REG. NUMBER. 001646146

References . Different tools to estimate the energy needs and to evaluate suitable energy technologies 3. Conclusion 6. Intruduction and context 2. Predicted energy use and carbon emissions in the project • Design pPH and PHPP • Total energy demand • Total carbon emissions 4. Renewable Energy aplication • What can be suitable for the project? • PV pannels • PV-T pannels 5.CONTENT 1.

2016) BATHROOM BEDROOM LIFT LIFT STAIR CASE The sunrise.” (Jiménez J. the average of 1. Built in the 1960’s and late 70’s.6 hours in BATHROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM winter and 218 hours during summer. Due to BATHROOM the fact that the elevation over the sea level is 4 meter.5°C. the BEDROOM LIVING concrete objectives of this retrofit project were: ROOM BATHROOM -To improve the daylight solar factor between 2 and 5 percent in KITCHEN the main areas of the apartment -Energy consumption under 100 kWh/m2/y (70% energy saving compared to existing building) HALL -Access to daylight in most of the living spaces.8 mm. The energy study wasreport of Sustainable Studio by Julio Jiménez . 2 bedrooms. 2015). “The Towers sits between the KITCHEN BATHROOM train rails and the Carville Hall Park (approximately 100 meters to BEDROOM the north) and the Thames River (400 meters to the south). during winter. The proposal retrofits an existing flat facing north.7 mm however. bedroom. most of the buildings are small houses and have an LIVING ROOM KITCHEN LIVING ROOM average height of 2 to 3 stories tall. living room. West London. insulation was added to provide the building with a 1. living room.1. The towers are 55m tall (23 floors) and the tallest building in the context is Hyperion Towers with 15 stories tall (45m) to the south. the climate HALL BEDROOM BATHROOM of the zone is humid. according to a report made by the London Borough of Hounslow “Major works are required to address current health and safety issues relating to the exterior of the building and ensure the long- term future of the Towers. BEDROOM Apart from it. STAIR CASE LIFT LIFT Due to the fact that the building structure is held by concrete walls and to the height between each floor (2.” (Curran S. and bathroom. ROOM In addition. Image taken from the ARC 6841 Design report of Sustainable Studio by Julio Jiménez water is 69. According to the design report of ARC 6841 by Julio Jiménez.3 meters). Each floor of the towers contains four flats. Image taken from the ARC 6841 Design better performance and thermal envelope. the complex has 6 towers with a total of 528 flats (88 flats each tower) and provides social housing to 792 people. and bathroom.7°C in ROOM February and the maximum would be in July: 23. The temperature of the site BATHROOM changes according to the season too. The existing external wall panels cladding the towers are progressively deteriorating resulting in several areas of exposed reinforcement where concrete from the cladding panels has fallen off. two different types: • Single flat: Kitchen. the lowest LIVING ROOM LIVING BEDROOM KITCHEN temperature recorded between 1981 and 2010 was -1.1 Proposal of the project.1. In addition. -Provide several public spaces for residents. the solution BEDROOM LIVING was to re-accommodate the floor plans as shown in image 1. it was KITCHEN BATHROOM proposed to rearrange the actual flats by respecting the structure. the towers need retrofit.2 Illuminance study. October is the month with more rain recorded. Nowadays. according to the Met Office. goes from 70. and March presents a reduction of rain with 42. • Double flat: Kitchen. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT The Brentford towers are located in Hounslow.

there are many other utensils to do this. The tools shown above can estimate and provide information to make a decision on what renewable should be used in the project. 20161) (shown in image 1. calculations and familiarity provided along this course.” (Design PH. 2016) The interface works with Excel and provides results in heating and cooling demand. “The plugin provides an automatic analysis algorithm which can infer element types and area groups. it provides useful information to make decisions in the future development of the design. The reasons why it was decided to work with the chosen tools are: • PHPP and Design PH due to all the information. “The PHPP is easy to use planning tool for energy efficiency for the use of architects and planning experts. developed by the Passive House Institute to work as a 3d modeling interface that works together with PHPP. The environmental pocket book by Dr.”(Design PH. as a result. summer comfort (frequency of overheating). This method is a very simple and comprehensive tool that mixes different information. this. the space heating demand had a reduction of the 73. DIFFERENT TOOLS TO ESTIMATE THE ENERGY NEEDS AND TO EVALUATE SUITABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES DESIGN PH AND PHPP ( PASSIVHAUS PLANNING PACKAGE) Design PH is a plugin for Sketch Up. However. Sofie Pelsmakers gives manual calculation and matrixes to help to decide what kind of renewable is suitable for the project.2) 2. Surfaces are given a color-code so that it is possible to visually verify in the 3D model that all the heat-loss surfaces have been correctly taken into account. BRE and PHPP data from the project.made only in a flat facing north because it was the only one the team had access. . “The primary energy dropped down from the original performance a 52. BENCHMARKING In the design process benchmarks are goals that are trying to be achieved.7% having as a result 260 kWh/(m2a).3% (71 kWh/(m2a)). 2016) In addition. The illumination also had a noticeable increase to 3% of daylight factor in the areas of the living room and kitchen” (Jiménez J. • Benchmarks were also chosen to do this analysis because of the easy and comprehensive way that it works. In addition. CIBSE TM 46. by using ICE database. this plugin provides a simplified energy balance in Sketch Up to allow the users to make changes in the model before exporting. demand for renewable energy demand and assessment of the annual renewable energy gains.

1 Material performance information.3 Building Regulations England 2013. As the building structure was made by concrete panels and due to the low amount of space inside the apartment it was decided to create exterior insulation. Pelsmakers 3. ‘model design specification Part L in Englan given in Dr.3.2 Design PH u-value study 3. the Environmental Design pocketbook was referred. the thickness and high performance of the material phenolic foam was selected. Pelsmakers 3. Environmental Design pocket book by Dr. After getting the u-value result in Design PH it is observed that the total is lower than the Nationa fabric specification. Pelsmakers . PREDICTED ENERGY USE AND CARBON EMISSIONS IN THE PROJECT DESIGN PH AND PHPP ( PASSIVHAUS PLANNING PACKAGE) To understand the way the wall works and its insulation it was important to use Design PH and PHPP to make predictions on how the energy performance and carbon emissions of the project would be. In order to know the type of insulation. Image taken from the book. In chapter 7 of the book. a table with different lambda values is shown. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book by Dr. because of the height of the building.

6 Specific Annual heating demand. the graphic shows the energy balance heating in the project and specify the amounts of kWh/(m2*a) where gains and loses happens.4 Design PH u-value study When the file was exported to PHPP and the settings changed to the correct location. is shown that most of the energy gains happen due to Solar reasons and Heating reasons. it has to Environmental Design pocket book by Dr. the quantity of heating demand is a little higher than the Part L New Dwellings. In the comparison. altitude. Taken from PHPP 3. In the images below.5 Existing housing stock legacy and CO2 savings. Also. the heating demand gave as a result 67kWh(m2/a). Pelsmakers take into consideration the risk of overheating. the next chart shows that the highest heat demand in the project is during December while 3. Taken from PHPP . etc. As shown in the table.. 3. Image taken from the in summer there is no need for heating.3.7 Energy balance heating .

631.08 kgCO2e/kWh *88 = 85.6 kWh * 88 = 999. that has to be multiplyed by the area: 2 0 .7m2= 11.40 kgCO2e/ kWhm2 3.2 kWh/ (m2a) *0.4kWh/ (m2a) * 0. The result. using 10% of the electricity demand without heatpump and 90 % with a boiler. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book by Dr.8 kWh TOTAL CARBON EMISSIONS To calculate the total carbon emissions it is needed to multipliciation of factors taken from SAP 2012 that are shown in the Environmental design pocket book.352. 143.04 kgCO2e/kWh 3.08 kgCO2e/kWh The total emission for one tower will be: 973.7 m2.8 CO2 conversion factors from SAP 2012.6 kWh Now. as shown in table 3. taking in consideration that the towers have 88 flats: 11352.4 is 238 kWh/(m2a). Taken from PHPP .216 kgCOce/kWh6 = 20. 4 0 kgCO2e/kWh * 47.7 m2 = 973.9 Primary energy value .519 kgCOce/kWh6 + 94. This factors have to be multiply by the results given in the PHPP.028. To solve the total per flat the areaa needs to be multiplyied by the total energy demand: 238 kWh/(m2a)*47. The treated floor area is 47.TOTAL ENERGY DEMAND PHPP also gives you the result of the Energy consumption that in this case. Pelsmakers then.

4.2 CO2 conversion factors from SAP 2012. macro CHP. it gave that the project is likely suitable for solar thermal PV-T panels and PV’s. PV and PV-T. another matrix was used and as a result. To validate this technology. As shown in the images below.4. it could be better to apply the technologies to the ground due to the required and that that could give a better performance. as results biogas.3 CO2 conversion factors from SAP 2012. a solar radiation study was made during the design process to understand the impact of the context. Pelsmakers .1 South west and North east solar radiation study taken in the Towers. Image taken from the Environmental 4. Pelsmakers Design pocket book by Dr. However. RENEWABLE ENERGY APLICATION WHAT CAN BE SUITABLE FOR THE PROJECT? To have a starting point on this chapter matrixes in chapter 12 of the Environmental design pocketbook were used to get an idea in the use of Renewables. Due to the outstanding height of the towers on the site. the west and south facade could be 4. Image taken from ARC 6841 Design report for sustainable studio 1 by Julio Jiménez used to put some solar renewable technology as some area on the ground too. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book by Dr.

it is important to mention that one of the disadvantages of this renewable is that “domestic electricity usually peaks in winter and in the evenings . Moreover.4 CO2 conversion factors from SAP 2012. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book 4. Pelsmakers by Dr. Pelsmakers shown. PV PANELS In the next image. In the left image. this will produce 10. Pelsmakers 4. 2015) In the next chart. This could reduce the performance of the PV but4. it was mapped out in a solar study made for the design report the area where the most amount of direct sunlight is getting.4 PV panel diagram.5 Summer and winter shadow study in a single day. which is the 1. In addition. a comparison of different PV panels is 4. the total energy trying to cover is 999.Design pocket book by Dr. Image taken from ARC 6841 Design report for sustainable studio 1 by Julio Jiménez PV’s convert solar energy into electricity.028. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book by Dr.5 Types of PV panels. (Pelsmakers. 2006) So.8 kWh (for a single tower). during winter some shading is caused in the same space as a result of the lower position of the sun. However. as it can be observed. By using the roof of the tower (324 m2) and while reducing the space needed for circulation and management the PV panels area is reduced o 108 m2.800 kWh. it is illustrated the importance of having a good angle in the solar system to maximize the use and production of the panels an angle between 30° and 40° is required facing south. Each square meter of this technology produces 100 kWh/m2 per year (Feilden Clegg Bradley.08% of the total . the monocrystalline PV is the most efficient but also the most expensive. the diagram shows that during summer the west area has a lot of potentials to put some solar panels.when solar energy is least available”. Image taken from the Environmental that is one of the potentials risks of having a solar system.

6 PV’s only in the roof calculation sheet. Julio Jiménez sounds attractive the landscape mark (trees needed . Julio Jiménez PV-T “PV-T’s are a relatively new technology and remain largely untested. Julio Jiménez CO2 reductions would be 70KgCo2 * 6980.136 Total energy produced of the 1. only using the roof) will be 108m2 * 120 kWh/m2 = 12.87431463 all the complex but could potentially reduce the project energy consumption from the grid. the4.7 PV’s on the green areas calculation sheet.646667 Energy produced 698064. as in the PV’s.87% (206179500 kWh) of the Total number of panels with space 3490.267 KgCO2 .6 m2 x 120 kWh/m2= 837.9 PV’s only in the roof calculation sheet.323333 observed that PV-T’s have a better performance inreduction PV area 6980. the 4.8% of the energy needed for areduction PV area 108 Tower. The energy produced by this technology (again. the cost of improving this system would be 108. project 4. if the area shown in the image 4. Total area 20941.95 m2) were used to put some solar panels.617. The carbon reductions of PV-T’s 70 kgCO2 * 108m2 = 7.646667 energy and CO2 emissions.6 m2 = 488645.960 kWh (1. Image taken from the Environmental Design pocket book by energy produced would be: Dr.94 could produce 69.6667 tower! This area will not give enough energy for Total energy produced of the 69. This means that filling this area with PV-Energy produced 12960 T’s would give the energy to provide electricityTotal energy produced of the project 1.323333 energy needed for a tower.84917755 say: Perhaps the idea to fill a land with all this PV-T’s4.94 After showing the 2 selected systems it can beTotal number of panels with space 3490.6 the decision to take for this project is necessary toTotal energy produced of the project 83.000 pounds. that one Total area 20941. Julio Jiménez If the dotted area in the image 4.600 pounds reduction PV area 108 and the embodied carbon of using this number Energy produced 10800 of PV panels will be 108 m2*242KgCO2= 26.Total area 324 energy consumption.10 PV’s only in the roof calculation sheet. this means that with reduction that space we can have energy for not even one PV area 6980. In addition.5 was filled with PV-T’s for the whole six towers. Their potential to produce more energy from a given roof area compared to other technologies is very promising” (Pelsmakers.980. Now.6 kWh thatTotal number of panels with space 54 represents the 83.297259639 and heating for almost 1 tower.30% of the whole use).560 KgCO2 and finally. a good reflection onEnergy produced 837677.08% KgCo2. Taking five years to have a payback. 2015) The way the system works is by using a PV overheating by drawing heat away from the PV panel usually with an air source heat pump.5 (20. Pelsmakers Total area 324 6. The cost of putting solar Total number of panels with space 54 panels in the roof area will be 102. 4.8 PV-T panel diagram.677.

view.. It was tried to reduce the thermal performance of the building but due to the fact that the best lamda value was being using and we had a very low u value. CONCLUSION THE BRENTFORD TOWERS SHOULD BE. The placecment of this tools would be on the roof of each tower and in the selected area shown in image be chopped down and visual landscape) would have a very large impact in the way the community looks at this moment. with this type of system storing generated electricity might mean issue “using the national grid to export (sell electricity will be problematic on a large scale since supply (daytime) and demand (evening) do not match” (Pelsmakers. the result of energy was the one given in the building. However. In addition. In addition. We know that the future of the cities is energy reduction. and recreation spaces. 5. in the process to get here some designARC 6841 Design report for sustainable studio 1 by Julio Jiménez considerations could have been improved to give a better and lower energy performance. Also. it is not needed to achieve a 100% the energy of the project however it could be helpful for the habitats and people in the site. Some of the maintenance issues are the snow cleaning and leaves. birds dropping and dust removal has to be considered if this is not done a 10% on the system performance can be lost. but. Moreover. PV-T’s were selected as the renewable technology to marry with the project. a lo of considerations has to be taken in order to achieve a good performance and life of the4. the longevity of the panels would be 20 to 25 years and cost of maintenance will include replacing refrigerants every year. 2015). greenery is something we need to have a better quality of life. After doing this report. . Image taken from system . The way these panels are monitored is a simple display that identifies failures but issues should be rectified swiftly. air. the asthetic considerations on how this project is going to look after the implementation of the renewable energy is very important. A comprehensive project that involves the people in comunity and renewable energy to reduce the CO2 impact and use of energy.1.5 Summer and winter shadow study in a single day. As said in chapter 4.

aspx?bcr=1 (Accessed: 20 April 2017). Curran. U. Jiménez. Sheffield.: University of Sheffield. J. REFERENCES Pelsmaker. (2011) The environmental design pocketbook. S. de/en/04_phpp/04_phpp.htm [Accessed 5 May 2017].passiv. [online] Passiv. .K. (2017) ARC 6841 BIM Design report for sustainable studio 1. Available at: Passivhays Institute (2017).uk/uuCoverPage. 2ND EDITION edn. London: RIBA Enterprises. (2015) Brentford Towers: Ensuring the towers long-term Available at: http:// democraticservices. Passivhaus Institut.5. S.