Life-cycle primary energy implication of the new Swedish Building Code

Panel: Panel 4. Residential and commercial sectors: delivering lower energy use in buildings

Authors:
Ambrose Dodoo, Dept. of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Mid Sweden University, Sweden
Leif Gustavsson, Dept. of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Mid Sweden University, Sweden
Roger Sathre, Dept. of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Mid Sweden University, Sweden

Abstract

In this study we analyze the life-cycle primary energy use of apartment buildings made with wood- and concrete-frames, and built to meet either the Swedish building code of the mid-1990s or the maximum energy use standard of the new Swedish code (BBR 09). The analysis includes the primary energy use during the production, operation and end-of-life phases. Scenarios are analyzed in which the buildings are heated by district heating or electric resistance heating. We find that an electric resistance heated building built to the new code has greater life-cycle primary energy use relative to a district heated building, although the standard for the electric heating is more stringent. Making an electric resistance heated building to the new code's standard instead of the mid-1990s standard results in a large reduction in primary energy use. However, relatively little primary energy use reduction is achieved if a district heated building is made to the new standard instead of the old standard. Still, the primary energy use is on average 20-34% higher for the electric heated buildings than the district heated buildings. The wood-frame buildings have significantly lower production primary energy and also give greater end-of-life benefit than concrete-frame buildings. The primary energy for production is small relative to that for operation, but it is more significant for the district heated buildings.