gravelld

Because, as we know Jeremy, regulations are not "what is right" they are "what is acceptable to stakeholders". The residents are just one stakeholder.

Seems to back you up: I think the second one is wood fibre isn't it? My russian ain't very good.

Are you saying the temps are higher in a higher rise building? Why? Because there's more building or material to burn?

I have read that it was a PE based insulant, although probably just Interweb speculation. Is this a failure of design or procurement - should the insulant have been flame retardant and some dodgy panels have been fitted, or is it allowed to not be? I can see Knauf might get a lot more work out of this when they start tearing down all the retrofits.

Hmmm. So it costs £244 to read the standard which is supposed to protect me? Before I get all self righteous, in what way is that democratic?

It would be interesting to know the test process stove manufacturers go through to derive the efficiency figures, assumptions made, and so on.

You probably aren't spending _that_ much extra on a low energy house are you? The only thing I'd be wary about is resale. Plenty of advice about this, but ensure you still have a heating system, or you have the pipe work, in case you need to show the less enlightened they can still waste their money on fossil fuels if that's what they want.

One thing that jumps out at me about that is that maybe they say "low energy" because it is vague, while Ph does actually have targets that have to be met. Therefore they can absolve themselves if things don't go right, pushing the risk on to you... Note there are other proper low energy standards, like the AECB Silver. Others may provide other examples. If you don't want to go full Ph you could target those instead, and ask your supplier to meet them or £££.

I *hope* that's the magic of Photoshop there...

Well, air *is* extracted through them continuously, just not enough ;-)

So long as it's EPS why does it matter whether it breaches the DPC?

Were they from volume builders @Triassic or smaller builders? Just wondering whether it's sloppy standards being the problem, or just that the houses don't fit into their lives, aren't designed for them.

Anyone had a problem with the chain brake failing on the Titan electric chainsaw? Mine runs for about 3s after switching off now... What's the best saw horse for smaller diameter cuts, e.g. I have a load of beech that will be fine for burning, but only 5-10cm diameter. When the chainsaw meets the wood, it inevitably moves. Best to have a saw horse with teeth rather than a clamp?

Best (better?) practice would be to change the window when you do the insulation, and install it in the insulation layer.

No I agree, you wouldn't. Using the inner face seems the obvious approach in that case.

Is that in answer to my question?

Can you provide a citation or explanation for that? The inner face bit I mean. In the case of a cold loft I can see why you'd say that, but if you are going full tea cosy on a house, why not join the outer face of the outer blockwork to the air tight layer on the warm roof? If anything I'd have thought that's easier than joining it to the inner face, because then you have to get past the timber in the roof structure somehow.

Normally you'd have an air tightness strategy which identified the continuous layer around your house that is air tight. You then use the tapes as just one means of ensuring that layer is continuous. For example, you might use them around the window frames.

Is this basically a difference between air tight and vapour tight style question? If so: http://www.ecohome.net/guide/difference-between-air-barriers-vapour-barriers

Thanks Jeremy. Another approach may be to solve the problem at a different point. Is the system too closed to not allow other heat inputs, or different ways of drawing hot water? For example, PV or solar thermal could top up the temperature, or even a system boiler might be a good idea if you can have a modern gas boiler installed. Also, you could make do with lower temperature in the tank if you had inline modulating heaters like yours, right? However, that still assumes you can just have a exhaust air heat pump which doesn't go into overdrive, and will just through the day trickle energy in at the ventilation rate.

I kind of agree, but risk is the reason you should have a diverse portfolio of different types of assets. A lot of people who just invest in property are exposing themselves to a lot of risk.

Put another way, is it that fast recovery is the issue? I think I naively thought that leaving it to run through the day would slowly build up enough energy in the tank, but then as I think ST's calcs showed in the other thread, there just wouldn't be enough air or high enough exhaust temperature to provide enough energy. But this definitely wouldn't work if the tank was depleted and needed immediate energy. If the ventilation rate was increased as you say and the energy was exchanged back into the water, it's not being wasted is it, other than the losses of the heat exchanger?

And lack of education. People have no idea how houses "should" be. With education, they may demand more. But whether that education ever occurs is the question; the only thing Kirsty Allsop seems to go on about is fireplaces. Personally I disagree with any payback exemption. If you are investing in housing, you have to take the risks. Maybe a future government may be less likely to look favourably on landlords.

I can totally understand it won't work for your house Jeremy, I meant that I wondered whether there's a sweet spot with less performant dwellings. The sweet spot may also relate not just to the technical questions of balancing the heat loss and DHW demand, but also the woolier demands of an overall building project. For example, might this be a good fit for a refurbishment project with reasonable aims at low-ish energy (let's say AECB Silver), if it also ticks the ventilation box, without having ducting which might otherwise by overly disruptive. I don't know the answers to these questions and my examples are purely speculative.

I guess so, or you have to pay to insulate and air tighten your properties further. That's part of the risk you take on when being a landlord I guess. All investments have risk.