Stop beating arround the bush!

We need action and progress!
No diluting and digressing!

This telegraph article on "The low-cost family house of the future" is a prime example of the hot air our society and precisely lobbies of all kinds of industries are producing, obviously trying to avoid progress threatening established margins by all means.

The article is all about low-cost and low-energy but it avoids the slightest, in fact any reference to real numbers; as such those terms remain as accurate as the coordinates of cloud-cuckoo-land, obviously just another exercise to fill the paper and irritating the public.

Cost in relation to home building regularly comes as £ per square metre [£/m²] and low-energy refers to gobbledygook unless you define the energy consumption; internationally that is done in kiloWatt per square metre and year [kW/m²a].

There is, oh wonder oh Telegraph, an international Standard, supra-nationally now accepted in many countries, from Japan to the US, from Norway to South Africa, in Australia and in South America: it is called Passive House Standard; it defines the maximum energy consumption to be no more than 15 kW/m²a* for the space heating demand. To get there it needs a thorough calculation taking many different factors into account not only the construction's location and orientation but also all materials', all components' and all appliances' energy efficiencies; the software developed to do exactly that is called PHPP, the Passive House Planning Package.

Solar gain and lunar loss, air-changes per hour [ach], air tightness, U-values, thermal conductivity, thermal bridging, psi-values, efficiency values those are the modern parameters to take into account. Quite a difference to living in caves or cavity-cold homes.

 

So it is time to stop producing hot air, time to end this useless inventing British complicated but diluted standards that no enduser will be able to understand (> CoSH); no need to invent any more British wheels again and again; what is needed is for all members of the British construction industry, from the bosses down, to (want to) understand that it is high time to apply this existing and proven knowledge extensively, now!

It would also end rubbish like ...

There were also technical issues for the Simonsens. The ventilation system broke down on a Friday night, and an engineer had to be called out to fix the problem. The technology in the Kettering house is similarly daunting with a plant room filled with pipes and tanks. Nik says if it goes wrong: “I have a number to call.”

What shall sound so dangerous describing a dramatic high-tech problem like The ventilation system broke down... can be no more than one ventilator that probably had no more power supplied and that similarly daunting with a plant room filled with pipes and tanks by implication just avoids the dirty chaos in British homes with pipes and pumps, tanks and meters dumped into dark and poky cupboards, an almost inaccessible attic or into so desperate needed bathroom or kitchen cabinets guaranteed avoiding proper access for maintenance or repair.

And cost? From experience it can be done for around £1,500 per square metre, Passive House Standard, turnkey - now, to compare like with like one should know what turnkey really comprises! And make sure that both products, turnkey homes, built to PH Standard, hence comparable in energy consumption! Plus, make sure that both homes are heated to the same levels, i.e. 21° in all rooms, but 19°C in the bedrooms. I know, complicated, but I said like with like! And efficiency does not come with throwing the dice!

Here is one pretty good wall... (not a PH wall) but a wall is just one element of the complex calculation, anyway.

Carpe diem!

* one litre of heating oil equates to 10.7kW, so your 150m² 5-bedroom house should not use more than the equivalent energy of 210 litres of heating oil per year or roughly £13 a month to keep a temperature of 21°C throughout the house (bedrooms 19°C). Now you compare!

PH for Standard!

passiv(e) but fast...

A HH PH (HANSE HAUS PassivHaus) going up...

An interesting article to read.

Call for Passivhaus standard to beat fuel poverty and climate change


And here a wee reminder...

Carpe diem!

DC's concept for a foundation...

of a wise builder?



PM DC, 1:44 into the above video:

...I know that you can't see it or feel it right now. But think of it like this: the new economy we are building it is like building a house; the most important part is the part you can't see: the foundations. Slowly but surely we are laying solid foundations for a stronger future. And the vital point is this: if you don't stick with it it won't work.

A lot of can'ts, Mr. Prime Minister, but I like your metaphor: it is like building a house, isn't it:

²⁴ “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. ²⁵ The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. ²⁶ But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. ²⁷ The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

That's Matthew 7:24-27, known as "The Wise and Foolish Builders".

Yes, the foundation is very important; yet, in your speech it remains unclear what shall be build on this solid foundation: is it going to be a traditional construction, then, what would be new?

We need to tell the truth... you say, so is this new economy on what you describe as a solid foundation going to be like a Passiv Haus? Future-proof, healthy, comfortable and affordable?

I doubt it facing such basic but untackled problems like deficits and unemployment while I miss the strengthening or in some cases even rebuilding of the basic elements such like education, tuition, training, manufacturing and rational R&D into what will be the true elements of our future as well as setting any new standards for what you tell me I can't see or feel right now, Mr. Cameron.

All I see is more cuts and more debts or the same vice versa, trying to save banks, banksters, governments and incapacitated politicians just to preserve what can't be sustainable; is this all and again related to tradition or where and when will we see or feel any kind of learning effect coming in that will take us all forward?

Carpe diem!

Fuel or rather construction poverty?

telegraph article on fuel poverty

With energy prices going up more and more people/households will be pushed into fuel poverty.

...the targets of ending fuel poverty in vulnerable households by 2010 and all households by 2016 were now "embarrassingly unattainable.

High energy bills are a serious problem for millions struggling with the consequences of Gordon Brown's recession.

I wonder how that ominous target was and is dealt with? Throwing money at it might help - short term.

A more lateral approach will be to clean up poor building regulations and poor construction standards. All instruments are readiliy available; it is for a future-oriented governement to set the targets and a customer-oriented industry to offer the appropriate products. The technology is long known, it needs training and education of both, the customer and the supplier.

more

The benefits will be multifaceted from reduced CO2 emissions to lower energy bills, from creating valuable jobs to creating future-proof, comfortable and healthy living space.

What is the hold up?

Carpe diem!

“The Chicken or the egg” thing…

It appears there are two major ways to reduce energy consumption of buildings from fossil fuels:

• Renewables are to be part of the consideration when planning a new build and have become mandatory.
  
  
• Building regulations have been tightened to improve energy efficiency of all constructions.
  
  

Where the chicken or the egg comes in, is where the two issues are off balance.

To require excessive installation of alternative technologies on a construction while its insulation level is suboptimal is a waste of resources, money and energy; its impact turns out to be dramatic once the lifespan of such a wrong decision becomes part of the consideration > footprint.

Modern, existing and proven insulation and construction technologies allow energy reductions of 70 to 90% compared to existing regulations which is far beyond what current building regulations require. However, once those highly efficient technologies are implemented the decision requirement to use “renewables” on such a construction, be it PV, solar, heat pumps, wood chips, etc. comes much easier because the cost impact of such devices will be less dramatic: It is a simple fact that demanding less energy reduces the necessary scale of investment into alternative energy generating devices.

Of course and very important, it reduces running cost, it lessens emissions, it improves comfort and well being. Now, who would mind all that?

Consequently, even though building regulations do not cover what is possible it makes sense to go way beyond such requirements and make up for that in the long run; in this case I believe it is the egg that should come first.

http://www.architecturescotland.co.uk/blogs/index.php?blog=6&blog=6&title=decisions_decisions&page=1&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1&disp=single

http://www.architecturescotland.co.uk/blogs/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=79

Carpe diem!