-
4 2014
/ /
. , . , 11, -1, 212.+7 (7172) 901-636, 901 960, e-mail:
[email protected], www.beeca.net
-
12
32
22
?
- - -
--2014
4
-
3
/ /
: [email protected]
:
-
PR-
-
:
. , . 11, -1, 212
. + 7 (717)2 901 636, 901 960, e-mail: [email protected]
www.eep.kz, www.beeca.net
-
:
., ., 22, 401,.: 8(7172) 44-51-67,
8 707 060 06 26e-mail: [email protected]
?__________ 46 .
: ________________________ 7 .
PRO ECO______________________________________________ 8 .
: _____________ 911 .
_________________________________________1216 .
______________________________________ 1719 .
________________________ 20 .
________________________________21 .
_____________________________________2223 .
____________________________________24 .
___________________________25 .
1000 ____________________________________25 .
- ________________________ 2628 .
DGNB: -________________ 2930 .
___________________________________ 31 .
--2014___________________3233 .
________________3435 .
_____________________ 3637 .
_________ 3839 .
________________ 40 .
Green building stands on three pillars: ecological safety, human
wellbeing, economical efficiency_____________________________ 4142
.
Forces and barriers in energy efficiency of
buildings_____________ 4345 .
Energy conservation at schools as a contribution to
environmental protection_________________________________ 4649
.
Songdo ________________________5051 .
Topical problems of the organization of design and construction
of energy efficient buildings in Kazakhstan_____________________
5253 .
!________________________________________5455 .
-
4
- . - . , , , - .
- , -. - .
[1] - - . , [2].
- , - . , , - , . , , , , , - -. , , , - .
[3] -
- , - 1 . , - . - .
- - [3]. , (-
, ). - .
, . - , , :
Ti=Tiin-Tiout, i=1NN; f1 - , /(20); qi=Ei/(S ti) - i- , /2; Ei (
- ), i- , ; ti i- , ; iin iout - i , .
iin= 23 , - , . . - .
f1 - , Q, /(2) :
Q = (f1 Nf2)0,024, -
, , N - ; f2 .
, , -
?
1
: 6286 , 216 - ( )
= 0,87 610 0,8 .
- 4 /2.
4 /2.
/ - , . . .
-
5
. 20112012, 20122013 20132014 . , - . 1 - .
. - : , , . - . - - .
1 , , 69 , . 139 /(2) - - (148 /(2), . , [1]. , 20% .
. 2 - . 127,8 /(2) , (132 /(2), - -. , 34,3 /(2), - 27% .
-
, 00074950 / - , , 30% , . , , , . - -
1. ( 1), . , ( 2) ( 3). .
-
6
, . - , - . - , - , .
,
. - , . - .
- - , [4]. - . - . - , . -, - -. - , - [4].
:1. 2.04-21-2004*
.2. Energieeinsparverordnung (EnEV), Bundesministerium fr
Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen BRD vom 16. November 2001.3.
..
/. . -. // , , 2011.- 375 .
4. . . - , 2014 .
,
/ ,
, /
2. ( 1), . , ( 2) ( 3).
-
7
, - . - - 20112020 . -, -, , - , , , , .
(, ..), , - . - . , ! -, / - .
- / - . - . , / - 20072013 .
, /, , , . , . 20092013 . - 22% ( 27%). - - - 1,22,8 . , 40% ! -
.
. , -, , . CD-, . - .
- /
, - -. -, , . , 5880%, - 10 , .
, , - , - . - , , .
, , - , - .
:
-
8
PRO ECO .. . . . , , - , - . , ( , ), , .
- PRO ECO - ( ), - ( ).
, , - .
, - - 40%. - , , .
PRO ECO
3 () PRO ECO. . / . .
-
9
:
2011 , - . , - , - , - . - , - . , , .
, , . , , , , , , - , -, . , , . , , . , , , .
, , - , - , - ,
, . , , - , , , , - , . , , . , , -, : . .
- ?
, -, , . , , - () . - () - . . , , . -. , . - , . .
, . , , - , , , , .
, - , -
-
10
- . , , , : , , , -.
, - . - , . , . - , . , -. , , - .
. , , . , . . , - , . , . , - , - . ! () . , . 15 . , : - 2/3
400- .
, . , , - , , , . - - .
, . , - , . , .
. . .
, : , - , - . -, . , , , , . - , , - . 2011 , -, , - , .
, . , , , -. , . , 6070 - -
, , . - .
, - ?
-, ( - ). , 5 . ( -
2020 , , , , :
1 2 30%;
100% 2015 ;
25%;
100% .
-
11 10
,
SEVEN-Energy Efficiency Center, - , :
- - . - , .
, - Lowcost LowEnergy (19992004 .) - . - (, ), , . , - , , . ,
-, , , .
, Ph.D, -
, / - -, :
, - - , . - - ,
. . , - , , - . , , . - !
-, - - . , , -, . , , , .
-, , , - .
, -
-, :
, . - , -, , -
.
- . , - . - . - .
- -.
, , . , - . . - .
- .
4000 2) 368 000 , 4 416 000 . - . - . - . , .
, - , , . . , -
, - 30 , - , .
: , / , - . - , .
, () .
. , , - , , , , . - , , . , - - .
- ,
- - ,
.
-
12
, , - - , - . - , , - - , .
, - , - . , - .
, :
; , -
; ; ; ; -
, ; ; -
- ;
. -
- :
, - - - , - , ;
- , - - - ;
- , - - .
- (. , . , ), - .
, - , -. ( : , , ().
- ( ), ,
20132014 . , . , . .
.
-
13 ,
, (SCADA), - , ( ), -, , . ( ), .
- , , , (SCADA) , -, - . , . - 1,64 . . ( ), 131 000 USD ( .)
128 000 USD ( , - ). : - 52 000 USD, 56 000 USD. 79 000 USD, 72 000
USD ( -). , . - ( ). ( / , - 25 ). !
- , (, , , )
- - , - , - -, - .
: (2013 ) -
( ), , - . - .
(2014 ) -, , - .
, - : -; () -/ ; - / ; / -; ; ; .
, -, , . , - - . , .
: www.eep.kz.
- -
60 , , 50 000 .
2012 1,4 . 23% .
-
14
. .
/ - :
a. - - ( ).
b. - - ( ).
c. (/) - .
d. - 57 - ( ).
e. , , - .
: 125 . . , , -, - , .
, - . - , .
5- . - , :
1 ,2 ,3 , ,4 ,5 .
, - :
1. .2. -
.3. -
. 125
. . , . . . - 45%. .
- -, , , - , - () , .
( ) - - - .
. -- : , , , , . : -, . : - .
53 759 193 ( - 21 021 942 , 16 275 395 . - . 19 545,24 . . ( 50
. )
-
15 , !
7 11 634 ( ( ) 8 143 . - .
- , - . , , . - - . , - . . - .
() -. .
15%, 25%. , , .
. - , , 1:500 - . . Flexalen, - . - , . . - , .
-
- . . , .
-.
- . : 125, 112 (), - 15% , . on-line (- , , - .).
. . () - / . -/. (-) / , - , . - . - (, ) . , -. , . . . / -, .
, . , , , . , . , -. -
-
16
, - , .
, , - , , - , , .
, . -, , :
- .
.
.
, - ( , -, - ).
-, .
-- - ( ).
- ; () . , , .
- .
- :
. .
, ( , , , .).
, -, - .
- .
(- ) ( 23- ).
, - / - , - ( ).
, , - (.. ), -, . - , .
, ,
/ ,
, /
125
-
17
- - , / , -, - - .
, , - - , .
, - - - . , , , , -
, / . , . , - . , . , .
/ (- ) , . -, .
. , . .
2013 , , , . .
-
18
: / -. 184 .
, 1,0 2/ - , (), - , , .
- , . , . -- - . . .
, - - .
, . - 2007 -1. -
, , - , . 3 . - , . - .
, - , . . , - - - . :
- . - . -. , . - . - ( ), , .
- - , -. , , - .
, -. , - , . , .
- . , , - . ,
. 2012 .
-
19
, , .
, - : -, - ( -), , . , .
, - - . - , , , -, , , - , -. , . , - .
, , -, .
, - , , , .
, , . , , - ,
. , - , ? - : , - , .
, , , - , . -, , . . , . . ?
: ?
, - , .
, , , - . . -, .
, - , . . -, . - , , - , . . , , , , , - .
. , . . , - .
. 2012 .
. 2013 .
-
20
/ - . , , .
, 12 . 12 2014 . - .
. , - .
2- -- ()
.
, - . . , . :
- . , , - . .
9- -. , - .
, , , -. - , . , - .
, , .
.
- Green . 3- Samsung Galaxy .
2- - - 230 . iPad mini .
1- , Lenov, , . . - .
- -, , , . .
- , , - , - .
.
/
-
21
, 4- - - (-), , . :
230 ( ). - . 300 . , .
. - , . , - . - .
, 2- - (), , . :
-, , , , .
-, . , . - , . - . .
, -. , .
, , . , , , . , , , .
, - , , , , . ! . , .
-, , .
- , / .
-
22
, , - () , . - . - . , - , , .
: , - , , - .
- , . - . , - , - . - , , , -, , ().
- . (, , , .) - .
, . - , - / (20072013 .) - (20131014 .).
- , - . . 11, 198 173. 3. - . ( 11), , - ( 198 173), . --. 1520-
, , - , . - , .
- , . - , - , -. , , 400 , 500 . . , .
, , - , , . , ( , , , ) .
- , . , - 30% . - .
- - ( ), . ? , -
, , . , , - , .
-
23 ,
, . . - . !
, 11 3 . - () . , , - . , , , - : - , , . - (!!!) , ( - on-line
). , -, .
: 25% ( ).
- . , , - . , - .
- , , - - .
, - , . , () . , , , . , , - ! , , - . () : , - . , .
-
( 11) ( 3), . (), - : , , , , (, ). - () , .
: - (), - . - - (), - . , () - - , , , . - , , , , , .. , - , ,
- . , , , .
() , , - . -, ( , . 31, 42-1, 50-2) - - , - .
.
, , , ( ), . . , , .
-
24
- . . - . , . .
2008 . , , -, , - .
? -, . - , , - , . - .
, , , , , -. : , - : - , . , . . , , . .
, , - , , .
, , , , , , -
. - , (, - ). , , - , - . , . , , - .
, . - . . - , , - , , . : . -, . - , , , .
-, PRO ECO. , - , . PRO ECO , .
: , , . - , , , , , , -. , . -, , , . , . , , . , , . - .
,
-
25
- (Pinwheel House) - . . 1 000 . -, , , , . -, - - , , .
1 000 , , 2008 . . - - , , . 90
. - 800 . .
- 8- - . , , . , - . .
, - . 10 000- .
!
, . , , , - , . - , .
-, , . , - , .
, - , - - . , -, , .
-, . , - , .
: 13 , , . - . , , - . , , .
, 1520% , . , - , .
.
,
, , , , ,
, .
-
, 1000 ,
.
1 000
-
26
- , -- .
- ( ) - :
1) 2.04-04-2011 - ;
2) 4.02-02-2011 , - ;
3) - (2 ): 1- . ; 2- . .
- , ( - . , . , . , Energy Partner). - - .
: 1. .
- . - , :
; ; ; ; - ;
. , , -
. : -, , ; .
- , - .
2. , .
:
1) ;
2) - ;
3) - - ;
4) - .
, -- , , - , .
- -
-
, , /
4- / . .
-
27
- .
- , - .
3. - .
- ( ) :
1- , 2- .
-, 3D- , , pdf, , - - .
1.
, - , . - , . , - , . - .
- - 2.04-101-2000, - ISO 10211 ISO 14863.
2. -
:
;
- .
: 1) -
. 2) . 3) . 4) .
-. , - , -- . , , - .
13 2012 .
- / - . - . , . - , - .
- . / .
- , - , - , . -
-
28
- . , :
) ( -- , - ; - - ; - - );
) ( - ; -, , - );
) ( ; ; - -);
) ( -, - - , , ; - - ; ; );
) ( -; - ).
. - , -, ., -, .
-, - , - .
- .
- - .
- .
BlingCrete -
, , - .
- . - .
- , , .
www.blingcrete.com
, -
SABER. ,
, . , , -. , - .
, SABER , - .
www.vzavtra.net
Senso Sloan
. . . (-) .
www.sloanvalve.com
-
29
DGNB: -
DGNB(GSBC) : 2007 . 2008 . GSBC 2009 . 2009 , , . 2009 GSBC
(GSBC AP). 640 , 280 . , , . GSBC. 2010 GSBC (DGNB).
- DGNB, - .
DGNB: ,
- .
.
() - (), , - , .
, DNGB, - , 35% 20% .
DGNB -, , ( ).
DGNB - (DGNB) - .
, DGNB - : , . , : , , - , , , . - - .
.
40% 50% .
,
,
. , DGNB, .
, ()
-
30
,
. , , , - . . , - , - . -, - .
, - ,
, - . - 70 80%.
, - . . , - , . - , , . - , - . .
, , .
DGNB , . DGNB , LEED ( - ) BREEAM ( ), .
www.DGNB.DE- DGNB Navigator
. - . .
DGNB DGNB -
. - 650 , . -. DGNB 400 . DGNB -, , , . DGNB : - .
DGNB
, . , , - , (Zhangjiang Science and Culture Exchange Centre), .
- . , - 60% - .
- . - . . : - , - .
DGNB , - Liujie Architecture Design Co. Ltd. , , .
DGNB .
DGNB, - 68 , - . DGNB . DGNB , .
(DGNB) .
-
31 !
5 , , , - , , , , , .
. , 2013- 2014 .
/ , - , . , , .
, / .
.
/
, , , (. ) , , .
-
,
.
-
32
40% 22% . , - , .
- , , . , 8 . .
, , 30% . , 20112012 . 17 , . 2014 12,8 698 .
- . , .
, , . , 65% . , , , , .
, 20% , 4,6 , . , . - 40%. - - , , . .
, / . , , . , .
--2014
1819 --2014. - - . , , , .
-
33
( ), . ( , , ).
, /, , , . (.. ), , . - .
VII --2014 IV . , , . -
, - .
. , , . - .
, , . . , , , , - .
, , - - .
-
34
, - , - , , -, - , , , - .
, - ; .
- - . , - 40% . - - . -. , - , - , , , , .
- , / . /, - , , .
, . , - - - . (IWO - ) /- , .
/ - .
- -, ; .
- , -, , . - , , CVL, -
2627 . - : . , , .
-
35 ?
, - , .
- , - , , - , - .
. . , . , , -, - . .
, , 60% - . 2011 -- 33 , 2012 46, .
. . 107 . 23 . - 544 . , , , 87 .
. , - , , .
, . , , - . -Energy. , - (). - . , . - .
, , - .
Hot-Tubes
, , .
, - ( Hot-Tubes - ), . , 24/7, 20 - .
- , , 80 , 150 .
www.vzavtra.net
Composite Panel Building Systems (CPBS)
C-SIS, - , - , - .
, C-SIS , .
, C-SIS - , -- . , , .
- - .
www.vzavtra.net
3D-
3D--, - . 3D- CyBe Additive Industries, 2013 - , .
- ProTo R 3DP .
, - , - 4000 /.
, - 3D-, , CyBe. , , , - , , 24 . . - 32 , . , CyBe , .
www.vzavtra.net
-
36
2009 - - , - , .
, -. - . . , - , - . , , , .
, . 148 , 1,5 . . - , 200 .
- , - 20122015 . 20132015 , - .
67 . : ; -; - ;
; -; .
, . 100%, 74,6% (807 ). - , - , , , 20%.
- . , -, . , - 12 50 000 , , .
-, , . , 220 . 220 . -110 ; 2- 110/10 ; 35/10 -35 . ; - -10 - .
. 110/10/6 . ; -110 220 ( 110 ); . , . .
,
-
37
- 13 , - 20,5 . - 5,5 , 136,5 . 0,5 , 80,5 . 2020 , 400 .
-. , . , .
. , , . 20112014 - 126 , 109 - 91 . 18,8% - . Call Center, . -
.
2,5 , , - . 100 . , 20 . .
- . , -
, , . -. , , , . - , 200 70% . , 1 - . - .
57
57
. . , . 18
-
38
, .
, , . - , .
, .
, . , , , . , , , . , , , . , . , , , , .
, . 2050 50%. 60%, 80%.
, , , , . , , , . , . . . 90- , .
: 60% ; 25% ; 15% . 1993 . 2003 . 6,2 . 23 000 , .. 8 500 .
, ? , . , .
, , . , , , . , , .
18 40 , 1979 . , 40% .
- , , , , .
, IWO
2020 . 20%
2050 . 50%
60% ( 2050 .)
80% 1990. ( 2050 .)
2050 ( )
-
39
, . ,
. , , . . , , , . , . , .
, ,
. - .
, . , , . , . .
. . , 20 .
, , .
; ; ; ; .
- , .
, . - . , . .
O, -, . , , , , , - , , , .
Fordern - , ,
(EnEV)Frdern - () KfW, ,
Informieren - Forschen -
CO2
20062013 .: 11,1 : 65 :
1:16 CO2 7,2
30-
300 000 !
, . ,
-
40
, (). . , , , . - 20 , - .
. . , . , PLC- . : , , , . PLC-.
. .
, 0,05%. 0,1. -
. , .
, , , , .
. , .
. , , . , . , .
, - . , .
() , , . : 78% 1516% .
, , , .
-Energy . - : 2014 . .
-
41
Kazakhstans Green Building Council (KazGBC) is a non-profit
association, established in 2013, which aims to change peoples
attitude towards the construction and operation of buildings
through the development of green construction industry in
Kazakhstan. KazGBC focuses on the promotion of green building idea,
providing the construction market participants with information on
the subject, creating a community of professionals in green
building and of the national certification system for green
buildings.
Green building councils are formed in more than 100 countries
and operate under the auspices of the World Green Building Council
World GBC.
KazGBC Director Daniar Azymhanov talks on its activities.
Kazakhstan Green Building Council KazGBC is a non-profit
organization established by construction market actors to
develop green building in Kazakhstan. Such councils like ours exist
in 98 countries around
the world, and are united under the World Green Building Council
WorldGBC, involved in development of green building worldide at the
supranational level. In Kazakhstan, we have identified four key
directions in the work: to popularize the idea of green building,
provide the market with information on green building, train and
nurture professional community in green building, create the
national standard for green construction. On these directions we
conduct various kinds of round tables, trainings and workshops,
excursions, develop an information portal on green construction. It
is still early to talk about the results and achievements we
started less than six months ago, and concentrate so far mainly on
self-education and study of the international experience.
To what extent is this direction relevant to Kazakhstan? What
are the criteria to determine, whether it is a green home or not?
Are there standards for green housing?
Kazakhstan started transition to green economy, which implies
more energy and water efficiency, waste processing development,
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and a number of other
activities in all our economy sectors. On world statistics,
buildings consume up to 20% of all the water, 2540% of all energy
and 40% of the timber. Buildings also account for 3040% of
greenhouse gas emissions and generate 35-40% of garbage. Therefore,
transformation of the construction sector in Kazakhstan and its
transition onto the green rails should become a key target in the
set of measures in the greening of our economy. This applies to
homes, offices, commercial, industrial and other buildings. Without
it there is no green economy.
To understand whether the building is green, or not, takes an
appropriate assessment of its environmental characteristics. In
case these characteristics are better than the standards and
requirements prescribed by the state to your building, you can say
it is green.
Few people can make this assessment on their own. For it, there
are different systems of environmental assessment of buildings in
the world and accredited professionals in the area. Such systems
are also called standards of green construction that enable a
holistic analysis of the building and obtaining of independent
expert assessment of a third party. The obtained assessment can be
used by those, who asked for it for various purposes, including in
marketing ends.
Nowadays there are dozens of different standards in green
building in the world, but the most accepted and recognized are
four of them:
Green building stands on three pillars: ecological safety, human
wellbeing,
economical efficiency
Daniar Azymhanov, Director of Kazakhstan Green Building Council
(KazGBC)
-
42
LEED created in the US, BREEAM the UK, DGNB Germany, and Green
Star in Australia. By date more than 1 billion square meters of
various buildings are certified or under certification on various
international systems.
Does it make sense then to talk of creating our own national
green building standard?
It surely does. National certification system of green buildings
is certainly needed, not only for homes, but also for other
buildings. It is important to understand that our system, like the
rest in the world, has to be non-mandatory all the mandatory
requirements cease to be regarded as green. And with non-mandatory
system applied, the construction is better, even of excellent
quality, stimulating thereby the evolution of markets and
technologies.
We could develop the national system ourselves, or emulate one
of the international systems, but one thing is certain the national
system is necessary. National standards should take into account a
number of local factors, such as language, measurement units,
geographic and climatic conditions, building codes, national
priorities, and others. None of the international systems can
embrace all these factors. The national system should also
encourage the emergence of domestic cohort of professionals in
green building, local production of environmentally friendly
building materials. In other words, in the coming decade it must
give rise to a mass spread of green building culture in our
country, create a new construction paradigm and enroot green
approaches in the construction industry, helping thereby in the
transition of Kazakhstan to the green economy. International
systems are unable to attain this task.
What green projects are already being implemented or have been
implemented in Kazakhstan in construction?
In Kazakhstan several major green development projects have been
launched in the construction of residential and commercial estate,
both for the EXPO 2017 and individual. These projects will be
certified on the LEED and BREEAM standards. More detail on the
first projects can be found on our website kazgbc.kz.
Tell us about your partners and KazGBC cooperation with the UNDP
project Energy efficient design and construction of residential
buildings.
We established a good teamwork with UNDP from the very start of
the KazGBC. We jointly conducted a round table and workshops on
green construction, interact in the creation of national green
buildings certification system. I believe that our cooperation will
be long-term, given the correlated goals.
Among our key partners are the RealInvest Group, BASF,
Samruk-Kazyna Real Estate Fund , FSC, BI Group, Saint Gobain, SGS,
Colliers International, CBRE, Global Development and a number of
other equally solid and important to us organizations. Range of our
partners expands almost daily.
Who funds construction of green homes? Is this construction
gainful to the developers? What are the gains to the owner of such
a home and to the state?
Green building stands on three pillars: ecological safety,
human wellbeing, economical efficiency. Together, these three
factors give the synergy that makes green building projects
beneficial to all the parties. The state rationally uses natural
resources and gets a healthier and happier nation. People get a
favorable, healthy and comfortable environment for their life and
activities, save on utility bills and maintenance costs. Developers
and investors get a better-quality and more competitive product,
premium in selling or leasing it. All contribute to the sustainable
development of our society and economy.
Our country is short of accommodation, which above all is overly
expensive too. Wouldnt the green construction lead to an even
bigger appreciation of the real estate?
Personally, I do not always understand what makes the price of
the real estate, now offered on the market: crisis, devaluation,
country rating, funding of the developer, US monetary policy, oil
price, EXPO, sellers speculative mood? ... In case of certified
green buildings I understand why I pay extra and how I will benefit
by it.
World experience shows that the certification of the building on
green standards may not tell on its cost, and it can also hype it
up manifold. Everything depends on the approaches and technologies
applied in each building. The market will put everything in its
place, and determine a fair premium for each project.
Our President Nursultan Nazarbayev approved the Decree on the
concept of Kazakhstan Republics transition to the green economy
that lays the groundwork for profound systemic transformation,
transition to the economy of new formation by raising Kazakhstan
populations living standards and the countrys joining the ranks of
30 world advanced nations, while minimizing the burden on the
environment and natural resources degradation.
-
43, !
Yulia Nichkasova, international consultant of UNDP / GEF project
(Minsk)
Leadership implies responsibility. The Republic of Kazakhstan,
setting ambitious and challenging task in energy efficiency,
demonstrates a high level of responsibility to the world community,
directing efforts towards transformation of the economy in order to
achieve new parameters of its efficiency, one of which is the
energy efficiency of buildings.
Forces and barriers in energy efficiency of buildings
Kazakhstan Republic targets joining the ranks of 30 world
advanced nations by the year 2050 and building a sustainable
economy. To meet this target a strategic objective is pursued to
reduce energy intensity of GDP, including in 2015 down to 10%.
These goals are attained by addressing sectoral tasks in industry,
energy, utilities, construction and transport.
By the RK Government Decree of August 29, 2013 904 On approval
of the Energy Saving 2020 program, the task in the construction is
to make 100% energy efficient buildings from 2015, in the utilities
it is reduction of specific energy consumption per 1 sqm by 30%,
and the reduction of normative heat losses by 3,6%.
Achieving the goal of energy-efficient construction in 2015
means that all the buildings, whose construction start in the next
year, have to conform to energy efficiency class A and B. However,
I believe it should be noted that the program says what to do, but
does not answer the question how to do it. We will try to answer
it, analyzing the life cycle of a building.
In Kazakhstan, creation and operation of a real estate object,
as follows from the analysis, involves three stakeholders: the
state, business units and homeownerships families and individuals
(householders). They have different force of influence in this
process, and pursue different values.
These parties are motivated for energy efficiency, because
common sense and logic suggest that it is beneficial to all the
three parties. But by force of the peoples inertia of innovation
perception, high level of conservativeness of the industry,
duration of the life cycle and sizeable investment in the creation
of the object, energy efficiency is balked.
The state is the main driving force of energy efficiency,
motivated to create conditions for sustainable development of the
society. By establishing rules and requirements, it regulates
energy efficiency at all stages of the buildings life cycle.
The state provides land to a business unit- the primary resource
for the construction. However, at this stage, the requirements for
energy efficiency class of the estate object are not established.
Absence of these requirements at the initial stage of the buildings
life cycle is a barrier to its energy efficiency.
At the phase of design, construction and operation, the state
provides control through five state institutions:
local authorities, represented by architecture bodies at the
stage
of the selection and provision of land, issuing of permits for
the design works, technical specifications and
architectural-planning assignment,
expertizing bodies at the stage of the building project
appraisal, State Architectural and Construction Supervision bodies
at the
stage for obtaining construction permits, construction and
installation works, acceptance into operation,
certification bodies in the issuance of certificates of
conformity and declarations of construction materials quality,
energy audit bodies at the stage of operation of the facility,
and again all the above-mentioned bodies when deciding on
thermal upgrading of the building.However, control of compliance
with energy efficiency is not
provided in full, because it is narrowly directional and one of
the host of functions carried out by these organizations. There is
a barrier on the way to energy efficiency here.
The State, through the formation of the tariff policy on living
resources of the building, the ideological and awareness raising
work, stimulates the adoption of economically viable solutions in
terms of energy efficiency of the households.
In particular, the increase of utility rates, requirements for
installation of individual heat meters, awareness raising and
education, provision of concessional financial resources for heat
supply points upgrade these are the incentives for households to
opt for energy efficiency. Issuing from these incentives, common
sense, logic and rationalism, the households must make economical
decisions in terms of payment for services, management of property
in favor of energy efficiency.
But actually it does not happen, because this problem is not a
priority to households. The reason for it is subsidizing of tariffs
on housing and utilities, and as a result a small share in the cost
of services in the general budget of household expenses. It thwarts
economic incentive for energy efficiency.
Business units are legal bodies operating in the construction
and operation sector. Accordingly, profit is the main motivation
for their creation and development. Hence, the decision in favor of
energy efficiency should also ensure the maintenance or increase of
the planned income.
However, to meet the energy efficiency requirements takes
additional time and expenses for obtaining and processing
information,
-
44
personnel training, technologies, and new materials and
equipment. These costs are not recouped, because at the moment the
energy efficiency is not a priority value to the households, which
increases the risk of declining economic viability and profit of
the business unit. This situation hiders the progress of energy
efficiency.
Establishing long-term relationships with households is a
guarantee of success in the market by way of stable profit earning.
Creating of quality building and providing servicing in its
operation would form a positive business reputation to a business
unit.
Consequently, the quality criteria at this level of relations
are most essential. Energy efficiency in this case must be regarded
as an essential element of the buildings quality parameters at the
current stage.
Households are the end users of the created finished product in
the form of estate property in the course of its operation.
However, due to different levels of education, awareness,
initiative, available time, they are not able to fully control the
acceptance of the object in terms of energy efficiency parameters.
Moreover, households do not perceive the acquisition of an
apartment as part of a single whole, of one building, which does
not give them the opportunity to fully monitor its quality.
Lack of control of the factual energy efficiency at the
completion of construction of the facility, does not allow
assessing the quality of its construction and conformity to energy
efficiency class, indicated in design, which is also a barrier to
the achievement of energy efficiency.
A household is an indication to the customer, making the
decision on the characteristics of the object, as the households
form demand for real estate property. In this case, the more
educated and informed the representative of the household and the
higher the number of such people, the higher the demand for the
new-standard housing. However, the demand for energy efficient
accommodation is low. Absence or lack of households awareness of
the energy efficiency class of the building is a barrier to energy
efficiency.
In the upkeep of the building, the households are not able to
make management decisions in energy, heat and water consumption, as
a decrease or increase in the consumption of resources does not
tell on the actual payment on utility bills. Nor can they influence
the resource-providing organizations quality of services. The
consumers very small influence in it is a barrier to energy
efficiency.
These barriers can be grouped on three main positions:
Information Quality Monitoring. Accordingly, these very indicators
can and should become the guidelines for removing of the barriers
and improvement of the situation.
Awareness raising is a complex process because it influences the
peoples mentality and lifestyles and, therefore, takes a long time
to produce tangible results.
Positive change in the awareness is accumulation of its critical
mass with subsequent transition from quantity to quality. This
breakthrough can be achieved primarily through the implementation
of pilot projects, extension of good practices in energy
efficiency, creation of information centers, and support to the
growth points in energy efficiency, training and improvement of
literacy in this area.
Economic instruments in the form of changes in the tariff
policy, access to concessional financial resources that are
directed to the goal of energy-efficient construction and
operation, are also part of the information (awareness) block.
Introducing the practice of informing citizens about the energy
efficiency class of the object on the stage of public hearings, on
the passport of the facility in the sale of apartments and
subsequent operation of the facility would speed up the movement to
a new mentality.
Leadership of the state, demonstrating the value of energy
efficiency
The life cycle of a building has four main phases:1) The initial
(pre-investment) phase,2) The investment phase,3) The operational
phase,4) The liquidation phase.Each of these phases is composed of
several stages, determining the sequence of actions that reveal the
main stages of the cycle (from investment idea to the commissioning
of the constructed object, its state registration, operation proper
and in the long run its liquidation), also the legal requirements
(conditions, administrative procedures), compliance with which is
mandatory during these stages.
Green Quarter. Astana
-
45
in the ideological policy would also help to overcome the
inertia of thinking in this area.
I believe that EXPO 2017 is able to become a powerful
information breakthrough in the consciousness of both rank and file
citizens and managers making strategic decisions, since it will
showcase the latest energy-efficient technologies in action.
Improvements in Quality can be achieved by displacement of
control from separate production processes or types of materials
onto holistic perception of the estate property as a finished
product.
The building as a consumption product has its technical and
economic characteristics total area, living area, usable area,
selling area and building volume. It should also have qualitative
characteristics at that, energy efficiency including.
Thus, the energy performance certificate of a building can and
should be a tool to ensure the quality parameters, set on the
design stage until a decision on its liquidation. This document at
that, should be formed at the stage of investor decisions to invest
in the construction, until the removal of the object.
Non-departmental body of standardization or environment should
control the availability of this document at all stages of the
investment cycle, which can exclude departmental approach to
it.
To remove barriers in Control, the following actions are
offered.1. Energy efficiency class of the object is determined by
the investor
(basing on the master plan for the area development, the
functional purpose of the object, its location, technical
feasibility for connection to utility networks, supply and demand
in the market). In developed conceptual decision of the property
object, the investor (customer, developer) declares the energy
efficiency class of the building (structure) to the competent
authority on the basis of the regulatory requirements set by the
State;
2. During the decision on preliminary design, the architecture
department verifies the presence of the declared energy efficiency
class and reflects it in the architectural-planning assignment as a
binding rule for the design. Business unit includes this norm in
the design and survey works for the designer.
3. In carrying out the designing works, the design organization
provides a set of solutions for achieving the desired energy
efficiency class. The result of these decisions should be the
estimates of the energy performance of the object as a confirmation
of the given class of its energy efficiency.
4. The state expertize department monitors the quality of the
design solutions to achieve the desired energy efficiency class. To
obtain a positive expertize conclusion, coordination with
non-departmental body is required as an intermediate step in
controlling the energy efficiency class.
5. In the process of construction the quality control services
(contractor, technical supervision of the customer, the
architectural supervision of the design organization, GASC) ensure
that construction and installation works are in accordance with the
project while maintaining the parameters of the equipment,
coefficient of resistance of thermal conductivity in the exterior
walls materials and the quality of the works. Deviations from the
design are coordinated with the architectural supervision body,
which takes care that the heat and power
characteristics of the materials and equipment used in the
facility are saved and are not below the designed
characteristics.
6. In the start-up of the building, its real heat power
characteristics are checked to determine its actual energy
efficiency class, achieved on completion of the construction. In
case it is lower than the given parameter, the causes must be found
out and actions are required to achieve it during the warranty
operation period.
7. Acceptance of the object in operation in case of reduced
energy efficiency by not more than one class is permissible, with
documented customer commitments to achieve the initial parameters
of energy efficiency within the warranty operation period.
Authorized body for energy efficiency is involved in the acceptance
of the building in operation and is responsible for acknowledgment
of the quality parameters of energy efficiency. Energy performance
certificate, as part of post-completion documentation, is further
handed over to the operating organization as a declaration of
compliance with the norms and standards of energy saving and energy
efficiency.
8. During the operation period, the authorized by households
operating organization establishes relations with the resource
providers, basing on the energy performance certificate, monitors
quality and quantity of heat, water and energy, actual performance
of the buildings heat and power characteristics, conducts energy
audits and implements the recommended energy efficiency
measures.
Removal of these barriers to energy efficiency will speed up
achievement of the strategic goal of sustainable development in the
country.
Kapchagai solar plant
-
46
Opening the event, coordinator of Kazakhstan Government UNDP/GEF
project on energy efficiency in housing, utilities and
construction, Alexander Belyi recalled that heating account for the
bulk of energy losses in our country. About 30% of all the energy
resources in the country are used in the construction and housing
sectors. The main consumers of this energy are resident houses and
social facilities. He said that among other social facilities,
school buildings deserve a special focus.
Improving the energy efficiency in school buildings is necessary
to make them comfortable to learn in. Comfort in school buildings
is most essential for emotional, moral, intellectual and physical
development of students. It is also important that the fulfilled
project will result in reduced expenses on consumption of heat and
hot water and improve heating of the classrooms. It is especially
relevant now, with the growing rates on energy sources, when the
utility services can hardly handle the load on heating, Alexander
Belyi said.
Many schools built back in the Soviet times, have a common
problem - the heat and resources loss, because of the outdated
thermal insulators, worn down window and door frames, the lack of
heat accounting and regulating systems. If these problems are
properly addressed, the energy loss can be reduced by 40%.
The main indicator for comparing energy efficiency in the
organizations of public utilities, including in schools, is the
specific energy consumption per 1m2 a year (kWh/m2 year). The
studies carried out in Kazakhstan show that so far not all the
buildings, funded from the state budget, are equipped with heat
meters. And there are more than 10 000 budget-funded facilities in
the country. After the installation of meters in all of them,
charge for heating will be annually decreasing by more than 3
billion tenge at the total cost of simultaneous installation of
metering systems at the public sector facilities making 3,5 billion
tenge. Judging by the experience of Astana and Almaty, the
installation of automatic heat control systems in the municipal
institutions can reduce energy consumption by at least 500 000
tenge annually, which is a 25% saving on utility bills. Analysis of
the situation in energy efficiency and energy saving in the
residential sector, according to a survey conducted in more than
100 municipal community organizations, shows that the total
potential of energy saving is 25 to 40% of public utility charges.
The payback time of funds under common energy saving measures in
public buildings, even at current rates, is not more than 3 years.
In the capital, the UNDP already has a positive experience of
thermo-upgrade in lyceum 15 and the school for gifted children
Zerde. School number 25 was built in 1963 for 1 200 student seats.
The building consists of the main and the adjoining gym premises.
The main building overlooks the east. The total area of the
building used in the calculations is 3214 m2 and the total heated
area is 11 803 m3. Currently, the school is on two- shift learning
and caters to over 1600 students. On the state program for the
school buildings reconstruction in Astana, its heating, water and
sanitation system was rebuilt in 2009.
Energy conservation at schools as a contribution to
environmental protection
United Nations Development Programme in Kazakhstan and the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) have
completed a joint project Demonstration of energy efficiency
improvement in public buildings on the example of school number 25
in Astana. In the first days of September the school students,
teachers, parents and guests attended its presentation.
Public buildings should be reconstructed in order to reduce heat
losses, budget expenditures on utilities and negative impact on the
environment.
-
47
The EBRD selected DAppoloniacompany as a consultant in energy
efficiency for the energy assessment and development of steps to
further upgrade of the building. This analysis was carried out for
the technical and financial assessment of the total consumption
level in order to best identify opportunities for the buildings
upgrade, purposed to its energy efficiency.
In 2011, DAppoloniacompany conducted a technical evaluation and
proposed measures for the school building reconstruction. This work
was accomplished by a local company and local experts in
collaboration with UNDP and the EBRD, Alexander Belyi specified.
Under the
project, experts also offered to replace the windows, install an
automated heating unit and adjust the heating system of the gym.
The project was implemented on the grant, given to the school in
2011, at the annual meeting of the EBRD. EUR 160 000 went to
purchase and installation of energy efficient windows, upgrading of
heat consumption systems of the new school building, including the
installation of automated thermal point with weather-depending
automatics.
Now the school heating system is directly connected to external
heat networks and has a control valve and a group of mixing
circulation pumps, said Alexander Entin, general director of
Enkom-ST, who installed the heating unit. The new equipment will
give heating on weather compensation
Anar Omarova, Head of the EBRD Office in Astana:
The authors of the project have tried to reconstruct the school
to make it warmer and lighter, comfortable for children to learn
at, and leaving only pleasant memories of childhood school years-
the best years of life.
The Bank carries out a lot of such projects in different cities
and in different countries. The total investment is about $ 13
billion. In Kazakhstan, we have invested nearly $ 800 million
in
the projects that save 10% of consumed electric power.
A y n u r S o s p a n o v a , Director of Renewable Energy
Department of the RK Energy Ministry:
The project of school modernization improves the school students
life and saves the environment. It is for our descendants to see
Astana as beautiful, for the planet Earth to flourish, not to
pollute it by greenhouse gas emissions. I urge you to take care of
your environment. Give all the best in our life to children.
Sayran Gaisina, director of secondary school number 25:
Thanks to the United Nations Development Programme and the
financial support of the EBRD, our school has a thermal unit, and
the old wooden windows were replaced by new energy efficient ones.
All the summer we have been working hard for our children to come
to learn to a completely new building.
The school became more spacious, brighter and comfortable.
On
behalf of students, parents and teachers of the school I thank
all those, who in a short time have accomplished the building
upgrades.
In preparation for EXPO 2017, we foster in our students an
attitude of energy conservation and environmental friendliness.
Stefan Liller, Deputy Permanent Representative of the United
Nations Development Programme in Kazakhstan:
Since 2010, the EBRD and UNDP are working together with the
Government of Kazakhstan and local companies on environment
projects. Energy conservation is a critical issue, and we willingly
share in such projects around the world and provide technical
solutions in energy saving issues.
Usually modernization, made on such projects saves 25-30% of
energy, and investment returns within 3 years.
In this school we see a practical example of how the energy
conservation should be carried out. Installed in it energy saving
windows and equipment are but a small contribution to a big work.
It will be useful to the city, the ecology and the students,
studying in a comfortable environment. Such projects will spread
throughout the country.
Expected benefits are: 32-37% reduction of heat consumption
Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 150-200 tons a year
Improving the microclimate in the school building Contribution to
environmental education
-
48
principle, that is, depending on the actual outdoor temperature.
Balancing valves are set, enabling an even distribution of heating
on all the standpipes. There will be no more complaints about
uneven heating of some classrooms. A controller runs the entire
process, enabling the equipment transfer to a more economical mode
of basic heating.
Automated thermal unit (ATU) was installed to regulate the
temperature in the school premises during the heating season. The
schools hot water system was connected through plate heat
exchangers, maintaining a constant temperature in the DHW circuit.
Hot water will also depend on water tempering. The gyms heating
system was reconstructed.
We believe that the right heat distribution will reduce the heat
consumption by 3237%, Alexander Entin said. And we must not
stop at the achieved results, but go on installing radiator
thermostats to make the schools energy saving measures
complete.
A representative of ALCON + LLP Baurzhan Mukhamedzhanov said
that in summer all the wooden windows at school were replaced by
energy efficient translucent structures with reduced thermal
resistance not below RFr0,8m2 C/Watt, with a special energy saving
glass with a special coating that reflects infrared rays, which
carry the heat back into the room. The new windows will reduce heat
loss to save on electricity costs.
Representatives of contractors promised assistance to the school
in the further operation of the installed equipment, and UNDP
undertakes the analysis of the economic benefits of the project in
order to replicate the experience in other schools of the
country.
Project of UNDP / EBRD and the Government of Kazakhstan Republic
Demonstration of energy efficiency improvement in public buildings
on the example
of school No 25 in Astana.
Brief description of projectThe project Demonstration of energy
efficiency improvement in public buildings on the example of school
number 25 is aimed at showcasing the improvement of educational
environment for students in a typical office building in Astana as
part of a general approach of organization (EBRD) to neutralization
of greenhouse gas emissions (carbon footprint). The main goal of
this project is improving the energy efficiency of school
buildings, basing on the recommendations of energy auditors.The
project will result in reduced city budget expenses for the
consumption of heat and electricity in the school building and
improve the provision of school facilities, where the children and
staff are, with heating. This is particularly relevant given the
growing rates on energy sources and shortage of public heating
capacities. It will also mitigate the impact on the environment by
reducing greenhouse gas emissions as a result of a more rational
use of heating in the building.
Time of the program: 2010-2015.Project Budget: $ 224,023
EBRD: $ 204,023 UNDP (in-kind contribution): $ 20,000
-
49
Astana is a young capital, ever-evolving and moving ahead. In
all the 16 years Astana has developed from a backwater to a
world-class city. Currently a great number of high-rise buildings
are constructed, modelled on Japanese and American projects.
Economic and political relations are developing fast. In short, we
can confidently position ourselves as a successful country. Our
school keeps pace with all these developments. This year, school 25
has undergone major upgrades. Firstly, the school grounds have been
transformed beyond recognition: there is a new basketball field,
improved football pitch and a lot more. And most importantly, in
our school old wooden windows were replaced
with new energy-saving plastic windows (177 windows in all).
This was done in order to reduce heat loss through the school
buildings envelope. This project is designed to fully equip our
school. In conclusion, on behalf of the students of our school I
would like to thank everyone who took part in this project, namely:
the United Nations Development Programme in Kazakhstan, European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, heads of organizations who
shared in the program.
Diana TymoshenkoGrade 10 B, school No 25
1 , , . . , . , , . .
, , - . - .
, . . .
- .
,8
25
Energy conservation in schools as a contribution to the
global
climate protection
-
50
Songdo 610 ( ) - . 2010 , 2020 350 . 3,2 2 75 000 . (4,7 2) 300
000 .
,
. - : .
. - .
, - : 40%- . 40- (Songdo Central Park) . : .
100- - . , . , - ( ) . ICT (information communication
technology) ( 30- 100%- ) . 35%- .
Songdo - -
. - . - . .
-
. ,
Songdo . Songdo . .
II Central Park
40 %-
-
51 !
. - . - , .
2013 -
POSCO Green Building . 5 571 2, , , . POSCO Green Building BEMS
(building energy management system ) BMS (building management
system ) - . BEMS , ( .. ), OLED (organic light-emitting diode )
.
Convensia
-
-
52
Alexander Belyi, Coordinator of Kazakhstan Government - UNDP /
GEF projects in energy efficiency in housing and public utilities
and construction
A research under UNDP / GEF project was recently carried out on
the observance ofenergy efficiencyrequirements of the buildingson
the pilot territory of Astana, which found that about 30% of the
studied buildings fall short of the regulatory requirements that
were in effect at the time of construction1. Experts of the project
attribute it to a set of factors, underlying the algorithm of the
process of design and construction of energy efficient buildings
from the time of formation of the technical specifications for the
design of the object to its commissioning and subsequent
maintenance. We will try to point out the stumbling blocks in this
process.
Topical problems of the organization of design and construction
of energy efficient
buildings in Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan has basically formed the regulatory framework for
energy efficient design and construction of residential buildings.
These are:
1. The Law On energy saving and energy efficiency.2. Building
Codes BC RK 2.04-04-2011 Thermal protection of
buildings.3. RK Government resolution of August 31, 2012 1117
On
approval of rules defining and revising the class of energy
efficiency of buildings, structures and facilities.
4. Guidance manual to BC RK 2.04-04-2011 Thermal protection of
buildings, based on revised edition 2.
5. Guidance manual to BC RK 4.02-02-2011 Heating, ventilation
and air conditioning (HVAC), based on updated edition.
6. Directory of technical solutions for the design of
energy-efficient residential buildings (2 volumes): volume 1.
Enclosing parts; Volume 2.Engineering systems.
7. Method of energy audits of residential buildings.8. The
system of electronic testing for independent knowledge
verification of experts, performing technical oversight,
authorial supervision, technical inspection and examination of
projects and of the state inspectors in energy conservation and
efficiency.
9. RK Government Resolution of September 13, 2012 1192 On
approval of requirements for energy conservation and energy
efficiency requirements for pre and (or) the project (design and
estimate) documentationof buildings, structures and facilities.
10. Resolution of the RK Government of September 11, 2012 1181
On establishing the requirements for energy efficiency in
buildings, structures and their elements that are part of the
enclosures.
11. Resolution of the RK Government of December 29, 2012 1784 On
Approval of the Rules for the examination of energy conservation
and energy efficiency.
12. Energy 2020 program.It is not a complete list of documents
that have been adopted to
ensure energy efficient design and construction in Kazakhstan.
However, as shown by the analysis carried out in the framework of
the UNDP / GEF project, in practice, various deviations are
revealed from the order prescribed in the documents, which
eventually leads to non-energy efficient building. Such deviations
can be traced back to the very start in the processorganization.
Thus, in the customers technical design specification of the
object, the energy efficiency class of the future building is often
not indicated. However, under the RK Government decree of August
31, 2012 1117, the customer is required to specify the desired
class of energy efficiency for predesign, and design and estimate
documentation.
Design companies have insufficient capacity of design based on
the established class of energy efficiency. The UNDP / GEF projects
had such a problem before, while implementing the projects on
existing residential buildings thermo-modernization (in 2011-2013).
Design companies developing projects failed to make appropriate
documentation based on the established specific heat consumption
(class of the building). But according to the RK Government
resolution of August 31, 2012 1117, in predesign and (or) design
(design-estimate) documentation energy efficiency class of the
building must be indicated.
It should be noted that in the BC RK 2.04-04-2011 and manuals to
BC RK Thermal protection of buildings, made in the framework of the
UNDP / GEF project, in contrast to previous documents, calculating
method of the reduced R-value is changed; the notion of specific
values of thermal protection of the building was introduced, its
normative values were set; estimation of vapor permeability of
walling was revised; thermo-physical estimation of hinged facade
systems with ventilated air layer was given, calculating method of
vapor permeability of walling was refined; the number of energy
efficiency classes was increased to 10 (from A++ to F).
At the same time the standard B RK 2.04-21-2004 remains
operating in Kazakhstan, which is contrary to the RK Government
Resolution
-
53 10
Green office. LLP Ergonomics.
1181 of 11.09.2012. And standard BC RK 2.04-04-2011 is still not
enacted. This hinders development of project design works towards
improving energy efficiency of residential and public buildings. In
the Regulation and standards more progressive methods are offered
for calculating thermal performance of the buildings,
classification of buildings on energy efficiency, closely adapted
to that practiced in the European Union.
It is known that during the design,the Building Energy Rating
Certificate (BER Certificate) is made, in which energy efficiency
class is indicated, and which is attached to the main DED(design
estimate documentation). It should be noted that designers often
make BER assessment formally. After the BER is made, it should be
checked by a competent person who confirms the energy efficiency
class of the designed building, which is currently not done. Nor
are the statistics run on energy efficiency class of the designed
and constructed buildings.
Experts working in the UNDP / GEF projects, point to another
shortfall: in the examination of the design documentation, the
expert report the most sought document does not indicate energy
efficiency class of the building, making it difficult to monitor
its energy efficiency during its operation. With regard to projects
on thermal upgrades of the buildings, unfortunately, energy rating
certificates (energy passports) are not made as a rule in such
projects.
Nevertheless, according to the requirements of SNIP RK
1.02-01-2007* (construction rules and regulations) Instruction on
the development, coordination, approval and content of the design
documentation for construction, energy rating certificate of the
building must be provided for the expert examination. In this
examination, the design and operating parameters indicated in the
energy rating certificate are checked for compliance with
regulatory requirements. Assessment of energy efficiency class of
buildings is not provided for in the current rules on drawing
expert report, which is a gross omission.
In the first place, the customer, for whom the building is
designed, must be interested in energy-efficient construction.
However, the customer does not conduct the examination of energy
conservation and energy efficiency of pre and (or) the project
(design and estimate) documentation. Meanwhile, according to the RK
Government resolution of August 31, 2012 1117, for determination of
energy efficiency compliance with the indicated class in the pre
and (or) of the project (design and estimate) documentation, the
customer refers to the legal entity, accredited for this type of
activity, to do it.
The authorities, who oversee the construction progress, do not
fully control the observance of energy efficiency standards in it.
The UNDP/GEF analysis found that these issues are not sufficiently
addressed in the work of the supervisory bodies. From the long list
of documents, studied by mostly building inspectors, only passports
and quality certificates for materials, products, structures and
equipment can be attributed to energy efficiency control. Experts
point out that under the existing
circumstances, when objects with a normal level of
responsibility (risk) constitute asignificant proportion,and with
insufficient staff of building inspectors in State Architectural
and Construction Supervision departments (GASKs), the checks
consist in obtaining the necessary information from the
representatives of the authorial and technical supervision, and
reports on the construction quality from the customer (contractor),
with their subsequent analysis. Therefore, the quality of control
is largely dependent on the reliability of the information
provided. Under the current government regulations the technical
supervision is carried out by the customer or an engineering
company providing relevant services on the contract with the
customer; and supervision is performed by the project developer or
other organization, to which the developer delegated the
appropriate authority; but it is also on the basis of the contract
with the customer.
Thus, one of the factors required for building control funding
is administered by the customer. In view of the existing mentality
it has a strong influence on the objectivity, accuracy and
completeness of the building control, and in practice cases are not
infrequent, when the construction quality control is not at the
proper level.
After the building is constructed as envisioned its energy
performance certificate is required for the quality control in the
acceptance of the building and its subsequent operation.
However, UNDP/GEF experts note, after acceptance, the buildings
energy performance certificate is practically unclaimed to assess
its energy efficiency. In practice it turns out that the building
energy rating certificate is used just to make an appearance that
the requirements for energy indicators and project documentation
are met. And its main purpose to be a tool to further improve the
energy efficiency of buildings is overlooked at that. It is because
one of the requirements filling out the energy passport of the
building at the operation stage by the organization operating the
building- in fact is not respected or is observed just
occasionally.
The root cause of most of the above-mentioned shortcomings is
lack of accountability mechanism and of preferences for compliance
of the constructed buildings with a particular class of energy
efficiency. Alongside that, BC RK 2.04-21-2004 recommends actions
for the RK administration: in the construction of A and B class
buildings (very high and high) economic incentives should be
applied; and vice versa in the construction of class G buildings
(low) and below it to apply penalties. So far this rule exists in
BC only in advisory form and to all appearances should be
implemented in practice.
In the next issue of the news bulletin we will continue the
above topics and will try to formulate key recommendations to
improve energy efficient design and construction in Kazakhstan,
including the ones obtained in the pilot project of the UNDP/GEF
project Energy-efficient house in Karaganda.
-
54
, /- -, , - .
. , . , . -, , , . , . - . .
. , .
, , - - 50 -. , , , / - . . - . , .
, , , .
!
.
. 57
.
-
55
. , . , .
Polyset.kz - :
() - (-), . - -. , . . , .
, - , . - , , .
? 200 - - . - . , , , . . , . . .
- . : , , . . -
. , -
. . --, - - . +280 +480- -, . , . 900- .
, . , , . -, . . , - . , , , .
, 57 - , , - . 27350- . 500- . .
. - , , /- - . . , . , - .
, . , . , - . , .
-
www.eep.kz
