Apologies - we had major wi-fi problems this morning when attempting to live blog from the Rebuilding Ireland conference at Plan Expo. Rebuilding Ireland is examining ways to create a sustainable construction sector in Ireland. Wi fi is back now - blog posts on this morning's speeches by Eamon Ryan, Construct Ireland editor Jeff Colley, Dept of Environment chief architect Martin Colreavy and Forfas's Declan Hughes will appear online later today.  Live blogging of speeches by Jay Stuart on "repositioning Ireland as a green construction sector", and by architect Elizabeth Francis, will appear here over the next hour and a half.  

9.26am:  Government aims to introduce pay-as-you-save type scheme next year

9.25am: Ryan says bureaucracy associated with government energy grant programmes has been drastically reduced through web-based applications so far

9.23am: About 30,000 applications so far for Home Energy Saving Scheme

9.20am:  Ryan says he's energy-upgraded his own house recently and that he now realises the value of undertaking insulation measures. 

Some random links worth browsing:

Bord Pleánala warns on relaxing planning rules: Irish Times

Profile of a British passivhaus: Green Building Advisor

Comparing the passivhaus standard to other low energy homes: Green Building Advistor

Solar Refract house leads solar decathlon: Jetson Green

New smart meter developed at Oxford: Guardian

High costs and brightness still a challenge for LEDs: Green Energy News

Environment minister John Gormley yesterday published the government's policy on architecture for 2009 to 2015, titled Towards a Sustainable Future: Delivering Quality Within the Built Environment. 

The Guardian yesterday reported that the UK Conservative Party's plans for a "green deal" include a Pay As You Save proposal that would allow householders to receive energy upgrades at no up front cost and pay for the work over time through their bills.

Alok Jha reports from a speech by Tory enegy and climate spokesperson Greg Clark:

Every UK homeowners will benefit from an allowance of up to £6,500 to make their properties more energy efficient, under a "green deal" proposed by the Conservatives today. The idea is part of a wider energy and climate change package aimed at kick-starting a green economy in the UK...

...Heating and powering homes accounts for 27% of the UK's overall carbon emissions and, speaking this afternoon, Clark set out how the green deal would aim to reduce this total. The money, to be sourced from the private sector, would not be given to householders directly; instead, energy companies or charities would insulate homes at no cost to residents and then recoup the money through energy bills. As the new insulation would reduce energy use, this should not result in extra costs for the homeowner. 

This does beg the question though - just how much of an energy improvement can you make to the average home with £6,500? 

Some random links for you to peruse: 

An interesting-looking series of podcasts on the theme of building science: Green Building Advisor

Should buildings be designed like letters? Article on finding the right balance between minimising surface area for heat loss and maximising it for natural light and ventilation. Treehugger

Six clever 'green' products in the pipeline: Jetson Green

Dow unveils solar PV roof shingles: Jetson Green

An article on careers in sustainable design and engineering: Guardian

US survey shows builders don't tell buyers about green features in their homes: EcoHome magazine

Ireland now ranks fourth in the world for the contribution of wind energy to electricity use, according to the International Energy Agency's 2008 Wind Energy Annual Report.

SPENDING ON the smart economy should be increased eightfold to almost e4 billion a year to make Ireland a world leader in creating green collar jobs, according to the national advisory body on sustainable development.



In a report on a “Green New Deal” for Ireland published yesterday, Comhar argued that a multi- billion euro commitment would be needed if Ireland was to become a sustainable, low-carbon economy.



I blogged a few days ago about Mick Williams's campaign for a boiler scrappage scheme in the UK that would offer money to householders to replace their old boilers with new, high efficiency units.

A somewhat similar scheme is about to kick off in the US. The US Department of Energy's Cash for Appliances programme will fund rebates to consumers purchasing energy efficient appliances, and is backed by $300m of funding. The new appliances must be certified by the US Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star program - an award mark for energy efficient appliances. Individual states will decide which appliances are eligible, and the level of rebate. The Department of Energy has recommended they focus on heating and cooling equipment such as heat pumps, boilers, washing machines, dishwashers, fridges and freezers.

Unlike the proposed boiler scrappage programme and "cash for clunkers" car scrappage schemes, there is no requirement to trade in old appliances. Rebates are expected to be between $50 and $200.

Turning straw waste into building beams: Inhabitat 
Global oil reserves and fossil fuel consumption: Guardian data blog
Twenty 'solar-powered' homes compete at solar decathlon: Jetson Green
New Hampshire home lands coveted LEED Platinum certification: Green Building Advisor
Two Dublin buildings win major architectural awards: Irish Times
Using waste plastic as a cement aggregate: Inhabitat
Nicholas Stern optimistic about climate change talks: Guardian

Writing in US monthly The Atlantic, architect Witold Rybczynski outlines his "green case for cities", arguing that there is too much focus on flashy green gadgets and not enough on practical building methods:

Putting solar panels on the roofs doesn’t change the essential fact that by any sensible measure, spread-out, low-rise buildings, with more foundations, walls, and roofs, have a larger carbon footprint than a high-rise office tower—even when the high-rise has no green features at all.

He also has a pop at the media for encouraging the "green gadget" trend:

Architectural journals and the Sunday supplements tout newfangled houses tricked out with rainwater-collection systems, solar arrays, and bamboo flooring. Yet any detached single-family house has more external walls and roof—and hence more heating loads in winter and cooling loads in summer—than a comparable attached townhouse, and each consumes more energy than an apartment in a multifamily building. Again, it doesn’t really matter how many green features are present. A reasonably well-built and well-insulated multifamily building is inherently more sustainable than a detached house. Similarly, an old building on an urban site, adapted and reused, is greener than any new building on a newly developed site.

Rybczynski leaves his most important point to the end, suggesting the future could be developments that are "dense without being vertical". He cites Montreal as an example of city where the dominant form of housing is a three or four-storey apartment block that doesn't require elevators.

Rybczynski makes a good point - while high rise is often touted as the solution to unsustainable urban sprawl, tall buildings typically require elevators, artificial ventilation (due to increases wind speeds and noise associated with openable windows at height) and heavy, high embodied energy structural components - perhaps three or four storey "walk ups" represent an ideal compromise.

But without solid figures, it's impossible to be sure. Does anyone know of any studies out there examining the energy footprint of different building forms?