I have a 4 year old son called Elliot. He’s in pre-school at the moment. Every morning I drive him there we have 10 minutes to ourselves where I try to resolve or answer his questions. Travel is a huge issue with Elliot at the moment. He is mainly focused on France, Spain, Australia and America. Australia excites him the most since it means he’ll spend the maximum amount of time on an airplane. He’s insistent that we go to Australia soon and is very impatient about it. I love these conversations. There is no need for framing or context in his mind. If he can get the right answer from me then he doesn’t see any reason why we can’t just go ahead and do something.
The real world or more correctly the conventional world that we adults live in is far more complicated. Emphasis on the word conventional. What I mean to say is that in our day to day lives we both invent and subscribe to conventions that help us to navigate our way through. The thing to watch out for is which of these conventions serve a societal good and which are subtlely impeding improving our world.
I have been an advocate of high building standards and construction for over 10 years. Don’t ask me how that happened, it just did. It was always a matter of time before I became familiar with the Passive House standard (a building performance standard that delivers healthy, comfortable, energy efficient houses). I started building this type of house in 2013 and have become very involved with the standard since the begining of last year.
As with any change in standards there will be high levels of resistance. However, despite being very subtle, the impediments placed in its way are potentially quite insidious. Its a bit of a masterstroke really.
What I regularly see is that the health, comfort, energy efficiency and sustainability benefits of Passive House are subject to the exiges ‘financial payback’. Clever stuff. If you can whittle an argument down to euros and cents or pounds and pennies then you can communicate very clearly !
I see how this convention is so heavily subscribed to. They even teach you how to calculate the Net Present Value of energy efficiency savings when you train to become a certified Passive House Designer. I read articles on the financial payback of airtighting a house.
Financial payback pervades almost every discussion on Passive House. In a bizzare twist of fate building regulations have tightened so much in Ireland that there is almost no price uplift to go to Passive House. This is not the case in other markets so the convention of financial payback needs to be challenged.
As I write this piece I look across the kitchen to see my two week old daughter, Maisy, sleep peacefully on the sofa. I listen anxiously since I know that she’s due a feed soon. She’s a strong girl. She needs to be. She has a congenital heart defect, her immunity is suppressed and myself and my wife are hoping that she’s doesn’t get ill before her operation in February.
We live in a self-built energy efficient home completed in 2009. Its well insulated, airtight sealed but doesn’t have a mechanical ventilation system. I didn’t understand the value of indoor air quality at the time so I decided to save money on buying a ventilation unit for the house. We rely on natural ventilation which at this time of year means cool night air coming into the house. Of course, now I’m feeling a tad stupid. This may be an extreme example but it serves to emphasise the point that the value of health and comfort is often overlooked and can be difficult to articulate in a meaningful way.
They key to changing the conversation is education. That’s the tough bit. I was listening to George Church who is known as the ‘Godfather of Genetics’. I thought that he captured the challenge of changing values (albeit in a separate context) exceptionally well;
“It’s all about education. It’s not the technology that’s the problem. It’s the societal pressures and market forces that are at work. If we want to instill certain values spread the word”
Thankfully, I am beginning to see some great examples of this education in practise. I’m starting to enjoy reading pieces on the futility of financial payback when assessing the economics of a sustainable house.
One thing that particularly impressed me was the paper “Does Residential Comfort Have to Pay for Itself” by Robert Schild. His paper, more philosophy than science, made its way into the conference proceedings for this years International Passive House conference. He persuasively argues the skewed financialisation of modern society’s values.
A great initiative which is helping educate people in a very tangible way are the International Passive House Open Days which are being held this year from 11-13 November. There are several houses in Ireland that will be open to the public on these days. If you live in a Passive House share the experience. If you want to learn about Passive House go visit one near where you live.
And finally, to leave you on a positive note, it is possible to change things. To quote Margaret Mead:
“Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”
Reminds me of a bunch of people in Dun Laoghaire !