<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Links for October 24th through October 29th</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.melstarrs.com/elemental/2009/10/30/links-for-october-24th-from-0818-to-0818/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.melstarrs.com/elemental/2009/10/30/links-for-october-24th-from-0818-to-0818/</link>
	<description>Communicating sustainable solutions for the built environment</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:26:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nick Grant</title>
		<link>http://www.melstarrs.com/elemental/2009/10/30/links-for-october-24th-from-0818-to-0818/comment-page-1/#comment-2436</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Grant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:04:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.melstarrs.com/elemental/2009/10/30/links-for-october-24th-from-0818-to-0818/#comment-2436</guid>
		<description>Nice round up Mel

Curious to hear what you make of the Superfreakanomics talk. I was underwhelmed by the first book despite the whacky title and tempting snippets.

Agree BRE statement on U calcs is a gem!!! I&#039;d be very curious to see the example that meets PH requirements but with more accurate calculation, fails B Regs!! Sure the PHPP calculation cannot be uses to accurately model a cavity wall with metal ties but I don&#039;t think BRE needed to embarrass themselves with the silly statement.

Interestingly  their latest clarification on certification says that the calculator in PHPP must be used (whilst introducing other UK specific nonsense).

Luckily the Germans have a sense of humour, what with out zero carbon buildings, Code for Sustainable Homes and more accurate U value calculators!!

I&#039;m sure there will be interesting discussions on the Passivhaus Designer course next week with people from BRE and PHI present, can&#039;t wait.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice round up Mel</p>
<p>Curious to hear what you make of the Superfreakanomics talk. I was underwhelmed by the first book despite the whacky title and tempting snippets.</p>
<p>Agree BRE statement on U calcs is a gem!!! I&#8217;d be very curious to see the example that meets PH requirements but with more accurate calculation, fails B Regs!! Sure the PHPP calculation cannot be uses to accurately model a cavity wall with metal ties but I don&#8217;t think BRE needed to embarrass themselves with the silly statement.</p>
<p>Interestingly  their latest clarification on certification says that the calculator in PHPP must be used (whilst introducing other UK specific nonsense).</p>
<p>Luckily the Germans have a sense of humour, what with out zero carbon buildings, Code for Sustainable Homes and more accurate U value calculators!!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure there will be interesting discussions on the Passivhaus Designer course next week with people from BRE and PHI present, can&#8217;t wait.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
