A method for supporting the design of efficient heating systems using EU product policy data

Figures & data

Figure 1. Heating system within the global context.

Table 1. Overview of the design method.

Step 0: Global context and system modelling

Step 1: Calculation of the energy services demand

Step 2: Calculation of the energy losses and non-renewable energy (NRE) consumption

2A. Estimation of the product performance using available figures of EU product policies and/or, if necessary, calculating them with other tools

2B. Calculation of the energy losses and NRE consumption from the figure of the energy services demand

Step 3: Calculation of the low-emission energy efficiency

Figure 2. Energy flows of the energy consumed by the system.

Figure 3. DHW and SH systems of the case study.

Table 2. System modelling of the heating systems.

	Generation	Storage	Distribution	Emission	Controls
DWH system	2. Solar sub-system	3. Storage tank	4. Distribution components DWH	5. Taps and showers	–
	1. Boiler				–
SH system
	–	–	6. Distribution components SH	7. Underfloor heating	8. Temperature control

Table 3. Performance of the system components of the case study.

Systems	Sub-system and components	Performance (current design)	Performance calculation
DHW system	2. Solar sub-system	Solar contribution: 64.5%	SEAS3 solare (ENEA 2014).
	3. Storage tank	Standing losses: 226 W	Calculated from the figure of the thermal dispersion declared by the manufacturer. Energy label G (EC 2013b)
		Total losses (LST): 2070 kWh/y	Calculated with SEAS3 (monthly calculation according to climate data)
	4. Distribution components DHW	Total losses (LDIST): 1018 kWh/y	Calculated with SEAS3
	5. Taps & showers	No energy losses, no savings (on the DHW energy demand)	Case study assumption
	1. Boiler	Water heating energy efficiency (ηDHW Boi): 74.4% (load profile M)	Compiled from manufacturer’s product sheet. Energy label A for both functions (EC 2013e)
SH system		Seasonal space heating energy efficiency (ηSH Boi): 92%
	6. Distribution components SH	Losses (LSH Dist): 38 kWh/y	Calculated with SEAS3.
	7. Underfloor heating	ηUFloor = 97%	SEAS3 (default value).
	8. Controls	Temperature control: Class V: savings of 3% (SCont)	Assumption based on information included in Energy Labelling (EC 2014b).

Table 4. Energy flows (kWh/y) of the case study.

DHW system
Distribution components DHW		Storage tank		Boiler DHW
LDHW Dist (Table 3)	EDHW Dist INPUT (Equation 2(2) )	LST (Table 3)	EST INPUT (Equation 2(2) )	EDHW Boi OUTPUT (Equation 5(5) )	EDHW Boi INPUT (Equation 1(1) )
1018	1655	2070	3725	3326	4471
SH system
Underfloor heating		Distribution components SH		Controls	Boiler SH
EUFloor INPUT (Equation 1(1) )	LUFloor (Equation 2(2) )	LSH Dist (Table 3)	ESH Dist INPUT (Equation 1(1) )	ESH Boi OUTPUT (Equation 6(6) )	ECont (ESH Boi INPUT*SCont)	ESH Boi INPUT (Equation 1(1) )
18,630	545	38	18,668	18,108	560	19,683

Table 5. Summary of energy parameters (in kWh/y) of the current design of the case study.

DHW system
EDHW Demand	EDHW Boi INPUT (Table 4)	ηDHW SYSTEM (Equation 7(7) )	EHW Losses (∑LDHW Comp (i))
637	4471	14.2%	4233
SH system
ESH Demand	ESH Boi INPUT (Table 4)	ηSH SYSTEM (Equation 8(8) )	ESH Losses (∑LSHComp (i))
18,085	19,683	91.9%	2158

Table 6. Share of energy losses of the components of the heating systems of the case study.

	3. Storage tank	4. Distribution components DHW	1. Boiler DHW	1. Boiler SH	6. Distribution components SH	7. Underfloor heating
kWh/y	2070	1018	1141	1575	38	545
Share (%)	32	16	18	25	1	8

Table 7. Performance levels of the system components.

Variables (component parameters)	Current design (case study system)	Performance levels	Source/comments
DHW System
2. Solar panels (number of panels)	1	0, 1 (2.06 m^2), 2 (4.12 m^2) solar panels	Same characteristics of the one already installed
1. Boiler (energy class/water heating energy efficiency)	A (74.4%)	E (30–33%), D (33–36%), C (36–39%), B (39–65%), A (65–100%)	See Table 8
3. Storage tank (energy class/ standing losses)	G (226 W)	G (>158 W), F (158–130 W), E (130–100 W), D (100–80 W), C (80–57 W), B (57–41 W), A (41–30 W), A+ (<30 W)	Energy labelling (EC 2013b)
5. Taps and showers (energy losses/savings)	0% losses	−53%, −35% and −18% losses	Assumption based on Swedish label SS 820000:2010 (SIS 2010).
	0% savings	18%, 35%, 53% savings
SH SYSTEM
1. Boiler (energy class/ seasonal SH energy efficiency)	A (ηSH Boi 92%)	B (82–90%), A (90–96%)	Energy Labelling (EC 2013e), Ecodesign (EC 2013d) and EU Ecolabel (EC 2014b).
8. Controls	Class V: 3% savings	No controls (0% savings), class I (1% savings), class III (1.5% savings), class II and IV (2% savings), class VII (3.5% savings), class VI (4% savings), class VIII (5% savings)	Assumption made based on energy labelling (EC 2013e).

Figure 4. Energy flow chart of the heating systems of the case study.

Figure 5. Results of the analysis of individual components’ potential for improvement.

Table 8. Performance range of the water heating energy efficiency of the boiler.

Energy labelling (EC 2013e)		Other product policies
Energy efficiency class	Water heating energy efficiency – Profile M (%)
A+++	ηWH ≥ 163	In theory, these energy classes can only be achieved in packages of water heaters that include also solar devices (Van Amerongen 2015)
A++	130 ≤ ηWH < 163
A+	100 ≤ ηWH < 130
A	65 ≤ ηWH < 100	74.4% Current boiler case study
		65% EU Ecolabel (EC 2014a)
B	39 ≤ ηWH < 65	–
C	36 ≤ ηWH < 39	–
D	33 ≤ ηWH < 36	–
E	30 ≤ ηWH < 33	30% – minimum Ecodesign requirements (EC 2013e)
F	27 ≤ ηWH < 30	Phase out by Ecodesign (EC 2013d)
G	ηWH < 27	Phase out by Ecodesign (EC 2013d)

Figure 6. Alternative solutions based on combining products with different levels of performance.

Table 9. Economic results of the DHW system of the case study (all values are in €).

	Current DO	DO1	DO2	DO3	DO4	DO5	DO6
Investment costs (products + installation)	5990	5990	5990	5990	7592	7592	7388
Operation costs (natural gas + sanitary water + maintenance and repair)	18,755	18,181	17,400	16,447	14,938	13,884	13,714
Total	24,745	24,170	23,390	22,437	22,530	21,476	21,102
Savings with respect the current design	–	−574	−1355	−2308	−2215	−3268	−3643

ENEA. 2014. Software SEAS3. Accessed March 21, 2016. http://www.enea.it/it/Ricerca_sviluppo/ricerca-sistema-elettrico/efficienza-per-gli-immobili-della-pa/software-seas

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2013a. Commission Decision C(2013) 2826 on Establishing the Ecological Criteria for the Award of the Community Eco-label for Sanitary Tapware. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2013e. Regulation (EC) No 811/2013 Implementing Directive 2010/30/EC with Regard to Energy Labelling of Space Heaters, Combination Heaters, Packages of Space Heater, Temperature Control and Solar Device and Packages of Combination Heater, Temperature Control and Solar Device. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2014b. Commission Communication in the Framework of the Implementation of Regulation (EU) No 813/2013 and of Regulation (EU) No 811/2013. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar

SIS (Swedish Standards Institute). 2010. Method for Determination of Energy Efficiency of Mechanical Basin and Sink Mixing Valves. SS 820000:2010. Swedish Standards Institute (SIS).

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2013c. Regulation (EC) No 814/2013 Implementing Directive 2009/125/EC with Regard to Ecodesign Requirements for Water Heaters and Hot Water Storage Tanks. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar

Van Amerongen. 2015. Ecodesign and Energy Labelling for Solar Thermal Related Products. Part 1: Introduction to the Methodology. vAConsult. European Solar Thermal Industry Federation.

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2014a. Decision C(2014) 3452 Establishing the Criteria for the Award of the EU Ecolabel for Water-based Heaters. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar

EC (European Commission). 2013d. Regulation (EC) No 813/2013 Implementing Directive 2009/125/EC with Regard to Ecodesign Requirements for Space Heaters and Combination Heaters. European Commission (EC).

 Google Scholar