<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - Merton rule</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 01:30:08 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>Merton rule</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=5877#Comment_5877</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=5877#Comment_5877</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:44:18 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA["The Department for Communities and Local Government is to in effect abolish the so-called "Merton rule", under pressure from housebuilders who do not want to bear the cost of adding things like solar panels to the buildings they construct or the effort of marketing them as "green"."<br /><br />The rest:  <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/20/energy?gusrc=rss&feed=19" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/20/energy?gusrc=rss&feed=19</a>]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Merton rule</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=5892#Comment_5892</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=5892#Comment_5892</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 22:04:48 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>biffvernon</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[See rants at <a href="http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4897" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4897</a>]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Merton rule</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=6025#Comment_6025</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=6025#Comment_6025</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:04:30 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Tuna</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Could it be that the practicalities of achieving Merton rule levels of on-site renewable useage is extremely difficult? <br /><br />As has been pointed out elsewhere, surely the focus on energy supply rather detracts from the far more practical (and implementable) approach of high insulation and energy efficiency in buildings?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Merton rule</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=6067#Comment_6067</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=579&amp;Focus=6067#Comment_6067</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:48:05 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Peter A</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[The Merton Rule is a bit academic these days, the Code for Sustainable Homes will ensure that developers still have to factor in some form of renewable energy in order to achieve the 25% improvement that level 3 demands. To achieve level 3 without renewables calls for some pretty stiff u values, 0.1 walls, 0.16 floors, 0.12 roofs, 1.3 windows, air leakage of 4 plus a few other tricks on heating controls etc. Ever tried to build a wall at 0.1 in masonry. The easy option is renewables. Anybody who can prove me wrong will be a hero to the developers!]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>