publishable effcobuild report...marta skubic, b.sc. civ.eng. bcei zrmk dimiceva 12, 1000 ljubljana...
TRANSCRIPT
EffCoBuild “Energy Efficiency Communities – establishing
pilot communities for the building sector”
M. Kolpek
Partners: Austrian Society for Environment and Technology (AUT), Comm. Thalgau (AUT), SIR
- Salzburger Institut für Raumordnung & Wohnen (AUT), Berliner Energieagentur GmbH (GER), Comm. Eggesin (GER), Comm. Sala (SK), Regionálna energetická
agentúra (SK), ZRMK - Technological Building & Civil Engineering Institute (SLO), JEKO-IN (SLO)
Contract No. EIE/05/063 - Effcobuild
Final Publishable Report
January 2006 to June 2008
Project supported by the European commission in the framework of of the EU-Programm Energy Intelligent Europe
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild Project Partners
AUSTRIA:
Mag. Michael Kolpek (project co-ordination) ÖGUT - Austrian Society for Environment and Technology Hollandstraße 10/46, 1020 Wien Phone: +43 1 / 315 63 96 -30 Fax: +43 1 / 315 63 93 - 22 e-mail: [email protected] DI Alice Sedmidubsky ÖGUT - Austrian Society for Environment and Technology Hollandstraße 10/46, 1020 Wien Phone: +43 1 / 315 63 96 -28 Fax: +43 1 / 315 63 93 - 22 e-mail: [email protected] DI Gerhard Bayer ÖGUT - Austrian Society for Environment and Technology Hollandstraße 10/46, 1020 Wien Phone: +43 1 / 315 63 96 -16 Fax: +43 1 / 315 63 93 - 22 e-mail: [email protected] Dr. Herbert Greisberger ÖGUT - Austrian Society for Environment and Technology Hollandstraße 10/46, 1020 Wien Phone: +43 1 / 315 63 96 -13 Fax: +43 1 / 315 63 93 - 22 e-mail: [email protected] DI Helmut Strasser SIR - Salzburger Institut für Raumordnung & Wohnen Alpenstraße 47, 5020 Salzburg Phone: +43 662 / 62 34 55 - 26, Fax: +43 662 / 62 99 15 e-mail: [email protected] DI Monika Bischof SIR - Salzburger Institut für Raumordnung & Wohnen Alpenstraße 47, 5020 Salzburg Phone: +43 662 / 62 34 55 - 17, Fax: +43 662 / 62 99 15 e-mail: [email protected] Gerhard Enzesberger Gemeinde Thalgau Wartenfelserstraße 2, 5303 Thalgau Phone: +43 6235 / 74 71 – 30 Fax: +43 6235 / 74 71 - 15 e-mail: [email protected] GERMANY:
Claudia Alt Berliner Energieagentur GmbH Französische Straße 23, 10117 Berlin Phone: +49 30 / 29 33 30 – 36 Fax: +49 30 / 29 33 30 - 99 e-mail: [email protected] Bürgermeister Dennis Gutgesell Com. Eggesin Hans-Fischer-Straße 21, D-17367 Eggesin Phone: +49 39 / 779 - 26 441 e-mail: [email protected] Helmut Schiebel Com. Eggesin Hans-Fischer-Straße 21, 17367 Eggesin Phone: +49 39 / 779 - 0 Bianka Schwibbe Com. Eggesin Hans-Fischer-Straße 21, 17367 Eggesin Phone: +49 39 / 779 - 26 428 e-mail: [email protected]
SLOVAKIA:
Dipl.Ing. Karol Mikloš REA - Regionálna energetická agentúra Partizánska 20 5, SK-92701 Šaľa Phone/Fax: +421 31 / 770 62 59 e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] MUDr. Martin Alföldi Com. Šaľa Namestie Sv. Trojice 7, SK-92715 Šaľa Phone: +421 31 / 770 - 2351, Fax: +421-31 / 770 - 6021 e-mail: primator@Šaľa.sk Dipl.Ing. Eliška Vágová Com. Šaľa Namestie Sv. Trojice 7, SK-92715 Šaľa Phone: +421-31 / 770-5985, Fax: +421-31 / 770-6021 e-mail: vargova@Šaľa.sk SLOVENIA:
Dr. Marjana Sijanec Zavrl BCEI ZRMK Dimiceva 12, 1000 Ljubljana Phone: +386 1 / 280 83 42, Fax: +386 1 / 280 84 51 e-mail: [email protected] Marta Skubic, B.Sc. Civ.Eng. BCEI ZRMK Dimiceva 12, 1000 Ljubljana Phone: +386 1 / 280 84 89, Fax: +386 1 / 280 84 51 e-mail: [email protected] Dipl.Ing. Andraž Rakušček BCEI ZRMK Dimiceva 12, 1000 Ljubljana Phone: +386 1 / 280 84 89, Fax: +386 1 / 280 84 51 e-mail: [email protected] Dipl.Ing. Roman Novak Jeko-IN Cesta zelezarjev 6, 4270 Ljubljana Phone: +386 4 / 5810-433, Fax: +386 4 / 5810-456 e-mail: [email protected] Dipl.Ing. Robert Pajk Jeko-IN Cesta zelezarjev 6, 4270 Ljubljana e-mail: [email protected]
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
TABLE OF CONTENT 1. Final Report Summary ......................................................................................................4
1.1 Objectives of the action............................................................................................4 1.2 Achieved results and lessons learnt during the action ...................................5 1.3 Identified problems and corrective actions taken during the action .........12 1.4 Activities and impact after end of the action ....................................................13
2. Consortium management during the action .............................................................14 3. Achievements of the action ...........................................................................................16
3.1 Achieved results per work package against initial objectives.....................16 3.2 List of deliverables...................................................................................................53 3.3 Review of impact of the action .............................................................................57 3.4 Success stories ........................................................................................................59
4. Lessons learnt...................................................................................................................60 4.1 Management ..............................................................................................................60 4.2 Communication and Dissemination ....................................................................61 4.3 Common Dissemination Activities ......................................................................62 4.4 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................62
Page 2 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
INDEX OF TABLES Table 1: Country results of the project ......................................................................................6 Table 2: Updated list of submitted deliverables of the action ..............................................53 Table 3: Review of performance indicators ............................................................................57
Page 3 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
1. Final Report Summary
1.1 Objectives of the action
The long-term target of the project was to move the communities towards an “Energy
Sustainable Community”, as described in the publication “Energy Sustainable Communities,
Experiences, Success Factors and Opportunities in the EU-25, 2004”. Gaining the energy
saving potential in the building sector can be the first step of such a process, and many citizens
can be effectively involved in the idea of sustainability. With the energy demand of buildings
having been reduced, covering the remaining energy demand by renewable energies is easier,
e.g. by employing thermal solar or biomass, because less storage volume or roof surface are
needed.
As many energy efficiency measures have an acceptable payback period, comparatively small
additional incentives are necessary to initiate their implementation. If certain energy efficiency
technologies are requested more often in a region, the building and supply companies will
correspondingly extend their assortment of products and services in the energy efficiency
sector. Therefore, the latter will size down in price and become more professional.
Tangible and visible demonstration projects are the most effective way to convince building
owners in the feasibility and reliability of energy efficiency concepts. The project focuses on
distributing the information on already existing best practise examples and creating new ones
on a local level. A brochure of the “best of” examples, excursions to successful projects, public
events for the citizens as well as several Public Relation activities in print and electronic media
will help distributing the results.
The methodology on how the community has analysed its framework for energy saving
measures, their saving potentials and their suitable measures were reported in detail on an own
project website. Communities in other European countries and worldwide can use the
methodologies and results to implement similar activities to move towards “Energy Efficiency
Communities” in their region. The concept of measures, worked out in each community includes
a list of measures to support energy efficiency in buildings. This list will provide a pool of ideas
for other communities, so they can apply the “lessons learnt” and recommendations, also
documented on the project website.
Communities are often linked together in networks by regional associations and decision-
makers, like mayors exchange their experience in regular meetings and own print media. These
means of communication will also be used to distribute the results of the project within the whole
region and the country.
The short term objective of the project was to reduce the energy demand of buildings. The
project should overcome existing barriers for gaining the energy saving potentials in the building
Page 4 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
sector on community level. By involving and connecting the different stakeholders, such as
building owners, administration entities, financing institutes, private companies and regional
politicians, the joint economic and environmental interests will be bundled.
A concrete “saving target” for the community helped the single citizen to realise the dimensions
and changes of the energy efficiency measures. The project raised the awareness on
community level that sustainable energy supply in Europe is feasible and that energy efficiency
in buildings is a piece of a puzzle toward this “vision”. The project also demonstrated that
environmental protection can positively affect economic benefits for the region, as energy
efficiency measures enable the local added value to mainly remain in the region.
1.2 Achieved results and lessons learnt during the action
The results referred to the target groups in the community (owners of public buildings, owners of
apartment houses with tenants, private building owners of single-family houses, tenants of
apartment houses, community administration, companies and deliverers in the construction
sector) and the citizens. It should increase their attention for:
- the energy efficiency measures in the building sector are an important step towards a
sustainable energy supply
- a large number of measures and actions can be set by the community stakeholder
themselves
- energy efficiency measures provide a positive impulse for the regional economic
development and employment situation by the added value kept in the region
The community received a detailed analysis of the energy saving potentials for its buildings, a
concept of measures for enhanced exploitation of the potentials, a “best of” brochure with
examples from the own region and examples from “abroad”. As a result, a pilot project was
implemented in each community. The pilot communities should serve as a role model for the
surrounding regions as well as for communities in other European countries.
The results in the partner communities differ due to their varying pilot projects concepts:
Page 5 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Table 1: Country results of the project
Results Lessons learnt
AUSTRIA
A. Saving potentials The energy saving potentials could be visualized as a virtual energy efficiency power plant which symbolizes the
energy that has not been produced and used due to the
energy efficiency measures that have been implemented.
When renovating 300 private houses and all communal
buildings it is possible to save in total 5.925 MWh of energy
each year. This target could be reached in 2017. The amount
of 5.925 MWh/a is equal to the energy amount which is sold
by the biomass power plant of Thalgau each year. The
capacity of the power plant is 2.000 kW.
B. Concrete Achievements
− Demonstration of energy saving potential (by 40%) through
refurbishment of the Polytechnical school in Thalgau.
− The purchase of green electricity was organised by the
community of Thalgau within the fram of this project. A new
contract for the supply of green electricity has been fixed
with a local supplier (Ökostrombörse Salzburg) and the
− Simplification of the tender
process needed through
multilevel contracting
− All stakeholder need to
have the same level of
knowledge in order to
understand the activities
planned.
− Focus on feasible measures
and better choice of sites to
implement the planned
measures
Page 6 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
supply with green electricity has started in January 1st,
2008.
− Improvement of energy efficiency in buildings through the
tenderer -agreed to service the local enterprises in trade
and industry to identify saving potentials and to assist them
in the implementation of necessary steps
− e5 membership: this is a program for awarding
municipalities for the efficient usage of energy and green
energy. It is connected to the European energy award.
− Energy accounting software: “E-Buch” software for the
gathering and analyse of energy data of buildings
− Supply of the households with green electricity
C. Long lasting effects
− Increased awareness about energy efficiency; strong
attendance to public information campaign and services
(energy consulting for private house owners)
− Experience in the tender process through the complex
proceedings to find the right contractor
− Application of a two-phase performance contracting model
to improve the quality of knowledge between the contractor
and the costumer for future public tender
GERMANY
A. Saving potentials
The final energy saving potential is summarized in the picture
below showing the “energy saving plant” of Eggesin. It
visualizes the high potential in private households with about
2.700 MWh/a (heat energy of private residential buildings and
electricity of all households), followed by potentials of the
industry of about 650 MWh/a. The communal buildings,
residential and public buildings together, offer the lowest
potential due to measures already performed.
− Pilot community:
Consideration of the
structural situation of the
community partner
− Information level: small
municipalities need support
to get qualified information.
Increase of energy
consumption: The
Page 7 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
B. Concrete Achievements
− Field test:
The application of electronic controllable thermostatic valves
for heat radiators in Wittstock.
The field study is divided into three performance periods. The
first period embraces the involvement of the project partners
(energy suppliers, manufactures, and housing associations).
In the second phase the described technology should be
installed in the participating households. Additionally, several
interviews shall be carried out with the tenants, the
technicians, and the household associations. In the third and
last phase, the energy consumption and the results of the
interviews were evaluated. Due to the relevance of the field
test the BEA was able to negotiate a price of 40 to 50 %
below the actual market price.
municipality should increase
its activities and build up a
network with other
municipalities in the region
to implement measures by
low costs. Joint projects
could be: energy
commissary, mobile energy
counselling, or CO2-
reducing plan for the region.
Page 8 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
Figure 1: Project development plan
− Development of a webbased tool to collect the energy
consumption of households in cooperation with the
company Vattenfall (VEB) and publication of materials in
the form of an handbook, acontrolling utility and a software-
tool on the website of the community.
C. Long lasting effects
− An additional cost reduction is possible to achieve due to
the financial support of the energy suppliers GASAG and
EMB.
SLOVAKIA
A. Saving potentials
The potentials could be achieved by realizing the following
targets:
− Accept provisions regarding energy savings and increasing
energy efficiency according to usage.
− Constantly inrease the awareness of the citizens about
possibilities regarding efficiency and savings in households
and at workplaces
− Public education at schools helping to increase the energy
awareness of pupils
− Looking for financial sources in order to use alternative (
Key learning from the
Slovakian case is that the
resources needed to run a
project has to be considered
very carefully from the very
beginning. Better
communication with the
supporting agency is
necessary.
Page 9 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
renewable) energy sources for heat and electricity
production
B. Concrete Achievements
Due to the exit of the community of Šaľa in that period, no
results could be identified.
SLOVENIA
A. Saving potentials
The estimated energy savings in residential and municipal
housing stock could reach 45% (48.642 MWh /year) in case
of implementation of the most important energy saving
measures. 30% of the identified energy saving measures is
the measures with the payback bellow 10 years.
Energy savings in space heating, identified in different
building types are as followed in the figure below:
Municipal efforts for the
renovation of existing
residential buildings encounter
difficulties like social,
organisational and financial
barriers (scattered ownership
– problems with consensus for
renovation, a lot of low income
flat owners after privatisation,
the lack of motivation for
improvement). It is very
important to make various
instruments, like information of
energy indicators, best
practice cases, energy
Page 10 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
In case of the implementation of the proposed measures the
municipality Jesenice could reduce CO2 emissions in the
building sector for:
advisory service, financial
subsidies and technical
support in organisation of the
building renovation easily
accessible to the building
owners and/or their
representatives. Good linking
of information may multiply the
impact of particular instrument
and increase the number of
renovation cases.
− 8,4 mio ton/year CO2 in single family houses,
− 6,0 mio ton/years in apartment buildings and
− 0,6 mio ton/year in public building sector.
B. Concrete Achievements
Web site benchmarking: The web site supports cross-linked
various existing studies (local energy plan, energy audit of
apartment buildings), municipal strategic programms on
energy supply in the municipality and on the development of
social housing in Jesenice as well as up-dated national and
local subsidies of RES and RUE in the housing sector.
− Delivered energy for 40 apartment buildings connected to
d.h. and considered as big energy consumers in the heating
season 1998/99, on-line consumption data available for
recent years
− Ranking of 40 apartment buildings by energy saving
potential – big potential, average, already refurbished cases
Page 11 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Results Lessons learnt
− Pilot energy certificate for 40 apartment buildings
− IR thermography for 40 apartment buildings
− Energy advisory network ENSVET – strengthening the role
of energy advisors in EE project formation
− EIE EI-Education, EIE Passive Retrofit Kit , EIE SHARE –
target: building managers, building owners, users of flats in
social housing
C. Long lasting effects
− Information and awareness raising of building managers
− Training of building managers
1.3 Identified problems and corrective actions taken during the action
Austria: The community of Thalgau decided for the pilot project “„performance contracting” ” out
the concept of measures. The energy saving potential was analysed and a public tender was
started. It included the “„performance contracting” ” of the public buildings and the supply with
“green” (renewable) energy. Due to the fact that the houses were in good conditions (that
means the saving potentials = margins for the energy service company were low) and the
participation on a public tender was too extensive for most of the interested companies, the
tender process was not that successful and made it difficult to find an interested “energy service
company” (ESCO) which could guarantee the required measures. As a result of these problems
the community decided to implement only the renovation of the polytechnic school, the supply
with green energy and to support the actions of the “Ökostrombörse Salzburg” (this is a
company which was established to support the modernization of green electricity installation
and measures for energy saving to increase the efficiency of electric energy appliances) by
joining it and financing renewable energy projects.
Germany: The aim of establishing a pilot community concerning energy consumption in the
building sector with the Community of Eggesin objectively seems not to be achieved, because
of structural problems e.g. the economic situation of the community because of the geographic
situation but also due to low interest of financial partners to participate in the project and other
difficulties e.g. the long distance between the Berliner Energieagentur and the community of
Eggesin. The local gas supplier refused the dissemination of data of the energy consumption of
the community and therefore the data of energy and heat consumption of the private buildings
Page 12 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
had to be estimated by appropriate benchmarks referring to the age and the renovation status
and estimated shares.
Slovakia: Due to the exit of the community of Šaľa in that period, no actions could be identified.
Slovenia: The collection of the information of best practice cases in Jesenice was difficult and
time consuming. It is not a common practice to store the energy consuming data information,
especially since there are many actors involved in the renovation projects (building
management companies, multiple building owners, various contractors and craftsmen). Several
interviews with the actors had to be done and the information collected was cross-checked in
order to publish consistent and accurate data.
1.4 Activities and impact after end of the action
Austria: The EffCoBuild project effected that energy was always a topic in the municipality in
the last 2.5 years (in workshops, events, newspaper…). Thalgau has continued its way based
on the general energy concept. In spring 2009 there are elections on communal level where
energy will be a topic again. When a municipality wants to reach a certain level of energy
efficiency it is very obvious that they need a professional contact person, preferable a person in
the municipal administration, who cares for this topic. This person must be interested in energy,
should have a certain technical knowledge, should know the important persons, should be
communicative, should know a little bit about project management and most important: must be
convinced of the importance of energy efficiency and renewable energy. The local energy team
of Thalgau has these qualities. Without this team a lot of measures could not be implemented.
Germany: The big challenge for the municipality in future will be to support their inhabitants to
reduce their energy consumption and thus their costs especially private building owners and
households.
The municipality should increase its activities and build up a network with other municipalities in
the region to implement measures by low costs. Joint projects could be energy commissary,
mobile energy counselling, or CO2-reducing plan for the region.
Slovenia: The communication with the actors in Jesenice during the lifetime of the project
stimulated the interest for further development of two main activities: training of building
managers (apartment buildings have to make an agreement with a professional building
management company for the purpose of service, maintenance, renovation of the building) and
development of „performance contracting” projects in apartment buildings together with the
started efforts for demonstration projects of renovation on “low energy houses” level of a
residential building.
Impacts of the action in Jesenice Slovenia:
Page 13 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Short term impact of the action is demonstrated in better cross-linking of relevant information for
building renovation. That is important since recently a new budget line for incentives for complex
RES and RUE building renovation in Slovenia was opened. One of the elements for the
realization of the concluded measurements in apartment buildings in the municipality of
Jesenice is the “online energy indicator”. In the last decade (from the first municipal efforts to
the end of EffCoBuild project) the average energy indicators (for primary energy and CO2
emissions), for the apartment building stock in Jesenice was reduced by up to 10% by
behavioural changes and investments, due to the cross-linked support at the web site the
achieved savings in the whole apartment stock are expected to be doubled.
Long term impact: The replication potential of web site benchmarking and support to RES and
RUE renovation of apartment buildings is high, since there are other potential municipalities in
Slovenia that could implement such an approach (Kranj, Maribor, Nova Gorica, Velenje,
Ljubljana, Celje, Ravne, Slovenj Gradec, Kočevje, Piran).
2. Consortium management during the action
The EffCoBuild-Project started on 1.1.2006 and ended by 30.06.2008. As main coordinator of
the project, ÖGUT (Austrian Society for Environment and Technology) had the responsibility for
project planning and scheduling, internal / external reporting, the documentation of the results
as well as the coordination of the transnational activities.
Apart from ÖGUT as overall (umbrella) coordinator, four communities and four supporting
agencies participated into the project. The participants were from Austria, Germany, Slovakia
and Slovenia:
Country Community Supporting Agency
Austria Thalgau SIR
Germany Eggesin BEA
Slovakia Šaľa REA
Slovenia Jesenice BCEI ZRMK
In order to guarantee smooth communication and understanding between the partners, regular
project meetings in form of workshops were organized. As part of the different work packages,
national workshops took place and the results of these were presented and discussed during
trans-national workshops. The aim of the workshops was to ensure the quality in terms of timely
execution and content of the different tasks as well as to negotiate the next steps of the project.
Additionally to that, the project was presented during two contractors meetings.
Page 14 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
On February 6th, 2006 during the contractors meeting (CM) in Brussels, the project was
presented to other IEE contractors and for the information exchange with those contractors and
the European Community (EC).
As agreed in the contract, four transnational workshops as well as two contractors meetings
(CM) took place, one in each participating country.
• Start - Workshop: Vienna (Austria), March 13th-15 th 2006
o First joint project meeting of the participants
o Commitment on the key steps and activities of the forthcoming months
o Presentation and analysis of first investigations and interviews conducted in the
frame of WP2
o Visit of two buildings, recognized as best practice examples for energy efficiency
(passive house technology in social housing) in the building sector
• Workshop 1 Berlin (Germany), September 26 th-27 th 2006
o Summary presentation of the country reports for WP2 (framework analysis)
o Presentation of the surveys on energy consumption in the partner communities
o Discussion and commitment on the key steps and activities of the forthcoming
months
• CM Meeting: Lyon (France), November 2006
o Project Presentation
• Workshop 2: Šaľa (Slovakia), February 22nd 2007
o Presentation of the draft concepts of measures of all communities
o Discussion of next steps to finalise WP 4 – Concept of measures to enhance
energy efficiency in the building sector
o Outlook on WP 5 – Compilation of "10 best of" brochure and WP 6 –
Implementing pilot projects
o Further dissemination activities / public relations for EffCoBuild
o Contractual and financial matters
o Conclusions and next steps
• Workshop 3: Jesenice (Slovenia), October 23rd -24 th 2007
o WP 4/6: Report on actual state of concept of measures and work programme for
the next months of all communities
o WP 5 – Actual state and next steps to completion of "10 best of" brochure (BEA)
o WP7: Dissemination of results (ÖGUT)
o Contractual and financial matters (ÖGUT)
• CM Meeting: Brussels (Belgium), November 8 th-9th 2007
Page 15 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
o Presentation of project results
• Workshop 4: Salzburg (Austria), March 13 th-14 th2008
o WP 4/6: Report on actual state of selection and implementation of energy
efficiency in the partner communities (all partners)
o WP 5: Actual state and completion of "10 best of" brochure (BEA)
o WP7: Dissemination of results (ÖGUT)
o Preparation of final report and financial matters (ÖGUT)
o Technical visit of refurbished Polytechnical School and Thalgau's biomass district
heating plant
o Final agreement on final steps for completion of the project
The agendas and minutes of the workshops can be found in the appendices.
All relevant documents, such as agenda and minutes of the meeting as well as all presented
papers were available via the webbased data platform “sharehouse” of the project. Via this tool
any project partner was able to upload relevant information and documents. The project website
www.effcobuild.eu was created and all relevant documents that were meant to be seen publicly
have been published there. The website was maintained by ÖGUT for the time period stated in
the agreement.
3. Achievements of the action 3.1 Achieved results per work package against initial objectives
WORK PACKAGE 1: PROJECT AND CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT
Within the EffCoBuild project ÖGUT, the Austrian Society for Environment and Technology, was
responsible for the project planning and scheduling, internal and external reporting and
documentation and the coordination of transnational activities. In this role ÖGUT had the
responsibility for organizing the start workshop in Vienna in March 2006 and prepare the
partners for the project by presenting the project flow and packages. Furthermore ÖGUT
delivered three progress reports, one interim report and the current final report on the project.
As part of the administration work, ÖGUT delivered also the financial reports.
After the national workshops had taken place, transnational meetings were organized, where
the outcome of the national workshops was discussed and the next steps were negotiated. In
the coordinator role, ÖGUT ensured that all meetings were reported and the follow-up actions of
the committed actions were executed.
The transnational workshops and their main topics / achievements were:
Page 16 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
• Start-Workshop: Vienna (Austria), March 13th-15th, 2006 – setting the stage for the
project and focusing on WP 2
• Workshop 1: Berlin (Germany), September 26th-27th, 2006 – discussion of the framework
analysis and outlook for WP3
• Workshop 2: Šaľa (Slovakia), February 22nd, 2007 – finalization of WP 4 and outlook on
WP5
• Workshop 3: Jesenice (Slovenia), October 23rd -24th, 2007 – WP5 and WP6 (project
implementation) progress. Further the information dissemination was discussed -
publication of all necessary deliverables on the Effcobuild-project home page
effcobuild.eu ( the website was located and hosted by ÖGUT – all necessary information
about the project like duration, partners and content were published there) as well as
broader publicity possibilities of the project by presenting them on the homepages of the
partners (communities and agencies).
• Workshop 4: Salzburg (Austria), March 13th -14th, 2008 - WP5 and WP6 (project
implementation) progress. Šaľa announced its decision to step out of the project;
however the decision didn’t affect the budgets and commitments of the other partners. In
terms of information dissemination, a lot of articles had been published, but even more
publicity had to be ensured.
Figure 2: Project meeting in Salzburg, March 13 / 14, 2008
All relevant documents such as agenda and minutes of the meeting as well as all presented
papers were available via the sharehouse project website. On this platform the project partners
were able to upload relevant information and documents. The software of this internet tool
guarantees save online-communication in the password-secured project area. Additionally the
project website www.effcobuild.eu was created and charged with the necessary information and
maintained by ÖGUT.
There was an ongoing exchange of information via mail and phone. Further, project partners
were regularly informed about the project status, time schedule and next steps to take.
Page 17 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
WORK PACKAGE 2: ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FRAMEWORK AND INSTRUMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROMVEMENTS
The leader of the WP2 was ÖGUT. The goal of the WP2 was to understand the existing
framework and instruments for energy measures in the building sector. This analysis was done
on a national level. Following topics had to be analysed:
• Economic framework in the community (e.g. energy costs accounting methods,
etc.)
• Financing framework (e.g. availability of loans, knowledge of innovative financing
instruments)
• Legal framework (e.g. ownership of apartment buildings, responsibility for
investment and refurbishment, etc.)
• Know-how / technical framework (e.g. knowledge level of the stakeholders and
citizens about energy consumption and costs in buildings, etc.)
• Possibilities to improve the frameworks (e.g. what instruments are missing, how
can existing instruments be improved, etc.)
A detailed report on the results of the questioned experts was provided. As result of the surveys
that each community performed, SWOT analyses of existing and possible instruments were
created. This information was then used to develop the energy saving potentials and concepts
for the pilot projects in each community. The detailed SWOT analyses and reports can be found
in the Annex 5 and on the project homepage (www.effcobuild.eu).
WORK PACKAGE 3: ENERGY SAVING POTENTIALS IN THE BUILDING SECTOR
The leader of WP3 was ÖGUT. As presented in previous reports in more details it was planned
to investigate the total energy demand of the participating communities as well as the amount of
energy consumed by the buildings.
The building stock has been classified by its condition regarding the energy demand and the
saving potentials have been estimated for each group of buildings consequently. The
estimations were orientated at technical standard values and experience values of energy
refurbishments of buildings in the region. The sum of the saving potentials in all building groups
resulted in the total energy saving potential in the respective communities.
In order to gain the interest of the stakeholders and citizens of different educational background
for the idea of energy efficiency, it was important to demonstrate its positive effect in an easily
understandable way. One option to visualise the saving potentials also for “non experts” was to
define a “virtual power plant”.
Page 18 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
As outcome of this work package each community has delivered a written report on the total
energy demand and on the energy demand in buildings divided in different type of buildings.
Further a report on the saving potentials in the buildings has been created. The demand and
saving potentials were discussed in national workshops.
In order to demonstrate the energy demand and saving potentials, posters with a visualized
“virtual power plant” have been prepared in the four participating communities and information
meeting were organized.
All documents prepared within this work package were also available via the project platform
sharehouse and the project website www.effcobuild.eu.
Following are examples of the posters.
Page 19 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 3: Poster Thalgau
Page 20 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 4: Poster Šaľa
Page 21 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 5: Poster Jesenice
Page 22 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 6: Poster Eggesin This work package has been completed in the course of 2007. Upon request of the EACI the
Austrian report has been revised and extended in January 2008. On the next pages the Thalgau
report on saving potentials can be seen.
Page 23 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 24 of 63
Page 24 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 25 of 63
Page 25 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 26 of 63
Page 26 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 27 of 63
Page 27 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 28 of 63
Page 28 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 29 of 63
Page 29 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 30 of 63
Page 30 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 31 of 63
Page 31 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 32 of 63
Page 32 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 33 of 63
Page 33 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 34 of 63
Page 34 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Page 35 of 63
Page 35 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
WORK PACKAGE 4: CONCEPT OF MEASURES TO ENHANCE ENERGY SAVINGS IN BUILDINGS
The leader of the WP 4 was the REA (Regional Energy Agency Šaľa)
Based on the results of WP 3 the national teams had to develop measures to improve energy
efficiency in their communities. The consortium started to collect ideas and examples of
instruments, measures and actions on how to improve energy efficiency in the building sector.
These ideas together with the outcomes of work package 3 have been discussed with a number
of stakeholders from the respective communities and put together in draft concepts in the
following. In the frame of a trans-national workshop, held in February 2007 in Šaľa, these drafts
were presented and discussed.
The results of these discussions and the conclusions drawn from the transnational workshop
provided the basis for the development of the final concepts of instruments, measures and
actions. The Berlin Energy Agency was successful in winning Vattenfall Europe (VEB) as new
cooperation partner. With help of this partner an online energy counselling tool in Eggesin was
implemented at the end of June 2008.
The concepts mentioned above were available via the project platform sharehouse and on the
Effcobuild project website.
WORK PACKAGE 5: "10 BEST OF" BROCHURE
In order to stimulate new methods and approaches within the project consortium and to provide
instruments for a mutual learning assistance and exchange of know-how the compilation of a
best-practice brochure was started. A further aim of the brochure was to disseminate knowledge
on the wide range of possible measures within the population but also to decision makers of the
participating communities and surrounding areas.
The Berlin Energy Agency (BE) as work package leader provided a questionnaire to the
partners to collect data on best practice examples. Further, a template for providing the
examples was developed and distributed to the partners. In spring 2007 the partners started to
identify suitable best practice examples and to collect the necessary data for the elaboration of
the brochures.
Brochure Austria
Within the reporting period the Austrian brochure has been completed. The brochure was co-
financed by the government of the province of Salzburg and also was planned to be used and
disseminated together with the "Energieberatung Salzburg" (energy counselling service of the
Page 36 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
provincial government). Additionally, Energieberatung Salzburg provided the brochure on its
website: “Sanieren mit dem Energieausweis”
The full brochure can be found on the project website. Here an example of one of the best
practices the complete renovation of the secondary vocational college Bramberg.
Brochure Slovenia
The collection for the Slovenian brochure on best-practice examples on building renovation
also was completed. Best practice examples were presented and discussed also at the
transnational workshop in Ljubljana in October 2007. To enhance the appeal of best practice
cases additional data (like users' opinion on renovation) were collected after the meeting. In
order to optimise the promotion, the aim was to add the first results of the implemented
measures from WP6 (i.e. website benchmarking of energy indicators of large residential
buildings – biggest energy consumption to the web) to the “10 best of” practice brochure. Thus
the municipal actors were given comprehensive information not only about best practice
renovation cases but also on saving potentials of existing large energy consumers. Website
benchmarking was done by the end of February '08 and the data is available at the Slovenian
website of the community of Jesenice. Then the brochure was printed and distributed.
Page 37 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Here is one of the Slovenian examples:
Brochure Germany
In the course of the preparations for the German brochure two meetings have been organised
with the community of Eggesin (October 10, 2007 and January 23, 2008). During these
meetings, the collected good practice examples and their concepts were discussed. Until the
end of January 2008 nine examples have been collected and all those were described in
German and English. As a problem appeared to be that best practice or at least good examples
for refurbishment of one and two-family houses were very rare in the Eggesin region. Many
efforts were done to find examples. As a first step the reflux from the questionnaire for WP3 was
checked and some owners of houses with good benchmarks were asked for their consent to be
presented in the brochure. Then the stakeholders who accompanied the development of the
concept of measures were asked. Additionally, local energy consultants and architects were
contacted by phone. Finally, an advertisement was published at the end of August in the
communal gazette to search for owners of private one- or two family houses that have
performed good energy saving measures in the course of the refurbishment of their buildings. In
parallel the local “architects’ table” was also asked by representatives of the community.
Unfortunately, there was no response. Moreover it turned out that the owners of energy efficient
Page 38 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
refurbished houses in question were not willing to present their house as an example in a
brochure.
This caused a considerable delay in finalising the brochure but eventually a 44-page brochure
was created. The brochure was disseminated at least among all communities in Northern East
Germany.
The brochure was disseminated at least among all communities in Northern East Germany. As
the other brochures, the full brochure can be found on the project website and bellow an
example of one of the best examples.
Brochure Slovakia:
The Slovakian best practice brochure focused on the public procurement requests for
service, maintenance and reconstruction:
Page 39 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
The project of reconstruction of the elementary school object (without the area of gym, dressing-
rooms and hygienic facilities was realised in the year 2005. The reconstruction of the own
building contained: the innovation of concrete covering in the classrooms and halls the change
of tile the change of window and external door to provide the facade against the heat loss
including the roof the innovation of the roof hydro isolation.
WORK PACKAGE 6: IMPLEMENTING PILOT PROJECTS
This work package was dedicated to the selection and implementation of at least one pilot
action per partner community. After the elaboration of the concepts of measures the partner
communities started a discussion process to identify those actions which should be
implemented first. After a preparative phase on national level a transnational workshop (D24) of
WP6 – Introduction and discussion of pilot projects in municipalities and recommendations for
improvement (Oct. 23, 2007) was organised by the work package leader ZRMK in Ljubljana with
5 lectures from EffCoBuild partners and municipalities (12 participants).
Page 40 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 7: Transnational workshop on the introduction and discussion of pilot projects in Ljubljana
Status in Austria
Because of its strong involvement in several programmes and activities for a sustainable
development the community of Thalgau organised or participated in a high number of meetings
on energy related issues. Therefore, the project team of Salzburg decided not to hold one single
national workshop to evaluate the concept and to select the most important measures for
implementation, but to raise the respective issues in several relevant meetings taking place in
the region/community. In particular, the following meetings have taken place:
- Meeting of regional members of the e5 team on February 7, 2007,
on April 18, 2007 and on December 4, 2007
- Special meeting of Thalgau's energy committee on November 20, 2007
In the course of these meetings the selection of measures to be implemented influenced the
implementation plan.
As already reported, first activities in Thalgau had to be started ahead the schedule in
spring/summer 2007: Preparations for a tender for a comprehensive contracting project to
improve the energy efficiency of 13 communal buildings and street lightning combined with the
supply of green electricity have been started. The reason to start this activity ahead the
schedule was the fact that the previous contract for electricity supply of Thalgau expired.
Therefore it was necessary to call for tenders early enough to ensure a smooth change over to
a new contract to supply the community with (green) electricity. Green electricity should have
been provided by January 2008, implementation of the other measures was meant to be started
before summer 2008. Several contractors expressed their interest in the participation of the
tender, but it turned out that contractors are not prepared for such innovative models so that the
implementation of this model will take more time and efforts than expected – finally only one
contractor submitted a proposal. As this proposal did not comply with a classical one, the
Austrian project team decided to go a strike a new path. The purchase of green electricity was
organised by the community of Thalgau itself. A new contract for the supply of green electricity
has been fixed with a local supplier (Ökostrombörse Salzburg) and the supply with green
Page 41 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
electricity has started with January 1, 2008. In order to achieve also the intended improvement
of energy efficiency in buildings the tenderer agreed to service the local enterprises in trade and
industry to identify saving potentials and to assist them in the implementation of necessary
steps.
Also the refurbishment of the Polytechnical School has been already completed by the end of
October 2007 and was chosen to be presented in the best-practice brochure (see page 24/25 of
the Austrian brochure). An energy saving of 40 % could be reached (energy performance before
refurbishment: 161 kWh/m²a; after refurbishment: 65 kWh/m²a). The main problem during the
refurbishment was the insulation of the floor. The municipality decided to insulate only that parts
which are not parquet-floor. Otherwise the refurbishment would have been too expensive.
Further, the energy consulting for private households has been continued. Once a month the
citizens of Thalgau have the possibility to seek for energy consulting for free at the town hall.
Altogether 11 consulting have been realised (3 in the period from August 2007 to January 2008)
– this corresponds to an average of 2.1 consulting per 1 000 inhabitants. Compared to the
average figure for the entire province of Salzburg (2.2 consulting per 1 000 inhabitants) this
activity can be seen as quite successful.
In order to visualise the potentials of thermal renovation the municipality, in cooperation with a
local provider of a thermo-cameras, also offered thermal imaging for private households.
Thermal images of 8 private buildings could be made although the winter was quite warm in
Salzburg. Following this action the municipality organized in spring an information evening for
these citizens to inform them about energy efficient renovation.
Page 42 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 8: Thermal images from houses in Thalgau
SIR has prepared a concept for the scheduled electricity saving campaign for private
households and communal buildings. The original idea was to find approx. 5 owners of private
households and few communal buildings that are willing to save electricity just by changing their
behaviour for one year. After discussions with the "Energieberatung Salzburg" (energy
counselling service of the provincial government) and the Salzburg AG (local energy supplier)
the concept contains now following steps:
- detailed measuring of all electronic equipment in the house for a period of two weeks
- preparation of a list with possible measures
- determination of saving potential just by changing the behaviour
- information of dwellers/employees
- implementing the measures by dwellers/employees for a period of 2 or 3 weeks and
measuring
- publication of the results and experiences
In March 2008 the next meeting with the municipality took place. If the municipality agrees with
this concept they can start to find suitable households (preferably 3 - 4 persons per household)
and communal buildings. The campaign will be implemented in summer 2008 in cooperation
with the regional utility Salzburg AG.
Status in Germany
In Eggesin the stakeholders' willingness to participate in a full-day workshop on the
development of an implementation plan turned out to be not sufficient. As also experienced in
terms of the preparation of the German best practice brochure the population is particularly
reserved and hardly to motivate to get involved in a participation process. To balance the
missing inputs from the stakeholders the staff of the Berlin Energy Agency intensified its
exchange with the representatives of the Eggesin community. The latest meeting was held in
January 2008 and was dedicated to the discussion of the implementation of the concepts of
Page 43 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
measures and the progress of demonstration and pilot projects. Meanwhile several activities
have been set to accomplish some of the measures identified for Eggesin:
- Check-up of communal buildings which exceed the energy benchmark – with the priority on the lighting systems of the school buildings
The caretaker of the schools in Eggesin has gathered information about the lamps used in the
buildings. Most of the lamps used comply with the T 8 standard.
In October 2007 the BEA made a site visit in several schools of the city of Eggesin where the
installed lighting systems have been checked. The lighting was in a good state. That is, why an
exchange of T8-tubes with T5 by installation of adapter systems could be recommended. The
Berlin Energy Agency asked two lighting contractors (Eurolux and econlux) whether they were
interested to submit an offer. However, they both rejected. The reasons were on the one hand
the low using hours estimated between 800 and 1.000 h/a and on the other hand the high rate
of 36 W tubes which provide a lower saving potential in comparison with longer 58 W tubes. The BEA gave the community of Eggesin a description summary and data of several
manufacturers of adapter systems.
- Check-up of communal residential buildings which exceed the benchmark
The housing company of Eggesin used the provided benchmarks to check some buildings with
high marks. Some results were:
o In one block existing dormers were additionally insulated and proofed as a construction defect
o The housing company implemented consumption based billing in its last block without that system to increase the motivation of the tenants in energy saving
o One block was connected to the local district heating system (based on wood chips)
o The relatively new buildings (construction year 1994) in Ziegelbergstraße with noticeable high benchmarks were checked one after the other and construction defects were resolved step by step.
The search and evaluation for energy controlling tools for the communal public buildings of
Eggesin was carried further. As a responsible person of the city administration was not
appointed, the calculation tool was still not selected yet. Implementation of energy efficient
environmental pumps
In case of change energy efficiency pumps with energy label "A" were installed.
- Field test: Reduction of the heat energy consumption through electronic thermostatic valves in multifamily residences
Page 44 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
The field test for the introduction of single electronic thermostatic valves in Berlin was set in
August and September 2007. Three housing companies had selected different multi-family
houses. Tenants received an information letter with information about the process of the field
test. In September installation companies implemented the electronic controlled thermostatic
valves in each selected apartment. After the installation the tenants were briefed.
The corresponding consumption data was collected for two years in Wittstock and one year in
Berlin. Results of the field test in Berlin could be expected at the earliest after the heating period
in spring 2008. Nevertheless first experiences and results could be described as follows:
o The implementation was technically without problems
o Some older tenants had problems with the handling so that a few exemplars had to be rebuilt.
The result of the energy savings until now is not very representative. Only the data of GWV
Wittstock could be used for the evaluation. In these two buildings small energy savings of 6.5%
and 10.5% could be achieved. However, these numbers do not necessarily represent the
potentially achievable savings. The evaluation of at least one more accounting period in
Wittstock as well as evaluations of the data of Berlin would be essential for a well-founded
statement.
- Regularly energy saving tips for households in the communal gazette
Monthly tips on energy saving were published in the local gazette in 2007. The topics have
been: “energy efficient use of washing machines” and “information all around energy efficient
cooking”. These activities also will be continued.
- Participation in the Dena initiative "efficient use of electricity in private households"
The information material is placed in the new building of the city administration.
- Presentation of regional and national good and best practice examples
As described in WP5
- Cooperation with the local “architect's round table” in Eggesin
Representatives of the community of Eggesin approached participants of the local “architects'
round table” several times. There seems to be substantial interest on energy topics but no date
could be arranged until now. Representatives of the community will continue in approaching this
important group of stakeholders in order to organise special events for information on energy
saving topics.
Page 45 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
As the decision for the implementation of some energy counselling tools on Eggesin's
communal website was made lately, the BEA completed the planned handbook with energy
saving tips (to download) and the calculation tool. It will be published on the website in autumn
2008.
The scheduled individual energy counselling for households or owners of one- or two-family-
were carried out in June by the BEA.
Status in Slovenia
In order to evaluate the concept and to select the most important measures for implementation
in WP6 a national workshop has been held in April 2007 in Jesenice. A draft implementation
plan for pilot projects in Jesenice was prepared and discussed at the transnational workshop in
Ljubljana (October 2007).
Following the conclusions from the transnational workshop a final implementation plan for pilot
projects in Jesenice with detailed phases and activities for the implementation in the following
months was prepared.
The first selected pilot project to be implemented in the municipality of Jesenice is the "Website
benchmarking": "Website benchmarking" is an umbrella name for a set of measures using
internet for communication with the target group: building owners (incl. users, tenants) and/or
building managers in order to stimulate EE renovation projects in the building sector in Jesenice
and to facilitate the use of available municipal co-financing instruments and other national
supporting instruments.
The main elements of the benchmarking website are:
- Information about EIE EffCoBuild project
- Communication with end users & building managers
- FAQ about heating and energy savings
- Promotion of measures in support to “RUE in over 150 kWh/m2 buildings”
- List of 40 buildings on Google map
- ranking of these buildings by energy consumption on "click"
- energy performance certificate available
- IR thermographs
- RUE measures identified (energy audit)
- Best practice cases in buildings restoration
- Financing opportunities
- further advice options for households
- http://www.jeko-in.si, working link
The implementation of this pilot project started in November 2007. The majority of the web site was done February 2008 and then the intensive promotion took place.
Page 46 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 9: Starting page of benchmarking tool
Status in Slovakia
Slovakia’s community Šaľa decided to step out of the project. In an official letter to ÖGUT as
project coordinator, the mayor of Šaľa – Mr. Martin Alföldi explained the reasons for this
decision:
- lack of human recourses to complete the project and to move on with the necessary and
required commitment and pace
- lack of support by the Regional Energy Agency (REA), where also high personnel
fluctuation was one of the hurdles to overcome the problems and move on
Hence, no project was implemented in Slovakia.
WORK PACKAGE 7: DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS
The leader of the WP7 was ÖGUT.
In order to facilitate internal information exchange the communication platform “sharehouse” has
been set up in. This tool served as virtual office where all project partners had easy access to
relevant documents, reports, presentations and papers etc. The share house was regularly
updated uploaded with new documents elaborated within the project. In order to make the
projects' findings and results available for the general public a project website has been set up
(www.effcobuild.eu). The site contains also public reports elaborated during the project. The
Page 47 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
website was extended by presentations of the best practice examples and the best practice
brochures. The site was regularly updated and new reports or results presented on the website
are additionally announced by ÖGUT's electronic newsletter.
Figure 10: Screenshot of the project website
Further information dissemination activities have been undertaken by the communities
themselves and started to prepare articles for communal and regional newspapers. In particular,
the Austrian partners have promoted the practice brochure in SIR's regular newsletter "SIR-
INFO". Further the opportunity to get a thermograph for free was promoted in the communal
gazette (Thalgauer Gemeindenachrichten, October 2007). The initiative of the community of
Thalgau to reduce energy consumption and climate pollution by renewable energy projects and
has been disseminated at the website of the clearing and regulation agency for green electricity
(OeMAG), the journal of the league of towns (Die Österreichische Gemeinde-Zeitung - ÖGZ)
and the Austrian Press Agency (APA) so far. Here are some examples:
Page 48 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 11: APA press release
Page 49 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 12: Press release Thalgau Gazette
Page 50 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Figure 13: Screenshot of the web press-release from the OeMAG The German partners have put the focus on the publication of energy saving tips in the local
gazette and the search for best practice examples in terms of one-family-houses.
In Slovenia an article to promote energy efficiency issues was published in the magazine
"Gorenjski glas", October 2007 (article about Mr. Noc as a municipal councillor, who is
supporting energy efficiency by professional and municipal work) and an article to promote the
Page 51 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
EffCoBuild project published in the magazine GRADIM, no 9, February 2008 (back issues
available at the mtb website. Further, a paper to promote the EffCoBuild project was prepared
(December 2007) and accepted for CIB W70 Conference – Edinburgh planned in June 16-18,
2008.
EffCobuild also was presented and promoted by a lecture on Energy saving in buildings, in the
frame of the workshop Obnovljiva in učinkovita raba energije za Slovenijo, held in Ljubljana,
Friday, December 7, 2007, hall DSRS, Šubičeva 4 (120 participants); by a lecture at Strokovni
posvet »Residential buildings – actual news«, Wednesday, November 28, 2007, Hall
Slovenijales, Dunajska 22, Ljubljana (90 participants) and by a lecture at a national workshop
on Energy efficient buildings in whole life-cycle, on November 23, 2007 in Ljubljana, ZRMK
Building (22 participants).
WORK PACKAGE 8: COMMON DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES
The leader of WP8 was ÖGUT. The work package contained mainly three types of tasks:
Page 52 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Task 1: Contribution to the development of online information systems under EC management
Upon request of the EC updates of the fact sheets and summary slides have been prepared
and delivered to the respective departments in the Executive Agency.
Task 2: Participation at Contractors' meeting / Task 3: Contribution to the preparation of
common presentation materials related to EIE actions.
In order to represent the project in the scientific community and to have an information
exchange with other contractors and the EC, upon request of the EC, the coordinator ÖGUT
took part in the contractors' meeting in Brussels in February 2006 and November 2007 as well
as in the CM meeting in Lyon in November 2006.
Information materials and inputs requested by the IEEA were delivered in the run-up to the
event.
3.2 List of deliverables
During the course of work, all the meetings, outcomes, reports, drafts, concepts and plans had
to be the documented and presented in the form of the deliverables. This was not a pure control
mechanism, but rather help for the participant to ensure that they are on track with the different
work packages and have a better overview of the steps completed and those still open.
Table 2: Updated list of submitted deliverables of the action
D N° WP N°
Deliverable Type of deliverable
Size and form *
Language
Target group
Lead participant
Dissemination level
Sub-mission deadline
D1 1 Trans-national Start workshop
Workshop
1 day, all project partner participating, approx. 15 person
EN consortium
ÖGUT RE -
D2 1 Report on trans-national Start workshop
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 15 pages
EN consortium
ÖGUT RE PR 1
D3 2 work plan with detailed methodology for the expert interviews
Installed on project website
1 Work plan EN consortium
All partner RE PR 1
D4 2 Interview protocols
Electronic file
10 interviews for each (4) pilot community
EN consortium
All partners RE PR 1
D5 2 Summary and Conclusions of the interviews, SWOT
Published on project website
Written report EN Consortium, decision maker in pilot
Each “country lead partner”
PU PR 1
Page 53 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
D N° WP
N° Deliverable Type
of deliverable
Size and form *
Language
Lead Target Disse Sub-participant group minat mission
ion deadline level
analyses communities
D6 1 1st progress report
Electronic file
Written form EN Consortium and Commission
ÖGUT RE PR 1
D7 3 4 reports on the total energy demand and the energy demand in buildings
Electronic file
written reports for each (4) pilot community, approx. 15 pages
EN Consortium, decision maker in pilot communities
Each “country lead partner”
PU PR 2
D8 3 4 reports on the saving potentials in the buildings, including of description of methods of calculation
Electronic file
written reports for each (4) pilot community, approx. 15 pages
EN Decision maker, building owner, citizen
Each “country lead partner”
PU PR 2
D9 3 4 national workshop for stakeholder to discuss the saving potentials
1 workshop at each (4) pilot community
Approx. 15 stakeholder at each workshop
local Stakeholder
Community + each “country lead partner”
RE -
D10 3 4 reports on national workshop for saving potentials
1 report for each (4) national workshop
Written form, approx. 10 pages
EN Consortium
Each “country lead partner”
RE PR 2
D11 3 4 Poster to demonstrate/visualise the energy saving potentials
Coloured Poster
Approx. 200 posters for each (4) pilot community
Local & EN
Citizens
Each pilot community
PU PR 2/IR
D12 4 4 national workshops on concept for measures
1 workshop at each (4) pilot community
1 day, approx. 15 stakeholder
Local Stakeholder
Community + each “country lead partner”
RE -
D13 4 4 report on national workshop for measures
1 report for each (4) national worksh
Written form, approx. 10 pages
EN Consortium
Each “country lead partner”
RE IR, SK missing
Page 54 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
D N° WP
N° Deliverable Type
of deliverable
Size and form *
Language
Lead Target Disse Sub-participant group minat mission
ion deadline level
op
D14 1 2nd Progress report
Electronic file
Written form EN Consortium and Commission
ÖGUT RE PR 2
D15 4 4 draft concept of instruments, measures and actions
1 concept for each (4) pilot community
Written concept EN Consortium
Each “country lead partner”
RE IR
D16 4 Trans-national workshop for draft concepts
1 workshop
All country lead partners, two days, experts from com-mutinies, approx. 10 participants
EN Country lead partner
REA RE -
D17 4 Report on trans-national Workshop for draft concepts
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 15 pages
EN Consortium
REA RE IR
D18 4 4 Final concepts of instruments, measures and actions
1 concept for each (4) pilot community
Written concept Loc+ EN
Consortium
Each “country lead partner”
PU IR, SK missing
D19 5 4 Documentation of the 10 “best of” examples
Electronic file
Approx. 40 pages for each (4) pilot community
Loc+ EN
Consortium, Media
Each “country lead partner”
PU FR
D20 6 4 national workshops to evaluate the final concept for measures and selection of pilot project
1 workshop at each (4) pilot community
1 day, approx. 15 participants
Local Stakeholder, representatives of communities
Each “country lead partner”
RE -
D21 1 Interim report
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 20 pages
EN Consortium and Commission
ÖGUT RE PR 3
D22 5 4 Brochures of the 10 best of examples
Printed brochure
Approx. 40 pages for each (4) pilot communities, app. 500 printed pieces per
Local EN
Decision maker, building owner, citizen
Each “country lead partner”
PU FR
Page 55 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
D N° WP
N° Deliverable Type
of deliverable
Size and form *
Language
Lead Target Disse Sub-participant group minat mission
ion deadline level
brochure
D23 6 4 draft plans for implementing the pilot projects
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 10 pages
EN Stakeholder, representative of Communities
Each “country lead partner”
RE FR (joint with D 26)
D24 6 Trans-national workshop to introduce & discuss the draft plans for the pilot projects and recommendations to improve them
1 workshop
Participating country lead partner and experts from the communities (approx. 10 participants)
EN Country consortium, stakeholder
BCEI ZMRK
RE -
D25 6 Report on Trans-national Workshop for pilot projects
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 15 pages
EN Consortium
BCEI ZMRK
RE PR 3
D26 6 4 Final plan for the implementation of pilot projects
Electronic file
Written form, approx. 20 pages for each (4) pilot community
EN Stakeholder, representative of the Communities, citizens
Each “country lead partner”
PU FR
D27 1 3rd Progress report
Electronic file
Written form EN Consortium and Commission
ÖGUT RE PR 3
D28 6 4 pilot projects
1 pilot project in each (4) pilot community
Implemented project (e. g. energy refitting of building)
Stakeholder, representative of the communities, citizens
Each “country lead partner”
PU FR
D29 7 Final project report
Electronic form, also in PDF for public download
Written form, approximately 150 pages
EN Stakeholder, representative of the Communities, citizens
ÖGUT PU FR
Page 56 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
D N° WP
N° Deliverable Type
of deliverable
Size and form *
Language
Lead Target Disse Sub-participant group minat mission
ion deadline level
D30 7 Project website, which permanently documents the interim results and all deliverables.
Web site, serves as information & communication platform for project partners, stakeholders, citizen & media
Web site with all relevant documents and results available to download
EN, local
Project partner, stakeholder, citizens, media
ÖGUT PU Online
3.3 Review of impact of the action
In order to track the implementation of the different steps, a number of performance indicators
were tracked. Table 3: Review of performance indicators
Performance indicator
Quantification
Interviews of experts
Complete and in-detail answered questionnaire by 10 relevant experts from each community. The interview partner must consist of at least 5 different groups of actors, such as representatives from the local administration entities, regional or national administration entities, building (refurbishing) companies, architects, financing institutes, building owner
Summary of the existing and suggested measures
At least 12 measures/instruments/activities will be analysed for each (4) pilot communities. Detailed SWOT-analyses for the measure.
Detailed knowledge of the energy saving potential in the building sector in each pilot community
Written report on the total energy demand and the energy demand in buildings, divided in different types of buildings in GWh/a and by primary energy sources.
Written report on the energy saving potentials for the several building groups, such as “one family houses”, apartment houses, panel blocks, public buildings), in GWh/a, as well as a detailed description of the method of calculation and the sources
Distribution of the information on the saving potentials
Designing of a poster, 200 posters printed in each (4) community, to be distributed at well frequented sites by the community administration and stakeholders.
Page 57 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Performance indicator
Quantification
and receiving feedback from the stakeholders
Workshop with at least 15 stakeholders from the community, at least one representative from the local administration entities, regional or national administration entities, building (refurbishing) companies, architects, financing institutes, building owners.
Written report on the workshop and the feedback of the stakeholders.
Work out draft concepts of measures to increase the implementation of energy efficiency measures in buildings
The concept includes minimum 12 measures and at least ¾ of the stakeholders in the community agree with the community.
The measures address following sectors:
- awareness building for the citizens, - distribution of know-how on energy efficiency technologies to relevant stakeholders, - innovative financing methods, - improvements in public buildings, as they are opinion leaders - increasing the assortment of products and services for energy efficiency of the local companies
Workshop with at least 15 stakeholders of the community, at least one representative from the local administration entities, regional or national administration entities, building (refurbishing) companies, architects, financing institutes, building owners.
Improve the draft concepts of measures
Written statement (feedback and recommendations) to each concept draft by the partners of the other countries.
Final concept for each community, the concept has to include min. 10 measures to support energy efficiency measures in the community. For each measure, a work plan for implementation and the estimated effect (number of buildings, where efficiency measures will be induced, number of citizens to be addressed ...) will be developed.
Improve the awareness of the citizens for the saving potentials in the community and the technical options
Media events: at least 3 articles in the local print media concerning the project idea, the saving potentials and the concept of measures.
Brochure with local “10 best of” examples: min. 10 local best practice examples in the communities region. Each example will be described at 4 A4-pages, including photos, main figures of the result and text. Min. 500 brochures will be printed for each community and distributed to interested citizens by the stakeholders.
Implementation of a pilot/demonstration project
Workshop national: with at least 20 stakeholders of the community, at least one representative from the local administration entities, regional or national administration entities, building (refurbishing) companies, architects, financing institutes, building owners.
Workshop trans-national: participation of all country lead partners.
Page 58 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Performance indicator
Quantification
Detailed presentation of each planned pilot project
The pilot project must fulfil the following criteria: - Its effect must address a significant part of the community buildings
- More than 50 % of the citizens will be informed by the pilot
measure/action and the results
Dissemination of the results
- 3 national workshops, each a whole day, approx. 15 relevant stakeholders participants:
- 3 trans-national workshops, each a whole day (see above) - Media: min. 3 print articles in each (4) community - Poster of saving potentials and brochure (see above) - Establishing of an own project website (e.g. www.effcobuild.eu) to
secure an optimised communication among all project partners (internal pages) and to distribute all results to the citizens and other communities interested to become Energy Efficiency Communities
3.4 Success stories Austria:
• Since the planned contracting model did not prove successful, the project team decided
to take new measures and made an agreement with the “Ökostrombörse” (association
that deals with green energy) for supplying the community buildings with green energy.
• The energy savings after the refurbishment of the Polytechnical School in Thalgau were
really impressive (40%).
• In the private building sector a lot of awareness was created, especially by offering the
house owners a free thermograph of the house which can afterwards be used for
refurbishment or other measures to increase efficiency
Germany:
Field test: Reduction of the heat energy consumption through electronic thermostatic valves in multifamily residences The intention of the field test was to evaluate the cost-efficient reduction of heat energy
consumption in existing buildings by installing electronic controllable thermostatic valves. The
valves promise energy savings of 10 – 25% for relatively low investment prices. For this reason
388 thermostatic devices (for 355 radiators) were installed and the corresponding consumption
data collected for two years in Wittstock and one year in Berlin. Additionally the handling and
acceptance by tenants was evaluated. The tenants were informed about the project and the
technology and were asked to fill in a questionnaire before the installation and after the first
heating period.
Page 59 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
Most of the tenants of the participating households already tried to save electrical energy at
home and were aware of the means to save energy. Still some tenants showed antipathy
against the new technology – especially older people objected the electronic devices. It has
become obvious that the acceptance and the willingness of tenants to take part in a technical
field test depend on the voluntary character of the project. The differences in results between
Wittstock and Berlin make this clear.
The tenants in Wittstock were well informed by the housing company and introduced to the
technology by the craftsmen. As a result no bigger problems occurred with the handling (7 –
25%). Although the expectation to save heat energy is only 44 – 70 % most of the tenants find
the usage of the devices suitable for everyday use. Also a feeling of higher comfort is a result of
the thermostatic valves. It can be concluded that especially younger or mid-aged families are
very satisfied with the handling, the higher comfort and the possibility to lower their energy
costs.
The result of the energy savings until now is not very representative. Only the data of GWV
Wittstock could be used for the evaluation. In these two buildings small energy savings of 6.5%
and 10.5% could be achieved. However, these numbers do not necessarily represent the
potentially achievable savings. The evaluation of at least one more accounting period in
Wittstock as well as evaluations of the data of Berlin would be essential for a well-founded
statement.
Slovenia:
For the first time a website benchmarking on energy saving potential in the building sector was
offered in Slovenia. This increased not only the general awareness, but linked different actors
into networks for exchange of experience.
Some municipal actors decided to develop an adjusted form of contracting for the purpose of
renovation of the worst apartment buildings in Jesenice. Two preliminary meeting were done in
late spring of 2008: with the heat producer Enos, municipal councillor, producers of insulation,
PV panels, institutes, energy advisors, building contractors and Eco fund. The energy saving
potentials demonstrated at Web-site benchmarking home page at Jesenice was a successful
motivation for the creation of a pilot project of low energy / passive house standard building
renovation.
4. Lessons learnt
4.1 Management
The project management coordinated by ÖGUT-Austrian society for environment and
technology was responsible for the organization and preparation of the workshops, the
maintenance of the project webpage www.effcobuild.eu and the information flow via the project
Page 60 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
coordination platform http://sharehouse.wienfluss.net/. For the project coordination no serious
problems were identified.
Austria: Several project workshops were held in the context of EffCoBuild to find out which
measures the municipality should implement to increase the energy efficiency in Thalgau. The
workshops were easy to organise and the invited people were happy to come and to discuss.
But it got difficult when someone should shoulder responsibility for a certain project. If people do
not volunteer for a particular task the only chance is to convince them by talking about the
advantages of the project. Unfortunately there is no other method. When preparing the next
project, the proposer should ensure that there is a reasonable number of deliverables and the
content of the deliverables should be defined very clear. In this project sometimes the
deliverables were too similar.
Germany: The lead partner in Germany (BEA) analysed the structural problems as the
geographic situation of Eggesin (close to the border) and the distance between Berlin and
Eggesin as main struggles for an easy communication. Furthermore it was difficult to motivate
financial stakeholders for the project and to convince the citizens for aspects like energy
consumption. The scope of the deliverables was considered as very ambitious but too
extensive.
Sovenia: No problems have been reported
Slovakia: As reported the municipality of Šaľa stepped out of the project due to communication
difficulties with the regional energy agency REA. As learning effect of the project an open
discussion about existing problems at an earlier time could have prevented these problems.
4.2 Communication and Dissemination
Due to the 2 ½ year period of the project it seemed to be difficult that one project officer is in
charge for whole project. But despite those circumstances there was no problem being
communicated with the EACI. Concerning the interim absence (vacation, etc.) of the project
officer it would be useful to have on substituting person at the EACI who has the competence
for answering project related questions.
It appeared as well that there was some miscommunication between the REA and the
community Sila. Although it was not the main reason, it was certainly one of the influencing
factors of the community of Šaľa to take the decision of stepping out of the project.
Page 61 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
4.3 Common Dissemination Activities
Upon request of the EC the progress-, interim- and final report and the deliverables have been
submitted successfully and timely to the EC. Information materials and inputs requested by the
IEEA were delivered in the run-up to the event.
4.4 Conclusions Austria:
o Simplification of the tender process: The realization of the tender was difficult to
develop for a small community. After the announcing of the tender it came out that
there were few interested companies because of the complex combination of energy
supply and „performance contracting”. Above all the public buildings were in good
condition so it came clear that it would not very profitable for the contractors. Finally
the decision was made to have the community supplied only with renewable energy.
o Selection of the partner companies: It was hard to get in touch with companies. But
recently the politicians of the municipality got invited by SONY for a conversation
concerning energy. The output was that energy is a big topic for SONY because of
the costs. SONY in Thalgau is the most energy efficient plant of all SONY-plants in
the world! At the moment the plant in Thalgau gets an extension. In autumn, when
the building is ready, the local energy team is invited for a tour in the plant. This
could be a chance to get SONY as a partner for energy efficiency and as it has a
good practice example to attract other companies.
o Project preparation – deliverables: When preparing the next project, the presenting
party should ensure that there is a reasonable number of deliverables and the
content of the deliverables should be defined very clearly. In this project sometimes
the deliverables were too similar.
Germany: o Pilot community: The aim of establishing a pilot community regarding energy
consumption in the building sector with the Community of Eggesin as the actor
objectively seems to be not achieved because the undertaken actions and measures
were not very ambitious or innovative.
o Information level: It could be seen that small communities like Eggesin need support
of experts regarding the topic energy efficiency. People and also the stakeholders
were generally well informed through media like TV and press. But the details and
the structural matters are unknown or not familiar. For this purpose the EffCobuild
project was a start to sensitise the stakeholders and several citizens as multiplicators
for the future.
Page 62 of 63
EffCoBuild EIE/05/063/SI2.419490 PUBLIC REPORT AUGUST '08
o Decrease of energy consumption: The big challenge for the municipality in future will
be to support their inhabitants to reduce their energy consumption and thus their
costs especially for private building owners and households. The municipality
should increase its activities and build up a network with other municipalities in the
region to implement measures by low costs. Joint projects could be energy
commissary, mobile energy counselling, or CO2-reducing plan for the region.
All communities were pleased to have had the chance of participating in the EffCoBuild Project
and thus make the first steps into increasing the energy efficiency in their municipalities. The
lessons learnt will help in future projects that for sure will come, because it is clear that it’s
everybody’s responsibility to contribute to more efficient energy consumption. The citizens of
Thalgau, Eggesin, Šaľa and Jesenice are convinced that even small changes in their behaviour
can have big effects.
The network established through the project strengthens the participants’ capacity in the future
to implement the pilot projects that were commonly prepared. The energy savings and the use
of renewable energy sources after the project’s implementation will increase economical and
environmental benefits for the regions and the citizens. The four communities of Thalgau,
Eggesin, Šaľa and Jesenice agreed to extend their communication to cooperate and to motivate
other municipalities to reduce their energy consumption.
In the future more communities around Europe will take the chance to go through this
experience as well and use the existing network between the municipalities, the stakeholders
and the citizens participating in the Effcobuild-project.
Page 63 of 63