1. IEE ECOLISH Improvement of Energy Efficiency of Low Income Housing Zoltán MAGYAR Hungary

2. The problem - general Energy use in residential buildings in EU is 9500 PJ (= 23% of total use) > largest proportion Measures on existing residential buildings will make major contribution in energy and CO 2 reduction But large number of barriers: Technologies are available (more based on new buildings) Financial constraints Social constraints Organisation

3. The problem - specific Social housing and (extreme) low incomes –Often high energy consumption (poor thermal and building physical quality, building services) –In combination with poor IAQ and Thermal Comfort –Increasing energy prices (>> inflation rates), leading to fuel poverty Problematic spread ownership –how to organise –who is interested/responsible Allocation and risk of revenues of investments –Investors do often not have repays of investments –How to allocate the repays?

4. Objectives of ECOLISH Objective: investigate and demonstrate the feasibility and the potential of instruments like Energy Performance Contracting Target groups: occupants with low income Means: organising ESCO companies and EPC, involving occupants

5. … organised on 4 pilot locations Heerlen - the Netherlands Ogre- Latvia Pieria – Greece Pécsvárad – Hungary Representing 4 different Regions, cultures and climate zones (moderate, cold, mild, continental)

6. Ogre (LV) Heerlen (NL) Pecsvarad (HU)Pierniki (GR) Number of investigated apartments 238 837 single family dwellings107150 Ownership 100% 80 % private, 20 % rented99% Workers Housing Organisation and inhabitants Occupancy person/app. 2.22.82.22.6 Age ≤ 18 16%24%16%14% under 14 Age 18 - 65 63%66%75% 59% between 15- 65 Age 65+ 21%10%9%27% Occupant behavior no heat during the nights 080%31%100% Occupant behavior Lowering temperature during the nights 100%20%69%0%

7. Analysis of the pilot locations Social analysis (questionairre, 97 questions) Ownership of the apartments Average occupancy/ apartments Age group distribution Occupants heating habits/behaviour Technical analysis Temperature Building structure Heating, DHW, cooking, ventilating Energy use Habits Calculation

8. Pilot location Heerlen (NL)

9. Energy analysis EPBD Original1960’s * Renovation 1980’s –5075 m 3 nat. gas * 2605 m 3 nat. gas –EI = 4.05 (G-label) * EI = 2.68 (F-label)

10. Actual situation Fitted gas consumption: 2190 m 3 Energy-index = 2.18 (E-label) Some packages:

11. b. Additional package Measures Basic package plus:  Insulation Behind Facades /stuck (180 m 2 )  HE glazing +insulated panels  Investment € 114.000 inclusive VAT Gas saving 7.500 m 3 yearly. Financial scheme: Financing by savings€ 104.000 Own contribution€ 10.000 Home appreciationPM

13. d. Sustainable package

14. d Sustainable package Measures Complete package plus:  solar collector Investment € 208.000 inclusive VAT Gas saving 10.700 m 3 yearly. Financial scheme: Financing by savings€ 149.000 Own contribution€ 59.000 Home appreciationPM

15. Overview packages

16. Ogre, Latvia Concrete panel houses

17. Typical social problems Problems connected to social and political change and transition taking place in Latvia; Lack of income; Individual problems economic and social, lack of self-esteem and self- reliance, young people prefer to move to Riga and work abroad. Lack of interest in municipal politics and public issues is also a problem at the individual level; Lack of extension and knowledge in home economics and especially in house management; Lack of free time FUEL POVERTY! They spend 40 – 50 % of net income on energy cost

18. Pecsvarad, Hungary 121 flats in 10 buildings Min. floor area 65 m2 Max. floor area 105 m2

19. Flat in the corner Category H (bad) Flat in the middle Category E (better than average) General building Category F (average) Energy certification based on current situation

21. Pieriki, Greece

22. Space heating Specific gas consumption for heatingDWH Total gas con.Total IEP m ³ /akWh/m ² am ³ /m ² am ³ /a kWh/ m ² am ³ /akWh/m ²a Ogre125--67192 Heerlen187614814,542433,42300181 Pecsvarad112015316--601120225 Pieriki--144-- 54,5--198 Comparison the energy uses Integrated Energy Performance

23. EPBD certification in Hungary

24. NAME HEATING DEMAND HEAT. PERIOD HEATING ENERGY PERFORMANCE DHW ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE INTEG. ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE ALLO- WED VALUE CATEGORY kWh/akWh/m2a Ogre 18 o C 1445064150,146,4196,5128,1F Pieriki 533504161,713174,7142,7E Heerlen 904368221,837,7259,4146,6F Pécsvárad 1044632169,764,8234,5133,94F 1. All the pilot locations within their own local and climate conditions with the HU calculation

25. 2. Technical analysis of all the pilot locations within the Hungarian standard and climate conditions NAME HEATING DEMAND HEAT. PERIOD HEATING ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE DHW ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE INTEG. ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE ALLO- WED VALUE CATE- GORY kWh/akWh/m2a Ogre 18 o C 1193840100,646,4146,9128,1D Pieriki 71463223613249,9142,7F Heerlen 993624196,837,7234,5146,6F Pécsvárad 1044632169,764,8234,5133,94F

26. Measures Thermal insulation of the external walls, roofs, and basement Retrofitting of the installation (condensin boilers, TRV and in case of Heerlen heat recovering ventilation) 3. Comparision of the insulation and retrofitting measures for all the pilot locations within their own local and climate conditions with HU calculation

27. NAME HEATING DEMAND HEAT. PERIOD HEATING ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE DHW ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE INTEG. ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE ALLOWED VALUE CATEGORY kWh/akWh/m2a Ogre 20 C 99547287,946,4134,3128,1D Pieriki 23240030,51343,5142,7A+ Heerlen +heat recovery 4664818,636,555146,6A+ Pécsvárad 58348045,844,390,1133,94A 3. Comparision of the insulation and retrofitting measures for all the pilot locations within their own local and climate conditions with HU calculation

28. Measures Thermal-insulation of the external walls, roofs, and basement Retrofitting of the installations (condensing boilers, TRV, and in case of Heerlen heat recovering ventilation) 4. Comparision of the thermo-insulation measures for all the pilot locations within the Hungarian standard and climate conditions (in Pecsvarad)

29. NAME HEATING DEMAND HEAT. PERIOD HEATING ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE DHW ENERGY PERFOR- MANCE INTEG. ENERGY PER- FOR- MANCE ALLOWED VALUE CATEGORY kWh/akWh/m2a Ogre 8239365546,4101,5128,1B Pieriki 32321645,91358,8142,7A+ Heerlen + Heat recovery 515281436,550,5146,6A+ Pécsvárad 58348045,844,390,1133,94A 4. Comparision of the insulation and retrofitting measures for all the pilot locations within the Hungarian standard and climate conditions (in Pecsvarad)

30. Conclusions In social housing energy costs are high in combination with poor thermal comfort and indoor air quality Saving potential and benefits are high Benefits can be allocated to investments Specific problem is spread ownership: to be solved by organising occupants and forming legal entities; very important to achieve any results and commitment. Important to provide a balanced set of energy saving measures, measures to improve IAQ and thermal comfort, in combination with ways how to finance this for these groups of housings that normally don’t have possibilities for this. Many buildings are at the end of their technical and economical lifetime Risk allocation in energy exploitation is still a big problem

31. Recommendations Role of municipalities can be important, different political interest can be a threat ESCOs could play a new and important role. Residential sector can be a new and interesting business area We started with pilots, considered as „hopeless cases", but these cases appeared to be not so hopeless after all ……

32. www.ecolish.com