uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Comparing the benefits of energy saving measures with seasonal solar thermal heat storage
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Solid State Physics.
2014 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

This thesis compares the effects of energy saving measures with Active Solar Energy

Storage (ASES) on a property owned by Stena Fastigheter. The building is located in

Lövgärdet in Gothenburg and was a part of the Million Homes Program. It was built in 1967, has 9 floors, a heated basement and is heated by district heating. The thermal envelope of the building consists of the walls, doors, windows, roof/attic and the basement.


ASES is a system consisting of solar panels on the roof of a building connected to the heating system. The solar energy that cannot be used immediately is stored in a ground storage unit for when it is needed. ASES can also be supplemented by geothermal heating by drilling boreholes into the ground and, via a Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP), using the heat in the underlying rock.


The ASES and GSHP system combined were compared to energy saving measure on the thermal envelope in terms of reducing the need for purchased energy and increasing profitability. The energy saving measures were: changing the 2-pane windows to 3-pane windows (either by adding a window pane or changing to a 3-pane window), insulating the façade, insulating the attic, insulating and draining the basement, changing doors, replacing the heat exchanger with a more efficient one, and improving ventilation system. The new system, called FTX, reuses the heat from the exhaust air to save energy.


The results of the thesis show that it is difficult to make energy saving measures profitable. Of the measures evaluated, draining and insulating the basement is extremely cost effective, with a payback time of less than two years. Other profitable measures are insulating the walls (renovation costs of the wall excluded) and insulating the attic, but with a much longer payback time. The ASES and GSHP system are profitable and greatly reduced the need for purchased energy, but require a long payback time. The sum of all energy saving measures does not reduce the need for purchased energy as much, or as cheaply, as ASES, which reduced the energy usage by 62 %.


Due to limited solar panel area ASES cannot supply enough heat to cover the heat demand of the studied building. ASES is therefore believed to be better suited for the buildings that surround the evaluated building. The surrounding buildings have fewer storeys, larger roof area where solar panels can be mounted, and open areas better suited for the ground storage. The potential to implement the ASES system for buildings like these from the Million Homes Program should be evaluated further.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
UPTEC ES, ISSN 1650-8300 ; 14006
National Category
Energy Systems
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-220650OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-220650DiVA: diva2:705978
External cooperation
Norconsult AB
Educational program
Master Programme in Energy Systems Engineering
Available from: 2014-03-20 Created: 2014-03-18 Last updated: 2014-03-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2176 kB)433 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2176 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Solid State Physics
Energy Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 433 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 1005 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link