INDUSTRY VIEWFINDER 19
Only 26% of our respondents believed they had achieved that level of integration between fabric and services
prohibitive for many, however they were acknowledged by our survey group, and we asked them to select and rate their fi ve most pressing design challenges. The answer with the most votes was ‘eliminating cold bridges,’ with reducing such thermal bridging providing a headache in many areas of the external envelope such as around windows and doors. The second major challenge, unsurprisingly, was achieving airtightness, with tapes and rigorous design detailing being particular focuses, as we will see in the solutions section below. Third, and possibly a new area for many architects to tackle, was incorporating the necessary space and integration to include MVHR services infrastructure, followed by MVHR design itself at number four. Number fi ve in the list was including the necessary amount of insulation in walls, fl oors and roofs, which can often impact on fl oor space and therefore living space, but also presents cost and spatial challenges in build ups. Finally, there are installation challenges to avoid gaps in what will in the end be hidden parts of the building.
Building technologies We asked respondents which building technologies they were prioritising for meeting Passivhaus standards in both studies, and many answers in 2025 replicated the pattern of the previous study. In a new question for 2025, we asked which materials (as well as installation skills) that architects had experienced challenges with, in their Passivhaus projects. Perhaps showing the correlation with timber as a preferred structural solution, most respondents picked sourcing timber frame as the key challenge, followed by membranes, SiPS panels (also containing timber), concrete envelope, steel, MVHR and brick. Surprisingly, given the issues reported around supply of heat pumps, this was only a sourcing issue for 10% of respondents, and reassuringly 40% of respondents said they had experienced no product or skills availability issues.
Design compromises In this year’s study, we delved deeper into design to discover the potential design ‘compromises’ that architects may have needed to make in Passivhaus projects in order to achieve the stringent demands of the certifi cation route. These were not performance compromises (in fact the opposite), and were instead referring to adjusting traditional notions of proportion and other aesthetic preconceptions required to achieve Passivhaus certifi cation. The most popular option was the need to ‘adjust ventilation strategies,’ followed closely by the need to ‘simplify the building form,’ and third was ‘restrictions on material choices.’ Other inclusions were changed layouts and reduced fl oorplates, reduced window sizes and deeper window reveals. Non-opening windows was not a top issue – only picked by 12%, but was still a consideration, while 26% had not experienced any design compromises of this sort that needed to be addressed. One of the hardest parts – as well as most successful in terms of reducing heat loss – about Passivhaus designs is fully integrating building fabric with infrastructure such as building services like plumbing and electrics. However, this requires not only full
ADF MARCH 2025
Have you achieved Passivhaus designs that fully integrate building fabric and infrastructure (building services etc)?
coordination across teams, but a degree of focus and rigour that is unusual in many construction projects. This hels to explain why only 26% of our respondents believed they had achieved that level of integration between fabric and services to minimise any gaps in the building. Lastly, we asked the important question of whether, based on their experience of projects, architects believed that Passivhaus can be widely scaled across various sectors – which is going to be necessary to achieve the exponential carbon cuts needed for net zero. There were a range of responses on this issue from our respondents – confi rming expectations, the top answer was new build residential, with 82% believing that Passivhaus could be expanded on a large scale in housebuilding, despite the challenges.
Conclusion
As well as reinforcing some of the reasons why clients and architects are increasingly looking to Passivhaus as the answer to the energy effi ciency challenges in new buildings, our survey also contains a series of evidential factors that show why wider adoption of Passivhaus in the UK is still lagging behind European neighbours. One of the key fi ndings from our architect respondents is that there has possibly been excessive focus on creating Passivhaus buildings which function as ‘mini power stations’ or ‘machines’ whose sole purpose is to reduce owners’ bills to zero. While this may be crucial for achieving the bigger picture of net zero, in order to broaden Passivhaus’ appeal to the widest potential range of buyers and renovators, as well as clients across other sectors such as commercial, there needs to be more holistic focus on the benefi ts it can bring users day to day. Arguably the discussion needs to move on from issues about maintenance of MVHR and keeping windows shut, to a more aspirational conversation which includes marketing Passivhaus for its lifestyle benefi ts, such as in terms of the comfort, health, and even luxury, that users can enjoy.
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
