Re-building destroyed districts using the principles of bioclimatism

Objectives and target audience

- The Objectives are the below

• Saving energy, reduction of energy use

• Reduction of greenhouse emissions

• Saving resources, reduction of resources use

• Economic benefits

• Improvement of citizens quality of life

• Citizens activation and sensitization (Development of active citizens-formation of active behaviors)

-The target group was all citizens of Kalamata’s Municipality.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

Funding came from different sources:

• A loan from the European Investment Bank,
• Grants from the European Commission through the THERMIE programme,
• The Municipality of Kalamata gave the land free of charge to DEAK (the municipal corporation for the rebuilding of Kalamata).

Process

- Decision taking by the municipal authorities
- Pursuit for financial resources
- Choice of the area: The project concerned 120 new homes using direct or indirect solar heating. Buildings are 9 to 10.5 meter high up to the roof and include dwelling units of different sizes and types:

• Two-storey family houses,

• Family flats in blocks of flats,

• Student’s flats in blocks of flats.

-Analysis of the microclimate, building sitting, window orientation and roof ventilation, the use of natural ventilation and air-conditioning and the optimisation of natural light.
-Choice of the techniques:

• Insulation of external walls,
• Building orientation and optimisation of the distances between them
• Roof ventilation
• Solar collectors
• Optimised fenestration depending on solar radiation.

- Implementation of the construction
- Informative campaign carried out from 96 to May 97
-    Collaboration between the inhabitants and CRES for monitoring the energy savings: collection of statistic data per m² of building and financial comparisons.

Results

The innovative techniques used in this project appears however as interesting economic solution for this part of Europe. In winter, they allow to reduce energy consumption by 35 to 65% depending of the type of buildings. As regard pollutant emissions, 7.8 to 18.5 tonnes of CO2 per dwelling house are also avoided. In summer, the indoor temperature limited to 30 °C, a result which was confirmed by the inhabitants themselves in surveys.
Another remark would refer to the inhabitants’ behaviour. The huge differences in the energy savings achieved (from 35 to 65% depending on the flats) are exclusively linked to the inhabitants’ behaviour and their willingness to contribute to energy savings. This demonstrates the need for providing the inhabitants with suitable information when launching this type of experience.
The Kalamata experience in the field of low energy houses served also as an example for other projects in the region, including:
•improved insulation in private and public buildings,
•adaptation of a solar system for producing domestic hot water in the municipal slaughterhouse
•projects aimed at integrating energy savings in municipal stadiums and sports facilities.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

The key issues for success were:
- The coordination between the municipality’s services and the Athenian architects’ office selected for the operation.
- The cooperation with CRES (Center for Renewable Energy Resources)
-    -The dissemination of the monitoring results.

Klosterenga is a block of flats in Oslo. The project has implemented several environment-friendly technologies, among them solar collectors from SOLARNOR. The 240 square metres of solar collectors produces about 80.000 kWh per year. SOLARNOR has also provided control systems for under floor heating in each of the 35 flats.
Integrated ecological measures are:
1) Solar collectors for domestic hot water and water-based floor space heating.
2) Double-glazed south facade discussed as part of a passive solar system.
3) Improved insulation standards.
4) Combination of active and passive solar systems.
5) Individually metered apartments (energy consumption).
6) Simplified building details.
7) Reduced number of materials.
Materials that can be recycled or re-used.
9) Materials that can be easily maintained and repaired.
10) Materials that don’t have bad influence on indoor climate.
11) Local cleaning of grey water.
12) Collecting and use of rain water for outdoor purposes and park elements.
13) Building volumes designed to give maximum access to neighbouring park areas.
14) All apartments have visual access to both backyard and park.
15) High and narrow windows to the North improve the amount of daylight.

Objectives and target audience

The target energy consumption is primary energy only (net energy consumption, heat from solar collector not included).

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The project is partly a research and development project to document effects of the different features within the housing co-operative. It is supported by grants from EC through EHEN, the Housing Bank of Norway, the Research Council of Norway, the municipality of Oslo, the Norwegian Water Resources and the Energy Directorate. The cost of the Klosterenga building is 15-20% higher than the reference building at the nearest site. The different features have a payback time of between 5-20 years but the payback period for the active solar heating system, specifically, has been estimated at 15 years.

Process

The building as a whole is formed like a solar collector for the optimisation of active and passive solar energy systems. Rooms that need to maintain a stable temperature are located in the middle, and rooms that are normally kept at lower temperatures are orientated to the north. Rooms for which a variable temperature is acceptable, are orientated to the south.
Measures were taken to:
1)    Minimise energy loss and consumption
2)    Optimise the use of renewable energy
3)    Reduce construction and operating waste
4)    Improve the quality of indoor and outdoor environment.
The annual energy demand for heating of the premises is 195.000 kWh/year, the annual energy demand for heating of tap water is 105.000 kWh/year. The solar collector produces 80.000k Wh/year.
Energy-efficient buildings normally have an annual energy consumption of between 140-180 kWh/m2. Because of the favourable orientation to the south, the aim for Klosterenga was set to 100 kWh/m2.

Results

The energy production and consumption was monitored throughout 2001. Due to problems
with the active solar system, the solar collector was occasionally out of operation.
The active solar system thus produced 270 kWh/m2 in the solar collector area, although the expected output was 300 kWh/m2 per year. The monitoring also revealed differences in expected and actual energy consumption. The aim of 100 kWh/m2 for the heated floor area was met by some of the residents, but the average consumption turned out to be 127 kWh/m2. In 2002, measures like information campaigns towards the residents and installation of new temperature controllers will most likely result in a reduction of the energy consumption.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

During the three summer months, the solar collector covers the heating demand.

The Iguana project consists of eight show homes with one company house and presentation space.
The original initiative came from Hendrik Gommer and Elsa Visser. When looking for an environmentally-friendly house in 1997 they kept drawing a blank. ‘Eco-friendly building’ did not mean much more than putting in a bit more insulation and a water-saving showerhead.
Iguana homes, like the iguana, look to the sun for their energy.

Objectives and target audience

The Iguana project demonstrates affordable bio-ecological houses constructed with a fully-environmental approach.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The total cost of the work was € 2,100,000 (including photovoltaic panels) contribution with LIFE amounted to € 91,497.
The beneficiary is: De Groene Leguaan VOF (The Green Iguana), Middelweg 51, 8715 EV Stavoren, Netherlands

Process

There is less environmental pollution from the use of renewable and/or recycled materials, while shape is important as well (e.g. orientation to the sun).
A balance was sought by using solutions both cheaper and more expensive than traditional building methods. The result was a medium-budget home. Cheaper than normal was the wooden frame construction and the use of EPDM as the roofing material and larch as the facade coping. More expensive was, in particular, the use of cellulose, loam insulating walls and a solar greenhouse.
This mode of construction, with ‘breathing’ walls and vapour control/thermal buffer materials, can be sources of supply that are being used up.
Consumers, building contractors, project developers and authorities are insufficiently convinced of the feasibility and the advantages of bio-ecological houses. The aim of the Iguana project is to publicise the advantages of bio-ecological construction.

Results

The Iguana project has received considerable attention in the media. Just about every trade journal has carried an article on it. Three films have been made, including one by the EC. The Iguana houses have above all been a source of inspiration.
But not many have been built so far. The technical solution did not turn out to be the main problem in the short term. Creating a bio-ecological house is a complex business, too complex to be solved with a single project. The client, the architect, the estate agent, the provincial council, the town council, the project developer, the contractor, the subcontractor and the building worker all have to be advised and convinced. The construction of a bio-ecological house demands a great deal of know-how and the parties involved do not have enough. Accumulating know-how takes time and money and project developers want to invest too little. Every time a new contractor is brought in the same mistakes are made.
Lessons are learned only by practical experience.
Many model houses will therefore have to be built before really sustainable building becomes the norm.
Nevertheless, the Iguana project can be called a success. This has helped and is helping to shake up the building world.
The Iguana project is still being studied (SBR, SEV, TNO-hout, NOVEM) and reports on the Green Iguana still appear very regularly in newspapers and/or trade journals. An Internet publication (www.leguaan.nl) and a subsequent article have ensured extra attention for sustainable building in Friesland.
The typical shape of the house points to the need to orient new houses to the sun. Building solar-oriented houses led to as many as 16 different PV systems being installed on Iguana houses, making the Iguana project a testing area for PV systems in existing structures. So much experience has been gathered that the Green Iguana can now be said to be an authority on photovoltaics in existing buildings. This in turn has led to the involvement of the MegaPV design office in the Iguana project, which in the coming years is going to carry out a practical experiment on the ‘large-scale introduction of PV’ in cooperation with Novem, Essent and the city councils of Leeuwaarden, Groningen and Assen (www.megapv.nl/mega). One of the aims is to bring in environmentally-neutral construction in the wake of the introduction of PV.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

In the Netherlands and even in other parts of Europe the Green Iguana has more or less grown to become a symbol of environmentally-neutral construction. It will therefore focus attention for years on the need for environmentally-neutral construction. Thanks to the contributions of LIFE, IPR, Novem, Friesland Province and SEV it will now be able to stand on its own two feet and develop new initiatives.

This 1,160m2 prototype three-storey building with very low energy use consists of a two-storey office and 13 small family apartments.  Energy savings of approximately 65% are reached by: very high insulation (U-values of 0.10-0.12), controlled ventilation with preheating of infiltration through earth channels and heat recovery on exhaust.  The prefabricated wooden construction elements are produced locally.

Objectives and target audience

• Use of ecological and sustainable materials from Austria;
• Very simple and compact building shape, extremely reduced energy consumption;
• Reuse of non-preserved wood possible;
• Controlled ventilation systems with an air change rate of 0.5 – 0.7;
• High degree of prefabrication, therefore, short construction period (about 4.5 months including underground parking);
• Lowest possible energy consumption and use of organic materials without additional compared with a conventional construction.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The total floor area is 1160m2 and construction costs were 1,625,400 Euro, 1400 €/m2

Process

The prototype in Ölz/Bündt is based on a number of principles:-
Variability: Besides the single-depth terraced houses, which have actually been built, it is envisaged to build double-depth houses, and buildings grouped around an inner courtyard;
Standardisation: The construction system, the facade, and the mechanical services are standardised units that can be used in the same way regardless of the site conditions;
Prefabrication: The design allows assembly without scaffolding, independently of weather and within very short time;
Mechanical services and building physics: Thermal insulation to the level of an ‘lowenergy- house’ or the standard of a ‘passive house’.  Air tightness is sufficient to operate controlled ventilation with heat recovery and additional air heating.

Results

The energy consumption of the building has been estimated using the dynamic thermal model TRNSYS.
The energy consumption was estimated at 17 kWh/m2.  Energy use is reduced to a value as low as 7.3 kWh/m2 by pre-heating of fresh air supply passing through earth channels, waste heat recovery from used air and small heat pumps.
Due to the low energy needs, the prototype house has no chimneys for heating systems.
Electrical heating covers the remaining heat demand.
A 33 m2 central solar heating facility on the roof produces.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

This 1,160m2 prototype three-storey building with very low energy use consists of a two-storey office and 13 small family apartments.  Energy savings of approximately 65% have been reached due to good insulation (U-values of 0.10-0.12), controlled ventilation with preheating of infiltration through earth channels and heat recovery on exhaust. The prefabricated wooden construction elements are produced locally.

This is a modest two-storey office building (410m2 for 30 people) with exhibition and ancillary spaces. Almost 50% saving on energy use was reached by significantly higher insulation than Irish building regulations. Next to that the high thermal mass, good controlled infiltration and day lighting contributed to the 50% reduction on space heating and electricity use.
The constructions costs for this modest building were just 550,000 Euro for a total of 410 m2 office floor.

Objectives and target audience

The green Building Objectives:-

• To exemplify and promote efficient energy usage;
• To provide high quality working conditions for the users;
• To make a positive contribution to the existing campus;
• To place minimal demand on non-renewable energy sources;
• To make an innovative response to traditional materials and energy standards;
• To demonstrate that it was possible to achieve these objectives with construction costs not exceeding those of a conventional building.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The budget for the entire project, including design fees, was € 635,000. Cost control was a primary concern of the client, and the building was delivered on time and within budgets. Up to now the building has performed to satisfactory.

Process

The client (Irish Energy Centre), was a new semi-state agency, the Irish Energy Centre (IEC) was formally established, with the help of the EC Structural Funds Programme, in January 1994. Its role is to promote the efficient use of energy in all sectors, offering advice, information and expertise.
The client wished to construct a building which would itself demonstrate energy awareness in its design and operation.
To this end it commissioned the Energy Research Group (ERG), University College Dublin, to draw up a general and energy performance brief and advise on selection of the site for the project. This work was partly funded under the European Commission’s THERMIE Programme.

The building envelope was designed with U values significantly better than required by the Building Regulations.
With Ireland’s high wind speeds control of infiltration is critical. Before work started on site the contractor was ‘sensitised’ to the importance of workmanship for the energy performance of the buildings.
Energy efficiency was the primary objective of the design, but materials, components and construction methods were selected with their effects on internal, local and global environment in mind. Locally produced recyclable materials with low VOCs were given preference whenever possible. Only new products of which performance was already proven were selected.
The extensive use of concrete in the building’s construction (ground and first floor structure, some internal and all external walls) provides substantial thermal mass. There are no raised floors or suspended ceilings. Internal wall surfaces and ceilings are plastered and painted, and floor finishes in the atrium and corridor areas are black natural slate to enhance thermal performance.

High levels of insulation and thermal mass with good control of infiltration all help to reduce the heating load. There are also some south-facing windows to the offices and to all cellular spaces.

Limited south-facing glazing, natural ventilation and the thermal mass of the building all reduce the likelihood of overheating. In the office spaces cross-ventilation is manually controlled by openings at each workspace, while the stack effect in the atrium assists the natural ventilation of the areas opening onto it. In the atrium two punkah fans at high level prevent stratification. Reflective metallic venetian blinds mitigate solar gain by 15 to 20% compared with normal internal blinds. Deciduous trees have been planted in the east and west-facing courtyards to screen the sun in summer and filter light in winter.

Windows are evenly spaced and are higher than average (3 m) so that light is cast deep into the room. Glazing on opposite sides of the room provides excellent light distribution. The masonry window reveals are splayed to increase natural light and reduce glare. The atrium brings borrowed light into office spaces to either side.
Energy efficient lamps were specified throughout. Control features include daylight sensors, dimmable light fittings, infrared occupancy sensors and programmable time scheduling. When daylight levels fall below 300 lux the artificial lighting comes on in occupied spaces.

Results

During the design stage the winter and spring hourly, daily and monthly heating loads of the building were calculated using the TRYNSYSBIO simulation tool. The results demonstrated that the basic design strategies were effective and were taken into account during the detail design stage.
Day lighting performance in the first floor offices was monitored within the context of the JOULE contract ‘Daylight Europe’.
Under overcast conditions Daylight Factors on the working plane were found to be in the range 5% to 10% and with good distribution.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

Most solid waste generated in the Dublin area goes to landfill sites; in 1993 less than 10% was recycled. It is government policy to reduce municipal waste substantially through increased recycling.
On the Enterprise Ireland campus water supply and drainage are common to all buildings and a large network of underground services ducts runs below the main pathways. Water is metered as it enters the campus.
From the start IEC occupants had in place a paper recycling system. Since 1997 the building has also benefited from a campus recycling / safe disposal system for fluorescent tubes, batteries and similar materials.

A lot of heating and energy is lost in houses with bad insulation or inefficient.  Community projects are in general more accessible for households that are financially strong. Underprivileged households are often misinformed and, as a consequence, show low interest in participating in any program related to energy-saving.

Objectives and target audience

By signing the Kyoto Protocol, the City of Antwerp has committed to achieve 7.5% reduction of energy consumption by 2012.  One action taken to achieve this goal is the development of awareness campaigns and financial incentives targeted to specific social groups.

The main objective of the bonus system is to improve insulation and support energy saving measures targeted to households with a low cadastral income.
The City of Antwerp in collaboration with vzw Recyclant developed an energy saving bonus system targeted to households with a low cadastral income (max € 745)
This bonus is used for:

• Super insulated window panes (€ 20/m²; with U max 1,3 W/m²K)
• Roof insulation (€ 5/m², with minimal R value of 3m²K/w)

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The financial support for this project has increased each year:

• 2005: € 90 000;
• 2006: € 100 000;
• 2007: € 250 000;
• 2008: € 260 000.

Finance-support partners: vzw Recyclant (municipal non profit organisation) and City of Antwerp.

Awareness-support partners: Housing information centres and ecological information centre.  They promoted the campaign city wide and specifically to the target group.  The Housing information centres also helped citizens to fill in the application forms for the premiums.

Process

On May 2005 the City Council approved the new energy premium system for energy saving measures.  It was targeted to house owners with low cadastral income to encourage them to invest in roof insulation and super insulated window panes.
Different information channels were/are used to reach this target group as for example:

• Environmental newspaper with energy tips and general information on environmental and energy campaigns (3 times/year);
• City information newspaper “De(n) Antwerpenaar” (2 times/month) (free for all citizens), approx. 450 000 prints;
• Information at the website of the City Environmental Department ;
• Distribution of information folders all over the city;
• Information points at the recycling parks of the city;
• Organisation of the Energy week Campaign for citizens of Antwerp: with information about actions and exhibitions concerning energy saving measures;
• Environmental phone for information on environment and energy;
• Press conference to launch the campaign.

Results

Table 1 shows the number and the amount of premiums delivered from 2005 until 2007.  There was a 3fold increase (2007) in amount of premiums delivered for roof and window insulation since 2005.

Table1: Premiums for roof insulation and window insulation (owners)
2005    2006    2007
Total number of premiums    163    395    565
Total amount of premiums (in €)     30 316    75 591    119 205
Average amount of premium (in €)     186    192    211
Total surface covered for roof insulation (in m²)     929    3 834    5 763
Total surface covered for super insulation of the windows (in m²)     1 396    3 426    5 168

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

The city wanted to make special efforts towards citizens with low income to promote energy saving measures.
Due to the combination of federal tax reduction, other premiums from the energy network distributors and the city premium system, the pay back period for the investments made by the house owners was very small and therefore this bonus system was very successful.
This principal of “product and target group” adjusted premiums can be used by any other municipality or organisation.

By 2015, all new construction of houses, offices and businesses in the city of Amsterdam will be climate neutral.

Objectives and target audience

This project aims to reduce energy usage in households, businesses and offices. The main objective is to achieve that four out of ten newly built houses will be climate neutral by 2010 and this standard will apply to all new houses built within the municipality borders by 2015.
The estimated amount of CO2 that can be saved due to Climate neutral new construction is 30Kton per year.
This new standard will also change the way the building sector looks at the building procurement process. New criteria will be used to select parties and award projects.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The main partners involved in this project are the Municipality of Amsterdam and the construction companies.

Process

After a consultation to a large group of parties, the City Council set the ambition to promote climate neutral construction of houses, offices and businesses. As a result, the City Council has developed and is now enforcing a new standard for climate neutral construction which affects to the entire process of land allocation, development and construction of new houses, offices and businesses.
Normally, the selection is based on the highest price offered for a certain plot. In this case, the different plots are offered for a fixed price and the parties are selected on criteria such as energy savings and sustainability. Such measures may include a district heating grid, district cold grid, thermal storage and sustainable energy generation. In addition, during the design of buildings it is important to make beneficial choices regarding the orientation of houses, insulation, sustainable energy and installations.
This process requires great deal, not only from the municipal spatial planning office and the municipal development corporation, but also from developers, contractors and subcontractors.

Results

Even though this initiative is very new, it has already had an impact on the development of certain projects in different districts of Amsterdam. For example:
At the Zuidas location, ABN-Amro, together with other parties, has developed the Dutch Green Building Council. This concept makes it possible to achieve a better sustainability score than is prescribed in the legislation.
A group of eight market parties is working on a proposal to make the Buiksloterham development district as climate neutral as possible. In this context, the Noordwaarts Administrative Consultation Committee has decided that the project will be awarded to the developer with the most sustainable plan, and not necessarily to the developer with the lowest price. To compare the plans with each other, a ‘sustainability meter’ is being used. The first experience with this approach is being acquired in the Buiksloterham. The intention is for many more projects in Amsterdam Noord and other parts of the city to start using this method.
Finally, in the Spaarndammerbuurt, the De Key housing association is starting to build climate-neutral houses and is bringing existing houses to that level during renovation.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

All parties are working together in order to find joint solutions for the problems they encounter on the path to climate-neutral construction. In order to facilitate this work, a leading Group for New Construction will be established later this year.

Hammary Sjöstad is a former brownfield in Stockholm now transformed into an exciting new district where the City has imposed tough environmental requirements on buildings, technical installations and the traffic environment, from day one.

Objectives and target audience

The main objective is to convert an old industrial and harbour area into a modern, sustainable neighbourhood.
The overall environmental goal is that the impact placed on the environment by emissions from Hammarby Sjöstad shall be a massive 50 % lower than the corresponding level for newly constructed housing areas dating from the early 1990s.  The project sets strict environmental standards on land usage, energy, water & sewage, waste, transportation and building materials.
In terms of energy, the main target is that by the time the site is fully built, residents will produce half the amount of energy they need.  This will be accomplished by e.g. reusing the heat from the purified waste water, and by utilising the energy from the combustible household waste which has been separated at source.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

This project has been financed by the ordinary planning budget.
The key partners involved in the project are: Stockholm City Administration, developers, proprietors and several public and private companies as for example: Fortum (power and heat company), Stockholm Water Company and the Stockholm Waste Management Administration.

Process

At Hammarby Sjöstad, the environmental programme was an integral element of the masterplan.  This clearly set out key objectives and requirements which had to be addressed at both the planning and implementation stages of the development.  By having clearly stated objectives from the outset, these requirements were already taken into account during the detailed design discussions between the plot developers, architects and city planning team.
The project team designed a local ecosystem known as “Hammarby Model” which shows how the relationship between sewage processing, energy provision and waste handling can be structured to deliver wider social and environmental benefits.

Results

This new city neighbourhood has delivered an attractive place to live and work and it has become a successful example of how new development can minimise their environmental impact and enhance its setting through careful planning, joined up thinking and strong leadership.  The project has already delivered homes for almost 10,000 people and will deliver 9,000 homes and 10,000 jobs by 2015.

In terms of energy use, different solutions for supplying energy have been tested in Hammarby Sjöstad; as for example: solar cells and panels for electricity supply and hot tap water, the installation of a fuel cell in GlashusEtt – the area’s Environmental Information Centre and biogas cookers for approximately 900 households.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

Setting high environmental goals fundamentally contribute to a more sustainable and attractive living environment, while at the same time adding constraint to the planning process.  Key factors for successful planning and implementation include:
An institutional (municipal) involvement with a clear organisational set-up;
Visions and strategies around which consensus among stakeholders is achieved;
The establishment of incentives, catalysts, and trademarks to support development;
Access to land and appropriate planning tools;
Environmental considerations through the entire planning process.

A tenement building containing 34 apartments was built by conventional means with purpose to reduce the requirement of bought energy by half.

Objectives and target audience

The aim of the project was to build a tenement building with half the requirement of bought energy for heating, building electricity and household electricity.  LKF set the target 95 kWh/m2 bought energy for Jöns Ols.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The Swedish Energy Agency financed the follow-up and the evaluation of the project.  The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency financed part of the measures and calculations of the project through a local investment program.  Although most of the financial backing was brought about by LKF.  The measures installed cost LKF approximately 90 k€ more then an ordinary building.  Jöns Ols cost 16,4 promille/m2 to build, when compared to an ordinary building.

Process

Jöns Ols is constructed as follows:
-    Conventional building technique with concrete foundation.
-    Thermal bridges is eliminated in all connection as leakage of air.
-    An exhaust air ventilation system was installed.
-    The heat to the radiators is supplied by a heat pump and from district heating when required.  Each apartment can control the temperature.
-    Heat and hot water is measured individually for each apartment and is charged separately accordingly.
-    Heat from the wastewater is recycled via a heat exchanger.
-    A solar collector system with district heating as complement is used for producing hot water.
-    The electrical equipment included i.e. fans and pumps are all energy efficient.

Results

2 years after Jöns Ols were completed the bought energy was measured to 84 kWh/m2, which therefore can conclude that the objective was achieved.  LKF achieved an excess of more than half the bought energy need compared to similar buildings at was also at a very low cost.

Critical Success Factors / Challenges

Success factors are:
-    Good energy and profit calculations
-    The energy measurements have a waiting period of one year before the relevant  results can be recorded.  This is due to the construction moisture that is required to
-    That the correct method to calculate the cost of necessary investments was used.  The pay off method is not recommended as it does not take into account the whole life span of the building.  Use LCC method instead.

Conclusions:
-    The heat pump is very profitable.
-    The solar collector system is not profitable due to it’s design, therefore suggestions could be thought about to improve the design.
-    The wastewater heat exchanger may be just profitable.  The use from the exchanger may be energy wise but could be overrated.
-    The system of measuring the temperature of heat and hot water usage individually in each apartment is not profitable.  Only measuring hot water individually would be profitable.

Eighteen environmentally friendly homes, with renewable energy sources.

Objectives and target audience

The previous scheme at Selwyn Street, built in 1986, consisted of houses and flats. A significant proportion was built for older people who lived in Coppice at a time when there was a demand for this type of accommodation in the area. However, in recent times the scheme suffered from a lack of demand and security and access problems. The flats became increasingly hard to let and a hot spot for crime and anti-social behaviour. The objective was to build eighteen homes which were environmentally friendly and have renewable energy generation. The target audience of the project was the residents of Coppice, one of the more economically deprived areas of Oldham. The area has a high percentage of residents from South Asia, so the development had to be suitable for Asian families.

Financial Resources and Partners involved

The £3 million project was developed by Manchester Methodist Housing Association – (part of the Great Places Housing Group), and has received over £800,000 from the Housing Corporation and a £280,000 contribution from The Oldham Rochdale Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder Project.

Process

The previous houses were demolished to make way for 18 contemporary, large family homes that now make up the new Selwyn Street. The Housing Corporation approved a replacement housing scheme for local families in late 2004, with additional funding from Oldham Rochdale Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder. Renewable energy technology is used extensively on the homes. The mono-pitch roofs accommodate solar panels that are connected directly to all hot water tanks. These should provide 90% of hot water in summer and 60% in winter. Prevailing wind conditions restricted electricity-generating wind turbines to the higher houses where, at one of the highest points in Oldham, they should provide up to 1kw of power. In the back gardens, which are orientated to avoid overshadowing, water butts collect rainwater from flat kitchen roofs. Over the next few years Great Places will be carrying out a monitoring exercise to assess the true running costs for the houses and the effectiveness of these renewable energy alternatives.

Results

Selwyn Street was one of only two housing schemes in the country to achieve the ‘Building for Life’ gold standard. Thanks to the high levels of insulation, wind turbines and solar-heated water, annual energy bills for residents in the new homes are on average over £700 lower than neighbouring houses. Residents are very satisfied with the eco features, especially water collecting tubs and solar panels. Residents were also satisfied with the recycling features: recycling of glass, paper, tin cans and plastic has increased significantly. A high percentage of residents stated that moving to the buildings improved their lives. The project created a lot of positive publicity for Oldham Council’s regeneration programmes. Wayne Hemingway, fashion designer and chairman of Building for Life, praised the innovation behind Selwyn Street’s environmentally-friendly features, saying: “The gold standard only goes to schemes which score well on environmental impact as well as the other criteria, and Selwyn Street’s features set a new standard for the pathfinders.”

Critical Success Factors/Challenges

The key for success was communicating to people in the area, and potential buyers, the benefits of the wind turbines and solar panels. Such developments could easily be built with success in other locations, as this development has shown that this type housing can be both popular and environmentally friendly.
Challenges including communicating all the eco-features to the residents. Not all of the residents were aware of all the features the houses have. Further work should be carried out on the process of providing residents with information about the features of their eco-home to ensure that they fully understand what features they are benefiting from, how to maximise their use and suggestions for living in a more eco-friendly way.