Implications of New Part L for planning applications after 30 Nov 2011

[Superman]

We are bringing foreign investment in to develop our natural resources - we should be doing this ourselves.

There is also about 100,000 tonnes of gold spread around the country. If we only collected it all, we'd be rich.
It's just a pity that it is such minute quantities (the odd atom here and there)...

Who is this "ourselves" when it comes to off continental shelf deep sea oil and gas well development. Do you have any idea how sophisticated and beyond the reach of any Irish company such development is?

You think that an economy based on the hydrogen cycle is nonsense?
I see it as the future base of a world economy, but each to their own.

Hydrogen functions as a rather poor medium for conveying energy - i.e. a battery.
It is part of the carbon cycle if what powers the battery is carbon based energy. "Getting hydrogen out of seawater" requires energy - this has to be provided by an energy source. This energy source would be an existing energy source - i.e. a gas power-station.
Unless you think that Steorn are going to have success any day now.

 

[onq]

thats the end of the discussion on the new TGD L so??

what's is the problem with Gormley, he often seems to be the scape goat, have we forgotten that most of our building legislation is just drip feed from the EU/UK? - are you aware that Whales was the first to commit to zero carbon in use by 2016 (whether that happens is another story)

This is part of the problem - MBA bureaucrats in Brussels making decisions about stuff they don't really understand. Figures, not values. Aspirations with no feedback loop. This thread is a feedback loop.

Gormley also tried to tidy-up our councillors that were making a mockery of our planning zoning,

Gormely tried to put manners on one or two Councils - did you see that going anywhere? Miserable damp squib. Planning corruption won't go overnight. Flood/Mahon only scratched the surface and missed the point.

but now it looks like Hogan is going to erode that as well http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/PlanningDevelopment/Planning/News/MainBody,28537,en.htm (Draft Retail Planning Guidelines) - its turning into another Galway tent crew, instead of getting our town centres back to life!

Have yet ot read them.

we import 97% of all our fuel into Ireland, but don't confuse fuel security with climate change, and don't forget our EU commitments to reduce or Carbon emissions, again blamed on Gormley.

And I say again, why aren't we developing a hydrogen fuel cycle instead of polluting ourselves with wood burning stoves - have you gone for a walk recently in the newly polluted atmospheres in our suburbs? Another misguided measure. We need to stop relying on fossil fuels altogether. We have geothothermal under our feet and we're surrounded by water. Refocus.

 

[onq]

Buildings are one of the main culprits as regards co2 producing and we have a long way past energy in issue to consider. Buildings are of course the easiest to attack/reduce consumption in, as there is no coherent lobbying like the road hauliers, concrete federation and farmers etc.

We could be using geothermal, producing our own sugar beet and rapeseed oil, and working towards a hydrogen cycle - this should be the real focus of Part L in conjunction with a government taking the lead in this - instead we're pumping millions into electricity grids and gas pipelines. Who gets the long term benefits of these?

But the whole idea is we improve the comfort of our homes while, reduing energy consumption,with the idea that this will actually save home-owners money in the long run.

But instead we're adopting and adapting partly thought out cut-down technologies suitable for buildings with an alert occupation, not homes where people sleep.

its a similar argument many people use when austerity or legislative measures don't suit them. shouldn't we be trying to reduce energy consumption in buildings, even if we found the miracle cure for cheap fuel storage?

Now you're making sense - I'm working on just such a project at the moment for roll out next year, with any luck. We'll see how it goes.

is there a reincarnation as Jim Corr happening here?

Ask why more electric/hydrogen hybrids aren't out there. Ask what is the real reason behind programmers like "top gear". Safe driving? Economy? No. Just like the cheap money, our habits and addictions are being used ot enslave us. Deny with proofs down in Letting off Steam at your leisure and I'll join you

yes please, but lets leave that to the 'Professor Nannites' and how about we use our skills as a designers to design out the issues that are causing comments like this:
???

If your immune system isn't tested by a certain age, you can develop deficiencies. Someone working with sealed technologies should know this.

 

[lowCO2design]

before I respond, I'll answer my own question regarding whether this is a
discussion on the new TGD L. This is no longer a serious discussion!

We could be using geothermal,

so the answer to the new part L becoming more onerous for the specifier (remember we've discussed my preferred thermal bridging requirements), is a geothermal system ie heat pump that's more hungry electrically than MVHR is? that uses miles of high embodied piping?

producing our own sugar beet and rapeseed oil, and working towards a hydrogen cycle - this should be the real focus of Part L in conjunction with a government taking the lead in this - instead we're pumping millions into electricity grids and gas pipelines. Who gets the long term benefits of these?

this discussion now just gets ridiculous, as its off to the food v fuel debate! we cant even sustain enough building materials from the trees grown in Ireland, never mind considering Rapseed and Sugar beet as an alternative to fossil fuels while we wait your hydrogen to work.

But instead we're adopting and adapting partly thought out cut-down technologies suitable for buildings with an alert occupation, not homes where people sleep.

? stricter energy conservation and the new part L does not assume any specific technology thats your job to solve. have you seen Bedzed for instance? why not improve on this system?

Ask why more electric/hydrogen hybrids aren't out there.

because We still generate over 90% of our electricity from fossil fuels. and the battery's last less than 5 years and come from an open mine in some Brazilian forest and can only get 160km max on an 8 hour charge, so its back to hydrogen then.

Ask what is the real reason behind programmers like "top gear". Safe driving? Economy? No. Just like the cheap money, our habits and addictions are being used ot enslave us. Deny with proofs down in Letting off Steam at your leisure and I'll join you

Jim, to me its entertainment, but I suppose some people are certainly open to brainwashing.

If your immune system isn't tested by a certain age, you can develop deficiencies. Someone working with sealed technologies should know this.

sealed technologies? are you referring to the new part L's really tough standards with the outrageous permeability value of 7m3/hr/m2 at 50 Pascal ?

 

[onq]

<snip>

Who is this "ourselves" when it comes to off continental shelf deep sea oil and gas well development. Do you have any idea how sophisticated and beyond the reach of any Irish company such development is?

Any undertaking starts with an endeavour - Ireland spends too much of its time NOT developing our skills for our own use.
We train people to the highest standards then watch them wave goodbye, taking their value-added learning with them.
This is a defeatist mindset, not a business strategy - we need to break out of that mould.

Not developing and utilising our own energy resources because "it costs a lot" is not a valid reason for not attempting it.

Hydrogen functions as a rather poor medium for conveying energy - i.e. a battery.

Hydrogen as a fuel is what I was talking about.
Yes, you can tie it back to how the fuel is generated, but ambient power can be used - it needn't be fossil fueled.
We have some sun, a lot of wind, high waves and plenty of water to supply power.
With the proper catalyst, we can extract hydrogen from several sources, our abundant supply of water being one of them.

ONQ.

 

[Superman]

Not developing and utilising our own energy resources because "it costs a lot" is not a valid reason for not attempting it.

Yes it is: paying no attention to "makes no economic sense" is what got Ireland into its current situation.

Yes, you can tie it back to how the fuel is generated, but ambient power can be used - it needn't be fossil fueled.
We have some sun, a lot of wind, high waves and plenty of water to supply power.
With the proper catalyst, we can extract hydrogen from several sources, our abundant supply of water being one of them.

ONQ.

So your solution is a long winded way of saying "renewables".

 

[onq]

Its well known that extracting fossil fuels does make economic sense, so the "makes no economic sense" argument is out the window.
You're talking funding, equipment and expertise, all of which can be bought. When you look at what we're "investing" in our banks for no foreseeable return, you realize what can be done.

My solution is a detailed way of saying -
(i) realise what I meant when I said "hydrogen fuel" and
(ii) don't automatically assume that you need a huge carbon footprint to do this.

In fact, the technology can be developed almost anywhere you can drill down to geothermal, catch waves or absorb sunlight.
Somewhere on the equator near a sheltered sea would be ideal to maximise solar power generation.

The west coast of Saudi would be fine, and they're the ones who'll need to be one step ahead of the game with the technology because it'll hit oil producing nations hardest, so they'll be motivated to join in the race.
And if you invest in processing sea water efficiently you have a lot of useful by products apart from hydrogen and water including salt and yes, gold.
But all that's for another thread.

 

[Superman]

Its well known that extracting fossil fuels does make economic sense, so the "makes no economic sense" argument is out the window.

This sentence makes no sense.

It does sum up your position however.

 

[Lecorbusier]

As per the government publications shop in Molesworth Street, the government has not yet printed and may never print TGD Part L from the Building Regulations 2011.

This would be a first... I have all the Government printed hardcopies of TGDs in my office; it seems that I will never have this one...

Why do they refuse printing it? Part M which is only to be implemented on 01/01/12 was available months ago...

They probably think that it does not worth printing a document that will be in service for only 2 years...

 

[lowCO2design]

I'm not fully agreed with topicstarter

thats great thanks for the input