Report by UK

First Order Draft, Buildings:
UK
This is quite long and uses a lot of jargon. This should be cut to around 2 pages similar to other sector chapters (e.g. industry & agriculture). For example, the last section (from line 37 on page 6 can be cut - far too much detail on methodology that is unnecessary for an exec summary)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 0
UK
I regret I have not had time to review the Sectoral chapters in depth. It may be interesting to illuminate the hypothesis that the Buildings sector is the most heavily dependent upon “First Domain” characteristic, and in particular to liaise with FOD Chapter 2 on how they relate to “System 1” decision-making systems laid out there. This is the broad suggestion laid out in the structure-setting Chapter 3 of Grubb, Hourcade and Neuhoff, Planetary Economics: the Thre
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 11
UK
surely there are some more up to date figures than 2005?
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 13
UK
No mention here of climate - it's the key reason why Iceland and Canada are right at the top (high heating requirements), whereas other countries at similar levels of development like France and the UK are lower down (lower heating requirements and also limited air con needs)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 14
UK
I presume an important issue here is that urbanization tends to be accompanied by higher energy service requirements (e.g. air con, appliances) as people's incomes tend to be higher in urban than in rural areas?
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 17
UK
please clarify in each case whether these are residential or non-residential buildings. Most of these examples/sources are now quite a few years old - can't you find some more up-to -date examples? E.g. in the UK this office building (http://www.passivhaus.org.uk/page.jsp?id=96) has an energy demand of 103 kWh/m2 and CO2 reductions of 80%
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 18 , Line 42
UK
not sure it's true to say that net zero energy is easiest in buildings with a large roof area. Biomass CHP linked to district/communal heating is an easy and probably cheaper option - very common in Austria.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 18
UK
rather than making this a subsection, this could be integrated into 9.3.6 (which is about control)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 19
UK
again, these sources examples are mostly more than 5 years old. Surely, there are more up to date examples?
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 21 , Line 14
UK
needs to explain what a 'curtain wall' is - not a term in common use
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 36
UK
I would cut this section - it's quite vague and doesn't really discuss what the heading suggests (or certainly not community approaches)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 4 , Line 11 To Page 9 , Line 12
UK
page 4 talks of potential savings of 29% by 2030 but doesn't say compared to which year, whereas page 9 talks about 40% but doesn't specify by when. Are these figures consistent? They need to clearly state by year y, compared to year x.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 40 , Line 11
UK
first para is about housing issues in general but not necessarily directly linked to fuel poverty (cut be cut). Don't really understand the terms 'upliftment and up gradation'
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 42 , Line 13 To Page 42 , Line 14
UK
For a more up to date review of rebound effects, see Maxwell et al (2011). Maxwell, D., P. Owen and L. McAndrew (2011). Addressing the Rebound Effect - Final Report, European Commission DG ENV.
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 42 , Line 15 To Page 42 , Line 17
UK
The phrase “..... caused by the additional spending.....” is inaccurate. The indirect rebound effect is caused by re-use of the money saved, which is different from simply “additional spending”. Re-use of the money saved will generally include investment (eg saving the money in a bank) as well as additional spending. The balance of how the money is re-used (saved or re-spent) is important for estimating the rebound effect, depending on the savings ratio. See Druckman
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 42 , Line 29 To Page 42 , Line 31
UK
Chitnis et al (2012) estimate the direct and indirect rebound effect to be 5-15% for a selection of typical energy efficiency measures applied to the UK domestic building stock. Chitnis, M., S. Sorrell, A. Druckman, S. K. Firth and T. Jackson. (2012). ""Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for UK households. Sustainable Lifestyles Research Group: Working Paper 01-12."" available from http://www.sustainablelifestyles.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publicationsdocs/slrg_w
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 42
UK
Heading is misleading - the rebound effect is neither a technological risk nor public perception
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 42
UK
Not sure why this section is called 'public perception' - it seems a mishmash of different things. First sentence mentions several US voluntary programmes but so what - what are you trying to say here? This whole section isn't very clear in what it's trying to day.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 43 , Line 41
UK
Markandya et al showed that in India when the health co-benefits of reduced particulate air pollution were taken into account using EU methodology to monetise the benefits they covered the costs of mitigation. This was less so in the case of China and the EU because of lower baseline levels of air pollution but the benefits were still substantial. Markandya A, Armstrong BG, Hales S, Chiabai A, Criqui P, Mima S, Tonne C, Wilkinson P. The Lancet - 12 December 2009; 374, 9706: 2
View full comment by Andy Haines...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 43
UK
should mention here that barriers into energy efficiency have been widely studied. This (short) section seems to be in the wrong place - should be with 9.10 as this is about policies to overcome the barriers.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 44 , Line 40
UK
It is the combination of insulation with improved ventilation control for example through mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, that results in the health benefits by reducing exposure to indoor air pollution and to the ingress of outdoor pollutants if filters are fitted and maintained. In the Wilkinson study referred to it was assumed that the 20% of dwellings that were most tightly sealed and insulated were fitted with MVEHR
View full comment by Andy Haines...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 46 , Line 22
UK
which 5 years are these?
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 47 , Line 2
UK
should say 'these buildings' will still be standing
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 48 , Line 9
UK
personal carbon allowance - this is only a potential policy instrument, it hasn't been introduced anywhere and would be politically very difficult to do. Not sure about the link between property taxation and energy sufficiency. Property taxation is usually done for other reasons, need to explain their use in this instance.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 49
UK
why is this a subsection? It's one sentence and doesn't really say anything.
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 49
UK
this could be merged with 'a holistic approach' on page 48
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 53 , Line 7
UK
The UK government is not planning to subsidise the interest rate. However, some measures installed under the Green Deal (notably solid wall insulation) will be subsidised under the separate energy company obligations (where energy companies have obligations to meet carbon targets)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Buildings: From Page 9 , Line 16
UK
passive house standard in Upper Austria - the 2006 figure is very out of date. I've seen figures of 25% for Austria (http://www.igpassivhaus.at/%C3%96sterreich/Wir%C3%BCberuns/tabid/63/language/de-DE/Default.aspx)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

Breakdown for UK