Share
Sam Shead
Reporter
A realistic home of the future?
In the 1950s people imagined that by the year 2000 we would have a man-made planet and people would be cruising around in flying cars. While many of their predictions did come true, it is clear that many did not.
Today, people are still asking what will the homes of our grandchildren’s grandchildren look like? Chris Sanderson, co-founder of a consultancy called The Future Laboratory, put forward his predictions in the first episode of Channel 4’s new TV series, Home of the Future.
1950s visions of what the house of the future might be like now look very wide of the mark
The first hour-long episode focused on how an average family in Sheffield could use the latest technology to improve their lives. The programme looked at how each member of the family adjusted to their new home, which wouldn’t have looked out of place on the set of a new sci-fi movie.
The home was stripped bare and kitted out with everything from mini power stations in the garage to front door locks that recognise the patterns on your thumb. And to help you ’destress’, there’s things like the mind relaxation game, which is an almost ironic contraption that requires the user to relax their mind with all their might in order to defeat the computerised sun by making it set.
But, will families across the UK really see this kind of technology creeping into their homes? Probably not is the answer. Or at least not yet.
The cost to kit out the Sheffield house was a staggering £250,000 and it’s fair to say that the average UK family doesn’t have the same budget as a Channel 4 production team, who were generously co-funded by technology heavyweights, E-ON.
The cost is one thing but does the technology actually improve people’s standards of living? Certain members of the eight strong Perera family certainly took a while to adjust to their new surroundings. The father for example was unable to open the door due to a skin condition that appeared to leave him with a weak thumb print, while the mother still firmly believes that a simple cup of tea is more relaxing than the mind game.
While all the consumer gadgets and gismos might not have been an instant hit, it’s hard to ignore the cost-saving advantages of the power generating devices.
For example, the BlueGen combined heat and power (CHP) generator that was touched on earlier converts natural gas into electricity with the help of a highly efficient fuel cell.
The developers claim that as a result of the fuel cell’s efficiency, up to 85 per cent of the original fuel energy gets used in the home. Compare this to conventional coal-fired power stations, which are only able to deliver up to 30 per cent of the original fuel energy because of heat losses at cooling towers and further energy losses during transmission and distribution, and the BlueGen unit starts to become more appealing.
While the distributors, Burden Energy, told The Engineer that the price of the unit currently stands at £28,000, the company said they are aiming to bring this down to £12,000 over the next two years.
Nearly all of the technology previewed in the show is likely to remain relatively expensive until it goes into mass production to supply a demand, which currently does not exist because people a) aren’t sure what they want and b) don’t want to let go of what they are used to.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (15)
Paul Reeves | 17 Feb 2012 1:13 pm
What I thought was interesting about the program was not the technologies themselves – but the fact they were in the form of gadgets (even the heat/power generator) bolted onto a house ‘made’ effectively Victorian design methods, materials and building methods. At least the visionaries of the 30s/60s/60s ( Buckminster Fuller, le Corbusier) often considered new ways of planning and manufacturing housing itself, as well as what goes in them. Of course arguably many of these visions have failed – although Manhattan and even the Barbican complex in the UK do indicate that if the right materials and sufficiently good quality resources are used in design and construction then good and desired designs in addition to those based around the small plot, Victorian terrace or 30s semis are possible.
Perhaps future episodes may consider the industrialised design and offsite (i.e. factory) production of houses (delivered by HAV airships, fabricated from silicon or carbon composites?) – which allow for imaginative ‘built in’ incorporation of insulation, networking systems and service systems, large- even complete wall screens etc.. Using the design processes of the car industry (balancing aesthetics with function) combined with new materials and manufacturing techniques should produce volume produced but varied designs (i.e. not post WWII prefabs). Manufacturing and assembling buildings under cover, rather than in some muddy field allows for the whole design and architecture of houses and buildings to be transformed. If the government really wants to create new industries and indeed ones with huge export potential surely it should be encouraging that kind of transformative ambition?
Of course politically, there is the issue that while the UK’s existing dilapidated building stock is kept artificially high through that nationalization of land (via the 1947 planning act) – what incentive is there for big investors to invest their cash mountains in setting up design and production systems producing cheaper but better products (homes) that cost less than the land they stand on.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 17 Feb 2012 1:29 pm
Prediction for the future always seem to extrapolate the past but in reality it is completely new innovations like the internet which unexpectedly cause technology to take a sharp turn. Political changes can do the same (maybe anarchy and an end to formal education are on the cards in which case technology may go backwards). My best prediction is that the future is unpredictable.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ralf | 17 Feb 2012 1:51 pm
Power Generating at home by fuel cell? Possible, but unlikely.
More likely is the no-energy house, where you get heat from the sun either through triple-glazed windows or solar collectors attached to the roof and/or south-facing walls.
Add insulation to the walls to keep the heat inside.
Add low energy using devices that can be powered by photovoltaics or by your treadmill in the home gym.
Instead of using high temperature washing machines, kill germs with UV-light inside the washing machine at lower temperatures.
Connect your car to the home grid to provide the necessary power to turn the washing drum.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Arrowhead | 17 Feb 2012 2:02 pm
Most of the products featured I believe were luxury items; even for the home of the future!
The Bluegen however I believe will be a must have and will go along way to reduce our reliance on Gas/Coal powered stations and thus reduce our carbon emissions.
The Bluegen was installed in an Austrailian Home of the future over 18 months and produced on average 28KW hours of electricity per day. More than enough electricity for two average UK homes and produced 200 litres of hot water per day.
With the new feed in tariffs recently announced by the UK government of 13.5p for every kwh produced and 15.6p for every kwh given back to the grid the Bluegens become more attractive.
Bluegens and other such devices are still being produced in small batches as you say but the real revolution in the very near future lies with Bluegens and other such CHP devices.
IMHO
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dainis | 17 Feb 2012 2:25 pm
As we are likely to have to heat our existing housing stock for some time to come, does the Rankine cycle engine still have potential at this scale? Although the electricity generated might be only a small proportion of energy output, the heat coproduct warms house and provides hot water. Couldn't a plant like this made in China and using wood pellets be economically viable now or is the boiler certification too much of a hurdle?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
James Stewart | 17 Feb 2012 4:30 pm
Trends: In America, and in Europe, national debts are out of control. Look at the tent cities springing up, and you will find your housing of the future, if indeed the government does not tax the tentmaker out of business. Of course, there is still time to educate yourselves, band together to work toward a more fruitful, (and IMHO a more equitable society) where the potential of each person's knowledge and sweat is rewarded greatly, and all benefit from our generous planet. We just need to start using the most efficacous methods of arriving at a more basic and robust economy that produces what the families of this world need, what they want, and what they aspire to in the future.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 17 Feb 2012 4:56 pm
"1950s visions of what the house of the future might be like now look very wide of the mark" ?
Doesn't look too wide to me. Looks just like something out of Grand Designs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rodney Harrap | 17 Feb 2012 10:25 pm
I have not seen channel 4 programme.
The Bluegens system looks interesting, but I saw figures of 66% efficiency at optimum 75% of maximum operation rate of 1.5 kw.
A cheaper solution is the Sterling Engine Generating 50 Hz AC electricity (not Bluegen's
DC - needs an inverter). The cold end of the Sterling engines preheats water prior to a Condensing Boiler that is working on the hot gaseous exhaust. Supplementary firing of condensing boiler can raise heat output as required.
The heating demand for a home usually matches it's electrical demand - evening central heating is accompanied by electrical demand by human occupants. Also a feed in tariff and resale value is available because it reduces electrical demand for new power stations.
A British manufacturer claims their units typically save £600/year but units currently 60 % more expensive than pure condensing boilers. Since condensing boilers were made a statutory requirement and their price diminished; why not make CHP statutory on new build and replacement and watch the purchase price of such CHP tumble?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Cutter | 18 Feb 2012 9:02 am
Generating your own electricity and heat from the gas main (either by fuel cell or by conventional combustion engine) makes sense compared to a central generator which loses all the valuable heat of the process, if that heat can be used. The nub is to provide a safe and convenient device at a cost to the home owner and the nation which is favourable compared to the alternatives. The device should stand on it's own merit and mass production is the key. Compare the cost in £/¥/€/$ and environmental impact of home generation compared to central generation on the same scale. How many power stations will it save and how much of our gas resource will it save? It's a national question not one just for the home owner.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Malcolm | 18 Feb 2012 2:17 pm
I missed the programme, did they start by installing very high levels of insulation because that's the first thing we need in present houses nevermind the future.
Daianis - are you thinking of a tiny steam turbine per house, say 2kW? Is that possible?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment