I won't dispute the aesthetics, but the "energy guzzling" bit needs looking at more closely.

Because envelope insulation levels play less of a part in determining total heat loss from large open plan buildings (ventilation losses tend to dominate) and because sensible glazing design and specification can give significant solar gain in winter (for example by the use of things like a brise soleil to allow low angle gain whilst reducing high angle gain) are "glass boxes" necessarily all bad?

I have a bit of a vested interest, in as much as I managed a programme that included building a "glass box", albeit one with a BREAM Excellent rating.

Posted By: JSHarrisI won't dispute the aesthetics, but the "energy guzzling" bit needs looking at more closely.

re

Large buildings have huge volumes for relatively small surface areas - making the lack of insulation due to glazing fairly irrelevant - the challenge is managing the solar gain.

Paul in Montreal.

Posted By: JSHarrisa "glass box", albeit one with a BREAM Excellent rating

But how excellent is BREAM Excellent? About as excellent (relative to real best practice/possibility) as current Building Regs, I'd say. It's a v old standard.

A big, costly, technical object like an office block can and should be designed as a national asset rather than drain, with nett negative consumption of both heat/cooling and electrical energy (acting as a nett generator to the grid), as well as nett-negative embodiment of CO2 - and of other resource-materials as well, as soon as we get to expanding our thinking beyond the carbon obsession.

Charlie-boy is talking on that level, even if he doesn't fully understand it (or maybe he and his advisors really do). He's always right there - witness the howls from those financial or mental vested interests that he continually challenges with such sure aim - a great way to use the privilege of his position, which I'm sure he's praying won't end in shackles as King.

Is anyone using LEED on office buildings in the UK? Over here, all new federal and municipal buildings have to be at least LEED Gold.

Posted By: JSHarrisFabric heat loss is negligible,

Exactly.

Paul in Montreal.

Except that we always seem to be playing catch-up nowadays, Tom.

The speech was made to the Institution of Civil Engineers and HRH quotes their Royal Charter 1828, which defines Civil Engineering as: '...the art of directing the great power of nature for the use and convenience of man....' .

The prince goes on to expand on 2 important elements - 'the art' and 'directing the great power of nature'. The transcript can be found here (hope link works!):
http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/speechesandarticles/a_speech_by_hrh_the_prince_of_wales_at_the_2012_institution__562313434.html

There is much within the speech that I agree with ie working with natural balance of nature; how new buildings are placed and used; to consider the spaces around them, their energy consumption, how long they last and the use of natural drainage to create meadows and wetlands amongst others. Unfortunately he persistently weaves in his own views on 'beauty and style', which detract from the main thrust of his arguments because it seems his aesthetic sensibility drives his passion for sustainability rather than the other way round.

He states that, '...glass, concrete and steel are deeply environmentally unfriendly, especially if they are incorporated into designs that are very much 'in the moment'. I am afraid if a building is of a fashionable design today it almost inevitably condemns it very quickly to becoming unfashionable - tired looking, out dated, no longer contemporary. And so within thirty or forty years, they are ripe for demolition and replacement.'

Here it seems he is more concerned about the design than actual performance of the buildings in question.

He then makes reference to an energy use study of 2 houses by Atelier 10: lightweight glass v masonary (masonary wins). As an example of the way forward he describes his Natural House at BRE as 'contemporary yet timeless design...based on time honoured, geometric principles of balance and harmony'...

The house is built of clay blocks, woodfibre and wool - wonderful if you have the money. A more radical step would be to question the profit margins of some of these insulation companies or to promote office buildings made of recycled tyres/ plastic bottle etc, or make reference to a project like Hockerton, alongside his own endeavors like Poundbury.

I am not sure what his views would be on EWI of historic buildings, suspect it may be negative. I personally would be happy to see some of them done.

I and others have spent hours fighting planners in various counties to build sustainable homes made out of earth/straw/tires/recycled concrete and wood /cedar cladding/green rooves/flat rooves/corrugated iron rooves/zinc clad/round houses/large expanses of south glazing etc, etc... If we had wanted to build a typical cottage or Poundbury style house it would have been easy - problem is we don't like them. It's got a bit better but HRH just compounds this problem as people listen to him.

I know that part of Exeter centre you're referring to pretty well Tom - it's a massive improvement on the decaying, what was it, '60s / '70s style area it once was. However, I also concur with your thoughts on what is 'trendy' now becoming that '60s / '70s equivalent inside a half a century.

The trouble is, you simply cannot predict 'taste'. The Adam-like church is indeed a beautifully fascinating area too, but I'd never personally want to live in something which resembled it.

Perhaps the main issue, which appears to be the thrust of the thread, is that there should be a substantial swing in mindset to what is really necessary, functional & efficient, rather than pure aesthetics..?

Erm, not entirely sure my comment was intended to suggest that Charlie's point as being one of aesthetics Tom... I was aiming at the need for a change in perception about what's important


I might still be barking up the wrong leafy, twiggy thing though!

Would agree in part! Given it was a speech to engineers I'm surprised he didn't mention London's super sewer - huge, controversial - with the opposition offering alternatives more in line with HRH views I would have thought.