Ed_

Thanks, on digging further I think it should be sufficient to list the systems and that they will be commissioned by the installer under competent persons scheme or similar.

Part L seems to want me to submit a commissioning plan before construction: 8.2 A commissioning plan should be produced, identifying both of the following. a. Systems that need to be tested. b. How these systems will be tested. For new dwellings, the commissioning plan should be given to the building control body with the design stage dwelling primary energy rate, dwelling emission rate and dwelling fabric energy efficiency rate calculations. Seems quite sensible but do people actually do this in practice? I want to get my submission in asap and thought I'd work out these details as I go along but maybe that is not possible anymore.

I think my point is that the amount of work flying someone does is less likely to be affected by their environmental ideals than their personal flying. For example a company CEO could choose to never fly for personal reasons but is unlikely to be able to do the same regarding work travel regardless of their personal beliefs, so not considering this distinction introduces a source of bias into the analysis.

I too want to know the answer to this and haven't been able to find it. The principle of SUDS is that the sub base acts like a water tank, storing the water until it can drain away into the underlying ground. As soon as you put that on a slope, you are tilting the tank and reducing the amount of water it can store - like tipping a tray of water. Logically there is no solution to this other than make the bottom of the "tank" level, which hugely increases the volume and cost, or an ACO drain at the bottom to a soak away.

I notice a lot of cognitive dissonance around the impact of flying. It's not clear in this study whether they count flying for work and pleasure as the same, I expect that people earning more generally are required to fly more.

I think this is a devil is in the detail question. EU data is H2 2025 whereas 24.67p is price cap now, so was a few p higher in the comparative period, say 32 euro cents. Still not most expensive. I believe a lot of the shouting is about prices for industry which are not set in the same way as household prices. I have no idea where we stand on that measure and I'd imagine a serious international comparison is highly non trivial and well beyond journalists.

Some of these portable AC units can be simply modified so that the air intake is ducted outside too which makes it closed loop. A whole internet ecosystem of people doing it!

There is rebar yes. I don't doubt all that is necessary for this concept where the 2m section of retaining wall beyond the edge of the basment is structurally integrated, and it may be the best solution, but it can also be done by freestanding sheet piles for example, so I just want to get a feel for any other options. For example I could have a separate retaining wall for that 2m wide section using something like this:

I have a walkout basement as the house is built into a slope. I need to retain the earth between one side of the basement and an existing retaining wall on the boundary, approx 2.5m height of earth. My structural engineer has come up with a design which extends the basement slab and one of the basement retaining walls to the boundary. It just doesn't look quite right to me. My concerns are mainly: rain water splash back from the extended slab, particularly as there is a door threshold and external insulation/render with no ventilation cavity. thermal bridging (not too concerned as just one corner) This is the plan view: This is the section view I don't want to just say "I don't like it" because maybe i'm wrong and this looks fine to others. I will also get the view of the builder. I'm just wondering what the general thoughts are as to whether it is a detail that will cause issues in the longer term and whether there are any ideas for improvement that I could take back to my SE? For example, the cowboy developer next door is retaining the same earth with sheet piles bashed in using a digger bucket. Not an approach I will take but does show that there may be other approaches.

Rust bulks up much more than the parent steel, around 7 times, so rust always looks very bad. I'm not saying its not an issue, but don't assume it must be an issue based on how it looks. Concrete inhibits corrosion so it is not a given that there is corrosion under the mortar - is the mortar cracked at all? Rust expands so if it is rusted you might expect to see the mortar was cracked. 6m is quite a long span so it is likely that the beam is sized for the bending moment not shear force. BM is maximum at the middle of the span, shear force is maximum at the ends, so SF would be your concern here and it is likely the beam has spare capacity e.g. it is the middle of the span which is most highly stressed not the ends. Also your rust is mainly on the flange and the flange barely contributes to shear strength. I would definitely investigate further before cutting anything. If you scrape the rust off you can measure the thickness and compare to the nominal thickness. If it has lost only a small amount I would clean and preserve as best you can and then monitor. If you are concerned then the belt and braces approach would be to get a technician out to do some ultrasonic thickness measurements and then ask a structural engineer to redo the calculations with the new thickness measurements to check the strength. They could also advise on remaining corrosion margin and when to start worrying about it again. For preservation something like Zinga is ideal, and you can get a spray which might help to get into any tight corners.

Your house should have been designed to never form mold. F&B is popular for period houses so I imagine that is why they are cautious. Similarly I personnally would not worry about moisture affecting paint in a kitchen, i've just checked my kitchen smart thermostat (current 100+ yr old house, average to poor extractor over hob) and the humidity only changes a few percent during cooking.

I'm going to be building a Danwood house. Some things are flexible and other things definitely aren't and it is difficult to tell beforehand which will be which, they have a build system and that is that. I've attached a photo i took of the system in a completed house I visited.

Never stated, just drawings of panels, but only 4-5kw ish. If finances allow at the end of the build I likely will do as you suggest and try to semi DIY it, I'd just rather not have to do it as I want to keep options open.

I have a planning condition that I must submit a sap which includes solar PV in accordance with my climate questionnaire. Climate questionnaire says PV as per drawings. Drawings show quite a large array. I would rather not fit panels now, due to budget. The development one side never mentioned solar and has no conditions to have solar. The other side has the same drawings and climate questionnaire but no condition to have PV. All approved within a year of each other, so I don't believe that solar PV is a necessary condition of approval, just that I have messed up by promising more than necessary. A compromise would be to fit solar to my shed roof, much smaller array, easier and cheaper. AI suggests I do a NMA to alter the roof plans to reduce and reposition the array, then seek to discharge my condition using these new drawings and smaller PV array. My question is whether this is really a good strategy and whether it is even necessary. If I submit a SAP with a small array to the council will they really compare to the drawings and say it is not big enough? And will they really care if they are not on the roof as per the drawings? It all seems a bit trivial but I have no experience. Many thanks.

Thanks @Russdl that is great, it looks like a sensible detail and I'll probably tweak mine to copy it. That GRP angle will hopefully also deal with the issue identified by @craig. Thanks everyone, really appreciated.