Implications of nZEB Retrofit on Fuel Poverty. Technical obstacles, governance issues. Need for a holistic approach to assessing cost optimality, need for thermal bridge calculation, sustainability measurement and a jaundiced view of the renewables requirement contained in the Irish national Dwelling Energy Assessment Procedure (DEAP) for retrofit. Many RES decisions are not sustained under lifecycle cost assessment.

1. From Gullwing to Flat Top
Simon McGuinness, MRIAI

2. Societal Needs
 Minimum 80% carbon emissions reduction by 2050
 40% of all emissions related to buildings
 90% of all buildings standing will still be standing in 2050
 90% of them need to be upgraded to a BER of A2 (nZEB)
 Biggest construction project in human history
 Who has the knowledge and skills to achieve this? – We
do.

3. DIT Experience in Retrofit
 4 years of level 9 (Masters) in Retrofit Technology
 Retrofit Residential, Commercial & Institutional to
nZEB
 60 graduates in the marketplace
 116 post-graduate professionals researching retrofit
 Hosted 3 national nZEB conferences
 Biggest database of nZEB research in Ireland
 Shortlisted for SEAI research awards 2014

4. Overall Findings
insurmountable
 We can do nZEB, there are no technical barriers
 It is economic, it will pay for itself in time
 It will work, nZEB can reduce emissions by at least
85%
 It could eliminate fuel poverty permanently
 We have no shortage of skills (at present)
 Obstacle: Govt commitment to fund exemplars
obstacle

5. 2012 student project work
Postgraduate Certificate in Digital Analysis and Energy Retrofit

6. 2011 Gullwing project brief
 Achieve a BER of A3
 Achieve compliance
with Part L, 2011 (new
build)
 Condensation risk
 Surface temperatures
 Calculated thermal
bridges

7. Digital Analysis of Existing Building
 The apartments are:
 Un-heatable (Part L)
 Un-healthy (Parts L&F)
 Un-visitable (Part M)
 Un-comfortable
 Non-compliant (Part B)
 Too small (DECLG standards)

8. Simplify thermal envelope
33% improvement in
energy performance
coefficient
with no additional
insulation
Source: Team D - DT774
Simplifie
d
thermal
envelop
e
geometr
y

9. Gullwing 2012 (Team A)

10. Gullwing 2012 (Team A)

11. Gullwing 2012 (Team B)

12. Team B

13. 2013 student project work
Postgraduate Certificate in Digital Analysis and Energy Retrofit

14. Flat-Top Block

15. DCC Proposal 2010

16. DCC Proposal 2010
WARNING!
Based on linear thermal
bridge default of 0.15

17. Insulate without LTB assessment?
 Default y-factors allowable
are 0.15 and 0.08
depending on construction
quality
 Calculated y-factors in the
Gullwing / Flat-Top blocks
ranged 0.32 to 0.36
 DEAP defaults are
misleading!

18. Is DCC Proposal “Cost Optimal”?
 The apartments are:
 Un-heatable (Part L)
 Un-healthy (Parts L&F)
 Un-visitable (Part M)
 Un-comfortable
 Non-compliant (Part B)
Solved
?
Partly
No
No
No
No
No
 Too small (DoE standards)

19. Flat-Top Block - project brief
 Building Regs as if new build
 DoE space standards
 60-100 year lifecycle
 BER of A2
 Calculated y-factor
 Hygrothermal analysis
 Surface temperature
 Condensation risk

20. Flat-Top Block
Results 95% Confidence Interval Uncertainty
Air flow at 50 Pa, V50
[m3/h] 1085 1060 1105 +/-2.0%
Air changes at 50 Pa, n50
[/h] 6.601 1.320 11.90 +/-80.0%
Permeability at 50 Pa, q50
[m3/h.m2] 5.255 1.050 9.461 +/-80.0%
Specific leakage at 50 Pa, w50
[m3/h.m2] 29.259 5.844 52.674 +/-80.0%

21. Outline
Energy Use Space Heating
nZEB

22. Digital energy analysis
 BIM model Embodied Carbon
 Therm Surface Temperature, Psi- values
 BuildDesk Condensation risk, U-values
 DEAP Energy balance, carbon emissions

23. Digital energy analysis
 BIM model Embodied Carbon
 Therm Surface Temperature, Psi- values
 BuildDesk Condensation risk, U-values
 DEAP Energy balance, carbon emissions
… I am competent
…
… reasonable skill care and diligence
…
I certify that … the design … is in
compliance … with Building
Regulations

24. DIT Proposal -“Cost Optimal”?
Solved
?
 The buildings are:
 Un-heatable (Part L)
 Un-healthy (Parts L&F)
 Un-visitable (Part M)
 Un-comfortable
 Non-compliant (Part B)
 Too small (DECLG)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Green
Public
Procurement

25. Flat-Top 2013 (David Ledwith)

26. Flat-Top 2013 (David Ledwith)

27. Flat-Top 2013

28. The Passive House Designer

29. The Technologist

30. DEAP focus on renewables adds costs
€14,000
Heat Pump –
Cost Optional
over 50 years?
€4,500
PV -
Cost Optional
over 10 years?
€14
Saving = €18,500

31. nZEB Retrofit Project Outcomes
 BER of A2/A3
 100% compliance as new build (Parts B, M, K & L)
 Zero Surface Condensation
 90% fuel cost reduction (€1,486 to €156)
 100% Replicable

32. Co-Benefits
Social Economic
 Fuel poverty
 Employment
 Skills
 Health
 Carbon saving/trading
 Self-funding
 Sustainable
 Fuel imports

33. Why not?
Co-benefits need to be measured and added to the Retrofit
budget. This can only be done by committing to fund a
series of nZEB retrofit exAenmdp ala Mrsi.nister for Climate Change.
Social Economic
 Fuel poverty
 Employment
 Skills
 Health
 Carbon saving/trading
 Self-funding
 Sustainable
 Fuel imports

34. Follow me on twitter: @PassiveLogical
Simon McGuinness MRIAI, Dip.Arch., B.Arch.Sc., CEPHD