Improving insulation in the reference warehouse leads to:
Key results
1,511 tons to 3,976 tons
total CO₂ savings over 15 years
- 14% to 36%
of total warehouse CO₂ emissions (comparing poor to standard and poor to optimal scenarios, respectively)
€4.1 to €7.1 million
higher OpEx of over 15 years (poor to standard and poor to optimal scenarios, respectively)
At a glance
Insulation is a major factor in a building’s energy efficiency and thus its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the degree of its impact on corporate sustainability targets depends on the initial insulation quality of the warehouse. While superior insulation significantly reduces energy consumption, and therefore also operating costs and GHG emissions, the required investment is very high. For this reason, decisions about insulation quality must consider more than just the effect on GHG emissions.
The case in context
Substantial heat loss (often amounting up to 60%) due to inadequate insulation is a critical concern in the warehousing industry.1 The strategic implementation of insulation presents a pivotal lever for mitigating heat loss, which in turn results in both significant energy savings and emission reductions.
A closer look: case details and parameters
Three different scenarios are analyzed and compared with regards to both economic and environmental impact: poor, standard, and superior insulation.
Based on the model warehouse dimensions, external surfaces relevant for insulation total to approximately 65,000 m². 20% of this area are external walls, 74% is the roof and 6% are designated for windows and doors in equal proportions.
The calculations are based on natural gas as the energy source for heating, but the three scenarios vary in terms of insulation materials for walls and roofs, as well as in window quality. Poor insulation entails a thermal insulation standard from approximately 2005-2010, and simple double-glazed windows. Standard insulation meets regulations from circa 2020-2022 and uses currently average-to-good insulation materials, more advanced double-glazed windows and insulated doors and gates. Superior insulation exceeds mandatory insulation practices, deploying triple-glazed windows and highly efficient insulation material with the best available insulating properties for walls, roofs and doors.
Results
The analysis indicates that transitioning from ineffective to more effective insulation is beneficial for the reduction of GHG emissions. However, the CO₂ abatement costs are high, leading to a sharp increase of OpEx over 15 years. This result applies equally to all three scenarios.
Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that these calculations depend on consistent energy prices and emission factors. Anticipated changes, for example rising CO₂ certificate prices in the EU Emission Trading System, will inevitably have an impact on the calculations. As energy prices rise, each of these scenarios becomes more advantageous.
Evaluation: significant CO₂ reductions but negative OpEx effects
Improving warehouse insulation is one of the biggest levers for CO₂ emission reduction – more specifically, the second-, fourth- or seventh best lever analyzed in this study, depending on the initial and implemented quality of insulation. However, this lever offers little cost savings potential. In fact, evaluated using a conservative cost projection for natural gas and CO₂ emissions, financial and emissions savings resulting from lower energy consumption do not balance out the investment of improved insulation. Not by chance, there is motivation to establish legislation on building efficiency across Europe.
Feel free to write us a message
