Dear all

I'm sorry for making flippant comments but I can't resist this - after
having taught Building Technology to Architects for 10 years, and having
seen lots of new buildings in this time, I recently brought a 1910 brick
built house with sash windows and an unfilled cavity wall. The wooden joists
are nice and thick and the house is what is fashionably termed 'flexible',
i.e. it can be adapted to new uses without major rebuilding.

I know this is all politically incorrect, and the house uses too much energy
(though I am gradually whittling that down), but I don't think there is any
pride left in any of the volume housebuilders current or recent products
(timber framed or brick), and as such they are environmentally and purchaser
unfriendly.

I am aware that there are good points to modern housing - a possibility of a
life rather than DIY for the first few years of ownership for a start - but
the generally human unfriendly (low ceilings) room dimensions and airtight
construction without adequate ventilation is not acceptable to me. Look
forward to the health programmes on Indoor Air Quality soon....

I look forward to the volleys of abuse, and I apologise in advance to the
proud owners of new houses - it is obvious that there will be some good new
houses built, but it's a bit like the old British Leyland cars in that you
don't know what you're buying until it's too late.

On a more serious note I think the debate over wall U-values is a red
herring, leave one window open for ventilation and you've undone all the
savings in one easy go.

I think the govt recognises this hence the 'hidden agenda' for metering to
be installed in Part L. The only way to bring CO2 production down is to know
how much CO2 buildings are producing per m2 and then to tax them
accordingly. I look forward to the legislation being enacted in the next
parliament to enable this to be done.

So get your green electricity and heat suppliers on board now for the
long-term, or start that feasiblity study for wind-turbines. The smart
University's will be looking to acquire land (sea?) rights in suitable areas
to generate power to offset their consumption.

Right, enough rambling, most of you wil recognise activity displacement
happening here and I really must finish marking my MSc students Renewable
and Sustainable Resources module exam papers.

See you all next Sharefair I hope

Ian

PS Please don't take any of the above too seriously, some of it is fact but
most of it is just crystal-ball gazing.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Honeyman, David" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Building Regulations U-values


> Colleagues,
>
> I see what Gilbert is getting at...but my mind (and I'm sure many
potential
> house buyers minds also) goes back to the 1980's when timber framed
> construction was possibly more common in the UK than it is today...someone
> will have the figures for that I'm sure.
>
> Then along came a couple of 'Watchdog' type programmes which revealed the
> building techniques being employed (or at least condoned / accepted) by
> major housebuilders...and the bottom fell out of the market overnight.
>
> Demand for and the resale price of such dwellings fell
> rapidly...(fantastically important in a house-price driven
> mindset)...result...back to brick / block!
>
> It has taken years to restore the confidence of people (including lenders)
> in the concept of timber framed construction...time and better site
> practices (which in my view have not yet arrived) will eventually persuade
> folk the timber option is worth having.
>
> Until then I do not believe we should impose it by making traditional
> construction virtually impossible through use of the building
reg's...that's
> not what they are there for...although there are I am sure others who
would
> argue that point.
>
> David H.
>
> ***Disclaimer*** I have no shares in any brick manufacturing company!!!
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gilbert Valentine [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 30 April 2001 14:05
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Building Regulations U-values
>
>
> Brian,
>
> It is very interesting that 'political' influences continue to act
> contrary to good energy conservation, although the effect is at long
> last being overcome, - a wee bit.
>
> The Swedish U-value for walls was 0.2 decades ago. Of course the
> Swedes have a huge interest in timber supply, and timber-frame
> poses no difficulties for producing walls with 0.2 U-value. (And they
> have a colder climate, granted).
>
> Why do brick and block manufacturers in the UK have such
> influence on government legislation, and manage to resist an easily
> achievable solution in housing construction?  And more importantly
> why are the legislators so easily influenced ?
>
> Why build 20th century standard housing in the 21st century ?
>
>
> Gilbert Valentine
>
> Estates & Buildings Department
> University of Dundee, DUNDEE, DD1 4HN.
> Tele: 01382 344053 (Fax.:01382 322638)
> website: http://www.dundee.ac.uk/estates/
>