MONITORED ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE IN NEW LOW

ENERGY HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE IN SCOTLAND

Fig 1: View of south faade two-story terraced houses

Leave blank space here

WHICH ARE YOUR ARCHITECTURAL (R)SOLUTIONS TO THE SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC
CHALLENGES OF TODAY?
Research summary

The drive to reduce energy consumption is leading to range of new standards, designs, materials and
technologies being used in contemporary buildings. At the same time, changes in demography and
lifestyle affect how people occupy buildings. Occupants are both the subjects and participants of what
are effectively a series of experiments. To learn from these it is vital that we go back and evaluate the
performance of these buildings. This paper describes the results of a 2-year Building Performance
Evaluation project of three low energy houses for older people in Glasgow, Scotland. Older people are
an increasing demographic, with particular environmental demands and patterns of occupancy. The
study has found that whilst warm and dry conditions are prevalent, and occupants have high levels of
satisfaction, there are some performance gaps emerging in terms of both energy consumption and
indoor air quality. Energy consumption is higher than predicted. Some technical defects were found,
including problems with active systems such as the solar thermal system and building fabric including
detailing and insulation. Achieved demand temperatures were in some cases very high, beyond
comfort levels. The study also found evidence of high CO 2 levels internally, with a specific concern
over ventilation in bedrooms overnight. The key resolution is to ensure that Building Performance
Evaluation becomes mainstream practice to develop feedback loops into design.
Keywords: Housing, Older people, Occupants, Energy, Ventilation, Performance
Insert page break
1. Introduction
The need to reduce current high level of
energy consumption and carbon emissions
from housing (Palmer and Cooper 2011) has
led to revisions of the Building Regulations in
the UK (HMG 2010, SG 2010). However there is
now clear evidence of performance gaps
between design intentions and actual
performance (Green Construction Board, 2012;
Zero Carbon Hub 2014), and there is also
emerging evidence that some measures (for
example increasing building air tightness) can
have detrimental impacts in indoor air quality
(Crump et al, 2009; Davies M, Oreszczyn T.
2012). Within this context housing for older
people is a particular challenge. In the UK there
will be an additional 5.5 million elderly people
in 20 years time, rising to 19 million by 2050.
(Cracknell, 2010). While space heating
accounts for 60% of domestic energy
consumption in the UK (DECC 2013), older
people may consume more domestic energy
(Brounen, Kok, Quigley, 2012) possibly due to
higher temperature requirements or longer
periods of occupancy (Adams, White, 2006).
They are also more vulnerable to cold
(DeGroot, Kenney 2007). This leads to advice to
maintain higher temperatures (Age UK 2013)
that may not be applicable in energy efficient
dwellings. Affordability of fuel costs in the
context of reduced income is an important
consideration (Carrera, Beaumont, 2011). At
the same time there is concern about
overheating (Loughnan, Carroll, Tapper, 2014),
(Brown and Walker, 2008) with some evidence
emerging of discomfort in housing for older
people (Barnes, Torrington, Darton, Holder,
Lewis, McKee, Netten and Orrell. 2012). The
need for healthy environments for older
people is also clear, but effects of ventilation
on this group have not been addressed
(Coelho, Steers, Lutzler, SchriverMazzuoli,
2005). It is therefore imperative that data is
gathered on the actual performance of
buildings for older people and that this
information is used to inform design.
2. Research objectives
The objective of the research was to examine
the in-use performance of a series of dwellings
occupied by older people. The study undertook
a monitoring programme of 3 dwellings in a
scheme of 16 houses built to low energy
standards for older people in Glasgow, UK. The
aim was to measure the achieved levels of
both energy and environmental performance
and to identify the nature and causes of
variations between design expectations and
actual performance. The project was
undertaken in collaboration with Hanover
Scotland Housing Association (HSHA), which
manages more than 5000 homes for older
people.
2.1 Description
The site for study is a new build development
located in Barrhead, Scotland. The dwellings
are designed to provide a safe residential
environment for elderly people and comprise
two-bedroom cottages, flats, and two-storey
houses. These are arranged around a central
garden courtyard with a passive solar
orientation. The single storey dwellings are
placed to the south of the courtyard, with the
two-storey dwellings and flats to the north.
The south facing dwellings incorporate a living
wall to provide natural shading. The design
was developed with reference to the Green
Guide to Housing Specification, and the
principles embodied in EcoHomes. Strategies
to reduce CO 2 emissions from the dwellings
took a fabric first approach, with low U-values
and a passive solar orientation. The three
buildings being studied are a 2-story terraced
house (BA1), an upper floor flat (BB1) and an
end terrace cottage (single storey) (BC1). The
construction is generally timber frame with
140mm warmcell insulation with a vapour
permeable construction, and an external brick
leaf. However BB1 is masonry construction
with blockwork and brick cavity walls with
100mm cavity insulation. Roofs are pitched
trusses with 300mm insulation. Design U-
values are 0.21 W/m2oC for walls, 0.22 W/m2oC
for floors and 0.14 W/m2oC for roofs. The
windows are double-glazed units with a U-
value of 1.8 W/m2oC. Heating is by a 30kW gas
boiler supplying radiators fitted with TRVs.
Water heating is augmented by a flat plate
collector Solar Thermal System (STS) with 2 No.
2.34m2 collectors (total 4.68m2) on the south
facing slope of the roof, which supply a indirect
hot water cylinder located in the cold loft
space. The decision to include a STS had been
taken at a HSHA board level as a means of
saving running costs for occupants. Ventilation
provision is via intermittent extract fans
located in the kitchen and bathrooms, and
through trickle vents at high level in the
windows.
3. Methods 2.1 Subtitle
The research comprised three areas of study:
an investigation into the design and
construction including a series of physical tests;
a process of environmental and energy
monitoring over a 2-year period; and a series
of occupant surveys, engagement and
feedback. The study undertook in-situ U-value
testing, thermography both internally and
externally. Air permeability tests were
conducted at the beginning and end of the
project, and the mechanical fans were also
tested. Information was gathered on
construction information and specification. An
audit of electrical appliances was undertaken
using the domestic Energy Assessment and
Reporting Methodology (DomEARM). The
study undertook remote energy monitoring of
fiscal meters for gas and electrcity, sub-
metering of 6 electrical sub-circuits (cooker,
kitchen sockets, other sockets, lighting and
heating power), and heat meters on the STS
hot water output and domestic hot water
consumption. Environmental conditions were
recorded using temperature, relative humidity
and CO 2 sensors located in the living room,
kitchen and master bedroom collecting data at
5 min intervals. Window contact sensors were
also located in these rooms. Temperature and
humidity was monitored externally. Additional
data was gathered from occupants, which
included basic occupancy profiles and
interviews, but also included detailed diaries
during some periods of investigation.
Interviews were also conducted with the client
and design teams.
4. Results
The study produced a large dataset with
interesting findings across a range of
measures. The principal results presented here
are for fabric, overall energy use, temperature
and hot water consumption.
4.1 Fabric Performance
In general the fabric performance of the
dwellings was good and exceeded the design
values. The timber walls were close to the
calculated U-values of the as-built construction
at 0.198 W/m2oC. The measured U-value of the
blockwork wall in BB1 was 0.26 W/m2oC, some
26% worse. However thermography identified
particular weaknesses, including missing and
misplaced insulation in the roofs, and elements
of thermal bridging in construction. Some of
this may be ascribed to workmanship, but the
issue of buildability - the ability for a designed overall energy consumption is significantly
detail to actually be physically constructed - higher than the design expectation, and this is
was also observed. Measured airtightness was driven primarily by much higher space heating
better than the design requirement of 10 consumption. Actual hot water consumption is
m3/h/m2, with a maximum of 6.65 m3/h/m2. lower than the prediction. The relative
performance of the three dwellings is similar,
4.2 Energy Consumption however the magnitude of difference is
Fig. 2 shows the actual consumption in significantly higher SAP indicated a 24%
comparison to UK averages and theoretical difference between the lowest and highest, but
regulation compliance using the Standard the reality is a 75% difference.
Assessment Procedure (SAP). This consumption
2
is higher than anticipated as is the difference (kWh/m ) SAP Actual Diff
between dwellings. BA1 Primary Energy 99.0 114.1 115%
Space heating 48.5 81.3 167%
Water Heating 23.5 20.4 86%
BB1 Primary Energy 114.0 142.1 125%
Space heating 51.3 120.4 235%
Water Heating 28.8 7.5 26%
BC1 Primary Energy 123.0 199.0 162%
Space heating 66.7 175.3 263%
Water Heating 26.0 19.4 75%
Fig 3: Comparison of SAP predictions and actual
consumption for heating and hot water.

Fig 2: Measured annual energy consumption and 4.3 Temperature Profiles

UK and Building Regulation benchmarks. Overall annual temperatures are shown in Fig.
4 and further context for this difference can be
More detailed energy consumption comparing seen in the temperature profiles over different
predicted and actual use is shown in Fig. 3. The seasons.

Fig 4: Annual temperatures for living rooms, bedrooms and externally.

It is apparent that good levels of temperature
are being achieved across the year. Cooler
temperature in the bedroom of BB1 is due to a
preference for window opening. Temperatures
in BC1 are consistently much warmer.

Feb BA1 BB1 BC1

Temp BED LIV BED LIV BED LIV
Average 19.92 22.41 18.43 21.43 22.32 23.01
Max 22.60 26.00 22.20 25.80 26.60 27.60
Min 15.80 19.80 15.00 15.60 17.40 17.00
S/D 1.26 1.24 1.48 2.11 1.86 2.52
May BA1 BB1 BC1
Temp BED LIV BED LIV BED LIV
Average 21.65 22.74 21.05 22.39 23.40 24.41
Max 25.20 26.00 24.00 26.80 27.80 29.20
Min 18.00 19.80 18.20 17.40 19.20 19.00
S/D 1.33 1.24 1.09 1.51 1.56 2.09
Aug BA1 BB1 BC1
Temp BED LIV BED LIV BED LIV
Average 23.63 23.87 22.29 22.85 24.69 25.26 Fig 6: Temperature distribution living room and
Max 27.00 28.60 25.00 26.60 26.80 29.40 bedroom Feb, May and Aug 13
Min 21.00 21.00 20.20 19.40 22.20 21.40
S/D 1.03 1.47 0.85 1.24 0.88 1.57 The tendency for high temperatures in BC1 is
Fig 5: Average, max, min temperatures and apparent. Even in winter, with an external
standard deviation, Feb. May and Aug 13. average of 2.33oC, temperatures exceed 25oC
for 25% of the time in the living room and 6%
Variations in seasonal performance are shown of the time in the bedroom. BB1 was the
in Fig. 5. Consistently warm conditions are coolest house, but this still has a comfortable
achieved across the dwellings, but much higher average temperature of 21.43oC during this
temperatures are prevalent in BC1 in both period. Both BA1 and BB1 bedroom
living room and bedrooms. Bedrooms in BA1 temperatures are lower and both these rooms
and BB1 are cooler, but not cold and this is have similar periods of window opening.
generally a function of ventilation regimes. The Increases in periods of overheating are noted
increase in window opening (see Fig. 7) in the spring but in the summer more
suggests that this is a primary mechanism for overheating is apparent in BA1 and in BC1. In
controlling temperature. Residents reported the latter temperatures are in excess of 25oC
that they did not tend to change the controls. for 42% of the time. However the effect is far
Minimum temperatures are due to preferences less marked in BB1. This is due to increasing
or absences rather than lack of heating. window opening, but also the thermal mass of
Temperatures across the seasons are very the blockwork construction. There is no
consistent in BB1, but in the other dwellings obvious indication of excessive solar gain. The
temperatures increase into the summer. Fig. 6 living room of BC1 faces north and although
compares the percentage of time that the both the bedroom and living room of BB1 are
dwellings are at accepted comfort levels.
south facing the bedroom never exceeds 25oC this can been seen when comparing
and the living room only exceeds it for 9% of differences between winter and summer.
the time.

4.4 Ventilation
Clearly ventilation behaviours are impacting on
the performance, but the need for good
ventilation is important for this type of
occupancy. Fig. 7 shows CO 2 levels and window
opening.
Fig 8: Seasonal average and peak CO 2 levels;
percentage of time windows are opened.
BA1 BB1 BC1
CO 2 Bed Liv Bed Liv Bed Liv 4.5 Hot water
Feb Ave 1270 1222 974 998 1263 1054 As discussed the measured consumption of hot
Max 2675 3300 1525 2175 3150 3375 water was lower than predicted, but there are
W/O 7% 9% 8% 1% 0% 0% also variations in the STS thermal performance
May Ave 1206 810 686 777 1081 928 and this is shown in Fig. 9.
Max 2975 2175 1275 1500 4200 2525
W/O 15% 13% 91% 6% 10% 4% kWh SAP Actual Diff
Aug BA1 Solar HW output 1119 1298 116%
Ave 1092 829 712 781 1344 1123
HW consumption 2188 1900 87%
Max 3075 2700 1275 1375 3325 4050
BB1 Solar HW output 1119 794 71%
W/O 24% 99% 0% 22% 10% 32% HW consumption 2188 571 26%
Fig 7: Seasonal average and peak CO 2 levels; BC1 Solar HW output 1021 422 41%
percentage of time windows are opened. HW consumption 1962 1462 75%
Fig 9: Solar Hot Water output and domestic hot
The dwellings have substantial periods where water consumption.
CO 2 levels exceed 1000 ppm, which is generally
accepted as the threshold for good ventilation A number of problems were apparent with the
rates. The increased levels of window opening STS installation. In BB1 due to limitations on
reduce CO 2 levels across seasons and CO 2 the roof size only one panel was installed and
levels are lower in BB1, which has a more this is reflected in the difference in output
liberal opening regime, particularly in the between BA1 and BB1. Although the panel size
bedroom. Looking more closely at occupied is half, the output is 61% of BA1. This may be
periods in Fig. 8 shows the extent of this. In due to the panel being aligned vertically. The
bedrooms where the windows are closed, CO 2 low output in BC1 is due to a number of
levels rise to high levels overnight. Data from defects. The quality of installation was poor
this study was used in a wider research project and there have been a number of repairs
looking at the effectiveness of trickle vents, required to this property, including a leak from
which showed that these are generally not able the system. Across all dwellings there are
to maintain ventilation levels commensurate generally lower levels of hot water
with good IAQ (Sharpe McQuillan, Howieson, consumption, and solar production exceeds
Farren, Tuohy 2014). Window opening is the demand particularly in the summer (Fig. 10). In
principle mitigating factor and the effects of these properties incidental heat loss from
overproduction is lost to the loft. If located in
the dwelling the summer incidental gain could
contribute to overheating (Sharpe 2014).
Taking into account over production the
savings to occupants are about 45 (63) and
in BB1 it is only 30 (41).
Fig 10: Comparison of Solar Thermal production
and hot water consumption BB1, July.
Given the relative cost of the system and
subsequent maintenance requirement this may
not be cost effective. In comparison the
consumption of the fridge-freezers in BB1 and
BC1 was 1293 kWh and 237 kWh respectively
a saving of 73 (101).
5. Conclusions
In surveys the overall levels of satisfaction
were very high on a range of issues including
air quality, comfort, lighting, noise and
temperature. Areas of reduced satisfaction
were temperature in summer. A performance
gap is apparent, due in part to assumptions
about standard occupancy, but also because of
some fabric deficiencies, ventilation provision
and a greater demand profile. This is clear in
BC1 where the higher temperature leads to
greater consumption. In BB1 the poorer fabric
and higher ventilation increases consumption,
but with lower (comfortable) temperatures
and better ventilation. In interviews problems
with the STS were common and only one of the
households was confident in using the heating
programmer. It was apparent that window
opening is the preferred (and more effective)
means of temperature regulation. Whilst the
fabric performance is reasonable, the study
found a range of defects, which would not
otherwise have been discovered. Whilst some
of these have been addressed, the importance
of detailing the overall thermal envelope is key,
with attention required at junctions and
openings. The need to detail for buildability is
critical and some standards details were
amended as a result of this. In this project,
individual STS were not particularly effective as
older couples have lower hot water demands
than other demographics. Attention should be
paid to incidental gains, for example HW
systems, but also appliances. There is an
emerging concern about ventilation rates in
airtight houses, particularly bedrooms where
adaptive behaviour is not possible when
occupants are asleep and more consideration
is needed about how older occupants will
interact with ventilation. There is also a need
for improved handover processes so that
occupant have clear guidance on how the
home can be used. The study indicated that
thermal mass may be a useful characteristic in
this type of housing with continual occupancy
and stable environments. There is clearly a
delicate balance between energy and air
quality. Whilst improved fabric performance
may reduce running costs at higher
temperatures, without effective ventilation
this can easily lead to overheating. This
requires a holistic approach to design, which is
not generally supported by regulation. The
study also underlines the importance of
gathering post occupancy information to feed
back into design.
7. Acknowledgments
The project was funded by Innovate UK and we DeGroot, D. W. and Kenney, W. L. 2007. Impaired
would also like to thank Hanover Scotland defense of core temperature in aged humans in
Housing Association and in particular the mild cold stress, American Journal of
residents for their cooperation and help. Physiology Regulatory, Integrative and
Comparative Physiology, vol.292 (2007): R103-
R108.
8. References
Department of Energy and Climate Change. 2013.
Adams, S and White, K. 2006. Older People, Decent
The Future of Heating: Meeting the Challenge
Homes and Fuel Poverty: an analysis based on
(London: Department of Energy and Climate
the English House Condition Survey (London:
Change, 2013) 66.
Help the Aged, 2006).
Green Construction Board Buildings Working
AgeUK. 2013. Winter Wrapped Up A Guide to
Group, (2012). The Performance Gap: Causes &
Keeping Well and Staying Warm in Winter.
Solutions:
(London: AgeUK, 2013).
www.greenconstructionboard.org/index.php/r
Barnes, S, Torrington, J. Darton, R, Holder, J, Lewis,
esources/performance-gap [accessed May
A, McKee, K, Netten, A and Orrell, A. 2012.
2014]
Does the design of extra-care housing meet the
HM Government. 2010. The Building Regulations
needs of the residents? A qualitative study.
2010: Conservation of fuel and power in new
Ageing and Society, vol.32, no.7 (2012): 1193-
dwelling. Approved Document L1A. London:
1214.
NBS, part of RIBA Enterprise Ltd., 2010. ISBN
Brounen, D. Kok, N, Quigley, J. M. 2012. Residential
978 1 85946 324 6, 2010
energy use and conservation: Economics and
Loughnan, M., Carroll, M., & Tapper, N. J. 2014. The
demographics. European Economic Review,
relationship between housing and heat wave
vol.56, (2012): 931945.
resilience in older people. International journal
Brown, S and Walker, G. 2008. Understanding heat
of biometeorology, 1-8.
wave vulnerability in nursing and residential
Palmer J, Cooper I. 2011. Great Britain's housing
homes. Building Research and Information,
energy fact file. DECC 2011.
vol.36 (2008): 363-372.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syst
Carrera, S and Beaumont, J. 2011. Income and
em/uploads/attachment_data/file/48195/3224
Wealth (London: Office for National Statistics,
-great-britains-housing-energy-fact-file-
2011).
2011.pdf (accessed 21/03/2014)
Coelho, C., Steers, M., Lutzler, P., &
Scottish Government. 2010. Scottish Building
SchriverMazzuoli, L. 2005. Indoor air pollution
Regulations, Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
in old people's homes related to some health
Sharpe, T, Morgan, C. 2014. Towards Low Carbon
problems: a survey study. Indoor air, 15(4),
Homes Measured Performance Of Four
267-274.
Passivhaus Projects In Scotland. In: Eurosun
Cracknell. 2010. The ageing population. Key Issues
2014, 16 - 19 September 2014, Aix-les-bains,
for the New Parliament 2010, Briefing paper for
France.
UK government. House of Commons Library
Sharpe, T, McQuillan J, Howiseon, S, Farren, P,
Research.
Tuohy, P. 2014. Investigation of Occupier
Crump D, Dengel A, Swainson, M. 2009. Indoor Air
Influence on Indoor Air Quality in Dwellings.
Quality in Highly Energy Efficient HomesA
Technical Report. Scottish Government.
Review. IHS BRE Press: London, UK.
Zero Carbon Hub. 2014. Closing the Gap between
Davies M, Oreszczyn T. 2012. The unintended
Design and As-Built Performance End of Term
consequences of decarbonising the built
Report accessed at: www.zerocarbonhub.org
environment: A UK case study. Energy Build
[accessed May 2014]
2012;46:80-5.