Hi,

I hope to buy a late-Victorian end-of-terrace house sometime in the
new year.

The house is in sound condition - well so it appears and so the
survey says. However, over the next couple of years it will need new
boiler, new bathroom etc. and I am trying to think how to extend into
the loft without it looking like a spaceship has landed on the house.

Now, while I am having work done (by "professionals" (hopefully))
for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

I will check all the obvious like quality of insulation and
eliminating damp. However, I would like to find which other "eco"
techniques are effective and have a pay-back of say 10 years or less. I
have thought of the obvious such as some kind of solar panel to
pre-heat water, ground heat collection, water butts, wind generator.
Are there any good Web sites that give "long-term" analyses of these
techniques such as cost of installation and maintenance, effectiveness,
usefulness in SE UK (e.g the amount of "collectible" power form the
wind), reliability etc. etc. ?

Thanks

Clive

Clive wrote:

Hi,

I hope to buy a late-Victorian end-of-terrace house sometime in the
new year.

The house is in sound condition - well so it appears and so the
survey says. However, over the next couple of years it will need new
boiler, new bathroom etc. and I am trying to think how to extend into
the loft without it looking like a spaceship has landed on the house.

Now, while I am having work done (by "professionals" (hopefully))
for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

I will check all the obvious like quality of insulation and
eliminating damp. However, I would like to find which other "eco"
techniques are effective and have a pay-back of say 10 years or less. I
have thought of the obvious such as some kind of solar panel to
pre-heat water, ground heat collection, water butts, wind generator.
Are there any good Web sites that give "long-term" analyses of these
techniques such as cost of installation and maintenance, effectiveness,
usefulness in SE UK (e.g the amount of "collectible" power form the
wind), reliability etc. etc. ?

Thanks

Clive

You ask an important but difficult question. Why? Because there are
endless designs around, and very detail impacts the ROI.
News:alt.solar.thermal is one place to ask.

Warm air solar heating is going to give much more payback and cost less
to install than solar HW ever will. One example:
http://www.builditsolar.com/Projects...rn_project.htm

Re damp I'd recommend getting advice from
http://periodpropertyshop.co.uk/phpB...wforum.php?f=1
before doing anything.


NT

Clive wrote:

Now, while I am having work done (by "professionals" (hopefully))
for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

I will check all the obvious like quality of insulation and
eliminating damp. However, I would like to find which other "eco"
techniques are effective and have a pay-back of say 10 years or less. I
have thought of the obvious such as some kind of solar panel to
pre-heat water, ground heat collection, water butts, wind generator.
Are there any good Web sites that give "long-term" analyses of these
techniques such as cost of installation and maintenance, effectiveness,
usefulness in SE UK (e.g the amount of "collectible" power form the
wind), reliability etc. etc. ?

Thanks

Clive

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it
windgens in inhabited areas forget it
shower drain heat exchanger can pay back well
passive cooling avoids much ac
deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.
CFLs god ROI


NT

wrote:

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
snip

He means:
insulation, insulation, ventilation.

A lot of moisture rises through an house and enters the loft, any
attempt to block the vents in it may mar the condition up there -which
should be dry.

You don't want birds nesting in there though and before you do anything
else, check the place out for mice and other pests. I don't think the
surveyor covers them in his report.

On 2006-12-26 13:15:04 +0000, "Clive" said:

Hi,

I hope to buy a late-Victorian end-of-terrace house sometime in the
new year.

The house is in sound condition - well so it appears and so the
survey says. However, over the next couple of years it will need new
boiler, new bathroom etc. and I am trying to think how to extend into
the loft without it looking like a spaceship has landed on the house.

Now, while I am having work done (by "professionals" (hopefully))
for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

I will check all the obvious like quality of insulation and
eliminating damp. However, I would like to find which other "eco"
techniques are effective and have a pay-back of say 10 years or less. I
have thought of the obvious such as some kind of solar panel to
pre-heat water, ground heat collection, water butts, wind generator.
Are there any good Web sites that give "long-term" analyses of these
techniques such as cost of installation and maintenance, effectiveness,
usefulness in SE UK (e.g the amount of "collectible" power form the
wind), reliability etc. etc. ?

Thanks

Clive

The goals may be mutually incompatible.

Having had a house of the type you describe in the past, there are
limits to what
may be achievable.

An end terraced house, especially if it has a rear extension, generally
has a massive exterior wall area
in comparison with the internal area. A depth of 3 to 4 times the
width is quite common.

As a starting point, try to find out about the wall construction -
whether it is solid brick or has cavities.

If you do heat loss calculations (using a calculator program from one
of the CH radiator companies or an on line site), you will almost
certainly find that heat loss through exterior walls is by far the
largest contributor, certainly if the walls are solid.

If the walls are cavity, then insulation in the cavity is a possible
option and will pay back fastest of all, even more so than loft
insulation.

If they are not, then you could insulate them internally with Celotex.
You could use 50mm sheet and make an enormous difference to overall
loss from the building. This would entail losing approximately 75mm
or possibly a little more from room widths,, however, and if they are
already small, may not be acceptable. You could always choose a
subset of rooms, of course. However, ventilation is then even more
important than normal since moisture from the air will tend to condense
on cooler surfaces.

If you can't do something about the walls, then out of the total
heatloss for the house, making substantial improvements in other places
will have a quite small impact on the total.

Heat loss through the loft is normally second after the walls unless
there are a lot of windows. It's reasonable to put in 200-250mm of
glass fibre insulation, or if you are doing a loft conversion,
insulation requirements are stipulated anyway. Again Celotex is
useful because the insulating properties are something like 4 times
those of equivalent depth of glass fibre.

You could do something about the windows, although that will be
restricted if the house is in a conservation area.
If it isn't, then horrible plastic DG units can be used, or there are
wooden framed units that should be in better keeping with the period of
the house. Heat loss through windows is normally third after walls
and an uninsulated loft.

Loss through air changes through floor boards and window frames is
usually significant as well, but again be careful not to try to
hermetically seal the place or there will certainly be condensation if
the walls are not well insulated.

As far as a new boiler is concerned, except in unusual circumstances,
one has to have a condensing boiler anyway, and all have efficiencies
quite close to one another.

All of the above are places where you can make a major difference,
assuming that they are architecturally and economically possible. In
comparison, energy generating schemes such as windmills and solar
panels and alleged saving schemes such as fluorescent bulbs are either
not worth doing or pale into insignificance.

At the end of the day, if you wanted to spend your money on these kind
of generating/saving schemes, you would probably not be buying this
kind of house in the first place because there is a limit on what can
be done to it both practically and economically.

wrote:
Clive wrote:

Now, while I am having work done (by "professionals" (hopefully))
for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

I will check all the obvious like quality of insulation and
eliminating damp. However, I would like to find which other "eco"
techniques are effective and have a pay-back of say 10 years or less. I
have thought of the obvious such as some kind of solar panel to
pre-heat water, ground heat collection, water butts, wind generator.
Are there any good Web sites that give "long-term" analyses of these
techniques such as cost of installation and maintenance, effectiveness,
usefulness in SE UK (e.g the amount of "collectible" power form the
wind), reliability etc. etc. ?

Thanks

Clive

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it

PV?

I DO know that a fine winters day with the curtains drawn back seems to
add about an extra 500W of heating to a biggish room.

windgens in inhabited areas forget it
shower drain heat exchanger can pay back well

Not heard of that..intersting and I suspect valid.

passive cooling avoids much ac

Add into that HUGE masses of masonery or stone inside the
insulation..yes it takes longer to warm in winter, but boy it holds the
temps down in summer!

Ideal if in teh house all day as opposed to out at work.

Also add overhanging eaves to reduce solar gains in summer.

Also add trees - natures own air conditioners.


deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.
CFLs god ROI

But overall small impact on everything. Lighting in winter adds a useful
bit of heat, and lighting is nowhere near as huge a bill as house
heating is.



NT

Andy Hall wrote:
On 2006-12-26 13:15:04 +0000, "Clive" said:

Hi,

I hope to buy a late-Victorian end-of-terrace house sometime in the
new year.
snip
If the walls are cavity, then insulation in the cavity is a possible
option and will pay back fastest of all, even more so than loft
insulation.

If they are not, then you could insulate them internally with Celotex.
You could use 50mm sheet and make an enormous difference to overall
loss from the building. This would entail losing approximately 75mm
or possibly a little more from room widths,, however, and if they are
already small, may not be acceptable. You could always choose a
subset of rooms, of course. However, ventilation is then even more
important than normal since moisture from the air will tend to condense
on cooler surfaces.

You only lose 75mm, if there is no internal plasterboarding, or if it's
touching the existing walls.

snip
You could do something about the windows, although that will be
restricted if the house is in a conservation area.
If it isn't, then horrible plastic DG units can be used, or there are
wooden framed units that should be in better keeping with the period of
the house. Heat loss through windows is normally third after walls
and an uninsulated loft.

But...
Taking as an example my house.
It's got 15m^2 of window, in 12 windows.
Under very pessimistic assumptions, this costs maybe a couple of hundred
quid a year to heat, this takes a long time indeed to pay back if new
windows cost 3 grand. (of course, it is possible to DIY reterofit for a
fraction of this, and comfort factors may be important)

Compared to 25mm+12mm of kingspan +plasterboard, over 1/2 of the walls,
that should be the one done first, if at all possible. (and 25mm only if
you are really pushed for space).

snip
All of the above are places where you can make a major difference,
assuming that they are architecturally and economically possible. In
comparison, energy generating schemes such as windmills and solar
panels and alleged saving schemes such as fluorescent bulbs are either
not worth doing or pale into insignificance.

I'd _sligtly_ disagree on energy saving schemes - currently 3 rooms in
the house are lit. With non-CF bulbs, I'd be using 150W or so.
With CF bulbs, I can properly light the rooms, using 50W or so, saving
100W of electricity.
Even if I need to heat at the moment, and neglecting the poor heating
position, that's still a saving of 40 quid a year or better.

IMO - you should first do everything with a short payoff time.
Even if this is only draughtproofing the front door letterbox, and CF
lights.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:
Clive wrote:

for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it

PV?

yes, photovoltaic. Unless youre a long way from the grid its a
non-starter option.


passive cooling avoids much ac

Add into that HUGE masses of masonery or stone inside the
insulation..yes it takes longer to warm in winter, but boy it holds the
temps down in summer!

Ideal if in teh house all day as opposed to out at work.

Yes, exterior insulation for sides and back can be used on solid walls,
which keeps the thermal mass inside the insulation. Wouldnt want to use
it on the front, unless the front wall is ugly anyway.


Also add trees - natures own air conditioners.

yes, quite effective, but its important theyre deciduous, otherwise you
get cooling in winter too.


deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.

A mixture of plants is better in that youre going to make far more use
of all the different fruits & nuts than with just one species.


CFLs god ROI

But overall small impact on everything. Lighting in winter adds a useful
bit of heat,

yes, heat which could be much cheaper supplied by CH.

and lighting is nowhere near as huge a bill as house
heating is.

that really depends, a lot of people are now putting in lighting whose
run cost exceeds the CH.


A new boiler probably only makes sense if your old one dies. I would
not usually expect it to pay back its buy & fit costs otherwise.


NT

wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:
Clive wrote:

for CH and loft I would like to incorporate as many energy-saving /
energy-generation mechanisms as possible.

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it

PV?

yes, photovoltaic. Unless youre a long way from the grid its a
non-starter option.



More because its costly than because its einneffective I guess.

passive cooling avoids much ac

Add into that HUGE masses of masonery or stone inside the
insulation..yes it takes longer to warm in winter, but boy it holds the
temps down in summer!

Ideal if in teh house all day as opposed to out at work.

Yes, exterior insulation for sides and back can be used on solid walls,
which keeps the thermal mass inside the insulation. Wouldnt want to use
it on the front, unless the front wall is ugly anyway.


I wouldnt do it that way..dig out floors and re-lay with large masses of
concrete over insulation...add interior blockwork or concrete walls
instead of stud..

Also add trees - natures own air conditioners.

yes, quite effective, but its important theyre deciduous, otherwise you
get cooling in winter too.

yup. Agreed. Watch foundations tho..

deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.

A mixture of plants is better in that youre going to make far more use
of all the different fruits & nuts than with just one species.


CFLs god ROI

But overall small impact on everything. Lighting in winter adds a useful
bit of heat,

yes, heat which could be much cheaper supplied by CH.

In this house lighting is insignificant compared to heating. Its a big
house, well insulated..


and lighting is nowhere near as huge a bill as house
heating is.

that really depends, a lot of people are now putting in lighting whose
run cost exceeds the CH.

Lucky them.

A new boiler probably only makes sense if your old one dies. I would
not usually expect it to pay back its buy & fit costs otherwise.

Easy enough to do the comparisons. You might reduce heating bills by
10%...amortize that over whatever period..compare cots of new installation..

NT

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:
Clive wrote:

PV?

yes, photovoltaic. Unless youre a long way from the grid its a
non-starter option.

More because its costly than because its einneffective I guess.

.... so costly that a realistically priced system can only be
ineffective


Also add trees - natures own air conditioners.

yes, quite effective, but its important theyre deciduous, otherwise you
get cooling in winter too.

yup. Agreed. Watch foundations tho..

Yes, thats one reason why climbers are preferred. Ideally those are
grown on a wire frame 2'-3' from the house, but most of us just grow
them direct on the house, and accept they may need to be cut back
occasionally.

Another reason is leaf fall and gutters, its not a problem when the
cilmbers are trimmed to stay below roofline, but with trees it is.

Another plus of climbers is quicker cover. Another is that being
smaller plants, you can have many different varieties in the space
you'd have just one tree. How many people can use 100lb of one fruit?
20lb of 5 different fruits harvested at 5 different times is a lot more
practical and enjoyable.


A new boiler probably only makes sense if your old one dies. I would
not usually expect it to pay back its buy & fit costs otherwise.

Easy enough to do the comparisons. You might reduce heating bills by
10%...amortize that over whatever period..compare cots of new installation..

Yes, but be aware, where people often err in these calcs is that modern
boilers have short life times and need more repairs during that time.
Those are the factors that kill off any perceived advantage in a new
boiler in most cases.


NT

On 26 Dec 2006 07:01:49 -0800, wrote:
To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it
windgens in inhabited areas forget it
shower drain heat exchanger can pay back well
passive cooling avoids much ac
deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.
CFLs god ROI

Thats an interesting list and I'm glad to see that I have all the
sensible ones installed or planned, except a shower-drain heat
exchanger, which is a new one on me. Can you elaborate?

Anna

--
~~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantels, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk 01359 230642

Anna Kettle wrote:
On 26 Dec 2006 07:01:49 -0800, wrote:

To kick off...

insulation insulation insulation
solar hw can pay back but too often doesnt.
solar warm air can give good ROI
underground pipes can give a nice return as an ac substitute
solar pv forget it
windgens in inhabited areas forget it
shower drain heat exchanger can pay back well
passive cooling avoids much ac
deciduous climber on house walls producng fruit gives summer colling &
food, but must be kept off the roof. High ROI.
CFLs god ROI

Thats an interesting list and I'm glad to see that I have all the
sensible ones installed or planned, except a shower-drain heat
exchanger, which is a new one on me. Can you elaborate?

Anna

Sure. In a diy incarnation its a piece of metal waste pipe with
microbore wrapped round it. The 4 lengths of microbore wrapped in
parallel connect to a 4 way manifold at each end.

The idea is as the warm shower waste water flows one way, the cold feed
to the shower flows the other way thru the 4 microbores. This makes a
crossflow heat exchanger, giving you a lukewarm cold feed to the shower
and thus reducing hot water use.

In the right situations they can give over 50% ROI, but in Britain they
will generally be nonideal implementations, but still be a good long
term investment when fitting a bathroom.


NT

Excellent answers, all.

Thank-you. I will try to incorporate as much as I can. I know all about
poor ventilation in a flat that suffered from condensation. I installed
a heat-exchange ventilator that seemed to improve (reduce) the
condensation. I just hope I can find the instructions somewhere.

I intend to keep notes and post my experiences via a blog as and when I
commence on all of this.

I will have a period with "existing" setup so I will have a little
"baseline" info to compare the improvements against - although I won't
wait a whole year before starting work


Clive