Name: UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services Set Exercise -Option D
Uploaded: 2023-12-14
Duration: 11 min 49 s
Description: Good morning everyone. We are here today to discuss Uwe Chung Ka Kuen's presentation exploring a low carbon building services option for a mixed multi-storey building. We will compare a baseline with a low carbon scenario and evaluate the overall outcome. Let's begin with the first slide of this presentation..

[Audio] Good morning everyone. We are here today to discuss Uwe Chung Ka Kuen's presentation exploring a low carbon building services option for a mixed multi-storey building. We will compare a baseline with a low carbon scenario and evaluate the overall outcome. Let's begin with the first slide of this presentation.. 

Scene 1

UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services
Set Exercise -Option D

Student Name : CHUNG KA KUEN Uwe student number :21070046 Shape Student Number :217106120

[image] UWE
Bristol
University
of the
West of
England

[Audio] We will be looking at UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services. We will explore the summary of the site information, the baseline scenario, the low carbon scenario, a side by side comparison, a SWOT analysis by technology, and an overall evaluation, as well as the next steps for further feasibility analysis. Let's begin.. 

Scene 2

-Site Information -Baseline Scenario -Low Carbon Scenario -Side By Side Comparison -SWOT Analysis(By Technology) -Overall Evaluation -Next Steps for further Feasibility Analysis

[Audio] The slide we are looking at depicts the total energy consumptions of a mixed multi-storey building. The table shows that the total cooling consumption is 476000 kWh per year, the total hot water consumption is 191000 kWh per year and the total electricity without cooling consumption is 286000 kWh per year. It is important to take these consumption values into consideration when planning and designing building services. Focusing on the total energy consumption allows us to plan, design and select the most suitable technology in order to reduce energy costs and carbon emissions.. 

Scene 3

Mixed multistorey building : 47 residential units + 1 Library Mid to High Rise building Urban area (assumed ) ,location ( Hong kong is assumed) Size of plantroom and roof top spacer a vailed is unknown

Residential Units Annual Consumption (kWh)

 Cooling Hot water Other Electricity use (excluding both hot water and cooling) 144,000 58,000 87,000

Commercial Unit Annual Consumption (kWh)

 Cooling Hot water Electricity/without cooling 332,000 133,000 199,000

Total Annual Energy consumtion (Kwh)

 Cooling Hot water Electricity/without cooling 476,000 191,000 286,000

[Audio] We are examining a baseline setup including hot water, cooling and electricity components. Electrical heaters with an efficiency of 95% are employed for hot water, supplemented by 5% from solar thermal energy. Air conditioning units with a coefficient of performance of 3.0 are utilized for cooling, and grid electricity caters for all electricity demand and even the electricity needed for cooling.. 

Scene 4

Hot Water : Electrical Heaters at 95% efficiency providing all hot water demand + 5% from solar thermal energy Cooling : Standard Air Conditioning Units ( COP 3.0) providing all cooling demand Electricity : Grid electricity providing all electricity demand ,including the electricity demand to provide cooling

[Audio] Regarding low carbon building services, the data table presented indicates the cost and amount of carbon dioxide produced in relation to different energy sources. Electricity has a cost of 1.3 dollars per kilowatt hour and produces 0.65 kilograms of CO2. Town gas is priced at 0.3 dollars per megajoule and produces 0.0119 kilograms of CO2. For the building's hot water demand of 191000 Kwh, a gas boiler with 95% efficiency would have a cost of 197,581 dollars with 7,823 kilograms of CO2 generated; the grid would have a cost of 185,166 dollars with 7,345 kilograms of CO2 generated. If cooling the building, an air-conditioning unit with a COP of 3.0 would have a cost of 206,267 dollars with 103,133 kilograms of CO2 generated, or 578,067 dollars with 289,034 kilograms of CO2 generated via the grid with 100% efficiency. The information provided here should help to assess the cost and environmental impact of different energy sources.. 

Scene 5

Cost and Carbon $ kg CO2 Electricity 1.3/Kwh 0.65 kgCO2/kWh Towngas 0.3/MJ 0.0119 kgCO2/MJ of town gas

Hot Water Hot Water (Grid) Total Building Demand (Kwh) 191,000 191,000 N/A Gas Boiler with 95% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 181,450 9,550 191,000 Tower Gas (MJ)
 617,220 34,380 653,220 Cost ( $)  185,166 12,415 197,581 Carbon (kgCO^2) 7,345 478 7,823

Cooling Building Demand (Kwh) 476,000 AC Unit with COP 3.0 Demand (Kwh) 158,667 Cost ( $)  206,267 Carbon (kgCO^2) 103,133

Electricity Cooling Total Building Demand (Kwh) 286,000 158,667 444,667 Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 286,000 158,667 444,667 Cost ( $)  371,800 206,267 578,067 Carbon (kgCO^2) 185,900 103,133 289,034

[Audio] A low carbon scenario is our next slide topic. An absorption chiller is showcased as the cooling solution, with 65% of the hot water supplied by a gas CHP, as well as 30% of the electricity. The remaining hot water and electricity would come from the grid.. 

Scene 6

Cooling : Absorption Chiller to provide cooling providing all cooling demand Hot Water :  65% Gas CHP of heat for hot water + (35% Grid Assumed) Electricity : 30% Gas CHP( + 70% Grid Assumed)

[Audio] Focusing on Low Carbon Scenario Option D, we will be examining the use of absorption chillers for cooling and heating. According to the table, total building demand is 476000 Kwh, while the absorption chillers with the COP 4.0 Demand is 119000 Kwh, costing 154,700 US Dollars. Carbon emission in KgCO^2 is 77,350. In order to gain a better understanding of absorption chillers and the advantages they offer in the field of low carbon building services, further discussion is needed.. 

Scene 7

Heating and Cooling :  Absorption Chillers to provide cooling and heating

Cooling Total Building Demand (Kwh) 476,000 476,000 Absorption Chillers with COP 4.0 Demand (Kwh) 119,000 119,000 Cost ( $)  154,700 154,700 Carbon (kgCO^2) 77,350 77,350

Binary Solution & Absorption Refrigeration
9
Con&nser
Evaporator
7
Refrigerant
vapor
10
3
Str
Generator
solution
4
Weak solution
6
Absorber
2
Equivalent Subsystem

[Audio] Without greetings, without beginning with "today" and without thanks:
We will be discussing one of the low-carbon scenarios for hot water in buildings, Option D which consists of 65% gas Combined Heat and Power, and 35% from the grid. The tables show that when only using the grid, the total cost would be $86,905 and the total carbon emissions be 43,453 kgCO2. When combined with the gas CHP, the total cost increases to $220,987 and the total carbon emissions to 48,772 kgCO2. It is evident that using gas CHP to generate hot water requires more cost and results in greater carbon emissions.. 

Scene 8

Hot Water : 65% Gas CHP of heat for hot water + 35% Grid

Hot Water Building Demand (Kwh) 191,000 Gas CHP with 65% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 124,150 Tower Gas (MJ) 446,940 Cost ( $)  134,082 Carbon (kgCO2) 5,319

Hot Water (Grid) Building Demand (Kwh) 191,000 Grid with 35% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 66,850 Cost ( $)  86,905 Carbon (kgCO^2) 43,453

As for Hot water 
 Total Cost ( $)  220,987 Total Carbon (kgCO2) 48,772

[Audio] Our team has developed an innovative electricity generation system that combines 30% Gas CHP and 70% Grid power to produce electricity, cooling, and hot water. The Gas CHP technology is highly efficient and environmentally friendly. The Grid serves as a reliable supplement for peak demand. This approach is cost-effective and energy efficient, while also reducing pollution. Additionally, it offers us flexibility and resilience, ensuring uninterrupted power supply. As you can see from the tables, Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) is 286000, 158,667 and 444,667 for electricity, cooling and total building demand respectively. In the second table, Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) is 398,172 for total building demand. With our system, we can generate electricity, cooling, and hot water more efficiently and attractively.. 

Scene 9

Electricity Cooling Total Building Demand (Kwh) 286,000 158,667 444,667 Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 286,000 158,667 444,667 Cost ( $)  371,800 206,267 578,067 Carbon (kgCO^2) 185,900 206,267 289,034

Heating Cooling Hot Water Electricity Total Building Demand (Kwh) N/A　 158,667 　 124,150　 286,000 　 568,817　 Solar PV with 95% efficiency inverter demand (Kwh) N/A　 　 N/A　 　 N/A　 　 4,515　 　8,982 Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) 　N/A　
 N/A　 　 N/A　 　 200,200　 398,172　 Cost ($) N/A　　 　N/A　 　N/A　 　260,260 　517,623 Carbon (KgCo^2) N/A　 　N/A　 　N/A　 　130,130 　119,452

[Audio] We compared the baseline scenario to the low carbon scenario in the UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services Set Exercise and reached some interesting findings. The low carbon scenario was the cost winner with 39% lower costs, while also being the carbon winner with 15.8% lower carbon emissions.This suggests that if we choose the low carbon scenario, it can bring us both cost and environmental savings. Examining the cost comparison table reveals the dollar figures and the carbon comparison provides the amount of carbon emissions. To sum up, the low carbon scenario is the more beneficial option in terms of both cost savings and green credentials.. 

Scene 10

Key Considerations and Take Aways: Cost winner is low carbon scenario with 39 % lower costs Carbon winner is low carbon scenario with 15.8 % lower carbon emissions.

Cost Comparison ($)

 　 Baseline Low Carbon Cooling 206,267 154,700 Hot Water 197,581 134,082 Electricity (Total) 371,800 260,260 Total 763,233 549,042

Carbon Comparison (kgCO2)

 　 Baseline Low Carbon Cooling 103,133 77,350 Hot Water 7,823 48,772 Electricity (Total) 185,900 130,130 Total 296,856 256,252

[Audio] Absorption chillers are highly valued for their energy efficiency and environmentally friendly attributes. They are known to be more efficient than their counterparts and are powered by natural refrigerants which makes them a popular choice for those looking for a cost-effective solution. Moreover, they are known to require less energy and maintenance costs in the long run. These chillers are also very flexible, being able to use various heat sources. However, absorption chillers tend to be more expensive initially and require more space for installation, and have lower cooling capacities compared to vapor-compression systems.. 

Scene 11

SWOT Analysis
Absorption chillers - Cooling

Strengths Weaknesses Energy efficiency: Absorption chillers are known for their high energy efficiency . Environmentally friendly: These chillers use natural refrigerants  Cost savings: Absorption chillers can provide cost savings in the long run due to lower energy consumption and reduced maintenance requirements. Flexibility: They can use various heat sources Higher initial cost: Absorption chillers typically have a higher initial cost compared to conventional chillers, which may deter some potential buyers. Larger space for installation: requiring more space for installation. Lower cooling capacity: Absorption chillers generally have a lower cooling capacity compared to vapor-compression systems

Opportunities Threats: Integration with renewable energy sources: Absorption chillers can be integrated with renewable energy sources, such as solar , to provide efficient and sustainable cooling solutions. Competition from vapor-compression chillers: Vapor-compression chillers are more widely used and have a bigger market presence, posing a threat to the adoption of absorption chillers.

[Audio] CHP systems, or Gas Combined Heat and Power systems, offer great opportunities for improving energy efficiency due to their high efficiency and potential for cost savings. Not only are CHP systems reliable, but installation requires a substantial initial investment and professional installation, maintenance, and monitoring. Despite this, growing awareness and concern for energy efficiency is presenting an opportunity for driving demand for CHP systems. However, this demand must contend with fluctuating gas prices which can impact the cost-effectiveness of CHP systems.. 

Scene 12

Strengths Weaknesses Energy efficiency: Gas CHP systems are highly efficient in utilizing energy Cost savings: CHP systems can provide significant cost savings by reducing energy Reliability: Gas CHP systems generally offer high reliability and uninterrupted hot water supply, especially when compared to relying solely on grid electricity or traditional water heating systems. Initial investment: The intital cost of installing a gas CHP system can be relatively high Technical complexity: Gas CHP systems require professional installation, maintenance, and monitoring Space requirements: CHP systems are larger than conventional water heating systems, necessitating adequate space for installation.

Opportunities Threats: Growing demand for energy efficiency: Increasing awareness and concern about energy efficiency and sustainability can drive the demand for gas CHP systems as an efficient heating solution. Fluctuating gas prices: Changes in natural gas prices can impact the cost-effectiveness and attractiveness of gas CHP systems, especially if gas prices rise significantly.

[Audio] Gas CHP systems boast numerous advantages. They are remarkably energy efficient, rendering less energy lost in generating electricity and heat than separate electricity generation and heat production. Additionally, they burn cleaner, lessening greenhouse gas discharges and the environmental effect produced by conventional electricity generation systems. The downside is that they necessitate a sizable initial cost, and specialized intricacy that necessitates expert installation, upkeep and observation.. 

Scene 13

Strengths Weaknesses Energy efficiency: Gas CHP systems are highly efficient in generating both electricity and heat simultaneously, resulting in reduced energy waste compared to separate electricity generation and heat production. Environmental benefits: Gas CHP systems can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impact by utilizing cleaner-burning natural gas and producing less waste heat compared to separate electricity generation. High upfront cost: By installing a gas CHP system can be relatively high Technical complexity: Gas CHP systems require professional installation, maintenance, and monitoring, which can be more complex and require specialized knowledge compared to traditional electricity generation systems.

Opportunities Threats: Energy market participation: Gas CHP systems can participate in energy markets by selling excess electricity back to the grid, potentially generating additional revenue and offsetting operational costs. Fluctuating gas prices: Changes in natural gas prices can impact the cost-effectiveness and attractiveness of gas CHP systems, especially if gas prices rise significantly.

[Audio] In order to make an informed decision about installing a gas CHP system, it is important to consider the energy demand of the property, the cost-effectiveness of the CHP system compared to separate hot water and electricity generation systems, and the available space for installation. It is essential to evaluate the initial investment, operational costs, energy prices and potential incentives or government programs to determine if the CHP system is the most suitable solution for the property.. 

Scene 14

Energy demand: Assess the hot water and electricity demand of the residential or commercial property. Determine the required capacity for both hot water and electricity to ensure that the gas CHP system can meet the energy needs effectively.
 Cost-effectiveness: Evaluate the potential cost savings and payback period of installing a gas CHP system compared to separate systems for hot water and electricity generation. Consider the initial investment, operational costs, energy prices, and potential incentives or government programs that can reduce the financial burden.
 Space availability: Gas CHP systems typically require more space compared to individual hot water and electricity generation systems. Assess the available space for installation and ensure that it meets the requirements of the gas CHP system.
 Technical requirements: Gas CHP systems require professional installation, maintenance, and monitoring. Consider the technical expertise and resources available for installation, operation, and maintenance of the system. Ensure that there is access to qualified technicians who can handle any maintenance or repair needs.
 Environmental impact: Evaluate the environmental benefits of the gas CHP system, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions compared to separate systems. Consider the sustainability goals and environmental requirements of the residential or commercial property.

[Audio] For this presentation, we will be taking a look at a Low Carbon Building Services Set Exercise. The next step in the further feasibility analysis involves technical feasibility. This includes determining what the technical requirements are for installing a Gas CHP system in residential or commercial properties, the compatibility of existing infrastructure such as gas supply, electrical connections and plumbing with a Gas CHP system, the required space to install the Gas CHP system and related equipment as well as the expected electrical and thermal energy outputs of the system and how they fit with the designed building energy demand. We will now proceed to examine these questions in more detail.. 

Scene 15

Next Step for further feasibility analysis

Technical Feasibility: What are the technical requirements for installing a gas CHP system in my residential or commercial property? Is my existing infrastructure (gas supply, electrical connections, plumbing) compatible with a gas CHP system? How much space is required for installing the gas CHP system and associated equipment? What are the expected electrical and thermal energy outputs of the system, and how do they align with designed building energy demand?

[Audio] Absorption chillers are an economical and efficient solution for cooling requirements. Before adoption, the cooling demand of the property, energy source, cost-benefit analysis, cooling efficiency and risk assessment should all be taken into account. To determine the viability of using an absorption chiller, the available energy sources such as natural gas, waste heat or steam should be considered, followed by a cost-benefit analysis comparing against other cooling technologies. The Coefficient of Performance (COP) should also be assessed, as well as any potential risks such as equipment failure, supply disruptions or changes in energy prices. To ensure a secure operation, any contingency plans which would address any potential risks should be put in place.. 

Scene 16

Next Steps for further feasibility analysis

Consideration for Absorption chillers : Cooling Demand: What are the cooling requirements of my residential or commercial property? Energy Source: What are the available energy sources for absorption chillers, such as natural gas, waste heat, or steam? Cost-Benefit Analysis: How do the operational expenses, including energy consumption and maintenance, compare to alternative cooling technologies? What cost savings can be achieved by adopting absorption chillers? Cooling Efficiency: What is the Coefficient of Performance (COP) of absorption chillers under consideration? Risk Assessment: What potential risks or challenges are associated with absorption chillers? How can equipment failure, supply disruptions, or changes in energy prices be mitigated? Are there contingency plans in place to address potential risks?

[Audio] Low Carbon Building Services strives to decrease utilization of power, cooling, and hot water in both residential and commercial properties. We can fit these services in the structure and work out the measure of energy one unit can save. This is an extraordinary method to cut down the carbon impression and save money eventually.. 

Scene 17

1. Which Component is reduced by the proposal  (cooling ,electricity ,hot water ) 2. Where to install? (residential part? Commercial part?) 3.Calculate how much one unit could save ?

Scene 18

UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services
Set Exercise -Option D


We are here today to discuss Uwe Chung Ka Kuen's presentation exploring a low carbon building services option for a mixed multi-storey building

We will compare a baseline with a low carbon scenario and evaluate the overall outcome

Let's begin with the first slide of this presentation.

avatar

We will be looking at UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services

We will explore the summary of the site information, the baseline scenario, the low carbon scenario, a side by side comparison, a SWOT analysis by technology, and an overall evaluation, as well as the next steps for further feasibility analysis

The slide we are looking at depicts the total energy consumptions of a mixed multi-storey building

The table shows that the total cooling consumption is 476000 kWh per year, the total hot water consumption is 191000 kWh per year and the total electricity without cooling consumption is 286000 kWh per year

It is important to take these consumption values into consideration when planning and designing building services

Focusing on the total energy consumption allows us to plan, design and select the most suitable technology in order to reduce energy costs and carbon emissions.

We are examining a baseline setup including hot water, cooling and electricity components

Electrical heaters with an efficiency of 95% are employed for hot water, supplemented by 5% from solar thermal energy

Air conditioning units with a coefficient of performance of 3.0 are utilized for cooling, and grid electricity caters for all electricity demand and even the electricity needed for cooling.

Regarding low carbon building services, the data table presented indicates the cost and amount of carbon dioxide produced in relation to different energy sources

Electricity has a cost of 1.3 dollars per kilowatt hour and produces 0.65 kilograms of CO2

Town gas is priced at 0.3 dollars per megajoule and produces 0.0119 kilograms of CO2

For the building's hot water demand of 191000 Kwh, a gas boiler with 95% efficiency would have a cost of 197,581 dollars with 7,823 kilograms of CO2 generated

the grid would have a cost of 185,166 dollars with 7,345 kilograms of CO2 generated

If cooling the building, an air-conditioning unit with a COP of 3.0 would have a cost of 206,267 dollars with 103,133 kilograms of CO2 generated, or 578,067 dollars with 289,034 kilograms of CO2 generated via the grid with 100% efficiency

The information provided here should help to assess the cost and environmental impact of different energy sources.

A low carbon scenario is our next slide topic

An absorption chiller is showcased as the cooling solution, with 65% of the hot water supplied by a gas CHP, as well as 30% of the electricity

The remaining hot water and electricity would come from the grid.

Focusing on Low Carbon Scenario Option D, we will be examining the use of absorption chillers for cooling and heating

According to the table, total building demand is 476000 Kwh, while the absorption chillers with the COP 4.0 Demand is 119000 Kwh, costing 154,700 US Dollars

In order to gain a better understanding of absorption chillers and the advantages they offer in the field of low carbon building services, further discussion is needed.

Without greetings, without beginning with "today" and without thanks:

We will be discussing one of the low-carbon scenarios for hot water in buildings, Option D which consists of 65% gas Combined Heat and Power, and 35% from the grid

The tables show that when only using the grid, the total cost would be $86,905 and the total carbon emissions be 43,453 kgCO2

When combined with the gas CHP, the total cost increases to $220,987 and the total carbon emissions to 48,772 kgCO2

It is evident that using gas CHP to generate hot water requires more cost and results in greater carbon emissions.

Our team has developed an innovative electricity generation system that combines 30% Gas CHP and 70% Grid power to produce electricity, cooling, and hot water

The Gas CHP technology is highly efficient and environmentally friendly

The Grid serves as a reliable supplement for peak demand

This approach is cost-effective and energy efficient, while also reducing pollution

Additionally, it offers us flexibility and resilience, ensuring uninterrupted power supply

As you can see from the tables, Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) is 286000, 158,667 and 444,667 for electricity, cooling and total building demand respectively

In the second table, Grid with 100% efficiency Demand (Kwh) is 398,172 for total building demand

With our system, we can generate electricity, cooling, and hot water more efficiently and attractively.

We compared the baseline scenario to the low carbon scenario in the UBLMN7-30-3 Low Carbon Building Services Set Exercise and reached some interesting findings

The low carbon scenario was the cost winner with 39% lower costs, while also being the carbon winner with 15.8% lower carbon emissions.This suggests that if we choose the low carbon scenario, it can bring us both cost and environmental savings

Examining the cost comparison table reveals the dollar figures and the carbon comparison provides the amount of carbon emissions

To sum up, the low carbon scenario is the more beneficial option in terms of both cost savings and green credentials.

Absorption chillers are highly valued for their energy efficiency and environmentally friendly attributes

They are known to be more efficient than their counterparts and are powered by natural refrigerants which makes them a popular choice for those looking for a cost-effective solution

Moreover, they are known to require less energy and maintenance costs in the long run

These chillers are also very flexible, being able to use various heat sources

However, absorption chillers tend to be more expensive initially and require more space for installation, and have lower cooling capacities compared to vapor-compression systems.

CHP systems, or Gas Combined Heat and Power systems, offer great opportunities for improving energy efficiency due to their high efficiency and potential for cost savings

Not only are CHP systems reliable, but installation requires a substantial initial investment and professional installation, maintenance, and monitoring

Despite this, growing awareness and concern for energy efficiency is presenting an opportunity for driving demand for CHP systems

However, this demand must contend with fluctuating gas prices which can impact the cost-effectiveness of CHP systems.

Gas CHP systems boast numerous advantages

They are remarkably energy efficient, rendering less energy lost in generating electricity and heat than separate electricity generation and heat production

Additionally, they burn cleaner, lessening greenhouse gas discharges and the environmental effect produced by conventional electricity generation systems

The downside is that they necessitate a sizable initial cost, and specialized intricacy that necessitates expert installation, upkeep and observation.

In order to make an informed decision about installing a gas CHP system, it is important to consider the energy demand of the property, the cost-effectiveness of the CHP system compared to separate hot water and electricity generation systems, and the available space for installation

It is essential to evaluate the initial investment, operational costs, energy prices and potential incentives or government programs to determine if the CHP system is the most suitable solution for the property.

For this presentation, we will be taking a look at a Low Carbon Building Services Set Exercise

The next step in the further feasibility analysis involves technical feasibility

This includes determining what the technical requirements are for installing a Gas CHP system in residential or commercial properties, the compatibility of existing infrastructure such as gas supply, electrical connections and plumbing with a Gas CHP system, the required space to install the Gas CHP system and related equipment as well as the expected electrical and thermal energy outputs of the system and how they fit with the designed building energy demand

We will now proceed to examine these questions in more detail.

Absorption chillers are an economical and efficient solution for cooling requirements

Before adoption, the cooling demand of the property, energy source, cost-benefit analysis, cooling efficiency and risk assessment should all be taken into account

To determine the viability of using an absorption chiller, the available energy sources such as natural gas, waste heat or steam should be considered, followed by a cost-benefit analysis comparing against other cooling technologies

The Coefficient of Performance (COP) should also be assessed, as well as any potential risks such as equipment failure, supply disruptions or changes in energy prices

To ensure a secure operation, any contingency plans which would address any potential risks should be put in place.

Low Carbon Building Services strives to decrease utilization of power, cooling, and hot water in both residential and commercial properties

We can fit these services in the structure and work out the measure of energy one unit can save

This is an extraordinary method to cut down the carbon impression and save money eventually.