The British government has recently opened the comment period on a major plan to revise the building code. The revisions phase in regulations ensuring that all new homes are built carbon-neutral by 2016. Other elements of the plan include:
- Code for Sustainable Homes: national standard to inform home buyers about the environmental performance of homes offered for sale.
- Energy Performance Certificates: national standard to inform home buyers about the energy efficiency and running costs of homes offered for sale.
- Urban planning policy to support lower carbon emissions and resiliency in the face of climate change.
- Water Efficiency standards
- Review of Existing Buildings: While the new regulations cover new construction, the government looking at ways to upgrade existing homes and buildings.
- January 6, 2010
- 7 Comments
Back in September, we reported that DC’s first carbon neutral home was being built in Capitol Hill. Yesterday, the much-anticipated property hit the market.
The three-bedroom, 3.5-bath home at 19 4th Street NE (map) was gutted and renovated by GreenSpur, Inc., a DC-based building and design firm that uses sustainability techniques to deliver homes that are energy efficient as well as cost effective.
After overcoming a labyrinth of regulatory hurdles and permitting nightmares given the property’s location four blocks from the Capitol, GreenSpur enlarged the home (from 1,000 to 2,100 square feet), hand dug the basement and, in keeping with their mission statement, made it completely green but priced comparably to other (non-carbon neutral) homes in the area.
Then there is this. Wiki makes a political statement.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May 2010)|
Carbon neutrality, or having a net zero carbon footprint, refers to achieving net zero carbon emissions by balancing a measured amount of carbon released with an equivalent amount sequestered or offset, or buying enough carbon credits to make up the difference. It is used in the context of carbon dioxide releasing processes, associated with transportation, energy production and industrial processes.
The carbon neutral concept may be extended to include other greenhouse gases (GHG) measured in terms of their carbon dioxide equivalence—the impact a GHG has on the atmosphere expressed in the equivalent amount of CO2. The term climate neutral is used to reflect the fact that it is not just carbon dioxide (CO2), that is driving climate change, even if it is the most abundant, but also encompasses other greenhouse gases regulated by the Kyoto Protocol, namely: methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). Both terms are used interchangeably throughout this article.
Best practice for organizations and individuals seeking carbon neutral status entails reducing and/or avoiding carbon emissions first so that only unavoidable emissions are offset. The term has two common uses:
- It can refer to the practice of balancing carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels, with renewable energy that creates a similar amount of useful energy, so that the carbon emissions are compensated, or alternatively using only renewable energies that don’t produce any carbon dioxide (this last is called a post-carbon economy).
- It is also used to describe the practice, criticized by some, of carbon offsetting, by paying others to remove or sequester 100% of the carbon dioxide emitted from the atmosphere – for example by planting trees – or by funding ‘carbon projects‘ that should lead to the prevention of future greenhouse gas emissions, or by buying carbon credits to remove (or ‘retire’) them through carbon trading. These practices are often used in parallel, together with energy conservation measures to minimize energy use.
Climate neutral. Who is zooming who here. Did somebody just make up a phrase to create the new denier strawman. Yah think.