Conclusions
Here is a reminder of our objectives:
- Investigate ways to reduce energy consumption in Glasgow
- Make the project value for money
- Focus our analysis on social housing
- Investigate possible ways to tackle fuel poverty
- Investigate the reducing CO2 emissions
- Achieve sustainable growth
Here is how we have answered our objectives:
- The conventional way to design CHP systems is not valid
- Demand reduction should always be the first option
- CHP is technically better suited to hot water
- Fuel Poverty can only be tackled with both demand reduction and CHP for hot water
- CHP for hot water is 4 times cheaper than CHP for central heating - for the same energy savings
- 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