1. 1
Insulation
First Issue June 2016
The Real Value of Improving U-values
THE IMPACT OF DIFFERING U-VALUE SPECIFICATIONS ON THE
ROI ASSOCIATED WITH ENERGY SAVINGS IN NON-DOMESTIC
AND DOMESTIC BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE EAST - WHITE PAPER
Understand the positive impact of
improving today’s regulations
See rear cover for applicable countries
Low Energy –
Low Carbon Buildings
www.kingspaninsulation.ae/u-valuebenefits
3. 3
Contents
Page
Introduction 4
Executive Summary 4
Analysis 5
Background 5
Approach 5
Baseline U-values 6
Construction 7
Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete with Concrete Block infill 7
Floor Construction – Concrete Slab 8
Roof Construction – Concrete Deck 9
Case Studies 10
Villa 10
Low-rise Residential 12
High-rise Residential 14
Low-rise Commercial 16
High-rise Commercial 18
Hotel 20
Conclusion 22
Appendix A 24
Construction Build − ups – Specification & Cost 28
Appendix B 29
Modelled Buildings − Specification & Assumptions 30
4. 4
Executive Summary
The operational expenditure of a commercial building is
a fundamental metric in understanding the valuation, and
thus the investment potential, of real estate. The operational
expenditure is deducted from the future income streams of
a building, and therefore, a higher operational expenditure
will reduce future income streams, and as such, give a
lower valuation.
Additionally, governments across the Gulf are commiting to
cut carbon emissions and energy demand, with programmes
such as Dubai’s integrated energy strategy, Abu Dhabi’s Vision
2030 and Qatar’s National Vision 2030.
As such, the demand for energy reducing solutions has
intensified. However, understanding the Return on Investment
(ROI) that can be generated from the increased Capital
Expenditure (CapEx) on energy saving solutions, is paramount
to them being considered, by building owners
and developers, long term.
With the aim of quantifying the energy saving benefits, and
therefore, financial benefits, that result from insulating the
floors, soffits, roofs and external walls of new non-domestic
and domestic buildings, Kingspan Insulation commissioned
Mott MacDonald to investigate the energy saving benefits of
improving U-values.
To this end, Mott MacDonald developed a research
programme to analyse six modelled buildings that denoted
representations of common building types found across
the Middle East. The modelled buildings were subsequently
analysed, by Sefaira Systems Software, to identify the energy
savings obtained via the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™
wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan
Thermaroof™
insulation solutions in five different locations
across the region: Dubai, U.A.E.; Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; Muscat,
Oman; Doha, Qatar; and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Two types of
external wall construction, one type of floor construction and
one type of roof construction were examined.
The findings show that, despite the requirement for a CapEx
uplift for the additional insulation ranging from 0.01% to 3.23%
of total development costs, the additional cost of increasing
the insulation to achieve the required U-values can provide an
over whelming ROI* and energy saving potential:
l 100% of the 1,241 calculations showed energy savings
and a reduction in carbon emissions;
l with the potential to save up to 92 tonnes of CO2
emissions annually in just one building;
l 1 in 5 of the total calculations showed an ROI of
over 200%;
l up to 84% of calculations for a building showed an
ROI of over 100%; and
l all six modelled buildings showed opportunities for
a positive ROI – one building an instant ROI and, in
absence of that, over 6,500%.
Introduction
“All of the models in each of the
study locations showed a reduction in
cooling and overall energy consumption
when improvements were made to the
U-values of the building’s wall, roof
and floor elements”
— Mott MacDonald
* The overall return on the additional CapEx investment required for the use of Kingspan
Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation
solutions to meet the required U-value specification over a 50 year lifetime of the building.
5. 5
Analysis
Background Approach
This study looks at the energy saving benefits, and therefore,
financial benefits, that result from improving U-values in floor,
soffit, roof and external wall constructions.
The U-value is a sum of thermal resistances of the layers that
make up a building element (i.e. walls, floors, roofs etc.). This
value, measured in W/m2.k, shows the ability of an element to
transmit heat from a warm space to a cold space in a building
and, more specifically, from outside to inside the building. If
an element has a higher thermal resistance, it has a lower
the U-value. The lower the U-value the better insulated the
building element is. Across the Middle East, regional building
regulations are in place, which prescribe different U-value
specifications for architects and consultants to adhere to when
designing a building.
The complete analysis considered six different building types
and commercial variables (e.g. geographical location, energy
usage and material cost) and a range of performance variables
(e.g. HVAC system type, HVAC operating hours and occupant
density)*, that were representative of modern day building
stock across the Middle East. The modelled buildings were
subsequently analysed to identify the energy savings obtained
by improving U-value specifications via the use of Kingspan
Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and
Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions.
To establish the extent of the financial value for the energy
savings, regional baseline insulation specifications were
compared against improved insulation specifications. The
construction costs for each different U-value specification
were used as direct inputs into the models. The increased
CapEx was, therefore, calculated by subtracting the savings
due to the reduction in cooling plant size from the cost of the
additional insulation. The subsequent outputs from the models
were evaluated to determine the energy cost savings over the
life time of the building resulting from the increased U-value
specification. The ROI was thus calculated by dividing the
former by the latter.
* See Appendix B for further details of assumptions used in Sefaira Systems Software
To quantify the energy saving benefits, and therefore, financial
benefits, that result from additional insulation in the floors,
roofs and external walls, Mott MacDonald used an approach
that comprised the following four stages.
Stage 1: Developing the Building Models
Locations in which the buildings were to be modelled included:
l Dubai, U.A.E.;
l Abu Dhabi, U.A.E;
l Doha, Qatar;
l Muscat, Oman; and
l Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The following six different building typologies were identified
to cover the majority of construction development that is
undertaken in the aforementioned locations:
l villa;
l low-rise residential;
l high-rise residential;
l low-rise commercial;
l high-rise commercial; and
l hotel.
Stage 2: Build-up selection
For each element, common methods of construction were
identified as those typically used within buildings in the
chosen locations.
For floor constructions, concrete slabs have been insulated
below through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit
Board, or above through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™
K3 Floorboard. For high-rise buildings, a podium level has
been assumed, and therefore, soffit insulation has been used.
For low-rise buildings, the floor is assumed to be connected to
the floor so has been insulated above with floor insulation.
For roof constructions, concrete decks have been insulated
above through the use of Kingspan Thermaroof™
TR27
LPC/FM.
For wall constructions, two build-ups were considered,
buildings which incorporate a cladding façade have been
insulated through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15
Cladding board or buildings which incorporate an Exterior
Insulation Finishing System (EIFS) have been insulated through
the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall board.
These walls consist of a reinforced concrete structure, which
has been in filled with concrete blockwork.
Full details of the construction build-ups can be found in
Appendix A.
6. 6
Analysis
Standards and regulations in the listed locations and regions
were considered for each baseline insulation specification. The
baseline U-values can be found in Tables 1 2 below.
Stage 3: Insulation specifications
Standards and regulations in the listed locations and regions
were considered for each baseline insulation specification.
For Dubai, this incorporated the Dubai Green Building Code;
for Abu Dhabi, this incorporated the Abu Dhabi International
Energy Code; for Doha, this incorporated Karamah
Regulations; for Riyadh, this incorporated the draft Saudi
Arabian Standard, SASO and, where applicable, ASHRAE
Energy Standard 90.1-2013 (for all buildings except low-rise
residential buildings) and ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.2-2007
(for low-rise residential buildings); and for Muscat, ASHRAE
Energy Standards 90.1 and 90.2 were considered as no local
standards are in place.
The proposed improved U-values were concluded from
carefully considering standards and regulations across
the globe.
Stage 4: Cost Analysis
The cost breakdown and elemental rates for each build-up
were ascertained. Prelims, contingency, delivery costs and
professionals fees were excluded. The analysis of the cost
differential between each build-up for each construction
did, however, include a deep review of cost differences e.g.
materials, labour sundries. In addition, all costs such as
construction costs and energy costs were assessed on a
regional basis, and therefore, overall development and energy
costs are different for each of the geographical profiles.
Please refer to Appendix A for further details of the
construction build-up costs.
Environmental and building performance profiles for each
location and building type were created. The outputs,
generated by Sefaira Systems Software, were ascertained
and a quantified energy saving could be determined by
comparing the proposed improved specifications against
the baseline model for the specific location.
Please refer to Appendix B for further details of the model
used to generate the energy savings.
U-values
Element
Element
Table 1: U-value regulations for commercial buildings across the Gulf
Table 2: U-value regulations for residential buildings across the Gulf
Table 3: Improved U-value specifications used in Sefaira
Systems Software
U-value (W/m2.K)
U-value (W/m2.K)
Improved U-values W/m2.K
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Doha,
Qatar
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
Wall 0.329 0.57 0.57 0.857/3.293 0.857/3.293
Roof 0.221 0.30 0.437 0.27 0.22/0.27
Floor 1.828 0.57 1.825 1.825 1.825
Wall 0.57 0.57 0.57 1.48/0.857 0.53/0.857
Roof 0.31 0.30 0.437 0.22 0.22/0.31
Floor 0.36 0.57 1.825 1.825 1.825
Wall 0.45 0.30/0.29 0.22/0.20 0.18
Roof 0.29 0.20 0.14 0.10
Floor 0.54 0.30 0.19 0.13
Note: Where the baselines varied, the iterations had two options. The second option would be
used if the first option was too close to the baseline value.
The improved U-value specifications are shown in Table 3.
7. 7
Location
Table 4: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of
the locations and buildings constructed using an External Insulation
Finishing System insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External
Wall Board
Figure 2 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15
Cladding Board
Baseline Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Residential
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 256.97 262.26
Dubai, U.A.E. 256.97 256.97
Doha, Qatar 275.33 275.33
Muscat, Oman 244.14 244.14/231.73
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 231.93 231.93/220.14
U-value
(W/m2
.K)
Location
Table 6: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of
the locations and buildings constructed using a cladding façade
insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board
Construction
Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete
with Concrete Block infill
Cost of wall build-up
3 mm skim coated
12.5 mm plasterboard
on dabs
Render system
incorporating EML
or glass fibre mesh
(alternative cladding
system)
Bedding compound
(render system only)
Figure 1 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External
Wall Board
Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete
with Concrete Block infill
Cost of wall build-up
Kingspan KoolthermTM
K15 Cladding Board
Kingspan Kooltherm™
K5 External
Wall Board
Mechanical fixings
(render system only)
Non−combustible substrate
– structural masonry wall
Discrete fixing bracket
Proprietary fixing rail
Cladding panel
Improved Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Baseline Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Residential
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Commercial Commercial
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
Table 5: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of
the locations and buildings constructed using an External Insulation
Finishing System insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External
Wall Board
0.52 N/A N/A N/A 107.50 102.12
0.45 113.42 113.42 121.52 N/A 102.62
0.29 116.72 116.72 125.06 111.16 105.60
0.20 121.83 121.83 130.53 116.02 110.22
0.18 123.25 123.25 132.06 117.38 111.51
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 112.87 116.72
Dubai, U.A.E. 112.87 112.87
Doha, Qatar 120.93 120.93
Muscat, Oman 90.46 106.58
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 102.12 85.94
Table 7: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of
the locations and buildings constructed using a cladding façade
insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board
U-value
(W/m2
.K)
Improved Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
0.54 N/A N/A N/A 244.74 232.50
0.45 257.79 257.79 276.20 N/A N/A
0.30 262.26 262.26 280.99 249.78 237.29
0.22 268.53 268.53 287.71 255.74 242.96
0.18 277.51 277.51 297.33 264.30 251.08
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
8. 8
Construction
Concrete wall
Concrete floor
Floor screed
Concrete
slab
Kingspan KoolthermTM
K10
FM Soffit Board
Kingspan KoolthermTM
K3 Floorboard
Hardcore
Separation layer
(see ‘Sitework’) Damp proof
membrane
Floor Construction – Concrete Slab Floor Construction – Concrete Slab
Cost of floor build-up Cost of floor build-up
Figure 4 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3
Floorboard
Location Location
Table 8: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the
locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated
below with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board
Table 10: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the
locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated
above with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard
Figure 3 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM
Soffit Board
Baseline Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $) Baseline Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
ResidentialResidential
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 99.10 96.36
Dubai, U.A.E. 96.87 96.87
Doha, Qatar 103.25 103.25
Muscat, Oman 91.78 91.78
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 87.19 87.19
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 114.30 111.50
Dubai, U.A.E. 112.93 112.93
Doha, Qatar 119.47 119.47
Muscat, Oman 106.19 106.19
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 100.88 100.88
CommercialCommercial
Improved Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Table 9: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the
locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated
below with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board
0.54 96.87 N/A 103.79 92.26 87.64
0.45 N/A 97.88 N/A N/A N/A
0.30 100.40 100.40 107.57 95.62 90.84
0.19 106.18 106.18 113.76 101.12 96.06
0.13 116.79 116.79 125.13 111.22 105.66
Table 11: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each
of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab
insulated above with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard
0.54 112.93 N/A 120.99 107.55 102.17
0.45 N/A 112.93 N/A N/A 102.17
0.30 115.56 115.56 123.81 110.06 104.55
0.19 117.10 117.10 125.47 111.53 105.95
0.13 126.03 126.04 135.04 120.03 114.03
Improved Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
U-value
(W/m2
.K)
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
U-value
(W/m2
.K)
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
9. 9
Figure 5 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27
LPC/FM
Roof Construction – Concrete Deck
Cost of roof build-up
Kingspan Thermaroof
TM
TR27 LPC/FM
Damp proof course (DPC)
Paving Slab
Screed Bedding
Insulation
upstand min.
300mm from
bottom surface
of horizontal
insulation layer
Waterproofing e.g. single-ply
non-bituminous membrane
Seperation
Layer
50mm
screed to falls
150mm
concrete deck
Location
Table 13: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each
of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete deck
insulated with Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC/FM
Table 12: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the
locations and buildings constructed using a concrete deck insulated
with Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC/FM
Baseline Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Residential
0.29 N/A N/A 219.96 N/A N/A
0.25 206.26 206.26 N/A 196.44 186.62
0.20 210.44 210.44 225.47 200.42 190.40
0.14 215.07 215.07 230.44 204.83 194.59
0.10 229.98 229.98 246.40 219.02 208.07
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 205.30 208.74
Dubai, U.A.E. 205.30 205.30
Doha, Qatar 217.30 217.30
Muscat, Oman 198.80 196.02
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 188.86/186.22 188.86/185.74
Commercial
U-value
(W/m2
.K)
Improved Build-up Costs per m2
(USD $)
Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.
Dubai,
U.A.E.
Doha,
Qatar
Muscat,
Oman
Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia
10. 10
Case Studies
Villa
A typical new build Villa located in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. The building comprises two storeys, three bedrooms and a ground
floor area of 125 m2
. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of VRF fan coil unit with central outside air. Refer to
Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 116.72
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 206.26
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 115.56
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 460.64 (0.16% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 52,538
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 34.03
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 356
Return on additional CapEx 5,412%
Table 14: Details of the baseline villa building model in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Table 15: Details of an improved villa building model in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 115.39
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.31
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 205.30
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.36
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 114.30
Total Development Cost ($) 282,038.03
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 53,131
Description Value
Baseline Building
Description Value
Improved Building
11. 11
Table 16: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled villa insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™
insulation solutions.
Across all locations, the fabric uplift for the villa was the highest
of all the modelled buildings at between 0.11 and 3.23% of the
total development costs, with 3.23% representing the biggest
improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.
However, the villa model calculations still concluded in 57%
of calculations giving a positive ROI, across all locations, and
100% of calculations in Muscat, Oman and Dubai, U.A.E.. It
also concluded in the highest ROI within the whole study, at
instant ROIs being calculated in Muscat and Dubai.
The villa showed the largest improvements when improving
U-values, with peak cooling demand being reduced by up to
12.7% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and 12.3%, 9.2%, 6.8% and
6.1% in Muscat, Abu Dhabi, Doha and Dubai, respectively.
Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 8.9% in
Muscat, Oman. In Saudi Arabia, this represented the
largest carbon emission reduction of up to 8.9% and 2.9
tonnesCO2/year.
The results showed improving the floor U-value specification
offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI, but the smallest
energy reductions. However, increasing the wall insulation,
by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon
emissions and, furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls
could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption
as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when
improving the floor and roof specification.
ROI: Modelled Villa
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.45 625 375 Instant
0.25 0.29 0.45 1,289 773 799%
0.25 0.45 0.30 645 387 915%
0.20 0.18 0.30 1,805 1,042 242%
0.14 0.18 0.30 1,915 1,147 219%
0.14 0.20 0.19 1,826 1,095 222%
0.10 0.18 0.13 1,973 1,183 143%
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E 0.25 0.29 0.30 1,204 723 602%
0.20 0.29 0.30 1,311 787 337%
0.14 0.29 0.30 1,441 865 246%
0.14 0.18 0.30 1,847 1,109 154%
0.10 0.20 0.19 1,923 1,154 118%
0.25 0.45 0.54 1,215 603 527%
0.25 0.29 0.54 1,971 978 222%
0.20 0.29 0.30 2,143 1,063 125%
0.14 0.29 0.30 2,290 1,136 102%
Muscat, Oman 0.20 0.29 0.54 4,485 2,570 1,585%
0.20 0.52 0.19 3,713 2,128 Instant
0.20 0.54 0.54 3,713 2,128 6,927%
0.14 0.29 0.30 4,665 2,674 499%
0.10 0.18 0.13 5,142 2,947 126%
0.14 0.18 0.30 5,057 2,898 219%
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 0.25 0.29 0.54 831 605 138%
Dubai, U.A.E.
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.
Doha, Qatar
Muscat, Oman
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
Summary
12. 12
Case Studies
Low-rise Residential
A typical new build low-rise residential building located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The building comprises five storeys and a
total floor area of 5,711 m2
, and a ground floor area of 1,125 m2
. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils
with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.29
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 105.60
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 186.62
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 107.17
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 12,566.43 (0.20% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 549,260
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 2,120.48
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 5,847
Return on additional CapEx 205%
Table 17: Details of the baseline low-rise residential building model in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.53
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 87.64
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.31
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 190.40
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 1.825
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 100.88
Total Development Cost ($) 6,175,482.25
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 557,303
Table 18: Details of an improved low-rise residential building model in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Description Value
Description Value
Baseline Building
Improved Building
13. 13
ROI: Modelled Low-rise Residential Building
Table 19: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled Low-rise residential building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™
and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Across all locations, the fabric uplift for the low-rise
residential building was between 0.06 and 1.35% of the total
development costs, with 1.35% representing the biggest
improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.
The model calculations concluded in the most improved
U-value combinations that would provide a positive ROI, at
84% across all locations, and 100% of calculations in Muscat,
Oman and Dubai, U.A.E.
The low-rise residential building showed the second largest
improvements when improving U-values, with peak cooling
demand being reduced by up to 9.4%. Reductions in annual
electricity demand of up to 6.5%, which represented a carbon
emission reduction of up to 6.5% and 25 tonnesCO2/year. It
concluded in the second highest ROI within the whole study,
at ROI of up to 3,242% being calculated in Muscat.
The results showed improving the floor U-value specification
offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI, but the smallest
energy reductions. However, increasing the wall insulation,
by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon
emissions and, furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls
could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption
as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when
improving the floor and roof specification.
0.25 0.45 0.45 4,501 2,700 1,869%
0.10 0.18 0.13 16,425 9,855 154%
0.25 0.18 0.45 11,297 6,778 248%
0.25 0.45 0.30 5,906 3,243 764%
0.20 0.29 0.30 7,365 4,419 189%
0.14 0.20 0.19 10,670 6,402 120%
0.25 0.45 0.30 3,457 2,075 446%
0.25 0.45 0.45 12,850 6,374 323%
0.20 0.29 0.30 19,153 9,500 129%
0.25 0.20 0.45 19,503 9,673 105%
0.20 0.29 0.30 37,808 21,664 712%
0.14 0.20 0.19 42,492 24,348 322%
0.10 0.18 0.13 44,472 25,483 198%
0.20 0.45 0.45 32,370 18,548 3,242%
Riyadh 0.25 0.45 0.45 5,280 3,838 476%
0.20 0.29 0.30 9,634 7,004 145%
0.25 0.18 0.45 11,072 8,049 112%
Dubai, U.A.E.
Doha, Qatar
Muscat, Oman
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.
Summary
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
14. 14
Case Studies
High-rise Residential
A typical new build high-rise residential building located in Dubai, U.A.E. The building comprises fourty three storeys and a
total floor area of 111,886 m2
, 2,602 m2
per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central
outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 257.79
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 206.26
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 97.88
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 36,155.89 (0.016% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 20,167,376
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 5,506.20
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 4,999
Return on additional CapEx 165%
Table 20: Details of the baseline high-rise residential building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 256.97
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 205.30
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 96.87
Total Development Cost ($) 215,796,717.29
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 20,175,708
Table 21: Details of an improved high-rise residential building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Description Value
Description Value
Baseline Building
Improved Building
15. 15
ROI: Modelled High-rise Residential Building
Table 22: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled high-rise residential building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™
and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
All locations showed examples where a positive return
on investment could be made by improving the U-value
specification, with 882% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia being
the highest.
The high-rise residential building showed peak cooling
demand being reduced by up to 1.9%. Reductions in annual
electricity demand of up to 0.7%, which represented a carbon
emission reduction of up to 0.7% and 92 tonnesCO2/year. By
amount, this was the highest reduction in carbon emissions
in the study.
Across all locations, the fabric uplift was the lowest out of
the six modelled buildings, at between 0.01 and 0.41% of
development costs, with 0.41% representing the biggest
improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.
Additionally, due to the height of the building, the uplift for the
wall insulation was significantly higher than when improving
the U-value specification in the roof and floor.
Subsequently, the results showed improving the floor and
roof U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a
positive ROI. However, increased wall insulation, by far, had
the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions
and, furthermore, that improving the U-value in the walls
could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption
as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when
improving the floor and roof specification. In most cases,
this would not produce a positive ROI, however, it is safe
to assume that as we see energy prices increase, this
will change.
Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.30 8,527 5,116 139%
0.20 0.45 0.45 9,090 5,454 133%
0.14 0.45 0.30 9,293 5,576 118%
0.25 0.13 0.45 27,083 16,250 21%
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E 0.25 0.45 0.30 13,220 7,932 181%
0.20 0.45 0.30 14,352 8,611 147%
0.14 0.45 0.30 15,545 9,327 124%
0.25 0.22 0.30 42,430 25,458 42%
Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.45 0.54 34,258 16,992 226%
0.20 0.45 0.30 34,995 17,357 119%
0.14 0.45 0.54 37,095 18,399 119%
0.25 0.22 0.54 57,786 28,662 21%
Riyadh 0.20 0.54 0.54 45,914 33,379 882%
0.20 0.30 0.54 101,733 73,960 145%
0.14 0.54 0.54 48,473 35,240 526%
0.14 0.30 0.30 98,283 71,452 127%
Dubai, U.A.E.
Doha, Qatar
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.
Summary
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
16. 16
Case Studies
Low-rise Commercial
A typical new build low-rise commercial building located in Muscat, Oman. The building comprises nine storeys and a total
floor area of 5,400 m2
, 600 m2
per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air.
Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.29
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 111.16
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 196.44
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.54
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 107.55
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 52,721.60 (0.80% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 2,087,738
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 12,599.43
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 23,095
Return on additional CapEx 295%
Table 23: Details of the baseline low-rise commercial building model in Muscat, Oman insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 3.293
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 91.78
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.27
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 196.02
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 1.825
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 106.19
Total Development Cost ($) 6,619,443.72
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 2,128,044
Table 24: Details of an improved low-rise commercial building model in Muscat, Oman insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Description Value
Description Value
Baseline Building
Improved Building
17. 17
ROI: Modelled Low-rise Commercial Building
Table 25: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled low-rise commercial building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™
and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions.
Four locations showed examples where a positive return
on investment could be made by improving the U-value
specification, with 1,361% in Dubai, U.A.E. being the highest.
100% of the improved U-value calculations in Muscat, Oman
and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia gave a positive ROI and 93% of the
calculations in Dubai, U.A.E..
Across all locations, the fabric uplift was mid-range, as
expected, at between 0.04 and 1.77% of development costs,
with 1.77% representing the biggest improvement in U-values,
and therefore, the highest uplift.
The low-rise commercial building showed peak cooling
demand being reduced by up to 12.6% in Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia. Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 2.6%,
which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 2.6%
and 31.9 tonnesCO2/year. For other locations reductions in
peak cooling demand were up to 5.9%, 1.3%, 1.2%, and
0.1% in Muscat, Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, respectively.
The results showed improving the floor and roof U-value
specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI.
However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest
impact on energy usage and carbon emissions. Furthermore,
improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce
the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy
consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof
specification, in some instances double the energy savings. In
most cases, this also produced a positive ROI.
Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.45 3,095 1,857 1,361%
0.25 0.45 0.30 3,289 1,973 674%
0.20 0.45 0.30 3,337 2,002 376%
0.20 0.18 0.30 8,176 4,905 126%
0.10 0.18 0.19 8,415 5,049 106%
Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.45 0.54 4,810 2,386 368%
0.25 0.29 0.54 8,703 4,317 146%
0.20 0.45 0.54 5,239 2,599 205%
0.20 0.30 0.29 9,319 4,623 118%
Muscat, Oman 0.25 0.52 0.54 40,306 23,095 374%
Oman 0.20 0.52 0.54 40,490 23,201 347%
0.10 0.29 0.30 46,290 26,542 235%
0.10 0.18 0.13 48,752 27,935 160%
Riyadh 0.25 0.52 0.54 39,449 28,680 718%
0.25 0.18 0.54 44,345 32,239 338%
0.10 0.29 0.30 42,616 30,982 403%
0.10 0.18 0.13 43,927 31,935 255%
Dubai, U.A.E.
Muscat, Oman
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Doha, Qatar
Summary
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
18. 18
Case Studies
High-rise Commercial
A typical new build high-rise commercial building located in Doha, Qatar. The building comprises thirty three storeys and
a total floor area of 66,680 m2
, 3,186 m2
per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central
outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 270.20
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.29
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 219.16
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.54
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 103.79
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 27,120.69 (0.02% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 18,882,556
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 5,447.48
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 5,105
Return on additional CapEx 117%
Table 26: Details of the baseline high-rise commercial building model in Doha, Qatar insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 275.33
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.437
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 217.30
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 1.825
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 103.25
Total Development Cost ($) 135,665,469.80
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 18,892,849
Table 27: Details of an improved high-rise commercial building model in Doha, Qatar insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan
Thermaroof™ insulation solutions
Description Value
Description Value
Baseline Building
Improved Building
19. 19
Table 28: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled high-rise commercial building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and
Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
The only location which offered a positive return on investment
for the increased U-value specification was Doha, Qatar at
117%. Less opportunities for a positive ROI was expected
as, where applicable, the current U-value requirements for
commercial buildings are lower than residential.
The high-rise commercial building showed peak cooling
demand being reduced by up to 8% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 0.9%,
which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to
0.9%. For other locations reductions in peak cooling demand
were up to 0.7%, 0.6% and 0.1% in Dubai, Doha and
Abu Dhabi, respectively.
Additionally, due to the high internal loading of a high-rise
commercial building, increasing the U-value, in some cases,
increased the thermal mass of the building and caused it to
retain heat. This resulted in the lower reductions in cooling and
electricity demand.
The fabric uplift across all locations was consistent and,
as the development costs of a commercial building are
lower than that of a residential, it came out higher than the
high-rise residential building at between 0.02 and 0.63% of
development costs, with 0.63% representing the biggest
improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.
Additionally, due to the height of the building, the uplift for the
wall insulation was significantly higher than when improving
the U-value specification in the roof and floor.
Consistent with the other high-rise building, the results
showed improving the floor and roof U-value specification
offered the highest ROI results. However, increased wall
insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage
and carbon emissions and, furthermore, that improving the
U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s
energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption
calculated when improving the floor and roof specification.
Significant reduction potential was seen in the Riyadh high-
rise commercial building. In most cases, this did not produce
a positive ROI, however, it is safe to assume that as we see
energy prices increase, this will change.
ROI: Modelled high-rise Commercial Building
0.25 0.30 0.43 16,780 10,068 85%
0.25 0.30 0.30 17,123 10,274 84%
0.20 0.30 0.19 17,547 10,529 74%
0.25 0.18 0.43 24,014 14,409 30%
0.29 0.45 0.30 10,458 5,187 88%
0.25 0.22 0.54 24,019 11,913 21%
0.14 0.45 0.54 11,533 5,720 68%
0.25 0.54 0.54 137,358 78,707 18%
0.25 0.30 0.54 144,189 82,621 13%
Dubai, U.A.E.
Doha, Qatar
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Summary
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
20. 20
Case Studies
Hotel
A typical new build hotel located in Dubai, U.A.E. The building comprises sixteen storeys and a total floor area of 26,787m2
and a ground floor area of 3,186 m2
. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air.
Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.29
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 262.26
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.20
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 210.44
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 97.88
Total Fabric Uplift ($) 18,183.85 (0.02% of total development costs)
Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 3,835,420
Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 12,303.46
Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 26,795
Return on additional CapEx 293%
Table 29: Details of the baseline hotel building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Table 30: Details of an improved hotel building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Wall build-up costs ($/m2
) 256.97
Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30
Roof build-up costs ($/m2
) 205.30
Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57
Floor build-up costs ($/m2
) 96.10
Total Development Cost ($) 94,243,834.58
Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 3,880,079
Description Value
Description Value
Baseline Building
Improved Building
21. 21
ROI: Modelled Hotel Building
Table 31: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled hotel insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation solutions
Four locations showed examples where a positive return
on investment could be made by improving the U-value
specification, with 2,999% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia being the
highest. 100% of the improved U-value calculations in Dubai,
U.A.E. and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia gave a positive ROI and 84%
of the calculations in Muscat, Oman.
Across all locations, the fabric uplift was low, as expected,
at between 0.02 and 0.52% of development costs, with
0.52% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and
therefore, the highest uplift.
The hotel showed peak cooling demand being reduced by up
to 7.8% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This represented a carbon
emission reduction of up to 2.7% and 68 tonnesCO2/year. By
amount, this was the highest reduction of carbon emissions
for this building. For other locations reductions in peak cooling
demand were up to 4.1%, 3.5%, 2.8%, 1.2%, and 1.1% in
Muscat, Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, respectively.
Furthermore, buildings modelled in more temperate climates,
such as Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, showed greater results when
improving U-values. This was due to the increased internal
loading of the hotel model, and in fact, all of the other
commercial buildings that were modelled.
The results showed improving the floor and roof U-value
specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI.
However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest
impact on energy usage and carbon emissions. Furthermore,
improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce
the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy
consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof
specification, in some instances double the energy savings.
In most cases, this also produced a positive ROI.
0.25 0.45 0.45 25,363 15,217 1,334%
0.14 0.20 0.19 57,305 34,383 162%
Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.20 0.45 46,992 28,195 178%
0.25 0.29 0.30 57,146 28,345 135%
0.20 0.45 0.45 41,402 20,536 323%
0.25 0.45 0.45 48,021 27,516 888%
0.14 0.20 0.19 82,127 47,058 103%
0.25 0.45 0.45 52,396 38,092 2,999%
0.20 0.29 0.30 73,796 53,650 375%
0.25 0.18 0.45 83,558 60,747 131%
0.20 0.45 0.45 55,887 40,630 1,203%
Summary
Dubai, U.A.E.
Doha, Qatar
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Muscat, Oman
Location Roof Wall Floor
Annual Energy
Saving (kWh/year)
Carbon Emissions
Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI
Improved U-values (W/m2.K)
22. 22
Conclusion
It is clear from Mott MacDonald’s findings that improving the
U-value specifications, over and above that required by local
regulations, in the floor, roof and external walls, should be a
consideration for energy conscious architects, consultants,
building owners, tenants and developers who are looking to
build energy efficient buildings with a return on investment.
On the whole, the reduction in energy charges, resulting from
the specification of Kingspan Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor
insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof™
insulation
solutions, is far greater than the CapEx ‘cost’ of the additional
insulation. The offsetting of the CapEx ‘cost’ of the reduced
energy charges, is further underpinned by the findings in the
modelled buildings.
Policy and legislation need to continue to target those activities
that consume vast amounts of energy and contribute most to
CO2 emissions, buildings in particular, which account for over
50% of energy usage in all of the modelled regions. Stricter
requirements for the building envelope can, quite clearly, help
to solve this problem.
In addition, it is key to focus on the positive effect of U-values
and understanding that should the value not be matched, the
energy consumption of the building will increase, and thus,
the energy charges and building valuations follow suit.
Finally, whilst the carbon emissions and energy savings should
remain constant for each of the modelled buildings, one
factor that may change in the near future is energy costs. As
energy prices increase, it is safe to assume that the ROI on the
increased insulation will increase also, giving the occupier and
developer an even better return.
Improving the U-value specifications,
over and above that required by local
regulations, in the floor, roof and external
walls, should be a consideration for
energy conscious architects, consultants,
building owners, tenants and developers.
24. 24
Appendix A
Construction Build–ups – Specification
Cost
Construction Build–up Specifications
The floor, soffit, roof and external wall constructions and
corresponding build–up specifications used in the analysis
are defined by Kingspan Insulation LLC. The U–values are
calculated using the methods detailed in:
l BS EN ISO 6946: 2007 (Building components building
elements. Thermal resistance thermal transmittance.
Calculation method);
l BS EN ISO 13370: 2007 (Thermal performance of
buildings. Heat transfer via the ground. Calculation
methods); and
l using the conventions set out in BR 443 (Conventions
for U–value calculations).
For the purpose of these calculations, the standard of
workmanship is assumed good therefore the correction
factor for air gaps is ignored.
Build–up Cost Breakdown Elemental Rates
Cost data for the components comprising the build–ups has
been researched and determined by the relevant building
professionals at Mott MacDonald, namely Quantity Surveyors.
Prelims, contingency, delivery costs and professional fees
are not included for in the total cost shown for the build–ups,
neither is an allowance for a damp proof membrane
(where applicable).
28. 28
United Arab Emirates
United Arab Emirates
Oman
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
Country City Location Factor
Dubai
Abu Dhabi
Muscat
Riyadh
Doha
0.84
0.84
0.80
0.76
0.90
Country City Currency $1 = (21/03/16)
Table A–10: Location Factors Used Within the Costing Model
United Arab Emirates
United Arab Emirates
Oman
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
Dubai
Abu Dhabi
Muscat
Riyadh
Doha
Dirham
Dirham
Rial Omani
Saudi Riyal
Qatari Riyal
3.67315 AED
3.67315 AED
0.38470 OMR
3.75007 SAR
3.64150 QAR
Table A–9: Currency Exchange Rates Used Within the Costing Model
The following location factors and currency exchange rates,
found in tables A-9 and A10, have been used within the model.
29. 29
Modelled Buildings – Specification
Assumptions
Modelled Specifications
Building Envelope specifications, energy usage and
internal conditions have been researched and determined
by the relevant building professionals at Mott MacDonald,
namely Sustainability Consultants, and via the use of
Sefaira Systems Software.
Appendix B
30. 30
Villa Low-rise Residential
Building Form Layout
Storeys 2 5
FloorArea m2
266 5,711
Ground Floor Area m2
125 1,255
Roof Area m2
140 1,255
Storey Height m 3.4 3.4
Window to Wall Ratio % 40% 35%
HVAC System Type VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air
Envelope
Glazing Type Description Aluminimum Frame, double glazing Aluminimum Frame, double glazing
Glazing U-value W/m2
K 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7
SHGC 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Shading
Use Model Shading? Yes/No Yes No - assume balconies
Walls
Structure Description Concrete Frame Concrete Frame
Wall Type Description
Double skin thermally insulated concrete
blockwork with plaster render
Double skin thermally insulated concrete
blockwork with plaster render
Floor Finish Description Tiles Tiles
Roof Type Description
Concrete hourdi slab system consisting
of main and distribution rib beams
Reinforced Concrete Slab
Infiltration Type Façade Area Façade Area
Infiltration m3
m2
.h 5.4 5.4
Internal Conditions
Occupant Density m2
/person 20 20
Equipment Power Density W/m2
5 5
Lighting Power Density W/m2
5 5
Setpoint Temperatures ºC 20-24 20-24
Setback Temperature ºC 18-28 18-28
Outside Air Rate / Person L/s.person 12 12
Outside Air Rate / Unit Area L/m2
.s) 0 0
Contaminant Ventilation Air changes 0 0
Operating Hours 24hr 24hr
Setback to Setpoint Ramp Up Time Hours 1 1
Air-side
Design Air Flow L/m2
.s 1.5 1.5
Cooling Coil Source n/a n/a
Heat Recovery Sensible Effic 0.6 0.6
Heat Recovery Latent Effic 0.6 0.6
Peak Specific Fan Power 3.49 3.49
Heat Rejection air-cooled air-cooled
Cooling Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop
Heating Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop
Peak Specific Fan Power W/L.s 0.64 0.64
Water-side
Chilled Water Source n/a Air-cooled chiller
Chiller COP n/a 3.1
Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a 0.9
Chilled Water Temperature n/a 7ºC-12ºC
Heat Rejection Source n/a n/a
Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a n/a
Condenser Water Temperature n/a n/a
Heating Hot Water Source n/a Electric boiler
Boiler Efficiency/COP n/a 0.9
Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a 0.85
Hot Water Temperature n/a 70ºC-80ºC
Renewables
Renewables None None
Zoning
Zoning Stratey One zone/floor One zone/floor
Dubai AD MuscatDoha RiyadhDubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh
30
Appendix B
Table A–11: Floor Construction Build–up Cost Breakdown Elemental Rates in Dubai.
31. 31
High-rise Residential Low-rise Office High-rise Office Hotel
43 9 33 16
111,886 5,400 66,660 26,787
2,602 600 2,020 3,186
2,602 600 2,020 3,272
3.8 3.4 3.8 3.4
50% 40% 50% 40%
VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air VRF Fan Coil Units w/ Central Outside Air
Aluminimum Frame, double glazing Aluminimum Frame, double glazing Aluminimum Frame, double glazing Aluminimum Frame, double glazing
2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
No - assume balconies Yes Yes No - assume balconies
Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame
Concrete Block with aluminium framed
double glazed curtain wall system
Concrete Block with aluminium framed
double glazed curtain wall system
Concrete Block with aluminium framed
double glazed curtain wall system
Concrete Block with aluminium framed
double glazed curtain wall system
Tiles Tiles Tiles Tiles
Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab
Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area
5.4 7.2 7.2 7.2
20 10 10 15
10 20 20 5
7.5 10 15 12
20-24 21-24 21-24 21-24
18-28 18-28- 18-28- 21-24
12 12 12 12
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
24hr 8am-6pm 8am-6pm 24hr
1 1 1 1
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
n/a n/a n/a n/a
0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49
air-cooled air-cooled air-cooled air-cooled
VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop
VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop
0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64
Air-cooled chiller Air-cooled chiller Air-cooled chiller Air-cooled chiller
5 3.1 5 5
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC
Cooling tower n/a Cooling tower Cooling tower
0.95 n/a 0.95 0.95
29ºC supply -35ºC return n/a 29ºC supply -35ºC return 29ºC supply -35ºC return
Electric boiler Electric boiler Electric boiler Electric boiler
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC
None None None None
One zone/floor One zone/floor One zone/floor One zone/floor
Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh
32. TM
Kingspan, Kooltherm, Thermaroof, and the Lion Device are Trademarks of the Kingspan Group plc.
Countries comprise: the Middle East as far North and East as (and including) Turkey, Iran and Oman and as far South and West as
(and including) Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Kingspan Insulation LLC
P.O. Box 113826, Dubai Investment Park 2, Dubai, U.A.E.
Tel: +971 4 889 1000 Fax: +971 4 883 8515
info@kingspaninsulation.ae
www.kingspaninsulation.com
Kingspan Insulation LLC reserves the right to amend product specifications without prior notice. Product thicknesses shown in this document should not be taken as being available ex–stock and
advice should be sought directly from Kingspan Insulation LLC. The information, technical details and fixing instructions etc. included in this literature are given in good faith and apply to uses described
herein. Recommendations for use should be verified as to the suitability and compliance with actual requirements, specifications and any applicable codes, laws and regulations. For other applications
or conditions of use, contact Kingspan Insulation LLC. Advice should be sought for uses of Kingspan Insulation products that are not specifically described herein. The fire tests referenced in this
literature and the assigned results are not intended to reflect hazards presented by the materials and products described herein under actual fire conditions. Please check that your copy of the literature
is current by visiting www.kingspaninsulation.com.
