Conclusions
To make 40 percent house happen requires an overarching UK housing and energy strategy covering both the rate of stock turnover and the provision of clean energy.
The 40 percent house scenario is the provision of comfortable homes for all, the development of a sustainable energy industry, and the encouragement of a carbon-conscious society. A 40 percent house future will be realised through a major programme of refurbishment in existing homes; the building of all new homes to a high-energy efficient standard; the uptake of best technologies for lighting and appliances; and the widespread installation of LZC technologies. Securing this future requires a radical shift in perspective from the housing, appliance and energy supply industries as well as policy co-ordination across a number of Government departments. Critical decisions need to be made in several policy arenas to ensure that all stakeholders have the steer they need to develop and implement low carbon solutions. A clear government strategy will enable companies across the housing and energy sector to deliver low carbon solutions and be at the forefront of technological innovation.
on January 25th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
How would this proposal seek to address the issues related to conservation of properties of architectural / historical merit? There are powerful design and heritage groups / bodies who would resist the improvements to fabric insulation and lighting designs / types if they were considered to change the intrinsic nature of the residence. This would also be relevant with the idea of dramatically increasing the demolition rates for the worst energy wasting houses. As an example of the issues – In listed buildings it is currently not possible to install double glazing.
on February 14th, 2006 at 12:52 pm
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for your question. The 40 percent strategy recognises the importance of protecting homes that are of historical and architectural importance. Our modelling for achieving the 60% reductions in carbon dioxide emissions excluded dwellings located in historic conservation areas. There is no good data available on the number of dwellings located in historic conservation areas so we did try to estimate the number (see the report’s background material: Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings, http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/lowercf/40house.html) It is true that for listed buildings there are restrictions on refurbishment however, even then it is often possible to improve the energy performance of the building but often traditional buildings methods and materials need to be applied. Shortly we are putting up some case studies of 40 per cent house in practice (check back around 27th February), included in these case studies is Sally Harper’s story of refurbishing a 200 year old cottage in a historic conservation area. Sally illustrates it is possible to improve the energy performance of the building as well as protect the historic character of the house. In addition, look out for a piece with Brenda Boardman in an upcoming Green Futures magazine, which discusses the compatibility of creating a low carbon housing stock and protecting the historic building stock.
Regards, Catherine
on March 11th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
Andrew’s question is a pertinent one. I look forward to the material you promise Catherine.
I feel that there is quite a lot that can be done in many listed properties and in conservation areas. This is particularly important in the SW of England where we have a high proportion of older “cottage” type properties that are an integral part of the attraction of the region. Many of these are not listed, but we do need to find an alternative to demolition.
I wonder if you know of any work being done to develop a “40% guide” for older homes in different vernacular styles in consultation with English Heritage and Planning departments. In addition to upgrading Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian properties we need guides for Cotswold Cottages, Dartmoor longhouses, half timbered properties in the Wesh Marches and so on that will help owners upgrade them while retaining the look and feel that makes them so attractive to both owners and tourists. Each will require a different approach if it is to be sympathetic — and we will need to work with ConstructionSkills and Summit Skills to develop the relevant skills for each house type.
I wonder if the situation is now such that we should presume that listed and conservation area properties should be upgraded unless it can be demonstrated that it is not appropriate. (Much of what we conserve now has evolved over the years – why do we feel that process should arbitrarily stop in around 1970?) Thus listed building consent would be required NOT to upgrade to the full standard – or perhaps some lesser Listed building/Conservation area standard(s).
With best wishes, Alan
on May 15th, 2006 at 11:34 am
We have just completed a new build mews house in Kensington and Chelsea – a new build that looks pretty much exactly as if it had been built 100 years ago – and this upon the requirement of the local authority planning dept. It is now complete with single glazed sash windows, lead roofing etc. etc.
In their rage our clients have installed a PV on the roof to try to compensate (but it makes you cry really).
I mention this for two reasons:
1. When figuring the volume of housing stock that may be less readily adaptable to the green imperative – note that most local planning departments stretch the number of “tradiional” new builds up as far as they can.
2. That part and parcel of the problem is the assymetric nature of opinion given upon planning applications. Generally a planning officer and a consevation officer will be involved in vetting proposals – the planner perhaps neutral, the conservation officer just that (reactionary). The process needs a counterbalance to the conservation officer.
Duncan Chapman
I mention it not because we have had to design a 21st C. building that looks like a 19th C. one but because to make it fully “authentic” we have had to install single glazed sash windows.
on January 25th, 2007 at 11:37 am
I’m surprised to hear the above comments about having to build with single-glazing just to look authentic. Although I can completely agree with regulations to prevent inappropriate use of materials in historic buildings, and making new-build houses stay in keeping with their areas, it seems completely bizarre not to allow wooden sash windows made with double rather than single glazing. Having seen these made and fitted in other houses, they look slmost indistinguishable at first glance from single-glazed sash windows!
There are other interesting matters raised by historic houses, mainly the need to keep them ‘breathable’ as many of them were designed to be. Using traditional and sensibly chosen modern materials, however, I see no reason why many of them cannot be made signficantly more energy efficient (such as putting in sheepswool insulation into timber-framed houses etc.). And where measures cannot be taken (such as installing double glazing) this is often compensated by greater efficiency in other areas (such as the existence of thicker walls, or by measures such as putting extra insulation into loft spaces).