AECB Conference 2008 Feedback

[Chris Herring]

Please post any feedback, comments or discussion points. 

[Patrick Wilkinson]

Please post any feedback, comments or discussion points. 

Hi The committee
 
Very good agm etc. a few comments with regard to the debate on Passiv Haus and net zero carbon having thought about it since arriving home.
 
I think that we should aim for net zero carbon but the way to that goal has to be tempered with common sense.  In my opinion we have to prioritise in the following way
 insulation and airtightness 
 High efficiency windows and doors
 thermal bridging
 Orientation
 Daylighting
 low energy lighting and appliances
 heat recovery ventilation
all above to be to Passiv Haus standard
Domestic hot water top up by pellet,  logs or fossil fuel.
I agree with Cath Hassels comments about not discouraging the use of renewables which seems to be the committees stance, they should be secondary to the envelope but encouraged where possible, they are valid in the reduction of co2 emissions.
 Then if a client can afford it we have to have the possibility to fit pv and solar thermal and rain harvesting and wind turbine (minimum viable size 5kwp, if site is suitable)
so orientation has to be correct, ducting fitted for cables and flow and return pipes for solar thermal on all builds at an early stage.
From my experience pv and wind are very effective trouble free technologies which should not be dismissed lightly, some if not all of my clients are willing to pay the price for these and I wouldn't want the AECB to discourage them, obviously after the initial Passiv Haus details have been satisfied. If the client cannot afford them at the time of building it should be simple to install them later, they are effective.
If there is a possibility of community ownership and larger installations these should be encouraged because of the far greater efficencies possible but my clients tend to be one offs.
Solar thermal whilst being the most cost effective technology is not the easiest for the uninitiated to cope with and probably the technology most badly set up and ineffective.
As was mentioned we have to educate people, they have to understand the working of their houses and the effort that may be required keep them running efficiently.
 
regards
 
 
 
Pat Wilkinson
Touchwood Homes
Mob : 07970 119107 www.touchwoodhomes.co.uk
 

[Geoff Stow]

Feed back from the 2008 conference in Norwich

This is a summary of the comments on the feed back forms. They were overwhelmingly positive with some very constructive comments.
I have added my comments in italics

Most people seemed to think there was a good range of workshops. Some of the comments are below.
I particularly enjoyed Dr Berthold Kaufmann twice, delivered at a good pace.
   Practical session would be good.
Some of the workshops were very technical and a bit rushed so it was hard to take in all the information.
It would be good to look at actual building projects.
Some of the workshops could have been run twice.
Help for self builders. (Kits, design etc.)
A look at some inspirational projects from around the world.
Move the focus from domestic buildings.
Presentations should not try to use small type faces as they were unreadable. Same for graphs.
How do we get the info out to the builders?
Several suggestions on heating and ventilation such as ground source heat pumps, boilers and controls, bio mass, decentralised energy etc.

The feed back on the venue was mixed.
It did offer a great space in terms of size and having the big hall with the exhibition area and eating area together was good. Not having any natural light was a bad point especially for 2 days.
The venue was hard to find.
I would completely agree with the comments but it is very hard to find venues that fulfil our needs: that are large enough with breakout rooms, central location, accessible by public transport, with interesting environmental features and is within our limited price range. Suggestions always welcome.

Most people want to keep the national conference but would like regional events as well.

Other points
The food was OK but a hot evening meal would have been good. A couple of people did say we had been spoilt for the last 3 years. It is clear that some institutions have a hard time catering exclusively for vegetarians.

Slightly more people thought that we should open the conference to non members than keep it as a members only event.

We asked this because despite several mailouts the bookings were very slow and we still didn’t get enough people to cover our costs. If we opened the event to non members we could encourage them to join we could promote more widely. Also it would be good to look at ways to get students to attend. We could use the conference to increase membership. I will post a crude breakdown of the figures when I have them.

All the feed back said the event was well organised.

We will be asking workshop presenters to give us a copy of their presentations and will put them on the web site. This may take a while.
   
Please feel free to add your comments on the forum and if you didn’t fill in a feed back form and want to please do so and send it to me.

Geoff Stow   

[David OLIVIER]

I expect peripheral venues attract fewer delegates but I think we've held confs. in different parts of the UK to please members based in different regions. AFAIK the best-attended have been in more central locations. Maybe somewhere like Oxford in 2009? The last four have now been SW, SW, NE and E.

But we probably won't find another university with as many energy-efficient buildings as UEA.

David.

[Tahir]

I would say it should most definitely be open to non members. Attendees might be encouraged to join, but even if they just help cover costs it can't be a bad thing.

[Chris Herring]

We had an issue some years ago where we were concerned that members might not be able to attend, as fully booked by a large number of non=members.  Was decided that after all, anyone could join and attend so why throw it open to non=members.  Was also seen as a significant member benefit.

[Tahir]

Surely the game is to get the message out, and hopefully attract new members?

[neill lewis]

The problem is that members leave it until the last moment before booking a place, by which time the non-members have scooped up all of the places.  When this happens, the members feel a bit miffed.  While the obvious reaction is that it's their own fault for not booking early enough [which causes serious headaches for the conference organisers because we are never sure if we are going to make a loss], the situation still remains that they have been deprived of a place which is rightfully theirs. 

Anyway, the conference is a member benefit and I'm not sure I want to share it with people who aren't otherwise supporting the Association.

[Nick Grant]

The only case I can think of for it being open to non members is to encourage enthusiasts within larger organisations who might have difficulty getting approval for their company to join.

For individuals it costs very little to join so it is not a significant barrier at time of booking. ie the conference is open to anyone who wants to pay the fee and their sub.

[Tahir]

For individuals it costs very little to join so it is not a significant barrier at time of booking. ie the conference is open to anyone who wants to pay the fee and their sub.

Fair enough, I think it should therefore be marketed in a 2 tier way:

Rate 1: Members only

Rate 2: Non members, this rate will be higher and will include membership

I know this is the same as signing up and then booking but I think presenting it thus has greater appeal than saying "members only".

[Andy Simmonds]

sounds a good idea.

[Nick Grant]

And Tahir has just volunteered to market the conference next year!
 

[Tahir]

 

Market it where?

[David OLIVIER]

Agree with Tahir.

Also, offer say a 30-40% discount if booked 4 months early, 15-20% off if booked 2 months early, etc. Make most of the fee non-refundable.

Almost all other bodies holding conferences follow this type of policy to avoid a last minute rush and improve cash flow.

D.

[Tahir]

Any other views on the sliding scale of rates?

Has sponsorship ever been sought, is it desirable? Personally I think a transparent, open way of presenting any sponsorship should allay any concerns that the board/members might have.