Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.
Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
 Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




Housing - New Build: Code for Sustainable Homes to be Ditched!

Bottom of Page

1 to 17 of 17

  1.  
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2013
     
    I read that the Government is thinking of ditching the Code for Sustainable Homes. Who needs energy efficient warm homes anyway!?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2013
     
    And this by the greenest government ever:sad:

    Suppose the Green Deal will be following it
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013 edited
     
    Posted By: tonySuppose the Green Deal will be following it
    As far as I can see the only achievement of the Green Deal has been to put people out of work following the collapse of the insulation industry. What was it -- 1000 deals done and 70,000 out of work.
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    This has been mooted since the Housing Standards Review, but the Environmental Audit Committee are resisting, see:
    http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environmental-audit-committee/news/code-for-sustainable-homes-report-published/

    It will be swept up as part of the 'red tape challenge', and the Fabric sections passed over to Building Control / AI to police, we think.....?

    Not holding my breath tho'.... :neutral:
    • CommentAuthorJonti
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Yes, the government have been amazingly bad in this department. Taking something that was working well and wrecking it. Next they will remove the renewable charges from the electricity bills of which we might get about half of it past on only to have that wiped away by a couple of years of massive hikes in bills. Or am I just being pessimistic:sad:

    Jonti
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Jonti,

    Remember that the Tories are backed heavily by the big builders, and they do not want anything to stop them turning out the same leaky cardboard boxes that they have been allowed to get away with...

    Pickles' stupid comment about the extra/over cost of building in Wales was using out-of-date data and information, but it is all ammunition to the lobbyists.
    The analogy of fuel-efficient cars comes to mind, people did not know they wanted fuel-efficient cars, till the mfrs were forced to produce comparable results.....
    :confused:
    • CommentAuthorJonti
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Too true DarylP.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    To my mind the problem with CfSH was that it was trying to force a lifestyle onto people via the design of their property (did nothing for existing properties).
    So they had to offer an area for drying washing, a cycle or two, an area to work from home, a nearby bus stop. All very commendable, but a complete nonsense to most people I know.
    Building at a lower density would achieve some of those aims and let people choose their lifestyle.
    Like most of these schemes, they look good on paper but don't translate well into the real world.

    Take better fuel consumption of vehicles. Does it actually reduce energy usage? or does it just allow more miles to be covered for the same relative price. I suspect the later, though there was some evidence that vehicles were travelling less miles and at lower speeds immediately after the financial collapse of 2008.
    If you want to limit usage and encourage alternatives, put the price up of today's usage and don't create schemes that are complicated, have unexpected consequences and are open to abuse.
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    ST,

    Yes, the CfSH was diluted by the lobbyists just before it was released. The big builders effectively 'buy in' credits such as Ecology, Material, Home User Guides, etc etc whilst still building as they have done before....:cry:

    I think the new Part L dual approach of both DER and Fabric Efficiency is a step in the right direction, just not a very big one?

    Cheers:smile:
  10.  
    so the question is, what happens to those of us who have received CSH4 as part of our planning and are more than happy to go above and beyond on the 'fabric first' parts of the build but are going to compromise design and spend money to comply with other parts?

    Do we get out of our planning requirement, if so when?
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Simon,

    That is a question we have been asked 13 times since October!
    In only one case has a client had the PP Condition for CfSH L3 been enforced (threatened) .

    So, do you think the LPA will come back to enforce a Condition that relates to a non-existant regulation?

    Unofficially we have been told, 'No', as long as you cover the Ene credits that relate to the fabric.

    Good luck:neutral:
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaTake better fuel consumption of vehicles. Does it actually reduce energy usage? or does it just allow more miles to be covered for the same relative price
    Road fuel consumption has dropped steadily since 2008.
    • CommentAuthorwindy lamb
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    My 1960's petrol car easily does 50mpg, but my 2007 petrol car of similar engine size struggles to get 40mpg. Progress what progress?
    • CommentAuthordaserra
    • CommentTimeNov 21st 2013
     
    Posted By: windy lambMy 1960's petrol car easily does 50mpg, but my 2007 petrol car of similar engine size struggles to get 40mpg. Progress what progress?

    I'd be very interested to know the 2 vehicles you refer to.
  15.  
    It would be interesting to measure what comes out of the exhaust of both cars. In the 60s my 875cc Hillman Imps used to return 50 mpg and now my 1.8 Honda Civic returns 47mpg.
  16.  
    Posted By: windy lambMy 1960's petrol car easily does 50mpg, but my 2007 petrol car of similar engine size struggles to get 40mpg. Progress what progress?


    I'd be careful about comparing apples with pears here:tongue:

    When you consider that the newer car will (most likely) be laden with more equipment for comfort, safety and desirability, could well be more spacious, probably has a larger contact area with the road and emits fewer unpleasant substances from its rear end it's probably made a fair bit of progress.

    Just think of say... a MK1 Volkswagen Golf and place it beside the latest model then compare the difference in size, safety, build quality and equipment included. Apart from the badge and number of wheels there won't be much that is like for like.
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeNov 22nd 2013
     
    My neighbour has a 1927 Clyno which he uses everyday, he's in a recovery scheme, free with his insurance, the last time he had to call them out was in 1974 when he broke a half shaft, he now carries a spare under the back seat.

    I bet a lot of the boxes being built today won't last as long.

1 to 17 of 17

  1.  
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
Back to Discussions Top of Page
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press