Retrofitting
Residential Buildings
in Australia: A Life
Cycle Energy
Analysis
ENGG454 – Thesis
Oral Presentation
By Meliss...
An Overview
 Thesis Aims
 Methodology
 Initial Experimental Findings
http://mashimbye.com/welcome-to-mashimbye-group/20...
Thesis Aims
This thesis aims to develop a framework using
Life Cycle Energy Analysis (LCEA) as an
approach to support deci...
Innovation and Significance
 Current research identifies many different approaches to using
Life Cycle Analysis to suppor...
Proposed Methodology
Life Cycle Energy Analysis
Australia/New Zealand Standard, 1998, Environmental
management - Life Cycle Assessment - Princi...
Life Cycle Energy Analysis
Resource
Extraction
Manufacturing
of Product
Construction Operation
Maintenance/
Refurbishment
...
Proposed
Framework
Survey Data
Questions 1 2 3 4 5
If in the situation to retrofit
(renovate, upgrade
appliances, layout, make
improvements o...
Retrofitting Priorities
Reasons to Retrofit
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Operational
Energy
Improvement
Visual Appeal In...
Retrofitting Priorities
Product Objectives
Invest-
ment
Cost
Social Impacts
Priority by Age
Group
Time
Improvemen
t to Lif...
Preferred Retrofitting Choices
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Priority
< 30
> 50
Case Studies:
Case Study One; Balgownie
www.maps.google.com.au
Case Studies:
Case Study Two: Holt
Preliminary Results
Life Cycle Assessment
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Base Model Insulation G...
Preliminary Results
Operational Energy
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation and Glazing
MegaJou...
Preliminary Results
Embodied Energy
36.4
36.6
36.8
37
37.2
37.4
37.6
37.8
38
38.2
Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation...
Preliminary Results
Embodied Energy
18.6
18.8
19
19.2
19.4
19.6
19.8
20
20.2
20.4
Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation...
Findings of Preliminary Results
Operational Energy
 < 30 priorities bring about large energy
savings, greater star rating...
Findings of Preliminary Results
Embodied Energy
 < 30 priorities bring about significant additional
embodied energy
 > 5...
Preliminary Results
Life Cycle Assessment
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Base Model Insulation G...
Findings of Preliminary Results
Life Cycle Assessment
 < 30 prioritise retrofitting options that have a
large embodied en...
Next Step
 Incorporate further social factors
in LCEA and retrofitting choices
e.g. Time Constraints
 Further test frame...
Acknowledgements and
References
• Lan Ding, Thesis Supervisor ENGG452, University of Wollongong
• Survey Participants
• AB...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

CIB World Building Congress Presentation: Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Residential Building Retrofits Incorporating Social Influences 2013

741 views

Published on

This presentation accompanies the research that incorporates human and social aspects into a Life Cycle Energy Analysis to support decision making, and a means to align the most effective life cycle improvements to the social intentions of home owners. It is a preliminary paper in hope to begin to fill the gap in connecting social aspects with lifecycle decision-making

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
741
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • For embodied energy we see the reverse almost, under 30s priorities brought about significant increases in embodied energy. While Over 50’s priorities are harder to asses and account for in terms of embodied energy, but essentially reflect their views on maintaining and only replacing appliances at the end of their life – you could look at this as a way of maintaining a steady embodied energy level.
  • I realise you have seen this slide before however, the significance of the life cycle energy analysis is core to the conclusions of my preliminary results, and its this diagram that shows clearly, the whole of life impact of the priorities when making retrofitting fitting choices.
  • < 30s age group will have large embodied energy costs with greater operational energy savings, where as > 50 will have little embodied energy costs, but will make savings across more varied energy and consumption demands, such as water consumption. However, we know that all of the retrofitting priorities mentioned bring about some saving in operational energy if only minor.

  • The next steps are to build on these preliminary results, and further incorporate social factors, like time constraints as one example, in the LCEA and see how these affect retrofitting choices available.

    I’d also plan to further test the framework to see how it can further support retrofitting decision-making using these two case studies, I’ve mentioned.
  • CIB World Building Congress Presentation: Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Residential Building Retrofits Incorporating Social Influences 2013

    1. 1. Retrofitting Residential Buildings in Australia: A Life Cycle Energy Analysis ENGG454 – Thesis Oral Presentation By Melissa Gaspari 3267465 http://www.sanctuarymagazine.org.au ISO 14040 – 1998 Environmental Management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework
    2. 2. An Overview  Thesis Aims  Methodology  Initial Experimental Findings http://mashimbye.com/welcome-to-mashimbye-group/2011/05/05/ http://mobileministrymagazine.com/tag/mobile-ministry-methodology/
    3. 3. Thesis Aims This thesis aims to develop a framework using Life Cycle Energy Analysis (LCEA) as an approach to support decision-making in retrofitting options, and how social factors influence these retrofitting options for residential buildings within a specific climatic zone.
    4. 4. Innovation and Significance  Current research identifies many different approaches to using Life Cycle Analysis to support decision-making in retrofitting, however few have addressed the influence of social aspects.  This research incorporates the human and social aspects into a decision-support framework.  This framework uses Life Cycle Energy Analysis as a tool to support decision-making and intends to identify a means to align the most effective life cycle improvements to the social intentions, objectives and constraints of homeowners.
    5. 5. Proposed Methodology
    6. 6. Life Cycle Energy Analysis Australia/New Zealand Standard, 1998, Environmental management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and framework, ISO 14040:1998, accessed 28 February 2012,
    7. 7. Life Cycle Energy Analysis Resource Extraction Manufacturing of Product Construction Operation Maintenance/ Refurbishment Demolition Life-cycle energy analysis through whole life time of the building  Embodied Energy Embodied energy is the energy consumed by all the processes associated with the production of a building, from the mining and processing of natural resources to manufacturing, transport and product delivery.  Operational Energy Operational Energy comprises the energy used for space heating and cooling, hot water heating, lighting and appliance and equipment operation throughout the life of the building.0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1 2 3 Thousands Operational Energy Embodied Energy
    8. 8. Proposed Framework
    9. 9. Survey Data Questions 1 2 3 4 5 If in the situation to retrofit (renovate, upgrade appliances, layout, make improvements of any kind etc.) your current home, why would you retrofit? Energy improvements and visual appeal/style I would retrofit the house mainly to make it a more comfortable place to be for everyone and also to bring it up to current standards using modern technology, like insulation, LEDs, new taps, etc. It would be good to save money on bills too. I would retrofit (or would actually be fit out in first instance) with water/energy saving appliances (white goods) and tap fixtures etc. Strata living limits the amount of structural changes allowed. Age of house, means there is a need to replace old appliances Keep up with modern technology and ensure use of the latest appliances E.g. water tank, save water and use newer technologies Easy go living What do you know as energy retrofit? Glazing Alternatives to current heating and cooling, such as evaporative cooling, solar heating Taking advantage of sun exposure Insulation External Shading Replacing old inefficient items throughout the house to reduce power/water usage. Replacing appliances with more energy efficient solutions. Replacing water usage, heating, cooling, electricity usage, and reducing the cost of services Reducing current costs and increasing lifestyle Energy efficient blinds in all windows Would you retrofit your house purely to make energy efficiency improvements? Yes Yes, if I thought the cost of the retrofit was justifiable. Yes Not solely for retrofitting but would consider it, e.g. if replacing a broken item would replace it with a more energy efficient one Yes and reduce cleaning of blinds If you were retrofitting purely for energy efficiency, what would be your main aim/goals? Increases in Thermal comfort An independent power and water supply would be good and it would be ideal if the house didn't need any form of cooling or heating. Consumption - energy efficient appliances as mentioned above. Heating - insulation, heavy curtains, and energy efficient windows (if allowed) To achieve a more cost-effective state (for operational costs only) Reduce heat and cold transfer from building Do you have any kind of budget for energy retrofit (or retrofitting at all), and approximately how large would that budget be? $2000-$7000 Not really. It is something that's getting done slowly as time and money becomes available. No, not a present specifically for that purpose. May do upon purchasing that 'said' property'. No allocation, when repairs are needed look at doing most cost effective and efficient. Would use other income processes such shares or investments to help allocate appropriate budget. E.g. If replacing oven, would ask what's the best value for my dollar to get something at a good price but has a good efficiency rating but also cooks well, and has current feature. Would put cost effectiveness first don't need a expensive oven even if it is most efficient, would ask "Does item do what I need it to do?" Not at the moment, but would be about $10,000 When replacing an item and considering energy efficiency or during an energy retrofit what are your expectations of savings (Expected Savings in dollars)? $1000/Year Increase in value to the value of investment Not sure in terms of exact dollars, I would just expect to be saving money. I would probably compare bills/usage before and after the retrofit to see what sort of savings I was making. I wouldn’t have any idea in pricing. I'd have to research. No particular monetary savings, however must improve lifestyle E.g. when choosing between two comparative product from different energy sources, would consider life style impacts before energy improvements reduced gas account for heating When replacing an item and considering energy efficiency or during an energy retrofit what are your expectations of outcomes (Expected Outcomes in physical improvements or comfort levels)? Increased Savings Increase visual appeal to home Small changes in behaviour, with decreased operating costs I would expect comfort levels to at least remain the same but generally to improve. Improve my comfort! Increase lifestyle, operational costs and visual appeal to home Reduced costs and improve looks of the house “(when replacing items) would ask what's the best value for my dollar to get something at a good price but has a good efficiency rating but also works well, and has current features. Would put cost effectiveness first don't need a expensive item even if it is most efficient, would ask "Does item do what I need it to do?” “ “If an item is broken would replace it with a more energy efficient one (but wouldn’t replace it purely for energy purposes)” Retrofit purely for energy purposes Expectation of some behavioural change to achieve energy efficiency Interview with 10 different homeowners
    10. 10. Retrofitting Priorities Reasons to Retrofit 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Operational Energy Improvement Visual Appeal Increased Comfort Additional Property Value Life style Improvements Operational Savings Replacement of Older Components All > 50 < 30
    11. 11. Retrofitting Priorities Product Objectives Invest- ment Cost Social Impacts Priority by Age Group Time Improvemen t to Lifestyle Thermal Comfort <30 >50 Replace Single Glazing with Double Glazing Windows 20-30% reduction in Heating and Cooling High Low Low High 2 5 3000MJ of energy per increase in star rating Savings $250 Saving 0.4 Tonnes of Green House Gas Emissions Installing Wall Insulation save up to 20% of energy costs Mid Mid Low High 1 0 Installing Ceiling and Wall Insulation Save up to 45% of energy costs Mid Mid Low High 1 0 Installing Floor Insulation Save up to 5% of energy costs Mid Mid Low Mid 1 0 Installation of various Air- Sealing techniques Improve Thermal Comfort Low Low Low Mid 3 2 Installation of various Shading Devices Improve Thermal Comfort Low Low Mid Low 5 3 Installation of Skylights to reduce artificial lighting Improve natural light, remove article light sources Mid High Mid Low 0 Replacement of Appliances to all 3.5 stars or above Reduce energy and water demands Mid Low High Mid 4 1 Place solar heating for water Reduce non-renewable energy demands High Mid Low Low 0 4
    12. 12. Preferred Retrofitting Choices 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Priority < 30 > 50
    13. 13. Case Studies: Case Study One; Balgownie www.maps.google.com.au
    14. 14. Case Studies: Case Study Two: Holt
    15. 15. Preliminary Results Life Cycle Assessment 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation, Glazing ^Appliances *Solar Water ^Shading ^Air Sealing MegaJoules(MJ)Thousands Operational Energy Embodied Energy 1 - Case Study 1 (>50’s) 2 – Case Study 2 (>30’s)
    16. 16. Preliminary Results Operational Energy 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation and Glazing MegaJoules(MJ)Thousands Case 1 Case 2
    17. 17. Preliminary Results Embodied Energy 36.4 36.6 36.8 37 37.2 37.4 37.6 37.8 38 38.2 Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation, Glazing MegaJoules(MJ) Thousands
    18. 18. Preliminary Results Embodied Energy 18.6 18.8 19 19.2 19.4 19.6 19.8 20 20.2 20.4 Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation, Glazing MegaJoules(MJ)Thousands
    19. 19. Findings of Preliminary Results Operational Energy  < 30 priorities bring about large energy savings, greater star ratings  > 50 priorities bring about smaller savings in more diverse areas of house hold energy use, in water energy and water usage demand  > 50 priorities are based on already having some level of energy efficiency mechanisms in place
    20. 20. Findings of Preliminary Results Embodied Energy  < 30 priorities bring about significant additional embodied energy  > 50 priorities are much harder to assess in terms of embodied energy, as the variables in appliances, solar energy, shading and air sealing are difficult to account for  > 50 priorities reflect their intentions to maintain and use items until their reach their obsolescence point which can be seen as one method to reduce embodied energy in a LCA
    21. 21. Preliminary Results Life Cycle Assessment 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Base Model Insulation Glazing Insulation, Glazing ^Appliances *Solar Water ^Shading ^Air Sealing MegaJoules(MJ)Thousands Operational Energy Embodied Energy 1 - Case Study 1 (>50’s) 2 – Case Study 2 (>30’s)
    22. 22. Findings of Preliminary Results Life Cycle Assessment  < 30 prioritise retrofitting options that have a large embodied energy cost, and are will to put aside aspects such as time and money to achieve greater energy improvements  > 50 priorities bring about smaller savings in more diverse areas of house hold energy use, in water energy and water usage demand and this is not always assessed in LCA  All retrofitting choices bring about saving, even if only minor.
    23. 23. Next Step  Incorporate further social factors in LCEA and retrofitting choices e.g. Time Constraints  Further test framework to see how it can support further retrofitting decision-making using the two case studies http://www.timecreationcoaching.com.au
    24. 24. Acknowledgements and References • Lan Ding, Thesis Supervisor ENGG452, University of Wollongong • Survey Participants • ABS 2009, 2009-10 Year Book Australia, Cat no. 1301.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, (ABS), Canberra. • Australia/New Zealand Standard, 1998, Environmental management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and framework, ISO 14040:1998, accessed 28 February 2012, • Bankier and Gale 2006. Energy Payback of Roof Mounted Photovoltaic Cells, Energy Bulletin, • Carbon Cops 2007. Carbon Cops Transforming energy use Embodied emissions and energy, ABC Copyright 2007, • Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency 2010, The Pathway to 2020 for Low-Energy Low-Carbon Buildings in Australia: Indicative Stringency Study, Cat no. DCC 137/2010, Efficiency, Department of Climate Change and Energy, Canberra. • Department of the Environment 2008, Energy Use in the Australian Residential Sector 1986-2020, Cat no. 978-1-921298-14-1, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. • Fay, Treloar, et al. 2000, "Life-cycle energy analysis of buildings; A case study", Building Research and Information, Vol.28, 31-31. • Haynes 2012, "Embodied Energy Calculations within Life Cycle Analysis of Residential Buildings", Unknown, 1-15. • Home Energy Advice Team 2010, accessed 13 March 2012. http://www.heat.net.au/action-advice-page • Ireland 2008, "The Changing Shape of Renewables Technology", Electrical Construction and Maintenance, Vol.107, 1, pp. C26-C30. • McLeod and Fay 2011, "The cost effectiveness of housing thermal performance improvements in saving CO2-e", Architectural Science Review, Vol.54, 2, pp. 117-123. • Reardon, Milne, et al. 2010, Your Home Technical Manual, Fourth Edition, Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Efficiency, Department of Climate Change and Energy, Canberra. • Tucker, Hramiak, et al. 1999, Towards More Energy Efficient Australian Housing: Life-Cycle Aspects, Cat no. BCE Doc. 99/149, CSIRO, Highett. • University of Wollongong 2011, ENGG446 Energy Efficiency Enhancement in Domestic Buildings, Sustainable Buildings Research Centre, delivered Autumn Session 2012. Melissa Gaspari Tarun Charker Jenny Charker Peter Charker Ryan Duff Angela Gaspari Robert Gaspari Todd Huuskes Stefanie Gaspari Peter Lennon

    ×