Conclusions

Here is a reminder of our objectives:

  1. Investigate ways to reduce energy consumption in Glasgow
  2. Make the project value for money
  3. Focus our analysis on social housing
  4. Investigate possible ways to tackle fuel poverty
  5. Investigate the reducing CO2 emissions
  6. Achieve sustainable growth

Here is how we have answered our objectives:

  1. The conventional way to design CHP systems is not valid
  2. Demand reduction should always be the first option
  3. CHP is technically better suited to hot water
  4. Fuel Poverty can only be tackled with both demand reduction and CHP for hot water
  5. CHP for hot water is 4 times cheaper than CHP for central heating - for the same energy savings
  6. 19,300 tonnes of carbon could be saved in Glasgow per year, whilst also saving Glasgow Housing Association £3.9 million per year.

© University of Strathclyde 2009