energy savings opportunity scheme update...energy resources. this includes waste heat recovery, heat...

OCTOBER 2015

Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme Update

Also in this issue: Case Study: AECC Energy Centre Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure Designing For Flexible Spaces

2 criticalthinking www.hurleypalmerflatt.com criticalthinking 3

Contents

74

9 11

4 Case Study: AECC Energy Centre

7 Countdown To ESOS

9 Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure

11 Designing For Flexible Spaces

In this issue of

Hurley Palmer Flatt Client Services Director, Dr David Telford, discusses the AECC Energy Centre project and how it showcases the latest in renewable technologies.

With only a few months to go, Client Services Director Richard Whitaker, gives us an update on the Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme and discusses the options open to companies that have not yet taken action.

Technical Board Director, Wyn Turnbull, advises on the real difference between resilience classifications, Tier III and Tier IV, and how to apply these using a more holistic approach.

Finally, Executive Director Adrian Gray comments on the issue of shorter office leases and how they have directly affected designing for flexible spaces.

Paul Flatt, Group Chairman and CEO Hurley Palmer Flatt

(c)

Hen

ry B

oot D

evel

opm

ents

Ltd

Editor: Dominique Varleigh

Contributors:Dr David Telford Client Services Director

Richard Whitaker Client Services Director

Wyn Turnbull Technical Director

Adrian Gray Executive Director

Designer: Dominique Varleigh


CASE STUDYCASE STUDYAECC ENERGY CENTRE AECC ENERGY CENTRE

Dr David Telford, Hurley Palmer Flatt Client Services Director, discusses the AECC Energy Centre project and how it showcases the latest in renewable technologies.

(c)

Hen

ry B

oot D

evel

opm

ents

Ltd

CASE STUDY:AECC EnergyCentre

Hurley Palmer Flatt have been working with Henry Boot Developments on the energy solution for the new Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre.

The energy centre will showcase renewable technologies to contribute to Aberdeen’s position as Europe’s energy capital and will allow the new AECC to be one of the most sustainable venues of its type in the UK.

The energy centre sits within the masterplan and is an integral part of a fully integrated approach to sustainability and delivery of the vision. Given the operational profile of the exhibition and conference venue, the most sustainable solution is to develop a separate energy centre.

This will meet the annual demand of the AECC, together with the remainder of the proposed masterplan development and will offer the potential for additional off-site uses. By connecting the complementary use profile of these other energy demands the energy centre will deliver zero operational carbon energy to the AECC.

The energy centre will also be designed as an on-site demonstration facility, providing a showcase for Aberdeen City and Shire as not only an oil and gas leader, but a world class centre of excellence for the global renewable energy industry.

The Energy Centre Concept – A Biogas Based Ecosystem

The energy centre is based on a modular solution to address the changes in seasonal demand and to provide flexibility for expansion and also to provide a platform for demonstration plants. The energy ecosystem comprises the two main components.

An on-site Anaerobic Digestion Plant (AD) will take in Aberdeen City food waste, agricultural waste and purpose grown crops to produce on-site renewable biogas. The biogas is upgraded to pure Biomethane (equivalent to natural gas).

The gas output from the AD plant will be injected into the main gas grid and will also feed parts of the on-site Combined Cooling Heat and Power (CCHP). The CCHP facility will utilise various technologies to produce power, heat, and cooling to the AECC and the remainder of the buildings on the masterplan site. Combined heat and power will be generated using Spark Ignition (SI) gas engines coupled to alternators, heat recovery boilers and static Molten Carbonate Hydrogen fuel cells.

The SI gas engines and Hydrogen fuel cells are capable of running off both Biomethane and mains grid gas. Excess Biomethane will be reformed to Hydrogen for transport. Surplus electrical power (generated at night) will be used within an on-site electrolyser to produce an additional high grade Hydrogen stream for Aberdeen fuel cell buses.

The annual electrical demand for the AECC is met by the Hydrogen fuel cells. Static fuel cell technology provides base load power and heat and does not modulate well to changes in demand.

Molten Carbonate has been selected as these are the most robust for variable gas quality and can operate at high CO2 carry over. To meet the sharp peaks in demand for heat, power and cooling associated with an exhibition, the performance and conference venue additional CHP, in the form of more conventional gas fired generators, will be provided.

In addition, support for diurnal variation will use both heat and cool stores. These will be charged up overnight and available to support the power generation plant output at times of high peak demand. In addition, technologies for storing excess overnight electricity will be demonstrated on-site. Both high grade Hydrogen production and power batteries (in the1-2MWhr scale) may be used.

The Hydrogen and Internal Combustion (IC) IC CHP units will be modular and capable of running on either grid gas or Biomethane to provide flexibility and resilience. While the thermal and electricity storage technologies will allow the site to use more of the renewable energy directly.

When sizing CHP plants, it is fundamental to ensure that 100 percent of its outputs (both electrical and thermal) are used. A detailed analysis of the outline design using advanced thermal modelling will be carried out to accurately predict the thermal and electrical load profiles of each building over annual, monthly and daily periods.

A demand side response model will be constructed to optimise the modular plant sizes. A particular feature of the proposed development is that the district heating and cooling systems need to be more efficient, intelligent and cheaper.

It is necessary to develop and deploy intelligent systems using smart metering and control solutions for optimisation and consumer empowerment and exploiting multiple energy resources. This includes waste heat recovery, heat pumps, thermal storage, cogeneration and renewable energy integration, and to roll-out solutions for the integration of intelligent thermal network with smart electricity grids.

The plant mix will balance the heat and power demands across the wider development at the scale required. As the individual building designs develop with the aim of minimising primary energy demand, plant selection and sizing will be an iterative process as building designs are finalised. Additional modules can be added at a later date to provide energy for the wider area, if required.


Anaerobic Digestion. AD is a process in which micro-organisms break down biodegradable material in the absence of Oxygen. It takes place in sealed vessels, which exclude air and is quite a different process to composting, which needs air fed through it. The primary purpose of AD is to produce the Methane rich biogas. This can be utilised directly or purified and upgraded to Biomethane as a renewable replacement for natural gas.

Gas upgrading technology. The raw biogas which is produced in the AD process contains 60 percent Methane and approximately 40 percent CO2. In order to inject the Biomethane into the grid, the CO2 must be removed. CO2 capture technology will be used to harness this for use in the Commercial/Industrial market.

A typical use for this type of bottled CO2 is in fire extinguishers. The net effect of installing the CO2 capture facility on overall emissions is that the energy centre will become Carbon negative making the AECC one of the first Carbon negative conference facilities in the world.

AD plant logistics. A particular challenge here is to separate the logistics so that the clean odour free operations are conducted on-site with off-site support for the fuel preparation and transport. Loading the plant will entail taking prepared waste materials and energy crops from off-site to the sealed on-site reception hall for loading into the AD plant. This is done in the negative pressure reception building. Delivery of feedstock will be from either tankers or bulk haulage lorries. Digestate will be removed by tankers as organic fertiliser and returned to the farms. All feedstock will be stored and handled in a controlled environment. There will be no open air storage at the AECC site.

Digestate storage and treatment digestate. This is the material remaining after the anaerobic digestion of a biodegradable feedstock. The primary use of digestate is as a soil conditioner and organic fertiliser. Most of the nutrients in the original feedstock remain in the digestate as does the fibrous matrerial. Digestate contains Nitrogen, Phosphate and Potassium in a form that is readily available for crop uptake and the fibre is a valuable soil conditioner. This reduces reliance on other industrially produced fertilisers. Growth trials on digestate, originating from mixed waste, have shown healthy growth results for crops.

While digestate is technically not compost, it is similar in physical and chemical characteristics. Digestate will be removed by tanker and spread on the land which the feedstock has come from. Use of crops co-digested with food waste is sustainable from a land-use perspective and can be shown to be a prudent use of resources.

ENERGY SAVINGS OPPORTUNITY SCHEME ESOS

AECC ENERGY CENTRE OVERVIEW

AECC FOUR PIPE DISTRICTHEATING & COOLING NETWORK

ELECTRICITY TO &FROM GRID

GRID GASCONNECTION

FERTILISER

AGRI &FOOD WASTE

BIOMETHANEPRODUCTION

CCHP POWER GENERATIONBUILDING

POWER

HEAT

COOLING

ANAEROBIC (AD)BUILDING

EXCESS HYDROGENFOR TRANSPORT

Inside the Combined CoolingHeating and Power (CCHP)Building CHP Bulk� Gas Fired CHP Units� Hydrogen Fuel Cells� Absorption Chillers� Electric Chillers� Gas Boilers� Back-Up Diesel Generation� Hot Water Store� Ice Store

Company obligations for compliance with ESOS have been very well publicised this year, but with the deadline date of the 5 December looming, the Environment Agency (EA) have made the decision to provide some saving grace to companies that are at risk of missing this deadline.

The EA have announced that companies have until the 29 January 2016 to make their ESOS submittals without penalty.

This is as long as organisations advise the EA of their participation by the 5 December, along with the reasons why they are unable to comply. Any company that should be part of ESOS and fail to do this will risk the penalties imposed by the EA.

For organisations committing to achieving compliance through ISO 50001 certification, enforcement action will not normally be taken as long as notification is received by 30 June 2016.

It may be the case that some are underestimating its significance and putting it off; though with the risk of critically misjudging how strictly the EA will impose penalties for not undertaking the necessary energy audits in time.

There is no doubt that the EA is taking this very seriously, and the agency knows exactly who the 6,000 or so affected companies are.

As a general principle, it is reasonable to assume that the fines will outweigh the fees, though the burden of fines will only be the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the reputational risks involved with non-compliant organisations being listed on the EA website.

Non-compliant organisations who have adopted ISO 14001 will also be in breach of this. Businesses which fail to comply with ESOS could be fined up to £50,000, plus an additional £500 a day, every day the audit remains outstanding.

Countdown To ESOS With a few months to go, what options are left?

The UK’s Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme (ESOS) is a mandatory energy assessment and energy saving identification scheme for large undertakings (and their corporate groups). The scheme applies throughout the UK.

Richard Whitaker, Hurley Palmer Flatt Client Services Director, gives us an update on ESOS and identifies the options left with only three months to go.

AECC ENERGY CENTRE CASE STUDY

(c) Henry Boot Developments Ltd


There are several routes to ensuring compliance, though each applies a different life cycle cost model accounting for varying timescales and budgets.

Every option requires a calculation of total energy consumption by an organisation, including buildings, transport and industrial processes (if applicable), then the need to identify the areas where there is significant energy consumption, and the best route to take may be different in each case.

The three main options open to most organisations currently include the recommended ESOS Energy audit, the DEC (Display Energy Certificates) path, as well as the ISO 50001 approach, although companies already covered by the latter will not need to carry out an ESOS assessment.

However, bluntly speaking, the requirements for an ISO 50001 energy management system probably means it is now off the table for most organisations, unless this can be fully implemented prior to the 30 June 2016 deadline. This may be achievable for smaller organisations, but for larger corporates, this time scale may present a challenge.

As such, the two main qualifying assessments open to organisations are either a full ESOS audit or the lower cost and lower detail DEC option.

The completion of a full ESOS assessment is perhaps the most comprehensive and involved option, providing detailed information on energy efficiency initiatives and investment grade proposals for their implementation. This route to compliance will also allow sampling of buildings within an estate, allowing companies the opportunity to target critical buildings in their portfolio. A lead assessor then needs to be appointed – and organisations should be cautious about who is selected for this role, ensuring they fully meet the requirements of ESOS and the EA (including being a member of an approved register).

Although the notification of compliance has now been extended to 29 January 2016, subject to informing the EA of participation by the 5 December 2015. The same submission requirements are in place with the requirements for the production of an evidence pack and an online submission underwritten by a board director and lead ESOS assessor.

This may seem straightforward, but it involves a significant investment in time and resource in order to complete it accurately, and companies really should be commencing this process as soon as possible.

Finally, the DEC route to compliance is perhaps the lower cost option, replying on less detailed energy certification. No sampling is allowed on this route and all buildings in a portfolio will need to have a DEC certificate to achieve compliance. DEC certificates have been approved to count towards ESOS compliance. However, only buildings holding a valid DEC certificate (and accompanying recommendation report) can be regarded as compliant with ESOS.

The most important thing is that companies begin to take action now. Failure to comply will result in all manner of actions, and least of all will be the often significant fines. The potential loss of ISO accreditation and the much publicised public naming and shaming will be an even bigger concern. No large organisation will want to be associated with not complying with such an important environmental matter.

Hurley Palmer Flatt have developed a specialist ESOS service to provide a structured approach to compliance. To find out more, please contact Richard Whitaker at [email protected]

I am a large undertaking

and I am in ESOS

I am a large undertaking

and I am in ESOS

I am in ESOS

Do I employ 250 or

more employees

Am I part of a group of

undertakings?

Does the group of

undertakings include one

or more large undertakings/

establishments in the UK?

Is my turnover in excess of

€50m/£38,937,777?AND

Is my balance sheet total in excess of

€43m/£33,486,489?

Am I registered/based in the UK or a UK

establishment?

ENERGY SAVINGS OPPORTUNITY SCHEME ENERGY SAVINGS OPPORTUNITY SCHEMEESOS ESOS

As we count down towards the deadline, what are the options open to companies that have not yet taken action?


As a means of determining the resilience of engineering infrastructure that supports Information and Communications Technology (ICT), the mission critical engineering services industry, to a greater degree, makes reference to the Uptime Institute’s (UTI) Tier classification.

The commonly used terms for the UTI Tier III and Tier IV classifications are ‘concurrently maintainable’ and ‘fault tolerant’, respectively. The former term, ‘concurrently maintainable’, tends to be more widely understood, though detailed examination by the UTI during accreditation exercises reveal nuances that are relatively easy to comprehend. The latter term, ‘fault tolerant’, is not always so well understood, for which this article explores and will attempt to remove some of the myths.

UTI Tier classification development.

The terms ‘concurrently maintainable’ and ‘fault tolerant’ originate from within the ICT industry. They were adopted by the UTI during the development of its Tier classification which dates back to 1995, and even further back to IBM’s classifications of levels one to four in the 1980s.

Interestingly, performing a Google search using the words ‘fault tolerant’ provides results that are solely ICT related and do not refer to the Uptime Institute for at least the first five pages. Whether this changes after the first five pages was not investigated.

Most practitioners within the engineering aspect of the ICT mission critical environment will be familiar with the UTI’s publication: ‘Tier Classifications Define Site Infrastructure Performance.’, originally issued as a white paper in 1996 with revisions in 2001 and 2006. This document was eventually withdrawn and superseded by ‘Data Center Site Infrastructure Tier Standard: Topology.’ in 2010; with a subsequent revision in 2012.

Other similar, possibly competing documents include the American organisation TIA with their TIA 942 which was first published in 2005, originally concentrating on ICT principles for resilience. Also included is the more recent European based specification BS EN 50600 entitled, ‘Information Technology - Data centre facilities and infrastructures.’, again with a starting point of looking at ICT systems and progressing to MEP systems.

2N OR NOT 2N? THAT IS THE QUESTIONFAULT TOLERANT MEP INFRASTRUCTURE

Wyn Turnbull, Technical Director, advises on the real difference between resilience classifications, Tier III and Tier IV, and how to apply these using a more holistic approach.

Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure

2N or not 2N? That is the question.

Unsurprisingly, these documents do not always align and their scope varies depending upon interest – regular revision every couple of years serve to confuse the practitioner and the market! While the UTI did not include cooling system block schematics within their publications, the electrical block schematics that existed within the original white paper were removed when this document was superseded by the new standard in 2010.

It may be considered that omission of the electrical block schematics removed clarification of the Tier Classification requirements. In fact, the opposite is true. Designers and reviewers would often make reference to the block schematics on the assumption that provided the design followed the principles of the UTI electrical block schematics, the system design must therefore be UTI Tier compliant. Closer examination of the other tier criteria shows that this is not necessarily a safe assumption.

One of the subtle, but nevertheless important, differences between the UTI’s original white paper and the 2010 and 2012 standards, is that the latter removed the need for Tier III infrastructure to have segregated components or systems; leaving this criterion as a requirement solely for the Tier IV classification.

The definition of a fault.

The electrical engineering discipline tends to have a narrow definition of what constitutes a fault. In generic terms an electrical fault may be considered as being an event that results in the tripping of a functional device (e.g. circuit breaker), with the subsequent isolation and loss of power to part or parts of the electrical system.

In the UTI’s ‘fault tolerant’ term, the word fault has a much broader meaning. It refers to an abnormal event within the facility or the failure, and the associated consequences, of any component or system.

The difference between the restricted electrical definition and the wider UTI use of the term may be illustrated in the following example. Consider two electrical switchboards, which by the nature of their construction, are within adjacent but separate rooms (fire rated or not). They each independently form part of two separate power streams that may not be fault tolerant. From the electrical aspect, a breaker tripping on one switchboard may only affect one of the two switchrooms and the associated power stream. However, the failure of a water line that passes externally to the two switchrooms may result in both rooms flooding possibly affecting both power streams. From an electrical consideration the arrangement would be considered to be fault tolerant but the physical adjacency to a common abnormal event may fail a fault tolerant examination.

Form of segregation.

When Tier IV fault tolerant compliance is assessed the extent of the component and system segregation becomes

significant in addition to the attributes provided by the system schematics.

When considering the role of segregation within the UTI Tier classification, it is important to note that no mention of the extent of, or lack of, fire segregation is contained within the UTI Tier documents. The principal reasoning behind this is to make the UTI documents totally independent of, and non-reliant upon, the fire codes across the world.

To satisfy the fault tolerant criteria the method and form of segregation needs to be able to prevent a fault (abnormal event) associated with one service stream affecting the alternative service stream.

The provision of fire suppression is an example of where the fabric forming a compartmental approach to segregation need not, from the fault tolerant aspect, have a specific fire rating.

In the example of abnormal water release the method or form of segregation has to be sufficient to prevent the incident affecting the continuance of service.

Commercial considerations.

It is not unusual for the focus to be centred on system redundancy rather than identifying if the separation of system components can meet the fault tolerant criteria.

Following the principles of the original UTI block schematics without consideration of the advantages that segregation can offer, may not always provide the most commercially beneficial fault tolerant solution.

As an example, the provision of 2N or even 2 x (N+1) generation is not an absolute necessity if each generator set is located within its own compartment; and the alternator connections to the electrical network are appropriately arranged. It is therefore feasible for a fault tolerant generator system to be limited to N+1. This arrangement becomes a cost benefit analysis between the cost and space required for the generator sets against the provision of additional switchgear and the space to accommodate the required electrical reticulation.

Back to the origins of a fault tolerant system.

With the increasing application of control systems to data centre engineering infrastructure, there is a need for the industry to more closely examine how the ICT industry approaches the question of fault tolerance.

Sometimes the simpler approach may offer a better solution. This counters the trend towards larger integrated DCIM systems resulting in centralised rather than distributed and independent standalone components or sub-systems. This poses the question of whether two mirrored Tier I or Tier II data centres will, as a pair, be fault tolerant and commercially more attractive than one Tier IV site.

2N OR NOT 2N? THAT IS THE QUESTIONFAULT TOLERANT MEP INFRASTRUCTURE


IMPLICATIONS OF SHORTER LEASESDESIGNING FOR FLEXIBLE SPACES

Traditionally commercial offices in the UK, and particularly in London, have been designed to be let on a 25 year basis. Long leases have long been considered attractive by landlords as it allows the asset to yield a consistent return over a fixed term, which makes the building easy to value and trade. Incentives, such as initial rent free periods have been used to encourage tenants to sign up long-term. However, the 25 year lease is peculiar to the UK. Elsewhere in the world, offices are often let on much shorter terms, typically closer to ten years in the USA and Australia and even shorter in Singapore and the Far East.

In recent years, London has become even more

international and many occupiers are now questioning the wisdom of committing to long leases. This has generated some downward pressure on the market reducing the average length of office leases.

Recent surveys by CBRE and the British Property Federation have shown that since 2012, the average lease length has been shortening. Leases over ten years are now a rare event and make up only six percent of new leases.

The distribution of lease lengths shows how rare leases over ten years have become in recent years.

Less than six percent of leases are over ten years in length now, compared to twice that only five years ago and more than 20 percent ten years ago.

Designing For Flexible Spaces

Implications of shorter leases.

Adrian Gray, Hurley Palmer Flatt Executive Director, comments on the issue of shorter office leases and how they have directly affected designing for flexible spaces.

IMPLICATIONS OF SHORTER LEASESDESIGNING FOR FLEXIBLE SPACES

Managed and serviced offices. Both managed offices and serviced offices are flexible office space solutions that can be convenient for companies who do not want or cannot commit to long-term leases. Serviced offices differ from managed offices in two main aspects. First of all, serviced offices have been built to specification, keeping the needs of modern businesses in mind. Secondly, rental fees for serviced offices are fully inclusive. On the other hand, managed offices often consist of vacant space rented out by the company or by the individual that owns the space. Since the space will not have been necessarily built to be occupied as an office, tenants may have to invest in things like office furniture and telecommunications. Most managed offices are fitted with basic amenities like workstation partitions and cabling, and their fees may include office cleaning, but they do not offer clerical support, dedicated meeting rooms, reception services, and the full range of facilities offered by serviced offices.

How does this affect how a building is designed?

Shorter leases mean that buildings will be fitted-out more often, whilst staggered leases with multiple tenants can mean that there are often some tenants fit-out work being undertaken somewhere in a building.

To take account of this, office buildings now have to be more flexible and many developers are now taking this into consideration when setting a brief for the design team.

In terms of general arrangement, to facilitate more frequent fit-out work, there should also be adequate access to the goods lift at ground floor level with a separate route that avoids the reception. The goods lift should also be adequately sized to allow the transportation of fit-out materials.

This also affects our work as building services engineers as there are many aspects of a buildings flexibility that depend on the correct approach to the design of services. This generally means that services should be adaptable and easily modified to suit different room layouts in the least amount of time and with as little disruption as possible.

14 criticalthinking

IMPLICATIONS OF SHORTER LEASES IMPLICATIONS OF SHORTER LEASESDESIGNING FOR FLEXIBLE SPACES DESIGNING FOR FLEXIBLE SPACES

Risers and plant rooms.

Careful consideration needs to be given to commissioning and how this can be achieved with minimum disruption in an occupied building.

This can be as simple as ensuring that equipment and valves are easily accessible but can be taken further by specifying addressable controllers and electronic measuring devices. This allows the flow of air and water to be adjusted remotely with little or no disruption – other than the periodic calibration of equipment.

Mechanical air services.

Fresh air systems should be designed to be flexible and this can be achieved by including variable volume boxes to control the flow of fresh air to floors and even parts of floors. Even more control could be afforded by introducing VAV boxes to control the flow to zones or batches of fan coil units. These control devices can be individually addressable and linked to the BMS to enable adjustment without the disruption of accessing tenant’s space.

The central air system should also be capable of providing a variable volume of air by using a variable speed drive that is controlled by a pressure sensor in the fresh air riser.

On the secondary side of the ductwork system, flexibility can be introduced by using multi-fan fan coil units, where the individual fans within the unit each provide air to just one grille. This provides the ability to vary the amount of air to each grille by adjusting fan speeds individually to suit requirements. It is possible to do this remotely using the BMS – Individual fans can also be turned off if necessary.

With careful design it is possible to allow for multiple configurations of offices and meeting rooms within the same space and to make adaptations without disturbing the ceiling grid.

Mechanical water systems.

The main cooling system should be designed and selected to operate efficiently at lower loads as in a flexible space building, the requirements will be subject to constant change and part load operation will be more of a frequent occurrence.

Primary circulation pumps should be capable of providing variable flow so that the flow can be adjusted to meet the demands of secondary systems.

Tenants secondary water circuits should be separated from landlords systems by a heat exchanger. This will allow draining, flushing and cleaning of the tenant’s water systems to take place without the disruption of the landlord’s primary circuits.

Mechanical services above a false ceiling have to be modified to accommodate changes to partition layouts; the most disruptive part of this work is the cutting of pipe work which requires isolating and draining.

Where offices are designed to be very flexible, it is advisable to fit additional connection points so that further fan coil units can be added quickly and without too much disruption.

Other important factors are metering and the ability to control systems on a floor by floor basis with the possibility of further sub-division.

Tenants place space.

The provision of external space for tenants to use and locate plant and equipment also becomes more important.

It is important to carefully consider the potential usage of the building during the design stage; this should form part of the concept and strategic briefing exercise.

Most occupiers will require resilient cooling for computer rooms.

Electrical systems.

Whenever a tenancy change occurs the building design needs to allow flexibility for a change in layout and this will occur more often with shorter tenancies. As with the mechanical systems it is important to consider how equipment can be adjusted and commissioned whilst keeping disruption to a minimum.

The use of intelligent lighting control systems and fittings, including dimming control, allows flexibility for a change of layout. The use of addressable dimming adds even more flexibility and control.

Fire alarm systems and smoke detectors should be designed to allow the maximum amount of flexibility with sufficient spare capacity to allow for the incorporation of additional meeting rooms or cellular offices.

Frequent changes of use on floors may lead to a variation in the small power requirements. An efficient way to provide flexibility for this is to incorporate additional capacity in the electrical risers to allow for varying amounts to be taken at each floor during the lifetime of the building.

Electrical and water services metering should be installed on a floor by floor basis to allow for future split tenancy’s.

Building Services Engineering | Energy and Sustainability | Building Structures and Surveying | IT and Security Consultancy

LONDON CITY | WEST END | PURLEY | MANCHESTER | GLASGOW NEW YORK | DUBAI | MUMBAI | SINGAPORE | SYDNEY

www.hurleypalmerflatt.com

* Associate offices

London City

Broken Wharf House

2 Broken Wharf

London

EC4V 3DT

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7429 3333

Glasgow

204 West George Street

Glasgow

G2 2PQ

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 141 572 1324

London West End

York House

45 Seymour Street

London

W1H 7JT

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7535 3100

New York*

rda | Hurley Palmer Flatt

19 West 44th Street

New York

NY 10036

Tel: +44 20 7429 3360

Tel: +00 1 212 764 7272

Sydney

Level 11

50 Pitt Street

Sydney NSW 2000

Australia

Tel: +61 2 9112 9900

Purley

NWS House

1E High Street

Purley, Surrey

CR8 2AF

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 8763 5900

Dubai *

PO Box 333370

Dubai

Tel: +971 50 585 5666

Manchester*

Hannan | Hurley Palmer Flatt

Beta House

Alphagate Drive

Manchester Road, Denton

M34 3SH

Tel: +44 (0)161 337 2200

Mumbai

L2, 294 CST Rd,

Off Bandra-Kurla Complex Kalina,

Santacruz (E)

Mumbai 400098

India

Tel: +91 80 6792 0873

Singapore

545 Orchard Road

#13-06

Singapore 238882

Tel: +65 6736 7394

energy savings opportunity scheme update...energy resources. this includes waste heat recovery, heat...

Documents