Net-Zero Energy Building Schools

Wim Zeiler*, Gert Boxem

1
Research group Building Physics and Systems, Department of Architecture, Technische Universiteit
Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Netherlands

* W.Zeiler@bwk.tue.nl

Abstract
In the Netherlands with respect to sustainable educational building the main focus has been
on energy saving. Recently some schools were built as rather environmental friendly schools
with more attention to comfort and health aspects. The first NZEB designed school is
analyzed and the results compared with other more traditional schools. With all the
enthusiasm for NZEB buildings it is good to look into the pro and contra. In the past
important necessary technological and organizational changes were frustrated and thus
delayed as people only focused on the positive aspects and forgot about the possible negative
aspects. This then resulted in disappointing pilot projects. Therefore the article will give a list
of advantages and disadvantages and will come up with recommendations to gain more and
lose less in the process of doing so. The way to approach the design task is to look for win-
win situations, find those solutions which increases the advantages of NZEB while at the
same time improve some of the NZEB disadvantages characteristics.

Keywords: Net-Zero Energy Building, IAQ, Thermal comfort

1. Introduction
School buildings are very important for society as the number of in school children is large, in Europe
alone already more than 100 million. However in the design of school buildings the obtainment of a
good environment is often not considered a priority [Lanniello & d’Ambrosio Alfano 2010]. School
buildings represent therefore a significant part of the building stock, and also noteworthy part of total
energy use [d’Ambrosio Alfano 2010]. In existing school buildings there are very often non optimized
systems in term of energy consumption [Lanniello & d’Ambrosio Alfano 2010]. This had to change.
During the last decades several educational buildings were built with a strong environmental ethos,
real icons of a new generation of low-energy sustainable educational buildings. Also in the
Netherlands during the last years several new concepts were developed for sustainable schools [ISSO
2008]. This is an interesting topic as many of the traditional designed schools have problems
concerning energy efficiency, indoor air quality and thermal comfort. In the case of sustainable
schools much effort went into the design process of the schools to try to find better solutions and to
face the problems of traditional designs. As the icon of this new generation of sustainable educational
buildings the Queens Building at De Montfort University, Leicester completed in late 1993, gained a
reputation with its startling architecture, in particular the distinctive ventilation chimneys [Bunn 2007],
see Fig. 1.

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 1

Figure 1 . Queens Building, De Montfort University
The Queens Building was seen as the first in a new generation of low-energy, naturally ventilated
sustainable buildings. However the focus changed from energy saving to the Indoor Air Quality, as
there were more and more indications of IAQ that even might endanger the health of pupils [Daisey et
al 2003].

Studies at Dutch schools have shown poor IAQ in the average classroom as well as in the more recent
build sustainable schools [Joosten 2004, van Bruchem 2005]. The Indoor Air Quality at (Dutch)
schools needs to be improved. Ventilation of schools in warm climates have a dilemma between the
energy efficiency (EE) on one side and IAQ and TC on the other [Becker et al. 2007]. The challenge
between TC and IAQ also occurs in classrooms in moderate climats: more ventilation means more
energy use. Therefore new solution were sought. One of these is the Passive house concept. The
passive house concept, as developed over the years in Germany and Sweden has proven to lead to
energy efficient housing. The Passive House is the world’s leading standard in energy efficient
construction: Energy saved on heating is 80% compared to conventional standards of new dwellings.
By building a school in PH-standard not only the running costs are reduced substantially. Above all
better learning conditions could be created for the pupils and better conditions of work for the
teachers. Over the past years the building of Passive houses has received a stimulus in countries such
as Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Luxemburg and Belgium. So it is not strange that the principles of
passive building also are applied to school buildings. In a Passive House school the heat from 32
pupils and a teacher is enough (2.0 kW), to keep the classroom comfortable warm during the whole
year. In Germany and Austria several school have been build according the passive design philosophy
[ Haase 2006, Peper et al 2007, Wagner and Jähnig 2007]. The evaluation studies showed very good
energy efficiency. The EE-TC-IAQ dilemma is that either improving the IAQ or the thermal comfort
will both lead to an increase of energy consumption. Passive schools are a possible way out of this
dilemma for schools in moderate climates. However the new NZEB, Net-Zero Energy Building, are
even an step further on the road to improvement. In their development the Adem Joseph Lewis Center
is one of the striking examples in the Zero Energy Buildings Database [U.S. Department of Energy
2008].

The Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies is located on the Oberlin College campus
in Oberlin, Ohio. It houses classroom and office space, an auditorium, a small environmental studies
library and resource center, a wastewater-purification system in a greenhouse, and an open atrium.
Although the building opened for classes in 2000, modifications continue as the energy performance
of the building is studied and is better understood. The building, 1.260 m 2, is part of an academic
program and consequently has experimental aspects to it that are being evaluated [Petersen 2005]. In
addition, improvements will be made as new technologies become available. So in 2006 was the
original 60-kW PV roof installation enlarged with a PV roof over the car park adding another 100
kW. This resulted in a total produced amount of energy by the renewable sources of 145.085 kWh per
year and a total energy load of the building of 128.231 kWh per year. This made that the building net
exports to the grid 16.853 kWh per year [Kilkis 2010].

Figure 1: Oberlin College Lewis Center with photovoltaics on the building roof and roof above the car
park

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 2

We undertook a literature research to compare the results of build passive schools in Germany and
Austria [Boxem and Zeiler 2010] with the results of the first Dutch ZEB school, see Fig. 2, called F2.
The school F2 its electricity consumption of around 14.650 kWh is supplied by 145 m² PV-panels on
the roof while its heating needs around 4000m³ gas ~ 16.000 kWh covered by participation in a wind
turbine park. A good ZEB definition should first encourage energy efficiency, and then use renewable
energy sources available on site [Torcellini et al. 2006]. A building that buys all its energy from a
wind farm or other central location has little incentive to reduce building loads, which is why we refer
to SEB F2 school as an off-site ZEB [Torcellini et al. 2006] as compared to the Oberlin College.
However for Oberlin finished in 2000 with a 60-kW peak PV installation first the annual PV
production was less than the best-case energy consumption scenario. Therefore Oberlin installed
another 100-kW PV system in the parking lot which will be tied into the building’s electrical system.
Off-site ZEB or ZEB the definitions are still not absolute with could mean a disadvantage in setting
the design targets.

Figure 2: First Dutch NZEB school F2

2. Methodology
To investigate the results of the ZEB school approach measurements were done concerning thermal
comfort and indoor air quality. During a week different measurements in schools were undertaken to
be able to define the quality of indoor air quality and thermal comfort. The NZEB school, the first
ZEB elementary school of the Netherlands [van Weenen 2000, van Weenen et al. 2000]. Between
January 29th till March 31st 2004 measurements were conducted in 5 selected schools [Joosten 2004].
Between January 13th till February 22st 2005 the second series of long-term measurements were
conducted in 6 new selected schools. School B2 is a sustainable low energy school and school F2 is a
ZEB designs [van Bruchem 2005].

3. Measurements
One classroom in each school building was selected for the measurements in the heating season during
1 week which include long-term measurements of air temperature, radiant temperature, relative
humidity and air velocity.

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 3

Figure 3: The actual CO2 concentration as measured in the ZEB school building F2.

The average level was determined for which during 50% of the time of use this level would not be
succeeded, CO2-PM50, also the level was determined for which 95% of the time of use this would not
be succeeded, CO2 PM95. These values are based on the actual measurements and the actual
occupations of the classrooms. Also the CO2-concentations were calculated based on the
measurements and the additional increase of the CO2-concentations based on the design conditions of
an occupation of 32 pupils and one teacher in the classroom, the so called CO2-PM 95 33p* value, see
Fig. 4. Also the effective ventilation rate within the classroom is determined by using the rise of CO2-
concentations. School F2 is the ZEB school.

4500
4000
CO2 concentration

3500
3000
2500
Series1
2000
1500
1000
500
0
A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 A2 C2 D2 E2 B2 F2
Series1 1418 3680 1600 2059 2850 1776 3993 2108 3095 1973 1938

Figure 4. Overview results of schools CO2-concentation levels which are not succeeded during 95%
off the time with a population of 33 persons in the class room.

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 4

Figure 5: The actual roomtemperatures as measured in the ZEB school building F2.

Figure 3: The actual relative humidity as measured in the ZEB school building F2.

Besides the measurement there were also held questionnaires to find out about the perceived feeling
about several aspects related to thermal comfort and IAQ. In ZEB school F2 the perceived overall IAQ
satisfaction is in line with the expectation based on the improved CO2 concentration with an 29%
better results compared to the average of traditional schools. However we found out that the ZEB
school does not perform better on all aspects [Zeiler & Boxem 2009].
The perceived feeling of humidity by the teachers of the ZEB school F2 is worst compared to
traditional schools. This can be explained as the ventilation is controlled by CO2 and therefore related
to the hours of use, besides these hours ventilation is kept on a much lower level. This lower
ventilation rate is probably not sufficient enough to dispose all moisture within the classroom after the
pupils have left the classroom. Also the aspect perceived of odour indicates that the overall ventilation
is not enough to dispose of the odour of the pupils after the lessons and maybe also odour of emitting
building materials in the classroom with as result that odour is left within the classroom.

4. Conclusions

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 5

The following table represents the results of the measurements and questionnaires. For the important
aspects the comparison is made between the average of the ‘traditional’ school of series 1 & 2
compared to the specific sustainable design for school B2 and F2, see Table 4. To sum up all the
results overviews are presented of all the calculated mean PM 95 33 CO2 concentration based on the
measurements during the winter period of all the projects and the results of questionnaires about
aspects of perceived IAQ in winter situation.

Table 4. Comparison thermal comfort and IAQ quality of ‘traditional’ schools compared to two
sustainable designed schools
averageΣ ZEB school comparison
traditional F2 school F2
Dutch schools compared to Σ
series 1 &2 series 1 & 2
PM 95 - 33 CO2 2508 1938 23%

In literature some general advantages and disadvantages of ZEB can be found:

- ZEB advantages: isolation for building owners from future energy price increases, increased comfort
due to more-uniform interior temperatures, reduced total cost of ownership due to improved energy
efficiency, reduced total net monthly cost of operation, extra cost is minimized for new construction
compared to an afterthought retrofit, future legislative restrictions, and carbon emission taxes/penalties
may force expensive retrofits to inefficient buildings
- ZEB disadvantages: initial costs can be higher, solar energy capture using the building envelope only
works in locations unobstructed from the South
Although simple in concept, the design and realization of ZEB requires totally different approach from
conventional buildings [Kang et al 2010]. Architects in particular should apply appropriate design
process in order to effectively initiate ZEB design. It should be understood that in order to achieve
sustainable future the current design practice should be changed to adapt Zero Energy Building
especially for ZEB schools.

5. Acknowlegdements
The foundation “Stichting Promotie Installatietechniek (PIT)” supported this research.

References
Ambrosio Alfano F.R. d’, 2010, REHVA Guidebook 13 – Indoor environment and energy efficiency
in schools
Becker, R Goldberger, I and Paciuk M. 2007. Improving energy performance of school buildings
while ensuring indoor air quality ventilation. Building and Environment. Vol 42 pp 3261-3276.
Boxem G., Zeiler W., 2010, Passive House Schools, an inventory of ventilation & comfort,
Proceedings Clima 2010- 10th REHVA World Congress, 9-12 May, Antalya, Turkey
Bruchem M. van. 2005. Verbeterd installatietechnisch ontwerp voor basisscholen om luchtkwaliteit en
comfort te waarborgen, Master thesis Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (Dutch)
Bunn R., 2007, Live and learn: Queens Building, De Montfort University, Building ServicesJournal ,
April 2007
Daisey J.M., Angell W.J. Apte, M.G .2003. Indoor air quality, ventilation and health symptoms in
schools: an analysis of existing information, Indoor Air, 13, 53-64
Haase W., 2006, Energieeffizentes bauen in Bayern
ISSO publicatie 69. 2008. Binnenklimaat Scholen. ISBN:979-90-5044-151-3. Stichting ISSO
Joosten L.A.H. 2004. Field study on the performance of exhaust-only ventilation in schools with
regard to indoor air quality, Master thesis Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
Kang H.J., Lee S., Rhee E.K., 2010, A study on the design process of Zero Emission Building,
Proceedings Clima 2010, Antalya, Turky.
Lanniello E., Ambrosio Alfano F.R. d’, 2010, WS10: The REHVA guidebook on indoor environment
and energy efficiency in schools – Part 1. Principles, The REHVA European HVAC Journal, May
2010, p. 35-38

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 6

Peper, S. Kah, O. Pfluger, R. and Schnieders, J. (2007), Passivhausschule Frankfurt Riedberg.
Messtechnische Untersuchung und Analyse. Darmstadt: Passivhaus Institut, 2007.
www.passiv.de/04_pub/Literatur/Riedberg/Riedberg_F.htm
Petersen J.E., 2005, Oberlin college: From zero to 60 on green electrictricity, Proceedings Greening
the Campus VI, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, September 15-17, 2005
Torcellini P., Pless S., Deru M., 2006, Zero Energy Buildings: A Critical Look at the Definition,
Proceedings ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings
U.S. Department of Energy, 2008, The Zero Energy Buildings Database, http://zeb.buildinggreen.com/
Wagner W., Jähnig D., 2007, Energietechnische und Baubiologische Begeleitungsuntersuchung der
Bauprojekten, Berichtsteil Kindergarten Ziersdorf. AEE – Institut für Nachhaltige Technologien.
Gleisdorf, April 2007
Weenen, J.C. van, Dettmers, W.J.M., Overtoom, M.S.J., Poldermans, H.G.J.M., 2000, Development
of the First Sustainable Elementary School of The Netherlands, Proceedings International
Conference Sustainable Building 2000, 22-25 October, Maastricht, the Netherlands, pp. 651-653.
Weenen H. van. 2000. Passive Solar Schools International Expertise in Support of the First
Sustainable Elementary School of The Netherlands International Workshop, 3-5 March 2000,
Castricum, The Netherlands, Organized within the framework of the National Demonstration
Project of the Dutch Governmental Building Agency (RGD): ‘Sustainable Decision-Making’.
Zeiler W., Boxem G., 2009, Sustainable schools: better than traditional schools?, Proceeding
ROOMVENT, Buxan, Korea

Net-Zero Energy Building Schools 7