5 star rated houses in Victoria, Australia

From Greenlivingpedia, a wiki on green living, building and energy

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 12:18, 21 November 2008 (edit)
Peter Campbell (Talk | contribs)
(Cranbourne Estate houses - Down heading level)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 12:31, 21 November 2008 (edit) (undo)
Peter Campbell (Talk | contribs)
(Cranbourne Estate 5 star houses - Add 6 star houses.)
Next diff →
Line 75: Line 75:
These houses have similar shortcomings to those listed for the Waverley Park site houses. These houses have similar shortcomings to those listed for the Waverley Park site houses.
 +
 +==Moving to 6 or 7 star ratings==
 +A Master Builders Association (MBA) survey has that showed Victoria's five-star minimum energy rating had added $7600 to the cost of a new house, and that six and seven-star ratings would add $10,000 and $14,000, respectively. The Victorian State Government is considering implementing a six-star minimum.
 +
 +However, the MBA, which lobbied in the past to minimise the cost and effectiveness of the 5 star rating, is lobbying against the introduction of a new 6 star rating, citing housing affordability and the housing crisis as reasons against upgrading the rating.
 +
 +However, some builders say that five-star compliance has only added only about $1000 to $2000 to the cost of a new house, and that six-star option has added about 1% to 2%, which equates to $4350 extra for a house priced at the Melbourne median of $435,000.
 +
 +THe Green Building Council has pointed out that increasing green star requirements from 5 to 6, while adding to housing costs, would reduce household costs in the long term, a factor which will become more important as the price of water and energy will be increasing in the future.<ref>[http://business.theage.com.au/business/sixstar-energy-rating-adds-10000-to-cost-of-new-house-mba-20081120-6cv8.html Six-star energy rating adds $10,000 to cost of new house: MBA], The Age, November 21, 2008</ref>
 +
 +Moving to 6 star, or preferable 7 star mandatory building ratings could see:
 +* Many houses becoming almost self sufficient for water
 +* Houses producing as much electricity as they consume
 +* Elimination of air conditioners - the main appliances causing peak power load on hot summer days
 +* Greatly reduced carbon emissions associated with domestic housing, reducing Australia's overall carbon emissions
 +* The use of much more energy and water efficient appliances.
==See also== ==See also==

Revision as of 12:31, 21 November 2008

In Victoria all new homes built since July 2004 have been required to achieve a 5 star rating.

This means it is compulsory for new houses to have:

  • Star energy rating for the building fabric, and
  • A rainwater tank for toilet flushing or a solar hot water system, and
  • Water efficient shower heads and tap wear.

The average energy efficiency rating of houses in Victoria was only 2.2 stars before the introduction of 5 star standard. From 1 May 2008, the 5 Star standard will be extended to cover alterations to homes and relocations of existing homes.[1]

Contents

Why five stars is not enough

The five star rating system in place in Victoria is well below current standards in Europe. For example, it has the following shortcomings:

  • the efficiency of appliances (heating, cooling and electrical) are not assessed
  • the use of energy intensive appliances that can be avoided by good building design - such as evaporative coolers and air conditioners - is not assessed.
  • the use of thermal mass is not optimised - for example large unshaded brick walls facing north are allowed.
  • double glazing is not required - single glazing has a higher heat loss through windows.

A move to 7 star standards is required to reduce carbon emissions and energy use for residential housing. The final goal of reaching zero emissions housing needs to be set.

Examples of 5 star houses

Surrey Hills - 2 houses on a main road

These two houses house is newly built on a cleared block. They are on a main road. The price of the land for both would have exceeded $400,000.

The front of the house 1 is unremarkable.

At the rear of both houses:

  • A single solar hotwater panel on the north facing roof, but no solar photovoltaic panels. A lot of solar potential is wasted here.
  • A swimming pool is installed - which is a waste of water and chemicals.
  • There are no eaves or other shading over the north facing rear windows - which will transmit excessive heat into the house over summer months.
  • Brick thermal mass is also exposed to north facing sunlight - rather than being insulated byh a facade or shaded. This will also store and transmit excessive heat into the house over summer months.
  • The rear windows are not double glazed

The front of house 2 is reveals a large evaporative cooler on the roof, no eaves around the house, and extensive external brickwork.

These two houses house is newly built on a cleared block. They are on a main road. The price of the land for both would have exceeded $400,000.

3 north facing houses in Surrey Hills

The front of these three houses are all north facing, and have the following shortcomings:

  • Little or no eaves or shading over masonry north walls or windows - both will transmit excessive heat into the house over summer months.
  • No solar photovoltaic panels. A lot of solar potential is wasted here.
  • No double glazing

Houses built at or near the Waverley Park site

These houses have the following shortcomings:

  • Small eaves over external masonry north walls or windows - both will transmit excessive heat into the house over summer months.
  • No solar photovoltaic panels. A lot of solar potential is wasted here.
  • No double glazing
  • Many houses have evaporative cooling units

Cranbourne Estate 5 star houses

These houses have similar shortcomings to those listed for the Waverley Park site houses.

Moving to 6 or 7 star ratings

A Master Builders Association (MBA) survey has that showed Victoria's five-star minimum energy rating had added $7600 to the cost of a new house, and that six and seven-star ratings would add $10,000 and $14,000, respectively. The Victorian State Government is considering implementing a six-star minimum.

However, the MBA, which lobbied in the past to minimise the cost and effectiveness of the 5 star rating, is lobbying against the introduction of a new 6 star rating, citing housing affordability and the housing crisis as reasons against upgrading the rating.

However, some builders say that five-star compliance has only added only about $1000 to $2000 to the cost of a new house, and that six-star option has added about 1% to 2%, which equates to $4350 extra for a house priced at the Melbourne median of $435,000.

THe Green Building Council has pointed out that increasing green star requirements from 5 to 6, while adding to housing costs, would reduce household costs in the long term, a factor which will become more important as the price of water and energy will be increasing in the future.[2]

Moving to 6 star, or preferable 7 star mandatory building ratings could see:

  • Many houses becoming almost self sufficient for water
  • Houses producing as much electricity as they consume
  • Elimination of air conditioners - the main appliances causing peak power load on hot summer days
  • Greatly reduced carbon emissions associated with domestic housing, reducing Australia's overall carbon emissions
  • The use of much more energy and water efficient appliances.

See also

References

  1. 5 Star House, Victoria, Australia
  2. Six-star energy rating adds $10,000 to cost of new house: MBA, The Age, November 21, 2008


You can help Greenlivingpedia by adding more content to this stub article. Click on the edit tab above the article title to start editing and adding content.


Personal tools