All roads lead to Rome

Fabulous story in the papers yesterday about the birth of eco-friendly building: in common with roads and sewers, sustainable construction was apparently invented by the Romans. Archeologists at Oxford University have analysed the building methods used on an average Roman villa and compared them with a standard 1930s semi-detached property.
The results of this research, which was carried out in conjunction with energy company E.ON, showed that the Romans had a far greater understanding of energy efficiency, using underfloor heating instead of inefficient radiators placed near windows is just one example. As Professor Andrew Wilson from the Institute of Archaeology explains: "One of the many things the Romans did for us was to show us ways to be much more imaginative and efficient with their energy use. They made heat and water work much harder round the house than most of us do today.”
TV presenter Dick Strawbridge worked with Professor Wilson, comparing the two building methods using criteria highlighted by E.ON as part of its Energy Fit campaign. The findings were analysed and E.ON has given the follwing summary:

Heating rooms

• Roman Villa:  Romans used underfloor heating systems called hypocausts, which heated the entire room starting with the floor and walls. In addition, rooms which featured this system tended to face south or south-west, with glazed windows to catch the sun, making clever use of solar radiation;
• British Semi: Houses in Britain can waste heat unnecessarily. For example, we tend to place wall-mounted radiators underneath windows, where heat can escape, or we cover radiators with drying clothes and curtains, and don’t use the right radiator size to fit a room. All of these things can mean that your central heating is failing to heat the room effectively and can waste money. Interestingly, underfloor heating has been making a come-back in recent years, 2,000 years after it was last used extensively in Britain. Providing a gentle and even heat, underfloor heating is unobtrusive with no radiators and the heat is where people need it most, at ground level.

Heating water

• Roman Villa: Romans visited public baths where the water was kept hot with a device called a testudo – a bronze semi-cylinder with an open end which linked to the hot pool and was placed close to the furnace of the hypocaust (underfloor heating system) This effectively re-heated the water with the same air going into the hypocaust and heating the room. Water was then circulated back into the pool at the top of the opening and replaced by cooler water at the bottom by convection;
• British Semi: Compare this multi-tasking heating system to common British houses, which often shut the hot water tank in a cupboard where it fails to heat the rest of the house.
• Tip – if your hot water tank is in a cupboard make sure the heat isn’t being lost, fill any holes in and around the water tank so the warmth doesn’t escape.

Water efficiency

• Roman Villa: The Romans had a keen sense of putting different qualities of water to varying uses.  Many of their cities were fed drinking water by an aqueduct served by a spring, river or by groundwater.  At the same time, they were also heavily reliant on rainwater cisterns for laundry and household cleaning;
• British Semi: Thanks to our heritage of Victorian water schemes, which aimed to purify all water to drinking standard, we use the same quality of water for drinking as we do flushing the toilet.

Building materials

• Finally, Romans were highly energy efficient when it came to recycling building materials. Abandoned properties were systematically stripped of their metal fittings which could be melted down and used again. Pottery could be reused for building materials – old amphorae (the traditional Roman vase with two handles) might be used as hollow aggregate to lighten the concrete of a vault; drains might be made from amphorae; broken ceramics might be crushed as an ingredient in water-proof cement linings for aqueducts, cisterns and baths. 

Green on the inside

An article in The Independent today describes a prison in America that is aiming to cut carbon as well as crime. The Coyote Ridge Corrections Centre in Connell, Washington, has just received the gold LEED award (the first prison in the world to do so) from the US Green Building Council for a 21-unit extension that means it can now house almost 2,500 prisoners. The green credentials of the revamped facility will save Washington State's Department of Corrections hundreds of thousands every year and, according to some experts, could have a massive impact on the prisoners' behaviour too by improving what is described as the 'balance between security and a human environment'. That last quote is taken from the book Prison Design, which also says that it's important to have 'buildings that will facilitate positive activities with staff and prisoners'. 
Complex social engineering aside, the sustainable achievements of the building are impressive. Simply by removing all the grass and replacing it with gravel has cut the prison's water use by a quarter, that's a saving of 5.5m gallons every year. I don't imagine a site landscaped entirely with gravel looks particularly attractive but, let's face it, it's not Kew Gardens, it's a prison.

Power of God

Fundraisers for church roof repairs could be a thing of the past if places of worship are all kitted out with solar panels. According to British Gas, religious buildings could make up to £29m per year by generating their own electricity and selling it back to the grid under the Feed-in Tariff scheme. There would also be carbon savings of up to 42,000 tonnes, which has got to be good for the soul, as well as the planet.
As Phil Bentley, managing director of British Gas, explained: "Religious buildings are particularly well suited to solar power as they tend to have large south-facing roofs which receive direct sunlight for the main part of the day."

Let's go fly a kite

An American inventor (that's my favourite type of inventor) has come up with an interesting way of generating energy from wind. JoeBen Bevirt, of Joby Energy, has created kite-like airborne wind turbines, that make the most of the high-speed winds found at higher altitudes. As Bevirt told BBC's Radio 4, higher altitude winds are not only faster, but more consistent than the winds nearer the ground and considerably more power can be converted to electricity.
This seems to be a fabulous idea that is not only a more efficient way of harvesting wind energy, but less likely to annoy those people who don't want a wind farm near their house. One concern would be safety. I'm a nervous flyer already and the thought of an aircraft getting tangled with a giant kite would add to the already substantial list of things that I'm worried will go wrong. Not an issue, says Joby in its FAQ: "Well-established air traffic control procedures have been in place for decades to ensure the safety of aircraft around areas of Restricted and/or Special Use Airspace (SUA). We are actively working with the Federal Aviation Administration and military airspace coordinators to choose sites in existing SUA, or where our airborne wind turbines will not adversely affect existing traffic. Our turbines will be equipped with lighting and radar transponders to ensure their visibility to pilots and controllers."
So with that worry dismissed, airborne wind turbines do seem to have a lot going for them. They're even cheaper than conventional wind turbines (the materials cost less and the units produce more, so the capital costs are reduced). Although still at the development stage, it seems likely that airborne turbines could be producing some of our renewable energy soon.

Greenbuild's Most Wanted

Footballer Gary Neville has failed in his bid to build an eco home after planning permission was turned down this week. According to the Daily Mail, Neville spoke passionately about his desire to create an energy-efficient dwelling for a whopping 90 minutes (perhaps that's the only timeframe he's comfortable with), but his enthusiasm wasn't enough to convince the good folk of Lancashire that the project wouldn't adversely affect the green belt.
Anyone who can speak passionately about a subject (and coherently, let's hope) for 90 minutes is going on my just-created list of most-wanted contributors for the website. It's called Greenbuild's Most Wanted. It could also be called Greenbuild's Most Unlikely, as I don't think even my powers of persuasion will be enough to bag any of these as contributors:

1. Gary Neville (see above).
2. Al Gore. Definitely beyond my budget.
3. Daryl Hannah.She appears to be completely bonkers but clearly can't be accused of greenwash.
4. Bill Bryson. He's president of the Campaign to Protect Rural England and one of the few writers to make me laugh out loud.

So, who else should I be putting on the Greenbuild's Most Wanted list? Do tell.

In good company

It's taken me a while but I've finally had a good look through this year's Sunday Times Green List, a compilation of the UK's best 60 green companies, to see how well the construction industry is respresented. According to the introductory comment, written by managing editor Richard Caseby: "Our Best Green Companies enterprise is unique. There are plenty of other environmental awards out there, but this is the first robust methodology to measure environmental performance and, crucially, to survey staff to find out whether the corporate green glow is more than just window dressing." All great stuff.
He goes on to say: "A total of 92 companies took part in the competition, of which 87 completed the process." Now, do correct me if I've misunderstood, does this mean that the 60 best green companies are, in fact, the 60 best green companies taken from a list of just 87? If that is the case, it's not quite as impressive as it sounds.
But anyway, I digress. I studied the supplement as I wanted to see how construction fared compared to other industries. Particularly as many construction companies will already have a high environmental impact as they tend to be energy intensive. Skanska is the highest ranking construction company, coming in at second place behind office supplies company UKOS. Last year Skanska UK cut its carbon footprint by almost a fifth, which is an impressive achievement and went way beyond its 10% target.
I realise that the way I started this post sounds as if I want to take some of the shine of those 60 green companies' achievements, and that's not what I meant to do. If these companies are willing to put themselves up for scrutiny like this, jumping through whatever green hoops that involves, then the chances are then they really are some of the best green companes in the UK.
There's certainly more than 87 companies in then UK claiming to be green, so why aren't more of them actually trying to prove it by undergoing some kind of environmental audit? Perhaps it's a cost issue or perhaps it's because they haven't got the eco credentials to back up their claims. Either way, the 60 companies in the list might not have had much competition, but should be applauded nonetheless for a fanstastic achievement.

Power from the people

A Danish hotel seems to have come up with a solution to two of the modern world's biggest challenges: generating clean electricity and fighting obesity. According to Reuters, guests at Crowne Plaza Copenhagen Towers can help power the building by jumping on one of the electricity-generating exercise bikes in the hotel's gym. Rather ruining the weight-loss possibilities, a free meal in the restaurant is on offer to anyone who cycles a certain distance.

That aside, we like this idea. Similar to the MO of Steve Miller from Sky 1's Fat Families who wires up his victims' TVs to exercise equipment so they can only watch Jeremy Kyle while working up a sweat: if they stop for a breather, the TV goes off. I'd certainly like one of these devices in my living room. And with the amount of rubbish telly I watch I'd probably produce enough surplus electricity to power the whole street (and have thighs of steel as an added bonus).

The winning product at ecobuild's innovation zone this year was paving slabs that generate energy from the pressure of being walked on, so maybe we are cottoning on to the fact that getting off the sofa and moving might be good for more than just our waistlines.

What's green worth?

A Seattle-based development company has released a report showing that properties with green features go for a higher price than standard homes. The GreenWorks Realty study looked at properties sold in King County from November 2009 to February 2010 and states that environmentally certfied homes sold for $85,550 more per home, despite being 9.8% smaller in size.

Great news for the sustainable construction industry in King County, Seattle, but the UK market is unlikely to tell the same story. Research carried out by Savills back in 2007 certainly didn't give sustainability a ringing endorsement when it comes to adding to a home's value, finding that few households were prepared to pay more for measures that reduce environmental impact.

Things have moved on since then, with rising energy prices and the economic climate making consumers more aware of what they actually, well, consume. But there isn't much recent research (that I could find) into what the great British public thinks about green homes in this post-credit crunch period. We'll have to wait to see if housebuyers are willing to dig that little bit deeper for a zero-carbon home that will save them money in the long-term. Seeing our homes as long-term places to live rather than short-term investments to make a quick buck is a very new situation.

A RICS report issued a few months ago about the commercial market also highlighted the need for further research into the value of sustainability. The catchily titled Sustainable Property: Is Sustainability Reflected In Commercial Property Prices: A Review Of Existing Evidence? concluded that there is a lack of data to see if sustainable buildings do or don't command a premium price. Where America goes we do usually follow, and recognising that sustainability is a benefit to property is surely just a matter of time.

Green equals mean

The Guardian has reported today on a study claiming that people who opt for green products are meaner than consumers of standard products. The study, Do green products make us better peeople?, was carried out by Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong at the University of Toronto. It states that: "People act more altrusitically after mere exposure to green than conventional products. However, people act less altruistically and are more likely to cheat and steal after purchasing green products as opposed to conventional products."
Taking this piece of research at face value leads me to assume that a sizeable chunk of the Greenbuild News readership are criminals, specifying sustainable building products to make themselves feel better about the armed robbery.
The report seems to be suggesting that we all have a limited amount of goodness within, and if we use all that up on cutting carbon emissions or buying recycled materials then we must, somehow, find a balance. I bought some low-energy lighting today so I'll have to kick a puppy on my way home, that kind of thing. If, however, I'd just casually leafed through a catalogue of low-energy lighting, the puppy would be free to live a full and healthy life.
I'm all for the wonders of academia, but this study does seem a little, well, meaningless. For a start, my idea of a green product may be significantly different to yours and, as far as I know, nobody has come up with a globally accepted definition of what green really means. The final conclusion the authors come to is that green products do not necessarily make us better people. Is that really so shocking? After all, Hitler was an animal-loving vegetarian (possibly).

Football's going green

From mullets to sarongs, footballers can always be counted on to embrace new trends. And, it seems, our sporting stars are leading the way when it comes to sustainable building too.
Manchester United defender Gary Neville is reported to be planning a four-bedroom eco house, built into a Bolton hillside. The proposed home, designed by Make Architects, could be the first zero-carbon home in the region, if the application to Bolton Council is successful. The £8m development would include geothermal energy, a wind turbine and solar panels.

Neville's proposal is not popular with many locals though, with some dubbing it a 'Teletubby-style eco-bunker'. Another footballer who plans to build an eco-friendly development is former Manchester City and Blackburn Rovers player Garry Flitcroft, who now runs Eco house Bolton Ltd. His controversial development has been approved and a historic mill will be demolished to make way for seven luxury eco houses. The houses will feature energy-saving technology, sustainably sourced materials and recycled stone from the mill.

Welcome

Welcome to the Greenbuild News blog, where I intend to look at the lighter side of sustainable building. Assuming there is one, of course. Failing that, I'll just use the blog to promote the latest news and features on www.greenbuildnews.co.uk.