Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘climate change’ Category

new coal? you’re joking

Posted in climate change, energy, engineering, london, renewable energy, sustainability, utilities, tagged , , , on January 4, 2008| 2 Comments »

If the government backs up Medway Council’s inane decision to allow a new coal fired power station in Kent, I’m going to pack it in. The superfluous runway at Heathrow is bad enough, but new coal? The squabbling we all do over saving a tonne of CO2 here and a tonne of CO2 there – and Gordon Brown is going to give us the first new coal plant in 30 years?

Seriously, I’m going to put my feet up, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe, and join the national guard. Who knows, I might even become the next prime minister.

Read Full Post »

without action, the plan for zero carbon homes by 2016 will fail

Posted in architecture, chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, micro chp, renewable energy, stamp duty exemption, sustainability, utilities, tagged , , on January 3, 2008| 5 Comments »

The requirement for all homes to be zero carbon by 2016 is going to fail unless we take action now. In particular, a set of interim requirements under the Code for Sustainable Homes must be imposed on private housebuilders. In addition, the Code must allow more flexibility in how zero carbon is achieved.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Carbon Trust micro CHP interim report finally out

Posted in chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, micro chp, stamp duty exemption, sustainability, utilities, tagged , , on November 27, 2007| 3 Comments »

Much later than planned, but here it is. In summary, micro-CHP saves 5% to 10% of carbon in large inefficient houses but only if you use a flawed methodology and give yourself extra-extra credit for displacing grid electricity. A few of the key findings:

  • The trial has demonstrated that the carbon and cost savings from Micro-CHP are generally better for buildings where they can operate for long and consistent heating periods.
  • In small commercial applications, the field trial has shown that Micro-CHP systems can provide typical carbon savings of 15% to 20% when installed as the lead boiler in appropriate environments.
  • The domestic Micro-CHP systems monitored in the trial have the potential to provide typical carbon savings of 5% to 10% for older, larger houses with high and consistent heat demands (over 20,000kWh/yr).

So since the last report, the Carbon Trust has toed the industry line that the 0.568 figure should be used.

There’s some very interesting output from the boiler field trials in the report as well. In particular, the boilers they’re monitoring are generally performing 4% to 5% below their SEDBUK rating.

Read Full Post »

confused about policy changes? Phil’s crib sheet is the answer

Posted in architecture, biofuel, biomass, chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, london, micro chp, other stuff, renewable energy, stamp duty exemption, sustainability on November 22, 2007| 2 Comments »

Phil Clark and Fulcrum have put together a fantastic list of upcoming proposed policy changes relevant to construction. Though I couldn’t find the attached doc he talks about: Fulcrum’s housing chart – where is it? Phil’s promised to keep the list updated as more information is released.

That’s just saved me a pile of research this morning, Phil. Thanks.

Read Full Post »

SAP and CHP – a dangerous muddle?

Posted in biomass, chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, london, micro chp, renewable energy, sustainability, utilities, tagged , , , on November 19, 2007| 6 Comments »

[Update March 20 – while it’s true that SAP gives misleadingly high emissions savings for CHP, I got the methodology wrong. See an updated post here. Points 3 and 4 below are still valid.] 

The SAP results for dwellings using CHP are badly skewed. This may cause large developers to formulate strategies for meeting the Code for Sustainable Homes which fall well short of the targets.

Doing some research this week, I read the Housing Corporation’s report on the estimated costs of meeting various levels of the Code for Sustainable Homes. It’s an interesting document, but at a certain point I was confused by their claim that you can meet the carbon reductions required by code level 4 (i.e. a 44% reduction in DER relative to TER) just by using gas CHP. In fact, when I looked closer I found that in some cases, they were claiming an emissions reduction of over 50% – an extremely high figure. Something closer to 10 and 15% is much more reasonable, unless you want to get Orchardesque.

The source of these wild claims is the Government’s Standard Assessment Procedure for dwellings – SAP 2005. As hinted at in the CHP debate running in the BSJ over the summer, SAP does some funny things when it comes to CHP. Have a closer look at the SAP worksheets and you find that SAP:

(more…)

Read Full Post »

self-defeating renewables policy

Posted in climate change, energy, engineering, renewable energy, sustainability, utilities on November 2, 2007| 1 Comment »

Rather than taking action to meet its commitments on renewable energy, Brown’s government is actively wriggling out of them. Even more pathetically, it’s trying to persuade other governments to soften their line, let the targets slide a bit, don’t worry so much about climate change. Why? Because in the view of Brown’s advisers (in which we might include the CBI), the targets just aren’t realistic. We’ve done all we can and it just won’t work.

Over a year ago, the Carbon Trust were sending up warning signals about the inefficiency of the Renewables Obligation (RO), the Government’s primary method for supporting renewable energy technology. They found that the RO is the worst of all possible options. Yep, of the methods they considered, the RO is the least practical and cost effective method of achieving renewables targets and carbon reduction. And the best? Feed in tariffs similar to those that sparked the PV boom in Germany and that you find in Italy, Spain, Greece, and other countries.

So why does the UK stick to a doomed policy? Probably a number of things: Government inertia, the nuclear lobby feverishly presenting themselves as a silver bullet, utilities hoping to maintain current margins. But little in the way of valid argument. There’s no excuse for shirking responsibility on this issue.

Read Full Post »

CHCP saves carbon? the question is moot.

Posted in chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, london, micro chp, sustainability, utilities, tagged , , , , on October 30, 2007| 5 Comments »

Over the summer there was a debate between some big names in engineering over whether combined heat, cooling, and power (CHCP) using absorption chillers actually saves carbon. The theory goes that because engine size is usually dictated by the base summer heat load, the additional heat load from the chillers allows you to upsize your engine and generate more low-carbon electricity throughout the year.

However on a current project, we’re looking at the feasibility of installing a district heating and cooling network, including installation costs. And one thing is clear: regardless of whether CHCP saves carbon, the capital cost of cooling is unaffordable.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

well done RICS

Posted in climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, engineering, renewable energy, sustainability on October 14, 2007| 2 Comments »

Back in the UK for project meetings, I arrived at my inlaws’ house in Dorking yesterday evening and within minutes my father-in-law was spreading the Telegraph on the table, pointing to the article about how long efficiency measures take to pay back. Phil at the Sustainability Blog has already commented on the RICS claims and I agree with him.

And here’s first hand proof of the damage their histrionics have done: as I explained to my father-in-law that the RICS study was making unreasonable assumptions (e.g. simple payback calculations) his eyes glazed over. Why? Because the soundbite had already done its job. Nevermind the VAT debate or discussion of EPCs, he’s now more convinced than ever that there’s no point in pursuing any of this eco-treehugging-mumbo-jumbo as it’s obviously frivolous and expensive.

Thanks RICS.

Read Full Post »

estimating energy cost

Posted in biofuel, biomass, chp, climate change, energy, engineering, micro chp, renewable energy, sustainability on October 11, 2007| 3 Comments »

I’m doing financial comparisons of energy systems on one of our projects. It’s a pretty standard part of our work but this morning the precision of the figures appearing in my spreadsheet strikes me as particularly specious because it doesn’t tell the whole story. Sure, clients need a comparator and you can’t preface every report with a thesis on complexities of the energy market (not that I’m capable) but just the same these results are making me uneasy and here’s a short list of reasons why:

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Stamp Duty Exemption scuppers zero carbon homes

Posted in architecture, biofuel, biomass, chp, climate change, Code for Sustainable Homes, energy, london, stamp duty exemption, sustainability on October 3, 2007| 4 Comments »

The Draft Statutory Instrument (DSI) for Stamp Duty Exemption for Zero Carbon Homes, announced at the last budget, will undermine the majority of attempts to deliver the greenest of housing. The DSI doesn’t appear to be available online, but the link is to a copy we acquired from the Treasury after badgering them.

The DSI is to be laid before Parliament at the end of next week for Committee approval by the end of the month. It is at best a misguided piece of well-meaning legislation that will do more harm than good, or at worst a genuine attempt by central Government to limit the loss of stamp duty receipts from too many zero carbon homes.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started