House Building 1,890 views Dec 19, 2018
Compare Eco Housing Design Types

Private homes are estimated to be responsible for about one fifth to one fourth of global carbon dioxide emissions; and for that reason, eco-friendly construction or green building is becoming more and more of a necessity. If you’re looking to move home and are wanting something more eco-friendly, Roof Stores have been investigating some alternative types of housing that will help you cut down your carbon footprint…

Earthship

Earthship designs are made completely from natural and upcycled materials. They are built with the intention of being “Off-The-Grid ready”. This means the require minimal reliance on public utilities and fossil fuels. They are also constructed to use available natural resources in particular energy from the sun and rain water

Sub-Types

Packaged: Prefabricated construction packages available making it easier to construct. Most economical and versatile.

Modular: Provides more sculptural and variety of rooms. Every room has thermal mass and stability.

Eco-Friendly Elements

  • Constructed using natural and upcycled materials.
  • Thermo-solar heating and cooling.
  • Solar and wind electricity.
  • Self-contained sewage treatment.
  • Water harvesting and long-term storage.

Advantages

  • Grow food inside thanks to greenhouse interaction zones.
  • Thermal mass keeps you cool in summer and warm in winter.
  • Ease of construction.
  • Can be constructed using materials that are free and would otherwise be landfill.
  • Inexpensive. Models start at $20,000.
  • Little to no utility bills.

Disadvantages

  • While materials are free, they take time to collect.
  • Most Earthships are constructed with the aid of concrete, which contributes 10% of the world’s greenhouse gases.
  • If not done by yourself, it can be costly to construct.
  • Can take 2-3 years to find its median temperature.

Environment Rating

  • 4/5

Practicality Rating

  • 2/5

Cost To Build

$225 per square foot.Or, from as little as $10,000.

Earth Sheltered

 

Earth Sheltered Houses are typically built into the side or underneath the ground. This could be through ‘Earth Berming’ where earth is piled up against exterior walls and packed, sloping away from the house. Or, they could be classed as ‘in-Hill Construction’ where the home is set into a slope or hillside. There is usually only one wall visible, the rest are surrounded by earth. Some houses are completely underground, otherwise known as Fully Recessed Construction. This is where the ground is excavated, and the house is set in below grade.

Eco-Friendly Elements

Thermal mass: Generated by the earth surrounding the building, warming the house in winter and cooling it in summer.

Advantages

  • Lower Bills: Energy usage will be minimal from heating.
  • Storm Resistant: Thanks to being mostly underground, the impact on your home from high-winds will be minimal or non-existent.
  • Thermal Mass: Energy Usage can be slashed by up to 50%-80%

Disadvantages

  • If the earth shelter has not been properly designed, you will find the following;
    1. Water Seepage
    2. Internal Condensation
    3. Bad Acoustics
    4. Poor Indoor Air Quality
  • Due to the threat of water seepage, non-biodegradable substances, like concrete and plastics, tend to be used, which isn’t eco-friendly
  • Lack of natural light.

Environment Rating

  • 4/5

Practicality Rating

  • 1/5

Cost

$100-$120 per square foot

Prefabricated

 

Pre-fabricated designs are houses that are constructed off-site. Once complete they are shipped to your chosen location and even assembled for you.

Sub-Types

Manufactured: Built on nonremovable steel frames, known as chasses, which are used to transport the home and for permanent support and are relatively low cost.

Modular: Consist of units or modules that are constructed in factories and joined together on site.

They often use costlier materials and are bigger than manufactured homes. They also tend to have more customisation options

Panellised: Have separate units joined together on-site and are more structured then Modular.

The panels fit together in a unique order, rather than the random method of modular.

Eco-Friendly Elements

  • Green Construction: Prefabricated houses use less energy during construction.
  • Green Materials:Typically built with environmentally friendly and recyclable materials like wood and steel.
  • Wastage: There’s less wastage during construction.

Advantages

  • Air-Tight: Tight seams and state-of-the-art windows keep heat in and thus reduce energy bills. Also have a reputation to withstand natural disasters.
  • Speed Of Assembly: Thanks to being pre-made assembly is very quick, as walls and ceilings just need to be joined together.
  • Affordability: Cheaper than standard stick-built homes.

Disadvantages

  • Increased up-front costs due to pre-construction and assembly before you can move in.
  • Hooking up utilities can be problematic.
  • Transportation can be difficult depending on where you want to live.
  • Buying the land to put your home on can be very expensive.

Environment Rating

3/5

Practicality Rating

5/5

Cost

Can range from $50,000 - $500,000.

Shipping Container

Homes made out of shipping containers! They have grown in popularity over the past several years due to their inherent strength, wide availability, and relatively low expense.

Eco-Friendly Elements

  • Reusing Steel: For each recycled shipping container 7,000 pounds of steel become reused.
  • Less Concrete & Cement: The only concrete that you will need will be for the foundations.

Advantages

  • Low Cost: Containers and much cheaper than materials such as brick and steel.
  • Quick Construction: Due to the walls, floors and ceilings being already constructed, moving in time is radically decreased.
  • Durable: Containers are already made to resist extreme weather conditions.
  • Off Site Construction: Containers can be converted off-site so only assembly and interior design in needed on-site.

Disadvantages

  • Temperature Control: Temperature control can be difficult due to the metal’s absorption quality.
  • Space & Shape: You are restricted to the length and width of the containers.
  • Cargo Spillages: You never know what the container was storing before you owned it.
  • Solvents: Solvents released from paint and sealants used in manufacture might be harmful.

Environment Rating

  • 2/5

Practicality Rating

  • 3/5

Cost

$2,000 per container.

Tiny House Movement

Tiny houses have become so popular that they have their own ‘movement’. Generally, they are under 500 square feet.

Eco-Friendly Elements

  • Less building materials required.
  • Easier to build with recycled, repurposed and salvaged materials.
  • Reduced life cycle cost of materials.
  • Smaller space to heat.
  • Can be mostly powered off solar and wind resources due to size.
  • Composting toilet.
  • Catch and filtration of rainwater.

Advantages

  • Many tiny houses can be built with wheels enabling it to be a mobile home.
  • Affordability.

Disadvantages

  • Less living and storage space.
  • Limited entertaining space.
  • Minimalist lifestyle.

Environment Rating

4/5

Practicality Rating

3/5

Cost

$19,000 - $50,000

Visit: https://www.roof-stores.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Tags: #Compare Eco Housing Design Types 

  • By Talk. Build
    Ageing housing stock stands proud in 21st Century
    Failing roofs, car parks and walkways are a fact of life. However, when this vital infrastructure forms part of a well-populated social housing development, failure to address deteriorating pathways and the like before major damage sets in can lead to huge expense for the local authority involved.  With council purse-strings tightened like never before it’s possible the cost of pricey refurbishment projects will be passed to the taxpayer, so it’s in all our interests repairs are carried out quickly and with minimal disruption. Dave Maginnis, Managing Director at BriggsAmasco explains what the solution to the issue of upgrading the UK’s rapidly ageing social housing stock and surrounding infrastructure is? In England there are around 2.5 million housing association tenants. With a national waiting list for social housing now at 1.36 million households or 3.4 million people, the need to maintain authority-owned buildings to the highest possible standard is more apparent than ever. For more than 150 years leading waterproofing and roofing contractor, BriggsAmasco, has been applying practical and technical expertise to a range of new and existing building requirements. This experience and skill is needed like never before with current figures showing one-fifth of Britain’s housing stock is more than 100-years-old. With many of these ageing buildings now in need of regeneration, it’s vital to choose products and systems that deliver long term performance for the client, and in a social housing context, that means a fast application for the contractor and minimal disruption to the residents. Housing stock given thermal blanket BriggsAmasco offers a broad range of waterproofing solutions for roofs, walkways, balconies and car parks. Renowned for providing full-proof, cost effective solutions to new and existing projects nationwide ensured the company was specified as Principal Contractor by Aberdeen City Council to upgrade weather tightness and thermal performance in its stock of more than 20,000 properties. The company supplied and installed a complete build up system comprising Icopal Monarplan single ply, 120mm insulation and Technatorch vapour control layer. Combining excellent thermal performance and airtight construction, the system has helped to reduce the buildings’ carbon footprint whist ensuring high quality waterproofing protection. Aberdeen City Council provides affordable housing for nearly 25,000 families and so it was important BriggsAmasco ensured minimal disruption was caused to council residents whilst also meeting strict health and safety regulations. By appointing BriggsAmasco for the installation, the council and its residents were guaranteed a high performance roofing system that will perform for many years to come. Building a path to better walkways Social housing refurbishment can achieve a range of desired results such as improving a structure’s aesthetics as well as shoring up its safety and potentially extending its lifetime. The same outcome is required of the surrounding infrastructure as council-owned walkways or pavements can be a huge drain on public resources if not properly maintained. Figures revealed councils in England paid out more than £82m in compensation over a five-year period to people who tripped on pavements or walkways. It is therefore vital these public paths are hazard-free to ensure damage limitation to public and council alike. BriggsAmasco helped breathe new life into an ageing and dilapidated walkway at a social housing complex in Hull. The surface of Wilberforce Walkway had suffered water ingress for a number of years due to it becoming beset with cracks and uneven surfaces. It led to trip hazards and uncomfortable walking conditions for nearby residents. Requiring comprehensive refurbishment to return it to its very best, BriggsAmasco applied an asphalt installation to the walkway, comprising 15mm Permapark Waterproofing layer and 25mm one coat Permapark Paving layer with a crimped finish. It ensured the new Wilberforce Walkway will provide social housing residents with long-term safe and reliable access. The cost of ignoring surface danger Failing public surfaces are not only a danger to people; machines can suffer too. Compensation pay outs are not limited to drivers whose cars have been damaged by a pot-holed road or highway; poorly maintained car parks can also result in a hefty repair bill for motorists. This is invariably passed on to the car park’s managing authority leading to an expense claim which could run to several hundred pounds; unnecessary expenditure, especially if the authority happens to be a cash-strapped local council or hospital. In such cases an urgent solution is required if a car park used by hospital visitors, staff, patients or social housing residents shows signs of disrepair. BriggsAmasco was appointed to replace a car park designed to serve housing association tenants in Southampton city centre that was causing damage to the structure and vehicles parked below due to surface leakage. With just six weeks to complete the project and the car park in operation throughout, the company installed 2500m2 of Permapark mastic asphalt waterproofing and surfacing system. BriggsAmasco ensured there was no disruption to residents during renovation which helped return the roof car park to its functional best. There is nothing anyone can do to halt time’s inexorable march, but BriggsAmasco has a variety of quality, cost-effective solutions to ensure the future survival of Britain’s ageing social housing stock and infrastructure. Vist:https://briggsamasco.co.uk/
    Feb 05, 2018 0
  • By Talk. Build
    Overheating - the hot home issue
    In our quest to meet greater energy efficiency in homes through better insulation, thermal glazing and efficient heating systems, properties might be able to prevent heat losses in the winter, but remain at risk of overheating in the warmer months.  As we rise to the challenge of making our homes more resilient to the extremes of winter, Michael Brogden, Director at Darren Evans Assessments looks into the issue of overheating, an issue that needs to be tackled head-on.  The issue of overheating is a complex one and not simply a case of airtightness or simple measures adopted to increase the efficiency of the building fabric.  Overheating occurs when heat builds up in a home due to external forces such as the sun, or from internal sources such as appliances and hot water pipes. Throw into the mix the increases in the number of unusually hot summers as our climate changes, more frequent and intense heatwaves and urban high-density construction, and you begin to have alarming levels of overheating in homes and a potential health issue. In the past, heat has been lost from buildings due to lower levels of insulation and gaps in the building fabric. These previous leaks would have dissipated the heat gain from south facing windows for example, but now, our well-intentioned improvements to a building’s efficiency in winter means that heat cannot not escape, causing issues in the summer. The bigger picture The 2015 report by the Zero Carbon Hub, ‘Overheating in Homes – The Big Picture’, highlighted five key risk factors for overheating in homes, only one of which directly concerns the building fabric. This shows the need for a greater focus on wider design issues beyond the building itself particularly when planning new schemes. These factors are: Site context (e.g. air quality issues may prevent occupants from opening windows) External temperature (warm external air may not provide enough of a cooling effect) Solar gain (unshaded double-glazed windows can lead to high heat gain) Internal gain (electrical appliances, building services and activities such as cooking all contribute to heat gain) Building design (Building Regulations require increased levels of insulation and airtightness, meaning built-up heat will have to be removed) It is easier with new build schemes to address these design factors than with existing buildings that may have constraints which are hard to alter. For example, opening windows may be restricted in apartment buildings such as where they open over bins, or tenants may have south facing windows or even windows which they cannot open. The only approach which is likely to be practical in addressing overheating is a combination of sensible design interventions taking on board what is practical for people to do. There are further challenges in urban settings in summer, for example, in high density housing in cities like London opening windows may even cause hotter air to enter due to waste heat from cars, air conditioning and other sources. This wide range of issues is proof the issue of overheating is not as simple as people think. Comfortably cool By considering a range offactors, it’s possible to tackle the issue of overheating. Housing developments should adopt a five-step ‘cooling hierarchy’ as outlined in the London Plan to avoid the risk of overheating. This should include the minimisation of internal heat generation through energy efficient design such as decreasing pipe lengths and adopting pipe configurations that minimise heat loss, and reducing the amount of heat entering a building in summer by the use of shading measures including louvers, blinds or trees and vegetation. Increasing the amount of exposed thermal mass can also help to absorb excess heat with a building. In addition, both passive ventilation (openable windows, dual aspect units etc) and mechanical ventilation can be used to make free use of free cooling. CIBSE’s introduction of TM59: Design methodology for the assessment of overheating risk in homes, is another step in the right direction for the building services industry in terms of future proofing buildings to rising global temperatures. It can be used at the planning stage and later to assess overheating risk and influence building design for the better. In reality, a well-insulated building can make it easier for occupants to maintain a comfortable temperature whatever the season, but only if that shell is well designed in the context of its site, and properly constructed to include an appropriate ventilation strategy. Whether new build or retrofit, it’s important the construction industry provides homes that are warm in winter and cool in summer.  Visit: http://www.darren-evans.co.uk/
    Jul 08, 2017 0
  • By Sophie Slociak
    WELL, WELL, WELL
    Sustainability has been at the top of the agenda for many years but I have an ever-increasing feeling that much of the industry is missing the next step. Over recent years we have been placing our emphasis on the environmental and economic parts of sustainability, but we shouldn’t forget the fact that we are creating buildings for people and the well-being of these people should be the priority. So the question is: Are we putting buildings before people? Is it now time to place greater emphasis on people? When you look at costs in relation to buildings, we freely talk about energy savings but our biggest cost is the people within them and this figure is an astonishing 90% of that overall cost. In addition it has been claimed that we spend over 90% of our time indoors and in an office environment. So why has the focus been put firmly on creating better buildings when, in fact, we should be creating buildings to make the occupants feel better, and in turn, happier and more productive? Imagine what we could achieve if we were able to increase productivity in an office by just 1% simply through creating a better working environment? Well, I have a feeling this is all about to change.  A couple of months ago it was alluded to in an article in Building magazine that the WELL Building Standard could soon be aligned with global sustainability standard BREEAM. The WELL Standard, created by US-based consultants Delos, measures human health and wellness using evidence-based medical and scientific research to help inform better design of buildings. To quote Delos founder Paul Scialla and Building magazine: “Delos are in talks with BRE about pairing the WELL Standard with BREEAM.” This could be a major step forward to aligning the performance of buildings with the wellness of its occupants as reinforced by Scialla who stated that he realised 7 years ago there was a “huge gap in regard to not enough understanding of how the built environment really is impacting biological sustainability as opposed to just environmental.” BREEAM has long been the ‘go to’ standard to help deliver sustainable buildings. Used in more than 70 countries and with 24,000 projects around the world, and more than 2.2 million buildings and communities registered for certification, it is clear to understand the value that the built environment places on BREEAM. Whilst BREEAM does encourage occupier and building owners to continually monitor performance, it doesn’t go as far as looking and measuring occupier behaviours and well-being. Surely this is the next natural step? And, as if on cue, we have WELL. Whilst the WELL Standard has been in existence for some years now – most actively in the USA – it is relatively new to Europe. However, Studio Ben Allen Architects’ One Carter Lane project has just become the first European project to receive the accreditation. One Carter Lane, the new London headquarters of engineers Cundall, is a 15,400ft² Cat-A office fit-out. The fit-out provides new workspaces for up to 180 employees and attained a BREEAM Excellent rating and SKA Gold certification – in addition to a WELL Gold standard.  The WELL Building Standard defines a set of compliance requirements that cover seven key areas: air, water, nourishment, light, fitness, comfort and mind. It looks at driving change towards more personal criteria such as stating that 30% of staff must have space to eat lunch together; materials such as desks and storage must use natural materials; and that the volatile organic compound (VOC) rating of all materials must be between negligible and zero, thus ensuring that office fixtures, fittings and fabric do not expel harmful chemical or organic emissions. So how does all this help to improve well-being and, whilst we can measure productivity, how do we actually measure emotions such as happiness and the direct effect this has on outputs? And the big question is: What cost does this add to a project? According to Cundall it has added around 3% to the project value which equates to just £200 per head. There are elements of WELL that will need to be addressed if it is to become mainstream in the UK, in much the same way that BREEAM has. For example, in the UK and many other European countries, certain standards are higher than those within WELL. A comparative base line will need to be created so we are not rewarding for going backwards. Also the business case will be different. In the US there is no NHS, instead private healthcare is provided by employers. As such there is a clear reason for US employers to adopt WELL to increase productivity and reduce their healthcare costs. We may need to look at incentives for UK employers. In the case of the success of One Carter Lane, time will tell, but the initial reports do indicate that a working environment that promotes happiness, well-being, positivity and improved productivity has been created. The challenge is how do we adopt wellness in the same way that we have embraced sustainability? For me, wellbeing is a vital part of every building – whether it is a school, a hospital, an office or a home. Buildings that make us feel comfortable, happy and calm are essential. With so much of our time spent indoors, and with illness costing UK businesses on average £550 per employee per year (a total of about £30bn, according to the Chartered Institute of Professional Development) it’s something that we all need to embrace – after all we build buildings for people.
    Sep 02, 2016 0