CLIMATE, ECOLOGY, ENERGY
Heating is scarcely needed at all, because 20 to 30 pupils in each classroom generate enough heat to maintain a pleasant temperature in a well-insulated room. A pellet boiler fired with renew- able raw materials covers the remaining low energy demand. An underfloor heating system dis- tributes the heat, which is only needed on particularly cold winter days. In summer on the other hand, the building has to be kept cool. The rooms therefore mainly point to the north or south so that they aren’t heated up unnecessarily by the low-lying sun in the east and west. South-facing windows are fitted with venetian blinds whose slats keep the sun out when it is standing high while still letting enough indirect daylight into the rooms to manage without artificial lighting. These passive measures already bring about a considerable reduction in the cooling requirements. If more is needed, the underfloor heating is changed over to an active cooling system: cold water flows through the pipes during the night and extracts heat from the room. The 10 cm cement screed acts as an accumulator that preserves the coolness of the night for the next day. Electricity is generated by a photovoltaic array on the roof. The annual energy yield exceeds the total primary energy needed for heating, cooling, ventilating and lighting the building. Schmutter- tal Grammar School therefore complies with the energy-plus standards, far surpassing most other school buildings. But the question is, will this annual energy surplus actually suffice to balance out the embodied energy that flowed into the actual construction of the building. After all, on the bottom line it is a case of how much harmful CO 2 is saved throughout the entire life cycle of the building. The eco- logical footprint was based on a service life of 50 years. During this period, the building man- ages almost completely to “recover” the quantity of CO 2 emitted during its construction, giving the school a carbon footprint of nearly zero. The carbon footprint of any building has to consider the climate impact of both the construction phase and the building’s subsequent use. A major role in the case of Schmuttertal Grammar School is played by the very low impact that the wooden construction has on the climate, as seen in comparison with a conventional solid construction built according to the EnEV standard (German Energy-Saving Ordinance). Taken over a period of 50 years, the school in Diedorf managed to reduce the CO2 equivalent for construction and usage by around 95 percent.
Climate potential 50 a in kg CO
2 -equivalence
60.000.000
Building operation Building construction
50.000.000
40.000.000
30.000.000
20.000.000
10.000.000
0
– 10.000.000
Schmuttertal Grammar School
Solid Construction in EnEV standard
Timber construction as passive house
25
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter maker