^wot he said. All in the pockets of big companies now.
Go to big shed DIY and buy whatever works out cheapest.
I would love to update our house but its listed. Took us 15 months to get consent to replace 1/3 of our windows with double glazed units. The rest have to stay single glazed & putty.
The number of houses that I have surveyed over the last year to two with severe condensation problems caused by racking up loft insulation without considering ventilation.
New building standards have improved over the last 10 years in general particularly with air tightness, but thermal bridging remains the major challenge. The lack of any real movement in this area is frustrating for anybody in the industry that cares.
the failure to replace the "accredited details" with a formal scheme is something that the politicians can be proud of.That original intentions were there, just no guts to see them through.
Start by reading up:
Is that it - a link to a company's website ? I don't suppose anyone is going to bother reading all that why can't you just explain, at least in general terms, how you would change the regs ?
And also what are the costs savings involved are likely to be, since after all the whole purpose of your increased energy efficient homes is to reduce costs to consumers - one does not necessarily follow the other you know.
For example solar (photovoltaic) panels have a life expectancy of approximately 25 years, which is about the amount of time it takes for the savings to cover the cost of the panels. Photovoltaic panels [i]are[/i] a good idea, but not because they significantly reduce costs to consumers - they don't. Solar water heating on the other hand provides a much more sound economic argument.
If the building regs could be undated in such a way so that the result would significantly reduce overall costs to the consumer then I'm sure they would be.
In the meantime I think consumers are perfectly justified in complaining about the constant over inflation rise of energy prices :
[url= http://news.sky.com/story/1017576/heating-bills-rise-63-percent-in-five-years ]Heating Bills 'Rise 63% In Five Years'[/url]
Is that it - a link to a company's website
Fair point: so drop U-values to about half what they are now. Reduce cold bridging a similar amount. Reduce air leakage to a third of current regs. All this has to be proved when the house is built: not a fancy drawing or spec. This is done by testing the finished house or retrofit.
After that I need to type for hours - hence the read the specs.
For example solar (photovoltaic) panels...Solar water heating
They are not an efficiency or reduction: they generate power. That is not what is being discussed.
in other words Passivhaus".
even if you were to build 200000 new builds a year, its small fry compared to the overall housing stock, & there just isn't the political will there to build that many new builds let alone crate the infrastructure for control of both design & operational assessments.
drop U-values to about half what they are now. Reduce cold bridging a similar amount. Reduce air leakage to a third of current regs. All this has to be proved when the house is built: not a fancy drawing or spec.
How would you actually achieve that ? Houses built today have less than a quarter the U-values houses over 50 years old have. And what would the cost be to the consumer ? What would the savings be ?
I don't believe that air tightness can be reduced to a third of what it is now. What more can you do than polythene all the walls and the ceilings ? If it was physically possible people would probably die of suffocation in their sleep - they would be living in the equivalent of a sealed jam jar.
And btw the air tightness is tested on site after houses have been built, it isn't just proved on a [i]"a fancy drawing or spec"[/i].
They are not an efficiency or reduction: they generate power. That is not what is being discussed.
Of course it's efficiency - solar panels are using the solar energy which hits the roof to convert it into either hot water or electricity. If that isn't energy efficiency then I don't know what is, it's "using less energy to provide the same service".
Interesting though that you didn' have solar heating in mind.
And btw the air tightness is tested on site after houses have been built, it isn't just proved on a "a fancy drawing or spec".
This is not done on new build domestic houses ( in England at least)
Oops what was I thinking.
[url= http://www.nhbc.co.uk/ProductsandServices/ConsultancyandTesting/Airleakageservices/documents/filedownload,46547,en.pdf ]Part L they do test a sample of new houses[/url]
Thatll be the air tightness test done with tape over fail pointa then is it ?
Air tightness has to be countered by controlled ventilation, whether passive or mechanical which can lead to good overall results, & i'm lead to believe a more healthy living environment.
The air pressure process is not great, but I believe that big difference is the fear of the risk of a failed test. Yes there have been instances of over zealous use of sealant & tape early on but as an industry, we are getting there. There of course will always be the some fails.
The industries next big challenge is thermal bridging, lighting & hot water. Chasing U values once you get below 0.1 starts to become uneconomic
Air tightness has to be countered by controlled ventilation, whether passive or mechanical which can lead to good overall results, & i'm lead to believe a more healthy living environment.
Surely we can ban new housing from having trickle vents included with all windows, and extractor fans in bathrooms, toilets, and kitchens, just think of all the heat that's being lost !
What we need is homes so air tight that vacuum pumps are required before the front door can be shut.
Instead of complaining that heating bills have risen by 63% over the last 5 years.
What we need is homes so air tight that vacuum pumps are required before the front door can be shut.
You mean something driven by better building regs and improved practices in the construction industry?
Better airtightness coupled with better insulation, less thermal bridging, healthier and less carbon-intensive materials and overall easier to use so the consumer can get the best out of them.
That - but retrofitting is the bigger concern by far. Something like 75% of the buildings that will be standing in 2050 are already built - so retrofitting is THE pressing concern.
