For an excellent and refreshing read of a collaborative project that is aligned to and sensitive to nature, read the the account of the new fishing store development at LL Bean (an old haunt of mine when living in New England many years back) on the Building Design and Construction website
Following on from earlier posts (whats wrong) on this site where I raised the question that Level 6 of the Code for Sustainable homes was seemingly too low a standard – as Barratts and Eddie Shah, and others, already claim they can achieve it , apparently without doing to much different, it is encouraging to see Bill Dunster pushing the goal posts further.
‘Anybody can build to Level Six,’ says Bill
Bill Dunster claims his RuralZED house, which will be shown at the Ecobuild exhibition (26-28 February at Earls Court), meets the unprecedented (and non-existent – he invented the term) Level Seven of the Code for Sustainable Homes, with a wind turbine producing energy to make up for the embodied energy in the materials and construction of the structure. more info at AJ
Level 6 and now Level 7 must remain stretch targets – targets to stretch our rethinking, our innovations and our urgency in addressing sustainability issues. To say we can achieve them today is plain greenwash. (Greenwash sin number 1, 2 3, or 6? )
And, on a similar issue will we see a higher level BREEAM assessment to continue to stretch our sector? After all if BREEAM Excellent doesn’t achieve the targets we need to reach nationally or globally then indeed we do need higher, tougher standards.
As Dr Jo Williams, in the latest edition of Journal of Environmental Planning and Management shows, the current government strategy is unlikely to drive the required increase in technological, infrastructural, service and knowledge capacity needed to deliver zero-carbon homes. If it is going to meet its carbon targets the government should make the current “code 6-star rating” (ie zero-carbon standard) mandatory for all new housing, and invest in the technology, infrastructure and knowledge needed to support its delivery… Without which we will head to an environmental disaster. (Guardian report – where are the green houses)
Or – the will (hearts and minds) and motivation to do so without legislation and standards – ie just getting on and doing it as in the spirit of Contraction and Convergence for example – but thats another post.
The news that Medway Council have given the green light to a coal fired power station at Kingsnorth in Kent seems at complete odds with the current informed thinking on energy, on coal and on the current ‘mood’ or zeitgeist towards sustainability. It also appears as a developing country decision – not one taken by a nation attempting to be a leader in sustainability and carbon targets. Building Guardian
The decision can be seen in many ways as a damning comment on the built industry in not moving fast enough to address the energy issue within buildings and facilities.
76 % of the energy from this new power plant will be consumed by buildings. By reducing building energy use of new and renovated buildings by a minimum of 50%, we negate the need for new coal plants. (source)
How can the government and local authorities push forward with zero carbon homes to Code 6, zero carbon schools, zero carbon non-domestic buildings, insist on reductions through Merton Rule approaches, and demand organisations reduce their carbon emissions … when in one action we turn the carbon emissions clock back 30 years ( This will be the first plant to be built in 30 years)
And many of these targets come in to place before the new plant comes on stream.
Perhaps the Kent council and others should read the work from the excellent and influential Architecture 2030, who, in the USA are directly and indirectly influencing cities and states to cancel or shelve coal fire plants in favour of a green build approach .
Emissions from the new plant will blow the UK’s targets and commitments for carbon reductions out of the water. The notion of cleaned coal is an oxymoron, with environmentalists and scientists diasgreeing over the viability of any capture / claeaning / sequestration technology. It will take years and seems a high gamble to rely on a technology in the future.
In a time when we need positive actions and messages to prevent green fatigue – this will send a dangerous message – that it is ok to invest in traditional planet threatening energy sources whilst playing lip service to renewables and alternatives investment.
A very ominous start to 2008.
The excellent Worldchanging site (changing your thinking) posted a review of the best of its green building articles recently – it makes for an interesting overview of emerging themes in green building albeit US based, many of which have been picked up through isite… Of note are
Digital House and the Future of Green Building
The Slow Home Movement
Convergent Media and the DIY Home of the Future
Architecture 2030: An Interview with Ed Mazria
When you say that the building sector is responsible for half of all greenhouse gas emissions, though, do you mean that in a direct or an indirect sense? Because surely houses aren’t just sitting there emitting carbon dioxide all day – it’s the power plants that those houses are connected to.
Mazria: It’s direct.
Consolidation: cutting traffic and waste
The term ‘consolidation centre’ may not sound sexy, and little about the contemporary construction industry is. But in London a pilot program has found that managed consolidation of delivery operations can cut construction-related vehicle emissions by 70%, and cut waste by a huge percentage too. Pretty impressive? Even more so when you consider the simplicity of the idea.
Grow Your Own Treehouse and other thoughts on Ecological Architecture
Following the Code for housing which seems to be setting the sustaintainbility agenda the industry, the UKGBC UK Green Building Council today launched a report on behalf of the government that starts to set out an agenda for acheiving zero carbon non-domestic buildings by 2020
From the press release at UKGBC:
Key findings in the report are as follows:
1) It IS possible to reduce carbon emissions from energy use down to zero in the majority of new non-domestic buildings, as long as on-site, near-site and off-site renewable solutions are employed
2) There is a cost associated with building to zero carbon. Cost varies widely with both the form and the use of the building. However, preliminary modeling suggest that the premium could range from over 30% down to as low as 5 or 10% of current baseline costs.
3) A challenging yet achievable time-frame for achieving zero carbon new non-domestic buildings along the lines set for housing is needed. With a trajectory in place similar to that adopted for the Code for Sustainable Homes, then a deadline of 2020 could be adopted.
Will this report, like the code for housing and BREEAM will now shape the direction for construction and the built environment for the next decade. As fellow blogger Phil over at Zero-Champion points out in his review of this report – a move from rhetoric to reality.
My initial thoughts on the costs associated with moving to carbon zero is that the ‘preliminary modeling’ figures are similar to the figures used to describe the ‘waste’ in the industry, (ie total waste or muda. – time, costs, lack of integration, non value-adding, unproductive activities, reworking, delays, as well as material waste).
Therefore a renewed drive on business improvement and collaborative working would pay for zero carbon buildings and facilities. (this is to some degree supported in the Strategy for Sustainable Construction which includes the Strategic Forums target for an integrated industry to support a sustainable one)
I shall be returning to this with further posts when I have digested the report
One of the excellent articles on the new Building Sustainability site is The Year to Zero. putting many of the important targets and objectives being set for our industry in a chronoligical count down to carbon zero, neutral or ‘sustainability’. (or wherever its is deemed we need to be)
The article, in conjunction with Fulcron Consultaing will be updated as and when more targets are set, so definelty one to watch.
I use a similar approach, looking into the ‘planned future’ for our sector, helping organisations set their own strategies and targets, on green and other related topics. How do your business or improvement plans map onto this timeline? Will you be ahead of the game, prepared, or lagging and playing catchup? Do you even have a route-map to get you there?
The cost of achieving carbon neutral or zero homes to the Code keeps raising its head, as Phil over at Sustainability Blog points out.
I didnt catch the UCT speakers name on the US Greenbuild365 live webcast testerday, I was listening rather than watching, but a sound bite delivered with typical American style caught my ear…“The building sector is over-estimating the cost and under-estimating the impact of climate change issues”
How true, when we think about the moaning around the cost of the new Code for Sustainable Housing, which will be seen as a smokescreen for reluctance in doing anything at all.
Jonathan Porrit writing in his blog and in BD… makes the point well… why put a price on the importance of carbon free homes?
Government policy is being applied to decarbonising both new and existing housing, with Building Regulations and the Code driving that transformation. An industry that has lived for far too long in a feather-bed world, where nobody gave a tinker’s cuss about energy and resource efficiency, is being incentivised to change, and is marketing to rapidly rising consumer expectations. So why would anybody suppose that the combined genius of architects, designers, engineers, builders, surveyors and planners isn’t going to be able to come up with the zero-carbon goods?
I live in weird world these days. Having spent most of my life described as a prophet of doom, I now find myself having to shake people out of a fatalistic “can’t be done” mind-set! We seem to have moved from denial to despair in one effortless leap. So let’s get our creative act together here. After all, we don’t have a choice about this. Either we rise to this challenge, or the mealy-mouthed, risk-averse mediocrity that dominates this particular industry will take us all down with it.
The costs arising from inefficiencies through waste, poor project management, incorrect procurement, lack of working together, poor design, legal fees to check contract documentation and all the well documented historical ills of our sector etc far far outweighs the cost of achieving the Code… surely?
Acheiving the code needs a different mindset, as Einstein said… we cannot solve todays issues with the same mind set that created them in the first place...
By rearranging the debate towards opportunity we can can move from despair to exciting.
I caught the live broadcast (webcast) of Bill Clintons speech at Greenbuild365* yesterday, and a few things stuck in my mind.
One was Clintons reference to this being an opportunity, a challenge but an opportunity, and that the transition from a carbon economy to a green economy will produce as many new jobs, skills and professions as the carbon industries loose.
he saw that the greenbuild sector was the place to be to really address climate change issues. “The sale has been made,” he said. “Otherwise Al Gore wouldn’t have got the Nobel Prize. Now what we have to do is to prove that this is not a bottle of castor oil that we’re being asked to drink”.
Secondly, Clintons call the need for an industry benchmark to keep score, and his pledge, I assume from his foundation, to create a tool for the AEC Industries – (Architecture, Engineering and Construction).
Watch this space…
In fact Clinton could be one to watch. The worldchanging writer and founder Alex Steffen ran a story on Clinton’s speech to US Mayors in Seattle recently and described it as …quite simply, the best speech on climate given by an American politician (other than Al Gore) I’ve ever heard — it’s the sort of speech I wish a sitting president would stand up and deliver before Congress and the nation
* As to Greenbuild, I understand7000 saw Clintons speech, 20,000 will attend over three days and most of the key speeches are webcast around the world. (An idea for the UK Think 2008 maybe Phil?) I just get a feeling something big is happening there, despite the rhetoric in American politics and leadership.
The USA “Green Buildings Research White Paper,” the fifth in a series of annual reports on green building by Building Design+Construction, provides exclusive data on how building owners, operators, facilities directors, and real estate executives view green buildings—and what they are doing to implement green building. The 60-page report covers corporate office buildings, hospitals, hotels, K-12 schools, college and university facilities, restaurants, and residential development.
Download here (3.2 MB PDF file) the full report.
Key findings of where respondents stand on key issues:
■ Respondents are still worried about possible higher initial costs for green buildings.
■ They’re generally sanguine about the energy savings from green buildings.
■ They believe that green buildings may deliver health benefits for occupants.
■ They appreciate the marketing and PR bonanza that green buildings often garner.
■ They see companies, institutions, and building owners more willing to invest in green buildings today than
they were just a few years ago.
Plenty of numbers and data in the report, along with signed statements from sponsors.
I need to keep asking myself why is it so much easier to access reports like this in the States than here in the UK?
Greeenbuild 365 mentioned in the last post, strap line is Transforming Green Building Education
It is through green building education, outreach, and the sharing of best practices that we will achieve our vision of a sustainable built environment within a generation.
Greenbuild365 makes this possible by providing green building education that is accessible for all. This learning portal features a Greenbuild conference journal, interactive polling, and streaming videos of visionary speakers…with much more to come.
Greenbuild365 is part of the USGBC – the US Green Building Council. It would be good to see similar initiatives from the UK Green Building Council
(In fact it would be good to see similar membership fees and access to both – registration is free in the US, minimum 0f £300 in the UK, although ft students are free)
Fairsnape 