Nemesis
Member
- Messages
- 9,402
- Location
- Planet Earth
The latest edition of SALON, the bulletin from the Society of Antiquaries, has this to say:
The carbon cost of protecting our heritage
The Guardian newspaper published a scare story last week, claiming that English Heritage was frustrating Government energy-saving efforts by denying listed home owners the right to basic improvements, such as secondary glazing, leading to the production of unnecessary carbon emissions. The article claimed as typical the plight of Richard and Lydia Savage, owners of a seventeenth-century farmhouse near Painswick, Gloucestershire, whose central heating system burns twice as much fuel as the average house, produces twice the carbon emissions and has to be kept on almost all year round because the house is so cold – all the fault of English Heritage, of course, who will not let the Savages install secondary glazing. According to the Guardian: ‘They are not alone – some 450,000 people in England live in listed properties, and millions more face similar restrictions in designated conservation areas’ (the reality is that it is rare to find a conservation area that hasn’t been comprehensively wrecked by a tide of uPVC replacement doors and windows; local planning authorities in England rarely undertake audits and almost never enforce the rules).
The article quite rightly led to a response from Justin Ayton, Buildings Inspector at English Heritage, who pointed out that the agency has no over-riding objection to the use of secondary glazing, that every case is judged on its merits, and that ‘In the case of the Savages, whose house is listed Grade II*, our concerns were not over the principle, but were based on having insufficient information to give a full understanding of the potential impact; and that such information as was included indicated internal frames of such bulky dimensions that they would have had an unnecessarily harmful impact on the appearance of the historic stone mullions. These concerns were raised with the Savages, but no further details or revisions were submitted.’
English Heritage says that it has produced guidance on the energy performance of historic buildings, and will be producing more specific guidance on secondary glazing in the future.
Historic Scotland is a step ahead, meanwhile, with a suite of excellent guidance documents for historic building owners, published by the Technical Conservation, Research and Education Group. These include simple common sense guidance on maintaining traditional sash and casement windows, reducing heat loss and improving sound insulation, and installing effective and unobtrusive secondary glazing. Other titles in the series – called INFORM – range from ‘Damp: causes and solutions’ and ‘The use of lime and cement in traditional buildings’ to ‘Domestic decorative glass’, ‘Maintaining a pantiled roof’ and ‘Ceramic tiled flooring’. More information on all of these from the Historic Scotland website.
http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/publications
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.11600
The carbon cost of protecting our heritage
The Guardian newspaper published a scare story last week, claiming that English Heritage was frustrating Government energy-saving efforts by denying listed home owners the right to basic improvements, such as secondary glazing, leading to the production of unnecessary carbon emissions. The article claimed as typical the plight of Richard and Lydia Savage, owners of a seventeenth-century farmhouse near Painswick, Gloucestershire, whose central heating system burns twice as much fuel as the average house, produces twice the carbon emissions and has to be kept on almost all year round because the house is so cold – all the fault of English Heritage, of course, who will not let the Savages install secondary glazing. According to the Guardian: ‘They are not alone – some 450,000 people in England live in listed properties, and millions more face similar restrictions in designated conservation areas’ (the reality is that it is rare to find a conservation area that hasn’t been comprehensively wrecked by a tide of uPVC replacement doors and windows; local planning authorities in England rarely undertake audits and almost never enforce the rules).
The article quite rightly led to a response from Justin Ayton, Buildings Inspector at English Heritage, who pointed out that the agency has no over-riding objection to the use of secondary glazing, that every case is judged on its merits, and that ‘In the case of the Savages, whose house is listed Grade II*, our concerns were not over the principle, but were based on having insufficient information to give a full understanding of the potential impact; and that such information as was included indicated internal frames of such bulky dimensions that they would have had an unnecessarily harmful impact on the appearance of the historic stone mullions. These concerns were raised with the Savages, but no further details or revisions were submitted.’
English Heritage says that it has produced guidance on the energy performance of historic buildings, and will be producing more specific guidance on secondary glazing in the future.
Historic Scotland is a step ahead, meanwhile, with a suite of excellent guidance documents for historic building owners, published by the Technical Conservation, Research and Education Group. These include simple common sense guidance on maintaining traditional sash and casement windows, reducing heat loss and improving sound insulation, and installing effective and unobtrusive secondary glazing. Other titles in the series – called INFORM – range from ‘Damp: causes and solutions’ and ‘The use of lime and cement in traditional buildings’ to ‘Domestic decorative glass’, ‘Maintaining a pantiled roof’ and ‘Ceramic tiled flooring’. More information on all of these from the Historic Scotland website.
http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/publications
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.11600