Zero Carbon

[Nick Grant]

There is a debate at RIBA next week titled: 'Zero Carbon Buildings – How do we get there?'

http://www.aecb.net/forum/index.php?topic=2098.0

I have attended numerous stakeholder meetings and conferences now where the question is how do we get to Zero Carbon homes by 2016 (or whenever). Questioning whether this is a sensible route to radically decarbonise the UK is seen as heresy and yet I don't know anyone who can make a case for Zero C beyond the 'we have to do everything we can' line of reasoning.

If your ship is going down, don't listen to the people who say 'grab a mop and start mopping, it won't stop us sinking but we have to try a bit of everything'.

At the Norwich conference we hurriedly put a panel together to discuss zero carbon and couldn't think of anyone to speak for it. However when it came to a show of hands I seem to remember that most of the audience thought Zero C to be a good thing.

The 3 speakers at the RIBA debate only have 10 minutes each with 2 pro on site zero C (PV and heat pumps) so I'd be surprised if this event changes many minds either way but I do think this needs discussing urgently.

I say that the Cargo cult science of sticking toy power generation on houses simply won't deliver, anyone want to make the case that it will? Can anyone show me that the Emperor is wearing clothes?

[Nick Grant]

I get up early anyway but this morning I woke with my mind churning over this debate. Did anyone else make it?

IMHO only Jonathan Hines actually responded to the proposition: "If I were the Government Minister responsible for zero carbon new buildings the key things that I would do to ensure that we are able to meet our targets would be ……"

Jonathan dared to argue agains zero C and instead proposed radical end enforced energy efficiency measures for new build plus a programme of radical retrofit and large scale renewables. (I'll see if we can get the presentation up).

The other two simply made an emotive sales pitch for what they sell, PV roof tiles and heat pumps. All good talks but no real debate about the core issue.

To add insult to injury Porritt decided not to hold a vote as to which speaker was most convincing. After all he argued, it is not a case of either or and it would be a shame to end with a vote. So lets keep mopping as the ship goes down, all hands on deck.

This felt like a real cop out. I knew what each speaker would pitch and my interest in travelling all the way to London and staying over was in seeing what Architects thought on this important issue beyond my small circle of friends and colleagues.

I'm not convinced that the man I was cheering would have won. Despite only having 10 minutes Jonathan made a really well argued pitch with clear numbers showing the madness of pursuing the zero carbon route. However what sways an audience in 10 minutes is a simple emotional argument not clearly argued facts.

So we have a proposal for a government driven joined up plan (see original brief) versus the promise of democratised power generation and freedom from power companies and foreigners and the promise of free heating from the ground that works even better when cooling.

I was too cross to say anything in public by this point would have probably just blurted out ' oh great, we get to live in air-conditioned 'ecohomes' that's going to be a weight of the minds of Bangladeshis' - but with sweary bits.

That's better. i'd be very interested to hear what others think especially if contrary to what I think.

[Tahir]

And breathe....

Whoever this Hines fella is I'm with him, although his beans must increase greenhouse gas emissions somewhat?

To think that anything other than a government driven policy that really is joined up is going to have any useful impact is laughable. Look at any new housing development, where are the services, where's the public transport? It's all totally inept and pathetic, disregarding any environmental benefits there are huge social implications for communities that have no transport option bar the motor car, and no service infrastructure within walking distance.

 

[Nick Grant]

 

Glad you made us enable the smileys Tahir! I'm alright now.

[David OLIVIER]

Just contrast us and ... Denmark (of course)

See here for instance http://www.solarthermalworld.org/node/766 and then consider that 40% of Copenhagen now cycles to work whereas UK thinks it's OK to have street lamp poles in the middle of "cycleways". I do hope the delegates heading to Copenhagen to discuss climate treaties will notice that the city they're staying in actually does other stunningly sensible things too; e.g. its buildings are heated by waste heat from its power stations.

On bad days it seems the UK has a less mature energy debate than I witnessed in the 1970s. Then it was discussing use of waste heat from power stations and government initiatives on this, now it's presenting grant-aided individual heat pumps and biomass boilers as somehow the main solution.

D.

[Tahir]

its buildings are heated by waste heat from its power stations.

You mean like Battersea power station?

What happened to all the different green power generation that I saw being developed in the UK in the 70s/80s on Tomorrows World?

Even as a motorist it's obvious that much of inner city London needs to be cyclist/pedestrian only.