From the category archives:

codes and guidelines

After I blogged about the various codes, guidelines and schemes I’ve seen mentioned in magazines, and admitted my confusion, I received an email from Martin Lawless of MTT/Sustain, an energy and sustainability consultancy. Martin kindly explained the relationship between the Code for Sustainable Homes, BRE’s EcoHomes, and BREEAM. He has generously given permission for me to blog it, as he explains things with more clarity than I could manage!

The Code for Sustainable Homes, ‘The Code’ or ‘CSH’, was launched in April 2007, superseding the environmental assessment method EcoHomes. It introduces a single national standard to be used in the design and construction of new homes in England, based on the BRE’s EcoHomes scheme, but with more challenging targets. From May 2008 a CSH rating is mandatory for all new homes built in England.

The Code sets out six increasingly demanding levels for the environmental performance of new homes, with minimum standards for energy and water use, surface water management, site waste management, household waste management and the use of materials.

Each level sets stringent standards, particularly with regard to energy (measured with respect to dwelling carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions) and water consumption.

The Code is initially voluntary, with the exception of registered social landlords, who currently have to build to a minimum of Code Level 3. For all granted-funded homes the minimum standard of CSH compliance to be three years in advance of the national standard is required. At present all properties are being designed and built to level 3 standard with the target of zero carbon set for 2013.

Adoption of the Code is intended to encourage continuous improvement in sustainable home building. Performance targets are proposed which are in excess of the minimum needed to satisfy Building Regulations; but are generally considered to be sound best practice, technically feasible, and within the capability of the building industry to provide.

There are three approaches to encourage performance in these categories within the code:

1. Minimum standards at each Level - energy efficiency of the property and water consumption

2. Minimum standards for Code compliance at any Level - materials, surface water run-off and waste

3. No minimum standards - pollution, health & well being, management and ecology

Mandatory Post Construction Reviews (PCRs) dictate that what is built should be as what was proposed and so meticulous document management is essential during construction.

The Code for Sustainable Homes is administered by the Building Research Establishment (BRE), but the scheme technically belongs to the Department for Communities and Local Government.

BREEAM (the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) has been around for a number of years and has a variety of forms for differing building types (offices/industrial/retail/prisons etc).

The BREEAM Office at BRE created and continues to run the Code for Sustainable Homes predecessor EcoHomes (which now only really applies to dwelling refurbishments and to dwellings not in England).

{ 0 comments }

Codes and guidelines and schemes

by Suw on July 21, 2008

I haven’t even begun to wrap my head around the various code, guidelines and schemes that have sprung up around environmentally sustainable building over the last five or so years. So far, the ones I’ve seen mentioned are:

Code for Sustainable Homes
It’s been mandatory since May for all new builds to be rated using the Code for Sustainable Homes, that’s if you can figure out what it is. Homes are given a star rating, between 1 and 6, where 1 star is the basic rating and 6 star is the best. It measures pretty much everything, from energy and Co2 emissions to waste, pollution and materials.

Standard Assessment Procedure
Rates the energy performance of dwellings, measuring energy costs for lighting and space/water heating.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
A ‘Green Building Rating System‘, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), which rates the design, construction and operation of buildings. It focuses on “performance in five key areas of human and environmental health: sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection and indoor environmental quality.”

BREEAM Rating System
Another UK scheme from the Building Research Establishment (BRE) which seems to be a lot like the Code for Sustainable Homes, but I can’t immediately see from the website if two are actually the same thing or different.

Passivhaus
A voluntary German standard for energy usage, Passivehaus is also promoted in the US.

It’s going to take more than a little willpower to start reading through the details for all of the these schemes and, given that I am so far away from builging, I wonder if there’s any point. By the time Kevin and I break ground, it will all have changed anyway.

I note from the ISite blog that the UK Green Building Council “has promised an open source sustainability code, to help address the confusion arising from the myriad of different green building standards with a new Code for Sustainable Buildings, joining in the debate / tussle between LEED and BREEAM.”

The UK-GBC say:

UK-GBC Chairman Peter Rogers added, “The UK-GBC wants to see very wide take-up of robust and customer-friendly tools, and we believe that the standards at the heart of a new Code for Sustainable Buildings should be ‘open source’, meaning that such a Code could potentially be incorporated into a range of different tools, from a range of providers who could then compete in terms of service provision, without confusing the industry with different standards.”

And ISite suggests that they adopt a Creative Commons licence, which I think is a great idea. I just hope that they make it much simpler for novices to understand, and ensure that third parties can use the information to provide tools to help people actually implement the code.

Because all the green building codes, guidelines and schemes in the world are worthless if no one understands or implements them.

{ 1 comment }