“Make a claim against your TaxCode for it.”

…and then sort out your house insurance as your using your home as an office.
Insurance doesn’t cost any more (not for me anyway). This is what I do. Heat on all day and claim for it.

…I’ll place a Wanted ad on here for ‘Small urchin required to crawl in under-joist floor space to fit insulation to underside of joists. Some gruel and limitless flogging provided. No payment if urchin is eaten by monsters / rats or gets stuck. Owner must remove stuck urchin before it starts to smell.’

That sounds jus like the ad I replied to to get my job 😀

…It might make sense if you’re building a passivhaus but for the rest of us, it’s never going to make a noticeable difference. If you have walls with a U-value of 2.1, then worrying about your loft being 0.16 or 0.1 is pretty academic.

I suppose you are right, although at “Buy 1 Roll get Three Free” then why not ???
.
We routinely put 150mm of kingspan and plasterboard on external Walls, insulate under floors to between 200 and 300mm, and insluate loft areas to 600mm. All with particular attention to Air tightness and Moisture control
.
So I suppose we do work to a different standard than most, and have different targets.
.
Although the aim is the same.

I suppose you are right, although at “Buy 1 Roll get Three Free” then why not ???

In fairness, whilst I think it’s a little bit pointless, it’s not an expensive mistake..

The wider issue is this: nearly half of the houses here in Bristol are solid-wall. Insulating those with just 50mm foam-backed plasterboard would make an enormous improvement to thermal efficiency – say from 2.1 down to around 0.5. Yet this would not comply with building regs! External insulation is difficult when we’re talking rows of terraced houses in conservation areas.

I’d rather see lots of houses getting modest insulation measures than just a few houses get the full monty.

If you have walls with a U-value of 2.1, then worrying about your loft being 0.16 or 0.1 is pretty academic.

This also answers the question of needing new housing stock that was posted on another thread, if your current house isn’t up to standard it’s not going to have a long life as the Govt is looking at Passivhaus as the way forward. Older stock will be removed. 😛

Older stock will be removed.

No reason why old stock can’t be significantly improved – some Victorian houses have been retrofitted to passivhaus standards. It’s also much less wasteful than knocking down and re-building.

.
Couldn’t agree more.
.
Our company is a social enterprise, set up to try and help reduce fuel poverty, and regularly talk to city councils and energy companies regarding these exact points.
.
Our customers who pay for the “Rolls Royce” treatment on their houses, help to pay for those that can’t afford to fund it themselves.

.No reason why old stock can’t be significantly improved – some Victorian houses have been retrofitted to passivhaus standards. It’s also much less wasteful than knocking down and re-building.

This is exactly what we aim for.

No reason why old stock can’t be significantly improved – some Victorian houses have been retrofitted to passivhaus standards

I completely agree with the first part and would be very interested in seeing some examples of a Victorian Passivhaus if you can point me in the right direction.

Here’s two for starters:

http://m.bdonline.co.uk/technical/haringey-passiv-terrace-retrofit-by-anne-thorne-architects/5015446.article
http://tcn.uk.com/blogs/entry/Passivhaus-retrofit

Cheers. 😀

Interesting articles.

Great articles!

Not working at home at the moment but I just wear thick shocks jumper and a hat. cheep cheep like the budgie.