Professional Documents
Culture Documents
UK Residential Tower Blocks Demolish or Refurbish The Energy Perspective
UK Residential Tower Blocks Demolish or Refurbish The Energy Perspective
UK Residential Tower Blocks Demolish or Refurbish The Energy Perspective
James Livingstone
January 2008
UK RESIDENTIAL
TOWER BLOCKS.
DEMOLISH OR
REFURBISH?
THE
ENERGY PERSPECTIVE
Abstract
Housing contributes almost a third of the UKs greenhouse gas emissions. A
coherent strategy is needed to reduce these emissions from the existing
housing stock.
Mass redevelopment of housing in the 1950s 60s and 70s delivered estates
of non traditional dwellings. The consequent movement and disruption of
communities caused social problems, and the tower block came to symbolise
all the worst aspects of design and build of the times.
The reputation of the tower block has been blighted in almost all respects.
Beyond social issues, the tower block has come to be thought of as energy
inefficient and considered the epitome of the Hard to Treat Home.
This thesis looks at whether this reputation is well founded and relevant today.
It asks if tower blocks have a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
the UK housing stock, or if energy priorities will dictate that they should be first
in line for demolition and replacement by more efficient dwellings.
It seeks also to provide tools for tower block owners to use in making
investment decisions about their housing stock.
Architecture, build quality, and condition are looked at to see whether there is
a design and structural basis for preserving tower blocks. Structural condition
is sometimes a spurious reason for demolition of tower blocks when social and
estate management issues are really the problem.
Stock knowledge and analysis of UK housing is assessed, and the conclusions
reached that what is known about the stock is inadequate for current purpose,
and that the analysis of that knowledge unfairly blights certain building types
including tower blocks.
Refurbishment case studies show the inconsistency in approach that tower
block owners have at the moment.
Thermal simulation is used to model energy use and heat losses in tower
blocks under a variety of scenarios. Results indicate that, although costs can
be high because of the access equipment required to carry out works,
form and layout of tower blocks are actually conducive to relatively simple
improvements in insulation and glazing, that can make tower blocks very
energy efficient dwellings.
Calculations of embodied energy in demolition, refurbishment and
replacement dwellings reflect well on the lifetime energy use of a refurbished
tower block when compared with an energy efficient new dwelling.
Acknowledgements
I am very grateful to:
- Melissa Taylor, my tutor for this project, for general support and her
comments on the proposal and drafts.
- Damian Randle, and Mike Thompson for their support throughout the MSc
course.
- Anthony Dickins and Prija of Wates Construction Limited who were very
generous with their time discussing and demonstrating the work at the Little
Venice refurbishment project in Westminster.
- Architects Kemp, Muir, Wealleans for further information about the Little
Venice project.
- Staff of The Apollo Group working on the refurbishment of Peregrine and
Kestrel Houses in Islington who went out of their way to show me round the
project with little notice.
- Graeme and Steven Henn of Islington Energy Centre for their time discussing
the energy strategy at Islington BC, and in particular the proposed installation
of a wind turbine on Kestrel House.
- Chris Goodings at Solar Energy Alliance, for further discussions about the
proposed wind turbine on Kestrel House.
- Graham Hill, David Green, and Andrew Chambers at Norwich City Council
for discussion, copies of plans and access to Normandie Tower in Norwich.
- The Zero Carbon Britain project, the production of which coexisted with the
thesis and encouraged my research into energy use and carbon emissions in
buildings.
- Andrew Holland, energy consultant, for fuel use figures for Winchester Tower
Norwich.
- Duncan Josh and Jamie Bull for support and comment during the work.
- Pedro for his helpful comments on Modernism
- My partner Nicci for proof reading, supporting me and tolerating an unhealthy
level of interest in tower blocks for 6 months.
Contents
Abbreviations and Glossary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
17
26
33
39
6. Case Studies
47
66
77
86
96
Appendices
100
Bibliography
105
Table 24: Little Venice Towers . Cost Energy and Carbon Performance......... 56
Figure 14: Polesworth House before refurbishment as the scaffolding is being
erected .................................................................................................... 58
Figure 15: Wilmcote House after refurbishment with the scaffold being
dismantled............................................................................................... 58
Figure 16: Over cladding and insulation detail on Little Venice project.......... 58
Table 25: Kestrel and Peregrine Houses basics .......................................... 59
Table 26: Kestrel and Peregrine Houses. Cost, Energy and Carbon
performance ............................................................................................ 59
Table 27: Wind turbine feasibility figures ....................................................... 60
Figure 17: Kestrel House, Islington , soon to be home to a wind turbine........ 60
Table 28: Six Towers Norwich basics.......................................................... 62
Table 29: Six Towers Norwich. Cost, Energy and Carbon performance ........ 62
Figure 18: Normandie Tower IES Model......................................................... 69
Figure 19: Normandie Tower Photograph....................................................... 69
Table 30: IES VE Analysis of Boiler loads for Normandie Tower (Whole
Block) ...................................................................................................... 71
Table 31: Flat by flat results of IES.VE analysis ............................................. 72
Table 32: Comparison of heat loads for flat and same construction bungalow.
................................................................................................................ 73
Table 33: Actual and IES simulation figures for whole block boiler loads ...... 74
Table 34 : Projected savings in cost of oil (per annum) from insulation
measures ................................................................................................ 75
Figure 20: Aluminium over cladding at Little Venice has dramatically improved
the look of the blocks............................................................................... 78
Figure 21: The corrugated concrete at Kestrel House has been expertly
repaired. .................................................................................................. 79
Figure 22 : Detailing for cladding installation .................................................. 79
Table 35: How Orientation and Tilt affect Photovoltaic Electricity Generation
Potential .................................................................................................. 83
Table 36: Calculation of Mass. Embodied Energy and Embodied Carbon in
Normandie Tower .................................................................................... 89
Table 37: Embodied Energy of new buildings (ECI 2007 p1)......................... 90
Table 38: Calculating the embodied energy of insulated cladding .................. 91
Table 39: Calculating the embodied energy of new windows ......................... 91
Table 40: Benchmark figures for energy use for space heating from hot water
................................................................................................................ 92
Figure 23: PassivHaus and refurbished flat. Lifetime energy use compared93
Table 41: Examples of development densities................................................ 94
Table 42: Normandie and Winchester Towers , Norwich. Existing
Construction details............................................................................... 101
Figure 24: Ground Floor Plan of Winchester Tower...................................... 102
Table 43: Tower Block modelled variables for IES VE simulations ............... 103
Table 44: Oil consumption for Winchester Tower, Norwich. .......................... 104
1. Introduction
Background
Europe is facing crises in the climate, energy security and housing.
With over a quarter of carbon dioxide emissions in the UK coming from
existing housing, and with housing in short supply and poor condition, some
tough decisions are needed.
High rise dwellings are not just numerically significant in themselves. They
also act as an archetype of construction for a lot of the housing buildings
constructed between 1950 and 1980. There are for example, a further
2,677,000 medium rise purpose built flats in the England having similar
construction details as high rise. (English House Condition Survey 2008)
Further, they have a symbolic importance, initially of post war architectural
optimism, and later of social breakdown and urban deprivation. They stand tall
and significant in the urban skyscape of all Europes major cities.
However, society has suffered from problems arising from the vast social
experiment that post war housing became.
Because of these problems, high rise buildings are still being demolished at an
unprecedented rate, this despite signs of a renewed interest in their potential.
In the current rush to redevelop post war estates and build new communities,
there is a very real risk of repeating the mistakes of the past, when good
buildings were wiped away with the bad in widespread demolition and
redevelopment schemes that were based on social and political imperatives,
rather than on careful assessment of the stock.
Energy Standards
Legislation and guidance for new housing is being introduced to ensure that
new dwellings at least, are built to high energy efficiency standards.
James Livingstone
Laudable as this is, it has limited impact on carbon dioxide emissions from the
UK housing stock, because, at present rates of construction and demolition,
over 90% of UK housing in 50 years time will be the buildings that exist now.1
There is no matching legislation and guidance for existing housing. Energy
improvement works to these have so far focused on the quick hits of loft and
cavity wall insulation. However, there is a growing realisation that this does not
reach enough of the stock, and cavity wall insulation in itself rarely produces
the improvements in the thermal performance of a building that are now
required.
There is little incentive, little information and little support for energy efficient
approaches to refurbishment, and where high rise blocks are being
refurbished instead of being demolished, they are apparently being done with
little recognition of the need for energy efficiency.
Should priorities change?
Content
This thesis therefore, aims to examine the environmental credentials of the
high rise residential block to assess its potential in a world where energy use
must play a bigger part in decision making.
The limited amount of the previous work in this area is looked at in chapter
two. This thesis attempts to go further. It tries to make specific contributions to
the decision making process about high rise buildings, by providing new
perspectives and an energy model for building owners to apply to their
housing investment decisions.
Local social circumstances will sometimes dictate the future of an estate, and
this is as it should be. Although it is not the business of this thesis to do any
more than to recognise that as a fact, it does try and look behind some of the
preconceptions arising from the perceptions of those problems. These are
looked at in some detail in chapter three.
For example, it is commonly thought that high rise blocks were ill conceived
and badly designed from the start. It is often said that tower blocks were badly
built and are falling down. If either contention were fundamentally true,
investment of any sort would not be worthwhile. Construction science and
types are examined to put these ideas to the test.
Chapter four looks in greater detail at the environmental and legislative context
in which the study is being done, and provides an introduction to the debate
about lifetime energy performance in new and refurbished buildings. This
continues in chapter five with examination of the concept of hard to treat
1
Demolition rates currently at about 20,000 per year and new build at 180,000 per year. (CAT
2007)
James Livingstone
homes and whether the labelling of high rise blocks as hard to treat is correct
or still relevant given the available evidence.
Case studies are not easily found, but several contractors, architects and local
authorities were good enough to give comprehensive access to some
interesting refurbishment projects, and these are looked at in detail in chapter
six, together with some secondary research downloaded from government
sponsored, and commercial web sites. These provide an empirical base for the
later analysis.
Computer modelling is used in chapter seven to analyse the thermal
performance of a particular tower block, and to measure the effects of energy
efficiency improvements on it. The modelled improvements are external wall
insulation and double glazing, as these two basic measures address the shell
of the building where the heat losses to the majority of flats occur.
The practicalities of wall insulation and double glazing are addressed in
chapter eight.
It is the generally accepted presumption of this thesis that insulation should be
maximised before power generation from renewables is considered, but in
chapter nine, recognition is also given to the particular contributions that
district heating, combined heat and power (CHP), and renewable technologies
can make to high rise dwellings.
Demolition and refurbishment are compared in the last chapter, in terms of
embodied energy, energy in use and land use.
The conclusion assesses the success of the project.
James Livingstone
2. Literature Review
This chapter looks at the most significant contributions to the
study of sustainability of high rise dwellings. It aims to review
what is written and to ensure that the thesis is adding to these
not duplicating them. It also acknowledges some of the most
important sources of background information for the thesis and
lastly, looks at some of the contemporary thinking about high rise
buildings.
The resource starts by putting the issues in context under the headings of:
Background :
Why refurbish?, history of tower blocks, present context, case studies.
and ..
Refurbishment Process:
Consultation, funding and decanting.
It takes a broad brush approach to a wide range of sustainability issues and
presents the issues as design options for:
Building roof, building facade, entrance and security, lifts, lobby and
corridors, flat layout , heating and hot water, electrical and IT, ventilation, water
supply, waste management, site and surroundings, landscape and
environment, and tenants and management.
Of these headings, the building facade is the most relevant to this thesis so it
is this that is looked at in more detail below to demonstrate the approach taken
by the Sustaining Towers resource.
James Livingstone
The LAs and RSLs that are the usual owners of these buildings are rarely in a
financial position to consider many of the options presented here. Officers
often have to fight for sufficient funds to carry out basic repairs let alone for
improvements.
In reality, building owners faced with social deprivation, and structural
dilapidation and very limited budgets in an unsupportive political environment,
have to make hard and often unacceptable choices. If they are given the
opportunity to invest in their high rise blocks it is often only the basics that they
will be able looking at.
The site describes itself in part as a tool kit for building owners, but falls short
of the real detail to enable financial cases to be made for any of the options. It
is possible to estimate some costs, but no detailed information of the benefits
is given.
James Livingstone
The main product of the initiative, apart from co-sponsorship of the Sustaining
Towers resource above, seems to be the 2000 report Streets in the Sky (Gale
and Church 2000) which introduces the subject and identifies the needs and
means of moving towards sustainable tower blocks under the following
headings:
Tower Blocks matter introduces the subject and spells out the aims of the
NSTBI which include demonstration, disseminating good practice, influencing
policy, providing guidance to tenants.
Tower Blocks the challenge identifies the perceived and actual problems
with tower blocks and the associated funding and management issues.
Making a start proposes new ways of thinking and identifies opportunities
and potential benefits of tower blocks.
Making it happen proposes ways of dealing with what it sees as the key
issue of funding, building communities, security, and management, all in the
context of urban regeneration.
Whilst there is some brief discussion of energy, particularly in relation to waste
when tower blocks are demolished, building sustainable communities is the
basis of this initiative rather than energy and the environment.
The NSTBI appear to have been mostly inactive since 2000.
Euroace
The European Alliance of Companies for Energy Efficiency in Buildings
(Euroace) was set up in 1998 by 20 large European companies, all involved in
the business of energy efficiency in buildings.
The information relevant to high rise dwellings is included in a published
document entitled Changing the View (subtitled Energy Efficiency in the
Refurbishment of High Rise Buildings).
James Livingstone
It divides Europe into climatic zones, identifies the numbers of high rise
dwellings (36 million or one in six households!), identifies the potential
improvements in terms of process (insulation, window improvement and
services improvements) and in terms of carbon saving, and makes
recommendations for policy and research.
This is a commercial site and its primary aim is to lobby, but there is useful
information particularly in respect of basic data and for the examples, some of
which are used later in the thesis.
Other Resources
It is important also to acknowledge the principal resources used for
background, context and technical understanding.
For historical and architectural context, Glendenning and Muthesius book The
Tower Block. Modern Public Housing in England Scotland and Northern
Ireland, was important. The website From Here to Modernity was also useful
for further information this area.
For technical understanding and some early case studies, Building Research
Establishment (BRE) reports were well used.
For thermal simulation, the Integrated Energy Solutions Virtual Environment
(IES VE ) software was used. IES VE is among five widely used simulation
programmes in the UK. It has been tested using ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 1402001 building energy simulation software accreditation tests and is approved
by The Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers for use under their
Low Carbon Consultant Programme. It is also approved for use for SAP
calculations and for compliance with part L2 of the Building Regulations.
For U Value calculations Build Desk software was used. This software is
approved for use in calculations for SAP for Part L of the Building Regulations.
Other resources are referenced in the bibliography.
Contemporary thinking
Finally, it is worth giving space here to some of the recent renewed interest in
new high rise buildings, both residential and office based. Land pressure in
cities and shifts in planning perspectives, have meant that high rise buildings
now being built in all major cities once again.
There is surprise among many at this development, partly because of the
associations that high rise residential has with urban deprivation, and partly
because many see new high rise as unsustainable.
James Livingstone
It is not a part of this thesis to consider these issues in any depth, but it notes
the following in the interest of shedding light on some of the later discussions:
Sue Roaf (Roaf et al 2005 p240 - p265), argues strongly against new high rise,
on the grounds of cost, carbon footprint, psychological effects and shading.
She welcomes the potential opportunities for wind generators, transparent
photovoltaics and geothermal piles in high rise developments, but highlights
their limitations because of the poor ratio of roof to floor space. She also
recognises that extra energy demands are placed on high rise dwellings
because of lifts, wind pressure, thermal stratification, solar gains and
maintenance inputs.
Having said all this, the integration of renewables - sometimes in spectacular
fashion, can teach useful lessons about the use of this type of technology in
our existing buildings, and breakthroughs can be made.
These projects go ahead for reasons of status, architectural experiment and
land pressure. What they bring us may be folly, but the level of investment in
research and development is important in informing the work that is done on
more modest projects.
Case :
The Bahrein Trade Centre (left )has three 29 metre
diameter integrated wind turbines producing 1.3
GWh electricity per year.
James Livingstone
James Livingstone
Introduction
To understand the development of the tower block requires the study of
architecture (Modernism, Gropius, Le Corbusier and the Chicago School),
technological developments in building materials, and the politics and
sociology of post war Britain.
It is a common misconception to think of flats as a 20th century invention. Flats
were commonplace in 19th century cities.
Tenements had existed for centuries. Four to six storey blocks had been the
predominant urban form of housing form the middle of the 19th century.
(Glendenning and Muthesius 1993 p 24)
However, although people have long been familiar with living in low rise flats, it
is true that the high and medium rise blocks that are so much a feature of our
urban landscape today, are largely a product of the special conditions of the
mid 20th century.
The aspiration for good lighting was a prime driver and as Glendenning and
Muthesius point out ...
James Livingstone
10
Walter Gropius vocalised the desire to move away from the darkness and
squalor of what were now seen as primitive Victorian slums:
... all dwellings should command a clear view of the sky over the broad
expanses of grass ... instead of the ground floor windows looking onto blank
walls or onto sunless courtyards (Glendenning and Muthesius 1993 p45) .
In the 1920s Le Corbusier developed the Dom-ino system. This together with
the Chicago frame gave rise to two of the most important ideas in modernist
architecture. The birth of the framed building led to a freedom of design by
allowing a design separation of the floor plan and elevation, from the structure.
It also introduced mass, and off site production into building.
One of the most important driving concepts of this architecture was one of
creating communities in the sky and this aspiration led to the predominant
pre-war high rise form the slab type blocks often known as Zeilenbon blocks.
These were characterised by being low to medium rise and were generally
associated with deck/ balcony access.
Slab blocks however, had the disadvantage, when built close together, of
shading each other and provided only relatively low density environments.
The aspiration for height was driven partly by the need to achieve higher
densities, but also (as is still seen today) by the architects ambition to create
architecturally imposing buildings. (This aspiration was perhaps the first to
compromise the design premise of building serving the occupant).
James Livingstone
11
This led to the development of the point block, early examples of which were
generally built on green field sites such as those at Roehampton in London.
Along side this architectural and social ambition, were the development of
structural engineering principles, the understanding of reinforced concrete and
the rapid development of industrial techniques for mass production.
In addition, the concept of the U Value was introduced at this time and was
first seen in the Housing Manual of 1944. According to Glendenning and
Muthesius...
.. the thermal properties of all kinds of external walls were minutely
investigated... (Glendenning and Muthesius 1993 p80)
Town planning became an important area of study and debate. In 1944, the
Greater London Plan looked back at inter-war housing planning with dismay:
London indeed can take no pride in the bulk of the 600,000 houses that were
built on her ever expanding outskirts between the wars. What would our
feelings be if were thought that the scheme of decentralisation proposed in
this plan were destined to impose on the still vacant land a mass of similar
houses similarly disposed, during the next decade? Would a repetition of
Londons sprawl be something that we should want to show our allies as our
contribution to remaking the world?
(The Greater London Plan 1944: Sect 476 490)
Whether to build flats or houses was thus the subject of much heated debate.
In the end however, rebuilding more small houses was felt to be tantamount to
rebuilding the slums they were trying to replace.
The provision of facilities was also thought about in great detail. Despite what
might appear inadequate provision now, these new housing units were a huge
improvement in terms of space and basic facilities over those that they
James Livingstone
12
replaced. Each member of a family had a room of their own, and by the early
1960s there was more or less universal application of the Parker Morris
standards which defined minimum provision for spaces for new dwellings.
Where individual provision was not thought to be feasible, communal laundries
and drying areas played well to the idea of creating those communities in the
sky.
And people at the time appear to have been very happy with their new homes:
Small wonder Mrs Gameroll likes her flat. When the rival claims for flat
versus house arise for discussion she will no doubt agree that here at Spa
Green the Finsbury Borough Council have demonstrated to the full the many
advantages ,- individual and communal among which she includes her
neighbours . The people here are all so nice she says.
(Concrete Today 1951)
Reality sets in
The optimism of Le Corbusier, Lubetkin, and Modernism's early champions,
the belief that their new architecture would contribute to a better world for all,
and the optimism of the post war welfare state which had striven to make that
vision real, were all swept away in a torrent of bad buildings and economic
crisis. The modernist dream, it seemed, was dead (From Here to Modernity).
Between 1945 and 1969 4 million public sector dwellings were constructed
and as the numbers of homes required continued to increase through the
1950s and1960s several things happened.
Table 1 Post war Multi-storey Approvals and Starts
Date
Pre 1948
1948 1952
1953-1957
1958- 1962
1963-1967
1968-1978
1972 0n
Total
(Glendenning and Muthesius 1993 Appendix )
Number
3212
14170
31453
77054
20047
65623
11119
403108 flats
6544 blocks
The quantity of houses built became more important than quality. As a result,
some of the in situ construction was done on the cheap. The shortcuts tended
to be in the provision of services and communal areas, and this resulted in
problems with safety, lighting and landscaping.
The pressure to build meant that incentives were introduced to production.
The 1956 Housing Act, for example, incentivised high rise building, regardless
of location and design, by paying a premium to councils for building blocks
higher than five storeys.
James Livingstone
13
... and they responded by designing their own version of modernism with a
conscious reversion to the early ideals of Le Corbusier and Gropius, and a
more neighbourly reinterpretation of these ideals. Denys Lasdun did likewise.
Sheffields Park Hill estate was designed with these ideals and concerns in
mind too, but this was not immune from the social problems that were
beginning to surface in these modern developments.
Although it was the architecture that took the blame, this was not principally a
failure of design. It was a failure resulting from the corruption of the design by
mass market interpretation, from the break up of communities, and perhaps,
above all, from the under investment in management of these estates.
James Livingstone
14
Despite that, by the early 1960s the level of dissatisfaction with modern
estates had generated so much criticism that Modernism as an architectural
philosophy was effectively dead, and generally agreed to be a failure.
The final nail in the coffin of Modernism was driven home on the 16th May
1968, when Mrs Ivy Hodge struck a match in her kitchen and blew out the side
of her 18th storey flat resulting in the collapse of one end of Ronan Point in
East London.
It was modern architecture's Titanic, and spelled the end of the high-rise as a
viable solution to the post-war housing crisis as well as plunging modern
architecture and the architectural profession to a low level of public esteem.
(From Here to Modernity).
The result of this was to question the very structural integrity of high rise
blocks, and encourage the anti Modernist lobby.
However, although the systematic dismantling of Ronan Point revealed some
appalling workmanship in its assembly, subsequent survey of similar blocks
did not reveal any inherent structural problems, and there are no examples of
major failures anywhere else among tower blocks in this country.
Management failures however, were often presented as evidence that the
structure of the blocks were inherently defective, and this reputation has
largely remained, giving justice to building owners wanting to hide their
failure to manage tower blocks behind a programme of demolition and
replacement. This is looked at in greater detail later in this section.
The net result of this about turn on high rise living has been the systematic
destruction of large numbers of tower blocks, and many cities have seen the
ritual explosive demolition of the majority of them.
The emotive headlines of the Birmingham Mail on March 19th 2007 - as they
reported the demolition of Hamilton House, go a long way to illustrate the
feelings, and ingrained preconceptions about high rise living that prevail even
now in some quarters.
eyesore tower block bites the dust
James Livingstone
15
Redemption
Not all high rise blocks were problematic however. In Aberdeen they
established a management and allocations model that worked, and they
continued to build high rise until the mid 1980s.
And there are many signs now of a reappraisal of high rise blocks as housing
and land shortages necessitate a rethink.
A lot of the worst blocks are gone, and although there is still a significant
backlog of repairs in social housing, a lot of investment has been made into
security and other environmental improvements. Landlords have also learned
how to manage high modern estates better by improving security, encouraging
tenants associations, and ensuring common areas are kept clean, safe and
well lit.
The Right To Buy has created mixed tenure blocks, and in some cases entire
blocks have been taken over by private developers, turning what were once
considered squalid council flats into luxury apartments for young executives.
Even some blocks that remain in our social housing stock such as Trellick
Tower in West London have apparently been redeemed, by a combination of
good management by landlords and resident involvement. Trellick Tower is
now one of Londons fashionable addresses.
Conclusions:
This section concludes that Modern architecture was the product
of a high minded and virtuous ideal that was corrupted in a mad
rush to build.
The Modernist movement behind the development of the high rise
block was a principled one in which the best examples produced
(such as the Unite dhabitation) are still cherished and continue to
work well.
It also concludes that high rise housing is not inherently bad, that
public perception is perhaps coloured by the inability of social
landlords to manage their new responsibilities, and that the
beginnings of a long overdue reappraisal of the qualities of high
density high rise living is now starting.
James Livingstone
16
3.2. Understanding
High Rise Buildings Construction
3.2 looks at the way tower blocks were built and what construction
characteristics they consequently have. This informs later
discussions about condition, comfort and hard to treat homes.
Discussion concentrates on the walls, windows and a brief
description of the heating to maintain focus on the thermal and
environmental issues that are the focus of this work. Roof and
ground constructions are ignored as being of no special relevance
to the discussion about tower blocks.
James Livingstone
17
Technology
Materials development and structural science largely determine the structural
evolution of the tower block.
The Chicago frame and pre-war tower block design in the UK were
predominantly steel framed, with conventional in-fill panels of brick.
Traditional brickwork was also occasionally used at this time, up to about
eleven storeys in height.
Significant improvements in reinforced concrete technology just after the
Second World war encouraged the development of cast in situ, and pre-cast
concrete buildings. In the early 1950s reinforced concrete frames with in-fill
panels predominated , later giving way to frame construction including
crosswall, egg box and box frames.
At the same time, the concept of cladding came into its own. High rise
buildings place special demands on their exposed components, so research
was done into developing materials to incorporate qualities of weatherproofing,
good looks, durability and insulation. Materials such as steel, aluminium,
asbestos, wood, concrete and later, plastics were all developed in different
forms that would take on these qualities.
Exact construction information is hard to come by and is not often available
from design details, as a lot of high rise blocks were built under design and
build contracts and details were never recorded. A lot of the information here
is obtained from pre refurbishment survey details.
James Livingstone
18
James Livingstone
19
Camus, Bison Wall frame and Taylor Woodrow Anglian (Larsen Neilson), were
perhaps the most widely applied systems, in which each floor was supported
by the load bearing walls directly beneath it. The wall and floor system fitted
together in slots with overlaps on the horizontal, and straight joints on the
vertical. These were bolted together and filled with dry pack mortar to secure
the connections. (BRE 1985)
James Livingstone
20
Thermal Characteristics.
Although this thesis looks briefly in the next section at the repair problems
these constructions have in order to assess their longevity, the primary interest
here is in the thermal characteristics of these blocks.
There is scant good information on exactly how these blocks are constructed,
but certain conclusions can be drawn from first hand observation (see Chapter 6,
Case Studies) and from the available literature .
Walls:
Standards
For benchmarking and comparison purposes some standard wall
constructions their U values are recorded in Table 2 below.
Table 2 :Typical U values for wall constructions1
Wall Construction ( all plastered internally)
225mm solid brick ( e.g for Terraced house or cottage)
300mm solid slate wall
Typical brick cavity wall with no insulation
Typical brick cavity wall with 50mm fibreglass insulation
2006 Building Regulations ( min elemental) standard Cavity
wall
1 Calculated using Build Desk Programme
Typical U Value
2.18 Wm2K
2.86 Wm2K
1.06 Wm2K
0.47Wm2K
0.35 Wm2K
External wall types that predominate in the four types of high rise blocks are:
Sandwich walls
Cavity walls
Solid concrete walls
These are examined individually in the following sections.
Sandwich Walls
The best available sandwich wall construction details are from the BRE study
of Bison Wall Frame construction (Hotchkiss and Edwards 1998)
Table 3 : Bison Wall external wall construction
Bison Wall frame
Pre-cast reinforced concrete load bearing storey height sandwich panel comprising:
6 inch inner leaf
1 inch polystyrene
bitumen felt
3 inch outer concrete leaf or 4 brick
James Livingstone
21
Conductivity
W/(mK)
0.13
0.51
2.3
0.04
0.23
2.3 (0.8)
0.06
Thickness
mm
n/a
10
150
25
5
75 (114)
265 (292)
1.08 Wm2K
0.93 Wm2K
1 Conductivity from Cibse and Build Desk. U values calculated using Build Desk 3.2 1
The Department of the Environment (DOE) Good Practise Case Study 121
records 4 variations for this type of block with different insulation thickness:
(DOE 1996)
Table 5 : Recorded Insulation thickness for LPS type blocks
Block
Type
Insulation Thickness
25mm polystyrene
40mm polystyrene
20mm polystyrene
25mm polystyrene
Note:
It is not the purpose of this thesis to look at condensation risk in any detail, but, it is
interesting to note that the risk of interstitial condensation in this type of sandwich
construction is considered high by the Build Desk programme used to calculate the U
Values. It is surprising that the bitumen felt layer in this construction is outside the insulation
layer. It is there presumably to prevent the ingress of moisture from the air. There is no use
of a vapour barrier on the inside of the insulation layer. It may be that the concrete is
sufficiently dense to act as one.
James Livingstone
22
Cavity Walls:
Table 6 below illustrates the Build Desk calculations for the U values typical
cavity wall constructions found in high rise blocks.
Table 6: Cavity Wall Thermal Characteristics
Cavity walls
Inner surface
Gypsum plaster
Sand and Cement Render
Aerated Block
Cavity with 50mm mineral wool insulation ( or none )
4 brick external skin
Outside wall surface
U Value with insulation
U Value without insulation
Conductivity
W/(mK)
0.13
0.51
1
0.227
0.05
0.8
0.06
0.51 Wm2K
1.06 Wm2K
Thickness
mm
n/a
5
12
100
50
114
n/a
Concrete Walls:
Table 7 below illustrates the Build Desk calculations for the U values typical
no fines concrete constructions found in high rise blocks.
Table 7: No fines Concrete Thermal Characteristics
No fines concrete
Inner surface
Gypsum plaster
Plasterboard
50mm mineral wool insulation ( or 25mm cork)
No fines concrete
Outside wall surface
U Value with mineral wool insulation
U Value with cork insulation
Conductivity
W/(mK)
0.13
0.51
1
0.05
1.13
0.06
0.57 Wm2K
0.91 Wm2K
Thickness
mm
n/a
5
12
50
300
n/a
Thermal Bridging
It is important not to overlook the effects of thermal bridging on the overall
thermal efficiency of high rise walls.
Table 8 : Typical thermal bridging components
Construction type
Typical Column and Beam
Typical Box frame
Typical LPS
Typical Wimpey no fines
James Livingstone
23
As an example of this, the U value for a concrete column (300mm square) will
be 3.5 Wm2K. Typically, this would be adjacent to the cavity wall or the
sandwich type LPS system wall with U values of 0.51 Wm2K and 0.93 Wm2K
respectively. Thermal bridging therefore brings down the overall U value of the
wall considerably and is likely to induce condensation.
Windows : Types and U values
Original installed widows were, almost without exception, single glazed metal
or wood framed as was the case for most housing types at this time.
The U values for a 2m2 wooden framed window with 4mm single glazing is
4.86 Wm2K.
This compares with the target elemental U Value for windows under 2006
Building Regulations standards of 2 Wm2K.
Infiltration
It is evidenced, particularly in the reports and investigations that followed the
Ronan point tragedy in 1968, that panel bedding and joint sealing especially in
the large panel systems was not done to a very a high standard . This results
in high air infiltration rates and effectively high thermal bridging at these joints.
James Livingstone
24
This is probably because air infiltration is high and occupants are long
suffering.
In contemplating a refurbishment, and with the likelihood of a warmer climate,
window shading may be needed. This is considered briefly in later chapters.
Heating
Heating of high rise blocks varies considerably, but two main factors seem to
have influenced the choices at the time of construction and when
refurbishment options are considered
District heating was often installed. This provides efficiencies in terms of plant,
installation, running and maintenance costs.
Gas was often overlooked because of the perceived danger of explosion,
particularly after Ronan Point. The predominant form of heating in high rise
was therefore under floor or warm air electric heating, both of which are
relatively inefficient and carbon heavy compared to other heating fuels.
Conclusions
There are four main types of high rise residential construction.
Within the broad definitions of these types, there are many
overlaps and variations.
Because of the way that these high rise blocks were
commissioned, thermal standards were not set, workmanship was
not always good and exact records of construction details were
not often recorded.
U values of walls vary, but there is enough evidence to
demonstrate that insulation was given some consideration in
design and construction.
However, although insulation standards are relatively good
compared with many other contemporary construction types, they
do vary considerably, and thermal bridging through structural
elements appears to have been largely ignored.
District heating was seen to have advantages, but was installed
infrequently compared to less efficient electric flat based central
heating system.
The single glazing is typical of the times.
James Livingstone
25
James Livingstone
26
Structural instability
Ronan Point opened the debate about workmanship, and structural condition
so it is here that the appraisal will start.
There is a lot of analysis of the incident. Rouse and Delatte (2003) is the
primary resource drawn on here.
When Ivy Hodge lit the match that caused the explosion in her 18th storey flat,
the corner walls were knocked outwards by the force of the blast.
These walls were the only bearing for the walls above. As a result of their
collapse, the floors above gave way, loading floor eighteen, which then set off
a chain reaction loading on all the floors below which collapsed like a set of
dominoes down to ground floor level.
In later analysis, three key problems were identified. Firstly, there was the fact
that the Larsen-Neilson design had been intended for blocks of a maximum of
six storeys. Ronan Point was 21 storeys high.
Secondly, there had been no redundancy built into the design. In other words,
if a failure occurred in any key component, there were no alternative load
paths to support the structure above.
Thirdly, and this was not fully revealed until some 16 years later when Ronan
Point was systematically demolished by the architect Sam Webb, was the
issue of bad workmanship. Sam Webb:
I knew we were going to find bad workmanship what surprised me was the
sheer scale of it. Not a single joint was correct. Fixing straps were
unattached: levelling nuts were not wound down, causing a significant loading
to be transmitted via the bolts: panels were placed on bolts instead of mortar.
But the biggest shock of all was the crucial H-2 load-bearing joints between
floor and wall panels. Some of the joints had less than fifty percent of the
mortar specified. (Wearne, 2000).
Ronan Point itself was repaired and eventually with its eight sister blocks
demolished sixteen years later. In the immediate aftermath of the incident
reinforcement work was done to these blocks and to blocks of similar design
across the world.
Much criticism was rightly levelled at what had preceded, and this led to
widespread changes in Building Standards Regulations.
Although Ronan Point blighted the reputation of high rise dwellings, it remains
the only example of structural failure of a high rise residential building, and in
their conclusions to their investigation into the incident the BRE concluded that
there has been ... :
... no major failure of an LPS building in the United Kingdom since the
appraisal and strengthening of LPS buildings was carried out following the
collapse at Ronan Point in 1968. (BRE 1985)
James Livingstone
27
Concrete Defects
Carbonation
Carbonation is a chemical process that takes place in the concrete, resulting
from atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2) getting into it, causing a reduction in
the alkalinity of the concrete and corrosion in the reinforcing bars (rebars) and
ultimately, spalling of the concrete. Problems are exacerbated if concrete
cover levels over the rebars are inadequate.(Davis Langdon and Everest 2002; Ciria
1992)
Chlorides
Chlorides from salt and from chemicals added to speed the curing of concrete
in cold weather can result in corrosion damage to rebars and spalling of
concrete.
Cover
Inadequate cover on rebars exacerbates the above problems and can lead to
spalling due to water penetration alone.
Concrete delamination
Delamination of concrete sandwich panels occasionally happens, as does the
separation of cavity walls where wall tie failure occurs.
Joint failure
Cracking of joints in cast in-situ concrete sometimes occurs where the
concrete has not been given enough time to cure.
James Livingstone
28
It is apparent that concrete condition varies a lot between sites, but there are
no recorded cases yet of the concrete being in any sense beyond repair:
Some buildings were found to be virtually defect free and to have suffered
only minimal deterioration whilst others of similar age and design were in need
of extensive repair. In the majority of buildings inspected there were at least
one or two places where concrete cracking or spalling had occurred.
The standard and consistency of workmanship was found to differ
considerably between buildings of the same form of construction, both on the
same site and on different sites. However the standard of workmanship and
construction practice was found to be reasonably consistent throughout
individual buildings.
The quality of the pre-cast components was in line with observations of other
pre-cast work. In general, serious deterioration had not arisen so far. (Glick and
Reeves 1996)
In 1987, although they recommended the introduction of log books and annual
inspection regimes, the BRE had no serious concerns about the structural
integrity of high rise residential buildings:
The BRE has found no LPS building showing structural distress sufficient to
give concern for the safety of people, not has it received any reports of any
LPS building failing to sustain the loads experienced in service including fire
loads (Currie et al 1987)
Nevertheless, concrete repairs will be in needed on all high rise blocks built in
the sixties and earlier, and complex access equipment is needed to carry out
the work.
It is this requirement that demands questions about whether the repairs are
worth doing, and if the answer is yes, then what else should be done whilst the
access equipment is in place.
Weather tightness
Vertical joints between panels seem to be the main point of weakness for
weather tightness. These were generally neoprene, and not of the standard
that would be used today. With high levels of exposure, demands on materials
are great and many of these neoprene strips are now brittle and have
separated from the structure, allowing the ingress of wind driven rain.
Horizontal joints were usually of dri-pack cement and have generally
performed better - where they were properly installed.
Repairs
Patch repairs, involving cutting out and replacement of affected concrete using
proprietary mortars, are the solution to spalling caused by lack of cover,
chlorides, and carbonation.
James Livingstone
29
Cladding
Where insulation and aesthetics are also invested in, over cladding is the
obvious solution.
Over cladding may be made from:
Render
Pressed metal , aluminium , steel , galvanised, plastic coated or stainless,
often in sandwich form with insulation
Glass
Glass reinforced plastic.
Cost
Secondary data on costs for this type of work is hard to obtain, and does not
bear easy comparison. However the following table is indicative of the
amounts involved:
Table 9 Indicative estimates for external repair costs to high rise blocks
Source
Work as described
Render application
including insulation
Rain screen cladding
including insulation
Concrete repairs and
prevention
Access : item
90.00 / sm
210.00 /sm
685,000
24 /sm
52,240
70,000
70,000
100/ sm
1,031,240
326,500
Ave 220/ sm
718,000
Sustaining Towers
James Livingstone
30
The case studies in chapter six include some actual project costs.
non
decent
homes
fail
thermal
comfort
only
those
failing
fitness,
repair
or
moderni
sation
average
floor
area
(m2)
average
SAP
rating
average
(mean)
repair
costs
(/m2)
average
property
value
000s
all
dwelling
s
in the
group
('000s)
this group
that are:
dwelling
type
small
terraced
house
medium/la
rge
terraced
house
semidetached
house
detached
house
bungalow
converted
flat
purpose
built flat,
low rise
purpose
built flat,
high rise
33.7
18.4
15.3
58
54
52
115
2,629
29.8
15.1
14.7
92
53
46
158
3,494
27.1
15.4
11.7
87
50
47
161
6,127
18.2
11.7
6.5
136
50
25
298
3,631
18.4
11.7
6.6
72
47
48
163
2,072
44.8
17.3
27.5
60
43
71
158
654
45.7
33.0
12.7
56
62
30
120
2,677
51.5
31.7
19.8
63
52
39
164
328
James Livingstone
31
Conclusions
There are strong suggestions that the explosion at Ronan Point,
the anti modernist sentiments of the late 1960s and the
mismanagement of high rise estates, have contributed to a
representation of the structural condition of high rise blocks as
poor.
The BRE generally found however that:
Examples of cast-in-situ high-rise concrete housing built
for local authorities between the early 1950's and early
1970's examined by BRE, and reported on by local
authorities or their consultants, were found to be
structurally sound. No cases of structural inadequacy of
concrete frames or cross walls were found during the
survey.
Concrete repairs, if not already done, are overdue on high rise
blocks of this era.
It is the access equipment that is the really expensive part of these
repairs, and it is therefore at this time, that the opportunity should
be taken to invest in other improvements to the blocks.
According to the available data repair costs of high rise flats are in
fact lower than for most other types.
James Livingstone
32
4. Environmental, Social
and Legislative Issues
This section looks at the issues which frame this thesis. It looks at
why priorities in decision making about housing, need to shift
towards those that serve the environmental agenda.
It does this to examine whether debates about demolition, new
build and refurbishment numbers should proceed with greater
urgency.
Climate Change
There is no need to add to words of the IPCC draft fourth assessment report of
17th November 2007:
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from
observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures,
widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level
Observational evidence from all continents and most oceans shows that many
natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly
temperature increases.
Most of the observed increase in globally-averaged temperatures since the
mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic
GHG concentrations (IPCC 2007)
Policy implications for climate change are likely to be carbon pricing and
rationing, resulting in effect, in a rationing of the right to burn fossil fuels.
James Livingstone
33
Peak Oil
This term is used here in its most generic sense to mean the reduction in the
worlds ability to produce fossil fuels. The peak date for different fuels and
from different thinkers varies, but there is more or less universal agreement
that fossil fuels will become progressively harder to extract and that
consequently, prices will increase.
James Livingstone
34
Within the Buildings Sector space heating accounts for the largest proportion
of total use.
Table 11: Total UK domestic energy consumption by end use (DCLG 2007)
Space heating
Hot water
Lights & Appliances
Cooking
Total
James Livingstone
2002(TWH)
337
130
72.5
15.1
554
2002 (%)
61
23
13
3
100
35
1990
990
422
228
63.3
1703
2002
1213
467
261
54.4
1995
Growth
223
45
33
-8.9
292
Growth %
12.3
11.1
11.4
-8.59
17.1
The implications for housing of the 60% reduction target in the Climate
Change Bill of 2003 has been interpreted best for buildings by the 40%
House research carried out by the Environmental Change Institute. (ECI 2003)
In aspiring to a zero carbon UK, Zero Carbon Britain includes a more
challenging figure of 57% reduction in domestic demand for heat by 2027.
(Helweg-Larsen et al 2007)
Both the ECI and ZCB identify the need for a dramatic increase in both
refurbishment, and in demolition and new build.
At present, just 20,000 dwellings per year are being demolished and replaced
(0.08%of the stock) and only 180,000 more are being built. (Helweg-Larsen et al
2007), this despite the ambitions of the governments own advice to build more
than 200,000 per year just to meet the needs of the market. (Barker 2004)
Both the 40% house and ZCB models require a large increase in investment
in energy efficient refurbishment. The 40% house proposes cuts in average
space heating demand for existing homes from 14,600 kWh p.a. now to 9,000
kWh p.a. in 2050 and ZCB aspires to cuts in space heating in refurbished
homes down to 6000 kWh p.a.
Demolish or Refurbish?
Confronting the issue of energy efficiency in buildings means addressing key
decisions about which properties to demolish and rebuild, and which to
refurbish.
Historically, demolition has been fairly widely spread across building types, but
largely determined by social and economic issues rather than technical and
environmental ones.
It is the contention of many that energy efficiency should replace social issues
as the main criteria in deciding where to demolish, and that demolition and
replacement should be targeted along these lines.
James Livingstone
36
Case:
A study by XCO2 (2002 p40,41) estimates efficiency savings after only 5 years with new
build based on the following figures :
New build designed to run at 1.5 MWh p.a.
Refurbishment to run on 14 MWh pa.
Embodied energy in new build 80MWh
Embodied energy in refurbishment 12MWh.
A study by ECI (ECI 2007App E p 5 ) frames a scenario in which the energy payback is
about 25 years for high efficiency refurbishment (9.5MWhpa) compared with new build
(2MWHpa)
It is important to recognise that these outcomes depend on the new build and
refurbishment energy standards achieved, but even if the running costs were to be 5MWh
and 10 MWh respectively (and even this is ambitious for new build) at the present time,
the payback would only be 10 years.
If this is true, more detailed analysis is needed and building types should be
assessed against the ease of their refurbishment in this way.
There is analysis of a tower block in these terms later in the thesis in chapter
nine.
James Livingstone
37
Conclusions
Fuel and the right to emit carbon dioxide is likely to be rationed.
Space heating in housing is one of the most significant sources of
carbon dioxide emissions.
Although little attention is currently paid to the existing housing
stock, increasingly ambitious targets will be set for energy
efficiency in buildings.
Demolition rates must increase to keep up with the demand for
housing.
The energy payback times for demolition and rebuild are
surprisingly short compared to refurbishment, but this does
depend wholly on the standards to which the work is done.
The emphasis in the selection of which buildings to demolish and
replace will have to shift towards the most energy inefficient.
James Livingstone
38
5. Classification and
Comparison
This chapter looks at the concept of Hard to Treat Homes (HTTH)
and the way in which flats in high rise blocks have been included
in this classification. It looks at whether this definition is now
useful and appropriate, or if with our growing appreciation of the
urgency of climate change and energy issues, it is limiting our
understanding of the energy efficiency of buildings.
It then looks at the available national stock data in an effort to see
how high rise dwellings fits into it, in terms of thermal
characteristics and repair costs, and finally to ascertain whether
the label Hard to Treat is an appropriate one to apply to high rise
blocks.
It is quite easy to understand how solid walled houses and those with no loft
can be broadly classified as hard to treat, but to include non traditional house
types and high rise blocks, may be a generalisation too far.
James Livingstone
39
It was defined at a time when ambitions for energy efficiency were lower
than they are today. Hard to treat homes therefore usually include homes
with solid walls and no loft space.
It was only really applied in terms of the potential for fuel poverty and thus
limited to the construction types and locations in which those likely to
suffer from this lived. The definition therefore often includes homes which
cannot accommodate energy efficiency schemes such as Warm Front 1
where there is no connection to low cost fuel such as oil or gas. (Energy
Savings Trust 2007)
James Livingstone
40
The CSE do therefore recognise for the first time here, that high rise flats
should not generally be considered as energy inefficient, and that they do not
generally even fit the definition of being solid walled and off gas.
Classification:
It continues to be surprising that we know so little about the construction types
and consequential energy performance of the housing stock in this country.
Various initiatives and research projects seek to address this and part of the
role of the recently introduced Energy Performance Certificates is to fill this
knowledge gap.
The classification of construction types and their energy efficiency, has for a
wide variety of purposes, been largely based on research gathered for the
English House Condition Surveys (EHCS) commissioned by the Government
and updated annually. The Energy Savings Trust have also published figures
for energy use by dwelling type based on Bredem methodology.
James Livingstone
41
dwelling age
pre 1919
1919 to 1944
1945 to 1964
1965 to 1980
post 1980
dwelling type
small terraced house
medium/large terraced house
semi-detached house
detached house
bungalow
converted flat
purpose built flat, low rise
purpose built flat, high
rise
dwelling size
under 50m2
50- up to 70m2
70- up to 90m2
90- up to 110m2
over 110m2
Neighbourhood Renewal
Funded (NRF) districts
NRF districts
other districts
owner
private
local
occupied
rented
authority
numbers of dwellings ('000s
RSL
total
3398
2,931
2,780
3,350
2,873
1,042
364
268
363
430
106
362
811
738
149
186
151
421
477
582
4,731
3,808
4,279
4,928
4,035
1,704
2,629
4,728
3,512
1,535
288
868
67
445
365
447
220
113
309
515
54
270
325
419
9
209
42
747
145
246
315
302
11
172
78
654
40
2,665
3,634
5,897
3,753
2,028
716
2,783
305
1,068
3,470
4,749
2,598
3,446
573
821
596
220
257
602
842
596
103
23
593
623
473
89
39
2,837
5,756
6,414
3,009
3,765
5,335
9,996
1,035
1,432
1,332
834
838
979
8,540
13,241
market conditions
Market Renewal Pathfinder
areas
other areas
411
115
202
4,920
2,352
1,964
1,703
20,939
4,492
4,411
6,428
944
615
908
667
710
789
563
601
653
6,666
6,337
8,778
nature of area
city or other urban centre
suburban
rural
2,782
9,104
3,445
946
1,031
490
711
195
563
1,024
230
5,002
12,418
4,361
occupancy
vacant
occupied
363
14,968
253
2,214
128
2,038
80
1,737
824
20,957
All dwellings
15,331
2,467
2,166
1,817
21,781
James Livingstone
1,260
114
842
42
tenure
owner
occupied
private rented
all private
sector
local authority
RSL
all social
sector
dwelling age
pre 1919
1919 - 1944
1945 - 1964
1965 - 1980
post 1980
dwelling type
small terraced
house
medium/large
terraced house
semi-detached
house
detached
house
bungalow
converted flat
purpose built
flat, low rise
purpose
built flat,
high rise
NRF districts
NRF districts
other districts
market
conditions
Market
Renewal
Pathfinder
areas
other areas
broad regional
areas
south east
regions
northern
regions
rest of
England
nature of area
city or other
urban centre
suburban
rural
occupancy
vacant
occupied
all dwellings
...fail
thermal
comfort
only
..fail
fitness,
repair or
modernis
ations
average
floor
area
(m2)
average
SAP
rating
averag
e
(mean)
repair
costs
(/m2)
average
property
value
all
dwellings
in the
group
(000s)
24.9
15.2
9.7
94
46
43
204,971
15,331
40.6
27.1
19.4
15.8
21.2
11.3
72
91
46
46
70
46
173,119
200,556
2,467
17,798
33.7
23.8
29.2
19.1
16.5
17.9
14.6
7.4
11.3
63
62
62
55
59
57
50
32
42
114,058
120,665
117,072
2,166
1,817
3,983
40.8
30.0
25.8
28.0
10.8
25.4
15.6
8.2
5.6
1.1
15.4
14.4
17.6
22.3
9.6
96
88
81
80
83
39
43
48
51
61
71
65
44
34
12
213,480
199,292
160,943
164,597
190,113
4,731
3,808
4,279
4,928
4,035
32.3
16.4
15.9
58
51
56
127,656
2,665
29.0
14.6
14.4
92
48
49
172,289
3,634
23.8
13.8
10.0
86
45
50
173,138
5,897
16.7
10.5
6.2
135
44
30
311,681
3,753
16.7
44.3
44.3
11.0
18.8
32.2
5.6
25.4
12.1
71
61
55
44
43
61
48
76
33
170,394
162,483
130,456
2,028
716
2,783
50.3
29.5
20.8
61
60
45
169,98
8
305
30.4
25.6
16.4
16.0
14.0
9.6
78
90
50
47
52
41
155,156
204,724
8,540
13,241
36.5
15.0
21.4
72
49
68
73,210
842
27.1
16.2
10.9
86
48
45
173,398
20,939
29.3
17.1
12.1
85
50
46
249,277
6,666
27.3
15.9
11.3
83
48
49
133,446
6,337
26.3
15.6
10.7
87
46
43
174,125
8,778
36.5
18.3
18.2
75
50
58
174,630
5,002
24.2
26.4
15.2
16.3
9.0
10.2
83
105
50
42
41
45
172,493
233,956
12,418
4,361
51.0
26.6
27.5
20.1
16.0
16.2
30.9
10.6
11.3
76
86
85
47
48
48
95
44
46
164,256
186,117
185,290
James Livingstone
824
20,957
21,781
43
Table 15 below draws out the facts most relevant to this work.
Table 15: Condition of Homes Extracts from ECHS (EHCS 2005)
High rise
Flats
% age in this group
that are :
non decent homes
50.3
29.5
20.8
61
60
45
169,988
305
Highest
Lowest
50.3
High Rise
16
Det. house
/ bungalow
10.5
Det. house
5.6
32.2
Low rise
25.4
Converted
flat
Bungalow
135
Detached
House
61
Low rise
flat
76
converted
flat
311,681
Detached
house
5,897
Detached
house
55
Low rise
flat
43
Converted
flat
30
detached
house
127,656
Small
terraced
305
High Rise
flat
Mean
High Rise
- Rank
(out of 8)
th -
32
Highest
18
14
th --
7
2 highest
th
7 nd
2 highest
nd
st -
77
1
Smallest
50
2 best
48
6 most
expensive
nd
th
th
177261
2723
5 most
expensive
last
Smallest
James Livingstone
44
High Rise flats have the second best SAP rating. This seems surprising in the
light of the fact that they are the least decent and are included in the category
of hard to treat homes.
High rise flats have the 6th highest per metre repair costs. There is a simple
relationship between size and cost that is reflected here.
Table 16: heating costs and carbon dioxide emissions by dwelling type
Property Type
Bedrooms
Flat
Mid Terraced House
End Terraced House
Semi-Detached House
Detached House
2
2
2
2
2
Gas Heating
kWh/yr kgCO2/
yr
11,423 2,170
11,693 2,222
15,138 2,876
18,373 3,491
24,412 4,638
Electric Heating
kWh/yr kgCO2/yr
8,626
9,057
12,222
14,886
20,092
3,709
3,895
5,255
6,401
8,639
Conclusions
The hard to treat stock is generally properties that have any of
the following features: solid walls, off the mains gas network, no
loft space, high-rise blocks, or for other technical reasons cannot
be fitted with standard efficiency measures (DCLG 2006 p12 )
The classification of Hard to treat Homes in the above way is
outdated and needs reviewing in the light of current environmental
pressures.
The available knowledge of the housing stock in the UK is poor,
relying as it does to such an extent on the English House
Condition Surveys and their subsequent analysis for different
purposes.
Such data as there is, tends to support the view that high rise
dwellings are in fact some of the more energy efficient dwellings in
the English housing stock and that their inclusion in the
James Livingstone
45
James Livingstone
46
6. Case Studies
This chapter looks at some recent and ongoing examples of high
rise refurbishment contracts.
It does this to assess to what extent energy efficiency is a
consideration in key decision making about the maintenance and
improvement of high rise blocks, and to assess the drivers behind
these decisions.
It does this also to look at published and reported figures for
energy savings and consumption so that comparisons can be
made between these and the analyses later in the thesis.
It is a collection of information that informs the work, rather than
analysis, as the quality of the information falls short of the detail
required for this.
Finally there is a paragraph about demolitions
Introduction
The examples are drawn from two sources.
James Livingstone
47
Primary Research
First hand research of particular case studies was done in London and
Norwich.
These were selected on the basis that either they were local and records of
work were made available, or because large scale refurbishment projects were
ongoing at the time of the research, and the participants were receptive to
requests for information and assistance.
These are:
Little Venice Towers, Westminster
Kestrel House, Islington
Six Towers, Norwich
James Livingstone
48
Glastonbury House
Table 17: Glastonbury House basic information
Location
Owner
Height (storeys)
Flats
Construction type
Principal Construction
Architects , Consultants
Principal Contractors
Pimlico, London
Westminster City Homes
22
131
Post and beam
Integer , Enabling Concepts , Westminster Homes
Wates Construction
Glastonbury House, is the most often cited example of a sustainable high rise
refurbishment.
It was heralded on its completion by John Prescott as:
the UK's first intelligent and green residential tower, clearly a truer, better
building. (Enabling Concepts 2002)
The predicted performance data was supplied to Euroace by Enabling Concepts who
worked on the project for Integer:
James Livingstone
49
Note
It is interesting to compare these figures with those supplied by Norwich City Council for
Winchester Tower, and those estimated by the IES simulation, both in Chapter 7.
In the Winchester tower example, the average heating load per flat is 9,700Kwh (a 78%
proportion of the total boiler load derived from fuel supplies), which is similar to those
quoted for Glastonbury house.
The IES simulation of Normandie Tower(the sister block to Winchester Tower) calculated
potential improvements to the heating load per flat of up to 86% with the addition of
100mm external insulation and 2006 standard double glazing. This compares with a
target of 29% (50%) for the Glastonbury House project.
Commentary
Glastonbury House was not externally insulated. The walls remained as brick
cavity walls with probably no more that 50mm insulation in the cavities. The
energy savings therefore were principally from heating system improvements
(connecting to the Pimlico District Heating Scheme), and double glazing and
balcony enclosure.
This project seems to have been principally aimed not at cutting energy use,
but more at a sustainability agenda that was more about social and housing
sustainability.
James Livingstone
50
James Livingstone
51
Makartstrasse Flats
Table 19: Makartstrasse Flats : basic information
Location
Owner
Height (storeys)
Flats
Date of construction
Construction type
Principal Construction Architects ,
Consultants
Principal Contractors
Linz Germany
Not known
Not known
50
1958
Not known . Photograph suggests cast in situ cross
wall concrete
Bmst. Ing. Alfred Willensdorfer
GIWOG Gemeinntzige Industrie-Wohnungs-AG
Not known
179kWh/ma
to 13,3 kWh/ma
446.800 kWh/a
147 kg/a (per flat)
None
Not known
27%
James Livingstone
52
Note
This equates to space heating saving of 93%. This is equivalent to the saving achieved
for the mid floor flat at Normandie Tower analysed in Chapter 7 with a total annual
heating load of 630 watt hours (down from 9000 KWh).
Figure 11 :
Makartstrasse Flats before
the refurbishment
programme
(Photograph: gap-solar.)
Figure 12:
Makartstrasse Flats after
the refurbishment
programme
(Photograph: gap-solar)
Commentary
This project was an experimental and demonstration one in which the aims
were specifically to try to reproduce PassivHaus principles in an urban
refurbishment project. Although falling some way short of PassivHaus
standards, it appears to have been successful.
James Livingstone
53
Riga Latvia
Not known
9 Storeys
Not known
Not known
LPS - Lightweight single layer prefabricated
concrete panels
Not known
Not known
There is not a lot of available information on this project, but it tells us energy
costs were more than halved through apparently simple measures of insulation
and heating improvements
James Livingstone
54
Commentary
Whilst the improvements are valuable, they are of a relatively modest standard
and this perhaps reflects the priorities of the time.
The use of energy costs per flat as a measure of savings tells us that fuel
poverty was of greater interest than energy use, and reflects on the fact that
standard measures are not yet settled even now in a business that is still
evolving fast
Further research into these case studies can be done following the sources
recorded in the Bibliography.
James Livingstone
55
Table 24: Little Venice Towers . Cost Energy and Carbon Performance
Space heating energy consumption:
Before refurbishment:
Figures
After refurbishment:
Figures
Saving of around
Figures
CO2 saved
Figures
CO2 saved due to renewable
Figures
energy integration:
Refurbishment cost:
External Works
Render
Concrete repairs
Cladding
Windows
Access equipment
roofing
Sub total external works
Internal Works
Kitchen and Bathroom
Lifts
Heating
Refuse chutes
Other
Sub total internal works
Total
James Livingstone
not
not
not
not
not
available
available
available
available
available
56
New heating was installed. There was no mains gas in the blocks, so the
architects specified electric storage heating and water heating by Elson as the
most cost effective to install.
According to the contractors, demolition was never considered as an option as
this would have been too expensive.
No consideration was given to renewables.
Commentary
Although a lot of money and attention was given to insulating these blocks,
there is nothing to suggest that this was done with much detailed
premeditation. There does not seem to have been any particular brief or
understanding relating to the thermal performance of these blocks, the
insulation merely coming as part of the cladding package. In further support of
this suggestion is the use of electric water heaters, the absence of any
consideration given to renewables and the lack of any energy performance
calculations.
I am very grateful to Anthony Dickins and Prija of Wates Construction Ltd, and
Martyn Kemp and Ken Lee of Kemp Muir Weallams architects for their
assistance and time to discuss and show me around this project.
James Livingstone
57
Before refurbishment the Little Venice Tower blocks were unsightly LPS
system built dwellings :
James Livingstone
58
The LPS wall panels are 300mm thick comprising (from outside to in) 250mm
dense reinforced concrete, 35 mm cork and render and plaster finish.
The design work was done by Homes for Islington. The Islington Energy
Office was not included in the design proposals and there is nothing to suggest
that thermal efficiency was an integral consideration in the design. When
asked, the design team said that it was not practical to do wall insulation.
Table 26: Kestrel and Peregrine Houses. Cost, Energy and Carbon performance
Space heating energy consumption:
Before refurbishment:
Not
After refurbishment:
Not
Saving of around
Not
CO2 saved
Not
CO2 saved due to renewable energy Not
integration:
Refurbishment cost:
Not
known
known
known
known
known
known
Islington Energy Office became involved in the project when they saw an
opportunity to use a high rise block to fulfil a commitment they had to install
four wind turbines in the borough.
Kestrel House and Peregrine House were assessed for this installation.
Peregrine House was excluded because of the amount of telecommunications
equipment already on the roof.
A feasibility study was carried out for the installation on Kestrel House:
James Livingstone
59
6kw
13,000 to 18000 kWh
102,000 kWh
714
35,000
1085
620
1705
21 years
Commentary
The driver for the external parts of project was the concrete repairs.
Replacement windows were being fitted because the old ones were no longer
serviceable and because they are a popular improvement for occupants.
Some of the original concrete detailing made over cladding more challenging
than in other blocks that have been looked at (see photograph chapter eight),
and this may be one reason why improving the thermal performance of the
walls was not done. It is surprising though, that this never seems even to have
been part of the proposals, despite having full scaffold in place.
Calculations on Builddesk give a U Value of 0.89 W/m2k for these walls,
which is only slightly better than an uninsulated cavity wall. (See table in chapter
3.2).
James Livingstone
60
Energy efficiency was not a design consideration, and the wind turbine was
only proposed as highly visible part of a political drive to be at the cutting edge
of the green agenda in London.
It is interesting to compare the payback times for the wind turbine with
payback times for external insulation seen later in the work.
I am very grateful to Graeme Lowe and Steven Henn of Islington Energy
Office, Rob Forest of Homes For Islington and Apollo Construction for their
time in interviews and for showing me around the site, whilst under
refurbishment.
James Livingstone
61
Norwich
Norwich City Council
11 storeys and 44 flats in each block
1965 -1968
Post and Beam with Brick in fill panels
Norwich City Council
CityCare , Gunnite
The towers are of reinforced cast in situ concrete post and beam construction
with brick in fill panels of cavity brickwork with approximately 50mm cavity
insulation installed at the time of construction.
The towers were suffering from spalling concrete, which by 2000, had become
so bad that consideration had to be given to fencing off areas outside the
towers to protect the public from falling debris. Tests indicated that the
problems were being caused by a combination of poor rebar cover and
carbonation.
Other problems in the blocks related to cold common areas, and condensation
from cold bridging problems.
Table 29: Six Towers Norwich. Cost, Energy and Carbon performance
Space heating energy consumption:
Before refurbishment:
Not known
After refurbishment:
Not known
Saving of around
Not known
CO2 saved
Not known
CO2 saved due to renewable energy Not known
integration:
Costs
Concrete and miscellaneous repairs 650,000
Access equipment
550,000
Total
1,200,000
Refurbishment cost:
Not known
District heating from CHP had been installed in the three tower blocks in the
Mile Cross area of Norwich and PVCu double glazing had been installed in all
blocks in about 1985.
James Livingstone
62
Commentary
The district heating installation had addressed any fuel poverty issues that
there may have been here, so insulation was not thought to be a priority when
the concrete repairs were done.
Nevertheless, this is another example of access equipment being raised for
concrete repairs and no additional work being done whilst it was in place. In
this case the reasons given for this were largely funding related. Norwich City
Council owns these blocks. Had they been part of a stock transfer to a
Registered Social Landlord, it may be that additional funds could have been
found to replace the windows, enclose the balconies and externally insulate.
James Livingstone
63
Demolitions
It has not been possible to establish how many residential tower blocks have
been demolished, or exactly why decisions were taken to demolish them.
The website UK Housing Wiki which is a collaborative site (and therefore
largely unsubstantiated) records 187 cases of demolitions to date in thirteen
cities in the UK. There are obvious omissions from the list and there is every
reason to think that the total might be twice as many as this.
Reasons given for demolitions are more often than not given by local
politicians, and tend to include emotive descriptions of urban blight, damp,
flooding and structural problems. More often than not in fact, demolition takes
place as part of regeneration of an area and is seen as a kick-start to the
process, enabling funding for new housing for new communities.
An air of celebration almost always accompanies explosive demolition.
James Livingstone
64
James Livingstone
65
7. Analysis of Heat
Loads in High Rise
Residential Buildings
This chapter reports on the analysis of the heat loads of high rise
dwellings.
The analysis is based on:
Observation
The IES VE thermal simulation tool
Reported actual energy use.
None of these methods provides the absolute answer. Each
contributes to our understanding of the situation and illustrates
methods that can be used by building owners to assess the actual
and potential energy performance of their buildings.
The analysis is done to try and estimate the effects of different
improvement measures on the thermal performance and fuel use
of a high rise block.
Observation
It is important to observe and understand before analysing, both to illuminate
the analysis and to try to understand what to expect from it - and why.
What is it about high rise dwellings therefore that might give reason think that
they are heat efficient or heat inefficient, and what special characteristics is it
important to be aware of?
On the side of efficiency are:
The buffer effect of adjacent dwellings.
Each flat only has two outside walls. The others benefit from the adjacency
to other flats or to the common areas.
Similarly, with the exception of the ground and top floors, the floor and
ceilings benefit both from being protected and heated by the other
dwellings above and below.
Simplicity of form is very helpful in external insulation, there being few
services to move or obstacles to build round. Most high rise buildings for
instance have internal rainwater down pipes.
The potential for district heating
James Livingstone
66
The fact that high-rise blocks are rarely considered beautiful and often
ugly - means that over cladding may be welcomed rather than feared.
Conclusion
Critical observation and understanding therefore suggests that improving the
thermal performance of high rise dwellings should achieve good results but
perhaps at a high cost.
James Livingstone
67
These factors mean that the greatest strengths of computer simulation are not
in predicting actual energy use, but in demonstrating relative performance of
different construction make ups.
Checks
Checks were made against results by:
Revisiting the data, checking the input values against Cibse values, application
of common sense, and calculating the U Values of the walls separately using
the Build Desk programme, referenced in chapter two.
Information
Normandie Tower , Rouen Rd, Norwich was chosen because access was
made available by Norwich City Council. Within the block, one flat had been
completely gutted after a fire, so the construction details were exposed.
Measurements were taken on site to establish exact construction details for
input to the model.
Plans supplied by Norwich City Council, and the relevant specification of
construction details are included as Appendices.
The actual figures for energy consumption were only obtained after the IES
analysis was completed. They apply to Winchester Tower, the sister tower
block to Normandie Tower, constructed at the same time and to the same
specification.
Conductivity figures to calculate U values were sourced from CIBSE Guide A
James Livingstone
68
Other variables for the modelling were sourced form IES itself or from
experience. All relevant variables are included in the Appendices.
Figure 18: Normandie Tower IES Model
James Livingstone
69
Analysis
The Models Explained
The analysis looks at two simple options for the preservation of heat, external
insulation with cover cladding, and replacement glazing. It compares the heat
required in five models with different configurations of insulation and double
glazing.
This approach has been taken because windows and walls constitute the
whole envelope of most high rise flats, and insulation of these elements is the
key to energy saving. These also represent the most accessible and readily
understandable options for building owners.
The Models analysed :
Model 1: As built . No fines concrete walls and 4mm singles gazing
Model 2: As existing. No fines concrete walls and 1985 double glazing.
Model 3: Walls insulated with 100mmm rockwool and cladding, and windows
as existing.
Model 4: No fines concrete walls and 2006 Building Regulations standard
double glazing.
Model 5: Walls insulated with 100mmm rockwool and cladding and 2006
Building Regulations standard double glazing.
More details of the constructions and modelled variables can be seen in the
Appendices.
The simulation results are broken down into heat demand for space heating,
and boiler load for space heating and hot water. This project focuses on space
heating, as hot water demand is similar in all dwelling types, and largely
dependant on occupant rather than building characteristics. In this case
however kerosene is the fuel used for both space and hot water heating, so it
is necessary to include the analysis of both in order to compare it with the fuel
use figures supplied.
Results
The Whole block
The results of the simulation in Table 30 illustrate a potential reduction over
existing performance of 86% in heat demand for the block, cutting it by 544
MWh p.a. - from 634.5 MWh p.a. in the original construction to 90.31 MWh
p.a. in Model 5.
James Livingstone
70
Table 30: IES VE Analysis of Boiler loads for Normandie Tower (Whole Block)
Heating
Load (MWh) p.a.
Block
Boiler Load
(Heating and HW )
(MWh) p.a.
Block
Average
% age savings
over existing p.a.
Average
per flat
Htg
Model 1
As Built no fines walls and single glazing
933.34
9.82
1194.26
12.57
n/a
Heating is 78% of total boiler load
Model 2
As existing no fines walls and 1985 double glazing
634.5
6.68
901
9.48
n/a
Model 3
Model 4
Model 5
Htg and
HW
n/a
n/a
5.26
56.90%
44.57%
3.90
75.12%
56.84%
3.11
85.77%
67.19%
The most significant gain is from insulating the walls. This is the case because
the walls constitute the largest external surface area (78%), and the U value of
the walls is being cut by over half from 0.54 to 0.28 W/m2k.
Flat by flat results
Table 31 breaks down the results into across section of individual dwellings.
This level of analysis gives us further insights into the thermal dynamics of the
block:
Heat demand is much higher on the top and ground floor illustrating the
level of heat loss through the flat roof and into the ground. The flat roof
could relatively easily be improved, but the replacing of the ground floor
would be much more disruptive. Both these could be easily modelled, but
would add little to the overall debate.
Orientation makes a small but significant difference.
Heat demand reduces and then increases going up the block.
James Livingstone
71
14th floor
12.38
10.92
7.8
7.5
10.16
11.99
Top floor
13.79
12.02
8.6
8.43
11.41
13.27
glazing
8th floor
6.63
5.38
4.26
3.63
4.98
6.13
14th floor
6.78
5.51
4.35
3.71
5.11
6.25
Top floor
8.07
6.65
5.12
4.49
6.26
7.42
glazing
8th floor
2.66
2.08
1.83
1.31
1.69
2.43
14th floor
2.8
2.2
1.91
1.39
1.8
2.55
Top floor
3.9
3.13
2.58
2.03
2.71
3.57
8th floor
1.35
1.02
0.93
0.63
0.74
1.17
14th floor
1.49
1.12
1
0.69
0.86
1.28
Top floor
2.48
1.94
1.62
1.25
1.59
2.19
glazing
8th floor
0.61
0.44
0.45
0.23
0.23
0.49
14th floor
0.73
0.53
0.52
0.29
0.3
0.57
Top floor
1.55
1.97
1.19
1.03
0.89
1.32
James Livingstone
72
2 Bed flat converted to bungalow (Flat 2) Compared to Results for 8 floor flat
Heating loads (MWh p.a.)
Model 1
Bungalow
8th Floor flat
As Built no fines walls and single glazing
40.4
10.74
Model 2
Model 3
Model 4
Model 5
Actual Figures
Norwich City Council supplied the figures for oil consumption at Winchester
Tower, the sister block to Normandie Tower.1 These are produced in full in the
Appendices, but summed up and compared with the IES analysis in Table 33
below.
Winchester Tower was constructed at the same time and to the same specification as
Normandie Tower. Winchester Tower has a slightly older average tenant than Normandie.
James Livingstone
73
Table 33: Actual and IES simulation figures for whole block boiler loads
Heat and Hot water
MWh
Difference
1184
901
23%
There is a significant difference in the amount of oil actually used and that
calculated in the simulation.
The difference could be accounted for by a number of factors including:
Human behaviour,
More air infiltration than allowed for in the model.
Greater than estimated inefficiencies in the boiler and heating system.
Greater hot water use.
Conversion rates. NCC have applied a figure of 10.6 to convert the oil to
kWh. This is a bit higher than the generally accepted figure of 10.3 used by
the Department of Trade and Industry (dti) among others and takes no
account of distribution losses or boiler efficiencies.
Other inaccuracies in the models
Correction
Having discovered this difference, it is important to assess how much it affects
confidence in the results of the IES analysis.
Whilst it would have been good to achieve a result closer to actual, it would be
a mistake to do it by trying to adjust the inputs to fit.
The introductory paragraph highlighted the importance of IES VE in analysing
relative improvements in thermal performance rather than absolute ones, and
the analysis is still perfectly valid for this.
In terms of absolute values for thermal performance, lengthy site evaluation to
assess the actual performance of the flats and their occupants would be
valuable.
It is quite satisfactory to accept the analysis and work in the knowledge of this
limitation and to aspire to do longer term research into the actual performance
of buildings that have had this type of improvement work done.
Potential Savings
Projected financial, energy and carbon savings can now be calculated for
these models from the savings figures in Table 30 above.
James Livingstone
74
Table 34 : Projected savings in cost of oil (per annum) from insulation measures
Existing
Actual
Oil used
no fines walls and 1985 double glazing
111754 ltrs
Cost
37,748
Model 3
Projected with
20923
Model 4
Projected with
16292
Model 5
Projected with
12385
The 67.19% saving on boiler load between the existing Model (Model 2) and
Model 5 represents a potential saving of 53,000 litres of oil, equivalent to about
18,000 (at todays rates) and 14,045 kilograms of carbon dioxide.1
With available estimates varying around an average of about 1 million
pounds2 to do this work, the simple payback period looks unattractive at 55
years. But although the payback period is important, it requires the use of
projected fuel prices such as Fuel Prophet3 might give, and does not take into
account offset costs and other benefits to the occupants arising from the work.
Conclusions
Thermal performance analysis of Normandie Tower a no fines
concrete construction high rise block was carried out using
observation, IES VE analysis and actual fuel use data.
The analysis indicated that some dramatic potential energy
savings are possible using external insulation and double-glazing
alone.
The modelling results showed a potential reduction in average
space heating demand in the flats, from 13MWh per flat as built, to
1.25 MWh with these measures.
This compares well with available benchmarks. The current
average for UK housing stock is 14MWh, and the 40% House
1
Current price of oil taken as 35 p per litre. Conversion rate for Kerosene (10.3 KWh per litre
of oil) from the dti. Conversion rate for oil ( 0.265 Kg Co2 per Kwh) from Energy Savings
Trust.
2
Estimated using Sustaining Towers website figures and Little Venice figures (Chapter 6)
3
Fuel Prophet is a software tool that forecasts the effects of fuel price increases on payback
times for investments in energy efficiency.
James Livingstone
75
James Livingstone
76
8. Improvements to
Thermal Performance Potentials and
Practicalities
This chapter looks at the practicalities of improving the energy
performance of high rise buildings.
One of the key drivers behind this work is the conviction that
insulation comes before renewables in the drive to save energy in
housing, and it is on this therefore, that this chapter concentrates.
This chapter also looks briefly at opportunities that are specific to
high rise blocks for improvements in the efficiency of heating
systems, and the installation of renewables.
Access
Access is the issue which, more than any other, influences the approach to
improvement and remedial works on high rise buildings.
In the case studies in chapter six, access costs in the Westminster and
Norwich examples were about 300,000 per twenty one storey block and
90,000 per eleven storey block respectively.1 It is important therefore, that if
access equipment is going to be erected, maximum possible advantage is
made of it, and that workmanship is of the highest quality so that maintenance
is minimised.
James Livingstone
77
Form
It has been argued that the simple form of the high rise block makes them
conducive to external cladding and insulation. This was so in the Normandie
Tower example used in chapter seven, but is by no means always the case.
1
Permarock, Sto , Weber and Alumasc systems are the market leaders. Their products were
looked at to inform this section, together with those sources listed in the bibliography
James Livingstone
78
Many brick built houses with complex architectural features and surface
mounted building services present a much greater challenge to external
insulation. Although form is not generally as complex on high rise as on these,
high rise blocks are not just the flat boxes they are sometimes thought of.
Features include balconies and sculpted concrete, such as that at Kestrel
House as well as raised and indented panels, all of which require additional
detailing if they are to be successfully clad.
Form also takes in aesthetics here. It is much more palatable to over clad an
ugly plain building than a complex and attractive one.
James Livingstone
79
Weather
Extreme weather conditions can prevail high up. Suction loads from wind and
rain loadings that are not met at ground level must be catered for.
Workmanship
It is imperative that workmanship is of the highest quality to avoid thermal
bridging, infiltration and weathering problems.
Fire
Fire testing at the BRE (Colwell and Martin 2003) has concluded that spread of fire
through thermosetting insulation1 and expanded polystyrene is too great to
allow their use on multi-storey buildings, unless a barrier of Rockwool is
incorporated at each level. In practise this means that Rockwool is the
insulation of choice for most, if not all, proprietary insulation systems for
external application to multi-storey blocks.
Condensation
The British Board of Agrement Certificates for external cladding (Swisslab 2003)
state that high internal moisture content internally could result in interstitial
condensation but not in the insulation itself. This seems unlikely and in any
event can be calculated prior to installation and prevented through the
installation of efficient ventilation systems.
Internal Insulation
Internal insulation is an option that has been chosen by a number of landlords,
but has normally been done on a piecemeal basis in response to extreme
condensation problems caused by uninsulated walls and cold bridging, often
exacerbated by lifestyle issues.
It is more straightforward than external insulation in the sense that it can be
done flat by flat and does not require access equipment to do the work.
However, disruption to the occupants is extreme. There is a loss of floor space
and, if workmanship is not of the highest quality, interstitial condensation is
likely.
There is also a loss of thermal mass, but in the case of high rise blocks there
is enough concrete in the floors and internal walls for this to be insignificant.
There are enough good throught the enclosed balco reasons for insulating
externally that it is the default choice, but internal insulation can be more
appropriate where the form of the building externally is so irregular that
external cladding is impractical, or where other external works are not taking
place requiring access equipment.
The Blades Rise Estate in Sandwell is an example of large-scale internal
insulation. (Trim 1991)
1
James Livingstone
80
Balcony enclosure
Glazed balcony enclosure is often a good choice if access equipment is in
place, particularly where the balcony is recessed on the face of the building,
such as at Glastonbury House.
If used properly and oriented right, solar gain through the enclosed balcony
can give considerable fuel and feel good benefits to the occupants.
Balcony enclosures can also reduce wind noise and cut down on the problems
with pigeons that are commonly associated with high rise living.
Roof Insulation
Roof insulation benefits the top floor flats, and it almost goes without saying
that when the roof surface needs recovering, the insulation should be
upgraded to the highest standards. Although easier with external access, it can
be done independently of other external works. Some owners have
approached this by pitching the previously flat roof. This often provides an
aesthetic improvement as well.
Most high rise roof spaces have been let to telecommunication companies,
who may install bulky equipment, which can seriously obstruct improvements
to the roof surface.
Glazing
Windows generally have shorter life span than other elements of the external
envelope. For this reason, a lot of high rise blocks seem to have had window
replacement programmes in the early 1980s, often before concrete repairs
were really needed. Early forms of PVCu double glazed windows were
generally the replacement of choice, and in a number of cases external
cladding was also done. PVCu profiles from this date have developed
problems with discoloration and have become brittle. In many cases they now
need replacing again.
There is nothing complicated about window replacement in high rise buildings
except access and ensuring that the workmanship and materials are good
enough to last in the demanding conditions.
With access so difficult, windows of the highest available (proven) quality
should be installed when access equipment is in place.
Although there are many sound environmental reasons not to use PVCu, the
technology has improved, and there are compelling arguments for using it in
windows in situations where access for maintenance is difficult.
James Livingstone
81
Photovoltaics
The facades of high rise blocks could be suitable for the erection of photo
voltaic (PV) panels. Research only revealed one example of this being done.
This was on Bowater House in Sandwell, where a small 4KW array was
installed in 1999. (Save Energy)
High rise rooftops are generally too small and often too crowded, to make a
significant contribution to either electricity or hot water generation, but they do
have the advantage of not being liable to shading. There are PV panels on the
roof of Glastonbury Tower in London, but there is no information available on
the size and generating capacity.
James Livingstone
82
Solar Century have installed panels to the facade of the CIS Tower, an office
building in Manchester. Performance figures are not available for this
installation.
This could serve as a model for the potential for PV in domestic high rise
buildings. However, office buildings, and this building in particular which has a
flat glazed facade, are usually better suited in use and design to the
application of PV facades.
They state that the cladding project cost 5.5 million to do, but there is no
estimate of what cost can be offset from that amount to get the true extra over
cost of the solar panels. They do claim however that the
PV panels are cheaper than most commonly used high quality cladding
materials.
Tilt
35 deg
Vertical
Horizontal
35 deg
Vertical
Horizontal
Generation
kWh/m2/day
3.00
2.18
2.63
2.46
1.63
2.63
Difference from
Optimum
Optimum
17%
12%
18%
47%
12%
The table shows that that efficiency of the PV cells is compromised by 17%
when placed vertically as a building facade, and that east or west facing
facades suffer a 50% loss in efficiency.
1
2
James Livingstone
83
Solar thermal
Similar issues apply to solar thermal installation, although it might be
advantageous use it to preheat some domestic water with panels on the roof.
Installations on a flat by flat basis are probably impossible because there is
usually no stored water in the flats themselves, either because they are
connected to district heating systems or because they use combination type
boilers.
Wind Power
The Islington case study case in Chapter 6 analyses the potential of wind
power on Kestrel House concluding a simple payback of twenty one years.
This seems reasonable, with turbines generally having a simple maintenance
schedule and a long life, but the figures have yet to be substantiated.
Energy for Sustainable Development carried out a feasibility study on wind
turbines for high rise dwelling blocks in Bradford (ESD 2003); They concluded
that the best potential payback period was 17 years even allowing for a 50%
grant towards installation. This was for 6kW Proven type turbine the same
type being installed in Islington.
Putting economic feasibility side, it should be remembered that the visibility of
this type of project acts as a great proclamation of commitment to renewable
sources of energy, which arguably has great value in itself.
"It's not going to generate loads and loads of electricity but it is a symbol of
where we should be going with renewable energy."
(Ian Simpson, Bradford Community Housing Trust Executive Director 2007)
James Livingstone
84
Conclusions
High rise blocks have particular challenges, but also offer particular
opportunities for the installation of energy efficiency measures.
Each case needs individual assessment based on the criteria here.
A key conclusion however is that, if access equipment is erected for any
reason, then full advantage should be taken of it to carry out widespread
improvement works and that this work must be done to the highest standard to
minimise long term maintenance.
The retrofitting of renewable energy technologies on high rise blocks is
important for its visibility, but the practicality and economics appear very
challenging for most landlords at present.
James Livingstone
85
9. The Environmental
Impact of Demolition,
Replacement and
Refurbishment of High
Rise Blocks
Chapter four looks at the demolition / refurbishment debate in
general terms and concludes that demolition and rebuild is
generally more energy efficient over the lifetime of buildings than
refurbishment
This chapter looks at this debate with specific reference to high
rise residential blocks.
It uses Normandie Tower in Norwich as a case study for this
research.
It looks first at what the embodied energy of a tower block is.
It then looks at the embodied energy in the refurbishment of the
tower block.
The running costs of the tower block and the running costs of
replacement houses are then calculated. These are combined with
the figures for embodied energy, to compare the life time energy
costs of the two types.
Finally, it also looks at the implications for land use if high rise
blocks are replaced by low-rise housing.
James Livingstone
86
Table 36 shows the calculations done for this paper of the embodied energy
and carbon dioxide in Normandie Tower.
It is limited to the fabric of the building and does not include services, fixtures,
or fittings.
In the table the embodied energy source data comes from Bath University.
(2007). The density figures for materials are sourced from IES Virtual
Environment programme. The density figure for no fines concrete are
increased to allow for high density beams and columns. The figures for the
windows are based on 3980 mj per 1.2 x 1.2 window (Asif et al)
By Bath Universitys own admission their figures are need further work. For
example, these are cradle to gate and in some cases cradle to site so do not
include integration into the building. This is probably a very small proportion of
the costs, but a significant one nevertheless.
Construction processes and energy costs change. It is the replacement energy
and carbon costs of the tower block that are being analysed, and not the
original cost of construction.
Nevertheless, it gives some indication of the investment in the structure, from
which we can summarise more accessibly as follows:
Normandie Tower contains 21000 tonnes of materials produced at a
cost of 7,100 megawatt hours (MWh) of energy and 3000 tonnes of
carbon dioxide.
Of this, 20,500 tonnes (or 98%) is concrete produced at a cost of 6000
MWh and 2646 tonnes of carbon dioxide.
James Livingstone
87
3.8
0.75
1.35
0.265
0.16
0.16
0.265
0.16
Embodied
carbon Kg
Co2 /unit
372.5
877200
120435
15422
324972
12895
80114.4
1313005
80114.4
Total
embodied
energy
2,220,100
25597363
Totals
89
0.265
6,796,800
James Livingstone
Embodied
carbon Kg
Co2 /Kg
0.08
0.228
0.102
1.35
0.24
0.16
Embodied
energy
Mj
8815
1,60569
13,490,672
51996
10773
33480
General description : 16 storeys. 95 flats. Central core with services , lift, stairs and access corridors to flats
Materials
Thickness Area m2
Volume
Density
Total
Embodied
m3
kg/m3
Weight
energy
External Walls
Mj/Kg
Pebble dash
10mm
3265
32.65
1800
58770
0.15
External render
25mm
3265
81.62
1300
105638
1.52
No fines Concrete
300mm
3265
979.5
1700
16655150
0.81
Glass Fibre Quilt
50mm
3095
154.75
12
1857
28
Plasterboard
13mm
3095
40.23
950
3990
2.7
Plaster
5mm
3095
15.5
1200
18600
1.8
Floors
Dense cast concrete
250mm
5760
1440
2000
2880000
2.36
Flat Roof
3 layer bitumen felt
15mm
459
6.88
1700
11696
75
Ply
25mm
459
11.47
700
8029
15
fibreglass
100mm
459
45.9
12
550.8
28
dense concrete slab
150mm
459
68.85
2000
137700
2.36
Plaster
13mm
459
5.97
1200
7164
1.8
Internal Walls (Dividing )
Plaster
13mm
2853
37.09
1200
44508
1.8
Cast Concrete
130mm
2853
370.9
1500
556358
2.36
Plaster
13mm
2853
37.09
1200
44508
1.8
Windows
Materials
Area
Units
No
Embodied
energy
mj/unit
Double glazed PVCu
2 X 4mm
924
1.44m2
745
2980
Table 36: Calculation of Mass. Embodied Energy and Embodied Carbon in Normandie Tower
3025284
7121.28
147434
7121
Embodied
carbon
Kg Co2
277512
44444
6021.75
743.58
36490
1146
763200
Embodied
carbon
Kg Co2
4701
24085
1,698825
2506
957.6
2976
Source
Sustainable Homes
low estimate
Sustainable Homes
high estimate
Empty Homes
Agency
Buchanan & Honey
low estimate
Buchanan & Honey
mid estimate
Buchanan & Honey
high estimate
BRE low estimate
Embodied
Notes
MWh
22 Given as 250 kWh/m2. Assumed floor area
= 88 m2 average
44 Given as 500 kWh/m2. Assumed floor area
= 88 m2 average
90 Subject to error according to Killip et al (ECI
2006)
XCO2
Table 37 above gives a wide range of figures for the embodied energy in new
dwellings.
Normandie Tower
Normandie Tower comprises 95 dwellings.
To replace these 95 dwellings therefore would cost anywhere between 2,090
MWh (Sustainable Homes Low Estimate) and 13,680 MWh (Buchanan and
Honey high). The average figure is 7885 MWh.
It is not really possible to convert this figure to carbon dioxide without the source
data on production methods and fuels used.
Given the variation in the estimates, the figure of 7,100 MWh produced in the
analysis in Table 39 does not compare too badly, particularly when taking into
consideration the apparent naivety of the science.
James Livingstone
90
It is possible to look at some of the materials. In this case, the primary materials
for energy saving are the double glazing and the external insulation.
Permarock, the system recommended and used in the simulation models in
chapter seven comprises 100mm rockwool with a protective coating of a high
polymer content cementitious material and reinforcing mesh and galvanised
steel framework and fixings.
Permarock insulation board has embodied energy of approximately 91 mega
joules per metre squared for 60mm thick insulation (Permarock Ltd Specification
2006).
The Normandie Tower example uses 100mm rockwool so 40mm needs adding
as per table 38 below:1
Table 38: Calculating the embodied energy of insulated cladding
Permarock
Rockwool
Thick
mm
Area
m2
vol
m3
density
kg/m3
weight
kg
60
40
3265
3265
n/a
131
n/a
12
n/a
1572
Emb.
energy
Mj/xx
91/m2
16.8
Emb.
energy
Mj
297115
26409
Emb.
energy
MWh
825
7.3
745
Embodied energy
mj/unit
2980
Embodied energy
mj
2,220,100
Emb energy
MWh
617
1
2
Embodied Energy base figures from Bath University ICE as per table 39 above
3980 mj per 1.2 x 1.2 window ( Asif et al)
James Livingstone
91
Running costs
This section looks at the running costs in energy terms of the flats to see how
they compare with published benchmark figures.
In the Normandie Tower IES VE analysis in chapter seven, space heating
demand was estimated to reduce overall to 90 MWh, or to an average of 1.25
MWh per flat, or 25 kWh /m2 with the two improvements cited above.1
Table 40: Benchmark figures for energy use for space heating from hot water
Measurement Standard
UK Average1
BedZED1
AECB Silver2
AECB Gold2
Passivhaus2
1
BedZED Bioregional
2
AECB
James Livingstone
92
Figure 23: PassivHaus and refurbished flat. Lifetime energy use compared
Energy in MWh
120
100
80
60
40
20
2114
2106
2098
2090
2082
2074
2066
2058
2050
2042
2034
2026
2018
2010
Date
The graph shows us that, even with PassivHaus standards it takes over a
hundred years to make the in use energy savings necessary to outweigh the
difference in embodied energy investment between the refurbished high rise flat
and the new build.
James Livingstone
93
density/hectare
Source
30
292 (134 according to Rogers)
71
78
300
1700
Minimum 30
2 (3)
3
Where tower blocks have been demolished it has been done largely for social
reasons, and they are not replaced by other tower blocks. This would be seen
to be repeating the same mistakes.
It is likely therefore that the replacement dwellings will require as much as twice
the land as the demolished tower block occupies. Bear in mind also that
Normandie Tower stands at a relatively modest 15 storeys high. The impact
doubles for blocks of thirty storeys, of which there are many examples.
The point is well made by Rogers however that achievable density is as much
about good and appropriate design as it is about numbers.
Richard Rogers in his Housing for a Compact City report for the Mayor of London
suggests that terraced housing, medium rise and high rise (20 storeys) can be built in the
same plot, giving very different results in terms of privacy and amenity, but resulting in the
same density. His figure is 75 dwellings per hectare which seems to give a larger than
normal space around the tower block and no parking for the terraced housing development.
(Rogers 2003 p 20)
James Livingstone
94
Conclusions
This chapter concludes that the approximate energy costs of
demolition and replacement of Normandie Tower or an equivalent
Tower Block is 7885 MWh (the energy required to build the
equivalent number of replacement dwellings).
This does not take into account the hazards and cost associated
with demolition.
It also concludes that refurbishment to the levels in chapter seven
is more cost effective than demolition and replacement, (in overall
embodied and energy in use terms) for at least 100 years.
With regard to land use, tower blocks are a high density form of
housing and fill the a current need in terms of the size and
accommodation type. Demolition and replacement places demands
on infrastructure and greenfields. A rational housing policy
maximises high density housing because delivery of facilities can
be so much more efficient than to a sprawl of cul-de-sacs full of
semi detached houses.
The Environmental Change Institute reporting to the Royal
Commission on Environmental Pollution ( RCEP) concluded that
high density development of smaller dwellings within existing
urban environments reduces greenfield take makes better use of
existing infrastructure, whilst recognising the increasing demand
for single person dwellings. (ECI 2006)
Limitations:
It would be wrong however, not to point out at this time, the
particular limitations of the science in this chapter.
The data for embodied energy from Bath University is by their own
acknowledgement, just a collection of information from various
sources with different methodologies underlying them.
Having looked at some of the primary sources behind the ECI table
of the embodied energy in new build, it is difficult to be confident
that these are based on strong analysis.
Further detail could be added to the calculations of embodied
energy in Normandie Tower.
Appropriate urban density is complex area of research that has only
been touched on here.
There is further work to do here, but a methodology is suggested and
there are good reasons and sufficient margins to be confident in the
overall findings of the chapter.
James Livingstone
95
James Livingstone
96
The next two sections of this chapter then looked at the way high rise blocks
were built and at their current condition. This was primarily descriptive, in order
to contextualise the later analysis, but also concluded that high rise blocks,
although in need of internal refurbishment and concrete repairs, were generally
fit for purpose and remain in a basically sound condition. Demolition on the
grounds of condition, has generally been a smoke screen for building owners
with overwhelming estate management problems.
Chapter four described why the issue is important and how hard decisions are
necessary. Climate change is a reality. Housing contributes almost a third to the
carbon dioxide emissions of the UK, and high rise represents a significant
proportion of housing. Housing is in short supply and poor condition and
investment in it is far too small. In order to address the climate change and
housing issues therefore, a debate is needed about where to refurbish and
where to demolish and rebuild. The emphasis in the selection of which buildings
to demolish and replace will have to shift towards the most energy inefficient.
Chapter five looked at the poor understanding the UK has about its housing
stock, and concluded that the countrys approach to energy efficiency in the
existing stock is naive, being based on misunderstanding and an out of date
appreciation of what is needed to achieve the energy savings required by this
situation. Available data was analysed and the chapter concluded that, on the
basis of the evidence, the labelling of high rise dwellings as Hard to Treat
Homes is misplaced and an example of this misunderstanding.
Three case studies from primary research and three from secondary sources
are included in chapter six, together with a review of demolition numbers. They
look at the approach building owners are taking to the issue, aid analysis of
heat loss from particular building types and inform the later chapters.
It is evident for the English examples, that energy efficiency is not a primary
driver in doing refurbishment work. Where energy performance improvements
are made, they are done either for political gain or are ancillary to cosmetic
improvements already proposed. Even in the case of the Little Venice project
there is a surprising omission of the application of standards and scientific
principles, preferring instead a hit and hope approach. Budgets and a lack of
urgency about energy efficiency seem to drive the agenda for these works. The
infrequent opportunity to carry out energy efficiency works, presented by the
erection of access equipment to carry out the repairs, is being routinely missed.
The thermal performance analysis, by observation and the use of IES VE
thermal simulation software, of Normandie Tower in Norwich is discussed in
chapter seven to establish what relative improvements can be made through the
introduction of external insulation and double glazing.
There was some discrepancy between the results and the actual fuel use, and
the suspicion remains that the overall level of results obtained from the
computer modelling was optimistic. However, the modelling proved pertinent
nevertheless, and the relative improvement in performance of the block was
impressive. Informed observation confirms that high rise flats should perform
James Livingstone
97
well as they benefit from a simple form and the buffer effect of each other and
the common areas to keep them warm.
Chapter eight studied the practicalities of improving the thermal performance of
high rise blocks, paying particular attention to the basics of insulation and
double glazing, and to the particular and relevant differences they have to other
construction types. Whilst the height of these blocks requires expensive access
equipment and results in extremes of weather, the relatively simple form and
aesthetic of the tower block is conducive to the fitting of external insulation and
double glazing without much practical difficulty or objection.
The impact of refurbishment and demolition and new build on the environment,
green field sites and urban density was then looked at in the chapter nine. It
concluded that, if the performance assured by the earlier analysis could be met,
the refurbishment option was significantly more energy efficient over the lifetime
of the building than demolition and rebuilding.
It also concluded that high urban densities are key to efficient resource use.
Urban densities can remain high and still be successful with good design, but in
most cases demolition and replacement of the dwelling is likely to at least
double the land use for the same number of dwellings.
Further Research
To undertake research of this sort is to realise the frailty and novelty of this
branch of science and policy. There is much research to do in this area, and a
lot of it will only be done when the political and financial backing is provided.
The urgency of the debate continues to increase, and the parameters change.
The housing stock is badly understood. The data may be there, but adequate
analysis for energy assessment purposes has not been done. Classification of
dwelling types as hard to treat on the basis of whether there are lofts and
cavity walls, is simply not adequate for the challenge that lies ahead.
Some basic scientific parameters are still unclear in this debate. In the early
BRE case studies, energy improvements were measured in terms of fuel costs
to occupants. Now, building energy is analysed in terms of SAP ratings, kWh
per metre squared, and kWh per dwelling, and there is still no consistency
about methods of carbon accounting. This makes comparison and analysis
difficult.
Embodied energy of building materials and installations is a subject that is
widely debated in these discussions, but the implications seem to be largely
misunderstood. There is little surprise in this when there is so little reliable base
data on the subject.
Whilst the detailed analysis of the energy use at Normandie Tower would be
invaluable in any debate about investment in it, there is scope to harden up the
James Livingstone
98
findings, both in terms of the inputs to the model and of prolonged study of the
ways in which the occupants use the dwellings.
To apply the findings of this analysis to all other locations would be to presume
too much. The findings have a general significance for high rise blocks, but
mostly present a useful methodology for understanding each one, as the need
arises. The results themselves are only reasonably accurate for this one tower
block and even then form only part of the equation.
Conclusions
There is a resurgence of interest in high rise living - and no wonder. Although
the housing experiments of the 1950s and 1960s failed in so many ways, the
concept of high rise living fits the times well now and, apart from building new
tower blocks, a thorough reappraisal of our existing blocks is necessary in the
current context.
This is an emotive issue. Many will argue that it is simply inhuman to cram
people together in a tall building, but demand for inner city high rise apartments
belies this assertion. This work has not sought to deny the importance of social
factors in decisions about demolition and refurbishment, merely to raise
environmental issues up the agenda and provide a framework to discuss them.
Resource use, security, provision of facilities and, as has been demonstrated
here, the potential for energy efficient living, must favour the high density
environments provided by residential high rise. The demonstrable potential
energy reduction for space heating and the impacts on land and resource use of
demolition provide a strong case for the energy efficient refurbishment of high
rise blocks.
Building owners are still continuing to favour demolition over refurbishment, and
even where refurbishment is being done, once in a lifetime opportunities to
carry out energy efficient improvements to high rise blocks are being spurned.
There are many reasons for this. There is a lack of urgency in introducing
energy efficiency measures in to the existing housing stock generally; there is a
political and economic bias towards new build over refurbishment; and finally,
there is a lack of understanding of the issues by building owners, who in any
event, are routinely under funded for investment in their stock.
Decisions about refurbishment or demolition of high rise buildings will continue
to be local ones in which local conditions prevail. Town by town, and block by
block, social, climatic, structural, architectural and economic circumstances
contribute to these decisions. All that is required is that decision makers are
armed with the right tools to make the right decisions, and the right tools
includes an energy performance assessment in the context of a changing
climate.
__________________ oo __________________
James Livingstone
99
Appendices
Appendix 1: Normandie/ Winchester Tower Construction Details
Appendix 2 : Normandie / Winchester Tower Floor Plans
Appendix 3 : Tower Block Modelled variables for IES simulation
Appendix 4 : Oil consumption figures for Winchester Tower
James Livingstone
100
Appendix 1 :
Table 42: Normandie and Winchester Towers , Norwich. Existing Construction details
.
General description
16 storeys
95 flats ( 6 per storey with 5 on the ground floor)
four 2 bed flats and 2 i bed flats o each storey
central core with services , lift, stairs and access corridors to flats
Walls (External to
internal)
Material
Thickness
Pebble dash
External render
No fines2 Concrete
Glass Fibre Quilt
Plasterboard
Plaster
Total
10mm
25mm
300mm
50mm
13mm
5mm
403mm
Floors
250mm
Windows4
4mmGlass
8mm Cavity
Flat Roof
15mm
25mm
100mm
150mm
13mm
300mm
U Value 0.3341
Plaster
Cast Concrete
Plaster
Total
13mm
130mm
13mm
156mm
U Value 2.3041
Dimensions
Flat 1 (2Bed)
Flat 2 (2Bed)
Flat 3 (1Bed )
Flat 4 (1Bed )
Flat 5 (2Bed)
Flat 6 (2Bed)
Area m2
62.4
54.4
36.96
36.96
55.08
56.8
Height m
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
Volume m3
149.76
130.56
95.90
95.90
132.19
136.32
5760m2
3265
924m2
Internal Walls
U Value3 of 0.5397
James Livingstone
101
Appendix 2 :
Figure 24: Ground Floor Plan of Winchester Tower
This is the identical sister block to Normandie Tower
James Livingstone
102
Appendix 3:
Table 43: Tower Block modelled variables for IES VE simulations
Model 1 --- As built
Walls
Construction 1
U = 0.5397
Glazing 1
U= 5.2237
First
3.0 ach
Original
Windows
Air infiltration
Windows
Air infiltration
Glazing 2
U= 2.8643
Second
2.0 ach
Air infiltration
Construction 2
U = 0.2783
Glazing 2
U= 2.8643
Third
1.0 ach
Construction 1
U = 0.5397
Glazing 3
U= 1.9698
Fourth
0.7
Windows
Air infiltration
Air infiltration
James Livingstone
Construction 2
U = 0.2783
Glazing 3
U= 1.9698
Fifth
0.4 ach
103
Appendix 4
Table 44: Oil consumption for Winchester Tower, Norwich.
Oil Consumption
Date 05/06
Consumption
(litres)
Cost
()
05.04.2005
12.05.2005
13.06.2005
18.07.2005
15.08.2005
19.09.2005
28.10.2005
17.11.2005
31.11.2005
15.12.2005
22.12.2005
03.02.2006
12.01.2006
17.02.2006
03.03.2006
17.03.2006
7,000
7,009
6,200
5,000
5,219
7,000
7,000
7,150
6,980
7,000
7,038
7,006
7,130
7,120
7,178
10,724
2,104.20
2,106.90
1,949.28
1,574.50
1,772.37
2,420.60
2,522.10
2,431.72
2,346.68
2,443.00
2,373.21
2,380.64
2,510.47
2,503.39
2,500.10
3,809.16
Total
Average Unit Cost (p/litre)
kWh
James Livingstone
111,754
1,184,592.40
37,748.32
0.338
3.2 p/kWh
104
Bibliography
Abbreviations / Glossary
Bredem definition from Building Research Establishment General Information Sheet 31. from
http://www.ihsti.com/tempimg/B98864-CIS888614800201832.pdf accessed 04.01.08
Decent Homes programme defined with the aid of the Department of Communities and Local
Government at http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/decenthomes/whatis/ accessed
04.01.08
HECA definition from Defra http://www.defra.gov.uk/
environment/climatechange/uk/publicsector/localauth/heca95/index.htm accessed 04.01.08
Non traditional Construction defined with help from National Centre For Excellence in Housing
at http://www.homein.org/page.jsp?id=543 accessed 03.01.08
PassivHaus definition with help from PassivHaus UK. from http://www.passivhaus.org.uk/
accessed 03.01.08
Retscreen from www.retscreen.net accessed 04.01.08
ROCS definition assistance from
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Sustainability/Environmnt/RenewablObl/Pages/RenewablObl.aspx
accessed 03-01-08
SAP definition with assistance from Building Research Establishment at
http://projects.bre.co.uk/sap2005/ accessed 03.01.08
U Value definition from Clear at :
http://www.learn.londonmet.ac.uk/packages/clear/thermal/buildings/building_fabric/properties/tra
nsmittance.html accessed 03.01.08
Warm front definition from www.warmfront.co.uk accessed 07.01.08
1. Introduction:
Department of Communities and Local Government.(2005) English House Condition Survey
from http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housing research/housing surveys/ english house
condition/ Accessed 08.07 to 01.08
Euroace. http://www.euroace.org/highrise/index.htm. Accessed. 09-07 to 01-08
Eso News http://eso-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/oliennes-sur-le-world-trade-center.html
Accessed 12.01.08
2. Literature Review
Sustaining Towers Resource: http://www.sustainingtowers.org/ (Accessed 09-07 to 01-08)
National Sustainable Tower Block Initiative (NSTBI) from http://www.towerblocks.org.uk/html
(Accessed 09-07 to 01-08)
James Livingstone
105
Gale T, and Church C (2000). Streets in the Sky. Towards improving the Quality of life in Tower
blocks in the UK. The First Report of the National Sustainable Tower blocks initiative. Available
from NSTBI http://www.towerblocks.org.uk/html ( Retrieved 12-10-2007 )
Euroace . http://www.euroace.org/highrise/index.htm. Accessed. 09-07 to 01-08
IES VE. Software downloaded from IES www.iesve.com. April 2007
Build Desk 3.2. U Value Calculator software. Download from Build Desk Ltd. September 2007.
Roaf S, Crichton D, Nicol F. (2005) Adapting Buildings and Cities for Climate Change. Elsevier /
Architectural Press. Oxford
Glendenning M and Muthesius S. (1993). Tower Block. Modern Public Housing in England
Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Yale University Press for the Paul Mellon Centre for Modern British Studies in Art.
Open University. From here to Modernity. ( Accessed October 2007)
http://www.open2.net/modernity/
Jencks.C. (2000) Le Corbusier and the Cultural Revolution in Architecture. Monacelli Press.
Abercrombie. P. (1945). The Greater London Plan 1944: London HMSO
Concrete Today. The Cement and Concrete Association Jul Sept 1951 Living in Flats .
Sourced via the Concrete Society http://www.concretecentre.com/PDF/cq_011.PDF. Accessed
Sept 2007
James Livingstone
106
Hotchkiss A.R and Edwards MJ . (1988) Bison Large Panel System Dwellings: Constructional
details . Garston. Building Research Establishment.
CIBSE (1999) Guide A Environmental Design . London. Chartered Institute of Building
Engineers.
The Department of the Environment (DOE) (1996) Good Practise Case Study 121. Energy
Efficient Refurbishment of High Rise LPS dwellings. Garston. Building Research Establishment.
Rouse and Delatte (2003) Lessons from the Progressive Collapse of the Ronan Point Apartment
Tower, Proceedings of the 3rd ASCE Forensics Congress, October 19 - 21, 2003, San Diego,
California
http://www.eng.uab.edu/cee/faculty/ndelatte/case_studies_project/Ronan%20Point.htm
Accessed 21.08.07
Wearne, Phillip (2000). Collapse: When Buildings Fall Down. TV Books, L.L.C., USA. via
http://www.eng.uab.edu/cee/faculty/ndelatte/case_studies_project/Ronan%20Point.htm
Accessed 21.08.07
Davis Langdon & Everest (2002) Refurbishing a Tower Block, Cost model, From Issue 49 of
Social Housing: December 2002 via
http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=113&storycode=1024090&c=
Ciria (1992) Special Publication 87 . Wall technology. Volume E. Large Heavy units on framed
buildings and in situ Concrete. London .Ciria
Currie R J, Reeves B R, Moore J F (1987) BRE report A .The structural adequacy and durability
of large panel system dwellings. Garston, Building Research Establishment
Department of Communities and Local Government.(2005) English House Condition Survey
from http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housing research/housing surveys/ english house
condition/ Accessed 08.07 to 01.08
Brookes. A (1998) Cladding of Buildings . London. Spon .
James Livingstone
107
6. Case studies
John Prescott to the Better Buildings Summit quoted by Enabling Concepts at :
http://www.enablingconcepts.co.uk/testimonials.html
Wates Construction Limited from
www.wates.co.uk/living_space/living_space_projects/glastonbury 16/11/2007
Makartstrasse Flats information from Nachhaltig Wirtschaften. www.
etn.wsr.ac.at/(en)/rxml/results accessed 10.12.07
Makartstrasse Flats Photographs from Gap Solar at http://www.gapsolar.at/beitraege/downloads/2006_%20Projektbericht%20Makartstra%C3%9Fe%20Linz_1012.
pdf. accessed 10.12.07
Euroace : Energy Efficiency in High Rise Refurbishment Case Study Series. www.euroace.com
th
James Livingstone
108
Various correspondence by e mail with Martyn Kemp and Ken Lee of Kemp Muir Weallans
between October 2007 and January 2008.
Information obtained from site visit and interviews with Apollo Construction, and Homes for
th
Islington. 8 October 2007
Norwich City Council Interviews October 2007
UK Housing Wiki at http://ukhousing.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Demolished_tower_blocks,
accessed 08.01.08
James Livingstone
109
Ireland D (Empty Homes Agency). (no date) Blue Prints for Green Homes. Energy Policy for the
st
21 Century http://www.emptyhomes.com/documents/publications /Blueprints%20for%20
Green%20Homes.pdf. Downloaded Nov 27 2007
Specification from Permarock Ltd : Permarock Mineral Fibre 2006
Bioregional Bedzed energy standards
http://www.bioregional.com/programme_projects/ecohous_prog/bedzed/bz_monitoring.htm
accessed 14.12.07
AECB Energy standards : Page 3
http://www.aecb.net/PDFs/carbonlite/AECB_VOL_3_EnergyStandard_V4c_FINAL.pdf Accessed
14.12.07
Society Guardian (25.06.2003). Livingstone attacks low density Housing
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,984783,00.html Accessed 03.01.08
Society.guardian.co.uk/urbandesign/image/0,11200,765683,00.html - 32k 20.07.02 . Accessed
03.01.08
CABE: http://www.cabeeducation.org.uk/buildingforlife.aspx?bfl=true&contentitemid=340&aspectid=24 . Accessed 0301-08
Planning Policy Statement 3
fromhttp://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/planningpolicystatemen
t3 . Accessed 03.01.08
Rogers R (2003) Housing for a Compact City . London. Greater London Authority.
Palmer J, Boardman B et al (March 2006) Reducing the Environmental Impact of Housing Final
Report Consultancy . Study in support of the Royal Commission on Environmental pollutions
26th Report on the Urban Environment. Environmental Change Institute
XCO2 (2002) Insulation for Environmental Sustainability A Guide . London. XCO2 Conisbee
WRAP (No date) The Demolition Protocol . Aggregates Resource Efficiency in Demolition and
Construction. Wrap London.
James Livingstone
110