Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7)

/ ©ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED1
DELIVERABLE 3: IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF
BUILDING RELATED MEASURES AND
DISCUSSION ON ADVANCED M&V
EVALUATION PROTOCOLS
FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
MEASURES TO BOOST
FURTHER UPTAKE
05/02/17

/ ©ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED22 / ©ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
INTRODUCTION
TO ENHANCE ENERGY EFFICIENCY SAVINGS POTENTIAL IN THE EU, ECI
WISHES TO PROMOTE AND IMPROVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
ECI wishes to improve energy efficiency obligation
schemes to uncover a larger saving potential in Europe
• ECI and Ecofys recently analysed the potential of
additional technology measures for Energy Efficiency
Obligation (EEO) schemes. The potential of the EEO
mechanism is high and the current applications seem very
promising1.
• Further improving the mechanism by providing improved
evaluation protocols, measurements methods and pooling
of expertise could further improve the mechanism and
therefore obtain larger saving potential for Europe in the
short and long term.
• It is observed that the evaluation protocols of different
national EEO schemes do not necessarily have the same
calculation and measurement methods. Most countries
have learned throughout the years to develop and improve
on their evaluation protocols, but there is not (yet) a more
standardized European approach.
• Such an approach could take advantage of pooling of
expertise, knowledge and practical experience with the
energy efficiency measures (and the verification of their
obtained savings).
1 ECI, Ecofys, Winter package, Energy efficiency obligation scheme applications, 2017
• ECI wishes to promote establishing a database for EU
EEO member states of energy savings measures with
simplified measurement & verification protocols that offer a
reasonable degree of certainty.
• As a first step ECI and Ecofys analyse which measures
are the most relevant in terms of energy savings and
could provide best practices and a potential template for
future measures.
• As selecting energy efficiency measures to be on the
standard list is, ultimately, the decision of the individual
member states, this project should provide insight into why
member states and obliged parties would benefit by
promoting selected measures as a standard measure.
• The results of this project will also enable discussions with
the regulator in member states, obliged parties and the
European Commission on specific guidance and
regulation that can facilitate further refinement of the
energy efficiency obligation schemes through
standardisation of measures.

INTRODUCTION
THIS DOCUMENT DESCRIBES THE RESULTS OF AN IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF
HIGH POTENTIAL, BUILDING RELATED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
This document describes the results of phase 1, step3,
phase 2 and phase 3
1 ECI, Ecofys, EEO Measure mapping, 2017
2 ECI, Ecofys, Utilisation of standard measures, 2017
ECI and Ecofys selected six existing EEO measures for
further analysis in five EEO member states
• As a first step ECI and Ecofys have developed a longlist
containing all standard measures that are implemented in 5
target EEO member states: Italy, United Kingdom, France,
Luxembourg and Denmark1
• For the target member states Ecofys analysed the highest
savings associated with individual measures2
• From this analysis ECI and Ecofys selected six (sets of)
measures for deeper analysis
1. Boiler replacement
2. (Hybrid) heat pumps
3. Electric vehicles
4. Building automation and control systems (BACS)
5. Energy management systems (EMS)
6. District heating
• The selection was done based on criteria such as current
and future implementation potential, size of potential
savings per measure and the relevance of the measure to
ECI
Step 1: Mapping of all
standard EEO measures
Step 2: Analysis of mea-
sures with highest savings
Step 3: In-depth analysis
of six building measures
Phase 4: Develop exploitation plan (separate
document)
Phase 1: Present best practices for M&V methods, and
scoping
Phase 3: Future M&V 2.0 (advanced M&V)
Phase 2: Establish M&V approach for measures not
yet pushed in existing EEOS

/ ©ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED4 / ©2016 NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED44 / ©ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
OUR ANALYSIS FOCUSES ON BEST PRACTICES AND GUIDANCE FOR
STANDARDISATION OF UNDERUTILISED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
For each selected (set of) measures we analyse
differences in scope and focus across counties and
suggest ways to synchronise potentials
• What are the technical changes to energy use in buildings
that these measures aim to have?
• In which countries have these measures been
implemented?
• Are measures implemented in residential buildings, or also
in other buildings, such as public or commercial?
By reviewing country calculation methodologies we
analyse how and via which parameters, energy
efficiency savings are calculated
• How are the deemed energy savings calculated in the
different countries?
• Which parameters are taken into account, either implicitly,
or explicitly?
• What predefined parameters are used, and how do they
affect the outcomes?
• Can we spot best practices, or suggest improvements?
Illustrative figure showing the different parameters (marked by X) that
are used in the measures as input to calculate energy savings.
Parameters are collected from analysis of individual EEO measures in
member states
Illustrative figure showing if and how a set of related measures are
implemented across EEO member states
Full analysis of all selected measures is listed in Annex B of this document
1 2

From the six measures, we select four underutilised
measures and determine their EU savings potential
• What is the energy savings potential for these measures in
the EU and in selected member states?
• What are typical costs associated with implementation?
Based on analysed best practices in member states we
propose a set of parameters required to calculate
energy savings
• What are the required elements that should be included to
calculate energy savings due to the measure?
• What parameters can we propose to use in calculating the
energy savings, bearing in mind that member states have
different methodologies to do so?
• What are triggerpoints: what are the windows of
opportunity in which the measure can be implemented?
Illustrative figure showing the list of parameters that we propose to be
used in development of energy savings calculations
Illustrative figure showing the proposed scope of the measures and
potential when implemented in the European Union and selected
countries
Full analysis of all selected measures is listed in Annex B of this document
3 4

We describe developments and opportunities
advanced M&V (M&V 2.0) brings to energy efficiency
programs
• What are the drivers behind developments in advanced
M&V?
• What solutions does advanced M&V bring to energy
efficiency programs in Europe?
• Can we define next steps to identify opportunities to benefit
from advanced M&V?
Illustrative figure showing potential solutions that advanced M&V brings
to energy efficiency programs
Full discussion on advanced M&V is listed in Annex A of this document
5

CONCLUSIONS
WE IDENTIFIED FOUR EE MEASURES THAT HAVE LARGE POTENTIAL
SAVINGS BUT ARE UNDERUTILISED IN STANDARD LISTS OF MEASURES
We identified four energy efficiency measures that have
high annual EE savings potential
Identified measures are not always listed on standard
measure lists, making it less attractive to implement
them for obliged parties
550
1,710
625
250
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
BACSElectric
vehicles
District
heating
Heat pump
TWh
Total potential energy
savings in EU (TWh)
We advise member states to define standard measures based on the four identified energy efficiency measures
EU guidance on definition and implementation of these measures can lower costs of standardisation for member
states
Savings potential per implemented measure1
30-40%30-50%
1 Primary energy
13-25% 30-90%
Heat
pump
Electric
vehicles
BACS District
heating
X / / /
/ / X /
/ - - -
/ - - /
- / - -
X = listed, / = partially listed, - = limited or no listing.

CONCLUSIONS
STATES SHOW DIFFERENCES IN SCOPE OF MEASURES AND SAVINGS
CALCULATIONS; SAVINGS DEPEND STRONGLY ON DEEMED VALUES
We identify two categories of differences:
1. Scope of the measures:
- Type, e.g. measures stimulate related, but different
technologies, such as heat pumps versus hybrid heat
pumps
- Detail, e.g. single measure that captures all possible
technical details, versus multiple measures focused on
each different technical detail separately
- Focus area, e.g. residential buildings versus other
building types, or complete absence of the measure
2. Deemed savings potential:
- Lifetimes can differ by as much as a factor 2, resulting in
different deemed savings
- Parameter values: underlying assumptions to calculate
fixed parameter values in savings calculations are
typically not communicated. Differences in how
parameters are used across countries, result in over-
and underestimates of energy savings for specific
cases.
• Calculation of energy savings of individual measures is a
balancing act between being transparent and precise on
the one hand, and having an easily implementable
solution on the other
• Countries have been experimenting with the right balance
and change the set-up of their scheme in favour of
predetermined deemed scores (UK in 2017, DK in 2018)
• Member states determine the savings of a measure based
on public consultation of experts in combination with
statistics and calculations
• We found no evidence of supranational syncronisation of
scores
• While deemed savings make it easier to implement
measures, they make it nearly impossible to compare
between countries and suggest improvements on the
lowest detail in savings calculations
Measures are not synchronised between EEO
members, resulting in differences in scoping and
deemed savings potential
For ease in implementation, countries have set fixed
values that only depend on a few, practical building
parameters

CONCLUSIONS
ENERGY SAVINGS FOR STANDARD MEASURES ARE CALCULATED USING
DEEMED AND SCALED SAVINGS, NO SUPRANATIONAL STANDARD EXISTS
• Annex V of the energy Efficiency Directive identifies four
main types of M&V that can be used to calculate energy
efficiency savings:
- Deemed savings (ex-ante, standard values for each
measure)
- Metered savings (ex-post, before and after
measurements)
- Scaled savings (based on engineering estimates)
- Surveyed savings (based on consumer responses)
• Building related measures on the standard lists of member
states only use deemed scores (e.g. typically for residential
buildings) and scaled scores (typically for commercial
buildings)
• Trend is to use more deemed scores, in fact UK changed
their engineering based methodology in favour of deemed
score methodology.
• Deemed savings can be considered best practice,
especially when it comes to EE measures with a
straightforward impact, such as boiler replacement or
insulation improvement
Current M&V for standard measures in analysed
countries use deemed and scaled savings
Although member states all use deemed scores, there
is no standard method making it difficult to compare
calculated savings
• Each member state uses its unique own set of parameters
to calculate savings
• Choice of parameters is driven by details of the existing
building stock that provide the baseline (e.g. type of current
heating system) and design choice (e.g. lifetime, include or
current heating system)
Example of parameters used for the standard measure boiler
replacement in different member states

CONCLUSIONS
SOME PREDEFINED VALUES USED IN EXISTING DEEMED VALUES
UNDERESTIMATE SAVINGS POTENTIAL OF ELECTRICITY BASED MEASURES
• Calculation of HP energy efficiency improvement includes
the primary energy factor for the production of electricity
• Current electricity generation efficiency is typically limited by
fossil power generation, resulting in primary energy factors
between 2-2.5
• Within the lifetime of HPs primary energy factors are going
to drop due to growth in renewable electricity supply,
effectively improving the efficiency of HPs
• This effect is not taken into account in the energy saving
calculations of EEO member states, resulting in an
underestimate of the total savings for heat pumps
The use of conservative primary energy factors not only
makes electricity based measures less attractive, it also
stimulates measures based on fossil fuels
EE savings calculations underestimate savings by up to
50% due to use of the efficiency parameters based on
standard laboratory testing (New European Driving
Cycle)
• New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) test is increasingly
deviating from real world fuel economy
• For measures based on NEDC results, calculated
savings are significantly lower due to this deviation
Lifetimes used in measures are significantly
underestimating total savings of new vehicle
• Lifespan of actual energy savings could be up to twice or
thrice times the measure lifetime.
• Using a more realistic lifetime of the measure would result
in a higher and more accurate saving estimate.
Use of primary energy factors based on status quo,
underestimates saving potential of fuel switch from
fossil based to electricity
Use of standard test results and short lifetimes for
vehicles results in underestimated savings potential for
electric vehicles

NEXT STEPS
IN OUR ANALYSIS WE DISTILLED THREE KEY INSIGHTS THAT CAN BE USED
TO FURTHER BOOST ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
1. Four sets of EE measures may provide the start of the EU toolbox: heat pumps, district heating, building automation and
control systems, electric vehicles. We advise member states to define standard measures based on the four identified
energy efficiency measures. Beyond buildings, additional measures can be defined in the sectors Industries, Agriculture,
Transport that offer potential to be standardized.
2. Only general recommendations are made what a evaluation protocol should look like, as ultimately implementation in a
standard list of measures will be the decision of the individual member states. Also methodologies to calculate energy
savings is very much tailored to country specifics by individual member states. Next steps should therefore focus on
providing guidance to member states to facilitate development of additional measures, while keeping implementation costs
low.
3. For non-residential buildings, current deemed and scaled scoring methodologies are probably not very accurate. Advanced
M&V, using remote energy monitoring and data analytics may present a cost-effective yet more accurate alternative to
deemed and scaled scores.
Three key insights can be used in engagements with various stakeholders.
These engagements will focus specifically on standard measures in current and new EEO schemes and how
advanced M&V may reduce transaction costs for implementing agencies, while providing reliable energy
performance measurements
Proposed next steps are outlined in the exploitation plan as a deliverable of Phase 4 of this project

DISCUSSION ON THE POTENTIAL OF
ADVANCED M&V IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAMS
ANNEX A – ADVANCED M&V

Deemed savings M&V methodologies work well for:
• Large number of comparable buildings (e.g. residential)
• Standardised EE measures that have a well predictable
behaviour (e.g. insulation or boiler replacement)
Deemed savings well may not work well for:
ADVANCED M&V
MORE ADVANCED MEASURES MAY REQUIRE DIFFERENT TYPES OF M&V,
ADVANCED M&V THROUGH SMART METER DATA OFFER POTENTIAL
• The performance of building automation and control
systems (BACS) and energy management systems (EMS)
depends on many factors:
- Human behaviour factor (e.g. overruling of optimal
settings)
- Correct settings applied that optimize for energy (e.g.
energy efficiency versus comfort settings)
- Correct installation
- Correct set of update
• The interplay of different, not controllable factors results
in poor accuracy for deemed savings
For more advanced EE measures or use in specific, non-residential buildings, deemed or scaled savings may no
longer be accurate enough
2. Non-residential, few-of-a-kind buildings
Lack of statistically large enough sets of comparable
buildings limits the accuracy and applicability of scaled
savings in non-residential buildings
• For non-residential: typically scaled savings are
used that scale with floor surface area of the
building
• Different usage of area in one building not taken
into account
• Usage type, e.g. hospital versus office, is taken into
account as a deemed correction factor
3. Tailored M&V is expensive and labour intense
1. Advanced, behaviour dependent measures
Alternative ways to determine savings, through audits,
energy modelling or consumer surveys are labour
intense and result in high transaction costs

ADVANCED M&V
ADVANCED METERED SAVINGS, USING SMART METER DATA, OFFER
ADVANTAGES OVER DEEMED OR SCALED SAVINGS
Source:thestatusandpromiseofadvancedM&V,
RockyMountainInstitute,EnergySavvy
Key features of advanced M&V:
More granular data More automation Advanced data
analytics
Near- real time
feedback

ADVANCED M&V
EU SMART METER DEPLOYMENT OPENS UP POTENTIAL FOR NEAR-
REALTIME ENERGY PERFORMANCE DATA ANALYSIS
• Over the next decade we
will see a steady increase
in the amount of smart
meters installed in
Europe, opening up
opportunities to use the
data for data-analytics
and advanced energy
efficiency M&V
• Advanced M&V refers to integrated systems that measure energy consumption, collect usage data, and communicate data
automatically between smart energy meters (AMI) and the energy service provider
• The meters themselves are capable of recording energy consumption automatically or upon request at a level of granularity
not previously possible.
• Most smart meters in operation today are capable of measuring energy usage in hourly or subhourly consumption intervals.

ADVANCED M&V
ADVANCED M&V USING SMART METER DATA OFFERS SEVERAL BENEFITS
THAT REDUCE TRANSACTION COSTS FOR EEO ACTORS (1/2)
Advanced measurement and verification:
• The use of more data, analytics and computation can help
to streamline the M&V process. It can for instance lower
evaluation costs by eliminating (or reducing) the need for
field- or survey-based verification.
• In addition, results can likely be delivered more quickly
than those arrived at through traditional approaches, as
analysis can be performed as quickly as data becomes
available.
• Typically, minimum energy efficiency savings in the range
of 5%-10% of baseline usage is needed to have
confidence in savings measured using smart meter data.
Energy efficiency measures that target energy
consumption behaviour:
• Customized energy efficiency information can be
feedbacked to customers to incentivize them to adopt
behaviour.
• Near-real time or specific information is more effective than
generic information based on average customer data
Peak demand savings:
• Consumption data at hourly or subhourly intervals can
provide insight into the effect of energy efficiency
measures in a way that had not been possible at scale
before.
• This more granular data provides insight in time-resolved,
peak demand or supply from (groups of) users. In cases of
demand-supply mismatch or grid congestion, time-resolved
peak energy information gives insight into where demand-
response measures will be feasible.
• Advanced M&V also provides a way to quantify the impact
of the demand-response measures, and allows them to be
measured and verified as part of demand-response
incentives.
Based on: Utility strategies for Smart meter
innovation: Energy efficiency Measurement and
Verification, Navigant Research, 2017

ADVANCED M&V
ADVANCED M&V USING SMART METER DATA OFFERS SEVERAL BENEFITS
THAT REDUCE TRANSACTION COSTS FOR EEO ACTORS (2/2)
End-use disaggregation:
• Interval consumption data can enable remote analysis of
the energy use of individual appliances or systems within a
structure.
• Disaggregation of total energy use, based on machine
learning algorithms, can be leveraged to provide insight
into end-use loads
Source: Fraunhofer IMS

ADVANCED M&V
PROS AND CONS FOR THE ADOPTION OF ADVANCED M&V IN EU EEO
SCHEMES
Lower costs of M&V
• Usage of high volume smart meter data at low costs
• Possibilities increase due to advancements in data
analytics
• Advanced M&V may lower total costs for M&V
More adaptable deemed savings
• Possibilities to determine deemed values based on
regional specifics or more granular building types
• Periodic evaluation and (automatic) refreshing of deemed
values
Improved possibilities for energy efficient behaviour
• Better understanding of energy performance trough
disaggregation of smart meter data
• Potential for energy efficiency measures that target energy
consumption behavior and consumer feedback
Pilots are required to show where reproducible benefits
lie
• Obliged parties, the regulators and software developers
are still learning about the best way to use advanced M&V
Submetering M&V is getting cheaper too
• Dropping prices for submetering and data collection could
totally reduce need deemed savings, and for smart meter
data disaggregation
• Especially for small energy savings, submetering offers a
better accuracy
Smart meter data is sensitive to privacy and security
issues, and not shared easily
• Smart meter data use is restricted because of privacy
issues
• Smart meter data collected by private companies (e.g.
smart thermostat data) is typically not shared because of
commercial interests
Pros: advantages of advanced M&V Cons: dis-advantages of advanced M&V

ADVANCED M&V
NEXT STEPS IN ADVANCED M&V REQUIRE PILOT TESTING IN REAL-LIFE
SITUATION AND A PROMOTION OF EE SAVINGS WITH LARGE IMPACT
• Typically, minimum energy efficiency savings in the range
of 5%-10% is required for accurate M&V through smart
meter interval data
• EEO member states could incentivize measures with large
savings that can be measured through low cost M&V
• This will lead to an increased demand in high savings,
energy efficiency products and services that result in
relatively low transaction costs for the regulator.
Benefits of using advanced M&V may stimulate obliged
parties to promote savings with high (=measurable)
impact
Next steps involve testing existing advanced M&V
techniques in real-life pilot situations
• While from a technical perspective advanced M&V is
feasible, more piloting is required to:
- Determine optimal sector application
- Determine feasibility for different types of measures
- Test and validate data analytics software
• The speed at which advanced M&V can be implemented
also depends on the smart meter penetration level,
making advanced M&V a development that will become
more and more relevant as EU member states continue
on the smart meter deployment roadmaps

CROSS-COUNTRY COMPARISON OF
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES AND
PROTOCOLS
ANNEX B - ANALYSIS OF
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
MEASURES

1. (HYBRID) HEAT PUMPS

INTRODUCTION (HYBRID) HEAT PUMPS
HEAT PUMPS (HP) COULD HALF THE PRIMARY ENERGY USE OF BUILDING
SPACE HEATING BY UTILISING WASTE HEAT FROM AROUND THE BUILDING
• Air-source: based on heat in the air
• Ground-source: based on geothermal heat
• Hybrid: based on combination of one of the above and
usually a gas-fired boiler.
• Function: transfer of heat energy from lower to higher
temperature
• Low temperature heat sources in the surroundings are
utilised in this process.
• Heat can be utilized to (pre-)heat for space heating and
domestic hot water
• The surrounding heat is obtained locally and will never run
out (if installed properly).
Source: Industrialheatpumps.nl
• Heat pumps have an efficiency which is up to 50% better
(on a primary energy basis) than fueled heating.
• Heat pumps utilize local, low temperature heat from the
area around the building
• Due to more renewable electricity sources, their primary
energy use will reduce coming decades
Heat pumps are can realise up to 50% energy efficiency
savings compared to fuelled heating
Heat pumps use heat from the area around the building
to cover heat demand
Heat pumps can utilize different sources of heat from
(ventilation) air or the ground

Hybrid Air-source Ground-Source
Investment costs
(residential)
• € 6,000 - € 10,000 • € 10,000 - € 15,000 • € 15,000 - € 20,000
Energy savings as
part of total heating
energy
Implementation
impact
Low
• Installation of internal and
external unit required
Low
Medium - High
• Drilling into ground required
Indicative yearly
savings average EU
dwelling.
• Primary e-use 3.000 kWh
• Final e-use: 5.000 kWh
• Primary e-use: 3.000 kWh
QUANTIFICATION FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES
BY SHIFTING FROM GAS TO ELECTRICITY, HEAT PUMPS CAN CAPTURE
BETWEEN 50% AND 80% OF HEAT DEMAND FROM THE ENVIRONMENT
70%
80%
50%
30%30%
50%
Final energy
Primary energy
All heat pump types can significantly reduce final and primary energy consumption. Investments range between € 6,000
and € 20,000 and final energy savings reach up to 80% of total residential building energy use. On primary energy use
this results in a potential energy efficiency savings up to 50%.
• Electricity can provide more work per unit of energy than a fossil fuel source such as gas, making it an efficient energy carrier
• Despite high final energy savings, the current, large primary factor of electricity results in primary energy savings up to 50%
• Impact of implementation is low for hybrid and air-source heat pumps Ground-source heat pumps require drilling

Heat pumps present a total energy savings potential of around 250 TWh. Because of cost-effectiveness, we
assume buildings are insulated before heat pumps are installed.
• We expect that about 50% of buildings is suited for heat pump installation
• Before installation of heat pumps, heat demand is reduced by adding insulation (excluded from savings in table)
• Total residential heat demand (73%) is much higher than non-residential, but differences between countries are
significant
Country Hybrid Air-source Ground-Source Total Share of heating energy
Unit TWh primary energy savings
% of total heating energy
(Residential – non-residential)
70 110 70 250
10 15 10 35
7.5 15 7.5 30
1 2 1 4
7.5 15 7.5 30
0.2 0.3 0.2 0.7
ESTIMATED ENERGY SAVINGS POTENTIAL
HEAT PUMPS CAN SAVE CIRCA 250 TWH OF PRIMARY ENERGY IN EUROPE,
WITH A SUBSTANTIAL POTENTIAL FOR HYBRID HEAT PUMPS
* Indicative energy savings calculated after 50% heat reduction due to insulation. Efficiencies for climate region Netherlands/Germany
* Market potential assumed: hybrid 15%, air-source 25%, ground-source 10% of total heating energy provided
73%
76%
77%
82%
56%
27%
27%
24%
23%
18%
44%
73%

MS IMPLEMENTATION HEAT PUMP MEASURES
NOT ALL MS HAVE HEAT PUMPS AS STANDARD MEASURES, OPPORTUNITIES
EXIST IN NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND FOR HYBRID HP MEASURES
Measure Description Measure in target member states
Residential Non-residential1
Air-source heat pumps Heat pumps with ambient air energy as heat source
Ground-source heat pumps Heat pumps with geothermal energy as heat source
Hybrid heat pumps Heat pumps which combine a (mostly) air-source
heat pump and a gas boiler
Gas absorption heat pumps Heat pumps which run fully on gas instead of
electricity. This has, compared to the other heat
pumps, a relatively low efficiency.
1 Commercial buildings or public buildings
Most countries have measures for air or ground sourced heat pumps in place, however non-residential
applications, or adoption of hybrid heat pumps could still be improved
• Only France has measures in place to stimulate heat pump adoption for non-residential buildings, while Luxembourg
has no EEO measures to stimulate heat pump adoption at all
• The use of hybrid heat pumps is still underutilised. Especially in older, less insulated buildings these technologies can
provide energy efficiency improvements compared to e.g. existing boiler systems

• Most important indicators and their basic parameters can be found below.
• These parameters are similar to what Member states already use to determine the savings of standard
heating related measures, such as boiler replacement measures
(Hybrid) heat pumps can easily be implemented using some very basic but relatively accurate parameters. If more
accuracy is required, additional parameters can be implemented.
Element required for EE calculation Suggested parameters1
Temperature heat source
• Type of heat source (air, ground)
• Climate zone
Distribution temperature
• Distribution system type (floor heating, convectors,
radiators)
• Design temperature current heating system
Heat demand of building
• Building size & type (non-residential)
• Building insulation level
• Ventilation rate & heat recovery rate (non-residential)
• Energy demand of previous years
Efficiency heat pump
• Verified COP provided by supplier (EN-14511)
• Correction for climate zone & distribution temp.
• Control and parameter settings (important for high EE)
Share of gas
• Heating capacity of heat pump
• Capacity of peak load boiler for hybrid heat pumps
M&V FOR HEAT PUMPS
HP MEASURES CAN BE STANDARDISED USING SIMILAR PARAMETERS AS
EXISTING STANDARDISED BUILDING HEATING MEASURES
1 Based on existing parameters in similar measures in analysed EEO member states

ANALYSIS CURRENT CALCULATION PROTOCOLS
MEMBER STATES SHOW DIFFERENCES IN HOW HEAT PUMP MEASURES ARE
DETAILED AND THEIR ENERGY SAVINGS ARE CALCULATED
Efficiency of heating system Total heat demand of building
Efficiency
before
measure
Lifetime
ºC external
source
ºC internal
distribution
Outside
temperature
Heat loss
Heat
pump
source
Heat
pump
efficiency
Heating
distribution
type
Climate zone Insulation
building
Building
size or
function
Legacy
heating
system
Lifetime
(years)
- X - X - X - 17-20
- X - X - X - 15
X - - - - - X >15
X - - - / X X 15-20
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
In determining energy savings from (hybrid) electric heat pumps, some remarkable differences can be observed:
• Some countries use total system efficiency, others use only the heat pump source as efficiency proxy.
• No country takes into account building insulation level, while this is highly relevant for determining savings potential.
The UK only varies between two wall types, not the amount of insulation.
X = used in calculations, / = partially or indirectly used, - = not used in calculations
Parameters used by member states in calculating the total energy savings of a measure

USE OF THE PRIMARY ENERGY FACTOR FOR ELECTRIC HPS UNDER-
ESTIMATES THEIR EE SAVINGS AND PROMOTES GAS-BASED SOLUTIONS
Current primary energy factors for electricity underestimate energy savings produced during the lifetime of HPs1
• Calculation of HP energy efficiency improvement includes the primary energy factor for the production of electricity
• Current electricity generation efficiency is typically limited by fossil power generation, resulting in primary energy factors
between 2-2.5
• Within the lifetime of HPs primary energy factors are going to drop due to growth in renewable electricity supply, effectively
improving the efficiency of HPs
• This effect is not taken into account in the energy saving calculations of EEO member states, resulting in an underestimate of
the total savings for heat pumps
The underestimation of EE saving for electric HPs, effectively makes gas-based EE measures more attractive
1 Ecofys, Primary energy factors for electricity in buildings, 2011 &
Ecofys Primary energy demand of renewable energy carriers, 2013

IMPLEMENTATION OF HEAT PUMPS
HEAT PUMPS ARE TYPICALLY IMPLEMENTED IN NEW BUILDINGS OR AFTER
DEEP RENOVATION, BUT CAN ALSO BE APPLIED INDEPENDENTLY
• Cost-effective operation of heat pumps requires a good building insulation level. Because of this implementation
moments for heat pumps are:
- New building construction
- Deep renovation of existing buildings
• Residential deep renovation cycles are >40 years, making it important to consider installation of heat pumps as
part of the renovation
• Hybrid heat pumps have less strict requirements on insulation level and can be installed after modest building
insulation measures
• Heat pumps have highest potential in all situations where heat distribution temperature is low (below 50 degrees
C):
- Low(er) temperature heating distribution technologies (e.g. convectors, floor heating)
- Replacement of existing heating system in buildings with low(er) temperature heating (e.g. relatively new
buildings)
• Synergies between different residential measures can increase potential of heat pumps. Support combining heat
pump installation with:
- Building insulation
- Low temperature heating
Heat pumps have been deployed mostly in new or renovated buildings. Heat pumps provide the most effective
energy saving potential after building insulation and at heat distribution temperatures of below 50 degrees.
>40 y

IMPLEMENTATION OF HEAT PUMPS
THERE ARE SEVERAL BARRIERS WHICH COULD BE LIFTED TO INCREASE
ADOPTION RATE OF HEAT PUMP MEASURES
Potential barriers to large scale deployment of heat pumps as an energy efficiency measure
• Current calculated saving potential is not high enough compared to alternatives
- Mitigating action: revise saving calculations, especially conservative numbers on the primary energy factor, heat pump
efficiency and lifetime
• Heat pumps cannot directly be deployed due to existing high distribution temperatures
- Mitigating action: combine multiple measures, increase awareness or provide incentives to combine multiple energy
efficiency measures and lower distribution temperatures
• The exteral unit of air source heat pumps produces too much noise
- Mitigating action: facilitate high quality pumps and installation via certification
• Heat pumps requite large investments for building owners
- Mitigating action: generate awareness around or provide low-interest loans or lease constructions
• Past experiences with heat pumps installations do not fullfil expectations from energy companies or final customers
- Mitigating action: Improve quality assurance of installed heat pumps measure, require optimization of heat pump controls
and parameters and provide certification or annual performance checks

• Heat pumps provide a indicative savings potential of about 250 TWH for the entire EU and up to 50% efficiency
improvement on a primary energy basis
- HPs have high efficiencies, resulting in a potential 80% improvement in final energy use savings over fossil based
solutions. Primary energy savings, however are lower, up to 50%, due to energy losses in electricity generation
- While residential heat pump measures have the highest total savings potential, all member states analysed also have a
significant potential for heat pumps in non-residential, commercial buildings
• Adopting a primary energy factor that takes into account future efficiency improvements in electricity generation
provides a better representation of the actual energy savings
- The current relatively high primary energy factor greatly reduces saving potential of heat pumps
- Due to increased renewable electricity generation during the lifetime of the heat pump, the primary energy factor will
significantly decrease and should therefore be corrected when calculated the savings of this measure
• Residential air-source and ground-source HP are available as standard measure in most countries, hybrid heat pump
measures and measures for non-residential buildings are lacking
- Non-residential buildings are only taken into account in France for heat pump measures
- Hybrid heat pump technologies present a relevant expansion to current HP measures in most countries
• Several barriers obstruct scale-up of heat pump deployments, but mitigating actions can reduce these barriers
- Barriers include the limited primary energy savings because of the primary energy factor for electricity and high investment
costs of heat pumps
- Mitigating actions include reviewing the role of primary energy factor in energy efficiency calculations plus improving
economies of scale and financing options to reduce investment barriers
CONCLUSIONS
HEAT PUMPS HAVE A HIGH SAVINGS POTENTIAL, BUT LAGGING PRIMARY
ENERGY FACTORS REDUCE THE CALCULATED SAVINGS SIGNIFICANTLY

2. ELECTRIC VEHICLES

INTRODUCTION ELECTRIC VEHICLE
ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) PROPULSION IS HIGHLY EFFICIENCY, IT CAN SAVE
UP TO 75% ON FINAL ENERGY USE OF VEHICLES
• Motor efficiency: efficiency from the ‘fuel’ into the motor
to energy into the vehicle drivetrain (primary energy
factor electricity not taken into account)
• On a primary energy efficiency basis, electric vehicles
save up to 38% of energy.
• Light Passenger Vehicles (LPV), e.g. passenger cars,
currently run mostly on gasoline and diesel.
• Light Commercial Vehicles (LCV), e.g. commercial
vans, currently run mostly on diesel.
• Internal combustion engine (ICE): motor running on
fossil fuels (gasoline, diesel, CNG).
• Hybrid electric: combination of an electric and internal
combustion engine.
• Full electric: motor running solely on electricity (no
support ICE).
• Electric vehicles are more efficient in converting
electricity into movement than conventional vehicles
are in converting fossil fuels into movement
• Electric vehicles have the additional advantage that
local pollutants and noise are reduced
• The future transport system is very likely to have a
significant share of electric vehicles
Electric vehicles (EV) provide high energy savings and
reduced local pollution
Electric vehicles can save around 75% on final energy
use of vehicles, both in LPV’s and LCV’s
There are several fuel systems available for vehicles:
ICE, hybrid and full electric drive trains.
90
2520
-78%
Gasoline Diesel Electric
Typical motor efficiency of different fuel types

POTENTIAL OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES
CURRENT MEASURES ONLY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PASSENGER TRANSPORT,
WHILE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT ALSO PROVIDES A HIGH POTENTIAL
Commercial vehicles provide a significant saving potential in the European Union
• 30 million light commercial vehicles in the EU, 37 million total commercial vehicles.
• The relative energy saving (in %) is comparable between commercial and passenger vehicles.
• Current electric commercial vehicle offer is limited, but this is changing rapidly, even extending to medium and heavy
commercial vehicles (e.g. the new Tesla Semi).
Light commercial vehicles are very suitable for conversion to hybrid or all-electric
• Light commercial vehicles tend to be utilized more locally (e.g. service vans or contractors)
• Energy savings are especially high when used in more urban environments (e.g. delivery van)
<
Source picture: Businessinsider.nl
Future (2020-…)Now
Source picture: Renault UK

Light passenger vehicles (LPV) Light commercial vehicles (LCV)
Investment costs
(full-e hatchback, 300 km)
(full-e small van, 200 km)
• € 35,000 - € 45,000 • € 35,000 - € 45,000
Energy savings of full electric
vehicle compared to an ICE
Implementation impact
Low
• Charging infra required
Low
• Charging infra required
Indicative yearly savings for a
full electric vehicle
• Primary e-use 4.000 kWh
QUANTIFICATION FOR AVERAGE LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
FULL ELECTRIC VEHICLES CAN SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE ENERGY USE IN
BOTH PASSENGER AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL VEHICLES
40%
75% 72%
30%
Primary energy
Final energy
Full electric vehicles can save up to 75% on final energy use and up to 40% on primary energy use. Investments range
between € 35,000 and € 45,000. Costs and savings of hybrid vehicles are very dependent on type and utilization.
• Energy savings and investment costs of hybrid models are heavily dependent on battery size, and annual travel distances
• Full electric cars become more attractive due to the increased availability of high range electric passenger vehicles (>300 km),
• Due to (current) primary factor of electricity, primary energy savings are significantly lower compared to final energy savings
* Annual mileage passenger vehicles 13,000 km, light commercial vans 20,000 km
* Investment costs are very dependent on model segment and range (size of batteries)

Due to recent price and battery developments, electrification of LPV and LCV is a realistic and short term option.
• We estimate that LPV and LCV have an electrification potential of 80%
• Electrification of LPV results in large energy savings, the potential savings through electrified LCV is lower, due to the
smaller number of vehicles
• Similar as for heat pumps, for electric vehicles, improvements to the energy efficiency of electricity generation or use of
renewable electricity will greatly boost the potential primary energy savings
Country LPV LCV Total Share of savings
Total savings (TWh)
(Passenger – Light Commercial)
500 125 625
60 25 85
70 15 85
4 1 5
65 15 80
0.7 0.1 0.8
ELECTRIC VEHICLES CAN SAVE MORE THAN 600 TWH OF PRIMARY ENERGY
IN EUROPE
0.7 0.1
65
25
4
15
15
1
70
60
500 125
* Annual mileage passenger vehicles 13,000 km, light commercial vans 20,000 km. Assumption: 80% of vehicles electrified
* Indicative numbers. differences in annual mileage or car driving behavior between countries are not taken into account

MS IMPLEMENTATION ELECTRIC VEHICLES MEASURES
THREE MS HAVE (HYBRID) ELECTRIC VEHICLES IS THEIR STANDARD LIST
OF MEASURES, BUT ONLY PASSENGER TRANSPORT IS INCLUDED
Hybrid Full electric
Private passenger vehicles Replacing of privately owned passenger vehicle
with a (hybrid) electric vehicle.
Business passenger vehicles Replacing of a passenger vehicle owned by a
business (e.g. lease) with a (hybrid) electric
vehicle.
Commercial vehicles Replacing non-passenger transport( e.g. delivery
vans or trucks) vehicles with electric vehicles.
The diversity in standard measures on electric vehicles in analyses member states is large. No member state has
standard measures focusing on light commercial vehicles.
• Italy has separate measures for hybrid and for full electric vehicle
• France has one standard measure for fuel efficiency of all vehicles, dependent on CO2 emissions.
• Luxembourg: one measure for fuel efficiency in fossil vehicles, one measure for replacing fossil vehicles with either a
hybrid or a full electric vehicle.
• United Kingdom & Denmark don’t have measures on transport in their list of standardised EEO measures.
• Currently there are no standardised EEO measures focusing on light commercial vehicles such as delivery vans or
trucks. Large energy efficiency savings can be expected in this segment as well.

Laboratory test results can be used as energy efficiency indicators, if they are corrected for real-world practice
• Relative differences between NEDC test results and real-world consumption is increasing over the last years (see next
slide)
• Currently the NEDC is slowly switched to the World harmonized Light vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), which estimates real-
world consumption more accurately
Energy savings for electric vehicles are directly correlated to the distance driven
• As investment costs for EVs can be higher than ICE, drivers with high annual mileage benefit most from EV’s.
Element required for EE calculation Suggested parameters
Fuel consumption old vehicle
• Laboratory test results (NEDC/WLTP)
• Correction factor for real-world consumption*
Electricity consumption new vehicle
• Laboratory test results (NEDC/WLTP)
• Correction factor for real-world consumption*
Annual distance driven
• Fixed value for LPV and LCV
• Value based on type of user (business or commuting only)
• Distance driven in previous year
Share of fossil fuel use in hybrid
vehicles
• Electric range (size of battery)
• Petrol range (liters of gas tank)
• Expected daily distances
M&V FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES
ENERGY SAVINGS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE MEASURES CAN BE ESTIMATED
USING A LIMITED NUMBER OF PARAMETERS
* The NEDC test results are increasingly deviating from real world energy usage, currently averaging around a 40% difference.
For the new WLTP test this deviation is about 10%. It is necessary to apply a correction factor to obtain real world driving results.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEDC AND REAL WORLD FUEL CONSUMPTION ARE
INCREASINGLY DEVIATING, RESULTING IN UNDERESTIMATION OF SAVINGS
Source: Transport & Environment (2014)
DeviationfueleconomyfromNEDC
Currently member states often refer to NEDC test results to determine deemed savings for Evs. These deemed
calculations underestimate savings by up to 50% due to unrealistic efficiency parameters based on standard
laboratory testing
• Car manufacturers are becoming more experienced in optimizing configuration for labaratory testing
• New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) test is increasingly deviating from real world fuel economy
• NEDC are indicative for efficiency, but an incorrect absolute efficiency parameter, deviations up to 50%
• For measures based on NEDC results, calculated savings are significantly lower due to this deviation
Deviation between NEDC and real world fuel economy until 2013

DEEMED SAVINGS CALCULATIONS IN MS ARE ALL BASED ON STANDARD
DRIVING CYCLES, BUT OTHER PARAMETERS DIFFER PER MEMBER STATE
Efficiency of transportation Travel
distance
Lifetime
Difference in fuel consumption Vehicle type and size
Fuel
consumption
old vehicle
Fuel consumption
reference vehicle
Fuel
consumption
new vehicle
Vehicle type
(hybrid/full
electric)
Vehicle
size
Annual
distance
Lifetime
(years)
- X / - - - 4-8
- X X X X / 5-10
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
- X X X - - 5
Differences in approaches to calculate the energy savings of electric vehicles include:
• Italy and Luxembourg use energy use of the standard test cycle1, France uses CO2 emissions as a deemed parameter
• Italy is the only country taking into account travel distance, although this is prespecified per category car
• Across all member states the lifetimes used in energy efficiency calculations are shorter that actual technical lifetimes of
vehicles. The lifetimes used seem to be based only on the first owner of the car, while actual savings should also be
attributed to future owner usage
1 The New European Driving Cycle (NEDC), which test the fuel efficiency of the vehicle in a laboratory setting. This test is heavily criticized for
resulting in efficiencies unachievable in practice. In September 2018 a new test will be implemented, the World Harmonized Light Vehicle Test,
but only for new vehicles (making it harder to compare to the NEDC results of existing vehicles).

Lifetimes used in standard measures are significantly underestimating total savings of new vehicle
• Lifetime of measures between 4 and 8 years, but vehicle lifespans are much longer.
• After 4 years, the car may be sold, but the savings continue as the new owner also saves energy.
• Vehicles older than 10 years are between 17% and 50% of total vehicles in 4 EEO countries.
• Share of vehicles older than 10 years is substantial in EU countries (on average ~50%).
• Lifespan of actual energy savings could be up to twice or thrice times the measure lifetime.
• Using a more realistic lifetime of the measure would result in a higher and more accurate saving estimate.
ACTUAL SAVING IMPACT ALSO EXTENDS TO FUTURE OWNERS, LIFESPAN
OF VEHICLES IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN MEASURE LIFETIME
Source: Adaptation from Eurostat 2017 (data from 2013-2015)

IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
ELECTRIC VEHICLES ARE TYPICALLY IMPLEMENTED WHEN LEASING OR
BUYING A NEW HIGH BUDGET VEHICLE
• Typical implementation for electric vehicles:
- When switching to a new private or business lease vehicle
- Buying a new (high budget) passenger vehicle
- When there is an opportunity to install an EV charger at home
• Renewal of the entire car fleet takes more than 15 years. This reduces the speed of electric vehicle uptake.
• Increased implementation can be obtained in the following sectors (which are currently undersupplied):
- Replacing existing fleet of passenger vehicles of companies
- Replacing light commercial vehicles (especially when they are used in urban environments)
- Replacing older fossil fueled passenger vehicles (which normally would be replaced with a used vehicle)
• Synergies between other related measures could increase implementation. Support combining:
- Combining electric vehicle measure with electric vehicle charging point measure
- Combining electric vehicle measure with solar PV measure (to offset increased electricity consumption)
The lease market provides a major potential for electric vehicle implementation, while replacement of company fleet
and replacing light commercial vehicles provide good implementation opportunities.
>15 y

IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
THERE ARE SEVERAL BARRIERS WHICH COULD BE LIFTED TO INCREASE
ADOPTION RATE OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Barriers for application of electric vehicles are diverse and can be related to perceived disadvantages in price or
range. Informing on current developments in the field is necessary to improve measure adoption.
• Range anxiety (being afraid you will not make it to your destination) or inability to install a charging station at home
- Mitigating action: inform on charging locations and higher ranges of new models
- Mitigating action: support further development of (fast) charging opportunities
• Apparent competitive disadvantage compared to combustion vehicles (higher prices for low ranges)
- Mitigating action: inform on current developments (higher ranges for the lower prices)
- Mitigating action: show fuel costs per km for improved comparison of Total Cost of Ownership.
• High upfront investments (purchase price)
- Mitigating action: Provide low-interest loans (or inform on existence of financing options)
• Current calculated saving potential is not high enough compared to the effort required
- Mitigating action: revise current saving calculations in member states, specifically how NEDC test results (currently used
without real-world correction), lifetime of measure (currently often 5 years or lower) and primary energy factor for electricity
are used to calculate savings

CONCLUSIONS
ELECTRIC VEHICLES HAVE A HIGH SAVINGS POTENTIAL AND THEIR
APPLICABILITY HAS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED IN THE LAST YEARS
• Electric vehicles provide an indicative savings potential of about 600 TWH primary energy, with final energy saving
up to 75% and up to 38% efficiency improvement on a primary energy basis compared to conventional vehicles
- Electric vehicle motors are between 3 to 4 times more efficient in turning ‘fuel’ into motion as combustion engines.
- Electric vehicle motors are not only much more efficient, they also produce less noise and no local pollutants.
- While light passenger vehicles have the highest potential, all countries have a significant share of light commercial
vehicles, which should not be overlooked.
• Potential of the energy savings across EEO member states through this measure could be improved by optimizing
the indicators to calculate savings and also by including commercial vehicles
- Actual lifespan of electric vehicles could be up to three times longer than current measure lifetimes.
- Especially light commercial vehicles have the opportunity to be converted to electric vehicles in the short term.
- Actual (expected) distance travelled is not taken into account when savings are calculated, significantly reducing the
accuracy of the saving measure (hybrid) electric vehicles.
- Use of NEDC test results as indicator for energy performance, underestimates actual savings of electric vehicles as
practical fuel efficiency is known to differ up to 50% of NEDC test results.
• Several barriers can obstruct successful implementation of electric vehicle measures, but some mitigating actions
can reduce these barriers
- Due to high prices and low electric range, the electric vehicle is often perceived as having a significant disadvantage
compared to fossil fueled vehicles, despite advantages such as lower ‘fuel’ and maintenance costs
- Mitigating actions include informing on current positive developments in the sector, providing financing options and
improving saving calculations to better reflect the actual, real world savings

3. BUILDING AUTOMATION AND CONTROLS
SYSTEMS (BACS)

INTRODUCTION BACS
BUILDING AUTOMATION AND CONTROL SYSTEMS (BACS) HAVE THE
POTENTIAL TO REALISE 15-50% EE SAVINGS USING A SET OF MEASURES
• BACS can realise an energy efficiency improvement of 15-
22%.1
• The introduction of BACS have a large unutilized potential,
about 75% of buildings have no BACS at all
• Especially in non-residential buildings, BACS can result in
major improvements in energy efficiency of heating
systems and electricity use
• BACS can help bridge the gap between the slow,
expensive renovation and renewal of the building stock and
the need to quickly realize energy efficiency because:
1. Speed, appliances are renewed more often
2. Scalability, the software is highly scalable
3. Flexibility, the use of BACS is easily changed
• One of the benefits of BACS is that it can also be
implemented where renovation measures cannot, because
the physical impact of BACS are negligible. For example,
in historical buildings traditional measures are not allowed,
with BACS the energy demand can still be reduced
1 ECI, Six reasons why Building Automation should be included in the 2015-
2017 Working Plan, 2015
BACS present a potential of 15-25% energy efficiency
improvement in 75% of all buildings
BACS comprise a variety of products and engineering
services
• BACS are a combination of hardware and software that
allow the following:
- Automatic controls (including interlocks),
- Monitoring and optimization for operation
- Human intervention and management to achieve
energy-efficient, economical, and safe operation of
building services equipment2
• BACS are used for technical building systems, this
includes technical equipment for:
- Heating
- Cooling
- Ventilation
- Domestic hot water
- Lighting
- Electricity production
In our analysis we use the standard EN 15323, Impact of Building
Automation, Controls and Building Management to scope BACS
2 DIN EN 15232 standard

Electric energy Building heating Domestic hot water
Investment costs1
(single family home)
• € 750 • € 2000 • € 150
Energy savings of
energy use
Implementation
impact
Low
• Retrofit solutions available
Low
Low
Indicative yearly
savings average EU
dwelling.
• Primary energy use: 3.200
kWh
kWh
kWh
BACS REQUIRE RELATIVELY SMALL INVESTMENTS, CAN BE EASILY
RETROFITTED AND PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT ENERGY SAVINGS
25%25%
13%13%
25% 25%
Primary energy
Final energy
DIN EN 15232 provides estimates of energy efficiency improvements that can be obtained through implementation of
BACS
• On average full implementation of BACS results in an energy efficiency improvement by 13-25%.
• The use of BACS for the energy used in heating has a high potential, especially for non-residential buildings, where energy
savings of 50% are reported (DIN EN 15232 )
1 Optimising the energy use of technical building systems, unleasing the power of EPBD’s Article 8, Ecofys, 2017

Due to the large number of potential buildings where BACS can be deployed plus the impact on both heating
efficiency and electricity use efficiency, the total savings potential is large compared to other EE measures
• Potential final energy savings through implementation of BACS across Europe can result in primary energy savings of
1700 TWh, comparable to the total primary energy use of Italy in 2015.
• Despite the much smaller number of non-residential buildings in countries building stock, the potential for BACS is
roughly similar for residential and non-residential buildings.
• For non-residential buildings the energy savings through BACS deployment can be 50% for heating and 20% for
electricity use
Country
Electric
energy*
Building
heating*
Domestic hot
water*
Total Share of total energy
% of total total final energy
(Residential – Commercial)
640 930 150 1710
110 130 10 250
60 110 15 185
10 15 2 27
80 95 25 200
1.5 2.4 0.2 3.8
IMPLEMENTATION OF BACS IN EVERY BUILDING CAN SAVE CIRCA 1700 TWH
OF PRIMARY ENERGY IN EU, COMPARABLE TO THE ENERGY USE OF ITALY
* Market potential assumed: 25% buildings have standard level BACS, 75% have no BACS. Maximum potential is realized when all buildings
are brought to maximum BACS level, with efficiencies as listed in DIN EN 15232
57%
56%
58%
62%
66%
40%
43%
44%
42%
38%
34%
60%

MS IMPLEMENTATION BACS MEASURES
ALL COUNTRIES HAVE IMPLEMENTED BACS MEASURES, HOWEVER THERE
ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO ADD ADDITIONAL MEASURES BASED ON EN15232
Residential Non-residential
Thermostatic valves Installation of thermostatic valves on existing radiators
Clock
controls/timers
Installation of a programmable thermostat (FR)
Remote control on circulation line for hot water (DK)
Heating controls (UK)
Installation of timer for light (LU)
Weather controls Installation of outdoor temperature sensor
Motion/presence
detection
The installation of a motion detector to reduce operating
time of a light.
All BACS All BACS included in standard EN 15232 (It)
All BACS only for heating and domestic hot water included
in standard EN 15232 (Fr).
All EEO member states have BACS measures in place, however the diversity in which ones differs strongly.
• While Italy, and partly France, refer to the standard EN 15232, which includes many different types of BACS measures,
the other member states only offer a limited list of BACS that fall into the low to intermediate efficiency classes
• EEO member states may benefit from adopting additional BACS measures to open up a larger energy efficiency potential.
The EN15232 presents a basis for cross-country synchronisation and standardization (see next slide)

• Calculating energy savings from deemed scores requires the use of parameters as listed below.
• Experience shows that installed BACS will deviate dramatically from desired sustainable optimization
and expected energy efficiency over time due to lack of services. Advanced M&V can be a way to
monitor and signal performance issues of BACS
The energy savings calculation of BACS can be turned into deemed scores using predefined factors for energy use
of the building and the BACS efficiency class. To ensure optimal use, savings should be periodically monitored, e.g.
by using advanced M&V
Electricity demand of building
• Distribution system type (floor heating, convectors,
radiators)
• Design temperature current heating system
• Climate zone
Heat demand for domestic hot
water
• Number of residents (residential)
Level of BACS installed • BACS energy performance class1
M&V FOR BACS
BACS SAVINGS CAN BE DETERMINED VIA DEEMED PARAMETERS, PERIODIC
MONITORING IS REQUIRED TO SUSTAIN ENERGY EFFICIENCY SAVINGS
1 DIN EN 15232

MEMBER STATES ALL USE DEEMED SCORES TO CALCULATE BACS ENERGY
SAVINGS, DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PARAMETERS USED ARE STRONG
Differences can be found in how member states calculate the energy savings from BACS. No evidence was found that
periodic measurements or verification was done to ensure optimal energy performance of BACS.
• To calculate the energy savings from BACS it is important to understand the energy demand of the building service that BACS
will interfere with, every country estimates this differently.
• For BACS that include a single measure there is typically a predefined fixed value per installed item
• All savings calculations use deemed scores and no reference is made to measurements of actual savings, leaving room for
suboptimal control setting or negative impact from inefficient energy user behaviour
Heat
supply
Total heat demand
Use of
standards
Lifetime
Heating
system
Power or
annual
energy use
Climate
zone
Building
size or
function
Insulation
building
X - X X - X 11-20
- X - X - X 10
X - - X X - >15
X - - X X - 12
X X - X - - -

IMPLEMENTATION OF BACS
THERE IS MORE POTENTIAL TO REDUCE ENERGY DEMAND WITH BACS IF
MORE BACS MEASURES ARE INCLUDED FROM HIGH-EFFICIENCY CLASS A
• EN 15232 identifies BACS classes A to D, with A having
the highest energy performance.
• Except for Italy and France, BACS measures implemented
in EEO member states all fall into the intermediate
categories B and C.
Class Description
Class D Non-energy efficient BACS. Building with such
systems shall be retrofitted. New buildings shall not
be built with such systems.
Class C standard BACS
Class B advanced BACS and some specific technical
building management functions
Class A high-energy performance BACS and technical
building management functions
Current BACS measures in EEO schemes are not yet
addressing the high-energy performance BACS
• There is a difference between Energy Management
Systems (EMS) and BACS: EMS require interaction with
the buildings owners, and target consumer behaviour,
while BACS do not
• The use of BACS can encourage building owners to
implement an EMS in buildings and simplifies and
improves the impact of EMS for buildings, which will result
in higher energy savings.
• Besides EMS, also more appliances become available on
the market that are controllable. BACS, in combination with
EMS, can help optimize the use of these appliances.
Besides energy efficiency improvements, BACS offer
additional value, such as offering reduced costs for in-building
energy system inspections, remote control, effective usage of
fluctuating energy prices or self-consumption and potential
support in managing congestion issues in the energy grid
BACS can be integrated with other systems for more
energy reduction

IMPLEMENTATION OF BACS
BACS CAN BE ARE TYPICALLY IMPLEMENTED IN NEW BUILDINGS OR WITH
DEEP RENOVATION, BUT CAN ALSO BE APPLIED INDEPENDENTLY
• Typical implementation moments for BACS are:
- New buildings
- Deep renovation of existing buildings
- Step-by-step energy efficiency optimization of existing buildings
• Due to the ease of implementation, BACS can be implemented at any time in during the building lifecycle,
payback period for BACS are typically less than 5 years1
• Synergies with other smart building applications and opportunities to influence energy consumption behaviour
- Direct feedback on energy use and consumer behavior
- Integration with other smart building applications, e.g. lighting colour controls or fire protection and security
systems
• Synergies with remote measuring, data analytics and evaluation of energy performance
- Sensors allow detailed energy use data gathering for analysis
- Analysis can reveal additional savings potential, system calibration issues or malfunctioning components
- Energy performance evaluation allows EE measures to be further refined and developed.
BACS are relatively easy to install and have short payback times. Additional benefits arise when BACS are combined
with energy management systems and energy efficiency data analytics
< 5 y
1 Optimising the energy use of technical building systems, unleasing the power of EPBD’s Article 8, Ecofys, 2017

CONCLUSIONS
BACS OFFER A LARGELY UNTAPPED POTENTIAL FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
IMPROVEMENT IN BUILDINGS, BUT ALSO FOR ADDITIONAL BENEFITS
• BACS can be relatively easy and fast to implement and offer a saving potential up to 50% in non-residential
buildings
- BACS offer fast, scalable and flexible options to reduce energy demand
- In addition, BACS can be implemented in buildings where renovation is not allowed or possible
• There is a large potential to implement additional, high-efficiency measures in EEO member states
- Most analysed countries have a specified list of BACS, in low and intermediate efficiency classes
- To add more BACS to the list, the standard EN 15252 offers a basis for additional measures
• Implementation of BACS can benefit from additional guidance by member states or the European Commission,
including best practice examples, guidance on cost-optimal solutions and optimal (advanced) M&V strategies
- Methods member states use to calculate energy savings of BACS differ, partially related to scope differences between
individual BACS measures
- Due to the diverse nature of individual BACS measures, reference to the EN15252 can improve implementation of BACS
as energy efficiency measure
• Additional energy savings can be realized when BACS are used in combination with other measures, like EMS
- BACS are always integrated within a system. The better these systems work together, the more energy can be saved
- BACS offer additional benefits by integrating value streams from energy market price fluctuations, self-consumption of
generated electricity and congestion management services

4. DISTRICT HEATING

INTRODUCTION DISTRICT HEATING
MANY EE MEASURES IN EEO MEMBER STATES FOCUS ON DISTRICT
HEATING, HAVING A POTENTIAL OF 50-60% EE SAVINGS PER BUILDING
• District heating networks range from small scale, based on
a single source to large scale, including multiple sources
• Because of the strong dependence of energy efficiency in
the building on the network and source characteristics, we
also explicitly include measures focusing on both the heat
sources the network and the buildings
• District heating is a way to collectively source heat and
supply it to a large number of buildings through a
distribution network
• District heating is considered to be an effective way to
improve energy efficient and reduce CO2 emissions in
urban areas, through the use of residual heat from
industries and power plants
www.livingenergy.co.nz
District heating is a proven technology to reuse waste
heat and collectively benefit from it
Energy efficiency potential of DH depends on both
source, network and user
• The total system efficiency for district heating, including
heat generation, reduction due to heat losses and the
electricity use for distribution are typically between 100-
200%
• The energy efficiency can be improved further by
incorporation of more efficient heat sources and by
reducing heat losses in the system through insulation and
reduced distribution temperatures
• Compared to individual building heating systems, this
presents an energy efficiency improvement potential up to
50-60% per building
Collective use of heat has the potential to realise up to
50-60% efficiency improvement compared to individual
heating measures

ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF DISTRICT HEATING DEPENDS STRONGLY ON
LOCAL CHARACTERISTICS AND SHOULD BE EVALUATED CASE-BY-CASE
Energy efficiency of district
heating depends strongly on
individual source and
network characteristics
• Increasingly (multiple)
sources of renewable heat
are used, including heat
pumps, geothermal energy
and residual heat in cities
• The systems energy
efficiency is dependent on
the efficiency each source,
the heat distribution and
heat use in buildings
• The impact of energy
efficiency measures in
buildings therefore depends
strongly on local network
and building characteristics
and needs to be determined
on a case-by-case basis
4thGenerationDistrictHeating(4GDH):Integratingsmartthermalgrids
intofuturesustainableenergysystems,Lundetal.(2014)

THE PRIMARY ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF DISTRICT HEATING CAN BE A
FACTOR 2 TO 10 HIGHER THAN AN INDIVIDUAL HEATING SYSTEM
• Utilising waste heat produced in industries or power
generation results in an improved energy efficiency in both
the industry and the building where it is used, e.g.
combined heat and power (CHP) operate at higher total
efficiencies as electricity only power plants
• This resuls in heat generation efficiencies exceeding 200%
for power plants and waste incinerations.1
• Primary energy efficiencies for geothermal and industrial
heat recovery can be even higher, exceeding 700-1000%
respectively, especially if renewable energy sources are
used in heat generation
• Calculation of the energy efficiency of the heat source
depends on individual country norms
• Differences exist e.g. how primary energy is incorporated in
the total source efficiency
1 Warmteladder, afwegingskader warmtebronnen voor
warmtenetten (Dutch only), Ecofys 2014
• District heating is cost-effective when large volumes are
distributed over small areas
• Densly populated urban areas present the largest potential
for energy efficiency improvement through district heating
Heat sources in district heating can have energy
efficiencies far exceeding 100%
Potential for new heating networks and connections is
especially large in dense (city) areas

DH grid with gas fueled CHP
source
DH grid with geothermal
energy source
Other types: residual heat,
biomass CHP, district heat
pumps, etc.
Investment costs
(heat connection)
€2000-€5000 €2000-€5000 €2000-€5000
Primary energy
savings of heating
energy1
Implementation
impact
Low
• New connection needs to be
realized and heat exchanger
installed
Low
installed
Low
installed
Indicative yearly
savings average EU
dwelling.
• Primary energy: • Primary energy: • Primary energy:
DISTRICT HEATING MEASURES REQUIRE INSTALLATION OF A HEAT
CONNECTION, PRIMARY ENERGY SAVINGS CAN BE CLOSE TO 100%
30 -
90%
30%
80%
Primary energy
savings
Depending on the source of heat, district heating has the potential to realise nearly 100% primary energy savings for
heating in buildings.
• Costs of district heating depend strongly on the type of source installed and number of users. In practice, the DH operator
translates investment costs into a periodic fee for energy use. Cost of the installation in buildings is around €2000-5000
1Simplified estimates. Actual savings depend on local grid details such as available sources and grid efficiency. Typically a combination of sources is
used for district heating, resulting in a mixed efficiency.

District heating has the potential to realise around 550 TWh of primary energy savings in Europe, including both
residential and non-residential buildings. District heating solutions are complementary to all electric solutions for
heating, such as heat pumps.
• District heating solutions are preferably implemented in areas with relatively high heat demand, such as close to city
centers, large commercial or residential buildings or dense commercial or residential areas
• Implementation of district heating is typically cost-efficient for buildings where heat pumps are not and vice versa.
Country Total Share of heating energy
Unit
TWh primary energy
savings
% of total heating energy
(Residential – Commercial)
550
80
65
10
60
1.5
DISTRICT HEATING CAN SAVE CIRCA 550 TWH OF PRIMARY ENERGY IN
EUROPE, IMPLEMENTATION IS COMPLEMENTARY TO HEAT PUMPS
* Indicative energy savings calculated assuming average efficiency savings of 50% through district heating and a penetration of 30%
for residential buildings and 50% for commercial buildings
62%
62%
66%
67%
73%
43%
38%
38%
34%
33%
27%
57%

MS IMPLEMENTATION DISTRICT HEATING MEASURES
DH MEASURES IN STATES RANGE FROM REALISING NETWORK
CONNECTIONS TO IMPROVEMENTS IN NETWORK OR USAGE EFFICIENCY
Residential Other buildings1
Realise connection to district
heating network
Connecting a building to a new or existing heating
network
Improved energy efficiency of
building related district
heating equipment
Replacement or improvement of the heat
exchanger in the building or improvements to the
internal heating system (piping, radiators, etc.)
district heating network
Reduction of heat losses in the district heating
network through insulation and distribution
temperature reduction in the network
district heating sources of
heat
Connection of new heat sources with improved
efficiency to new or existing district heating
networks
indirectly through
impact calculation
Most countries have measures stimulating new connections to DH networks. Both France and UK also have
measures stimulating efficiency improvements in the DH system itself
• Denmark, France, UK and Italy all have measures in place to realise new DH connections. In France however no
measures are in place for residential buildings. DH is not part of any EE measure in Luxembourg.
• In Denmark EE measures focus only on improving the efficiency inside buildings, for France and UK it is the opposite with
measures stimulating efficiency improvements in the network and heat source

Savings obtained by a connection to district heating can be calculated using deemed values, combined with efficiency
information of the network and heat source.
• The parameters that are required to calculate savings for a district heating network are limited to the typical parameters to
determine energy demand in buildings, combined with efficiency performance of the district heating network itself
• The energy performance of the district heating network could be provided by the DH operator, and should be periodically
monitored, verified and evaluated by the regulator.
Primary energy efficiency of
heat source
• Verified efficiency data as provided by the heat supplier
Efficiency of heat distribution
grid
• Verified efficiency data as provided by the heat supplier
Efficiency of heat exchanger
and circulation pump in
buildings
• Verified efficiency data provided by equipment supplier
• Correction for distribution temperature
M&V FOR DISTRICT HEATING
ENERGY SAVINGS OF DISTRICT HEATING CAN BE CALCULATED USING THE
SPECIFIC EFFICIENCY INDICATORS FOR THE DISTRICT HEATING NETWORK

THE EFFICIENCY OF THE DH HEAT SUPPLY TO BUILDINGS HAS HIGH
IMPACT, BUT IS LACKING IN THE SAVINGS CALCULATION IN SOME STATES
Efficiency of district heating system Total heat demand of building
Efficiency
before
measure
Lifetime
Heat source
efficiency
Efficiency of heat
network
Outside
temp.
Building heat loss
Heat source
efficiency
Network
energy use
Distribution
losses
Climate
zone
Insulation
building
Building size
or function
Legacy heating
system
Lifetime
(years)
/1 - /1 X X X - 20-30
X X X - - - X 20
- - - - - - X 15
X X X X X X X 15-402
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
With the exception of the UK, savings are calculated using predefined values that depend on few building
characteristics. The efficiency of the DH itself is only taken into account for Italy and the UK.
• Only Italy and the UK include DH system efficiency in the calculation of savings. The UK uses a detailed energy
efficiency model (SAP), including the DH system and building characteristics. Other countries use predefined values.
• DH system efficiency is key in determining total savings potential of the set of DH EEO measures.
• Furthermore, the predescribed lifetimes of the savings differ strongly between member states, possibly resulting in a
factor 2 difference in estimated savings.
1 Only taken into account for measures impacting the network efficiency directly 2 15-30 years for new heat sources, 40 years for new network connections

IMPLEMENTATION OF DISTRICT HEATING
DH IS TYPICALLY RELEVANT FOR NEWLY BUILT BUILDINGS OR LARGE
SCALE RENOVATIONS. INVESTMENTS REQUIRE LONG PAYBACK TIMES
• Typical implementation moments for district heating are:
- New buildings
- Renovation of entire neighbourhoods
• Due to the large investments and long payback times for infrastructure, energy efficiency improvements to the
district heating network are typically done at maximum once every 15-30 years, when the heat source is replaced
or the grid is renewed.
• Improvements to the energy efficiency of district heating has impact on a large number of users, resulting in
potentially low transaction costs per user
- Typically >1000 users are connected to a DH network
- Improvements in energy efficiency can be done in a single location, at the heat source, instead of having to
address all users individually
District heating networks allow improvement of the energy efficiency for a large number of users at the same time,
making them attractive for large scale EE programs and neighbourhood redevelopments
>15 y
>1000
users

CONCLUSIONS
EE MEASURES FOCUS ON REALISING NEW CONNECTIONS TO DH, LARGELY
UNTAPPED SAVINGS POTENTIAL IS IN STIMULATING DH EFFICIENCY
• All analysed countries, except Luxembourg have measures in place to stimulate connections to district heating
networks
- Luxembourg has no measures on district heating, while France only stimulates new connections for tertiary buidings
- Other countries all have measures to stimulate new connections to district heating networks
• Several tens of percents savings can be realised for all connected users through improved energy efficiency of the
network, for which measures are only implemented by France and UK
- Efficiency improvements can be made through incorporation of highly efficient heat sources and reduction of heat losses
- Only UK and Italy use the use the efficiency of the DH sources and network in order to calculate energy savings
- Only France and UK have concrete measures in place to improve the energy efficiency of the DH sources and network
• As only in UK measures, underlying assumptions in savings calculations are made explicit, it is difficult to compare
between countries and to suggest changes or improvements to measures
- The UK uses the SAP model to calculate savings. The model is very detailed, but allows a structured and transparent
calculation.
- We notice differences between countries in the listed lifetimes of measures that we cannot explain
- Denmark and France use fixed savings parameters, that cannot easily be checked.
For all analysed countries there are opportunities to introduce an integral district heating energy efficiency package,
providing measures for both residential and commercial users, stimulating both new connections and improvement of the energy
efficiency of existing connections: heat source, network and users

CONNECT WITH US
JURIAAN VAN TILBURG
Senior Consultant
M: +31 (0)655 482 893
T: +31 (0)30 662 30 17
juriaan.van.tilburg@navigant.com
Kanaalweg 15-G, 3526 KL Utrecht, the Netherlands
MAARTEN STAATS
Consultant
M: +31 (0)6 25 33 17 13
T: +31 (0)30 662 30 35
maarten.staats@navigant.com
Kanaalweg 15-G, 3526 KL Utrecht, the Netherlands
EDWIN HAESEN
Associate Director
M: +32 498 73 49 00
T: +32 (0)2 880 41 05
edwin.haesen@navigant.com
Avenue Marnix 28, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
ECOFYS, A NAVIGANT COMPANY

5. BOILER REPLACEMENT

INTRODUCTION BOILER REPLACEMENT
REPLACEMENT OF BOILERS FOR RESIDENTIAL HEATING IS A POPULAR
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURE RESULTING IN 15-20% EE SAVINGS
• The replacement of an existing heating system with a
high-efficiency (condensing) boiler is in the top 3
measures of all analysed EEO member states.
• A substantial share of residential buildings is currently still
heated with non-gas based, non condensing boilers
• The impact of boiler replacement implementation on the
in-building heating system is limited, as it typically requires
the change of one system to another
• The combination of easy implementations, high and
immediate savings and deemed savings that can be easily
estimated makes this measure a popular one across EEO
member states
Boiler replacement is one of the most popular EEO
measures across member states
The potential energy efficiency savings realised by
switching boiler is around 15-20%
• Modern, condensing boilers have an energy efficiency
around 93%, while conventional boilers typically have
much lower efficiencies even down to below 75%
• The efficiency improvement that can be obtained by
switching to a modern, condensing boiler are therefore in
the range of 15-20% and even more for very old boilers

MS IMPLEMENTATION BOILER REPLACEMENT MEASURES
BOILER REPLACEMENT IS A MATURE EEO MEASURE AND HAS BEEN
IMPLEMENTED BY ALL TARGET EEO MEMBER STATES
Description Measure in target member states
Residential Other buildings1
Replacement of current boiler
to higher efficiency boilers
Replacement of boilers on different fuels to more
efficient boilers, including condensing boilers
Addition of flue gas heat
recovery units
Addition of a heat recovery unit that can be placed
on the exhaust of a boiler system to improve
efficiency
Boilers for hot tap water Installation of a high efficiency boiler specifically
for hot tap water
All countries have boiler replacement implemented as standard measure. On top of that, France and Italy also have
more specified boiler-related measures
• Boiler replacement is a mature EEO measure, and countries have all implemented various measures to stimulate
replacement
• France and Italy have more specific measures in place, that increase the heat generation efficiency in buildings, but
keeps the existing heating system largely intact.
• Boiler replacement for non-residential buildings is less well implemented, also because of the focus of the UK and
Danish EEO schemes on residential buildings

MEMBER STATES SHOW LARGE DIFFERENCES IN HOW MEASURES ARE
DETAILED AND THEIR ENERGY SAVINGS ARE CALCULATED
Efficiency of boiler system Total heat demand of building
Efficiency
before
measure
Lifetime
ºC external
source
ºC internal
distribution
Outside
temp.
Heat loss
Boiler type Boiler
efficiency
Heat distrib.
type
Climate
zone
Insulation
building
Building size
or function
Legacy heating
system
Lifetime
(years)
- X - X - X - 17-22
-
X - X - - - 15
X - - - - X X 15
X - - - X X X 12
- X X - X X X 20
Large differences can be seen in the methodology to calculate savings, however most countries include sets of
parameters that allow correct calculation
• The magnitude of EE realised depends on the legacy heating system. This parameter is not included in France and
Denmark, also large differences can be seen in the lifetime of the measure.
• The efficiency of a condensing boiler depends strongly (10%) on the ability to condense through optimizing boiler heat
settings. This parameter is lacking in the saving calculations and could stimulate additional savings if included.

CONCLUSIONS
BOILER REPLACEMENT IS A MATURE EEO MEASURE AND ITS SETUP CAN BE
USED AS A TEMPLATE FOR NEW MEASURE DEVELOPMENT
Boiler replacement is one of the most popular EE measures across analysed member states in terms of total energy
savings realised
• Boiler replacement is relatively easy to implement in buildings and results in an immediate EE improvement of 15-20%
• The penetration rate of boilers in buildings is very high, resulting in a large number of buildings where this measure can be
implemented
• This makes boiler replacement one of the most popular measures under the EEO schemes in analysed member states.
All analysed EEO member states have boiler replacement measures for residential buildings. Additional savings
potential could be realised by improving some critical parameters, that are currently lacking in the EE saving
calculation in analysed countries
• The temperature of the heat produced through a condensing boiler determines whether a boiler is able to retrieve energy from
the flue gases, with a 10% increase in efficiency. The heating temperature is not included in the calculations of energy savings
• The efficiency of the legacy heating system is also relevant in determining the heating efficiency. Also this parameter is lacking
in some calculations. Including this parameter results in a better case for replacements of heating systems with low
efficiencies.
The simplicity in the setup of the boiler replacement measure is part of its success under the EEO schemes. As such
the measure setup provides a template for development of successful new EEO measures

6. ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

INTRODUCTION ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
THE POTENTIAL USE OF EMS IS GROWING WHICH CAN HELP REDUCE
ENERGY DEMAND AND INCREASE COMFORT LEVELS IN BUILDINGS
• An EMS analyses data from building systems to improve
the performance of a building. The analyses can be
extended with data from other sources like utility bills and
live weather feeds.
• The results of the analyses are available for the building
owner. Increased consumer awareness on energy
consumption results in energy savings. The savings
potential is estimated to be between 5-15%.
In addition, EMS can be used for demand
response, e.g. reduce the peak load, thus less
investments in the grid will be needed. This
functionality and its benefits to system
efficiency is included in this analysis
EMS is used to optimize comfort level and buildings
efficiency, resulting in 5-15% energy savings potential
• Purpose of EMS is to enable an building owner to follow
a systematic approach in achieving continual
improvement of energy performance including energy
efficiency, energy use and consumption.
• For this analysis we adopt the ISO 50001 definition of
what is EMS. Based on that EMS offerings can include
software, services, and/or hardware that allow:
- Measurement
- Documentation
- Reporting
- Design
- Procurement
There are many definitions of EMS, here we use ISO
500011
A smart thermostat is
an example of an
EMS

Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7)

Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7)

Similar to Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7) (20)

More from Leonardo ENERGY

More from Leonardo ENERGY (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Evaluation protocols for building-related energy efficiency measures (EED art.7)