sgt_woulds

Exactly right. If the evidence proves otherwise scientific opinion changes. That is why science is a better touchstone for forming policy than personal opinion. The point is that a significant amount of the evidence and thus (as you say yourself), a significant portion of the scientific community believe in human amplified climate change. When seat belts first came in, Volvo et al had already published significant amounts of evidence to prove their efficacy. The greatest driver of the day, Stirling Moss had his own opinion on the matter and thought it was better to be thrown from a vehicle and had the seat belt achchors on his car (Marcos at the time IIRC) sawn through. When the inevitable happned he was thrown clear but suffered injuries that he would not have if he'd stayed in the vehicle. It was a miracle that he wasn't killed. In a situation where all the evidence tells you our Fossil Fuel addiction will lead to disaster, do you just hope to be thrown clear?

🙃 Slip of the keyboard, sorry!

Only use unnatural insulations if you are fitting them yourself and can absolutely confirm every detail of installation is impecible, interstitial damp and misery awaits unless you get very lucky with your builders. A poorly installed but breathable natural insulation will generally give less long term issues than a badly installed unatural and non-breathable one. It is important to note that companies that make natural insulations do not generally recommend achieving high U-values with IWI due to the condensation risk to the structure. There is, generally, a sweet spot between 40-100mm of woodfibre that balances the energy savings, cost, and condensation risk. Part L of the Building Regulations for England offers flexibility when retrofitting existing walls, roofs and floors; an improved U-value of 0.30 W/(m2·K) is the target but a ‘threshold’ level of up to 0.70 W/(m2·K) is sufficient, as long as the approach can achieve a payback not exceeding 15 years and is ‘technically and functionally feasible’. There is also a provision in the regs if IWI will reduce the floor area by more than 5% where lower insulation levels are allowed, but honestly, if your barn is that small then you will need to look at alternatives to conventional insulation anyway. Unfortunately these allowances only really apply to an existing residence and are harder to swing for a conversion, but it is worth discussing with your local authority / BCO. For an older building, most BCOs are now sympathetic to the argument that breathability is more important than the ultimate insulation value. IWI requires careful consideration; the breathability and condition of the walls and pointing should be assessed before specifying the insulation solution. The best advice is to have the external walls assessed via hygrothermal software - such as WUFI - which will take all of the site variables into account. Internal wall insulation is more complicated than external insulation due to the way it moves the dew point within the construction. In addition, standard U-value calculations will not correctly account for the sorption properties of natural insulation fibres, nor their ability to pass on liquid water through capillary action. WUFI purely considers moisture issues and how the various elements of the building fabric will deal with the volumes based on site-specific conditions. This is the evidence you need to convince BCO of your inentions. These may help: Rethinking IWI with Natural Fibre Insulation Insulation and retrofit - Finding the sweet spot - The Alliance for Sustainable Building Products (asbp.org.uk) The-use-of-natural-insulation-materials-in-retrofit.pdf (stbauk.org) I can also recomend Back to Earth as they not only have a lot of experience with insulating historic buildings but can provide the WUFI assessment too.

Also the toilet cistern becomes a heat source. But Legionnaires' might be an issue

Correct hence my earlier post:

That sentance gets bandied about a lot, but we need to remember that this forum is open to the unititiated who might take it as gospel. In simple terms you can perform a voltage drop calculation to determin which system will have less losses over the same distance with the same size conductors - generally, whether AC or DC, whichever has the highest voltage will have less voltage drop over the run. But efficiency is only part of the decision process, you also need to facter in cost and safety. On the cost front, back in the 2000's when I was installing PV, it was always cheaper to fit a long run of AC vs DC. Pure copper low loss double insulated solar cables were more expensive. I haven't looked in years, but I don't imagine the costs have changed much! We couldn't use 'standard' AC rated cable for DC as you always wanted to finish the cable with an MC plug, not a screw connection wherever possible. With high voltage DC linked to variable(pulsing) solar, screw connections work loose and are an arc risk. The DC plugs are only certified for installation with double insulated solar DC cable, so you couldn't just fit the same MC plugs to an type AC cable. Then you have the safety factor. High voltage AC is always safer than high voltage DC, espescially when the cables are hidden. I've been unfortunate enough to experience shocks from both, and I can tell you neither is fun, but I'm a lot more respectful of DC! High voltage AC can be protected with affordable and easily available RCD. If someone puts a shovel through a buried AC cable, the power cuts in the blink of an eye, and the inverter shuts down. If the same spade goes through a buried DC cable, it forms a direct circuit with the solar panels at full power until the sun sets! Again, I've been out of the game for a long time, and I know that DC RCM are now available for connection between the panels and field cables, but CMIIR, these don't work as quickly as an AC RCD, and are costly . With long buried DC field cables you will also need to use very expensive DC specific double insulated and armoured cables. Or 'ordinary' double insulated DC cables in armoured conduit. It would be usefull to hear from any practicing Solar installers / electricians for their thoughts

i Huh?

Sorry, I miss typed! I should have said changes to the planning laws: Labour's new planning bill "will lead to permanent biodiversity loss" - Protect the Wild What do the UK Government’s changes to the Planning Bill mean for nature? Don’t Let New Planning Laws Cost the Earth - Woodland Trust The concept of irreplaceable habitats already exists in the planning system, (in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)) and it is supposed to protect habitats that are impossible to recreate within a reasonable timeframe – such as ancient woodland. In practice this rarely happens. What suffices as a 'reasonable timeframe' when these ancient processes have literally built up over many thousands of years? Espescially as we are only scratching the surface in terms of our knowledge of natural interconnections (as this latest study into bark highlights, let alone what processes go on in the deep soil beneath ancient sites that we cannot study directly). It’s important that this planning definition is better (scientifically), defined for the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, as the current wishy washy wording allows for financially incentivised 'interpretations' that steamrole development to the detriment of nature: Lower Thames Crossing risk to ancient woods - Woodland Trust For balance, this is GOV.UK's responce: Inaccurate reporting of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill – MHCLG in the Media Does anyone else wonder at the 'informed decisions' of our politicians?

It also calls into question the changes to UK building regulations to make it easier to destroy existing, old growth forests and other natural ammeneties and replace them elsewher with 'equivalent' planting. It takes milions of years to set up an intricate interconnected system of life, and a few minutes for Bloores and Barretts et al, to destry it to make way for better profit margins.

I'd still question the overhangs of the top l/h/ sides, especialy when using a washer rather than an engineered clamp. You are probably not concerned with warranties, and the trees behind do offer a wind break, but manufacturers specify clamp zones for a reason, and the joy of unistrut is that it is easy to customize as required. It's hard to tell from the pictures, but it looks like some of those washers may be partially covering cells which can lead to localised cell burn out and reduced output.

Good old unistrut! Its what we used 25 years ago before the MCS licencing nonsence came in. Did you check the clamping zones for the panels? They will be under a lot of stress in windy conditions in an exposed situation like that. Even if they dont fly away in the night, the stress may induce micro fractures in the cells and glass laminates. It looks likes half the panels face a slightly different direction to the others. Have you wired in two strings?

Judging by the flow meters, only the centre loop is working, but that may be because you have multiple zones and that is the only one calling for heat. However, seeing a flow meter maxed out like that is not usual and would indicate a zone about the same size at Trumps new ballroom...

Also, what is the floor area in m2?

Have you seen the shading design guide - downloadable here: BBSA and GHA launch new shading for housing design guide I'm a big fan of roller shutters having used them at my parents in law's house in Hungary. They add both shade and security. Roller shutters have different options for use, including a stage where they are almost shut but still let a little bit of light through slits. However, I've got to say that the louvres / slats shown in the pictures above are much better aesthetically. In Europe, most windows open inwards so cleaning is less of an issue even with close fitting louvres.

Sorry, yes I should have said it will need to be Solar DC specific SWA. We didn't fit it very often but there was a specific brand we found that was SWA with insulated and sheathed cables. I remember that our Sparx still had to note it as a variation as technically you are not supposed to use a wire armoured cable for unearthed DC. Copex is the easier / cheaper / more compliant option. Elimination of DC isolators is generally accepepted, but unless the cables are surface mounted and identified with labels all the way to the inverter location you need a method of isolating the hidden DC cable run. If you rely on the built in DC isolator in the inverter - and espescially if that inverter is fitted elsewhere in the property - that still leaves the entire run of field cables live. Interesting figures on the failure rates of isolators. I imagine this is mostly due to people not paying for regular electrical inspections. For some reason the negative DC cable always seems to work loose over time in any screw connction, and its important to check and re-torque at regular intervals. (The neutral connections on the AC side are prone to this too) If this was taken out of the equation then the biggest failure boint would be the DC connectors - which sounds right to me as changing from MC3 to the MC4 'compatible' type connector was the biggest mistake ever made in the solar industry.

Yes, but you can push back. In my experience, most BCO aren't up to date with current regulations anyway, so going back with a reasoned argument and references to the regulations will mollify them. Our standard responce to BBA questions for our woodfibre insulation: We don’t have a BBA for our wood fibre boards and It is not mandatory to carry this certification for building regulations compliance; regulation 7 (1) states that CE marking and the appropriate Declaration of Performance can be used to establish the suitability of a product for its intended use. Additional national or international technical specifications are referenced in Section 1.14 and Independent certification schemes are in Section 1.15. These are not mandatory and it is stated that they ‘may be in addition to, but not conflict with, CE marking’. Our products are all CE-marked, and the DOP information is available on our website I would suggest to get a WUFI calculation for whichever system BRUCE chooses. This should also help with BCO approval. Back to Earth offer WUFI assessments for their IWI systems - I'm sure they will try to pursuade you away from unnatural insulations to more healthy options though... 🙂

Don't forget, if you are running cables from the loft to a position elsewhere in the house, they need to be SWA (or double insulated cables in Copex with a draw cable to the inverter if an electrician is doing final fix at a later date). If an inverter is not being fitted in the loft then a seperate DC isolator as close to the entry point is always required. 32 amp - DC specific - double pole isolator. From experience I wouldn't recommend any DC isolator made by ABB... although I haven't touched one for 10 years so hopefully they are more reliable now! A competent (sensible) sparky will work from the AC location up to the DC isolator and make the final connection to the isolated switch.

GagsPritch, are you talking about surface mounted plastic pattress rather than metal back boxes sunk into the wall?

Old ones won't have bonding connecteions for metal face plates, but those can be soldered on without removing from the wall. Other than that, as long as they are deep enough to take the gubbins for modern sockets without crushing cables I can't think of a reason to replace them?

I've never used bags in my Henrys (multiple) but then I've never bough one brand new either! I've currently got 3, and I've given away I think another 5 to friends. All taken off skips or grabbed at the local tip when no-one is looking. There is a common problem with his high/low suction switch that stops them from turning on. Most people just buy a new one when this happens, but being of the 'make do and mend' type (generation cheapskate) I just bypass the switch so it is constantly on full power. If I'd paid for a hoover I would probably just use it to clean the house and buy the ridiculously small and expensive bags, but otherwise they work fine without as long as you bash the filter regularly into the wheely bin. You need to do this more regularly with plaster dust and wood fibre as they clog the filter quickly. I use one of the other Henries to clean the filter and bob's your uncle. The suction is much better without the bags and you can get more dirt into the hoover. I keep meaning to buy a cyclone attatchment, but until I start paying for hoovers I'm not too bothered. I've just realised that my oldest free hoover (and the one I keep for the worst jobs) came off a skip on the day that I started installing solar, so that would make it more than 25 years old and still going strong. 😀

We hear sentiments like this a lot and unfortunately they are based on a misunderstanding of the respources we have. This line is promoted by certain sections of the media (who unfortunately no longer have the journalistic integrity to check their sources), and politicians on the make, and is 'encouraged' by the oil companies who source oil outside the UK but know that promoting 'British Oil' will actually lead to more sales of non-British oil in the UK! I'm by no means an expert, but I used to work for a solar company (way back, the first solar installer in the country) that was founded by a man who came from the oil industry and had first hand knowledge to impart. Without going into the weeds (which I'm in no way knowledgeable enough to do - I'm dragging this from the back of my mind from conversation 25 years ago...) you need to understand some basics of the oil industry as it has existed for the last 100 years. And a little Geology. Where to start? Oli is not what you think it is. Most oil in the world (and unfortunately the oil available off our coast) is not the black stuff you see shooting out of the ground in the Beverly Hillbillies. It is a multi coloured sludge made up of a vast array of chemicals that need careful and expensive processing to become useful - and that usefullness may not be as an energy source. Most crude oil - like that available in the UK - is only suitable for chemical productions (fertilisers, medecines, etc), not high grade energy use. Setting up oil refineries is increadibly expensive and to maximise economies of scale, a single type of process tends to be dominant in any region. Essentily, individual countries have specialised in different processes, using particular types of oil that is shipped around the world. I believe we ship 'our' sludge to South America for processing into a usable product, and vice versa). TLDR, The Geology of the North Sea does not produce the type of oil that UK refineries are specialised in, and the cost (and time frame) of converting our refineries to handle UK-sourced oil and the percieved benefits (and profits) are vastly outweighed by and dwindling resources of existing drill sites. In a heating world, WE MUST NOT drill any new fields and even if we did, the product would not power our country. Promoting th use of British Oil is a wheeze by foriegn oil producers (in bed with corrupt politicians and journalists happy to trouser a commission) which keeps the UK dependant upon their products. 'Gas lighting' in the literal sense... Another important lesson regarding 'Energy Security' has been learned from the war in Ukrain. A distributed power production that is not dependant upon a single source of energy is better able to withstand interferance from bad actors. It is very hard to cpmpletely destroy a wind or solar farm in a bombing raid, and even if you succeed, it will only be part small part of overall production. A distributed power generation will keep the lights on. But if you blow up a gas powered station - or the North Sea drilling rigs that supply your gas - it is much harder to get back up and running. To achieve a renewables based distributed grid is going to require huge investment of our aging infrastructure. But the long-term result will be lower bills, which should boost the economy as it will make manufacturing costs cheaper. Espescially if, as weve discussed before, industry is encouraged to move up North to be near the wind generation sources. We were perhaps disadvantaged compared to our European friends in the last 80 years, in that the last 'bad actor' was so very inefficiant at destroying our victorian infrastructure that we didn't have to rebuild earlier. Ironically, we probably gave Germany a boost by levelling the country and forcing a better grid to be built...

You can have a hybrid warm roof if breathable insulations (e.g. woodfibre) is used over the rafters. For these you need to allow a ventilation path above the insulation to draw away moisture exiting the structure. min. 80mm on a flat roof & 40mm on pitch roof 30 degrees+ with slates/tiles)

Yes but a standardised form and tested for structural use - I believe they have BBA, so easier get BC than some other soil based solutions. Used for inner leaf of cavity walls. Presumably can also be used in a solid wall with external breathable insulation. We had an architect/builder who was interested in using our woodfibre EWI on an earth block wall using BETTABLOK last year. I really must ask how they got on...

Perhaps, but we should hive it off to a seperate conversation 🙂 I like @solid' too, but other construction methods can achieve that. I was lucky enough to experience many types of construction back when I started installing PV. Back then the average price for a 1kw system was £20k! Only the absolute eco warriers were willing to pay, and they were as varied a bunch of characters as the houses they built. Great days... I've experienced TF, Strawbale, Rammed Earth, Cob, Earth Bag, Earth Sheltered (Stone built), Underground Bunker, ICF, Mass Timber, Double skin Insulated Wattle & Daube, Container house. The best timberframes can match any 'solid' construction method with correct detailing and pumped cellolose or woodfibre insulation, but, like anything, it will depend upon the quality of the build. As far as concrete goes: One of our customers and his architect built two houses side by side using different methods; Dense (fly ash) concrete block solid wall with external insulation, & ICF. Both had the same notional U-values and apart from the walls, all finishing details were identical. Multiple sensors everywhere. I spoke to the architect a couple of years later and he reported that the blockwork house was performing slightly better. His suggestion was that the internal layer of insulation on the ICF was blocking some of the advantages of thermal storage but the difference was marginal. The concrete block wall was quicker and easier to build (ICF collapsed twice during pours, even with manufacturer supervision on the site) and had about half of the upfront carbon than the ICF. They had the advantage of a highly motivated and dedicated team of builders - probably the best I've ever known. Would a blockwork wall built by the typical Great British Builder have perfored as well as the ICF? Of course cost is a factor. If I'd had the money, I would have like to have built a TF with Woodfibre insulation throughout. SIPs with a thin layer of WF was (supposed to be!) a cheaper compromise for a higher performing build, balanced against up front emmissions. If I was doing it again with the same budget, I would probably build a hybrid cavity wall with STROCKS.

I'm an ex PV specifier / installer and roofer, so I'm aware of my options... none of which will provide significant shade for my roof unfortunately. 😞 But enough distraction from the OP - hopefully we convinced not to use SIPs, but I wouldn't go for CIF either! I've felt guilty enough about the amount of global warming my house will have contributed to with SIPs, there is no way we should be building monolithic concrete structures in this day and age. What are the percieved advantages of CIF that would push Mueller to use this method?