Commercial Passive House Case Studies
4 likes1,236 views
The document discusses the Passive House Standard for commercial buildings, highlighting its energy efficiency and environmental benefits through several case studies, including the first certified Passive House in North America and various retrofits in different climates. It details the architectural design principles, energy consumption metrics, and life cycle cost advantages while emphasizing improved indoor air quality and reduced carbon emissions. Key findings from projects in North Dakota, South Dakota, China, and Minnesota illustrate both performance outcomes and financial considerations for implementing Passive House designs.
Commercial Passive House Case Studies
- 1. Passive House for Commercial Projects Tim Eian, Dipl.-Ing. Certified Passive House Planner & Consultant
- 2. Learning Objectives 1.Introduction and relevant work 2.The Passive House Building Energy Standard 3.Case Study 1: BioHaus Environmental Living Center North America’s first certified Passive House in Bemidji, MN 4.Case Study 2: State of South Dakota Impact of Passive House for the State of South Dakota 5.Case Study 3: Hongqiao Lvyuan Condos EnerPHit (Passive House retrofit) in Shanghai, China 6.Case Study 4: Hook & Ladder Apartments Affordable multi-family housing in Minneapolis, MN
- 3. Building Performance, Measured Results high performance architecture Stephan Tanner Tim Eian
- 4. Milestones
- 5. “BioHaus” First certified Passive House in North America Photos: Cal Rice
- 8. Impact of Passive House State of South Dakota
- 9. Passive House Retrofit Hongqiao Lvyuan, Shanghai
- 10. Hook & Ladder Apartments Minneapolis, MN
- 12. Passivhaus - Passive House “A rigorous, voluntary building energy standard focusing on highest energy efficiency and quality of life at low operating cost.”
- 13. Passive House in 90 Seconds Video: Hans-Jörn Eich
- 14. Think globally, build locally. Global Standard
- 15. Global Adoption
- 17. Tool
- 18. The Path to Ultimate Sustainability
- 21. Energy Modeling
- 22. Conservation first ➡ Minimize losses ➡ Maximize (free) gains Basic Concept
- 23. Active vs. Passive Passive: 4.75 kBtu/(sf yr)Active: 25-125 kBtu/(sf yr) 85 - 450 kWh/(m2 a), typically found in the U.S. 15kWh/(m2 a), maximum target Source: Krapmeier & Drössler 2001
- 24. Energy Footprint Heating (active) Hot water (active) Cooling (active) Household Electricity Heat & hot water (passive) ➡ up to 95% less heating energy ➡ 50 to 75% less total energy Code Passive House
- 25. Energy per Square Foot and Year Gas mileage for buildings. Metrics
- 26. ≤ 4.75 kBtu/(sf yr) ≤ 15kWh/(m2 a) Total energy used to heat or cool a building. Space Conditioning Energy Targets ≤ 7.9 kBtu/(sf yr) ≤ 25kWh/(m2 a) ≤ 9.5 kBtu/(sf yr) ≤ 30kWh/(m2 a)
- 27. ≤ 38 kBtu/(sf yr) ≤ 120kWh/(m2 a) Total energy used to heat or cool a building. Source Energy Targets varies ≤ 120 kWh/(m2 a) + ((QH - 15 kWh/(m2 a)) * 1.2)
- 28. ≤ 3.17 Btu/(h sf) ≤ 10W/m2 Heating energy can be supplied through ventilation system. Heating Load Target (suggested)
- 29. ≤0.6 ACH50 Measured with a blower door in the field. Airtightness Targets ≤1.0 ACH50
- 30. EnerPHit offers a Component Track. Component Targets • Maximum U-values • Minimum R-values • SHGC requirements • Minimum heat-recovery rates
- 32. Predictable Outcome & Measurable Results Passive House Planning Package - PHPP
- 33. Key Benefits
- 34. Highest Comfort
- 35. Superior Indoor Environmental Quality
- 36. Image Source: dreamstime.com Ecology and Resource Efficiency
- 37. Image Source: dreamstime.com Cheapest Life Cycle Cost
- 38. Case Study 1 Waldsee BioHaus - Environmental Living Center Bemidji, MN - 2006/16
- 39. North America’s first certified Passive House building. 10 years of operation. Ground zero for Passive House in the United States. • Energy performance over a decade • Performance comparison with other standards • Operating a Passive House • Key Conclusion and Benefits Project
- 40. Waldsee BioHaus, North America’s first certified Passive House Average energy use since 2006: 33kWh/(m2 yr), or 10,500 Btu/(sf yr) 10-year Update
- 42. Performance Comparison LEED-Platinum (ASHREA 90.1 2004) LEED-Platinum (ASHREA 90.1 2010) ASHREA 90.1 2004 ASHREA 90.1 2010 EU Code 2018 ASHREA 90.1 2013 EU Code Today
- 43. Operating a Passive House Passive House takes care of energy performance. Other systems and certifications are recommended to control: • Environmentally and people friendly use of resources • Operation, facility management • Indoor environmental quality
- 44. Key Conclusions & Benefits • It just works • No need for very sophisticated or complicated systems • Indoor environmental quality is fantastic • Energy performance is stellar and consistent
- 45. Case Study 2 State of South Dakota Pierre, SD - 2012/14
- 46. Using the Passive House Standard for State projects. What changes? • Differences for the Building Envelope • Thermal Bridge Free Design • Heat Flow and Loss Comparisons • Energy Consumption and Flow Comparisons • Carbon Emissions Comparison • First Day and Life Cycle Cost Comparison • Key Conclusion and Benefits Project
- 47. SDSU, Brookings, South Dakota
- 48. Jackrabbit Grove Residence Hall South Dakota State University campus in Brookings, South Dakota Building E, 2012 LEED Silver, 95 rooms, 190 tenants
- 49. Jackrabbit Grove Residence Hall
- 50. Base Building Passive House Building Exterior Walls R-16 (h sf °F/ Btu) R-34 (h sf °F/ Btu) Roof R-70 (h sf °F/ Btu) R-70 (h sf °F/ Btu) Slab R-3 (h sf °F/ Btu) R-27 (h sf °F/ Btu) Windows, Ext. Doors U- 0.41 (Btu/ h sf °F) SHCG-0.27 U- 0.12 (Btu/ h sf °F) SHCG-0.50 Thermal Bridges Significant Free Airtightness ACH50: 3.0 1/h (est.) ACH50: ≤ 0.6 1/h (field tested) Ventilation w/ HR 51% HR-Efficiency 0.45 Wh/ m3 Electr. Eff. 87% HR-Efficiency 0.45 Wh/ m3 Electr. Eff. Heating/ Cooling District heating/cooling District heating/cooling High-Performance Building Envelope ➡ Opportunity for on-site HVAC system
- 51. Thermal Bridge Free Assemblies Base Building Passive House Building Exterior Interior Exterior Interior
- 52. Base Building Passive House Building Thermal Bridge Free Details Exterior Interior Exterior Interior
- 53. kWh/(m2yr) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Passive House Building Exterior Wall Roof Slab/ BSMT Ceiling Windows/ Doors Thermal Bridging Ventilation/ Infiltration Solar Gains Internal Gains Active Heat kWh/(m2yr) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Base Building Exterior Wall Roof Slab/ BSMT Ceiling Windows/ Doors Thermal Bridging Ventilation/ Infiltration Solar Gains Internal Gains Active Heat Heat Flow Comparison ➡ Heat Load Reduction 95%! ➡ Poor R-values ➡ Poor components ➡ Major thermal bridges
- 54. Heat Loss ComparisonkBtu/(sfyr) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Base Building Passive House Building Exterior Wall Roof Slab/ BSMT Ceiling Windows/ Doors Thermal Bridging Ventilation/ Infiltration ➡ LEED causes building to be over-ventilated! ➡ Major thermal bridges ➡ Poor R-values ➡ Poor components
- 55. Energy Consumption ComparisonkBtu/(sfyr) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Base Building Passive House Building Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Plug and Appliances Lighting Auxiliary Electricity
- 56. Base Building 9% 3% 10% 12% 2% 65% Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Plug and Appliances Lighting Auxiliary Electricity Passive House Building 8% 8% 26% 34% 12% 13% Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Plug and Appliances Lighting Auxiliary Electricity Energy Flow Comparison ➡ Focus on plug loads ➡ Focus on domestic hot water
- 57. Carbon Emissions Comparison kg/(m2yr) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Passive House Building Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Plug and Appliances Lighting Auxiliary Electricity kg/(m2yr) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Base Building Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Plug and Appliances Lighting Auxiliary Electricity
- 58. Building Component Base Building Passive House Building Difference Structural Building Concrete + Steel + Masonry Systems $2,015,796 $2,015,796 $0 Rough + Finish Carpentry $230,339 $230,339 $0 Roofing, Moisture & Thermal Protection $334,957 +$634,957 +$300,000 Glass & Glazing/ Door + Hardware $611,076 +$1,067,076 +$456,000 Drywall Steel Stud Framing $587,489 $587,489 $0 Interior Finishes $451,441 $451,441 $0 Specialties & Accessories $84,406 $84,406 $0 Elevators $95,000 $95,000 $0 Plumbing Systems + Fire Suppressions System $762,800 $762,800 $0 HVAC Systems $518,650 $468,650 ($50,000) Electrical Systems $683,675 $683,675 $0 Earthwork Excavation $122,590 $122,590 $0 Building Investment Cost Total $6,498,219 $7,196,046 $697,827 First Day Cost Comparison ➡ Construction cost increase of approx. 10.5%
- 59. Life Cycle Cost Comparison Annual Annualized Cost Comparison w/o HVAC system reduction Base Passive House $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 Construction Cost Management & Insurance Security Cleaning Inspection & Maintenance Utilities & Disposal Repair Refurbishments Calculation Parameters The following parameters were used for calculation of the life cycle and operating cost: • Duration of assessment: 50 years • Inflation: o Construction (nominal) 3.00% o Management and services (nominal) 1.00% o Utilities and waste (nominal) 3.00% o Interest rate (nominal) 4.00% o Energy and telecommunication • Water (m3) $ 0.83 • Waste water (m3) $ 1.11 • District Heat (kWh) $ 0.05 • District Cooling (kWh) $ 0.05 • Electricity (kWh) $ 0.07 ➡ Annual Annuitized Cost Reduction of approx. 3%
- 60. • Passive House costs less over its life (annuitized and total cost of ownership) • Construction cost increase; approx. 10.5% (mostly building envelope) (HVAC system savings are not accounted for in this study) • Operating cost decrease; annuitized annual cost decrease approx. 3% (mostly utilities and refurbishments) • Improved financial risk management (predictable and lower life cycle cost) • Increased competitiveness and resilience (improved bottom line, simpler systems, less reliance on HVAC) • Increased quality of the building and reduced risk for early building deterioration (field testing and thermal bridge free design) • Comfort improvement (Happier and healthier tenants = less call-backs) • Carbon risk management and premier environmental stewardship Key Conclusions & Benefits
- 61. Case Study 3 Hongqiao Lvyuan Passive House Retrofit Shanghai, China - 2015/17
- 62. First Passive House Retrofit (EnerPHit) in Shanghai. Three, 25-unit condo buildings. 5-stories and 45,000 gross sf ea. Hot and humid climate. • Defining the Building Envelope • Identifying Key Details • Managing PH-Compliance • MEP Strategies • System Opportunities • Resource Shifting • Key Conclusion and Benefits Project
- 63. Defining the Building Envelope
- 64. Identifying Key Details INTERMEDIATE FLOOR INTERMEDIATE FLOOR THERMAL BRIDGES WINDOWS/DOORS SLAB WALL ROOF
- 65. Managing PH-Compliance • Overlay standard details with Passive House details, or design PH right from the beginning • Clearly outline insulation, airtightness, hygrothermal performance and understand climate influences • Define strategies, systems and components which support the Passive House targets
- 67. 120mm Insulation 120mm Only Sound Insulation Exterior Cladding Air Barrier
- 71. Air Barrier Window/ Door Exterior Cladding Insulation 120mm 120mm
- 72. A
- 73. Disconnect Existing Structure replace with new structure (for example steel) at the air barrier/ insulation location Balcony/ Planter/ Exterior Cladding Insulation 120mm Air Barrier Window/ Door Shading (see window section)
- 74. VENTILATION HEAT EXCHANGER BYPASS EXHAUST AIR OUTSIDE AIR RETURN AIR SUPPLY AIR AIR-TO-LIQUID HEAT PUMP SYSTEM AIR-TO-LIQUID HEAT PUMP: - LOAD SHIFTING - HEATING - COOLING - DEHUMIDIFICATION DHW TANK: PRE-HEAT DOMESTIC HOT WATER CIRCULATION LINE MUNICIPAL POTABLE WATER 1 2 3 4 5 HEAT-RECOVERY VENTILATION SYSTEM 1 PRE-FILTER 2 LIQUID-TO-AIR HEAT EXCHANGER: FROST-PROTECTION, PRE-COOL, DEHUMIDIFICATION 3 LIQUID-TO-AIR HEAT EXCHANGER: PRE-COOL, DEHUMIDIFICATION 4 OUTSIDE AIR FILTER 5 RETURN AIR FILTER 6 LIQUID-TO-AIR HEAT EXCHANGER: POST-HEAT 6 "EARTH LOOP" HEAT PUMP HEAT PUMP VENTILATION SYSTEM WASTE HEAT FROM COOLING AND DEHUMIDIFICATION & AIR-TO-LIQUID HEAT PUMP HAC SYSTEM RETURN AIR SUPPLY AIR HEATING, COOLING & DEHUMIDIFICATION (HAC) SYSTEM 1 RETURN AIR FILTER 2 LIQUID-TO-AIR HEAT EXCHANGER 1 2 APARTMENT DUCTWORK HEAT PUMP MEP Strategies
- 75. SOLAR PANELS ELECTRICITY OPERABLE WINDOWS & EXTERIOR SHADING DEVICES DOMESTIC HOT WATER; INDIRECT-FIRED HEAT PUMP FOR HYDRONIC RADIATORS & DOMESTIC HOT WATER HEAT- EXCHANGER; BOREHOLE AIRTIGHT BUILDING ENVELOPE; n ≤ 0.6 h-1 BALANCED VENTILATION; HEAT RECOVERY ≥ 75% EXAMPLE: 2020 TECHNOLOGY MAKE-UP AIR UNIT; GAS-FIRED BATHROOM/ KITCHEN EXHAUST FANS OPERABLE WINDOWS BASEBOARD HEATER; ELECTRIC RESISTANCE DOMESTIC HOT WATER; GAS-FIRED GAS ELECTRICITY CURRENT TECHNOLOGY System Opportunties
- 76. SPACE HEATING DOMESTIC HOT WATER VENTILATION PLUG AND APPLIANCES, UNIT LIGHTING, COMMON LIGHTING, UNIT EQUIPMENT AND AMENITY ELEVATORS TRANSPORTATION Source Primary Energy Site Energy Useful Energy Primary Energy Reduction Factors Efficiency Operation SPACE HEATING DOMESTIC HOT WATER VENTILATION PLUG AND APPLIANCES, UNIT LIGHTING, COMMON LIGHTING, UNIT EQUIPMENT AND AMENITY ELEVATORS TRANSPORTATION Source Primary Energy Site Energy Useful Energy Primary Energy Reduction Factors Efficiency Operation Resource Shifting Energy avoidance enables: • Use of renewable resources, energy independence • Resilience (extended periods of coasting) • Offset with decentralized systems
- 77. • Goal setting right in the beginning is key • Team selection is crucial • Understanding high-performance building envelope principles is critical • First design and model, then build • Understanding the life-cycle cost impact versus first day cost is key to fiscal success, and true value engineering Key Conclusions & Benefits
- 78. Case Study 4 Hook & Ladder Apartments - Affordable Housing Minneapolis, MN - 2016/18
- 79. 59-unit, affordable multi-family housing project. 61,000 gross sf. on 5-stories. First certified multi-family Passive House in Minnesota. • Differences in Construction • Differences in Systems • First Day Cost Comparison • Life Cycle Cost Comparison • Site and Source Energy Comparison • Carbon Comparison • Conclusion and Benefits Project
- 80. Differences in Construction Building Envelope Base Passive House Exterior Walls R-22 (h sf ºF)/Btu R-45 (h sf ºF)/Btu Roof R-40 (h sf ºF)/Btu R-65 (h sf ºF)/Btu Slab R-10 (h sf ºF)/Btu R-25 (h sf ºF)/Btu Windows U-Factor: 0.30 Btu/(h sf ºF) SHGC: 30% U-Factor: 0.14 Btu/(h sf ºF) SHGC: 26% Thermal Bridges No consideration Thermal bridge free design Airtightness No consideration ACH50: 0.2 1/h (Preset and field-measured)
- 81. Differences in Systems System Base Passive House Ventilation Assumed bypass inside “magic pack” heating and cooling system in combination with individual bathroom exhaust fans. Balanced whole-house heat recovery ventilation system with Passive House recovery efficiency: 87% Electric efficiency: 0.45 Wh/m3 Automated controls based on air quality Heating/ Cooling Individual apartment “magic pack” units with ducted distribution (gas furnace heat, electric air- conditioning) Single, whole-house air-source electric heat-pump with individual apartment indoor units and ducted distribution (electric heating and air-conditioning) Domestic Hot Water Central gas-fired domestic hot water boilers with circulation line Summer: heat recovery from air- conditioning to domestic hot water system; summer and winter: gas-fired backup boiler with circulation line
- 82. First Day Cost Comparison Based on predesign analysis, the first day investment cost for the Passive House building is between 7.5 and 17% above the cost for the base building (MN code). This is the first project of its kind in the region and the developer and build teams are new to Passive House— making this a pilot project.
- 83. Life Cycle Cost Comparison 60 years 50 years 40 years 30 years 20 years 10 years Passive House (high) savings 6.36% 7.03% 3.95% 3.13% cheaper 1.31% -5.40% Passive House (low) savings 11.95% 12.87% 9.00% 8.63% cheaper 6.05% -0.08%
- 84. Site Energy Comparison Heating Energy (kBTU/ yr) Total Energy (kWh/ yr) Total Energy (kBTU/ yr) Energy Use Index (kWh/ gsf) Energy Use Index (kBTU/ gsf) US existing 78.8 Base 116,360 581,254 1,983,795 9.5 32.6 Passive House 3,792 196,024 669,021 3.2 6.6 Passive House Savings 112,568 (97% less) 385,230 less 1,314,774 less 66% less 66% less (92% less than existing)
- 85. Energy Cost Comparison Cost Index ($/ gsf) Base 0.482 Passive House 0.328 Passive House Savings 32% less
- 86. Source Energy Comparison Total source energy (kWh/ yr) Source Energy Use Index (kWh/ gsf) Source Energy Use Index (kBTU/ gsf) US existing 127.9 Base 1,106,432 18.2 62.0 Passive House 401,686 6.6 22.5 Passive House Savings 704,746 less 64% less 64% less (82% less than existing)
- 87. Carbon Comparison Total CO2 Impact (tons CO2 equ.) CO2 Impact Index (kg CO2 equ./ gsf) Base 184 3.03 Passive House 109 1.79 Passive House Savings 75 less 41% less
- 88. • Differences in construction and systems are manageable but require diligent, experienced design team—particularly for energy modeling and detail design • Passive House costs “differently” on day 1 • Life Cycle cost are cheaper (not putting any cost value on human benefits of Passive House design) • Energy performance is entirely different; heating is no longer a major consumer of energy; domestic hot water production and plug loads need to be managed and reduced • Fits the paradigm of a sustainable building Key Conclusions & Benefits
- 89. Discussion