Friday, June 29, 2012
Our built environment and the likely effects on people - a case for a new order of engineering/medical professional teamwork
Our built environment has an immense effect on the daily lives of all people. The benefits afforded by our buildings in providing us with shelter, warmth, safety and security are obvious. Yet, there are some aspects of the buildings in which we live and work which may not be good for our health and well-being. Solutions to these problems require professional engineers and medical professionals coming together and working as a team, with an increased synergy which does not presently exist. This is needed in order to revive the importance of people within the products of engineering and our built environment generally.
Every day most of us wake up with an alarm clock, turn on the tap and boil some water, cook some food, walk out to the pavement, drive a car, or take a bus, and head into an office or other place of work. These items are so much engrossed in our daily lives that we seldom consider how they originated. Society has developed over the ages, thanks to a dedicated, largely invisible, group of professional engineers and technologists.
Professional engineers and technologists are the creators who designed and developed the alarm clock, designed and were responsible for the dam which supplied the electricity to boil the water and to cook the food, designed and were responsible for the construction of the pavement and road, designed the car and bus, supplied professional expertise to ensure that the office or place of work is strong enough to stand up against earthquake and wind forces, and to ensure an adequate supply of fresh indoor air.
Much of our built environment goes a long way to providing an enhanced standard of living for most people. However, there are negative impacts created from engineering solutions, which often go unrecognised by society. There needs to be a greater role on the part of medical professionals in providing input into much of the built environment provided by engineers and technologists. There are several examples where this enhanced teamwork is needed.
The one area of potential concern which should be given first priority is that of buildings. There is considerable documentation and evidence to indicate that sick building syndrome in commercial buildings and mould incidence in houses is relatively common. Further research by teams combining medical and engineering professionals is required, in order to reduce the causes and determine more clearly what the detrimental effects on occupants are. Such a starting point should provide maximum gains, as the issue of buildings is the area which most probably has an effect on the largest number of people, being the places where they live and/or work.
Filling the regulatory gap in chronic disease prevention and the influence of building codes
A paper written by Helen Walls, Bebe Loff and yours truly considers the model of building regulations, vehicle emissions and tobacco control as a catalyst for initiating some control over the obesity epidemic.
There is a lot of scope for engineers and other professionals in the built environment to collaborate with epidemiologists and public health reserchers.
The full paper is referred to in my previous blog post. The Conversation in Australia has written a feature on this topic, and this is able to be accessed on the following website:
http://theconversation.edu.au/filling-the-regulatory-gap-in-chronic-disease-prevention-6127
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
The regulatory gap in chronic disease prevention: A historical perspective
Abstract
Experience shows that regulatory intervention can lead to substantial improvement in population health. The history of regulatory intervention in public health suggests that 'tipping points' necessary to catalyse regulatory change may be identified. We examine three areas in which governments have legislated to protect public health: sanitation, building standards, and vehicle emissions. We apply the lessons to regulatory reform addressing obesity and the chronic disease it causes.
Journal of Public Health Policy advance online publication, 20 October 2011; doi:10.1057/jphp.2011.50.
Authors - Walls HL, Walls KL, Loff B.
J Public Health Policy. 2011 Oct 20. doi: 10.1057/jphp.2011.50. [Epub ahead of print]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22012068
Experience shows that regulatory intervention can lead to substantial improvement in population health. The history of regulatory intervention in public health suggests that 'tipping points' necessary to catalyse regulatory change may be identified. We examine three areas in which governments have legislated to protect public health: sanitation, building standards, and vehicle emissions. We apply the lessons to regulatory reform addressing obesity and the chronic disease it causes.
Journal of Public Health Policy advance online publication, 20 October 2011; doi:10.1057/jphp.2011.50.
Authors - Walls HL, Walls KL, Loff B.
J Public Health Policy. 2011 Oct 20. doi: 10.1057/jphp.2011.50. [Epub ahead of print]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22012068
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Energy-efficient fluorescent lighting may cause eye disease
Eye disease could increase as a result of the global trend towards replacing incandescent globes with energy-efficient fluorescent lighting.
With climate change, reducing our greenhouse gas emissions is important. One way to do this is to phase out incandescent lighting in favour of more energy-efficient lighting.
This shift has already taken place in Australia and countries of the European Union. In the United States, federal law stipulates that incandescent lights be phased out by 2014.
In Australia, this change in lighting type has been estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 28 million tons between 2008 and 2020. Thus a global move toward fluorescent lighting in the home will lead to significant reductions in greenhouse gases.
The types of energy-efficient lighting with which incandescent lights are being replaced are high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and fluorescent lighting, including the popular compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs).
These light sources are all more efficient than the incandescent lamp. HID lamps produce intense light in a small area. They are less energy efficient than fluorescent lights, but are used widely for lighting large areas such as streets and sports facilities. LEDs are energy efficient but not as bright, stable, or cheap as fluorescent lights.
However of all these lighting types, fluorescent lighting is considered most energy-efficient and also produces light most appropriate for working under. CFLs use 75% less energy than do incandescent lamps.
As a result of the popularity of fluorescent lighting, many people are now exposed to artificial sources of UV radiation emitted from these lights.
There is a general public awareness that UV radiation from the sun can damage the eye. For example, most people are aware of the importance of not looking directly at the sun, and operators of arc welders know to wear protective goggles. Less attention has been paid to the potentially damaging effects of UV radiation people are exposed to indoors, in particular from fluorescent lighting, a significant source of UV light.
The safe range of light, to avoid exposing the eye to potentially damaging UV light, is approximately 2000 to 3500K and greater than 500 nanometers. UV wavelengths less than 500 nanometers (and certainly less than 380 nm) are capable of irreparable damage to the eye. Unfortunately, some fluorescent lights currently fall outside this safe range.
CFLs vary in terms of color temperature, and there are variations and inconsistencies among manufacturers. The fluorescent lighting used indoors, particularly in commercial settings, is often in the form of cool-white tubes with a color temperature of 4000K or greater. The warmer CFLs, which are usually less than 3500K, are less damaging to the eye but produce light that is often inadequate for concentration at work.
Fluorescent lighting may increase UV-related eye diseases by up to 12% and, according to our calculations, may cause an additional 3000 cases of cataracts and 7500 cases of pterygia annually in Australia. Thus for Australia alone, we estimate at least 10000 additional cases of eye disease each year.
Our estimates are conservative and crude in that they are limited by the poor information currently available with regard to the incidence and etiology of many eye diseases. We have not included in our estimates age-related macular degeneration (AMD) because there is not yet universal agreement in the literature that it causes UV radiation. But if UV radiation was shown to cause AMD, this would have significant public health implications.
The evidence suggests that the least hazardous approach to lighting is to use warm-white tubes or incandescent bulbs of lower color temperature and longer wavelength light rather than fluorescent lamps. Unfortunately anything other than fluorescent lighting is considered inadequate for many workplaces and in the home.
We recommend that UV filters become a required standard, and that lamp manufacturers should not allow current levels of emission of UV light from fluorescent lighting to increase (and should work toward reducing emissions). Further research is also needed to improve lighting from artificial sources.
The full paper was published by the American Journal of Public Health, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300246
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2011.300246v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=walls&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT
With climate change, reducing our greenhouse gas emissions is important. One way to do this is to phase out incandescent lighting in favour of more energy-efficient lighting.
This shift has already taken place in Australia and countries of the European Union. In the United States, federal law stipulates that incandescent lights be phased out by 2014.
In Australia, this change in lighting type has been estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 28 million tons between 2008 and 2020. Thus a global move toward fluorescent lighting in the home will lead to significant reductions in greenhouse gases.
The types of energy-efficient lighting with which incandescent lights are being replaced are high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and fluorescent lighting, including the popular compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs).
These light sources are all more efficient than the incandescent lamp. HID lamps produce intense light in a small area. They are less energy efficient than fluorescent lights, but are used widely for lighting large areas such as streets and sports facilities. LEDs are energy efficient but not as bright, stable, or cheap as fluorescent lights.
However of all these lighting types, fluorescent lighting is considered most energy-efficient and also produces light most appropriate for working under. CFLs use 75% less energy than do incandescent lamps.
As a result of the popularity of fluorescent lighting, many people are now exposed to artificial sources of UV radiation emitted from these lights.
There is a general public awareness that UV radiation from the sun can damage the eye. For example, most people are aware of the importance of not looking directly at the sun, and operators of arc welders know to wear protective goggles. Less attention has been paid to the potentially damaging effects of UV radiation people are exposed to indoors, in particular from fluorescent lighting, a significant source of UV light.
The safe range of light, to avoid exposing the eye to potentially damaging UV light, is approximately 2000 to 3500K and greater than 500 nanometers. UV wavelengths less than 500 nanometers (and certainly less than 380 nm) are capable of irreparable damage to the eye. Unfortunately, some fluorescent lights currently fall outside this safe range.
CFLs vary in terms of color temperature, and there are variations and inconsistencies among manufacturers. The fluorescent lighting used indoors, particularly in commercial settings, is often in the form of cool-white tubes with a color temperature of 4000K or greater. The warmer CFLs, which are usually less than 3500K, are less damaging to the eye but produce light that is often inadequate for concentration at work.
Fluorescent lighting may increase UV-related eye diseases by up to 12% and, according to our calculations, may cause an additional 3000 cases of cataracts and 7500 cases of pterygia annually in Australia. Thus for Australia alone, we estimate at least 10000 additional cases of eye disease each year.
Our estimates are conservative and crude in that they are limited by the poor information currently available with regard to the incidence and etiology of many eye diseases. We have not included in our estimates age-related macular degeneration (AMD) because there is not yet universal agreement in the literature that it causes UV radiation. But if UV radiation was shown to cause AMD, this would have significant public health implications.
The evidence suggests that the least hazardous approach to lighting is to use warm-white tubes or incandescent bulbs of lower color temperature and longer wavelength light rather than fluorescent lamps. Unfortunately anything other than fluorescent lighting is considered inadequate for many workplaces and in the home.
We recommend that UV filters become a required standard, and that lamp manufacturers should not allow current levels of emission of UV light from fluorescent lighting to increase (and should work toward reducing emissions). Further research is also needed to improve lighting from artificial sources.
The full paper was published by the American Journal of Public Health, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300246
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2011.300246v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=walls&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Building maintenance
DAMPNESS IN BUILDINGS
Roman wisdom states that a fire may be stopped with water but asks with what can you stop water? Water is one of the most destructive forces faced by buildings. It needs to be eliminated by careful design, construction, and regular maintenance. Buildings generally represent the largest investment most of us make in our lives. We use buildings as investments and as a hedge against inflation. It is worth remembering that to enhance the longevity of any building, it must be maintained regularly. Some useful tips in that respect are:
•Ensure that water does not run under the building.
•For floors above the ground, ensure there are vents to facilitate air flow.
•Repaint painted surfaces before the paint coating has broken down too far.
•Ventilate the interior by opening windows.
•Do not vent showers or clothes dryers to the roof space. Ensure they vent to the outside.
Remember, buildings are constructed to provide comfort against the elements of nature. The buildings must be designed and built to resist natural forces of degradation. From the time that a building is completed, it is on the slow downward path of destruction, usually at an infinitesimal rate. But that rate will depend on how well it is cared for. It is that prudent intervention of planned maintenance which gives building owners the optimum return on their investment.
As a harsh assessment of the situation, you could say that all built infrastructure (including buildings) is waste in transit.
Roman wisdom states that a fire may be stopped with water but asks with what can you stop water? Water is one of the most destructive forces faced by buildings. It needs to be eliminated by careful design, construction, and regular maintenance. Buildings generally represent the largest investment most of us make in our lives. We use buildings as investments and as a hedge against inflation. It is worth remembering that to enhance the longevity of any building, it must be maintained regularly. Some useful tips in that respect are:
•Ensure that water does not run under the building.
•For floors above the ground, ensure there are vents to facilitate air flow.
•Repaint painted surfaces before the paint coating has broken down too far.
•Ventilate the interior by opening windows.
•Do not vent showers or clothes dryers to the roof space. Ensure they vent to the outside.
Remember, buildings are constructed to provide comfort against the elements of nature. The buildings must be designed and built to resist natural forces of degradation. From the time that a building is completed, it is on the slow downward path of destruction, usually at an infinitesimal rate. But that rate will depend on how well it is cared for. It is that prudent intervention of planned maintenance which gives building owners the optimum return on their investment.
As a harsh assessment of the situation, you could say that all built infrastructure (including buildings) is waste in transit.
Noisy classrooms
Noise levels in classrooms are distressing preschool children
The problem of noisy classrooms is widespread amongst schools, affecting children of all ages as well as teachers.
With offending buildings it can usually be shown that it is a problem by calculating the reverberation time, as this is often the main problem. It is then a case of proposing some judicious changes by way of introducing some soft furnishings and possibly some changes to floor, wall and/or ceiling surfaces.
New problems often arise from “echo” nuisance experienced in recently refurbished rooms. This produces discomfort and some degree of irritability affecting occupants due to noise characteristics of the rooms.
A good approach is to analyse likely reverberation time of normal speech within classrooms. The value in seconds obtained from such an analysis indicates the time taken for sound to decay a level of 60 decibels (dB). This is a standard method of measuring sound characteristics within built spaces. For many classrooms, the desirable reverberation time is about 0.7 - 1.0 second. The actual calculated value for some rooms we have seen due to the surface materials used is 1.45 seconds, almost twice the optimum value. Such a result is consistent with the reported difficulties experienced by occupants, and of the types of interior surface finishes used in many classrooms.
We have also observed new refurbishment work that has produced considerable noise transfer from the floor of the upper levels. Typically in these cases, before the building work commenced there were acoustic ceiling tiles, and they are replaced with ceiling finishes of smooth plaster-board. The perception of the increased noise from the upper levels is often consistent with the change of ceiling lining type.
Often the answer for acceptable noise levels in classrooms is the judicious selection and use of floor, wall and ceiling surfaces.
The problem of noisy classrooms is widespread amongst schools, affecting children of all ages as well as teachers.
With offending buildings it can usually be shown that it is a problem by calculating the reverberation time, as this is often the main problem. It is then a case of proposing some judicious changes by way of introducing some soft furnishings and possibly some changes to floor, wall and/or ceiling surfaces.
New problems often arise from “echo” nuisance experienced in recently refurbished rooms. This produces discomfort and some degree of irritability affecting occupants due to noise characteristics of the rooms.
A good approach is to analyse likely reverberation time of normal speech within classrooms. The value in seconds obtained from such an analysis indicates the time taken for sound to decay a level of 60 decibels (dB). This is a standard method of measuring sound characteristics within built spaces. For many classrooms, the desirable reverberation time is about 0.7 - 1.0 second. The actual calculated value for some rooms we have seen due to the surface materials used is 1.45 seconds, almost twice the optimum value. Such a result is consistent with the reported difficulties experienced by occupants, and of the types of interior surface finishes used in many classrooms.
We have also observed new refurbishment work that has produced considerable noise transfer from the floor of the upper levels. Typically in these cases, before the building work commenced there were acoustic ceiling tiles, and they are replaced with ceiling finishes of smooth plaster-board. The perception of the increased noise from the upper levels is often consistent with the change of ceiling lining type.
Often the answer for acceptable noise levels in classrooms is the judicious selection and use of floor, wall and ceiling surfaces.
Flooding of properties
Apart from the major flood events around the world which continue to hit the media headlines, the matter of overland flow from neighbouring properties continues to be a vexing problem in all towns and cities. Constantly many areas are put to the test in that respect. At the time, there is often general acceptance of the view that flooding is inevitable. However, in cases we are called in to advise on, the problems generally result from identifiable short-falls in meeting acceptable construction details.
It is important to keep in mind that all drainage systems require a secondary overland flow path to cope with the more extreme storms which cannot be designed against. Having a clear understanding of the location and form of that flow path is important to ensure that it is not dammed by such things as fences, buildings or built-up gardens.
It needs to be kept in mind that landscaping can lead to additional problems of flooding. We see many cases where ground and pavement levels are built up too high, so that water is then able to enter buildings.
It is important to keep in mind that all drainage systems require a secondary overland flow path to cope with the more extreme storms which cannot be designed against. Having a clear understanding of the location and form of that flow path is important to ensure that it is not dammed by such things as fences, buildings or built-up gardens.
It needs to be kept in mind that landscaping can lead to additional problems of flooding. We see many cases where ground and pavement levels are built up too high, so that water is then able to enter buildings.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
From Environmental Reductionism to Ecological Governance
Meeting of Engineers for Social Responsibility (ESR)
Date: Thursday 21 October 2010, 7.30pm
Venue: Room 3.407, School of Engineering, University of Auckland, 20 Symonds Street, Auckland, New Zealand
Speaker: Professor Klaus Bosselmann PhD. is Director of the New Zealand Centre for Environmental Law at the University of Auckland. He has dedicated his adult life – as a political activist, judge, attorney and academic – to changing society‟s relationship with nature. He co-founded the Greens in Germany (1980) and New Zealand (1990) and has published over 20 books in the area of political ecology and environmental law.
Abstract:
Overlooking 40 years of environmental policies and laws, we may have saved some “trees”, but the “forest” is being lost as critical global issues including climate change, biodiversity loss and our ecological footprint continue to worsen. Existing laws and policies mitigate the ecological damage inflicted by industrial economies and western lifestyles; they assume that environmental problems can be managed without significant changes to production and consumption patterns. Such reductionist approach needs to be replaced by a sustainability approach. Sustainability law is proactive and would aim for transformation rather than mitigation. The good news is that ecology-related values and principles are
evolving into accepted norms of international and domestic environmental law. The bad news is that governments and courts are not adopting them fast enough.
Taken from IPENZ Auckland Branch Newsletter, October 2010
Date: Thursday 21 October 2010, 7.30pm
Venue: Room 3.407, School of Engineering, University of Auckland, 20 Symonds Street, Auckland, New Zealand
Speaker: Professor Klaus Bosselmann PhD. is Director of the New Zealand Centre for Environmental Law at the University of Auckland. He has dedicated his adult life – as a political activist, judge, attorney and academic – to changing society‟s relationship with nature. He co-founded the Greens in Germany (1980) and New Zealand (1990) and has published over 20 books in the area of political ecology and environmental law.
Abstract:
Overlooking 40 years of environmental policies and laws, we may have saved some “trees”, but the “forest” is being lost as critical global issues including climate change, biodiversity loss and our ecological footprint continue to worsen. Existing laws and policies mitigate the ecological damage inflicted by industrial economies and western lifestyles; they assume that environmental problems can be managed without significant changes to production and consumption patterns. Such reductionist approach needs to be replaced by a sustainability approach. Sustainability law is proactive and would aim for transformation rather than mitigation. The good news is that ecology-related values and principles are
evolving into accepted norms of international and domestic environmental law. The bad news is that governments and courts are not adopting them fast enough.
Taken from IPENZ Auckland Branch Newsletter, October 2010
Sunday, February 14, 2010
What is the cost of our built environment?
Building and engineering professionals have over the last 150 years become proficient at determining costs of projects that clients have desired be built. Whether it be a hydro-electric dam, a power station, bridge or chemical manufacturing plant, based on detailed designs such projects have been broken down into small elements and the cost determined.
Over the last few years the consciousness of the need to consider sustainability in our activities has reached new heights, as environmental ethics have been incorporated within most professionals’ codes of ethics, and sustainability is becoming important to many individuals. This increased awareness has taken place contemporaneously with a reduction in professional input towards the construction of buildings, along with a New Zealand Building Act which requires a specified intended life of buildings to be at least 50 years (and similar in some other countries). This specified intended life could be seen as incompatible with the notion of sustainability, considering that many existing buildings in other countries are centuries old.
On the face of it, there appear to be contradictions in this New Zealand Building Act (arguably) minimal specified intended life requirement of buildings due to many competing issues in the present highly commercial world.
The term sustainability may conjure up many different meanings to different people. It generally implies, however, that something should last for as long as possible so that it does not become prematurely obsolete. This should imply a positive impact on the mortality of a country’s building stock, so that buildings last longer before they have to be maintained and replaced. Since the actions of each individual affect the earth in some way, it must be kept in mind that building activities must not be considered in isolation. With in excess of 60,000 chemicals in common use and pollution paralleling technologic advances, increased pollution (that is anti-sustainable practices) is related to “the production and use of energy, the production and use of industrial chemicals …” (Plaa, 1998). The production of building materials is intrinsically linked with these processes.
Reflecting on the UK building scene, Addleson (1977) stated that shortcomings in buildings owing to a proliferation of new materials and building techniques became prevalent in “the post-war period”. He questioned “the significance of the sixty-year economic life of buildings”, suggesting that they could be beyond their economic life before then.
Does the concept of “expected life of buildings” sit well with society’s current expectations relating to sustainability? The proven ability of New Zealand houses to exceed a service life of 140 years seems to throw into serious question why such a relatively short specified intended life is allowed under the Building Act (Johnstone, 1999). From the writer’s experience in the building industry, it has become apparent that this situation is leading to planned obsolescence, with many developers intent on meeting the minimum statutory requirements (or even less, if they can get away with it), for maximum profit, without considering any other adverse matters relating to environmental issues or other social issues.
The term sustainability usually implies in a general sense the wise use of resources. This can have many different meanings and interpretations. Not enough consideration is given to the energy embodied in existing buildings; instead, there is too much emphasis on new development of housing (Seip, 1979). Few buildings are ever demolished as a result of failure of their structural system. Johnstone (1994b) advised that “Departures of dwellings from a housing stock are the end result of an economic process and the potential physical life of most dwellings is not realised”.
The lowest first cost is also a driver for developers in order to maximise profits at the expense of appropriate life cycle considerations.
The question of the ethics of so-called sustainability was raised by Buckeridge and Tapp (1999). They questioned society’s morals in emphasising the words rather than effectively dealing with the issues, and suggested that the road towards sustainability is even being thwarted. This feeling appears to be borne out from the preceding discussion. According to The Institution of Structural Engineers (1999), “Sustainable development is for all cultures, climates and geographical locations and for all disciplines”. This is an interesting concept considering that most “developed” countries plundered their forests, sometimes, centuries ago, and when China, for instance, representing a quarter of the world’s population, is at the very early stages of its “modernisation” programme. Challenges like these are yet to be addressed by anyone (Walls, 2000).
Given the devastating effects of the recent earthquake in Haiti why should they even think about “sustainability”?
The sustainability of buildings is strongly linked with durability, a notion which is not even covered by building codes in many countries. In many areas the path towards sustainability does in fact appear as being thwarted. “During the last 50 years, buildings in general, and city buildings in particular, have become significantly less, not more, durable and much more resource consumptive”. (Storey and Baird, 1998). Most of this derives from expedient practices motivated by short-term commercial (monetary) gains.
Porteous (1992) advised that in New Zealand there is no nationwide system of investigating and recording events of building failure. This is likely to apply to all countries. It is unlikely also that any country has compiled a database of age-specific dwelling losses (Johnstone, 1994a). In order to practise sustainable living in a serious way, it is important that all the information tools available are implemented. Without those two knowledge databases in place on an ongoing basis, and without dealing with the issues covered in this posting, then it can only be said that society is paying lip service to the notion of sustainability.
REFERENCES
Addleson, L. 16 Feb 1977. “Guide to Building Failures”. Architects Journal. pp 23 - 25.
Buckeridge, J St J S, & Tapp, B A. 1999. “Ethics and that Ethic Called Sustainability”. Australasian Environmental Engineering Conference. Auckland, New Zealand.
Johnstone, Ivan M. 1994a. “Modelling the annual replacement rate of housing stock”. Fourth Australasian Real Estate Educators’ Conference. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Johnstone, Ivan M. 1994b. “Modelling the Dynamics of Housing Stock”. Department of Property. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Johnstone, I M. 1999. “Periodic Rehabilitation and Reductions in Total Average Costs to Sustain Dwelling Services”. Department of Property. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Plaa, Gabriel L. 1998. “Introduction to Toxicology: Occupational & Environmental”, in “Basic & Clinical Pharmacology”. 7th Edition. Bertram G Katzung (ed.). Lange Medical Books/McGraw-Hill. San Francisco.
Porteous, W A. 1992. “Identification, Evaluation and Classification of Building Failures”. PhD thesis. Victoria University of Wellington. New Zealand.
Seip, H. March/April 1979. “Building in Economic Terms”. Building Research and Practice. p. 90.
Storey, John B & Baird, George. 1998. “Towards the Self-Sufficient City Building”. IPENZ Conference. Auckland. New Zealand.
The Institution of Structural Engineers. 1999. “Building for a sustainable future: Construction without depletion”. The Institution of Structural Engineers. London. England.
Walls, Kelvin. 2000. Review of “Building for a sustainable future: Construction without depletion”. The Institution of Structural Engineers. 1999. London. England. For IPENZ “e.NZ Magazine”, Sept/Oct 2000.
Over the last few years the consciousness of the need to consider sustainability in our activities has reached new heights, as environmental ethics have been incorporated within most professionals’ codes of ethics, and sustainability is becoming important to many individuals. This increased awareness has taken place contemporaneously with a reduction in professional input towards the construction of buildings, along with a New Zealand Building Act which requires a specified intended life of buildings to be at least 50 years (and similar in some other countries). This specified intended life could be seen as incompatible with the notion of sustainability, considering that many existing buildings in other countries are centuries old.
On the face of it, there appear to be contradictions in this New Zealand Building Act (arguably) minimal specified intended life requirement of buildings due to many competing issues in the present highly commercial world.
The term sustainability may conjure up many different meanings to different people. It generally implies, however, that something should last for as long as possible so that it does not become prematurely obsolete. This should imply a positive impact on the mortality of a country’s building stock, so that buildings last longer before they have to be maintained and replaced. Since the actions of each individual affect the earth in some way, it must be kept in mind that building activities must not be considered in isolation. With in excess of 60,000 chemicals in common use and pollution paralleling technologic advances, increased pollution (that is anti-sustainable practices) is related to “the production and use of energy, the production and use of industrial chemicals …” (Plaa, 1998). The production of building materials is intrinsically linked with these processes.
Reflecting on the UK building scene, Addleson (1977) stated that shortcomings in buildings owing to a proliferation of new materials and building techniques became prevalent in “the post-war period”. He questioned “the significance of the sixty-year economic life of buildings”, suggesting that they could be beyond their economic life before then.
Does the concept of “expected life of buildings” sit well with society’s current expectations relating to sustainability? The proven ability of New Zealand houses to exceed a service life of 140 years seems to throw into serious question why such a relatively short specified intended life is allowed under the Building Act (Johnstone, 1999). From the writer’s experience in the building industry, it has become apparent that this situation is leading to planned obsolescence, with many developers intent on meeting the minimum statutory requirements (or even less, if they can get away with it), for maximum profit, without considering any other adverse matters relating to environmental issues or other social issues.
The term sustainability usually implies in a general sense the wise use of resources. This can have many different meanings and interpretations. Not enough consideration is given to the energy embodied in existing buildings; instead, there is too much emphasis on new development of housing (Seip, 1979). Few buildings are ever demolished as a result of failure of their structural system. Johnstone (1994b) advised that “Departures of dwellings from a housing stock are the end result of an economic process and the potential physical life of most dwellings is not realised”.
The lowest first cost is also a driver for developers in order to maximise profits at the expense of appropriate life cycle considerations.
The question of the ethics of so-called sustainability was raised by Buckeridge and Tapp (1999). They questioned society’s morals in emphasising the words rather than effectively dealing with the issues, and suggested that the road towards sustainability is even being thwarted. This feeling appears to be borne out from the preceding discussion. According to The Institution of Structural Engineers (1999), “Sustainable development is for all cultures, climates and geographical locations and for all disciplines”. This is an interesting concept considering that most “developed” countries plundered their forests, sometimes, centuries ago, and when China, for instance, representing a quarter of the world’s population, is at the very early stages of its “modernisation” programme. Challenges like these are yet to be addressed by anyone (Walls, 2000).
Given the devastating effects of the recent earthquake in Haiti why should they even think about “sustainability”?
The sustainability of buildings is strongly linked with durability, a notion which is not even covered by building codes in many countries. In many areas the path towards sustainability does in fact appear as being thwarted. “During the last 50 years, buildings in general, and city buildings in particular, have become significantly less, not more, durable and much more resource consumptive”. (Storey and Baird, 1998). Most of this derives from expedient practices motivated by short-term commercial (monetary) gains.
Porteous (1992) advised that in New Zealand there is no nationwide system of investigating and recording events of building failure. This is likely to apply to all countries. It is unlikely also that any country has compiled a database of age-specific dwelling losses (Johnstone, 1994a). In order to practise sustainable living in a serious way, it is important that all the information tools available are implemented. Without those two knowledge databases in place on an ongoing basis, and without dealing with the issues covered in this posting, then it can only be said that society is paying lip service to the notion of sustainability.
REFERENCES
Addleson, L. 16 Feb 1977. “Guide to Building Failures”. Architects Journal. pp 23 - 25.
Buckeridge, J St J S, & Tapp, B A. 1999. “Ethics and that Ethic Called Sustainability”. Australasian Environmental Engineering Conference. Auckland, New Zealand.
Johnstone, Ivan M. 1994a. “Modelling the annual replacement rate of housing stock”. Fourth Australasian Real Estate Educators’ Conference. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Johnstone, Ivan M. 1994b. “Modelling the Dynamics of Housing Stock”. Department of Property. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Johnstone, I M. 1999. “Periodic Rehabilitation and Reductions in Total Average Costs to Sustain Dwelling Services”. Department of Property. The University of Auckland. New Zealand.
Plaa, Gabriel L. 1998. “Introduction to Toxicology: Occupational & Environmental”, in “Basic & Clinical Pharmacology”. 7th Edition. Bertram G Katzung (ed.). Lange Medical Books/McGraw-Hill. San Francisco.
Porteous, W A. 1992. “Identification, Evaluation and Classification of Building Failures”. PhD thesis. Victoria University of Wellington. New Zealand.
Seip, H. March/April 1979. “Building in Economic Terms”. Building Research and Practice. p. 90.
Storey, John B & Baird, George. 1998. “Towards the Self-Sufficient City Building”. IPENZ Conference. Auckland. New Zealand.
The Institution of Structural Engineers. 1999. “Building for a sustainable future: Construction without depletion”. The Institution of Structural Engineers. London. England.
Walls, Kelvin. 2000. Review of “Building for a sustainable future: Construction without depletion”. The Institution of Structural Engineers. 1999. London. England. For IPENZ “e.NZ Magazine”, Sept/Oct 2000.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Haiti earthquake and collapse of the UN building
Sympathy must be provided to the people of Haiti along with abundant tangible support in the wake of the earthquake that struck a few days ago. Even without the force of earthquakes, however, the collapse of buildings is almost a daily event in some parts of the world. A reminder of this was that of a building collapse of a school in Haiti about a year ago. This is a further reminder of the problems facing many third world countries in which political and social norms are not serving their people well.
Extralegal capital in the form of shanty towns, squatter developments and illegal buildings is a large part of economies of some countries. Some of the following characteristics of these economies include:
• Houses built on land with inadequately recorded ownership
• Lack of property rights
• Lack of enforceable transactions on property rights
• Unincorporated business with undefined liability
• Non-compliance of building with building codes
• Illegal buildings
• Corruption at national and local government levels
Haiti appears to have some of these characteristics. Irrational adherence to outdated traditions, a disregard for any building codes that may exist, and dense populations of people all trying to compete for limited resources and opportunities, are just some of the reasons for the problem in many countries.
Haiti is a relatively small land-mass attempting to support more than nine million people. A plundering of resources by deforestation is one characteristic of this society. It is typical of many countries where too many people are trying to eke out a living on impoverished land where there are increasingly diminishing resources.
As with many other poor countries, the resource base is simply inadequate to fulfil the needs of most people and this leads to building structures for shelter (or in the collapse of about a year ago, a school) using the most rudimentary methods and with minimal use of materials. Moderate to severe earthquakes, such as that which occurred last week in Haiti, serve as a further reminder of the frailty of the building stock in Haiti and in many other parts of the world.
The pressure on the planet is well understood to be leading to increasing shortages of food and water. While building technology and construction knowledge using rational engineering principles should be accessible to people anywhere in the world, perpetual poverty in some countries and diminishing access to appropriate building materials is going to lead to many more building failures and loss of life in the future.
Our sympathies are also due to those injured in and to the families of the UN who perished in the collapse of the UN building. It does, however, beg the question as to what due diligence the UN carried out in relation to the design and construction and/or the purchase of the UN building before they took occupancy. Did the UN occupy a building that was not up to standard, given that they of all agencies would be the best placed to ensure the least risk to those working in and using the UN building? Will the UN ensure that their building is replaced to appropriate design and construction standards? Who will ensure such improvements to the rebuilding of the buildings and infrastructure in general in Haiti?
The following are some further relevant blog articles:
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/11/building-collapse-in-haiti.html
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2009/04/earthquake-in-laquila-italy-april-2009.html
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/10/earthquake-in-pakistan-october-2008.html
Much has been reported on this catastrophic event in Haiti including the following CNN article:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-381544
Extralegal capital in the form of shanty towns, squatter developments and illegal buildings is a large part of economies of some countries. Some of the following characteristics of these economies include:
• Houses built on land with inadequately recorded ownership
• Lack of property rights
• Lack of enforceable transactions on property rights
• Unincorporated business with undefined liability
• Non-compliance of building with building codes
• Illegal buildings
• Corruption at national and local government levels
Haiti appears to have some of these characteristics. Irrational adherence to outdated traditions, a disregard for any building codes that may exist, and dense populations of people all trying to compete for limited resources and opportunities, are just some of the reasons for the problem in many countries.
Haiti is a relatively small land-mass attempting to support more than nine million people. A plundering of resources by deforestation is one characteristic of this society. It is typical of many countries where too many people are trying to eke out a living on impoverished land where there are increasingly diminishing resources.
As with many other poor countries, the resource base is simply inadequate to fulfil the needs of most people and this leads to building structures for shelter (or in the collapse of about a year ago, a school) using the most rudimentary methods and with minimal use of materials. Moderate to severe earthquakes, such as that which occurred last week in Haiti, serve as a further reminder of the frailty of the building stock in Haiti and in many other parts of the world.
The pressure on the planet is well understood to be leading to increasing shortages of food and water. While building technology and construction knowledge using rational engineering principles should be accessible to people anywhere in the world, perpetual poverty in some countries and diminishing access to appropriate building materials is going to lead to many more building failures and loss of life in the future.
Our sympathies are also due to those injured in and to the families of the UN who perished in the collapse of the UN building. It does, however, beg the question as to what due diligence the UN carried out in relation to the design and construction and/or the purchase of the UN building before they took occupancy. Did the UN occupy a building that was not up to standard, given that they of all agencies would be the best placed to ensure the least risk to those working in and using the UN building? Will the UN ensure that their building is replaced to appropriate design and construction standards? Who will ensure such improvements to the rebuilding of the buildings and infrastructure in general in Haiti?
The following are some further relevant blog articles:
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/11/building-collapse-in-haiti.html
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2009/04/earthquake-in-laquila-italy-april-2009.html
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/10/earthquake-in-pakistan-october-2008.html
Much has been reported on this catastrophic event in Haiti including the following CNN article:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-381544
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Climb of Petronas Tower, Kuala Lumpur
It was scary enough walking across the air-bridge between the two towers, and that was on the inside. See this article
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5juf0vvCj2N4MMSUl-1IwIMjcKSlg
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5juf0vvCj2N4MMSUl-1IwIMjcKSlg
Monday, August 3, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Building collapses around the world
The list of building collapses continues. Go to http://twitter.com/KLWalls
Where is the engineering input and compliance with building codes?
Where is the engineering input and compliance with building codes?
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Building collapses - where is the engineering input?
One of many building collapses - Haiti
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/11/building-collapse-in-haiti.html
Burundi, East Africa - 10 July 2009
http://www.congoo.com/news/2009July10/Fourteen-dead-partially-constructed-building
Barisal, Bangladesh - 12 July 2009
http://www.southasianmedia.net/cnn.cfm?id=593726&category=Social%20Sectors&Country=BANGLADESH
Lagos, Nigeria - 13 July 2009. More government legislation called for.
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/homes_property/article15//indexn3_html?pdate=130709&ptitle=Engineers,%20others%20urge%20multi-disciplinary%20strategies%20to%20curb%20building%20collapse&cpdate=130709
Boston, USA - 13 July 2009
http://wbztv.com/local/huntington.avenue.building.2.1083188.html
Istanbul, Turkey - 14 July 2009
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=180853&bolum=100
Bridge collapse, India - 14 July 2009
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h00UNGeKcIley2uxzOV0-lPAsuoQD99DBDDO0
Karachi, Pakistan - 15 July 2009 - collapse resulting from a fire
http://www.geo.tv/7-15-2009/46008.htm
House in Ahmedabad - 15 July 2009
http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20090715/1416/tnl-two-killed-in-building-collapse.html
East Delhi, India - 16 July 2009
http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20090715/1416/tnl-two-persons-injured-in-building-coll.html
Ogbomoso, Nigeria - 20 July 2009
http://www.tribune.com.ng/20072009/news/news5.html
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2008/11/building-collapse-in-haiti.html
Burundi, East Africa - 10 July 2009
http://www.congoo.com/news/2009July10/Fourteen-dead-partially-constructed-building
Barisal, Bangladesh - 12 July 2009
http://www.southasianmedia.net/cnn.cfm?id=593726&category=Social%20Sectors&Country=BANGLADESH
Lagos, Nigeria - 13 July 2009. More government legislation called for.
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/homes_property/article15//indexn3_html?pdate=130709&ptitle=Engineers,%20others%20urge%20multi-disciplinary%20strategies%20to%20curb%20building%20collapse&cpdate=130709
Boston, USA - 13 July 2009
http://wbztv.com/local/huntington.avenue.building.2.1083188.html
Istanbul, Turkey - 14 July 2009
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=180853&bolum=100
Bridge collapse, India - 14 July 2009
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h00UNGeKcIley2uxzOV0-lPAsuoQD99DBDDO0
Karachi, Pakistan - 15 July 2009 - collapse resulting from a fire
http://www.geo.tv/7-15-2009/46008.htm
House in Ahmedabad - 15 July 2009
http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20090715/1416/tnl-two-killed-in-building-collapse.html
East Delhi, India - 16 July 2009
http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20090715/1416/tnl-two-persons-injured-in-building-coll.html
Brazil - 19 July 2009
Ogbomoso, Nigeria - 20 July 2009
http://www.tribune.com.ng/20072009/news/news5.html
Traditional divine powershift from engineers to physicists?
Traditional divine powershift from engineers to physicists with a change in paradigm in relation to earthquake design for buildings?
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=8112569&page=1
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=8112569&page=1
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Do you think the economic downturn could be positive?
The downturn could be positive from an environmental point of view. Doing more with less seems like a good idea for those of us concerned about an insatiable use of resources and the sustainability of the world. Developing better technology and doing things smarter in a recession should be an experience we could use in the long term, even when the economic situation has improved. Those companies that are in tune with this approach to business are going to be those who flourish in the future.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Six die in high-rise fire in London
Deja vu. Fire knows no political boundaries or differences between developed and developing countries.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/07/03/london.fire/index.html?eref=rss_latest
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2009/02/fire-in-astrakhan-russia.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/07/03/london.fire/index.html?eref=rss_latest
http://bildingblocks.blogspot.com/2009/02/fire-in-astrakhan-russia.html
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Earthquake in L'Aquila, Italy - April 2009
Naturally we cannot prevent earthquakes from happening, but is it a case of deja vu? I mean the seemingly unnecessary death and destruction in L'Aquila, Italy, due to the earthquake on about 6 April 2009.
Italy ranks with some other countries such as New Zealand, Japan and the US in having the most highly developed and advanced seismic design abilities, and yet the San Salvatore public hospital which was built in 2000, was able to collapse along with historic churches and stone houses. Did other modern buildings suffer from similar damage? How could this happen?
Italy is so much involved in advanced engineering research and seismic design that it is the base of the new Global Earthquake Model (GEM). Take a look at these websites.
http://www.globalquakemodel.org/
http://www.globalquakemodel.org/RossSteinsVisionSpeech.html
The answer to the vexing question of how this could happen may be amongst the reports of relative chaos in the way building controls are administered in Italy. As one commentator said,
"In a country littered with illegal buildings and construction eyesores, experts blamed the use of low-quality cement and inadequate supporting iron rods, saying tens of thousands of palaces, schools and hospitals were at risk".
Elsewhere in this blog I have said that we must realise that the investment in enforcing seismic codes on a nation-wide basis and strengthening unsafe structures in risk areas is a smaller price to pay than the pain and suffering, the economics of lost livelihoods, bankrupt businesses and the fear and guilt.
Italy ranks with some other countries such as New Zealand, Japan and the US in having the most highly developed and advanced seismic design abilities, and yet the San Salvatore public hospital which was built in 2000, was able to collapse along with historic churches and stone houses. Did other modern buildings suffer from similar damage? How could this happen?
Italy is so much involved in advanced engineering research and seismic design that it is the base of the new Global Earthquake Model (GEM). Take a look at these websites.
http://www.globalquakemodel.org/
http://www.globalquakemodel.org/RossSteinsVisionSpeech.html
The answer to the vexing question of how this could happen may be amongst the reports of relative chaos in the way building controls are administered in Italy. As one commentator said,
"In a country littered with illegal buildings and construction eyesores, experts blamed the use of low-quality cement and inadequate supporting iron rods, saying tens of thousands of palaces, schools and hospitals were at risk".
Elsewhere in this blog I have said that we must realise that the investment in enforcing seismic codes on a nation-wide basis and strengthening unsafe structures in risk areas is a smaller price to pay than the pain and suffering, the economics of lost livelihoods, bankrupt businesses and the fear and guilt.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
50-50 Sustainability Dilemma – Is it Ethical?
These musings relate to buildings, civil engineering developments and our whole built environment. The terms “house” and “building” are used for brevity.
An energy-efficient house is not environmentally friendly. Every building covers ground that would otherwise be organically productive or useful in some other way, thereby making it functionally sterile. Every building reduces the area of the earth that is capable of keeping the earth in balance due to the natural interactions between soil, sun and water. What is the link between sustainable building as an ethical issue and building design and construction as pragmatic activities? All human activities produce green-house gases that are said to be detrimental to the functioning of the earth from the point of view of human habitation.
The main mitigating factor with new building is that they remain relevant and useful for a maximum period of time and that they are designed to be capable of minimal modification in dealing with changing user needs during the life of the building.
While most of us learn from direct experience with feedback – that is facing the consequences of our actions, this does not apply to the notion of sustainability as we are usually unable to observe the consequences of our actions due to such long time-frames. Sometimes, however, we are able to make those observations but forget what existed several decades ago in our lifetime. Degradation to the environment is so gradual that most people are not able to discern or forget changes over a long period of time. Younger people just accept the status quo of the environment that 'it has always been like that'.
The construction and use of buildings consume up to 50% of all energy consumption and 50% of all material taken from nature. They also produce 50% of all waste and 50% of all CFC and HCFC production.
Humans are the only animals that create waste. Buildings provide human habitat. In contrast to what natural undeveloped land does, buildings fail on all other aspects of life principles. Some of these other principles are to create clean air and water, store water, create its own food, create rich soil, use and store solar energy, provide wildlife habitat, moderate climate and weather and consume its own waste.
If the above musings have any credence, then what are the answers for going forward? Ethics codes as adopted by professional organisations such as IPENZ and RICS, both of which I am a member, purport to deal with members’ advice and actions relating to sustainability. While I could never admit to breaching these codes of ethics I can genuinely say that mitigating the adverse consequences of my actions is paramount. But given that each mitigating action still continues to have incremental adverse results for the long-term sustainability of the earth may leave us all in a slight dilemma.
An energy-efficient house is not environmentally friendly. Every building covers ground that would otherwise be organically productive or useful in some other way, thereby making it functionally sterile. Every building reduces the area of the earth that is capable of keeping the earth in balance due to the natural interactions between soil, sun and water. What is the link between sustainable building as an ethical issue and building design and construction as pragmatic activities? All human activities produce green-house gases that are said to be detrimental to the functioning of the earth from the point of view of human habitation.
The main mitigating factor with new building is that they remain relevant and useful for a maximum period of time and that they are designed to be capable of minimal modification in dealing with changing user needs during the life of the building.
While most of us learn from direct experience with feedback – that is facing the consequences of our actions, this does not apply to the notion of sustainability as we are usually unable to observe the consequences of our actions due to such long time-frames. Sometimes, however, we are able to make those observations but forget what existed several decades ago in our lifetime. Degradation to the environment is so gradual that most people are not able to discern or forget changes over a long period of time. Younger people just accept the status quo of the environment that 'it has always been like that'.
The construction and use of buildings consume up to 50% of all energy consumption and 50% of all material taken from nature. They also produce 50% of all waste and 50% of all CFC and HCFC production.
Humans are the only animals that create waste. Buildings provide human habitat. In contrast to what natural undeveloped land does, buildings fail on all other aspects of life principles. Some of these other principles are to create clean air and water, store water, create its own food, create rich soil, use and store solar energy, provide wildlife habitat, moderate climate and weather and consume its own waste.
If the above musings have any credence, then what are the answers for going forward? Ethics codes as adopted by professional organisations such as IPENZ and RICS, both of which I am a member, purport to deal with members’ advice and actions relating to sustainability. While I could never admit to breaching these codes of ethics I can genuinely say that mitigating the adverse consequences of my actions is paramount. But given that each mitigating action still continues to have incremental adverse results for the long-term sustainability of the earth may leave us all in a slight dilemma.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Fire in Astrakhan, Russia
There are reports of a fire in a residential building in the Astrakhan region of Russia on 17 February 2009 in which 18 people died. Is this another lesson not learned? This follows on the heals of another recent tragic fire in a home for elderly persons. Just two days earlier, on 15 February 2009 there was a fire in an old apartment building in Independence, US, where 3 people died. I have mentioned two other examples in this blog, but the potential list is endless. When is all the carnage and destruction going to end?
This will only happen when government and building control authorities start taking more seriously the need for greater levels of fire protection systems and emergency escape systems from buildings. All too often older buildings and buildings that have undergone a change to residential accommodation are set up to house people with no cognisance of the fire safety of the building, or at best with only the most rudimentary consideration having been given to such important safety issues.
This will only happen when government and building control authorities start taking more seriously the need for greater levels of fire protection systems and emergency escape systems from buildings. All too often older buildings and buildings that have undergone a change to residential accommodation are set up to house people with no cognisance of the fire safety of the building, or at best with only the most rudimentary consideration having been given to such important safety issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)