LOW CARBON ENERGY


To mitigate the increase in grid connection size, ways of reducing the burden on the grid need to be explored. New and innovative low and zero carbon technologies – such as large PV arrays, battery storage, low carbon generators, e.g. hydrogen to electricity, and other methods of electrical generation and storage – could be considered to ‘peak lop’ the maximum demand in place of traditional fuel oil generators, which have an adverse effect on any zero carbon target.


The general drive for reducing the operational carbon footprint of a building means that increasing numbers of installations are exploring heat generation via electrical sources. The current regional electrical infrastructure in many regions will therefore come under increasing strain. It is imperative that from a building design perspective this is considered.


Conclusions


The two following differences impact the relative economic and carbon emissions between using a gas or electrical heating system solution: difference in cost per kWh, and difference in kgCO2


all countries reviewed have a higher cost/kWh for electricity, which varies from 300 per cent to over 1000 per cent. Through many countries’ commitments to zero carbon, decarbonisation of grid electricity is progressing dramatically, and there are countries where the carbon content/kWh is less for electricity than gas. In some countries this difference is significant, such as France and Sweden. In these examples, the annual carbon emissions through fuel consumption of


a gas-fired system are more than three times that of an electric heating solution. Trends indicate this will shortly be true for increasing numbers of countries. The high coefficient of performance of ASHP technology offers the opportunity to significantly decrease carbon consumption, and, dependent on the ratio of electricity carbon to gas carbon content, this can occur even when the carbon factor of electricity is higher than that of gas.


per kWh. Presently,


With regards to the capital costs of the various options, those for an all-electric hospital are significantly higher than for a gas-fired boiler. This is due to increased electrical infrastructure requirements and equipment cost for an ASHP solution. Looking at other heating system fuel options, the potential future replacement/ combining of fossil fuels with alternatives, such as hydrogen, are still in their infancy. As a result, medium- to long-term predictions on the direction of achieving zero carbon targets are difficult. However, in the short term, routes to zero carbon buildings tend to favour replacing traditional heating systems with electrically fuelled sources. Through the use of electricity- generating renewable technology such as wind or photovoltaic solutions, the overall carbon content of electricity utilised by a hospital is further reduced. Trends in fuel prices and


decarbonisation of the electricity grid indicate that in the short term for many countries, the lower carbon solution is an electrical heating system one. And in the long term, the operational fuel cost will close its margin on a gas fired system.


Due to a key factors such as air quality, potential ability for zero operational carbon, and long-term diminishing kWh cost between electricity and gas, there is a strong case that all heating solutions will gravitate towards this over the coming years. The challenge to the construction and healthcare sectors is to consider all aspects, while thinking of affordability against a more positive direction in achieving a zero-carbon hospital.


hej


References 1 Karliner J, Slotterback S, Boyd R, Ashby B, Steele K. Health Care’s Climate Footprint – How the health sector contributes to the global climate crisis and opportunities for action, Arup, 2019.


2 UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. UK becomes first major economy to pass net zero emissions law, 2019 [https://www.gov.uk/ government/news/uk-becomes-first- major-economy-to-pass-net-zero- emissions-law].


3 NHS England. National Commitments, 2019 [https://www.england.nhs.uk/ greenernhs/national-ambition/national- commitments].


4 UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. Building Energy Efficiency Survey, 2014-15: Overarching Report, 2016.


[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/ attachment_data/file/565748/ BEES_overarching_report_FINAL.pdf].


5 NHS England. National Commitments, 2019 [https://www.england.nhs.uk/ greenernhs/national-ambition/national- commitments].


Peter Thomas


Peter Thomas is an electrical engineer who has been working in the healthcare building services sector for over 15 years. He has worked on numerous hospitals across the UK and internationally, and led the technical delivery of a number of multi-million pound hospitals, with a focus on ensuring a long-term benefit from the hospital to the users – through consideration of facilities management and sustainability in the design.


36 Health Estate Journal August 2021


Hywyn Jones


Hywyn Jones is an associate within the buildings engineering team at the Cardiff office of Arup. He has a variety of experience on a range of healthcare projects, as well as other large-scale projects and infrastructure works. He has worked on several healthcare schemes, both as the design lead, and as a client supervisor. He is committed to low carbon and sustainable design, and has experience in developing electric solutions for healthcare schemes.


Siôn Lewis


Siôn Lewis is an electrical engineer who has worked in building services for over 10 years. He has worked across several building sectors, but has focused predominantly within the healthcare sector. Healthcare projects have involved both refurbishment and new build facilities. Recently completed projects include large critical care facilities and proton beam therapy centres, and his work has also focused on several ‘all- electric’ buildings/campuses.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60