The Olympic Stadium, London, under construction. Photo by tompagenet . 

I listened to Peter Bonfield, the chief executive of the Building Research Establishment, talking in Dublin last year about sustainability at the now-under-construction Olympic park in London. He was speaking at the annual conference of the BRE's Irish arm, and two aspects in particular impressed me: the amount of material being recycled, and the genuine efforts being made to ensure the facilities will benefit local communities in the long term - social sustainability, you might call it. For example, the upper half of the main stadium (above) is a temporary structure that will be removed after the games, ensuring it's not out of place in the surrounding community and that local people will feel comfortable using it.

Which brings me to an interesting video from the Guardian on the sustainable features of the Olympic park facilities.

If you want an alternative take on the social impact of the Olympics, read George Monbiot here and here .

In Novemeber 2008, George Monbiot wrote regarding the American "thinker" Sharon Astyk:


In an interesting new essay, she points out that replacing the world’s energy infrastructure involves “an enormous front-load of fossil fuels”, which are required to manufacture wind turbines, electric cars, new grid connections, insulation and all the rest. This could push us past the climate tipping point. Instead, she proposes, we must ask people “to make short term, radical sacrifices”, cutting our energy consumption by 50%, with little technological assistance, in five years. There are two problems: the first is that all previous attempts show that relying on voluntary abstinence does not work. The second is that a 10% annual cut in energy consumption while the infrastructure remains mostly unchanged means a 10% annual cut in total consumption: a deeper depression than the modern world has ever experienced. No political system - even an absolute monarchy - could survive an economic collapse on this scale.

 Astyk's essay can be found here.
 
Re-reading Monbiot's piece recently, it got me thinking about how much carbon would be emitted by a massive national insulation and retrofitting effort here in Ireland - by the manufacture and transport of the materials, the vans on the road etc. I'm not for a second suggesting this work shouldn't be done - it should and must.

 It's the only way to future-proof our buildings against energy insecurity and to help ensure they are responsible for producing as little carbon dioxide as possible - I'd much rather rely on a highly energy efficient building to keep energy use low than on consumer behaviour. And besides, there's an important comfort argument to be made here too - everyone would prefer a well insulated, warm home to having to reduce energy use even further in a draughty energy inefficient home.
 
But the question is, how do we keep the carbon footprint of retrofitting itself to a minimum? Is the key using as many locally produced, low embodied energy materials as possible? Or perhaps to ensuring batches of houses are done at the same time to ensure transport efficiency? As far as I can tell, nobody has really attempted to answer the question of how to minimise the carbon footprint of retrofitting, or done a thorough carbon audit of retrofitting work. Anyone?
 

The advantages of magnesium-based cement: GreenHomeBuilding.com

Frank Gehry's Dancing House, Prague. Photo by RyanGWU82.

Renowned architect Frank Gehry caused a a bit of a stir last month during a speaking engagement in Chicago. Asked about the role of green architecture and buildings in tackling climate change, he said: "I think the issue is a political one."

He went on to criticise LEED, the US's rating system for the environmental impact of buildings, for rewarding "bogus stuff", and added that the costs of green buildings are "enormous", and that "they don't pay back in your lifetime."

Treehugger has an interesting report on the response from architecture writer Fred Bernstein, who defends Gehry's criticism of LEED, writing in ArchNewsNow:

One example is CityCenter, the Las Vegas complex that contains more than 5,000 hotel rooms, plus casinos and shopping malls and restaurants and nightclubs - altogether, 18 million air-conditioned square feet smack in the middle of the Mojave Desert. I can't imagine a greater environmental disaster than this complex (which, in addition to requiring vast resources to build and operate, is designed to draw travelers from around the world). And yet it was awarded LEED Gold status.

What I found most interesting was Gehry's claim that the costs of green building are "enormous" - this is patently untrue. Construct Ireland has published numerous articles over the years that prove green buildings - or at least buildings that are quite green - can be built at little extra cost (see this project for example). Consider the mixed-use complex in Foxrock we featured  in the March issue of the magazine, which will be online shortly. It's built to an almost-passive energy standard and makes abundant use of green materials, but Seamus O'Loughlin of contractors Viking House told us his price was the same as that offered by conventional builders - who were planning to build to the 2005 energy standards - who also bid for the project.

Gehry has designed some of the most iconic buildings of our times, but I think his comments are reflective of a wider lack of understating among many architects when it comes to green building and architecture. Of course some have been building green properly for a long time, but many have only started to talk about sustainability as the term has become trendy in the last five years or so. While some have genuinely made the effort to educate themselves, others haven't and just throw the lingo around. I've spent hours browsing architects' websites looking for potential case studies for Construct Ireland, and though many talk a lot about sustainability and energy, when you get to the details they usually reveal a lack of in-depth knowledge about what green building really is. In fairness to Gehry, at least he isn't pretending to be green when he isn't. 

 

Knock yourselves out: 

US group offers to meet Ireland's wave energy targets: Irish Times

OMA Architects has created an ambitious proposal for a European-wide power network that it claims would reduce the conintent's carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. Check out a fascinating image gallery of the design here: Guardian

The Emilio Ambasz Prize for green architecture, top three: ArchDaily

Bill Gates donates $300,000 to cloud-seeding geo-engineering technology: The Times

Slideshow - the greenest of the winners of the Canada governor general's medals in architecture: Treehugger

Short profile of a passive house in the Wisconsin Woods: Green Building Advisor

Will fly ash be classified as a hazardous waste by the US Environmental Protection Agency: Green Building Law Update

I've been keenly waiting to see the finished Monte Rosa Hut in Swtizerland since I saw the first design illustrations, and the building is now finally finished. This Swiss mountain hut, a five-storey timber frame building on steel foundations, is designed to be 90% energy self-sufficient - it boasts an 85 square metre solar PV array with excess energy stored in "lead-acid accumulators". There's more details here and here. Photos courtesy of ETH-Studio Monte Rosa/Tonatiuh Ambrosetti.

 

Last week the American Institute of Architects announced its top ten green building projects of 2010. Pictured below is one of the buildings, the Omega Centre for Sustainable Living in New York. Jetson Green has a gallery  of all the buildings, while detailed information on all of the projects can be found here . 

Photo by Andy Milford

For your perusal:

A journalist re-designs his neighbourhood: Grist
Is the Passivhaus standard too inflexible for America? Treehugger
Solar plane takes first successful flight: Inhabitat
A few interesting green buildings: Wildlife Conservation Society HQ, Harpoon House, Maine low enegy house, Dairy barn converted into eco home, Guelph City Hall
Frank Gehry not a fan of green architecture, says the cost of green building is "enormous": Infrastructurist
Applying Passivhaus to a "centuries old" building: Green Building Advisor
How to sell green products to builders: Green Building Advisor
Sustainable 'superbus' under development: Energy Saving Trust (more here)
Best of green design & architecture, 2010: Jetson Green

Sorry for the prolonged absence - after the madness of the last CI deadline I took a week off, but normal service will resume now.

The following letter appeared in the Guardian a couple of weeks ago. Does Ireland need a green bank too, or are the big banks' 'green funds' enough? 

 

 
As it says on the tin. Full details here.

Just a quick update today, as the deadline for our next issue is approaching rapidly. Anyone interested in reading more about the pay-as-you-save programme launched in Britain yesterday should take a look at the official press release. The plans seem quite ambitious - ambitious enough to make you wonder if the amount of work that's being planned can be done properly in such a short space of time. Are the skills and expertise available and ready?

These figures caught my eye particularly:

The strategy will be implemented in a three stage plan:

• To insulate 6 million homes by the end of 2011
• To have insulated all practical lofts and cavity walls by 2015
• To have offered up to 7 million eco upgrades by 2020; all homes to have smart meters.

According to the Guardian yesterday:

 

 

A bumper bunch of links today:

Video of Bill Gates talking about 'zero carbon' at the TED conference: TED
World's tallest building closed indefintely: Archinect
50 "must read" green engineering blogs: Top Online Engineering Degree
Passivhaus renovation of a Victorian terrace house: TreeHugger
Are the days of the cul de sac over? Treehugger
Looking at lights from space - a sign of progress or failure? Treehugger
Norway to build world's largest wind turbine: Inhabitat
The coming renaissance of electrical contractors: softwareadvice.com
Would you live in a shipping container? Inhabitat
Is the Living Building Challenge the toughest green building standard in the world? Jetson Green
UK boiler scrappage scheme a "success": Energy Savings Trust
Barack Obama's $5bn green home gets off to a slow start: Guardian
Loft insulation - Australia's burning issue: Guardian

...and lastly, officials in Tysons Corner, Virigina are thinking of letting developers build at higher densities if their buildings are greener - a concept known as 'planning gain', and something I wrote about in my first ever article for Construct Ireland.  See Green Building Law Update for more.

A press release on the SEI website has announced the launch of a new quality mark for wood fuels in Ireland. With a deadline approaching I don't really have time to dissect the details right now, but the programme - known as the Wood Fuel Quality Assurance scheme - will be launched in Tipperary tomorrow.

Various agencies appear to have played a role in drawing up the scheme, including Coford, NSAI, SEI, the Irish Bioenergy Association and Waterford IT.

The press release says the "quality assurance scheme will certify organisations involved in the manufacture / supply of quality logs, chips, pellets and briquettes formed from clean wood. This QA scheme will provide customers with confidence that they are purchasing a quality wood fuel from a sustainable source relevant to their needs."

Unfortunately the press release doesn't appear to list the specific criteria wood fuels will have to meet to get the stamp, nor does the Irish Bioenergy Association website. However the Wood Fuel Quality Assurance scheme website will go live tomorrow, so more details should be available then.

For those of you who haven't already seen pictures of it floating about, I thought I'd post a pic of the design for Manchester United captain Gary Neville's new house, designed by Make Architects. According to Inhabitat, the house will feature locally-sourced materials, a ground source heat pump and PV panels, and is designed to be "zero carbon". The architects say it was inspired by the neolithic settlement of Skara Brae in Orkney, and not the Tellytubby House.

As usual, a few links:

Out of the ruins, a more sustainable Haiti: Treehugger
Why are so many Paul Rudolph buildings being torn down? Treehugger
Car bodies could store energy like batteries: Inhabitat
Top five green gadgets to look for in 2010: mylifescoop.com
Can solar panel mounts cause roof leaks?: GreenBuildingAdvisor.com
World's first personal carbon credit: Guardian
£60m eco-home funding announced in the UK: Energy Savings Trust

 

 

I've come across mentions of aerogel insulation a few times recently - it featured in a few of the buildings from the Solar Decathlon that I wrote about in the current issue of Construct Ireland. The claims made about it are generally impressive: that it's an ultra-light, extremely high performance translucent insulator that was, apparently, developed by Nasa. But I have no real way to verify these claims, so I'm curious to hear what readers know about it. I've certainly yet to see it used in a project in Ireland.

A new article on Jetson Green certainly speaks fondly of the stuff: 

Despite the fact that we are now living in the 21st century, aerogel insulation seems like a material out of science-fiction. It is the lightest solid known, although by volume it is 99% air. It is breathable, but it doesn't absorb water. It is incredibly strong for its weight. But most importantly, it is a fantastic insulator.

There's also an interesting discussion about it on greenbuildingforum.co.uk. 

Anyone know any more? 

As usual, a few links for your perusual:

Code for Sustainable Homes to apply to new UK dwellings from this year: Energy Savings Trust
Tesco opens its first "zero carbon" store in the UK: Guardian (see Construct Ireland's profile of a Tesco Passivhaus-certified store in Waterford)
Demolish Buckingham Palace and replace it with an eco-friendly replica? Guardian
Profile of some new green homes in Portland, Oregon: Jetson Green
Solar roof system unveiled: Jetson Green
Solar Decathlon comes to Europe: Green Buidling Advisor (The US Solar Decathlon is profiled in the current issue of Construct Ireland)
Re-envisioning New York to combat sea level rise: Treehuger
Berlin factory renovated into recyclable live/work space: Inhabitat

We're thinking of making a few changes at Construct Ireland to freshen up the magazine, and we'd love your input. Among the changes we're thinking of introducing in the March issue are:

• More, shorter case studies of new build and retrofit projects. Rather than publishing three to four long case studies (of 5-6 pages each), we're thinking of featuring one big case study along with 3-4 short new builds and a similar number of retrofits (each of about 2-3 pages).
• A letters page, and a one page opinion column on green building and energy issues (written by a different person each issue).
• A 'how to' article in each issue, which would examine a particular green building topic in detail, starting with the basics but getting into a lot of technical detail too. Articles could focus on topics like insulation, air tightness, thermal mass, solar thermal - practically anything relevant to sustainable building really.
• Getting architects and other experts to contribute to our feature on international green buildings by selecting some of their favorite green buildings globally.
• A one-page interview in each issue with a leading figure in a field such as sustainable building, architecture, energy or green economics.

And that's about the gist of it. We'd love to hear your thoughts on these ideas - click 'comment' below and then 'show/hide comment form' to leave a comment.

 

Architect Peter Powell has an interesting post on GreenBuildingAdvisor.com about passive solar design principles. Powell, who say he's designed over 60 "passive solar homes" over the last 35 years, challenges some of the most widely held principles of passive solar design. The full post is here, but I've selected a few snippets and copied them below.

Powell advises against using trees to shade south-facing facades, writing:

Using deciduous trees to shade the south elevation in summer is a major design error. This is a myth that won’t go away. Don’t do it! This theory holds that deciduous trees and vines will shade south-facing windows in the summer and reduce heat gain, while in the winter, when the leaves are down, sun will be able to enter and heat the house. It doesn’t work.

The problem is that the limbs of any tree tall enough to shade the windows in the summer will significantly block the lower winter sun, even with the leaves down. In my area (central Pennsylvania), most of the leaves don’t fall until November anyway, after there have been many cool days and nights when the solar gain would have been useful.

 

He also says that getting your building orientation 100% perfect isn't necessary...

I keep reading articles about how to locate true south, using everything from computer programs to measuring shadows through different seasons. Just get a simple compass and correct for declination if you must.

Orienting a house east or west of true south by up to 20° will have no significant effect on solar performance. For example, I currently live in two virtually identical passive solar buildings, a residence and a studio. The studio faces due south and the residence faces 25° west of south. By the end of a sunny day, the overall solar performance of the two buildings is almost identical, with the house performing slightly better in the spring and fall and the studio doing slightly better in the middle of winter.

...and that it's okay for designers to specify more south-facing glazing than most rules of thumb allow:

The area of south-facing glazing area can comfortably be 15-20%+ of total floor area as long as there is adequate storage mass and “active” movement of the heat into the storage.

To maximize solar gain while minimizing overheating, immediately move the stratified heat into storage. Don’t rely on natural conduction and convection to move the heat.

Most rules of thumb for south-facing glazed area assume that the storage mass is located only in the south-facing rooms, and they assume direct conduction of the solar heat into that storage. This method is relatively slow and inefficient, except for the limited surface areas which are directly in the sun, and often results in overheating. It fails to take full advantage of the available mass in rooms remote from the sun, as well as the advantages that occur when heated air is moved through hollow masonry walls or hollow floor slabs to remote mass storage.

A house with a larger-than-normal glazed area (which could be 30%+ of the floor area of the south-side rooms) can still be comfortable and productive if solar heat is moved mechanically out of these areas and circulated into other rooms and, most importantly, directly into supplemental storage mass.