This is an archive. The forum is not taking new registrations or allowing new discussion, despite what the buttons might suggest.
Energy Ratings
I am interested in readers thoughts on the Victorian energy rating requirements.
Does anyone have [philosophical] views on the current legislation ?
How are Firms approaching the requirements ?
Do you find that you need to alter your design process ?
Does anyone have [philosophical] views on the current legislation ?
How are Firms approaching the requirements ?
Do you find that you need to alter your design process ?
Comments
-
It all sound like a good idea except for:
- project home builders being able to satisfy the 5 star regulations by installing smaller windows and a few door snakes, but using the same energy hungry floor plans.
- the State Government at the same time letting the Hazelwood power station linger on for another 25 years. "Victorias 5-star energy efficient homes standard is expected to save 200,000 tonnes of greenhouse gasses per annum just a week of Hazelwoods operations would cancel that benefit." So says Environment Victoria. The State government likes to appear to be doing good green things, when behind the scenes it sure ain't.
related
HAZELWOOD BACKGROUND
http://www.butterpaper.com/talk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=401
HAZELWOOD TIME EXTENSION APPROVED - The Age 07.09.05
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/hazelwood-extension-gets-the-green-light/2005/09/06/1125772522506.html -
News in today... Compulsory 5 star ratings aren't helping to reduce CO2 emissions from new homes. While the walls of the average new home might be well-insulated, and the windows double-glazed with external blinds and internal drapes, pelmets, valences, and tassles... the house itself has grown. Larger houses for fewer people mean more carbon wasted through lighting, heating etc etc.
Making A Farce OF Five Star, THE AGE 21.05.07
Bright appearance puts green dream in the shade, THE AGE 21.05.07
I'm not sure the 5 star rating was ever sold as being a way to lower CO2 emissions - my recollection is that it was sold as a way to increase a home's energy efficiency, which is a bit different. One is about saving the biosphere and the other is more directed to saving money. Messrs Khazzoom and Brookes wouldn't be surprised:In a disturbing assault on intuition and conventional wisdom, Khazzoom and Brookes have asserted that energy efficiency improvements might increase, rather than decrease energy consumption... In fact, the effect can be more dramatic than even Khazzoom and Brookes may appreciate. Energy efficiency gains can increase energy use even more directly by increasing the economic growth rate, not only by decreasing the effective cost of energy. Efficiency gains for other factors (capital and labor) can also increase energy use.
Harry D. Saunders analysis of the Khazzoom and Brookes Postulate, Abstract, 1992 PDF
Howdy, Stranger!