För småhusägare finns ekonomiska incitament till att sänka det årliga energibehovet för värme och tappvarmvattenberedning, då det utgör huvudparten av det totala årliga energibehovet för bostäder i Sverige. Valet av värmesystem är därför ett viktigt då det kan medföra mer eller mindre gynnsamma ekonomiska konsekvenser sett över längre tidsperioder,då den mängd köpt energi som systemet kräver kan medföra besparingar som viktas mot den ekonomiska investeringen av systemet.Syftet med denna studie har därför varit att skapa ett referensunderlag över fyra olika värmesystem med jämförelser mot småhus av olika storlek, geografisk placering samt olikaisoleringsstandard, där det eller de mest ekonomiskt gynnsamma värmesystemen, sett över en 50-årsperiod, kan utläsas utifrån dessa parametrar.De småhus som studien har jämfört har bestått av enplanshus med tre antagna areor, 89,7/120/150,3 m2. Dessa har jämförts för Malmö, Stockholm, Sundsvall samt Luleå, varpå varje area har innefattat tre olika antagna genomsnittliga värmegenomgångskoefficienter, Umedelvärden. Studien har genomförts med energiberäkningar enligt gradtimmemetoden, och den ekonomiska analysen genom beräknade livscykelkostnader, LCC, för de olika systemkonstellationerna. Fyra värmesystem har undersökts: Fjärrvärme, bergvärmepump, luft-vattenvärmepump samt frånluftsvärmepump. Frånluftsvärmepumpen har inkorporerats som ett FX-ventilationssystem, frånluftsventilation med värmeåtervinning. De övriga tre systemen har för studien kombinerats med ett FTX-ventilationssystem, från- och tilluftsventilation med värmeåtervinning.Resultaten har påvisat att FTX-system, i jämförelse med FX-system, sänker för samtliga studerade byggnader i Malmö det årliga värmeenergibehovet, den energi som måste tillsättas byggnaden, med 36–71%, medan det i Luleå sänks med 32–61%. Den årliga energianskaffningen, den energi som måste köpas för att värmesystemen skall generera erfordrad värmeenergi och tappvarmvattenberedning, är genomgående lägst för systemkonstellationen bergvärmepump i kombination med FTX. Den systemkonstellationenmed studiens genomgående högsta andel köpt energi, är fjärrvärme i kombination med FTX.Vid jämförelse av livscykelkostnader, LCC, har påvisats att fjärrvärme i kombination med FTX är mest ekonomiskt gynnsam endast då det årliga behovet av köpt energi är mycket litet, och att det vid högre behov istället blir det dyraste alternativet. Frånluftsvärmepump utgör ett ekonomiskt gynnsamt alternativ vid majoriteten av analyserade fall, tack vare lägre investeringskostnader som väger upp de högre värmeenergibehov som ventilationstypen medför. Bergvärme i kombination med FTX, utgör det dyraste alternativet i de flesta fall därdet årliga behovet av köpt energi är lågt, men påvisar ekonomisk gynnsamhet vid höga energibehov. Luft-vattenvärmepump i kombination med FTX, är relativt likvärdig bergvärmepump men har ej påvisats vara det billigaste alternativet i något studerat fall. Vid jämförelse mellan frånluftsvärmepump och bergvärmepump i kombination med FTX, har påvisats att för studiens samtliga analyserade objekt är den största prisskillnaden, utslaget på 50 år, mindre än 1.800 kr/år.Utifrån de parametrar som presenterats, har påvisats genomförbarhet i att skapa ett referensunderlag över optimal gynnsamhet för värme- och ventilationssystem hos småhus, vilket avläses utifrån husets storlek, U-medelvärde samt geografiska placering. / For homeowners, there are economic incentives to reduce the annual energy demand for heating and domestic hot water preparation, as these constitute the main part of the total annual energy demand for houses in Sweden. The choice of heating system is therefore important as it can have more or less favorable economic consequences over longer periods of time, as the amount of purchased energy required by the system can lead to savings that weigh against the economic investment in the system. The purpose of this study has therefore been to create a reference framework for four different heating systems, comparing them across houses of different sizes, geographical locations, and insulation standards, to identify the most economically beneficial heating systems over a 50-year period, that can be interpreted based on these parameters. The houses compared in the study were single-story houses with three assumed sizes: 89.7/120/150.3 m². They have been compared in Malmö, Stockholm, Sundsvall and Luleå, with each size having three different assumed average thermal transmittance values, average U-values. The study was conducted using energy calculations based on the degree-hour method, and the economic analysis was performed using calculated life cycle costs, LCC, for the different system configurations. Four heating systems were investigated: district heating, geothermal heat pump, air-to-water heat pump, and exhaust air heat pump. The exhaust air heat pump was incorporated as an MEVHR ventilation system, mechanical exhaust air ventilation with heat recovery, while the other three systems were combined with an HRVventilation system, mechanical exhaust and supply air ventilation with heat recovery. The results have shown that HRV systems, compared to MEVHR systems, reduce the annual heating energy demand, the amount of energy that must be supplied to the building, for all studied buildings in Malmö by 36-71%, while in Luleå it is reduced by 32-61%. The annual energy procurement, the amount of energy that must be purchased for the heating systems to generate the required heating energy and domestic hot water preparation, is consistently lowest for the geothermal heat pump system combined with the HRV. The system configuration with the highest proportion of purchased energy throughout the study is district heating combined with HRV. When comparing life cycle costs, LCC, it was found that district heating combined with HRVis the most economically beneficial system only when the annual demand for purchased energy is very low, and becomes the most expensive option at higher demands. The exhaust air heat pump is a cost-effective option in the majority of analyzed cases, thanks to lower investment costs that offset the higher heating energy demand induced by this type of ventilation. Geothermal heat pump combined with the HRV is the most expensive option in most cases when the annual demand for purchased energy is low but shows economic advantages at high energy demands. The air-to-water heat pump combined with the HRV is relatively similar to the geothermal heat pump but has not been shown to be the cheapest option in any of the studied cases. When comparing the exhaust air heat pump with the geothermal heat pump combined with the HRV, it is found that for all objects analyzed in the study, the largest price difference is, averaged over 50 years, less than 1,800 SEK/year. Based on the presented parameters, the feasibility of creating a reference framework for the cost-effectiveness of heating and ventilation systems in houses has been demonstrated, which can be assessed based on the house size, U-value, and geographical location.

This study centered on a novel thermoelectric generator (TEG) integrated into the built environment. Designed by Watts Thermoelectric LLC, the TEG is essentially a novel assembly of thermoelectric modules whose required temperature differential is supplied by hot and cold streams of water flowing through the TEG. Per its recommended operating conditions, the TEG nominally generates 83 Watts of electrical power. In its default configuration in the built environment, solar-thermal energy serves as the TEG’s hot stream source and geothermal energy serves as its cold stream source. Two systems-level, thermodynamic analyses were performed, which were based on the TEG’s upcoming characterization testing, scheduled to occur later in 2011 in Detroit, Michigan. The first analysis considered the TEG coupled with a solar collector system. A numerical model of the coupled system was constructed in order to estimate the system’s annual energetic performance. It was determined numerically that over the course of a sample year, the solar collector system could deliver 39.73 megawatt-hours (MWh) of thermal energy to the TEG. The TEG converted that thermal energy into a net of 266.5 kilowatt-hours of electricity in that year. The second analysis focused on the TEG itself during operation with the purpose of providing a preliminary thermodynamic characterization of the TEG. Using experimental data, this analysis found the TEG’s operating efficiency to be 1.72%. Next, the annual emissions that would be avoided by implementing the zero-emission TEG were considered. The emission factor of Michigan’s electric grid, RFCM, was calculated to be 0.830 tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) per MWh, and with the TEG’s annual energy output, it was concluded that 0.221 tons CO2e would be avoided each year with the TEG. It is important to note that the TEG can be linearly scaled up by including additional modules. Thus, these benefits can be multiplied through the incorporation of more TEG units. Finally, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the TEG integrated into the built environment with the solar-thermal hot source and passive ground-based cold source was considered. The LCOE of the system was estimated to be approximately $8,404/MWh, which is substantially greater than current generation technologies. Note that this calculation was based on one particular configuration with a particular and narrow set of assumptions, and is not intended to be a general conclusion about TEG systems overall. It was concluded that while solar-thermal energy systems can sustain the TEG, they are capital-intensive and therefore not economically suitable for the TEG given the assumptions of this analysis. In the end, because of the large costs associated with the solar-thermal system, waste heat recovery is proposed as a potentially more cost-effective provider of the TEG’s hot stream source. / text