Uploaded bynaeemcoleniv
16 views

Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth

Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth

Download to read offline
Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth download https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-sustainable-buildings- an-industry-insiders-view-mike-malinaauth-4302798 Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com
Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. Delivering Sustainable Growth In Africa African Farmers And Firms In A Changing World Takahiro Fukunishi Eds https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-sustainable-growth-in-africa- african-farmers-and-firms-in-a-changing-world-takahiro-fukunishi- eds-5379100 The Bioeconomy Delivering Sustainable Green Growth Viaggi Davide https://ebookbell.com/product/the-bioeconomy-delivering-sustainable- green-growth-viaggi-davide-9954748 Sustainable Value Chain Management Delivering Sustainability Through The Core Business 1st Edition Michael Dheur Eds https://ebookbell.com/product/sustainable-value-chain-management- delivering-sustainability-through-the-core-business-1st-edition- michael-dheur-eds-5053620 Delivering Development Globalizations Shoreline And The Road To A Sustainable Future Edward R Carr https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-development-globalizations- shoreline-and-the-road-to-a-sustainable-future-edward-r-carr-2390116
Delivering Development Globalizations Shoreline And The Road To A Sustainable Future Edward R Carr Auth https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-development-globalizations- shoreline-and-the-road-to-a-sustainable-future-edward-r-carr- auth-5364016 Future Carbon Fund Delivering Cobenefits For Sustainable Development 1st Edition Asian Development Bank https://ebookbell.com/product/future-carbon-fund-delivering- cobenefits-for-sustainable-development-1st-edition-asian-development- bank-51637958 Global State Of National Urban Policy 2021 Achieving Sustainable Development Goals And Delivering Climate Action Oecd https://ebookbell.com/product/global-state-of-national-urban- policy-2021-achieving-sustainable-development-goals-and-delivering- climate-action-oecd-35144660 The Purchasing Of Maintenance Service Delivery In The Dutch Social Housing Sector Optimising Commodity Strategies For Delivering Maintenance Services To Tenants Volume 17 Sustainable Urban Areas 1st Edition Jh Van Mossel https://ebookbell.com/product/the-purchasing-of-maintenance-service- delivery-in-the-dutch-social-housing-sector-optimising-commodity- strategies-for-delivering-maintenance-services-to-tenants- volume-17-sustainable-urban-areas-1st-edition-jh-van-mossel-2443080 Delivering Distinctive Value In Emerging Economies Efficient And Sustainably Responsible Perspectives Richard Boateng https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-distinctive-value-in- emerging-economies-efficient-and-sustainably-responsible-perspectives- richard-boateng-46255942
Delivering Sustainable Buildings
Delivering Sustainable Buildings an industry insider’s view Mike Malina Director Energy Solutions Associates A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication
This edition first published 2013 © 2013 Mike Malina Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing program has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientific, Technical and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell. Registered Office John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK Editorial Offices 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK 2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Malina, Mike. Delivering sustainable buildings / Mike Malina. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4051-9417-4 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Sustainable building–Design and construction. I. Title. TH880.M35 2013 690.028′6–dc23 2012027832 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. Cover images courtesy of Mike Malina Cover design by Sandra Heath Set in 10/12pt Palatino by SPi Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India 1 2013
v Foreword by Terry Wyatt, Past President of CIBSE ix Preface xi About the book xxiii About the author xxv Dedication and Acknowledgements xxvii Glossary of abbreviations xxix Introduction 1 Early modelling and design (BIM) 1 Technologies and applications 7 References 11 Section 1 Sustainability in the wider context 13 1 Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 15 Objectivity is the key 15 Rigorous standards and enforcement 17 Where will our energy come from in the future? 20 The leaky bucket! 23 References 24 2 Planning ahead – the role of planning authorities 25 A major influence? 25 Planning gain 27 The disconnect between building control and planning 29 The Merton rule 30 Training for planners and building control officers 32 Planning for the future 34 References 36 3 Legislative overview and meeting your legal obligations 37 Global targets and local actions 37 The European influence 38 Applying the EPBD in the UK 41 Continuous change – Part L 2010–2013–2016 and a new EPBD 43 Taking the energy performance of buildings to the next level 44 Legislation levels, change and enforcement – opinion 45 Joined-up government? 46 Looking forward 47 Enforcement 48 Some final thoughts 50 References 51 Contents
vi Contents 4 Paying for it – the finance question 53 Short-termism – damages sustainability 53 Funding for sustainable building projects 56 The cheapest kilowatt-hour is the one you never use! 59 What is the Green Deal? 61 References 65 Section 2 Delivering sustainable buildings 67 5 Delivering an energy-efficient and sustainable building 69 The wider design process – BREEAM 70 Learning from the manufacturing and car industry 72 Designing for sustainable communities 73 Where is the electricity coming from? 75 Dynamic demand control 76 Looking ahead 78 References 79 6 Managing energy and reducing its use 81 Energy is too cheap 81 Energy use and carbon taxes 82 Energy management must be integrated 83 The energy management process 85 Data is everything 85 Training, communication and education 89 The development of energy ratings 90 References 98 7 Water – a forgotten issue 99 Water and energy inexorably linked 99 Management of water in building services 106 Grey water and rainwater harvesting 109 Water and pipework infrastructure 111 References 113 8 Putting it together – the contractor’s role 115 Giving contractors room to work 115 The soft landings process 118 Towards proactive contracting 120 A sustainable future for contractors 121 Waste 125 Water 126 Adding value and opportunity 126 References 127 9 Main plant and building services – HVAC systems 129 Fixed thinking – assigned to the past 129 System design and application 131 Choice of heating systems 133 Ventilation 135
Contents vii Air conditioning and comfort cooling 142 Bringing it all together 143 Further reading 144 10 Getting and keeping control – building energy management systems 145 BMS becomes BEMS and can save a lot more energy 146 Evaluating an existing BEMS 148 Degree day analysis 149 Defining good control strategies 152 Example control strategies 153 Upgrading the BEMS – the business case 155 Specifying a new BEMS 156 Continuous optimisation 158 The BEMS needs user involvement 159 References 159 11 Commissioning and handover for energy efficiency 161 What is commissioning? 164 The commissioning process 165 Regulations and standards for commissioning 174 References 174 12 Keeping it all going – the importance of maintenance to sustainability 175 Maintenance is fundamental 175 Is it worth the risk? 179 Thermal imaging – seeing in a different light 182 Application of thermal imaging to sustainable buildings 185 Linking sustainability and maintenance 195 References 199 Section 3 The human element 201 13 The skills challenge 203 Resurgence of skills 203 Case study – East of England skills challenge 204 Manufacturers and trade associations – role in training and skills 207 The green deal – implication on skills 209 References 212 14 Changing behaviours 213 Behaviour, attitudes and perceptions 213 Convenience and resistance to change 215 Getting it right from the start 216 Getting the workforce on board 218 References 219 15 Putting my own house in order 221 I had a dream 221 Jack of all trades 222
viii Contents Greenfield or brownfield 222 Architect and planner-talk to the planners 224 Specification, materials and construction 225 Skills and knowing your limitations 227 Mechanical and electrical 228 Sustainability dilemma 229 The future: improvement and continuous commissioning 230 References 231 Further information 232 16 Sharing our technology and expertise with the developed and developing world 233 The big picture 233 Sharing our expertise 235 What did the Romans do for us? 238 Business and exports 239 References 242 Further information 242 Conclusion – some big challenges ahead 243 Index 247
ix It was by way of appreciating, in the 1980s, the dreadful consequences of manmade climate change that we soon came to realise that the real problems lay way beyond weather, and that solutions would require fundamental changes to the way we live on this planet. The title ‘sustainability’ was then coined, around the new millennium, as it seemed to encapsulate the basis for the changes needed. As building engineers, we quickly saw that the major responsibility for the problem lay with our product, with buildings producing over half of the ‘climate changing’ carbon emissions, using large quantities of raw materials and throwing away disproportionate amounts to waste. Put simply, we had to do more, much more, with less, far, far less. The consequences of failure are beyond imagining, threatening the very existence of a future for mankind. We saw the new millennium as a time of ‘the calm before the storm’, a period having the ‘luxury’ of both the time and the money to plan, organise and invest cost-effectively in solutions and a new order of society. A decade on, and a clear sight of the looming storm is upon us, as greedy global financial activity has brought us to the verge of bankruptcy and we can only lament how little we’ve taken advantage of ‘the calm’, when we had the means to make progress, and how it’s now so much harder to do so, with higher costs and our economies in tatters. Yet already it’s becoming clear that lessons have, even now, not been learned and solutions to economic woes are once again being sought through growth (a concept idolised too often in commercial circles), which solution is but an illusion when based, as it is, on more consumption. This is the very opposite of sustainability, where the solution comes via ‘creation’ through the capture of incoming energy and efficiency in its use, and its distribution for the good of everyone. So it is that we now see money being printed, in billions, to enable more consumption and more wastage, while sustainability is being side-lined, with its ‘creative potential’ for real growth being sacrificed. Well, we homed-in, a decade ago, on what we had to do and now it’s crucial that we let nothing deter us from pursuing those objectives with the added help from more recent discoveries whose potential could help us catch up on lost time. Scroll forward a decade and it should be inconceivable that a building would be engineered in any way that: „ requires fossil fuel, or nuclear power, to keep it comfortable to be in (instead recovered heat should warm ventilating air and domestic hot water, insulation and airtightness eliminate fabric heat losses and minimise, with the aid of shading, unwanted gains) Foreword
„ does not have adequate day-lighting and efficient, effective lighting facilities „ is not equipped with ‘super smart metering’ that automatically adjusts electrical demand to match the most efficient available supply „ does not employ its facade and its surrounds to capture and convert the potential of solar energy – this ranges from the simplest warming from winter sunshine, through solar thermal panels for heating water and air, and on to PV for the electricity to power indoor appliances. Many, by then, should be producing considerably more energy than they have direct need of, enabling export and power for transportation. This will also come from employing plants or algae on, or in, the facades and surrounds (100 trillion watts are captured in flower nectar each year) „ is not constructed from at least 50% recycled materials and fabricated in off-site factories as low wastage, pre-tested, modules ready for ‘plug-and- play’ assembly at site. Having first met Mike at the CIBSE/ASHRAE conference in Edinburgh in 2003, I’ve witnessed and admired his enthusiasm and determination over the pursuit of sustainability for the engineering of buildings in particular. Now, with sustainability appreciated as an imperative for the future of mankind, the need for a host of ‘Mikes’ and the global dissemination of their message and knowhow, becomes paramount. His book gives us much to dwell on and also offers a great deal of useful advice on how to respond to the challenge. Terry Wyatt, Past President CIBSE x Foreword
xi Most worthwhile books are the product of a long period of reflection, often spanning many years. I can trace the journey that led to this work, which seeks to make a small contribution to bridging the gap between the wider issues of sustainability and the key role of sustainable building services engineering, back to my childhood. For many, the environmental and energy performance of the built environment and many of the services crucial to this process; such as pumps, fans and ductwork systems; is less well understood, and the immediate connections are not made to wider environmental and sustainability considerations. What often gets priority is finance and cost factors, which are important and are the primary drivers for many. For me, this attempt to bring together approaches to building services engineering with sustainability – without doubt, the most pressing challenge to face present and future generations – is the culmination of an eclectic range of interests which has shaped my career and life to date. Given the importance of the subject matter, it seems strange to me that so little has so far been written with a holistic view of both the wider environ- mental links and sustainable building services engineering. Much has been written about ‘green issues’ and there is a veritable library of handbooks and texts on building services, but to the best of my knowledge this is the first full-length work devoted solely to bringing these important subjects together. There are many environmentalists, ecologists and ‘new sustainability experts’ as well as, of course, many building services engineers, but there are very few who cross the divide and work with both disciplines. Therefore, this process has been largely about bridging a chasm to make new connections, and the journey that brought me to do this started long ago. It began with an early interest in earth sciences. Anything in, or under and above, the earth was a source of fascination to me. As a child, I would seize any opportunity to dig holes, explore new sites of interest or discover more about the world around me. This interest was always eclectic. I was as intrigued by soil composition – and the invertebrates that inhabited it – as I was by the constellations above us. Microscopic organisms were as absorbing as oak trees, and pebbles as intriguing as the stars. Geology and cosmology held equal sway. In 1969, at the age of eight, I found my first fossil. This was during an age of rapid and radical social change, but my personal epiphany at that time was all about the past. How did that shell get ‘frozen’ forever in that piece of ancient limestone? What kind of world had it once inhabited? I started collecting rocks and fossils, and the discovery also fostered a wider engage- ment with history. The prehistoric, geologically captured world of fossils held my imagination, and I also benefitted from the teaching of a great-aunt who, in those far-off days when we were largely innocent of the strictures of health Preface
xii Preface and safety, would take me on trips to explore quarries. I still have many of the rocks and fossils we found. It all fired my enthusiasm for learning about the natural world. My aunt also encouraged a parallel interest in the more recent past, as revealed by the archaeological record, and I participated in a number of archaeological rescue digs from the age of 12. Was there no limit to what the earth could teach us? Accordingly, my interests at school were centred around history, geography biology and what was then craft, design and technology, and as these were the subjects that engrossed me, these were the areas where I did well. The wider world was also brought home to me as my Dad had served in the Royal Navy in WWII and had covered half the globe travelling to many exotic places. His stories and recollections inspired me to find out more about the geography and history connected to these events. At the same time as my aunt was risking life and limb to help me extract ammonites from abandoned quarries, I was also influenced by my older brother’s nascent career in electronic engineering. A good eight years older than me, he introduced me to circuit boards, switches and components. This, my first exposure to the world of technology, led me to speculatively dismantle many items to see if they could be successfully reassembled. I was an inquisitive child, and also quite a determined one – I couldn’t accept that broken things couldn’t be fixed again. Looking back, I think that this time was also the point where the crossover between an interest in the natural world and my parallel interest in things technological began. Rather than seeing technol- ogy as a universal solution to all challenges, I was not very old when I first realised that most of our engineered solutions are miserably clumsy compared to those refined by nature over millennia. As a fully paid-up Darwinist, I don’t see the wonders of nature as the creation of a higher power, but as answers to evolutionary challenges. I have long recognised that the natural world has developed all of the most elegant solutions to the problems posed by the constraints of our physical environment. We create poor copies by comparison. As such, I think I have always recognised the need to safeguard these amazing natural achievements rather than stifle them with the by-products of our own attempts at progress. Not least, we need to do this because we can learn so much from the natural processes around us, as nature’s experience is way in excess of our own. Its engineering through trial and error has produced the most amazing things, and we need to base our own future solutions on our improved understanding of these structures and processes. I never doubted that such advances were possible. Growing up in the sixties and early seventies meant living through a time of progress and opti- mism, when many momentous things seemed to be achievable. Between the ages of 9 and 11, from 1969 to 1972, I was allowed to stay up to watch the Apollo programme moon landings. The buzz and excitement around the events were palpable, and had a massive effect on many young children at the time. I became an avid collector of newspaper cuttings, which at the time were assuring us all that by 2000 we would have bases on the moon, and would perhaps even have been to Mars. I remember the first time that I saw the famous, now iconic, image of the astronauts looking back at the earth. It was the first time the earth had been seen pictured from afar; now that pictures of
Preface xiii the earth from space are commonplace, it is hard to remember what impact it had. The moon landings were arguably the crowning achievement of the age, and yet their defining image is a stark reminder of our finite place in the universe. Humanity was, we must remember, driven to conquer the moon by the relentless international competition bred by the cold war, and so it was essentially an extension of the arms race. Peace was a fragile commodity back then, but the race to the moon brought us a reminder that the world, which could it seemed have been engulfed by war at any time, was but one small globe in an infinity of space. It also emphasised just what could be done with the political and technical will to achieve the most difficult of tasks. It seems fitting, then, that 1972 also brought the first international conference on the environment, the Stockholm Conference. Despite my tender years at the time, I feel a personal connection with that event. My mother was an avid ama- teur radio enthusiast, and in particular an adherent of DXing. For the uniniti- ated, DXing (the name comes from DX, which is telegraphic shorthand for ‘distance’) is the practice of tuning into distant radio stations. Listeners would send in reception reports to these far-off stations, and the convention was that they would receive what was known as a QSL card in reply, which acted as a confirmation of the broadcast and an acknowledgement from the station of an accurate reception report. In the days, when there were a limited number of radio stations, and only three terrestrial television stations, this was a way to broaden one’s entertainment and knowledge options by discovering a myriad of English language broadcasts from round the world. Many of the broadcasts thatmymotherlistenedtoandreportedonwerefromtheStockholmConference, and its reporting by many stations around the world. She duly received a certificate from Radio Sweden and numerous QSL cards acknowledging her detailed participation in this important event. I can remember these broadcasts quite well, and they were the first mention I can recall of things that now domi- nate the agenda, such as the balance between resources and population. (This was long before the internet, when short wave was the only way of listening to foreign radio.) Just as the photograph from the moon had suggested, it seemed that the earth really was self-contained, and the resources that were present on it were finite and therefore very important to conserve and use wisely. This interest in environmental issues was reawakened in 1977. By then I was 16, and was in Wales with a cousin on my first independent holiday trip. Travelling round various youth hostels, on one of our journeys we stopped at the Centre for Alternative Technology in Machynlleth, which had only just opened. The technologies immediately grabbed my interest. There were demonstrations of solar panels, wind turbines and hydroelectric power, and information on ecological processes and techniques such as composting and recycling. These are all commonplace now, but they were pioneering in 1977. Again, I had found something that sparked my curiosity. It reinforced my earlier interest in engineering and the wider environment, and also prompted me to join Friends of the Earth. I spent time wondering why we live in such a wasteful society, and why more people weren’t involved in the effort towards sustainable living. I read Lovelock’s work on the Gaia theory, the proposition that the whole earth is one enormous living organism, in the
xiv Preface sense that all processes are interlocked and the earth is constantly moving in interwoven cycles. Combining my early love of rocks and fossils with my growing interest in engineering, I went on to study geology, technology and engineering. My first job was actually in the oil industry working offshore. It took me round the world. I saw West Africa and the Middle East. Looking back, it wasn’t perhaps the best career for a budding environmentalist, but then again it grounded me in reality, provided me with industrial experience and taught me self-reliance. You have to find a very practical and anchored way of living in order to sur- vive offshore, without all the available land-based support systems. It gave me my first taste of finding my own solutions, of repairing and even making my own equipment when things broke. Offshore life also brings a huge amount of work, downtime and rest, with 12 hour shifts and tours of 3–4 weeks working 7 days solid. It’s very much a case of work hard, play hard. You can only spend so much time eating, fishing and watching videos, but the rest of the expanse of spare time was, for me, spent in reading and contem- plation. It was then I decided that one day I would build my own house and I spent time considering designs and specifications. This would, one day, become another opportunity for practical problem-solving, and a new perspective on the environmental issues that preoccupied me. Before that could happen however, I had to change career. The oil exploration industry went into recession, and I moved into energy manage- ment and traditional building services. I spent time in both the private and public sectors. This culminated in a job working for a building services com- missioning specialist company, Commtech, where I headed up the energy division, often focusing on building energy audits and also working as a commissioning manager on some large projects. I stayed there until I founded my own business, Energy Solutions Associates, in 2007. In my spare time, I made my dreams a reality and built my own house in 2000. What finally made me decide to do it was a family holiday to Canada in 1998. In Canada, I noticed how many good-quality self-build houses there were. It could clearly be done. So, when we got back to the UK, I started looking round for a suitable site. I found an old bungalow in Suffolk, which was quite literally falling down, and so I knocked it down and built my house on its footprint. Sticking to my environmental principles, I was able to reuse a significant amount of the footings and saved many of the materials. I recovered a lot of the timbers and bricks. Any material that would otherwise have gone to landfill was hand separated to be crushed and used as recycled aggregate for the building over-site and a local farmer’s track. In short, I tried to be as low impact as pos- sible, although in reality there is no such thing at present as a carbon neutral build. It’s more a case of minimising impact and trying to be as low carbon and efficient as realistically possible. Still, minimising the impact was made both in an economic and an environmental sense. By utilising what was there before and using off-site construction techniques, it came in on time and on budget. All extra timber came from stewarded forested sources, and the house was also designed to be way above the Building Regulations (2000) in terms of thermal efficiency. It was also built to have accessible services and easier
Preface xv maintenance, where you can get to the pipe and cable runs. That means that I can alter things when I want to and enables me to upgrade technology as it develops and becomes more economic. For example, the mechanical thermo- stats have now been replaced with electronic ones, enabling all the rooms to have individual time and temperature control via under-floor heating,powered by a heat pump. Overall, we have roughly half the fuel bills of a traditional house of the same size. (See Chapter 15 for the details and the whole story.) As an engineer and environmentalist, I try to practise what I preach. I still drive a car – I’m a realist, not a fundamentalist, and I live in a very rural area so I need it – but it has a small one-litre engine, so I minimise my impact and save money at the same time. For me, it’s all about common sense. Why waste money and resources? These real-life experiences are the credentials I bring to this book, along with my years in building services engineering. In my professional life, I haven’t just worked to deliver energy management design and audits: I’m also a member of the regional committee of CIBSE and am regularly employed to give high-level training to my fellow engineers. I chair the Eastern region SummitSkills group (our sector skills council) as well as Sustainable Built Environment East, a unique group comprising all the major professional and trade associations in the building sector, in the east of England. All these years later, however, I’m still influenced by the ideas and experiences of my youth, in particular James Lovelock on Gaia theory. This has influenced and formed that basis of my beliefs as an environmentalist. I’m both an engineer who became an environmentalist and an environmentalist who became an engineer. I still hold that by upsetting the balance of the earth, we are threatening our survival as a species. Everything we do has an impact. In the second decade of 21st century, our overriding issues are about world popu- lation growth, and the almost inevitable end of fossil fuels en masse, which we are set to see in our lifetime. There is pressure on water resources and food production, and also on mineral resources. Because of all these happenings, we are having a direct impact on our climate. As humans, we see things in short periods, because we are only seeing things across our lifetime. But if we take a holistic view, and examine what has happened to our planet over millennia, we find proven scientific facts from peer-reviewed data. Extremes in tempera- tures and climatic change have happened before, but always through natural processes. Modern humans originated in Africa some 195,000 years ago and then migrated to the rest of the world starting around 60,000 years ago (National Geographic 2007); but our real significant impact on the planet only started around 150 years ago, as the technologies of the industrial revolution were exported around the world. Remember, the original industrial revolution was a British-led affair, and as such its impact was relatively limited. As the rest of the world industrialised, the impact began to accumulate. In the future, it should be noted, full industrialisation in China and India, given their massive populations and potential for economic growth, they could yet make our impact to date appear minor in comparison. There are so many studies and graphs published showing varying degrees of evidence for climate change and the links with our industrial activities. For me, the following graphs say it all.
xvi Preface We can see the evidence for the dramatic rise in greenhouse gases in such a short period, and I am convinced it is still accelerating, as year on year meas- urements continue to see the levels rise (NOAA 2012). It’s no coincidence that the rapid rise in the production and use of fossil fuels between 1800 and the present, shows a startling correlation to the rapid rise of greenhouse gases over the same time span. Because of this, within my current professional role as a building services, energy and sustainability specialist, I see sustainability as fundamental to everything I do. I see my role as not just about making things work, but about influencing others to see why we need to do things in a certain way. The current inequality of resourcing is inexcusable. People often mistakenly believe that it’s about saving the planet. It’s not. The planet is fine, and will survive perfectly without us, as it’s always done. It’s us, the human race, that we’ve got to save. If we look back through the historical record etched into our rocks and soils, we can see all through geological time a series of mass extinctions. The most famous was the dinosaurs, but there were also others, through various climatic changes. Some were caused by super- volcanoes, extra-terrestrial impacts and some by shifts in the earth’s axis and rotation or sea-level rises. Whatever the causes, there have always been rapid and profound changes. We are going through a profound – if largely unremarked upon – change at the moment. When you listen to scientists and naturalists, you hear the warning that we are going through one of those phases of mass extinctions of species. This hasn’t happened because of a volcano. This is happening because of us. In his television series ‘State of the planet’ Sir David Attenborough examined the main causes of damage 0 500 1000 Year 1500 2000 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Carbon dioxode (CO2) Methane (CH4) Nitrous oxide (N2O) 400 350 300 CO 2 (ppm), N 2 O (ppb) CH 4 (ppb) 250 Concentrations of greenhouse gases from 0 to 2005 Figure 1 Graph showing concentrations of greenhouse gases from year 0 to 2005 (IPCC 2007)
Preface xvii to the natural world produced by humans, pointing out that up to 50% of the species on this planet could disappear during this century unless we make radical changes to the way we use resources. If we fail, he argues, we will have made a radical and irrevocable change to all future life on this planet. Attenborough also made a BBC Horizon Special ‘How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?’ This is compelling viewing and I would recom- mend it to everyone. This book cannot attempt to solve or fully discuss these global issues, but we do need to bear in mind that we can’t do what we do in our work in isolation. This book is about what we can do in the building services and the facilities management professional spheres. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if you believe in climate change or not, because it makes business, economic and practical sense to run buildings as efficiently as possible. What makes people tick? For me, it’s a passionate belief in getting things right and protecting the environment as much as a pragmatist can, but I recognise that not every- one is as passionate as me on these issues. Nonetheless, we all want to save money and resources. If I can help you save money, and it also benefits the environment, then who’s going to argue with that? References IPCC (2007), Graph showing Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases from year 0 to 2005 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2007 (AR4) http://www.ipcc.ch/ graphics/ar4-wg1/jpg/faq-2–1-fig-1.jpg (accessed 13.8.2012) MacKay, David JC (2008) ‘Without hot air’ UIT Cambridge National Geographic, January 2007 NOAA (2012) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Monthly data Atmospheric CO2 at Mauna Loa Observatory, March 1958 – February 2012 ftp://ftp. cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt (accessed 13.8.2012) ‘State of the planet’ (2004) DVD – PAL BBC 1400 1600 1800 2000 Saudi oil U K c o a l W o r l d c o a l World oil World total 1000 1200 10 1 0.1 GtCO 2 per year Figure 2 The Industrial Revolution – Fossil fuel production from 1800 to 2000 (Mackay 2008)
xviii Preface Highly recommended viewing BBC Horizon Special ‘How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?’ (2009) http:// topdocumentaryfilms.com/how-many-people-can-live-on-planet-earth/ (accessed 13.8.2012)
Preface xix Figure A The first international conference on the environment, the Stockholm Conference 1972 – Sylvia Malina’s certificate
xx Preface Figure B My early interest in renewable energy took me to Burgar Hill, Orkney, in 1986, the site of the UK’s largest experimental wind turbine at that time
Preface xxi Figure C This cartoon has followed me from 1979 – student days – and acts as a light- hearted reminder of what happens if we get sustainability wrong (Reproduced by kind permission of ‘Brick’ – www.brickbats.co.uk) ‘To Let – Suit Ambitious Amoeba’
xxiii About the book What is this book about and who is it for? Anyone who is interested in bridging the gap between the wider sustainability debate and the technical issues of building services engineering, in delivering a sustainable built environment should read this book. It will tell you what you need to know to fulfil current legal requirements, but much more than this it will make you think about the wider long-term issues and how, in order to prepare for future challenges, we need to have an understanding of the ‘bigger picture’. My aim is to highlight the current issues around sustainability and energy use, looking at what is going wrong in the present system and suggesting some potential solutions. I also want to encourage debate among profession- als in the field, people who understand the day-to-day realities of working in the construction and building services industry or of managing a building. It is not designed to be a textbook, as you can get this from the excellent resources provided by BSRIA, B&ESA, CIBSE, ECA, etc. This book is very much a personal view, deriving from many years of experience within the industry and an even longer time being genuinely fascinated by the world and how it works, from the interconnected workings of the natural world to the vagaries of the political system and financial mar- kets. I want people to read this book and believe that energy efficiency is both possible and desirable and that it will not happen by technological advance alone; it will require personal understanding and shared responsibility. Education and awareness is a vital component. Getting it right will make organisations more efficient and save them money. Getting it wrong is not an option. After all, if you can save money, lessen your environmental impact and address the crucial issues of climate change and resource sustainability, who is going to argue with that?
xxv Mike Malina is the founder and director of Energy Solutions Associates, which is a building services engineering practice that works in the field of sustainable engineering, energy management and training. He has 30 years related experience, working at the start of his career in the offshore oil industry, then working in both the public and private sectors in related buildings and services sector. He is the principal trainer for the Building & Engineering Services Association (formally HVCA), Building Regulations Competent Persons Certification scheme for commercial and domestic HVACR work. Over many years Mike has conducted hundreds of building energy audits and has never failed to find ways to save energy. In 2010 he won the HVR Consultant of the Year award and in 2011 the Innovation and Sustainability Outstanding Contribution to the Industry award. In a voluntary capacity he serves as the chair of SummitSkills East and chair of Sustainable Built Environment East. He is also a member of the CIBSE Eastern Region Committee. About the author
xxvii Dedication To all my family – past, present and future. Acknowledgements This book is the result of the many hours of dialogue with many people throughout the building services industry and beyond. My thanks to all of them – you know who you are. Indeed many have helped, but it would be somewhat ungracious not to acknowledge a few people by name. In no particular order, I’d like to thank, Terry Wyatt, Bob Blake, Roger Clark, Cath Hassell, Roger Carlin, Nick Ward, Ant Wilson, Rod Pettigrew, Karen Fletcher, Uly Ma, Richard Brown, Ian Ellis, Dean Clackett, Dave Mervin and Lucien Dop. I’d like to particularly thank my wife Sue for her support and encourage- ment throughout this project and to Caroline Collier for her patience and keeping me on track in the writing and production of this book. Mike Malina, March 2012 ‘In the realm of ideas everything depends on enthusiasm; In the real world, all rests on perseverance.’ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Writer, biologist, theoretical physicist and polymath. 1749–1832
xxix Glossary of abbreviations AA Automobile Association ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers AHU air handling unit BAP biodiversity action plan B&ES Building and Engineering Services Association BIFM British Institute of Facilities Management BIS (Department for) Business, Innovation and Skills BRE Building Research Establishment BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method BSRIA Building Services Research and Information Association CCC Committee on Climate Change CDM Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 CIBSE Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers CSA Commissioning Specialists Association CSR corporate social responsibility DECC Department of Energy & Climate Change DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DTI Department of Trade and Industry (now called BIS) ECA Electrical Contractors Association EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive EU European Union FCU fan coil unit FM facilities manager/ment HVAC heating, ventilation, air conditioning HVCA Heating and Ventilating Contractors Association (Now the B&ES) ICE Institute of Civil Engineers IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LCT low carbon technology LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design NGO non-governmental organisation PII Partners in Innovation scheme – a DTI scheme RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects RICS Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors ROI return on investment SBEE Sustainable Built Environment East
xxx Glossary of abbreviations SDC Sustainable Development Commission TCPA Town and Country Planning Association UKAS UK Accreditation Service UNFCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
Delivering Sustainable Buildings: an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 1 This publication is not just another technical tome about sustainable building design; this is a book about reducing costs and saving money in the long term. In particular, it’s about reducing the whole life costs of a building, and therefore reducing the overall cost of ownership. The bonus, of course, is a reduced carbon impact and greater energy efficiency. Building services are not the first things that we notice when we look at a building. What most people see is an impressive facade, or perhaps the shape of an architecturally interesting roof. It’s easy to forget that all that is merely a shell without the components which make a building fit for function and occupation. A building is useless, even as a warehouse, without building services such as heating, ventilation, air handling, light and power. These services are an integral and vital part of the building. They are also central to its energy-efficient operation. Early modelling and design (BIM) It makes sense that these services are considered from the earliest possible stage in the design. You need good-quality engineering if you want an efficient and optimally performing building, and it has to be planned for from the outset. Too often this is where things go wrong and important opportunities for saving energy and reducing carbon emissions are missed. Buildings represent 40% of the world’s energy consumption (IEA 2002) and energy accounts for 40% of the actual building operation cost (Carbon Trust 2012). These figures can vary, but it will certainly be a significant sum. If services are developed as an afterthought, which they often are, the building will almost inevitably cost more to run, both financially and environmentally. Encouraging the design team to work more closely together is challenging. However, building information modelling (BIM) is a software tool that is helping to encourage greater cooperation in construction teams. It can also be seen as a tool to encourage and promote a more sustainable and cost- effective way to deliver sustainable buildings. BIM applies software systems to evaluate and maximise the efficiency of the project construction. It works as the foundation for collaboration in design and construction, to ensure that Introduction
2 Introduction project stakeholders including client, architects, consultants, contractors and facilities managers have access to a collective system that includes all the details of the projects design, specification, materials, project plan and costs. As part of the process BIM will produce a 3D model of the project. The industry will see BIM become more commonplace over the next few years and this has already been identified by the UK government as an important part of its construction strategy, which it published in May 2011 (GCS 2011). The government identifies a 20% improvement in efficiency of construction using BIM, and has stated that it intends this method to be phased in for all government contracts by 2016. Figure Acan help us think about project timings and their impact on design and construction costs (MacLeamy 2005). The project timeline runs across the horizontal axis, while effort, cost and effect are shown on the vertical axis. If services are considered at the start, you get the maximum impact and effect. As the process goes on, however, it becomes more difficult to influence the changes without problems and excessive costs. The first line shows the positive results of designing in services early, with the ability to gain maximum influence on cost and performance. The second line illustrates the cost of changes. We can see that costs rise significantly, as other factors become set in stone and the physical reality of the building makes alterations more challenging. If you are trying to save money, late changes will work against you. Line three represents the traditional decision-making process, representing the majority of projects as they have been conducted up until recently. As we can see, this does not happen as early as would be optimal, so costs can spiral and everything happens late within the construction process. Ability to impact cost and performance Cost of design changes Conventional project working Using BIM for the project Operation 4 3 2 1 2 Construction Construction documentation Effect / Cost / Effort Time 3 4 Detailed design Preliminary design 1 Figure A Design costs, impacts and influence on project timeline (MacLeamy 2005)
Introduction 3 In contrast, line four shows a robust design process, using BIM, which models everything before the start of the project. In this model, building services have significant early influence, meaning that both effort and reward come early in the process and the team can head off the majority of problems from the start. The later things happen, on the other hand, the bigger the impact on costs and potential delays. The same pattern also holds true for refurbishment projects. The more thought and effort that is put into early planning, the better. With the process of BIM, both the costs of the project will be lower than conventional methods as well as the whole quality of the project’s delivery. Costs tend to override everything in construction, particularly in hard economic times, but the mindset of the industry needs to change to the point where it realises that just a little bit more thought and early intervention will pay massive dividends for the future. Savings on operating costs and handover will actually have the biggest impact of all, since the energy consumed over the lifetime of a building is phenomenal. The other factor that will become an increasingly important issue for the future is embodied energy. This will probably be included in the total lifecycle calculations and added to the operational energy measurement of the building. So, what constrains progress? Of course, a major issue is that often when a client wants a building, it’s not actually for their own use. The client may be a developer. Therefore, they have no obvious incentive to consider whole life costs. Legislation in this area is developing however, to tighten up the process and address this issue. There is also the growing role of corporate social respon- sibility (CSR). As a society, we have to be more realistic about the sustainability of the world we are creating and influencing. If concerns about the future of the planet are not sufficient motivation, the other factor that developers should realise is that they will get a better return on investment (ROI) on a building that will operate efficiently over its lifetime. Lower operating costs equate to significant added value for a building’s occupants. In a buyers’ market, those buildings that can demonstrate a higher level of energy-efficient performance will be more attractive. Some of the larger developers and estate agents are starting to realise that this is in their interest, particularly at the time of writing when there is a glut of office space, with buildings lying empty. Low-efficiency buildings can’t be marketed, whereas higher-efficiency buildings can. If a client is planning to occupy a building themselves, there is obviously a clear incentive for them to specify a building which will run efficiently. Despite all this, until very recently architects tended to have little under- standing of building services. In this situation, it almost inevitably becomes a bolt-on. It is vital for architects to talk to consulting engineers and to the designers of mechanical and electrical (M&E) building services. Unfortunately, because of the way the construction process has traditionally worked, the M&E engineers sometimes arrive on site with a bare minimum of informa- tion, and have to design services in a short time. They will then have to do their best to fit these into an already constructed environment. This means that you can end up with a ridiculous situation, with the engineers trying to work with drawings that don’t bear any relation to what exists on site.
4 Introduction For instance, the ductwork, in the drawings, looks as though it could be straight, but when the engineer arrives, they find it actually has to bend around numerous architectural features. This extra strain on the system will make the ductwork less efficient, and there will be a knock-on effect. The engi- neers will have to redesign the services to cope with all this extra resistance. This might mean bigger fans or motors in air handling units, which consume more energy and therefore cost more to run. This is a simple example of how, because the services were not thought out early, a building can be delayed and become more expensive to operate. Going back to Figure A, having to change things late means that the engineers have less influence, and the effect from their effort goes down. This needs to be addressed, because the majority of construction projects currently suffer from problems of this type. Changing the current modus operandi in the face of the real financial and time constraints, which are inherent in the industry, will take a lot of effort and education. Just as politicians look no further than re-election, some construction professionals look no further than the next job. The industry needs to develop a longer-term vision – as, indeed, does society as a whole. The construction industry needs to nurture a sense of pride in its work and outputs, to remember that it is creating buildings which will stand for generations. These buildings do not only need to be aesthetically pleasing, they need to work efficiently. Despite this, the notion of checking that everything is working and that the new owners are happy beyond the handover is very new. Contractors, including M&E engineers, are not usually looking beyond installation. Nonetheless, if the industry is to deliver the products society needs to meet the challenges of the 21st century, it is vital to look at how things are performing and to find out whether the people using the building are satisfied with it. Construction professionals have to create a usable and integrated environment that will work for its occupants. Ultimately, a functional, calibrated building is less costly. Not only that, but studies have shown (Heerwagen 2000) that workers perform better in well-functioning buildings.Apleasant working environment therefore creates value in more ways than one. People are more productive if their premises are well commissioned, maintained and operated. Currently, if we talk to people actually using buildings, are they happy? In my experience as a consultant, I have found that when asked this question, a lot of people say no. They often feel that they have no control over their environment. There is currently a debate about how much control of their environment people should have. Some engineers and designers would like to automate everything. They like the idea of taking decisions out of people’s hands and relying on technology for regulation, but this may not always work. In practice, people can feel alienated if they feel they have no control over their surroundings. But, at the other extreme, too much control in inexperienced hands can throw the system out. Historically, building service engineers have not liked the idea of ordinary people interfering with building controls. There have been instances of placebo controls being installed; dummy thermostats, for example, that look
Introduction 5 and feel like the real thing (in fact, they are the real thing – they’re just not connected) make people think they have that all-important control. There has been some evidence to show that because people can adjust these fake controls they feel more in control of their environment. Another instance of this approach to occupant perception is an occasion where people in an office requested more natural daylight-coloured lighting. As there was no budget for it, the building’s facilities team cleaned the light fittings over a weekend instead. Coming in on Monday morning, occupants had the perception that the light fittings had been changed, and were satisfied. With care, psychology can be used to impact on how people interact with, and understand, their environment, but it is certainly a dangerous game. It’s generally far better to explain circumstances honestly. If building users were educated better, they would come to understand what is physically possible. Creating a satisfactory environment is also about good housekeeping. That means that commissioning and maintenance are not the only issues engineers have to think about. They also need to make a big effort to explain to users what they can achieve in local operation. If an environment is operated incorrectly, users can effectively destroy its set-up. All too often, people fiddle with controls that they don’t know how to use. For instance, there might be a unit on the wall for the air conditioning, or a handheld set of controls. People often don’t fully understand these controls. They might use them to raise and lower the temperature, but do they ever reset it? Too often, common sense deserts building users if they find they can’t control the environment effectively with the controls. What they often do is physically open the windows. This is tantamount to throwing money down the drain. To achieve optimum results, there has to be a compromise to achieve the best of an automated system while still leaving occupants feeling that they are involved. Success here requires a culture of trust between the designer, the building services engineer and the building users. I believe that the only way for this to be done is through good design, operation and commissioning, supported by effective training and handover. If all these are carried out cor- rectly, the building will operate efficiently and people will feel that they have more ownership of their own environments. This is a debate that needs to be thoroughly explored within the building services industry. There is also the issue that people today generally have very high expectations; sometimes these expectations are too high. After all, technology can only do so much and people need to understand what it can and can’t do. Air conditioning, for example, is a catch-all term. A lot of buildings have localised comfort cooling. This is termed ‘air conditioning’, so people expect almost magical control over their environment, but often all it does is physically cool the air. It’s just a localised intervention, and people have little control over it. Also, different people have different perceptions. Some people feel the cold more than others, and people with different perceptions of heat share the same offices up and down the country. People also often forget to dress for the weather, working in clothes that defy common sense. People come to work in
6 Introduction sleeveless shirts in winter and expect to be kept warm, and then do the opposite in summer. Due to design issues and energy consumption, this is not always physically possible. If buildings are not commissioned and maintained properly they will have ‘starved’ systems. In effect, one end of the building is hot, while one end is cold and what you end up with is system that is not balanced properly. Where it can’t reach a comfortable temperature, people bring in electric heaters. This of course creates more energy consumption and puts a strain on the electrical load, raising numerous other safety issues. While this is going on, at the other end of the building where all the resources are being used, the system overheats and people open windows. This situation is all too common, and can even happen with a brand new system. The reason for this failure is poor commissioning. This could be alleviated by a good building services explanation and handover, and investing in the processes of continuous commissioning. Returning to the diagram in Figure A, which shows effect and effort, you could equally apply a compressed version of this illustration to the commis- sioning and handover. Once again, you could have a fantastic building that’s designed to the highest standards, but unless it’s commissioned and handed over to the users properly, all the construction effort is a waste of time. A useful analogy is to think of a car. It might look nice and run OK, but if the engine is not tuned, it won’t run properly. In the same way, you need to think about fine-tuning building services early in the handover process. Using another aspect of the car analogy, when you learn to drive, you learn how to use the gears. You learn not ot push your revs over a certain level and not to go hard on the gas. It’s only later that you develop bad habits. In the first place, you aim to pass your test and do everything perfectly. Unfortunately, most building users have never even been taught to ‘drive’ their building in the first place. But there is a sense in which you should learn to drive your building. If you drive efficiently, if you use the gears appropri- ately, you will spend less money and there will be less wear and tear. Well maintained and calibrated buildings are also more efficient, because they don’t waste heat, light and energy in air movement. It places less strain on a building’s resources, and is also good for maintenance. Unfortunately, as with driving, people pick up bad habits. They get lazy. We all take things for granted, and it’s all too easy to come into work in the morning and just flick all the switches on. People automatically turn the heating on or up without really thinking, or leave in the evening without switching everything off. Computers and lights are routinely left on all night. Even if the lights are on a timer, that timer may well not have been altered when the clocks changed. The consequences are just the same as if we neglect a car, and forget to check the air pressure, oil and water. Of course, not all occupants need to do all the checks. However, like the passengers in a car, theyhaveavestedinterestinthebuildingworkingtoitsoptimumperformance. A wealthy client is perhaps more like the passenger in a chauffeur-driven vehicle. They put their trust in the driver, just as the client puts trust in the building services engineer. Both roles need to be filled with competent and conscientious members of staff for reasons of both safety and finance.
Introduction 7 When going to a car showroom to select a car, we increasingly look for efficiency. We also consider what we will use the car for. Do we need to be able to move a piano, or just people? Does the car need to be prestigious, or do we just want a run-around? There are a whole range of questions. Once again, the same applies to building services. What is the building’s function and what want do we want it to do? The engineering has to meet the client’s expectations. Clients don’t have technical knowledge by and large; they just say ‘I want a heating system’. It’s the engineers who have to select the right technology. If the engineers don’t specify correctly and understand the overall concept of the building, things will go wrong. Some technologies are better suited to some designs rather than others. It’s not possible to just put any system into any design. There are common patterns – just as all cars have four wheels, all buildings need heat, light and ventilation – and there are common systems to use, but we have to select the right technology. How does it all fit together in the design? What is it to be used for? How much control does the client want, and how much needs to be automatic? If the engineer gets this right and meets the client’s needs, then it might cost more to start with but it will decrease the cost of ownership over the life of the building. It’s simply about getting the right technology in the right place for the right operation. Ultimately, whole life costs of a building can be considered with regard to the whole project. If construction is planned well, it will pay dividends. It always pays back. Traditional methods of construction deal with building services on an ad hoc basis, but integration brings real benefits over time. Technologies and applications Every building is different. This doesn’t just apply to appearance and design, but also to geographical location. Is the building urban or rural? Location often defines what type of technologies can be used; for example, in a semi- rural or rural environment, it is possible to use more natural ventilation. In a city centre, constraints come from conditions such as air pollution and noise pollution. Therefore, a building is likely to have to use more mechanically controlled ventilation. The other factor is orientation. How is a building affected by natural processes such as the sun? How much natural heat will build up? Natural heat can be both good and bad. Solar gain is beneficial in the winter, but an engineer will want to restrict it in summer. Also, services must take account of the nature of the building envelope. The fabric, even the colour, must be considered. Reflective material is desirable in warmer climes, and with changing weather patterns and climate, more areas will need to adopt these measures. Insulation can be both for heating and cooling. Sometimes we need to keep heat out, and people often forget this. There are situations where we need to stop solar gain, which can go through walls as well
8 Introduction as windows if they’re not insulated. There are often good examples of this problem in factory units and warehouses. A metal-clad exterior can become like a frying pan, picking up the heat. Without reflective material, the internal environment will become oppressive and the occupants will have to disperse heat. A lot of these problems should be addressed through the Building Regulations. See Chapter 3 for a discussion of the Building Regulations Part L. When it comes to ventilation, we should try to use natural methods wherever possible. If the cooling and air movement can be free, it would seem foolish in terms of both expenditure and the environment not to use it if possible. Despite this, there are many examples of buildings that could be adapted to use free cooling that are not, and remain reliant on mechanical systems. The reasons for this are cultural, and need to be addressed at a societal level. People expect technological solutions for everything. Therefore, some things tend to get specified automatically, and there is a tendency to over specify. This is not done to intentionally disadvantage the customer, but because engineers become conditioned to do it. Lighting also needs to be considered with regard to orientation, as natural daylight will obviously be affected by this. Where there is free light, we should take advantage of it. Nevertheless, many buildings have their lights on all day for no reason. As a society, we have stopped taking account of natural daylight. This is both cultural and habitual. We could do it either manually or through technology – a simple daylight sensor could switch the lights off for us. The energy hierarchy diagram (Figure B) is absolutely key to effective, low carbon services design. The most important step towards energy efficiency in Reduce the need for energy in the buildings design Use energy more efficiently in the building – controls Supply energy from low carbonrenewable sources where appropriate Shorter Financial payback Longer Remaining fossil fuels to be used as efficiently as possible and phased out as soon as possible More Environmental benefits Less Figure B The energy hierarchy – What delivers a low carbon energy-efficient building?
Introduction 9 building services is to make this hierarchy the underpinning strategy behind every design and operation for the future. It’s a simple but extremely effective strategy. It’s also important to remember that achieving a good plan based on this hierarchy will also improve the cost–benefit analysis on projects. Too often people think that ‘green’ building is expensive, but energy efficiency and cost savings are actually coterminous. The hierarchy shows us that it is important to reduce the need for energy in the building’s design in the first place. This stage will include things such as making sure that the building’s lifecycle is taken into account. It’s important to examine the energy flow in the entire lifecycle of all materials that go into the building, so first there is a need look at the external envelope of the building. It’s important to conserve the energy, so why design something that will be naturally wasteful? Having studied the building envelope first, the designer and engineer then need to ensure that all the systems are integrated so that they naturally use the least energy possible. At the same time, it’s important to look at the carbon impact and usage of the materials involved. In the first stage of the design process, therefore, the designer has to look at the embodied energy, which refers to the amount of carbon used to manufacture and transport the materials and the energy input within the process. This should be the first priority in any building design. Secondly, it’s important to use energy more efficiently in the building once it’s being operated. This can be significantly affected by the early design process. The key point in this second part of the process is the issue of systems integration and controls. This involves utilising building technology and controls to monitor and operate the building services, and to make sure that all the building services doing different things are integrated, not competing against each other. It means working for the benefit of the operation of the systems themselves. This will be covered in more detail in the building controls Chapter 10. This hierarchy means that steps one and two can be taken into account from the start of the design process. Only then do we need to consider the third element of the hierarchy, and to start looking at the supply of energy from renewable and low carbon technologies, because this can only sensibly be done once steps one and two have been undertaken. At the time of writing however, there is an increasing trend, within society, with building end users and with designers, for people to want to start the energy efficiency process with step number three. This is because there is a growing awareness of the need to source energy from renewable sources, and people want to help this process along. People want to be green. Therefore, many are going out and spending large capital sums on renew- able and low carbon technologies, as they think it will help mitigate climate change. Unfortunately, this trend can actually be detrimental to carbon consumption if it means that this aspect is focused on to the exclusion of working on steps one and two of the energy hierarchy (Figure B). The reduction in embodied energy from alternative technologies can be really insignificant in comparison
10 Introduction to the savings that would be achieved by getting steps one and two correct. There would be a much better return on investment, in terms of both carbon reduction and financial savings, if these steps were taken to reduce the need for the energy in the first place. When nuclear power first came along, the catchphrase was that it would be able to provide limitless energy that became ‘too cheap to meter’. We now know that this was totally wrong. It’s about the most expensive form of energy going, factoring in the issue of nuclear waste that always seems to be ignored in these equations. Despite this, similar expectations are forming around renewable energy sources – once again, as a society, we expect it to produce limitless cheap energy. Sadly, it’s not that simple. The technologies involved are very expensive, though they will reduce in price as they become more established. Speaking as a practitioner, I believe that there are far better things to do to save energy. By starting with steps one and two of the energy hierarchy, we can reduce our overall need for energy and increase our control over its use. People feel good about installing a solar photovoltaic panel, but it takes more than ten years to pay back. If, by contrast, we reduce energy need, by installing insulation, for example, the payback is comparatively very quick indeed. The energy hierarchy provides a total correlation between its priorities and the likely level of financial payback – adopting step one will provide the greatest dividends. Step four will take far longer, although it will become cost effective in the longer term. Historically, technologies such as solar photovoltaics have had an artificial boost from the feed-in tariff (FIT), a government-led market mechanism that guarantees the owner of the renewable energy system payment for the energy, which is up to four times the value of a unit produced and purchased conventionally. This has been used as a stimulus to prime this market, but as the market develops this will no longer be economically viable.As it is, it is funded by the tax on carbon. As renewables become mainstream, the tariff starts to be reduced. This reduction began in 2012, somewhat controversially, but it was inevitable. I believe that this was the correct thing to do, but the government handled this whole issue very badly and caused a great deal of confusion with the wider population and threw the industry into turmoil. Ultimately there has to be a balance between technology, deployment and finance. This is a theme that I try to develop throughout this book and raise in more detail in Chapter 4 on finance. I believe that the future for sustainable buildings will involve the use of the BIM process that makes cooperative working in the construction team more realistic. We will also see a much closer consideration of the building’s lifecy- cle, including its energy use over the long term, and its actual performance compared to the design. At the same time continuous commissioning and maintenance will become much more important. These principles will be the bedrock of a holistic approach that offers the best possibility of achieving low carbon and sustainable buildings.
Introduction 11 References Carbon Trust (2012) – Buildings Policy http:/ /www.carbontrust.co.uk/policy-legislation/ business-public-sector/pages/building-regulations.aspx (accessed 13.8.2012) GCS (2011) Government Construction Strategy, Cabinet Office, May 2010 Heerwagen J, (2000) Green Buildings, Organisational Success, and Occupant Productivity Published in a special edition of Building Research and Information Vol. 28 (5), 2000:353–367 London, UK IEA (2002) International Energy Association http:/ /www.iea.org/index_info. asp?id=2401 (accessed 13.8.2012) MacLeamy (2005) adapted from the ‘MacLeamy curve’ http:/ /www.msa-ipd.com/ MacleamyCurve.pdf (accessed 13.8.2012) also based on Barrie, Donald S. and Boyd C. Paulson, Jr., Professional Construction Management, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2nd edn, 1984
1 Sustainability in the wider context
15 Delivering Sustainable Buildings: an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Exactly how do we make the right, sustainable choices? There are so many competing facts and figures, and a lot of conflicting information from well- meaningcampaigners,business,government,non-governmentalorganisations (NGOs) and trade bodies. Everyone has their own agenda and opinions. There is a wealth of information from industry as well as legislation and standards, and a lot of this creates conflict, which reflects opposing interests. In any process, in business or buildings, there are differing views and product loyalties, but in the field of sustainability the problem seems to be particularly acute. How do we cut through this? How do we create a transparent system to make sure that everyone gets the right technologies? There are so many claims for products, which can be oversold and mis-sold. Therefore we need a level playing field involving testing, transparency and accountability. Objectivity is the key I would argue that the only solution is to be as objective as possible. I would always approach every claim – and every adjustment to conventional technology such as proposed enhancements and renewable technology developments – as the ultimate sceptic. I work on the basis that you always have to ask the question: does it do what it says on the tin? Just because the product literature says it does some- thing, it doesn’t mean it does. Even when it does do what it says on the tin, is it the right application for the task in hand? How is it going to be used and, of course, we must ask: what is its true impact throughout the product’s lifecycle and how will it affect and influence the wider project or building? (This goes back to the implementation of the hierarchy of energy, as referenced in the introduction and throughout this book.) So the key is to be objective. What I believe is lacking are national stand- ards that would truly test every new sustainable product or claim. I think that, as an industry and a society, we are too trusting, and we often like to believe that things are the best thing since sliced bread. A good sales person can exert enough influence for the wrong decision to be made, and it may 1 Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma
16 Sustainability in the wider context be only years later that the buyer, specifier or user finds out that the technology doesn’t live up to expectations. An example would be large utility companies who, at the time of writing, are in the process of setting up significant installation businesses for renewable and low carbon technologies, as they see this as a major market opportunity. The big question is whether this will encourage the tendency for sales people to get carried away with sales targets. As more grants are made available for funding, the take-up of renewable and low carbon technology in the UK, we have to ask how that might influence the selling process. How often have you heard a sales person admit that this isn’t right for you and thereby not making a sale? This will be a crucial point, in that there need to be very responsible business attitudes, so internal systems of these large companies need to guard against mis-selling. As an industry, we’ve got to guard against risking our good reputation with potentially false claims or poor standards, like those associated with the double-glazing industry’s reputation of the 1970s and 1980s. Legislation and industry and government action are required to police the markets and give people the correct information. If the industry is left to func- tion as a free market, poor products will eventually fall out of the system, but this will only work to a small degree. And what will be the cost to the consumer as this process takes place? Surely it’s better to get this right from the start? It’s always been a difficult situation, because governments want to stay clear of market intervention. And yet, they are still intervening in the market by provid- ing significant stimulus to encourage the take-up of sustainable products – for example, look at the feed-in tariff, or the renewable heat incentive. It would seem logical for the government to set up national standards for energy-saving and low carbon renewable technologies, to test and rate all these new products. This would give the products more credibility. There could be a common label, independently verified, to promote rigorous national stand- ards, perhaps based on an A to G rating model to measure and benchmark the operational performance. Put simply, A is good – G is not so good. This would create a simple and transparent system, which would allow everyone to judge the relative merits of what a technology does or claims to achieve. This could be done by a range of institutions, perhaps academic bodies, or the National Physical Laboratory. There are also other institutions that have a very good reputation, such as the Building Research Establishment (BRE) or the Building Services Research and Information Association (BSRIA). They could also become part of this scheme, and once this scheme is established, we would then have a baseline to start to judge relative merits of each technology. At the same time we also need detailed notes and guidance for a product’s actual application in non-domestic and domestic buildings. This is because too often at the moment we see a perfectly good technology misused because it has been wrongly specified. For example, using the sun to warm water with solar thermal panels is a good idea in principle, but only if there is a reason- able need for hot water. Putting lots of panels into a small dwelling or office would not be a good application of the technology. So this would need to be part of any national standard involving the use of good application guides. In other words the technology could be A rated for good performance, but be totally wasted if installed in an inappropriate application.
Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 17 Rigorous standards and enforcement In the marketplace itself, we need to have a rigorous policing of the standards, and to stamp out bad practices. We have existing legislation that can be enforced by local authority trading standards bodies. These departments need to be significantly enhanced, since they tend to be very small and have limited resources. An example of helpful legislation would be the The ConsumerProtectionfromUnfairTradingRegulations(2008).Thissuperseded the Trade Descriptions Act (1968). This would provide a legal course for claims to be challenged and taken through the courts if necessary. I’ve always been astounded at how many ‘snake oil sellers’ there are in the market, an example of which might be magnets on fuel lines or water pipes, which claim to have energy saving properties. I believe these claims to be totally false, because when any of these sales people are challenged to provide robust independent scientifically verified reports, they can never do so. The ultimate question I always pose is if the technology is that good, why aren’t manufacturers fitting them as standard? Why aren’t the Automobile Association (AA) recommending them for vehicles? In fact, on the contrary, there have been scientifically based reports (Crabb 1997) and a review of tests carried out that showed little value in these claims and dismissed these particular products (Allen 2005; Powell 1998). The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), upheld complaints from two local authority trading standards departments on misleading statements made by one of these companies (ASA 2002). Yet these companies continue to sell and advocate these products, and people still continue to buy a virtually useless bit of kit. It astounds me when I see these devices fitted in some major companies’ plant rooms (Figure 1.1a). The same applies to Electronic ‘descalers’ (Figure 1.1b) which are also questionable as to their effectiveness. Figure 1.1 Water ‘treatment’ magnets and ‘electronic descaler’ – might as well be an ornament (a) (b)
18 Sustainability in the wider context Ultimately we need a strong lead from the government to set up a system of standards for testing and transparent labelling. This should provide all the neces- sary information to show what actually works and contributes positively to increasing performance and saving energy. This government information could also be extended to the true costs and real-life performance of a whole range of sustainable or low carbon products. It’s always nice to feel like you’re doing your bit for the environment, which has led to a fashion for what I have termed ‘green bling’ (Malina 2010). Even Prime Minister David Cameron had a wind turbine fitted to his own house (Guardian 2012), which in reality was nothing more than an expensive ornament. The same applies to photovoltaic (PV) panels. So many times in my career, I’ve come across people not understanding that PVs are a developing technology and that at the present time the effi- ciency and conversion rate of sunlight to electricity is 12–18% at best. Obviously this technology has to start somewhere, and those people that do adopt this early should be made aware of this. This is why the government intervened in the market and created a feed-in tariff (FIT), as it was the only viable way of making it financially economic. Saying that, this could still be regarded as marginal when compared to other technologies and practices, which have a far better energy and environmental performance and provide the best return technologically and financially, very much following the steps of the energy hierarchy methodology. If the FIT was removed or reduced sig- nificantly, then this would pull the rug from under the market. So the reality has to be laid out for everyone to see. There are a number of variants to the way that companies are approaching thismarket.Anexamplewouldbethe25yearleasingofdomesticorcommercial roof space, whereby a company gets the owner of a building to sign an agreement to allow them to place PV panels on the building’s roof. The leasing company get the benefit of the FIT, and the building occupier gets the benefit of the free electricity. This is useful from a sustainability point of view, but the offset of the payments for electricity use is far less than the feed-in tariff. That gives you guaranteed money for electricity generated. The owner would get the free electricity, but this is normally priced at 3p per unit, not the 43p offered by the original feed-in tariff prior to its reduction in 2012. The payback was in theory 10 years, but realistically you’re not guaranteed the weather pattern that is often used to calculate the projected performance and payback. There are also hidden costs for maintenance: panels will degrade over time, and the inverter devices – which transform the resulting (weather-variable) DC current of the PV panels into alternating current – degrade and will need replacing on average every eight years. They’re also costly, being priced at up to £2000, depending on the PV installation size The other dilemma here is that the companies are leasing these PV panels on a contract signed by the owner of the building, which typically provides for a 25 year lease. So what happens if the owner moves? The contracts are designed so that when the building is sold, the new owner inherits the lease. You would think from a marketing point of view, that most people would agree, and see the benefit for the incentive of free electricity, and more so as prices rise. This may be true for some, but quite a few people would not like
Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 19 to have that feeling of loss of possession. This may create unforeseen prob- lems when the original owner attempts to sell, and this underlines the fact that these things need to be properly thought through. The idea of this type of leasing agreement has been applied in the past to a whole range of major industrial products and plants, and it may well be a financial mechanism for encouraging the take-up of the developing renewable and lower carbon tech- nologies, as many people whether domestic or business owners will not have capital to pay up front for them. It’s the same with the Green Deal: the funding will be made available and all the payback will be funded from the electricity bills as the savings are made. Here again there is a potential pitfall: if you went out tomorrow and brought photovoltaics and then sold the house in three or four years, the pan- els would be seen as a bonus by some but as a negative by others. It may even be an obstacle to selling, as the contract is with the house rather than the owner. It’s a fixed item. We will need a culture change, however, to see this as part of the house, like the newly installed double glazing. Personally, I don’t see it as a problem, but it’s new and there may be resistance. I often find myself in a difficult position, as I have wanted to see more deployment of these renewable and low carbon technologies. Nevertheless, in conversation with people who passionately believe in renewables for energy production, I often find myself almost playing devil’s advocate. This is because I always come back to the principle and concept of the energy hierar- chy. Surely it is better to reduce energy use in the first place rather than to spend more money and waste energy generating even more? Even with sustainable energy, we don’t want to get into a culture where we think of electricity as too cheap to meter. This concept is a lesson from history, as this is what many in the nuclear energy industry were forecasting in the 1950s. Nuclear failed to deliver, and this demonstrates the impossibility of truly cost- free energy. We don’t want people to think that energy is limitless. There are always going to be some costs, including the energy that goes into manufac- turing the PV panels, which are loaded with embodied energy and resources. They also require additional maintenance to the associated infrastructure and can degrade in performance over their operational lifetime. Throughout history, technologies have crept in and slowly become the standard. It’s interesting – can anyone think of a precedent where there has been such a large government-inspired subsidy to encourage technology to this degree? I often wonder, if the government had legislated to put this type of market subsidy and scale of resource into energy conservation, wouldn’t it have been a better use of resources to have significantly increased energy conservation? This question is also highlighted by the government’s newly created Green Deal. (See Chapters 4 and 13.) This covers renewable and low carbon technology and energy conservation, so this again would be enhanced by the adoption of the energy hierarchy. No one should be allowed grants or subsidy for PV panels without first implementing basic energy conservation. This will hopefully be part of the thrust of the Green Deal. The ‘green deal assessors’ (Department of Energy and Climate Change 2010) could be used to deliver such a programme of moving towards a lower
20 Sustainability in the wider context carbon society. This would provide a mechanism to truly implement a workable energy hierarchy regime. To this end, it is vital that thorough training is provided to ensure that assessors have the proper skills to interpret a multitude of possibilities and situations. Installation, commissioning, verification of performance monitoring and true financial monitoring will need to be integrated to give an truly accurate picture and give all the facts to create confidence in the development of the low carbon and renewables market of the future. This is discussed further in Chapter 13, which looks at the issue of skills. Where will our energy come from in the future? There is a lot of thought going in to the future of energy generation in the UK, as the debate on the transition to a lower carbon economy moves forward. The future of coal, gas and North Sea oil production all have such a major impact, because at present they have such a dominant role in the current econ- omy, and will continue to exert a major influence for the next decade and more. These fuels cannot be switched off or reduced significantly in such a short time. There will be a need to develop a national programme, recognising the importance of energy conservation, coupled with more efficient techno- logical development and deployment. This, together with the large-scale deployment of renewable energy infrastructure, will have to be accelerated if the government targets for carbon reduction are to be achieved. It must also be remembered that the current set of nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their lives. There are ten nuclear power stations across the UK. At present, government planning envisages all but one of the existing nuclear power stations closing by 2023 (BERR 2008). There is a debate developing around what will replace them. This is a whole debate that could fill another book. The government has stated that any new nuclear power stations will be constructed without public subsidy, yet the decommissioning of old reactors and the handling of nuclear waste will be subsidised. Government subsidies to the nuclear power industry, throughout its history over the last 50 years, have been massive in proportion to the actual value of the energy produced. In a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists (Koplo 2011) a conclusion was made that in some cases it would have cost taxpayers less to simply buy the energy on the open market and give it away to consumers. The two largest political parties in Britain both see nuclear as part of the UK’s energy mix, as well as advocating a massive expansion in low carbon technologies including renewable energy production. Research by the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) established that even if the UK’s existing nuclear capacity were doubled, it would only result in an 8% cut in CO2 emissions by 2035. The SDC also highlighted many other disadvantages, including long-term waste problems and complications for storage. The cost could be a massive drain on public money, despite the government saying no to a public subsidy.
Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 21 The design of nuclear power stations is very inflexible. The continuing idea of expanding this type of energy generation could undermine energy effi- ciency. Finally, there is always the question of international security and potential terrorism. There is a risk attached to the transportation of nuclear materials. On balance, the SDC concluded that the problems outweighed the advan- tages of nuclear as a form of energy generation in making a contribution to meeting future carbon reduction and energy needs (SDC 2009). Public opinion is something else that the government will have to take into account. A recent Ipsos MORI/Cardiff University survey (MORI 2011) found that the British public favoured using renewable sources of energy over and above nuclear power. Solar power was viewed the most popular (88%), followed by wind (82%) and hydroelectric power (76%). By comparison, the popularity of conventional fuel sources were gas (56%), coal (36%), nuclear power (34%) and oil (33%). Although the present government seems to be pushing ahead with the building of at least four nuclear power stations, Britain and France are to sign an agreement to cooperate on civil nuclear energy, paving the way for the construction of a new generation of power plants in the UK (Guardian 2012). However this pans out with public opinion and environmental campaigners, and the potential for a long planning or public enquiry, this will probably dominate the debate over the next few years. Figure 1.2 shows the Sizewell nuclear site, which is in my home county of Suffolk. This dumps an enormous amount of waste heat into the sea. Even the new generation of proposed nuclear stations will, after generating electricity, waste the remaining 63% of heat energy in this way. To deal with the other element of still significant energy generation – coal – the government is also looking at carbon capture and storage. However, I personally see this as tantamount to ‘sweeping the carbon under the carpet’, Figure 1.2 Sizewell nuclear site
22 Sustainability in the wider context Figure 1.3 Aerial view of the cooling towers of the Cottam power station, Nottinghamshire Copyright: Ian Bracegirdle and licensed for reuse under the Creative Commons Licence Government policy on sustainability and energy Figure 1.4 Government energy policy (credit: Sarah Malina)
Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 23 as we should be looking to phase out coal and, where possible, look at the cleanest combustion as a transition to the lower carbon economy. Ultimately it’s the ‘fifth fuel’ – energy conservation and efficiency – that should dominate the future, but all governments have yet to fully grasp this as the priority it should be. Figure 1.3 shows an aerial view of the cooling towers of the Cottam power station, Nottinghamshire, where 60% of the energy is also wasted as steam to the atmosphere. The government has been obsessed with the idea that the lights are going to go out and that the UK needs generating capacity. This has partly fuelled the idea of micro-generation technologies. But if we return to the energy hier- archy, we can see that much of this generation is like pouring water into a leaky bucket. If we’re going to plug the holes in the bucket, we need to reduce energy in the first place. I sometimes liken the lack of joined-up government policy on energy to a very confused octopus (Figure 1.4). The leaky bucket! Energy policy and generation are big policy issues, which would normally be considered beyond the remit of the client or the construction project team. However, I would say that any project for delivering sustainable buildings, whether new-build or refurbishment, should ask: where is the bulk of the power coming from? True attempts at sustainability should try to negotiate a supply contract to come from a renewable or as low carbon a source of energy as is available. It is important that when we talk about delivering a sustainable Figure 1.5 The leaky energy bucket!
24 Sustainability in the wider context built environment the whole supply chain is taken into account. Ultimately, how efficient is the energy supplied to the building and what are its carbon implications from its source of generation and demand on natural resources? Government and wider industry is waking up to this, but many still haven’t grasped the concept, and others don’t feel it can be done in time, but I am convinced that it’s what we should concentrate on. If we’re going to have a proper green deal, we need massive market intervention. Government and industry need to lead with energy conservation and efficiency as the priority. We need to plug the holes in the leaky energy bucket! (Figure 1.5) The other important element is the significant impact that building controls can have on the energy hierarchy. (See Chapter 10 for information on reducing energy and getting control of it.) This is about making sure that everything is optimised and switched off at the right time, that equipment cuts out at the right temperature and operates within the right parameters. This is key to efficiency and to achieving steps towards the ultimate goal of sustainability. References Advertising Standards Authority (2002) ASA Non-broadcast Adjudication: Ecoflow Ltd. http:/ /www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2002/4/Ecoflow-Ltd/CS_33701. aspx (accessed 13.8.2012) Allen M, Popular Mechanics (2005) http:/ /www.popularmechanics.com/cars/ alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/1802932 (accessed 13.8.2012) BERR, Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (2008) Meeting the Energy Challenge: A White Paper on Nuclear Power The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (2008) http:/ /www. legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110811574/contents (accessed 13.8.2012) Crabb, J (1997) Field Test of Fuel Efficiency Magnets; Exeter University Centre for Energy and the Environment Department of Energy and Climate Change, DECC (2010) The Green Deal; A summary of the Government’s proposals Guardian Friday 17 February 2012, ‘David Cameron in France to sign nuclear power deal’ Koplo D (2011) The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), ‘Nuclear Power: Still Not Viable without Subsidies’ Malina, M. ‘Bling Generation’. CIBSE Journal, January 2010. pp. 42–43. Available at: http:/ /content.yudu.com/A1k3hn/CJJAN10/resources/42.htm MORI 2010 Ipsos MORI/Cardiff University survey Public Perception of Climate Change and Energy Futures in Britain Powell M. (1998) Sceptical Inquirer, Volume 22.1, January/February 1998 ‘Magnetic Water and Fuel Treatment: Myth, Magic, or Mainstream Science?’ http:/ /www.csicop. org/si/show/magnetic_water_and_fuel_treatment_myth_magic_or_mainstream_ science/ (accessed 13.8.2012) SDC Sustainable Development Commission (2006) The Role of Nuclear Power in a Low Carbon Economy
25 Delivering Sustainable Buildings: an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Local planning authorities can have a major influence on the development of sustainable communities and the built environment, both from a commercial and a housing point of view. But the planning system is often constrained by conflicting policy and resource priorities, as well as having to respond to, and take account of, the local community’s views. Some would consider that planning in the UK can be over-democratic. The often-used phrase NIMBY (not in my back yard) describes a reaction from people who instinctively either want to resist change or perhaps oppose a major development such as a wind farm for either misconceived or legitimate reasons, depending on your viewpoint. A case of democracy in action? It is sometimes difficult to get the balance right. The problem is that we can only talk for so long about some of the very big choices that need to be made. Big issues and choices lie ahead, especially when it comes to major energy policy, the issues of natural resources, expanding population and their relation to the holistic view of sustainability. The scale of all of this is daunting when considered as one big project. However, this is unlikely to be considered as one grand plan; it is more of a collage which has grown over time, and will be dealt with as part of the evolving society we live in. Figure 2.1 reminds us of the scale when we look at a developed city. A major influence? The current planning system is highly decentralised, albeit guided by the recently revised National Planning Policy Framework. This is potentially good for local democracy, but it leads to a haphazard system where development is often speculative. Historically, there have been local and regional spatial plans, but at the time of writing the regional plans have recently been abandoned by central government. Therefore, except for large national interest projects which are led by central government and national infrastructure policy, all planning is done locally by professional planning officers employed by local councils. They are accountable to a community- elected body of councillors which comprise the local authorities planning or development control committee. Most planning decisions are determined 2 Planning ahead – the role of planning authorities
26 Sustainability in the wider context under delegated powers by the officers, but if the plans are for larger developments, or potentially highlight a question of policy, then the planning committee will debate the proposals. The other important dimension is to show a public demonstration of the democratic process, where councillors can hear the views of the local community either by written representations or in person. This can be one of the most problematic aspects as there will always be two sides of the debate and it is often one of the only times that local people become involved in the planning process. My own experience was gained as an elected local government councillor in the 1990s, where I served on full planning committees and both unitary development and local plan subcommittees. Decisions have to be made, and a lot is open to differing views of elected councillors, professional officers and the community they serve. There will certainly be different interpretations, even taking account of the professional guidance that is always provided. Local and regional forward planning is essential and it is unfortunate that government threw local authorities into turmoil with the scrapping of regional planning. Not to say that they were all good in the first place, but at least the bigger picture was being looked at. Figure 2.1 Looking at the scale of the built environment makes planning very complex
Planning ahead – the role of planning authorities 27 Obviously, there are planning criteria identifying what kind of development is and isn’t permitted, but local plans often do little more than ring-fence areas for different types of development – say, residential, industrial or retail. This created permitted development zones with specific policy guidance. Apart from that, the system tends to be ad hoc. It relies on developers coming forward with plans for development. For major developments, local planners will put forward a design brief, but they have no control over how things will develop overall in their local area. They might have a target, for example, of 800 homes by 2016, but executing this plan will depend on the vagaries of the market. Development can be, in many respects, little more than a random patchwork quilt. In some senses, this is a good thing, because it allows each area to develop in its own individual way, but it is also highly inefficient from a resources and sustainability perspective. Infrastructure may well be developed after build- ings are already in place, where clearly it should be developed before building construction, and this leads to public discontent. Significant new building projects create a need for roads, healthcare and education, for instance, which may not be fully developed and integrated when the plans are first drawn up. So any mechanism that can aid infrastructure and gain resources for the com- munity should be made a priority, especially if this will also create benefit from a social and environmental dimension. Planning gain To help create infrastructure and more community resources, planners can draw on legislation such as Section (S106) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (previously Section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971). This allows a local planning authority to enter into a legally binding agreement with a landowner for reaching an obligation associated with the granting of planning permission. This is referred to as planning gain, termed a Section 106 agreement. In Scotland it’s a Section 75 planning agreement (Scotland Section 75). This creates a means of getting developers to contribute towards the community. If, for example, they build 30 houses, they must contribute so many pounds towards schools. It’s a form of forward planning, and generates money from applications to fund infrastructure. The problem is that it is still ad hoc, and money from these agreements may not actually find its way to the local community. It’s often put in a central pot that may get used anywhere. Different governments have had different approaches for dealing with this question of planning. There are many arguments that can be used – for exam- ple, standardised and central planning would be more efficient, and create a focus for everything to happen in a coordinated way. From a sustainability point of view, it would also be more advantageous, since it would mean that councils, developers and utility companies wouldn’t have to dig up the same piece of road six times to put in different services as more developments are
Another Random Document on Scribd Without Any Related Topics
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others. 1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States. 1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: 1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook. 1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. 1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License. 1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. 1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that: • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.” • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works. • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work. • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. 1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. 1.F. 1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. 1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem. 1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. 1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. 1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause. Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life. Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS. The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate. While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate. International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate. Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org. This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! ebookbell.com

More Related Content

PDF
What is a Green Building
bySchneider Electric India
 
PPTX
Enhancing Skills for Sustainable Buildings (ESSB)
byJeremy Gibberd
 
PDF
Smart Sustainable Built Environments 1st Edition Jay Yang Peter S Brandon
bybulduciacci25
 
PDF
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
byneweysorna
 
PDF
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
byasustaseanan
 
PDF
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
bytadoloague
 
DOC
Sustainable Office Tips
bysarahlyon12
 
PDF
Inspired to be Green: Volume7
byFrank Costanzo Connelly
 
What is a Green Building
bySchneider Electric India
 
Enhancing Skills for Sustainable Buildings (ESSB)
byJeremy Gibberd
 
Smart Sustainable Built Environments 1st Edition Jay Yang Peter S Brandon
bybulduciacci25
 
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
byneweysorna
 
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
byasustaseanan
 
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
bytadoloague
 
Sustainable Office Tips
bysarahlyon12
 
Inspired to be Green: Volume7
byFrank Costanzo Connelly
 

Similar to Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth

PDF
Future challenges for sustainable development within the built environment Br...
byajmrfnwjsf1272
 
PDF
Sustainable Development In Chemical Engineering Innovative Technologies Vince...
bykahituyanik
 
PDF
Sustainable Building Services Bernhard Lenz Jrgen Schreiber
bylynchsjhond
 
PPT
Green Economy
byJo Balucanag - Bitonio
 
PDF
A Handbook Of Sustainable Building Design And Engineering An Integrated Appro...
bycalfudayung
 
PPTX
Green economy
byMunish Sudan
 
PDF
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
bynoranafadvan27
 
PDF
36161850 go-green-initiative
byshrutigiri
 
PPTX
Green February 2010
byTimothy Holden
 
PPTX
Reduce Your Utility Costs seminar
byBusinessVictoria
 
PDF
Sustainable Building Design Lecture: Technical Aspects 2015, Aalto University...
byKen Dooley
 
PDF
Dawn of the Building Performance Era WP
byErin Grossi
 
PPTX
Green is the colour! May 2011
byTimothy Holden
 
PDF
Driving transformation-to-ee-buildings
byESTHHUB
 
PPTX
Business West - Go Green Workshop - Paintworks
byamievaughan
 
PDF
VET4SBO Level 1 module 5 - unit 1&2&3 - v1.0 en
byKarel Van Isacker
 
PDF
Dtz european sustainability guide (april 2013)
byWorld Office Forum
 
PDF
Unlocking the benefits of Energy Efficiency
byQs. Nahinga David
 
PDF
Green bling does it stack up camfil webinar
bySimply Marcomms
 
PDF
The Industry and Business Position
byInternational Energy Agency
 
Future challenges for sustainable development within the built environment Br...
byajmrfnwjsf1272
 
Sustainable Development In Chemical Engineering Innovative Technologies Vince...
bykahituyanik
 
Sustainable Building Services Bernhard Lenz Jrgen Schreiber
bylynchsjhond
 
Green Economy
byJo Balucanag - Bitonio
 
A Handbook Of Sustainable Building Design And Engineering An Integrated Appro...
bycalfudayung
 
Green economy
byMunish Sudan
 
Smart sustainable built environments 1st Edition Jay Yang
bynoranafadvan27
 
36161850 go-green-initiative
byshrutigiri
 
Green February 2010
byTimothy Holden
 
Reduce Your Utility Costs seminar
byBusinessVictoria
 
Sustainable Building Design Lecture: Technical Aspects 2015, Aalto University...
byKen Dooley
 
Dawn of the Building Performance Era WP
byErin Grossi
 
Green is the colour! May 2011
byTimothy Holden
 
Driving transformation-to-ee-buildings
byESTHHUB
 
Business West - Go Green Workshop - Paintworks
byamievaughan
 
VET4SBO Level 1 module 5 - unit 1&2&3 - v1.0 en
byKarel Van Isacker
 
Dtz european sustainability guide (april 2013)
byWorld Office Forum
 
Unlocking the benefits of Energy Efficiency
byQs. Nahinga David
 
Green bling does it stack up camfil webinar
bySimply Marcomms
 
The Industry and Business Position
byInternational Energy Agency
 

Recently uploaded

PPTX
Banking Company Accounts in Corporate Accounting .pptx
byDGayathiry
 
PPTX
GDG CU Google Cloud Study Jams 2025 Kickoff.pptx
byNamVr
 
PDF
Artificial Intelligence in Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning for ...
byNavid Nazhand
 
PPTX
business economics unit 3 production dr kanchan (1).pptx
byDr. Kanchan Kumari
 
PPTX
Isikhangisi .pptx....ukubaluleka kokwazi isikhangiso.
byKwanele28
 
PDF
SlideShare Presentation presentation about awareness
byrebomash573
 
PPTX
Week 2-Introduction to Indian Ethics.pptx
byRajshreeBeneymadoo
 
PPTX
Discharge procedure.................pptx
byAneetaSharma15
 
PDF
Get to know your EEG and MEG data - artifacts, segmenting, preprocessing
byRobert Oostenveld
 
PPTX
Implantable Drug Delivery Systems – Concepts, Types, and Applications
byseemashinde5197
 
PDF
47 ĐỀ CHÍNH THỨC THI CHỌN HỌC SINH GIỎI CÁC TỈNH MÔN TIẾNG ANH LỚP 8 THCS NĂM...
byNguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
PPTX
Admission Procedure.................pptx
byAneetaSharma15
 
PDF
Heat-Transfer-in-Nature.pdf/7th class new ncert/by k sandeep swamy/samyans ed...
bySandeep Swamy
 
PPTX
Prometheans finals ppt arambh.pptx
byPrometheans Quiz Club
 
PDF
20th C Landscape architects - Noguchi & Burle marx.pdf
byAr.Asna
 
PPTX
ZULU METHODOLOGY 3B MICRO LESSON PRESENTATION.pptx
bySiphokazi Ncobela
 
PDF
Pragya 6th Sense (P6S) – 4th Edition | Open General Flagship Quiz 2025
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
PDF
Hit The Homerun FINAl- A U25 sorts quiz of Jigisha 4.0 organized by Pragya, ...
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
PDF
Fandomania, an U25 Fandom and Pop-Culture Quiz under Jigisha 4.0
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
PDF
Auto Autorefractometer/ppt/notes/pdf.pdf
byAnmol Singh
 
Banking Company Accounts in Corporate Accounting .pptx
byDGayathiry
 
GDG CU Google Cloud Study Jams 2025 Kickoff.pptx
byNamVr
 
Artificial Intelligence in Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning for ...
byNavid Nazhand
 
business economics unit 3 production dr kanchan (1).pptx
byDr. Kanchan Kumari
 
Isikhangisi .pptx....ukubaluleka kokwazi isikhangiso.
byKwanele28
 
SlideShare Presentation presentation about awareness
byrebomash573
 
Week 2-Introduction to Indian Ethics.pptx
byRajshreeBeneymadoo
 
Discharge procedure.................pptx
byAneetaSharma15
 
Get to know your EEG and MEG data - artifacts, segmenting, preprocessing
byRobert Oostenveld
 
Implantable Drug Delivery Systems – Concepts, Types, and Applications
byseemashinde5197
 
47 ĐỀ CHÍNH THỨC THI CHỌN HỌC SINH GIỎI CÁC TỈNH MÔN TIẾNG ANH LỚP 8 THCS NĂM...
byNguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
Admission Procedure.................pptx
byAneetaSharma15
 
Heat-Transfer-in-Nature.pdf/7th class new ncert/by k sandeep swamy/samyans ed...
bySandeep Swamy
 
Prometheans finals ppt arambh.pptx
byPrometheans Quiz Club
 
20th C Landscape architects - Noguchi & Burle marx.pdf
byAr.Asna
 
ZULU METHODOLOGY 3B MICRO LESSON PRESENTATION.pptx
bySiphokazi Ncobela
 
Pragya 6th Sense (P6S) – 4th Edition | Open General Flagship Quiz 2025
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
Hit The Homerun FINAl- A U25 sorts quiz of Jigisha 4.0 organized by Pragya, ...
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
Fandomania, an U25 Fandom and Pop-Culture Quiz under Jigisha 4.0
byPragya - UEM Kolkata Quiz Club
 
Auto Autorefractometer/ppt/notes/pdf.pdf
byAnmol Singh
 

Delivering Sustainable Buildings An Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth

  • 1.
    Delivering Sustainable BuildingsAn Industry Insiders View Mike Malinaauth download https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-sustainable-buildings- an-industry-insiders-view-mike-malinaauth-4302798 Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com
  • 2.
    Here are somerecommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. Delivering Sustainable Growth In Africa African Farmers And Firms In A Changing World Takahiro Fukunishi Eds https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-sustainable-growth-in-africa- african-farmers-and-firms-in-a-changing-world-takahiro-fukunishi- eds-5379100 The Bioeconomy Delivering Sustainable Green Growth Viaggi Davide https://ebookbell.com/product/the-bioeconomy-delivering-sustainable- green-growth-viaggi-davide-9954748 Sustainable Value Chain Management Delivering Sustainability Through The Core Business 1st Edition Michael Dheur Eds https://ebookbell.com/product/sustainable-value-chain-management- delivering-sustainability-through-the-core-business-1st-edition- michael-dheur-eds-5053620 Delivering Development Globalizations Shoreline And The Road To A Sustainable Future Edward R Carr https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-development-globalizations- shoreline-and-the-road-to-a-sustainable-future-edward-r-carr-2390116
  • 3.
    Delivering Development GlobalizationsShoreline And The Road To A Sustainable Future Edward R Carr Auth https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-development-globalizations- shoreline-and-the-road-to-a-sustainable-future-edward-r-carr- auth-5364016 Future Carbon Fund Delivering Cobenefits For Sustainable Development 1st Edition Asian Development Bank https://ebookbell.com/product/future-carbon-fund-delivering- cobenefits-for-sustainable-development-1st-edition-asian-development- bank-51637958 Global State Of National Urban Policy 2021 Achieving Sustainable Development Goals And Delivering Climate Action Oecd https://ebookbell.com/product/global-state-of-national-urban- policy-2021-achieving-sustainable-development-goals-and-delivering- climate-action-oecd-35144660 The Purchasing Of Maintenance Service Delivery In The Dutch Social Housing Sector Optimising Commodity Strategies For Delivering Maintenance Services To Tenants Volume 17 Sustainable Urban Areas 1st Edition Jh Van Mossel https://ebookbell.com/product/the-purchasing-of-maintenance-service- delivery-in-the-dutch-social-housing-sector-optimising-commodity- strategies-for-delivering-maintenance-services-to-tenants- volume-17-sustainable-urban-areas-1st-edition-jh-van-mossel-2443080 Delivering Distinctive Value In Emerging Economies Efficient And Sustainably Responsible Perspectives Richard Boateng https://ebookbell.com/product/delivering-distinctive-value-in- emerging-economies-efficient-and-sustainably-responsible-perspectives- richard-boateng-46255942
  • 5.
  • 6.
    Delivering Sustainable Buildings anindustry insider’s view Mike Malina Director Energy Solutions Associates A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication
  • 7.
    This edition firstpublished 2013 © 2013 Mike Malina Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing program has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientific, Technical and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell. Registered Office John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK Editorial Offices 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK 2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Malina, Mike. Delivering sustainable buildings / Mike Malina. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4051-9417-4 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Sustainable building–Design and construction. I. Title. TH880.M35 2013 690.028′6–dc23 2012027832 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. Cover images courtesy of Mike Malina Cover design by Sandra Heath Set in 10/12pt Palatino by SPi Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India 1 2013
  • 8.
    v Foreword by TerryWyatt, Past President of CIBSE ix Preface xi About the book xxiii About the author xxv Dedication and Acknowledgements xxvii Glossary of abbreviations xxix Introduction 1 Early modelling and design (BIM) 1 Technologies and applications 7 References 11 Section 1 Sustainability in the wider context 13 1 Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma 15 Objectivity is the key 15 Rigorous standards and enforcement 17 Where will our energy come from in the future? 20 The leaky bucket! 23 References 24 2 Planning ahead – the role of planning authorities 25 A major influence? 25 Planning gain 27 The disconnect between building control and planning 29 The Merton rule 30 Training for planners and building control officers 32 Planning for the future 34 References 36 3 Legislative overview and meeting your legal obligations 37 Global targets and local actions 37 The European influence 38 Applying the EPBD in the UK 41 Continuous change – Part L 2010–2013–2016 and a new EPBD 43 Taking the energy performance of buildings to the next level 44 Legislation levels, change and enforcement – opinion 45 Joined-up government? 46 Looking forward 47 Enforcement 48 Some final thoughts 50 References 51 Contents
  • 9.
    vi Contents 4 Payingfor it – the finance question 53 Short-termism – damages sustainability 53 Funding for sustainable building projects 56 The cheapest kilowatt-hour is the one you never use! 59 What is the Green Deal? 61 References 65 Section 2 Delivering sustainable buildings 67 5 Delivering an energy-efficient and sustainable building 69 The wider design process – BREEAM 70 Learning from the manufacturing and car industry 72 Designing for sustainable communities 73 Where is the electricity coming from? 75 Dynamic demand control 76 Looking ahead 78 References 79 6 Managing energy and reducing its use 81 Energy is too cheap 81 Energy use and carbon taxes 82 Energy management must be integrated 83 The energy management process 85 Data is everything 85 Training, communication and education 89 The development of energy ratings 90 References 98 7 Water – a forgotten issue 99 Water and energy inexorably linked 99 Management of water in building services 106 Grey water and rainwater harvesting 109 Water and pipework infrastructure 111 References 113 8 Putting it together – the contractor’s role 115 Giving contractors room to work 115 The soft landings process 118 Towards proactive contracting 120 A sustainable future for contractors 121 Waste 125 Water 126 Adding value and opportunity 126 References 127 9 Main plant and building services – HVAC systems 129 Fixed thinking – assigned to the past 129 System design and application 131 Choice of heating systems 133 Ventilation 135
  • 10.
    Contents vii Air conditioningand comfort cooling 142 Bringing it all together 143 Further reading 144 10 Getting and keeping control – building energy management systems 145 BMS becomes BEMS and can save a lot more energy 146 Evaluating an existing BEMS 148 Degree day analysis 149 Defining good control strategies 152 Example control strategies 153 Upgrading the BEMS – the business case 155 Specifying a new BEMS 156 Continuous optimisation 158 The BEMS needs user involvement 159 References 159 11 Commissioning and handover for energy efficiency 161 What is commissioning? 164 The commissioning process 165 Regulations and standards for commissioning 174 References 174 12 Keeping it all going – the importance of maintenance to sustainability 175 Maintenance is fundamental 175 Is it worth the risk? 179 Thermal imaging – seeing in a different light 182 Application of thermal imaging to sustainable buildings 185 Linking sustainability and maintenance 195 References 199 Section 3 The human element 201 13 The skills challenge 203 Resurgence of skills 203 Case study – East of England skills challenge 204 Manufacturers and trade associations – role in training and skills 207 The green deal – implication on skills 209 References 212 14 Changing behaviours 213 Behaviour, attitudes and perceptions 213 Convenience and resistance to change 215 Getting it right from the start 216 Getting the workforce on board 218 References 219 15 Putting my own house in order 221 I had a dream 221 Jack of all trades 222
  • 11.
    viii Contents Greenfield orbrownfield 222 Architect and planner-talk to the planners 224 Specification, materials and construction 225 Skills and knowing your limitations 227 Mechanical and electrical 228 Sustainability dilemma 229 The future: improvement and continuous commissioning 230 References 231 Further information 232 16 Sharing our technology and expertise with the developed and developing world 233 The big picture 233 Sharing our expertise 235 What did the Romans do for us? 238 Business and exports 239 References 242 Further information 242 Conclusion – some big challenges ahead 243 Index 247
  • 12.
    ix It was byway of appreciating, in the 1980s, the dreadful consequences of manmade climate change that we soon came to realise that the real problems lay way beyond weather, and that solutions would require fundamental changes to the way we live on this planet. The title ‘sustainability’ was then coined, around the new millennium, as it seemed to encapsulate the basis for the changes needed. As building engineers, we quickly saw that the major responsibility for the problem lay with our product, with buildings producing over half of the ‘climate changing’ carbon emissions, using large quantities of raw materials and throwing away disproportionate amounts to waste. Put simply, we had to do more, much more, with less, far, far less. The consequences of failure are beyond imagining, threatening the very existence of a future for mankind. We saw the new millennium as a time of ‘the calm before the storm’, a period having the ‘luxury’ of both the time and the money to plan, organise and invest cost-effectively in solutions and a new order of society. A decade on, and a clear sight of the looming storm is upon us, as greedy global financial activity has brought us to the verge of bankruptcy and we can only lament how little we’ve taken advantage of ‘the calm’, when we had the means to make progress, and how it’s now so much harder to do so, with higher costs and our economies in tatters. Yet already it’s becoming clear that lessons have, even now, not been learned and solutions to economic woes are once again being sought through growth (a concept idolised too often in commercial circles), which solution is but an illusion when based, as it is, on more consumption. This is the very opposite of sustainability, where the solution comes via ‘creation’ through the capture of incoming energy and efficiency in its use, and its distribution for the good of everyone. So it is that we now see money being printed, in billions, to enable more consumption and more wastage, while sustainability is being side-lined, with its ‘creative potential’ for real growth being sacrificed. Well, we homed-in, a decade ago, on what we had to do and now it’s crucial that we let nothing deter us from pursuing those objectives with the added help from more recent discoveries whose potential could help us catch up on lost time. Scroll forward a decade and it should be inconceivable that a building would be engineered in any way that: „ requires fossil fuel, or nuclear power, to keep it comfortable to be in (instead recovered heat should warm ventilating air and domestic hot water, insulation and airtightness eliminate fabric heat losses and minimise, with the aid of shading, unwanted gains) Foreword
  • 13.
    „ does nothave adequate day-lighting and efficient, effective lighting facilities „ is not equipped with ‘super smart metering’ that automatically adjusts electrical demand to match the most efficient available supply „ does not employ its facade and its surrounds to capture and convert the potential of solar energy – this ranges from the simplest warming from winter sunshine, through solar thermal panels for heating water and air, and on to PV for the electricity to power indoor appliances. Many, by then, should be producing considerably more energy than they have direct need of, enabling export and power for transportation. This will also come from employing plants or algae on, or in, the facades and surrounds (100 trillion watts are captured in flower nectar each year) „ is not constructed from at least 50% recycled materials and fabricated in off-site factories as low wastage, pre-tested, modules ready for ‘plug-and- play’ assembly at site. Having first met Mike at the CIBSE/ASHRAE conference in Edinburgh in 2003, I’ve witnessed and admired his enthusiasm and determination over the pursuit of sustainability for the engineering of buildings in particular. Now, with sustainability appreciated as an imperative for the future of mankind, the need for a host of ‘Mikes’ and the global dissemination of their message and knowhow, becomes paramount. His book gives us much to dwell on and also offers a great deal of useful advice on how to respond to the challenge. Terry Wyatt, Past President CIBSE x Foreword
  • 14.
    xi Most worthwhile booksare the product of a long period of reflection, often spanning many years. I can trace the journey that led to this work, which seeks to make a small contribution to bridging the gap between the wider issues of sustainability and the key role of sustainable building services engineering, back to my childhood. For many, the environmental and energy performance of the built environment and many of the services crucial to this process; such as pumps, fans and ductwork systems; is less well understood, and the immediate connections are not made to wider environmental and sustainability considerations. What often gets priority is finance and cost factors, which are important and are the primary drivers for many. For me, this attempt to bring together approaches to building services engineering with sustainability – without doubt, the most pressing challenge to face present and future generations – is the culmination of an eclectic range of interests which has shaped my career and life to date. Given the importance of the subject matter, it seems strange to me that so little has so far been written with a holistic view of both the wider environ- mental links and sustainable building services engineering. Much has been written about ‘green issues’ and there is a veritable library of handbooks and texts on building services, but to the best of my knowledge this is the first full-length work devoted solely to bringing these important subjects together. There are many environmentalists, ecologists and ‘new sustainability experts’ as well as, of course, many building services engineers, but there are very few who cross the divide and work with both disciplines. Therefore, this process has been largely about bridging a chasm to make new connections, and the journey that brought me to do this started long ago. It began with an early interest in earth sciences. Anything in, or under and above, the earth was a source of fascination to me. As a child, I would seize any opportunity to dig holes, explore new sites of interest or discover more about the world around me. This interest was always eclectic. I was as intrigued by soil composition – and the invertebrates that inhabited it – as I was by the constellations above us. Microscopic organisms were as absorbing as oak trees, and pebbles as intriguing as the stars. Geology and cosmology held equal sway. In 1969, at the age of eight, I found my first fossil. This was during an age of rapid and radical social change, but my personal epiphany at that time was all about the past. How did that shell get ‘frozen’ forever in that piece of ancient limestone? What kind of world had it once inhabited? I started collecting rocks and fossils, and the discovery also fostered a wider engage- ment with history. The prehistoric, geologically captured world of fossils held my imagination, and I also benefitted from the teaching of a great-aunt who, in those far-off days when we were largely innocent of the strictures of health Preface
  • 15.
    xii Preface and safety,would take me on trips to explore quarries. I still have many of the rocks and fossils we found. It all fired my enthusiasm for learning about the natural world. My aunt also encouraged a parallel interest in the more recent past, as revealed by the archaeological record, and I participated in a number of archaeological rescue digs from the age of 12. Was there no limit to what the earth could teach us? Accordingly, my interests at school were centred around history, geography biology and what was then craft, design and technology, and as these were the subjects that engrossed me, these were the areas where I did well. The wider world was also brought home to me as my Dad had served in the Royal Navy in WWII and had covered half the globe travelling to many exotic places. His stories and recollections inspired me to find out more about the geography and history connected to these events. At the same time as my aunt was risking life and limb to help me extract ammonites from abandoned quarries, I was also influenced by my older brother’s nascent career in electronic engineering. A good eight years older than me, he introduced me to circuit boards, switches and components. This, my first exposure to the world of technology, led me to speculatively dismantle many items to see if they could be successfully reassembled. I was an inquisitive child, and also quite a determined one – I couldn’t accept that broken things couldn’t be fixed again. Looking back, I think that this time was also the point where the crossover between an interest in the natural world and my parallel interest in things technological began. Rather than seeing technol- ogy as a universal solution to all challenges, I was not very old when I first realised that most of our engineered solutions are miserably clumsy compared to those refined by nature over millennia. As a fully paid-up Darwinist, I don’t see the wonders of nature as the creation of a higher power, but as answers to evolutionary challenges. I have long recognised that the natural world has developed all of the most elegant solutions to the problems posed by the constraints of our physical environment. We create poor copies by comparison. As such, I think I have always recognised the need to safeguard these amazing natural achievements rather than stifle them with the by-products of our own attempts at progress. Not least, we need to do this because we can learn so much from the natural processes around us, as nature’s experience is way in excess of our own. Its engineering through trial and error has produced the most amazing things, and we need to base our own future solutions on our improved understanding of these structures and processes. I never doubted that such advances were possible. Growing up in the sixties and early seventies meant living through a time of progress and opti- mism, when many momentous things seemed to be achievable. Between the ages of 9 and 11, from 1969 to 1972, I was allowed to stay up to watch the Apollo programme moon landings. The buzz and excitement around the events were palpable, and had a massive effect on many young children at the time. I became an avid collector of newspaper cuttings, which at the time were assuring us all that by 2000 we would have bases on the moon, and would perhaps even have been to Mars. I remember the first time that I saw the famous, now iconic, image of the astronauts looking back at the earth. It was the first time the earth had been seen pictured from afar; now that pictures of
  • 16.
    Preface xiii the earthfrom space are commonplace, it is hard to remember what impact it had. The moon landings were arguably the crowning achievement of the age, and yet their defining image is a stark reminder of our finite place in the universe. Humanity was, we must remember, driven to conquer the moon by the relentless international competition bred by the cold war, and so it was essentially an extension of the arms race. Peace was a fragile commodity back then, but the race to the moon brought us a reminder that the world, which could it seemed have been engulfed by war at any time, was but one small globe in an infinity of space. It also emphasised just what could be done with the political and technical will to achieve the most difficult of tasks. It seems fitting, then, that 1972 also brought the first international conference on the environment, the Stockholm Conference. Despite my tender years at the time, I feel a personal connection with that event. My mother was an avid ama- teur radio enthusiast, and in particular an adherent of DXing. For the uniniti- ated, DXing (the name comes from DX, which is telegraphic shorthand for ‘distance’) is the practice of tuning into distant radio stations. Listeners would send in reception reports to these far-off stations, and the convention was that they would receive what was known as a QSL card in reply, which acted as a confirmation of the broadcast and an acknowledgement from the station of an accurate reception report. In the days, when there were a limited number of radio stations, and only three terrestrial television stations, this was a way to broaden one’s entertainment and knowledge options by discovering a myriad of English language broadcasts from round the world. Many of the broadcasts thatmymotherlistenedtoandreportedonwerefromtheStockholmConference, and its reporting by many stations around the world. She duly received a certificate from Radio Sweden and numerous QSL cards acknowledging her detailed participation in this important event. I can remember these broadcasts quite well, and they were the first mention I can recall of things that now domi- nate the agenda, such as the balance between resources and population. (This was long before the internet, when short wave was the only way of listening to foreign radio.) Just as the photograph from the moon had suggested, it seemed that the earth really was self-contained, and the resources that were present on it were finite and therefore very important to conserve and use wisely. This interest in environmental issues was reawakened in 1977. By then I was 16, and was in Wales with a cousin on my first independent holiday trip. Travelling round various youth hostels, on one of our journeys we stopped at the Centre for Alternative Technology in Machynlleth, which had only just opened. The technologies immediately grabbed my interest. There were demonstrations of solar panels, wind turbines and hydroelectric power, and information on ecological processes and techniques such as composting and recycling. These are all commonplace now, but they were pioneering in 1977. Again, I had found something that sparked my curiosity. It reinforced my earlier interest in engineering and the wider environment, and also prompted me to join Friends of the Earth. I spent time wondering why we live in such a wasteful society, and why more people weren’t involved in the effort towards sustainable living. I read Lovelock’s work on the Gaia theory, the proposition that the whole earth is one enormous living organism, in the
  • 17.
    xiv Preface sense thatall processes are interlocked and the earth is constantly moving in interwoven cycles. Combining my early love of rocks and fossils with my growing interest in engineering, I went on to study geology, technology and engineering. My first job was actually in the oil industry working offshore. It took me round the world. I saw West Africa and the Middle East. Looking back, it wasn’t perhaps the best career for a budding environmentalist, but then again it grounded me in reality, provided me with industrial experience and taught me self-reliance. You have to find a very practical and anchored way of living in order to sur- vive offshore, without all the available land-based support systems. It gave me my first taste of finding my own solutions, of repairing and even making my own equipment when things broke. Offshore life also brings a huge amount of work, downtime and rest, with 12 hour shifts and tours of 3–4 weeks working 7 days solid. It’s very much a case of work hard, play hard. You can only spend so much time eating, fishing and watching videos, but the rest of the expanse of spare time was, for me, spent in reading and contem- plation. It was then I decided that one day I would build my own house and I spent time considering designs and specifications. This would, one day, become another opportunity for practical problem-solving, and a new perspective on the environmental issues that preoccupied me. Before that could happen however, I had to change career. The oil exploration industry went into recession, and I moved into energy manage- ment and traditional building services. I spent time in both the private and public sectors. This culminated in a job working for a building services com- missioning specialist company, Commtech, where I headed up the energy division, often focusing on building energy audits and also working as a commissioning manager on some large projects. I stayed there until I founded my own business, Energy Solutions Associates, in 2007. In my spare time, I made my dreams a reality and built my own house in 2000. What finally made me decide to do it was a family holiday to Canada in 1998. In Canada, I noticed how many good-quality self-build houses there were. It could clearly be done. So, when we got back to the UK, I started looking round for a suitable site. I found an old bungalow in Suffolk, which was quite literally falling down, and so I knocked it down and built my house on its footprint. Sticking to my environmental principles, I was able to reuse a significant amount of the footings and saved many of the materials. I recovered a lot of the timbers and bricks. Any material that would otherwise have gone to landfill was hand separated to be crushed and used as recycled aggregate for the building over-site and a local farmer’s track. In short, I tried to be as low impact as pos- sible, although in reality there is no such thing at present as a carbon neutral build. It’s more a case of minimising impact and trying to be as low carbon and efficient as realistically possible. Still, minimising the impact was made both in an economic and an environmental sense. By utilising what was there before and using off-site construction techniques, it came in on time and on budget. All extra timber came from stewarded forested sources, and the house was also designed to be way above the Building Regulations (2000) in terms of thermal efficiency. It was also built to have accessible services and easier
  • 18.
    Preface xv maintenance, whereyou can get to the pipe and cable runs. That means that I can alter things when I want to and enables me to upgrade technology as it develops and becomes more economic. For example, the mechanical thermo- stats have now been replaced with electronic ones, enabling all the rooms to have individual time and temperature control via under-floor heating,powered by a heat pump. Overall, we have roughly half the fuel bills of a traditional house of the same size. (See Chapter 15 for the details and the whole story.) As an engineer and environmentalist, I try to practise what I preach. I still drive a car – I’m a realist, not a fundamentalist, and I live in a very rural area so I need it – but it has a small one-litre engine, so I minimise my impact and save money at the same time. For me, it’s all about common sense. Why waste money and resources? These real-life experiences are the credentials I bring to this book, along with my years in building services engineering. In my professional life, I haven’t just worked to deliver energy management design and audits: I’m also a member of the regional committee of CIBSE and am regularly employed to give high-level training to my fellow engineers. I chair the Eastern region SummitSkills group (our sector skills council) as well as Sustainable Built Environment East, a unique group comprising all the major professional and trade associations in the building sector, in the east of England. All these years later, however, I’m still influenced by the ideas and experiences of my youth, in particular James Lovelock on Gaia theory. This has influenced and formed that basis of my beliefs as an environmentalist. I’m both an engineer who became an environmentalist and an environmentalist who became an engineer. I still hold that by upsetting the balance of the earth, we are threatening our survival as a species. Everything we do has an impact. In the second decade of 21st century, our overriding issues are about world popu- lation growth, and the almost inevitable end of fossil fuels en masse, which we are set to see in our lifetime. There is pressure on water resources and food production, and also on mineral resources. Because of all these happenings, we are having a direct impact on our climate. As humans, we see things in short periods, because we are only seeing things across our lifetime. But if we take a holistic view, and examine what has happened to our planet over millennia, we find proven scientific facts from peer-reviewed data. Extremes in tempera- tures and climatic change have happened before, but always through natural processes. Modern humans originated in Africa some 195,000 years ago and then migrated to the rest of the world starting around 60,000 years ago (National Geographic 2007); but our real significant impact on the planet only started around 150 years ago, as the technologies of the industrial revolution were exported around the world. Remember, the original industrial revolution was a British-led affair, and as such its impact was relatively limited. As the rest of the world industrialised, the impact began to accumulate. In the future, it should be noted, full industrialisation in China and India, given their massive populations and potential for economic growth, they could yet make our impact to date appear minor in comparison. There are so many studies and graphs published showing varying degrees of evidence for climate change and the links with our industrial activities. For me, the following graphs say it all.
  • 19.
    xvi Preface We cansee the evidence for the dramatic rise in greenhouse gases in such a short period, and I am convinced it is still accelerating, as year on year meas- urements continue to see the levels rise (NOAA 2012). It’s no coincidence that the rapid rise in the production and use of fossil fuels between 1800 and the present, shows a startling correlation to the rapid rise of greenhouse gases over the same time span. Because of this, within my current professional role as a building services, energy and sustainability specialist, I see sustainability as fundamental to everything I do. I see my role as not just about making things work, but about influencing others to see why we need to do things in a certain way. The current inequality of resourcing is inexcusable. People often mistakenly believe that it’s about saving the planet. It’s not. The planet is fine, and will survive perfectly without us, as it’s always done. It’s us, the human race, that we’ve got to save. If we look back through the historical record etched into our rocks and soils, we can see all through geological time a series of mass extinctions. The most famous was the dinosaurs, but there were also others, through various climatic changes. Some were caused by super- volcanoes, extra-terrestrial impacts and some by shifts in the earth’s axis and rotation or sea-level rises. Whatever the causes, there have always been rapid and profound changes. We are going through a profound – if largely unremarked upon – change at the moment. When you listen to scientists and naturalists, you hear the warning that we are going through one of those phases of mass extinctions of species. This hasn’t happened because of a volcano. This is happening because of us. In his television series ‘State of the planet’ Sir David Attenborough examined the main causes of damage 0 500 1000 Year 1500 2000 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Carbon dioxode (CO2) Methane (CH4) Nitrous oxide (N2O) 400 350 300 CO 2 (ppm), N 2 O (ppb) CH 4 (ppb) 250 Concentrations of greenhouse gases from 0 to 2005 Figure 1 Graph showing concentrations of greenhouse gases from year 0 to 2005 (IPCC 2007)
  • 20.
    Preface xvii to thenatural world produced by humans, pointing out that up to 50% of the species on this planet could disappear during this century unless we make radical changes to the way we use resources. If we fail, he argues, we will have made a radical and irrevocable change to all future life on this planet. Attenborough also made a BBC Horizon Special ‘How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?’ This is compelling viewing and I would recom- mend it to everyone. This book cannot attempt to solve or fully discuss these global issues, but we do need to bear in mind that we can’t do what we do in our work in isolation. This book is about what we can do in the building services and the facilities management professional spheres. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if you believe in climate change or not, because it makes business, economic and practical sense to run buildings as efficiently as possible. What makes people tick? For me, it’s a passionate belief in getting things right and protecting the environment as much as a pragmatist can, but I recognise that not every- one is as passionate as me on these issues. Nonetheless, we all want to save money and resources. If I can help you save money, and it also benefits the environment, then who’s going to argue with that? References IPCC (2007), Graph showing Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases from year 0 to 2005 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2007 (AR4) http://www.ipcc.ch/ graphics/ar4-wg1/jpg/faq-2–1-fig-1.jpg (accessed 13.8.2012) MacKay, David JC (2008) ‘Without hot air’ UIT Cambridge National Geographic, January 2007 NOAA (2012) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Monthly data Atmospheric CO2 at Mauna Loa Observatory, March 1958 – February 2012 ftp://ftp. cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt (accessed 13.8.2012) ‘State of the planet’ (2004) DVD – PAL BBC 1400 1600 1800 2000 Saudi oil U K c o a l W o r l d c o a l World oil World total 1000 1200 10 1 0.1 GtCO 2 per year Figure 2 The Industrial Revolution – Fossil fuel production from 1800 to 2000 (Mackay 2008)
  • 21.
    xviii Preface Highly recommendedviewing BBC Horizon Special ‘How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?’ (2009) http:// topdocumentaryfilms.com/how-many-people-can-live-on-planet-earth/ (accessed 13.8.2012)
  • 22.
    Preface xix Figure AThe first international conference on the environment, the Stockholm Conference 1972 – Sylvia Malina’s certificate
  • 23.
    xx Preface Figure BMy early interest in renewable energy took me to Burgar Hill, Orkney, in 1986, the site of the UK’s largest experimental wind turbine at that time
  • 24.
    Preface xxi Figure CThis cartoon has followed me from 1979 – student days – and acts as a light- hearted reminder of what happens if we get sustainability wrong (Reproduced by kind permission of ‘Brick’ – www.brickbats.co.uk) ‘To Let – Suit Ambitious Amoeba’
  • 25.
    xxiii About the book Whatis this book about and who is it for? Anyone who is interested in bridging the gap between the wider sustainability debate and the technical issues of building services engineering, in delivering a sustainable built environment should read this book. It will tell you what you need to know to fulfil current legal requirements, but much more than this it will make you think about the wider long-term issues and how, in order to prepare for future challenges, we need to have an understanding of the ‘bigger picture’. My aim is to highlight the current issues around sustainability and energy use, looking at what is going wrong in the present system and suggesting some potential solutions. I also want to encourage debate among profession- als in the field, people who understand the day-to-day realities of working in the construction and building services industry or of managing a building. It is not designed to be a textbook, as you can get this from the excellent resources provided by BSRIA, B&ESA, CIBSE, ECA, etc. This book is very much a personal view, deriving from many years of experience within the industry and an even longer time being genuinely fascinated by the world and how it works, from the interconnected workings of the natural world to the vagaries of the political system and financial mar- kets. I want people to read this book and believe that energy efficiency is both possible and desirable and that it will not happen by technological advance alone; it will require personal understanding and shared responsibility. Education and awareness is a vital component. Getting it right will make organisations more efficient and save them money. Getting it wrong is not an option. After all, if you can save money, lessen your environmental impact and address the crucial issues of climate change and resource sustainability, who is going to argue with that?
  • 26.
    xxv Mike Malina isthe founder and director of Energy Solutions Associates, which is a building services engineering practice that works in the field of sustainable engineering, energy management and training. He has 30 years related experience, working at the start of his career in the offshore oil industry, then working in both the public and private sectors in related buildings and services sector. He is the principal trainer for the Building & Engineering Services Association (formally HVCA), Building Regulations Competent Persons Certification scheme for commercial and domestic HVACR work. Over many years Mike has conducted hundreds of building energy audits and has never failed to find ways to save energy. In 2010 he won the HVR Consultant of the Year award and in 2011 the Innovation and Sustainability Outstanding Contribution to the Industry award. In a voluntary capacity he serves as the chair of SummitSkills East and chair of Sustainable Built Environment East. He is also a member of the CIBSE Eastern Region Committee. About the author
  • 27.
    xxvii Dedication To all myfamily – past, present and future. Acknowledgements This book is the result of the many hours of dialogue with many people throughout the building services industry and beyond. My thanks to all of them – you know who you are. Indeed many have helped, but it would be somewhat ungracious not to acknowledge a few people by name. In no particular order, I’d like to thank, Terry Wyatt, Bob Blake, Roger Clark, Cath Hassell, Roger Carlin, Nick Ward, Ant Wilson, Rod Pettigrew, Karen Fletcher, Uly Ma, Richard Brown, Ian Ellis, Dean Clackett, Dave Mervin and Lucien Dop. I’d like to particularly thank my wife Sue for her support and encourage- ment throughout this project and to Caroline Collier for her patience and keeping me on track in the writing and production of this book. Mike Malina, March 2012 ‘In the realm of ideas everything depends on enthusiasm; In the real world, all rests on perseverance.’ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Writer, biologist, theoretical physicist and polymath. 1749–1832
  • 28.
    xxix Glossary of abbreviations AAAutomobile Association ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers AHU air handling unit BAP biodiversity action plan B&ES Building and Engineering Services Association BIFM British Institute of Facilities Management BIS (Department for) Business, Innovation and Skills BRE Building Research Establishment BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method BSRIA Building Services Research and Information Association CCC Committee on Climate Change CDM Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 CIBSE Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers CSA Commissioning Specialists Association CSR corporate social responsibility DECC Department of Energy & Climate Change DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DTI Department of Trade and Industry (now called BIS) ECA Electrical Contractors Association EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive EU European Union FCU fan coil unit FM facilities manager/ment HVAC heating, ventilation, air conditioning HVCA Heating and Ventilating Contractors Association (Now the B&ES) ICE Institute of Civil Engineers IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LCT low carbon technology LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design NGO non-governmental organisation PII Partners in Innovation scheme – a DTI scheme RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects RICS Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors ROI return on investment SBEE Sustainable Built Environment East
  • 29.
    xxx Glossary ofabbreviations SDC Sustainable Development Commission TCPA Town and Country Planning Association UKAS UK Accreditation Service UNFCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
  • 30.
    Delivering Sustainable Buildings:an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 1 This publication is not just another technical tome about sustainable building design; this is a book about reducing costs and saving money in the long term. In particular, it’s about reducing the whole life costs of a building, and therefore reducing the overall cost of ownership. The bonus, of course, is a reduced carbon impact and greater energy efficiency. Building services are not the first things that we notice when we look at a building. What most people see is an impressive facade, or perhaps the shape of an architecturally interesting roof. It’s easy to forget that all that is merely a shell without the components which make a building fit for function and occupation. A building is useless, even as a warehouse, without building services such as heating, ventilation, air handling, light and power. These services are an integral and vital part of the building. They are also central to its energy-efficient operation. Early modelling and design (BIM) It makes sense that these services are considered from the earliest possible stage in the design. You need good-quality engineering if you want an efficient and optimally performing building, and it has to be planned for from the outset. Too often this is where things go wrong and important opportunities for saving energy and reducing carbon emissions are missed. Buildings represent 40% of the world’s energy consumption (IEA 2002) and energy accounts for 40% of the actual building operation cost (Carbon Trust 2012). These figures can vary, but it will certainly be a significant sum. If services are developed as an afterthought, which they often are, the building will almost inevitably cost more to run, both financially and environmentally. Encouraging the design team to work more closely together is challenging. However, building information modelling (BIM) is a software tool that is helping to encourage greater cooperation in construction teams. It can also be seen as a tool to encourage and promote a more sustainable and cost- effective way to deliver sustainable buildings. BIM applies software systems to evaluate and maximise the efficiency of the project construction. It works as the foundation for collaboration in design and construction, to ensure that Introduction
  • 31.
    2 Introduction project stakeholdersincluding client, architects, consultants, contractors and facilities managers have access to a collective system that includes all the details of the projects design, specification, materials, project plan and costs. As part of the process BIM will produce a 3D model of the project. The industry will see BIM become more commonplace over the next few years and this has already been identified by the UK government as an important part of its construction strategy, which it published in May 2011 (GCS 2011). The government identifies a 20% improvement in efficiency of construction using BIM, and has stated that it intends this method to be phased in for all government contracts by 2016. Figure Acan help us think about project timings and their impact on design and construction costs (MacLeamy 2005). The project timeline runs across the horizontal axis, while effort, cost and effect are shown on the vertical axis. If services are considered at the start, you get the maximum impact and effect. As the process goes on, however, it becomes more difficult to influence the changes without problems and excessive costs. The first line shows the positive results of designing in services early, with the ability to gain maximum influence on cost and performance. The second line illustrates the cost of changes. We can see that costs rise significantly, as other factors become set in stone and the physical reality of the building makes alterations more challenging. If you are trying to save money, late changes will work against you. Line three represents the traditional decision-making process, representing the majority of projects as they have been conducted up until recently. As we can see, this does not happen as early as would be optimal, so costs can spiral and everything happens late within the construction process. Ability to impact cost and performance Cost of design changes Conventional project working Using BIM for the project Operation 4 3 2 1 2 Construction Construction documentation Effect / Cost / Effort Time 3 4 Detailed design Preliminary design 1 Figure A Design costs, impacts and influence on project timeline (MacLeamy 2005)
  • 32.
    Introduction 3 In contrast,line four shows a robust design process, using BIM, which models everything before the start of the project. In this model, building services have significant early influence, meaning that both effort and reward come early in the process and the team can head off the majority of problems from the start. The later things happen, on the other hand, the bigger the impact on costs and potential delays. The same pattern also holds true for refurbishment projects. The more thought and effort that is put into early planning, the better. With the process of BIM, both the costs of the project will be lower than conventional methods as well as the whole quality of the project’s delivery. Costs tend to override everything in construction, particularly in hard economic times, but the mindset of the industry needs to change to the point where it realises that just a little bit more thought and early intervention will pay massive dividends for the future. Savings on operating costs and handover will actually have the biggest impact of all, since the energy consumed over the lifetime of a building is phenomenal. The other factor that will become an increasingly important issue for the future is embodied energy. This will probably be included in the total lifecycle calculations and added to the operational energy measurement of the building. So, what constrains progress? Of course, a major issue is that often when a client wants a building, it’s not actually for their own use. The client may be a developer. Therefore, they have no obvious incentive to consider whole life costs. Legislation in this area is developing however, to tighten up the process and address this issue. There is also the growing role of corporate social respon- sibility (CSR). As a society, we have to be more realistic about the sustainability of the world we are creating and influencing. If concerns about the future of the planet are not sufficient motivation, the other factor that developers should realise is that they will get a better return on investment (ROI) on a building that will operate efficiently over its lifetime. Lower operating costs equate to significant added value for a building’s occupants. In a buyers’ market, those buildings that can demonstrate a higher level of energy-efficient performance will be more attractive. Some of the larger developers and estate agents are starting to realise that this is in their interest, particularly at the time of writing when there is a glut of office space, with buildings lying empty. Low-efficiency buildings can’t be marketed, whereas higher-efficiency buildings can. If a client is planning to occupy a building themselves, there is obviously a clear incentive for them to specify a building which will run efficiently. Despite all this, until very recently architects tended to have little under- standing of building services. In this situation, it almost inevitably becomes a bolt-on. It is vital for architects to talk to consulting engineers and to the designers of mechanical and electrical (M&E) building services. Unfortunately, because of the way the construction process has traditionally worked, the M&E engineers sometimes arrive on site with a bare minimum of informa- tion, and have to design services in a short time. They will then have to do their best to fit these into an already constructed environment. This means that you can end up with a ridiculous situation, with the engineers trying to work with drawings that don’t bear any relation to what exists on site.
  • 33.
    4 Introduction For instance,the ductwork, in the drawings, looks as though it could be straight, but when the engineer arrives, they find it actually has to bend around numerous architectural features. This extra strain on the system will make the ductwork less efficient, and there will be a knock-on effect. The engi- neers will have to redesign the services to cope with all this extra resistance. This might mean bigger fans or motors in air handling units, which consume more energy and therefore cost more to run. This is a simple example of how, because the services were not thought out early, a building can be delayed and become more expensive to operate. Going back to Figure A, having to change things late means that the engineers have less influence, and the effect from their effort goes down. This needs to be addressed, because the majority of construction projects currently suffer from problems of this type. Changing the current modus operandi in the face of the real financial and time constraints, which are inherent in the industry, will take a lot of effort and education. Just as politicians look no further than re-election, some construction professionals look no further than the next job. The industry needs to develop a longer-term vision – as, indeed, does society as a whole. The construction industry needs to nurture a sense of pride in its work and outputs, to remember that it is creating buildings which will stand for generations. These buildings do not only need to be aesthetically pleasing, they need to work efficiently. Despite this, the notion of checking that everything is working and that the new owners are happy beyond the handover is very new. Contractors, including M&E engineers, are not usually looking beyond installation. Nonetheless, if the industry is to deliver the products society needs to meet the challenges of the 21st century, it is vital to look at how things are performing and to find out whether the people using the building are satisfied with it. Construction professionals have to create a usable and integrated environment that will work for its occupants. Ultimately, a functional, calibrated building is less costly. Not only that, but studies have shown (Heerwagen 2000) that workers perform better in well-functioning buildings.Apleasant working environment therefore creates value in more ways than one. People are more productive if their premises are well commissioned, maintained and operated. Currently, if we talk to people actually using buildings, are they happy? In my experience as a consultant, I have found that when asked this question, a lot of people say no. They often feel that they have no control over their environment. There is currently a debate about how much control of their environment people should have. Some engineers and designers would like to automate everything. They like the idea of taking decisions out of people’s hands and relying on technology for regulation, but this may not always work. In practice, people can feel alienated if they feel they have no control over their surroundings. But, at the other extreme, too much control in inexperienced hands can throw the system out. Historically, building service engineers have not liked the idea of ordinary people interfering with building controls. There have been instances of placebo controls being installed; dummy thermostats, for example, that look
  • 34.
    Introduction 5 and feellike the real thing (in fact, they are the real thing – they’re just not connected) make people think they have that all-important control. There has been some evidence to show that because people can adjust these fake controls they feel more in control of their environment. Another instance of this approach to occupant perception is an occasion where people in an office requested more natural daylight-coloured lighting. As there was no budget for it, the building’s facilities team cleaned the light fittings over a weekend instead. Coming in on Monday morning, occupants had the perception that the light fittings had been changed, and were satisfied. With care, psychology can be used to impact on how people interact with, and understand, their environment, but it is certainly a dangerous game. It’s generally far better to explain circumstances honestly. If building users were educated better, they would come to understand what is physically possible. Creating a satisfactory environment is also about good housekeeping. That means that commissioning and maintenance are not the only issues engineers have to think about. They also need to make a big effort to explain to users what they can achieve in local operation. If an environment is operated incorrectly, users can effectively destroy its set-up. All too often, people fiddle with controls that they don’t know how to use. For instance, there might be a unit on the wall for the air conditioning, or a handheld set of controls. People often don’t fully understand these controls. They might use them to raise and lower the temperature, but do they ever reset it? Too often, common sense deserts building users if they find they can’t control the environment effectively with the controls. What they often do is physically open the windows. This is tantamount to throwing money down the drain. To achieve optimum results, there has to be a compromise to achieve the best of an automated system while still leaving occupants feeling that they are involved. Success here requires a culture of trust between the designer, the building services engineer and the building users. I believe that the only way for this to be done is through good design, operation and commissioning, supported by effective training and handover. If all these are carried out cor- rectly, the building will operate efficiently and people will feel that they have more ownership of their own environments. This is a debate that needs to be thoroughly explored within the building services industry. There is also the issue that people today generally have very high expectations; sometimes these expectations are too high. After all, technology can only do so much and people need to understand what it can and can’t do. Air conditioning, for example, is a catch-all term. A lot of buildings have localised comfort cooling. This is termed ‘air conditioning’, so people expect almost magical control over their environment, but often all it does is physically cool the air. It’s just a localised intervention, and people have little control over it. Also, different people have different perceptions. Some people feel the cold more than others, and people with different perceptions of heat share the same offices up and down the country. People also often forget to dress for the weather, working in clothes that defy common sense. People come to work in
  • 35.
    6 Introduction sleeveless shirtsin winter and expect to be kept warm, and then do the opposite in summer. Due to design issues and energy consumption, this is not always physically possible. If buildings are not commissioned and maintained properly they will have ‘starved’ systems. In effect, one end of the building is hot, while one end is cold and what you end up with is system that is not balanced properly. Where it can’t reach a comfortable temperature, people bring in electric heaters. This of course creates more energy consumption and puts a strain on the electrical load, raising numerous other safety issues. While this is going on, at the other end of the building where all the resources are being used, the system overheats and people open windows. This situation is all too common, and can even happen with a brand new system. The reason for this failure is poor commissioning. This could be alleviated by a good building services explanation and handover, and investing in the processes of continuous commissioning. Returning to the diagram in Figure A, which shows effect and effort, you could equally apply a compressed version of this illustration to the commis- sioning and handover. Once again, you could have a fantastic building that’s designed to the highest standards, but unless it’s commissioned and handed over to the users properly, all the construction effort is a waste of time. A useful analogy is to think of a car. It might look nice and run OK, but if the engine is not tuned, it won’t run properly. In the same way, you need to think about fine-tuning building services early in the handover process. Using another aspect of the car analogy, when you learn to drive, you learn how to use the gears. You learn not ot push your revs over a certain level and not to go hard on the gas. It’s only later that you develop bad habits. In the first place, you aim to pass your test and do everything perfectly. Unfortunately, most building users have never even been taught to ‘drive’ their building in the first place. But there is a sense in which you should learn to drive your building. If you drive efficiently, if you use the gears appropri- ately, you will spend less money and there will be less wear and tear. Well maintained and calibrated buildings are also more efficient, because they don’t waste heat, light and energy in air movement. It places less strain on a building’s resources, and is also good for maintenance. Unfortunately, as with driving, people pick up bad habits. They get lazy. We all take things for granted, and it’s all too easy to come into work in the morning and just flick all the switches on. People automatically turn the heating on or up without really thinking, or leave in the evening without switching everything off. Computers and lights are routinely left on all night. Even if the lights are on a timer, that timer may well not have been altered when the clocks changed. The consequences are just the same as if we neglect a car, and forget to check the air pressure, oil and water. Of course, not all occupants need to do all the checks. However, like the passengers in a car, theyhaveavestedinterestinthebuildingworkingtoitsoptimumperformance. A wealthy client is perhaps more like the passenger in a chauffeur-driven vehicle. They put their trust in the driver, just as the client puts trust in the building services engineer. Both roles need to be filled with competent and conscientious members of staff for reasons of both safety and finance.
  • 36.
    Introduction 7 When goingto a car showroom to select a car, we increasingly look for efficiency. We also consider what we will use the car for. Do we need to be able to move a piano, or just people? Does the car need to be prestigious, or do we just want a run-around? There are a whole range of questions. Once again, the same applies to building services. What is the building’s function and what want do we want it to do? The engineering has to meet the client’s expectations. Clients don’t have technical knowledge by and large; they just say ‘I want a heating system’. It’s the engineers who have to select the right technology. If the engineers don’t specify correctly and understand the overall concept of the building, things will go wrong. Some technologies are better suited to some designs rather than others. It’s not possible to just put any system into any design. There are common patterns – just as all cars have four wheels, all buildings need heat, light and ventilation – and there are common systems to use, but we have to select the right technology. How does it all fit together in the design? What is it to be used for? How much control does the client want, and how much needs to be automatic? If the engineer gets this right and meets the client’s needs, then it might cost more to start with but it will decrease the cost of ownership over the life of the building. It’s simply about getting the right technology in the right place for the right operation. Ultimately, whole life costs of a building can be considered with regard to the whole project. If construction is planned well, it will pay dividends. It always pays back. Traditional methods of construction deal with building services on an ad hoc basis, but integration brings real benefits over time. Technologies and applications Every building is different. This doesn’t just apply to appearance and design, but also to geographical location. Is the building urban or rural? Location often defines what type of technologies can be used; for example, in a semi- rural or rural environment, it is possible to use more natural ventilation. In a city centre, constraints come from conditions such as air pollution and noise pollution. Therefore, a building is likely to have to use more mechanically controlled ventilation. The other factor is orientation. How is a building affected by natural processes such as the sun? How much natural heat will build up? Natural heat can be both good and bad. Solar gain is beneficial in the winter, but an engineer will want to restrict it in summer. Also, services must take account of the nature of the building envelope. The fabric, even the colour, must be considered. Reflective material is desirable in warmer climes, and with changing weather patterns and climate, more areas will need to adopt these measures. Insulation can be both for heating and cooling. Sometimes we need to keep heat out, and people often forget this. There are situations where we need to stop solar gain, which can go through walls as well
  • 37.
    8 Introduction as windowsif they’re not insulated. There are often good examples of this problem in factory units and warehouses. A metal-clad exterior can become like a frying pan, picking up the heat. Without reflective material, the internal environment will become oppressive and the occupants will have to disperse heat. A lot of these problems should be addressed through the Building Regulations. See Chapter 3 for a discussion of the Building Regulations Part L. When it comes to ventilation, we should try to use natural methods wherever possible. If the cooling and air movement can be free, it would seem foolish in terms of both expenditure and the environment not to use it if possible. Despite this, there are many examples of buildings that could be adapted to use free cooling that are not, and remain reliant on mechanical systems. The reasons for this are cultural, and need to be addressed at a societal level. People expect technological solutions for everything. Therefore, some things tend to get specified automatically, and there is a tendency to over specify. This is not done to intentionally disadvantage the customer, but because engineers become conditioned to do it. Lighting also needs to be considered with regard to orientation, as natural daylight will obviously be affected by this. Where there is free light, we should take advantage of it. Nevertheless, many buildings have their lights on all day for no reason. As a society, we have stopped taking account of natural daylight. This is both cultural and habitual. We could do it either manually or through technology – a simple daylight sensor could switch the lights off for us. The energy hierarchy diagram (Figure B) is absolutely key to effective, low carbon services design. The most important step towards energy efficiency in Reduce the need for energy in the buildings design Use energy more efficiently in the building – controls Supply energy from low carbonrenewable sources where appropriate Shorter Financial payback Longer Remaining fossil fuels to be used as efficiently as possible and phased out as soon as possible More Environmental benefits Less Figure B The energy hierarchy – What delivers a low carbon energy-efficient building?
  • 38.
    Introduction 9 building servicesis to make this hierarchy the underpinning strategy behind every design and operation for the future. It’s a simple but extremely effective strategy. It’s also important to remember that achieving a good plan based on this hierarchy will also improve the cost–benefit analysis on projects. Too often people think that ‘green’ building is expensive, but energy efficiency and cost savings are actually coterminous. The hierarchy shows us that it is important to reduce the need for energy in the building’s design in the first place. This stage will include things such as making sure that the building’s lifecycle is taken into account. It’s important to examine the energy flow in the entire lifecycle of all materials that go into the building, so first there is a need look at the external envelope of the building. It’s important to conserve the energy, so why design something that will be naturally wasteful? Having studied the building envelope first, the designer and engineer then need to ensure that all the systems are integrated so that they naturally use the least energy possible. At the same time, it’s important to look at the carbon impact and usage of the materials involved. In the first stage of the design process, therefore, the designer has to look at the embodied energy, which refers to the amount of carbon used to manufacture and transport the materials and the energy input within the process. This should be the first priority in any building design. Secondly, it’s important to use energy more efficiently in the building once it’s being operated. This can be significantly affected by the early design process. The key point in this second part of the process is the issue of systems integration and controls. This involves utilising building technology and controls to monitor and operate the building services, and to make sure that all the building services doing different things are integrated, not competing against each other. It means working for the benefit of the operation of the systems themselves. This will be covered in more detail in the building controls Chapter 10. This hierarchy means that steps one and two can be taken into account from the start of the design process. Only then do we need to consider the third element of the hierarchy, and to start looking at the supply of energy from renewable and low carbon technologies, because this can only sensibly be done once steps one and two have been undertaken. At the time of writing however, there is an increasing trend, within society, with building end users and with designers, for people to want to start the energy efficiency process with step number three. This is because there is a growing awareness of the need to source energy from renewable sources, and people want to help this process along. People want to be green. Therefore, many are going out and spending large capital sums on renew- able and low carbon technologies, as they think it will help mitigate climate change. Unfortunately, this trend can actually be detrimental to carbon consumption if it means that this aspect is focused on to the exclusion of working on steps one and two of the energy hierarchy (Figure B). The reduction in embodied energy from alternative technologies can be really insignificant in comparison
  • 39.
    10 Introduction to thesavings that would be achieved by getting steps one and two correct. There would be a much better return on investment, in terms of both carbon reduction and financial savings, if these steps were taken to reduce the need for the energy in the first place. When nuclear power first came along, the catchphrase was that it would be able to provide limitless energy that became ‘too cheap to meter’. We now know that this was totally wrong. It’s about the most expensive form of energy going, factoring in the issue of nuclear waste that always seems to be ignored in these equations. Despite this, similar expectations are forming around renewable energy sources – once again, as a society, we expect it to produce limitless cheap energy. Sadly, it’s not that simple. The technologies involved are very expensive, though they will reduce in price as they become more established. Speaking as a practitioner, I believe that there are far better things to do to save energy. By starting with steps one and two of the energy hierarchy, we can reduce our overall need for energy and increase our control over its use. People feel good about installing a solar photovoltaic panel, but it takes more than ten years to pay back. If, by contrast, we reduce energy need, by installing insulation, for example, the payback is comparatively very quick indeed. The energy hierarchy provides a total correlation between its priorities and the likely level of financial payback – adopting step one will provide the greatest dividends. Step four will take far longer, although it will become cost effective in the longer term. Historically, technologies such as solar photovoltaics have had an artificial boost from the feed-in tariff (FIT), a government-led market mechanism that guarantees the owner of the renewable energy system payment for the energy, which is up to four times the value of a unit produced and purchased conventionally. This has been used as a stimulus to prime this market, but as the market develops this will no longer be economically viable.As it is, it is funded by the tax on carbon. As renewables become mainstream, the tariff starts to be reduced. This reduction began in 2012, somewhat controversially, but it was inevitable. I believe that this was the correct thing to do, but the government handled this whole issue very badly and caused a great deal of confusion with the wider population and threw the industry into turmoil. Ultimately there has to be a balance between technology, deployment and finance. This is a theme that I try to develop throughout this book and raise in more detail in Chapter 4 on finance. I believe that the future for sustainable buildings will involve the use of the BIM process that makes cooperative working in the construction team more realistic. We will also see a much closer consideration of the building’s lifecy- cle, including its energy use over the long term, and its actual performance compared to the design. At the same time continuous commissioning and maintenance will become much more important. These principles will be the bedrock of a holistic approach that offers the best possibility of achieving low carbon and sustainable buildings.
  • 40.
    Introduction 11 References Carbon Trust(2012) – Buildings Policy http:/ /www.carbontrust.co.uk/policy-legislation/ business-public-sector/pages/building-regulations.aspx (accessed 13.8.2012) GCS (2011) Government Construction Strategy, Cabinet Office, May 2010 Heerwagen J, (2000) Green Buildings, Organisational Success, and Occupant Productivity Published in a special edition of Building Research and Information Vol. 28 (5), 2000:353–367 London, UK IEA (2002) International Energy Association http:/ /www.iea.org/index_info. asp?id=2401 (accessed 13.8.2012) MacLeamy (2005) adapted from the ‘MacLeamy curve’ http:/ /www.msa-ipd.com/ MacleamyCurve.pdf (accessed 13.8.2012) also based on Barrie, Donald S. and Boyd C. Paulson, Jr., Professional Construction Management, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2nd edn, 1984
  • 41.
    1 Sustainability inthe wider context
  • 42.
    15 Delivering Sustainable Buildings:an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Exactly how do we make the right, sustainable choices? There are so many competing facts and figures, and a lot of conflicting information from well- meaningcampaigners,business,government,non-governmentalorganisations (NGOs) and trade bodies. Everyone has their own agenda and opinions. There is a wealth of information from industry as well as legislation and standards, and a lot of this creates conflict, which reflects opposing interests. In any process, in business or buildings, there are differing views and product loyalties, but in the field of sustainability the problem seems to be particularly acute. How do we cut through this? How do we create a transparent system to make sure that everyone gets the right technologies? There are so many claims for products, which can be oversold and mis-sold. Therefore we need a level playing field involving testing, transparency and accountability. Objectivity is the key I would argue that the only solution is to be as objective as possible. I would always approach every claim – and every adjustment to conventional technology such as proposed enhancements and renewable technology developments – as the ultimate sceptic. I work on the basis that you always have to ask the question: does it do what it says on the tin? Just because the product literature says it does some- thing, it doesn’t mean it does. Even when it does do what it says on the tin, is it the right application for the task in hand? How is it going to be used and, of course, we must ask: what is its true impact throughout the product’s lifecycle and how will it affect and influence the wider project or building? (This goes back to the implementation of the hierarchy of energy, as referenced in the introduction and throughout this book.) So the key is to be objective. What I believe is lacking are national stand- ards that would truly test every new sustainable product or claim. I think that, as an industry and a society, we are too trusting, and we often like to believe that things are the best thing since sliced bread. A good sales person can exert enough influence for the wrong decision to be made, and it may 1 Making the right choices – the sustainability dilemma
  • 43.
    16 Sustainability inthe wider context be only years later that the buyer, specifier or user finds out that the technology doesn’t live up to expectations. An example would be large utility companies who, at the time of writing, are in the process of setting up significant installation businesses for renewable and low carbon technologies, as they see this as a major market opportunity. The big question is whether this will encourage the tendency for sales people to get carried away with sales targets. As more grants are made available for funding, the take-up of renewable and low carbon technology in the UK, we have to ask how that might influence the selling process. How often have you heard a sales person admit that this isn’t right for you and thereby not making a sale? This will be a crucial point, in that there need to be very responsible business attitudes, so internal systems of these large companies need to guard against mis-selling. As an industry, we’ve got to guard against risking our good reputation with potentially false claims or poor standards, like those associated with the double-glazing industry’s reputation of the 1970s and 1980s. Legislation and industry and government action are required to police the markets and give people the correct information. If the industry is left to func- tion as a free market, poor products will eventually fall out of the system, but this will only work to a small degree. And what will be the cost to the consumer as this process takes place? Surely it’s better to get this right from the start? It’s always been a difficult situation, because governments want to stay clear of market intervention. And yet, they are still intervening in the market by provid- ing significant stimulus to encourage the take-up of sustainable products – for example, look at the feed-in tariff, or the renewable heat incentive. It would seem logical for the government to set up national standards for energy-saving and low carbon renewable technologies, to test and rate all these new products. This would give the products more credibility. There could be a common label, independently verified, to promote rigorous national stand- ards, perhaps based on an A to G rating model to measure and benchmark the operational performance. Put simply, A is good – G is not so good. This would create a simple and transparent system, which would allow everyone to judge the relative merits of what a technology does or claims to achieve. This could be done by a range of institutions, perhaps academic bodies, or the National Physical Laboratory. There are also other institutions that have a very good reputation, such as the Building Research Establishment (BRE) or the Building Services Research and Information Association (BSRIA). They could also become part of this scheme, and once this scheme is established, we would then have a baseline to start to judge relative merits of each technology. At the same time we also need detailed notes and guidance for a product’s actual application in non-domestic and domestic buildings. This is because too often at the moment we see a perfectly good technology misused because it has been wrongly specified. For example, using the sun to warm water with solar thermal panels is a good idea in principle, but only if there is a reason- able need for hot water. Putting lots of panels into a small dwelling or office would not be a good application of the technology. So this would need to be part of any national standard involving the use of good application guides. In other words the technology could be A rated for good performance, but be totally wasted if installed in an inappropriate application.
  • 44.
    Making the rightchoices – the sustainability dilemma 17 Rigorous standards and enforcement In the marketplace itself, we need to have a rigorous policing of the standards, and to stamp out bad practices. We have existing legislation that can be enforced by local authority trading standards bodies. These departments need to be significantly enhanced, since they tend to be very small and have limited resources. An example of helpful legislation would be the The ConsumerProtectionfromUnfairTradingRegulations(2008).Thissuperseded the Trade Descriptions Act (1968). This would provide a legal course for claims to be challenged and taken through the courts if necessary. I’ve always been astounded at how many ‘snake oil sellers’ there are in the market, an example of which might be magnets on fuel lines or water pipes, which claim to have energy saving properties. I believe these claims to be totally false, because when any of these sales people are challenged to provide robust independent scientifically verified reports, they can never do so. The ultimate question I always pose is if the technology is that good, why aren’t manufacturers fitting them as standard? Why aren’t the Automobile Association (AA) recommending them for vehicles? In fact, on the contrary, there have been scientifically based reports (Crabb 1997) and a review of tests carried out that showed little value in these claims and dismissed these particular products (Allen 2005; Powell 1998). The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), upheld complaints from two local authority trading standards departments on misleading statements made by one of these companies (ASA 2002). Yet these companies continue to sell and advocate these products, and people still continue to buy a virtually useless bit of kit. It astounds me when I see these devices fitted in some major companies’ plant rooms (Figure 1.1a). The same applies to Electronic ‘descalers’ (Figure 1.1b) which are also questionable as to their effectiveness. Figure 1.1 Water ‘treatment’ magnets and ‘electronic descaler’ – might as well be an ornament (a) (b)
  • 45.
    18 Sustainability inthe wider context Ultimately we need a strong lead from the government to set up a system of standards for testing and transparent labelling. This should provide all the neces- sary information to show what actually works and contributes positively to increasing performance and saving energy. This government information could also be extended to the true costs and real-life performance of a whole range of sustainable or low carbon products. It’s always nice to feel like you’re doing your bit for the environment, which has led to a fashion for what I have termed ‘green bling’ (Malina 2010). Even Prime Minister David Cameron had a wind turbine fitted to his own house (Guardian 2012), which in reality was nothing more than an expensive ornament. The same applies to photovoltaic (PV) panels. So many times in my career, I’ve come across people not understanding that PVs are a developing technology and that at the present time the effi- ciency and conversion rate of sunlight to electricity is 12–18% at best. Obviously this technology has to start somewhere, and those people that do adopt this early should be made aware of this. This is why the government intervened in the market and created a feed-in tariff (FIT), as it was the only viable way of making it financially economic. Saying that, this could still be regarded as marginal when compared to other technologies and practices, which have a far better energy and environmental performance and provide the best return technologically and financially, very much following the steps of the energy hierarchy methodology. If the FIT was removed or reduced sig- nificantly, then this would pull the rug from under the market. So the reality has to be laid out for everyone to see. There are a number of variants to the way that companies are approaching thismarket.Anexamplewouldbethe25yearleasingofdomesticorcommercial roof space, whereby a company gets the owner of a building to sign an agreement to allow them to place PV panels on the building’s roof. The leasing company get the benefit of the FIT, and the building occupier gets the benefit of the free electricity. This is useful from a sustainability point of view, but the offset of the payments for electricity use is far less than the feed-in tariff. That gives you guaranteed money for electricity generated. The owner would get the free electricity, but this is normally priced at 3p per unit, not the 43p offered by the original feed-in tariff prior to its reduction in 2012. The payback was in theory 10 years, but realistically you’re not guaranteed the weather pattern that is often used to calculate the projected performance and payback. There are also hidden costs for maintenance: panels will degrade over time, and the inverter devices – which transform the resulting (weather-variable) DC current of the PV panels into alternating current – degrade and will need replacing on average every eight years. They’re also costly, being priced at up to £2000, depending on the PV installation size The other dilemma here is that the companies are leasing these PV panels on a contract signed by the owner of the building, which typically provides for a 25 year lease. So what happens if the owner moves? The contracts are designed so that when the building is sold, the new owner inherits the lease. You would think from a marketing point of view, that most people would agree, and see the benefit for the incentive of free electricity, and more so as prices rise. This may be true for some, but quite a few people would not like
  • 46.
    Making the rightchoices – the sustainability dilemma 19 to have that feeling of loss of possession. This may create unforeseen prob- lems when the original owner attempts to sell, and this underlines the fact that these things need to be properly thought through. The idea of this type of leasing agreement has been applied in the past to a whole range of major industrial products and plants, and it may well be a financial mechanism for encouraging the take-up of the developing renewable and lower carbon tech- nologies, as many people whether domestic or business owners will not have capital to pay up front for them. It’s the same with the Green Deal: the funding will be made available and all the payback will be funded from the electricity bills as the savings are made. Here again there is a potential pitfall: if you went out tomorrow and brought photovoltaics and then sold the house in three or four years, the pan- els would be seen as a bonus by some but as a negative by others. It may even be an obstacle to selling, as the contract is with the house rather than the owner. It’s a fixed item. We will need a culture change, however, to see this as part of the house, like the newly installed double glazing. Personally, I don’t see it as a problem, but it’s new and there may be resistance. I often find myself in a difficult position, as I have wanted to see more deployment of these renewable and low carbon technologies. Nevertheless, in conversation with people who passionately believe in renewables for energy production, I often find myself almost playing devil’s advocate. This is because I always come back to the principle and concept of the energy hierar- chy. Surely it is better to reduce energy use in the first place rather than to spend more money and waste energy generating even more? Even with sustainable energy, we don’t want to get into a culture where we think of electricity as too cheap to meter. This concept is a lesson from history, as this is what many in the nuclear energy industry were forecasting in the 1950s. Nuclear failed to deliver, and this demonstrates the impossibility of truly cost- free energy. We don’t want people to think that energy is limitless. There are always going to be some costs, including the energy that goes into manufac- turing the PV panels, which are loaded with embodied energy and resources. They also require additional maintenance to the associated infrastructure and can degrade in performance over their operational lifetime. Throughout history, technologies have crept in and slowly become the standard. It’s interesting – can anyone think of a precedent where there has been such a large government-inspired subsidy to encourage technology to this degree? I often wonder, if the government had legislated to put this type of market subsidy and scale of resource into energy conservation, wouldn’t it have been a better use of resources to have significantly increased energy conservation? This question is also highlighted by the government’s newly created Green Deal. (See Chapters 4 and 13.) This covers renewable and low carbon technology and energy conservation, so this again would be enhanced by the adoption of the energy hierarchy. No one should be allowed grants or subsidy for PV panels without first implementing basic energy conservation. This will hopefully be part of the thrust of the Green Deal. The ‘green deal assessors’ (Department of Energy and Climate Change 2010) could be used to deliver such a programme of moving towards a lower
  • 47.
    20 Sustainability inthe wider context carbon society. This would provide a mechanism to truly implement a workable energy hierarchy regime. To this end, it is vital that thorough training is provided to ensure that assessors have the proper skills to interpret a multitude of possibilities and situations. Installation, commissioning, verification of performance monitoring and true financial monitoring will need to be integrated to give an truly accurate picture and give all the facts to create confidence in the development of the low carbon and renewables market of the future. This is discussed further in Chapter 13, which looks at the issue of skills. Where will our energy come from in the future? There is a lot of thought going in to the future of energy generation in the UK, as the debate on the transition to a lower carbon economy moves forward. The future of coal, gas and North Sea oil production all have such a major impact, because at present they have such a dominant role in the current econ- omy, and will continue to exert a major influence for the next decade and more. These fuels cannot be switched off or reduced significantly in such a short time. There will be a need to develop a national programme, recognising the importance of energy conservation, coupled with more efficient techno- logical development and deployment. This, together with the large-scale deployment of renewable energy infrastructure, will have to be accelerated if the government targets for carbon reduction are to be achieved. It must also be remembered that the current set of nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their lives. There are ten nuclear power stations across the UK. At present, government planning envisages all but one of the existing nuclear power stations closing by 2023 (BERR 2008). There is a debate developing around what will replace them. This is a whole debate that could fill another book. The government has stated that any new nuclear power stations will be constructed without public subsidy, yet the decommissioning of old reactors and the handling of nuclear waste will be subsidised. Government subsidies to the nuclear power industry, throughout its history over the last 50 years, have been massive in proportion to the actual value of the energy produced. In a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists (Koplo 2011) a conclusion was made that in some cases it would have cost taxpayers less to simply buy the energy on the open market and give it away to consumers. The two largest political parties in Britain both see nuclear as part of the UK’s energy mix, as well as advocating a massive expansion in low carbon technologies including renewable energy production. Research by the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) established that even if the UK’s existing nuclear capacity were doubled, it would only result in an 8% cut in CO2 emissions by 2035. The SDC also highlighted many other disadvantages, including long-term waste problems and complications for storage. The cost could be a massive drain on public money, despite the government saying no to a public subsidy.
  • 48.
    Making the rightchoices – the sustainability dilemma 21 The design of nuclear power stations is very inflexible. The continuing idea of expanding this type of energy generation could undermine energy effi- ciency. Finally, there is always the question of international security and potential terrorism. There is a risk attached to the transportation of nuclear materials. On balance, the SDC concluded that the problems outweighed the advan- tages of nuclear as a form of energy generation in making a contribution to meeting future carbon reduction and energy needs (SDC 2009). Public opinion is something else that the government will have to take into account. A recent Ipsos MORI/Cardiff University survey (MORI 2011) found that the British public favoured using renewable sources of energy over and above nuclear power. Solar power was viewed the most popular (88%), followed by wind (82%) and hydroelectric power (76%). By comparison, the popularity of conventional fuel sources were gas (56%), coal (36%), nuclear power (34%) and oil (33%). Although the present government seems to be pushing ahead with the building of at least four nuclear power stations, Britain and France are to sign an agreement to cooperate on civil nuclear energy, paving the way for the construction of a new generation of power plants in the UK (Guardian 2012). However this pans out with public opinion and environmental campaigners, and the potential for a long planning or public enquiry, this will probably dominate the debate over the next few years. Figure 1.2 shows the Sizewell nuclear site, which is in my home county of Suffolk. This dumps an enormous amount of waste heat into the sea. Even the new generation of proposed nuclear stations will, after generating electricity, waste the remaining 63% of heat energy in this way. To deal with the other element of still significant energy generation – coal – the government is also looking at carbon capture and storage. However, I personally see this as tantamount to ‘sweeping the carbon under the carpet’, Figure 1.2 Sizewell nuclear site
  • 49.
    22 Sustainability inthe wider context Figure 1.3 Aerial view of the cooling towers of the Cottam power station, Nottinghamshire Copyright: Ian Bracegirdle and licensed for reuse under the Creative Commons Licence Government policy on sustainability and energy Figure 1.4 Government energy policy (credit: Sarah Malina)
  • 50.
    Making the rightchoices – the sustainability dilemma 23 as we should be looking to phase out coal and, where possible, look at the cleanest combustion as a transition to the lower carbon economy. Ultimately it’s the ‘fifth fuel’ – energy conservation and efficiency – that should dominate the future, but all governments have yet to fully grasp this as the priority it should be. Figure 1.3 shows an aerial view of the cooling towers of the Cottam power station, Nottinghamshire, where 60% of the energy is also wasted as steam to the atmosphere. The government has been obsessed with the idea that the lights are going to go out and that the UK needs generating capacity. This has partly fuelled the idea of micro-generation technologies. But if we return to the energy hier- archy, we can see that much of this generation is like pouring water into a leaky bucket. If we’re going to plug the holes in the bucket, we need to reduce energy in the first place. I sometimes liken the lack of joined-up government policy on energy to a very confused octopus (Figure 1.4). The leaky bucket! Energy policy and generation are big policy issues, which would normally be considered beyond the remit of the client or the construction project team. However, I would say that any project for delivering sustainable buildings, whether new-build or refurbishment, should ask: where is the bulk of the power coming from? True attempts at sustainability should try to negotiate a supply contract to come from a renewable or as low carbon a source of energy as is available. It is important that when we talk about delivering a sustainable Figure 1.5 The leaky energy bucket!
  • 51.
    24 Sustainability inthe wider context built environment the whole supply chain is taken into account. Ultimately, how efficient is the energy supplied to the building and what are its carbon implications from its source of generation and demand on natural resources? Government and wider industry is waking up to this, but many still haven’t grasped the concept, and others don’t feel it can be done in time, but I am convinced that it’s what we should concentrate on. If we’re going to have a proper green deal, we need massive market intervention. Government and industry need to lead with energy conservation and efficiency as the priority. We need to plug the holes in the leaky energy bucket! (Figure 1.5) The other important element is the significant impact that building controls can have on the energy hierarchy. (See Chapter 10 for information on reducing energy and getting control of it.) This is about making sure that everything is optimised and switched off at the right time, that equipment cuts out at the right temperature and operates within the right parameters. This is key to efficiency and to achieving steps towards the ultimate goal of sustainability. References Advertising Standards Authority (2002) ASA Non-broadcast Adjudication: Ecoflow Ltd. http:/ /www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2002/4/Ecoflow-Ltd/CS_33701. aspx (accessed 13.8.2012) Allen M, Popular Mechanics (2005) http:/ /www.popularmechanics.com/cars/ alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/1802932 (accessed 13.8.2012) BERR, Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (2008) Meeting the Energy Challenge: A White Paper on Nuclear Power The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (2008) http:/ /www. legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110811574/contents (accessed 13.8.2012) Crabb, J (1997) Field Test of Fuel Efficiency Magnets; Exeter University Centre for Energy and the Environment Department of Energy and Climate Change, DECC (2010) The Green Deal; A summary of the Government’s proposals Guardian Friday 17 February 2012, ‘David Cameron in France to sign nuclear power deal’ Koplo D (2011) The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), ‘Nuclear Power: Still Not Viable without Subsidies’ Malina, M. ‘Bling Generation’. CIBSE Journal, January 2010. pp. 42–43. Available at: http:/ /content.yudu.com/A1k3hn/CJJAN10/resources/42.htm MORI 2010 Ipsos MORI/Cardiff University survey Public Perception of Climate Change and Energy Futures in Britain Powell M. (1998) Sceptical Inquirer, Volume 22.1, January/February 1998 ‘Magnetic Water and Fuel Treatment: Myth, Magic, or Mainstream Science?’ http:/ /www.csicop. org/si/show/magnetic_water_and_fuel_treatment_myth_magic_or_mainstream_ science/ (accessed 13.8.2012) SDC Sustainable Development Commission (2006) The Role of Nuclear Power in a Low Carbon Economy
  • 52.
    25 Delivering Sustainable Buildings:an industry insider’s view, First Edition. Mike Malina. © 2013 Mike Malina. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Local planning authorities can have a major influence on the development of sustainable communities and the built environment, both from a commercial and a housing point of view. But the planning system is often constrained by conflicting policy and resource priorities, as well as having to respond to, and take account of, the local community’s views. Some would consider that planning in the UK can be over-democratic. The often-used phrase NIMBY (not in my back yard) describes a reaction from people who instinctively either want to resist change or perhaps oppose a major development such as a wind farm for either misconceived or legitimate reasons, depending on your viewpoint. A case of democracy in action? It is sometimes difficult to get the balance right. The problem is that we can only talk for so long about some of the very big choices that need to be made. Big issues and choices lie ahead, especially when it comes to major energy policy, the issues of natural resources, expanding population and their relation to the holistic view of sustainability. The scale of all of this is daunting when considered as one big project. However, this is unlikely to be considered as one grand plan; it is more of a collage which has grown over time, and will be dealt with as part of the evolving society we live in. Figure 2.1 reminds us of the scale when we look at a developed city. A major influence? The current planning system is highly decentralised, albeit guided by the recently revised National Planning Policy Framework. This is potentially good for local democracy, but it leads to a haphazard system where development is often speculative. Historically, there have been local and regional spatial plans, but at the time of writing the regional plans have recently been abandoned by central government. Therefore, except for large national interest projects which are led by central government and national infrastructure policy, all planning is done locally by professional planning officers employed by local councils. They are accountable to a community- elected body of councillors which comprise the local authorities planning or development control committee. Most planning decisions are determined 2 Planning ahead – the role of planning authorities
  • 53.
    26 Sustainability inthe wider context under delegated powers by the officers, but if the plans are for larger developments, or potentially highlight a question of policy, then the planning committee will debate the proposals. The other important dimension is to show a public demonstration of the democratic process, where councillors can hear the views of the local community either by written representations or in person. This can be one of the most problematic aspects as there will always be two sides of the debate and it is often one of the only times that local people become involved in the planning process. My own experience was gained as an elected local government councillor in the 1990s, where I served on full planning committees and both unitary development and local plan subcommittees. Decisions have to be made, and a lot is open to differing views of elected councillors, professional officers and the community they serve. There will certainly be different interpretations, even taking account of the professional guidance that is always provided. Local and regional forward planning is essential and it is unfortunate that government threw local authorities into turmoil with the scrapping of regional planning. Not to say that they were all good in the first place, but at least the bigger picture was being looked at. Figure 2.1 Looking at the scale of the built environment makes planning very complex
  • 54.
    Planning ahead –the role of planning authorities 27 Obviously, there are planning criteria identifying what kind of development is and isn’t permitted, but local plans often do little more than ring-fence areas for different types of development – say, residential, industrial or retail. This created permitted development zones with specific policy guidance. Apart from that, the system tends to be ad hoc. It relies on developers coming forward with plans for development. For major developments, local planners will put forward a design brief, but they have no control over how things will develop overall in their local area. They might have a target, for example, of 800 homes by 2016, but executing this plan will depend on the vagaries of the market. Development can be, in many respects, little more than a random patchwork quilt. In some senses, this is a good thing, because it allows each area to develop in its own individual way, but it is also highly inefficient from a resources and sustainability perspective. Infrastructure may well be developed after build- ings are already in place, where clearly it should be developed before building construction, and this leads to public discontent. Significant new building projects create a need for roads, healthcare and education, for instance, which may not be fully developed and integrated when the plans are first drawn up. So any mechanism that can aid infrastructure and gain resources for the com- munity should be made a priority, especially if this will also create benefit from a social and environmental dimension. Planning gain To help create infrastructure and more community resources, planners can draw on legislation such as Section (S106) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (previously Section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971). This allows a local planning authority to enter into a legally binding agreement with a landowner for reaching an obligation associated with the granting of planning permission. This is referred to as planning gain, termed a Section 106 agreement. In Scotland it’s a Section 75 planning agreement (Scotland Section 75). This creates a means of getting developers to contribute towards the community. If, for example, they build 30 houses, they must contribute so many pounds towards schools. It’s a form of forward planning, and generates money from applications to fund infrastructure. The problem is that it is still ad hoc, and money from these agreements may not actually find its way to the local community. It’s often put in a central pot that may get used anywhere. Different governments have had different approaches for dealing with this question of planning. There are many arguments that can be used – for exam- ple, standardised and central planning would be more efficient, and create a focus for everything to happen in a coordinated way. From a sustainability point of view, it would also be more advantageous, since it would mean that councils, developers and utility companies wouldn’t have to dig up the same piece of road six times to put in different services as more developments are
  • 55.
    Another Random Documenton Scribd Without Any Related Topics
  • 56.
    1.C. The ProjectGutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others. 1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States. 1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: 1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
  • 57.
    This eBook isfor the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook. 1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. 1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
  • 58.
    with active linksor immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License. 1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. 1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that: • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
  • 59.
    about donations tothe Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.” • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works. • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work. • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. 1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. 1.F. 1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
  • 60.
    damaged disk orother medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. 1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem. 1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
  • 61.
    INCLUDING BUT NOTLIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. 1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. 1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause. Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life. Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
  • 62.
    remain freely availablefor generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
  • 63.
    small donations ($1to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS. The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate. While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate. International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate. Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
  • 64.
    Project Gutenberg™ eBooksare often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org. This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
  • 65.
    Welcome to ourwebsite – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! ebookbell.com