Posted by gardenlen on January 28, 2007, 12:25 am
sorry about that but this message was not showing through the bigpond
server so i dragged it from the google interface.
yes i get that a lot "how can home design help?" it can help a lot and
a whole heap more than not designing can. just for a very lot of
people thinking outside the square and outside the comfort zone blocks
lateral thinking on the subject matter.
so i colder areas you design and build a home that needs minimum
heating because that is the major part of the season so then adding
some cooling isn't as bad and design can also minimise the cooling
needed.
suppose life is a whole lot easier in stable climates.
wrote:
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,
len
--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."
http://www.lensgarden.com.au/
Posted by Jen on January 28, 2007, 1:20 am
> sorry about that but this message was not showing through the bigpond
> server so i dragged it from the google interface.
> yes i get that a lot "how can home design help?" it can help a lot and
> a whole heap more than not designing can. just for a very lot of
> people thinking outside the square and outside the comfort zone blocks
> lateral thinking on the subject matter.
> so i colder areas you design and build a home that needs minimum
> heating because that is the major part of the season so then adding
> some cooling isn't as bad and design can also minimise the cooling
> needed.
But summer is generally 'very' hot, with the occasional snow, flooding and
many very cold days. And winter is generally 'very' cold with snow etc, but
occasionally has warm days. I can understand building houses to suit hot
climates, or very cold climates, but Australia has both. What about central
Australia, they have super hot days, but super cold nights.
Jen
Posted by gardenlen on January 28, 2007, 2:38 am
g'day jen,
i'll hark back to the need to thinbk ourside the square, it would be
all too easy if climates were stat' but we have hot and cold and
everything in between etc.,.
but a properly thought out design can take the edge of both extremes,
to the degeree that if you build to get the absolute best in one
extreme because that is the one you get more of then the other extreme
will be more manageable.
in the desert like copper pedi take the example.
in every climate if you build undergraound then the home would have
stable all year round temperatures.
i still say the designs that we are indoctrinated with are not working
anywhere in australia, they may fare better for folk who by accident
bought one on the right aspect, and it is aspects which give us our
micro climates so that is what we are about with our eco' home design
we had.
didn't matter if it was 38 outside in the sun or -10 on the ground on
a winters morning we were comfortable without wasting extra resources.
but then we ahd more stable climate conditions ie.,. no extremes form
either end of the scale.
even this macmansion that we have in the 'burbs now only needs some
passive cooling and a few strategicaly planted plants, we need no
heating in the winter because the home is orientated not too badly on
the block. and the aspect of the block isn't as bad as most.
we had a home similar situation near the bay and we needed fans in all
rooms all summer and heating in the winter, the results of the wrong
aspect and no consideration by the builder to orientation of the home
on the block, though it wouldn't have helped much as the aspect was
hopeless as is the aspect of roughly 70% of all homes.
wrote:
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,
len
--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."
http://www.lensgarden.com.au/
Posted by 0tterbot on January 29, 2007, 5:33 am
> g'day jen,
> i'll hark back to the need to thinbk ourside the square, it would be
> all too easy if climates were stat' but we have hot and cold and
> everything in between etc.,.
> but a properly thought out design can take the edge of both extremes,
> to the degeree that if you build to get the absolute best in one
> extreme because that is the one you get more of then the other extreme
> will be more manageable.
> in the desert like copper pedi take the example.
> in every climate if you build undergraound then the home would have
> stable all year round temperatures.
we have to consider that people have been living in places like arid deserts
and extremely northern locations for millenia & they didn't have
airconditioning or heated toilet seats :-)
> i still say the designs that we are indoctrinated with are not working
> anywhere in australia, they may fare better for folk who by accident
> bought one on the right aspect, and it is aspects which give us our
> micro climates so that is what we are about with our eco' home design
> we had.
> didn't matter if it was 38 outside in the sun or -10 on the ground on
> a winters morning we were comfortable without wasting extra resources.
> but then we ahd more stable climate conditions ie.,. no extremes form
> either end of the scale.
what was your house like?
> even this macmansion that we have in the 'burbs now only needs some
> passive cooling and a few strategicaly planted plants, we need no
> heating in the winter because the home is orientated not too badly on
> the block. and the aspect of the block isn't as bad as most.
> we had a home similar situation near the bay and we needed fans in all
> rooms all summer and heating in the winter, the results of the wrong
> aspect and no consideration by the builder to orientation of the home
> on the block, though it wouldn't have helped much as the aspect was
> hopeless as is the aspect of roughly 70% of all homes.
that's right. also, i think people underestimate how much plants can help
"rescue" a crap house, as well. (a subject pertinent for this group!)
but overall, i think generally good design had better become a more common
thing in australia soon!
kylie
Posted by 0tterbot on January 30, 2007, 5:38 pm
>>that's right. also, i think people underestimate how much plants can help
>>"rescue" a crap house, as well. (a subject pertinent for this group!)
>>
>>but overall, i think generally good design had better become a more common
>>thing in australia soon!
> yes planting in the right place using the right plant for a purpose,
> unfortunately like the yuk factor brigade and the water issues
> indoctrination has got too much of a hold, someone commented that
> retro fitting is better than rebuilding i dunno lots of variable
> there????
probably some variables, but in principle, i'd be in favour of retrofitting;
if only because it's bad enough something useless was built in the first
place - no point making the whole scenario worse by then wasting it
entirely! i'd think even the most appalling houses could be rescued with a
few changes & some landscaping in the right places... not to make it
"perfect". "good enough" has to be good enough imo :-)
> if the house is so badly aspecteed along with the land and so poorly
> designed with living cooking areas facing the wrong way maybe any
> money spent on retro fitting could be seen as a bad investment, like
> utting new tuyres on a car wher the body and motor are falling apart
> hey??
hm, i don't know. the last house we were in before we moved here had big
kitchen/dining windows & a bedroom all facing due west :-/ that needed some
"rescue" but we were renting, so there's that. it was very unpleasant in
summer, but if i'd owned it i'd have started with landscaping & it would
have been easy to do a couple of other things & it would have been fine (or
any rate, good enough).
> until people ahve lived in a purpose built home they will never know
> the difference, and anoteh thing for young families wanting to get a
> start, this home is very affordable this one at that stage cost
> $50,000 to build but at a maximum would ahve pulled up well under
> $70,000 that then would have been 22 meters long and 7 meters wide. at
> the size it is in the pic's it 15 meters long which is as i have said
> the size of a modest family 3 bedroom home of the 70's and 80's
> standard.
> there are lots of families up there living in those prefabs that are
> only 6m X 12m 3 bedroom, funny thing our home cost about the same as
> them only lots more comfortable.
> so if the community bites the bullet and demands change what then? do
> we start stipulating estates with only the right aspect lans being
> used and only homes that are of the 'warm-house/cool-house' ilk?
> so what of all the old inefficient homes?
well, that's it. if people know how to make some inexpensive improvements
that make a big difference, they can do so :-)
> natural progressinon would mean it could take oh i dunno 100 years for
> the change to take effect on our resource useage?
> maybe instead of wasting tax payer dollars feeding us potty water and
> keeping insolvent farmers afloat and paying for water tanks that
> simply won't make any difference.
> maybe we bit the bullet and and demolish these monoliths?
i just really think that's the more difficult option :-) change takes time,
nothing happens overnight. i don't know what the answer is, but it involves
doing things better from this point on.
however, you need to keep in mind that all water has been recycled from the
dawn of time, & many people in aust drink water that someone else used
upriver - scare tactics about water purifying aren't helpful!!!
kylie
> server so i dragged it from the google interface.
> yes i get that a lot "how can home design help?" it can help a lot and
> a whole heap more than not designing can. just for a very lot of
> people thinking outside the square and outside the comfort zone blocks
> lateral thinking on the subject matter.
> so i colder areas you design and build a home that needs minimum
> heating because that is the major part of the season so then adding
> some cooling isn't as bad and design can also minimise the cooling
> needed.