Nature and Society
December 2007 - January 2008 edition

NSF meeting report:

Sustainable housing development

Our November meeting launched Derek Wrigley’s new book Climate Change needsHousing Change: why is Australian housing unsuitable for the 21st century? The launch was combined with a forum on the topic.

Professor John Sandeman, an emeritus professor of physics, started the proceedings with a quick review of the evidence for human induced climate change, and its serious consequences. He concluded that we have a moral duty to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, being citizens of the country with the worst emissions in the world. Annually, Chinese per capita emissions are two tonnes per person, compared with nine tonnes for an American and eleven tonnes for an Australian. And Canberra is worse than the rest of Australia!

It seems ridiculous as well as immoral, when we could be making so much better use of the sun, as Derek has pointed out in his two books, and various articles and presentations. New suburbs are so badly laid out that 50 to 80 percent of houses cannot have proper solar access. Houses go on being built in inefficient and energy-guzzling ways, taking no notice of building research or even commonsense. Why do smaller numbers of residents per house require ever bigger buildings? Why are houses designed for the car(s) and the garage to get the best solar access? Why do houses always have to face the street?

Discussion became very lively. It quickly became obvious that there are a number of impediments to change. Part of it is sheer inertia, but it is hard to do anything because a lot of things need to change. The regulatory framework needs to change, the planning authority needs to be enabled to plan wisely and not be hamstrung by outdated rules, builders need to understand the importance of the changes, shortages of skilled workers have to be addressed.

Financial institutions could have a lot of influence. Politicians need to understand the problems and their responsibilities. Over all there is a gross lack of leadership. As an aside, it is also possible for very well meant intentions to have unfortunate consequences, such as a recent case where a preservation order on one tree prevented the proper planning of the surrounding area.

At least with Derek’s book in hand, buyers can learn what they should be looking for and asking builders to do better. They should not just accept what the market is offering, without complaint. One of the men present pointed out that, acting on the information in Derek’s first book, he has been able to reduce his home’s energy consumption to a quarter of what it was, and have a comfortable house.

Why indeed do people put up with stupid design and the spiralling cost of houses? Is this really what they want? Derek suggested that a house buyers’ association could make a difference, by persuading builders that they are not happy with what they are being offered. Somehow something has to happen, house buyers’ association or not. People are now finding that with the internet they can recruit support and take action. Maybe this is what house buyers need to do. They could take advantage of some of the websites that now offer advice on reducing one’s footprint, and publicise the benefits offered by better buildings.

Many things could be done. We could look at new forms of housing, co-housing, community housing rather than individual housing for everyone. What about a model retirement complex, utilising Derek’s ideas?

Building codes need to be improved and star ratings should try for twenty stars, rather than five. We should have a Sustainability Charter and a Commissioner for Sustainability.

Builders and buyers need to look to the near future, when the inevitable blackouts will occur on hot days, with the potent mix of air conditioners, heat waves and oil depletion. Anyone then with a well planned house and photovoltaic cells on the roof will be the envy of all their neighbours.

Jenny Wanless ©

A splendid idea!

Crispin Hull, having read Derek’s book and writing in The Canberra Times, has proposed that a new Prime Minister’s Residence should be built show casing the best in carbon neutral building design.

He also suggested that the current Lodge be retrofitted to show what can be done with existing buildings, in this case one that is eighty years old.

What a great idea!