Implementing energy efficiency in Swedens existing housing stock - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Implementing energy efficiency in Sweden’s existing housing stock Anna Joelsson Leif Gustavsson Mid Sweden University

Focus of presentation Do currently used policy measures encourage house owners to implement changes in accordance with national goals? 3 perspectives The societal economic perspective on cost and environment The house owners’ economic situation The house owners’ perception 2 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Methodology 1. Using reference houses 2. Implementing measures to house envelopes 3. Implementing changes to supply systems 4. Including current policy measures 5. Studying effects on resource use, emission and cost 6. Studying effects on the house owners annual heating cost 3 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

1 The reference houses • Built in 1974 and 1976 • Heated area of 100-306 m 2 • Heat demand of 28-47 MWh/year • Resistance heaters (electric radiators) • Resistance heaters, hot water boiler and drainage system need to be replaced. Window frames need to be painted. 4 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

2 Demand side measures • Extra insulation on the attic floor • Extra insulation on the outside of the basement walls • Ground insulation in the foundation • Replacement of the existing windows 5 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

3 End-use supply conversion Resistance heaters Heat Pellet District boiler pump heating 6 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Results - Societal economic view • House envelope measures reduced the heat demand by 20-25% • District heating and heat pumps reduced the primary energy use by 70 % and 54%, respectively • …and reduced the CO 2 emission by 93% and 94% • Biomass-based systems gave low CO 2 emission • Conversions to district heating, heat pump and pellet boiler reduced the societal economic cost • Pellet boilers and district heating less profitable for smaller houses 7 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Swedish energy goals • Phase out electric heating • Phase out heating with oil • Increase energy efficiency • Increase use of renewable resources • Reduce CO 2 emission 8 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

4 Assumptions house owners economic situation • Annualised investment costs • 3 % real discount rate • Remaining lifetime of house: 50 years • Changes to demand side before supply side • Comparing purchase of electricity and heat from 2 suppliers • Including effects from subsidies, electricity tax and real estate tax 9 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Subsidies • Conversion from resistance heaters – Installing heat pump, district heating or biomass based system – 30 % of the investment cost, up to € 3240 – Both material and labor included in the cost • New windows – U-value 1.2 or lower – 30 % of the investment cost exceeding € 1080 up to € 1080 – Both material and labor included in the cost 10 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Swedish customer electricity tax 2.2 c/kWh 2.8 c/kWh 11 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Real estate tax • Real estate tax of 1% of the assessed value • Installation of heatpump or new windows increse the assessed value • Original real estate tax for house B medium size was € 1070/year 12 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Annual customer heating cost Investment subsidies Reference AI AI+W AI+W+FI Östersund, tax 2.8 c 3500 3000 Heating cost ( € /year) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 RH PB DH HP RH PB DH HP excluding subsidies including subsidies RH=Resistance heaters AI=Attic insulatio PB= Pellet boiler FI= Foundation insulation DH=District heating W=New windows HP= Heat pump 13 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Annual customer heating cost Electricity tax Reference house AI AI+W AI+W+FI 3000 2500 2000 Heating cost ( € /year) 1500 1000 500 0 RH PB DH HP RH PB DH HP RH PB DH HP Jämtkraft, zero tax Jämtkraft, tax 2.2c Jämtkraft, tax 2.8c RH=Resistance heaters AI=Attic insulatio PB= Pellet boiler FI= Foundation insulation DH=District heating W=New windows HP= Heat pump 14 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Annual customer heating cost Energy supplier influence Reference AI AI+W AI+W+FI 3000 2500 Heating cost ( € /year) 2000 1500 1000 500 0 RH PB DH HP RH PB DH HP Jämtkraft, tax 2.8c Vattenfall, tax 2.8c RH=Resistance heaters AI=Attic insulatio PB= Pellet boiler FI= Foundation insulation DH=District heating W=New windows HP= Heat pump 15 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Total customer cost Cost of purchased energy Electricity tax Inv estment in heating system 4000 Inv estment in house env elope Real estate tax increase 3500 3000 2500 Cost ( € /year) 2000 1500 1000 500 0 RH RH PB DH HP PB DH HP Jämtkraft, tax 2.2 c/kWh Vattenfall, tax 2.8 c/kWh RH=Resistance heaters DH=District heating PB= Pellet boiler HP= Heat pump 16 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

House owners’ perception Results based on surveys by Mahapatra and Gustavsson 1 local survey in area with electric heating 1 national survey 17 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

House owners’ perception • 80 % do not plan to change heating system – Do not feel the need • House owners with RH are more dissatisfied, but also less likely to change – Lock-in effect due to high investment cost 18 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

House owners’ perception Most important performance factors ” Best” system • Annual cost HP • Investment cost PB • Fuctional reliability DH • Indoor air quality DH 19 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

House owners’ perception What system would you recommend to someone else? Locally Heat pump 41 % District heating 38 % Pellet boiler 2 % Nationally Heat pump 54 % District heating 15 % Pellet boiler 10 % 20 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Conclusions • The economic benefits not enough for customers to feel the need of a new heating system • Subsidies reduced annual cost by less than 7 % • Subsides affect investment cost – investment cost also important for house owners • Subsidies can be useful to break lock-in with resistance heaters • Subsidies might be a trigger to search for information 21 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Conclusions • Electricity tax encouraged energy efficiency measures and made pellet boilers and district heating competitive • Reduction of electricity tax in some areas counteracts the national goals • Increased real estate tax is contradictive • Reasonable with economic instruments to promote systems in line with environmental goals 22 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Conclusions • The energy supplier is important for the customers’ economic situation • The energy supplier may influence the effects of policy measures • The energy supplier might have the power to influence the customers attitudes towards the systems 23 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Issue for discussion How to encourage house owners to implement the presented changes that increases energy efficiency and reduces the CO 2 emission? 24 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

25 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Conversion from oil boiler Mitigation cost Reference house AI AI+BI AI+BI+Windows 300 200 ( € /tonne C reduced) 100 Mitigation cost 0 -100 -200 OB HP PB OB HP PB OB HP PB OB HP PB CST NGCC BST BIG/CC 26 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06

Conversion from NG boiler Mitigation cost Reference house AI AI+BI AI+BI+Windows 300 200 ( € /tonne C reduced) 100 Mitigation cost 0 -100 -200 NGB HP PB NGB HP PB NGB HP PB PB CST NGCC BST BIG/CC 27 Anna Joelsson 2007-06-06