According to the latest survey from the Federation of Master Builders (FMB) the construction industry still faces some major economic challenges in the coming year. Cuts in local authority spending seem to be hitting the industry hard and shows that the sector is still in a period of recession.

The survey has highlighted that the nearly one in three (30%) of building companies fully expect that their workload will fall this year. Further to this over half (51%) have noted that there has been a reduction in the amount of public sector work available, whilst 56% have seen a reduction of private sector housing work in the first quarter of this year.

Richard Diment, Director General of the FMB, added that employment prospects within the industry also look bleak with 55% of companies not expecting to take on any new staff over the next six months. This is particularly bad news for school leavers seeking a career in the industry this summer, sparking concerns that when the sector exits the recession it may suffer a skill shortage as happened after the last period of recession in the 1990’s.

The industry will be looking towards politicians in the run up to the general election to see what support is available for the industry, whether this is through showing a commitment for skills and training or changes to regulations to help the industry recover.

Today something entirely different and I’m afraid not really BuilderScrap related. I saw a rather disturbing report in The Guardian regarding how to reduce my carbon footprint once dead! Should I really be concerned how much carbon is expended whilst they dispose of my body?

It transpires that cremation creates a large carbon footprint, whilst burial is equally damaging to the environment and is also too space consuming. Again I am still not sure that this is something that will concern many including myself, after all the carbon footprint of the dead is always going to be less than even the most eco minded living person.

However, one man has devoted his life to providing a low carbon solution to death. Scottish biochemist Sandy Sullivan has undertaken research in order to provide a solution which achieves what cremation can without the high carbon and mercury emissions, it is called Resomation.

He has developed a pressurised chamber which accelerates body decomposition as it would be in nature, the body is placed in the chamber with an alkaline solution which when heated will leave human remains as white ash within 3 hours. He claims that the method reduces the carbon footprint by four times that of cremation and even more disturbingly suggests that medical parts such as false hips will be left in pristine reusable condition. I think I will leave going to the doctors about that sore hip now.

Surely this is a step too far on ethical living….or dying as it is? I think I will leave it down to friends and family to decide my fate once dead, whether they choose burial, cremation or resomation is fine by me.

CRC or the Carbon Reduction Commitment is the latest government initiative to try to reduce the UK’s carbon consumption. The initiative requests that all companies using in excess of £500,000 of energy per year will need to register for the CRC. Those companies whom do not register will be hit with some fairly hefty fines.

The CRC commitments are designed to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide emissions as well as raise awareness in the larger organisations especially at a senior level. In turn there is a hope for changes in behaviour and infrastructure.

These commitments began on the 1st of April, and saw Wall Engineering to be the pioneer, being the first to register. After the initial year there will be a league table complied from the data and those companies producing more carbon than the average will be forced to buy carbon credits. Initial reports indicate these will be at a cost of £12 per tonne of Carbon, but will fluctuate in an auction style process after a few years.

On the flip side companies producing less carbon than the average will be rewarded with the money from carbon credit refunded to these companies. These rewards and punishments are intended to create a competitive market for carbon usage with financial rewards possible.

This competitive edge may well stem beyond obvious financial gains with the positive PR which will surround companies that are actively taking steps to reduce their carbon footprint. In terms of construction companies this will be firm evidence of their environmental and social commitment and could well prove to be important when tendering for jobs.

Clients are now starting to demand more than just competitive prices, but also clear indications of a company’s environmental and social impacts. In order to remain competitive construction companies are going to need to continue to move in accordance with client demands.

BuilderScrap is currently working with CCI North West and Salford University to develop a carbon calculator, which can effectively measure the reductions in carbon through use of the BuilderScrap website.

Landfill sites have a number of associated problems including high emissions, ground and water contamination as well as being unsightly and smelly. One problem that an innovative landfill in Beijing is looking to solve is the bad odours created by landfill following a barrage of complaints from local residents bemoaning the unsavoury stench.

Beijing has a population of 17 million which is developing a more and more westernised throw away attitude, the city generates 18,000 tonnes of waste every day. This has led to a number (reports suggest around 200) of poorly managed tips on the city outskirts, many of which are illegally operated.

The landfill in question which is adopting a new strategy to reduce bad odours is the Asuwai dump site; they are set to install 100 large deodorant guns on the site. The giant deodorant guns can spray dozens of litres of deodorant each minute over a 50 metre radius. There are also plans to add more plastic covers over the landfill site to reduce the number of bad odours from becoming airborne.

Now local residents will be able to wake up to the smell of a combination of garbage and l’eau de toilette. Let’s just hope that the Beijing residents approve of the choice of deodorant, maybe a poll could be undertaken to determine a favourite fragrance.

Of course this can only be a temporary fix (if indeed it can be called that), China is developing a massive consumer economy and the statistics above tell us that longer term solutions are required. Less than 4% of rubbish in Beijing is recycled compared to 35% in the UK. Further to this only 2% is burned and the remainder is sent to landfill.

China faces a big challenge in order to ensure that its economic growth and success does not come at the cost of society and the environment. Consumer growth over the last 10-20 years has meant that the problem of waste has emerged too quickly to deal with effectively. The Chinese Government now realises this is an issue that will need to be actively addressed with plans to invest in a number of new incinerators, although this has been met by some strong local opposition as concerns have been raised regarding the safety of these. I assume that strangely they do not have similar concerns over the safety of the giant deodorant guns?

Source – The Guardian

At 8.30pm (local time) on Saturday the 27th March 2010, 4000 cities in more than 120 countries across the world turned their lights off as part of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) organised demonstration to raise awareness about climate change and the need for an ambitious global climate deal. This was the fourth time that “Earth Hour” has taken place in an attempt to increase awareness and has been described by the organisers as “both a warning and a beacon of hope”.

Millions turned their lights off for “Earth Hour” beginning at 8.30pm local time in the Chatham Islands off the coast of New Zealand. Over the course of the day lights continued to switch off as local times reached 8.30pm plunging many famous landmarks into darkness including the Sydney Opera House, The Eiffel Tower, Big Ben and The Empire State Building.

Whilst the singe hour will do little to nothing to reduce carbon emissions, the symbolic display was to raise awareness for a longer term climate solution. Whilst critics have been quick to point out that the short term switch off would create an upsurge when lights were turned back on after a relatively quick period of time. This could in fact lead to an increase in carbon emissions for the event.

The event has received backing from Gordon Brown and the UN as well as a number of other global leaders. Let’s hope that “Earth Hour” will have demonstrated that there is support for action and the need for a climate deal is of the utmost urgency.

On Tuesday I visited the Hargould Eco Showcase at Old Trafford Stadium to view a series of seminars about environment and sustainability in construction. It was a great opportunity to get an overview of the construction industry and try to gage the environmental feelings within the sector.

Arriving slightly late, after my sat-nav decided to stop giving me directions as soon as the stadium came into sight forcing me to spend the next twenty minutes negotiating myself down a series of side streets around the stadium. Finally I managed to locate where I was supposed to go, park up, register, collect my free cup of tea, say a quick hello to Eddie on the BuilderScrap stand and sit down in time for the first of the three seminars (resource efficiency in construction).

All three seminars followed a similar structure looking firstly at the issue, then the solution and finally the best practice. I was delighted that within the first seminar tackling resource consumption, BuilderScrap got a mention when discussing the practice of re-use and its growing importance to the industry, particularly pleasing with Eddie conveniently poised around the corner waiting for the seminar audience to filter past him ready to explain more about BuilderScrap.

Without going into too much detail about each seminar, the key points of the first seminar were to outline just how much perfectly good materials are being sent to landfill under the false pretence of being waste. Stats were provided demonstrating for example that 13 million tonnes of raw materials go to landfill which have never been used. It went on to explain how much money could potentially be saved each year with improved site management and planning to reduce and reuse as much as possible.

The second seminar discussed carbon management in construction, outlining the need to make carbon reductions in the industry through the use of good design, correct materials, best practice construction and also considering the long term operation of the building, will it be a big emitter of greenhouse gases (the period between construction and demolition). This was discussed with particular reference to BREEAM quality projects.

The final seminar looked into sustainable procurement in construction, this being the information about the products themselves. Where they are from? What they are made of? How have they been transported? And how they will be disposed of? It seems crazy to think that raw materials could be mined/farmed in one country, transported to be manufactured in the next, transported again to another country to be sold, and then end up never being used and ending on a landfill site after all that energy has been expended.

My main thoughts from the seminars were that whilst government in the UK is launching so many initiatives such as act on CO2 and halving waste to landfill, there needs to be more explanation why? It is not right to leave the construction sector feeling as if it is been persecuted by a series of laws without explanation,  why shouldn’t they carry on the way they have been, after all, many companies/individuals will have operated the same way for decades. If the time was taken to issue the relevant information in the industry it could show that sustainability is not that hard to build in to existing policy and with companies like BuilderScrap providing a platform to make it even easier to implement best practice then it can surprise how easy and cost effective a change in attitude can prove.

There is a need for constant reminders from the top down; you are not always going to get through to people first time, the saying is old habits are hard to break and teaching people to act differently can be tough. Having said that I think there is a willingness to change in the construction industry, maybe with les focus on the environment but certainly to save money and also to ensure that they are meeting their client’s expectations, ultimately if the client wants sustainable construction methods, the sector will move to accommodate, those that don’t will be left behind.

Overall I thought the seminars were excellent and would urge anyone within the industry to make an effort to attend in future, the presentations were very easy to follow and appealed to a wide audience. It did not try to be overambitious, there was an appreciation that you are not going to turn the construction industry into a band of eco-warriors overnight, it had a strong emphasis on monetary savings and client expectations, with the environmental message as an underlying theme throughout.

Last week, I took a quick look at the Copenhagen Summit and briefly discussed its failings; today I wanted to find out a little more about the US commitments to carbon, partly as research, but also to highlight the importance of the US developing an ambitious carbon reduction policy.

In the run up to the Copenhagen conference, President Obama declared that the US targets would be a reduction of Greenhouse gas emissions by 17% on 2005 levels by 2020. This compares to targets from the EU of 20% which could rise to 30%. Also the 2005 baseline is very misleading with the international standard baseline being 1990, this would only equate to a 4% reduction using this baseline if the US achieved their targets. Whilst it could be considered a breakthrough that the US is trying to implement some environmental targets and policies, it is disappointing that these are not more ambitious in attempt to set a benchmark for others.

Why is the US involvement so important? The US is no longer the biggest polluter in the world since China surpassed them in either 2006 or 2007 depending on which reports are believed.  However, the US is still by far and away the biggest polluter per capita than any other nation. With approximately 5% of the world’s population it accounts for more than 30% of the worlds emissions (http://www.seiu.org). Most of the world is looking at China and the US to lead the way in creating a deal as the two largest polluters with many seeing a deal as pointless if both are not involved. With China pledging to match the 17% levels set by the US though it seems unlikely that other countries will follow with greater targets.

The US still will be unable to pass this as legislation until it has been approved by the Senate however, and it will now be considered. But if the bill is passed what incentives/punishments can the US put in place to help? Suggestions have been for Carbon Taxes to be phased in for businesses and households; in turn these could be used to pay for research for more efficient energy schemes and to be used to assist developing countries to cope with climate change.

It is crucial that the highest polluting countries and businesses take the initiative. The need for polluters to take responsibility is imperative; it is the actions of the big polluters that directly impact on other countries. We need to create a similar feel to that of smoking in the UK where we appreciate that it not only damaging to the smoker but the actions are detrimental to others, a taboo has successfully been created whereby smokers are frowned upon for their actions. Similarly high polluters must appreciate that they have a responsibility to the developing countries that are struggling with the effects of climate change and act accordingly to reduce emissions. We need to reach a situation where it is no longer acceptable to be a country or company that is not tackling the problems of high emissions and these are condemned by others both socially and politically; this needs to be done globally, and I believe for this to happen it is the China and the US who will need to take the lead. Others will feel that their own contributions are negligible against the big polluters unless this occurs; ultimately action is needed by all.

A little different than the usual stuff on BuilderScrap but an important issue that has arisen from man made influences on the environment.

 I was saddened today to read a report in the Guardian concerning the plight of the worlds primates. The report complied by a coalition of conservation groups and  primatolgists has stated that nearly half of all primate species face imminent risk of exticntion. Species such as the Orang Utan (above left) and the Golden Headed Langur (above right) have dwindled in numbers leaving these species under a very real threat of dissapearence.

The Golden Headed Langur could be down to as few as 60 individuals, simiraly species of Lemur and Gibbons have also been reported to be as low as 100 remaining individuals. In total there are 634 primate species, of which 48% are categorised by the IUCN as “red list” species. These are the species which are under greatest threat as the impacts of logging, hunting and smuggling take there toll upon them.

So how have humans allowed and initiated the decline of some of our closest living relatives? All over the world we have seen widespread deforestation and the destruction of primate habitat, often these areas have suffered as countries have struggled for economic growth, leading to the clearance of these lands for increased levels of agriculture. Pressures have also come from hunters and smugglers, for example in China primate hearts have been used in traditional medicines.
 
Due to the very low numbers  of individuals within certain species the threat of extinction is now very high for some primates, an event such as a cyclone or an outbreak of disease could spell the end for an entire species. With such fragile populations, the ease at which these species could fail is increasing, any disaster or event such as the above could have massive ramifications and the loss of these species forever.

So what is being done to save these primates? Deforestation is a key element to any deal to tackle climate change, not only in saving these fantastic animals but also due to the importance of rainforest areas in locking in carbon and preventing more greenhouse gases from entering the environment. Plans for developed countries to give money to developing countries to maintain their areas of forest and take action against illegal logging. In terms of the conservation of primate species conservation work is been undertaken by  a number of zoos and scientists to try to bolster the numbers of these animals. A list of the top 25 list has also been documented in order to create greater public awareness and also to try to encourage governments to become more active in conservation measures.

It seems so deeply saddening that the human race has nearly driven so many of its closest relatives to near extinction. It seems strange how this situation has been allowed to reach such dramatic levels with nearly 50% of all primate species as endangered. Surely the plight of primates has, at least to some extent, been known for a considerable length of time, even if the full extent was unknown. The real situation is however if there is no action now it will be too late and these creatures will become little more than a lifeless image in a book for future generations.

Again, not our usual subject of discussion, but I hope you enjoyed reading, please let us at BuilderScrap know if you have any comments.