www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem

1. Realizing, Modeling and
Evaluating City’s Energy
Efficiency: the case of InSmart
in the city of Trikala, Greece
Leonidas Anthopoulos, George Giannakidis, Sotirios Sakkas
Leonidas Anthopoulos, Associate Professor
University of Applied Science of Thessaly, Greece
Mayor’s special advisor of city of Trikala, Greece

2. Presentation’s structure
 Introduction
 Background
 Research methodology – the project InSmart
 Conclusions

3. Introduction
 Smart cities: 6 main challenges
 providing an economic base;
 building efficient urban infrastructure;
 improving the quality of life and place;
 ensuring social integration;
 conserving natural environmental qualities, and
 guaranteeing good governance
 The rise of the smart city industry
 US $3 trillion (products among others smart buildings and smart grids etc.)
 Standardization bodies: energy efficiency has not been standardized
 Research questions:
 RQ1: how can city’s energy efficiency be defined and measured?
 RQ2: what is the role of government in ensuring city’s energy efficiency?
 Questions’ importance:
 city’s energy efficiency is not easy
 Governments try to control consumption and emissions (i.e., Covenant of Mayors 2020)
 Studies (i.e., Tsolakis & Anthopoulos, 2015) show that corresponding policies are estimated easy to fail

4. Background
 Efficiency:
 Oxford dictionary: the good use of time and energy in a way that does not waste any of them;
 Efficiency ~ productivity: optimal energy use
 Efficiency is related with sufficiency
 Energy efficiency = energy use performance
 City’s energy efficiency:
 Consumers (demand side): industrial (service and industry), transport and buildings (residential and commercial)
 Depends on physical characteristics (i.e., city size, population density etc.)
 Total‐factor energy efficiency (TFEE):
 interrelates energy efficiency and per‐capita income
 Inputs: labor size, capital, farm area, energy use
 Output: GDP
 Energy efficiency and waste management: extreme and useless energy demands
 Telecommunications: networks’ length increases energy consumption
 Policies: different among countries
 Energy and emission control;
 Emissions trading economy and the city
 Public lighting
 Urban transportation

5. Background #2
U.S.A. Japan
Year Policy Year Policy (Kawasaki city specialization)
1978‐ Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards 1951 (Threat to public safety recognized)
2006‐
2010
Federal Hybrid Vehicle Tax Credit 1959 (Finance program to treatment facility)
1980‐ Gas guzzler tax 1960 Pollution Prevention Ordinance
(the Old Ordinance)
1990‐ Federal appliance energy efficiency standards 1962 Soot and Smoke regulation (National designated
area for Soot and Smoke regulation (1963))
1978‐ Residential and commercial building codes 1967 Basic Pollution Prevention Law (Loan program for
treatment facility installation)
1978‐ Electricity Demand‐Side Management
programs
1968 Air Pollution Prevention Law (The K‐value
regulation)
1976‐ Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) 1969 Public Health Compensation Law
2009‐
2011
2009 Economic Stimulus
Additional WAP funding
 Recovery Through Retrofit
 State Energy Program
 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block
Grants
 Home Energy Efficiency Tax Credits
 Residential and Commercial Building
Initiative
 Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program

1970
1998
1st Pollution Diet (Pollution control agreement)
Producer’s Pay Principle (Finance program for
Pollution prevention)
Global Warming Prevention Law
Amendment to Energy Conservation Law
i.e.: US and
Japanese
policies

6. Research methodology
 The InSmart Project (2014‐2017)
 4 cities: Nottingham (UK), Cesena (Italy), Évora
(Portugal) and Trikala (Greece)
 Differences in size and smart city priorities
 multiple objectives:
 structure a model that can map local energy demand
sources
 calculate existing energy efficiency
 estimate energy efficiency by 2030 with the simulation of
several scenarios (policies)
 usual local policies:
 outcome of national policies
 small‐scale projects that enhance energy efficiency (i.e., new
facility development; public buildings’ upgrade; public
lighting management systems etc.)

7. Research methodology (#2)
 The InSmart Project (2014‐2017)
 7 work packages:
 a) the determination of the potentially different sources of energy supply and demand in
the involved cities;
 (b) the definition of a reference model (baseline) with energy demand size in the involved
cities with the use of data from 2012;
 (c) the selection of energy efficiency policies (scenarios) from all the involved cities;
 (d) the development of a model that calculates and estimates energy demand by 2030,
according the contributed scenarios;
 (e) the involvement of city stakeholders in all the city partners in order to define and
execute a multi‐criteria decision making (MCDM) process for the above scenarios’
prioritization;
 (f) the calculation of scenarios’ effect on policy targets

8. Research methodology (#3)
 The InSmart Project (2014‐2017)
 Energy demand sources (meet literature findings):
 (a) public lighting (street and open space lighting, fountain operation);
 (b) water and sewage treatment and distribution;
 (c) waste chain operation (collection, delivery and processing);
 (d) buildings (municipal, residential and commercial);
 (e) transportation (fuel and emission)
 Energy suppliers:
 heating oil, natural gas, solar photovoltaics (PV), wind turbines, district heating (DH),
combined heat and power (CHP), solar thermal, geothermal energy and biomass
 open green spaces to city “natural cooling”

9. Research methodology (#4)
 InSmart – Findings from Trikala (DEYAT as a partner)
 Reference framework:
 81,355 inhabitants
 GDP: 5% increase/year
 Transportation: 85,000 trips/day, facilities and city connections
 Water supply: 13 pumps, 2 stations, 8.5m3 million, 325Km pipe network
 Waste chain: 1 treatment station, serves 50% of population, 19 trucks, 27,557 tons, 40MWh for
landfill operation
 Energy profile:
 440MWh of electric power/year (2011)
 Buildings: the main consumer (15,500 buildings in 8 typologies)
 Oil consumption: 76,000 tons (47% for heating, 53% for transportation)
 Natural gas: 87.7 Km pipe network

10. Research methodology (#4)
 InSmart – Findings from Trikala (DEYAT as a partner)
 Reference framework:
 81,355 inhabitants
 GDP: 5% increase/year
 Transportation: 85,000 trips/day, facilities and city connections
 Water supply: 13 pumps, 2 stations, 8.5m3 million, 325Km pipe network
 Waste chain: 1 treatment station, serves 50% of population, 19 trucks, 27,557 tons, 40MWh for
landfill operation
 Energy profile:
 440MWh of electric power/year (2011)
 Buildings: the main consumer (15,500 buildings in 8 typologies)
 Oil consumption: 76,000 tons (47% for heating, 53% for transportation)
 Natural gas: 87.7 Km pipe network

11. Research methodology (#5)
 InSmart – Findings
from Trikala (DEYAT as
a partner)
 Trikala has signed
the Covenant of
Mayors
 Trikala 2025: a
smart, sufficient
and resilient city
 15 alternative
scenarios
Scenario Group Scenario
Buildings 1. Municipal building renovation (20% improved efficiency)
2. 80% of city buildings connected with the natural gas network
3. Renovation of all city buildings grounded before 1950
4. Energy efficiency upgrade of all city buildings
Public lighting 1. Public lighting upgrade to LED (6,000 units)
Renewable Energy 1. Renewable energy production by 10% of total demand
Green Spaces 1. Green Open Space creation (5% cooling demand reduction)
Transportation 1. Mobility Ring‐Road (8C) completion and Cycle Lane Network
Expansion with 5‐10 Km (8R)
2. Replacement of 10 municipal vehicles with electrical ones
3. Encouraging hybrid and electrical vehicle use (i.e., with tolls
in the city entrance)
Water and sewage 1. Biomass landfill (950KWh production capacity)
2. Sewage treatment with bacteria (25% decrease of energy
demand)
3. Dam construction (200KWh energy supply and down to 0%
energy demand for water pumping)
Systemic 1. Exploitation of all terraces for solar panels
2. 20% of CO2 production decrease

12. Research methodology (#6)
 InSmart – Findings
from Trikala (DEYAT
as a partner)
 Selection criteria
definition
 PROMETHEE MCDM
Criteria
1. Implementation Cost 6. Ease of Implementation
2. Implementation Cost Efficiency 7. City’s Quality of Life
Improvement
3. Energy savings 8. City’s Economic Development
4. Operation and Maintenance
Cost
9. Social Acceptance
5. Revenue Production

13. Research methodology (#7)
 InSmart – Findings
from Trikala (DEYAT as
a partner)
 Scenarios
calculation:
Scen01: Municipal building
renovation
Scen04: Energy efficiency
upgrade of all city buildings
Scen05. Public lighting
upgrade to LED (6,000 units)
Scen06: Renewable energy
production
Scen15: emission reduction
20% (totals)
Scen15: emission reduction
20% (transportation)

14. Research methodology (#8)
 InSmart – Findings
from Trikala (DEYAT
as a partner)
 Scenarios
calculation:
the most significant
contribution regarding
energy efficiency is being
performed by scenario 4
(Energy efficiency upgrade
of all city buildings)
Too Expensive

15. Conclusions
 Research questions
 RQ1: city’s energy efficiency concerns city’s energy performance in terms of
utilization and savings
 RQ2: government plays a vital role in ensuring city’s energy efficiency
 National government: long‐term planning
 Local government: aligns to national planning; project planning (local policies).
 InSmart: criteria and MCDM

16. Thank you
http://www.insmartenergy.com