The interior design profession is coming around to the idea that refurbishment jobs need to take into account the environmental impact these projects have and to address this, The Green Register is holding a seminal one day conference in London on 9th February to address some of the more pressing issues interior designers have to face. But what are these issues?

Since interior finishes are removed and replaced frequently, the building-fabric-only needs to be competent or every refit would require building regulations applications, associated design and application fees and increasing energy performance requirements would make refit progressively more expensive. Issues that need to be addressed by the building include: G value/solar gains/thermal mass /U value/decrement delay/wind and airtightness/thermal breaks/weather tightness/vapour permeability/internal surface temperatures etc.

No tenant/purchaser would want to buy into inadequate property that needs them to complete it as part of the fit out and tenant agreement. The Tenant would quite rightly expect a competent building. If building running/heating/ventilating/cooling are part of their landlord agreement there is no incentive to reduce costs unless they see a financial return for a consumption reduction.  Carpets may be insulating but they will have an effect on the ground floor only and they also hide thermal mass that can have an effect on the overall energy demands. The same two points apply to suspended ceiling, not the ground floor, but the roof.

The interior finishes can have variable properties that help of hinder regulating internal conditions and comfort conditions hence affecting heat/vent/coolth requirements.  The same finishes with the wrong choice of materials can affect indoor air quality and the need for ventilation which drive up energy costs.  Issues of concern include: material ingredients/ binders/ adhesives/ VOCs/ off-gassing/ indoor air quality/ moisture mass/ thermal mass/ acoustic mass etc.

Increasing internal insulation of historic buildings by wall coverings can lead to condensation, mould, asthma, rot, toxic mould, frost damage. In my limited past experience the level of technical expertise in IDs (who often have to rely on manufacturers reps to tell them what they need to choose and specify) is below Architects who themselves can still be inadequate in these matters, so I would be worried about this too. Issues to be address here include vapour permeability/ capillary action/ continuity/ gap avoidance/ moisture transport.

The RICS ‘Ska rating’ assessment process addresses refit better than any of the BREEAM tools – it focuses on building fabric and the materials that both IDs and Architects specify.  But I think it follows the conventional approach (competent building, complimentary interiors)  More importantly it addresses reuse of existing interior materials and reuse of reclaimed rather than sending perfectly sound materials to landfill.

Re-education of the designers in all disciplines on environmental issues is paramount, coordinated design is essential and respect of each other and each other’s contribution would help a lot. The Green Register’s one day conference will help ID’s to arm themselves with the knowledge they want and need to inform themselves and their clients about the choices they can make with fit-out, refit and refurbishment projects.

http://www.greenregister.org.uk/events.php?p=1&id=219#event219
http://www.scribd.com/doc/78130374/The-Challenges-of-Eco-Interior-Refit-A03-130112-BRM

I was in Delft recently with my partner where, as usual, we ordered tap water with our evening meal. It was pleasant enough, no discernable chlorine taste, but it certainly wasn’t worth the three Euros sixty that appeared on the bill! This slightly surreal experience was closely followed by a visit to Bruges where the restaurants and cafes refused point blank to serve tap water at all. So I decided to investigate the bottled water industry in more detail, and to ask whether we, as construction professionals, can reduce the amount of bottled water consumed in the UK.

Value of the bottled water market

It is an industry that has grown rapidly in the past 25 years, with global consumption in 2010 at 225 billion litres and a worldwide market worth £52 billion pounds a year. [1] It is a staggering fact that the world spends over six times as much per year on bottled water than it does on water supply and sanitation.[2]  Despite a slight downturn in sales in the last few years in the US (due to pressure from both environmentalists and municipal water suppliers) it is still the world’s fastest growing consumer beverage, and likely to remain so as increasing sales in China more than make up for any decrease in the States. Whilst consumption of bottled water per head in the UK is low compared to many European countries at 38 litres per head, it has also risen rapidly since the 1980’s. In 2009, 2.1 billion litres of bottled water were bought and the bottled water market in the UK is estimated to be worth between £1.4-2 billion.[3]  

 The decline in drinking tap water 

So why is the number of people drinking tap water in the UK declining? As with most countries it is due to three main factors: a fear about the quality of tap water, preferences of taste, and convenience.

We don’t need to drink bottled water in the UK because our tap water is unsafe; in fact, the tests that tap water is subjected to before it reaches our taps are more stringent than those required for bottled water. The “Story of Bottled Water” (from the same people that produced the “Story of Stuff”) and available at http://storyofstuff.org/bottledwater/ explains how the bottled water industry in the US systematically set out to persuade consumers that tap water was essentially unsafe, and did so very successfully. In the UK the British Soft Drinks Association has been accused of doing the same thing, though they have denied it.

The taste issue is more subjective. Certainly there are areas in the UK where tap water is heavily chlorinated and unpalatable.   However, filtering the tap water or allowing it to stand before drinking solves that problem, both at a far lower monetary and environmental cost than drinking bottled water. Depending where in the UK you live, tap water costs between 0.2 and 0.5 p per litre directly from the tap. Filtering at point of use will double the price at worst.

The environmental impact of bottled water v tap water

There are several environmental issues that are of concern when bottled water replaces tap water. Excessive withdrawal of natural mineral or spring water to produce bottled water can threaten local streams and groundwater, transporting the water to the consumer results in a far higher carbon load than delivering to a tap; the manufacture and disposal of billions of plastic bottles causes pollution, litter and fills landfill sites.

The carbon load of mains water in the UK is, on average 0.35kg CO₂ for every m³ of tap water delivered to the tap. Compare that to the carbon load of trucking bottles of water around the UK, a heavy and bulky commodity. To exacerbate the situation, of the 2.1 billion litres of water we drink every year, only 1.6 billion are UK-produced, meaning that 24% of the bottled water we consume in the UK is imported.[4] Whilst most of our imported water is from France, bottled water from Turkey and Fiji and even bottled rainwater from Australia (Cloud Juice) is available in our shops.

To reduce bulk and weight most bottled water is now sold in plastic rather than glass bottles, which brings extra environmental problems. Most plastic water bottles are made from polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is recyclable but research in the US has shown that less than 20% are recycled, with the bulk of the remainder going to landfill. Whilst figures are not easily available for the UK, the figures are likely to be similar. In both Sweden and Germany there is a substantial deposit on plastic bottles at point of sale and therefore recycling rates are far higher, but there seems little political will to introduce such a system in the UK in the near future. Because so much bottled water is consumed outside of the home environment, many empty bottles are disposed of in street bins where recycling rates are far lower than from home bins. Even recycling does not completely solve the problem as only 4% of PET bottles are recycled back into new bottles; most are merely downcycled.

Design solutions 

At first sight this does not seem an issue that those of us who work in the building industry can affect. But when we design kitchens we can specify a separate filtered water tap outlet and in the commercial sector we can design in water fountains or space and water connections for chilled water units fed directly from the mains water supply.

The Green Register has run about 60 events in 2011 which is some feat considering the small number of staff we have and the extremely tight budget we work to but this would not have been possible without the rock solid support of The Green Register team – Birgit, Elaine and Viv – who work tirelessly to keep TGR on track, on budget and on people’s lips. Our Steering Group members – Jillian Mitchell, Nicola Thomas, Jim Allen, Brian Murphy, Cath Hassell, Rob Borruso, Jean Pierre Wack, Emma Storey, Brian Gerhardt and Tom Dollard – have continued to guide us through this tricky year and out the other side. We’ve had some excellent local events run by TGR’s Regional Coordinators, in particular Steve Bradshaw and Tom Dollard who bring our message to the regional level and the TGR team have worked in the Bristol area with the Genesis Project in Taunton, Bristol City Council Sustainable City team (particular thanks to Celia Beeson and Christine Davis), RICS South West and Catherine Gandon and Jon Watkins at RIBA South West. Thanks to the Environment Agency in Bristol for hosting our End of Year event in December.

Nationally, TGR has enjoyed a very positive (and ongoing) relationship with: the RIBA in London who are working hard to promote sustainable construction to their members; SusCon in Kent (hope you are enjoying your travels Stephen!) and internationally we ran a very successful event with the Canadians on their Super E system of house building. 

We have also had some very generous either low cost or pro bono support from: Greg Annadale who keeps our website sharp; Paul Liptrot whose graphic design skills can be appreciated every time you read a TGR flyer; Emmelie and Pete Brownlee who are working on some short videos for our website (watch this space); Mike Fawcett, Charlie Howes, Christina Robino, Nigel Locker and Lilly Storey who have graciously given their time to work on marketing and PR for TGR; Alex Gostelow whose IT skills have kept our computers going.

TGR is very grateful for occasional and ongoing assistance from Knauf insulation (thank you Craig) and one time sponsorship from Ecological Building Systems, Southern Solar and Steelcase – all these donations have been used to oil TGR’s joints as we get back into gear for 2012.

Last but certainly not least, we are hugely grateful for the continued support from all our members and everyone who attended a Green Register event in 2011. We have reason to celebrate this year with over 60 very well-received events taking place in 2011, but successful events can only be so when they are supported by attendees, so I will take this opportunity to thank you for your support throughout 2011 and for your continued positive feedback which keeps us looking forward into the New Year to new events to come.

I write this with trepidation as I may have missed someone off the list-if this is so, it is not because you are not appreciated, more that the old grey matter is a little tired as we approach Christmas time but thank you to each and every person who has supported TGR.

Happy New Year and roll on 2012!

Lucy Pedler,  TGR Director

And yet here we are rushing towards 2012 with alarming rapidity.  Remember the disastrous floods that overwhelmed parts of the South West in 2007, and Cumbria in 2009?  As I write the rain is lashing the north again, last month it was Mevagissey, bringing back memories of Boscastle, shrinking the distance of time.  Flooding is a direct cause of human misery, dislocation on a local and national scale, with a heavy cost directly to individuals, their insurers and the country as a whole.

The Pitt review in 2008 led directly to The Flood and Water Management Act 2010.  This seeks to make management of flood risk a pro-active, rather than a reactive mopping up exercise.  Local authorities are key to the brave new world it seeks to create, looking up towards the Environment Agency for a strategic framework, and outwards to drainage boards, water companies and the design community to create, implement and manage solutions on the ground.  Management of surface water is the issue, and the adoption of sustainable drainage systems the key component.

All well and good, but over 3 years on from Pitt almost none of this is in place, and the current framework for enactment will not complete until the very end of 2014, over 3 years hence.  So why the delay?

The Bill will impact on planning processes, with sustainable drainage solutions a requirement for all but the very smallest schemes.  This at a time when one of the coalition’s much vaunted strategies for recovery is the abolition of red tape and reform of the planning processes. 

Local authorities are the key to successful implementation, and while they have skilled engineers they are too few in number, and not always trained in the design of sustainable drainage schemes.  Yet they are charged with establishing Sustainable Drainage Boards to sanction development and management of schemes and other assets post construction.  They are not ready.

On the other side of the fence, sustainable drainage schemes, done well, use space that could be used to raise scheme density and payback for developers on their expensively acquired land-banks.  Compliance will generate upfront costs and potentially delays.  Government is desperately keen to raise new housing starts, and is looking at ways to incentivise rather than discourage development. 

Perhaps no surprise then that implementation is so slow, although so far no one seems to be admitting to any dragging of the feet. 

The design community must put the counter arguments as strongly as we can.  We have a golden opportunity to use good design to improve amenity and biodiversity to the benefit of the wider community.  Permeable paving has its place, but it’s not paving paradise.  The existing system is broken, and is full of inconsistencies and hard to reconcile interests.  Reform is essential if we are to move forward and make the right kind of investment, saving costs to the wider economy in future years. 

The politicians would do well to remember the misery flooding creates.  It’s twice this year residents in Mevagissey have mopped out their homes; they may not know much about the Water Bill 2010 but they will surely want to know why this is happening again.

Location:
Bristol

Greenheart sustainable Construction, members of The Green Register, are looking for an office administrator to help with general office work to include wages & VAT. They must be competent in Excel.

Working in an informal shared office space in Montpelier Bristol.

Hours
approx 8- 10 hours per week ( but could be more)

Pay negotiable

Job Start Date
late January 2012

Location
Greenheart Sustainable Construction, Montpelier, Bristol

Expressions of Interest to:
Malcolm McMahon, Greenheart Sustainable Construction
info@greenheartuk.com

I was discussing with my family tonight who we might put on the bonfire this Saturday 5th November if given the choice and I said I’d like to choose Climate Change Minister Gregory Barker. This is because of the spectacularly disappointing decision announced yesterday to cut the Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) for micro-generation by more than half, reducing the FiT from 43p to 21p as of next April.

We all knew that the basis upon which FiT’s were introduced was that the unit payment would drop off over time but today’s decision is really unacceptable – both in terms of the degree to which it has been cut and the date when it comes into effect. Installers have been left with an unreasonably short time to adjust to this and their customers will understandably be furious if they don’t get the technologies installed by 12th December.

What really bugs me is the fallout from this decision: all the jobs that will be lost and the loss of faith in renewables that the public, already highly sceptical of the technologies, will have.

Whatever one’s opinion of the FiT’s – and there are many detractors – there are several positive outcomes so to date. According to Ofgen, the scheme has increased the amount of solar power installed in the UK from 30 to 321 megawatts (from before the subsidy started in 2010 to October this year). FiT’s have also kick-started many small businesses, created jobs and generally raised awareness of the fact that we have to start to decarbonise the grid right now and one of the many ways (although not the most efficient cost to benefit option) is to generate power from the sun.

With such a good start, it seems madness to pull the rug out from under micro-generation so fast and so soon. As shadow energy and climate change minister Caroline Flint said in response to the news “With growth flat-lining everywhere else today’s announcement threatens to strangle at birth the solar industry.”

Having been wooed by the venue; the warm welcome at the reception and the very enjoyable refreshments on offer, the day got even better with some splendid and entertaining presentations. The speakers were excellent, up to the minute with info and very well presented. By the end of the morning session I thought that it couldn’t be bettered. How wrong I was. Anyone who doubts that we, that is the inhabitants of this planet, have to make substantial changes to the way we live and use the precious resources available, would need no further persuasion.  Professionals, those of us who have chosen careers in the shaping of the environment we live, have a responsibility to take on board as much information as possible and use it to ensure our clients make the correct decisions. Some options are not cheap but in the long term the rewards will manifest themselves in the sustainability of the planet and us!

The day’s event was a great success. Everybody was buzzing with enlightening info and enthused to go forth and multiply! The day was rounded off by more splendid nibbles and delicious Canadian beer. What more does one need? So, any new prospective members should get on board. This train is moving. Don’t miss it, all in all a day to remember.

The Super E^® House conference was held in partnership with the High Commission of Canada and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), Canada’s national housing agency.

Language is important; it is one of the things that define us as human. As the environmental building industry expands, new systems, processes and products are introduced and new words start to become common currency. I am interested (and often surprised) by the way technical terms become misused by building professionals as well as the general public.

Rainwater and greywater

Rainwater and greywater (two completely different types of water, with differing requirements for treatment and storage) are increasingly referred to as greywater. So much so I now routinely ask whether the speaker really means greywater, regardless of the conviction with which they state the word.  Rainwater is obviously rain that has fallen out of the sky, which in a conventional building is discharged to a surface water sewer, combined sewer, or a soakaway; if it is stored for use back in the building it is still rainwater, until it is used. Once it is used it becomes either foul water (if used to flush WCs or urinals) or waste water if used for washing clothes. If wastewater from a bath, basin or shower is collected for re-use it becomes greywater. If greywater is used to flush WCs it becomes foul water. If it is used in washing machines it becomes waste water (but would not circulate through the greywater recycling system again as waste water from washing machines has too many detergents in it to be considered as suitable for greywater recycling). Simples!

Greywater and “blackwater”

When I first heard the term greywater used for waste water (back in 1997) I naively assumed it to be a reference to the appearance of the water due to the effect of scum formation, and the colour wastewater becomes after it begins to biologically decompose. But then I started to hear the term “blackwater” to describe water from toilets. “Blackwater” categorically does not describe the appearance of foul water either in the sewers or whilst undergoing treatment at a sewage treatment plant. It is an example of using the term black to describe something that has negative connotations, rather than an actual description (such as blackboard). We have a perfectly adequate term to describe water from toilets, which is foul water, and in the 21^st Century our language should be smarter than this.

Sewage treatment for direct or indirect re-use

Now the term “blackwater treatment”[i] is being used in the UK to describe the on-site treatment of sewage in an eco town or on an eco development, where the effluent is used back in the development for certain non-potable purposes. Although this is a different process to normal sewage treatment in so far as the sewage effluent is treated beyond normal secondary and tertiary treatment, (and the effluent may meet drinking water standards), the technology is not new, is not confined to just “eco” developments, and has a technical term that describes it perfectly, which is sewage treatment for direct re-use. In the US, home of the term “blackwater”[ii], such treatment and distribution schemes, of which there are an increasing number, are now being referred to as simply “water re-use” systems.

~ Direct re-use: the planned and deliberate use of treated sewage. At its most extreme, the sewage effluent is cleaned to potable water standard and injected directly into the mains supplying a town or city. However at present most direct re-use systems clean the sewage effluent so that it is considered fit for purpose for irrigation, WC flushing and urinal flushing, and supply a secondary network of distribution pipework for this water as well as a mains supply network. A separate distribution network is very costly. Therefore it makes economic sense for sewage treatment re-use to be directly into the mains. From 1985 to 1992 the City of Denver, USA, ran a large scale trial of direct re-use and found that water quality parameters were equal to or better than the city’s drinking water. However, public perception about direct re-use for potable water supplies is still mostly negative, and is holding back large scale take-up of this process.

~ Indirect re-use: water that is taken from a river, lake or aquifer that has received sewage or sewage effluent. Much of the water we use in our buildings in the UK could be classified as indirect re-use, i.e. effluent from one town’s sewage treatment plant is discharged into a river, taken out from the same river further downstream, to be cleaned and supplied to the next town. Hence the saying that every glass of water we drink has passed through seven other people’s kidneys first. With planned indirect water re-use the sewage effluent is discharged immediately upstream of the water treatment plant or used to recharge aquifers. Indirect re-use of sewage effluent is beginning to be used far more around the world as water demand increases and the water suppliers need a guaranteed supply.

Eight Associates is a growing and diverse team of sustainability specialists, passionate about
creating a positive impact in the built environment. We work nationally and internationally on
projects ranging from small residential units to large multi-use developments.

We are looking for a determined and intelligent individual, with a real belief in the role of the
built environment in achieving a sustainable future, to join our friendly and energetic team.

Key responsibilities:

Responsibilities may include, but not be limited to, the following:

• Assisting on undertaking BREEAM and Code for Sustainable Homes Assessments;
• Assisting on energy modelling and renewable energy feasibility studies of buildings;
• Liaising with design teams to gather information;
• Researching and writing reports; and
• Networking within the building and sustainability sector.

Person specification:

The following are desirable though not requirements:

• A relevant MSc (in the environmental field or similar);
• Work experience in a related field;
• Knowledge or Experience of BREEAM or Code for Sustainable Homes; and
• Understanding of Energy Modelling software and Renewable Energy technologies.

It is, however, essential that the successful candidate is:

• Committed to environmental considerations;
• Happy to work in a team and with clients;
• Able to clearly present information both verbally and in writing;
• A swift problem-solver with imagination and initiative;
• Punctual, reliable and able to prioritise work to meet deadlines; and
• Positive and independently minded with a good sense of humour.

Date
March 2011

Salary
£20,000 per annum

Job Start Date
Negotiable, but within the next few months

Location
The Old School House, 178 Ebury Street,
London SW1W 8UP
Expressions of Interest:

Please send your CV to:
info@eightassociates.co.uk
020 7881 3090

Prior to the event I was on a judging panel for the BIID Awards for Residential and Commercial Retrofit Awards and there was also a category for Sustainable Product Award. Despite there being a disappointingly low number of entries, I enjoyed reviewing the submissions that attempted to tackle the environmental impact of IDs work. The awards were presented by Wayne Hemingway who gave a truly inspiring talk about his and his business partner/ wife’s modest beginnings and their ethos. Despite his success, his ego was nowhere to be seen and he presented a cast iron case for using reclaimed products and materials. They’re cheap, unique and they reduce waste: a bit of a no-brainer.

On the expert panel with me in the afternoon were some very interesting people. In particular Russell Smith from Parity Projects who talked about a tool that could be used to assess the environmental impact of retrofits, which sounded like a far more useful tool than the ineffective EPC’s currently in use.

TGR is planning a full day Retrofit seminar for IDs on 14^th July in London with case studies from the commercial, residential and hospitality sectors, so take a look at our events page in a few weeks for more details.