the real cost of green building?

A recent report identified high levels of awareness of the issue of sustainable building but low levels of specific knowledge and involvement. It identified three key barriers to addressing energy efficiency in buildings

Lack of information about building energy use and costs
Lack of leadership from professionals and business people in the industry
Lack of know-how and experience as too few professionals have been involved in sustainable building work.

Phil Clarke reported in Building earlier this week:

Study finds professionals misjudging sustainable budgets and underestimating carbon footprint of buildings

Construction and property professionals are overestimating green construction costs by 300%, a new survey has found.

Source:

Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Business Realities and Opportunities (PDF; 1.9 MB)
Source: World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)
From their press release:

Survey finds green costs overestimated by 300% and a need to foster zero net energy construction. Key players in real estate and construction misjudge the costs and benefits of “green” buildings, creating a major barrier to more energy efficiency in the building sector, a new study by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) reports.

Respondents to a 1400 person global survey estimated the additional cost of building green at 17 percent above conventional construction, more than triple the true cost difference of about 5 percent. At the same time, survey respondents put greenhouse gas emissions by buildings at 19 percent of world total, while the actual number of 40 percent is double this.

Comment

Of interest within the report, after a quick scan are:

The EEB vision is a world in which buildings consume zero net energy

Use less, make more, share There are three key elements to achieving zero net energy:
• Use less energy
• Make more energy (locally)
• Share surplus energy (through an intelligent grid)

An Integrated Design Process (IDP) involving all participants in the early design phase of the project.

Behavioral, organizational and financial approaches to overcome barriers:

Encourage interdependence by adopting holistic, integrated approaches among the stakeholders that assure a shared responsibility and accountability toward improved energy performance in buildings and their communitiesMake energy more valued by those involved in the development, operation and use of buildings

Transform behavior by educating and motivating the professionals involved in building transactions to alter their course toward improved energy efficiency in buildings.

Understanding the Merton rule…

There has been a lot of coverage on the Merton Rule this week, with zero champion over at sustainability blog covering events.  here  and here  now, a further article in today’s Guardian attempts to clarify … or not.

Why is this important?

The so called Merton Rule wa introduced by Merton Borough and requires, as a planning requirement, that all new projects to obtain at least 10% of a building’s energy from sustainable sources such as solar or wind power.  The rule is now used by 150 councils across the UK, many using the 10% figure others, like GLA attempting to push for 20%.

A recent and current campaign by the British Property Federation and Home Builders Federation to overturn this ruling led to leaks of a draft planning policy statement which local authorities said would undermine their ability to insist that developers use green technologies.

Meanwhile – an epetition has been started… We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Not allow the abolition of the Merton Rule. There are 51 signatories so far.

CIBSE Carbon clean up for existing facilities …

CIBSE are repeating their carbon clean up 100 day programme again this year, starting on the 12th Sept. Sign up and get help, advice and tools to help you reduce your carbon footprint.

Programmes like this are important as they address carbon and environmental issues of our existing building stock.

Construction work prices to soar 34% over next five years

From today’s Building daily news :

Rise in PFI and Olympic works will see tender prices grow 2.5 times faster than inflation says report

The price of construction work is expected to surge ahead of inflation over the next five years.

Tender prices are forecast to rise 34% compared to an expected inflation rate of 13%, according to a report published by BCIS.

Certificates don’t cut carbon emissions, people do

Comments to the HIPs post led me to this fascinating site … worth a browse … into the world of HIP’s EPC’s and DEA’s

and check out the blog and podcasts

climate change? … dont worry we have a cunning plan … the moon

If we carry on, business as usual, not making the carbon and environmental targets within the timespan  scientists tell us we must act withi, then all is not lost.  There is another nearby planet we can start all over again on according to the National Geographic Website

 ‘Lunar Ark’ Proposed  August 14, 2007

The moon should be developed as a sanctuary for civilization in case of a cataclysmic cosmic impact, according to an international team of experts.

NASA already has blueprints to create a permanent lunar outpost by the 2020s

Only local labour and material resources to be used?

Expressions of interest for the design, construction and facilities management are invited.

carbon offsetting targeted … again

Interesting to see that the Climate Change Camp at Heathrow targeted carbon off setting companies in their recent protests. And quite rightly so, useful as chocolate teapots, carbon offsetting schemes distract from real actions to address environmental and carbon issues, and foster a ‘do nothing different’ attitude.  (Even for  LA trying to achieve zero carbon homes by paying £200 a home to a carbon offset scheme)

From today’s Guardian  

Two carbon offset firms staffed by committed environmentalists also found themselves targeted. Climate Care in Oxford was invaded by people dressed as red herrings and the CarbonNeutral Company in London was leafleted. Both offer to “neutralise” the emissions of consumers and companies by investing in projects which lower emissions elsewhere.

“Carbon offsets are ineffective, based on dubious science and lead people to believe they are helping when they are not,” said Sophie Nathan, who took part in the CarbonNeutral Company action.

3 Bed Hips …

Hips and the important Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) will be rolled out to 3 bedded properties from Sept 10th with the government making further announcement on rolling out Hips and EPCs to other properties very soon.

Will the EPC’s will start to address the carbon issues surrounding existing stock? and will EPC’s be applicable to non domestic properties in time?

understanding renewables

Interesting to watch the reposnse to yesterdays article (Revealed:cover up plan on energy target) in the Guardian  with  a flurry or posts to blogs, letters, responses from government and eidtorials.

This is being well covered by Phil Clarke over at Sustainability Blog,

Strong stuff in Monday’s Guardian, where economics correspondent Ashley Seager takes the Government to task for its encouragement (or lack of it) of renewable technologies. He offers a stark contrast between us and Germany, where renewables now makes up 13% of all energy compared to our 4.6%. Seagar reckons we are tinkering at the edges with our botched low carbon buildings programme and the renewables obligation (RO)system, which requires energy producers to use a growing propertion of renewable sources. “Britain’s climate change strategy, such as it is, is crumbling,” he concludes.

What is evident is that a whole new environmental and energy economy is emerging that will have great importance for the built environment and its future energy usage strategies.

Builders attack green homes rule

Reported on Guardian Unlimited today:

Housebuilders are trying to persuade the government to ditch a key policy designed to cut carbon emissions through constructing green homes.

Britain’s renewables industry and many local authorities are concerned that intense lobbying may have persuaded the government to rethink.

It is assumed the housebuilders in question do not include those commiteed to the 2016 Commitment to zero carbon housing (see Communities and Local Government website)