The Department of Health has confirmed that it has withdrawn its “NHS Model Engineering Specifications”.

The Department has stated that it will be issuing a new specification model over the coming year, associated with the existing Health Technical Memoranda (HTM) structure of topics.

This new model will be supported by new Health Technical Specifications (HTS).

The Department has determined that the CO2 section on thermal insulation is not specific to healthcare engineering services and therefore a replacement for this document will not be included in the new HTS. Instead, it is proposed that the use of insulation products will be governed by the appropriate industry standard, which takes into consideration current evidence and best practice from associations and governing bodies.

Eurisol welcomes the withdrawal of “NHS Model Engineering Specification CO2 - Thermal Insulation”, which was an outdated document which did not reflect current understanding of the appropriate usage or safety of insulation products.

Buildings & Sustainability

EURISOL STUDY
Study to investigate Solutions to the Cavity Party Wall Thermal Bypass

Introduction

Eurisol, the UK Mineral Wool Manufacturers Association, in conjunction with Leeds Metropolitan University's Centre for the Built Environment is undertaking a study of heat losses through Masonry Cavity Party Walls at a site in Bradford. The Stamford Brook Field Trial identified significant heat losses via party wall cavities in terraced and semi-detached masonry houses, and proposed various techniques to eliminate or minimise the effect. The purpose of this study is to extend the work carried out by the Leeds Met researchers at Stamford Brook, and help in the development of a practical low cost solution that effectively reduces, or overcomes heat loss in this area.

Project Objectives

This project attempts to quantify the bypass effect in more detail and also to evaluate whether filling the party wall cavity with mineral fibre insulation will eliminate or significantly reduce the heat loss due to the thermal bypass that operates in most cavity party walls. In addition, the project intends to:

• Establish a robust methodology for quantifying the effect of the thermal bypass on the energy and CO2 performance of dwellings.
• Obtain evidence that the proposed solution (in this case insulating the party wall cavity) can provide a measurable effect on the thermal performance of buildings.
• Increase understanding and inform CLG of how this data might be handled by SAP, so that there is a mechanism for accounting for heat losses via untreated cavity party walls and other identifiable thermal bypasses. This may eventually provide a methodology for allowing for technical solutions, such as insulating the party wall cavity, that might reduce or even eliminate such heat loss.

Project Methodology

The project will extend throughout Winter 2008/9 and into the Spring/Summer, with coheating tests, pressurisation tests and acoustic tests being performed on the dwellings.

Coheating tests are currently being performed to establish fabric heat-loss coefficients for the dwellings either side of the party wall. Once completed, a potential solution to the party wall thermal bypass can be implemented, and the coheating tests repeated to measure the resultant changes in the heat-loss characteristics of the dwellings.

Thermal imaging of the party wall shows a variation in surface temperature, with the lowest temperature at the junction of the party wall with the ground floor and external wall.	Thorough monitoring of the party wall is being carried out by the Leeds Met research team throughout the duration of the coheating tests.

Throughout the coheating tests the party wall and adjacent external walls will be monitored remotely by the Leeds Met research team. Measurements of cavity and surface temperatures, air flows inside cavities, heat flux densities and selected pressure differentials will provide valuable information on the heat transfer and air movement mechanisms in operation during the test period. Additional measurements of internal conditions (room temperatures, RH, CO2 concentration) and the external environment (temperature, RH, wind speed and direction, rainfall, solar insolence) will allow accurate calculations of fabric performance to be conducted.

As well as performing dwelling pressurisation tests at critical stages throughout the investigation, the ventilation rates of the dwellings will be determined by the release of pulses of CO2 into the habitable areas and subsequent analysis of the observed decay rates.

The party wall achieved compliance with Part E of the Building Regulations through being constructed in accordance with Robust Detail E-WM-2. Acoustic testing of the party wall will be performed both prior to and following implementation of the proposed solution to establish whether or not the measures taken affect the acoustic performance of the detail.

Goods containing ozone depleting substances (ODS) require de-pollution, before they can be recycled or disposed of. This involves safely removing potentially harmful substances and components.

Substances classified as ODS include foam blowing agents. CFCs were used in plastic based insulation panels up to 1994 when they were replaced by HCFCs, up to 2004 when their use was banned.

Currently only small quantities of ODS containing panels are entering the waste stream, however this is increasing as they reach end of life and the quality is expected to rise significantly.

As these are ODS (Ozone depleting Substances), insulated panels manufactured before 2004 come under legislation governing their disposal and recovery of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) - EC Regulation 2037/2000. The recovery of ODS from building foams is currently covered by Article 16(3) which states that substances in “other” products, installations and equipment shall be recovered “if practicable”. The European commission is currently consulting on bringing in stricter disposal requirements.

On 28 October 2008 HBCD (Hexabromocyclododecane), used as a fire retardant in EPS (expanded polystyrene insulation) and XPS (extruded polystyrene), has been placed on the ECHA ‘Candidate List Of 7 Substances Of Very High Concern for authorisation’. Above 0.1% (w/w) suppliers have to provide sufficient information, available to them, to their customers or upon requests, to a consumer within 45 days of the receipt of the request.

There is no HBCD used in mineral wool insulation.

Eurisol the UK Mineral Wool Manufacturers Association in conjunction with Leeds Metropolitan University’s Centre for the Built Environment is undertaking a study of heat losses through Masonry Cavity Party Walls at a site in Bradford. The purpose of this study is to extend the work carried out by the Leeds Met researchers at Stamford Brook, where the problem was formerly identified, and help in the development of a practical low cost solution that effectively reduces, or overcomes heat loss in this area.

Over 70 year olds are now eligible to a grant that will cover the entire cost of any insulation works! This is available for free loft and cavity wall insulation for all over 70s, irrespective of income if own your your own home, or rent it from a private landlord - as well as people on disability and income related benefits or those for whom the state pension is your main source of income?

Sounds too good to be true? The Government and utility companies consider these households to be a priority, which is why insulation is offered free of charge. This type of funding is also known as 'Priority Group'.

With fuel costs rising, now is a good time to save money on your bills and help keep warm this winter.. Apply now to ensure you are insulated ready for winter 2008/2009.

For more information and to apply, click on the following link:

government-grants.co.uk

Please note that insulation grants are not currently available for residents of Northern Ireland. Please contact the Northern Ireland Energy Efficiency Advice Centre on 02890 240664 for further advice.

If your are a Council or Housing Association tenant, please contact your landlord and ask them to contact the Heat project energy efficiency advisors on FREE PHONE 0800 093 4050 for funding.

If you are not eligible, there are plenty of other grants available. Click on the following link for more details:

est.org.uk

Click here to download the Eurisol explanatory statement.

Click here to download the Eurisol explanatory statement.

Click here to download the Eurisol explanatory statement.

Click on the following image to download the above document:

Click on the following image to download the above document:

Click on the following image to download the above document:

Release date: February 2007

The growing rejection of the seemingly exaggerated performance claims for some multifoil insulation products is good for the construction industry, good for the consumer and good for the UK’s commitment to reducing the energy consumption of buildings according to Eurisol, the UK mineral wool insulation trade association.

For some considerable time, Eurisol has disputed the testing methods used by some high profile multi-foil suppliers to calculate the claimed thermal insulation performance of their products. While the rest of the insulation industry and indeed progressive multi-foil suppliers use the harmonised European methods of testing and declaring their products’ thermal performance, some multifoil manufacturers have used ‘in situ’ comparative tests as the basis of calculations claiming thermal conductivity values better by 200 to 300 per cent than the values obtained using these recognised methods.

With the revision of Approved Document Part L of the Building Regulations coming into force, the thermal performance of buildings is under the spotlight as never before, with insulation set to play a vital role in meeting the increased standards required by the Government.

According to Eurisol it has therefore become even more important that specifiers can select insulation products with confidence, based upon consistent measurement methods and fair claims for performance.

Now a number of bodies have joined Eurisol in rejecting the claims of the multifoil lobbyists.

In recent months the government has moved to give guidance on the use of multifoil insulation in roofs, which counters the claims made by ‘in situ’ comparative tests. It has written to all local authority building control departments and to bodies such as the NHBC, concerned with the policing of building standards, and told them that they could no longer accept the thermal values claimed for Actis Tris Iso Super 10 and similar products. In future all insulation must meet the standards laid out in BR 443, requiring hot box tests to be carried out on multi-foil products. Interestingly, the Multi Foil industry itself is divided with companies such as Web Dynamics making fair and properly substantiated claims and actively opposing the ‘in situ’ comparative tests.

A Technical Guidance Note has also been issued by LABC, which instructs Building Control to:
- reject multifoil insulation claims for thermal resistances of 5m2K/W for all building works requiring compliance with ADL 2006
- only accept multifoil thermal resistances tested and declared in accordance with recognised EN test standards
- allow an R-value of 1.7m2W/K for multifoils with 'comparative' test data, pending the development of an agreed European  test standard for multifoil insulation.

In the light of these developments the NHBC has issued advice to members, saying: “NHBC has decided to err on the side of caution in order to prevent the possibility of homes being built with thermal performance which falls short of expectation.  Consequently, we will not accept any multifoil insulations until the situation becomes clearer.”

Eurisol has welcomed the announcement by these bodies.  “The role of insulation is too important to the construction industry, to the consumer and to the UK’s commitment to reducing the energy consumption of our buildings to allow anyone to take advantage unfairly” says Crispin Dunn-Meynell, General Secretary of Eurisol. “The cost of building with inadequate insulation materials is immense both in financial and in environmental terms.”

As well as unfounded claims over the thermal performance of multifoil insulation products when new, Eurisol believes the products have a question mark against their ongoing performance.

“A study by the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association in 1999 found there were a number of variables which affect the reliability of multifoil insulation in use.  It found that the claimed performance of these products could be reduced by as much as 85 per cent if the heat flow direction changes, the emissivity of the facing is degraded, the airspace is less than 88mm or the airspace is not fully sealed.

“Furthermore many studies have reinforced the eventual and continual drop in the R-value of multifoil insulation as dust accumulates on the reflective surface of the product.  As R-value decreases, the costs of maintaining stable temperatures either by heating or cooling to compensate for R-value loss will increase,” said Crispin Dunn-Meynell.

“Further studies have shown that mould and corrosion of the insulation is also possible, and that multifoil insulation does not fare well when exposed to low energy fire, when it can allow a flashover situation to occur.

“Compare that with mineral wool insulation, which provides the unique four-in-one benefits of proven thermal insulation performance, excellent sound absorption, fire protection and sustainability.

"With the increasing awareness of housebuyers of carbon efficiency, and the introduction of compulsory Energy Performance Certificates in Home Information Packs from this June, owners whose homes have had multi-foils used for their insulation should have serious concerns that they may face a reduction in their property value if they fail to perform.  If this proves the case, it will be interesting to see who the lawyers then target for compensation; the multi foils manufacturers who made the claims, Building Control who allowed foils to be used, or the builders who installed them.”

For further editorial information contact:
Crispin Dunn-Meynell, General Secretary, Eurisol on 020 7935 8532 or email: info@eurisol.com
or
Ken Harrison, HPR Marketing, on 07801 649045 or email: kharrison@hprmarketing.co.uk

6 April 2006

New Part L implemented.  Click here to download the Eurisol explanatory leaflet.

22 March 2006

The Technical Committee on Classification and Labelling of Dangerous Substances at its meeting 22nd of March 2006, with a clear majority, decided to delete the R38 irritant classification for mineral wool and refractory ceramic fibres.

The decision will be included in the 31st ATP, which according to DG Environment should take place in November 2006.  However, several member states commented that this was quite early, as the 30th ATP would just then have been finalised.  Therefore the 31st ATP is likely not to be until 2007.

It was clear from the discussions that for several member states the crucial point to accept a de-classification was the Commitment made by the European Mineral Industry to ensure information all over Europe to all users, including do-it-yourself, on the mechanical effects of mineral wool fibres in contact with skin and on prudent work practices with mineral wool insulation products.

Eurisol and its membership welcome the Technical Committee on Classification and Labelling of Dangerous Substances’ decision, which further clarifies for users the safety of mineral wool insulation.

New UK rules on energy efficiency in buildings will be tough to meet – mineral wool insulation can provide the answer.

As of 2006, the UK will be putting in place tough new rules on energy efficiency in buildings, through an amendment to the part L regulation.  In practical terms these rules will mean that new buildings will have to be 25% more energy efficient than is currently the case.   The rules also apply to existing buildings, making it mandatory for buildings above 1000m² to improve energy performance when renovated.  These changes create some challenges for those designing and building new homes.  However, with proven energy saving ability, installing mineral wool insulation will be key to deliver these savings cost-effectively.

THE NEW RULES – THE WHY AND THE WHAT

The new rules for buildings are being proposed in order to implement new European legislation.  However the reasons behind the European legislation are also valid for the UK.  High energy prices, the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and the fact that buildings account for almost 50% of the UK’s energy use are among these reasons.   The new rules try and ensure that buildings play their part in reducing energy use and CO₂ emissions.  They do this by creating the obligation to make new buildings 25% more energy efficient, with the calculation being based on CO₂ emissions.  The new rules also create new measures that will apply to both new build and existing buildings:

• Energy labels – all new buildings and all existing buildings when sold or rented will need to carry an energy label, similar to one you find on fridges and freezers.
• Refurbishment requirements – large existing buildings (above 1000m²) will need to brought-up to energy efficiency standard when a major renovation occurs.
• Pressure testing - mandatory new build pressure testing will be introduced.
• New specs - Specification of maximum permitted energy loss requirements from walls, floors, windows and doors will be introduced.

THE NEW RULES - A COMPETITIVE OPPORTUNITY

Although these rules create new obligations they also create new opportunities for the building industry.  Two key elements to consider are:

• The new energy labels:  The new requirement for owners of buildings to provide energy labels will for the first time make it clear to the new owner or tenant, the energy costs of different buildings.  This new knowledge will create a demand for more energy efficient homes and allow those who offer better levels of insulation to clearly demonstrate the benefits against other less efficient buildings. 
• Choosing the right approach:  The benefit to the eventual owner or tenant of a building will be based on reduced energy costs and not on the costs to achieve these reductions. Therefore in order to be competitive, it will be vital to find solutions that provide significant savings at a reasonable cost – it is here where mineral wool insulation can play a key role. When it comes to cost-effectiveness insulation is the first (roof), second (wall) and third (floor) most cost-effective solution. 

THE NEW RULES – WHERE NEXT?

The new UK rules come into effect from April 2006.  If you want more information on how mineral wool insulation can help to achieve the emission reductions and refurbishment requirements created by the legislation, visit www.eurisol.com.

END NOTES

The Energy Performance of Buildings Directive sets out a number of measures that European governments should take to improve the energy efficiency of buildings.  Its measures must be adopted by national governments by January 2006.  The current changes to the UK legislation will act to implement these obligations into UK law.   Cost-effectiveness: A study into the cost effectiveness of different solutions to reduce energy use in buildings was recently undertaken by Ecofys, a leading institute on energy and environment.  For more information and to receive the report please visit www.eurima.org.

This fact sheet below presents an overview of the current dialogue, aimed at taking the heat out of the debate.  At the center of the discussion is a lack of conformity with industry standards by the Multi-Foil insulation sector in both labeling and testing.  To better understand the issue at hand it is vital to have general knowledge about the products being compared.  Therefore, the initial task of this fact sheet is to briefly summarize the characteristics of both Mineral Wool and Multi-foil insulation.  Additionally, any valid test results are presented in order to clarify misconceptions, reinforce facts and inform consumers.  In conclusion, the information shared will clearly delineate the dangers, which non conformity with industry standards and the distribution of inconclusive testing results can have on safety, energy efficiency and customer relations.

…AND FACTS ON MULTI-FOIL?

Many of the studies conducted by the Multi-Foil insulation sector have not conformed to EN harmonized standard test methods, rendering the results unusable for industry comparison.  In general Multi-Foil insulation is applied in addition to bulk insulation, helping to achieve higher R-values.  Most often multi-foil or reflective foil insulation is used as a moisture barrier, where needed.  In tests conducted, in accordance with industry standards, by industry leaders, trade associations, and regulators it was found that Multi-Foil insulation does not fair well when exposed to low energy fire and allows for a flash over situation.  Furthermore, unless maintained by the consumer Multi-Foil insulation losses R-value due to dust and particle buildup on its reflective surface.  A study conducted by the North American Insulation Manufacturers’ Association in 1999 found that there where a number of variables, which affect the reliability of Multi-Foil insulation.  The study findings are given in the fact box below.

KEEP THE HEAT

As depicted in the graph to the left, many studies have reinforced the eventual and continuous drop in the R-value of Multi-Foil insulation as dust accumulates on the reflective surface of the product.  Likewise, further studies have shown that mold and corrosion of Multi-Foil insulation is possible, and may also affect the products reliability. In either situation the costs of correcting such issues clearly outweighs any initial benefit.  As R-value decreases the costs of maintaining stable temperatures either by heating or cooling to compensate for R-value loss will increase.

STANDARDS = GOOD DECISIONS

Conforming to industry standards assures there is no possibility for spreading of spurious information in regards to product reliability, safety, or performance.  The use of unconventional labeling and testing methods has fueled skepticism about the performance claims of Multi-Foil insulation.  The fact box below outlines the information that a correct label should contain.

IN THE END

As promised this fact sheet has presented an overview of the facts within the current debate comparing the effectiveness of Multi-Foil insulation to that of Mineral Wool insulation.  Many questions still remain in the precise quality and reliability of Multi-Foil insulation as a stand alone insulator.  The concerns addressed in this fact sheet, including deteriorating R-values, fire hazards, and mould growth, clearly call for further study before any concrete statements about the benefits of Multi-Foil insulation can be accurately proclaimed.   However, as the debate continues, Mineral Wool insulation remains a quality insulation choice; TIME TESTED WITH QUALITY GUARANTEED!

Eurisol’s Secretary General, Crispin Dunn-Meynell comments on the safety of mineral wool insulation

“In June 2004 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced that it had changed the hazard classification of formaldehyde from group 2A (probably carcinogenic to humans) to group 1 (carcinogenic to humans).

This decision appears to be based on studies 30 to 60 years ago in which workers exposed to high doses of formaldehyde in certain industries developed a rare cancer of the upper part of the throat, behind the nose.  IARC determined that the same studies were not considered sufficient to establish a casual association with any other forms of cancer.

Background levels of formaldehyde are present in most occupied buildings from a variety of sources.  Formaldehyde is used in the production of hundreds of everyday items – it can be found in soaps, cosmetics, deodorants, paper towels, chipboard, etc.  People, animals and plants also produce formaldehyde.

Whilst small amounts of formaldehyde are used in the manufacture of Eurisol members’ mineral wool insulation, virtually all of this formaldehyde is eliminated when it is cured into binder during production.

Whereas exposure to high levels of formaldehyde has been identified as a potential hazard for many years, there is no measurable contribution to levels of formaldehyde in buildings from Eurisol members’ mineral wool.  Mineral wool insulation products have passed indoor climate certification tests demonstrating that there is no critical release of formaldehyde (or other components) at normal room temperature.

In summary, release of formaldehyde from Eurisol members’ mineral wool insulation products, and exposure during their use, is so low that there is no risk to workers or consumers.”