The Decaying British Steel Industry

It’s no secret the steel industry is in dire straits. Last year saw the sale of British Steel to Chinese firm Jingye. They paid around £70m for a business whose £1m-a-day losses have been supported by a government indemnity since last May.

Around 3,200 staff were kept on and 400 were let go as a result of the takeover.

Those remaining staff may begin to see big cultural changes in the way the business is run over coming months; Jingye was founded in the 1970s by Li Ganpo, a former Communist party official who built the group from scratch in a corner of the Hebei province famed for the role it played in the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.

Whilst British Steel was on life support, there’s something undeniably sad about the loss of British steelworks that have existed for around 150 years to big spenders from overseas. It’s a shame it came to it.

Now, the future of the third biggest producer of steel in the UK, Liberty Steel, also hangs in the balance, following the demise of its major financial supporter Greensill Capital. The Government refused a £170 million request for financial support, spelling uncertain times for the 3,000+ workers.

How important is Steel for Britain?

The importance of the British steel industry cannot be overstated and it’s collapse would apply crippling pressures elsewhere.

Steel is a “foundational industry”. Its products support a range of other industries, such as automotive, construction, infrastructure, etc. Plus, the loss of Liberty’s modern energy-efficient arc furnaces would be a big blow to the hope of ‘a more sustainable future going forward.

State aid

Financial analysists say that the Government is unlikely to step in with financial support given the complexities of GFG’s corporate governance arrangements, coupled with the high degree of risk.

It would be easy to lambast the government for this, yet the general public would undoubtably moan if that is where their money was spent.

The British population is currently in a heightened state of disproportionate fear. They want their taxpayers’ money to be spent on keeping them safe from a virus with a mortality rate that falls somewhere between 0.5% and 1%.

The government has had to borrow and spend many billions of pounds to fight coronavirus and protect the economy. Lockdowns have reduced the amount of money the government raises in taxes, even though the WHO themselves have questioned the effectiveness of them as a means for controlling the virus.

In the first year of the pandemic, from April 2020 to 2021, Britain borrowed £299bn, the highest figure since records began in 1946. The government is expected to borrow less in the current year, April 2021 to 2022, though the figure could still be more than £200bn.

How will the debt be paid?

…By increasing our taxes and cutting spending!

So as long as this cycle of fear and debt continues, one cannot expect much state aid for the protection of assets, such as the British steel industry, meaning that unfortunately it is often being left to die or slapped with a ‘For Sale’ sign; a sad fate, for a once thriving industry that still employs over 33,400 people in the UK today.

It’s not just the steel industry that is affected

Steel itself is vital for just about everything we use. In buildings it makes up metal roofing, steel beams, reinforcing steel and mounting brackets. It is used in the creation of our vehicles. Our infrastructure is reliant upon it. Think bridges, steel safety barriers for roads, lighting and high voltage pylons, railings and railways etc.

The loss of an industry has a domino effect on other industries. Many argue that this is not just a crisis for the steel sector, but one affecting UK manufacturing in general, which accounts for roughly 10% of UK economic output. The plight of the British steel industry impacts on other allied sectors, such as steel processors, distributors, scrap metal dealers, metal traders and other metal product manufacturers. Not to mention the impact it will have on construction!

Are we expected to outsource all of our steel, post-Bexit, in a time of great scarcity of materials? …sounds expensive!

What can government do?

The industry claims that it knows what it needs: reduced business rates, a relaxation of carbon emissions targets for heavy manufacturers, (which doesn’t sound very progressive long term), more compensation for high energy prices, and a commitment that British steel is used in major construction projects.

At a steel summit held in Rotherham in October, Government argued that it has already taken clear action to help the industry, through cutting energy costs, taking action on imports, government procurement and EU emissions regulations, meeting key steel industry asks.

But industry trade body UK Steel, says it still needs to do more. Gareth Stace, Director of UK Steel, told the BBC: “The work it’s doing to help us is good but we need much further action taking place to tackle the imports, the flood of Chinese steel into the UK and the European economy.”

“We need to see government and the European Commission tackling that head on and quickly.”

In summary

According to the ONS, in 2014, the Great British steel industry employed 34,500 people – 0.1% of all those in employment.

However, the 1971 census of employment recorded 323,000 steel workers, representing 1.5% of all in employment at that time. By 1981 this had almost halved to 167,000 (0.8%). This decline in employment continued and is particularly noticeable between the late 1970s and mid-1980’s, with the biggest drop recorded between 1978 and 1981, when employment fell from 271,000 to 167,000.

Employment in the steel industry fell below 100,000 in the late 1980s and, after that, declined gradually throughout the 1990s and 2000s, reaching 37,000 in 2008.

This seems so contradictory to a layman like me, when one considers that demand for steel has increased exponentially since the 1970’s. Even now, amidst our self-destructive reaction to the pandemic, worldwide steel demand will grow 5.8% to exceed pre-pandemic levels, according to the World Steel Association.

Nobody seems to have the answers.

To me, an outside observer of the construction industry and its various sectors, what is happening to UK steel is a tragedy, playing directly into the hands of overseas competition. If left to continue, we will become entirely reliant on imports at a time when we have burned many bridges.

Let’s hope something is done by government quick before we lose an industry that we are reliant upon and should be proud of.

/0 Comments/by

A Chink in Britain’s supply chain

,

Britain needs buildings more than ever. As such, confidence within the sector is sky high. However, does the current state of our supply chains pose a risk to us capitalising on growth? Buildingspecifier’s Editor Joe Bradbury investigates:

 

According to IHS Markit/CIPS, output growth has risen in line with increased commercial, domestic and civil engineering projects. These works have largely come in the form of restarting delayed projects, critically around office development, leisure and hospitality.

Residential new build has also experienced a significant boost, alongside domestic renovation, with higher spends reported in both areas of the industry.

Output among private sector housebuilders has surged by nearly 141 per cent since its low point 12 months ago. Infrastructure work has also long since soared past its pre-pandemic level. Whilst government statisticians have confirmed that 2020 was the worst year on record for UK construction, that milestone is now thankfully behind us as contractors and their suppliers continue to gear up for a sustained surge of demand throughout the course of 2021.

This great surge in demand is great news, but like all great waves it brings with it a degree of risk.

Higher demand for construction and trade services has a real-world trickle down to small and medium trade businesses. This, coupled with the current stresses on the UK supply chain in the wake of Covid and Brexit, is cause for concern.

 

Materials shortage

When lockdown struck Britain in March of last year, the material supply lines for the whole of the UK were put on pause for a number of weeks. As we scrambled about creating toilet paper and flour shortages for one another, similar panicked antics afflicted the construction industry.

The delays caused in the initial weeks of lockdown resulted in a shortage of plasterboard, cement and many other essential construction materials. Subsequently, this has resulted in price increases for these products as availability decreased.

We can’t just lay the blame at the door of COVID-19 for these short-term supply constraints. Brexit laid the groundworks for disaster.

 

Before COVID there was Brexit…

I believe that people should be wary of forming too strong an opinion on the decision to leave the EU, because a) it has resulted in both good and bad outcomes and b) what works for a construction company may not work for a North Sea fisherman… so it isn’t black and white.

One of the negative outcomes of Brexit is that it has lengthened the supply lines for a number of core supplies from Europe. A significant majority of materials required by UK trade and construction are manufactured or processed in mainland Europe.

As COVID-19 did the rounds almost all major countries suffered shortages in stock. Now however, simply because it makes logistical sense, manufacturers are refilling the supply chains that are closer to home first, with the UK naturally falling to the back of the queue.

This is expected to ease up in time, and whilst it’s positive to see a host of efforts to move material production to the UK, there is no quick fix to this ongoing problem.

Unfortunately, SMEs are feeling the brunt of this, as bigger companies with more purchasing power have been able to buy in these products at higher prices, monopolising the materials industry, to the detriment of their smaller competitors.

Many large firms are also opting to stockpile, to future-proof their business. This has resulted in an in-balance of supply availability, and given that larger companies often rely on much smaller contractors to operate, a more collaborative approach to the sharing of materials would enable to construction industry to weather the storm as a team. Large firms should not use their leverage over smaller ones. This is bad for economy and will ultimately come back around to bite them regarding their reliance on the SME sector for contract staff.

 

Hold-ups at the border

Another thing impacting our supply chains is the increased regulation and paperwork that can now be seen at the borders. New customs and export documentation resulted in huge delays, even before Brexit was finalised. These delays are forcing many companies to re-engineer their supply chains.

Manufacturers relied on complex and interconnected supply chains, that weaved across Europe and beyond to move materials, components and finished systems between locations and suppliers. Then COVID-19 and Brexit hit these highly tuned avenues for transport hard.

The construction industry depends heavily on fast supply chains offering ‘just in time’ delivery of components, often across multiple borders. Increased regulations surrounding Brexit and COVID-19 are already having a significant impact on how goods are brought into the UK, with delays being reported across the sectors.

In summary

In summary, the construction industry supply chains were dealt two huge blows, firstly by Brexit and then by a pandemic.

However, it has shone a light on our resilience. In spite of hardships, there is much to be optimistic about. Consumers have enthusiastically returned to the high street, glasses have been raised to the opening of outdoor dining and drinking as restrictions ease and the vaccination programme continues at pace. Normality feels just around the corner… whatever that is! This can only be good for the economy!

Whilst some of the issues currently blighting our industry will naturally clear with the passing of time as the threat of Covid and Brexit reduces, the short-term impact on the smaller contractor market threatens to derail these good weeks of growth.

The construction industry would do well to work together when it comes to sharing materials fairly, otherwise it will only deal more blows to itself, preventing us to capitalise fully on this latest wave of optimism and growth.

/0 Comments/by

How electric vehicle uptake will impact the built environment?

,

By 2025, it’s estimated that one in six of all new cars worldwide will be electric. How will this affect the way we construct our built environment and what changes will need to be made to our existing infrastructure in order to accommodate the shift? Building Specifier’s Joe Bradbury investigates:

The last four years have seen a remarkable surge in demand for electric vehicles in the UK – new registrations of plug-in cars increased from 3,500 in 2013 to more than 214,000 by the end of May 2019. There has also been a huge increase in the number of pure-electric and plug-in hybrid models available in the UK with many of the top manufacturers in the UK now offering a number of EVs as part of their model range.

Figures published by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) each month show that electric car sales in the UK have risen dramatically over the past few years. While only around 500 electric cars were registered per month during the first half of 2014, this rose exponentially to an average of 5,000 per month during 2018.

By the end of 2018, almost 60,000 plug-in cars had been registered over the course of the year – a new record. This significantly improved upon the previous record, set in 2017, increasing it by more than 13,000 units. By the end of the year, plug-in cars as a proportion of total UK registrations reached 3.8%, and averaged over 2018 electric cars represented 2.7 per cent of the total new car market in the UK.

The electric car market continues to grow quickly, with more than 164,100 pure-electric cars on UK roads at the end of September 2020 – and over 373,600 plug-in models including plug-in hybrids (PHEVs).

Government are backing the shift towards electric vehicles, with the Department of Transport recently announcing a government boost of £50 million to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles. The Electric Vehicle Homecharge Scheme (EVHS), which provides up to £350 towards a charge point, has also recently been expanded to include people in rented and leasehold accommodation, and the Workplace Charging Scheme (WCS) will also be opened up allowing charities and small businesses such as B&Bs to benefit from funding, boosting access to EV charging in rural areas.

How will this affect our built environment?

The rising number of electric vehicles on our road will undoubtedly have an effect on the built environment. The infrastructure we are all used to would need to evolve with the changing times.

It is to be expected that petrol station numbers will gradually reduce or adapt to provide electric vehicle charging facilities. Coupled with this would be appropriate amenity services for drivers and passengers whilst waiting for their vehicles to charge. (Many major fuel companies are already adapting stations in anticipation of this.)

The service stations, roadside restaurants and hotels that line our motorways are all going to need to adapt to receive large numbers of clientele in electric vehicles and businesses will also need to consider installing charging points on site so that employees can charge their cars whilst they work.

The most notable change to cities will be the addition of charging points. Charging stations will become commonplace on car parks, municipal and multi-storey, private or public, outside supermarkets and restaurants etc. Since many potential electrical vehicle owners don’t own their own garages or driveways, retailers will capitalise on vehicle charging a great way of securing regular, captive customers.

The UK government is also set to introduce new legislation whereby all new-build homes will need to be fitted with electric car chargers. This will have cost and technical implications if all new apartments have to have a charging point with their allocated parking spaces – and of course maintenance and management implications including how the electricity is paid for.

The local electricity infrastructure may very well need to upgrade due to the increased load of multiple electric vehicles charging, pushing development costs upwards and introducing a need for space for electrical equipment.

Needless to say, there will be much work that will need to be done and the construction industry stands to benefit greatly.

 

Speaking to Buildingspecifier Martin Fahey, Head of Sustainability and Mitsubishi Electric commented:

As we move towards a fully electric economy, with everything powered by energy from a renewable source, we will see electric cars become mainstream. This will require not only our homes, but also our communities and workplaces to change so that everyone can easily power their vehicles. It will also mean better power storage at home and at work, and we are already seeing advances in battery technology which will allow storage of energy from PV and from other renewable sources, that can then be re-used to power our lighting, cooking and air source heat pump heating … and of course, our cars.

 

The current limitations of our infrastructure

Unfortunately, analysis suggests that a “patchy” network of charging points is currently preventing British drivers from fully embracing the benefits electric cars, something the government have said that they plan to address going forward.

The RAC have repeatedly stated the current network is the main deterrents for consumers considering a swap to electric cars. Over 35% of local authorities have ten or fewer locations where drivers can plug in their vehicles, with wide variation across the country.

Out of 385 authorities, only three had 100 or more charging locations. Milton Keynes was found to be leading the way with 138, followed by Westminster with 131 and Cornwall with 115. Overall, two thirds of local authorities were found to have 20 or fewer. Only one charging location was identified in Merthyr Tydfil, Caerphilly, North Dorset and Hinckley and Bosworth in the dataset.

The Department for Transport says 80% of charging is done at home, but for drivers who do not have access to off-street parking access to charging points is essential.

 

A collaborative solution?

Lympstone resident Joel Teague recently launched Co Charger, a new platform enabling those who do have electric car chargers, whether motorists, businesses or community buildings to share them with neighbours who don’t.

“Five years ago a neighbour in Lympstone convinced me, a card-carrying petrol head to get an electric car,” explains Joel. “The car arrived but my charger was delayed and I found myself giving that same neighbour a few quid to use their charger once a week until mine arrived. It led to a lightbulb moment where I thought of all the people blocked from getting an electric vehicle because they live in a flat or terraced house and don’t have anywhere to charge. It prompted me to launch Co Charger, a ‘matchmaking’ app connecting hosts with a charger with neighbours who want somewhere to charge, helping to create cleaner, greener neighbourhoods and fight climate change. Most importantly, it also means that those who would love to have an electric car will finally be able to buy one – confident in the knowledge that they can charge reliably and economically with a local host.”

The Co Charger app is free to download and there are no subscriptions. Hosts can be private individuals or any organisation with an electric charger, such as a community centre, church hall or doctors’ surgery.

Joel concluded that “easy access to EV charging should be for everyone – not just homeowners with driveways. Previously motorists in rented accommodation or in rural areas might have felt unable to transition to an EV, but this is a significant step towards ensuring that no-one is ‘locked out’ of the electric vehicle revolution. But this levels the playing field and recognises the importance of leaseholders, tenants and small businesses in helping their neighbourhood to go electric.”

“It’s great to see the government backing the installation of more charger points in rented and leasehold accommodation and in the car parks of small businesses. What can make these schemes even more effective is if a proportion of those charge points are shared – enabling
Motorists who live in flats and terraced houses to buy an electric car.”

By 2025, it’s estimated that one in six of all new cars worldwide will be electric.

In summary

A few short years ago it was almost fashionable to mock the warnings of where global warming might take our environment. Those who called for action were laughed off as fanatics with nothing better to do. However a new and worried generation now regards those once laughed at, not as fanatics but realists.

As a result the momentum for action to prevent is growing, almost equally in proportion to the fear that it may be too late for prevention.

Globally in 2018 transportation was responsible for 21% of carbon emissions and 15% of that could be immediately attributed to road vehicles. Not surprisingly the new reflection on the state of the planet is driving the market for electric vehicles and as it does, so increases the need for available power sources for the new green machines.

China has the largest population in the world and perhaps as a result, is also the biggest producer of carbon. It is a strange juxtaposition to note that in terms of its market take up of EV’s, whilst it is nowhere near as great per capita as in other major countries, its provision of public charging stations has a ratio of one charging point per 9 vehicles, beating every country with the exception of the Netherlands.

If one chooses to take a positive spin on this factor it could be viewed as a willingness to prepare for the coming of the electric vehicle age. If that is the case should we look closer to home at our own provision, currently running at a ratio of one charging point per 32 vehicles, more than three times that of China.

Our vehicles are a further extension of the convenience evolution that has become part of our everyday lives, an evolution with the prime benefit of time saving, but what practical use are electric vehicle’s if we have to hang around a public charge point, in line with 32 other vehicles and then wait another hour or more for the delivery of a charge that will get us to our destination? Perhaps the answer will be in preparation, and to that end would it not be sensible to build in charging points at the construction stage of all new homes, in the same way that we site a kitchen sink or any of the other modern home essentials.

/0 Comments/by

Is airtightness exacerbating ill-health amidst the pandemic?

,

Government incentives designed to encourage energy efficiency, coupled with technological advancements, have applied pressure on the construction industry to build increasingly airtight buildings of late. However, high levels of airtightness and poor ventilation are building up major health problems in new housing, according to a study by Glasgow School of Art’s Mackintosh Environmental Architecture Research Unit (Mearu). Building Specifier’s Joe Bradbury investigates:

Researchers at Mearu have uncovered serious indoor air quality (IAQ) problems in a wide range of new homes that had been built to be airtight and, as a result, were increasing instances of asthma and other respiratory problems in occupants.

Mearu studied 200 modern homes and found widespread evidence of poor ventilation, with bedrooms being a particular problem. The unit has produced a public awareness film urging people to ventilate their homes properly by “keeping vents or windows open when cooking, showering and cleaning; drying laundry near an open window; and opening windows at night.”

Head of Mearu Professor Tim Sharpe said “Poor indoor air quality is hard for people to detect. There are clear links between poor ventilation and ill health, so people need to be aware of the build-up of CO2 and other pollutants in their homes, and their potential impact on health.

“Modern homes are increasingly airtight and can also contain a great number of pollutants and chemicals, many of which can have serious health effects.”

Airtightness in a post-COVID world

Covid-19 has shone a spotlight on the devastating consequences of having respiratory issues. Seeing people gasp for air in hospital beds on respirators is hardly an image we are likely to forget in a hurry. However, it isn’t just coronavirus that attacks the lungs. Poor indoor air quality is linked to cancer, lung disease, COPD and asthma amongst other potentially fatal conditions.

On average, 3 people a day die from asthma alone. There are 5.4 million people (1.1 million children and 4.3 million adults) in Great Britain known to be suffering from the condition… and they are just the ones that came forward for treatment. An untold number battle through their symptoms undiagnosed. The UK has some of the highest asthma rates in Europe. Every day, the lives of three families are devastated by the death of a loved one to an asthma attack, and tragically two thirds of these deaths are preventable.

Indoor air quality is essential in the treatment and prevention of Asthma, along with many other respiratory conditions.

If you are building a new domestic property or commercial property of a certain size, it will need to undergo air tightness testing. This assesses the building for ‘air permeability’, checking for air leakage through gaps, holes and other areas. The Government has SAP (Standard Assessment Procedures) in place for air tightness testing, setting standards buildings must comply with to be energy efficient.

Airtightness in buildings has improved to such a degree in recent years and ventilation has had to play catch up. Adequate ventilation in airtight buildings is essential and mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR) systems offer that effective, efficient and clean way of ventilation so sorely needed by people living in poor quality air across Britain today.

Ventilation is the answer

MVHR (Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery) provides fresh filtered air into a building whilst retaining most of the energy that has already been used in heating the building. Heat Recovery Ventilation is the solution to the ventilation needs of energy efficient buildings. Mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR), heat recovery ventilation (HRV) or Comfort ventilation are all names for the same thing. A heat recovery ventilation system properly fitted into a house provides a constant supply of fresh filtered air, maintaining the air quality whilst being practically imperceptible.

MVHR works by extracting the air from the polluted sources e.g. kitchen, bathroom, toilets and utility rooms and supplying air to the ‘living’ rooms e.g. bedrooms, living rooms, studies etc. The extracted air is taken through a central heat exchanger and the heat recovered into the supply air. This works both ways, if the air inside the building is colder than the outside air then the building will retain its nice and cool temperature.

In a recent article featured on renewables experts Mitsubishi’s news site ‘The Hub’, Paul McLaughlin, chief executive of the Building Engineering Services Association (BESA) said “a well-sealed building envelope combined with effective filtration of incoming supply air can reduce particle penetration by 78%. Considerable investment has already been made in improving the airtightness of buildings to reduce energy consumption and that same process can be used to manage air quality.”

“The general public already understands the impact temperature has on healthy and productive conditions inside buildings — we now need to stress that the same principle should apply to air quality.

“When it is too hot or cold outside, people now expect to be able to enjoy comfortable temperatures inside. They should also expect similar protection from rising air pollution.”

As an industry, we are responsible for the comfort and wellbeing of the occupants of the buildings we make and maintain. It’s also our duty to ensure we are taking adequate steps towards renewables. Especially these days! MVHR can tick both of these boxes, so it’s time to sit up and take note.

Bringing the fresh air indoors

When we are inside the home, an indoor workplace (or any other type of building, for that matter), we are placing ourselves unwittingly at the mercy of the air within that building. Any chemicals, toxins or pollutants are drawn into our bodies and can cause headaches, eye irritation, skin problems, allergies and fatigue. Prolonged exposure to more serious pollutants can even cause certain types of cancers and other long-term health complications. As specifiers building structures designed for people, we have to consider this in our projects and ensure we do everything within our power to protect occupants from the invisible menace of unclean air.

MVHR (Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery) provides fresh filtered air into a building whilst retaining most of the energy that has already been used in heating the building. Innovations within the field of airtightness in buildings have happened so rapidly in recent years and ventilation and heat recovery have had to play catch up to keep up with the momentum. Adequate ventilation in airtight buildings is essential and mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR) systems offer that effective, efficient and clean way of ventilation so sorely needed by people living in poor quality air across Britain today.

In summary

The general public understands the impact temperature has on healthy and productive conditions inside buildings sadly all too well; fuel poverty and winter deaths take centre stage in our newspapers and magazines. Unfortunately, the fact that air quality is equally as impactful on society is regularly overlooked, especially in 2021 when the news is dominated with COVID, Brexit and not much else…

Regardless of how hot or cold it may be outside, people have come to expect comfortable indoor temperatures. They demand that from their buildings. They now need to invoke the same demand for protection from harmful air pollution. Get either wrong and you run the risk of harming your occupants.

Warmth and clean air to breathe is essential. As an industry, we are responsible for the comfort and wellbeing of the occupants of the built environment. We must also ensure we are moving forward towards renewables, otherwise I would argue that we aren’t moving forward at all. MVHR just might be the answer.

/0 Comments/by

Grenfell: The Far Reaching Ripples

,

Nearly 4 years on, Buildingspecifier’s Joe Bradbury takes a look at the ongoing subject of the Grenfell Tower tragedy and raises concern about those still living at risk of death by fire in inadequately protected properties together with the wider  impact on individual homeowners, who find themselves financially trapped in properties they cannot sell.

 

The horrific fire that broke out in 24-storey Grenfell Tower in 2017 brought fire safety to the forefront of our attention, causing 72 deaths and injuring a further 70 others. It is considered the deadliest structural fire in the United Kingdom since the 1988 Piper Alpha disaster and the worst UK residential fire since the Second World War. To this day negligence is still being sniffed out throughout the construction industry and those responsible are being held to account.

The fire was ignited by a malfunctioning fridge-freezer located on the fourth floor. Once the fire had taken hold it spread rapidly up the building’s exterior to all the residential floors. For many, the image of the tower engulfed in flame will be painfully etched in memory for many years to come.

Whilst the ACM cladding itself was found to be largely responsible for how quickly the fire spread, police confirmed that the insulation used in the refurbishment was potentially more flammable and contributory to the inferno than the cladding tiles.

The impact of the Grenfell fire on its residents and community can only be described as devastating, and the protracted and tangled ongoing investigation does nothing to alleviate the suffering of those immediately involved.

The subsequent fallout spread like a virus throughout the UK, revealing concerns in buildings both new and old.

A shocking investigation undertaken by BBC Watchdog Live after the tragedy revealed that a number of new build homes built by two major housing developers are not adequately fire safe.

Fire in figures

 

In April 2018 a fire was started by a cigarette dropped at ground level in a new home in Exeter. It spread up to the roof of the house and then across to other properties nearby.

This fire sparked an investigation which found missing fire barriers at 37% of homes on the estate, where the fire had taken place. This initiated wider investigation of thousands of homes throughout the South West, where over 650 homes were found to have missing or incorrectly installed fire barriers.

The BBC investigation also uncovered potentially dangerous fire safety issues in developments in Kent and West Lothian.

BBC Watchdog Live sent their own expert surveyor to a new build development in West Lothian, to examine the fire protection at four houses, after concerns were raised by one resident whose house had previously been found to have inadequate fire barriers.

According to an article on the BBC website, surveyor and expert witness Greig Adams, who carried out the testing, found poorly fitted fire barriers at all four properties, with voids and gaps around them that would prevent them stopping fire from spreading. He said “What we’ve unfortunately found is that there are fire breach issues in every house we’ve looked at. It’s a legal requirement that the cavity barriers are to be there. It’s not optional – and with good reason: it saves lives.”

There were 573,221 incidents attended by the UK Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) last year. Of these incidents, around 182,491 were fires. These fires resulted in 268 fatalities and over 7,000 non-fatal casualties.

Unfortunately, despite our greatest effort in prevention, fires happen… and their impact can be devastating. With this in mind, it comes as a great shock to hear that many new-builds constructed by two of the largest house building firms were sold over the last couple of years with missing or incorrectly installed fire barriers, which functions to prohibit the spread of fire throughout a property.

 

Trapped in unsafe housing

 

Figures published by the National Housing Federation (who represent housing associations in England, social landlords to 5 million people) and Crisis (the national charity for homeless people) reveal the true scale of the housing crisis in England.

Their ground-breaking research, conducted by Heriot-Watt University, showed that England is short of four million homes. To both meet this backlog and provide for future demand, the country needs to build 340,000 homes per year until 2031. Needless to say, this isn’t happening at present.

The result of this is that those living in potentially unsafe buildings are constantly being overlooked. Whilst these residents have not so far suffered physical injury, there remains the underlying, quietly pervading threat that one day they too could be victims. More immediately imperative for them is the actual damage to their individual financial status and future. They find themselves financially trapped in un-saleable properties, as surely as the victims of Grenfell were physically trapped.

Whilst their situation is obviously nowhere near as dramatic, the impact of it causes ongoing damage for those affected and their concerns continue, seemingly without resolve.

 

Unable to sell

 

In response to the Grenfell disaster, lenders initially brought in stricter requirements for fire safety, demanding an EWS1 certificate to prove that the external walls of a building are free from material that is combustible, which led to the restrictions of buying and selling affecting 450,000 more homeowners.

Campaigners voice concern that approximately 700,000 people still live in buildings that have flammable panels fitted to their exterior and that millions are finding it tough to remortgage or sell their properties.

To combat this, the government decided that owners of flats in buildings without cladding will no longer require an EWS1 form to sell or remortgage their property, but there is still a ways to go if we are to free people from bureaucratic bondage.

In an official statement given on the matter, Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick MP said “Through no fault of their own, some flat-owners have been unable to sell or remortgage their homes – and this cannot be allowed to continue.

“That’s why the government has secured agreement that the EWS1 form will not be needed on buildings where there is no cladding; providing certainty for the almost 450,000 homeowners who may have felt stuck in limbo.

“However, this is only part of a wider solution and we continue to support those homeowners who do have cladding on their buildings and where there is still more to do.”

Cladding, the Witch-hunt

 

Cladding companies have had it rough in the past few years post-Grenfell, even the ones who pull out all the stops to ensure their product is safe and secure.  To this end, the mindless witch-hunt must stop in order for the true lessons to be learned from the tragedy.

 

It should be stressed that it was the incorrect specification of the components within the assembly that resulted in the tragedy.
As Carlton Jones Director of the MCRMA (Metal Cladding and Roofing Manufacturers Association) pointed out the word ‘cladding’ is a generic term which covers a vast array of products and assemblies. Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) is a component within a rainscreen cladding system but it must be recognised that it is available in various formulae to suit the application for which it is intended. Correctly specified, using a non-combustible grade it is a perfectly safe product, but the specification for the application on the Grenfell Tower was completely inappropriate.  The lack of technical expertise through the design, specification and installation phase contributed to the failure and allowed this to happen, and this should not be viewed as the general practices of all companies involved in the design and manufacture of metal based cladding systems”.

 

In summary

As an industry, it is our duty to stamp out negligence. Law dictates that new build homes must implement adequate fire protection measures which meet current Building Regulations to delay the spread of fire for as long as possible to maximise chances of escape for occupants.

Fire barriers are an integral part of a fire protection strategy and in many new builds (particularly timber-framed buildings) the barriers form a seal between different areas of a house. Without them, experts suggest that fire and smoke can spread five to ten times faster.

It is therefore of the utmost importance that housebuilders uphold their responsibility, ensuring that all new buildings are fully compliant with current Building Regulations. It’s a matter of life and death.

Failure to learn from the mistakes of Grenfell can only lead to more suffering and tragedy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

/0 Comments/by

What does the Fourth Industrial Revolution mean for construction?

,

Joe Bradbury discusses the fourth industrial revolution which is currently underway and what digitisation and technological advancement might spell for our industry:

We find ourselves on the brink of a fourth industrial revolution. Industrial Revolution, in modern history, can be defined as the process of change from an agrarian and handicraft economy to one dominated by industry and machine manufacturing. This process began in Britain in the 18th century and from there spread to other parts of the world.

What has come to be known by modern historians as the first Industrial Revolution lasted from the mid-18th century to around 1830 and was mostly confined to Britain. The second Industrial Revolution lasted from the mid-19th century until the early 20th century and took place in Britain, continental Europe, North America, and Japan.

The third revolution spread even further still, bringing about the rise of electronics, telecommunications and computers. These new technologies changed our world drastically, opening the doors to space expeditions, digital research, and biotechnology.

In 2017 data finally surpassed oil in value. Welcome to a new age.

 

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR)

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is now well underway, and can be described as the coming together of multiple advances within the fields of artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), 3D printing, quantum computing, etc.

The term itself describes perfectly the ever-dissolving boundaries between the physical, digital, and biological. As technology and digitalisation gains pace, so too does our newfound dependency upon it; as such many products and services of modern life are quickly becoming indispensable. Where would we be now without GPS, virtual reality, BIM, robotics and social media? Are we hooked on innovation? Will it be the making of us or our undoing? …Only time will tell!

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is definitely paving the way for hugely transformative changes in not only our perception, but also the way we live and work on a day-to-day basis. Change is underway, radically disrupting almost every business sector. The construction industry is of no exception to this, rippling to the shockwaves. How will 4IR affect us?

What 4IR means for construction

Even a quick scan of trade media outlets will show you that the future of the construction industry is a highly debated topic. Will it be offsite? Will it be smart homes? Will it be social housing? Will it be modular? Will it be sustainable? We ask many questions and posit many well-informed answers, but when doing so we are essentially gazing into a crystal ball.

One thing we can agree on is that you simply cannot stay the same in a world that is changing. This is a recipe for disaster. It is widely accepted that the construction sector has been slow to adapt to change in recent history. Indeed, this unwillingness to break from the norm is the very reason why offsite has not been adopted to anywhere near the levels it should be in order to meet modern demand and make a meaningful dent in the current housing crisis, in spite of its huge potential.

Regardless of the latest advancements in technology, cost and schedule over-runs are still considered normal and labour productivity has not kept pace with economic productivity. Of course, there are always many unforeseen challenges that arise when rolling out new technology at scale across a complex supply chain such as the construction industry, but simply soldiering on as we always have done is not the answer. These are challenges that must be overcome.

How to change along with the world

There are numerous technologies around that can greatly assist companies in digitally transforming, with new ones continually coming to the fold. The first stage in making sure we keep up with the rate of change being brought about by the fourth industrial revolution begins in our mind. We must embrace technology, with a positive mindset towards change, and make it work for us. This change of mindset is fundamental to the success of our industry in a modern age.

The push for sustainability

The UK construction industry is currently responsible for 45% of total UK carbon emissions, 32% of all landfill waste and is responsible for more water pollution incidents than any other industry. We are the largest consumer of natural resources in the UK today; a stark point that highlights just how high up on the agenda reconsideration of our building practices should be. The impact of our materials usage on the environment in of itself is staggering; a recent report by Willmott Dixon Group suggested that the construction industry alone is accountable for around 45-50% of global energy usage, nearly 50% of worldwide water usage, and around 60% of the total usage of raw materials.

The good news is that 4IR is bringing about the knowledge, skills and technology to facilitate real change in the world.

Growing demand for environmental solutions is driving innovation within the areas of building operations, site design, maintenance, repair and demolition and recycling. This is a positive thing, leading us to strive for zero energy buildings and sustainable indoor environments through the development of technologies such as renewable heating and smart devices.

Efficiency is becoming a much larger focus, and as such materials need to be cost-effective, durable and low impact on the environment. A challenge, no doubt; but one that we will benefit from greatly in overcoming it.

The need for safety post-Covid

The Covid pandemic will also play a huge role in shaping the world of tomorrow. Empowering the workforce to work remotely, flexibly and more adeptly will be ever more important over the coming years. We cannot afford all of this lockdown nonsense again. Will increased uptake of cloud services drive efficiency and increase productivity? Only if we embrace this change with an open mind!

This area of change will take some getting used to. However, the need for businesses to continue operating throughout this pandemic they have had to adapt quick to their workforce working from home, and out of necessity great innovations have taken place in order to facilitate this. Perhaps in the future AI, bots, and chat options will enable businesses to digitalise and automate the front office… but it cannot replace the need for customer interaction entirely.

We have all felt the frustrations of speaking to a bot on a phone!

In summary

The world seems to be changing so quickly now that the debate on whether or not it is a good thing is becoming irrelevant. In order for industries to survive and thrive, they must be open to change. Our role in this must not be that of a luddite. We must dive into it and ensure we take every step in our power to get it right. If we do this, the rewards and benefits that new technologies can bring to our industry will be huge, justifying the time we must now devote to its adoption.

Follow us on Twitter        Join us on Linked in 

 

/0 Comments/by

Brace yourselves for Brexit

,

The UK was originally due to leave the EU on March 29, 2019. But a few extensions, a pandemic and over four and a half years after the referendum, and there’s still no clear sign of a done deal. Since the initial shock following the referendum it was one of the only things the construction industry can think about… until the Covid pandemic. What will Brexit really mean for construction? We have been plunged into the unknown and understandably concern and fear has arisen. However, it isn’t all doom and gloom for the construction industry going forward, and regardless of your opinion on Brexit it is everybody’s responsibility to roll up their sleeves and help make it work.

Strength in unity

After 52% of UK voters deciding to leave the European Union back in 2016, organisers of the UK’s largest construction event called for a united front in the industry to face the challenges and opportunities ahead.

 

Nathan Garnett, Event Director for UK Construction Week at the time commented “A new dawn for UK construction begins here. It is inevitable that our industry will experience a period of uncertainty and adjustment, but the construction sector has proved time and time again to be incredibly resilient. Now the result of the referendum is clear, we, as an industry, must move forward together with confidence. Leaving the EU will likely mean UK construction firms will be looking to invest in British products and services like never before.

 

“The UK boasts many long-term infrastructure projects and the Bank of England have made sound contingency plans for leaving the EU. The UK also has the foundations for a boom in house building, and the industry must and will be committed to meeting the national need for housing. Leaving the EU will inevitably attract new investors to our shores offering new opportunities, and that will happen sooner rather than later. The last few weeks and months have been uncertain for the UK construction industry, but now is the time to embrace the change and these new opportunities.”

 

“Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”

Social media reverberate rumours that the bottom has fallen out of the industry and the wider economy overall, many are actually quietly reporting that both the overall uncertainty and the subsequent result of the referendum have actually had little to no impact on their business activity.

In a year-end trading statement released by Redrow housebuilders at the end of last year, Chairman Steve Morgan indicated that annual profits were expected to be at the upper level of city expectations of £240m. “Although it is too early to tell whether Brexit will have any effect on future sales, initial feedback is that sites remain busy, reservations continue to be taken.”

David Orr, Chief Executive at the National Housing Federation highlights the importance of a strong stance as an industry. Speaking on behalf of the Federation, he said “We recognise the uncertainty that Brexit has brought to the sector and we are working with our housing association members to support them to continue delivering the homes and services this country needs. Whatever happens there is still a housing crisis and we remain committed to ending it.”

David Brown, the head of agency Marsh & Parsons, addressed the widespread moral panic gripping the housing sector in The Guardian. He pointed out that regardless of the result of the referendum there was still plenty of pent-up demand in the UK housing market “leaving the EU doesn’t change that overnight.”

He added: “When you think back to before the financial crisis and the volume of transactions we were witnessing on an annual basis, there’s clearly scope for further improvement. The decision to leave doesn’t alter the fact that plenty of people have to and still want to move.”

 

One reason perhaps that indicates that Brexit will not impact the construction industry quite as heavily as other sectors is that many construction companies work exclusively within the UK. A recent CBI study into the implications of British withdrawal from the EU, showed that construction is the second most domestically focused major UK sector, surpassed by a hairs breadth by Government. “It’s a domestic market, so while there are some that operate internationally, what really affects them is what they do in the UK,” says Suzannah Nichol, chief executive of Build UK.

Home-grown talent

Whilst the skills gap is likely to worsen in the short term, Brexit is perhaps the catalyst for change long term regarding the training and retention of a better homegrown workforce. According to the Federation of Master Builders (FMB) The UK construction industry has been heavily reliant on migrant workers from Europe for decades now – at present, 12% of the British construction workers are of non-UK origin.

 

Brian Berry, Chief Executive of the FMB, said “we need to ensure that we invest in our own home-grown talent through apprenticeship training. We need to train more construction apprentices so we are not overly reliant on migrant workers from Europe or further afield. That’s why it’s so important that the Government gets the funding framework right for apprenticeships – when you consider that this whole policy area is currently in flux, and then you add Brexit into the mix, it’s no exaggeration to say that a few wrong moves by the Government could result in the skills crisis becoming a skills catastrophe. The next few years will bring unprecedented challenges to the construction and house building sector, and it’s only through close collaboration between the Government and industry that we’ll be able to overcome them.”

In summary

In summary, the biggest immediate threat to the construction industry following our departure from the EU is widespread confusion, stalling due to a feeling of insecurity and failure to act going forward. All this will undoubtedly be exacerbated by the ever unfolding Covid phenomenon.

It is a true testament to our industry that amidst such chaos demand remains strong as shown by reports from some of the major contractors and housebuilder’s across the UK. The construction sector remains strong but we need to keep moving and resist succumbing to hype in order to ensure it stays this way. It has to be business as usual. Keep calm, carry on and brace yourself for Brexit!

 

by Joe Bradbury

 

 

/0 Comments/by

The increasingly important role of Offsite post-Covid

,

As our wants, needs and behaviours are forced to change with the integration of new considerations into our daily lives, will offsite construction play a greater role in delivering the built environment we need whilst simultaneously keeping a workforce as safe as it can possibly be?  Joe Bradbury discusses:

How many politicians does it take to change a lightbulb? Just one, it seems. All they need do is hold it in place while the world revolves around them. Whilst politicians play with people’s lives and livelihoods, the construction sector attempts to soldier on, accounting for 6% of Britain’s economic output and providing employment for 2.3 million people, according to official figures from the ONS.

However, as CIOB rightly pointed out in a recent research paper entitled ‘The Real Face of Construction 2020’, this figure does not take into account the work of architects, engineers and quantity surveyors as well as manufacturers dedicated to the sector and many other firms that support construction, such as builders’ merchants and plant hire providers.

Needless to say, construction matters… and in a rapidly changing modern world, our construction methods matter more than ever. What role will offsite construction play in Covid world? Let’s take a look:

Social distancing and less time on site

As most offsite construction work is carried out offsite, there is a reduced assembly time on site with fewer tradesmen required. Offsite construction is considerably quicker than traditional on-site methods. As such, sites are measurably quieter than traditional construction sites with fewer people needing to be there to carry out works.

A recent study carried out by the Steel Construction Institute on a 4-storey residential building estimated that the total amount of site labour could be reduced by as much as 75% through the use of offsite construction – an obvious benefit to the local residents in terms of the general level of site activity and the number of vehicles travelling to and from the site, but also a clear advantage to anybody trying to navigate the ever-changing Covid restrictions and guidelines that serve to prevent us from delivering the homes this country so sorely needs.

Controlled build environment

Even before we awoke from the Brexit dream into a Coronavirus nightmare, transferring much of the construction programme from an open site to a controlled factory environment was proven to reduce on-site time for workers and reduces the potential for site-based accidents and ill health. Now, at a time when it is widely considered necessary to keep people apart, this seems more advantageous to any builder attempting to run a business at this complicated time.

Factory controlled conditions mean a better quality of build; better finish; fewer defects; all snagging complete and all services tested. These advantages are matched by those for the skilled workforce who are carrying out the work – a warm, controlled and enclosed workplace where their health and safety can be observed properly, significantly reducing the risk of accidents, ill-health or exposure to a flu virus.

Housing shortage

The UK finds itself in the midst of an acute housing crisis. Current annual construction levels are typically less than half of the estimated 250,000 new homes this country needs built every year through to at least the 2030s. With only 63% of projects delivered on time and only 49% delivered to budget, it’s clear to see that traditional building practices, whilst still integral, are falling short of meeting major challenges on their own.

There is an urgent need for a mass volume of houses to be constructed in a limited time scale and whether the state takes on housebuilding, or if it is left to private house builders, the benefits of offsite construction could be crucial to meeting targets that have repeatedly been missed. Offsite construction provides housebuilders with programme certainty and quality though simplification of site operations and reduced weather dependencies due to the controlled factory-based assembly process. Houses delivered through offsite construction offer enhanced specification standards and build quality which reduces occupancy costs related to energy use, defects and repairs. There is significant evidence that suggests that the use of offsite construction has been successful when applied to meet the needs of significant housing developments at scale with consequential opportunities for standardisation of design details – particularly to meet the need of government led programmes.

Offsite housing construction looks set to grow in a post-pandemic world. Demand is expected to be driven by several contributing factors; mainly by the ongoing shortage of homes across Britain and the declining numbers of key skilled tradesmen and professionals, which in turn increases demand in offsite housing manufacturing and output capacity.

Key areas of demand are likely to be where there is an urgency to increase the rate of completions, such as affordable housing and Build-to-Rent.

The environment still matters… more than ever!

Covid-aside, we need to reduce our impact on the planet as a species fast… otherwise, there will not be a platform for all of our opinions, actions and debates to take place upon. I would argue that this is the one truth that we can all agree on.

The built environment contributes around 40% of the UK’s total carbon footprint. Despite erratic annual variations, the carbon footprint of the built environment has reduced since 1990, but we still have a considerable way to go. Newly constructed buildings are more energy efficient, but 80% of buildings that will be in use in the year 2050 have already been built today, so a major priority will be decarbonising our existing stock through modern construction technology.

Builders are now rightly expected to create sustainable and energy efficient buildings as part of the greater effort to reduce CO2 emissions, energy consumption and waste as an industry. As such, environmental considerations will transform how our buildings are constructed, what materials are used and which methods are employed.

Offsite construction is far less energy intensive than traditional housebuilding methods. The carbon footprint left by the many construction vehicles and machinery on the site of a traditional construction project alone is considerably larger than that of modular construction. Put simply, fewer vehicles involved and less time spent on site results in less greenhouse gases being released into our environment.

In summary

Although Covid-19 and the subsequent clumsy government responses around the globe has caused untold devastation to our mental health, our lives and our economies, it also hit pause for a brief few moments on an unsustainable model, affording us an offset perspective on our habits as a species.

It would be a shame if all that was taken from it was pain and destruction. Times of difficulty are also times of great learning.

We all heard beautiful stories in the beginning of city smog clearing to reveal clear blue skies over capital cities around the world. The pandemic shone a light on our need for change.

With this in mind, a transition to a low-carbon economy presents our industry with great opportunities for growth, something we will need to focus on to recuperate some of the economic damages inflicted upon us by rash decisions and a coronavirus bill.

Environmental considerations, will transform how our buildings are constructed, what materials are used and the methods employed. The world is changing and the time is right for the construction industry to embrace innovative technology and offsite techniques to develop better buildings at a rapid rate to enhance lives, minimise the environmental impact and reduce energy costs for occupants for many years to come.

 

/0 Comments/by

COVID IMPACT ON UK ARCHITECTS

,

How Covid-19 restrictions are impacting the health, wealth and wellbeing of our architects.

#architects #pandemic #constructionprojects #RIBA

 

Running a business through a pandemic is like fighting with one arm tied behind your back. Buildingspecifier.com’s Joe Bradbury takes a look at how the draconian Covid-19 restrictions are impacting the health, wealth and wellbeing of our architects.

In order for our built environment to meet the needs of its people, we need good architects.

Back in May, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) Future Trends Workload highlighted the scale of the impact Covid-19 restrictions were having on business. The showed that:

  • Workloads were at significantly reduced levels – down 33% compared to May 2019.
  • 73% of respondents expected profits to fall over the next 12 months – within that, 8% considered that their practice was unlikely to remain viable.
  • 22% of architectural staff were furloughed – an increase of 8% from April.
  • 1% of architectural staff were made redundant; 1% were released from a ‘zero hours’, temporary or fixed-term contract.
  • 38% of projects had been put on hold since the start of March.

Confidence was certainly at an all-time low. RIBA Executive Director Professional Services, Adrian Dobson said “The current pandemic and economic uncertainty are clearly continuing to impact both architects’ current workloads and their confidence about the future, with the majority expecting their workloads to decrease in coming months.”

A second COVID-19 survey of architects conducted by the institute delved a little deeper into the personal impact of the crisis on architects working within the profession.

These findings revealed the main concerns not just for business but for people, practices and projects:

People

Mental health decline – 40% said their mental health had been affected (a significant increase from 23% in April); 20% felt isolated.

Working location – 74% said they were working entirely from home, a further 10% said they were working mostly from home.

Working from home difficulties – almost a quarter (24%) are caring for others and 13% said they have inadequate equipment.

Reduced income – 56% have reduced personal and/or household income.

Working patterns have changed – 15% said they had been furloughed and 27% said they were working reduced hours. 37% reported finding ‘new and better ways of working’.

Practices

Economic impact – 58% reported fewer new business enquiries, 53% reported a decreased workload and 57% said they were experiencing a cashflow reduction.

Projects

Site closures – 60% said at least one of their project sites had closed.

Widespread project delays – 90% reported project delays, citing parties including clients, contractors, planning officers and building control officers.

Clients responsible for most project cancellations – 48% of decisions to cancel projects were made by the client.

Every cloud has a silver lining

After four months in negative territory, the RIBA Future Trends Workload Index rose to +3 in July, from –17 in June. Could this be the early signs of recovery? Obviously it is too soon to tell at present, but let’s take a look at the facts:

Nearly a third (31%) of practices anticipate a workload increase, 42% expect workload to remain the same and 28% expect a decrease.

In July the Staffing Index also rose by 5 points, with 75% of practices saying they expect the level of permanent staff to remain the same over the next three months and 8% (rising from 4%) anticipating the need to employ more permanent staff. Despite this, 17% still expect their staffing levels to decrease over the next three months.

All sectors returned slightly more positive balance figures. The private housing sector rose significantly to +17 (from -3 in June), the commercial sector rose to -15 (from -32), the community sector to -14 (from -19) and the public sector to -4 (from -12).

While there was increased optimism about workloads over the next three months, 62% of respondents still expect profits to fall over the next year and within that, 7% consider that their practice is unlikely to remain viable.

Industry expert and Head of Research, Analysis and Forecasting at National Building Specification (NBS) said “While these findings might show the first glimpse of positivity we’ve seen for a while – with practices seeing a specific increase in private residential enquiries as home working continues – architects still face a particularly challenging market.

“For some, their current workloads mainly consist of pre-pandemic commissions and the source of future work is uncertain. As the UK enters its first recession in 11 years, we can expect further caution from clients to commit to new projects, and confidence in future workloads may be affected.

“It remains our fundamental priority to support our architects through this difficult time with resources and economic intelligence to help overcome immediate hurdles and build future resilience.”

In summary

To date, 998 thousand people across the globe are reported to have died from coronavirus. This figure cannot be fully trusted as not all Covid-related deaths are directly attributable to the virus. (Many people have died from other conditions, tested positive posthumously and therefore been registered as a covid death.) No less heart-breaking – the true figure, which is likely to be less, may never be known.

Isn’t it strange that a staggering 2.8 million people die EVERY YEAR from obesity and yet we don’t go to such drastic lengths to protect these lives?

About 25,260 excess deaths occurred in Great Britain over winter last year, most were in people of pension age. Cold weather is a major contributor to these deaths, but there are a number of causes. Vulnerable people are dying EVERY YEAR from something as simple as not being able to afford their heating bills. How come the government doesn’t step in here?

Air pollution is the biggest environmental threat to health in the UK, with between 28,000 and 36,000 deaths a year attributed to long-term exposure. There is strong evidence that air pollution causes the development of coronary heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease and lung cancer, and exacerbates asthma.

We need to change the way we think about this virus and fast. Around 7.6 million jobs, or 24% of the UK workforce are at risk because of COVID-19-related restrictions. People with the lowest incomes are the most vulnerable.

Self-destruction is the true enemy. There’s a reason why they call it a depression…

As we move into the next phase of the crisis, it is vital that we are safeguarding lives, but we must also safeguard livelihoods.

 

/0 Comments/by

HS2 – HOW RELEVANT IS IT NOW?

,

Work on the highly controversial HS2 officially began last week. Those in favour expect it to create 22,000 jobs in the next few years, whilst objectors claim it could actually displace almost that many jobs.

#HS2 #cost #government #environment #transport #employment

 

In a post-Covid world, is the argument for what has ultimately been labelled “a vanity project” still relevant? Joe Bradbury discusses:

 

Way back in 2016, a survey conducted by the ITV Tonight programme found that:

  • Only 15% feel that HS2 is worth £56bn
  • 58% don’t think it’s a price worth paying
  • 77% of people would prefer that the money was spent in other areas, like the NHS
  • Nearly three-quarters of people thought HS2 would lead to price rises for train tickets
  • 60% said they would not pay more to ride on HS2
  • 7% would be prepared to pay increased prices for the high speed line
  • 80% said they felt sympathy for people who may lose their homes to HS2, even though they may be compensated
  • 11% people thought the high speed rail link would benefit the majority of commuters
  • 23% are not aware that HS2 is being planned

 

That was then. Pre-covid. Pre-Brexit. Pre-global economic downturn. Pre-depression. Imagine where public support is now? The gutter?

 

Do we need it?

At least on the surface, the primary aim of HS2 seems to be to link the north with the south, allowing commuters to broaden the area that they can work in. However, with Covid set to change the way we live and work permanently, with a cultural shift towards home-working now well underway, is this something we even need? Indeed, many employees for companies who have sent all staff home are already starting to question why they had to go in to the office in the first place. Employers who are now struggling thanks to the damage we have inflicted to our economy through misunderstanding and fear are looking at their overheads in an entirely different way.

In response to the news that work was going to begin, Stop HS2 Campaign Manager Joe Rukin said “the case for building HS2 has gone from questionable to completely non-existent. The passenger forecasts invented to justify this gargantuan white elephant started off as being grossly inflated, but now this idea that HS2 is needed because tens of thousands of people, will demand to commute even greater distances for work in the future, are just laughable. We’ve spent 10 years trying to tell tin-eared politicians that working practices will change in the future and drastically reduce the need for travel, and even now it’s happened right in front of their eyes, they refuse to accept it.”

 

 

Can we afford it?

Back in 2015, the project was expected to cost £56 billion. Now, the estimate has almost doubled with a leaked review revealing it could be up to £106 billion. Around £8 billion has already been spent on the purchase of land and property, ground investigation work, technical designs, IT systems, wages and public engagement. Can we really afford such a thing in the depths of what might be the UK’s worst recession and the wider global economic downturn?

Objectors argue no, stating that the £100+ billion being spent on HS2 should be ploughed into improving digital infrastructure in the country as we prepare for a post-Covid 19 way of working and living.

Conservative MP Esther McVey suggests that Plans for the high-speed rail line should be stopped and money ploughed into ensuring all areas of the country have high quality internet connections and no area is left behind.

Ms McVey said “Government must prioritise this new digital infrastructure. Our working and living culture are evolving so fast it has outpaced HS2 and that £100 billion investment would be better placed in IT infrastructure. We need the whole country connected not just small sections of it. We need to be online, not on a train line but online, this pandemic has proved this. We are living in a new virtual sphere and we cannot have a digital divide across the country. I do not want to see a new North-South divide or differences in cities or suburbs through a post code lottery. We must invest in technology now and grasp these opportunities for not only this generation but others to come.”

McVey isn’t alone with her objections as a member of the conservative party, the very party responsible for delivering the project. Dominic Cummings is also an outspoken critic of HS2 and there is now a coalition of around 60 dissenting voices on the Tory backbenches.

It seems that rather than connecting people, HS2 continues to divide.

The environment

This is the most important thing. You can’t make money on a dead planet.

HS2 is the most environmentally destructive project this century, with almost 700 wildlife sites under threat, and HS2 Ltd themselves even admitting it will have a negative impact on carbon emissions for over a century. This is why there are currently hundreds of activists camped out along the HS2 route, fighting to protect nature and it certainly doesn’t look like they will be going away any time soon.

Chris Packham, on behalf of the Rethink HS2 alliance of environmental organisations said “HS2 involves one of the largest deforestation programmes since the First World War, damaging more than 100 ancient woodlands along the planned route, along with dozens of wildlife habitats. If this project gets the go ahead, and I sincerely hope that it doesn’t for so many reasons, you can expect ferocious public opposition to it, and I will be happy to lead that from the environmental perspective.”

Sarah Green, founder of the Colne Valley HS2 Protection Camp added “People need to be made aware of the horrendous impact HS2 will have, especially on water supplies. If people knew what was actually happening, there would be an outcry as the chalk is prone to cracking and fissuring and working around historic landfills is a recipe for disaster. The work HS2 are conducting now must be halted.”

In summary

I always try to keep an open mind, but when it comes to a topic as polarising as HS2, it is impossible to remain on the fence. The sheer turbulence of it all will blow you off!

The most chilling revelation for me throughout lockdown is that we now have a government that does what it wants. The rushed-through coronavirus bill now grants Government powers over its citizens well beyond a reasonable period of what is necessary with this Coronavirus crisis, taking full advantage of the Covid-19 crisis as a means to control citizens with new powers of arrest, detention, quarantine and burials to name but a few.

All protest is squashed, petitions are rejected and even the very act of protesting is an illegal, punishable offence… all in the name of our safety.

The BBC turns a blind eye to genocide in China (who will likely be building HS2 for us) and the violent destruction of migrant camps in favour of turning us against one another in pointless debates about 1m vs. 2m, mask vs. no mask etc.

It seems that now, in 2020 (11 years on from HS2 being proposed), it is far easier to put forward an argument against HS2 than for it. How alarming then, that this doesn’t seem to make a jot of difference. Are we really so powerless? In spite of widespread objection from the British public, members of parliament and even members of Boris Johnson’s own party, the project plows ahead, through fields, pastures, homes, gardens, habitats and nature reserves.

This government does what it wants… and sadly it wants HS2 whether you like it or not!

Perhaps a more relevant question to ask would be this – is this really the kind of behaviour you want from your government?

/0 Comments/by