Preparatory Study for BACS

17/12/2020 Preparatory study for BACS

Intro

Paul Van Tichelen(VITO), Paul Waide (WSE), Alan McCullough(RICARDO) Policy officer EC: Georgios Takoudis

Online meeting, DG ENER 15th of December 2020 Agenda

» 9h45: Web meeting opens, testing » 10h00-10h05: Welcome and introduction to the study (DG ENER) » 10h05-10h15: tour de table +agenda and MEErP task structure (VITO) » 10h15-10h30: Task 1, Scope, key comments and updates (VITO) » 10h30-10h45: Task 2, Markets, key comments and updates (Waide) » 10h45-11h00: Task 3, Users, key comments and updates (VITO) » 11h00-11h10: Coffee Break » 11h10-11h25: Task 4, Technology, key comments and updates (Ricardo) » 11h25-11h40: Task 5, LCA/LCC results (VITO) » 11h40-12h15: Q&A on draft final Tasks 1- 5 (VITO/Waide/Ricardo) » 12h15-13h00: Lunch Break

» 13h00-13h15: Draft Task 6, LCA & LCC for the selected design options (VITO) » 13h15-13h30: Q&A on draft Tasks 6 (VITO/Waide/Ricardo) » 13h30-14h00: Draft Task 7 policy options/scenarios (Waide) » 14h00-14h10: Coffee break » 14h10-14h50: Q&A on draft Tasks 7 (Waide/Ricardo/VITO) » 14h50-15h00: AOB, conclusion and next steps (VITO/DG ENER)

» Present today are: Paul Van Tichelen(VITO), Paul Waide (WSE), Alan McCullough(RICARDO) » Other contributors:

» Everyone remains muted (unless speaking when invited by the Host) - WE CAN MUTE PEOPLE IF NECESSARY » Only audio connections, no video to keep a maximum band width » Signal and question through chat ONLY, if you would like to do a short oral intervention or question + write in the chat simple question indicating “your full name and who you represent” » Longer written contributions are welcome, see comments form on the website » The meeting will be audio-visual recorded for internal use only » We are asking not to record this meeting yourself

» For commenting in writing please sent your comments to, by preference use the appropriate form, deadline is 20 January » Info on: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies_main/preparatory-studies_en » Powerpoint presentation will be uploaded tomorrow

17/12/2020 6 © 2013, VITO NV Preparatory study according to MEErP Tasks in MEErP (see website): PREVIOUS MEETING: » Task 1 - Scope (definitions, standards and legislation, first screening); » Task 2 – Markets modelling (volumes and prices); » Task 3 – Use modelling (product demand side); » Task 4 - Technologies (product supply side, Best Available Technology(BAT) design options » Task 5 – Environment & Economics (Base Case Life Cycle Analysis(LCA) & Life Cycle Costing(LCC) = reference); THIS MEETING: » Task 6 – Design options to improve LCA + LCC; » Task 7 – Scenarios (Policy, scenario, impact and sensitivity analysis).

17/12/2020 7 © 2013, VITO NV General approach Task 1-7 Based on exploratory study (Task 0): » BACS-function oriented approach with the focus on the Technical Building System (TBS) related functions using the EN 15232 standard as a starting point. » In addition in limited extend: » Self-consumption » requirements for durability,(today Task 6 = life time) » Interoperability for Demand Side Management » Based on the exploratory study > focus on BACS functions(EN 15232 based) for TBS to provide EE » An approach largely parallel to Lot 37 (Lighting Systems)

Major Changes: » the functional unit definition has been reworded and updated also in Task 3 » The auxiliary power of BACS has been added to the definition of self- consumption » The table with gaps and recommendations for standards has been updated, especially standards that might be relevant for Task 7 policy considerations » This version also contains an update of the relevant European Regulations and Directives including a review of the EPBD

Functional unit definition: » in alignment with the recommendation of the preceding exploratory study, the proposed scope of this study is the BACS functions » Therefore, the primary functional unit (FU) is 1 m² of building floor area, where the thermal comfort, sanitary hot water (SHW), indoor air quality (IAQ) and lighting requirements (per EN 16798–1:2019) – for health, productivity and comfort of the occupants – are maintained » It is a matter of rewording only but it has no impact on Task 4-6 modelling and approach » It was not recommended to consider a much broader scope. This is because each of these have another functional unit whose treatment would lead to the need to conduct complex and inconsistent multi- objective optimizations. .. Could be future studies depending on the policy considered

Standards and definitions: the main finding is that the BACS scope can be defined clearly based on existing standards BACS self-consumption or internal power consumption is a part of the auxiliary power consumption as defined in the EPBD standards Term ‘self-consumption’ also refers to the energy consumption of on-site production > Therefore we use BACS internal power consumption

Gaps in standards: this task includes a list of standards which might need to be updated when considering policy options in Task 7 Please review it and we would welcome your suggestions!

The objective of Task 2 is to present an economic and market analysis including: » to provide basic economic information (subtask 2.1) » to provide market size and cost inputs for the EU-wide environmental impact (covering the period from 2005-2050) assessment of the product group (subtask 2.2) » to provide insight into the latest market trends to help assess the impact of potential Ecodesign measures with regard to market structures and ongoing trends in product design (subtask 2.3) » to provide a practical data-set of prices and rates to be used for the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) calculations (subtask 2.4)

The main focus of the report is on estimating: » the magnitude of building floor area that has BACS installed each year in units of square metres » the proportion of this floor area which has BACS installed differentiated as a function of the BACS energy performance (i.e. energy performance class and/or BACS factor under EN15232) » the total market value » how value is distributed through the supply chain » the cost of BACS for the end customer » and parameters and trends that are helpful to understand how the market is likely to develop in the future, informing the scenarios of Task 7

Ordinarily PRODCOM data is used to determine market volumes of products considered for Ecodesign measures; however, in the case of BACS: » there are a wide range of BACS products and consequently of applicable product codes in PRODCOM » a screening exercise was done for the BACS scoping study and revealed as many as 141 products that could contain BACS functions » these are product categories that might contain BACS but can also serve other functions, or have no BACS function at all » this remains a very generic list that does not contain sufficient disaggregation of BACS to provide useful data and therefore is not suitable for the Task 2 analysis » e.g. an apparent market for electronic thermostats of 815m units in 2019, but the share used in BACs is unknown Therefore, another approach is needed based on the functional unit

Other relevant data include: » building stock information (floor area by type, stock, new build, renovation rates etc.) which is mostly available from DG ENER’s EPBD Impact Assessment and also the Building Stock Observatory » the sources also include information on shares of certain types of TBSs, U-values and other energetically relevant information » economic and census data (GDP, population etc.)

This data helps to frame the demand for BACS and informs energy savings and economic calculations in future tasks

The purpose of this task is to compile BACS market and stock data in physical units for the EU-27 for a reference year. Therefore, the following parameters needed to be identified: » installed base ('stock') and penetration rate » annual sales growth rate (% or physical units) » average product life (in years), in service » total sales/real EU-consumption (also in euros, when available) » replacement sales (derived) » new sales (derived)

A stakeholder market survey was conducted and processed to support the Task 2 analysis

Other trends include: » evolution of sales by BACS energy performance class (starting point is to draw upon data reported in WSE 2019 study for eu.bac) » sales value trends - all market projections in the trade press are positive with annual average growth value of between 2.6% and up to 7% being reported, thus, there seem to be a range of projected growth rates and the actual trend will likely depend on the strength of the drivers and inhibitors for sales » key drivers are thought to be: energy efficiency policies, GDP/capita, new build + major renovation rates » large uncertainty due to combined impacts of the pandemic, the Renovation Wave and the EPBD

The objective of subtask 2.4 is that for each of the product categories defined in Task 1 (and subsequently Task 4) this task will ultimately establish: » average EU consumer prices, incl. VAT (for consumer/procurer prices)/ excl. VAT (for B2B products), in euros » consumer prices of consumables » repair and maintenance costs (euro/product life) » installation costs » disposal tariffs/ taxes (euro/product)

This is intended to provide a practical data-set of prices and rates to be used for the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) calculations. Note - further price information will also be supplied in Task 4

» there is considerable uncertainty about the overall value of the EU27 BACS market, but the best estimate derived from reconciling many sources of information, including responses to the stakeholder survey, is €8.1bn for the final installed BACS product i.e. the price paid by the final customer » the total floor area that this is applied to is estimated to be 448 Mm2 per year across all residential and service sector building types » 42.5% of the market value is estimated to be for BACS product and the remaining 57.5% for other aspects in the value chain » Average maintenance costs area estimated to 3% of installation costs per year

17/12/2020 21 © 2013, VITO NV Estimated EU-27 annual BACS sales for 2020 expressed via proxy building stock useable floor area Indicator Base Case BC1 BC2 BC3 BC4 BC5 BC6 BC7 BC8 EU27 annual BACS proxy 58 63 21 23 12 10 17 14 sales area for each Base Case (Mm2) in 2020 Primary building type SFH SFH MFH MFH Retail Retail Office Office exist- new exist- new exist- new exist- new ing ing ing ing EU27 annual BACS proxy sales area by corresponding primary 177 84 57 72 28 13 40 18 building type (Mm2) in 2020 Base Case sales share of all the corresponding 37% 65% 42% 27% 47% 69% 45% 69% primary building type 17/12/2020 22 sales © 2013, VITO NV Projected EU27 building stock to 2050 (derived from EBPD Impact Assessment)

Sector Floor Area (Mm²) 2020 2030 2040 2050 Single Family 10102 10831 11812 12788 Homes Multi-Family 7956 8653 9425 10193 Homes Offices 1874 1979 2143 2328 Retail 1694 1790 1938 2105 Education 1137 1200 1300 1412 Other non- 4897 5172 5601 6084 residential Total 18058 19484 21237 22981 Residential Total Non- 9601 10141 10981 11930 Residential

Related Single Single Multi- Multi- Retail Retail Office Office reference family family family family outlet outlet case house house apart- apart- ment ment Age type Exist- New Existing New Existing New Exist- New ing build build build ing build BACS class C C C C C C C C Product cost 1.5 3.0 1.5 3.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 (€/m2) Installed 2.8 5.6 2.8 5.6 16.5 16.5 21.2 21.2 price (€/m2)

Related Single Single Multi- Multi- Retail Retail Office Office reference family family family family outlet outlet case house house apart- apart- ment ment Age type Exist- New Existing New Existing New Exist- New ing build build build ing build BACS class A A A A A A A A Product cost 4.7 7.1 4.3 7.0 12.0 13.2 13.3 14.7 (€/m2) Installed 11.1 16.8 10.1 16.5 28.2 31.1 31.2 34.6 price (€/m2)

 the average energy performance of BACS already installed in EU27 buildings is between class D and class C but the most typical newly installed systems have class C energy performance (most class C, with much smaller shares for class B, D and A) » there is considerable uncertainty about the near-term growth trends in the BACS market due to the unknown influence of the Covid 19 pandemic and other market key drivers including the influence of the amended EPBD provisions and the Renovation Wave » Average lifetime is estimated to be 15 years with a spread of from a few years to 30 years

Final energy consumption TBS (TWh) Residential buildings Space heating 1679 Sanitary hot water 404 Space cooling 11 Ventilation 14 Lighting NA Service sector buildings Space heating 644 Sanitary hot water 294 Space cooling 116 Ventilation 53 Lighting 231 17/12/2020 27 © 2013, VITO NV Task 3 User Behaviour and System Aspects

The objective of Task 3 is to present an analysis of the actual utilization of BACS in different applications and boundary conditions. Key topics are: » Define the MEErP system aspects with direct and/or indirect energy impact » Selection of a useful set of Base Cases or reference buildings » End of life behaviour from an application perspective » Local infrastructure barriers and opportunities

» Some changes were made on the reference buildings based on feedback received and discussion in the stakeholder meeting: » it was agreed to always start simulating the average climate condition but in version 1 this was proposed differently(BC4 new flat). » TBS (also Task 4) » Some changes.. district heating > more heat pumps » Technical parameters for H/C aligned with ED » Wording of ‘existing buildings’ + added a poor insulated house (Task 6 impact check) » Based on the input received more text has been added in section 3.6 on Local Infrastructure barriers and opportunities

» We defined 8 references buildings that will be used in Task 4 to 6 and are the so-called MEErP base cases » Flat + shop is the single zone EN15232 reference shoe box from the standard but two more complex multi-zone buildings are added: house + office » Existing (renovated) vs new LEB » Existing is already well insulated » Added poor insulated house

17/12/2020 31 © 2013, VITO NV Task 3 modelling energy impact » following principles of EPBD set of standards (status of EPBD see https://epb.center/ ) » detailed method 1 + BACS factors (fBAC) method 2 (EN 15232) = hybrid » Total Energy demand BACS planned class= fBACxTotalEnergy demand BACS Class C

» study splitted fBAC,el: fBAC,el,V (ventilation) and f BAC,el,aux and f BAC,el,LENI (lighting) in Task 4 = recommended for EN 15232 review to upgrade simple method » Result of this approach = fits in the MEErP spreadsheet tool + EPBD (See Task 5)

» Modelling total energy demand from building involves a lot of usage parameters, sourced from EN 15232 + own assumptions » Occupancy patterns and internal heat gains (see report) » Much of expected BACS energy savings comes from fitting with room controllers to HVAC parameters, e.g. EN15322 heating assumptions:

EN 15232 class D EN 15232 class C EN 15232 classes B and A

comfort Economy Protection comfort Economy Protection comfort Economy Protection operating mode mode mode operating mode mode mode mode mode mode application time heating heating heating time heating heating heating operating time heating heating heating unit °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C non residential single office 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 5- 21h 22 15 8 6-20h(B)/6-19h(A) 21 15 8 group office 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 5- 21h 22 15 8 6-20h(B)/6-19h(A) 21 15 8 cafetaria 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 11-14h 22 15 8 11-14h 21 15 8 storage room 0-24h 21 NA NA 16-17h 20 15 8 16-17h 21 15 8 circulation area 0-24h 21 NA NA 5- 21h 20 15 8 5- 21h 21 15 8 welcome desk 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 5- 21h 22 15 8 6-20h(B)/6-19h(A) 21 15 8 wholesale area 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 9-24h 22 15 8 10-23h(B)/11-22h(A) 21 15 8 residential sleeping room 0-24h 20 NA NA 0-24h 20 18 8 22-8h 21 18 8 bathroom 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 0-24h 22 20 8 0-24h 21 19 8 living/kitchen 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 0-24h 22 18 8 7-23h 21 15 8 flat 0-24h 22,5 NA NA 0-24h 22 15 8 4-23h 21 15 8

» Repair and maintenance see report » .. Life time will mainly impact the economic analysis in Tasks 6 » = complex combination and will depend on whatever fails first » .. It is of course difficult to source precise data .. Task 5/6 did use 15 years but sensitivity analysis can be done in Task 7(?) »

» Climate conditions: cold –average=reference -warm » the building envelope level: » From EN 15232 = ‘existing buildings’ = well renovated » Added a poorer insulated for sensititivity » ‘New LEB buildings’ = new state of art » .. NZEB/TBS/Cabling » Installation and commissioning = very important for BACS » BACS opportunities: » Performance contracts ESCOs » Real time monitoring/metering .. EPCs evidence based » Continuous commissioning .. Can be important BACS pay back for new LEB with complex TBS! = close the performance gap

Second stakeholder meeting

Alan McCullough (RICARDO) Paul Van Tichelen (VITO), Ma Yixiao (VITO)

Web meeting 15th of December 2020 Key topics of Task 4

Objectives: » Analyse technical aspects of BACS products/systems on the EU market. » Provide descriptions of typical BACS products and systems and the main alternatives to centralised BACS network including those which will be used as the base case » Analyse energy savings realised by BACS, costs & internal power consumption » Define: » Best Available Technologies (BAT) » Best Not yet Available technologies (BNAT) » Assess the barriers to the introduction of BNAT, including cost factors and current levels of technical and commercial readiness.

» The base cases modelled were revised following stakeholder feedback: » Some TBS were changed from district heating to heat pumps » The energy saving BAC functionality requirements for a EN15232 Class A and B BACS were taken as the starting point for defining the Best Available Technology (BAT) rather than simply focusing on Class A. » Additional BAT design options modelled & costed » Consideration of LLCC moved to Task 5/6. » Based on the input received more examples of research in progress were added to the discussion of the Best Not yet Available Technology (BNAT). » Smart controls, self learning algorithms, Artificial Intelligence (AI) » Best practice in the reporting key performance indicators (KPI) » Functionality required for integration with Smart Grids.

Climate No Model run Building BAC methods / functions examined Zone Simulate impact of more accuracy from class 1 BC1hoBAT05 Existing House Average C type control systems (22°C to 21,5 °C). Simulate impact of more accuracy from class 2 BC1hoBAT10 Existing House Average C type control systems (22°C to 21 °C) Application of Class VIII temperature control from EU No 813/2013 (Multi-sensor room 3 BC1hoBATLot1 Existing House Average temperature control, for use with modulating heaters) 4 BC2hoBAT1 New House Average Simulates demand driven ventilation Application of pressure-controlled circulator 5 BC2hoBAT2 New House Average pump Simulates hydronic balancing + pump 6 BC3apBAT1 Existing Flat Average control 7 BC4apBAT1 New Flat Warm Simulates smart outdoor screens for shading

Climate No Model run Building BAC methods / functions examined Zone Check for heat replacement effect 8 BC5whoBAT1 Existing Shop Average combined with Lot 37 lighting Apply the EN 15232 simple BAC factor 9 BC6whBAT1 New Shop Average method (BAU=Class C vs BAT=Class B) Apply the EN 15232 simple BAC factor 10 BC6whBAT2 New Shop Average method (BAU=Class C vs BAT=Class A) Model BMS benefits based on literature 11 BC7ofBAT1 Existing Office Average finding (excluding ventilation) Model BMS benefits related to natural 12 BC7ofBAT2 Existing Office Average ventilation based on literature findings (incl. window openers) Occupancy based emission control of heating and ventilation (time + temp set 13 BC8ofBAT1 New Office Average points approach), individual room control and other functions.

» The energy demands and BAC factors for a Business as Usual (BAU) scenario and each BAT design option were modelled using: » A range of modelling packages: » PPHP » EnerCalc » EnergyPlus » The results of literature search were used to fill some gaps.

» A selection of BAC functions were modelled for each case: » The modelling focused on the key energy saving functions » Only partial implementations of EN15232 BACS Class A/B/C » Modelling was constrained by limitations of tools & resources. » Some BAC factors could not be modelled (NM) for every case.

No Model run fBAC,th, H fBAC,th, C fBAC,el,aux fBAC,el,L 1 BC1hoBAT05 0.95 NM 1.00 NM 2 BC1hoBAT10 0.90 NM 1.00 NM 3 BC1hoBATLot1 0.95 NM 1.00 NM 4 BC2hoBAT1 0.91 NM 0.59 NM 5 BC2hoBAT2 1.00 NM 0.96 NM 6 BC3apBAT1 0.94 NM 0.75 NM 7 BC4apBAT1 1.00 0.36 1.06 NM 8 BC5whoBAT1 1.02 NM 0.87 0.85 9 BC6whBAT1 0.71 0.85 NM NM 10 BC6whBAT2 0.46 0.55 NM NM 11 BC7ofBAT1 0.82 NM 0.86 NM 12 BC7ofBAT2 1.00 0.20 0.71 NM 13 BC8ofBAT1 0.58 0.82 0.67 NM

No Model run fBAC,th, H fBAC,th, C fBAC,el,aux fBAC,el,L 1 BC1hoBAT05 27% NM 0% NM 2 BC1hoBAT10 53% NM 0% NM 3 BC1hoBATLot1 26% NM 0% NM 4 BC2hoBAT1 49% NM 515% NM 5 BC2hoBAT2 0% NM 46% NM 6 BC3apBAT1 31% NM 313% NM 7 BC4apBAT1 0% NM -75% NM 8 BC5whoBAT1 -3% NM 147% NM 9 BC6whBAT1 54% 33% NM NM 10 BC6whBAT2 100% 100% NM NM 11 BC7ofBAT1 60% NM 50% NM 12 BC7ofBAT2 0% 186% 104% NM 13 BC8ofBAT1 139% 42% 118% NM

» The energy saving functionality defined by EN15232 Class A BACS: » Could be considered as a starting point for defining BAT for larger buildings with a total useful floor area greater than 1,000 m2 » Some non-EN15232 BAC functions may merit inclusion in BAT.

» For smaller buildings with a total useful floor area less than 250 m2: » EN15232 Class B BACS could be the starting point for defining BAT

» Different specifications may be needed for new and existing buildings, for residential and non-residential buildings, and for different building sizes.

» More information needs to be systematically gathered on what BAC functionality is deployed, the level of savings realized, and the costs of implementation before defining the minimum required functionality.

Second stakeholder meeting

Paul Van Tichelen (VITO)

Web meeting 15th of December 2020 Task 5: LCA/LCC Ecoreport tool method » MEErP: Methodology for Ecodesign of Energy-related Products » EcoReport tool developed for MEErP assessments » Simplified Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) tool » Latest version from 2014 » Excel-based tool » Life Cycle Cost (LCC) assessments also possible » The method includes simplifications and it is forecast which means uncertainties as explained in the report » Note: it brings much default or horizontal LCA and cost data to the study (e.g. gas cost, PEF = 2,50, etc ..) to compare studies » If you are interested in reviewing, a new study is launched: https://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/product-bureau//product- groups/521/home

» Processes Task 4 for the 8 BCs with the Ecoreport tool » It is done per functional unit, which is 1 m² building equipped with BACS » Task 4 reports the three different BACS factors (fBAC,th,H, fBAC,th,C, fBAC,el) to individually model the energy impact of BACS on different sources of final energy demand (gas & electricity). » Calculate 14 LCA impact indicators » These 14 impact indicators also include the Gross Energy Requirement (GER) [MJ], which is the LCA equivalent of Primary Energy (PE). PE is also the primary metric of the EPBD. » approach followed: » 1st calculate LCA/LCC from 1 kWh elec & gas with Ecoreport tool » 2nd upscale with own spreadsheet tool per BC based energy needs & costs per 1 m² building (incl. the BAC factors, product costs, ..)

» Note: added also the related EPBD parameters(PEF used)

» See also calculated EPBD metrics are added!

» EU27 total environmental impact in GER for annual sales in 2020 .. This is the addressable primary energy on which BACS savings can be applied

» Total ‘energy cost’ of annual sales in 2015 and 2020 per Base Case » simply upscaled totals of m² proxy BC data from Task 2

» It is recommended to use the Gross Energy Requirement (GER) [MJ], which is the LCA equivalent of Primary Energy (PE) [kWh], as leading parameter for Task 6 (3,6 MJ = 1 kWh) » The potential total EU energy impact is large but that was already known from previous studies

We restart at 13h00 CET

Task 6 BAT Design options

Paul Van Tichelen(VITO)

Web meeting 15th of December 2020 Task 6: BAT Design options Objectives: » LCA/LCC evaluation of the Task 4 ‘BAT design options’ which are in principle the improved functionality options » Hereby identify the solution with the Least Life Cycle Cost (LLCC) , which is relevant for ecodesign policy in Task 7 (note: relevant for ‘specific ED requirements’ <> ‘generic (information’) Approach: » Based on the Task 4 BAT design options data and the approach explained in Task 5

» Obviously all BAT design options resulted in lower GER… for example:

» BC2BAT1 (new house) = add two zone demand driven ventilation (HRV was also in the BC2BAU) ≠ LLCC (for BACS zoning is important but can also be a challenge to find the economic optimum especially wit LEB) » BC2BAT2 = add variable speed pressure controlled circulator pump (vsBC2BAU on/off controller with predefined speed settings(3)) ≠ LLCC

» Despite low f,BAC=0,54 in BC8BAT1 (new LEB office) was not LLCC

» BC8ofBAT1 simulated a class A BACS as far as we could simulate with EP dynamic building simulation software(see Task 4) » All other Task 8 options with lower energy needs were LLCC » .. The higher societal LCC did not change the conclusions

» For new LEB, not all BACS BAT design options modelled resulted in LLCC » This means, they have not a pay back below 15 years (15 years was used as product life time in the MEErP tool) » This should not be a surprise as they already have low energy needs » .. In practice this will vary according to building type/application, TBS, climate .. » .. Precisely defining an economic optimum is accordingly complex... » Despite all this: new LEB often rely on complex TBS and the owner will likely benefit from higher class BACS to avoid a performance gap and support continuous commissioning(see Task 3) .. but the quantitative field data is lacking (see Task 4)

» Our BAT design options are often already combinations but of course also some options can be combined (e.g. BC7BAT1+2) .. In building many routes can result in energy savings but in the end the economy will become a challenge, results in similar conclusions as before » the study did not identify any significant negative impacts due to: » BC7BAT1 the additional hardware (BC7BOM added).. nevertheless, not a reason to be exempted from general good practices. » Similar conclusion for additional auxiliary energy (check for actuators/motors and added in Task 4 data, e.g. BC4BAT1(screen motor) and BC7BAT2 (window openers), literature on valve actuator

» BNAT: Demand Response – important for the future with LEB and HP but difficult to quantify today (see policy proposal in Task 7) – similar hardware requirements as class A BACS but requires different software » Long term changes to the system environment: » Changes in the building beyond BACS » Poorer insulated home added .. Did not change the conclusion but provided absolute and proportional more savings (improved LLCC) » Announced Renovation Wave and ‘deep’ renovation strategy: » Do we bring all buildings to our BAU assumptions? » .. or do we go towards new LEB performance? » Not added yet in Task 6/7: cross check differences in climate? the software allows this ..but has similar effect as poor <> average<> new LEB?

17/12/2020 64 © 2013, VITO NV Task 7 - Scenarios (policy, scenario, impact and sensitivity analysis) Tasks include: » subtask Task 7-1 policy options aimed at reducing the impacts on the environment analysed in previous tasks. » subtask 7-2 on scenarios » subtask 7-3 on expected impacts related to the Task 7-1 proposals » subtask 7-4 a sensitivity analysis of the Task 6 findings taking into account the policies proposed and Task 3/4 recommendations for sensitivity analysis relative to the proposed base cases of Task 5 A key point to consider for Ecodesign BACS policies is the interrelationship with the EPBD – Articles 8, 14 & 15 and with the SRI – and the extent to which Ecodesign measures can help give power to the EPBD measures – thus the product/system interface will be important

EU directives on energy efficiency

Energy Ecodesign Energy Labelling Performance in Energy Efficiency Directive Regulation Buildings Directive Directive

17/12/2020 67 © 2013, VITO NV Summary of provisions in the revised EPBD that concern BACS » Mandatory requirements “where technically and economically feasible” for installation and retrofit of BACS in non-residential buildings (existing and new) with effective rated output of over 290 kW, by 2025 (within the amended Articles 14 and 15) » These BACS shall be capable of: a) continuously monitoring, logging, analysing and allowing for adjusting energy use; b) benchmarking the building’s energy efficiency, detecting losses in efficiency of technical building systems, and informing the person responsible for the facilities or technical building management about opportunities for energy efficiency improvement; and c) allowing communication with connected technical building systems and other appliances inside the building, and being interoperable with technical building systems across different types of proprietary technologies, devices and manufacturers

» Requirements for the installation of individual room temperature controls such as TRVs and IZC in new buildings and alongside the replacement of heat generators in existing buildings (within the amended Article 8) » Reinforced requirements on optimizing the performance of TBS i.a. with controls (within the amended Article 8) » Non-residential and residential buildings equipped with BACS and electronic monitoring, respectively, are exempted from physical inspections of Heating and Air-Conditioning Systems (within the amended Articles 14 and 15) » Definition of BACS according to the European Standards in the Directive (within the amended Article 2)

Includes: - NEEAPS (National Energy Efficiency Action Plans) - Energy efficiency obligations – Article 7 - Building renovations and public sector buildings – Article 4 - Energy audits and SMEs – Article 8 - Public procurement – Article 6 - Metering/Billing and information - Heating and cooling(DHC, CHP/cogeneration, microgeneration) - Energy services - Transformation, transmission and distribution - Training, accreditation, certification – Article 16 - Funding and financing – Article 20

» BACS are not mandatory below 290kW nor in residences » Performance specification for >290kW non-res BACS is open-ended » Art 8 optimizing the performance of TBS i.a. with controls is open-ended » BACS system performance is not explicitly linked to EN 15232 classes and there is no requirement to use EN15232 » BACS designers/installers are not required to assess the energy performance and declare this to the service procurers » Heating/Cooling systems <70kW not included in Art 14 and 15 inspection requirements .. but these already have ED/ELR requirements (see Lot 1)

» ED on products: impose minimum performance limits on energy performance or other LCA relevant parameters such as: lifetime, material content, repair, functionality, interoperability, etc. » ED on products and components: impose minimum information requirements on LCA relevant parameters (e.g. which EN 15232 functions supported, etc.) » ELR - impose performance labelling and information declaration requirements including within a public database

The Ecodesign Directive provides the possibility of setting requirements according to Annex 1 and 2 of the Directive, which are: » Generic ecodesign requirements (Annex 1) which aim for significant environmental aspects without setting limit values 1. Generic requirements to define the relevant product parameters, e.g. as defined in EN 15232 2. Generic requirements relating to the supply of information 3. Generic requirements for the manufacturer, which might include requiring to calculate ecological profiles against a benchmark » Specific ecodesign requirements (Annex 2) which typically aim to reduce consumption of a given resource such as: 1. Specific minimum energy performance requirements 2. Other specific ecological impact limits

17/12/2020 73 © 2013, VITO NV Summary of potential Ecodesign measures for discussion and evaluation » specific minimum performance limits at the packaged product level » specific minimum functionality requirements at the packaged product level » specific energy performance limits at the installed product level » specific internal power consumption limits at the installed product level » specific minimum functionality requirements at the installed product level » generic information requirements at the packaged product level » generic information requirements at the installed product level

Note – these are measures suggested for discussion/further evaluation and do not reflect a firm position by the study team at this point

Nature of requirements Accuracy limits

Room temperature controllers (thermostats) and room Candidates temperature schedulers, Air flow sensors, TRVs, Room humidity controllers, Room air quality controllers

Direct responsibility Manufacturers

Options Linked to application?

Do these produce sufficient significant cost-effective Issues savings?

Clearly within Ecodesign mandate/ Complex market Related benefits/concerns surveillance if linked to application

Self-regulation pathway? Potentially

Nature of requirements Limits on W per power mode per function and/or per I/O point

Candidates Packaged BACS products

Direct responsibility Manufacturers

Not currently viable due to lack of information/analysis on power levels Options per packaged BACS product function. Could be assessed in a future study if data is available

It is important not to set limits that could impinge on necessary functionality. Limited resources to assess the technological options for all Issues pertinent cases. Complex to determine W per function – particularly for multifunction devices were functionality can be adjusted to match application Related benefits/concerns Insufficient current data – therefore may need to have info requirements initially + analysis after

Self regulation pathway? Potentially

Minimum functionality: BEMS KPIs, I/F, minimum compatible with class C/B EN 15232, memory to allow for upgrading, modularity and Nature of requirements interoperability to support repair (e.g. a standard protocol)

room temperature schedulers, packaged building energy management systems, TRVs, thermostats, air flow sensors, Candidates actuators, In principle any TBS hardware including previous BACS components but in particular also heat pumps to support smart grid applications

Direct responsibility BACS & HVAC Manufacturers

Class C-A or B-A compatibility, number/type of KPIs and data Options storage format, types of I/F

Issues KPIs .. Use EU.BAC handbook?

Related benefits/concerns Clearly within Ecodesign mandate. Could be challenging to define

Self-regulation pathway? Potentially 17/12/2020 77 © 2013, VITO NV Controllability of room temperature schedulers » A requirement could be set for room temperature scheduling devices to be capable of setting temperature set points in <=5 minute intervals and to use different time schedules for each day of the week. This could increase the precision of temperature control and allow it to better be adapted to actual usage patterns, thereby saving significant amounts of energy compared to less flexible control systems BACS measuring and reporting of KPIs by packaged building energy management systems » Minimum functionality requirements could be imposed on packaged building energy management systems with regard to their ability to register and report key performance indicators. The KPIs chosen could align to a subset of those specified in the eu.bac BACS certification handbook (Part 4) and/or EN 16947-1:2017 on Energy Performance of Buildings - Building Management System. A transitional method would need to be developed if demand responses were to be covered

17/12/2020 78 © 2013, VITO NV Demonstrate EN 15232 class B or A compatibility with an EU27 benchmark building » Under this notion, only packaged BACS products that are compatible with installed BACS product solutions which can attain Class B or better would be eligible to be placed on the market » In order to avoid prohibiting the supply of retrofit products for existing class C BACS which may not always be justified in cost- effectiveness terms, i.e. for providing spare parts, and also to address cases were the packaged product could be used for purposes other than BACS, these requirements could be application dependent e.g. for new build or major renovations and/or for certain types of buildings » Implementation requires a means of determining whether a product is compatible with class B or A installed BACS products. This would require that a manufacturer demonstrates the class B/A compatibility of their products at the functional level (EN 15232) against a benchmark building via simulation. A transitional method including those reference buildings would need to be elaborated for this

17/12/2020 79 © 2013, VITO NV Lifetime, material content and repair at packaged product level » Minimum functionality with regard to repair and material use of packaged building energy management systems could be implemented via a requirement for the memory used to be upgradable, and for modularity in design to support repair e.g. a standard protocol » A requirement on the availability of spare parts could be introduced in line with recently adopted ecodesign measures for other product groups e.g. a requirement for spare parts to be made available for 15 years after the last unit of the model is placed on the market

17/12/2020 80 © 2013, VITO NV Interoperability at packaged product level » A requirement could be set for the use of open standards for communication between room controllers and other controllers » This would lower software dependency, reduce the need for gateways and hence increase the product’s service life » This requirement would only apply for packaged BACS used in new installations, to avoid creating a lack of spare parts in existing BACS installations » Note, it is not recommended to require interoperability at packaged product level in a first (near-term) policy tier, because components with proprietary protocols used for the repair of existing BACS installations would be prohibited too and this might make it impossible to repair or upgrade existing BACS without changing the whole system » Minimum interoperability at packaged BAC product level could, however, be required in a second policy tier to be introduced over the longer term

17/12/2020 81 © 2013, VITO NV Minimum functionality requirements for Smart Grid -ready heat pumps (<70 kW) » As heat pumps are important components in any future smart grid scenario minimum compatibility could be required if a heat pump intended for space heating is to be declared functionally able to support Demand Response in its product literature

Minimum requirements for packaged BEMS to be declared smart grid ready » As this issue has only been addressed through literature review in this study it might be premature to set such specific requirements now. However, the topic could be investigated further in future work

17/12/2020 82 © 2013, VITO NV Minimum requirements for room thermostats/ room temperature controllers to be declared smart grid ready » The idea behind this requirement is that the building mass could be used to store excess renewable energy when this is available. Therefore, for a room thermostat/temperature controller to be eligible to be declared as smart grid ready they should be able to communicate to a local BEMS to allow to offset the minimum set point by up to 2°C with a relative accuracy of 0.2°C or better

Nature of requirements Minimum energy performance class (per EN15232) requirements

Candidates Either any installed BACS, or installed BACS products differentiated by application

Direct responsibility System integrators/installers

Could be differentiated by application for higher energy intensity cases e.g. larger non-residential applications. Possible options include setting a Options minimum Class C (or B) performance level; perhaps differentiated by building type e.g. class C for installed BACS in residences and small non- residential buildings, and class B for larger non-residential building Market surveillance differences to the situation that applies for packaged Issues BACS products. To support conformity assessment it would be helpful were standardised tools to be made available. Market surveillance would then be a matter of verifying that the design/installation complies with the conformity assessment tool, which Related benefits/concerns is not a dissimilar process to verifying that an EPC has been issued correctly. On-site inspections would likely be too much work but could be done for a randomly selected set of sites.

Self-regulation pathway? No

Nature of requirements Specific BACS internal power consumption limits

Candidates Either any installed BACS, or installed BACS products differentiated by application

Direct responsibility System integrators/installers

Not currently viable due to lack of information/analysis on power levels Options per installed BACS product function. Could be assessed in a future study if data is available. It is important not to set limits that could impinge on necessary Issues functionality. Limited resources to assess the technological options for all pertinent cases. Complex to determine W per function Related benefits/concerns Insufficient current data – hence info requirements initially + analysis after

Self-regulation pathway? No

Nature of requirements KPI, lifetime, interoperability requirements

Candidates Either any installed BACS, or installed BACS differentiated by application

Direct responsibility System integrator/installers

• BACS measuring and reporting of KPIs at installed product level Options • Lifetime at installed product level • Interoperability requirements

Installer requirements are challenging especially for factors they are Issues indirectly in control of

Related benefits/concerns

Self-regulation pathway? No

17/12/2020 86 © 2013, VITO NV BACS measuring and reporting of KPIs at installed product level » In an echo of the proposal for packaged BEMS, minimum functionality requirements could also be imposed on installed BACS products with regard to their ability to register and report key performance indicators. In principle, the minimum requirements could be set to be compatible with BACS class C or B under EN15232, perhaps depending on the application. » Standard EN 15232 does not give a direct list of KPI’s. The KPIs chosen could align to a subset of those specified in the eu.bac BACS certification handbook (Part 4) and/or EN 16947-1:2017 » If demand response is to be covered a transitional method would need to be developed

17/12/2020 87 © 2013, VITO NV Lifetime at installed product level » the principal reason for considering lifetime requirements at installed product level is to address the problem of the software for installed BACS not necessarily being maintained such that the functionality of the product could cease to be operable before any hardware failure occurs » the main challenge is that installers would need to be liable yet they do not directly develop and maintain the software or hardwre they install – they would thus need a legal mechanism (e.g. via a contract) to pass the obligation onto their suppliers

17/12/2020 88 © 2013, VITO NV Interoperability » there is a rationale for recommending interoperability at installed product level, but it may be more advisable to require it under the EPBD » however, it should be noted that Articles 14 and 15 of the revised EPBD on heating, cooling (and ventilation) systems with a combined capacity of >290 kW already require to ‘allow communication to the TBS and appliances and be interoperable across different types of proprietary technologies, devices and manufacturers » it could, however, also make sense to require this also for smaller installations (<290 kW) and other technical building services than just heating and cooling

Compatibility of product with EN15232 BACS solutions e.g. "This product can is compatible with class D to B BACS class solutions“, low power mode Nature of requirements wattage, interoperability capabilities, life time, upgradability, power consumption for auxiliary power calculation

packaged building energy management systems, room temperature Candidates controllers/thermostats, TRVs, air flow sensors, actuators, relays, heat pumps suitable for space heating

Direct responsibility Manufacturers

Information on accuracy, Compatibility with BACS systems based on their Options energy performance class, Internal power consumption, Interoperability, Lifetime, material content and related information

How feasible is it to unambiguously determine such compatibility? (Can Issues rules be defined?)

Related benefits/concerns Can directly support MS to set EPBD Article 8 requirements. Aligns with SRI

Self-regulation pathway? Potentially

17/12/2020 90 © 2013, VITO NV Information on accuracy » Under this notion it would be required for the accuracy of room temperature controllers/thermostats to be declared in the product data sheet including the reference buildings used and/or test lab » In principle, the same requirement could be made for TRVs if technology neutral standards and testing infrastructure can be addressed » In principle, similar requirements could be specified for humidistats and room air quality controllers/sensors notwithstanding the caveats previously mentioned for these products (i.e. possibly more appropriate for future requirements)

17/12/2020 91 © 2013, VITO NV Compatibility with BACS systems based on their energy performance class » Under this notion it would be required for the compatibility of packaged BACS products with installed BACS product energy performance classes (A to D) under the EN15232 standard to be reported » This policy concept is analogous to the notion discussed earlier of demonstrating EN 15232 class B or A compatibility with an EU27 benchmark building and in principle if compatibility information requirements were to be introduced in the first Tier of a prospective Ecodesign regulation it would facilitate the setting of minimum compatibility requirements in a future policy Tier » In principle, the approach would require that a manufacturer demonstrates the energy class compatibility at the functional level (EN 15232) of their product against a benchmark building, for example as defined in Task 3 » A transitional method including such a reference building (or buildings) would need to be elaborated for this to be applicable

17/12/2020 92 © 2013, VITO NV Internal power consumption » Under this notion it would be required for internal power consumption of packaged BACS products to be reported under their lowest and maximum power states » In principle, it could also be possible to define standard duty cycles for some packaged BACS products that would allow average power demand across the duty cycle to be reported; however, this would probably necessitate additional research and/or standardisation development » For BACS Energy Management Systems (EMS) as a functional minimum requirement it is proposed to require that internal power consumption should also be monitored and is capable of being reported with an open interoperable protocol

17/12/2020 93 © 2013, VITO NV Lifetime, material content and related information » Under this notion it would be required for information to be reported for product lifetime related parameters including upgradability. In particular, the lifetime of electro-mechanical components such as actuators and relays could be required to be reported in the product literature, even, when these are used as components within other packaged BACS products » Upgradability and interoperability are important aspects to increase BACS lifetime » Additionally, information requirements on hardware repairability could follow the specifications in the new EN 45554. It could be agreed to simplify this information and in the case of packaged BAC products to focus on a reduced set of components with known high failure rates, for example: electromechanical relays, back-up batteries and computer memory

17/12/2020 94 © 2013, VITO NV Lifetime, material content and related information » It could also be required to maintain the availability of components for repair for a sufficient amount of time (e.g. 8 years), with an assessment and documentation of repair in line with standard EN 45554 » In this context instead of keeping spare parts in stock for repair an exemption could be granted if packaged BAC products are built with standard interchangeable electronic components that are also available from a second source of suppliers e.g. electromechanical relays » If rare earth materials are used, e.g. in permanent magnet actuators or relays then it could be a requirement to disclose this in the product data sheet

17/12/2020 95 © 2013, VITO NV Interoperability » Under this notion it would be required for the interoperability capabilities of packaged BACS products to be reported i.e. which standardised operating system protocols they can be used with » This could entail setting out all standardised operating protocols and indicating their compatibility with each plus any additional ones not in the list (to allow for innovation) » Note, this is important information with a bearing on the service lifetime of the product

Nature of requirements Information on energy performance, Information on demand response, Information on interoperability and other factors

Candidates either any installed BACS, or installed BACS differentiated by application

Direct responsibility System integrators/installers

Could be differentiated by application for higher energy intensity cases e.g. Options larger non-residential applications. Note, the energy performance aspects could be covered under the ELR and result in a label being issued.

Issues Different market surveillance process to most Ecodesign requirements

Related benefits/concerns Can directly support MS to set EPBD Article 8 requirements

Self-regulation pathway? No

17/12/2020 97 © 2013, VITO NV Information on energy performance » Currently, the large majority of those procuring installed BACS products do not know the energy performance of the product they are procuring because information regarding its performance is not declared » This is a major barrier to the adoption of energy efficient BACS. Furthermore, while the EPBD encourages Member States to set BACS energy performance requirements it is both difficult to specify and to enforce if the conformity of the installed BACS to one of the four classes within EN15232 is not declared » Therefore, were Ecodesign information requirements to be set that oblige the EN15232 energy performance class of the installed BACS product to be declared it would make BACS energy performance visible in the market and greatly facilitate the ability of Member States to set meaningful measures for BACS energy performance under the EPBD

17/12/2020 98 © 2013, VITO NV Information on energy performance » designers/specifiers would need to assess and declare the energy performance class of their design in the tenders they make to clients » For this to be confirmed as being the BACS product that is actually installed then installers would need to certify the energy performance class of the product they have installed » To support conformity assessment it would be helpful were standardised tools to be made available that designers/installers could use to determine the energy performance class of their products

17/12/2020 99 © 2013, VITO NV Information on demand response » In principle it would be beneficial were the DR capability of the installed BACS product to be declared » However, before this could be considered as an Ecodesign information requirement there is a need to revise the BACS standards, in particular EN 15232, to better reflect DR capability » The current provisions within EN15232 do not adequately reflect how smart grids are likely to work as many will use time of day tariffs to level out demand, rather than expecting demand side management signals from the utility company, which is a large building solution » If this issue is resolved then alignment with EN15232 DR specifications could be used in future information requirements

17/12/2020 100 © 2013, VITO NV Information on interoperability and other factors Requirements could also be added with regard to the declaration of: • interoperability i.e. which operating systems may be used against a standardised list • commissioning, operation and maintenance characteristics were put forward as important factors » The operation and maintenance manuals (O&M) for BACS are an important aspect of the deliverables presented to owners/tenants and it is proposed this documentation should contain at least the following information: • functional description • list of points or nodes • data sheets for the control products Requirements could be set to require the provision of information on commissioning, which would include guidance on operation and maintenance

Nature of requirements Information on energy performance, Information on demand response, Information on interoperability and other factors

Candidates either any installed BACS, or installed BACS differentiated by application

Direct responsibility System integrators/installers

the EN15232 energy performance class of installed BACS products could be declared. If this happens it would also be just as viable to require the Options installer to issue an energy label in the same way as is done for space heating systems.

Exactly, the same viability and market surveillance issues would apply as Issues for labelling of space heating and hot water systems

Related benefits/concerns Can directly support MS to set EPBD Article 8 requirements

Self-regulation pathway? No

17/12/2020 102 © 2013, VITO NV Updating the energy label for space heaters, water heaters and solid fuel boilers » The energy label for space heater, water heaters and solid fuel boilers i.e EU Regulations 811/2013, 812/2013 and 2015/1187 are under review in a parallel Ecodesign preparatory study » It could be an option to include more BACS functions within these regulations » In fact, this is already under discussion but efforts could be made to align the approach adopted with the product information requirements proposed in this study » An important aspect would be align the functions contained in EN 15232 with the updated Regulation or vice versa

17/12/2020 103 © 2013, VITO NV Impacts – scenario analysis » BAU scenario: under this scenario it is assumed that the BACS placed on the EU market initially have the same level of energy performance as new BACS sold in 2020; however, the energy performance of new BACS improves over time in response to the anticipated impact of Member State implementation of the measures in the revised EPBD » Accuracy gain of 0.5°C: the products placed on the market have the same energy performance as in the BAU scenario except that the accuracy of room temperature controllers improves by 0.5°C from the year 2024 onward » Accuracy gain of 1.0°C: the products placed on the market have the same energy performance as in the BAU scenario except that the accuracy of room temperature controllers improves by 1.0°C from the year 2024 onward » Class C: from the year 2024, all new installed BACS must attain at least an energy performance of class C » Class B: from the year 2024, all new installed BACS must attain at least an energy performance of class B » Class A: from the year 2024, all new installed BACS must attain at least an energy performance of class A

The annual final energy savings under each scenario in 2040 are: » 26 TWh - Class C scenario » 68 TWh - Accuracy gain of 0.5°C scenario » 112 TWh - Accuracy gain of 1.0°C scenario » 184 TWh - Class B scenario » 272 TWh - Class A scenario

Discussion on Task 7

AOB

Thanks for participating – meeting slides will be available on the website tomorrow