Prezentacija PB Nis

“Towards more sustainable heating system in the City of Niš, Serbia"

Bojan GajićMarija Živković

The goal of "participatory backcasting 'project in Nis was to develop a long-term strategy aimed to ensure the thermal comfort (heating and cooling) for the citizens of Nis up to 2030.

Why the city needs long-term planning of energy consumption?

• energy insecurity (import dependency)

• negative impact on the environment;

• low efficiency (direct usage of electricity for heating)

2010 2030

+40%

BAU (‘business-as-usual’) scenario

Increased energy demandIncrease of C02, CO, Nox emissions

Increased electricity consumption for heating

The reason for the project s realization was dissatisfaction with the possible development of heating systems, which would led to continuation of existing practices (presented BAU scenario), which is characterized by:

Stakeholders

involved City Council of Nis

Division for Sustainability of the Department for Commerce, Sustainable Development and Environment

Department of City Planning

Division for Energy of the Department of Energy

Department for Planning and Construction

Energy Efficiency Council of the City of Nis

City Municipality Palilula

City Municipality Pantelej

City Municipality Crveni Krst

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of NišUniversity of KragujevacUniversity of Belgrade

Organization of citizens consumers of district heating system

Center for Consumer Protection

Citizens representatives

Yugo-impex

NIS company

Public District Heating Company

Arhus centar Južne i Istočne Srbije

ELDI Nis

Workshop #320. February 2015.

Workshop #227. June 2015.

Workshop #14. April 2014.

Final ReportMay 2015.

Interviews March2014

Time frame

Without fossil fuels in the district heating system 2030

//Getenburg

Without using oil for heating dervivata to 2030//Danska

Decreased heat demand 30-50% until 2030

//Heat Roadmap Europe

Reduction of fosil fuel consumption in buildings:• 80% in 2020• 90% in 2025• CO2 neutral in 2030

//Architecture 2030

“Affordable, comfortable and environmentally friendly heating and cooling in the city of Nis by 2030”

Criteria 4Comfort

Criteria 1Reliability and

availability

Reliability and

availability

Subcriteria Assessment Value in 2014 General target

Reliability The number of days (hours) in the heating season without heating

n/a Reducing the number of days (hours) without heating

The number of failures during the year

n/a Reducing the number of failures during the year

Availability of cooling system

% of households that has the ability of cooling

n/a Increase of %

Energy security Number and structure of fuel used

5 (coal, wood, oil, natural gas, electricity)

Introduction of new energy sources for heating

Energy security The percentage of fuel from domestic sources in the energy mix

63.6% Decrease of import dependency

Energy security The percentage of locally available energy sources in the energy mix

26.3% Increased use of locally available energy sources

Criteria 2Affordability

Affordability

Subcriteria Assessment Value in 2014 General targetEnergy sources Wood Electricit

yDistrict heating

for consumersheating

% of the average revenue from the region required for heating, per month

10,7% 7,5% 13,3% Costs reduction

for consumerscooling

% of the average revenue from the region required for cooling, per month

3,7% Costs reduction

Producers and distributors

Normalized percentage of profitable companies

n/a Increase of % of profitable companies

Criteria 3Environmentally

acceptable

Environment

ally acceptable

Subcriteria Assessment Value in 2014 General target

Relative emissions CО2

kg CO2/kWht

0,3623 Reduction of 27% compared to the BAU

kg CO2/m2


Emissions CO kg CO/kWht


Emissions NOx kg NOx/kWht

0,355*10-3 Reduction of 20% compared to the BAU

Emissions SOx kg SOx/ kWht

0,305*10-3 Reduction of 20% compared to the BAU

Comfort SubcriteriaAssesment Value in 2014 General

target

Thermal comfort

Survey 80% To improve the level of comfort

Safety


Easy to operate


Criteria 4Comfort

Ener

gy e

ffici

ency

Subcriteria Assesment Value in 2014

General target

Efficiency of production and distribution

Production efficiency in the district heating system% Losses in the distribution network,%

85% 14%

To achieve optimal value

Efficiency of transformation

kWh of primary energy / KWh of thermal energy 1,515 Reduction of

20%

Specific annual energy consumption in buildings kWht/м2 per annum 94,19 Reduction of

20%

Criteria 5Energy efficiency

S1. “Advanced nature-based”

S2. “Advanced renewable-

based”S3. “DH expansion + building efficiency”

S4. “DH expansion based on renewables”

S5. “Nature focused individuals”

Selected scenario

Developed scenariosDeveloped scenarios are based on the outcomes of the 1st and 2nd workshops with stakeholders (solutions testing against criteria and robustness test) and results of the modelling in LEAP software, performed by the researchers.

Urban energy system modelling in the PB project in Nis

S1. “Advanced nature-based”

• Improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings to C class

• Class B for new facilities to the year 2030.

• The application of SMART technology.

• Insisting on individual solutions.

• Limited expansion of district heating network

• The application of green architecture, wherever possible

S2. “Napredni – zasnovan na obnovljivim izvorima”





• Limited expansion of district heating network

Scenario 2=

Scenario 1-

Green architecture

S3. “DH expansion + building efficiency”


• Class B for new facilities to the year 2030.• The expansion of district heating network• Connecting new consumers.• Substitution of electric energy• Without the application of SMART technology

S4. “DH expansion based on renewables”

• Minor improvement of energy efficiency of existing buildings to D class

• The expansion of district heating network

• Connection of new consumers• Substitution of electricity for

direct heating

Scenario 4=

Scenario 3-

Significant energy efficiency improvement

S5. “Fokus na primeni zelene arhitekrure i

individualnim rešenjima za grejanje”





• Without the district heating system in 2030

• The application of green architecture

Scenario 5=

Scenario 1-

Centralized heat supply system

Izabrani scenarioEfficiency for green future

Selected scenario

20102012

20142016

20182020

20222024

20262028

20300

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Wood

#REF!

Heavy oil

Natural gas

Heat

Geothermal

Electricity

Biomass

Izabrani scenario

GWh/annumi

Final energy for heating

• Combination of scenarios 3 + 5

• Improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings to Class C

• The new facilities Class B• Expansion of heating

network and connection of new consumers (multistorey buildings)

• Natural gas for peak loads

20102012

20142016

20182020

20222024

20262028

20300

50

100

150

200

250

300

C02 emissions, by source

Combustion in DH systemFinal energy consumptionEmission related to electricty generation used for direc heatingEmission related to electricty generation used for heat pumps

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

0100200300400500600

District heating, by fuelResidual fuel oil Natural gasBiomass Electricity (for heat pumps)Geothermal Municipal solid waste

Gigawatt-hours/year

In the base year, 29.7% of the energy required for heating is provided by district heating systems. In 2030 it is envisaged that 53% of the energy needed for heating provided by district heating systems.The base year in the district heating system is not used for the production of renewable heat. In 2030 it could 63% of energy could be produced by using RES.

Gigawatt-hours/year Selected

scenario

.

Comparison of developed scenarios by fuels used in 2030

BAU scenario

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

Scenario 5

Selected scenario

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Biomass Coal Sub bituminous Electricity Geothermal Heat Natural Gas Residual Fuel Oil

Gigawatt-Hours

Selected

scenario

BAU scenari

o

Biomass

Coal Sub bitumi...

Electricity

GeothermalHeat

Natural Gas

Residual Fuel OilWood

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700BAU scenario Scenario 1Scenario 2 Scenario 3Scenario 4 Scenario 5Selected scenario

Comparison of developed scenarios

by fuels used in 2030Selected scenario

Giga

watt-

hour

s/ye

ar

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

020406080

100120140

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)BAU Solution 1 Solution 2

Solution 3 Solution 4 Solution 5Izabrani scenario

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

0100020003000400050006000

Carbon Monoxide (CO)BAU Solution 1 Solution 2

Solution 3 Solution 4 Solution 5Izabrani scenarioTonnes Tonnes

BAU

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

Scenario 5

Izabrani

21%

6%

7%

16%

20%

37%

10%

Import dependence of the heating system in the city of Nis in 2030

Reliability and availability

Reliability for consumers

number of days (hours) in the heating season without heat

Reliability

Number of failures per year

Availability of cooling

% of households that have cooling

Energy security

Number and structure of fuel used

5 (coal, wood, oil, natural gas, electricity)Introduction of new energy sources for heating

+ geothermal, waste heat and municipal solid waste

The percentage of fuel from domestic production in the energy mix

63.6%Decrease of import dependency

83,7%The percentage of locally available energy sources in the energy mix

26.3Increased use of locally available energy sources

71,4%

TargetsSubcriteria Assessment Value 2014 General target Selected scenario

No data

Affordability

For consumersheating

% of the average revenue from the region required for heating, per month

Wood 10,77% Europe

Electricity 7,467% Europe

DH 13,37% Europe

For consumerscooling

% of the average revenue from the region required for cooling, per month

3,7%

For producers and distributers

Normalized percentage of profitable companies

Targets

No data

Subcriteria Assessment Value 2014 General target Selected scenario

Environmentally acceptable

kg CO2/kWht0,3623Reduction of 27% compared to the BAU0,201

Reduction 45%kg CO2/m234,13

Reduction of 27% compared to the BAU11,58Reduction 66%kg of CO/kWht0,0055

Reduction of 20% compared to the BAU0,0047kg of NOx/kWht0,355*10-3

Reduction of 20% compared to the BAU0,106*10-3

kg of SOx/ kWht0,181*10-3Reduction of 20% compared to the BAU

0,039*10-3


Comfort

Thermal comfort

Survey

80%

80%

Safety

Survey

65%

80%

Easy to operate

Survey

74,2%

80%


Energy efficiency

Efficiency of production and distribution

Efficiency of DH production %

85%Optimal value

Distribution losses, %

14%Optimal value

Efficiency of transformation

kWh primary/ kWh thermal

1,585Reduction 20%

0,632Efficiency of Buildings

kWh t/m2 annualy

94,19Reduction 20%

62,75


BAU vs selected scenario in context of European energy policy

Specific heat demand in the EU-EE scenario for the residential and service sectors, as well as for the space heating, hot water and total heat demand.

selected scenario(62.75 kWh/m2)

BAU scenario(94.2 kWh/m2)

//Figure is adopted from ‘Heat Roadmap Europe. Second pre-study for the EU27’ report (2013)

selected scenarioPEF: 0,632C02: 201 g/kWh

BAU scenarioPEF: 1,585C02: 393 g/kWh

//Figure is adopted from ‘District Heating in Buildings’ report, Euroheat & Power (2011)

Correlation of Primary energy factors (PEF) and CO2 emissions for different heating solutions and cities in whole

PEFkW

h/m

2

Thank you!

Dr Marija A. Živković, assistant professor

University of Belgrade-Faculty of Mining and Geology

[email protected]

Prezentacija PB Nis

Documents

Transcript of Prezentacija PB Nis