Archive

Posts Tagged ‘EcoHomes’

Links for June 3rd through June 5th

June 9th, 2009

These are my links for June 3rd through June 5th:

  • ECUK – Sustainability – Engineers chartered with EC now explicitly expected to "Do more than just comply with legislation and codes": "ECUK’s Guidance on Sustainability clarifies the role of engineers in relation to sustainability and lists six principles to guide professional engineers in their work. It should be read alongside sustainability related information produced by Professional Engineering Institutions, such as codes, policy statements or guidance of a technical nature. "
  • Sustainable legislation: keep it simple – Building – Pooran Desai of BioRegional takes on CSH: "Up to Code Level 4, the outcomes from an environmental persepective are basically sound though the metrics can be made more straightforward, robust. However, Code 5 and 6 as they are currently written are of dubious environmental value. The industry now generally accepts that forcing ‘net zero carbon’ on-site electricity generation is not helpful. There are other problems. On higher density sites particularly where you can’t collect sufficient rainwater to flush toilets, it forces on-site grey water treatment, often energy and chemical intensive, when even the Centre for Alternative Technology states that conventional sewage treatment is more eco-friendly than on-site grey water recycling. The solutions needed to deliver Code 5 and 6 are not just expensive in capital terms, but may not be kept operational because of high maintenance costs. This means that many homes built to current Code Level 5 and 6 will be less eco-friendly than Code 4."
  • Genuine partnership remains the key to regeneration success – The Regeneration Blog – Excellent point, and not just for regeneration, but the entire construction industry: "I was at a conference the other day when a very clever person (oh, I wish, I wish, it had been me) said "less than three years ago we were confidently asserting that we had seen the end of boom-and-bust, now we are bust we are pinning our hopes back on the forthcoming boom. Well, you can't have it both ways"."
  • Lord Turner on failed markets, irrational markets and environmental policy – 21 May 2009 – "The CCC’s report concluded that the electricity sector would have to be radically decarbonised by the 2030s in order to meet the 80% 2050 target. This cleaner electricity could then be applied, across other sectors such as transport, to help reduce emissions. He said that the CCC had concluded that the volatile nature of the financial market, with its direct impact on carbon and fossil fuel prices meant that a wholly market-led approach to tackling climate change would simply not work. Stronger policy instruments, coupled with government intervention would be needed to deliver the radical changes required."
  • Living Building Challenge Version 1.3 — ILBI – A kind of supplement to LEED, via CRGBC: "The Living Building Challenge is a rigorous performance standard that defines the closest measure of true sustainability in the built environment, using a benchmark of what is currently possible and given the best knowledge available today. Version 1.3 is comprised of sixteen prerequisites within six performance areas, or Petals: Site, Energy, Materials, Water, Indoor Quality, and Beauty + Inspiration."
  • China’s Grand Plans for <br/>Eco-Cities Now Lie Abandoned by Christina Larson: Yale Environment 360 – Arup's mythical Dongtan – lessons learned (a must-read): "Dongtan and other highly touted eco-cities across China were meant to be models of sustainable design for the future. Instead they’ve become models of bold visions that mostly stayed on the drawing boards — or collapsed from shoddy implementation. More often than not, these vaunted eco-cities have been designed by big-name foreign architectural and engineering firms who plunged into the projects with little understanding of Chinese politics, culture, and economics — and with little feel for the needs of local residents whom the utopian communities were designed to serve."
  • NYCDOT – Street Design Manual – "The New York City Street Design Manual provides policies and design guidelines to city agencies, design professionals, private developers and community groups for the improvement of streets and sidewalks throughout the five boroughs. It is intended to serve as a comprehensive resource for promoting higher quality street designs and more efficient project implementation.
    The Manual builds on the experience of innovation in street design, materials and lighting that has developed around the world, emphasizing a balanced approach that gives equal weight to transportation, community and environmental goals. It is designed to be a flexible document that will change and grow, incorporating new treatments as appropriate after testing. The use and continued development of the Street Design Manual will assure that New York City remains a leading innovator in the public realm as it becomes a greater, greener city."
  • Eco-ventilation health scare prompts regulation change – Building – "The draft report by the BRE’s Dr Michael Swainson and seen by Building, found that filters were not being replaced when worn out, which could lead to a build-up of humidity, carbon dioxide and other pollutants, as well as driving up energy use. It also says this could increase the risk of cancer in the homes of smokers.
    Mechanical ventilation systems are required in energy-efficient airtight homes to make sure that fresh air can circulate and that pollutants and humidity are extracted from the house. However, like a hoover, if the filter is not replaced the system stops working.
    The systems are virtually unavoidable if a home is to meet level four of the Code for Sustainable Homes, which all new homes in the social sector must meet by 2010."

admin News , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Finally – The Code for Sustainable Homes is published

December 13th, 2006

It’s been a long time coming (public consultation on the code was between 4 December 2005 and 6 March 2006) and it won’t be enforced until April 2007, but today the Code for Sustainable Homes (pdf, 28 pages) was published. Full technical guidance on how to comply will be issued in April.

Some reaction has already been issued, TCPA here (they comment on the fact that this applies to housing only at this stage), BBC here (they mention the proposal to bring water use into the Building Regulations), Building here (subscribers only), Guardian here (controversially – “The House Builders Association dismissed the plan as “gesture politics” that threatened to undermine the government plan to build tens of thousands of new homes in the south-east.”), BRE are more optimistic here, EST here.
As I predicted last week, the definition of zero carbon housing has been clarified as:

A zero carbon home is one with ‘zero net emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from all energy use in the home’. The definition encompasses all energy use in the home (including energy for cooking, TVs, computers and other appliances) rather than just those energy uses that are currently part of building regulations (space heating, hot water, ventilation and some lighting). It means that over a year there are no net carbon emissions resulting from the operation of the dwelling. This could be achieved either through steps taken at the individual dwelling level or through site wide strategies. So it will not be necessary for each dwelling to have its own microgeneration capacity where development level solutions would be more appropriate.

As expected, the Code builds upon EcoHomes, and from April 2007 CSH will replace EcoHomes for new housing in England. For those of us who are accredited EcoHomes assessors, we will be able to carry out CSH assessments. From the BRE website:

Compliance with the Code Assessment will consist of a two step process – an initial assessment at the design stage and final certification after construction as detailed below:

  • Design Stage Review
  • Based on design drawings, specifications and commitments
  • Results in interim certificate of compliance
  • Post Construction Review
  • Based on the design stage review
  • Confirmation of compliance including site records and visual inspection.

The rating system is from 1 star to 6 stars. The BRE think that a 3 star is equivalent to EcoHomes ‘Very Good’. The categories will look very familiar to anyone used to EcoHomes. The main changes from the old EcoHomes scheme are that minimum levels have been set for energy and water at each ’star’ level (theoretically, in EcoHomes if you do fantastically well in every other section, you could do badly in these two and still claim and ‘Excellent’ or ‘Very Good’ rating). The rest of the categories retain the flexibility EcoHomes had.
flexibility.jpg(click to enlarge)
My initial thoughts:

  • I would have liked to have seen this code as mandatory. Until April 2008 it is voluntary only and after that it will be up to the results of the consultation. At least the voluntary period running concurrently with the consultation ought to speed the process up a little.
  • I’m happy to see that PCR’s (post construction review) are mandatory
  • The starting point for a 1 star building is a 10% improvement on Part LA 2006 – had the scheme been mandatory, this would surely have been set at the same level as Part L1A – so what does this mean for the future development of both CfSH and Part L1A, which will now become inextricably linked?
  • Mention is made of the BRE Green Guide 2006 – I look forward to it’s publication. Ecopoints are mentioned as an aspiration for the future.
  • Some of my favourite bugbears of current housing are there – space for home offices, cycling facilities, composting facilities and waste and recycling facilities – could this spell the end for the two-bed shoebox apartment blocks that are springing up all over Leeds? Developers may be forced to look beyond the bottom line, and start providing spaces which are livable in.
  • It is not clear how the star system will relate to building labelling which will be brought in in response to EPBD. The vast majority of existing housing would fail to gain a 1 star rating? The star rating is said to ‘complement’ the proposed building labelling system.

What does the future hold? The timetable looks like this:

  • April 2007 – further guidance issued and the code becomes voluntary
  • June 2007 – EPBD building labelling becomes mandatory for all new houses
  • April 2008 – CSH possibly becomes mandatory along with a change in Building Regs Part L1A (10% improvement on Part L1A 2006?)? Water use included in Building Regs?
  • 2009 – EPBD building labelling becomes mandatory for all houses which are sold or leased
  • 2010 – 25% improvement on Part L1A 2006
  • 2013 – 44% improvement on Part L1A 2006
  • 2016 – zero carbon housing

Looking into my crystal ball, it is highly probable that in the next review of Part L1A, CSH will become mandatory and the two run side by side. The consultation process for this has been announced today here. The consultation is an interesting read (pdf, 44 pages) but it will be April 2008 before anything from this is implemented. The pace of change is very frustrating.

Today’s publications are great news for new housing, but as many others have pointed out this accounts for only 1% of the housing stock in England. Once EPBD kicks in and sellers begin to realise that their houses are not competing with new build, pressure will begin to build for addressing the problems with the existing stock. Now that CSH is published, let’s turn our attention to the existing stock and really begin to make a difference.

admin Regulation , , , , , ,