Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 19th 2015
     
    Steamy Tea, houses if you feel you must - decent dwellings of modest size built to passive house standard is what the lower half of the income range could now aspire to unless they want to/are able to live in an area where land is v.cheap indeed. Well built 3-4 storey blocks with EWI and open space around perhaps mixed in with some terraces. IMHO should include some 1 bedroom flats for the young and the elderly.

    fostertom, don't know where the script came from! Never happened before so am trying again. Second sentance can be an iterative process?
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeMay 19th 2015
     
    Few days old now.

    No more windfarms unless local people say yes, says new Energy Secretary..

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/energy/windpower/11611050/Amber-Rudd-No-more-windfarms-unless-local-people-say-yes.html
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 19th 2015 edited
     
    Posted By: bellaIMHO should include some 1 bedroom flats for the young and the elderly.
    So you think that social isolation while living in a cramp living space is a good thing :wink:

    Posted By: CWattersNo more windfarms unless local people say yes, says new Energy Secretary..
    Have we not been here before, nothing happened, so they changed it, so now they are changing it back.
    I would prefer a 'No power unless some is local'. Where do people think that electrical energy comes from, Unicorn Farts.

    Right back to how many houses can be built under a solar farm.
    According to the NREL ( http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25130 ) it takes 32 acres (13 Ha) to power 1000 homes (not read the article properly).

    The UK housing density is 25/Ha ( http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/journals/insidehousing/legacydata/uploads/pdfs/IH.060623.035-037.pdf ).

    So that will be 325 houses 'under the solar farm'

    But, London has 150 houses/Ha, Barcelona and Paris 400/Ha.
    So you could build at half the London density and get your 1000 homes under a solar farm. And this is with our existing poor energy stock.

    Now if we made lots of 1 bed flats, we could probably get to Barcelona's density (I like Barcelona and never felt it was crowded, same with Paris).

    Just had a quick count of motorway service area and there seems to be 97 of them (there are new ones being built).
    If 65 of them were suitable for a couple of 2 MW turbines running at 30% of installed capacity, they they could produce 683 GWh/year.

    It's late and I need to sleep
    • CommentAuthorbxman
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015 edited
     
    Ed Davies 7 days ago

    1) Full-rate VAT on domestic energy.
    fully agree

    however how about

    On all consumption over a basic allowance of say (1-2 000 KWh) for each occupant of that property .
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Posted By: bellaIMHO should include some 1 bedroom flats for the young and the elderly.

    When I was one of the young, I rented rooms in other young people's houses and shared various rented houses with various friends and acquaintances. That seemed to me to be a good idea. Much better social and community benefits than individual ticky-tacky boxes.

    Now I'm becoming one of the elderly, if I get to a situation where I need individual accomodation, I'll likely be looking for something in a development that specifically caters for old people. Perhaps cohousing; perhaps associated with a care home; who knows. But again, I think I'll be unlikely to be looking for a 1 bed ticky-tacky box in a mixed development with whatever young people have found their way to the same ghetto.

    JMHO.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Posted By: bxmanOn all consumption over a basic allowance of say (1-2 000 KWh) for each occupant of that property .
    Just gets way too complicated.
    How do you cope with lodgers, kids at university, elderly parents staying too long, carers.
    Just simpler and more sensible to charge a flat rate on all energy used. It does not have to be the full 20%, could be 10 or 15%.
    The idea is to get people to use less, rather than pay more.

    Just as an aside, fuel duty and VED raised £38bn in 2011/12 in the UK, that is 7% of total taxation. And it still only costs about 12p/kWh.
    We currently use about 18,000 kWh of energy for a typical house, so raising the VAT by 5% (assuming 40% electricity at 15p/kWh and 60% gas at 5p/kWh) would add £54 to the electric bill and £27 to the gas bill.
    I don't think that is enough to change behaviour.
    There was an interesting article on the radio about luxury goods (think it may have been Woman's Hour as it seemed to be about handbags). Apparently if something costs £300 then it is priced high enough to make it special, but not so high as to make it unaffordable (it is still 3 years clothings spend for me). So any increase would have to be over £300 to make people think.
    So Ed's idea of charging the full 20% has legs, though it may need to be higher, as charging an extra 15% VAT would still only be £243/year.
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    djh,
    Bit prejudiced don't you think? I am already elderly (!). My first "house purchase" was 1 bedroom flat in a nice 4 storey block in a leafy suburb (after a couple of years above a greasy spoon in Kilburn). One part of the block had two bedrooms and there was a row of small 3 bedroom houses opposite. What I thought of as an old lady - she must have been all of 65 - lived next door. She was good to us and we did her weekly shop. And "ticky-tacky" it wasn't - I would consider buying it to live in alone today; pleasant to look at, plenty trees around, short walk to shops and station, on a bus route. With just one outside wall and south facing it didn't even need that much heating. What's not to like? The flat cost £5600, about 3x our then joint income. These flats now sell for £350,000+. A small estate of well built, 3 bedroom terraced council houses just up the road now sell for £700,000+ and are on the market for just days. One would have to be very narrow minded indeed to see it as a "ghetto". Reproduce this kind of development to passive house standard with PV and you have a winner.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Bella
    Would you have been any less happy if the place had had two bedrooms at the same price?
    Not taking the micky here, I find it interesting the the British put up with small homes.
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Steamy Tea,
    those analyses are great. I doubt that there would be great public opposition (or even complaints from The Telegraph) to wind turbines on motorway service stations, retail parks and the like where housing is distant. Just don't know the economics of 2 or 3/site, and then the next lot 50 miles away.
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Try a flat in Paris, Rome, Amsterdam, New York if you really want to know what "putting up with small homes" is all about. Where have you been all your life? Maybe you underestimate the modest aspiration that emerges being poor relative to the cost of property (think the lower half of income range, now so wide that one end vanishes into the clouds).
    • CommentAuthorGarethC
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Japan also has a lot of small housing. And a lot of 1 bedroom places. I lived in a few and thought they were fine. In general, more logically laid out than our efforts mind you. As the UK has an increasing number of 1 person households, I think more 1 bed properties would be a good thing.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Posted By: bellaJust don't know the economics of 2 or 3/site, and then the next lot 50 miles away.
    That is the beauty of electricity, it is easily transportable and find the shortest path to earth, so ends up being used with the lowest losses.

    The biggest problem with new housing is local opposition. People just can't get to grips with the scale.
    If I said that every day that 1300 move into a new 'home', some people would be horrified. They would complain about lack of local resources/facilities, roads being blocked, not enough infrastructure to cope. And probably no library as well.
    Except that is what happens at the local secondary school near me. Everything seems to cope quite well.
    Down here we are used to the population increasing rapidly, it has ten times the local population coming and going, no problem (except when a caravan overturns on the A30). We really don't have a lack of land to develop housing and RE, along with industry, commerce, retail, leisure etc. We just have to educate people that we can design out overcrowding.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015 edited
     
    Posted By: GarethCAs the UK has an increasing number of 1 person households, I think more 1 bed properties would be a good thing.
    But you can't have friends to stay.
    Also you still need 1 bathroom, living room, kitchen. The bedrooms are less than a third of a house.
    But as you rightly say, we design badly.

    Maybe I am bias as I live in one of the poorest parts of the EU, I see terrible overcrowding all around me. Then I see thousands of hectares that are unused as they are no good for agricultural use, no tourism value and no chance of getting planning permission to help the area.
    • CommentAuthorGarethC
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    Actually, while I did have proper '1 beds' there, my favourites were actually the studio flats. There it's common for one, relatively large and airy, room to function as bedroom, dining room and living room (and kitchen really). In the morning, the futon disappears into the wardrobe and you pull out the little dining table for brekkie. When not eating, that fits in the corner, giving you room for your cushions while you watch telly.

    Wouldn't work as well in the UK, would need a lifestyle/culture change, but I loved it. Much preferred one really big room to several diddy ones.

    I'm all for a -lot- more housing, until there are more housing units than households and no need for overcrowding. Just think that single bed units can be part of that.
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    The majority of the population are city dwellers so I was going to add "studios" to my list - but decided not to provoke. I too would go for the "one big room" with bathroom and lobby. In fact I would choose 2 bathrooms over two bedrooms. This discussion brings another thought. Build to a set of space specs on an open plan principle and offer partioning (at extra cost) to choice?

    Turning to Amber Rudd, just to try out mode of address before getting to grips with the rest. To start you off how about:

    Re: Buildings that do not require heating and that generate energy
    We are members of a group who contribute to informed discussion on the practicalities of creating buildings that have low energy demands using a Website called the Green Building Forum (GBF). This Forum offers open-access; registration to become a contributor requires a small fee. All are welcome. We have no political, academic or commercial affiliation, have widely varying occupations and none, come from have many different backgrounds and have far flung places of residence.

    We congratulate you on your appointment as Minister and have no doubt that you are a well informed of your brief. For this reason we write to offer you a collective view on what our group considers one of the priorities within your brief......

    NB All can be changed/rejected until consensus (fostertom please note) is reached or agreement cannot be arrived at.
  1.  
    Willing to take bets that Rudd ends up chairwomen of a wind turbine/energy company. Or if she is shuffled over to defense, chairwomen for an arms manufacturer.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015 edited
     
    Posted By: bellaSteamy Tea,
    those analyses are great. I doubt that there would be great public opposition (or even complaints from The Telegraph) to wind turbines on motorway service stations, retail parks and the like where housing is distant. Just don't know the economics of 2 or 3/site, and then the next lot 50 miles away.


    Wind farms of three or four 126m turbines appear to be economic around my area (rural central England). They seem happy to run underground cables 5 or 6km to connect them to the local grid.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015
     
    I'd like to see the government encourage small scale solar but I'm puzzled by some peoples reaction to them.

    Two years back I was trying to sell a house with solar PV on the roof. Not a single potential buyer showed any interest in them. The estate agent wasn't surprised and said that PV doesn't seem to interest buyers at all.

    The house was rented out for a year and the tenants (who got the free electricity) were also uninterested. So uninterested that once they didn't notice the RCD had tripped out. A big thunderstorm just after a meter read tripped out the RCD and it wasn't noticed until I questioned the next meter read some three months later. This despite them having a remote display on the kitchen window sill right above the sink. When I pointed out that they were going to end up with a bill for three months electricity they didn't seem bothered. They weren't rich either.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2015 edited
     
    The government briefing document for onshore wind..

    http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04370/SN04370.pdf

    Doesn't really say much.

    Quotes:

    "We will...change the law so that local people have the final say on wind farm applications"

    "Information is not yet available on how "local people" would be defined, nor about whether a "final say" would amount to a full ability to veto a wind farm"

    Sounds like their manifesto pledge has been engraved in the same stone as the 'ed stone.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2015
     
    Posted By: CWattersSo uninterested that once they didn't notice the RCD had tripped out. A big thunderstorm just after a meter read tripped out the RCD and it wasn't noticed

    The electrician who is wiring my new house says that solar systems do not care whether they're behind an RCD or not, so he thinks they are best connected to an RCD protected bus. The one who wired the solar has actually put it in front of the RCD and appears to have used a regular MCB. I have no idea as to the merits of the viewpoints?
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2015
     
    I said RCD but I'm not certain that's what it was. Might just have been an MCB. Anyway it was big red switch that connected the PV to the rest of the world.
    • CommentAuthorbarney
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2015
     
    The circuit from the point of connection at your consumer unit to the invertor sees both the output from the PV and the mains potential of the house system and essentially the grid - if it connects on the "wrong" side of the RCD, then it's not offered RCD protection

    Unless the cable is a very specific type that offers inherent protection from you doing something silly like knocking a nail through it, or it's installed surface everywhere so you can see it, then it's a breach of BS 7671 and thus Part P - and any MCS installer is certifyingto that effect (as a minimum)

    So, the spark is correct, the PV installer (worryingly) doesn't seem to know his amp from his elbow

    Either way it will "work" - one method is far safer and compliant with wiring code than the other

    Regards

    Barney
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2015
     
    Posted By: barneyThe circuit from the point of connection at your consumer unit to the invertor sees both the output from the PV and the mains potential of the house system and essentially the grid - if it connects on the "wrong" side of the RCD, then it's not offered RCD protection

    The PV system uses microinverters, so in theory there's no voltage outside the panels except when there is low-impedance mains voltage present. I confess I wasn't brave enough to suck on the end of the cable during the several months it was left lying around :bigsmile:

    Unless the cable is a very specific type that offers inherent protection from you doing something silly like knocking a nail through it, or it's installed surface everywhere so you can see it, then it's a breach of BS 7671 and thus Part P - and any MCS installer is certifyingto that effect (as a minimum)

    The cable is SWA and is exposed everywhere except about 2.5 m where it runs above the utility room ceiling. For the final metre or less where it is not SWA, it is surface-mounted.

    So my guess is that it's compliant but I'm by no means an expert, which is why I have two electricians. :devil:
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2015
     
    Three things as a start to draft something:

    What would you say was the minimum comfortable space for 1 person living alone to allow living room with cooking space/bedroom included in same open space (= studio New York style) allowing later partitioning but with 1 dedicated bathroom, 1 lobby? 40msq? 50sqm?

    What are views on "best" building shell-type for lowest cost passive house, but robust for 100years. In that time it must allow for hammers/drills taken to walls, replacement of kitchens/bathrooms/windows/doors/electrics, rainscreen &/or EWI, airtightness detailing etc. Or do you go for 50years and and assume start again using the land as the real asset.

    Amanda Rudd worth reading about - does seem the right minister to get to grips with solar combined with buildings and wind where possible, maybe not yet there with energy prices and passive house.
    • CommentAuthorborpin
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2015
     
    Posted By: bellaWhat are views on "best" building shell-type for lowest cost passive house, but robust for 100years. In that time it must allow for hammers/drills taken to walls, replacement of kitchens/bathrooms/windows/doors/electrics, rainscreen &/or EWI, airtightness detailing etc. Or do you go for 50years and and assume start again using the land as the real asset.
    I think a timber frame shell with EPS EWI on EPS foundation and concrete floor. You can always stip back the internal plasterboard to renovate.
  2.  
    Posted By: bella
    What would you say was the minimum comfortable space for 1 person living alone to allow living room with cooking space/bedroom included in same open space (= studio New York style) allowing later partitioning but with 1 dedicated bathroom, 1 lobby? 40msq? 50sqm?


    I wouldn't be 'comfortable' with less than 80m2. I'm living in an 80m2 bungalow with my partner and it's too a small. My mother lived alone in it before us and she found it comfortable.
    I guess it would be a lonely existence if we were to be crammed into tiny boxes and there wasn't space for friends or family to stay overnight.
    • CommentAuthorbella
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2015
     
    borpin, sounds good to me but what about fire/rodents/ants? Any measures required?

    PeterStarck, that is 3 generous size rooms, plus hall, kitchen, bathroom. What price would that fetch? Remember there is dire need out there and Scrooge in charge of the money.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2015 edited
     
    Posted By: bellaWhat price would that fetch? Remember there is dire need out there and Scrooge in charge of the money.
    To a certain extend the size of place is irrelevant to the price. Entry level homes are set by the amount people can save/borrow.
    Imagine a world where the smallest house had 4 bedroom, 2 reception room, a large kitchen and a garage, but everything else was the same. That smallest house would be selling for the same price as the smallest houses are now.
    My houses is about 50 m^2, it is small and badly laid out, because it is small, there is little that can be done to improve the layout.
    My neighbours have split one of the bedrooms into two (because there are 4 of them in the house, 3 adults and 1 child). They now have one bedroom that is 2 m by 2.5 m and another than is 3 metres by 1.5 m. What used to be the small bedroom is 2.5 m by 3.5 m.

    We really must stop building small houses, they encourage over crowding and poor value.

    Anyone see the two articles in the ST today, one about the National Grid selling of the metering side of their business, and the other bit about the two large Chinese PV manufacturers that are in financial trouble (though they claim nothing is wrong).

    I think that Amber Rudd is going to be under immense pressure to close our energy gap with coal plants closing or being taken out of service, onshore wind being kicked into the long grass, new nuclear at least 20 years away (and that is only replacement), off shore wind not going to be competitive on price for 8 to 10 years, the national electrical grid needing £110bn spent on it in the next 15 years.
    She really can't be wasting time and energy on small scale stuff like building a few low energy homes, though she could get a framework set (along with a timescale) that can lead to this.
    The quick way to improve things, and probably the only option open to her to to put a tax on energy. If she started with a 0.25p/kWh tax (about 5% increase overall) on primary energy, but made it absolutely clear that this money will be spent on developing sites for RE production (a government should really be identifying places that things can and will happen), then I think there would be little complaints.
    • CommentAuthorborpin
    • CommentTimeMay 25th 2015
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaWe really must stop building small houses, they encourage over crowding and poor value.
    I fundamentally disagree with this. Actually what we need more of is small (but not tiny) studio / one bed accomodation. It is then cheaper to build, cheaper to rent and potentially frees up larger properties that do exist but are under used.

    Watched something on TV about a homeless couple, living under a railway arch. They were housed in a 3 bed flat. They didn't really want or need that. They would have been more than satisfied, certainly in the short term, with a smaller one bed place that would be cheaper to rent, cheaper to heat/light etc. Get them started and they can build their lives from there. The 3 bed place had little furiture and they just rattled around compared to their 'cosy' railway arch.

    A small, cheap (rent/fuel etc) home is ideal for young people or those needing a proper roof, independence and an address. Gets them started and gives them the opportunity to move on. For young people, if it is cheap they have the opportunity to save. A bigger more expensive place means they are stuck. A place of their own, address, build a credit score it just gets them started and there is not enough available which in itself makes what is available far more expensive than it should.
    • CommentAuthorborpin
    • CommentTimeMay 25th 2015
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaTo a certain extend the size of place is irrelevant to the price. Entry level homes are set by the amount people can save/borrow.
    Not totally. The price is also set by the supply (good old supply and demand). All housing is expensive because there is not enough of it both rented and purchase. Builders have no incentive to build more as if they do, they will increase the supply and depress the price. The only way to solve this is for the public sector to build like crazy and rebalance the equation.
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press