Eco-services Come to Town

Now that my assignments and exams for the semester are out of the way I can start contributing what I’ve learnt over the past few months to the blog. First off though some good news – my trip to London was not entirely in vain. ShrubhillWorks was awarded overall winner at the IHDC Awards! The Ecosystems Comes to Town conference was an interesting event to attend in general, but coming first was the icing on the cake. There were some really interesting projects on display and it’s reassuring to know there are a few courses encouraging designers to consider ecological and sustainable design principles in their work.

Green Roof Tour
The day began with a tour of some ‘living roofs’ on a couple of multi-storey office blocks in the Broadgate area of London. I use the term ‘living roofs’ rather than ‘green roofs’ as these were not your typical turf laid to provide high-flying occupants with a piece of grass for rooftop schmoozing or lunchtime sunbathing. As our host Dusty Gedge, the president of the Federation European of Green Roofs Association (slight contradiction in terms there), described, these were real approach to adapting for climate change whilst providing a habitat for birds and with a sub-structure deep and varied enough to provide support to various invertebrates whilst retaining storm water and rainwater run-off. The roofs looked more fragile and natural than their green counterparts, as visitors weight were deflected by spongy moss cultures, reed beds and shrubs. The wildlife present was not placed there to provide a typically aesthetically pleasing landscape (although I think it actually did this as well) but to provide support and encouragement for local ecosystems and biodiversity.

Next we headed to the heart of the city of London and to Evergreens offices where they have extended this concept further to include a rooftop vegetable plot with beekeeping facilities. Their living roof used a thinner layering of substructure, showing that additional structural support is not always necessary to provide a flourishing biodiversity rich rooftop. This was particularly reassuring for me to see considering such a rooftop garden was a key element of my Shrubhill Design. Conversely, the building across from Evergreens was fitted with a minimal green roof (i.e. lawn) as part of their BREEAM certification, showing that sometimes such endorsements do not reflect the true intent behind the project. We then headed to the Museum of London, where an ambitious project of ‘living roof’ retrofitting is underway. The even intend on converting areas of pooling on their flat roofs into rooftop ponds providing a larger variety of biodiversity.

Eco-services Conference
The organisers provided a wide variety of speakers with a balanced and perhaps sometimes too pragmatic approach to greening the built environment. Inspirational speeches were provided by Gary Grant (independent ecologist and IHDC judge) and Dr Bob Bloomfield (Head of Special Projects at the National History Museum) who talked about the ways in which biodiversity was already creeping into the built environment and its importance in relation to the United Nations Decade of Biodiversity. For me, the most interesting speech of the day came from an accountancy firm! PWC (PriceWaterhouseCoopers) have been compiling a report into how they can put a financial value on ecosystems and biodiversity as a tool for encouraging their clients to consider their companies actions on the environment. Whilst I don’t fully agree that everything should have a monetary value – I’m acutely aware that this is a viewpoint that is not shared by many decision makers and any tools to highlight the destruction carried out by certain activities has got to be a good thing. I was less impressed by talks given by representatives of Land Securities and Greater London authorities, whose entire focus seemed to be on how many trees they can plant in an area, regardless of their species, necessity or if their surroundings are capable of supporting rainwater run-off. Land Securities showed images of heavily hard-landscaped shopping centres with a scattering of trees which provide their inhabitants with pleasant surroundings in which to eat their lunch. Thankfully this was picked up by some conference goers in the following Q&A session.

Awards Ceremony + Follow-Up
I was really impressed by the work carried out by the other finalist, in particular the Hafod Copperworks scheme in Swansea. It was a very ambitious project, tackling the impact of area starved of long-term investment which many communities today are suffering from. I felt their submission really combined social-economic and environmental issues in a realistic and effective way. I was (along with my parents) spared a last minute announcement and given a heads-up by the organisers about my success in the afternoon. I hadn’t prepared a speech as I didn’t want to jinx my chances; however I had thought enough about winning the previous weeks to be able to conjure something up on the spot. I was a bit disappointed not to receive a comedy-sized cheque, but that perhaps is being a little too trivial. The follow-up so far has been encouraging, with my work being displaced in Architects Journal and Sustain Magazine as well as the through Heriot Watt and local newspapers. I also gave a presentation of my work to SEDA Show & Tell at the Glasgow School of Art. The local council and architects have also been in touch about the possibility of my giving a presentation in the New Year in the hope of persuading the client of the possibilities of integrating biodiversity within the site.

IHDC Awards

Some good news.... my design entry for this years Integrated Habitats Design Competition has been selected as one of three prizewinners. I'm heading down to London next week to attend the Ecosystems Come to Town conference at the Museum of London and for the awards ceremony and exhibition in the evening. In the meantime I though I would post up a couple of images and my statement of design which formed part of my submission. My final submissions should be available to download from the IHDC website in the coming weeks.

ShrubhillWorks

ShrubhillWorks illustrates the renewal of a 5-acre brown-field site in the Leith district of Edinburgh into a new sustainable community. The scheme incorporates suitable green technologies and passive designs, minimising the impact on the surrounding land whilst addressing local housing issues. The site will see the creation of 122 affordable homes, shared communal facilities, a community education centre and a new sustainable transport connection. Urban and natural environments will be linked, turning the site into a new hub of biodiversity.

Todayʼs new housing projects tend to focus on the energy reductions available through technological solutions. Whilst valid, the negative result of this myopic approach is that it encourages energy consumption by facilitating reduced service costs. It is clear that behavioural change to a more sustainable lifestyle needs to be encouraged. By taking a more holistic approach to design and re-establishing the role of community it is possible to stimulate peopleʼs behaviour positively towards the environment and their personal relationships with one another. ShrubhillWorks endeavours to achieve this by combining two major design principles to create an infrastructure for biodiversity and community life to flourish and energy use and resource consumption to fall: Co-housing and Permaculture.

ShrubhillWorks site was once home to Edinburghʻs bus and tram network. Large listed Victorian workshop buildings sit at the northern boundary, most notably a large red brick chimney. To the east lies listed 19th century buildings of a housing type unique to Edinburgh - Colony Housing. This style attempted to develop co-operative affordable housing, avoiding the prevalent tenement block design and providing affordable housing with gardens. To the south lies Shrubhill House, a dilapidated 1960ʼs former council office block with a solid concrete structure that faces Leith Walk, a major retail and transport thoroughfare. All buildings are suitable for refurbishment and retrofitting. Along the western boundary of the site runs a 3-mile railway line due to close in 2015.

Cohousing addresses two key elements of the Edinburgh Local Biodiversity Action Plan: greater community participation and encouraging partnership working. In todayʼs economic climate where many biodiversity conservation projects are suffering cutbacks, individual and community participation is increasingly important. Cohousing inhabitants enjoy increased levels of social interaction created through a sense of neighbourhood with a diverse mix of age groups, families and singles whilst maintaining self-contained accommodation and personal space. The scheme reduces material consumption and individual ownership by providing its residents with access to shared facilities including gardening, food production, laundry, childcare, communal dining space, workshops and guest-rooms. Cohousing creates an environment where the formation of social organisational structures to maintain the shared facilities is essential and encouraged. Community responsibilities could be broadened to include the development, supporting, and monitoring of local endangered species and habitats, linking local action to a global cause.

The redevelopment of the tram buildings to the rear of the site will provide a social link to the wider community, with one building acting as communal facilities for Shrubhillʼs Co-housing, the other functioning as a community and education centre promoting biodiversity, e.g. through school visits and film screenings. The cluster formation adopted in ShrubhillWorks is scaled towards the effective use of ʻgoods and servicesʼ provided by nature, such as clean air, water, food and other materials integral to our wellbeing. The site will take full advantage of the areaʻs high rainwater levels through the widespread deployment of rainwater butts connected to rooftop guttering, collecting water for reuse in soil irrigation or in grey water sanitary products within the dwellings. SUDS and permeable paving will be in place to dispose of any excess water effectively. A wastewater treatment system of large reed ponds will provide suitable grey, water clean enough to be feed into the local Water of Leith waterway.

By incorporating large-scale green spaces, an improvement in air quality will allow natural ventilation to be adopted in the redeveloped Shrubhill House. A ventilated timber wall panel system and passive stack ventilation will provide an efficient air-flow, reducing the need for mechanical extract ventilation. Trees around the site will also provide protection from prevailing winds and noise from nearby traffic. The scheme furthermore aims to minimise car use. Excellent public transport connections will be complemented by a community car club. Minimal car parking will be provided in the peripheral areas of the site, with access for services such as waste collection and maintenance. The removal of cars from the interior of the development will allow biodiversity to mature and provides a safe environment for its younger inhabitants. In addition, the rail track will be transformed into a cycle path linked to the cycle route network and wildlife corridor extension.

A district heating system working in conjunction with a combined heat & power generator will supply the electrical and heating requirements for the new development. Passive Solar gain will be utilised in all apartments through the orientation and incorporation of south facing solar buffers.

By adopting the principles of Permaculture, productive, non-polluting, self-reliant settlements can be created. Permaculture is about collaborating with nature, adding and cultivating soils, cleansing water and creating new habitats for biodiversity, adding rather than subtracting from our natural environment. Priority will be given to this when coordinating the project workflow, allowing the green spaces to ʻbed inʼ before construction works begin. Extending the existing wildlife corridor running parallel to the site creates a wild zone where natural eco-systems can be studied. Habitats for local invertebrates including white snails, slow worms, common dormice and wood-Sage Plum will also be created. Other zones will allow for cultivation of plants on the Scottish Biodiversity List, including heather, marsh violet, wood sage, wax caps and various fungi. The reed ponds will provide suitable environments for great crested newts and water voles. Existing buildings and structures will be adapted to encourage the reintegration of particularly vulnerable species, including large garden bumblebees and bats through the inclusion of rooftop beehives and a bat spiral. Bullfinches, skylarks, swifts and swallows will all benefit from these new habitats and nest-boxes placed around the site.

Green Gone Wrong - Book Review

Here is the sypnosis/review I recently carried out for the book 'Green Gone Wrong: How Our Economy is undermining the Environmental Revolution, Heather Rogers (2010), Scribner Book Company.

This excellent book does not cast a sceptical eye on climate change itself, but rather on the present consumer-led, free market strategy currently being employed to tackle climate change. Rogers challenges the notion of being able to shop our way out of the environmental crisis by researching current sustainable practices in an attempt to determine if such projects really are living up to their environmental proclamations. The results make for a disheartening read, with many ecological solutions stifled by economic and political interests whilst others inflict more damage on the environment they are supposed to support. This is not the case with all though, and the author does attempt to carve out some positives. The book deals with four areas well known to environmentalists:

Organic Farming
By talking with ‘beyond organic’ farmers in New York State, Foster reveals that organic certification is very expensive and increasingly not representative of truly organic produce. She reveals how standards are constantly being watered down by big business as demand for organic products increases. This has led to smaller farmers being put out of business as sellers and distributors demand far larger quantities than they can produce entirely organically. The author also visits several sugar cane plantations in Paraguay, where large areas of deforestation is taking place to create viable farming land for organic produce, highlighting the social and economic devastation this causes. It is also the case that certifiable organic practices are not actually being followed in some of these plantations. In particular monoculture practices, the opposition to which being one of the keystones of organic farming, are being employed.

Eco-Architecture
The author uses the comparison of BedZed in London and Freiburg/Vaubaun in Germany to demonstrate the present barriers to creating fully functioning sustainable communities. Both were designed with green credentials in mind however several elements of BedZed have failed, including the Biomass boiler and water treatment plant. The owners have since struggled to find the expertise required in proper maintenance and repair required for such new technologies. In contrast, Vaubaun produces a far lower ecological and carbon footprint through the removal and penalising of cars on site, solar generation and passivhaus building standards. The author argues this is because of the history of the Freiburg region and their commitment to green lifestyles which has fed through to the regions infrastructure, planning authorities and politics. The area is home of Germany’s Green Party who have maintained a strong present in both local and regional government for many decades. Germany has also embraced renewables in light of its historic objection to Nuclear power. Vaubaun continue to push boundaries with residents aiming to demonstrate the possibility of living in a 2000W life. This section as a whole is very positive – only citing the required political will required to make such improvements mandatory. Foster doesn’t however mention other drawbacks such as rebound effect or give mention to the whole life cost of building products.

Transportation
This section visits Indonesia to witness the devastation of the rainforest to make way for the growing of oil palm plantations. Ethanol (the key production of palm oil) emits less than 20% less CO² than fossil fuels in combustion. However when the production and destruction of ecosystems in developing countries is taken into account some research suggests that biofuels may actually emit more carbon. The author also aims her targets at the American car industry and their obsession with the SUV. It’s interesting to note that the Model T was built with an eye to keeping fuel consumption and cost to a minimum (26mpg) and today Fords best sellers is the F150 which runs at just under 15mpg. Ford have invested a lot in the sustainability of their factory production (obviously cutting costs in the meantime) but have focused on flex-fuel cars rather than hydrogen or plug in gas-electric cars. Their main argument for not implementing eco-cars is that there cost to manufacture is too high (an entire new assembly line would have to be created); they require charging too frequently and only have a range of around 40miles. Apart from the defunct biodiesel argument, many ford owners are actually unaware of the fact that these cars will actually run on biofuels. The author dispels the myth that these technologies are not there, and that effective distribution methods are possible, and gives the example of Chinas drive to build electric cars. However until this electricity is generated by renewable or clean sources we would just be replacing gasoline with coal, i.e. power stations. Indeed the technology does exist; they just don’t know how to make money from it. The internal combustion engine is just too powerful in terms of the profit it returns.

Air Travel & Carbon Offsetting
Here the book focuses first on tree planting and a mango plantation in Bangalore, India by the band Coldplay to offset their world tour – and the firm they employed to plant mango trees in a monsoon country where residents don’t have enough water to drink let alone feed the trees. Foster exposes the large discrepancies in the price firms’ offer for a ‘credit’, equal to one tonne of CO2 emissions. Beyond the lack of regulation and lack of disclosure amongst these firms, the idea of offsetting itself is a weak one. The emissions generated by current consumerism are immediate, whereas absorption takes several decades, deferring emissions for the next generation or two. Planting trees with shorter life spans absorb CO2 quicker, but also obviously die sooner, releasing their entire carbon load. While visiting a large scale biomass plant in Malavalli, India, the author discovers that jobs for local people are few and far between, with many roles going to favourable contacts, family members or external workers. There is also a lack of safety standards, with cobras and other snakes present in the palm leaves that manual labourers shovel by hand into the biomass incinerator. Sick leave is also unpaid. The energy generated from the plant does not go to local villages which lack the necessary electrical connection, instead being exported to the main grid for general consumption. Local people are also forced into buying wood to burn for heat as all the other biomass is taken to the plant – all things missed by certification. Some offset funds are also going to projects that are already built, thus not additional. The start-up of micro-solar generation enterprise companies is one potential plus point to be found in this chapter. These small scale entrepreneurs are good for getting projects off the ground, specifically for homes which currently have no connection to the grid at all. The problem comes when they are installed in homes with a grid connection. The result is that the locals only using the panels when the grid cuts out, which is often, rendering the panels practically redundant. Pricewise the panels struggle to compete with power generated from the grid, and their voltage is considered by many to be too weak.

Conclusion
The author argues that all of these green washed products give us the impression that we can consume our way out of climate change, when in effect the opposite is true. Foster argues that viable green products require a rejigging of our economy, not just in our choices as consumers and she advocates the need to move from an ownership model of consumerism to an access model. When viewed long term cutting emissions and energy use also provides a cut in costs, not an increase. However it is important that these savings are not ploughed back into energy intensive manufacturing or processing by firms. This consequence is also known as the Jevons Paradox, named after a 19th century economist William Stanley Jevons – whereby greater efficiencies lead to greater resource use rather than less.

Unfortunately in her notes on the possible I found that Fosters promoted solutions that were equally a little hazy. Hearing about agro-ecology projects in developing and third world countries is great but by using specific examples she fails to address one thing – that there are several problems with each proposed remedy and each will perhaps have their own individual solution. If anything this book shows that there is no silver bullet to reduce our demands on the environment without impacting our lifestyles, yet the author offers us individual solutions. Although her calls for more accountable certification boards are of merit, this is surely how the existing certification boards started out before being chipped away by big business and government. The description of co-operative farmers was definitely encouraging, where the owners are the ultimate watchdogs. Here the farmers have withdrawn from contracts with supermarkets when they begin using the very factory processes that they oppose. As our governments seek to kick-start economic growth through the will of the markets, it would appear that we are also betting our environment on their ability to create demand. From this book, it would appear futile, and leave us in an even bigger mess than we are now.

Cohousing - A solution to our housing woes?

INTRODUCTION

The UK is currently undergoing the ‘ageing process’. As the baby boomers enter their elderly phase of life, the percentage of population aged over 65 increased from 15% to 16% between 1984 and 2009. This marginal rise of 1% actually represents an increase of 1.7 million people. This demographic shift is even more acute in the over 85’s where numbers have more than doubled to 1.4 million. Figures for both groups are set to rise further, with predictions of 23% for over 65s and 3.5million over 85s by 2034 . Coupled with a decrease in under-16s the elderly face an imbalance that could seriously jeopardise their current access to care, security, welfare and mutual support. Today’s elderly housing is restricted to care homes or sheltered housing, ill-equip at adapting to an increasingly active elderly demography. Housing issues are not only restricted to the elderly. With over 1.7 million currently on the waiting list for social housing, and new house building output in 2009 dropped to 118,000 homes , there are clearly not enough affordable homes to satisfy demand, an issue intensified by the recent economic crisis.

These issues must also be confronted within the context of climate change. With the government committed to reduce CO2 levels by 80% by 2050 , ecological housing projects focus on the energy reductions available through technological solutions. Whilst valid, the negative results of this myopic approach are reflected in the rebound effect, demonstrated by an increase in energy consumption when energy-efficiency improvements facilitate reduced service costs – encouraging more use. Energy use accounts for 17% of the carbon footprint of the average household. With 39% of energy use for travel and food production and higher environmental degradation , it’s clear that behavioural change to a more sustainable lifestyle should be encouraged. The individual lifestyles prevalent in today’s society manifested by materialism and overconsumption expedite both mental and physical health diseases and led to deterioration in community structures. By taking a more holistic approach to design and re-establishing the role of community is it possible to stimulate people’s behaviour positively towards the environment and their personal relationships with one another? Can a shared community context create resilience in the face of these challenges? A radical response to all of the above issues seems evident.

COHOUSING_PRINCIPLES

One such response could be cohousing. Cohousing is a form of intentional community that attempts to bring together individuals and families through shared aims and activities and the integration of communal utilities and facilities, whilst maintaining self-contained accommodation and personal space. Meltzer defines an intentional community is “a group of mostly unrelated people living together and dedicated by intent to specific common values or goals”. Inhabitants of cohousing tend to have a shared common ideology encapsulated in the importance of social interaction and creation of a sense of neighbourhood, with a diverse mix of age groups, families and singles. Cohousing’s origins lie in 1960’s Scandinavian, formed as a response to the breakdown of community. It quickly spread to other European countries such as The Netherlands and Germany before being picked up as far afield as the US, Canada and Australia. Take up within the UK has been particularly slow, making up only 0.6% of the UK’s housing supply, compared with 18% in Sweden, 15% in Norway, 8% in Austria and 6% in Germany .

Forming these communities from scratch allows members to have a greater say in the design and planning stages of the development. The prevailing design characteristics of cohousing are highlighted in the communal facilities. Typical shared amenities include: communal dining space, laundry, guest rooms, workshop, child crèche, and gardening equipment. A collective approach towards energy and food production, waste and water use and transport is adopted. Cohousing site layouts tends to be small clusters with a density of 20-40 residents although larger communities have been formed. Cars are restricted to the outlying areas allowing large outdoor spaces, safe for children and a key encourager of social interaction. More familiar housing design is visible in the individual homes (including kitchen space) with gardens allowing residents to maintain their privacy. Members of cohousing communities take a strong role in the organisation and day-to-day running of shared common facilities, usually achieved through a voluntary rotor system. Other sub-groups are formed with the responsibility of managing specific aspects of the community such as maintenance, facilities, sales, land-use, finance and social activities. Despite such organisational structures, developments are non-hierarchical and have no shared economy. Community decisions are usually made by open consensus, with a well-defined process in place. Although cohousing requires a level of commitment from its residents, the timescale involved in participation is not usually defined. Residents are free to sell up at any time, and new members are welcomed usually with a prerequisite of sharing the same aspirations as the existing community. This is normally facilitated through membership criteria and subscription.

The benefits of cohousing extend beyond the social. The potential for reducing environmental impact and economic savings are also palpable. The process of providing residents with shared access to facilities and services rather than individual ownership has implications on the consumption and living costs. Environmental literacy with regard to energy, water and waste practices noticeably increases through community engagement. Car-pooling, access to communal office space and social activities all act towards a reduction of travel requirements. Shared facilities allow space requirements for accommodation units to reduce and become more affordable. On average cohousing provides a saving of 31% in space, 57% in electricity and 8% in goods. If such a model could be adopted for large-scale housing, would forgoing the intrinsic ‘intentional’ dimension of the model diminish its ability to offer socially cohesive sustainable communities? Or in fact does the intentional aspect of cohousing restrict its ability to be a truly diverse model of housing, allowing access to people who have the money to invest in such developments for their own personal gain and who perhaps are already living quite sustainably.

GOVERNMENT_POLICY & INITIATIVES

Should it be considered a solution to the problems highlighted in the introduction, it would be prudent to identify who is best placed to deliver this model – the public or private sector. Within the UK, government and local authorities to a degree assumes responsibility for social and senior care and housing. The state takes a long-term view of development because they take on the responsibility of managing and maintaining local infrastructure and the public realm. This would appear to suggest that the public sector is more suited to the delivery of sustainable communities through their awareness of the experiences of the ageing population and those reliant on the welfare state.

A strong political consensus is required. Each mainstream political party in the UK recognises the current housing shortage and are committed to building more homes, but currently only the marginalised Green Party mentioned cohousing in their last election manifesto . This contradicts statements made by various commissions and reports by a number of government-funded bodies. The Independent Commission for Co-operative and Mutual Housing states “We call for an aim to be set that by 2030, each town, village and community should be able to offer cooperative and mutual housing options to potential residents”. This is a sentiment repeated by HAPPI and the New Horizons Research Programme . Cohousing could also be heavily incentivised by the creation of new legislation by Government and local authorities. This is already evident in the tightening of building energy standards being phased in currently to reduce the use of CO2 emissions, which already makes cohousing an attractive alternative. Coherent policies on sustainable housing based on creating sustainable lifestyles rather than simply green buildings would aid support this further. Design standards that accommodate change care and support needs allowing future-proofing of homes. Planning legislation could also be geared towards encouraging collaborative developments. Vauban in Germany is an example of alternatives can be taken to bring local communities and local planning departments together.

The current governments ‘Big Society’ ethos aims to provide a shift of power from centralised state to local communities. This devolving of control, funds and services to local social enterprises, charities, co ops, community groups, neighbourhoods and individuals could present an opportunity for proponents of cohousing by the loosening of planning restrictions and increase of funding. Amended planning laws could also allow the adaption of thousands of habitable empty properties and surplus public sector land and buildings for cohousing developments.

Municipal funding mechanisms could come directly in the form of grants and subsides to aid the establishment of new cohousing groups. Indirect funding could take the shape of tax rebates for cooperative networks. Financial support is key to ensuring that affordable cohousing is available to all and not only those with existing personal wealth. Providing access to social rented cohousing, perhaps including a rent-to-buy option or through mutual home ownership, could allow those from low-income backgrounds to benefit from cohousing. Existing social tenants who are new to cohousing could also be encouraged to engage with their new community by offering a 10% equity share in their social rented property. Housing associations also have a key role in developing social cohousing, an example indicated by Hanover who recently worked with three groups to develop and manage the UK’s first cohousing scheme for older people.

Local authorities have a vested interest in advertising attractive living conditions when attempting to entice people and businesses to move to or invest in its constituency. As aspirations of individual home ownership dwindle, greater value is transferred to quality of life and sense of community that cohousing can offer. As a more resilient housing model, the drain on the states resources would also be markedly less, as care services and maintenance could be integrated within the community. This is a viewpoint taken in many other countries, where local authorities are allowed to compete for housing development due to its potential benefits for local services . Cohousing’s relatively small land footprint and increased density also provide councils with savings in terms of land costs and land use, alleviating space that could be made available for other infrastructure projects.

Although demand for social housing is so high, vacancy filling could be problematic, especially when a community seeks residents who conform to established interests and motivations. Cooperative rental tenure can ensure that any applicant is fully aware of their responsibilities before accepting the place. General awareness and availability of information regarding cohousing would also have to be promoted by local authorities in an attempt to combat prejudices surrounding such communities. Even after intense planning, the delivery of the building will be in the hands of the house-builder, who’s positioning within ‘the market’ may require them to restrict supply and optimise sale prices rather than meeting community needs.

DEVELOPER_LED

Could the private sector become the main provider of cohousing? It certainly has some speciality skills in terms of technical and legal competence, and the building of a shared community does not always require a new form of building organisation. The main pitfall associated with developer-led cohousing is the main motivation behind most volume house builder’s developments; market profitability. Over time, volume house builders have concentrated on driving down construction costs rather than creating greater value. When considering all costs involved in construction, it is clear that developer’s burden most if not all of the up-front costs before any completed units are occupied. There is also an element of risk associated with house building should the uptake of units not materialise as witnessed in the recent economic downturn which saw a number of house builders go out of business. On the reverse side, when profitable, this short-term capital growth investment market provides house builders and their investors with substantial returns. Should these companies take a more long-term view, a steady but more modest revenue flow could be achieved, reducing risk but increasing financial stability. By not maintaining a long-term interest in their sites, they have little interest in optimising design beyond any immediate cost implications. The perceived extra cost or loss of potential revenue associated with common areas is one problem highlighted by developers. Hansen & Wachter argues that if an investor considers how much floor space in an ecological house can they obtain for a certain price, the resultant reduction in floor space and therefore savings in building costs can be then used to finance community facilities. This argument becomes more relevant as regulations regarding energy efficiency take hold.

There are a number of incentives for developers to instigate cohousing. The high quality of life achieved and effective land-use with regards to density would be a strong argument when responding to planning guidelines. Costs are also reduced by low occupant turnover and a reduction in maintenance. A large undivided site also presents developers with the economies of scale required for energy efficient technologies. If they are successful in creating cohesive cohousing communities, is there a long-term opportunity to create a brand based on community creation? If developers need an incentive to invest long-term in communities, there may be some rational for the sharing of any capital gains received when units are re-sold to new residents should demand increase and house prices rise.
Property developers are already active in producing ecologically orientated settlements, but as previously stated, with a concentration solely on technical solutions. Traditional housing companies tend to trust only conventional housing solutions, and may take any opportunity to alter designs and endanger the collective nature of cohousing. How can developers be encouraged to pursue more social goals? Presently most housing development is built on a speculative basis; however cohousing requires participants to play an active part in the planning process. Perhaps by working in tandem with established cohousing organisations developers could form a design framework for potential schemes, find prospective residents, thus reducing sales risks and marketing costs. One potential role could be in the education and promotion of cohousing to prospective purchasers about the benefits of cohousing. Currently, projects are abandon the moment it is handed over to the new owner. But by again taking a longer-term role, developers could educate new owners not only in the operation of the new energy-saving technologies, but also aid in the setting up of the local management groups overseeing the day-to-day running of the community or even diversify into estate management. Also, by allowing access of shared facilities to the wider community, better relations can be created with the public and a new revenue stream created. Could developers become community landlords or would this diminish community relations?

NEEDS_BASED

As the demographic evidence suggests, people are indeed living longer, but are also remaining more active. Many people continue to work beyond the state retirement age. In could be argued that those who are still capable of working but chose not to increase the strain on the welfare state. Many elderly desire to remain as independent as possible for as long as possible. One major barrier to this is mental health. The number of people with dementia is set to double to 1.4 million over the next 30 years and the costs to the UK economy will go from £17billion to £50billion . The breakdown of extended family support has led to a reliance on the current system of elderly care homes and sheltered housing, which provides some level of security and care but yet can sometimes neglect the isolation and loneliness felt by their inhabitants. By surrounding elderly people with more elderly people, an out of sight out of mind mentality can prevail – hence why there is a fear of being 'put in a home'. Elderly people benefit considerably from the company of younger people, and from living near and seeing children. Providers of social care are increasingly interested in creating inclusive, non-institutional environments, where residents retain control. A national government strategy calls for “greater innovation from developers and new perspectives on inclusive design for lifetime neighbourhoods”. Cohousing could appeal to older people in particular. The elderly housing panel HAPPI highlighted several examples of cohousing in Europe and recommended that “co-housing models be supported, where a group of households meet their own needs”.

Although there will always be a requirement for high-level care of the elderly with severe physical or mental issues, low birth rates could see a shortage in future generations skilled care workers. A rise in immigration may also be required to deal with this need, itself presenting social cohesion issues. Today’s growing numbers of single parents and one person households underline a need for social support and access to social togetherness.

Could cohousing offer a housing form suited for elderly in need of daily care and provide an opportunity for integration of other isolated segments of society? This has been already put in practice in Munksogaard, Denmark, where young and old have been brought together under one cohousing development . Rather than rely on social care mechanisms to provide a social life for the elderly, a community structure seen in cohousing could provide an informal level of support. Specialist caregivers could also be provided with a home within the community and could play an active part in the planning of any developments. Both child and parent would benefit in the context of cohousing. As single parents attempt to find a work/life balance, on-site crèche facilities could provide necessary support whilst ensure a diverse environment for elderly residents. Cohousing can also be adapted to facilitate individual customs and practices seen in immigrant communities, educating local people and breaking down stereotypes.

The success of inclusive housing depends on how effectively managers can build a sense of community by encouraging residents to attend planning meetings and participate in decision making. This may pose challenges in light of the physical and mental impairment experienced by many elderly residents – therefore it is imperative that all age groups are involved.

CONCLUSION

As our resources dwindle and our materialistic lifestyle become less affordable, greater weight will lie in quality of life standards. With housing this can only be achieved through the creation of places with community rather than purely building greener homes. The long-term rise in fossil fuel prices and tightening of building regulations adds further viability to cohousing, but more coherent planning legislation and financial incentives are required.

Neither the public nor private sectors are ideally placed to provide cohousing, but yet both have a lot to offer in terms of ensuring that cohousing no longer remains a relative luxury that only consciously-minded citizens with strong fiscal backing can afford or that it develops into a new form of gated community. Therefore a partnership between developers, housing associations and local authorities should be encouraged, and the participation of sections of the public who will benefit from these developments is crucial. The Netherlands has already brought the public and private sectors together to deliver a cohousing scheme in Amersfoort . Elements of co-operative use are already beginning to break through in the UK, affecting where we shop, work, bank, and travel, as seen by the popularity of car clubs. This ethos needs to be introduced to mainstream housing provision. Prototype needs-based cohousing models could be rolled out across the UK in an effort to demonstrate the virtues of investing in diverse sustainable communities. For the public sector this would provide an alternative production of personal services, and for developers, a long-term financially stable housing model.

Perhaps the cohousing model requires adaption for 21st century lifestyles and aspirations? With a high percentage of the housing stock requiring retrofitting, can the cohousing model be applied to existing communities where social cohesion has failed? Radicals in the 1960s formed the original cohousing concept – the very age group now reaching their senior years. Can they once again help define progressive agendas for housing?

21.04.11 Feedback

Our last day in Findhorn – quite a melancholy feeling and I'm curious to how my perception of things has changed since being here. Our last council meeting was a sombre but yet heartwarming moment, it really does feel special to be the first to be on this course and to see our lecturers get so much out of all the hard work they put into the course. It was important for us all to give our feedback, but unfortunately I do feel sometimes that feedback can focus too heavily on the parts that didn't work and not enough on the parts that did. These can sometimes seem a little more elusive and it can be harder to acknowledge, but I do believe that in the following days, months and years I will continue to get something more out of what I have learned in the last 3 weeks, and the friendships I have made. Just knowing that I have a connection now with a place like Findhorn is something very special in itself. Something that I can take into my personal and professional life, whenever things do seem difficult, I can always remember the possibilities and the peace that are in abundance here.

20.04.11 Design Charette and Presentations

Another really busy day – getting up at 7am to meet and start work again. I'm really happy about how we are working together; Abdul is doing some really great hand drawn graphics; Meli is researching local materials and compiling images; Jane is coming up with the energy and water strategy while I have been working on some house and site images and the permaculture design. Our hard work has paid too, we managed to get finished an hour before the presentations began which gave us an opportunity to grab some fresh air and visit the beach once again. This really helped us stay calm beforehand and gain some perspective before delivering our work. It was really interesting to see the contrasts between the different groups work. They definitely progressed since the last time, and they took a more conceptial direction that ourselves. They did seem a little disorganised, but they had clearly given a lot of thought into their design concept. It would have been interesting to mix our groups up and see what we would have come up with if we had more time and combined their concepts with our more holistic approach to the site. I found their designs interesting, if a little unpractical and expensive to construct. But as Pano put well, in Findhorn you come up with the ideas first, then how to build them.

I felt our presentation went well – we covered most bases (although ran out of time almost) and we all participated in delivering the project. We all had each others backs though, interacting when we felt that someone had missed something out and dealing with any quesitons thrown at us. I think given the time allocated we did a pretty good job, and it did really feel like a team effort which was important. Having members of the community there really made the project feel a bit more real, and their feedback was very honest. I think everyone felt quite numb afterwards, but our course leaders did an excellent job of re-energising us afterwards. Giving us our marks too was a really great reward, it's good to know quickly that all our efforts have paid off and that in some way we have given the community some ideas to play with in exchange for all the ideas they have given us.

19.04.11 Design Charette Day 1.

Today was a really busy day, so much so that I barely found time to write. After being introduced to the brief of the West Whins project in the morning, we got stuck right in. I was glad that we were able to maintain the same groups for the project as before – we all kind of slipped into our roles quite easily. Some of our group had experience with formulating bids which was a big help – this was quite insightful for me as I am normally only involved in a project once the work has been awarded and the details of construction are being planned out. I felt at times that I wanted to get stuck into the actual design and concept of the buildings, but it was great to set ourselves a plan of action and to dapple a little in every other aspect of the master plan, such as energy, water, materials, landscaping and site analysis. From this I could really see how to treat a site holistically, and the amount of work that was involved. At midnight we called a halt to our work, but Abdul and myself began to discuss the rational that we should actually have a small part of a building plan laid out and some visualisations to go along with it. We worked away until past 3am coming up with a basic house layout, which we then applied this to the site – the end result looked a lot like something below. I'm curious how the other team are getting on – I hope they managed to overcome their problems from the previous session.

18.04.11 The Living Machine

I've been looking forward to see the living machine since arriving in Findhorn – a real physical symbol of working with nature to process sewage and waste. I was curious as to whether there would be a strong smell - apparently this is at its most strongest between anaerobic and aerobic – or with or without oxygen. Following this stage it converts any ammonia into nitrates collected by plant roots by pumping the system with oxygen (from my understanding anyway). It then goes through several processes until the processed water is then safe to flood into natural water flows or to be used as non-potable water. The construction costs in comparison to a standard sewage works is around 10% less, and the maintenance costs 30-40% less. It was really impressive to see the plant in progress – I can't believe that Scottish Water will no longer give permission to create another living machine due to it's threat to their monopoly. It was good to get some cold hard data from Michael regarding the renew ables – finding out how much electricity they produced and when they are actually practical to install. Giving us a task of exploring solutions to the problem of supplying the new development within Findhorn with energy – the grid is charging £47,000 to connect a new cable.

I found the afternoons talk about world economics very thought provoking. Jonathan is a very eloquent speaker and his arguments were quite compelling and quite depressing. It's difficult to argue with his ideas about an unavoidable economic crash and it's consequences. It wasn't all doom and gloom though – although an escape is highly unlikely I think our course will have an significant part to play in any resilience – investing in communities and our personal relationships will surely pay more dividends that any paper currency or precious metal.

16.04.11 Permaculture

There was still some simmering tension in today's class on Permaculture, but I think everyone has learned from yesterday and when some things started to grate members of the group everyone was a bit more open about mentioning it. Still not perfect, but a step in the right direction anyway. I found permaculture very interesting, especially when learning about the different zoning that you can do when allowing an area of land to develop. Permanent Agriculture or Permaculture is about building up the land and soil, rather than constantly ploughing and tilling, working with nature rather than against it. It was a surprise to hear that not all permaculture is organic, and that there are varying degrees of pragmatism throughout the permaculture ethos. It was definitely something I will delve deeper into when looking at site layouts, especially with zone and sector planning. We also covered a little about something called 'thinking contact' which was an attempt to get us to allow the basic idea of permaculture to flow into other aspects of our lives which I felt that while it was helpful, given the short time frame it perhaps would have been better to focus on design principles. But the interest is there now, so I will definitely read up on it.

15.04.11 Even more System Thinking.....

The process we went through in the morning involved us listing all the problems we associate with development and then later on clouding the statements we made into areas which we thought were similar or related in some way. From these areas we then formed questions. This is only one level of the system thinking but again has shown me a way to generate questions and attempt at least to view things more holistically, almost like a checklist to ensure that all processes and possibilities have been considered.

Then we had an explosion of anger within the team. Although this started regarding peoples time keeping regarding the class, I feel the underlying tension regarding the systems thinking class is really to blame for everyone losing their temper as well as a number of other factors. I think almost 3 solid days of presentation style classes with not enough practical work, and that we have almost 2 weeks in each others company – more than I would spend with my girlfriend or family. Once the barrier came down, people started to be quite vindictive within their accusations, and it was quite an emotional drain once talks had broken down and people went their separate ways. There seem to be a split in the form of the houses we are living in, and I did start to worry that things might stay this way which would have made the next week quite difficult, especially regarding the group presentations. Although I felt like sticking my head down and just getting on with my work, I knew this would be no solution. So I attempted to bridge the gap between the houses, sharing lunch and having an open discussion with the other house – attempting to find out where their grievances really lay, explain misunderstandings and sympathise where necessary. So I guess in way I've learnt something about conflict resolution here too. Tony, sensing our unhappiness with the course did a brave thing in twisting the last class into a reflective period where we could voice our opinions. It's good to know we will all learn something from this period, not just the students.

14.04.11 More System Thinking

The morning session was quite a struggle – not in terms of understanding the concept of systems thinking, but perhaps more of a frustration at the pace of the lessons. I feel at the moment that I already have an understanding about systems thinking, and our lecturers will certainly give us the language to communicate our thinking better. However, the only new thing I find myself with so far is some examples of systems archetypes, one of which I can use to illustrate some problems associated with my essay topic. Looking at the IFF World Model (see above) it started to make a bit more sense, although again I think that many people do look at these viewpoints, although perhaps they are unable to communicate them properly. By taking Findhorn as an example and working in small groups, I found that this help us to drag out the thinking behind the system which was definitely useful.

Unfortunately I thought the tension regarding this topic was building up – but thankfully a frank discussion in the group meant that the lessons changed their pace a little. I felt I struggled a little bit at first, but once we had separated into groups and worked through it started to make more sense. I'm still a little wary of it's application – mainly that it is so complex that unless someone has been heavily trained in systems thinking then it would be quite hard to communicate using the definitions and loops that they talk about. It is however a great tool for invoking discussion and for forming questions.

13.04.11 Work Departments & System Thinking

The tasks we performed today in the kitchen at Cluney House were pretty much the same as last week – more cleaning dishes and preparing dishes. The crew this time was different from last week, larger in fact, with only the head chef Jonathan who was also there last week. I do a lot of cooking at home, so it was good to get some tips about cooking more with vegetables and getting to try out some fresh rocket delivered from the garden. It was nice to meet some new faces, although I feel I perhaps would have gained more if our work departments were swapped giving us an insight into a different part of the community.

I have been thinking a lot today about the visit we had last night, and imagining the family on the croft going about their routine, and it has made me think a lot about how comfortable our lives, especially in the western world really is. I had an opportunity later in the day to discuss this with Graham, and we talked about how difficult it is to encourage people to part with so many comfortable aspects of their lives. Again, not that people have to live a lifestyle illustrated on the croft, but more about what our limits are – what are we really prepared to live without, which comforts are really truly necessary.

I've been attempting to fit in any reading for my essay into any free time I have, so my head was a little busy with thoughts when we started what will be a 2 and a half day lesson on System Thinking. To be honest, my first impression is that it is something that we have certainly been thinking about for the past week and a half, and in fact longer – something that was introduced to us formally in our Environmental Studies class with talks about earth systems and feedback loops, and even a presentation we were required to give on a specific element, mine being Tungsten – see below for an image of my life system diagram.

I also think that the fact that many of us have even signed up for this course and the diversity of nationalities and occupations mean that we are already predisposed to this way of thinking – we maybe just didn't have a word for it. My only concern is that we may be dedicating too much time to this topic in the next couple of days – I guess we'll see.

Our very long day ended with a short design charette/crit of proposals to alter and extend the existing Universal Hall. The teams were divided into two groups of 4, trying to get a fair share of experience and specialisms spread out. It felt good to have something concrete to be working on, taking on board some of the things we have beein mulling over the past few days. Our group worked well and I though we did a fairly good presentation of our ideas, although there was a quiet member in our group who we will need to try and bring in more for the design charette next week. It was a shame to see that the other group had not co-ordinated so well, something that they will need to work on. Their group highlighted that it's not necessarily about talents and skills but also balanced communication.

12.04.11 Essay Topics & The Croft

Today's opportunity to work on essay topics was welcome – I've been trying to keep my mind open to many possibilities here, whilst at the same time trying to read a little about subjects which interest me more. Out of all the topics covered so far co-housing has been the one that really stood out to me, a housing model that is already taking place across many countries, including the UK to a lesser degree. It attracts me for many reasons, and makes me ask many questions:

Why does this model appear more popular among other European countries other than the UK?

Could this model of housing every be picked up by housing developers or housing associations, and would this provide access to affordable housing?

If badly designed is there potential for co-housing to become a form of gated communities?

Are they truly 'diverse'?

Is there potential for urban retrofit project that involve co-housing?

Do the current planning and building regulations restrict co-housing in anyway?

We were given the afternoon to nail down our topics more firmly, although I felt this was a little restrictive – a few hours to do this I feel did not really produce a more developed outcome, and I feel sometimes that essays do grow and develop as you research and write them. However in this case, it definitely is important to not go too deep into some aspects, which bodes well should I decide to take this on as a thesis topic. Using a freeware mind mapping program called VUE, I put all these ideas and issues into node format and hoped that something clearer would appear. Here is a snapshot of my mind map:I decided to ditch the retrofit idea, and after researching a little more, it would appear that there is quite a lot of information on the use of co-housing for the elderly, as well as a possible solution to the current housing shortage the UK faces. The Netherlands has around 300 co-housing projects, and around 270 of them are for the elderly. As the baby boom generation grows old and returns (and is potentially the wealthiest generation also inhibit the earth) co-housing could provide a viable solution to care and housing needs. There is an issue there with diversity, one of the key components to housing, but this issue could perhaps be overcome by combining residential housing with accessible housing? After presenting my idea, it was quite clear that once again I needed to clip down my topic, although I felt there was definitely more of a plan forming in my head. I know have to write a brief introduction and structure for the weekend – something that I definitely think will be a worthwhile exercise. I do feel however a little short changed that this task was not given to all students, as I feel they may be missing out on this opportunity and it has caused a small rift in that people are feeling that their essay topic or presentation was not up to scratch – even though I found it very hard to differentiate between the quality of almost everyones presentations. The highest plus point for me was being able to actually finalise my essay question:

"Discuss how the principles of sustainable co-housing could be adapted to address the problems of an aging population and housing shortage within the UK."

Being shown around what is known on the community as 'The Croft' by Em and her family was certainly an eye-opener. She and her family have taken sustainable living to a whole new level. Whilst I doubt myself that I could live this lifestyle (or indeed question that anyone needs to), the audacity and resilience that they show is breathtaking. Their living quarters are modest at best, as are their facilities including compost toilet and cold baths with partial rainwater fill, but yet I think seeing this standard of living will make me question everything I take as home comfort a little bit more for a while. Being situated so close to the sea makes me fear a little for what happens when a storm hits or as sea levels gradually rise. Helping them collect their horse from the land was a challenge in itself – I nearly feel in a pond attempting to drag a pony away from the water, and we were all rewarded later on as one charged at me, forcing me to jump in the nearby horse manure store....

11.04.11 Dreaming New Mexico & Masterplanning

My impression of being 'Dreaming New Mexico' is that it is similar to the transition movement, although Illustrating the possibilities for change on a larger scale (state level in the US, or at a national or regional level within Europe) plans for energy and farming. It certainly is an interesting insight into the mechanisms that need to be altered or put in place – although timescales have not been mentioned much. I must admit I'm not too enthusiastic about the name 'Dreaming' and the mystical type map that they have produced to communicate the possibilities – I feel it could strengthen societies preconceptions regarding sustainability, that it's a green, hippy-dippy type idealism with lots of pretty pictures but no hard and fast solutions – which is definitely not what 'Dreaming' is about. I'm not at my best today I feel, I think mainly as yesterday gave me a taste again of what it's like to be in control of your life again, as opposed to almost 8 hours of class and discussion. Because of this I found the group projects a bit more of grind. However we were tasked with Energy and here's a bunch of principles which we came up with.

In the afternoon we were treated to some interesting case studies demonstrating sustainability practices in master planning. As an Architectural Technologist I always tend to get stuck in the detail of design rather than it's over-arcing principles of design so this was definitely enlightening to see how competitions and initial scheme designs are approached; viewing the overall area, existing building uses, community focal points and connecting new developments visually. I found our guess speaker experiences (Matt Bridgestock from 55° North) especially interesting, in particular the aspects of making co-housing and shared facilities a selling point. It has made me thing a little more about my co-housing essay topic in terms of why co-housing is not as big in the UK as Scandinavia and mainland Europe, and if the planning and building regulations here are in conflict with such developments. It was also interesting to see that the development he competed for in Denmark was actually developer led – something I would think impossible here in the UK. Perhaps it could be used as a model for social housing? I really like his description of co-housing as 'plug and play', something that could be used to shape it's image as a future looking idea rather than a reflection on the past.

Introducing the processes involved in Design Charettes was very interesting, and something that I would like to attend, and perhaps one day chair in the future – its also clear to see that lines in the sand must be drawn over some design decisions to achieve a positive outcome. Marks also dropped in some nuggets regarding building technologies (like composite compressed timber panels) and software including this solar tracking app which could definitely come in useful.

09.04.11 Spiral Dynamics

Returning to perhaps a more philosophical way of interpreting sustainability through peoples needs, desires and current life situation is something that I was actually quite surprised with. I was obviously familiar with Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, but learning about spiral dynamics, a theory originally introduced by Clare. W. Graves revealed to me an awareness that is necessary when diving into conversations about sustainability. Although the spiral dynamics systems has 8 levels in total, it is very important not to divide people into these categories but recognise that all of these levels exist within us, and by noticing when and where peoples motivation is coming from is definitely an effect tool in design.

That brief introduction has rounded off quite a busy week – I'm looking forward to taking some time the next couple of days to relax and enjoy the sunshine and the community itself, as well as dipping into some books from time to time.....

08.04.11 Co-Housing + Planning

Today's morning class was particularly inspiring – watching and listen to Graham delivery a talk that was clearly a integral part of his life for many years really came through. Having spent 8 years living and studying co-housing, here is someone who really knows his stuff. The basis of co-housing is an intentional community laid out as a cluster of buildings with shared facilities including washing, occasional dining and garden. I had previously held misgivings about co-housing mostly due to my own misconceptions, an image of people living in each others pockets and to some extent wallets and how this model of housing could be translated to the building environment I am more familiar. I was surprised to what level the residents can drop in or out of social activities at their own will, and the financial commitment to the actual day to day running is minimum. I also like the aspect of encouraging people to live a higher quality of life through having more time and interacting more rather than the empty building up of material wealth. That's not to say that is also not possible in this model, but the environment it creates is itself an advertisement for the palpable benefits co-housing can bring. Grahams extensive research and presentation has planted a seed in my head regarding a possible dissertation topic, which is really exciting.

In the afternoon we were treated to another wealth of knowledge, Bob Martin, who recently retired as the head of planning with Moray Council and who was responsible in part for approving permission for Findhorns wind park. Although I have had some experience with plannings in my professional life, it was good to drop the barrier that usually existing between architects and planners and have a frank discussion about the motivations behind decisions, and where the real power lies. Sharing a meal and drinks as a group later on also emphasised this – a real opportunity to hear stories and opinions.

07.04.11 Design Principles & Industrial Ecology

So far most of our lectures have been presentation based, so today it was quite refreshing to have a more of workshop type class. Each group was given different systems under which to summarise, their design principles, ours being Bio-mimcry. There was quite a lot of overlap, and I think at some point I will write all the principles down and attempt to 'cloud' them. Bio-mimicry was a whole different kettle of fish though – rather than have many design principles it more follows a thought process by which we can take systems or characteristics present in nature and recreate them (sustainably of course!) and integrate them with our lifestyles, materials or perhaps even thought systems. I’m quite tempted to visit the Bioneers Convention later in the year in Amsterdam – especially following the video presentation that we had. The speaker made the great point that nature has been R & D'ing for the last 3.8 Billions years!

Of all the pre-course reading I have done, industrial ecology was definitely on my radar of topics to look forward to. I really like the principle of how one man's waste is another man's raw material, and how you could apply this to industrial parks, or even regions as a whole. I do have some misgivings about the risk involved should one supplier of raw material go bust, and the potential for a domino effect for other companies reliant on that, but financial protections could be put in place and these risk are also prevalient in the current system. Daniel (our lecturer) is a great source of material, and it will probably take months for me to sift through all the recommendations of source material he made.

For the last part of the day we convened at one of the sanctuary buildings, and had a period of reflection on our time here so far, what we have learned and what relationships we have built up. As a Scotsman it can be difficult sometimes to engage in this way, but I did find the session really helpful and it was clear to see the benefits it gave to everyone, including the lecturers who have put such a lot of work in to make this programme happen. Seeing everyone open up what they previously had held back really brought our group together. I really have found the learning through the physical aspect of being here really helpful, it is a bit of shame to have to take this back and return to the books and essay assessment.

06.04.11 Work Departments and Transition Towns

Today has been a bit more of a story of familiarity – the first half of the day spent cleaning dishes and chopping vegetables in Cluney House as part of my work placement while here in the community, something that everyone must do. It was good to escape the confines of the village for a little while, and see another campus of the community. As I do most of the cooking at home I didn't really gain much skills-wise but it was rewarding to see people enjoy their lunch.

As a volunteer with Transition Towns in Edinburgh the afternoons lecture was also quite familiar. It actually reminded me that I had to forward a logo design I had done for the Community Bread Project I was working on to the committee that I'm currently working with.

Visiting the town of Forres community gardens set up by the wonderfully colourful (albeit one colour) Carin gave me a perspective on community gardens that I hadn't seen before. Set up with a grant of £138,000 from the Climate Challenge Fund, the circular gardens almost provide one person with enough food to be self sufficient for a year. But thats not really the main point of the community gardens – it's more about bringing the community together and reconnecting people with their food source, and perhaps even more importantly educating younger generations about the supply of their food. The difficult task, and perhaps something that needs to come in from a council planning level, would be persuading developers to set aside land within a new development for a community garden. However with property and land prices still at an inflated level, reducing density on a site to do this could be problematic.

Our course leader also arrived today to discuss the program so far – it brought up a few tensions within the group staying here, everyone with their own pressures, frustrations and desires of what they want to take from the course. But the open environment that the lecturers and ourselves to some extent have created here made it possible for everyone to voice their opinions freely and without any bad feeling.

05.04.11 Low/Zero Carbon Housing & Community Windfarm

One figure that has been repeated a couple of times is that 80% of the house stock in 2050 has already been built, therefore a large retrofit of the housing stock will be required for the UK to meet it's targets for carbon reduction. Most of the renewable technologies are still in their infancy, would it be impractical to wait until we have mastered these technologies before retrofitting and even building new homes? It that even an option? Are the carbon reduction targets actually in danger of forcing us down a path including technology which will be redundant in 20 years time. Also from my own experience how difficult it can be to introduce new technologies and products into a workplace that already has built up a relationship with manufacturers i.e insulation producers such as kingspan who provide a lot of support especially with calculating u-values and SAP calculations.

Greenhouse not making full use of the space heating potential (although it does grow bananas!)

Strawbale house with slightly over-engineered timber - proper workmanship required to ensure dampness doesn't penetrate the structure, ideal for prefabrication.

Barrel houses created with disused mash tonnes from distilleries - I'm sure I could still smell the whisky.

'Temporary' home in the spirit of the planning laws creating a very peaceful living space - I was curious about so many junctions causing thermal bridging problems though.

There were a few points in which I found the low/zero carbon homes unsettling - there seems to be a bit of overlap when it comes to electricity production (solar panels installed when the electricity is already coming from the windfarm) and also the scale of the buildings, particularly the new sanddune development. I felt a bit dishearted by the amount of steelwork used in the new buildings - something that comes hand in hand with large scale housing where huge spans are required. The owner also seemed to have his heart set on mechanical vent with heat recovery, even though the building is not quite up to passiv haus standard making it seem irrelivant. It seems to go against the grain of the rest of the eco-village and the original community. Although there is a lot to be said for the UK's health and safety overload, there seems to be a lack of good environmental practice when it comes to site maintenance - in particular the filling for the Poroton blocks, which has been left scattered around the site, floating in a couple of puddles of water.

Talking about renewable energy seems to have an added dimension following a talk yesterday evening by George Monbiot. Although his views were largely on energy generation on a macro scale, after visiting one of the wind turbines here it gives you more of idea of the scale of the installation and their impact as well as the sense of achievement that the community rightly has about them. Only main issue seems to be the maintainance, something that will hopefully be resolved over time as novice engineers become more experience, as well as multiply. Duncan, the engineer showing us round commented on how the engine starting sounds exactly like a tube leaving an underground stop.

To end the day I took my first shift in the KP (kitchen party), a chance to participate with the cleaning of the kitchen after one of the many lovely meals here. It was pretty tiring, especially after a long day but also left me with a small sense of worth that I was contributing, even if it was in a tiny way. I also met the couple living in the barrel house I viewed earlier - they seemed very happy, and apparently I'm my sense of smell is letting me down and there is no odour of whisky not so ever...