Energy Use and Conservation in Buildings

In examining the ways in which ​energy​ is used in buildings one can identify the
following broad categories:

(a) The energy utilised in the manufacture of building materials and in the construction
process of the building.

(b) energy required for servicing the building (central heating, domestic hot water,
lighting etc.).

(c) human energy, i.e. the energy involved in feeding, transporting and clothing the
occupants as well as the energy generated from their activities.

A number of important relationships can be drawn between the above categories which
can help us to understand some of the energy flow patterns involved in a building. The
graph in FIG. 1 shows the relationship which exists between the capital energy involved
and the time it takes the running energy costs to equal the capital energy expenditure
for a 100 sq.m., 4 persons, semi-detached house. If attention is given, at the initial
stages of design, in using low energy consumption and ecologically suitable materials,
substantial amounts of energy can be saved. A framework of analysis for the
establishment of environmentally responsive criteria in the selection of building
materials has been proposed (16) and MacKillop (17) has worked out specific examples
in order to demonstrate the scale of energy economies that can be achieved.
Fig. 1. At present it takes only 16 months for the running costs of a building to equal
the capital energy expenditure. The relationship between the time taken and the energy
consumed is not linear but varies depending on the time of year. A straight line has
been shown here for comparison purposes with Fig. 2. (Source: G. B. Brown and P.
Stullon, “The Energy Cost of a House”, Rational Technology Unit, Architectural
Association, London, 1974).

FIG. 2 shows the effect which ​energy conservation measures​ can have by increasing
the length of time taken by the running costs to equal the capital energy invested.
These measures, which are being discussed further on include the operation of ‘direct’
energy life support systems (see under Appropriate Technologies). If such a
relationship, as the one in FIG. 2 is further elaborated it could provide an index for a
household's energy economy.

Fig. 2. A small increase K in the capital energy expenditure of a building accounting for
better insulation and “direct” energy systems, can considerably lengthen the time
taken, by an amount N, for the running costs to equal the capital costs. A successful
energy conservation programme should aim at providing the largest N for the smallest
K.The way in which energy is distributed among the various uses in an average
household over a twelve month period is: space heating 20000 Kwh line (this to a
certain extent can be influenced by the designer); cooking, appliances and lighting 6000
Kwh. Of the 20,000 Kwh heating requirement, 4,500 Kwh are to compensate ventilation
heat-losses and they cannot be effected by insulation. The regaining 15,500 Kwh, due
to ​conduction heat losses​ could almost be halved by using double glazing and doubling
the insulation standards of walls and roof. The 7200 Kwh saving would bring down the
conduction loss​ to 8300 Kwh and the overall space heating requirement to 12,800 Kwh
per annum. Additional improvements to insulation could further reduce heat losses, and
thus the heating requirement, but the law of diminishing returns applies. Therefore
beyond a certain point the increase of insulation becomes uneconomic (18). Although
thermal insulation​ can achieve significant energy savings its true value should not be
overestimated. As Professor Hardy has observed (19) other physical properties of the
building envelope must be equally acknowledged. A study prepared by the Tyneside
Environmental Concern (4) has managed to compare in economic and energetic terms
the savings which can result by upgrading the thermal performance of a number of
different type of existing buildings. (See Table 1).

TABLE 1. Comparison of different age Terrace house before and after thermal
improvements have been carried out (including double glazing) DY - Do It Yourself
CONTR - Undertaken by Contractor Source: ‘Energy: Waste Not Want Not,’ Tyneside
Environmental Concern

Type Area Volume Capital Cost Peak Load An. Demand Running
(m2 (m3) £ (kw) (Kwh) Cost (£ p.a.)
)

DY CONTR. Before Afte Before Afte Before Afte

r r r
Pre 108 324 200 540 7.3 3.5 13800 6600 138 66
1919

1919– 96 240 180 440 6.0 2.8 11400 5300 114 53

1945

1945– 80 184 185 475 4.8 2.2 9100 4200 91 42

1965

Post 80 184 185 475 4.0 2.0 7600 4000 76 40

1965

The savings are achieved by a combination of techniques. “The principles involved are
simple and well understood, the materials and equipment are readily available, and the
capacity exists to expand production of these to meet the large scale programme of
upgrading” (20). Similarly, in the case of new buildings, by proper manipulation of the
design parameters, control of air change rates and careful detailing of components, it is
possible to reduce energy consumption by 50% at an increase of capital cost under
10% (21).

Summarising the issue o

​ f energy conservation​ in buildings two main working areas can
be broadly defined:

(a)

The thermal performance of existing and new buildings can be upgraded, and
hence energy saved, by applying various ‘indirect’ methods, For example, increase
 of insulation, improvement upon ventilation, recovery of sensible and l​ atent heat
contained in exhaust air, modifications of occupants' behaviour, introduction of
passive control systems (e.g. window shutters, wind breakers etc.)

(b)

The dependence of existing or new houses on centrally distributed energy can be

significantly reduced or even eliminated by the ‘direct tapping and utilisation of
naturally occurring and inexhaustible energy sources*, i.e. Solar and Aeolian
energy, hydroelectric and ​geo-thermal energy​ etc. This can be accomplished either
at an individual, (one or two houses) or at a group house level, (few houses up to
small town), depending upon the locality and the nature of the energy sources
available. In this way considerable energy savings can be achieved.

Buildings: Housing and the Service Sector

In A
​ n Efficient Energy Future​, 1983

Energy conservation measures in housing

Government ​energy​ policies for energy conservation in buildings show that a wide
range of measures are being applied in most ECE countries. Some countries have more
vigorous programmes than others. Policies have many similarities, but they all have at
least two things in common. The effect of conservation policies on future energy
demand is uncertain and potential savings are generally not included in national energy
forecasts.

Individually, some governments have appraised the results of their conservation efforts.
The direct effects are not easy to discern, although considerable progress has been
made in this respect. Monitoring energy conservation and efficiency is becoming a much
more widely accepted and well-understood practice. This applies at the local building
level and to a lesser degree at a city, regional, national and international level.
International comparisons of progress towards conservation can be very useful for each
country to understand its own potential for reducing future energy demand levels (US
Department of Energy 1981).

This study uses international comparisons and the main intentions of government
energy policies to show the range of energy demand that could be achieved in the
future. Two projections give an upper and lower range which can be described on the
individual dwelling level or for a country or group of countries. Even the upper level has
some improvement in the efficiency of energy use. The lower case has a full set of
modest conservation measures which are commercially available today. These two
cases are illustrated for individual dwellings in Figure 3.13.

Figure 3.13. Final energy consumption per dwelling 1960–2000.

Past trends show how energy demand per dwelling rose very sharply until 1973–4 and
then it rose more slowly or even declined in some countries. In others, consumption per
dwelling has been falling for years. In the future, these broad patterns are projected to
continue. In the United States, for instance, energy consumption is shown to decline
more quickly than it has in the past in the Conservation Case and a slower decline is
given in the Trends Continued Case (Figure 3.13). A similar drop can be seen in recent
Canadian consumption levels. The forecasts for Western Europe are also compatible
with recent trends in Sweden, the United Kingdom and other European countries.

While energy consumption per dwelling is shown to level off or decline in the United
States and Western Europe, it is forecast to rise in Eastern Europe and the Soviet
Union. This is partly caused by rising living standards, larger dwellings and higher
appliance ownership levels. Past trends of other European countries shown in Figure
3.13 are consistent with projected future developments. In each forecast, the potential
for conservation for the average dwelling is clearly shown. Some of the main technical
measures applied in each of the two Cases are set out for each end-use.