Optimizing environmental insulationthickness of buildings with CHP-based district heating system based on amount of energy and energy grade

doi:10.1007/s11708-020-0700-5

Frontiers in Energy

2022, Vol. 16

Issue (4): 613-628 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-020-0700-5

本期目录

Optimizing environmental insulationthickness of buildings with CHP-based district heating system based on amount of energy and energy grade

Yumei ZHANG¹, Pengfei JIE¹(

), Chunhua LIU², Jing LI³

¹. School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Petrochemical Technology, Beijing 102617, China
². Engineering and Technology R&D Center of Clean Air Conditioning in Colleges of Shandong, Shandong Huayu University of Technology, Dezhou 253000, China
³. China Environmental Resources Technology Co., Ltd, Beijing 100012, China

全文: PDF(1492 KB) HTML

Abstract：

The increase of insulation thickness (IT) results in the decrease of the heat demand and heat medium temperature. A mathematical model on the optimum environmental insulation thickness (OEIT) for minimizing the annual total environmental impact was established based on the amount of energy and energy grade reduction. Besides, a case study was conducted based on a residential community with a combined heat and power (CHP)-based district heating system (DHS) in Tianjin, China. Moreover, the effect of IT on heat demand, heat medium temperature, exhaust heat, extracted heat, coal consumption, carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions and sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions as well as the effect of three types of insulation materials (i.e., expanded polystyrene, rock wool and glass wool) on the OEIT and minimum annual total environmental impact were studied. The results reveal that the optimization model can be used to determine the OEIT. When the OEIT of expanded polystyrene, rock wool and glass wool is used, the annual total environmental impact can be reduced by 84.563%, 83.211%, and 86.104%, respectively. It can be found that glass wool is more beneficial to the environment compared with expanded polystyrene and rock wool.

Key words： optimum environmental insulation thickness heat medium temperature energy grade extracted heat exhaust heat

收稿日期: 2020-02-02 出版日期: 2022-10-21

Corresponding Author(s): Pengfei JIE

引用本文:

. [J]. Frontiers in Energy, 2022, 16(4): 613-628.
Yumei ZHANG, Pengfei JIE, Chunhua LIU, Jing LI. Optimizing environmental insulationthickness of buildings with CHP-based district heating system based on amount of energy and energy grade. Front. Energy, 2022, 16(4): 613-628.

链接本文:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/10.1007/s11708-020-0700-5
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/Y2022/V16/I4/613

Perspective	Ref.	Location	Insulation material	OIT	Highlight
Energetic	[14]	Seoul, South Korea	–	–	The minimum energy consumption point can be obtained where the heat transfer coefficient of building envelope is about 2.8 or 3.2 W/(m²·K) in high internal heat gain buildings
	[15]	Fort Drum, US	Vacuum insulation panels	–	46% of heating energy consumption can be saved through energy efficiency retrofit of building envelope
	[16]	Chongqing, China	Extruded polystyrene	–	The air conditioning energy consumption of the energy efficient chamber is 23.5% lower than that of the basic chamber
	[17]	–	Ultrafine fibrous	–	The optimized radiant thermal conductivity is about 25% lower than that of the experimental material
	[18]	Milan, Italy	Polyurethane	About 100 mm (multifamily house built in 1946–1960, apartment block built in 1961–1990) About 50 mm (multifamily house built in 1961–1975)	Embodied energy plays a critical role in the estimation of wall insulation
			Rock wool	About 200 mm (multifamily house built in 1946–1960, apartment block built in 1961–1990) About 150 mm (multifamily house built in 1961–1975)
			Resin-bonded fiberboard	About 100 mm (multifamily house built in 1946–1960, apartment block built in 1961–1990) About 50 mm (multifamily house built in 1961–1975)
Economic	[19]	Meknes, Morocco	Hemp wool	50 mm (east walls)	When applying the OIT, the total cost for the north walls is about 37%, 47%, and 45% less than that of the south, east, and west walls, respectively
				50 mm (west walls)
				40 mm (south walls)
				30 mm (north walls)
	[20]	Mersin, Çanakkale, Elazığ and Van, Turkey	Rock wool	About 10–110 mm	Of the four insulation materials, rock wool in external walls is the most eco-efficient insulation material
			Expanded polystyrene
			Extruded polystyrene
			Polyurethane
	[21]	Nottingham, UK	Aerogel	34–62 mm (non-insulated walls)	Aerogel is very suitable for non-insulated walls, but it is not a reasonable investment for insulated walls
			Aerogel	22–50 mm (insulated walls)
			Conventional insulation materials	45–165 mm
	[22]	Beijing, China	Expanded polystyrene	61.35 mm	Energy grade and the amount of energy should be considered in the determination of the OIT.
	[23]	Elazığ, Turkey	Extruded polystyrene	82 mm	When the OIT of walls is applied to non-insulated walls, the annual fuel consumption and emissions are decreased by 68%–89.5% depending on insulation materials
			Expanded polystyrene	120 mm
			Rock wool	54 mm
			Glass wool	192 mm
Environmental	[24]	Poland	Expanded polystyrene	67–134 mm	The ecological benefits of thermal insulation investments mainly depend on the conditions of buildings before thermal insulation, the used heat sources, the insulation materials and climate zones where buildings are located
			Mineral wool	65–130 mm
			Polyurethane	47–94 mm
			Ecofiber	60–137 mm
	[25]	Antalya, Samsun, Ankara and Erzurum, Turkey	Extruded polystyrene	12–81 mm	Expanded polystyrene is more environmentally friendly than extruded polystyrene
	[25]	Antalya, Samsun, Ankara and Erzurum, Turkey	Expanded polystyrene	20–118 mm
Economic and environmental	[26]	Asia	Rock wool	12 mm (economic) 98 mm (environmental)	Exergetic life cycle assessment demonstrates that glass wool is better than rock wool
	[26]	Asia	Glass wool	18 mm (economic) 219 mm (environmental)
	[27]	Bilecik, Turkey	Rock wool	176 mm (economic and environmental) 133 mm (economic) 227 mm (environmental)	The OIT determined by the combined economic and environmental method is larger than that determined by the economic method, but smaller than that determined by the environmental method
	[27]	Bilecik, Turkey	Glass wool	185 mm (economic and environmental) 140 mm (economic) 467 mm (environmental)
	[28]	Castellón de la Plana, Spain	Conventional insulation materials	100–180 mm (roofs)	Sheep wool, recycled cotton, mineral wool, and glass wool should be promoted because they offer high ecological efficiency
				60–160 mm (walls)
				50–70 mm (floors)
			Emerging insulation materials	120–200 mm (roofs)
				80–200 mm (walls)
				50–100 mm (floors)
	[29]	Poland	Polyisocyanurate	–	The economic and environmental performance obtained by using polystyrene or ecofiber is better than that by using other insulation materials
			Polystyrene
			Mineral wool
			Ecofiber
	[30]	Bilecik, Turkey	Rock wool	7 mm (economic) 64 mm (environmental)	The environmental performance obtained by using glass wool is better than that obtained by using rock wool
	[30]	Bilecik, Turkey	Glass wool	12 mm (economic) 150 mm (environmental)
Energetic, economic and environmental	[31]	Sabzevar, Iran	Mineral wool	85–110 mm	The comprehensive performance obtained by using mineral wool is better than that obtained by using other insulation materials
			Polyurethane	80–95 mm
			Expanded polystyrene	110–200 mm
			Rock wool	70–85 mm
	[32]	Weifang, China	Expanded polystyrene	38.83–120 mm (walls)	The weight coefficients of evaluation criteria and types of heat and cold sources should be considered in the determination of the OIT of walls and roofs
	[32]	Weifang, China	Extruded polystyrene	26.86–120 mm (roofs)
	[33]	Shanghai, China	Extruded polystyrene	42.6 mm (economic, shale hollow brick)	The optimum total cost for aerogel is the highest, followed by that for glass fibers, polyurethane, extruded polystyrene, and expanded polystyrene, respectively
			Expanded polystyrene	77.0 mm (economic, shale hollow brick)
			Polyurethane	49.0 mm (economic, shale hollow brick)
			Glass fibers	41.0 mm (economic, shale hollow brick)
			Aerogel	6.0 mm (economic, shale hollow brick)

Tab.1

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Tab.2

Parameter	Unit	Value
Unit power supply coal consumption (f) [7, 45, 46]	MJ/kWh	9.064
Lower heating value of coal used in this paper ( $L H V$ ) [46]	MJ/kg	22.0
Environmental impact point of coal [47]	mPts/MJ	4.2
Environmental impact point of CO₂ [42]	mPts/kg	5.4
Environmental impact point of SO₂ [42]	mPts/kg	1.8
Environmental impact point of rock wool [48]	mPts/kg	4.3
Environmental impact point of glass wool [48]	mPts/kg	2.1
Environmental impact point of expanded polystyrene [48]	mPts/kg	13
Saturation temperature of extraction steam (T_s,ext) [49]	°C	143.6
Saturation temperature of exhaust steam (T_s,exh) [49]	°C	33.2
Heat transfer temperature difference (σ) [49]	°C	3
The $C O P$ of AHP [22]		0.7
Radiator exponent (μ) [22]		1.3
Modified coefficient of grade lift coefficient ( $ψ$ ) [40, 41]		0.945
Enthalpy of saturated water at extraction pressure (h_s,wat) [49]	kJ/kg	603.8
Enthalpy of extraction steam (h_ext) [49]	kJ/kg	2970.9
Enthalpy of exhaust steam (h_exh) [49]	kJ/kg	2439.8
Lifetime of insulation material (n) [20, 26, 30]	a	10
Price of electricity [22]	$/kWh	0.074
Interest rate [22]	%	0.049
Price of AHP [22]	$/kW	196.70
Price of WWHE [22]	$/kW	32.79

Tab.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Tab.4

AHP	Absorption heat pump
CHP	Combined heat and power
CO₂	Carbon dioxide
DHS	District heating system(s)
HN	Heating network
IT	Insulation thickness
OEIT	Optimum environmental insulation thickness
OIT	Optimum insulation thickness
SO₂	Sulfur dioxide
SWHE	Steam-water heat exchanger
WWHE	Water-water heat exchanger
COP	Coefficient of performance of AHP
exp	Exponential
m_coa	Annual coal mass per square meter/(kg·m⁻²·a⁻¹)
$m C O 2$	Annual CO₂ emissions per square meter/(kg·m⁻²·a⁻¹)
$m S O 2$	Annual SO₂ emissions per square meter/(kg·m⁻²·a⁻¹)
Q_exh,a	Exhaust heat used in AHP/kW
Q_exh,t	Total exhaust heat/kW
Q_exh,w	Exhaust heat used in WWHE/kW
Q_ext,a	Extracted heat used in AHP/kW
Q_ext,s	Extracted heat used in SWHE/kW
Q_ext,t	Total extracted heat/kW
R	Relative heat load ratio
T_abs	Heat medium temperature from absorber/°C
T_con	Heat medium temperature from condenser/°C
T_n	Indoor temperature/°C
T_s,exh	Saturation temperature of exhaust steam at exhaust pressure/°C
T_s,ext	Saturation temperature of extraction steam at extraction pressure/°C
$T dr p$	Design return temperature of the primary HN/°C
$T d r s$	Design return temperature of the secondary HN/°C
$T d s p$	Design supply temperature of the primary HN/°C
$T d s s$	Design supply temperature of the secondary HN/°C
$T r p$	Return temperature of the primary HN/°C
$T r s$	Return temperature of the secondary HN/°C
$T s p$	Supply temperature of the primary HN/°C
$T s s$	Supply temperature of the secondary HN/°C
q	Fitting coefficient of the relationship between insulated design heat load and non-insulated design heat load
d	IT/m
s	Heat transfer temperature difference/°C
$Φ d$	Design heat load/kW

1	M A Sayegh, P Jadwiszczak, B P Axcell, E Niemierka, K Bry, H Jouhara. Heat pump placement, connection and operational modes in European district heating. Energy and Buildings, 2018, 166: 122–144 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.02.006
2	T Lidberg, M Gustafsson, J A Myhren, T Olofsson, L Ödlund (former Trygg) .. Environmental impact of energy refurbishment of buildings within different district heating systems. Applied Energy, 2018, 227: 231–238 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.022
3	M Badami, R Gerboni, A Portoraro. Determination and assessment of indices for the energy performance of district heating with cogeneration plants. Energy, 2017, 127: 697–703 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.03.136
4	S Werner. International review of district heating and cooling. Energy, 2017, 137: 617–631 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.045
5	S Frederiksen, S Werner. District Heating and Cooling. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2013
6	A R Mazhar, S L Liu, A Shukla. A state of art review on the district heating systems. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018, 96: 420–439 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.005
7	Building Energy Research Center of Tsinghua University. 2019 Annual Report on China Building Energy Efficiency. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2019
8	M Brand, S Svendsen. Renewable-based low-temperature district heating for existing buildings in various stages of refurbishment. Energy, 2013, 62: 311–319 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.09.027
9	N G Sağlam, A Z Yılmaz, C Becchio, S P Corgnati. A comprehensive cost-optimal approach for energy retrofit of existing multi-family buildings: application to apartment blocks in Turkey. Energy and Buildings, 2017, 150: 224–238 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.06.026
10	V Monetti, E Fabrizio, M Filippi. Impact of low investment strategies for space heating control: application of thermostatic radiators valves to an old residential building. Energy and Buildings, 2015, 95: 202–210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.01.001
11	F Roberti, U F Oberegger, E Lucchi, A Troi. Energy retrofit and conservation of a historic building using multi-objective optimization and an analytic hierarchy process. Energy and Buildings, 2017, 138: 1–10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.12.028
12	Y Ding, Z Tian, Y Wu, N Zhu. Achievements and suggestions of heat metering and energy efficiency retrofit for existing residential buildings in northern heating regions of China. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(9): 4675–4682 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.004
13	A Yildiz, G Gürlek, M Erkek, N Özbalta. Economical and environmental analyses of thermal insulation thickness in buildings. Journal of Thermal Science and Technology, 2008, 28(2): 25–34
14	J Lee, J Kim, D Song, J Kim, C Jang. Impact of external insulation and internal thermal density upon energy consumption of buildings in a temperate climate with four distinct seasons. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017, 75: 1081–1088 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.087
15	K Biswas, T Patel, S Shrestha, D Smith, A Desjarlais. Whole building retrofit using vacuum insulation panels and energy performance analysis. Energy and Buildings, 2019, 203: 109430 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109430
16	Z S Fang, N Li, B Z Li, G Luo, Y Huang. The effect of building envelope insulation on cooling energy consumption in summer. Energy and Buildings, 2014, 77: 197–205 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.03.030
17	J M Yang, H J Wu, M R Wang, S Q He, H K Huang. Prediction and optimization of radiative thermal properties of ultrafine fibrous insulations. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2016, 104: 394–402 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.05.062
18	S A Alla, V Bianco, L A Tagliafico, F Scarpa. Life-cycle approach to the estimation of energy efficiency measures in the buildings sector. Applied Energy, 2020, 264: 114745 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114745
19	M Dlimi, O Iken, R Agounoun, A Zoubir, I Kadiri, K Sbai. Energy performance and thickness optimization of hemp wool insulation and air cavity layers integrated in Moroccan building walls. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2019, 20: 273–288 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2019.07.008
20	D Evin, A Ucar. Energy impact and eco-efficiency of the envelope insulation in residential buildings in Turkey. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2019, 154: 573–584 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.03.102
21	E Cuce, P M Cuce, C J Wood, S B Riffat. Optimizing insulation thickness and analysing environmental impacts of aerogel-based thermal superinsulation in buildings. Energy and Buildings, 2014, 77: 28–39 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.03.034
22	P F Jie, F C Yan, J Li, Y M Zhang, Z M Wen. Optimizing the insulation thickness of walls of existing buildings with CHP-based district heating systems. Energy, 2019, 189: 116262 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116262
23	M Ozel. Cost analysis for optimum thicknesses and environmental impacts of different insulation materials. Energy and Buildings, 2012, 49: 552–559 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.03.002
24	R Dylewski, J Adamczyk. The environmental impacts of thermal insulation of buildings including the categories of damage: a Polish case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 137: 878–887 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.172
25	E Küçüktopcu, B Cemek. A study on environmental impact of insulation thickness of poultry building walls. Energy, 2018, 150: 583–590 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.153
26	M Ashouri, F R Astaraei, R Ghasempour, M H Ahmadi, M Feidt. Optimum insulation thickness determination of a building wall using exergetic life cycle assessment. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2016, 106: 307–315 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.05.190
27	E Açıkkalp, S Y Kandemir. A method for determining optimum insulation thickness: combined economic and environmental method. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress, 2019, 11: 249–253 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2019.04.004
28	M Braulio-Gonzalo, M D Bovea. Environmental and cost performance of building’s envelope insulation materials to reduce energy demand: thickness optimization. Energy and Buildings, 2017, 150: 527–545 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.06.005
29	R Dylewski, J Adamczyk. Economic and environmental benefits of thermal insulation of building external walls. Building and Environment, 2011, 46(12): 2615–2623 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.06.023
30	G Özel, E Açıkkalp, B Görgün, H Yamık, N Caner. Optimum insulation thickness determination using the environmental and life cycle cost analyses based entransy approach. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 2015, 11: 87–91 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2015.06.004
31	E A Rad, E Fallahi. Optimizing the insulation thickness of external wall by a novel 3E (energy, environmental, economic) method. Construction & Building Materials, 2019, 205: 196–212 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.02.006
32	P F Jie, F H Zhang, Z Fang, H B Wang, Y F Zhao. Optimizing the insulation thickness of walls and roofs of existing buildings based on primary energy consumption, global cost and pollutant emissions. Energy, 2018, 159: 1132–1147 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.179
33	H K Huang, Y J Zhou, R D Huang, H J Wu, Y J Sun, G S Huang, T Xu. Optimum insulation thicknesses and energy conservation of building thermal insulation materials in Chinese zone of humid subtropical climate. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2020, 52: 101840 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101840
34	V Bianco, M D Rosa, F Scarpa, L A Tagliafico. Implementation of a cogeneration plant for a food processing facility: a case study. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2016, 102: 500–512 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.04.023
35	H Lund, P A Ostergaard, M Chang, S Werner, S Svendsen, P Sorknæs, J E Thorsen, F Hvelplund, B O G Mortensen, B V Mathiesen, C Bojesen, N Duic, X L Zhang, B Möller. The status of 4th generation district heating: research and results. Energy, 2018, 164: 147–159 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.206
36	X Y Wang, X L Zhao, L Fu. Entransy analysis of secondary network flow distribution in absorption heat exchanger. Energy, 2018, 147: 428–439 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.157
37	H C Wang, R Lahdelma, X Wang, W L Jiao, C Z Zhu, P H Zou. Analysis of the location for peak heating in CHP based combined district heating systems. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2015, 87: 402–411 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.05.017
38	D S Ostergaard, S Svendsen. Case study of low-temperature heating in an existing single-family house–a test of methods for simulation of heating system temperatures. Energy and Buildings, 2016, 126: 535–544 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.05.042
39	J L Xu. Study on the effect of heat exchange equipment margin on thermal conditions in heating system. Dissertation for the Master Degree. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology, 2018 (in Chinese)
40	X Y Xie, Y Jiang. An ideal model of absorption heat pump with ideal solution circulation. Journal of Refrigeration, 2015, 36(1): 1–12 (in Chinese)
41	X Y Xie, Y Jiang. The ideal process model for absorption heat pumps with real solution. Journal of Refrigeration, 2015, 36(1): 13–23 (in Chinese)
42	A Kecebas. Determination of optimum insulation thickness in pipe for exergetic life cycle assessment. Energy Conversion and Management, 2015, 105: 826–835 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.08.017
43	China Academy of Building Research. Design Code for Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning of Civil Buildings (GB 50736–2012). Beijing: China architecture and Building Press, 2012
44	G Hammond, C Jones. Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE). Version 1.6a. Bath: University of Bath, 2008
45	P F Jie, F C Yan, Z M Wen, J Li. Evaluation of the biomass gasification-based combined cooling, heating and power system using the maximum generalized entropy principle. Energy Conversion and Management, 2019, 192: 150–160 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.04.009
46	X C Xu, J F Lye, H Zhang. Combustion Theory and Combustion Equipment. Beijing: Science Press, 2012
47	Eco-indicator 99 Manual for Designers: A Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment. 2013–10–28, available at website of pre-sustainability
48	The Eco-indicator 95: Manual for designers. 2013–10–29, available at website of pre-sustainability
49	L M Lian, Y F Tan, J Z Wu, D Zhu. Engineering Thermodynamics. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2007
50	P F Jie, N Zhu, D Y Li. Operation optimization of existing district heating systems. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2015, 78: 278–288 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.12.070

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed