no responses

  1. Wolfgang Feist
    September 25, 2010

    I would call the specific values of components (U-value wall, heat recovery etc.) “recommendations for Central European Climate”, not requirements. You are allowed to use components with less strict values, as long as you meet the overall performance requirements.

    These performance requirements for Passive Houses are:
    (1) total heating demand smaller than 15 kWh/m² (living area), calculated by PHPP using the regional climate
    (1a) total cooling demand also smaller tahn 15 kWh/m²/a
    (2) airtightness better than n50 of 0,6 h-1
    (3) total primary energy damnd smaller than 120 kWh/(m²a) including ALL energy consumed (incl. household electricity e.g.)

    Good success with the projects.

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      September 25, 2010

      Many thanks, I’ve tweaked the text accordingly. And many thanks for the good wishes.

      Reply

  2. Niall Dolan
    September 25, 2010

    Best of look with the passive house projects.

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      September 25, 2010

      Many thanks, one looks like it’s going through planning soon, the other is at first stages but was granted previously.

      Reply

  3. Simon McGuinness
    November 4, 2010

    Mark,

    I have built a certified Sub-10 Passive House for a private client in Ireland. That is 50% better than the Passive House 15kW/m2K standard and has a wall thickness of only 305mm. Ireland is the cheapest place in Europe to achieve the PH certification because our climate is made for the passive house.

    I would encourage all architects to go for PH certification because “near Passive” is a recipe for being sued in the future.

    PH is a holistic approach that deals for the first time with the very serious issue of interstitial condensation cause by linear thermal bridging. Up to now we have only survived as a profession because we had such leaky houses. Just cutting out draughts means lower air quality and much greater condensation within the construction. Just adding insulation actually increases the vulnerability of those linear thermal bridges: the more insulation you add the worse the hidden condensation issue becomes. In our climate, that is a recipe for decay.

    It may take 10 years to evolve, but my prediction is that “near Passive” will become the actuarial equivalent of “smoker” or “downhill skier” to a future household insurance provider.

    Already it is more expensive to insure a timber framed house – in future it will be impossible to insure a “near Passive” house. A certified Passive House will not face the same problems because they will not need to be rebuilt due to structural decay.

    My advice is to build it right first time. The cost difference is negligible, in fact, given my experience with the Sub-10 house, I am convinced that I can build a 3-bed detached to certified PH standard for LESS than a traditionally built, building regs compliant, house. That represents a CO2 emissions reduction of something like 90% over the full lifetime of the house. Zero carbon and energy positive are merely a bolt-on piece of kit away when ever the client wants to add them.

    Why would you build anything else?

    Simon

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      November 4, 2010

      Hi Simon

      I couldn’t agree with you more, my concern is that the houses will perform brilliantly but will have no architectural merit as clients go to a ‘certified Passive House Designer’ that has no architectural training.

      Reply

  4. Simon McGuinness
    November 12, 2010

    Don’t forget Mark that the Schroder house was designed by a cabinetmaker and there are many architect-designed houses that would be embarassed in its company. Training is often an inadequate substitute for ability.

    Good design does not gaurantee good building, however much we kid ourselves. If it did, there wouldn’t be half the number of claims against architects p.i. insurance. We need to build competently whatever design our skill and our clients budgets allow. With the new energy performance demands, that is far from a simple task.

    The good news is that achieving compliance is now well beyond the competence of the self-builder so more of our houses will be designed by architects.

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      November 13, 2010

      Excellent points, don’t forget also that Tadao Ando was a boxer and truck driver before being an architect despite no formal training in the field.

      Reply

  5. Micheal Byrne
    December 15, 2010

    Very good blog Mark.

    Well laid out and informative.

    Well done.

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      December 15, 2010

      Many thanks

      Reply

  6. John Moylan
    February 16, 2011

    Hi all – just came across this thread, whilst ‘on a google’ for something else !

    If I may, I feel the comment ‘The good news is that achieving compliance is now well beyond the competence of the self-builder so more of our houses will be designed by architects.’ is a bit premature.

    As surely as the posts above mention the climate of PI claims against architects, so too the practice – of practicing – to building Passive performance houses is, in fact going to be an evolution, not revolution – and there will be mistakes along the way.

    And, similarly, as surely as the complimented-upon Schroder house is acknowledged as good, but not by an architect……….then somewhere out there is a similar ‘non-expert’ is going to appear in the PH field………it would be brash to assume otherwise……….

    Reply

    • markstephensarchitect
      February 16, 2011

      Thanks for the comment, one thing is sure is tht we’re living in interesting times

      Reply

  7. Simon McGuinness
    February 17, 2011

    If i understand it correctly, I disagree with John Moylan’s “evolution” suggestion – Passive House is so far ahead of current practice in Ireland (or anywhere else) that adopting it cannot be considered other than revolutionary. I accept that once the certified – and I mean only certified – Passive Houses gain traction, there will be a subsequent evolutionary progress towards sub-Passive, like my own Sub-10 Passive house (see ConstructIreland Feb 2011).

    The difficulty arises in the evolution of the “near passive” status where all sorts of dodgy experiment at the expense of clients is taking place often as a result of a fundamental misunderstanding of the passive house concept. Aiming for a “near passive” house is an invitation to failure – it will be the “near passive” houses that end up in court or the subject of claims against PI cover. The certified Passive House incorporates checks and balances that ensure the elimination of key areas of potential failure like linear thermal breaks, internal air quality and interstitial condensation. The “near-passive” house designer often has no conception of the serious risks it they are playing around with in these areas.

    It is lamentable that the trajectory of Irish Build Regulations is towards an ill-defined “near passive” status by 2016, precisely the territory where most failure will occur. In my view this is irresponsible and a major disservice to Irish consumers. We should be legislating for beyond certified Passive, if not for reasons of national energy sovereignty, then simply as a consumer protection measure.

    There are already at least three Sub-10 passive houses in Ireland and almost none anywhere else. That is evidence of evolution beyond the revolution, or, more accurately, evolution on the safe side of the revolution.

    Reply

  8. Mark Stephens
    January 16, 2015

    Reblogged this on Mark Stephens Architects and commented:

    One from the archive; I wrote this post in 2010 on Passivhaus

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top
mobile desktop