A British initiative foreshadows a new approach for Australian developers.

Pooran Desai lives and works in a world-renowned urban project that pioneers eco- and community-conscious design. The Beddington Zero (fossil) Energy Development (BedZED), in South London, comprises 100 houses and units, as well as commercial, community and public space.

Its residents consume half as much electricity and drive nearly two-thirds fewer kilometres than the national average. They’ve got good access to public transport, bikeways and fresh local food. They also know about 20 neighbours by name.

“The overlap between sustainable lifestyle, community spirit, good health and low carbon emissions is very strong,” says Mr Desai, founder of BioRegional, which completed the BedZED project in 2002.

That holistic approach may soon find a home in Australia. Mr Desai visited Melbourne recently to work with local developers and councils. He met with Moreland City Council to discuss the Coburg Initiative, the council’s plan to create new housing, retail space and jobs in central Coburg.

Among his key arguments is that developers must carefully manage vehicle access onsite. “Cars connect people over long distances, but they actually disconnect you from your neighbours,” Mr Desai says. “At BedZED we removed cars from the centre of the development. We only have limited parking at the periphery. Kids play in the streets and in the public space, and parents don’t worry. Then parents meet each other and start talking.”

BioRegional has created the One Planet Communities framework, a set of principles and targets to help property developers reach for the highest environmental and social standards. It begins with the ecological footprint concept: assessing what the planet can produce renewably and how much of those resources we’re using.

“It turns out that globally we’re consuming about 40 per cent more each year than the planet can sustain,” he says. “But countries are consuming at very different rates.” If everyone on earth lived like the average Australian, we would need three planets to meet our consumption.

The One Planet principles include zero waste, sustainable materials, food, water and transport, and equity and local economy. They are now being applied to about 100,000 homes around the world, from the USA to the UAE.

“We try to make it easy for people to live happy and healthy lives, but within a fair share of the earth’s resources, so they only have a one-planet footprint. We can do that at the same time as increasing quality of life,” he says.

Barangaroo, a high-profile redevelopment in inner city Sydney, is a candidate to join the network. Lend Lease won the bid for the first stage, a commercial and residential precinct next to the existing CBD. The company is working with BioRegional on an action plan that would see the project meet the One Planet guidelines.

Mr Desai believes that the development industry is on the brink of a significant shift, one that will focus on creating sustainable lifestyles. The newest BioRegional development in the UK, One Brighton, has shown the model to be commercially successful. The 172 apartments were built for the same cost as conventional projects, and have delivered higher returns.

“One Brighton is completely car free,” Mr Desai says. “As a developer, we save huge amounts of money on that, so we invested in the renewable energy system and in higher quality, natural building materials. It’s selling better than other developments in England’s south-east.”

Older homes have the potential for energy efficiency on the cheap.

NEW houses must comply with six star energy regulations from next May. But what about our existing homes – how do they rate and how can we best improve them?

The Moreland Energy Foundation and Sustainability Victoria recently studied the energy performance of a group of older homes. “The vast majority of houses are estimated to have two stars or less,” says Govind Maksay from the foundation. “The 15 houses we studied were even worse – the average was 1.3 stars and a couple of them achieved no rating at all.”

The researchers surveyed each dwelling and calculated its energy rating. They modelled a series of upgrades to the building fabric: ceiling, wall and floor insulation, draught proofing, drapes and pelmets, external shading and double-glazed windows.

With all the measures in place, the houses jumped to an average of 4.3 stars, for an average cost of about $22,500.

However, the changes weren’t all equal, in either impact or cost. “On average, over 80 per cent of the rating improvement came from the insulation and comprehensive draught proofing,” Mr Maksay says, “but that constituted just 20 per cent of the total upgrade cost.” In contrast, double-glazing proved highly expensive for more limited benefit.

Although these findings vary according to the dwelling and the modelling undertaken, Mr Maksay says householders can learn important lessons from the study: seal your gaps and insulate your walls and ceilings.

“To really improve your star rating you have to tackle wall insulation, whether that’s with blow-in granulated rockwool or by removing the weatherboards or plasterboard and inserting batts.

“The other message is that there’s a difference between wimpy and comprehensive draught sealing. Really blocking up gaps and cracks has a big impact.”

If you live in an older house, your heating probably comes and goes like the wind. Choose your tactics carefully and you’ll bump up your rating at little expense. “It’s highly achievable for existing houses to get near the five-star standard. You can get a big bang for your buck,” Mr Maksay says.

With that advice in mind, an alliance of environment and welfare groups is launching One Million Homes, a retrofitting campaign aiming to transform half the Victorian housing stock over five years, beginning with low-income households.

Damien Moyse, from the Alternative Technology Association, says we have much room for improvement. Three in ten Victorian households are still using power-hungry electric storage hot water systems.

The scheme would cost an average of $2500 per house, Mr Moyse says. “Governments have already committed two-thirds of that under existing rebates and programs.”

A retrofitting scheme would cut greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption, and save householders about $290 per year. “It would make properties more liveable in the context of rising temperatures and more extreme weather events,” he says, “and target people who can’t afford to install some of these technologies.”

If you want even more impetus to insulate, visit the green building events scheduled during the State of Design Festival, from July 14 to 25.

Next weekend, Sanctuary magazine is setting up speed dating with sustainable architects and development firm Brutal Art is conducting green design workshops. The following weekend there’ll be open houses and courses in Castlemaine and Bendigo, all for free.

Green-minded councils and community groups can save you time, money and energy.

IN LATE 2006, at a meeting held by Ballarat Renewable Energy and Zero Emissions (BREAZE), Nick Lanyon asked how many of the crowd had solar hot water systems. “I assumed that half the room would put their hands up,” he says. “But out of 170 people there were only six hands.”

It was a green-minded audience, so Mr Lanyon asked why they hadn’t switched systems. People answered that they didn’t know which suppliers to trust, were too busy to research, and didn’t want to make the wrong decision. “So they just stayed in a situation of paralysis,” he says.

If you’re choosing solar hot water units or photovoltaic panels, it’s easy to be overwhelmed. But never fear: many councils and community groups can help you pick the right product at a good price.

Mr Lanyon and the BREAZE volunteers set about finding a good system and a supplier that would offer its members a hefty discount. The organisation also investigated solar photovoltaic panels and, eventually, became a supplier itself. “The research was fairly intensive,” he says. “We contacted nearly every photovoltaic supplier in Australia at the time.”

Altogether, he estimates that BREAZE has coordinated the installation of nearly 600 solar electricity and hot water systems. In recent years, the renewables market has surged, with big suppliers often selling cheap, low-quality systems with questionable warranty provisions. “We’re concerned about the longevity of what’s available now,” Mr Lanyon says. “People respect our independence because we exist to reduce emissions, regardless of who supplies the technology.”

Many other sustainability groups and councils have run bulk-purchasing schemes for solar hot water and electricity, so it’s worthwhile seeking information in your local area.

For residents in Melbourne’s north and north-east, Zero Carbon Moreland and the Manningham and Nillumbik councils are now offering solar hot water deals – visit their websites for more information.

Environmental consultant Bill Pemberton, from Scarab Solutions, has worked for a number of councils on similar programs. “They make it easier for people to invest in renewable energy,” he says. “A lot of the administration is done for you – the council looks at the technology and the rebates, and gets quotes from the whole industry.”

That pre-planning is particularly helpful for hot water units. “When your existing system breaks down, you need it replaced straight away,” Mr Pemberton says. “But if you want solar, you hit a wall of complexity.” For energy efficiency, he argues, it’s far better to buy a new system before your old one dies, especially if you have an electric service.

The other benefit is monetary. “By purchasing on a large scale, people can save hundreds of dollars each. In Manningham and Nillumbik we found a saving of about $300, compared to buying and installing individually,” he says.

Zero Carbon Moreland estimates that its program will cut the cost of installing a climate-friendly hot water system by $800 to $1200. Householders can also save up to 15 per cent on ongoing energy bills and up to four tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, depending on their existing unit.

With rebates constantly changing, Mr Pemberton says it pays to be on the lookout for new bulk-purchasing schemes. “I think they’ll also include appliances, such as front-loading washing machines, or even the replacement of halogen downlights.”

Comparing the impact of building products is not as straightforward as you might think.

WHEN you plan a green building or renovation, sooner or later you’ll rub up against embodied energy. The encounter is more likely to be perplexing than pleasurable.

“Basically, embodied energy is the energy it takes make a product,” says Dr Usha Iyer-Raniga, assistant director of RMIT’s Centre for Design. That can include the mining, processing and transport of base materials, as well as energy for manufacturing, packaging and delivery.

“It’s a very technical area,” she says. It’s also very imprecise. According to the sustainable design guide Your Home, findings can vary by a factor of ten depending on the research method.

Generally, the more highly processed a material, the higher its embodied energy. But it’s not as simple as opting for timber over brick, or brick over steel. Best practice manufacturing techniques can reverse the order.

Likewise, recycled content or future reuse can drastically change a material’s footprint. Also, products with higher embodied energy can shrink ongoing energy consumption, if wisely deployed. A well-placed, exposed concrete slab can cut home heating and cooling needs.

Dr Iyer-Raniga suggests householders ask a lot of questions. “People have to be really savvy. There’s a lot of greenwash out there, particularly in the building industry – not just with materials, but with appliances and furniture as well,” she says.

“You need to think about your needs. Is it a house you want to live in for the rest of your life? Think about using long-lasting materials that aren’t entirely dictated by fashion. Consider where the materials come from, how durable they are and whether they need maintenance.”

Embodied energy typically comprises about one-tenth of the energy used by a building during its lifetime. “Building codes are becoming more stringent and appliances more energy efficient,” Dr Iyer-Raniga notes. “From a whole-of-life energy perspective, embodied energy will become more significant.”

But it only tells part of the story. For the rest, you need life cycle assessment, embodied energy’s younger and more comprehensive cousin.

“Life cycle assessment looks at the cradle-to-grave impacts of a product or service, including all the relevant environmental indicators,” says Tim Grant from consultancy Life Cycle Strategies. “That might be the loss of species, the production of greenhouse gases and pollutants, or the use of non-renewable resources.”

To date, not much life cycle information is available for homeowners, although eco-product database EcoSpecifier recently introduced the GreenTag accreditation system.

Mr Grant says there are simple rules of thumb for householders to follow. “Firstly, anything that will improve operational efficiency is worth doing, whether it’s solar panels or light sensors that switch lights off automatically. The environmental impacts of production will nearly always be outweighed by savings during the life of the home.

“The second thing is to reduce the size of everything. Smaller buildings use less material, less energy for heating and have less room for furniture and fittings.”

That means modification or refurbishment is preferable to building from scratch, if it can ensure energy efficiency. Earth building techniques such as mudbrick have very little embodied energy, but to remain ahead of the rest, they must also operate efficiently.

“There’s nothing that has no environmental impact,” Mr Grant says. “After doing life cycle assessment, you come to realise that less is more. We really need to reduce our consumption of everything.”