Time valued life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from buildings

The UK has adopted legally binding carbon reduction targets of 34% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (measured against the 1990 baseline). Buildings are estimated to be responsible for more than 50% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the UK. These consist of both operational, produced during use, and embodied, produced during manufacture of materials and components, and during construction, refurbishments and demolition. A brief assessment suggests that it is unlikely that UK emission reduction targets can be met without substantial reductions in both Oc and Ec. Oc occurs over the lifetime of a building whereas the bulk of Ec occurs at the start of a building’s life. A time value for emissions could influence the decision making process when it comes to comparing mitigation measures which have benefits that occur at different times. An example might be the choice between building construction using low Ec construction materials versus building construction using high Ec construction materials but with lower Oc, although the use of high Ec materials does not necessarily imply a lower Oc. Particular time related issues examined here are: the urgency of the need to achieve large emissions reductions during the next 10 to 20 years; the earlier effective action is taken, the less costly it will be; future reduction in carbon intensity of energy supply; the carbon cycle and relationship between the release of GHG’s and their subsequent concentrations in the atmosphere. An equation is proposed, which weights emissions according to when they occur during the building life cycle, and which effectively increases Ec as a proportion of the total, suggesting that reducing Ec is likely to be more beneficial, in terms of climate change, for most new buildings. Thus, giving higher priority to Ec reductions is likely to result in a bigger positive impact on climate change and mitigation costs

Identifying behavioural predictors of small power electricity consumption in office buildings

It is widely accepted that there is a gap between design energy and real world operational energy consumption. The behaviour of occupants is often cited as an important factor influencing building energy performance. However, its consideration, both during design and operation, is overly simplistic, often assuming a direct link between attitudes and behaviour. Alternative models of decision making from psychology highlight a range of additional influential factors and emphasise that occupants do not always act in a rational manner. Developing a better understanding of occupant decision making could help inform office energy conservation campaigns as well as models of behaviour employed during the design process. This paper assesses the contribution of various behavioural constructs on small power consumption in offices. The method is based upon the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) which assumes that intention is driven by three factors: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, but we also consider a fourth construct: habit measured through the Self- Report Habit Index (SRHI). A questionnaire was issued to 81 participants in two UK offices. Questionnaire results for each behavioural construct were correlated against each participant’s individual workstation electricity consumption. The intentional processes proposed by TPB could not account for the observed differences in occupants’ interactions with small power appliances. Instead, occupants were interacting with small power “automatically”, with habit accounting for 11% of the variation in workstation energy consumption. The implications for occupant behaviour models and employee engagement campaigns are discussed

Influencing energy efficient occupant behavior through improved building and control design

There is growing pressure on the construction industry to deliver energy efficient, sustainable buildings but there is evidence to suggest that, in practice, designs regularly fail to achieve the anticipated levels of in-use energy consumption. One of the key factors behind this discrepancy is the behavior of the building occupants. This paper explores how insights from experimental psychology could potentially be used to reduce the gap between the predicted and actual energy performance of buildings. It demonstrates why traditional methods to engage with the occupants are not always successful and proposes a model for a more holistic approach to this issue. The paper concludes that achieving energy efficiency in buildings is not solely a technological issue and that the construction industry needs to adopt a more user-centred approach

Evaluating the performance of windcatchers for natural ventilation

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Communities of practice in UK large contracting firms: contrasting application and non-utilized merits

The idea of a community of practice (CoP) has been offered as the engine to unlock the potential of organizational resources, mainly knowledge and people, to achieve the strategic goal of sustained competitiveness. The relevance and application of CoPs in large UK contracting companies was investigated using two case studies. Contrasting variations in the understanding of the concept between the two contracting companies were observed. While a CoP was applied in one company with strategic intent, the concept was not fully understood in the other. In one company, only a third of CoP members surveyed agreed that CoPs were a vehicle for driving best practice and innovation throughout the business; this compared with more than 60% in agreement in the other contracting firm. The higher agreement and satisfaction of CoP members in the latter case study was the result of the management's understanding and commitment. CoPs require time and organizational support to mature. The strategic inception and management support of CoP application is vital for their maturation and progress. Although the construction industry change discourses portray CoPs as fostering an environment of trust, and hence serving as innovation and competiveness enablers, their potential contribution to contracting firms does not provide a compelling case and hence merits further research studies