Ask nearly any type of construction company or supplier what the biggest issue facing their business is, and without exception, they will reply ‘sustainability’.

What does that mean? The answers are myriad. And contradictory. It’s about offsite; recycled materials; local materials; reducing mileage; reducing carbon output...

How can anyone who doesn’t have a couple of years to spare on studying the intricacies of sustainability hope to make sense of it all?

That’s where guidance such as the Code for Sustainable Homes comes in. Or does it? This month Ian Abley tells us about the complexity and confusion surrounding the Code . A user-friendly guide it ain’t. And some of the elements which contribute towards scoring in the Code are still up in the air. Pity the poor designers.

There’s no doubt that something has to be done about housing. But rather than the mysterious mathematics of the Code for Sustainable Homes, there is surely some room for common sense? On page 19 we present a breakdown from consultant calfordseaden of all the ‘sustainable’ features you could add to a house, from the mundane to the ambitious, setting down initial costs and payback times.

It could serve as a guide for new-build or for existing stock. And, as many people have pointed out, there’s far more energy-inefficient old housing than there ever will be ‘sustainable’ new homes.

Our four-page report demonstrates that the best solutions today involve the application of bog-standard measures such as insulation combined with sensible inhabitants. So if you’re wondering what you might do with your own property, you could start by donning a chunky jumper and turning the heating down a few notches.

It’s not sexy. But it is sustainable.

Source

Construction Manager