Sustainability, Energy and Architecture: Case Studies in Realizing Green Buildings

1

Dutch Efforts Towards a Sustainable Built Environment

Wim Zeiler,    TU Eindhoven, Faculty of the Built Environment, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Abstract

Sustainable building has a respectable history in The Netherlands, especially since the early 1970s. The report ‘The limits to growth’ from the Club of Rome in 1972, and the 1973 energy crises shortly afterwards showed the downside of the long period of growing prosperity experienced since the early 1950s. In governmental energy policy introduced from 1973 to 1990, energy efficiency and diversification became the key subjects of development. This chapter presents a historical overview of Dutch efforts right up to some current NZEB schools and office buildings built just in the last year, as well as an historical overview of the developments in sustainable building. It shows that a sustainable built environment is technically feasible in The Netherlands, by using common construction methods in combination with various components and specific solutions. Legislation is an essential ‘stimulus’ for a sustainable built environment, but fortunately in addition to this there also exist some good examples from principled participants who act as the driving force for more sustainable housing. Local authorities and some project developers, like OVG, are the main drivers taking part in the latest initiatives for Dutch sustainable buildings.

Keywords

sustainable buildings; governmental policy; private initiative; net zero energy buildings

Chapter Outline

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Passive Houses

1.3 Types of Case Studies

1.4 The Veldhuizerschool Ede

1.5 Christiaan Huygens College: an Energy Plus School

1.6 Conventional Dutch Building Design

1.7 Energy Saving Techniques

1.8 Novel Design and Examples

1.9 The TNT Green Office

1.10 Sustainability

1.11 Diverse Sustainability Measures

1.12 Results of GreenCalc+ and LEED Assessment

1.1 Introduction

Until the nineteen sixties in The Netherlands, almost all houses used a coal stove that only heated one room, in which everyone gathered in winter. The growing need for a healthier indoor climate and the discovery of enormous amounts of natural gas in The Netherlands led to the widespread installation of gas-fired central heating systems in Dutch homes [1]. While this initially led to a big increase in energy use, step by step measures were introduced to reduce the energy demand. Sustainable building has a respectable history in The Netherlands especially since the early nineteen seventies. The report ‘The limits to growth’ produced by the Club of Rome in 1972, and the 1973 energy crises shortly afterwards, showed the downside of the long period of growing prosperity experienced since the early nineteen fifties. In October 1973, Middle Eastern OPEC nations stopped exporting oil to the US and other Western nations. The embargo forced Western governments to consider alternative sources and strategies for energy, such as their cost and supply, which up to 1973 no one had worried about. Governmental regulations before this period were concerned primarily with the indoor environment and health, but after the energy crises, the focus shifted to saving energy. In new government energy policies introduced between 1973 and 1990, energy efficiency and diversification became the key subjects. The first solar energy projects were completed in Boxmeer and Oss (1975) and Zoetermeer (1977) [2].

One of the oldest Dutch Photo Voltaic (PV) hybrid systems and the first ‘large scale’ PV system in Europe was installed in 1983 on the island of Terschelling [3]. At the ‘Willem Barentsz’ Higher Maritime School, a 43 kWp PV system was coupled to a 40 kW wind turbine and a large battery bank. Later a new 75 kW wind turbine was installed, and in 1995 a diesel engine was added [4]. In 1988 the first off-grid solar house was opened in Castricum, having a 2,5 KWp PV array with a 10 kWh storage capacity. It was an autonomous system, dimensioned for winter demand and functioned very well and reliably until 2012. These projects were the first large scale applications of PN in the Netherlands and were folloed by many ohers:

• 1991: 10 houses with a grid-connected PV-system were built in Heerhugowaard.

• 1994: 66 houses were built in the district Nieuw Sloten in Amsterdam (250 kWp) using PV.

• 1996–2000: project Nieuwland: 1,3 MWp in Amersfoort, 500 houses equipped with PV roofs were constructed.

The publication in 1987 of the Brundtland committee’s report ‘Our Common Future’ made policy makers realize that sustainable development required as high a priority as a healthy indoor environment and energy savings. This led to the RIVM (National Institute of Public Health and the Environment) report Zorgen voor Morgen (Looking after Tomorrow), and in 1989 the government responded with the National Environmental Policy Plan (Nationaal Milieubeleidsplan – NMP). The 1995 ‘Sustainable Building Plan: Investing in the Future’ marked the beginning of a programmatic approach by central government and the energy performance coefficient (EPC) was incorporated in the building code. The government published the 2000–2004 Sustainable Building Policy Program in order to embed sustainable building in policy and practice. The Dutch pavilion at the Hanover World Expo 2000, (see Figure 1.1) designed by the Dutch architectural firm MVDRV, demonstrated trends in sustainable building on land use by multi-level function, integration of renewable energy (5th floor), preserving greenery (3rd floor) and reducing environmental impact, within a natural setting [1].

FIGURE 1.1 Dutch paviloen World Expo Hannover.

An interesting project from this period is the ecological building project EVA Lanxmeer, Culemborg, completed in 2004. The project, consisting of around 200 houses, is an example of integrated sustainable building and innovative urban landscape design features [1].

Energy performance certification for homes was introduced in The Netherlands in January 2008, one year before the introduction date prescribed by the European Union. The Netherlands was an early adopter of the EPC initiative, and all transactions in the Dutch housing market now need to be accompanied by an energy performance certificate. The energy performance grading ranges from ‘A++’ for exceptionally energy-efficient dwellings, to ‘G’, for highly inefficient buildings.

The rationale of energy performance certification schemes of the EU energy label is that it will cause buyers to favor houses which have higher levels of energy efficiency. However, in the absence of objective data that measures to what extent such schemes actually do have an impact on homebuyer behavior, it is difficult to determine whether they are a meaningful intervention in seeking to address climate change. Agentschap NL, an agency of the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, administers the quality control and registration of the certificates. As of September 2009, more than 100,000 residential homes (rental and owner-occupied) had been certified. The report by Dirk Brounen of Erasmus University, Rotterdam, and Nils Kok of Maastricht University, based on data from The Netherlands, provides some of the first evidence regarding the market adoption and financial impact of energy performance certificates.

Energy performance certification is not fully mandatory in The Netherlands: homebuyers are allowed to sign a waiver that removes the seller’s obligation to provide a certificate for the dwelling. This semi-mandatory choice for energy performance certification creates a natural experiment to study the adoption and market effects of the energy label in the residential housing market. During the first three months of 2008, more than 25% of all housing transactions had an energy label. However, soon after this the adoption rate for Dutch energy labels started to decline, eventually reaching a rate of less than 7% of the 150,000 homes on the market in September 2009. The empirical results show that the choice of certification is driven partially by the quality of a dwelling, with duplex homes constructed during the 1970s and 1980s and located in high-density, low-income areas being significantly more likely to obtain an energy performance certificate. There is a premium associated with properties that demonstrate high levels of energy efficiency, with a 2.8% higher sale price for properties with an A, B or C certificate. The price increment achieved varies with the grade of the certificate, and mostly reflects the financial benefits obtained from lower energy costs in more energy-efficient buildings.

Zero or nearly zero impact buildings are designed and built in every country. In this context, zero energy means that the building does not use fossil fuels, but only renewable energy. Energy 0 projects were already in development in the late nineteen thirties – e.g. the 1939 MIT Solar House 1 [5], in The Netherlands. An overview and evaluation of the early Dutch projects are given by Gilijamse [6] and Hoiting et al. [7]. In the last Now zero or nearly zero impact buildings are designed and built in The Netherlands as a matter of course. The energy consultant Kroon, built a zero energy house in Woudbrugge in 1993 (see Figure 1.2).

FIGURE 1.2 Schematic of the photovoltaic and active (thermal) solar heating systems and zero-energy house.

However at that time the necessary technology had to be developed. The house was the first net zero energy building that had a fully integrated PV implementation on the roof combined with thermal solar collectors. The roof of the house carries 3.4 kWp in photovoltaic cells, connected to the public grid, and a 12 m² active (thermal) solar collector [8,9]. In 1995, a measurement program showed that the energy consumption of 1,070 m³ natural gas equivalent was more than balanced by the energy production of 1,146 m³ natural gas equivalent and proved that the house met the designer’s ‘zero-energy’ target. Figure 1.2 shows the energy concept of the house: more information can be found in references [8,10].

After a few experiments with zero-energy houses in 2000, the first Net Zero Energy Building (NZEB) School in The Netherlands was completed [11,12] (see Figure 1.3). The school’s electricity requirement of around 14.650 kWh is supplied by 145 m² PV-panels on the roof, while its heating needs of around 4000m≥ gas (∼ 16.000 kWh) are supplied by participation in a wind turbine park. To investigate the results of this ZEB school approach, thermal comfort and indoor air quality were measured.

FIGURE 1.3 First Dutch NZEB School.

Over a week, different measurements in schools were made, and questionnaires issued to determine the indoor air quality and thermal comfort, and it was found that the ZEB school does not perform better on all aspects [13].

Although the projects proved that is possible to build a zero-energy house and zero-energy school, the investment proved too costly for large scale application. For example the photovoltaic system of the NZEB house in Woudbrugge amounted to € 52,000, whereas the revenues from the annual yield of 2,905 kWh at a rate of € 0.113/kWh, giving an income of € 329 [8]. This would not produce a realistic pay-back period. However, the purpose of the project was to demonstrate the technical feasibility of the zero-energy concept. The project concluded that the required equipment will become cheaper and energy prices will rise to the point where the zero-energy concept would become economically feasible.

A new direction in the development of zero energy buildings was also followed in The Netherlands, due to developments in other countries: Passive Houses.

1.2 Passive Houses

An important first step to reach NZEB is the application of the Passive House strategy. This leads to energy savings in heating of 80%, compared to conventional standards for new buildings. The general definition of a Passive House is that its energy consumption is limited to a maximum of around 15 kWh/m² for space heating, and a maximum total of around 120 kWh/m² for heating, domestic hot water and electricity for electrical equipment and lighting. To meet these criteria, the Passive House concept focuses first and foremost on reducing the energy demand of the building. Passive House solutions give high priority to the performance of the thermal envelope: this means high grade insulation for walls, roofs, floors and windows/doors, thermal bridge-free construction and air tightness [14]. For well-insulated, low energy houses the heating energy needed for the ventilation is around 50 to 65% of the total heat demand. This is the reason that the ventilation is often significantly reduced; some mention values as low as a ventilation rate of 0.4. There is a competition between energy saving on the one hand and good indoor air quality on the other.

Designing and building Passive Houses in a country is not a straightforward matter, as can be seen from the experience of building such houses in Germany and Austria. Each country has its own building tradition, architecture, building technologies, climate and culture. Architects and builders are familiar with local construction materials and solutions which have been developed to meet the specific building codes and standards of that country [15]. In The Netherlands, a number of houses have been built according to Passivhause Projectierungs Paket (PhPP), but the actual performance of these houses has not yet been thoroughly investigated. A study at the Technische Universiteit Eindhoven investigated whether the ventilation levels achieved by the installed mechanical ventilation systems in these Dutch Passive Houses were sufficient [16]. For the study, three Passive Houses in The Netherlands were chosen. Case 1 was of one of the 12 houses that were built against the inner slope of a river dike. Cases 2 and 3 were villas in which the technology used was also based on Passive House technology. Case 4 was a three story house that was investigated by DHV [17]. This house has special, large night ventilation facilities. The results of all the measurements are given in Table 1.1. The average airflow found in Cases 1 to 3 was lower than recommended by the Dutch Building Code, while the capacity installed is sufficient. Another remarkable fact is that the energy use is 13% higher than calculated, presumably due to the higher average temperature recorded in the living room compared to the program of requirements (22 °C instead of 20 °C). This ‘rebound’ effect is presumably due to people preferring a higher comfort level if this is possible: something to be careful about.

TABLE 1.1

Information and Measurement Results for Dutch Passive Houses [8]

∗Average night time level CO2 [ppm]

1.3 Types of Case Studies

Sustainable building continues to increase in importance, not only for new buildings but also in renovation. Over the past decades, several concepts have been developed to reduce the environmental impact of dwellings [18]. A fairly new concept in this area is the greenhouse residence concept (Dutch: kaswoning): which is a combination of a normal building and a greenhouse [18]. A greenhouse residence (GHR) is a dwelling covered by a transparent building envelope, the size of which is the same order of magnitude of the dwelling, and which is not used for commercial horticultural activities [19]. This approach tries to optimize the use of energy from the sun during the cold season. Different versions of greenhouse residences have been built in The Netherlands (Culemborg and Almere), Germany, Sweden, France and Japan. Three series of greenhouse residences have been built in Culemborg (The Netherlands) [20–22]. They were designed by Arjan Karssenberg and Peter Wienberg of the architectural firm ‘KWSA’ [20]. In May 2002 the first series (Figure 1.4), consisting of one row of six greenhouse dwellings, was completed. This was followed in 2006 by the second series, a row of five dwellings and two workspaces [21], and by the third series in 2009. The residences of the first series are almost completely covered by the greenhouse and those of the second series have an adjacent greenhouse [20]. Preheated air from the greenhouse is used to ventilate the residence [20]. The residences are also very well insulated. Photovoltaic‐panels are assembled on the greenhouse and solar collectors are applied for low temperature heating. Single glazing is used for the greenhouse [22]. This causes the temperature inside the greenhouse to rise by approximately 3–5°C over the outside temperature [23]. In order to keep temperatures inside the dwelling acceptable during the summer season, the doors and windows of the dwelling and the windows of the greenhouse are opened during the night. Sun screens in the greenhouse are not necessary, according to the architects [21]. Nevertheless, at least two of the six greenhouses are provided with sun screens in the form of cloths or a parasol [22]. An automated system is installed to control the opening of the greenhouse windows. This can also be done manually, however when it rains or when high wind speeds occur the windows are closed automatically. The architects of the greenhouse residences in Culemborg claim that the greenhouse functions as a buffer between the indoor and outdoor environment, and therefore a greenhouse residence has a very low energy demand and a pleasant indoor climate. Extra space for living due to the indoor terrace, light and openness, lack of weathering of the materials of the shell of the residence, low maintenance and cheap construction are mentioned as other advantages of the greenhouse residence