How can that be?

No it has solid stone walls visible inside and out and is very recent.

Tony

Are you referring to last night's programme on Five? I asked myself the same question. I missed the first half of the programme, but despite the liberal use of the Eco and sustainability words, the emphasis seemed to be on heat pumps, rather than insulation and building materials.

Did you see it at the construction stage? Were some walls solid, some stone to inside and others stone to outside, giving the impression of solid stone walls, while actually most sections were insulated?

David

Well if it was listed grade II all wall insulation bets could be off - especially if well insulated elsewhere.

In addition to listed buildings there are also other circumstances where insulating walls can be avoided. If for example the BCO accepts that to do so would be 'technically difficult' [which could mean detrimental to existing fabric]; or where the cost can be argued to be prohibitive [ie bad payback]; or where the loss of internal floor area would be unacceptable.

Crucially, all of this dependent upon the interpretation of the regs by the individual BCO. Each may interpret as they see fit.

All very complicated. For those interested in the finer detail there is a section in GBB Vol1 pg144 [3rd Edition] or pg 330[4th Edition]

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: tony</cite>that only covers not insulating it externally doesn't it?</blockquote>
No - Not necessarily - if the character of the barn walls is deemed important internally.
Remember that Listing covers work to both the external and internal elements of a building.

Also, I gather if you do nowt to them in some circumstances that means having to come up to latest regs doesn't come into play. It's complicated.

Dunno. I was discussing this scenario with a very experienced Historic Buildings Officer last week and I suppose it depends on how much you want to get round the regs (whch are not law of course...).

Depends. Maybe they just wear thicker jumpers (as I do).

It is possible though - if you present a good argument - and justify it. Dynamic Simulation is one way of doing so, though cost prohibitive for a domestic situation

It could show that the as built [modelled] conversion would perform no worse than a Notional building having the standard [required] u-values.

It can be demonstrated in some instances that an extremely airtight building with low u-values for glazing, ceiling and possibly even floor [but with an unchanged wall] would perform no worse than the Notional building. This approach is standard for Comercial builings under Part L2 [though it is no doubt an unintended loophole exploitable for Part L1] The key to compliance is the contribution of solar gains and airtightness which are both ignored in U-value calcs, but are considered in a dynamic simulation.

It would rely on a BCO interpreting the regulations in the same way.

I think any condensation risk would only be an issue for the BCO if a change WAS made to the wall

If you are discussing the programme on 5 last night - my comments are - 6 bedrooms, 5 bathrooms, a wet room??? For two adults and two children. The blurb says "modest budget" - their budget was over 1/2 million - is that modest?

Posted By: tonyDavid asks, "Did you see it at the construction stage? Were some walls solid, some stone to inside and others stone to outside, giving the impression of solid stone walls, while actually most sections were insulated?"

No !!! -- totally uninsulated

and Mike couldn't have been pre 2006

If we are talking about the one on C5 last night then I remember seeing February 2009 come up on the screen part way through the build so it must have been completed in the summer of 2009 (or thereabouts). They had been in planning for a couple of years, so no idea when building regs approval was granted but can't have been too much earlier.

I watched this again last night. I noticed that the roof was insulated with a reasonable thickness of polyurethane foam & the all new extension had a mineral wool insulated cavity wall. At least some sections of the original barn were internally insulated with mineral wool behind dry lining partitions, but the areas with slot windows appeared to be solid stone walls. I didn't see any floor insulation, but perhaps the cameras weren't there the day the screed was poured.

I wouldn't class it as an Eco conversion and, with the huge steel frame, it certainly isn't sustainable. The only nods towards the environment were the ground source heat pump (better than electrical resistance, but no better than gas), heat recovery ventilation & rainwater harvesting. However, they did have a log burner and it wasn't clear whether this had a back boiler.

That said, the build seemed to be to a very high standard & reminiscent of a hotel in some respects.

David