You are on page 1of 29

Building Research Establishment

International comparison
of energy standards in
building regulations:
Denmark, Finland,
Norway, Scotland, and
Sweden

September 2007
International comparison prepared by:

Building Research Establishment


Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride, Glasgow, G75 0RZ

Reports from Nordic countries prepared by:

Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut,
Danish Building Research Institute
Dr. Neergaards Vej 15, DK -2970 Hørsholm, Denmark

VTT Building and Transport


Technical Research Centre of Finland
P.O. Box 1805, Kemistintie 3, Espoo, FIN - 02044 VTT, Finland

Statens Bygningstekniske Etat, National Office of Building Technology and


Administration
Møllergt. 16 7th floor, PO Box 8742, Youngstorget N-0028, Oslo, Norway

Projektengagemang on behalf of
Boverket, Swedish Board of Physical Planning and Building
Energi & klimatanalys, Golfvägen 2, Mörby C. Pl. 5, Box 515, 182 15 Danderyd

The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors.

SBSA would like to thank Kirsten Engelund Thomsen, Jenni Jahn, Catherine Grini,
Brita Dagestad, Brian Anderson, and Per Levin for their contributions to this project

Report commissioned by:


Scottish Building Standards Agency
web: www.sbsa.gov.uk

© Crown Copyright 2007

Applications for reproduction of any part of this publication should be addressed to:
SBSA, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Livingston, EH54 6GA
Tel: 01506 600 400
Fax: 01506 600 401
e-mail: info@sbsa.gsi.gov.uk

This report is published electronically to limit the use of paper, but photocopies will be
provided on request to the Scottish Building Standards Agency
Contents

Contents 3
Executive summary 5
1 Introduction 7
2 Comparison of energy calculations 8
3 Compliance with energy standards 14
4 Impact on CO2 emissions 18
5 Differences between calculation methods 22
6 Conclusions 23
References 24
Appendix A: Benchmark dwelling definition 25
Appendix B: SAP calculation 27

Country Reports:
Denmark Link
Finland Link
Norway Link
Sweden Link

3
Executive summary
This report details the findings of the Scottish Building Standards Agency (SBSA) research
project to compare energy standards in Scotland with those in Denmark, Sweden, Norway and
Finland.
The comparisons are based on a benchmark dwelling, a 2-storey 3-bedroom detached house,
which is compliant with current Scottish energy standards. This dwelling does not meet the
requirements in any of the other countries considered in this study, particularly Denmark,
Norway and Sweden. The main reason is concerned with differences in climate between
Scotland and the other countries, all of which are appreciably colder in winter.

It is not possible to compare the energy standards directly because of differences in what is
included, particularly as regards energy use for electrical appliances, and because of different
inherent assumptions in the calculation methods as regards occupancy, hot water use and
other factors. Despite these differences, it is clear that all the Nordic countries have energy
standards which would usually necessitate U-values that are substantially lower (more
demanding) than those used in the benchmark dwelling, but that these standards provide for
appreciably higher internal temperatures to be maintained whilst the external temperatures are
much lower.
The calculation methods are broadly similar in all the countries including Scotland. There are
many differences of detail, such as assumptions for occupancy, internal heat gains, treatment
of thermal bridging, treatment of solar gain, etc, but all follow the principles set out in the
applicable European standards. Factors taken into account are, on the basis of the information
supplied, essentially the same in all the calculation methods.

When the assumptions used in the UK calculation method, SAP 2005, are adjusted for the
climate and internal temperature conditions that apply in each country, the calculation of energy
required for space heating is much more comparable with the methods used in the country
concerned. Residual differences are likely to be connected mainly with differences in
assumptions on occupancy etc that are built into the calculation methods.

The principal differences therefore lie in the specifications for a house that would comply in the
Nordic countries compared with the benchmark dwelling used in this study. This concerns
U-values of all building elements and also air tightness.

The findings provide an indication of the scale of effect on CO2 emissions of adopting U-values
that would typically be used to achieve compliance for the benchmark house with the Nordic
energy standards. If the Swedish levels of U-values were to be adopted in the Scottish
benchmark dwelling the space heating needs could be reduced by 23% and the total CO2
emissions from the benchmark dwelling could be reduced by 13%.

5
1 Introduction
The Scottish Building Standards Agency (SBSA) commissioned reports from Denmark, Finland,
Norway, and Sweden to establish a methodology for comparing energy standards in these four
countries with those applying in Scotland.
The comparison was based on a benchmark dwelling, a 2-storey 3-bedroom detached house,
which was designed to narrowly achieve compliance with Standard 6.1 of the Scottish Building
Regulations in terms of CO2 emissions. The design was developed from an example provided
by Cala Holmes, as part of another research project undertaken by Turner and Townsend,
Impact on costs and construction practice in Scotland of any further limitation of CO2 emissions
from new buildings.

Details of the benchmark dwelling are given in Appendix A.


This report compares the findings of the four reports and explores some of the reasons for
differences. Additional information and clarifications were sought from the research partners
and some supplementary calculations were made in order to make some of the following
comparisons:

• the energy requirements for space heating for the benchmark dwelling, using the
calculation method of each country;
• the energy requirements for space heating for the benchmark dwelling, using the
UK calculation method SAP 2005, adjusted for the Nordic climates (degree day data
only) and assumed internal temperatures;
• the extent of compliance of energy use of the benchmark building with the national
energy standards in the Nordic countries, using national calculation methods;
• the levels of fabric insulation that would typically be used to achieve compliance of
the benchmark dwelling with national energy targets;
• backstop insulation standards;
• the impact on CO2 emissions of adopting U-values and standards of airtightness
that would typically be used to achieve compliance in each country.

7
2 Comparison of energy calculations
Calculation methodology
In Scotland energy calculations for the purposes of building standards are undertaken using the
Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP 2005). SAP is a methodology for calculating annual
energy use and associated CO2 emissions. It complies with the Energy Performance of
Buildings Directive and is based on standardised assumptions about occupancy and heating
patterns and takes account of the characteristics of the building fabric and the efficiency of
provision of building services. Space heating energy needs are obtained from heat loss from the
building under standardised weather conditions allowing for internal and solar heat gain. Energy
needs for water heating and lighting are obtained on the basis of typical use patterns for the
size of the dwelling. The resulting CO2 emissions are calculated taking account of the carbon
intensity of the fuels used to provide the services.

Calculation methodologies in the other countries are based on the same framework and
principles, although they all differ in details particularly as regards the standardised
assumptions for occupancy and patterns of use of building services.

In Scotland the calculation results used for assessing the compliance of domestic buildings with
Standard 6.1 are expressed in kg of CO2 per square metre per year (kgCO2/m2/annum),
resulting from heating, ventilation (if mechanical), domestic hot water, and lighting. The Scottish
energy standards also set backstop insulation values, but the benchmark dwelling exceeds
these throughout.

In the other countries standards are set in different ways.

• Denmark: The standard is expressed as a limit on the calculated energy use in kWh/m².
This includes heat losses from heat distribution systems and the efficiency of the heating
installation. District heating systems are common in Denmark; the requirement controls
the use of heat from the heat generator. It also includes energy for water heating, and
for general household electricity multiplied by a factor of 2.5.

• Sweden: The standard is expressed as a limit on the delivered energy use in kWh/m². In
principle this includes efficiency of heating systems, but in practice electrical heating is
common in Sweden for which the efficiency is taken as (or close to) 100%. For buildings
of less than 100 m² and openings less than 20% of the floor area, an alternative
elemental approach with limits on U-values, air tightness and ventilation heat recovery
efficiency can be used.

• Norway: Compliance can be either by elemental U-values and an air tightness limit or by
a limit on the ‘useful’ energy in kWh/m², i.e. not taking the carbon intensity of energy
supply systems into account. The elemental approach includes limits on the area of
glazing, windows and doors (20% of heated floor area), thermal bridging (dwellings 0.03
W/m2K; other buildings 0.06 W/m2K), airtightness (dwellings 2.5 m³/h.m² at 50 Pa.; other
buildings 1.5 m³/h.m² at 50 Pa.), specific fan power (dwellings 2.5 kWh/m3s; commercial
buildings 2.0 kWh/m3s daytime, 1.0 kWh/m3s nighttime), automatic shading or other
precautions to avoid the use of local cooling systems; lowering of indoor temperatures
for certain categories of buildings.

• Finland: Compliance is by elemental U-values and air-tightness limitations.

A common denominator between these differing ways of expressing requirements is the total
‘useful’ energy expressed in kWh/m². All countries have a calculation methodology for energy

8
use, which is applied for energy labelling even if not for regulation compliance. The
comparisons in this report are based on useful energy in kWh/m², given to the nearest whole
number.

Energy for space heating, water heating and lighting


Each country undertook calculations for the benchmark dwelling using the calculation procedure
for compliance normally used in that country and obtained results as shown in Table 1 and
Figure 1. The data include the items incorporated in SAP calculations, i.e. space heating, water
heating, mechanical ventilation and, where identified separately, lighting.

Table 1 : Energy (for space heating, water heating, and lighting) the benchmark dwelling
would use in each country using their calculation procedure (kWh/m²)

Scotland* Denmark+ Sweden Norway Finland+

Space heating 58 108 145 164 159


Water heating 33 20 38 30 33
Lighting 7 - - 17 10

* The figure for energy use for Scotland was obtained by dividing the space
heating requirement (see Appendix B: item (81) of the SAP 2005 worksheet
calculation) by the total floor area (100 m²), namely 5791/100 = 58 kWh/m². For
water heating it is 33 kWh/m² from (51), and for lighting 7 kWh/m² from (87g).
+ In the original reports for Denmark and Finland, the energy/m² was given on
the basis of external dimensions for floor area and have been adjusted to
internal dimensions in this table and elsewhere in the report.
The data are for 'useful' energy, i.e. the energy to be supplied to meet the needs
for space heating, water heating and lighting, not taking account of the efficiency
of energy supply systems. In some of the papers provided by each country
slightly different figures are shown for the results of the SAP 2005 calculation.
This is because the boiler efficiency was taken into account.

9
Figure 1 : Energy (for space heating, water heating, and lighting) the benchmark dwelling
would use in each country using their calculation procedure (kWh/m²)

180

160

140

120

100 Space heating


kWh/m²

Water heating
80 Lighting

60

40

20

0
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

The figure for water heating in Denmark is low, (based on a hot water consumption of 250 l/m²
(gross) per year heated to 55 °C), but otherwise are very similar in all countries. Lighting is not
calculated separately for dwellings in Denmark and Sweden (being included in estimates of total
electricity usage for lights and appliances) but would be expected to increase with longer hours
of darkness in more northerly latitudes. There are limitations therefore on what can be deduced
concerning water heating and lighting, and so the following analysis concentrates on space
heating.

Space heating requirements


The calculated space heating as shown in Table 1 indicates substantial variations between the
calculations done using the methods for each country. There are two basic reasons why this
might be so:

• because of differences in the national calculation methods; and

• because of differences in the climates and/or assumed internal conditions.

Allowing for climatic differences


The calculations in Table 1 show higher energy use for space heating in all the other countries,
which is to be expected as each of them is known to be colder in winter. The extent of climatic
differences can be gauged by considering the average temperatures in each country, as
indicated in Table 2 and Figure 2.

The average temperature during the heating season (September to May) is appreciably lower in
each of the other countries than the temperatures used for calculations in Scotland.

10
Table 2 : External temperature (°C)

Scotland* Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

12-month average 9.7 8.2 6.3 5.9 4.3


Average for September to May 7.7 4.9 2.9 2.5 0.4

*Figures for Scotland are UK averages comparable to data used in the UK calculation
methodology, SAP 2005. These correspond approximately to those for the central belt, the
location of the majority of Scotland’s population.

Figure 2 : External temperature (°C)


12

10

12-month average
°C 6
Average for September to May

0
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

In order to obtain an indication of the effect of climate, calculations were made for the same
house using the SAP methodology but with degree-day data estimated for each of the
countries. Degree-days are the difference between mean internal and external temperature
obtained on a daily basis and summed over the heating season. In the SAP methodology,
degree-days are adjusted for internal and solar gains so that the space heating requirement is
directly proportional to the degree-days.
Average temperatures were provided for each country for each month of the year, from which
degree-days were calculated using a modified version of the method normally employed in
SAP. The results are shown in Table 3. The space heating requirement ranges from 58 to
132 kWh/m², indicating that the climatic differences have a major impact on space heating
needs.

11
Table 3 : Space heating calculations by SAP 2005 adjusted to the external temperatures
of each country

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

Degree-days, K.d 1360 2322 3028 3140 3601


Space heating 58 88 108 112 132
requirement, kWh/m²

Allowing for internal temperature assumptions


There is also another factor. SAP calculations in the UK are based on intermittent heating
(morning and evening for weekdays, all day at weekends, with heating being off at night), with a
mean internal temperature of approximately 18°C whereas in the other countries the basis is
continuous heating with an internal set-point temperature of 20°C or 21°C. This means that the
calculations for the other countries are based on higher average internal temperatures and
lower average external temperatures, both of which result in higher space heating energy.

For use in the UK, SAP calculations are based on fixed weather data and the intermittent
heating described above. When adapted to the assumed internal temperatures and the
estimated degree-days for each climate, the results are as in Table 4. This is analysed in the
next section.

Table 4 : Space heating calculations by SAP 2005 adjusted to both external and internal
temperature assumptions of each country

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

Mean internal 17.9 20 21 21 21


temperature °C
Space heating 58 99 129 134 154
requirement, kWh/m²

Comparison of calculation results by national methods with adjusted SAP


The results using national methodologies with those produced using SAP 2005, adjusted for
climate and internal temperature assumptions, are compared in Table 5 and Figure 3.

The adjustments for climate in the above analysis are approximate; for example allowance has
been made for external temperature but not for differences in solar radiation and hence solar
gains. Nevertheless Table 5 shows that, if SAP were in use in each country adapted to local
conditions, the calculated energy use for space heating would not be substantially different from
that calculated by the methods applicable in each country (comparison of rows a and c in
Table 5).

12
Table 5 : Comparison of energy required (kWh/m²) for space heating of benchmark
building using a) country calculation methods, b) SAP 2005 adjusted for external
temperature, and c) SAP 2005 adjusted for both external and internal temperature
assumptions of each country

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

a. Own country calculation method 58 108 145 164 159


b. SAP 2005 adjusted to local
external temperature conditions 58 88 108 112 132
c. SAP 2005 adjusted to local
internal and external temperature 58 99 129 134 154
conditions

Figure 3 : Comparison of energy required (kWh/m²) for space heating of benchmark


building using a) country calculation methods, b) SAP 2005 adjusted for external
temperature and c) SAP 2005 adjusted for both external and internal temperature
assumptions of each country

180

160

140
Own country calculation
120 method

100
kWh/m²

SAP adjusted to local external


temperature conditions
80
SAP adjusted to local internal
60 and external temperature
conditions
40

20

0
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

13
3 Compliance with energy standards
Each country expresses its energy standards as performance requirements, rather than
stipulating unit values for insulation. This, taken together with differences in climate and in
assumptions for certain parameters that contribute to energy performance, means that direct
comparisons are unreliable and that it is a very complex matter to make accurate, detailed
comparisons. This chapter attempts to outline the differences in U-values and airtightness
standards that would be necessary to comply with the national energy standards. Any more
detailed, accurate comparison would require substantial additional analysis and modelling.
The benchmark dwelling was assessed against the energy standards for each country, using
the calculation method applicable in the country concerned, for a location in the south of the
country which would have a latitude similar to parts of Scotland. The results are shown in
Table 6, in which the first row is the calculated energy use for the benchmark dwelling, the
second row is the compliance standard (see also Figure 4) and the third row is the percentage
by which the benchmark dwelling exceeds the compliance standard (see also Figure 5).

The data used here are as reported by each country. The standards always include space and
water heating but differ in what is included for other energy uses (lighting and other electrical
energy). The data are therefore not directly comparable across the columns. In particular, the
figures for Denmark include general household electricity use in addition to lighting, while those
for Sweden do not include lighting.
Bearing in mind that the results are not directly comparable, it is nonetheless reasonable to
observe that the benchmark dwelling is not far short of the compliance standard for Finland, but
is substantially below the compliance standards applicable in the three Scandinavian countries.
The principal reason for the differences is the result of the different climates in each country and
the additional fabric insulation needed to meet their performance standards at substantially
lower external temperatures in winter.

Table 6 : Compliance of energy use of the benchmark dwelling with national energy
standards using the national calculation methods+

Scotland* Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

a) Calculated energy 107 145 185 234 237


use of benchmark
dwelling, kWh/m²
b) Compliance 108 88 110 141 202
standard for energy
use, kWh/m²
c) Excess: -1% 65% 68% 66% 17%
c = 100 x (a/b-1)
+
All the national standards include space and water heating but differ in what is
included for other energy uses (lighting and other electrical energy). The data are
therefore NOT comparable across the columns.
* For Scotland, figure given is the delivered energy for space and water heating and
lighting from section 9a of the SAP worksheet).

14
Figure 4 : Compliance of energy use of the benchmark dwelling with national energy
standards using the national calculation methods
250

200
Energy use of benchmark
dwelling
Compliance standard
150
kWh/m²

Note: All the national


standards include space
100 and water heating but
differ in what is included
for other energy uses
(lighting and other
50 electrical energy). The
data are therefore NOT
comparable across the
columns.
0
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

Figure 5 : Percentage difference of energy use of the benchmark dwelling compared with
national energy standards using the national calculation methods

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30% Note: All the national


standards include space
and water heating but
20% differ in what is included
for other energy uses
10% (lighting and other
electrical energy). The
data are therefore NOT
0% comparable across the
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland columns.
-10%

15
Typical U-values for new construction
Table 7 compares the levels of fabric insulation for typical cases of compliant dwellings. The
U-values in this table are:

• Scotland: The values for the simplified compliance method (gas heating)

• Denmark: The values for an extension to an existing dwelling (for which compliance is
on an elemental basis)

• Sweden: Values recommended for compliance with the national target (as calculated
using the Swedish methodology)

• Norway: The values for elemental compliance

• Finland: The values for elemental compliance


The Scottish values are higher (less demanding) for all elements than the values that typically
would be used to achieve compliance in each country.

Table 7 : Typical levels of fabric insulation (U-values, W/m²K) for compliance with
national targets

Scotland+ Denmark† Sweden+ Norway* Finland*

External wall 0.25 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.24


Roof 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.15
Ground floor 0.22 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.19
Windows and doors 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.4
+
U-values recommended for compliance with national target

U-values for an extension to an existing dwelling
* U-values for elemental compliance

Backstop U-values
Table 8 compares the general backstop insulation values set for Scotland with those in other
Nordic countries. Backstop values set the least demanding, maximum U-value that is
acceptable for fabric insulation, in order to avoid excessive heat loss and reliance on equipment
performance to achieve reductions in energy use. In practice, it would be difficult to meet the
CO2 emissions target using backstop U-values for all the external elements, so that they can
usually be applied only to parts of the external elements in order to meet the target, with the
remainder of the fabric achieving more demanding U-values.

The Scottish backstop U-values are lower (more demanding) than those in Denmark and
Finland but higher (less demanding) that those in Norway.
In Sweden the backstop is expressed only as the average U-value of the fabric inclusive of
thermal bridges, i.e. total fabric heat loss divided by total exposed surface area. This is not
readily compared with the other countries; however for Scotland the average U-value of the
benchmark dwelling, with all elemental U-values at the backstop limits, is 0.51 W/m²K.

16
Table 8 : Backstop U-values (W/m²K)

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway* Finland

External wall 0.30 0.40 0.22 0.60


Roof 0.20 0.25 0.18 0.60
Ground floor 0.25 0.30 0.18 0.60

Windows and doors 2.2 2.3 / 2.0 1.6 1.8
average U-value 0.51+ 0.50
(including thermal
bridging)
* When the total energy method is being used

Backstop values for new houses will change to 2.0 in January 2008
+
Not stated, but calculated from the U-values for Scotland in the table for purposes of
comparison with Sweden

Air tightness and mechanical ventilation


In Scotland airtightness testing is not required for compliance. For the purposes of SAP
calculations, an air permeability of 10 m³/h.m² at 50 pascals pressure difference is assumed if
accredited construction details are to be used, or 15 m³/h.m² if not. However, lower values are
permitted in SAP calculations if confirmed by testing.

In the Nordic countries much higher standards of airtightness apply, as shown in Table 9. In
Denmark, Norway and Finland the values are expressed in air changes per hour at 50 Pa; the
air permeability in m³/h.m² is taken as numerically equal, as is done in SAP.

Table 9 : Airtightness (air permeability in m³/h.m² at 50 pascals)

Scotland* Denmark Sweden† Norway Finland+

10.0 2.5 2.2 2.5 1.0


* assumed value if accredited construction details used

is a requirement only when using elemental compliance method for
dwellings of floor area less than 100 m²
+
guideline value, but has to be proved through testing if less than 4

Mechanical ventilation is needed when airtightness is at these levels. A maximum specific fan
power of 2.5 W(litre/sec) is set in Denmark, Norway and Finland, and 65% minimum heat
recovery efficiency in Denmark and 30% in Finland. Norway does not specify a requirement for
heat recovery efficiency but regulatory level for total energy use was set assuming 70%
efficiency.

17
4 Impact on CO2 emissions
Effect of external temperature on CO2 emissions
Using the temperature adjustments discussed in section 2 in SAP calculations, the effect of
external temperature on CO2 emissions can be assessed. This is done in Table 10 and Figure 6
for (a) regions of Scotland and (b) the Nordic countries. Variations across the regions of
Scotland are much less than the differences between Scotland and the Nordic countries.

Table 10 : CO2 emissions for benchmark dwelling adjusted for external temperature in
regions of Scotland and in the Nordic countries

Region DER, kg/m² % difference from


average
UK average* 24.05 0.0%
SW Scotland 25.07 4.2%
Borders 25.27 5.1%
West Scotland 25.45 5.8%
East Scotland 25.58 6.4%
North-East Scotland 27.05 12.5%
Highland 25.84 7.4%
Western Isles 24.75 2.9%
Orkney 26.00 8.1%
Shetland 27.56 14.6%
Denmark 30.55 27.0%
Sweden 35.27 46.7%
Norway 36.47 51.6%
Finland 41.57 72.8%
* UK average is used for normal SAP calculations

18
Figure 6 : CO2 emissions for benchmark dwelling adjusted for external temperature in
regions of Scotland and in the Nordic countries

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Highland

Western Isles

Norway
NE Scotland

Shetland

Finland
Orkney
UK average

W Scotland

E Scotland

Sweden
Denmark
Borders

Effect on CO2 emissions of adopting lower U-values (Scottish climate)


As noted earlier, U-values for typical compliant designs are appreciably lower in the Nordic
countries than in Scotland (see Table 7). The effect of the adoption of these U-values on the
total CO2 emissions for the benchmark dwelling is shown in Table 11 and Figure 7.

Table 11 : CO2 emissions for the U-values (W/m²K) given in Table 7

U-values typical for:

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

External wall U-value 0.25 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.24


Roof U-value 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.15
Ground floor U-value 0.22 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.19
Windows and doors U-value 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.4
CO2 emissions, kg/m² 24.05 22.26 20.87 21.01 22.92
Reduction in emissions
– 7.4% 13.2% 12.6% 4.7%
compared to Scotland

19
Figure 7 : CO2 emissions (kg/m²) for the U-values given in Table 7

25

24

23

22
kg/m²
21

20

19

18
Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

Whereas the Nordic insulation values have relatively limited effect on total CO2 emissions, there
is a considerable effect on the energy needs for space heating, as demonstrated by the values
in Table 12.

Table 12 : Energy needs for space heating (kWh/m2) for the U-values (W/m²K) given in
Table 7

U-values typical for:

Scotland Denmark Sweden Norway Finland

External wall U-value 0.25 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.24


Roof U-value 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.15
Ground floor U-value 0.22 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.19
Windows and doors U-value 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.4
Space heating energy
58 50 44 45 53
needs, kWh/m²
Reduction in energy needs
– 13.8 % 24.1 % 22.4 % 8.6 %
compared to Scotland

20
Effect on CO2 emissions of adopting higher standards of airtightness
The Nordic countries also have much higher standards of air tightness, coupled with heat
recovery ventilation systems. However setting the air tightness to 2.5 m³/h.m², specific fan
power to 2.5 W/(litre/sec) and heat recovery efficiency to 60% provides only a marginal
reduction in CO2 emissions; for example with the Swedish U-values the emissions would
become 20.82 kg/m² rather than 20.87 kg/m². This is because the electricity needed to operate
the ventilation fans more-or-less balances the gas saved by the heat recovery in CO2 emission
terms. A different balance would be obtained for electrical heating (as is common in Sweden).
There are presently six MVHR systems on the SAP Appendix Q website (www.sap-
appendixq.org.uk) with specific fan power in the range 0.69 to 1.37 W/(litre/sec) and heat
recovery efficiency between 60% and 90%. With specific fan power of 1.5 W/(litre/sec) and heat
recovery efficiency of 60%, the emissions for the benchmark dwelling with Swedish U-values
becomes 19.49 kg/m² (19.0% reduction).

Requirements for the use of renewable energy


The use of renewable energy is not mandatory in the Nordic countries, although the Norwegian
regulation says, “Buildings shall be designed and constructed to accommodate a significant part
of the energy needed for space and water heating being supplied by alternative energy carriers
to that of electricity and/or fossil fuels consumed by the end user.” However, heat pumps are
commonly used in Sweden. In Denmark, if micro-renewables are present they can be taken into
account.

21
5 Differences between calculation methods
As mentioned earlier, the principal differences between the calculation methods are the results
of the local external temperatures and the assumption of constant internal temperatures rather
than intermittent heating.
District heating is also common in all the Nordic countries in urban areas. It is used for 90% of
buildings in the largest cities in Finland, for instance. This will have a bearing on CO2 emissions
but is not considered in this report as the energy standards in each country are set in terms of
energy use rather than the CO2 emission basis used in Scotland.

The calculation methods all follow the same principles, but with differences of detail, as follows:

• generally they use a monthly basis for calculation of space heating, rather than the
annual degree-day method used in SAP (although SAP is likely to move to a monthly
basis at its next revision);

• assumptions for occupancy, internal heat gain, domestic hot water use, solar
transmittance of windows, overshading for solar gain, treatment of thermal bridging etc.;

• all the calculation methods include electrical energy use for appliances etc as well as
lighting.

This inclusion of electrical energy use for appliances is not expected to influence assessment of
compliance significantly, since standardised assumptions for appliance electricity use are used
both for the actual dwelling and for the reference dwelling used to set the standards.

On the basis of the information supplied, the factors taken into account are the same in each
case.

There are some further differences in the calculations provided by each country compared to
the calculation for Scotland, for example to include mechanical ventilation with heat recovery
where that is normal in the country concerned (but that is an option in the SAP specification that
is used where applicable).

22
6 Conclusions
The benchmark dwelling, which is compliant with current Scottish energy standards, does not
meet the requirements in any of the other countries considered in this study, particularly
Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
The main reason is concerned with differences in climate between Scotland and the other
countries, all of which are appreciably colder in winter.

It is not possible to compare the energy standards directly because of differences in what is
included, particularly as regards energy use for electrical appliances, and because of different
inherent assumptions in the calculation methods as regards occupancy, hot water use and
other factors.
Despite these differences, it is clear that all the Nordic countries have energy standards which
would usually necessitate U-values that are substantially lower (more demanding) than those
used in the benchmark dwelling, but that these standards also provide for much higher internal
temperatures to be maintained whilst the external temperatures are much lower, and also cover
energy use for electrical appliances. Nonetheless, Scotland sets backstop insulation values that
are lower than those set in Denmark.
The calculation methods are broadly similar in all the countries including Scotland. There are
many differences of detail, such as assumptions for occupancy, internal heat gains, treatment of
thermal bridging, treatment of solar gain, etc, but all follow the principles set out in the
applicable European standards. Factors taken into account are, on the basis of the information
supplied, essentially the same in all the calculation methods. Some are more detailed in certain
aspects: for example to undertake a detailed calculation of thermal bridging in all cases (which
can be avoided in Scotland by the use of accredited construction details, a system not available
in the other countries), or to take explicit account of thermal mass rather than using the implicit
treatment in SAP.
When the assumptions used in the UK calculation method, SAP 2005, are adjusted for the
climate and internal temperature conditions that apply in each country, the calculated energy
required for space heating is much more comparable with the methods used in the country
concerned. Residual differences are likely to be connected mainly with differences in
assumptions on occupancy etc that are built into the calculation methods.

The principal differences therefore lie in the specifications for a house that would comply in the
Nordic countries compared with the benchmark dwelling used in this study. This concerns
U-values of all building elements and also air tightness.

Because of the significantly colder climate in all the Nordic countries, a dwelling to a given
specification needs substantially more energy for space heating. This is mitigated in part by the
adoption of higher fabric performance in those countries. However, the carbon intensity of the
energy supply differs. In Sweden electricity generation for the grid is about 50% hydro and 50%
nuclear and in Norway almost 100% hydro, and electric heating is common in both these
countries. District heating is much more common in Denmark and Finland than in Scotland, and
in Finland especially many district schemes use waste combustion and/or CHP.
The findings provide an indication of the scale of effect on CO2 emissions of adopting U-values,
standards of airtightness, and mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, that would typically be
used to achieve compliance for the benchmark house with the Nordic energy standards. If the
Swedish levels of U-values and airtightness were to be adopted in the Scottish benchmark
house, together with reasonably efficient mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, CO2
emissions from the benchmark building could be reduced by 13 – 19%.

23
References
BRE, 2005, The Government’s Standard Assessment Procedure for energy rating of dwellings,
2005 edition
Danish Building Research Institute, 2007, Comparison of energy standards in Scotland and
Scandinavia, SBSA

Projekt Engagemang, 2007, Energy use for a Scottish house built in Sweden, SBSA

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, 2007, Comparison of energy standards in Scotland and
Scandinavia, SBSA

VTT, 2007, Energy standards in Finland, SBSA

24
Appendix A: Benchmark dwelling definition
SAP 2005 input data and results (new dwelling)
______________________________________________________________________________

Technical Handbook 2007, Domestic, Section 6


Summary of compliance with standard 6.1

Fuel for main heating: Mains gas


Target Carbon Dioxide Emission Rate (TER) for notional dwelling = 24.25 kg/m²
Dwelling Carbon Dioxide Emission Rate (DER) for proposed dwelling = 24.05 kg/m²

Result: Pass

Software version: Bresap v 4.37k, implementing SAP 2005 version 9.80


SAP 2005 rating = C 80
______________________________________________________________________________

Listing of input data

SBSA benchmark

Floor area Storey height


Ground floor 45.00 m² 2.59 m
First floor 55.00 m² 2.66 m

Living area: 16.00 m² (fraction 0.160)

Front of dwelling faces: (Unspecified)

Openings In element Area Side of dwelling


Door Walls (1) 1.85 not assigned
Window Walls (1) 23.15 not assigned

Overshading: Average

Gross area Openings Net area U-value Description


Doors 1.85 1.80
Windows 23.15 1.80 g = 0.72 FF = 0.70
Ground floor 45.00 0.22
Exposed floor 11.46 0.22
Walls (1) 146.93 25.00 121.93 0.25
Walls (2) 17.12 17.12 0.25
Roof 57.21 57.21 0.16

Thermal bridges: Accredited Construction Details (Scotland) (y = 0.08)

Pressure test: No (but q50 value assumed for the calculation)


Ventilation: Natural ventilation (extract fans)
Number of chimneys: 0
Number of flues: 0
Number of fans: 4
Number of sides sheltered: 2

25
Using Accredited Details (Scotland): Yes
Assumed q50 for the calculation: 10.00

Main heating system: Boiler system with radiators or underfloor


Fuel: Mains gas
Manufacturer's data:
Regular, room-sealed flue, fan-assisted
Efficiency 91.0% (condensing)
Radiators
Central heating pump in heated space
Main heating controls: Programmer, room thermostat and TRVs
Boiler interlock: Yes

Secondary heating system: none


(electric assumed for DER calculation)

Water heating: From boiler


Mains gas
Water heating separately timed: Yes
Cylinder volume: 150 litres
Cylinder insulation: Factory insulated 50 mm
Cylinder in heated space
Primary pipework insulation: Yes
Cylinderstat: Yes
Boiler interlock: Yes
Solar panel: No

Photovoltaics: None
Low energy lights: 50% of fixed lighting outlets

26
Appendix B: SAP calculation
SAP 2005 WORKSHEET FOR NEW DWELLING (Version 9.80, October 2005)
CALCULATION OF DWELLING EMISSIONS FOR REGULATIONS COMPLANCE
Domestic Handbook Section 6, 2007 Edition
calculated by program BRESAP version 4.37k

SBSA benchmark

1. Overall dwelling dimensions Area Av. storey Volume


(m²) height (m) (m³)
Ground floor 45.00 2.59 116.55 (1)
First floor 55.00 2.66 146.30 (2)
Total floor area 100.00 (5)
Dwelling volume (m³) 262.85 (6)

2. Ventilation rate
m³ per hour
Number of chimneys 0 × 40 0 (7)
Number of flues 0 × 20 0 (8)
Number of fans or passive vents 4 × 10 40 (9)
Number of flueless gas fires 0 × 40 0 (9a)
ach
Infiltration due to chimneys, flues and fans 0.15 (10)
Pressure test Assumed
Assumed q50 10.0
Infiltration rate 0.65 (19)
Number of sides sheltered 2 (20)
Shelter factor 0.85 (21)
Adjusted infiltration rate 0.55 (22)
(Natural ventilation)
Effective air change rate 0.65 (25)

3. Heat losses and heat loss parameter


Area U-value A×U
Element (m²) (W/m²K) (W/K)
Doors 1.85 1.80 3.33 (26)
Windows 23.15 (1.80) 1.68 38.87 (27)
Ground floor 45.00 0.22 9.90 (28)
Exposed floor 11.46 0.22 2.52 (28)
Walls (1) 121.93 0.25 30.48 (29)
Walls (2) 17.12 0.25 4.28 (29)
Roof 57.21 0.16 9.15 (30)
Total area of elements 277.72 (32)
Fabric heat loss 98.54 (33)
Thermal bridges (0.08 × total area) 22.22 (34)
Total fabric heat loss 120.76 (35)
Ventilation heat loss 56.70 (36)
Heat loss coefficient 177.45 (37)
Heat loss parameter (HLP) 1.77 (38)

27
4. Water heating energy requirements
kWh/year
Energy content of heated water 2102 (39)
Distribution loss 371 (40)
Cylinder volume 150 (43)
Cylinder loss factor (kWh/litre/day) 0.0152 (44)
Volume factor 0.928 (44a)
Temperature factor 0.54 (44b)
Energy lost from cylinder in kWh/year (150 litres) 417 (47)
Primary circuit loss 360 (48)
Total 3250 (49a)
Solar input 0 (50)
Output from water heater 3250 (51)
Heat gains from water heating 1444 (52)

5. Internal gains
Watts
Lights, appliances, cooking and metabolic 576 (53)
Reduction in lighting gains -33 (53a)
Additional gains (Table 5a) 10 (53b)
Water heating 165 (54)
Total internal gains 717 (55)

6. Solar gains
Orientation Area Flux g FF Shading Gains (W)
East/West 0.9 × 23.15 48 0.72 0.70 0.77 388 (58)
total: 388 (65)

Total gains 1105 (66)


Gain/loss ratio 6.23 (67)
Utilisation factor 0.944 (68)
Useful gains 1044 (69)

7. Mean internal temperature °C


Mean temperature of the living area 18.86 (70)
Temperature adjustment from Table 4e 0.00 (71)
Adjustment for gains 0.38 (72)
Adjusted living area temperature 19.24 (73)
Temperature difference between zones 1.53 (74)
Living area fraction 0.160 (75)
Rest-of-house area fraction 0.840 (76)
Mean internal temperature 17.95 (77)

8. Degree-days
Temperature rise from gains 5.88 (78)
Base temperature 12.07 (79)
Degree-days 1359.7 (80)

9a. Energy requirements kWh/year


Space heating requirement (useful) 5791 (81)
Fraction of heat from secondary system 0.10 (82)
(assumed for the calculation)
Efficiency of main heating system 91.0 (83)
Efficiency of secondary heating system 100 (84)
Space heating fuel (main) 5727 (85)

28
Space heating fuel (secondary) 579 (85a)
Water heating requirement 3250
Efficiency of water heater 91.0 (86)
Water heating fuel 3571 (86a)
Electricity for pumps and fans 175 (87)
(heating pump 130, flue fan 45)
Electricity for lighting (50% fixed LEL) 670 (87g)

10a and 11a do not apply

12a. Carbon dioxide emissions Energy Emission Emissions


(kWh/year) factor (kg/year)
Space heating, main - box (85) 5727 0.194 1111 (101)
Space heating, secondary - box (85a) 579 0.422 244 (102)
Water heating - box (86a) 3571 0.194 693 (103)
Space and water heating 2048 (107)
Pumps and fans - box (87) 175 0.422 74 (108)
Electricity for lighting 670 0.422 283 (109)
Total kg/year 2405 (112)
kg/m²/year
Carbon dioxide emissions from proposed dwelling 24.05 (113)

29

You might also like