Monthly Archives: December 2019

Upcycled breakfast waste: Throw Away IPA, Cast off Pale Ale and Sling it out Stout

Throw Away IPA. Photo: Seven Bro7ers

I bet you didn’t think your leftover breakfast could be recycled into something you enjoy in the evening, and with such snappy monikers, too? Well, Seven Bro7hers, a family-run brewery (the clue’s in the name) based in Salford, has gone into partnership with Kellogg’s to make it happen, producing three distinct beers:

  • Throw Away IPA: made with Corn Flakes
  • Cast off Pale Ale: made with Rice Krispies
  • Sling it out Stout: made with Coco Pops

Here’s how it works.

Some cornflakes, rice crispies and coco pops don’t make the cut; perhaps because they’re a little overdone or the wrong size or colour. However, they’re obviously edible, taste fine and still have value. These ones formed the basis for Seven Bro7hers’ beer-making experiment. Handily, after they’d been playing around with this idea, Kellogg’s moved their HQ to Media City in Salford, and were approached by the brothers.

It turned out that Kellogg’s were sending over 500 tonnes a year of unused Corn Flakes to be used as animal feed. Kellogg’s as a company are very keen to push a sustainability agenda and are investing in it, so the idea of turning waste into beer sat very well with them, as you’d imagine. They now send a percentage of their unused cereal to Seven Bro7hers.

The first of the beers to be born was Throw Away IPA in November 2018, available on draught or in cans. The brothers discovered that if they replaced 80kg of the malted barley in their already existing stout and pale ale with Coco Pops and Rice Krispies respectively, they had two more cereal beers, giving them a mini-range. It was a case of getting right the ratio of cereal to the existing grain mix; once that was achieved, the brothers say that it’s much the same as making any other beer. It is, but other beers, either those made in small craft breweries or by the giants of the industry, aren’t doing their bit for sustainability.

Food waste in a landfill. Photo: USEPA

As a New York Times article from this July suggests, this is not just a commercial venture: it’s a genuine attempt to contribute to arresting food waste, which as we know plays such a role in climate change. Why? Because a third of the world’s food lies unused, or is wasted or lost. It then goes to landfills, where it decomposes, and releases methane gas into the atmosphere.

Next time you have a drink, think about this, and consider a pint (or can) of one of these beers, particularly if you love the taste of cereal (and don’t we all?) It’s nice to think that every glass you sink is contributing in a small way to the fight against climate change, isn’t it?

New Guidance from BREEAM

YMCA Lakeside

In advance of a 3 year strategy to be announced in early 2020, BREEAM has written to all its assessors to inform them of a new Customer Service Charter and Code of Practice. The message is that there have been improvements in timescales and services but clients should be assured of their ongoing commitment to enhancement, with a particular focus on improving turnaround times for resubmitted assessments as well as assessments requiring translation. Included within the Charter is a set of newly defined Quality Assurance Principles, which describe the themes and behaviours by which their auditors will be guided when conducting technical reviews of assessments. There are three areas:

Communication: To work in partnership with assessors to deliver effectively for them and their client

Trust in Assessors: To recognise the professional competence, reputation and quality of assessors and their work

Confidence in QA: To inspire assessor and end-client confidence in BREEAM, their schemes and certification

Furthermore, the Charter commits BREEAM to delivering outstanding customer service through the motivation of their people to serve customers’ needs in a professional manner. They recognise that their role is to support assessors and their clients via transparent, quality-assured standards, procedures and outcomes that provide value and confidence.

To that end, they have published service level standards for QA audits and new guidance for certification application requests that provide a transparent timeline for audit, feedback and certification. At the assessor’s request, this information can be sent directly to a client. New guidance for registration and licence applications is also in the Charter, with attendant timescales. Guidance for Green Specification ratings is included, with a Green Guide Calculator to enable assessors to quickly and efficiently generate Green Guide ratings.

The Code of Practice aims to promote:

  • the best standards of practice and professional behaviour by Assessors
  •  confidence in the integrity of the Scheme, Assessors, Assessment Services and Certification

Assessors must ensure that they understand and comply with this Code and any accompanying guidance. They must adhere to the Code of Practice and meet its requirements in the following areas:

  • Personal and professional standards
  • Skills and ability
  • Conflicts of interest
  • Marketing
  • Information for the client

The Code of Practice will be rolled-out as part of assessors’ annual licence renewal over the next 12 months (or as part of any new licence application from 2nd January 2020).

Better Buildings Partnership – bridging the performance gap in UK offices

In terms of energy efficiency in UK buildings, a performance gap exists between what was intended at the design stage and what actually happens at the use stage. Better Buildings Partnership’s (BBP) Design for Performance (DfP) initiative has been designed to fix this.

This new approach being pushed by the BBP is predicated upon measurable performance outcomes and is based upon a 3-year review of the National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy Rating & Commitment Agreement.  Sarah Ratcliffe, chair of the DfP executive board, and programme director at the BBP, explained the proposed change of approach like this:

The UK property industry desperately needs verification and disclosure of performance in use because, without these, the market cannot drive improvements in performance.

The problems pertaining to the current system are well-known:

  • Failing regulations
  • Current voluntary schemes check design intent, but seldom inspect whether this translates into better performing buildings 
  • Operational data is hard to get
  • Operational performance is not reported upon and is therefore invisible to investors, occupiers and the market in general

A picture has formed of a market that is operating blind, with no reliable way of ascertaining which buildings are performing well and which are not. In Australia, on the other hand, operational ratings are required, rather than the theoretical ones that form the basis of Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs), which were introduced into the UK following a European Union directive in 2007. A recent article about EPCs for ScienceDirect outlines a further aspect of the problem:

The performance gap, i.e. the difference between estimated and actual energy performance…, may be preventing adoption of bottom-up energy efficiency measures.

This intimates that EPCs may be not only doing the job they were created to do, but that 12 years on from their introduction, may actually be part of the problem. In that context, moving away from the current design-for-compliance model to one that can insert measurable performance outcomes at the brief stage makes sense.

What testing has taken place and is the plan achievable?

The DfP team and the BBP have run pilots and feasibility studies throughout the last 7 years. Initial findings clarified that NABERS could not be used accurately on existing schemes, as heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) energy use could not be considered discretely from tenants’ other energy uses. Therefore, DfP decided to concentrate on developing the scheme solely for new buildings. Following this, a 2015 feasibility study in conjunction with Australian experts and pilots undertaken in the last 2 years tested the scheme in actual office developments. This has convinced the DfP that a national scheme equivalent to NABERS has legs in the UK. Moreover, the myriad failings of the current design-for-compliance process were writ large in the pilot studies, as Robert Cohen, technical lead at DfP, states:

The current system of applying energy efficiency requirements based on a theoretical model – the results of which are never, and can never be, verified by measurements – is so fundamentally flawed it is remarkable it’s continued for so long.

Of course, the success of this project will not just be based on its technical capacity to measure accurately and deliver the required ratings: it will also need industry buy-in, upskilling, engagement, training and a recognised accreditation scheme. Furthermore, it is important to leave scope for future transformation, as alluded to by one expert in the sector: “developers need to be mindful not to lock in the energy profile of a building, as the future may bring new efficiency measures and a rise or fall in energy demands.”

How will the benefits be obtained?

The aim is to achieve total market transformation. A key part of that is advanced modelling, which is standard in Australia and not part of the thinking in the UK. Virtual running of buildings before construction utilising software common in Australia will enable this to be done quite easily. Advanced simulation requires HVAC modelling and gives a much greater level of precision, with defined control systems that are written into the draft operations and then used by the engineers when designing the controls. This means the real building ends up being controlled in much the same way as its virtual version did at the modelling stage.

NABERS began as a voluntary scheme, and became mandatory throughout the market via the size of asset requiring disclosure slowly shrinking over time. The DfP believes this can be achieved in the UK in a much shorter period of time; as well as clearly making sense for creating environmentally sounder buildings, it adds a layer to the engineers’ jobs that make them more exciting. This can be used by firms to attract the best people and increase their retention once they’re on board. A win-win, then, for assets, the environment and engineering? Here are some headline statistics from Australia:

  • 870 million dollars in energy bills saved by users since 1999
  • 6 million tonnes of CO2 emissions saved – enough to power 93,430 homes for 1 year (based on Office Energy ratings only)
  • 78 percent of Australia’s office space is rated with NABERS

There is a difference worth pointing out, though: NABERS is a government programme and as such has state backing and buy-in. The BBP, on the other hand, is an umbrella for a number of companies from the private sector, who all have very good reasons, both commercial and environmental, to push the adoption in the UK of an equivalent scheme to NABERS. What remains to be seen is whether it can obtain the necessary government buy-in to roll this out across the sector. Will the move from voluntary to mandatory be more difficult in the UK? Only time will tell.

Mainer Associates can assist with a variety of services aimed at closing the performance gap including, occupation phase energy modelling (TM54), soft landings procedures, Post Occupancy Evaluation, energy monitoring strategies and BREEAM In-Use. Please contact us at