Guilty products included:

• The Ecotek Energy Wizard – A voltage optimisation device claiming to cut your electrcity bill by 10%, actually increased energy consumption equivalent to a plasma TV or stereo.
• Disposable battery chargers – chargers that claim to also recharge disposable batteries up to 10 times. The result was huge variation across the disposable batteries tested with most dropping to 10% of their original capacity.
• TreeGreen Energy Egg – Switches appliances on and off as a motion detector detects someone entering or leaving a room. A Which? tester suggested “at £40 it’s a pretty steep price to pay for laziness” and whilst it might save energy through switching unused appliance off, it probably wastes more by always switching unwanted appliances on each time someone enters a room.

The article goes on to support some product’s eco-claims, including:

• The Ecobutton – A flashing button that reminds you to press it when you take a break from your computer, switching everyting into energy-efficiency mode. Users particularly liked the feedback it gives on money and carbon emissions saved.

As we know, a large part of a product’s carbon footprint comes from its production and end-of-life disposal. However ‘eco’ a product is in use, if its usage over its lifetime doesn’t negate that impact, it will have a negative impact on the environment. This might be easy for a light bulb to achieve, but harder for battery recharger if you rarely use batteries. There must be many white elephant energy monitors and eco gadgets lying unused in drawers for which this is the case.

We thought now would be a good time to review how users are finding our new site and the services that we offer.We have created an online survey for you to complete, and would really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to fill in this short survey.

Click here to take the One Planet Products Survey.

Update: this survey closed on 28th September 2011.

The pilot was carried out by a partnership of BioRegional, B&Q and Sutton Council and explored one approach to retrofitting homes for improved energy efficiency and reduced fuel bills and CO2 emissions. The 67-home pilot, is one of five DECC funded Pay-As-You-Save (PAYS) pilots around the country designed to inform next year’s Government’s Green Deal for helping householders. The Sutton homes were retrofitted by B&Q with energy efficiency measures such as insulation, draught proofing, boiler upgrades and solar photovoltaics. The average capital spending per household was around £13,000, funded from a 40% grant and a 60% interest-free loan from the council. Households should see a predicted 26% average reduction in the CO2 emissions of their property.

Key findings

• Whilst participants were generally interested in the financial benefits that the loan offered – for example the removal of upfront capital costs, the grant and the energy savings, the majority of homeowners believed the long term savings were lower than expected. This was one of the key reasons for nearly half of the audited homes later declining the retrofit offer.
• With 28% of homeowners within the pilot choosing the shortest loan payback option over immediate savings, and 33% of those taking the 25-year loan choosing measures that meant the repayments were higher than the fuel bill savings, immediate financial savings were not found to be the top driver. In fact 41% of all surveyed participants cited reasons for taking part other than financial, such as increasing comfort and using a professional installation service.
• Retrofit installers need to understand from the outset that every home is unique and that there won’t be a one size fits all energy retrofit solution. This implies that additional costs and time need to be allowed for from the outset of the project.
• Finally, the householder needs to be informed not only about the combination of measures that will make the biggest difference to their home in terms of fuel bill savings, but also on the changes in behaviour that will maximise the benefit of these improvements. In addition, clear communication is needed on the timescales and the level of disruption involved in the installation.

Sue Riddlestone, Executive Director of BioRegional, emphasised the last lesson:  “The CO2 savings from the retrofit are a good start but we need to complete the picture by making sure that the Green Deal makes behaviour change towards using less energy a priority too. Turning down the thermostat is free and it’s going to be persuasive if consumers are told about the cost and carbon savings of that next to those of an expensive solar panel!”

Download the full report  ‘Helping to inform the Green Deal : Green Shoots from Pay As You Save’ from BioRegional’s website.

• Business benefits of reusing construction waste
• Practical examples from those who are already doing it
• Councils supporting reuse and enforcing Site Waste Management Plans (SWMPs)

Contact Ronan at BioRegional or call 020 8404 4890 to register.

The ZeroWISE Project is also still offering some fantastic FREE on-site support to construction SMEs in the South-East, including taking a reclamation-led approach to demolition, maximising segregation of waste, and implementing a successful Site Waste Management Plan.

• Reclamation audit – visiting site, quantifying carbon and material savings, and finding end markets. Contact Ben or call 020 8404 4897.
• Site waste audit – maximising the segregation of waste and minimising waste to landfill. Contact Ronan or call 020 8404 4890.
• Builder’s Merchant support – reviewing your current product range and recommending potential new eco lines. Contact Tom or call 020 8404 5044.
• Site Waste Management Plan support – designing and implementing SWMPs. Contact Sarah or call 020 7061 6366.
• Avoiding the Aggregates Tax through reuse – how to reuse and recycle more aggregate. Contact Gianluca or call 020 7061 6363.
• Getting into business of reuse – help with business planning, financing, marketing and attracting new business. Contact Peter or call 020 7061 6381.

To be added to our regular e-newsletter promoting all events and support, please contact Ben.

This project is part funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) as part of the South East ERDF Competitiveness Programme 2007–2013.

Defra produce a Water Technology List that includes all products that meet their water efficient eligibility criteria. These products are eligible for 100% Enhanced First-Year Capital Allowances when purchased by businesses.

There are two main ways of setting performance targets for taps and showers; through the use of target flow rates and by limiting the flow rate from exceeding a maximum level.

1. Flow rate – typically described in terms of litres per minute for a given level of pressure. This rate will vary depending on the pressure, with a lower pressure delivering a lower flow rate. As an example, Grohe’s K4 kitchen tap delivers around 9 litres per minute at 0.5 bar, 12 litres per minute at 3 bar and about 13 litres per minute at 5 bar.
2. Limiting flow rate – limiting the maximum flow rate of the tap or shower through the use of a flow restrictor or a flow regulator. If the later, the flow rate should not exceed the specified flow level for pressures up to and including 5 bar. E.g. if the maximum flow rate of a tap is 6 litres/ minute then the flow restrictor should cap the flow rate at 6 litres/minute for pressures up to 5 bar; in order that the system doesn’t exceed 6 litres irrespective of its pressure.

Two other ways of increasing a tap’s water efficiency are:

1. Water break function (sometimes known as ‘eco-click’) – introduces resistance to the lever movement, limiting the flow to about 50%. To get a higher flow, further force must be applied to overcome the brake. Whilst most manufacturers set the break to a default 50% flow, it could be set much lower for suitable functions.
2. Aerating – mixing air into the water flow as it leaves the tap so each water droplet consists of a skin of water around a bubble of air, saving the amount of water required for the same flow.

Both of these kinds of products can be found on the Waterwise products list as well.

The Bathroom Manufacturer Association’s (BMA) Water Efficiency Rating Scheme rates a selection of water-using appliances against a scale. The rating for baths ranges from the greenest baths with a total capacity of less than 155 litres, to the most water-intensive baths with a capacity over 200 litres.

Three new baths from Armitage Shanks pitched as space-savers; the Cameo 1500, the Sandringham 1500 and the Showertub, are all almost 200mm shorter than the average bath, saving around 9 litres of water when full.

A regular bath (typically using at least 80 litres) would only become a water-saver if you shower for longer than 10 minutes under a low-flow shower head, whereas these compact baths become more efficient than a 9-minute shower.

If you have a shower over your bath, a simple water efficiency test you can try next time you take a shower is to put the plug in whilst you shower and see how full the bath is once you’ve finished. If it’s less than you’d fill for a bath, keep showering!

Specifying a compact bath in a new build will also help improve a developer’s score in The Code for Sustainable Homes, with top marks offered to houses that achieve a predicted 80 litres/person/day total consumption.

The Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations 1999 mandate that installers notify the local water company where they intend to install baths with capacities in excess of 230 litres. This is designed to recognise that baths with large volumes have the potential to increase domestic water consumption and allows for the compulsory fitting of water meters to accommodate this.

As part of our wider One Planet Sutton programme, BioRegional is undertaking the Zero Carbon Hackbridge project, which aims to demonstrate how a suburb can be retrofitted cost-effectively to become zero carbon. We want to adopt an area-based approach looking at the different solutions that need to be implemented for the various types of domestic and commercial buildings and the different tenures present in this community. We want to start retrofitting energy efficiency measures now and prepare for the Green Deal roll-out in 2012.

We are also currently taking part in three retrofit projects, taking place in Sutton: a Retrofit for the Future project where three different houses are monitored with different levels of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures implemented: one house is refurbished to the Decent Homes standard and another is refurbished to become a One Planet House (using the holistic 10 One Planet Living principles framework which covers everything from zero carbon and zero waste to sustainable food, transport and materials with low-embodied energy). The third house is a control house. All will also benefit from behaviour change workshops.

Another retrofit project taking place in Sutton is the Pay As You Save scheme, which is a project led by B&Q. More than 60 houses are being refurbished with different types of energy efficiency measures (from standard boiler replacement to solid wall insulation and installation or micro-renewables). The purpose of the scheme is to test some elements of the future Green Deal roll out, planned in 2012. BioRegional is in charge of monitoring and evaluation of the project. A paper on the lessons learnt so far will be issued shortly on BioRegional’s website so watch this space!

To achieve the required level of energy savings the project team made use of a couple of interesting new technologies, its ‘WHISCERS’ insulation system and Pilkington’s energiKare vacuum glazing. Pilkington’s energiKare system offered a way of upgrading the performance of existing single glazed sash windows to levels exceeding those of typical double glazed windows. The process involves mounting an additional 6.5mm of glass onto the window and creating a 0.2mm vacuum over the existing glazing. This lowers the U-value of the windows from around 4.8 W/m²K to approximately 1.8 W/m²K – somewhat better than a typical double glazed window’s U-value of around 0.25 W/m²K. The vacuum process left a small plugged hole in the corner of the window but we felt that this was barely noticeable.

WHISCERS, short for Whole house, In-Situ Carbon & Energy Reduction Solution, uses a laser measuring system to collect a series of data points relating to the shape of the wall. These points are fed into a computer where they can be used to trim boards of XPS insulation down to size in order create a bespoke solution specific to that particular house. At 8 Bertram Street, 112.5mm boards were used in the lounge (taking the U-value from 2.1 W/m²K down to 0.21 W/m²K), and in order to accommodate a limited amount of space, 62.5mm boards were used on the external walls in the landings (2.1 W/m2K down to 0.45 W/m2K). The initial property survey typically takes around an hour with the data handling and cutting process taking another two hours or so. Installation itself took about an hour per room and, according to the tenant, created little mess and disruption.

According to United House both the WHISCERS insulation system and the energiKare vacuum glazing cost around £5,500 each to install. To achieve the desired level of energy savings the project also had to implement the other usual energy efficiency measures, such as draught proofing, upgrading the boiler and installing solar photovoltaics (PV). In total the project came in at just over £35,000, potentially opening it up to the accusation that, as a demonstration project, it is unaffordable for the mass market. However, what was interesting about 8 Bertram Street was that United House have begun to document their projects using their new ‘Value Carbon’ approach. Value Carbon allocates a carbon value in £/kgCO₂/yr for each of the different technologies being used. Some technologies, such as replacing the boiler and draught proofing have very low £/kgCO₂ values of around £2/kgCO₂ per annum whilst others, such as solar PV came out as much more expensive at around £18/kgCO₂ per annum. United House claim that focusing our efforts on a ‘first fix’ of more cost effective measures could generate significantly more savings in the short term. For instance, they estimate that it costs around £22,000 to reduce the CO₂ emissions of a single house by 70% but that, for £21,000, they could retrofit three houses for a 50% reduction. They suggest that a second fix of the more expensive measures can then be added at a later date, perhaps once technology has improved or other ways have been found to reduce our emissions.

In the Treasury’s ‘Plan for Growth’, launched alongside the budget, it announced that energy used by appliances in homes will not have to be generated from renewable sources, and the zero carbon definition will only cover heating, lighting and water. The above diagram from the Energy Saving Trust shows that this could omit around a third of a home’s CO2 emissions.

This is the latest and most significant watering down of the definition since its inception, still four years before it becomes compulsory for all new homes in 2016. The move shows further signs of successful lobbying from the house building industry to reduce standards as they struggle to achieve the required built performance.

BioRegional Director of One Planet Communities Pooran Desai reacted to the news pragmatically, feeling that household appliances should be outside the remit of housebuilders anyway. However, he stressed that the omission should be complemented by stricter regulations on the appliance manufacturers, to ensure their impact is reduced appropriately.

If this doesn’t happen, the gap left in our carbon reduction targets by this latest move will need to be filled by further tackling the emissions from our existing housing stock or further decarbonising of our electricity supply.

Existing Chief executive of the UK Green Building Council Paul King however responded in anger, “In the space of two weeks, this government has gone from a firm commitment on zero carbon homes, to a watered down policy. A zero carbon home will no longer do what it says on the tin. The world leading commitment that new homes would not add to the carbon footprint of our housing stock from 2016 has been scrapped despite a remarkable consensus between industry and NGOs in support of it.”

He went further to suggest this latest move not only threatens the government’s green targets, but also their push for growth – “Thanks to a crude de-regulation agenda we now have a policy that is not only anti-green but anti-growth.  Low carbon construction has been one of the few sectors showing genuine green shoots of growth. This U-turn will result in loss of confidence leading to lower investment, less innovation, fewer green jobs and fewer carbon reductions. It is a backward step by a government that wanted to be seen as ‘the greenest ever’.”

• What does one planet living look like and how can you embed it into your organisation’s operations?
• Designing for behaviour change: how to encourage green lifestyles in homes and communities
• What does one planet living look like and how can you embed it into your retrofit projects?
• What does one planet living look like and how can you embed it into your new build project?
• The basics of biomass for architects and developers
• Greenovation – how green construction brings opportunities for entrepreneurs and small-scale builders

A creative session on behaviour change raised ideas of watching Saturday night TV in the pub to reduce our individual carbon emissions from individually heating and lighting our own homes, and raising awareness of water usage amongst school children as a way of influencing their parent’s behaviour.

Another session took lessons from BioRegional’s experience of working on retrofit projects and applied them to two theoretical case studies – one retrofitting an area of a local authority, and another retrofitting a social housing block.

BioRegional’s co-founder Pooran Desai reflected “it is brilliant that green has become mainstream – it was the first time I really thought that green was seen as THE thing to aspire to in the construction and development industries; and to some extent green is seen as a potential growth industry in an otherwise very difficult economy going forward”. This was certainly the case for photovoltaics, with a huge increase in the number of panel manufacturers showing at the exhibition.

With Ecobuild this year moving to the Excel Centre, having out-grown Earls Court, its size has become slightly overwhelming. This is clearly encouraging if an indication of the growth of the sector, but did leave us wondering if exhibitors go through any vetting process to assess if they are green in any meaningful way – some of it seemed to be just ‘Build’ rather than ‘Ecobuild’. We would advocate a sustainability assessment questionnaire similar to the One Planet Products suppliers assessment as a good starting point. Furthermore, the scale of this event with elaborate exhibition stands constructed for just 3 days raises the usual question over the environmental impacts of  the event, and whether more could be done to make it truly sustainable.