Fluorescent lighting, Ventilation with no heat recovery
(HO-S1 system – Chiller/ Heat pump).
Key to figures III.21 and III.22:
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
IEERef 157.84kWh/m2.a EERRef 157.84kWh/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]
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
kWh/m2.year. This means reductions of around 0.25 % of primary energy.
III.1.5.4.2 Reference EER – HO4 – Fu
The reference EER was determined based on the assumptions defined in [5]:
EERRef = 157.84 kWep/m2.year
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.
E-73
ANNEXES
E-74
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
Table E-1.2 – Ventilated façades, FV02
Ventilated Façade - FV02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 1.45
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.3 – Ventilated façades, FV03
Ventilated Façade - FV03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 2.58
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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 0.67
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 1.5
Table E-1.5 – Ventilated façades, FC02
Curtain façade - FC02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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) 0.030 0.040 0.75
Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 1.42
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.6 – Curtain façades, FC03
Curtain façade - FC03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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) 0.070 0.040 1.75
Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 2.42
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.4
E-78
ETICS
Table E-1.7 – ETICS façades, ET01
ETICS - ET01 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
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
Total resistance Rt 0.74
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 1.3
Table E-1.8 – ETICS façades, ET02
ETICS - ET02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04
Total resistance Rt 1.49
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1. 9 – ETICS façades, ET03
ETICS – ET03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
Rendering 0.010 1 300 0.01
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.070 0.040 1.75
Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04
Total resistance Rt 2.49
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.4
E-79
DOUBLE BRICK WALL
Table E-1. 10 – Double wall façades, PD01
Double wall - PD01 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 0.95
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 1.1
Table E-1. 11 – Double wall façades, PD02
Double wall - PD02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
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 0.020 0.040 0.50
Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 1.44
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.70
Table E-1. 12 – Double wall façades, PD03
Double wall - PD03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
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 0.070 0.040 1.75
Brick 0.11 m 0.110 0.27
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir
0.13
Total resistance Rt 2.69
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.4
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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
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
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04
Total resistance Rt 0.68
(W/m
2.ºC) 1.5
Table E-1.14 - Façades of Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks, FE02
Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks – FE02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.030 0.040 0.75
Volcanic Slag Concrete Block 0.300 0.45
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04
Total resistance Rt 1.43
(W/m
2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.15 - Façades of Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks, FE03
Volcanic Slag Concrete Blocks – FE03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.13
Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.070 0.040 1.75
Volcanic Slag Concrete Block 0.300 0.45
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, Sir 0.04
Total resistance Rt 2.43
(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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
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
Total resistance Rt 1.10
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.9
Table E-1. 17 – Roof with false ceiling, C02
Roof - C02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03
Thermal insulation (XPS), self-protected slabs (integrated mechanical protection)
0.050 0.037 1.35
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
Total resistance Rt 1 912
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.5
E-82
Table E-1. 18 – Roof with false ceiling, C03
Roof - C03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03
Thermal insulation (XPS), self-protected slabs (integrated mechanical protection)
0.100 0.037 2.70
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
Total resistance Rt 3.27
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.3
Floor over garage
Table E-1.19 – Floor over garage with raised floor, P01
Floor – PO1 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
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
Total resistance Rt 1.06
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 1.1
Table E-1.20 – Floor over garage with raised floor, P02
Floor – P02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, Ser=Sir 0.17
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.050 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
Total resistance Rt 2.21
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 0.5
E-83
Table E-1.21 – Floor over garage with raised floor, P03
Floor – P03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, Ser=Sir 0.17
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.100 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
Total resistance Rt 3.29
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 0.3
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
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 0.3
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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.4
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
Total resistance Rt 0.75
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.4
Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.030 0.040 0.75
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 1.50
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.25 – Single Wall, PS-ES 02
Single wall – PS-IE 02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.4
Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.070 0.040 1.75
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 2.50
E-85
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.4
Single Wall - Internal Thermal Insulation
Table E-1.26 – Single Wall – PS
Single wall – PS-II 01 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.4
Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02
Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.030 0.040 0.75
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, siR 0.13
Total resistance Rt 1.50
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.27 – Single Wall, PS-II 02
Single wall – PS-II 02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.4
Rendering 0.02 1 300 0.02
Brick 0.22 m 0.220 0.52
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.070 0.040 1.75
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Internal surface thermal resistance, siR 0.13
Total resistance Rt 2.50
Heat transfer coefficient, U
(W/m2.ºC) 0.4
E-86
Horizontal roof with no Thermal Insulation
Table E-1.28 - Horizontal roof, COB
Roof – COB dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03
Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01
Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2.0 0.08
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Upward surface internal thermal resistance, SiR 0.10
Total resistance Rt 0.37
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 2.70
Table E-1.29 – Horizontal roof External Thermal Insulation
Roof – COB-IE 02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.07 0.037 1.89
Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01
Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2.0 0.08
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Upward surface internal thermal resistance, SiR 0.10
Total resistance Rt 2.16
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.46
Table E-1.30 – Horizontal roof External Thermal Insulation
Roof – COB-IE 03 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface external thermal resistance, Ser 0.04
Porous concrete 0.035 1.30 0.03
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.10 0.037 2.70
Sealing (PVC) 0.005 0.70 0.01
Shape layer 0.100 1.3 0.08
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2.0 0.08
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Upward surface internal thermal resistance, SiR 0.10
Total resistance Rt 2.98
Heat transfer coefficient, U (W/m2.ºC) 0.34
E-87
Floor Ground Floor No Thermal Insulation
Table E-1.31 – Flooring ground floor, PAV
Floor – PAV dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
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
Total resistance Rt 1.06
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 1.1
Ground Floor Flooring Internal Thermal Insulation Table E-1.32 – Flooring ground floor, P01
Floor – P01 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.060 0.037 1.62
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
Total resistance Rt 1.96
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 0.5
Table E-1. 33 – Flooring ground floor, P02
Floor – P02 dj Rj
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Thermal Insulation (XPS) 0.100 0.037 2.70
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
Total resistance Rt 3.04
Heat transfer coefficient, U W/m2ºC 0.3
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
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.13
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Brick 0.22 0.220 0.52
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.030 0.040 0.75
Rendering 0.020 1 300 0.02
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Total resistance Rt 1.50
(W/m
2.ºC) 0.7
Table E-1.37 - Roof for Reference Existing Offices building
Roof (COBref) d λ R
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.10
Stucco 0.020 0.430 0.05
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Shape layer 0.100 1 300 0.08
Sealing (asphalt) 0.005 0.700 0.01
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.060 0.040 1.50
Porous concrete 0.035 1 300 0.03
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Total resistance Rt 1.87
(W/m2.ºC) 0.5
Table E-1.38 - Ground floor flooring for Reference Existing Office building
Floor (PAVref) d λ R
(m) (W/m.ºC) (m2.ºC/W)
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.17
Floor tile 0.015 1 300 0.01
Laying surface 0.050 1 300 0.04
Thermal insulation (EPS) 0.060 0.037 1.62
Reinforced concrete (2 300-2 400 kg/m3) 0.150 2 000 0.08
Surface thermal resistance, seR 0.04
Total resistance Rt 1.96
(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)
Directorate-General for Energy and
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
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 (-)
d - depreciation coefficient (-): 0.80 (normal)
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;
Directorate-General for Energy and
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:
Properties of the space and light fixtures.
Length (c) = 38 m
Width (l) = 2.0 m
Height of the site (h) = 3 m
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-100
Hanging height of the light fixtures = 2.5 m
Working plan (view) = 1.2
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, 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
Bulbs and light fixtures were selected, with two different lighting options – fluorescent and
LED, with the following properties:
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
d - depreciation coefficient (-): 0.80 (normal)
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;
Directorate-General for Energy and
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)
EERRef = 3.80 x 101 / 100 x 0.80 (Fo) x 1.0(Fd) x 76 = 233.35 W; (LPD simulation: 3.07 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
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 1 350 18 12 16 200 216 2.8 2.60
LED 1 500 12.5 10 15 000 125 1.6 1.60
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 horizontal circulation zones is 3.8(W/m2)/100lux, and it can be seen that:
In the case of fluorescent bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 2.6(W/m2) / 100lux,
and the lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 2.8 W/m2;
In the case of LED bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 1.6(W/m2) / 100lux, and the
lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 1.6 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
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
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:
Properties of the space and light fixtures.
Length (c) = 10 m
Width (l) = 12.8 m
Height of the site (h) = 5 m
Hanging height of the light fixtures = 4.5 m
Working plan (view) = 0.8
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, 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
Bulbs and light fixtures were selected, with two different lighting options – fluorescent and
LED, with the following properties:
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
d - depreciation coefficient (-): 0.80 (normal)
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)
EERRef = 3.40 x 469 / 100 x 0.80 (Fo) x 0.90(Fd) x 128 = 1469.6 W; (LPD simulation: 11.48 W/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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-104
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-105
Table E-3.3 - Communal Services Zone, Ground Floor - lighting (Fo = 0.8, Fd = 0.9)
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 35 117 250 1 260 9.8 2.10
LED 3 350 28 35 117 250 980 7.6 1.63
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 communal services zone on the ground floor is 3.4(W/m2)/100lux, and it can be
seen that:
In the case of fluorescent bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 2.1(W/m2) / 100lux,
and the lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 10.0 W/m2;
In the case of LED bulbs, the resultant value is LPDFluor = 1.6(W/m2) / 100lux, and the
lighting power value to be used in the EnergyPlus program is over 8.0 W/m2;
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-106
ANNEX E-4 COSTS AND USEFUL LIFE OF THE SOLUTIONS
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
Maintenance Activities
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
15 cm BA slab + ceramic tiles/hydraulic mosaic tiles
XPS 50 mm
121.10
-
P03
15 cm BA slab + ceramic tiles/hydraulic mosaic tiles
XPS 100 mm
125.80
-
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-108
Table E-4. 3 - Façades and Walls
External walls Material Insulation Cost
Investment €/m
2
Comments Time
Useful life
Maintenance Activities
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)
Interior painting (every 10 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
Interior painting (every 10 years)
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)
Interior painting (every 10 years)
1.50
17.00
6.00
FV02
External tiling+ Brick 22 cm
Mineral wool
30 mm 80.00
FV03
External tiling+ Brick 22 cm
Mineral wool
70 mm 83.80
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-109
Table E-4. 4 - Glazed spans
Spans Frame Glazing Cost
Investment (m
2)
Comments Time
Useful life
Maintenance Activities
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
Replacement of seals
(every 10 years) 19
W04
Thermal-cut
aluminium,
revolving
Low double glazing and
(g= 0.207) 340
Sliding window with 2 sliding
plates 35 years
Replacement of seals
(every 10 years) 19
W05
Thermal-cut
aluminium,
revolving
Low double glazing and
(g= 0.138) 355
Sliding window with 2 sliding
plates 35 years
Replacement of seals
(every 10 years) 19
Table E-4. 5 - Solar protection
Solar protection
Description Cost Investment
€/m2
Comments Time Useful
life
Maintenance Activities
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
preventive maintenance and cleaning
PV 18 kW / (23 %Roof cov.)
30 650 25 2 % 600 Maintenance includes
preventive maintenance and cleaning
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-111
ANNEX E-5 COST OF ENERGY AND CO2 EMISSIONS
Directorate-General for Energy and
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-114
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-115
ANNEX E-6 DOMESTIC HOT WATER HEATING SYSTEMS
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
Directorate-General for Energy and
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
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-118
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-119
Domestic hot water (HO2-P) – Porto
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-120
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-121
Domestic hot water (HO3-Fa) – Faro
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-122
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-123
Domestic hot water – Funchal
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-124
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-125
ANNEX E-7 SENSITIVITY STUDIES HOTEL BUILDINGS – NEW-BUILDS
Directorate-General for Energy and
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.
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-127
Figure E-7 3 – External walls for the W03 glazing solution.
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.
Figure E-7 4 – External walls for the W04 glazing solution.
Directorate-General for Energy and
Geology
E-128
Figure E-7 5 – External walls for the W05 glazing solution.
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.