Energy refurbishment of the R82 factory

INTERDISCIPLINARY PROJECT Students: Supervisor: Søren Alrø Skovbo David Canosa Vaamonde Martín Amado Pousa Miguel Salgado Pérez Pedro Rico López

Energetic refurbishment of

R82’s industrial unit

CONTENT

1. Introduction.................................... ................................................................................. 3

2. The main report ............................... .............................................................................. 6

2.1. INSULATION SOLUTION. ............................................................................................. 8

2.1.1. Wall insulation construction ................................................................................... 8

2.1.2. Roof insulation solution ....................................................................................... 11

2.1.3. Basement floor insulation solution ....................................................................... 12

2.1.4. Results ................................................................................................................. 13

2.2. WINDOWS SOLUTION. .............................................................................................. 15

2.3. DOORS SOLUTION. ................................................................................................... 18

2.3.1. Energy Savings ................................................................................................... 19

2.4. HEATING SYSTEM SOLUTION .................................................................................. 22 2.4.1. Building 1 ............................................................................................................. 23

2.4.2. Building 2 ............................................................................................................. 30

2.5. PV CELLS SOLUTION ................................................................................................ 34

2.5.1. Design and Photo-Voltaic Solar Systems elected ............................................... 35

2.5.2. Technical information about solar panels ............................................................ 38

2.5.3. Calculation of the power energy with PV Cells ................................................... 39

2.5.4. Results ................................................................................................................. 42

3. Economic analysis ............................. ......................................................................... 45

3.1. INSULATION. .............................................................................................................. 44 3.1.1. Insulation budget ................................................................................................. 44

3.1.1. Financial analysis ................................................................................................ 46

3.2. WINDOWS. ................................................................................................................. 47

3.2.1. Windows budget .................................................................................................. 47


3.3. DOORS. ...................................................................................................................... 50

3.3.1. Doors budget ....................................................................................................... 50


3.4. HEATING SYSTEM SOLUTION. ................................................................................. 53

3.4.1. Heating system budget ........................................................................................ 53


3.5. PV CELLS SOLUTION. ............................................................................................... 56

3.5.1. PV cells budget .................................................................................................... 56


4. Problem solving ............................... ........................................................................... 61

4.1. FINAL SOLUTION DAVID CANOSA ................................................................................ 60

4.2. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 61

4.2.1. Final solution budget ........................................................................................... 61


5. Conclusion .................................... ............................................................................... 66

5.1. ECONOMIC CRITERIA ............................................................................................... 65

5.2. ENVIROMENTAL CRITERIA ...................................................................................... 65

5.3. PUBLIC IMAGE OF THE COMPANY .......................................................................... 66

6. Literature ..................................... .................................................................................. 69

7. Group work methodology ......................... ................................................................... 70

8. Plans .......................................... .................................................................................... 71

Interdisciplinary Project: Energetic refurbishment of the R82’s industrial unit

Page 1 of 70

ABSTRACT

This project emerges as a proposal of R82 to reduce the energy consumption, save

money and improve the public image of the company.

The company’s factory is an old building placed in Gedved (Denmark) which energy

consumption is quite high due to obsolete constructive solutions and systems that are

not adapted to contemporaneity.

In this context we have analyzed deeply the problem coming to the conclusion that the

main problems in the factory are in the envelope of the building, the heating system

and the wastage of renewable energies.

We have analyzed several options trying to reduce energy consumption;

- Increasing of insulation.

- Change of windows and doors.

- Heating system improvements.

- PV cells plant installation.

Besides these factors, the other criterion, and actually the most important of them, is

the economic feasibility of the solutions. Due to saving money is the real purpose of the

company, there will only be accepted the economically profitable solutions and all the

other will be rejected.

Finally we adopted two solutions, the heating system improvement (heat recovery

system) and the PV cells plant.


Page 2 of 70

1. INTRODUCTION:

This project is based on R82 buildings. This company is located a few kilometers north

from Horsens (Denmark). (view Plan 01 – Situation )

The main purpose of the project is to improve the energetic efficiency of R82 company

buildings and try to design and adapt new renewable energy systems.

At the same time we would like to know how far the renewable energy systems can

save sources and money and how long it would take to depreciate this investment.

The company R82 proposes a project to let them being more respectful with the

environment as well as save money.

This proposition suggests us the next questions:

- What can we change to be more respectful with the environment?

- How much time do they need to recover the initial investment?

- How can reduce the energy consumption?


Page 3 of 70

The factory is divided in two different buildings because each one has an independent

heating system composed by a gas boiler and a fan coils heating system. The big one,

“Building 1” has a factory area, a canteen area and an office area. The small one,

“Building 2” has a factory area and an office area.

Building 1

- Factory area

- Office area

- Canteen area

Building 2

- Factory area

- Office area

After visiting the factory and researching the information provided by the company, we

introduced all this information in BE10 software and we have obtained these results:

3792 m2

2476 m2


Page 4 of 70

Building 1


Page 5 of 70

Building 2


Page 6 of 70

Taking into account these results, we came to the conclusion that the critical points are:

− Insulation: The factory has two kinds of external walls, one for the factory and

canteen enclosure and the other for the office one and one kind of roof and

basement floor for all the building. All these elements have a relatively high

conductivity that involves high heat losses.

− Windows and doors: At the present time the external carpentry of the factory

is quite old and, like in the walls, roof and ground floor, the high conductivity of

these windows and doors supposes a wasting of energy and money.

− Heating system: The heating system is composed by a gas boiler connected

to fan coils that provides hot air to all the building. This kind of system

consumes a high amount of gas and furthermore it has huge heat losses

because of the ventilation system. This ventilation system doesn’t have a heat

recovery so here we have the main source of energy wasting in the buildings.

− Electricity consumption: The building electricity consumption is quite high and

it doesn’t take advantage of renewable energies. In our opinion this point can

be improved.

− Water consumption: Before knowing how the company works and their

activities we thought that they consume a high volume of water and we were

thinking to design a system that exploits the rain water accumulated in the roof

for industrial purposes and it was reflected in the project description as many

hours of work. Once analyzed the working process in this factory we realized

that they don’t have water consumption for industrial purposes, this means that

they only have water consumption for sanitary appliances in bathrooms. Finally

we change our minds about doing something for this part of the project because

the consumption is going to be really low. The hours that were going to be

invested in this system are now restructured in other topics.


Page 7 of 70

To achieve this target we are going to analyze some different solutions based on;

insulation improvement, optimization of the heating system and a reduction in the

electricity consumption.

- For the insulation improvement, we are going to research a solution for the

external wall, the roof and the basement floor. The conductivity of these

elements would be reduced and it would affect directly reducing the heating

demand and generating an energy saving. The money savings are going to be

estimated. Taking into account the initial investment we will know if these are

ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE solutions.

- In regard to heating system, each building has a fan coil heating system

supplied by a gas boiler. We have designed a heat recovery system that

extracts energy from the exhaust air ventilation instead of throwing it away.

Then, we use this energy in a heat pump to heat again the building saving a lot

of energy and money reducing the gas consumption.

- Finally, in order to reduce the electricity consumption, we have designed a PV

cells plan projecting a steal construction to cover the outside parking. The PV

panels will be situated above the awnings that we have design. The amount of

energy produced by the solar panels will be discounted into the bill obtaining a

return on investment.


Page 8 of 70

2. THE MAIN REPORT - PROBLEM SOLVING:

2.1. INSULATION SOLUTION.

2.1.1. Wall insulation construction

In the actual buildings we have high U-Values for the walls so we decided that it will be

an option to increase the insulation thickness by adding an extra layer.

To reduce the conductivity we have selected a freestanding structure of gypsum board

with mineral wool inside. This system is perfect both for the offices and the factory to

be able to install it even until 10m of height.


Page 9 of 70

The actual walls of the buildings:

Office wall:

100mm Brick

150mm Insulation

100mm Brick

20mm Plaster

U-value:o,185 W/(m²K)

Factoy wall:

2 mm Metal sheet

150mm Insulation

16mm Gypsumboard

U-value:0,211 W/(m²K)


Page 10 of 70

New solution: with double Gypsum board 24mm + 100 or 150 mm of insulation

Office wall:

100mm Brick

150mm Insulation

100mm Brick

20mm Plaster

100 mm Insulation

24mm Gypsumboard

U-value:0,115 W/(m²K)

Factoy wall:

2 mm Metal sheet

150mm Insulation

16mm Gypsumboard

150 mm Insulation

24mm Gypsumboard

U-value: 0,102 W/(m²K)


Page 11 of 70

2.1.2. Roof insulation solution

To improve the roof insulation we have decided to install the system Roofmate LG-X

from Styrofoam, this is a lightweight insulation. It is composed of prefabricated

insulation boards with a 10mm surface of modified mortar topping.

The reasons because we have chosen this system are:

- The factory roof is not

calculated to support too

much weight and this system

is very light. The boards have

a low weight about 16 kg/m².

- The insulation material is

polystyrene foam (XSP) with

low conductivity λ=0,029

W/m2K.

- There are several thicknesses

from 40 mm to 120mm. All of

these boards include mortar topping of 10mm thickness to give it a nice

finish.

- Easy and fast to install.

Installation

- The boards are placed directly over

the waterproof layer and the

connection between boards does not

need any mortar, it´s done dovetailing

each other.

- In the perimeter the boards have to be ballasted with concrete block of

600x600x50mm to reduce the uplift forces of wind on the insulation.


Page 12 of 70

For the drainage or ventilation connections, the

pieces of boards will be cut to allow the pass of the

ducts and ballasted same that the perimeter.

2.1.3. Basement floor insulation solution

Currently, the basement floor of the building is composed by 150 mm of grave, 50 mm

of insulation and 120 mm of concrete.

The conductivity of this basement floor solution is 0,512 W/m² K, which is relatively

high.

The initial intention was propose a solution that improves the insulation, but we came to

the conclusion that changing the basement floor is not a ECONOMICALLY

PROFITABLE for the next reasons:

- Any solution for the basement floor improvement is not cheap and the savings

generated are relatively low.

- Inside the factory there are heavy machinery and stored products and moving

it would suppose many hours of skilled labor which would increase hugely the

initial investment.

- For doing the work would be necessary closing the factory for many weeks

and it would involve monetary losses.

- As a last point, the heating flow goes up, for this reason the main heating

losses are produced in the external wall and in the roof.


Page 13 of 70

2.1.4. Results

With this new insulation the heating requirement of the buildings will be lower because

the conductivities of the walls and roof will be also lower.

For the Building 1 here we can see the new energy requirements with the extra

insulation:

With the extra insulation the energy saving will be:

Saving = 536,64 – 477,31 = 59,33 MWh/year


Page 14 of 70

For the Building 2 here we can see the new energy requirements with the extra

insulation:


Saving = 356,66 – 309,90 = 46,76 MWh/year

The annual heating requirement decreases from 536,64 to 477,31 Mwh per year in

building 1 and from 356,66 to 309,90 Mwh per year in building 2.

The total energy savings for the two buildings will be:

Total savings = 106,09 MWh/year


Page 15 of 70

2.2. WINDOWS SOLUTION.

One of the critical points in heat losses are the

windows due to its high conductivity in relation with

the external wall (view Plan 03 – Elevations ). At the

present time the factory has aluminum windows with

two glazing and without thermal break. The

conductivity is 1,80 W/m2K that is quite high compared

with modern windows.

The best solution to solve the problem is to change

the windows for new ones with a higher quality and

trying to get the best value for money.

The chosen windows are aluminum windows with 3-layer energy glazing and thermal

break. Their conductivity is 0,80 W/m2K and the conductivity for the joint with the

external wall is 0,85 W/m2K.

Adding the changes in the windows in BE10 software we obtain the next results:


Page 16 of 70

For the Building 1 here we can see the new energy requirements with the new

windows:

With the new windows the energy saving will be:

Saving = 536,64 – 520,79 = 15,85 MWh/year


Page 17 of 70

For the Building 2 here we can see the new energy requirements with the new

windows:


Saving = 356,66 – 339,91 = 16,75 MWh/year

As we can see the heating requirements in the building 1 have decreased from 536,64

to 520,79 Mwh per year and in the building 2 from 356,66 to 339,91 Mwh per year.




Page 18 of 70

2.3. DOORS SOLUTION.

The R82 buildings have 9 big doorways for the trucks that come and go on the factory.

We have old automatic doors but with a very thin layer of insulation and we want to

change those for a new ones with a lower U-Value. With a new well insulated and

faster ones, the energy loses will decrease and it will take less time and energy to heat

the building.

The actual U-Value of these doors is U=1,50 W/m2K and we want to change those for a

new ones with a lower U-Value=0,80 W/m2K.

There are 5 big doors of 24m2 (4x6m)

and 4 smaller doors 16m2 (4x4m).

These doors are made by sandwich

panels of 40mm width and 610mm

height. The panel is made of pre-

painted galvanized steel sheet and

polyurethane foam (40kg/mᶟ) inside.


Page 19 of 70

2.3.1. Energy Savings

We have 9 doors;

Type 1: 5 doors 4*6m Type 1 area= 120m2

Type 2: 4 doors 4*4m Type 2 area= 64m2

U-Value actual doors �� = 1,5 �/��

U-Value new doors �� = 0,80 �/��

Energy loses through the doors:

�� = 1, ,50 ∗ 184 = 276,0 �/�

�� = 0,80 ∗ 184 = 147,2 �/�

R82 buildings are situated in Gedved so Gt (degree hour) will be;

�� = 89 ��ℎ/�

Ø� = 276,0 ∗ 89 = 24564,0 ��ℎ/�

Ø� = 147,2 ∗ 89 = 13100,8 ��ℎ/�

Energy difference (how much we will save)

Ø� − Ø� = �� !, � "#$/%

With these new doors the heating requirement of the buildings will be lower because

the conductivities will be also lower.

Total área = 184 m2


Page 20 of 70

For the Building 1 here we can see the new energy requirements with the new doors:

With the new doors the energy saving will be:

Saving = 536,64 – 530,97 = 5,67 MWh/year


Page 21 of 70

For the Building 2 here we can see the new energy requirements with the new doors:

With the new doors the energy saving will be:

Saving = 356,66 – 350,92 = 5,74 MWh/year




Page 22 of 70

2.4. HEATING SYSTEM SOLUTION.

In order to reduce the gas consumption, we have designed a heat recovery system that

extracts energy from the exhaust air ventilation instead of throwing it away.

Then, we use this energy in a water to water heat pump connected with the existing

heating system (view Plan 04 – Heating system installation ).


Page 23 of 70

2.4.1. Building 1

2.4.1.1. Heat exchanger

● Airflow:

- &'( =)*+*,∗-.∗/01

21∗3

- &'( �)�,4�5+4,4�56∗4,64.∗�47*8∗9:;6,5<∗

=>?@A@

,

�<B,�C

DEF∗)�4G�B5.H

�

6,79�I/J

● Total energy of the exhaust air:

- K( � &'( ∗ �(

- QM � 6,79NO

P∗ 34,81

NQ

NO�

270�R


Page 24 of 70

● Energy extracted by the recovery system:

Enthalpy (kJ/kg)

Enthalpy (kJ/kg)


Page 25 of 70

t1 = 20 ºC t2 = 10,9 ºC (t after heat exchanger - Exhausto)

φ1 = 40% φ1 = 43%

P1 = 1,013*105 Pa P2 = 1,013*105 + 1500 Pa= 1,028*105 Pa

h1 = 34,81 kJ/kg h2 = 18,47 kJ/kg

∅TU � V'( ∗ |�� |

∅TU � 6,79 ∗ |18,47 � 34,81|

∅XY � ��"Z/[ � ��"#

∅XY,\]%^ � __, _"#

Because we have a large building the circuit will be very long, that’s why we estimate a

20% of heat losses.

If we deliver 88,8 kW to the heat pump evaporator and in the air we had 270 kW, this

means that we recover 33% of the heat.


Page 26 of 70

2.4.1.2. Heat pump

We have selected a Danfoss heat pump:


Page 27 of 70

We will use a heat pump with a COP = 3,5

ab �cd` ∗ Te

cd` − 1

ab =3,5 ∗ 88,8

3,5 − 1

ab = 124,3 ��

Kab/fg8h = 124,3�� ∗ 2340ℎ/ij�k

Kab/fg8h = 290862 ��ℎ/ij�k = 291 l�ℎ

We will use 3 heat pumps of 42kW = 126kW > 124,3Kw


Page 28 of 70

The heat pumps are connected to the heat recovery system loop and to the heat

accumulator. The heat pumps contribute with the 52,1% of the heating demand.

Evaporator: P = 29,6 kW

Compresor: P = 12,4 kW

Condenser: P = 42 kW

COP = 3,39


Page 29 of 70

2.4.1.3. Energy savings

Building heating demand = 536,64 MWh/year

Heat Pump production = 291 MWh/year

Heat Exchanger power = 0,80 x 111kW (20% of heat losses) = 88,8 kW

Heat Exchanger production (free energy) = 88,8 kW x 2340 h/year = 208 MWh/year

Energy saving = 38,75%

2.4.1.4. Results

The heat pump implementation in the building 1 involves the next results:

The annual heating requirement decreases from 180,40 to 145,80 Kwh/m2, it means a

drop of 34,6 Kwh/m2.


Page 30 of 70

2.4.2. Building 2

2.4.2.1. Heat exchanger

● Airflow:

&'( � 4,37�I/J

● Total energy of the exhaust air:

mn � �o�"#

● Energy extracted by the recovery system:

∅XY � p�, o"Z/[ � p�, o"#


Page 31 of 70

Because we have a large building the circuit will be very long, that’s why we estimate a

20% of heat losses.

∅XY,\]%^ � op, �"#

If we deliver 57,2 kW to the heat pump evaporator and the air has 152 kW, this means

that we recover 37,6% of the heat.

2.4.2.2. Heat pump:

We have selected the same Danfoss heat pump:

We will use a heat pump with a COP= 3,5

ab � 80,1��

Kab/fg8h � 187l��

We will use 3 heat pumps of 42kW = 84 kW > 80,1 kW


Page 32 of 70

The heat pumps are connected to the heat recovery system loop and to the heat

accumulator. The heat pumps contribute with the 52,1% of the heating demand.

Evaporator: P = 29,6 kW

Compresor: P = 12,4 kW

Condenser: P = 42 kW

COP = 3,13


Page 33 of 70

2.4.2.3. Energy savings

Building heating demand = 356,66 MWh/year

Heat Pump production = 187 MWh/year

Heat Exchanger power = 0,80 x 71,5 kW (20% of heat losses) = 87,2 kW

Heat Exchanger production (free energy) = 57,2 kW x 2340 h/year = 134 MWh/year

Energy saving = 37,57 %

2.4.2.4. Results

The heat pump implementation in the building 1 involves the next results:

The annual heating requirement decreases from 171,50 to 141,50 Kwh/m2, it means a

drop of 30,00 Kwh/m2.


Page 34 of 70

2.5. PV CELLS SOLUTION.

We thought that the best solution to reduce electrical consumption is to build a

photovoltaic solar plant in the parking plot next to R82 buildings.

The panels will be situated above the awnings that we have design. The electrical

energy generated by this installation will be injected into the distribution network. The

amount of energy produced by the solar panels will be discounted into the bill obtaining

a return on investment.

We also studied to put the installation over the roof but the structure of the factory is

not calculated to support the weight of the photovoltaic frame. This has been an

inconvenient because the area of the roof is bigger than the outdoor parking limiting the

energy production (view Plan 02 – Photovoltaic cells plant ). Although exist other kind

of photovoltaic panels without frame and low weight but we rejected this solutions

because the direction of the company R82 have preferred not to install it.

The parking has 1840 m² and its orientation is North-East

Parking


Page 35 of 70

2.5.1. Design and Photo-Voltaic Solar Systems elected

To obtain the biggest quantity of solar panels and parking spaces we designed a

structure that is able to shelter 72 parking spaces, 18 of these are external, and 288

solar panels.

The name of the commercial house is SunPower and was elected because it offers

more efficiency and performance than other commercial houses. The kind of solar

panel elected is the model SPR-E20-435-COM and the nominal power 435W per

panel.

The panel has a South orientation and a slope of 40º that takes advantage of the

largest possible solar radiations.


Page 36 of 70

Aerial view before the construction of the PV cells plan.

Aerial view after the construction of the PV cells plan.


Page 37 of 70

North-west view of the PV cells plan.

South-east view of the PV cells plan.


Page 38 of 70

2.5.2. Technical information about solar panels


Page 39 of 70

2.5.3. Calculation of the power energy with PV Cells

We use the program PVGIS to do the calculations. This program gives you the amount

of energy that can be generated anywhere in Europe and in surrounding regions. This

calculation is based on data of the sun's energy, the geographical distribution and

different

types of terrain across Europe, as well as a thorough analysis of available photovoltaic

technologies.

The data introduce in this program for calculate are:

- Location of the photo voltaic plant: Gedved, Denmark

- The technology of the cell : Crystalline Silicon

- Power installed: 125 ,3 KW

- Estimated losses: 12%

- Scope of the panels: 40º

- Orientation: South

We have obtained the next result:


Page 40 of 70

Cells Area/cell (m²)

Area

(m²) Pm/cell (W)

Total Pm

(W)

Total Pm

(KW)

288 2,06 593,05 435 125280 125,28

http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/apps4/pvest.php


Page 41 of 70

Total Pm (KW) Month Electricity production (kWh)

125,28 Jan 3390,00

Feb 5390,00

Mar 13000,00

Apr 17600,00

May 18700,00

Jun 18000,00

Jul 17600,00

Aug 16100,00

Sep 13200,00

Oct 8750,00

Nov 4270,00

Dec 2680,00

TOTAL 138680,00

PV cells production (free energy) = 139 MWh/year


Page 42 of 70

2.5.4. Results

The solar cell plant implementation involves the next results:

Building 1

Building 2

Taking into account the data exposed below we know that the construction of the solar

cells plant causes a decrease from 180,40 Kwh/m2 to 140,40 Kwh/m2 in the building 1

and from 171,50 to 114,10 Kwh/m2 in the building 2.


Page 43 of 70

3. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS:

The main target of a company is to earn money, that’s because energy savings and the

environmental preservation are not enough reasons to develop an energy

refurbishment. The company should have money saving which let them get back the

initial investment and provide then benefit which make them grow up.

The systems will be analyzed separately to show if they are sustainable or not.


Page 44 of 70

3.1. INSULATION.

3.1.1. Insulation budget

The new insulation involves an initial investment of 3.058.668,41 DKK and it provides

an energy saving of 106,09 MWh per year. This means a monetary saving of near

74.645,96 DKK the first year (which will increase the 4% each year because of the gas

price raise).

During the life span of the system (40 years) you could save 7.093.271,04 DKK

Taking into account the data exposed below, the initial investment would be gotten

back in less than 25 years .

Ud Q Price Amount3.058.668,52

3 Subject 3.058.668,52

3,1 144.617,99

m² 569,800 253,80 144.617,99

Units Length Width Height Partial Subtotal

Office wall B 1-2 408,80 408,80

Office wall B 3-4 161,00 161,00

3,2 1.203.920,16

m² 3.757,240 320,43 1.203.920,16


Factory wall B 1-2

1778,34 1778,34

Factory wall B 3-4

1978,90 1978,90

3,2 1.710.130,37

m² 6.112,690 279,77 1.710.130,37


Building 1-2 3775,75 3775,75

Building 3-4 2336,94 2336,94

Project: R82 RefurbishmentBUDGET

R82 Refurbishment

Insulation

Wall Insulation (100 mm)

Roof Insulation

Roofmate LG-X from Styrofoam for insulating lightweight. It iscomposed of prefabricated insulation boards with a surface10mm of modified mortar topping.

Wall insulation between gypsum board frames (included in theprice). Mineral wool compacted panels ECO40D "ISOVER",100mm width.

Wall Insulation (150 mm)

Wall insulation between gypsum board frames (included in theprice). Mineral wool compacted panels ECO40D "ISOVER",150mm width.


Page 45 of 70

IRR: The Internal rate of return (the future cash flow against first cost) is 3,68 %, lower

than the hurdle rate (minimum acceptable Internal Rate of Return).

NPV: The net Present Value (The total net cash flow generated over the lifetime with

discounted cash flows that occur in the future) is NEGATIVE.

Therefore, the investment is NOT ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE to the company.

WE HAVE REJECTED THIS SOLUTION


Page 46 of 70

3.1.1. Financial analysis

Year Initial cost Savings generated0 -3.058.668,52kr. 1 74.645,96kr. 2 77.631,80kr. 3 80.737,07kr. 4 83.966,56kr. 5 87.325,22kr. 6 90.818,23kr. 7 94.450,96kr. 8 98.228,99kr. 9 102.158,15kr.

10 106.244,48kr. 11 110.494,26kr. 12 114.914,03kr. 13 119.510,59kr. 14 124.291,01kr. 15 129.262,65kr. 16 134.433,16kr. 17 139.810,49kr. 18 145.402,91kr. 19 151.219,02kr. 20 157.267,78kr. 21 163.558,50kr. 22 170.100,83kr. 23 176.904,87kr. 24 183.981,06kr. 25 191.340,31kr. 26 198.993,92kr. 27 206.953,67kr. 28 215.231,82kr. 29 223.841,09kr. 30 232.794,74kr. 31 242.106,53kr. 32 251.790,79kr. 33 261.862,42kr. 34 272.336,92kr. 35 283.230,39kr. 36 294.559,61kr. 37 306.341,99kr. 38 318.595,67kr. 39 331.339,50kr. 40 344.593,08kr.

NEW INSULATION

0,16 Simple Payback 24,75 yearsNPV -2.107.331,48kr. IRR 3,68%

Annual GAS increasing 4,00%

Life span 40 yearsAccumulative

Savings7.093.271,04kr.

Hurdle rate


Page 47 of 70

3.2. WINDOWS.

3.2.1. Windows budget

The new windows involves an initial investment of 906.818,85 DKK and it provides an

energy saving of 62,61 MWh per year. This means a monetary saving of near

44.053,01 DKK the first year (which will increase the 4% each year because of the gas

price raise).



back in more or less 15 years .


Ud Q Price Importe 906.818,85

4 Subject 906.818,85

4,1 689.346,46

Ud 84,000 8.206,51 689.346,46

Uds. Largo Ancho Alto Parcial Subtotal

Building 1-2 43 43,00 43,00

Building 3-4 41 41,00 41,00

4,2 180.543,12

Ud 44,000 4.103,25 180.543,12


Building 1-2 3 3,00 3,00

Building 3-4 41 41,00 41,00

4,3 36.929,27

Ud 12,000 3.077,44 36.929,27


Building 1-2 0 0,00 0,00

Building 3-4 12 12,00 12,00

R82 Refurbishment

Windows

Windows type 1


Windows type 2

Aluminium window with 3-layer energy glazing. Uw =0,8 W/m²/K and Uw, inst = 0,85 W/m²/K. Size: 1,20x 1,60 m. Including delivery and installation.

Windows type 3




Page 48 of 70







Page 49 of 70


Year Initial cost Savings generated0 -906.818,85kr. 1 44.053,01kr. 2 45.815,13kr. 3 47.647,73kr. 4 49.553,64kr. 5 51.535,79kr. 6 53.597,22kr. 7 55.741,11kr. 8 57.970,75kr. 9 60.289,58kr.


WINDOWS

0,16 Simple Payback 15,3 yearsNPV -469.279,53kr. IRR 7,62%

4.186.159,87kr.

Annual GAS increasing

4,00%

Hurdle rate


Savings


Page 50 of 70

3.3. DOORS.

3.3.1. Doors budget

Ud Q Price Importe 186.884,51

5 Subject 186.884,51

5,1 73.112,50

Ud 4,000 18.278,13 73.112,50


Building 1 2 2,00 2,00

Building 2 2 2,00 2,00

5,2 113.772,01

Ud 5,000 22.754,40 113.772,01


Building 1 2 2,00 2,00

Building 2 3 3,00 3,00


Track doors type 2

Track doors 4,00x6,00m. Door sandwich panels of40mm width and 610mm height. The panel is made ofprepainted galvanized steel sheet and inside it haspolyurethane foam (40kg/m ᶟ). U-Value 0,80 W/m²K.

Track doors 4,00 x 4,00 m. Door sandwich panels of40mm width and 610mm height. The panel is made ofprepainted galvanized steel sheet and inside it haspolyurethane foam (40kg/m ᶟ). U-Value 0,80 W/m²K.

R82 Refurbishment

Doors

Track doors type 1

The new doors involves an initial investment of 186.884,51 DKK and it provides an

energy saving of 11,41 MWh per year. This means a monetary saving of near 8.028,19

DKK the first year (which will increase the 4% each year because of the gas price

raise).

During the life span of the system (40 years) you could save 762.882,67 DKK




Page 51 of 70








Page 52 of 70


Year Initial cost Savings generated0 -186.884,51kr. 1 8.028,19kr. 2 8.349,32kr. 3 8.683,29kr. 4 9.030,62kr. 5 9.391,84kr. 6 9.767,52kr. 7 10.158,22kr. 8 10.564,55kr. 9 10.987,13kr.


WINDOWS

0,16 Simple Payback 16,78 yearsNPV -104.164,70kr. IRR 6,83%

762.882,67kr.

Annual GAS increasing 4,00%

Hurdle rate

Life span 40 years Accumulative Savings


Page 53 of 70

3.4. HEATING SYSTEM SOLUTION.

3.4.1. Heating system budget

Ud Q Price Amount kr. 1.135.497,54

1 Subject kr. 1.135.497,54

1,1 kr. 1.074.306,18

Ud 5,000 kr. 214.861,24 kr. 1.074.306,18

Ud L W H Partial Subtotal

Building 1 3 3,000

Building 2 2 2,000

1,2 kr. 52.238,81

Ud 2,000 kr. 26.119,40 kr. 52.238,81


Building 1 1 1,000

Building 2 1 1,000

1,3 kr. 8.952,55

Ud 200,000 kr. 44,76 kr. 8.952,55


Building 1 1 120,00 120,000

Building 2 1 80,00 80,000

Heat system pipes

Heat recovery system made by polypropylenerigid pipes, of 26/28mm diameter. Including

Heat recovery system

Heat recovery system Exhausto X315. DX coilsit's used as an evaporator to extract energy from

Danfoss DHP-S heat pump 42 kW. High-capacity heat pumps designed for use in thelarge home and commercial sector. COP=3,92.


R82 Refurbishment

Heating System

Heat Pumps

The new heating system involves an initial investment of 1.135.497,54 DKK .

The first year you could save 277.621,94 DKK reducing the gas consumption in 491,4

MWh/a and you will increase the electricity consumption in 149,8 MWh/a which

involves 105.372,60 DKK.

Therefore, the first year you could save 341,6 MWh which involves 172.249,34 DKK



back less than 6 years .

IRR: The Internal rate of return (the future cash flow against first cost) is 18,17 %,

higher than the hurdle rate (minimum acceptable Internal Rate of Return).


Page 54 of 70


discounted cash flows that occur in the future) is POSITIVE (67.219,36 DKK). .

Therefore, the investment is ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE to the company.

WE HAVE ADOPTED THIS SOLUTION


Page 55 of 70


Year Initial cost Savings generated Total savings0 -1.135.900,41kr. 1 172.249,34kr. 172.249,34kr. 2 175.866,58kr. 175.866,58kr. 3 180.263,24kr. 180.263,24kr. 4 184.769,82kr. 184.769,82kr. 5 189.389,07kr. 189.389,07kr. 6 194.123,79kr. 194.123,79kr. 7 198.976,89kr. 198.976,89kr. 8 203.951,31kr. 203.951,31kr. 9 209.050,09kr. 209.050,09kr.

10 214.276,35kr. 214.276,35kr. 11 219.633,26kr. 219.633,26kr. 12 225.124,09kr. 225.124,09kr. 13 230.752,19kr. 230.752,19kr. 14 236.520,99kr. 236.520,99kr. 15 242.434,02kr. 242.434,02kr. 16 248.494,87kr. 248.494,87kr. 17 254.707,24kr. 254.707,24kr. 18 261.074,92kr. 261.074,92kr. 19 267.601,79kr. 267.601,79kr. 20 274.291,84kr. 274.291,84kr. 21 281.149,14kr. 281.149,14kr. 22 288.177,86kr. 288.177,86kr. 23 295.382,31kr. 295.382,31kr. 24 302.766,87kr. 302.766,87kr. 25 310.336,04kr. 310.336,04kr.

HEAT PUMP SYSTEM

0,16 Simple Payback 5,83 years

NPV 67.219,36kr. IRR 18,17%

Hurdle rate

Annual electricity increasing

6,00%

5.861.363,92kr.

Annual gas price increasing

4,00%

Life span 25 years Accumulative Savings


Page 56 of 70

3.5. PV CELLS SOLUTION.

3.5.1. PV cells budget

The photovoltaic system implation involves an initial investment of 848.728,21 DKK

and it provides an energy saving of 139 MWh per year. This means a monetary saving

of near 97.605,72 DKK the first year (which will increase the 6% each year because of

the gas price raise) and the possibility of getting a subsidy which reduces the electricity

price for the 20 years after the system installation. This means a saving of about

12.000 DKK the first 10 years and about 37.000 DKK the 10 years after.




Ud Q Price Amount848.728,21

2 Subject 848.728,21

2,1 1.398,75m³ 6,300 222,02 1.398,75

Uds. L H T Partial Subtotal

Trenching for unit fundations

63 0,50 0,50 0,40 6,300 6,300

2,2 4.794,09

2,2,1 4.794,09

m³ 6,300 760,97 4.794,09

Uds. L H T Partial Subtotal

0

Unit fundations 63 0,50 0,50 0,40 6,300 6,300

2,3 197.951,66

2,3,1 197.951,66

kg 8.707,500 12,38 107.836,84

kg 7.276,500 12,38 90.114,82

2,4 644.583,71Ud 288,000 2.238,14 644.583,71

R82 Refurbishment

PV cells plant

Earth work

SunPowerTM E20 Solar Panels provide today’s highestefficiency and performance. Powered by SunPowerMaxeonTM cell technology, the E20 series provides panelconversion efficiencies of up to 20.1%. The


Trenching for foundations in semi-hard clay soil.

Superficiales

Isolated foundation, reinforced concrete 25 N/mm².

Fundations

Steel

Steel beams. Including delivery, installation and weldingof joints.

Steel pillars. Including delivery, installation and welding of joints.

PV cells system

Structures


Page 57 of 70




discounted cash flows that occur in the future) is POSITIVE (21.414,85 DKK).


WE HAVE ADOPTED THIS SOLUTION


Page 58 of 70


Year Initial cost Savings generated Subsidy Total savin gs0 -848.728,21kr. 1 97.605,72kr. 12.325,84kr. 109.931,57kr. 2 103.462,07kr. 12.325,84kr. 115.787,91kr. 3 109.669,79kr. 12.325,84kr. 121.995,64kr. 4 116.249,98kr. 12.325,84kr. 128.575,82kr. 5 123.224,98kr. 12.325,84kr. 135.550,82kr. 6 130.618,48kr. 12.325,84kr. 142.944,32kr. 7 138.455,58kr. 12.325,84kr. 150.781,43kr. 8 146.762,92kr. 12.325,84kr. 159.088,76kr. 9 155.568,69kr. 12.325,84kr. 167.894,54kr.

10 164.902,82kr. 12.325,84kr. 177.228,66kr. 11 174.796,99kr. 36.977,53kr. 211.774,52kr. 12 185.284,80kr. 36.977,53kr. 222.262,34kr. 13 196.401,89kr. 36.977,53kr. 233.379,42kr. 14 208.186,01kr. 36.977,53kr. 245.163,54kr. 15 220.677,17kr. 36.977,53kr. 257.654,70kr. 16 233.917,80kr. 36.977,53kr. 270.895,33kr. 17 247.952,86kr. 36.977,53kr. 284.930,40kr. 18 262.830,04kr. 36.977,53kr. 299.807,57kr. 19 278.599,84kr. 36.977,53kr. 315.577,37kr. 20 295.315,83kr. 36.977,53kr. 332.293,36kr. 21 313.034,78kr. -kr. 313.034,78kr. 22 331.816,87kr. -kr. 331.816,87kr. 23 351.725,88kr. -kr. 351.725,88kr. 24 372.829,43kr. -kr. 372.829,43kr. 25 395.199,20kr. -kr. 395.199,20kr.

PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR PANELS

0,16 Simple Payback 7,73 years

NPV 21.414,85kr.

IRR 17,67%

5.848.124,16kr. Accumulative SavingsLife span 25 years

Annual electricity

increasing6,00%

Hurdle rate


Page 59 of 70

4. PROBLEM SOLVING:


Page 60 of 70

4.1. FINAL SOLUTION

We have just adopted the last two solutions because we can only get an economic

profit for the company with these two systems:

- Heating system solution

- PV cells solution.

The new heating system and the solar cell plant implementation involve the next

results:

Building 1

Building 2

Taking into account the data exposed below we know that the solution adopted causes

a decrease from 180,40 Kwh/m2 to 109,6 Kwh/m2 in the building 1 and from 171,50 to

83,3 Kwh/m2 in the building 2.

New heating system production = 491 MWh/year

Heat Exchanger production (free energy) = 342 MWh/year

PV cells production (free energy) = 139 MWh/year

TOTAL ENERGY SAVINGS = 481 MWh/year


Page 61 of 70

4.2. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS.

4.2.1. Final solution budget

Ud Q Price Amount1.984.628,62

1 Subject kr. 1.135.900,41

1,1 kr. 1.074.306,18

Ud 5,000 kr. 214.861,24 kr. 1.074.306,18


Building 1-2 3 3,000

Building 3-4 2 2,000

1,2 kr. 52.238,81

Ud 2,000 kr. 26.119,40 kr. 52.238,81


Building 1 1 1,000

Building 2 1 1,000

1,3 kr. 9.355,42

Ud 209,000 kr. 44,76 kr. 9.355,42


Building 1 1,00 120,000

Building 2 1,00 89,000

R82 Refurbishment

BUDGETProject:R82 Refurbishment

Heating System

Heat system pipes

Heat recovery system made by polypropylene rigidpipes, of 26/28mm diameter. Including delivery and

Heat Pumps

Danfoss DHP-S heat pump 42 kW. High-capacity heatpumps designed for use in the large home and

Heat recovery system

Heat recovery system Exhausto X315. DX coils it's usedas an evaporator to extract energy from the air. Air flow


Page 62 of 70

2 Subject 848.728,21

2,1 1.398,75m³ 6,300 222,02 1.398,75


Trenching for unit fundations

63 0,50 0,50 0,40 6,300 6,300

2,2 4.794,09

2,2,1 4.794,09

m³ 6,300 760,97 4.794,09


0

Unit fundations 63 0,50 0,50 0,40 6,300 6,300

2,3 197.951,66

2,3,1 197.951,66

kg 8.707,500 12,38 107.836,84

kg 7.276,500 12,38 90.114,82

2,4 644.583,71Ud 288,000 2.238,14 644.583,71

PV cells plant

Earth workTrenching for foundations in semi-hard clay soil.

Shallow fundations

Isolated foundation, reinforced concrete 25 N/mm².

Structures

SunPowerTM E20 Solar Panels provide today’s highestefficiency and performance. Powered by SunPowerMaxeonTM cell technology, the E20 series providespanel conversion efficiencies of up to 20.1%. TheE20’s low voltage temperature coefficient, anti-reflectiveglass and exceptional low-light performance attributesprovide outstanding energy delivery per peak powerwatt.

Fundations

Steel

Steel beams. Including delivery, installation andwelding of joints.Steel pillars. Including delivery, installation and weldingof joints.

PV cells system

The final solution includes heating system solution and photovoltaic system

implementation. This involves an initial investment of 1.984.628,62 DKK and it provides

an energy saving of 481 MWh per year. This means a monetary saving of near

282.180,91 DKK the first year.

During the life span of the systems (25 years) you could save 11.709.488,07 DKK






discounted cash flows that occur in the future) is POSITIVE (2.187.530,98 DKK).



Page 63 of 70


Year Initial cost Total savings0 -1.984.628,62kr. 1 282.180,91kr. 2 291.654,49kr. 3 302.258,88kr. 4 313.345,64kr. 5 324.939,89kr. 6 337.068,11kr. 7 349.758,32kr. 8 363.040,08kr. 9 376.944,63kr.

10 391.505,01kr. 11 431.407,77kr. 12 447.386,42kr. 13 464.131,61kr. 14 481.684,53kr. 15 500.088,72kr. 16 519.390,20kr. 17 539.637,64kr. 18 560.882,49kr. 19 583.179,17kr. 20 606.585,20kr. 21 594.183,91kr. 22 619.994,73kr. 23 647.108,19kr. 24 675.596,30kr. 25 705.535,24kr.

FINAL SOLUTION

0,16 Simple Payback 6,25 yearsNPV 2.187.530,98 DKKIRR 17,47%

11.709.488,07kr.

Hurdle rateAnnual electricity

increasing6,00%

Annual gas price increasing

4,00%


Savings


Page 64 of 70

5. CONCLUSION: DID YOU SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND WHAT W AS THE

SOLUTION?


Page 65 of 70

5.1. ECONOMIC CRITERIA.

Due to a company is mainly created to generate benefits, this point must be

considerate the most important. The implantation of the systems described above

saves to the company a considerable amount of money, nearly 300.000 kr. per year

among energy savings and subsidies which would be received that would rise each

year because of the energy price increasing.

The initial investment is important, but in the case of the photovoltaic solar panels they

would be payback in 7 years and a half and in the case of the heat pump system in

almost 6 years. Taking into account that the hurdle rate impost by the company is the

16%, both of the systems are investments that they should consider.

5.2. ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA.

Beside the economic criteria, environmental preservation must be considered too.

Fossil fuel consumption is delivering high amounts of gases which contribute to

develop the greenhouse effect therefore it substitution by renewable

energies may be a solution to the problem.

The proposed changes in the factory provide an energy saving of about 241.000 Kwh

per year in heating and 140.000 Kwh in electricity that means about 70 tons of CO2

that won’t be delivered to the atmosphere.


Page 66 of 70

5.3. PUBLIC IMAGE OF THE COMPANY.

As a final point, must be said that the implementation of renewable energies and the

support of environmental preservation could collaborate to the improvement of the

company’s image.

Taking into account the points exposed below the conclusion extracted is that the

company should at least analyze deeply the propositions, and probably they should

perform the changes.

tons

50 tons

100 tons

150 tons

200 tons

250 tons

300 tons

350 tons

kr. -

kr. 100.000,00

kr. 200.000,00

kr. 300.000,00

kr. 400.000,00

kr. 500.000,00

kr. 600.000,00

kr. 700.000,00

kr. 800.000,00

2010 2011 2012 Future

CO2 emissions Electricity Gas


Page 67 of 70

6. LITERATURE:

AGE BREDAHI ERIKSEN: Renewable Energy. Vitus Bering CVU, 2003

Sustainable Energy- without the hot air. Version 3.5.2. November 3, 2008.

JORN STENE:

Air-Source vs. Water/Ground-Source.

Heat Pump Systems – Operational Characteristics

TER CS1 A13. Basic of thermodynamics.

COOLENERGY. Commercial label. www.coolenergy.dk

DANFOSS. Commercial label. www.danfoss.com

EXHAUSTO. Commercial label. www.exhausto.com

EUROPE’S ENERGY PORTAL. www.energy.eu

LEGAL SOURCES ON RENEWABLE ENERGY. www.res-legal.eu

JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE Institute for Energy and Transport

http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/


Page 68 of 70

7. GROUP WORK METHODOLOGY

After finishing the project and reread the project description, we have considered

necessary to add a paragraph that explains our working methodology in order to ease

the evaluation.

The main reason to choose this project was that it includes many topics that we

consider interesting to learn, for this reason we all have worked in all parts of the

project, in a greater or lesser extent.

We consider that our project methodology is a great way to work because it favors the

debate and it provides consistence to the project as it’s made as a unit and not as

different parts collated. In the other way, this method doesn’t allow us to divide the

project into different sections according to its author and this could be a problem for the

examiners to assess it.

Trying to facilitate their work, we have elaborated a table that divides the work in

function of the maximum intervener but, as I explained before, not the only one.

37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Hours ECTS

9 9 0,3010 11 21 0,70

20 10 30 1,00

Water 10 5 15 0,50Electricity 15 5 20 0,67

Heating 35 5 40 1,33Heating loads 40 30 30 25 125 4,17

Heating loads Building 1 15 15 15 15 15 15 90 3,00Heating loads Building 2 15 15 15 15 15 15 90

Water consumption 10 10 0,33Electricity 30 20 40 30 30 20 20 190 6,33

Heating 30 20 40 20 20 30 25 20 205 6,8320 30 40 90 3,0020 10 40 40 110 3,67

30 10 5 5 35 30 115 3,8340 40 1,33

9 10 11 120 115 0 140 145 80 80 125 120 135 110 1200 37

Analysis ConstructionAnalysis Consumption

Project Description

Project Work

TotalMonthWeek

Visit InnoCamp

September October November December

Group Work

Total

Design solutions

Analysis of solutionsFinancial estimation

DrawingsRedaction

Group work

David Canosa Vaamonde

José Miguel Salgado Pérez

Martín Amado Pousa

Pedro Rico López


Page 69 of 70

8. PLANS:

Energy refurbishment of the R82 factory

Technology

Transcript of Energy refurbishment of the R82 factory