Thermostatic Radiator Valve Evaluation and Demonstration
A large stock of multifamily buildings in the Northeast and Midwest uses hot water or steam for space heating. Typically, residents do not pay for heat directly (i.e., heating fuel serves a central plant and use is not submetered). Losses from these systems are typically high, and a significant number of apartments are overheated much of the time. This is often evidenced by open windows on winter days. Controls and distribution are often faulty, and improving them can be more cost effective than replacing boilers. Thermostatic radiator valves (TRVs), which have been in use for many decades, are one potential strategy to combat this problem. They are commonly used in Europe and in other markets such as commercial buildings, but have not been widely accepted by the residential retrofit market in the northeastern United States. Anecdotal evidence suggests that heating systems engineers and contractors have a variety of opinions about their effectiveness, illustrating a lack of consensus on this potentially important energy efficiency measure. A review of the limited available literature revealed that, in one study, heating fuel savings as high as 15% was achieved through TRV retrofits. In this project, the U.S. Department of Energy Building America team, Advanced Residential Integrated Energy Solutions, sought to better understand the current usage of TRVs by key market players in steam and hot water heating and to conduct limited experiments on the effectiveness of new and old TRVs as a means of controlling space temperatures and reducing heating fuel consumption. The project included a survey of industry professionals, a field experiment comparing old and new TRVs, and cost-benefit modeling analysis using BEopt (Building Energy Optimization software). Radiator and apartment space temperature data were collected and analyzed for two similar apartment units in a building that underwent a one-pipe steam TRV retrofit. Space temperature comparisons were made across the pre- and post-TRV installation heating periods and between rooms equipped with old or new TRVs in an attempt to show the comparative effectiveness of each vintage of TRV. Analyses of the heating fuel utility bills before and after the building-wide TRV installation were conducted to quantify potential savings. The results of the field experiment and utility bill analysis did not show energy savings at either the unit or the building-wide level. The results provided inconclusive answers to the original study questions but provided valuable insight into common steam system imbalance and resident behavior issues that are critical to address in conjunction with TRV retrofits. Specific issues identified included steam distribution imbalance, possible TRV sensor location issues, a persistent window-opening habit, and a failure to optimize the boiler control set points as part of the TRV retrofit. The lack of heating fuel savings underscored the need to include whole steam system commissioning alongside or as a prerequisite to TRVs. Failed air vents and uneven steam main venting are critical to address either in conjunction with or before a TRV installation. Monitoring existing space temperatures before a retrofit strategy is chosen would allow the consultant and building owner to better assess the potential benefits of a whole-building TRV retrofit, selective installation of TRVs in some units, or simply balancing the steam distribution venting. Further gaps in the understanding of underlying processes that allow TRVs to function effectively were also identified and are presented as opportunities for future research.