Living the green life - Monday 17th March 2008 at Kings College Conference Centre

Kevin Christie from Renewables Connection discussing Micro Energy Renewables.

Kevin represents an umbrella service that offers to survey and assess a property and advise on what types of renewable energy may be suitable for use within the property. Using knowledge of the market and types of systems available, advisors can also recommend possible sources of funding for private households, small businesses and the public sector in Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire.

Further information: www.renewablesconnection.org.uk

Douglas Boyle - from Organic Services (Scotland) Ltd, discussing Organic waste disposal

Douglas highlighted the current situation in the UK regarding recycling with the emphasis on hard waste with little consideration to organic waste. He introduced a variety of products, some already in use in the UK, for the contained composting of animal and vegetable waste on a large scale. Douglas advised more consideration should be given to incorporating these systems into domestic and commercial developments. For an example of a working composting system, look at the Tower Hotel in Crieff which utilises the "Rocket“.

Douglas also provided information on solutions for water waste such as reed bed systems, food waste drying processes and anaerobic digestion.

Further information: http://www.compost.org.uk

Jacquie Forbes from Stewart Milne homes, discussing the Sigma energy efficient home.

The sigma home has been developed by the Stewart Milne group for the BRE innovation park, it was designed to utilise their expertise in timber kit building and incorporate renewable technologies to produce a five star sustainability rating from BRE. The house will be monitored and tested over the next two years to assess it's performance and commercial viability.

Further information: www.bre.co.uk to see the Sigma house and other examples of sustainable housing.

BIFM "Sustainababble"

Thanks to Angela for the article circulated between the office's ERD group. I feel it has raised some interesting arguments and put into words some things I felt, but couldn't articulate. It documents James Woudhuysen's comments at the BIFM annual conference 2008; "sustainability is all about guilt and pessimism, innovation has taken a back seat". The government talk about global warming and carbon neutrality, I have a friend who is a geologist, and when we talk about climate change, he maintains that tectonic plates cause tsunami's and earthquakes, NOT global warming. I feel sometimes that the public has been whipped into a state of frenzy by some clever 'spin', surely we should be thinking along the lines of balance, moving forward using the tools we already have except that we are incorporating sustainability into our way of thinking as we go - not regressing to a more basic way of living as James Woudhuysen put it, using "one hamster wheel trundling out enough energy to power one lightbulb"!!

Energy Performance of Buildings

Measuring your Carbon Footprint

Nearly 50% of the UK's energy consumption (33% worldwide) arises from the way in which our 25 million buildings are lit, heated and used.

Even comparatively minor changes in the energy performance of and the way which we use each building would have a significant effect in reducing energy consumption, and hence, carbon emissions.

In 1997 many countries around the world recognised the growing problems of ever increasing levels of greenhouse gases and agreed to take action to reduce this problem. These countries signed up to the Kyoto Protocol which agreed a set of measures to reduce C02 emissions.

The UK Government is leading the introduction of a number of energy and cost savings measures to make all buildings more efficient. The measures are being applied across all European Union countries and are in line with the European Directive for the Energy Performance of Buildings (EPBD). The energy saving measures are three key areas:


1. Air-Conditioning Systems

Many commercial buildings and an increasing number of homes have air conditioning systems, which will be required to be carefully maintained and managed in order that they do not consume too much energy. Measures are being introduced to ensure that systems are regularly inspected, and will include an assessment of efficiency, a review of their sizing and advice on improvements or replacements and alternative solutions. By 4 January 2009 the first inspection of all existing air-conditioning systems over 250 kW must have occurred.

2. Boilers

Making businesses and homeowners aware of the energy efficiency of their buildings, and in particular their heating and hot water systems, is an essential part of the Government's programme to reduce energy demand and CO2 emissions from buildings. it is now the recommended good practice to provide the customer with a completed energy efficiency checklist, during a service or maintenance visit. This provides them with basic information about the energy efficiency of their heating and hot water system and an indication of whether the customer would benefit from a more thorough assessment of their system.

Domestic checklists

The checklists have been developed in conjunction with key members of the heating and hot water manufacturing and installation industries. They have been designed to be simple, quick to complete and should be left with the customer.

Business checklists

The checklist for businesses provides a record of the main appliances in the system. As the efficiency of appliances varies considerably depending on age and how they are maintained, a simple set of questions about the system controls and boilers gives an indication of whether further expert advice on the heating and hot water systems improvement would be beneficial.

3. Certificates

Energy certificates rate the energy performance of a building. The idea is similar to the well-established energy labels for the sale of white goods such as fridges and washing machines. Two types of energy certificate are required in different circumstances:

3.2 Display Energy Certificates (DECs) for large, public buildings occupied by public authorities or institutions providing a public service to a large number of persons which need to be displayed at all times; and

3.1 Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) for all buildings when they are constructed, sold or rented out. Its purpose is to record how energy efficient a property is as a building. The certificate will provide a rating of the energy efficiency and carbon emissions of a building from A to G, where A is very efficient and G is very inefficient.

EPCs are produced using standard methods (SAP for dwellings, BREM for all other building types) with standard assumptions about energy usage so that the energy efficiency of one building can easily be compared with another building of the same type. This allows prospective buyers, tenants, owners, occupiers and purchasers to see information on the energy efficiency and carbon emissions from their building so they can consider energy efficiency and fuel costs as part of their investment.

An EPC is always accompanied by a recommendation report that lists cost effective and other measures (such as low and zero carbon generating systems) to improve the energy rating of the building. The certificate is also accompanied by information about the rating that could be achieved if all the recommendations were implemented.

When the construction of a new building is completed, the builder or person responsible for the construction is responsible for obtaining the certificate and providing it to the owner. This is a duty under Building Regulations. This will also apply if a building is converted into fewer or more units and there are changes to the heating, hot water provision or air conditioning/ ventilation services.


Key Dates

6 April 2008: EPCs required for all new or converted homes

1 July 2008: EPCs required for the construction, sale or rent of buildings other than dwellings with a floor area over 2,500 m2.

1 October 2008: EPCs required on the sale or rent of all remaining dwellings
EPCs required on the construction, sale or rent of all remaining buildings other than dwellings.
DECs required for all public buildings >1,000 m2.

Further Information can be found here

Article written by Andrew Mowat, CMA Company Associate

ERD Team visit Findhorn Ecovillage, Scotland

A team of seven from Covell Matthews, led by George Simpson, are in the process of producing an ERD (Environmentally Responsible Design) Guide for the company, leading towards the RIAS

Accreditation in Sustainable Building Design. The team are currently working through a 15 module program covering a holistic evaluation of the total building process from inception on through the buildings life cycle.

As part of the learning experience the team, along with clients from Castlehill Housing Association, Langstane Housing Association, Grampian Housing Association and The MacRobert Trust, visited the Findhorn EcoVillage pioneers in ecological housing.

Following an impressive vegetarian buffet the tour started in the original garden where it all began 42 years ago when the founders were spiritually guided to this location.


The Ecovillage

An EcoVillage is defined as being sustainable ecologically, economically, spiritually and culturally.

The tour meandered through the community whilst our guide informed us of the various construction materials, styles and concepts.

All Eco-houses on the site are built to a high standard, at least 50% above current building regulations. In most cases central heating is no longer required. Their aim is to minimise energy used during the build and reduce energy use over the buildings lifetime. Most building supplies, including timber I-Beams and windows are locally sourced.

House styles are generally simple, practical designs, yet each are individually beautiful buildings.

The tour concluded with a visit to the Living Machine plant where the private system treats sewage before arriving in a greenhouse containing a series of planted tanks, similar to a reed bed system. At the end of the process the water is deemed to be potable.

The Eco-village has recently been selected as North Europe's first United Nations training centre, specialising in environmental policy and sustainable development training.

Click for more photographs of Finhorn Village

FISP – Furniture Industry Sustainability Programme Seminar

Members of Covell Matthews ERD team, Chris Billimore and Alex Penter, attended a seminar on Thursday 29th November 2007 at Claremont Office Interiors, Aberdeen.

The seminar was conducted by FISP (Furniture Industry Sustainability Programme) who are a non-government funded organisation, with a diverse membership encompassing companies and individuals from around the world and across the entire furniture supply chain, from materials suppliers, components and furniture manufacturers, to specifiers, retailers and end users.

It was noted that most FISP Members are mostly from the commercial sector and not domestic. Members could be audited and will report annually. Anyone can become Associate or full member and will have access to a advice line with access to FIRA website

The key factors that FISP insist to be considered by furniture suppliers are:

• Social
• Environmental
• Economic

Environmental

• Waste management – re-use waste?

• Energy – how much is used and where (awareness).

• Packaging – re-using, consider psychology of over packed products.

• Transport – incorporating raw materials collection with delivery.

• Procurement – local procurement? eg. If sourced from middle east, child labour (ethical employment), wages, etc needed.

• Sustainable timber procurement

• Air emissions and discharges to land and water – permits in place for disposal of waste/SEPA

• End of life (re-cycling – re-use, etc.) – have they designed for longevity (re-use), recycling, demolition

Social and Economic Factors

• nuisance management (on its immediate environment)

• community relations

• education and training

• employment

• charity work

• competitiveness – profitable

Other factors also asked for consideration were certifications from the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO).

These include:

• ISO14001 certified. Environmental policy – procurement policy.

• ISO26000 – corporate and social responsibility.

Sustainable timber (chain of custody) – certified all along the way from where they come from (easy to trace). Detail information can be sourced at the following:

Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)

Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC)

Of note the FSC can now certify buildings >50% FSC timber used.

Carbon Foot-printing – carbon offsetting and ecological foot-printing

The FISP will aim to produce a furniture industry standard for carbon offsetting as currently there is more than one way to measure it. This standard would involve industry labelling of products.

The Stern Report - Economics of Climate Change

An Brief Overview

As architects we have a considerable responsibility for causing climate change and a significant opportunity to develop the form and structure of a low carbon economy. As examples; buildings account for around half of the UK's carbon dioxide emission; cement, a most commonly used material, manufacture accounts for 5% of the worlds greenhouse gas emissions.

In summary all countries around the world must make every effort to avoid the worst impacts of climate change by acting now. The estimated cost is 1% of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP). If we don't act then the estimated damage to the GDP will be in the region of 5 - 20% per annum.

Climate change may occur from the Earths internal processes, external forces such as variations in sunlight intensity and most recently by human activities. Increased emissions from industrial processes and engine exhausts are deemed to be responsible for the rise in the average surface temperature, commonly referred to as Global Warming.

The cost of stabilising the climate is significant but manageable and requires annual emissions be reduced to more than 80% below current levels. Emissions trading, technology co-operation, deforestation reduction and adaptation require international frameworks to aid each countries contribution.

Possible policies may include:

• i. Building Regulations should mandate on site renewable energy systems in all new developments.

• ii. Adopt the Merton Rule as Planning Policy by using onsite renewable energy to reduce annual CO2 emissions by 10%. http://themertonrule.org

• iii. Future Treasury spending on grants for the retrofit household sector.

• iv. Allow anyone to sell electricity back to the mains at a fair and reasonable rate.

• v. Lower tax rates (Ecotax) on ecologically sustainable construction materials.

Perhaps the greatest issue is public awareness.

In response to this growing concern a Banchory based group are looking at the feasibility of developing a Centre for Alternative Technology in Aberdeenshire. Former Shell Director Mark Hope leads the group as it aims to raise awareness to the wide range of options available to homeowners and developers alike. Although still in the inception stages the concept has been very well received.


Summary of Conclusions

There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we take strong action now.

The scientific evidence is now overwhelming: climate change is a serious global threat, and it demands an urgent global response.

This Review has assessed a wide range of evidence on the impacts of climate change and on the economic costs, and has used a number of different techniques to assess costs and risks. From all of these perspectives, the evidence gathered by the Review leads to a simple conclusion: the benefits of strong and early action far outweigh the economic costs of not acting.

Climate change will affect the basic elements of life for people around the world – access to water, food production, health, and the environment. Hundreds of millions of people could suffer hunger, water shortages and coastal flooding as the world warms.

Using the results from formal economic models, the Review estimates that if we don’t act, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least 5% of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risks and impacts is taken into account, the estimates of damage could rise to 20% of GDP or more.

In contrast, the costs of action – reducing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the worst impacts of climate change – can be limited to around 1% of global GDP each year.

The investment that takes place in the next 10-20 years will have a profound effect on the climate in the second half of this century and in the next. Our actions now and over the coming decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the
economic depression of the first half of the 20th century. And it will be difficult or impossible to reverse these changes.

So prompt and strong action is clearly warranted. Because climate change is a global problem, the response to it must be international. It must be based on a shared vision of long-term goals and agreement on frameworks that will accelerate action over the next decade, and it must build on mutually reinforcing approaches at national, regional and international level.

Climate change could have very serious impacts on growth and development.

If no action is taken to reduce emissions, the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could reach double its pre-industrial level as early as 2035, virtually committing us to a global average temperature rise of over 2°C. In the longer term, there would be more than a 50% chance that the temperature rise would exceed
5°C. This rise would be very dangerous indeed; it is equivalent to the change in average temperatures from the last ice age to today. Such a radical change in the physical geography of the world must lead to major changes in the human geography – where people live and how they live their lives.

Even at more moderate levels of warming, all the evidence – from detailed studies of regional and sectoral impacts of changing weather patterns through to economic models of the global effects – shows that climate change will have serious impacts on world output, on human life and on the environment.

All countries will be affected. The most vulnerable – the poorest countries and populations – will suffer earliest and most, even though they have contributed least to the causes of climate change. The costs of extreme weather, including floods, droughts and storms, are already rising, including for rich countries.

Adaptation to climate change – that is, taking steps to build resilience and minimise costs – is essential. It is no longer possible to prevent the climate change that will take place over the next two to three decades, but it is still possible to protect our societies and economies from its impacts to some extent – for example, by providing better information, improved planning and more climate-resilient crops and infrastructure. Adaptation will cost tens of billions of dollars a year in developing countries alone, and will put still further pressure on already scarce resources. Adaptation efforts, particularly in developing countries, should be accelerated.

The costs of stabilising the climate are significant but manageable; delay would be dangerous and much more costly.

The risks of the worst impacts of climate change can be substantially reduced if greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere can be stabilised between 450 and 550ppm CO2 equivalent (CO2e). The current level is 430ppm CO2e today, and it is rising at more than 2ppm each year. Stabilisation in this range would require emissions to be at least 25% below current levels by 2050, and perhaps much more.

Ultimately, stabilisation – at whatever level – requires that annual emissions be brought down to more than 80% below current levels.

This is a major challenge, but sustained long-term action can achieve it at costs that are low in comparison to the risks of inaction. Central estimates of the annual costs of achieving stabilisation between 500 and 550ppm CO2e are around 1% of global GDP, if we start to take strong action now.

Costs could be even lower than that if there are major gains in efficiency, or if the strong co-benefits, for example from reduced air pollution, are measured. Costs will be higher if innovation in low-carbon technologies is slower than expected, or if policy-makers fail to make the most of economic instruments that allow emissions to be reduced whenever, wherever and however it is cheapest to do so.

It would already be very difficult and costly to aim to stabilise at 450ppm CO2e. If we delay, the opportunity to stabilise at 500-550ppm CO2e may slip away.

Action on climate change is required across all countries, and it need not cap the aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries.

The costs of taking action are not evenly distributed across sectors or around the world. Even if the rich world takes on responsibility for absolute cuts in emissions of 60-80% by 2050, developing countries must take significant action too. But developing countries should not be required to bear the full costs of this action alone, and they will not have to. Carbon markets in rich countries are already beginning to deliver flows of finance to support low-carbon development, including through the Clean Development Mechanism. A transformation of these flows is now required to support action on the scale required.

Action on climate change will also create significant business opportunities, as new markets are created in low-carbon energy technologies and other low-carbon goods and services. These markets could grow to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year, and employment in these sectors will expand accordingly.

The world does not need to choose between averting climate change and promoting growth and development. Changes in energy technologies and in the structure of economies have created opportunities to decouple growth from greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, ignoring climate change will eventually damage economic growth.

Tackling climate change is the pro-growth strategy for the longer term, and it can be done in a way that does not cap the aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries.

A range of options exists to cut emissions; strong, deliberate policy action is required to motivate their take-up.
Emissions can be cut through increased energy efficiency, changes in demand, and through adoption of clean power, heat and transport technologies. The power sector around the world would need to be at least 60% decarbonised by 2050 for atmospheric concentrations to stabilise at or below 550ppm CO2e, and deep emissions cuts will also be required in the transport sector.

Even with very strong expansion of the use of renewable energy and other low-carbon energy sources, fossil fuels could still make up over half of global energy supply in 2050. Coal will continue to be important in the energy mix around the world, including in fast-growing economies. Extensive carbon capture and storage
will be necessary to allow the continued use of fossil fuels without damage to the atmosphere.

Cuts in non-energy emissions, such as those resulting from deforestation and from agricultural and industrial processes, are also essential.

With strong, deliberate policy choices, it is possible to reduce emissions in both developed and developing economies on the scale necessary for stabilisation in the required range while continuing to grow.

Climate change is the greatest market failure the world has ever seen, and it interacts with other market imperfections. Three elements of policy are required for an effective global response. The first is the pricing of carbon, implemented through tax, trading or regulation. The second is policy to support innovation and the deployment of low-carbon technologies. And the third is action to remove barriers to energy efficiency, and to inform, educate and persuade individuals about what they can do to respond to climate change.

Climate change demands an international response, based on a shared understanding of long-term goals and agreement on frameworks for action.

Many countries and regions are taking action already: the EU, California and China are among those with the most ambitious policies that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol provide a basis for international co-operation, along with a range of partnerships and other approaches. But more ambitious action is now required around the world.

Countries facing diverse circumstances will use different approaches to make their contribution to tackling climate change. But action by individual countries is not enough. Each country, however large, is just a part of the problem. It is essential to create a shared international vision of long-term goals, and to build the international frameworks that will help each country to play its part in meeting these common goals.

Key elements of future international frameworks should include:

• Emissions trading: Expanding and linking the growing number of emissions trading schemes around the world is a powerful way to promote cost-effective reductions in emissions and to bring forward action in developing countries: strong targets in rich countries could drive flows amounting to tens of billions of dollars each year to support the transition to low-carbon development paths.

• Technology co-operation: Informal co-ordination as well as formal agreements can boost the effectiveness of investments in innovation around the world. Globally, support for energy R&D should at least double, and support for the deployment of new low-carbon technologies should increase up to five-fold. International co-operation on product standards is a powerful way to boost energy efficiency.

• Action to reduce deforestation: The loss of natural forests around the world contributes more to global emissions each year than the transport sector. Curbing deforestation is a highly cost-effective way to reduce emissions; large-scale international pilot programmes to explore the best ways to do this could get underway very quickly.
  

• Adaptation: The poorest countries are most vulnerable to climate change. It is essential that climate change be fully integrated into development policy, and that rich countries honour their pledges to increase support through overseas development assistance.

• International funding should also support improved regional information on climate change impacts, and research into new crop varieties that will be more resilient to drought and flood.

Offical Publication