Elemental

::via Miles Walker at HOK Green BIM I found this interesting tidbit:

All new salaried hires are now expected to become (LEED) accredited within six months, with the long-term goal to have 100% of design professionals accredited. HOK has adopted a policy to apply LEED to every project and has fully integrated LEED into “The HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design.”

This is an excellent move.  I would hope there is someone in the UK approaching BREEAM with the same focus, but I don’t know of anyone yet.

There are differences between the business model of LEED and BREEAM which are worth pointing out.  In particular, BREEAM is a ‘closed’ scheme – only the accredited and paid up can access the extranet to get the credit criteria.  In contrast, LEED is much more open.  There seems to be an understanding that information alone is not knowledge.  Information needs to be applied to context to turn it from words and numbers to something much more useful – knowledge.

This approach to intellectual property is something I have applauded in the past and it appears HOK are following suit too.  From their site (under resources and tools):

HOK made a decision in the early 1990s not to be proprietary about our sustainable information. We believe that it’s important to the industry, to our communities and to the planet to share what we’re doing. 

In my experience, sharing information with someone does not automatically mean that they ’steal’ it from you and then fail to use you as a consultant in the future.  In general, most peope are far too busy doing their own job to try and take on yours as well.  In fact, by sharing information, you demonstrate your particular knowledge in a field and make it more likely that you will be used again in the future.  Well, this is my experience anyway.  Your own mileage may vary – any comments?

mel starrs Uncategorized BREEAM, Miles Walker, Sustainability, United Kingdom

In a follow up to this post, I went on to the BSJ site and in the feedback form asked for RSS feeds.  Unbeknownst to me, they had already sneaked them in without my noticing!  The feed can be found here. (edit 13 Feb 2009: the BSJ archives are now available on the BSD website, as are the BSD feeds)

It is not widely publicised on the site (in fact I can’t find the route from the front page), and they aren’t yet using the orange box symbol which seems to be the current standard, but I’m very happy to see the feed.

The email suggested that all publications in the stable had RSS feeds.  I shall hunt them out and if successful, let you all know.

mel starrs Uncategorized Knowledge, News, Productivity, Resources

Now I know I am probably the only person out of the 17,000+ CIBSE members who uses RSS and I have complained in the past about the lack of feeds for the news area of the CIBSE site.  But never let it be said that I complain without seeking solutions.  To the right of the screen, approximately where the Jobs section used to be is the RSS feed for the CIBSE news page.

Being the persistent nuisance that I am, I went to the very useful website, FeedYes.  I added the news page from the CIBSE website, imported it into my Google Reader and then used the public sharing function to add the clip to my sidebar.  Consider it a public service. I might do the same for BSJ if that isn’t violating any copyright issues (Phil?).

mel starrs Uncategorized CIBSE, Google, News

Lovely article in the FT at the weekend which I only just got round to reading.  Well written, balanced and perceptive.  A change to see that in the UK press these days when it comes to architecture.  I’m off to look up who Edwin Heathcote is, in the meantime, go read the article:

Of course, much of what was built in the 20th century was rubbish and there is no call to conserve everything. But the drive to purge the landscape of the output of an entire generation of architects is short-sighted. We hear much about the green revolution yet the energy (physical and intellectual) embodied in these buildings is disregarded.

mel starrs Uncategorized Architecture, Edwin Heathcote, Energy, United Kingdom

Of course, it’s not presented as takeover, but a merger. Ramboll (Danish company) have bought Whitby Bird and it will be now known as Ramboll Whitbybird – trips off the tongue, doesn’t it? Mark Whitby cites growing internationalisation as a key factor in the decision.

The marvellously named CEO of Ramboll, Flemming Bligaard Pedersen, cites strategic acquisition of know-how as their main aim. Neither company is publically listed, Ramboll being owned by Ramboll Foundation (95%) and the employees. This move is not an unknown event for Ramboll. In 2003 they doubled in size to around 6000 employees by undertaking similar acquisitions outside the UK. I am fascinated by acquistions and mergers in the industry having watched them from the inside and outside. Pedersen is optimistic about the mergers chances of success:

“It is our experience that if we prepare well and make efforts to secure alignment of values and organisational culture before the acquisition and if the following integration process is characterised by openness and empowerment, we have every chance of success”

 Building magazine have a comprehensive report here.

Of course all this consolidation at the top of the market signals an opportunity for small to mid-size consolidation at the other end of the market.  I expect to see all those one man start-ups starting to band together to fill the gaps left by all this consolidation elsewhere…

mel starrs Uncategorized Ramboll, Ramboll Foundation, Sustainability, United Kingdom, Whitby Bird

Plenty around on skyscrapers and tall buildings currently.  Fogetting for a minute Ms Greer, we have:

• New guidance from CABE on tall buildings. Tall buildings may in future be acceptable at outline planning consent stage provided the proposals are part of a robust and credible long term master plan. The new guidance (pdf, 8 pages), just published, has called for tall buildings to exceed the latest regulations for minimising energy and reducing carbon emissions over the lifetime of the development:

  • para 4.1.6 The sustainable design and construction of the proposal. For all forms of  development, good design means sustainable design. Tall buildings should set exemplary standards in design because of their high profile and local impact. Proposals should therefore exceed the latest regulations and planning policies for minimising energy use and reducing carbon emissions over the lifetime of the development. The long-term resource and energy efficiency of tall buildings will be enhanced if their design can be adapted over time.

• And not one, but two blogs/feeds to check out the world of tall buildings. James Newman’s Skyscraper News.Com which has plenty of UK news and Preston Koerner’s Skyscraper Sunday, a green look at global tall buildings every Sunday.

*I’m only going to have one Skyscraper Monday – Preston has a S2 (Skyscraper Sunday) every week…

mel starrs Uncategorized Energy, energy efficiency, energy use, Green Building, Greer, Guidance Documents, James Newman, Preston Koerner, United Kingdom

Thanks to Mark for this one:

“our assessment is supposed to be a purely visual one. We are not obliged to be thorough.”

Steve Younger, HIP provider

Oh dear.  As anyone who has ever tried to do a post construction heat loss calculation for any building built before 1985 will know, it is a minefield of supposition and estimation.  Which is not to say that the calculation shouldn’t be done.  Within the SAP methodology there are ways of making fair assumptions on building construction.  The issue in this case appears to be the availability and the applicability of information which would improve the building’s rating.

There is of course a bigger issue at hand here.  Does a few weeks training and a certificate prepare individuals (who may have no previous experience of assessing buildings except for dwelling in them) to make what are essentially judgement calls?  Obviously not.  Those who would be qualified to do so are in too short supply.  So the methodology needs to be absolutely water tight, with no room for subjective opinion.  Which devalues the process in itself.  Sigh.  We’ve got ourselves into a bit of a pickle with this one haven’t we…

The fact that the two assessors in the article got different answers would lead me to conclude that the methodology (or the delivery of the training of the methodology – it would be interesting to find out if the 2 inspectors were qualified with different providers) is insufficiently ‘idiot-proof’.

Of course, there is an opportunity screaming out here – differentiate yourself above the rest of the pack, charge a few quid more and market yourself as a ‘thorough’ HIP inspector, unlike poor Mr Younger.

mel starrs Uncategorized Green Building, News, Steve Younger

I’m in a pdf blackspot currently so have not been able to read the paper yet.  Luckily Mark Brinkley has done a sterling job summarising the key phrases here. Phil (who is no longer a zero champion, but now merely sustainable*) has a round up here.

*I jest of course – it’s a name change for the blog for mundane rather than philosophical reasons

mel starrs Uncategorized Green Building, Guidance Documents, Mark Brinkley, Sustainability

Germaine Greer (yes, the feminist) has solved the world’s building problems with just over 1000 words. In the Guardian. Why? I have no idea what purpose this serves. Plus Jane Jacobs said it all a lot better and with significantly greater authority.

Germaine might want to think about physics and math, too:

Following Lloyd Wright’s basic concept of the tree/house, we begin with the tap root that anchors the structure to the earth; this can be used for geothermal heating, hugely reducing the building’s carbon footprint as well as the cost of living in it. The height of the building stands in direct relation to the depth of its tap root, at a ratio of about 10:1. The building could be covered with photovoltaic cells that provide more than sufficient power for all the residents’ needs, the surplus of which, fed back into the grid, would provide income for essential maintenance.

Germaine, have you heard of shadows and orientation?

What is it about the industry that invites opinion from outsiders? What do they think we are all doing here? Staring out the window, waiting for Germaine to uncover FLW’s masterstroke of genius? Hmphhh.

edit: BTW, I’m not disagreeing with the message of building upwards, necessarily. I just object to sloppy journalism touting PV and geothermal as salves without proper quantification.

mel starrs Uncategorized Germaine Greer, Green Building, Jane Jacobs, Lloyd Wright, News, the Guardian

The AECB appears to be realigning it’s Carbon Lite program with CSH.  Press release in the latest newsletter states:

At the heart of the programme are three Steps to improved energy performance in buildings, which provide robust solutions to the CO2 targets at levels 4, 5 and 6 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. These steps offer extremely cost-effective ways of creating genuine CO2 emissions reduction in new buildings.

I had previously been confused as to why AECB seemed to be striking out on their own and they have been very critical of CSH in the past. Having facilitated a workshop on low energy standards in housing in UK, I am more than aware of the numerous competing standards and any paring down and rationalisation has to be applauded.

The AECB still seem to be a little militant in their approach though – I think they need to tone down the aggressive language, it’s not doing them any favours:

It is becoming increasingly clear that in the building sector, neither Government action nor Industry initiatives are leading to the level of regulatory reform or voluntary action needed to deliver a sustainable future for the UK, due to conflicting interests, ignorance of buildings’ actual energy performance and political uncertainty.

Independence may give them a licence to take a critical stance, but language like this is a turnoff.  IMO, better to say what can be done, than to point out what is wrong.  I’ll keep watching this space…

mel starrs Uncategorized actual energy performance, Built Environment, Green Building, Guidance Documents, improved energy performance, low energy standards, Sustainability, United Kingdom