Introduction Historically, district heating (DH) systems relied on fossil fuels, where downstream efficiency improvements had little effect on heat generation efficiency. As a result, traditional approaches have focused on localized gains, often overlooking the broader benefits of more efficient heat generation, distribution, and consumption practices. As the DH system transitions from carbon-intensive fuels to long-term sustainable renewables, a paradigm shift occurs, where efficiency measures in one system element can have a substantial impact on heat generation and the primary fuel supply chain in general. This creates an opportunity to rethink decision-making, impact evaluations, and investment strategies. To capture these benefits—such as lower energy costs, reduced emissions, and improved system resilience— decision-makers must apply a wide system boundary for investment impact evaluations. This article compares two hypothetical systems: one with a heat pump as the baseload, and the other with a biomass boiler as the baseload. The case studies illustrate how a holistic approach can reveal major differences in energy efficiency, costs, and emissions from identical improvements. Understanding how system setup affects the benefits of efficiency solutions allows policymakers, planners, and DH companies to make better decisions and plan long-term to maximize future returns. The Importance of System Boundary Selection The perceived effectiveness of improvement measures depends on how system boundaries are defined, as these boundaries determine which system elements are included in the assessment. Traditionally, boundaries focus on individual elements—such as heat plants, pipelines, or end- user installations—because upstream impacts were minimal, especially on heat generation efficiency. In decarbonized DH networks, a broader boundary encompassing the entire supply chain—from primary energy to end-user—provides a clearer view of benefits. This wider perspective helps reveal how localized improvements affect overall performance, reduce primary energy consumption, lower costs, and support environmental sustainability. The thermal energy supply system can be divided into seven elements, grouped into three categories: (1) primary system, (2) thermal system, and (3) final energy demand, as shown
in Figure 1. When assessing improvement measures, it is important to recognize that impacts may cascade within each group and across groups. Understanding how elements interact when parameters change in neighboring elements enables estimation of system-wide effects. For example, if the building’s technical installation is improved to achieve better cooling of the supply flow, this will reduce heat losses in the building, the energy transfer station, and the distribution network. The lower return temperature will also increase heat generation efficiencies, which in turn reduces the primary energy demand. Finally, the reduced primary energy demand lowers losses in the primary energy distribution and reduces, and potentially alters, the mix of primary energy generation. A detailed methodology is provided in [1]. Classification of Solution Improvement Impacts Many solutions can improve DH operation, but their impacts generally fall into four groups: Reduced oversupply – Oversupply refers to a situation where the delivered heat exceeds what is needed to fulfill comfort demands, or when a bypass maintains higher supply temperatures than necessary. Components that minimize oversupply include thermostatic radiator valves and building energy management systems. Reduced supply temperature – The minimum supply temperature is determined by end-user requirements or flow restrictions in the distribution network. Components affecting supply temperature include heat exchangers and heat emitters. Reduced return temperature – The return temperature depends on how efficiently components and control logic extract heat from the supply flow. Components such as heat exchangers, energy transfer station configuration, heat emitters, and control valves directly influence the return temperature. Reduced differential pressure – The distribution of the heat transfer fluid relies on the differential pressure between the supply and return pipes. Pipe networks, heat exchangers, control components, and other factors that affect operating temperatures or heat demand influence pressure requirements. Classifying the impact of improvement measures into these groups allows a generalized approach to assess their cascading effects across the entire heat supply system.
Figure 1: The three system categories and the seven elements of the thermal energy supply system.
15 www.dbdh.dk
Powered by FlippingBook