Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
1 to 30 of 54
The PassivHaus standard delivers buildings that are healthy, comfortable, and cheap to heat, with heating bills and resulting carbon emissions less than 10% of the average UK building stock. Fuel poverty and climate change can be delivered through high levels of internal comfort.More detailsDespite the obvious benefits of the standard, the construction industry often requires more stick than carrot, with full take-up of the standard only happening in places where legislation has been brought about, such as Brussels, Frankfurt and Dún Laoghaire.While the Building Regs are based on the minimum acceptable standard the building industry will deliver buildings of low performance, with high energy wastage, poor comfort conditions and contradicting design and living practices.
Posted By: SteamyTeaHave any of these petitions actually changed anything?
Posted By: gravelldwith heating bills and resulting carbon emissions less than 10% of the average UK building stock. Fuel poverty and climate change can be delivered through high levels of internal comfort.
Any system that locks a builder into being screwed by a small group of people with a license
Posted By: djh(unless you happen to live somewhere enlightened like Cambridgeshire)
Posted By: djhOne of the things that irks me is that the PHI hasn't bothered securing any passivhaus trademarks, which means cowboys on here and more seriously elsewhere are free to make use of the terms without fear of any comeback, so I've no idea what branding is being talked about.
Posted By: djhEd, I'm curious in what ways you find it too specific and biased? It's certainly taken a long while to catch up with PV, for one example.
Posted By: gravelldI think sometimes guys/gals, in cases like these,we need to be a bit more political and a bit less purist. … If we don't, we just end up like the Judean People's Front.
Posted By: Ed Davies[...] However, maybe the answer is to take a moment to think about what's really wanted (i.e., what many more people can get behind) rather than jumping in too quickly with something over specific.
Posted By: barneyI suspect the correct way is light touch and relevant in matters like building energy performance regulationCfSH and PHI all have very particular quirks and foibles - we have Building regs to address this - make them more rigorous by all means (and a bit of basic enforcement would help) - lets not make things more complicated than we have to - particularly as we don't build that many new houses - we are focussing on the wrong things in my opinion
Posted By: barneyNo doubt the current crop of house builders can do better - I suggest that it will be incremental changes to BR's that will "bring them along" on the journey
Posted By: barneySelf regulation works just fine in this respect - the biggest influence will be demands from purchasers rather than anything else - if we spent a fraction of the cost of adopting PassivHaus on every new build, on a bit of basic education then standards would improve markedly
Posted By: gravelldBroadly speaking I think the target should be kWh/m2 and should work in conjunction with evidence based policy on competing concerns, e.g. ventilation. The types of numbers should be around the Ph level. The important thing is then enforcement.
Posted By: barneyIn simple terms a move to adopting passive house standards based on a petition instigated by a passive house architect isn't what is required
Posted By: barneywhat does any of that nonsense actually mean in practice
© Green Building Press