Bep-tr, Passivhaus ve Energystar hesaplama yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Son yıllarda enerji kaynakları rezervindeki azalma araştırmacıları ve politikacıları yeni enerji kaynaklarının tespiti hususunda araştırmaya sevk etmiştir. Dünyadaki binalar nihai enerji tüketiminin % 40'ını oluşturmaktadır. Şaşırtıcı şekilde yüksek olan bu tüketimin sonucunda ortaya çıkan karbon ayak izi, ulaşım araçlarının tamamında ortaya çıkan miktardan belirgin bir şekilde fazladır. Binaların enerji tüketimini diğer sektörlere kıyasla daha düşük maliyetler ve daha yüksek getiriler ile azaltmayı sağlayan büyük ve cazip fırsatlar söz konusudur. Dünya üzerindeki insan sayısı ve bu insanların kullanım alışkanlıkları göz önünde bulundurulduğunda binalarda ısıtma, soğutma, aydınlatma ve sıcak su gibi temel ihtiyaçlar için tüketilen yüksek seviyelerde enerjiye ihtiyaç vardır. Bundan dolayı, yapı sektöründe enerji tüketiminin ve enerji ihtiyacının düşürülmesi üzerine birçok çalışma yapılmaktadır. Bu çalışmalarda, özellikle yapıların inşa aşamasında ortaya çıkacak olan imalat hatalarının minimize edilmesi öngörülmekte ve engellenemeyen insan alışkanlıklarına karşı yapılarda ve yapı elemanlarında iyileştirme yoluna gidilmektedir. Bu konuda ulusal yada uluslar arası birçok kanun, yönetmelik ve standartlar yayınlanmış birçok simülasyon programı geliştirilmiştir. Bu alanda Türkiye'de kullanılan BEP-TR, Amerika'da kullanılan Energystar ve Almanya'da kullanılan Passivhaus hesaplama yöntemleri ele alınarak karşılaştırmalı bir çalışma yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmada ayrıca BEP-TR, Passivhaus, Energystar hesaplama yöntemleri kullanılarak binanın yıllık ısıtma, soğutma, sıcak su ve aydınlatma enerji tüketim miktarları örnek bir bina üzerinde hesaplanmaktadır. Bu tezde, bir örnek bina üzerinden üç ayrı sertifika programı incelenmiş hesaplama yöntemleri ve sonuçlar karşılaştırılmıştır. Tez kapsamında, öncelikle zemin kat, üç normal kat ve çatısı bulunan bir bina için örnek bir çalışma tanımlanmaktadır. Farklı bölgelerdeki benzer iklim koşullarında yer alan örnek bina, yapı elemanları değiştirilmeden üç enerji standardına göre analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan analiz sonucunda çıkan sonuçlar enerji hesaplama yöntemlerindeki ve hesaplama programlarındaki farklılıklar açısından değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçları hesaplamak için BEP-TR, PHPP ve e-QUEST enerji hesaplama programları kullanılmıştır.Programlardaki farklılıklar her hesaplama yönteminin bağlı bulunduğu ülkedeki kanun, standart ve yönetmeliklerden kaynaklandığı gibi her hesaplama yönteminin kabul edilebilir standart değerleri de farklıdır. Bu farklılıklar ve bunların enerji performans değerlendirmesine etkisini göstermek bu tezde amaçlanmıştır.

Reduction in the reserve sources of energy in recent years has led researchers and politicians to investigate the issue of identification of new sources of energy. Building in the World constitutes 40% of ultimate energy consumption. Carbon footprint that result from the consumption that is surprisingly high is significantly more than the amount that emerged in all transportation vehicles. Compared to other sectors, there are large and attractive opportunities which reduce the energy consumption of buildings with lower costs and higher returns. Considering the number of people on the world and the usage habits of these people, we need implacable source of energy in the building, which is consumed for basic needs such as heating, cooling, lighting and hot water supply. For this reason, many research studies have been done on the reduction of energy consumption and energy needs in the building sector. These studies focused on especially on the reducing energy consumption of building using design techniques and energy simulation programs such as PHPP, e-QUEST and BEP-TR and on the minimizing construction mistakes that happened during the building process and on the improving the quality of building materials. In this regard, several national or international laws, regulations and standards are published and many simulation programs have been developed. These simulation programs can also determine the consumption level of energy for any buildings. With these concerns, a comparative study was conducted by handling the programs of BEP-TR used in Turkey, Passivhaus used in Germany and Energystar used in USA. In this thesis, the amount of the annual energy consumption of building for heating, cooling, lighting and hot water is calculated on a case study with using BEP-TR, Passivhaus and Energystar calculation methods. In the thesis, we first describe a case study for a building that has one ground floor, three floors and roof. This building is located in a similar climatic conditions in different regions is analyzed according to three energy certificate standards without making any changes on the building physics and materials. We use BEP-TR, PHPP and e-Quest energy simulation programs in order to calculate the results. The analysis results are compared with respect to the different aspects of energy calculation methods and simulation programs.Within the scope of this thesis, three separate certificate program examined via a case study and then calculation methods and the results were compared.Similarities and differences in the calculation methods were investigated in detail at section 4.1. Three programs which have the same basic logic show some differences in the detail. A few of the most important of these differences are summarized below:•Electrical home appliances that are caused internal heat gain which has the effect on the building's heating and cooling energy consumption considered in the calculation of PHPP and e-QUEST computer programs by making specific data entries. But in BEP-TR programs there is no specific data entry for electrical home appliances.•The user profile is not considered in BEP-TR and Passivhaus calculation methods. It is mentioned in BEP-TR program, but there is no information about determination methods. Also specific data couldn't be entered into the program.In order to compare the final analysis results in three programs, HERS-Home Energy Rating system is explained in section 4.2.As described in Section 4.2, the annual energy demand and energy performance value of a sample building was calculated with three different calculation methods. For both the main and the reference building, the calculations were made based on regions which have similar climate characteristics and the same building features (unchanged building elements and geometric features). A design and project value of building was based on the calculation of the annual energy demand of the main building. The minimum requirement values of national laws, regulations and standards were used for the calculation of the annual energy demand of the reference building. As a result of this analysis which will be made in accordance with national laws and standards in their region, the energy calculation methods in three different regions which is close to each other in terms of climate characteristics, it was targeted evaluating the differences of calculation methods and the compared the differences may occur due to the national law, regulations and standards.Calculation methods were studied in Section 2 in detail. In this thesis; BEP-TR, PASSIVHAUS, ENERGYSTAR calculation methods were compared with results of a case study. In order to compare these methods, we use their own tools that calculate energy performance. BEP-TR is used for BEP-TR, PHPP is used for PASSIVHAUS and e-QUEST is used for ENERGYSTAR calculation methods.In order to determine the required energy for a building, the data of the building for entering into each calculation tool is divided into seven main topics. These are:-Entering structural and geometric information about the building envelope-Determination of electrical load-Calculations of internal heat gains-Entering information of mechanical system-The use of renewable energy sources-Evaluation of energy performance results-Performing validation (testing)The methods of entering inputs and data requirements of the programs are given in Table 4.1- 4. In addition, three programs were compared using analysis of building energy classification system which is HERS index of energy performance indicator. As described in detail in the third section a main building and a reference building are created for each building. Then, the same calculation method has been run for both cases and the annual energy consumptions are provided accordingly.As the differences in programs is based on each calculation methods which are connected the country's laws, standards and regulations, acceptable standard values of each calculation methods is also different. In this thesis aimed to show these differences and the effects of these differences on the energy performance assessments.