employers warned against the risks of mandatory ‘no jab, no job’ policies 

Simon deMaid, Partner and employment law expert at Howes Percival

Law firm answers Covid-19 vaccination questions for employers 

Leading law firm Howes Percival is urging companies to consider the risks of adopting a blanket ‘no jab, no job’ employment policy.  

Currently, vaccination against COVID-19 is not compulsory, with the Government leaving it up to businesses to decide the ethics and feasibility of mandatory vaccination policies in their workplace.  After months of lockdown restrictions, companies will be eager to reassure customers and clients that they operate a ‘COVID-19 safe’ environment.  However, Howes Percival is warning employers to tread carefully and obtain specific legal advice regarding the implementation of any workplace vaccine policies.  

Issues regarding vaccination will be specific to each employers’ circumstances, their business sector, and the individual circumstances of their employees.   While employers are entitled to suggest that staff get vaccinated, if an employee refuses, great care needs to be taken to avoid potential discrimination claims. 

Simon deMaid, Partner and employment law expert at Howes Percival commented, “While the need for vaccination policies in the workplace may seem premature.  The expected trajectory of the vaccination rollout will lead to more instances of employers asking for or even requiring employees to receive the vaccine.”  

“There are still many unknowns about COVID-19 and the vaccinations.  Depending on the science, wide-scale vaccination may not be an all-encompassing solution for a return to “normality” or a pre COVID-19 workplace environment.  The vaccines have been shown to be effective at reducing or eliminating symptoms and effects of COVID-19, what is less known is the extent to which they prevent transmission (although the early data is encouraging) or the period of immunity.  This raises concerns about the feasibility of employers requiring vaccination, and highlights questions about the effectiveness of these polices in reducing risk to employers, employees, and customers.”   

Should employers introduce a “no jab, no job” vaccination policy?

Ultimately, it is a commercial decision for each employer to take based on the level of risk they are prepared to take.  However, employers should bear in mind that, a “no jab, no job” policy is too simplistic an approach for most companies because it does not take into account many of the current vaccine ‘unknowns’.  Existing employees may have medical clauses in their contracts, which could include a requirement to have a vaccination.  If not, employers may take steps to implement a vaccination policy or contractual clause.  It may also be possible to have a ‘no jab, no job’ policy for job applicants to any new role.  Although, this does not come without employment law risks, specifically discrimination. 

Can an employer compel an employee to take the vaccine?

In short, no.  Employers cannot physically force or compel employees to take a COVID-19 vaccine.  At this stage, rather than relying on compulsory vaccination, employers may wish to focus on how best to educate employees and publicise the benefits of taking the vaccination.  

Can employers require employees to have a vaccine on health and safety grounds?

Employers are required to reduce workplace risks under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and should continue to follow COVID-secure guidance regardless of vaccination status.  Requiring employees to take the vaccine on grounds of health and safety law would require employers to prove that vaccination protects other employees, and the third parties they encounter.  Although early data is showing a reduction in transmission this issue is yet to be resolved.  At this stage, relying on health and safety law is likely to be risky.  

Can an employer dismiss an employee for refusing a vaccine?

In theory, yes, however, whether the dismissal is fair or not will depend on the individual circumstances.  If the request to be vaccinated is reasonable, an employee’s unreasonable refusal to comply could result in disciplinary action.  Whether a request is reasonable will depend on the circumstances of the individual employee; the employer’s business and the sector they operate in.  For example, it will be more reasonable to require frontline health care workers to have the vaccine, compared to fully remote office workers.  

How can employers avoid unfair dismissal claims?

For a dismissal to be “fair”, it must fall under one of the five potentially fair reasons for dismissal.  The most likely justification for dismissing an employee will be “conduct” for failure to comply with a reasonable request.  Alternatively, dismissal might be for “some other substantial reason”.  Due to the complex issues involved, employers should take specific legal advice on any disciplinary or dismissal relating to employees who refuse the vaccine.  

What is the risk of discriminating against employees who refuse the vaccine?

There is a risk that employers could be accused of discrimination if they insist on employees, or job applicants, being vaccinated.  There are several potential ‘protected characteristics’ that an employee may seek to rely on to justify a refusal to take the vaccination and consideration will need to be given to the rights of individual employees and whether there are health reasons, religious or philosophical beliefs that mean vaccination is not appropriate.  

Can employers ask an employee if they have had the vaccine?

Yes, however, the vaccination status of an employee is private health information, which is a ‘special category of data’ (that requires extra protection under GDPR).  Use of this data must also be fair, necessary, and relevant for a specific purpose.  Any reason for recording employees’ vaccination status must be clear and compelling.  To process the data fairly and lawfully, employers will need to rely on one of the permitted grounds for doing so.   The sector, type of work and specific workplace health and safety risks will help employers decide if they have compelling reasons to collect employees COVID-19 vaccine records. 

For more information on COVID-19 and employment law visit:

 

/0 Comments/by

Why don’t we put it on the roof?

Researchers in Germany have shown that roof mounted photovoltaic systems can provide as much as 39% of the energy required by office buildings.  Just a small part of what we can do to avert the worst of global warming.

In the video at the end of this article you can watch David Attenboroughs recent speech to the UN.  We cannot stop the impact of global warming but we can mitigate it and if we don’t act, today’s youngsters will have far more to worry about than the impact of Covid on their education.

 

Office buildings generally consume a fair amount of electricity, and rarely in a climate-friendly way. As recent findings from the Centre for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research Baden-Württemberg (ZSW) indicate, this consumption can be made far more sustainable with façade and rooftop photovoltaic (PV) systems. Researchers recently investigated the façade-mounted PV system on the ZSW’s headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, to determine to what extent solar power generated by the building itself can cover overall electricity consumption. Feeding the data obtained from this building into a model, they found that electricity sourced from rooftop and façade-mounted solar panels cover nearly 40 percent of a standard office building’s overall demand – and can do so even without solar power storage units. This combination of PV systems on the roof and façade pays off in the course of the day as well as across seasons.

It takes quite a bit of electricity to keep office buildings running. Most of it goes to power lighting, ventilation, air conditioning and other electrical appliances. Germany will have to meet this energy demand in a more ecofriendly way now that it has committed to the goal of climate-neutral buildings by 2050. Electricity sourced from photovoltaic systems can help with that. The country will need at least 100 gigawatts of installed capacity by 2030, much of which will have to be mounted on buildings. Some owners of non-residential buildings have installed this type of carbon-free power source mainly on rooftops, but not nearly enough to meet these goals. Façade PV systems are few and far between.

A combination of solar panels on the façade and roof pays off

Very few owners integrate solar panels into the building’s envelope, despite their towering benefits. While the roof area remains the same regardless of a building’s height, the higher it rises, the greater its façade surface area will be. Façade-mounted PV systems offer benefits beyond their capacity to generate electricity. They also protect against wind and weather, provide shade, reduce heat loss, replace conventional building components and help to soundproof buildings.

Germany’s Building Energy Act (Gebäudeenergiegesetz) rewards owners who install façade PV systems by giving the building a better energy rating. Façade-mounted solar panels are most cost-effective when incorporated into the design on the drawing board, before new buildings go up. In this case, the investment can pay for itself in just ten years, after which the façade-mounted system starts turning a profit.

Thin-film modules with semiconductors made of copper, indium, gallium and selenium (CIGS) also have an aesthetic advantage. Offering the same design options as glass façades, they enable architects to create uniform glass surfaces in elegant hues. Panels come in various colors, sizes and shapes. They can even be flexible components and custom designs made to order. Researchers at ZSW are striving to optimize such applications.

Façade PV systems achieve 29 percent self-sufficiency

The ZSW model used actual power generation and consumption data to calculate how much of an office building’s electricity demands can be covered with photovoltaic modules on the façade and roof. First, the researchers determined the amount of power generated by CIGS thin-film solar modules on the southeast and southwest façades of the institute’s office building in Stuttgart and by its rooftop panels.

The researchers then applied this data to a model of a typical five-story office building with PV panels covering a quarter of the façade and 30 percent of the roof area. This amounts to 131 kilowatts of installed capacity. These solar modules would collectively generate around 115,000 kilowatt hours of electricity a year. In this modeled use case, the building’s annual demand comes to 170,000 kilowatt hours, a figure based on meter readings taken by the state of Baden-Württemberg for administrative buildings.

The results of these calculations show that office buildings can indeed meet quite a bit of their electricity needs with solar power furnished by façade and rooftop systems. “The façades alone furnish 29 percent of the electricity consumed over the period of a year,” says Dieter Geyer, project manager at ZSW. Most of the power generated by these solar modules – 80 percent – is devoted to this purpose, with the rest being fed into the power grid. “This combination of photovoltaic systems on the façade and roof elevates the level of self-sufficiency to 39 percent,” says Geyer. The majority of all solar power generated by the building’s systems – 58 percent – is consumed locally. The remainder increases the share of green electricity in the grid.

As much as 39 percent of demand covered by PV, even without batteries

Solar panels can satisfy a great deal of demand even without batteries to store the generated electricity. “Office buildings need electricity mainly during the day, so a good portion of the generated solar power can be consumed immediately,” says Geyer. “Storing this electricity for later consumption is not an absolute necessity.” This also brings down the cost of the overall photovoltaic system.

What’s more, solar façades generate electricity mainly in the morning and late afternoon when aligned to do so as in this use case. Rooftop systems generate electricity mostly in the midday hours. This means solar power is available during the hours when electricity consumption runs highest, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.

There is another reason why rooftop and façade-mounted solar panels are a greener option for office buildings – they complement each other well across seasons. Rooftop panels’ output is highest during the summer months. Façade-mounted PV panels are a perfect match, contributing to the overall system’s annual production with power output that runs highest during the winter months. Their vertical orientation puts façade-mounted panels in a better position than rooftop systems to capture the low winter sun’s rays.

PV façades set to take off

The upshot is that PV façades come highly recommended – they certainly make office buildings’ power supply more climate-friendly, particularly in combination with rooftop systems. Experts and scientists predict that façade PV systems will figure ever more prominently in architects’ designs and engineers’ building plans. When this practice goes mainstream, it will present a mass-market opportunity for German manufacturers of photovoltaic modules and production systems. The ZSW intends to step up its research to extend the life of photovoltaic façades to match that of standard façades.

This research was funded as part of a joint BMWi project to investigate façade-integrated CIGS photovoltaic systems (funding code 0324156A).

About ZSW

The Zentrum für Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoff-Forschung Baden-Württemberg (Centre for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research Baden-Württemberg, ZSW) is one of the leading institutes for applied research in the areas of photovoltaics, renewable fuels, battery technology, fuel cells and energy system analysis. There are currently around 300 scientists, engineers and technicians employed at ZSW’s three locations in Stuttgart, Ulm and Widderstall. In addition, there are 100 research and student assistants.

/0 Comments/by

PRINCIPLE DESIGNER ROLE – TAKE PART IN THE HSE SURVEY

New construction industry research to broaden understanding of how the vital CDM 2015 Principal Designer role is working in practice

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is urging the construction industry to get involved in important new research to develop a broader picture of the benefits and challenges of the Principal Designer (PD) role under CDM 2015 by completing an online survey.

HSE has appointed MPW R&R Ltd (an independent construction safety consultancy) to undertake this important research.

The survey is seeking the views of organisations and individuals that have experience of the PD role either by:

  • being appointed as a PD;
  • being appointed as one of the other CDM 2015 duty holders (Client, Designer, Principal Contractor or Contractor); or
  • working on or interacting with construction projects where a PD was appointed.

The views of individuals who have experience of the PD role, regardless of project size, would be welcomed.

Survey questions will ask how the PD role is being implemented, to broaden understanding of the benefits of the role as well as the challenges of implementing it.

In addition to the industry-wide survey, the research will also be seeking the views of key stakeholder organisations via a series of personal interviews and/or written submissions. These will be analysed in conjunction with the survey results to help draw overall conclusions. Research findings will be published on HSE’s website as a Research Report, freely available to download.

CLICK  HERE TO ACCESS THE SURVEY

It should take around 30 minutes to complete and closes on Friday 5th March.

/0 Comments/by

Cost worries outweigh Covid, as contractors reflect on 2020 and the year ahead

Our new Construction Sector Insight Report takes stock of sentiment and commercial perspectives after a unique and incredibly challenging year and reveals a stark reminder of the cost pressures facing the sector, even during a pandemic.

 

Over a two-month period at the end of 2020 and early 2021 we invited feedback from over 200 contractors from a wide range of organisations, to provide an opportunity for reflection on lessons learned, and to support contractors in 2021 with a shared understanding of where they have landed after such a unique time.

 

Despite the pressures that Covid has inflicted on the market, respondents pointed to the enduring challenge of driving down costs while delivering a raft of programme obligations as their number one concern, with 42% of respondents stating that it is the biggest industry pressure, followed by Covid at only c20%.

 

Caroline Romback, Copper Construction Practice Director comments; “Of all the statistics from the report, this one puts everything into sharp relief. For contractors to point to cost pressure outweighing the impact of Covid, it’s a stark reminder that the sector is still treading a tremendous commercial tightrope. There is a genuine ambition to modernise, but equally a need for that risk and added valued obligations to be built into the cost of delivering a project.”

 

Despite a strong momentum towards that sector modernisation, contractors reflect on a balance of risk that still sits with them, as expectations expand faster than margins. And with an expanded list of added value obligations, contractors also call for earlier engagement in project programmes.

 

Unsurprisingly of that expanding range of obligations Sustainability sits at the top of list, closely followed by Social Value, Modern Methods of Construction (MMC) and Engagement. In the report contractors reflect on the opportunities and challenges that each of these obligations bring, as the Government steps up in areas like Social Value delivery, with an increased level of prescription in its new Social Value Model.

 

Caroline Romback concludes “On the flip side it was a year of tremendous hope and achievement in the sector as well. And with agendas like the Construction Playbook and Project Speed, there could be a unique moment to harness collective momentum to make change on both sides of the negotiating table to truly help us all ‘build back better’ together.”

 

To download and view the Construction Sector Insight Report, please click here.

 

/0 Comments/by

US HOUSE PRICES BOOM – BUT SHOULD THEY FEAR BUST

Can shipping container homes solve the US housing demand

House prices in the US are skyrocketing. Low mortgage rates and Covid have driven the demand but supply is nowhere near meeting that demand, the discrepancy resulting in a further spike in the ever-increasing values.

We are seeing the same pattern in the UK.  In terms of patterns it doesn’t seem that long ago that a world financial disaster, which can be laid firmly at the door of the US banks precipitated a major fall in house values. Fool hardy lending and manipulation of funds instigated by greedy individuals, precipitated a financial crisis that lead to US house values toppling inexorably downward, as they did so the financial tsunami washed over the rest of the world. It has often been said that the housing market is the barometer of this countries wealth; we can only hope that we are not seeing the beginnings of a high temperature.

One of the key factors in all this is supply, also a major factor in our housing crisis. We have often heard of the quirky homes created by using shipping containers for their outer shells. However this US company seems to be taking the idea to a new level, we thought our readers might like to hear what Daniel Croft CEO of Giant Containers, a global supplier of modified modular and prefabricated shipping container structures, has to say about ‘Shipping Container’ real estate.

 

Modular Real Estate Could Solve Limited Space Issues Caused By The Pandemic

 

Larger-than-life Legos, a twist on tiny houses, upscale up cycling; at the end of the day, a relatively new building method in housing and property structures starts with a plain, steel-shipping container.

Who would’ve thought that a cargo container meant for the slow boats from China would appeal to anyone for a guest house, much less a modern luxury home, but indeed, it does! From she sheds and granny pods to pop-up office spaces and modular multi-story homes, shipping containers turned modular buildings are popping up all over the globe.

For those who think out-of-the-box about housing solutions, containers and prefab modular building products appeal to many for affordability, space-saving qualities, less environmental impact and expansion potential.

Pandemic restrictions have paved the way to prefab and modular construction to accommodate remote workers who need either an isolated workspace in the backyard or a quick home extension, creating extra space as we spend more time at home. The growing demand continues to gain traction in the real estate market because of the troubled economy. People, who recently escaped urban areas during the pandemic, longing for some extra space, have been disappointed with skyrocketing home prices, especially for single-family homes on individual lots. Modular builds, using containers and other prefabricated structures, are relatively inexpensive when compared to traditional construction and take very little time to build. Custom container homes give homeowners modular, industrial design without dealing with the logistics and renovation of used cargo containers. They can typically be done in a range of budgets and quickly. Homeowners can have a modular studio with a kitchen and bath ready in less than 12 weeks.

Based on the growing demand for affordable housing, our company, Giant Containers, amended our business model — once primarily focused on creating life-long experiences and experiential marketing installations for some of the world’s largest brands, we launched an entire division focused on creating sustainable real estate. Before this, our in-house staff of engineers and architects spent over a decade researching the benefits of container houses. My team used shipping containers to assemble prefabricated modular homes, unique swimming pools and Canada’s first retail center made entirely out of shipping containers. It was only a matter of time before municipalities and governments across North America realized the benefits of prefabricated homes and started building large-scale residential buildings from containers.

Even prior to the pandemic, modular builds solved an array of housing quandaries. The College of Idaho in Caldwell, Idaho, experienced a housing shortage in 2019 and had to get more student housing, fast. Built by a local company, two new dorms were made from 36 decommissioned shipping containers and are the first of their kind anywhere in the United States. KTVB reported that the design incorporated several key energy-saving components throughout the buildings, making them more energy-efficient than traditional construction.

Similarly, the city of Sacramento, California, struggled with solutions for people without housing. They also turned to contractors for ideas, turning containers into housing units quickly, saving lives and money.

Architect Peter DeMaria has been designing cargo container-based projects since 2004 and he is credited as the first architect to adapt a shipping container into a building solution that meets U.S. building code standards. He believes that reusing cargo containers is helpful to the planet. However, putting down a container home or workspace is not without its challenges, particularly when it comes to obtaining the permit. Before you begin making solid plans, find out if this sort of structure is allowed in your community or neighborhood. According to DeMaria, potential container homeowners need to be patient. It can take six to nine months to receive such permits. An additional consideration: containers have to be craned into place — but so do some giant roof trusses for large homes.

Decommissioned cargo containers must also be reinforced for occupancy, especially the floor and adjacent walls when another unit is attached. They have to be retrofitted and code-compliant for utilities. All of this adds to the cost, but you’re still not into the six-figure or more range of an ordinary home.

 

 

Building a home of any type faces drawbacks. Despite the sometimes-bumpy path to completing a container building, the strengths of ‘cargotecture’ will likely pay off for generations to come.

 

 

 

 

Source: Forbes

/0 Comments/by

REVERSE VAT – Calls for builders to write to their MP’s

Building industry ups the ante to get reverse VAT scrapped

The campaign for the government to ditch reverse charge VAT is mounting with the Federation of Master Builders, FMB, claiming two-thirds of SMEs believing it will damage cash flow.

Scottish National Party MP Kirsten Oswald has already tabled an early day motion calling for the controversial new regime to be dropped.

FMB chief executive Brian Berry said: “This is a damaging policy being introduced at the worst possible time for builders. By removing the flow of VAT money between businesses in the construction supply chain, four in ten builders say this will have a ‘significant or moderate’ impact on their cash flow.”

The new regime was to have gone live in October 2019 but was deferred to 1st March 2021 following industry lobbying. The new policy means no-one in the supply chain can invoice for VAT and pass the money on later to the tax office.

Build UK has told the government that many SMEs are fighting to consolidate their cash flow following the pandemic and the effects of leaving the EU. It has set up a Twitter hashtag #StopReverseVAT to channel responses from affected construction companies.

The organisation calculates that for companies that submit quarterly VAT returns they will need an extra five per cent of annual sales to compensate for the loss of cash flow. Firms who submit monthly returns will need an extra three per cent of annual sales.

 

“The introduction of the charge at this time will put jobs and businesses at risk and may result in companies that survived the Covid-19 outbreak and the UK’s withdrawal from the EU being undone by this additional burden,” said Build UK deputy chief executive Jo Fautley.

 

Licensing builders holds key to tackling fraud

The new policy is being introduced to tackle missing trader scams where fraudsters import goods VAT-free from other countries and then sell to domestic buyers charging them VAT.

City Lofts London director Deepak Sing Udassi believes a mandatory licensing scheme for the construction industry would be a better means for tackling the issue.

“Due to the little to no regulation in the industry, rogue traders are able to operate freely, to the detriment of consumers and reputable businesses like mine.

“Licensing would also drive-up standards, professionalism and the reputation of the industry, which is clearly not well regarded across Whitehall as demonstrated by this punitive policy.”

Elland and Steel Structures Ltd managing director Mark Denham said: “If this initiative is applied from 1t March, it will be the ‘final nail in the coffin’ for many sub-contractors both big and small.

“Reverse VAT penalises good honest companies that have continually paid their VAT on time.”

Build UK is calling on all firms in the supply chain to write to their MPs to request support for the forthcoming early day motion.

/0 Comments/by

£900m boost for West Midlands

A budget of more than £900m, including funding for infrastructure, regeneration and job training schemes that can support the region’s post-Covid-19 economic recovery has been approved by the West Midlands Combined Authority.

The 2021/22 WMCA Budget includes a package of major transport projects to help drive economic growth and cleaner air as well as funding to unlock and transform the region’s derelict industrial sites for new homes and jobs.

An Adult Education Budget (AEB) of £142m, the biggest of any UK region outside London, will be used to give people, especially those impacted by the coronavirus pandemic, the skills needed to get back into work and to secure jobs in growing sectors such as construction, digital and the emerging green industries.

But in approving the budget, the WMCA board warned of the financial uncertainty caused by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic with recent independent research also suggesting the West Midlands could be hit harder than any other UK regional economy.

Andy Street, the Mayor of the West Midlands, said: “The investments outlined in this budget will help the West Midlands make significant strides towards a quick and effective recovery from the coronavirus pandemic, as well as tackling the climate emergency facing our region.

“We’re investing hundreds of millions of pounds in our green public transport network, with zero carbon and Sprint buses, new rail stations, cycling infrastructure, and of course Metro extensions – with almost £100m alone being spent over the next year on the Wednesbury to Brierley Hill extension.

“Meanwhile more than £116m is being spent on the remediation of derelict brownfield land, saving acres of greenbelt from development, and we’re investing £142m to level up our skills, getting us ready for the huge boost in the green jobs of the future as we look to help get people into work.

“What these investments will do is help to create and protect jobs at what is such a critical time for many people’s livelihoods, whilst also helping us on our way to becoming carbon neutral by 2041.

“We are managing to deliver all of this without costing the taxpayer any more money, as this will be the fourth year in a row where we have not introduced a mayoral precept, meaning not an extra penny from us will be added to people’s council tax bills.”

The approved budget includes £363m for the WMCA’s transport arm – Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) – to deliver schemes that will improve connectivity, drive economic growth and help cut carbon emissions by making it easier and more attractive for people to switch to public transport.
 
Projects include:

  • The expansion of the electric-powered Metro tram system
    ·The opening of new railway lines and stations at Darlaston, Willenhall, Moseley, Kings Heath and Hazelwell
    ·The development of a ‘Sprint’ rapid bus network using zero emission vehicles
    ·Support for the continuing conversion of buses from diesel to hybrid
    ·More cycling and walking routes
    ·Concessionary travel for older people, the blind, disabled and children

In addition, there will be £11m available for subsidised bus services, £7m for Ring and Ride and nearly £4m to enhance transport for the Commonwealth Games.

More than £116m is committed for housing and land projects and in particular the WMCA’s ‘brownfield first’ policy to unlock and redevelop derelict urban land and help safeguard the Green Belt.

Investments will accelerate the on-going transformation of former industrial sites to deliver energy efficient, affordable new homes and modern commercial premises for businesses to grow and create jobs. There will also be support for the regeneration of town centres and for the research and development of modern methods of construction and zero carbon homes.

Key brownfield housing schemes include:

  • Up to 750 new homes on a former sewage works at Friar Park in Sandwell
    ·252 homes on the former Caparo steel works at Walsall
    ·The construction of a further 138 homes using cutting edge construction technology on derelict land at Icknield Port Loop in Edgbaston

Around £120m in capital grants will be allocated to local authorities to help fund major infrastructure projects with significant investment in Coventry (Station Masterplan, City Centre South, Very Light Rail, City of Culture), Solihull (UK Central Programme) and Birmingham including £20m for the Commonwealth Games.

The £142m of skills funding will be used by the WMCA’s productivity and skills team, working with local authorities, to fund training courses that give people the opportunity to upskill and get back into work, with more training matched to those industries suffering skills shortages, including higher level skills.

The WMCA Budget report also highlights how, ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s Budget announcement on March 3, the authority is continuing to seek the additional funding set out in its Spending Review Submission while lobbying for additional capacity and ongoing funding to tackle the impact of Covid-19.

 

Source: The Business Desk

 

/0 Comments/by

INVEST AND THRIVE

Invest in technology, productivity and sustainability, says Fergus Harradence, Deputy Director of Construction at the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. He will be addressing the CIOB’s Adapt & Thrive conference on 24 March.

The UK construction sector has done a great job amidst the pandemic, adopting new site procedures allowing the whole supply chain to continue operating to make a significant contribution to the national pandemic response. It has achieved this whilst largely avoiding significant outbreaks of Covid-19 on construction sites.

The challenge now is to maintain these high safety standards, especially with the emergence of new and more contagious variants.

The headwinds can’t be ignored. On top of Covid-19, there has also been some disruption to the supply of imported products, caused by problems in the global shipping industry due to a reduced number of vessels, and the new customs procedures introduced at the end of the Brexit Transitional Period.

Some parts of the industry have seen a reduction in work, especially in the hospitality and leisure sectors. Hopefully a combination of the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines and firms becoming more familiar with the new procedures will see these problems resolved.

Our view of the future

In the medium to longer term, the industry faces the need to adopt new technologies, techniques and working practices based on digital and offsite manufacturing to improve its productivity, the sustainability of its operations and the quality of its outputs.

This will require significant investments in capital equipment, training and capacity building in the workforce.

The industry also needs to prepare for longer term structural shifts in demand; for example building fewer offices or leisure facilities, but finding more work retrofitting homes and buildings to make them more energy efficient.

Finally, the industry needs to prepare for government and other clients demanding infrastructure and buildings that embody and emit much lower levels of carbon, higher standards in terms of building safety and information about buildings, and that it maximises its contribution to delivering wider social and economic value in the UK.

How should companies prepare?

The Construction Playbook, published in December, sets an ambitious vision for how government plans to reset its relationship with the construction industry.

Central government clients will provide greater transparency around project pipelines and build deeper relationships with the supply chain based on longer term contracts and more collaborative contractual structures.

In return we’ll seek better flow of information across the supply chain, the use of should-cost modelling (SCM) and benchmarking to underpin a more honest dialogue about project costs, and to ensure the industry can make a fair margin of profit.

The aim is also to deliver fairer contractual terms throughout the supply chain, better payment practices, and to improve the management of risk, as well as avoiding the escalation of issues into disputes, or to resolve these quickly.

It also sets out how government will challenge the industry to deliver better social value, and use new technologies to deliver this and improve its performance. The themes of the Playbook are relevant to the whole industry, and give examples of what firms should be doing to prepare for the future.

What’s holding industry back?

The main obstacles to the industry making progress are its structure, and also its adversarial culture.

The future is a more collaborative one, with closer relationships between clients and firms throughout the construction supply chain, greater transparency and information sharing, and an industry where the majority of infrastructure and new buildings are manufactured, and will form part of a digitised built environment.

The industry needs to be better at understanding the contribution it can make to society, and how it can maximise this, invest in improving its capability to innovate and deploy new technologies and techniques, increase its diversity, improve levels of skills and competency, and deliver better occupational and mental health provision for everyone working in the industry.

A path to the future

The Transforming Construction Challenge, a £420m innovation partnership between the industry and government, which is part of the Construction Sector Deal, is supporting the development of a wide range of innovations, and associated approaches and techniques.

It has supported the use of AI to improve project planning and delivery, digital platforms that support SMEs to use modern methods of construction, and new manufacturing techniques to produce homes and other buildings, including pioneering the use of product platforms (common sets of components) for built assets, an approach that has been very successful in the automotive sector.

In parallel, the Construction Innovation Hub has developed an approach to defining what constitutes value, to broaden the focus of procurement away from capital cost, and is also working on how to embed quality management approaches in the delivery of construction projects.

Many firms of all sizes are improving their performance. Covid-19 has required many to rethink their business processes and onsite operations, and to adapt these in ways that improve productivity to close the output gap created by the need to adopt safer working procedures.

In parallel, we are seeing firms large and small adopting new technologies and investing in the capabilities of their workforce, or recruiting people from other sectors, whether IT or manufacturing, to bring new ideas and skills into the business.

These trends are good, but they need to embed and accelerate if we’re to realise the full value of the industry and its output.

 

Source: Global Construction Review (CIOB)

 

/0 Comments/by

JAPAN – NET ZERO BY 2050

TOKYO: With Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga pledging to bring Japan’s carbon dioxide emissions to net zero by 2050, a growing number of Japanese companies are looking at how they can make a bigger contribution to curbing global warming.

As investors scrutinize how firms address environmental issues, sustainability and governance, Japanese trading houses are reviewing business strategies by reducing their traditionally heavy reliance on natural resources as a major source of profits.

Itochu Corp. is selling its 20 percent stake in a coal mine in Colombia to Drummond Company Inc., a U.S. coal producer that owns the remaining 80 percent, as part of efforts to promote decarbonization.

To highlight its commitment to tackling environmental issues, Itochu is now preparing to issue SDG bonds targeting overseas investors, the first by a Japanese trading house, by around April, a company official said.

Although details have yet to be worked out, the funds to be raised will likely be used to promote renewable energy among other green initiatives, the official said.

Such bonds are meant to help attain the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, which are intended to address a host of issues from climate change to poverty.

Itochu is not alone in putting more focus on reducing CO2 emissions. Mitsubishi Corp., another Japanese trading house, has invested in Canada’s CarbonCure Technologies Inc. to promote low-carbon concrete in the construction industry in Japan and other parts of Asia.

CarbonCure Technologies has a technology to inject recycled CO2 into fresh concrete, which will then undergo a mineralization process and become stronger.

The production of cement, a key ingredient in concrete, is one of the major contributors to CO2 emissions.

According to a recent survey by Teikoku Databank Ltd., the percentage of companies that regard efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions as part of their social corporate responsibility or as necessary to build “good relations” with stakeholders was higher among big companies than smaller ones.

Still, 43.4 percent of respondents said it would be “difficult” for Japan to attain carbon neutrality by 2050 and 17.9 percent see it as “impossible.”

Some 15.8 percent said the goal is achievable, according to the survey to which 11,479 companies responded.

The Japan Business Federation, the nation’s powerful business lobby known as Keidanren, regards achieving carbon neutrality as a formidable challenge and is stressing the need to tackle it by promoting the use of hydrogen, electric cars and new innovations.

Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. has begun studying the possibility of transporting and distributing hydrogen produced and liquefied by using renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power in Australia.

As part of such efforts, Kawasaki Heavy is working with Fortescue Metals Group in Australia and Iwatani Corp., a Japanese liquefied hydrogen supplier, to examine the business feasibility of the plan, with an eye to making a decision by 2025.

In recent years, Japan has been seeking to promote the use of hydrogen as an alternative energy source but building infrastructure remains a challenge.

“We will have to see how much demand will increase for hydrogen in the coming years,” a Kawasaki Heavy official said.

For consumers, recycling PET bottles can be one way to do their part in protecting the environment.

Aeon Co. is planning to experiment with turning PET bottles collected at its supermarkets into new ones and using them for its “Topvalu” private brand.

The Japanese retailer has set a goal of using 100 percent recycled or plant-based PET bottles by 2030.

According to Aeon, some 11,982 tons of PET bottles were collected at its stores in fiscal 2019. If these were recycled and remade into new bottles, it would mean that Aeon could roughly cover all bottles manufactured annually under the private brand, a company official said.

The trial will first cover Tokyo and its neighboring prefectures.

“The momentum is building for decarbonization and we believe this is an opportunity,” the official said.

 

Source: The Mainichi

 

/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