Retrofitting Existing Housing Stock

Transcription

1 Retrofitting Existing Housing Stock Professional collaboration lessons for the future: The role of professional advice in supporting householders and installers CIBSE Technical Symposium, Edinburgh, April 2016, Case Study Ref: 099 By Sadhbh Ní Hógáin, Haringey Council, Rebecca Ince, Sheffield University, and Edith Colomba, ECD Architects

2 Context for retrofit in Haringey Haringey Context Carbon Commission: 40% by 20:20 Local green growth strategy Single measure/homogenous housing rollouts. Green Deal Pioneer Places Pledge: Zero Carbon by 2050 Smart Homes Context Led by Haringey, with Camden, Islington, Waltham Forest, Hackney, Enfield, DECC funding: 6.5m Target: 1000 owner occupied and PRS House types: Range of housing archetypes and measures offered Stakeholders: over 50, which included 30+ installers ranging from large contractors to small local businesses.

3 Smart Advisor role Technical oversight + advisory Compromise between full design and single measure rollout Sensitivity towards ventilation and moisture risks from installing wall insulation Educating householders about whole house design approach Setting a standard approach for installation details for all installers Advising installers and householders of technical risks from measures selected Checking that quotations offered value for money

4 Lessons from the Smart Advisor #1 Design Responsibility: Standard Approach Wall insulation installations needed an insurance backed guarantee PAS2030 and BBA approved Lack of technical standards for detailing for wall insulation installation Risk of thermal bridging, thermal bypassing or unintended heat loss Standard approach plugged gap left by regulations and standards, protecting against: Damp Table 1. Key guidance covered in Smart Homes standard approach Mould 1. Window and door reveals Poor air quality 2. Ventilation Poor thermal comfort levels 3. Verge trims and eaves i.e. capping insulation Poor energy savings 4. Suspended floor insulation 5. Window sills 6. Base details i.e. insulation below damp course

5 Lessons from the Smart Advisor #2 Building trust: Knowledge sharing and education Homeowners Homeowners lack confidence/awareness Additional technical information assisted homeowners Enabling them to request sitespecific treatment of building risks Example: penetrating damp in part of the wall led to pull test Installers Smart Advisor report identified remediation works and additional details pre-retrofit allowing accurate costing and scheduling, e.g.: Damp mould treatment Repairing defects and cracks Maintaining decorative features Continuing insulation behind soil pipes and guttering Reinstating satellite dishes/wiring/other façade items Site Inspection Tailored Advice Review Options in EPC/GDA Technical Report Review quote for works Approve Quote Post Install Inspection

6 Ultimately, despite the slow start to the project, we are better contractors, and are providing better spec d quotes and schedules of work to customers at the end of the Smart Homes process. (Contractor feedback on Smart Advisor) 6

7 Lessons from the Smart Advisor #3 Building trust: evaluating value for money Schedule of rates across a network of 30+ installers too complex Instead produced benchmark rates Quotes received above benchmark rates were investigated by Smart Advisor Installers needed to rationalise excessive costs Worked with Smart Advisor to reduce costs, where possible. contributed to understanding true costs associated with retrofit. Common reasons for above-benchmark costs included: Replacing boiler exhaust flues Scaffolding costs Complicated architectural features

8 Lessons from the Smart Advisor #4 Co-operation: post-installation audits Post-installation audits - approx.10% of properties (funding constraints prevented more audits) Audit process is vital for ensuring quality installations and preventing long term hygro-thermal risks Identified a number of on-site defects

9 Common on-site defects Issue Description Capping No capping or flashing added on the insulation extruding above the roof ridge line. No cover between brickwork and insulation capping meaning the wall/insulation is directly exposed to rain penetration. Damage Minor damage reported to gardens and/or customer s property during insulation works and/or when scaffolding is being erected/dismantled On site cleaning and tidiness is not satisfactory. Detailing Poor detailing and finishing, for insulation areas bowing and bumpy. Finish at the bottom of the insulation has not been done properly. Over-cills Window cills not finished - left with a gap between installing and building, which allows rainwater penetration. This could lead to structural damage. Sealant The mastic used on site as sealant is not a durable solution. 9

10 Reflections on the Smart Advisor s role Challenges Relational issues installers initially threatened by interference of Smart Advisor Where does the Smart Advisor visit add most value? a hand-holder throughout the process? Poorly defined contracts and reporting processes hindered effectiveness Funding limited options for increasing scope of role Smart Advisor made up 4% of total cost of project Successes Installers improved specs, practices and installation quality Improved technical knowledge, costing and installation issues Customers reassured by Smart Advisor an intermediary protecting their interests Pricing processes more transparent and less exploitative

11 05/04/

12 Conclusions - topics for discussion Should the Smart Advisor be the first point of contact? How can the role be maximised within a retrofit project? Could Smart Advisor project manage the installations on behalf of the customer to minimise on-site defects? Could the Smart Advisor have design responsibility to ensure appropriately designed and executed solutions? Could they guarantee carbon and energy savings for homeowners? How can this role be funded in the future - it is critical to uptake of retrofit, and delivering on energy and carbon savings?