Can the topic energy efficiency be considered as energy efficiency of buildings only or should it be considered in association with the efficiency of the energy production and energy distribution? In many cases an efficient way of energy production and distribution would benefit more to overall energy savings and reduction of carbon emissions than decreased energy demands for buildings.

One very efficient initiative would be power production at Combined Power and Heat Plants (CPH) in conjunction with District Heating (DH) (Northern Europe) and District Cooling (DH) (Southern Europe).

Are these targets to be integrated in the Summer School 2012 to achieve the goals of creating student as shining examples according to energy efficiency?

In many countries and in many conditions energy efficiency is considered strictly to the energy us for building services. This is also the case concerning the EPBD. As an example this can be shown with the energy requirements stated in the Danish Building Code (Bygnings Reglement (BR)).

Fig. 1: Energy frames for nonresidential buildings according to the Danish Building Code (BR). Expressed in primary energy consumption [kWh/m² gross area].

Right now the demand for insulation in buildings according to the new Building Code BR10 has reached its maximum. If we as an example want to increase the wall insulation from 300 mm to 400 mm, the embedded energy and the embedded CO₂-emission from production of the insulation highly reduces the expected goals.

Is this steadily increasing demand for energy efficiency in buildings the right way to follow to obtain the 20-20-20 goals stated in the EU?

In the long term it is inevitable to increase the demands of energy efficiency to become independent of fossil fuels.

Buildings cannot be considered independently of the energy production and distribution. It may be many times more efficient to:

• Change from power plant to combined power and heat plants (CPH)
• Use the waste energy from power production for district heating (DH)
• Use the waste energy from power production for district cooling (DC)

These items are dealt with in many publications, e.g.:

1. The World bank has calculated that, if DH were used in the EU countries (mainly the northern countries) as widely as in Denmark, this initiative alone would be sufficient to reduce the CO₂- emission with more than 20% !!
2. The Energy Charter Treaty signed by 51 countries looks at CHP + DH as

the most promising way to reduce energy consumption (primary energy) and creating a flexible energy supply

1. The Danish District Energy Partnership among major DK market players states that:
   1. 135 Euro (1000 DKR) invested in DH reduces the CO₂-emission with 1 ton/year
   2. 135 Euro invested in wind energy reduces the CO₂-emission with 0.5 0.7 ton/year
   3. 135 Euro invested in hydro power reduces the CO₂-emission with 0.6 – 1.3 ton/year

Energy Charter Secretariat: www.encharter.org

Look for the report “Cogeneration and District Heating, best practice for Municipalities”, march 2006:  http://www.encharter.org/index.php?id=126#384

District Energy Partnership: www.districtenergypartnership.com/ (some interesting cases).