Real value of U-Values white paper

1

Insulat ion

First Issue June 2016

The Real Value of Improving U-valuesTHE IMPACT OF DIFFERING U-VALUE SPECIFICATIONS ON THE ROI ASSOCIATED WITH ENERGY SAVINGS IN NON-DOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE EAST - WHITE PAPER

Understand the positive impact of improving today’s regulations

See rear cover for applicable countries

Low Energy – Low Carbon Buildings

www.kingspaninsulation.ae/u-valuebenefits

2

3

Contents

Page

Introduction 4 Executive Summary 4

Analysis 5 Background 5 Approach 5 Baseline U-values 6

Construction 7 Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete with Concrete Block infill 7 Floor Construction – Concrete Slab 8 Roof Construction – Concrete Deck 9

Case Studies 10 Villa 10 Low-rise Residential 12 High-rise Residential 14 Low-rise Commercial 16 High-rise Commercial 18 Hotel 20

Conclusion 22

Appendix A 24 Construction Build − ups – Specification & Cost 28

Appendix B 29 Modelled Buildings − Specification & Assumptions 30

4

Executive SummaryThe operational expenditure of a commercial building is a fundamental metric in understanding the valuation, and thus the investment potential, of real estate. The operational expenditure is deducted from the future income streams of a building, and therefore, a higher operational expenditure will reduce future income streams, and as such, give a lower valuation.

Additionally, governments across the Gulf are commiting to cut carbon emissions and energy demand, with programmes such as Dubai’s integrated energy strategy, Abu Dhabi’s Vision 2030 and Qatar’s National Vision 2030.

As such, the demand for energy reducing solutions has intensified. However, understanding the Return on Investment (ROI) that can be generated from the increased Capital Expenditure (CapEx) on energy saving solutions, is paramount to them being considered, by building owners and developers, long term.

With the aim of quantifying the energy saving benefits, and therefore, financial benefits, that result from insulating the floors, soffits, roofs and external walls of new non-domestic and domestic buildings, Kingspan Insulation commissioned Mott MacDonald to investigate the energy saving benefits of improving U-values.

To this end, Mott MacDonald developed a research programme to analyse six modelled buildings that denoted representations of common building types found across the Middle East. The modelled buildings were subsequently analysed, by Sefaira Systems Software, to identify the energy savings obtained via the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions in five different locations across the region: Dubai, U.A.E.; Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; Muscat, Oman; Doha, Qatar; and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Two types of external wall construction, one type of floor construction and one type of roof construction were examined.

The findings show that, despite the requirement for a CapEx uplift for the additional insulation ranging from 0.01% to 3.23% of total development costs, the additional cost of increasing the insulation to achieve the required U-values can provide an over whelming ROI* and energy saving potential:

l 100% of the 1,241 calculations showed energy savings and a reduction in carbon emissions;

l with the potential to save up to 92 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually in just one building;

l 1 in 5 of the total calculations showed an ROI of over 200%;

l up to 84% of calculations for a building showed an ROI of over 100%; and

l all six modelled buildings showed opportunities for a positive ROI – one building an instant ROI and, in absence of that, over 6,500%.

Introduction

“All of the models in each of the study locations showed a reduction in cooling and overall energy consumption when improvements were made to the U-values of the building’s wall, roof and floor elements”

— Mott MacDonald

* The overall return on the additional CapEx investment required for the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions to meet the required U-value specification over a 50 year lifetime of the building.

5

Analysis

Background ApproachThis study looks at the energy saving benefits, and therefore, financial benefits, that result from improving U-values in floor, soffit, roof and external wall constructions.

The U-value is a sum of thermal resistances of the layers that make up a building element (i.e. walls, floors, roofs etc.). This value, measured in W/m2.k, shows the ability of an element to transmit heat from a warm space to a cold space in a building and, more specifically, from outside to inside the building. If an element has a higher thermal resistance, it has a lower the U-value. The lower the U-value the better insulated the building element is. Across the Middle East, regional building regulations are in place, which prescribe different U-value specifications for architects and consultants to adhere to when designing a building.

The complete analysis considered six different building types and commercial variables (e.g. geographical location, energy usage and material cost) and a range of performance variables (e.g. HVAC system type, HVAC operating hours and occupant density)*, that were representative of modern day building stock across the Middle East. The modelled buildings were subsequently analysed to identify the energy savings obtained by improving U-value specifications via the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions.

To establish the extent of the financial value for the energy savings, regional baseline insulation specifications were compared against improved insulation specifications. The construction costs for each different U-value specification were used as direct inputs into the models. The increased CapEx was, therefore, calculated by subtracting the savings due to the reduction in cooling plant size from the cost of the additional insulation. The subsequent outputs from the models were evaluated to determine the energy cost savings over the life time of the building resulting from the increased U-value specification. The ROI was thus calculated by dividing the former by the latter.

* See Appendix B for further details of assumptions used in Sefaira Systems Software

To quantify the energy saving benefits, and therefore, financial benefits, that result from additional insulation in the floors, roofs and external walls, Mott MacDonald used an approach that comprised the following four stages.

Stage 1: Developing the Building ModelsLocations in which the buildings were to be modelled included:

l Dubai, U.A.E.;

l Abu Dhabi, U.A.E;

l Doha, Qatar;

l Muscat, Oman; and

l Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

The following six different building typologies were identified to cover the majority of construction development that is undertaken in the aforementioned locations:

l villa;

l low-rise residential;

l high-rise residential;

l low-rise commercial;

l high-rise commercial; and

l hotel.

Stage 2: Build-up selectionFor each element, common methods of construction were identified as those typically used within buildings in the chosen locations.

For floor constructions, concrete slabs have been insulated below through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board, or above through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard. For high-rise buildings, a podium level has been assumed, and therefore, soffit insulation has been used. For low-rise buildings, the floor is assumed to be connected to the floor so has been insulated above with floor insulation.

For roof constructions, concrete decks have been insulated above through the use of Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC/FM.

For wall constructions, two build-ups were considered, buildings which incorporate a cladding façade have been insulated through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding board or buildings which incorporate an Exterior Insulation Finishing System (EIFS) have been insulated through the use of Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall board. These walls consist of a reinforced concrete structure, which has been in filled with concrete blockwork.

Full details of the construction build-ups can be found in Appendix A.

6

Analysis

Standards and regulations in the listed locations and regions were considered for each baseline insulation specification. The baseline U-values can be found in Tables 1 & 2 below.

Stage 3: Insulation specificationsStandards and regulations in the listed locations and regions were considered for each baseline insulation specification.

For Dubai, this incorporated the Dubai Green Building Code; for Abu Dhabi, this incorporated the Abu Dhabi International Energy Code; for Doha, this incorporated Karamah Regulations; for Riyadh, this incorporated the draft Saudi Arabian Standard, SASO and, where applicable, ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.1-2013 (for all buildings except low-rise residential buildings) and ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.2-2007 (for low-rise residential buildings); and for Muscat, ASHRAE Energy Standards 90.1 and 90.2 were considered as no local standards are in place.

The proposed improved U-values were concluded from carefully considering standards and regulations across the globe.

Stage 4: Cost AnalysisThe cost breakdown and elemental rates for each build-up were ascertained. Prelims, contingency, delivery costs and professionals fees were excluded. The analysis of the cost differential between each build-up for each construction did, however, include a deep review of cost differences e.g. materials, labour sundries. In addition, all costs such as construction costs and energy costs were assessed on a regional basis, and therefore, overall development and energy costs are different for each of the geographical profiles.

Please refer to Appendix A for further details of the construction build-up costs.

Environmental and building performance profiles for each location and building type were created. The outputs, generated by Sefaira Systems Software, were ascertained and a quantified energy saving could be determined by comparing the proposed improved specifications against the baseline model for the specific location.

Please refer to Appendix B for further details of the model used to generate the energy savings.

U-values

Element

Element

Table 1: U-value regulations for commercial buildings across the Gulf

Table 2: U-value regulations for residential buildings across the Gulf

Table 3: Improved U-value specifications used in Sefaira Systems Software

U-value (W/m2.K)

U-value (W/m2.K)

Improved U-values W/m2.K

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Dubai, U.A.E.

Dubai, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar

Doha, Qatar

Muscat, Oman

Muscat, Oman

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia


Wall 0.329 0.57 0.57 0.857/3.293 0.857/3.293

Roof 0.221 0.30 0.437 0.27 0.22/0.27

Floor 1.828 0.57 1.825 1.825 1.825

Wall 0.57 0.57 0.57 1.48/0.857 0.53/0.857

Roof 0.31 0.30 0.437 0.22 0.22/0.31

Floor 0.36 0.57 1.825 1.825 1.825

Wall 0.45 0.30/0.29 0.22/0.20 0.18

Roof 0.29 0.20 0.14 0.10

Floor 0.54 0.30 0.19 0.13

Note: Where the baselines varied, the iterations had two options. The second option would be used if the first option was too close to the baseline value.

The improved U-value specifications are shown in Table 3.

7

Location

Table 4: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using an External Insulation Finishing System insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall Board

Figure 2 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board

Baseline Build-up Costs per m2 (USD $)

Residential

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 256.97 262.26

Dubai, U.A.E. 256.97 256.97

Doha, Qatar 275.33 275.33

Muscat, Oman 244.14 244.14/231.73

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 231.93 231.93/220.14

U-value

(W/m2.K)

Location

Table 6: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a cladding façade insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board

Construction

Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete with Concrete Block infillCost of wall build-up

3 mm skim coated 12.5 mm plasterboard

on dabs

Render system incorporating EML or glass fibre mesh (alternative cladding system)

Bedding compound (render system only)

Figure 1 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall Board

Wall Construction – Reinforced Concrete with Concrete Block infillCost of wall build-up

Kingspan KoolthermTM K15 Cladding Board

Kingspan Kooltherm™

K5 External Wall Board

Mechanical fixings (render system only)

Non−combustible substrate – structural masonry wall

Discrete fixing bracket

Proprietary fixing rail

Cladding panel

Improved Build-up Costs per m2 (USD $)


Abu Dhabi,

U.A.E.

Residential

Dubai,

U.A.E.

Commercial Commercial

Doha,

Qatar

Muscat,

Oman

Riyadh,

Saudi Arabia

Table 5: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using an External Insulation Finishing System insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall Board

0.52 N/A N/A N/A 107.50 102.12

0.45 113.42 113.42 121.52 N/A 102.62

0.29 116.72 116.72 125.06 111.16 105.60

0.20 121.83 121.83 130.53 116.02 110.22

0.18 123.25 123.25 132.06 117.38 111.51

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 112.87 116.72

Dubai, U.A.E. 112.87 112.87

Doha, Qatar 120.93 120.93

Muscat, Oman 90.46 106.58

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 102.12 85.94

Table 7: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a cladding façade insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board

U-value

(W/m2.K)


Abu Dhabi,

U.A.E.

Dubai,

U.A.E.

0.54 N/A N/A N/A 244.74 232.50

0.45 257.79 257.79 276.20 N/A N/A

0.30 262.26 262.26 280.99 249.78 237.29

0.22 268.53 268.53 287.71 255.74 242.96

0.18 277.51 277.51 297.33 264.30 251.08

Doha,

Qatar

Muscat,

Oman

Riyadh,

Saudi Arabia

8

Construction

Concrete wall

Concrete floor

Floor screed

Concrete slab

Kingspan KoolthermTM K10 FM Soffit Board

Kingspan KoolthermTM K3 Floorboard

Hardcore

Separation layer(see ‘Sitework’) Damp proof

membrane

Floor Construction – Concrete Slab Floor Construction – Concrete SlabCost of floor build-up Cost of floor build-up

Figure 4 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard

Location Location

Table 8: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated below with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board

Table 10: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated above with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard

Figure 3 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board

Baseline Build-up Costs per m2 (USD $) Baseline Build-up Costs per m2 (USD $)

ResidentialResidential

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 99.10 96.36

Dubai, U.A.E. 96.87 96.87

Doha, Qatar 103.25 103.25

Muscat, Oman 91.78 91.78


Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 114.30 111.50

Dubai, U.A.E. 112.93 112.93

Doha, Qatar 119.47 119.47

Muscat, Oman 106.19 106.19


CommercialCommercial


Table 9: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated below with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board

0.54 96.87 N/A 103.79 92.26 87.64

0.45 N/A 97.88 N/A N/A N/A

0.30 100.40 100.40 107.57 95.62 90.84

0.19 106.18 106.18 113.76 101.12 96.06

0.13 116.79 116.79 125.13 111.22 105.66

Table 11: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete slab insulated above with Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard

0.54 112.93 N/A 120.99 107.55 102.17

0.45 N/A 112.93 N/A N/A 102.17

0.30 115.56 115.56 123.81 110.06 104.55

0.19 117.10 117.10 125.47 111.53 105.95

0.13 126.03 126.04 135.04 120.03 114.03


U-value

(W/m2.K)

Abu Dhabi,

U.A.E.

Dubai,

U.A.E.

Doha,

Qatar

Muscat,

Oman

Riyadh,

Saudi Arabia

U-value

(W/m2.K)

Abu Dhabi,

U.A.E.

Dubai,

U.A.E.

Doha,

Qatar

Muscat,

Oman

Riyadh,

Saudi Arabia

9

Figure 5 – Build-up incorporating Kingspan Thermaroof ™ TR27 LPC/FM

Roof Construction – Concrete DeckCost of roof build-up

Kingspan Thermaroof TM

TR27 LPC/FM

Damp proof course (DPC)

Paving Slab

Screed Bedding

Insulation upstand min. 300mm from

bottom surface of horizontal

insulation layer

Waterproofing e.g. single-plynon-bituminous membrane

SeperationLayer

50mmscreed to falls

150mmconcrete deck

Location

Table 13: Build-up costs to achieve improved U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete deck insulated with Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC/FM

Table 12: Build-up costs to achieve baseline U-values for each of the locations and buildings constructed using a concrete deck insulated with Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC/FM


Residential

0.29 N/A N/A 219.96 N/A N/A

0.25 206.26 206.26 N/A 196.44 186.62

0.20 210.44 210.44 225.47 200.42 190.40

0.14 215.07 215.07 230.44 204.83 194.59

0.10 229.98 229.98 246.40 219.02 208.07

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. 205.30 208.74

Dubai, U.A.E. 205.30 205.30

Doha, Qatar 217.30 217.30

Muscat, Oman 198.80 196.02

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 188.86/186.22 188.86/185.74

Commercial

U-value

(W/m2.K)


Abu Dhabi,

U.A.E.

Dubai,

U.A.E.

Doha,

Qatar

Muscat,

OmanRiyadh,

Saudi Arabia

10

Case Studies

Villa

A typical new build Villa located in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. The building comprises two storeys, three bedrooms and a ground floor area of 125 m2. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of VRF fan coil unit with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 116.72 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 206.26 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 115.56 Total Fabric Uplift ($) 460.64 (0.16% of total development costs) Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 52,538 Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 34.03 Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 356 Return on additional CapEx 5,412%

Table 14: Details of the baseline villa building model in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™

insulation solutions

Table 15: Details of an improved villa building model in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 115.39 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.31 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 205.30 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.36 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 114.30 Total Development Cost ($) 282,038.03 Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 53,131

Description Value

Baseline Building

Description Value

Improved Building

11

Table 16: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled villa insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions.

Across all locations, the fabric uplift for the villa was the highest of all the modelled buildings at between 0.11 and 3.23% of the total development costs, with 3.23% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift. However, the villa model calculations still concluded in 57% of calculations giving a positive ROI, across all locations, and 100% of calculations in Muscat, Oman and Dubai, U.A.E.. It also concluded in the highest ROI within the whole study, at instant ROIs being calculated in Muscat and Dubai.

The villa showed the largest improvements when improving U-values, with peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 12.7% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and 12.3%, 9.2%, 6.8% and 6.1% in Muscat, Abu Dhabi, Doha and Dubai, respectively.

Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 8.9% in Muscat, Oman. In Saudi Arabia, this represented the largest carbon emission reduction of up to 8.9% and 2.9 tonnesCO2/year.

The results showed improving the floor U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI, but the smallest energy reductions. However, increasing the wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions and, furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification.

ROI: Modelled Villa

Location Roof Wall Floor

Annual Energy Saving (kWh/year)

Carbon Emissions Savings (kgCO2/year) ROI

Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.45 625 375 Instant

0.25 0.29 0.45 1,289 773 799%

0.25 0.45 0.30 645 387 915%

0.20 0.18 0.30 1,805 1,042 242%

0.14 0.18 0.30 1,915 1,147 219%

0.14 0.20 0.19 1,826 1,095 222%

0.10 0.18 0.13 1,973 1,183 143%

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E 0.25 0.29 0.30 1,204 723 602%

0.20 0.29 0.30 1,311 787 337%

0.14 0.29 0.30 1,441 865 246%

0.14 0.18 0.30 1,847 1,109 154%

0.10 0.20 0.19 1,923 1,154 118%

0.25 0.45 0.54 1,215 603 527%

0.25 0.29 0.54 1,971 978 222%

0.20 0.29 0.30 2,143 1,063 125%

0.14 0.29 0.30 2,290 1,136 102%

Muscat, Oman 0.20 0.29 0.54 4,485 2,570 1,585%

0.20 0.52 0.19 3,713 2,128 Instant

0.20 0.54 0.54 3,713 2,128 6,927%

0.14 0.29 0.30 4,665 2,674 499%

0.10 0.18 0.13 5,142 2,947 126%

0.14 0.18 0.30 5,057 2,898 219%

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 0.25 0.29 0.54 831 605 138%

Dubai, U.A.E.

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar

Muscat, Oman

Improved U-values (W/m2.K)

Summary

12

Case Studies

Low-rise Residential

A typical new build low-rise residential building located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The building comprises five storeys and a total floor area of 5,711 m2, and a ground floor area of 1,125 m2. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.29 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 105.60 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 186.62 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 107.17 Total Fabric Uplift ($) 12,566.43 (0.20% of total development costs) Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 549,260 Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 2,120.48 Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 5,847 Return on additional CapEx 205%

Table 17: Details of the baseline low-rise residential building model in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.53 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 87.64 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.31 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 190.40 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 1.825 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 100.88 Total Development Cost ($) 6,175,482.25 Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 557,303

Table 18: Details of an improved low-rise residential building model in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Description Value

Description Value

Baseline Building

Improved Building

13

ROI: Modelled Low-rise Residential Building

Table 19: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled Low-rise residential building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions

Across all locations, the fabric uplift for the low-rise residential building was between 0.06 and 1.35% of the total development costs, with 1.35% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.

The model calculations concluded in the most improved U-value combinations that would provide a positive ROI, at 84% across all locations, and 100% of calculations in Muscat, Oman and Dubai, U.A.E.

The low-rise residential building showed the second largest improvements when improving U-values, with peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 9.4%. Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 6.5%, which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 6.5% and 25 tonnesCO2/year. It concluded in the second highest ROI within the whole study, at ROI of up to 3,242% being calculated in Muscat.

The results showed improving the floor U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI, but the smallest energy reductions. However, increasing the wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions and, furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification.

0.25 0.45 0.45 4,501 2,700 1,869%

0.10 0.18 0.13 16,425 9,855 154%

0.25 0.18 0.45 11,297 6,778 248%

0.25 0.45 0.30 5,906 3,243 764%

0.20 0.29 0.30 7,365 4,419 189%

0.14 0.20 0.19 10,670 6,402 120%

0.25 0.45 0.30 3,457 2,075 446%

0.25 0.45 0.45 12,850 6,374 323%

0.20 0.29 0.30 19,153 9,500 129%

0.25 0.20 0.45 19,503 9,673 105%

0.20 0.29 0.30 37,808 21,664 712%

0.14 0.20 0.19 42,492 24,348 322%

0.10 0.18 0.13 44,472 25,483 198%

0.20 0.45 0.45 32,370 18,548 3,242%

Riyadh 0.25 0.45 0.45 5,280 3,838 476%

0.20 0.29 0.30 9,634 7,004 145%

0.25 0.18 0.45 11,072 8,049 112%

Dubai, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar

Muscat, Oman


Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Summary





14

Case Studies

High-rise Residential

A typical new build high-rise residential building located in Dubai, U.A.E. The building comprises fourty three storeys and a total floor area of 111,886 m2, 2,602 m2 per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 257.79 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.25 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 206.26 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.45 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 97.88 Total Fabric Uplift ($) 36,155.89 (0.016% of total development costs) Projected annual energy Usage (kWhr/year) 20,167,376 Saving on Cooling Equipment ($) 5,506.20 Carbon Emissions Reduction (kgCO2/year) 4,999 Return on additional CapEx 165%

Table 20: Details of the baseline high-rise residential building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Wall U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57 Wall build-up costs ($/m2) 256.97 Roof U-value (W/m2.K) 0.30 Roof build-up costs ($/m2) 205.30 Floor U-value (W/m2.K) 0.57 Floor build-up costs ($/m2) 96.87 Total Development Cost ($) 215,796,717.29 Projected Annual Energy Usage (kWhr/year) 20,175,708

Table 21: Details of an improved high-rise residential building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Description Value

Description Value

Baseline Building

Improved Building

15

ROI: Modelled High-rise Residential Building

Table 22: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled high-rise residential building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions

All locations showed examples where a positive return on investment could be made by improving the U-value specification, with 882% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia being the highest.

The high-rise residential building showed peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 1.9%. Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 0.7%, which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 0.7% and 92 tonnesCO2/year. By amount, this was the highest reduction in carbon emissions in the study.

Across all locations, the fabric uplift was the lowest out of the six modelled buildings, at between 0.01 and 0.41% of development costs, with 0.41% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift. Additionally, due to the height of the building, the uplift for the wall insulation was significantly higher than when improving the U-value specification in the roof and floor.

Subsequently, the results showed improving the floor and roof U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI. However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions and, furthermore, that improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification. In most cases, this would not produce a positive ROI, however, it is safe to assume that as we see energy prices increase, this will change.

Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.30 8,527 5,116 139%

0.20 0.45 0.45 9,090 5,454 133%

0.14 0.45 0.30 9,293 5,576 118%

0.25 0.13 0.45 27,083 16,250 21%

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E 0.25 0.45 0.30 13,220 7,932 181%

0.20 0.45 0.30 14,352 8,611 147%

0.14 0.45 0.30 15,545 9,327 124%

0.25 0.22 0.30 42,430 25,458 42%

Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.45 0.54 34,258 16,992 226%

0.20 0.45 0.30 34,995 17,357 119%

0.14 0.45 0.54 37,095 18,399 119%

0.25 0.22 0.54 57,786 28,662 21%

Riyadh 0.20 0.54 0.54 45,914 33,379 882%

0.20 0.30 0.54 101,733 73,960 145%

0.14 0.54 0.54 48,473 35,240 526%

0.14 0.30 0.30 98,283 71,452 127%

Dubai, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar


Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Summary





16

Case Studies

Low-rise Commercial

A typical new build low-rise commercial building located in Muscat, Oman. The building comprises nine storeys and a total floor area of 5,400 m2, 600 m2 per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.


Table 23: Details of the baseline low-rise commercial building model in Muscat, Oman insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions


Table 24: Details of an improved low-rise commercial building model in Muscat, Oman insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Description Value

Description Value

Baseline Building

Improved Building

17

ROI: Modelled Low-rise Commercial Building

Table 25: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled low-rise commercial building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions.

Four locations showed examples where a positive return on investment could be made by improving the U-value specification, with 1,361% in Dubai, U.A.E. being the highest. 100% of the improved U-value calculations in Muscat, Oman and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia gave a positive ROI and 93% of the calculations in Dubai, U.A.E..

Across all locations, the fabric uplift was mid-range, as expected, at between 0.04 and 1.77% of development costs, with 1.77% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.

The low-rise commercial building showed peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 12.6% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 2.6%, which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 2.6%

and 31.9 tonnesCO2/year. For other locations reductions in peak cooling demand were up to 5.9%, 1.3%, 1.2%, and 0.1% in Muscat, Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, respectively.

The results showed improving the floor and roof U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI. However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions. Furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification, in some instances double the energy savings. In most cases, this also produced a positive ROI.

Dubai, U.A.E. 0.25 0.45 0.45 3,095 1,857 1,361%

0.25 0.45 0.30 3,289 1,973 674%

0.20 0.45 0.30 3,337 2,002 376%

0.20 0.18 0.30 8,176 4,905 126%

0.10 0.18 0.19 8,415 5,049 106%

Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.45 0.54 4,810 2,386 368%

0.25 0.29 0.54 8,703 4,317 146%

0.20 0.45 0.54 5,239 2,599 205%

0.20 0.30 0.29 9,319 4,623 118%

Muscat, Oman 0.25 0.52 0.54 40,306 23,095 374%

Oman 0.20 0.52 0.54 40,490 23,201 347%

0.10 0.29 0.30 46,290 26,542 235%

0.10 0.18 0.13 48,752 27,935 160%

Riyadh 0.25 0.52 0.54 39,449 28,680 718%

0.25 0.18 0.54 44,345 32,239 338%

0.10 0.29 0.30 42,616 30,982 403%

0.10 0.18 0.13 43,927 31,935 255%

Dubai, U.A.E.

Muscat, Oman


Doha, Qatar

Summary





18

Case Studies

High-rise Commercial

A typical new build high-rise commercial building located in Doha, Qatar. The building comprises thirty three storeys and a total floor area of 66,680 m2, 3,186 m2 per floor. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.


Table 26: Details of the baseline high-rise commercial building model in Doha, Qatar insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions


Table 27: Details of an improved high-rise commercial building model in Doha, Qatar insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Description Value

Description Value

Baseline Building

Improved Building

19

Table 28: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled high-rise commercial building insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions

The only location which offered a positive return on investment for the increased U-value specification was Doha, Qatar at 117%. Less opportunities for a positive ROI was expected as, where applicable, the current U-value requirements for commercial buildings are lower than residential.

The high-rise commercial building showed peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 8% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Reductions in annual electricity demand of up to 0.9%, which represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 0.9%. For other locations reductions in peak cooling demand were up to 0.7%, 0.6% and 0.1% in Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi, respectively.

Additionally, due to the high internal loading of a high-rise commercial building, increasing the U-value, in some cases, increased the thermal mass of the building and caused it to retain heat. This resulted in the lower reductions in cooling and electricity demand.

The fabric uplift across all locations was consistent and, as the development costs of a commercial building are lower than that of a residential, it came out higher than the

high-rise residential building at between 0.02 and 0.63% of development costs, with 0.63% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift. Additionally, due to the height of the building, the uplift for the wall insulation was significantly higher than when improving the U-value specification in the roof and floor.

Consistent with the other high-rise building, the results showed improving the floor and roof U-value specification offered the highest ROI results. However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions and, furthermore, that improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification. Significant reduction potential was seen in the Riyadh high-rise commercial building. In most cases, this did not produce a positive ROI, however, it is safe to assume that as we see energy prices increase, this will change.

ROI: Modelled high-rise Commercial Building

0.25 0.30 0.43 16,780 10,068 85%

0.25 0.30 0.30 17,123 10,274 84%

0.20 0.30 0.19 17,547 10,529 74%

0.25 0.18 0.43 24,014 14,409 30%

0.29 0.45 0.30 10,458 5,187 88%

0.25 0.22 0.54 24,019 11,913 21%

0.14 0.45 0.54 11,533 5,720 68%

0.25 0.54 0.54 137,358 78,707 18%

0.25 0.30 0.54 144,189 82,621 13%

Dubai, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar


Summary





20

Case Studies

Hotel

A typical new build hotel located in Dubai, U.A.E. The building comprises sixteen storeys and a total floor area of 26,787m2 and a ground floor area of 3,186 m2. The model assumed a standard HVAC System of fan coils with central outside air. Refer to Appendix B for further details of the building assumptions.


Table 29: Details of the baseline hotel building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions

Table 30: Details of an improved hotel building model in Dubai, U.A.E. insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof™ insulation solutions


Description Value

Description Value

Baseline Building

Improved Building

21

ROI: Modelled Hotel Building

Table 31: ROI, energy savings and carbon emissions savings for modelled hotel insulated with Kingspan Kooltherm™ and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions

Four locations showed examples where a positive return on investment could be made by improving the U-value specification, with 2,999% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia being the highest. 100% of the improved U-value calculations in Dubai, U.A.E. and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia gave a positive ROI and 84% of the calculations in Muscat, Oman.

Across all locations, the fabric uplift was low, as expected, at between 0.02 and 0.52% of development costs, with 0.52% representing the biggest improvement in U-values, and therefore, the highest uplift.

The hotel showed peak cooling demand being reduced by up to 7.8% in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This represented a carbon emission reduction of up to 2.7% and 68 tonnesCO2/year. By amount, this was the highest reduction of carbon emissions for this building. For other locations reductions in peak cooling demand were up to 4.1%, 3.5%, 2.8%, 1.2%, and 1.1% in Muscat, Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, respectively.

Furthermore, buildings modelled in more temperate climates, such as Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, showed greater results when improving U-values. This was due to the increased internal loading of the hotel model, and in fact, all of the other commercial buildings that were modelled.

The results showed improving the floor and roof U-value specification offered the best opportunity for a positive ROI. However, increased wall insulation, by far, had the greatest impact on energy usage and carbon emissions. Furthermore, improving the U-value in the walls could significantly reduce the building’s energy consumption as opposed to the energy consumption calculated when improving the floor and roof specification, in some instances double the energy savings. In most cases, this also produced a positive ROI.

0.25 0.45 0.45 25,363 15,217 1,334%

0.14 0.20 0.19 57,305 34,383 162%

Doha,Qatar 0.25 0.20 0.45 46,992 28,195 178%

0.25 0.29 0.30 57,146 28,345 135%

0.20 0.45 0.45 41,402 20,536 323%

0.25 0.45 0.45 48,021 27,516 888%

0.14 0.20 0.19 82,127 47,058 103%

0.25 0.45 0.45 52,396 38,092 2,999%

0.20 0.29 0.30 73,796 53,650 375%

0.25 0.18 0.45 83,558 60,747 131%

0.20 0.45 0.45 55,887 40,630 1,203%

Summary

Dubai, U.A.E.

Doha, Qatar


Muscat, Oman





22

Conclusion

It is clear from Mott MacDonald’s findings that improving the U-value specifications, over and above that required by local regulations, in the floor, roof and external walls, should be a consideration for energy conscious architects, consultants, building owners, tenants and developers who are looking to build energy efficient buildings with a return on investment.

On the whole, the reduction in energy charges, resulting from the specification of Kingspan Kooltherm™ wall, soffit and floor insulation solutions and Kingspan Thermaroof ™ insulation solutions, is far greater than the CapEx ‘cost’ of the additional insulation. The offsetting of the CapEx ‘cost’ of the reduced energy charges, is further underpinned by the findings in the modelled buildings.

Policy and legislation need to continue to target those activities that consume vast amounts of energy and contribute most to CO2 emissions, buildings in particular, which account for over 50% of energy usage in all of the modelled regions. Stricter requirements for the building envelope can, quite clearly, help to solve this problem.

In addition, it is key to focus on the positive effect of U-values and understanding that should the value not be matched, the energy consumption of the building will increase, and thus, the energy charges and building valuations follow suit.

Finally, whilst the carbon emissions and energy savings should remain constant for each of the modelled buildings, one factor that may change in the near future is energy costs. As energy prices increase, it is safe to assume that the ROI on the increased insulation will increase also, giving the occupier and developer an even better return.

Improving the U-value specifications, over and above that required by local regulations, in the floor, roof and external walls, should be a consideration for energy conscious architects, consultants, building owners, tenants and developers.

23

24

Appendix A

Construction Build–ups – Specification & CostConstruction Build–up SpecificationsThe floor, soffit, roof and external wall constructions and corresponding build–up specifications used in the analysis are defined by Kingspan Insulation LLC. The U–values are calculated using the methods detailed in:

l BS EN ISO 6946: 2007 (Building components & building elements. Thermal resistance & thermal transmittance. Calculation method);

l BS EN ISO 13370: 2007 (Thermal performance of buildings. Heat transfer via the ground. Calculation methods); and

l using the conventions set out in BR 443 (Conventions for U–value calculations).

For the purpose of these calculations, the standard of workmanship is assumed good therefore the correction factor for air gaps is ignored.

Build–up Cost Breakdown & Elemental Rates

Cost data for the components comprising the build–ups has been researched and determined by the relevant building professionals at Mott MacDonald, namely Quantity Surveyors.

Prelims, contingency, delivery costs and professional fees are not included for in the total cost shown for the build–ups, neither is an allowance for a damp proof membrane (where applicable).

25

Appendix A

Paving slabs Screed bedding Sarnafil polymeric waterproofing membrane Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC FM; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 50mm long; helical fixing 100mm Sisalkraft vapour control barrier 150mm laps; Insulex garde 714; single sided Screed Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Total

50.47 21.63

42.51

24.35

3.94

15.18 92.44

250.52

Description

50.47 21.63

42.51

47.61

3.94

15.18 92.44

273.78

50.47 21.63

42.51

29.87

3.94

15.18 92.44

256.04

Table A–2: Roof Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Concrete Deck.

Paving slabs Screed bedding Sarnafil polymeric waterproofing membrane Kingspan Thermaroof™ TR27 LPC FM; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 50mm long; helical fixing 100mm Sisalkraft vapour control barrier 150mm laps; Insulex garde 714; single sided Screed Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Total

Description

50.47 21.63

42.51

18.87

3.94

15.18 92.44

245.03

50.47 21.63

42.51

18.24

3.94

15.18 92.44

244.40

50.47 21.63

42.51

19.39

3.94

15.1892.44

245.55

50.47 21.63

42.51

22.34

3.94

15.18 92.44

248.50

Flat roof U-value (W/m2.K)

Flat roof U-value (W/m2.K)

0.270.31 / 0.30 / 0.29 0.250.46

50.47 21.63

42.51

15.27

3.94

15.18 92.44

241.44

Table A–1: Roof Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Concrete Deck.

Roof Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

Roof Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

0.20 0.100.140.221

26

Appendix A

Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 25mm long; helical fixing 75mm Total

1.825

100.16

14.56

114.72

100.16

15.16

115.32

100.16

16.36

116.52

100.16

17.82

117.98

100.16

19.36

119.52

Description 0.450.57 / 0.54 0.36 0.30

Soffit U-value (W/m2.K)

Table A–3: Floor Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Soffit.

Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Kingspan Kooltherm™ K10 FM Soffit Board; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 25mm long; helical fixing 75mm Total

0.20 / 0.19

100.16

26.24

126.40

Description

100.16

38.87

139.03

0.13

100.16

33.91

134.07

0.19

Soffit U-value (W/m2.K)

Table A–4: Floor Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Soffit.

Screed Sisalkraft vapour control barrier 150mm laps; Insulex garde 714; single sided Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide; themally broken 30mm long; helical fixing 75mm Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Total

Screed Sisalkraft vapour control barrier 150mm laps; Insulex garde 714; single sided Kingspan Kooltherm™ K3 Floorboard; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide; themally broken 30mm long; helical fixing 75mm Concrete deck 2000 Kg/m3

Total

Description

Description 0.150.20

Floor U-value (W/m2.K)

Floor U-value (W/m2.K)

1.825 / 1.65

0.30

15.18

3.94

13.46

100.16 132.74

15.18

3.94

18.29

100.16 137.57

0.57 / 0.54

15.18

3.94

15.16

100.16 134.44

15.18

3.94

20.13

100.16 139.41

0.45

15.18

3.94

15.16

100.16 134.44

15.18

3.94

26.93

100.16 146.20

0.13

0.36

15.18

3.94

16.79

100.16 136.07

15.18

3.94

30.77

100.16 150.04

Table A–5: Floor Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Ground Floor.

Table A–6: Floor Construction Build–up Specification for Insulated Ground Floor.

Soffit Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

Soffit Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

Floor Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

Floor Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

27

Factor

Reynobold cladding; aluminium composite materials cassettes with thermoplastic cores, back ventilated, vapour control membrane and aluminium support system - 4mm thick Ventilated cladding zone Kingspan Kooltherm™ K15 Cladding Board; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 25mm long; helical fixing 75mm Blockwork 2000 Kg/m3

Total

0.86Description

0.450.57 / 54 0.30 0.22 0.18

229.04

-

15.51

60.62

305.17

229.04

-

16.26

60.62

305.92

229.04

-

17.23

60.62

306.89

229.04

-

22.56

60.62

312.22

229.04

-

30.20

60.62

319.68

229.04

-

40.72

60.62

330.37

Table A–8: Wall Construction Build–up Specification for Ventilated Cladding Facade.

Sika Polymer render Kingspan Kooltherm™ K5 External Wall Board; telescopic tube fastener, polyamide, thermally broken 20mm long; helical fixing 75mm Bedding compound Blockwork 2000 Kg/m3

Total

1.483.293

52.46

12.22

7.93

60.62 133.23

52.46

-

-60.62

113.08

52.46

14.01

7.93

60.62

135.02

52.46

17.94

7.93

60.62 138.95

52.46

24.03

7.93

60.62145.03

52.46

25.73

7.93

60.62 146.73

Description0.45

52.46

13.36

7.93

60.62 134.97

0.57 / 0.53 0.329 / 0.29 0.20 0.18

External Wall U-value (W/m2.K)

External Wall U-value (W/m2.K)

Table A–7: Wall Construction Build–up Specification for External Insulation Finishing System.

Wall Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

Wall Build–up Cost ($/sq.m)

28

United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates Oman Saudi Arabia Qatar

Country City Location Factor

DubaiAbu Dhabi

MuscatRiyadhDoha

0.84 0.84 0.80 0.76 0.90

Country City Currency $1 = (21/03/16)

Table A–10: Location Factors Used Within the Costing Model

United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates Oman Saudi Arabia Qatar

DubaiAbu Dhabi

MuscatRiyadhDoha

DirhamDirham

Rial OmaniSaudi RiyalQatari Riyal

3.67315 AED 3.67315 AED 0.38470 OMR 3.75007 SAR 3.64150 QAR

Table A–9: Currency Exchange Rates Used Within the Costing Model

The following location factors and currency exchange rates, found in tables A-9 and A10, have been used within the model.

29

Modelled Buildings – Specification & AssumptionsModelled SpecificationsBuilding Envelope specifications, energy usage and internal conditions have been researched and determined by the relevant building professionals at Mott MacDonald, namely Sustainability Consultants, and via the use of Sefaira Systems Software.

Appendix B

30

Villa Low-rise Residential High-rise Residential Low-rise Office High-rise Office Hotel

Building Form & Layout Storeys 2 5 43 9 33 16

FloorArea m2 266 5,711 111,886 5,400 66,660 26,787

Ground Floor Area m2 125 1,255 2,602 600 2,020 3,186

Roof Area m2 140 1,255 2,602 600 2,020 3,272

Storey Height m 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.4 3.8 3.4

Window to Wall Ratio % <40% 35% 50% 40% 50% 40%

HVAC System Type VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r

Envelope Glazing Type Descr ipt ion Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing

Glazing U-value W/m2K 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7

SHGC 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

Shading Use Model Shading? Yes/No Yes No - assume balconies No - assume balconies Yes Yes No - assume balconies

Walls Structure Descr ipt ion Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame

Wall Type Descr ipt ionDouble sk in thermal ly insulated concrete

b lockwork with p laster renderDouble sk in thermal ly insulated concrete

b lockwork with p laster renderConcrete Block with a lumin ium framed

double g lazed curta in wal l systemConcrete Block with a lumin ium framed



double g lazed curta in wal l system

Floor Finish Descr ipt ion Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les

Roof Type Descr ipt ionConcrete hourdi s lab system consist ing

of main and distr ibut ion r ib beamsReinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab

Infiltration Type Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area

Infiltration m3m2.h 5.4 5.4 5.4 7.2 7.2 7.2

Internal Conditions Occupant Density m2/person 20 20 20 10 10 15

Equipment Power Density W/m2 5 5 10 20 20 5

Lighting Power Density W/m2 5 5 7.5 10 15 12

Setpoint Temperatures ºC 20-24 20-24 20-24 21-24 21-24 21-24

Setback Temperature ºC 18-28 18-28 18-28 18-28- 18-28- 21-24

Outside Air Rate / Person L/s.person 12 12 12 12 12 12

Outside Air Rate / Unit Area L/m2.s) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Contaminant Ventilation Air changes 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operating Hours 24hr 24hr 24hr 8am-6pm 8am-6pm 24hr

Setback to Setpoint Ramp Up Time Hours 1 1 1 1 1 1

Air-side Design Air Flow L/m2.s 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Cooling Coil Source n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Heat Recovery Sensible Effic 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Heat Recovery Latent Effic 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Peak Specific Fan Power 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49

Heat Rejection air-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled

Cooling Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop

Heating Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop

Peak Specific Fan Power W/L.s 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64

Water-side Chilled Water Source n/a Air-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler

Chiller COP n/a 3.1 5 3.1 5 5

Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

Chilled Water Temperature n/a 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC

Heat Rejection Source n/a n/a Cool ing tower n/a Cool ing tower Cool ing tower

Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a n/a 0.95 n/a 0.95 0.95

Condenser Water Temperature n/a n/a 29ºC supply -35ºC return n/a 29ºC supply -35ºC return 29ºC supply -35ºC return

Heating Hot Water Source n/a Electr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler

Boiler Efficiency/COP n/a 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9


Hot Water Temperature n/a 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC

Renewables Renewables None None None None None None

Zoning Zoning Stratey One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor

Dubai AD MuscatDoha RiyadhDubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh

30

Appendix B

Table A–11: Floor Construction Build–up Cost Breakdown & Elemental Rates in Dubai.

31

Villa Low-rise Residential High-rise Residential Low-rise Office High-rise Office Hotel

Building Form & Layout Storeys 2 5 43 9 33 16

FloorArea m2 266 5,711 111,886 5,400 66,660 26,787

Ground Floor Area m2 125 1,255 2,602 600 2,020 3,186

Roof Area m2 140 1,255 2,602 600 2,020 3,272

Storey Height m 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.4 3.8 3.4

Window to Wall Ratio % <40% 35% 50% 40% 50% 40%

HVAC System Type VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r VRF Fan Coi l Uni ts w/ Centra l Outs ide Ai r

Envelope Glazing Type Descr ipt ion Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing Alumin imum Frame, double g laz ing

Glazing U-value W/m2K 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7

SHGC 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 .25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

Shading Use Model Shading? Yes/No Yes No - assume balconies No - assume balconies Yes Yes No - assume balconies

Walls Structure Descr ipt ion Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame Concrete Frame

Wall Type Descr ipt ionDouble sk in thermal ly insulated concrete

b lockwork with p laster renderDouble sk in thermal ly insulated concrete

b lockwork with p laster renderConcrete Block with a lumin ium framed




double g lazed curta in wal l system

Floor Finish Descr ipt ion Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les Ti les

Roof Type Descr ipt ionConcrete hourdi s lab system consist ing

of main and distr ibut ion r ib beamsReinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab Reinforced Concrete Slab

Infiltration Type Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area Façade Area

Infiltration m3m2.h 5.4 5.4 5.4 7.2 7.2 7.2

Internal Conditions Occupant Density m2/person 20 20 20 10 10 15

Equipment Power Density W/m2 5 5 10 20 20 5

Lighting Power Density W/m2 5 5 7.5 10 15 12

Setpoint Temperatures ºC 20-24 20-24 20-24 21-24 21-24 21-24

Setback Temperature ºC 18-28 18-28 18-28 18-28- 18-28- 21-24

Outside Air Rate / Person L/s.person 12 12 12 12 12 12

Outside Air Rate / Unit Area L/m2.s) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Contaminant Ventilation Air changes 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operating Hours 24hr 24hr 24hr 8am-6pm 8am-6pm 24hr

Setback to Setpoint Ramp Up Time Hours 1 1 1 1 1 1

Air-side Design Air Flow L/m2.s 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Cooling Coil Source n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Heat Recovery Sensible Effic 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Heat Recovery Latent Effic 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Peak Specific Fan Power 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.49

Heat Rejection air-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled ai r-cooled

Cooling Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop

Heating Coil Source VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop VRF loop

Peak Specific Fan Power W/L.s 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64

Water-side Chilled Water Source n/a Air-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler Ai r-cooled chi l ler

Chiller COP n/a 3.1 5 3.1 5 5


Chilled Water Temperature n/a 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC 7ºC-12ºC

Heat Rejection Source n/a n/a Cool ing tower n/a Cool ing tower Cool ing tower

Peak Distribution Efficiency n/a n/a 0.95 n/a 0.95 0.95

Condenser Water Temperature n/a n/a 29ºC supply -35ºC return n/a 29ºC supply -35ºC return 29ºC supply -35ºC return

Heating Hot Water Source n/a Electr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler E lectr ic boi ler

Boiler Efficiency/COP n/a 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9


Hot Water Temperature n/a 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC 70ºC-80ºC

Renewables Renewables None None None None None None

Zoning Zoning Stratey One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor One zone/f loor

Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh Dubai AD MuscatDoha Riyadh

TM Kingspan, Kooltherm, Thermaroof, and the Lion Device are Trademarks of the Kingspan Group plc.

Countries comprise: the Middle East as far North and East as (and including) Turkey, Iran and Oman and as far South and West as (and including) Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

Kingspan Insulation LLCP.O. Box 113826, Dubai Investment Park 2, Dubai, U.A.E.

Tel: +971 4 889 1000 Fax: +971 4 883 8515 [email protected]

www.kingspaninsulation.com

Kingspan Insulation LLC reserves the right to amend product specifications without prior notice. Product thicknesses shown in this document should not be taken as being available ex–stock and advice should be sought directly from Kingspan Insulation LLC. The information, technical details and fixing instructions etc. included in this literature are given in good faith and apply to uses described herein. Recommendations for use should be verified as to the suitability and compliance with actual requirements, specifications and any applicable codes, laws and regulations. For other applications or conditions of use, contact Kingspan Insulation LLC. Advice should be sought for uses of Kingspan Insulation products that are not specifically described herein. The fire tests referenced in this literature and the assigned results are not intended to reflect hazards presented by the materials and products described herein under actual fire conditions. Please check that your copy of the literature is current by visiting www.kingspaninsulation.com.

Documents

Real value of U-Values white paper