Scotland group

[AECB admin]

Chat to members of the Scotland group here.

[David Somervell]

Very much looking forwards to catching up with other AECB members and friends in SEDA and emerging Passivhaus Trust Scotland at the event on Thursday 14 February. Food and drink available from 6pm. Book now via https://seda14feb.eventbrite.co.uk All best, David

[Mr Caunt]

For joint events with the Scottish Ecological Design Association go to SEDA.uk.net/events

[Jarek Gasiorek]

Hello everyone. I’m looking for members active in Scotland. Could you please get in touch. Thanks.

[Carol Keith]

Hi Jarek, I am based in Aberdeenshire.

[Jarek Gasiorek]

Thanks Carol. Are you close to some other AECB members?
I have been elected for a trustee of AECB. I’m based in Edinburgh. I hope to generate some interactions between Scottish members.

[Carol Keith]

I don’t have contact with any AECB members. If you can arrange a group of them in scotland though I’d be happy to join a chat/video call if that’s your plan.

[Jarek Gasiorek]

Thanks Carol, We are thinking about organising an event in Edinburgh. I will keep you posted.

[Jarek Gasiorek]

I’m looking for as many members in Scotland as it is possible. I’m hoping to organise a get together to facilitate some networking and socialising.  Please get in touch. Thank you!

 

[Ryan Holmes]

Hi Jarek, sounds great. It would be good to get a Scottish group together! Regards, Magda

[Grant McCowan]

Would anyone be prepared to spend an hour working through a project?  I have a project in St Andrews.  I have prepared and costed a strategy for retrofit and the costs are prohibitive.  I would really appreciate a second pair of eyes to review the proposals and share their experience.  For example: the property is constructed in cavity construction blockwork with an inner leaf of thermalite block.  I have avoided suggesting the cavity be filled but is there an environmentally sound, inert material that has been proven to not increase the moisture risk in the fabric?

Also looking for anyone who might be interested in certifying to AECB Retrofit Level 2.

[Jarek Gasiorek]

Grant, I have come across this product: https://springvale.com/ecobead/
I have not use it. Their case for dealing with moisture seems quite convincing. The environmental aspects will be as any other EPS I imagine.

We reviewed it for on of our double leaf projects. We concluded, that cavity fill is the best to deal with thermal bridges. Especially if you have some steel or concrete resting on the inner leaf. IWI could create problems in those locations. Did you speak to Ecological Building Systems? They offer advise and free Wu-Fi calculations.

[Grant McCowan]

Hi Jarek – Hope you are well. Good to hear from you.  Really appreciate your response and was drawing the same conclusion from a cost and disruption perspective.  The customer, however, has environmental concerns, wants to limit embodied carbon as well as operational and is keen to improve air quality as much as possible.  The following table refers to ‘Thermal Insulation Materials for Building Applications’ by Eshrar Latif, Rachel Bevan and Tom Woolley (published by ICE) to compare environmental attributes and health impacts of EPS with wood fibre:
<table width=”517″>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width=”239″>Environmental Attributes Comparison</td>
<td width=”107″>EPS</td>
<td width=”107″>Wood Fibre</td>
<td width=”64″></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Embodied energy</td>
<td>104.03</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>MJ/kg</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GWP 100 (Cradle to installation)</td>
<td>82</td>
<td>-181</td>
<td>kg CO₂ eq.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ODP (Cradle to installation)</td>
<td>2.34×10⁻⁰⁶</td>
<td>5.86×10⁻⁰⁶</td>
<td>kg CFC-11 eq.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Recyclable</td>
<td>No</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Biodegradable</td>
<td>No</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Pollution</td>
<td>Styrene exposure in production</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Health Impacts</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Endocrine distributor</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Carcinogen</td>
<td>Yes (potential)</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Irritant to:</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>eyes</td>
<td>Yes (in production)</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>skin</td>
<td>Yes (in production)</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>upper respiratory tract</td>
<td>Yes (in production)</td>
<td>No</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Wood fibre meets the customer requirements (apart from the ODP which may but it doesn’t make sense to me).  The manufacturer of the bead reports a duration of 5 months for operational carbon savings to recover the embodied carbon costs.  The cost and disruption of installing wood fibre IWI against blown cavity insulation makes a convincing argument for blown cavity insulation.

The middle ground would appear to be blown fibres from recycled PET but I cannot find a installer/supplier in the country.

I’m waiting on a price and duration for the supply and install for the beads.  Once this comes in, I’ll present the findings to the customer and let them decide.

Thanks again for your response.  Generally feel like I’m out on a limb with this stuff.  The guidance in the ICE publication referred to is clear but the market, practicality and cost makes following it for retrofit prohibitive.

[Jarek Gasiorek]

Wood fibre definitely looks much better.

I guess it’s a question of weighting the pros and cons.

Did you consider cellulose? I’m not sure if it suitable in Scottish/Costal context but maybe with some smart detailing at the base (e.g. beads to 150mm above ground level, then cellulose) ? Never seen this in use, trying to think outside of the box here…

[Claire Cockburn]

Hi, does anyone have any figures for the embodied carbon (kgCO²e/m²) within a traditional sandstone building? We’re carrying out some fairly high-level calculations for the embodied carbon within an existing building in Edinburgh and it would be great to be able to use more accurate figures than the ‘Business as Usual’ rates from the RIBA 2030 Climate Challenge. Thanks.

[Author]

Posts