From the ‘Smart Ground’ to the ‘Smart City’

An Analysis of Ten European Case-studies

Sesil Koutra

, Vincent Becue

and Christos S. Ioakimidis

ERA Chair 'Net-Zero Energy Efficiency on City Districts' Research Institute for Energy, University of Mons,

56 Rue de l’ Epargne, Mons, Belgium

Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Mons, 88 Rue d’Havre, Mons, Belgium

ERA Chair Holder ‘Net-Zero Energy Efficiency on City Districts’, Research Institute for Energy, University of Mons,

56 Rue de l'Epargne, Mons, Belgium

Keywords: Case-study, District, Energy, Smart.

Abstract: During the last two centuries, the urban percentage of the world's population, combined with the overall

growth phenomenon, has deeply increased and it is projected to reach 60% by 2030. In this current context

linked to environmental issues managing to plan sustainable cities appears a main policy target. The

implementation of Zero Energy Buildings as a European target becomes a challenge for the energy savings

with the significant commitment for larger urban scales. The aim of this paper is the development of a

methodological systemic approach about energy management in a ‘district scale’ with zero energy context

within the analysis of ten European case-studies to the potential of a ‘smart ground’ towards the development

of a ‘smart city’. This work opens and addresses numerous future research perspectives that should be

investigated widely to develop districts with an operational, sustainable and long-term context.

1 INTRODUCTION

The future of the majority of citizens’ is undeniable

urban. Fascinating the urban development is already

taken place in the notion of ‘smart city’ (Angelidou,

2015). Metropolitan areas around the world aimed at

upgrading urban infrastructure and services with a

view of better environmental, social and economic

conditions and enhancing cities’ attractiveness.

Reflecting these developments, many new

‘categories’ of the contemporary city have been

entered: ‘sustainable’, ‘green’, ‘intelligent’, ‘smart’,

etc. (De Jong et al., 2015). Despite the various debates

about what is ‘smart’ in literature (Angelidou, 2015;

Hollands, 2008; Komninos, 2011), there is no agreed

definition of a ‘smart city’ and its strategic planning

is still largely unexplored (Angelidou, 2015).

Calvillo et al., (2016) propose a ‘smart city’ as a

sustainable and efficient urban centre with high

quality of life through the optimal management of its

natural resources, while Angelidou highlights the

complexity of the system by diverging interests: the

use of ‘smart energy’ towards ‘intelligent’ ways for

the energy reduction (i.e. ‘smart buildings’, ‘smart

transportation’, ‘Intelligent Transport Systems’, etc.)

using innovative technologies (Angelidou, 2015). In

‘smart cities’, governments invest in Information

Communication Technologies (ICT) to improve

sustainable development by providing ‘smart urban

infrastructures’ that inform end-users about the

desired environmental agenda. In fact, a ‘smart city’

provides the required infrastructure for citizens for

more ‘intelligent’ decisions (Khansari et al., 2014),

while its concept operates in a complex urban and

built environment incorporating several systems of

technology, social and political structures, economy

and human behaviour as well.

Energy management is one of the most

demanding issues within this complexity. Therefore,

significant attention is dedicated to assess the impacts

of the ‘smart solutions’ towards the planning from

‘conventional’ to the ‘smart’ city (Calvillo et al.,

2016). Cities are the core of economic activities,

development and research and the key for 'smart

growth’ (Vollaro et al., 2014). In this framework, the

European ‘Smart Cities and Communities Initiative’

encourages cities to ambitious measures to progress

by 2020 towards a 40% reduction of greenhouse gas

emissions. ‘Energy 2020’ European strategy affirms

that ‘the well-being of people, industry and economy

depends on safe, secure, sustainable and affordable

energy’ and confirms the targets ’20-20-20’ defined

Koutra, S., Becue, V. and Ioakimidis, C.

From the ‘Smart Ground’ to the ‘Smart City’ - An Analysis of Ten European Case-studies.

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems (SMARTGREENS 2016), pages 105-110

ISBN: 978-989-758-184-7

105

in 2007 aimed at reducing greenhouse gases by 20%,

increasing renewable energy to 20% and achieving a

20% improvement in energy efficiency (Eurostat,

2014). In this effort, the concept of ‘zero’ is expected

to have a crucial role and anticipated to contribute

significantly at the achievement of ‘smart cities’

envisioned by the European Union (European

Directives, etc.) (Kylili and Fokaides, 2015).

The major challenge, therefore, is the adaptation

and retrofitting of the existing building stock in order

to reach the annual zero-energy balance. The

problematic of ‘Zero Energy Buildings (ZEBs)’ has

aroused increasing interest in international level

towards solutions focusing on the individual building

(Marique and Reiter, 2014). District level appears to

be particularly interesting in operational terms for

modelling and exemplifying as a first step towards the

realisation of the ‘smart city’. It consists the city’s

micrograph and a constructive element. By

addressing targeted issues, this approach results in

innovative solutions (Pérez and Rey, 2013) with the

introduction of modern technologies and multi-

energy applications.

The paper focuses on the solutions for districts’

transformation into more sustainable with the

introduction of the ‘smart ground’. The hybridization

of the ‘smart’ location and morphology with the

alternative use of multi-energy systems is the key

factor. Two additional levers complete this approach:

(1) optimization of occupants’ actual needs and (2)

organization of storage (energy, water, etc.). The

paper is structured accordingly. Section 2 includes the

methodological approach and proceeds to explore the

evaluation tool developed and the description of the

‘smart ground’, Section 3 illustrates ten European

exemplar case-studies highlighting their principles

and the main findings of their comparative analysis,

while Section 4 summarizes and discusses the most

interesting points that emerged from the previous

review.

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 The Systemic Approach

The goal of this study is the development of an initial

scripting tool on the basis of urban contextualisation

of the ‘smart ground’ adapted to the systemic

approach. For this study, the district is understood as

an ‘urban block’ and a complicated system with

various parameters, while the Net-Zero Energy

District (NZED) aims at articulating the primary

energy uses: building energy consumption,

production of on-site renewable energy and

transportation energy consumption (Marique and

Reiter, 2014) (Figure 1).

Figure 1: District components and interconnections.

Teller and Marique underline that the ‘Net-Zero

Energy District’ concept is described, by analogy

with the Net-Zero Energy Building, as a ‘district in

which annual energy consumption for buildings and

transportation of inhabitants are balanced by the

local production of renewable energy’ (Teller and

Marique, 2014) (Figure 2):

Figure 2: Systemic approach of NZED.

However, moving from buildings to districts with

a net zero energy concept requires holistic integrated

approaches, in which all the aspects of ‘green’ are

considered (i.e. mobility, ‘smart technologies’, etc.)

(Kolokotsa, 2015). ‘Smart ground’ could be the basis

of a ‘smart grid’ and ‘smart city’ as part of an efficient

energy management system in a district in

conjunction with power generation and energy

demand. However, the achievement of NZED

demands significant effort at operational

characteristics (Kolokotsa, 2015).

2.2 The Notion of ‘Smart Ground’

The innovative notion of ‘smart ground’ is defined in

accordance with the development of effectively

performed districts towards the ‘smart city’ and

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

106

symbolizes the hybridization of technologies, multi-

energy systems and renewable energy produced on-

site introducing the urban reflection and importance

at its planning and design. A compilation of

qualitative and quantitative criteria (and sub-criteria)

is acquainted by the authors in accordance with two

strategic axes:

2.2.1 The Smart ‘Location’

Four (4) essential criteria synthesize this axis (in a

non-exhaustive way):

a) Climate (and Micro-climate): the weather

conditions (temperature, daylight, wind, etc.)

influence the occupants’ actual requirements

in energy and policies pursued (i.e.

impediments for mild modes of transport- in

cold climates, etc.).

b) Potential of Natural Resources: constitutive

key factor for the ‘smart location’.

c) Proximity: proximity of services and facilities

for the site (i.e. the presence of an existing

transportation network enables savings and

ensures the connections to the city and

encouragement of ‘green’ mobility, less

dependency on car use, etc.).

d) Functional Mixing: ‘functional autonomy’ of

the district within its economic centre and

diversified services.

The ‘smart location ‘emphasises the geographical

site of a NZED. However, the goal of the study

remains the urban analysis and the identification of

the ‘ground’ (needs, potential, etc.) as a preliminary

step of any technological installation or achievement

to enhance its character as NZED in maximum.

2.2.2 The Smart ‘Morphology’

The ‘smart morphology’ is associated with the

reflection of the district’s urban structure:

a) Density (Residential and Population): central

to the urban planning of a district: a) limit

displacements and car dependency, b)

economise land use.

b) Orientation: spatial district’s urban pattern

that reflects the integration of benefits of solar

gain and natural lighting in NZED within its

architectural and planning composition.

Marique and Teller (Teller, Marique, 2014)

consider an angle of 25° measured

horizontally at a central point of each façade

of the NZED to maximise the solar gain.

c) Compactness: crucial to reduce energy

consumption. Maignant (Maignant, 2005)

underlines the optimum compactness with

spherical geometrical shape, while

simultaneously public transport are more cost-

effective, accessible and effective in a more

dense urban tissue.

Figure 3 highlights the components that

synthesize the notion of ‘smart ground’.

Figure 3: From the ‘smart ground’ to the ‘smart grid’.

2.3 NZED’ Evaluation Tool

The processes of optimization, evaluation and

monitoring of urban projects requires a defined

framework and methodology. Four main categories:

(i) certifications, (ii) modelling: (quantitative basis);

(iii) assessment tools, (iv) decision-making tools:

(Martínez-Pérez et al., 2013). A compilation of

qualitative and quantitative criteria on Figure 4:

1. Optimization of Actual Occupants’ Needs: key

indicators that frame the district’s ‘anatomy’

2. Use of Energetic Hybridization: reflects the

successful incorporation of energetic systems’

and technologies’ variety combining with

local production of renewable energy sources

3. Organization of Storage: energy performance

of technologies, systems and techniques

installed to reduce energy consumption.

3 CASE-STUDIES

A number of districts with an ‘ecological’ character

has been developed since ‘90s in the North Europe

supporting the idea of the urban metabolism into

more ‘sustainable’ towards the sensitivity for the

environment and the quality of life. Despite the

general context of the sustainable development in

urban projects, innovative realisations of the ‘eco-

districts’ adopt an approach more sectorial and less

global with specific and particular objectives. A brief

review of ten (10) representative case-studies in a

From the ‘Smart Ground’ to the ‘Smart City’ - An Analysis of Ten European Case-studies

107

Figure 4: Analysis of the three pillars of a NZED.

European level is performed in this study as a first

reflexion of the understanding of the sustainable

context in a district scale for three principle reasons:

• More than 50% have been implemented,

• The availability of the information

• The European geographical scale

3.1 Description of Case-studies

The majority of the selected case-studies concern

new-constructed projects, established mostly on

urban lands with high potential of renewable

resources. A number of the cases are transformations

of ancient land uses or part of political initiatives. The

cases-studies selected are (Figure 5):

Figure 5: Presentation of case-studies.

• Hammarby Sjöstad (Sweden): new-

constructed to expand the city centre of

Stockholm (1994-ongoing).

• Bo01 Malmo (Sweden): new-constructed

district of innovative environmentally

friendly technologies (1998-2002).

• Eco-Viikki (Finland): testing ground

construction to ecological building trends

(1999-2004).

• BedZED (Sutton, United Kingdom): new-

constructed pilot project (1999-2005).

• Solar Village (Greece): test a variety of

passive and active solar systems (1984-1988).

• Vauban (Germany): first district labelled as

‘sustainable’and the most famous example

of ‘eco-projects’ (1993-2006).

• Kronsberg (Germany): new-constructed in

the context of the Universal Exhibition in

2000 (1994-2000).

3.2 Comparative Analysis

3.2.1 Optimization of Energy Needs

Main findings:

The majority of the projects had a

construction duration varied from 4-6 years.

Exception consists the cases of Hammarby

(23 years) and the Kronsberg (11 years)

The surface (in ha) of the ‘eco-districts’

varied from 1.7ha (BedZED) to 200ha

(Hammarby) with an average of 35ha

The average population density reaches the

138 inh/ha while the average residential

density reaches the 48 units/ha.

South buildings’ orientation for the

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

108

maximization of natural lighting and solar

gain.

3.2.2 Energetic Hybridization

Concerning the energy field and the systems used

by the different cases, almost all of them use

photovoltaic and solar panels. Despite the use of

complicated energy systems, their energy

consumption does not often achieve their initial

objectives. Important reductions in water

consumption in view of the recuperation of storm

water and local sewage treatment in many cases (i.e.

Hammarby, Malmo, etc.). The analysis of the

energetic hybridization reveals that the systems

mostly used are the photovoltaic panels and the co-

generation. The tendency of their hybridization is

obvious for the majority of the cases. Regarding the

use of RES, the main statement is that the solar

energy remains the first priority of the stakeholders’

decisions sometimes in combination with the rest

potential of each case. The use of gas and biomass

seem to be less (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Energy systems and innovative technologies.

3.2.3 Organisation of Energy Storage

The organisation of energy storage remains a

challenge and unexplored both in the literature

review and in real life. However, the analysis of ten

European ‘eco-cases’ reveals efforts towards

mainly the recuperation of storm water (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Organisation of energy storage.

4 DISCUSSION

This paper explores the path from the ‘smart

ground’ to the ‘smart city’ as a result of the

contemporary urban transformation of the modern

districts. It proposes the development of a systemic

methodological approach for the evaluation of a

NZED within three interrelated pillars in a multi-

criterion concept.

This work opens numerous future research

perspectives that should be investigated widely to

develop NZEDs with a concrete and operational

context in real life. The proposed methodological

framework (systemic approach of the district, multi-

criteria approach related to three levers of

evaluation, etc.) will be extended and completed as

a further step in the scope of defining and

transforming modern districts into sustainable, and

energetically performed, validated and completed

as a further step of this study within a real case-

study.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was funded by the EC under the FP7

RE-SIZED 621408 (Research Excellence for

Solutions and Implementation of Net-Zero Energy

City Districts) project.

REFERENCES

Angelidou, M., 2015. Smart cities: A conjuncture of four

forces. Cities, 47(0), 95–106. http://doi.org/http://dx.

doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.004.

Calvillo, C., Sanchez-Miralles, A., Villar, J., 2016.

Energy management and planning in smart cities.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55,

273–287.

De Jong, M., Joss, S., Schraven, D., Zhan, C., Weijnen,

M., 2015. Sustainable–smart–resilient–low carbon–

eco–knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of

concepts promoting sustainable urbanization. Journal

of Cleaner Production, 109, 25–38. Retrieved from

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.004.

Eurostat. (2014). Final energy consumption by sector.

Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://epp.eurost

at.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_d

atabase.

Gaur, A., Scotney, B., Parr, G., McClean, S., 2015. Smart

City Architecture and its Applications based on IoT.

In The 5th International Symposium on Internet of

Ubiquitous and Pervasive Things (IUPT 2015) (pp.

1089–1094). Hollands, R. (2008). Will the real smart

From the ‘Smart Ground’ to the ‘Smart City’ - An Analysis of Ten European Case-studies

109

city please stand up? City: Analysis of Urban Trends,

Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 12(3), 303–320.

Teller, J., Marique, A., 2014. Référentiel Quartiers

Durables. SPW éditions, Guides Méthodologiques.

Khansari, N., Mostashari, A., Mansouri, M., 2014.

Conceptual Modeling of the Impact of Smart Cities

on Household Energy Consumption. In Conference

on Systems Engineering Research (CSER 2014) (pp.

81–86).

Kolokotsa, D., 2015. The role of Smart Grids in the

Building Sector. Energy and Buildings. http://doi.org/

10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.12.033.

Komninos, N., 2011. Intelligent cities: Variable

geometries of spatial intelligence. Intelligent

Buildings International, 3(3), 172–188.

Kylili, A., Fokaides, P., 2015. European smart cities: The

role of zero energy buildings. Sustainable Cities and

Society, 15, 86–95.

Maignant, G., 2005. Compacité et forme urbaine, une

analyse environnementale dans la perspective d’un

développement urbain durable. Actes Du Colloque

«Développement Urbain Durable, 1–17.

Marique, A. F., Reiter, S., 2014. A simplified framework

to assess the feasibility of zero-energy at the

neighbourhood/community scale. Energy and

Buildings, 82, 114–122. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbu

ild.2014.07.006.

Martínez-Pérez, B., De La Torre-Díez, I., Candelas-

Plasencia, S., López-Coronado, M., 2013.

Development and evaluation of tools for measuring

the quality of experience (QoE) in mHealth

applications. Journal of Medical Systems, 37(5).

http://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-013-9976-x.

Riera Pérez, G., Rey, E., 2013. A multi-criteria approach

to compare urban renewal scenarios for an existing

neighborhood. Case study in Lausanne (Switzerland).

Building and Environment, 65, 58–70. http://doi.org/1

0.1016/j.buildenv.2013.03.017.

Teller, J., Marique, A.F. 2014. Des « Quartiers

Durables » en Wallonie. Etat d’avancement des

travaux relatifs à l’évaluation des projets de quartiers

durables.

Vollaro, R., Evangelisti, L., Carnielo, E., Gori, P.,

Guattari, C., Fanchiotti, A., 2014. An Integrated

Approach for an Historical Buildings Energy

Analysis in a Smart Cities Perspective. In 68th

Conference of the Italian Thermal Machines

Engineering Association, ATI2013 (pp. 372–378).

SMARTGREENS 2016 - 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems

110