India
NIST Recommendations 16-20 > Improved People Evacuation
Previous Posts in This Series …
2011-10-25: NIST’s Recommendations on the 9-11 WTC Building Collapses … GROUP 1. Increased Structural Integrity – Recommendations 1, 2 & 3 (out of 30)
2011-11-18: NIST WTC Recommendations 4-7 > Structural Fire Endurance … GROUP 2. Enhanced Fire Endurance of Structures – Recommendations 4, 5, 6 & 7
2011-11-24: NIST WTC Recommendations 8-11 > New Design of Structures … GROUP 3. New Methods for Fire Resisting Design of Structures – Recommendations 8, 9, 10 & 11
2011-11-25: NIST WTC Recommendations 12-15 > Improved Active Protection … GROUP 4. Improved Active Fire Protection – Recommendations 12, 13, 14 & 15
.
2011-11-30: SOME PRELIMINARY COMMENTS …
1. In the First Post of this Series, I wrote …
” As such a high level of performance is expected … indeed demanded … of a Sustainable Building … Sustainable Fire Engineering must be ‘reliability-based’ … in other words, it must have a rational, empirical and scientifically robust basis … “
Sustainable Fire Engineering must also be ‘person-centred’ … i.e. a design process (in whatever architectural or engineering discipline) which places ‘real’ people at the centre of creative endeavours and gives due consideration to their responsible needs, and their health, safety, welfare and security in the Human Environment.
In order to prolong, and if at all possible, significantly extend the Life Cycle of a Sustainable Building beyond 100 years … Fire Engineers must begin to feel at ease … and be comfortable … with the following mainstream Sustainable Design Concepts …
Flexibility: The extent to which a building interior is designed, when new, to be capable of being easily modified at any later stage during the life cycle of that building – with minimal cost and user inconvenience – because of a person’s changing living or working needs.
Adaptability: The extent to which a building, or a building component, is designed when new, or capable of being easily modified at any later stage, to meet the changing life and living needs of the broad range of potential users, who may or may not have activity limitations, or may develop a health condition during the life cycle of that building or component.
Accessibility of a Building: Ease of independent approach, entry, egress (during normal ambient conditions), evacuation (in the event of an emergency) and/or use of a building and its services and facilities, by all of the building’s potential users - with an assurance of individual health, safety and welfare during the course of those activities.
2. Group 5 of the 2005 NIST WTC Recommendations is, by far, the most important … introducing some innovative concepts of ‘real’ evacuation … with nothing too startling. Contrary to the impression given by NIST … these Recommendations are equally valid for complex building types and, in reality, for all but the most simple of low-rise buildings. It is interesting to note, however, that when discussing fire behaviour or structural performance in fire, for example … the NIST texts are confident and direct. Here, when dealing with ‘people’ issues … not so confident, prone to some rambling … and lacking clarity.
Shortly after the 2005 NIST Report (NCSTAR 1) was published, I stated the following on the SDI Corporate WebSite … at this FireOx International Page … http://www.sustainable-design.ie/fire/structdesfire.htm …
” In its treatment of ‘disability’ and ‘people with activity limitations’, the Report does not go far enough, and is seriously flawed.”
Let me explain why …
As you go scan down through NIST’s Recommendations 16-20, you will encounter 1 reference to ‘mobility impaired occupants’ and 2 references to the impersonal ‘mobility impaired’. IF (and that is still a very big ‘if’, because there is still so much rabid resistance to this topic !) … a New Post-9/11 Evacuation Model, or Construct, Dealing with ‘Disability’ is being developed … all of the major impairment groupings (i.e. visual impairment, hearing impairment, physical function impairment, mental/cognitive impairment, and psychological impairment) must be added to the mix from the beginning. In other words, our proper focus of attention must be ‘people with activity limitations’ … not just people with disabilities, but also frail older people (not all older people !), children under the age of 5 years, women in the later stages of pregnancy, people with a health condition, etc.
And … because of the social stigma still firmly attaching to ‘disability’ … many building occupants/users will not self-identify … not even if their lives depend on it !
Concentrating on one group only, i.e. people with mobility impairments, is simplistic and entirely inadequate … and we will all end up, in a few years time, having to graft on a consideration of the other impairment groups.
This is exactly what has already gone wrong with the development of Accessibility Design Guidance during the last 30 years … where ‘people with visual or hearing impairments’ received merely token attention … and ‘people with cognitive or psychological impairments’ received no attention at all ! And … we are now grappling with the challenge of having to graft on additional texts to try to re-balance International Design Guidance on Accessibility of the Built Environment. Been there – done that – I have all of the t-shirts !!
People with Activity Limitations (English) / Personnes à Performances Réduites (French): Those people, of all ages, who are unable to perform, independently and without aid, basic human activities or tasks – because of a health condition or physical/mental/cognitive/psychological impairment of a permanent or temporary nature.
The above Terms (in English and French) include …
- wheelchair users ;
- people who experience difficulty in walking, with or without a facilitation aid, e.g. stick, crutch, calliper or walking frame ;
- frail, older people ;
- the very young (people under the age of 5 years) ;
- people who suffer from arthritis, asthma, or a heart condition ;
- the visually and/or hearing impaired ;
- people who have a cognitive impairment disorder, including dementia, amnesia, brain injury, or delirium ;
- women in the later stages of pregnancy ;
- people impaired following the use of alcohol, other ‘social’ drugs e.g. cocaine and heroin, and some medicines ;
- people who suffer any partial or complete loss of language related abilities, i.e. aphasia ;
- people impaired following exposure to environmental pollution and/or other irresponsible human activities, e.g. war and terrorism ;
and …
- people who experience a panic attack in a fire situation or other emergency ;
- people, including firefighters, who suffer incapacitation as a result of exposure, during a fire, to poisonous or toxic substances, and/or elevated temperatures.
3. So … what provision should be made for ‘people with activity limitations’ in typical Fire Engineering Design Projects ?
Equivalent to the concept of Maximum Credible Fire Scenario, which has already been discussed in this Series … at FireOx International, some years ago, we developed the concept of …
Maximum Credible User Scenario
Representing building user conditions which are also severe but reasonable to anticipate …
a) 10% of People Using the Building (occupants, visitors and other users) have an Impairment (visual or hearing, physical function, mental or cognitive, psychological, with some impairments not being identifiable) ;
[ This performance indicator appears in ISO FDIS 21542: 'Building Construction - Accessibility & Usability of the Built Environment', which will soon be published.]
b) The Number of People Using a Building increases, on occasions which cannot be specified, to 120% of designed/calculated maximum building capacity.
[ Generally ... the fire safety related texts contained in ISO 21542 are based on the 2005 & 2008 NIST WTC Recommendations.]
4. With regard to Recommendation 17 below, and NIST’s reference to the widths of evacuation staircases and door openings, etc … fire codes and regulations, fire authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ’s), and even the fire services themselves … still have a crazy mixed-up approach to defining the width of these building features … an approach which I am not even going to attempt to repeat ! Forget it !!
Without Exception … all understandings of Evacuation Route Width, Evacuation Staircase Width and Evacuation Door Opening Width … must be harmonized with the following definitions of Unobstructed Width …
Unobstructed Width – General
Free, unobstructed space – clear of all obstacles below a height of 2.1 metres above finished floor level – necessary for passage along a circulation route, or other route component, e.g. a staircase.
[ For example ... the Unobstructed Width of a Staircase is the clear dimension from the edge of one handrail to the edge of the opposite handrail ... and there is always a continuous handrail on each side of an evacuation staircase ! ]
Unobstructed Width – Door Opening
Free, unobstructed space – clear of all obstacles below a height of 2.0 metres above finished floor level – necessary for passage through a door opening, measured when the door leaf is opened to an angle of 90°, or when a sliding or folding door leaf is opened to its fullest extent.
[ For example ... the Unobstructed Width of a Door Opening is the dimension from the edge of the door leaf (when open at an angle of 90°) to the nearest edge of the door frame.]
This FireOx International Page on the SDI Corporate WebSite provides more guidance … http://www.sustainable-design.ie/fire/appendixd.htm
5. With regard to Recommendation 20 below, and NIST’s reference to allowing “all occupants an equal opportunity for evacuation” … this is not just a ‘nice idea’, or an ‘idealistic notion’ … this is now a Human and Social Right which is backed up and supported by International Law ! And … it is no longer acceptable for the Fire Science and Engineering Community to continue its stubborn resistance in the face of this fact !!
For the benefit of my fire engineering colleagues … I will, once again here, reproduce the most relevant extracts from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities …
UN CRPD Preamble Paragraph (g)
Emphasizing the importance of mainstreaming disability issues as an integral part of relevant strategies of sustainable development, …
UN CRPD Article 9 – Accessibility
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination of obstacles and barriers to accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia:
(a) Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor facilities, including schools, housing, medical facilities and workplaces ;
(b) Information, communications and other services, including electronic services and emergency services.
2. States Parties shall also take appropriate measures:
(a) To develop, promulgate and monitor the implementation of minimum standards and guidelines for the accessibility of facilities and services open or provided to the public ;
(b) To ensure that private entities that offer facilities and services which are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities ;
(c) To provide training for stakeholders on accessibility issues facing persons with disabilities ;
(d) To provide in buildings and other facilities open to the public signage in Braille and in easy to read and understand forms ;
(e) To provide forms of live assistance and intermediaries, including guides, readers and professional sign language interpreters, to facilitate accessibility to buildings and other facilities open to the public ;
(f) To promote other appropriate forms of assistance and support to persons with disabilities to ensure their access to information ;
(g) To promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet ;
(h) To promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible information and communications technologies and systems at an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become accessible at minimum cost.
UN CRPD Article 11 – Situations of Risk & Humanitarian Emergencies
States Parties shall take, in accordance with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.
[ Note: An outbreak of fire in a building is a situation of serious risk for all vulnerable building occupants/users.]
.
At the time of writing, 153 Countries had signed the UN CRPD … while 106 Countries have ratified the Convention and are, therefore, the ‘State Parties’ referred to above.
These are just a few of the State Parties to the UN CRPD …
- Argentina (ratified the UN CRPD, 2008-09-02)
- Australia (ratified the UN CRPD, 2008-07-17)
- Brazil (ratified the UN CRPD, 2008-08-01)
- Canada (ratified the UN CRPD, 2010-03-11)
- China (ratified the UN CRPD, 2008-08-01)
- Cuba (ratified the UN CRPD, 2007-09-06)
- European Union (ratified the UN CRPD, 2010-12-23)
- India (ratified the UN CRPD, 2007-10-01)
- Malaysia (ratified the UN CRPD, 2010-07-19)
- Mexico (ratified the UN CRPD, 2007-12-17)
- Philippines (ratified the UN CRPD, 2008-04-15)
- South Africa (ratified the UN CRPD, 2007-11-30)
- Turkey (ratified the UN CRPD, 2009-09-28)
- United Arab Emirates (ratified the UN CRPD, 2010-03-19)
I wonder how implementation is proceeding in these countries !?!
.
2005 NIST WTC RECOMMENDATIONS
GROUP 5. Improved Building Evacuation
Building evacuation should be improved to include system designs that facilitate safe and rapid egress, methods for ensuring clear and timely emergency communications to occupants, better occupant preparedness regarding their roles and duties for evacuation during emergencies, and incorporation of appropriate egress technologies.*
[ * F-36 This effort should include standards and guidelines for the development and evaluation of emergency evacuation plans, including best practices for both partial and full evacuation, and the development of contingency plans that account for expected conditions that may require adaptation, including the compromise of all or part of an egress path before or during evacuation, or conditions such as widespread power failure, earthquake, or security threat that restrict egress from the building. Evacuation planning should include the process from initial notification of the need to evacuate up to the point when occupants arrive at a place where their safety is ensured. These standards and guidelines should be suitable for assessing the adequacy of evacuation plans submitted for approval, and should require occupant training through the conduct of regular drills.]
NIST WTC Recommendation 16.
NIST recommends that public agencies, non-profit organizations concerned with building and fire safety, and building owners and managers develop and carry out public education and training campaigns, jointly and on a nationwide scale, to improve building occupants’ preparedness for evacuation in case of building emergencies. This effort should include better training and self-preparation of occupants, an effectively implemented system of floor wardens and building safety personnel, and needed improvements to standards. Occupant preparedness should include:
a. Improved training and drills for building occupants to ensure that they know evacuation procedures for a variety of emergency scenarios (e.g. including evacuation and shelter in place), are familiar with the egress route, and are sufficiently aware of what is necessary if evacuation is required with minimal notice (e.g. footwear consistent with the distance to be travelled, a flashlight/glow stick for pathway illumination, and dust masks).
b. Building owners and managers should educate tenants on the life safety systems present in their building(s), provide training materials explaining egress routes and stairwell and elevator information, and develop educational programmes explaining the most appropriate responses in emergency situations. It is further recommended that the owners and managers of office buildings implement the necessary systems for collecting and storing the training history of each building occupant.
c. Improved training and drills that routinely inform building occupants that roof rescue is not (or is) presently feasible as a standard evacuation option, that they should evacuate down the stairs in any full-building evacuation unless explicitly instructed otherwise by on-site incident commanders, and that elevators can be used if they are still in service and haven’t been recalled or stopped.
d. Improved codes, laws, and regulations that do not restrict or impede building occupants during evacuation drills from familiarizing themselves with the detailed layout of alternative egress routes for a full building evacuation.*
[ * F-37 New York City Local Law 5 prohibits requiring occupants to practice stairwell evacuation during drills.]
Affected Standard: ICC/ANSI A117-1. Model Building and Fire Codes: The standard should be adopted in model building and fire codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard. Affected Organizations: NFPA, NIBS, NCSBCS, BOMA, and CTBUH.
NIST WTC Recommendation 17.
NIST recommends that tall buildings be designed to accommodate timely full building evacuation of occupants when required in building-specific or large-scale emergencies such as widespread power outages, major earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes without sufficient advance warning, fires, explosions, and terrorist attack. Building size, population, function, and iconic status should be taken into account in designing the egress system. Stairwell capacity and stair discharge door opening width* should be adequate to accommodate contraflow due to emergency access by responders.
[ * F-38 Egress capacity should be based on an all-hazards approach that considers the number and width of stairs (and door openings) as well as the possible use of scissor stairs credited as a single stair.]
a. Improved egress analysis models, design methodology, and supporting data should be developed to achieve a target evacuation performance (e.g. time for full building evacuation*) for the design building population by considering the building and egress system designs, and human factors such as occupant size, mobility status, stairwell tenability conditions, visibility, and congestion.
[ * F-39 Use of egress models is required to estimate the egress capacity for a range of different evacuation strategies, including full building evacuation. NIST found that the average surviving occupant in the WTC towers descended stairwells at about half the slowest speed previously measured for non-emergency evacuations.]
b. To the degree possible, mobility impaired occupants should be provided a means for self-evacuation in the event of a building emergency. Current strategies (and law) generally require the mobility impaired to shelter in place. New procedures, which provide redundancy in the event that the floor warden system or co-worker assistance (i.e. a buddy system) fails, should consider full building evacuation, and may include use of fire-protected and structurally hardened elevators,* motorized evacuation technology (e.g. a battery-operated evacuation chair), and/or dedicated communication technologies for the mobility impaired.
[ * F-40 Elevators should be explicitly designed to provide protection against large, but conventional, building fires. Fire-protected elevators also should be structurally hardened to withstand the range of foreseeable building-specific or large-scale emergencies. While progress has been made in developing the requirements and technologies for fire-protected elevators, similar criteria and designs for structurally hardened elevators remain to be developed.]
c. If protected/hardened elevators are provided for emergency responders but become unusable during an emergency, due to a malfunction or a conventional threat whose magnitude exceeds the magnitude considered in design, sufficient stairwell capacity should be provided to ensure timely emergency responder access to buildings that are undergoing full evacuation. Such capacity could be provided either via dedicated stairways for fire service use or by building sufficient stairway capacity (i.e. number and width of stairways and/or use of scissor stairs credited as a single stair) to accommodate the evacuation of building occupants while allowing access to emergency responders with minimal hindrance from occupant contraflow.
d. The egress allowance in assembly use spaces should be limited in state and local laws and regulations to no more than a doubling of the stairway capacity for the provision of a horizontal exit on a floor, as is the case now in the national model codes.* The use of a horizontal exit creates an area of refuge with a 2 hour fire rated separation, at least one stair on each side, and sufficient space for the expected occupant load.
[ * F-41 The New York City Building Code permits a doubling of allowed stair capacity when one area of refuge is provided on a floor, and a tripling of stair capacity for two or more areas of refuge on a floor. In the world after 11 September 2001, it is difficult to predict: (1) if, and for how long, occupants will be willing to wait in a refuge area before entering an egress stairway; and (2) what the impact would be of such a large group of people moving down the stairs on the orderly evacuation of lower floors.]
Affected Standards: NFPA 101, ASME A 17. Model Building and Fire Codes: The standards should be adopted in model building and fire codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard.
NIST WTC Recommendation 18.
NIST recommends that egress systems be designed: (1) to maximize remoteness of egress components (i.e. stairs, elevators, exits) without negatively impacting on average travel distances; (2) to maintain their functional integrity and survivability under foreseeable building-specific or large-scale emergencies; and (3) with consistent layouts, standard signage, and guidance so that systems become intuitive and obvious to building occupants during evacuations.
a. Within a safety-based design hierarchy that should be developed, highest priority should be assigned to maintain the functional integrity, survivability, and remoteness of egress components and active fire protection systems (sprinklers, standpipes, associated water supply, fire alarms, and smoke management systems). The design hierarchy should consider the many systems (e.g. stairs, elevators, active fire protection, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural) and system components, as well as functional integrity, tenant access, emergency responder access, building configuration, security, and structural design.
b. The design, functional integrity, and survivability of the egress and other life safety systems (e.g. stairwell and elevator shafts, and active fire protection systems) should be enhanced by considering accidental structural loads such as those induced by overpressures (e.g. gas explosions), impacts, or major hurricanes and earthquakes, in addition to fire separation requirements. In selected buildings, structural loads due to other risks such as those due to terrorism may need to be considered. While NIST does not believe that buildings should be designed for aircraft impact, as the last line of defence for life safety, the stairwells and elevator shafts individually, or the core if these egress components are contained within the core, should have adequate structural integrity to withstand accidental structural loads and anticipated risks.
c. Stairwell remoteness requirements should be met by a physical separation of the stairwells that provide a barrier to both fire and accidental structural loads. Maximizing stairwell remoteness, without negatively impacting on average travel distances, would allow a stairwell to maintain its structural integrity independent of any other stairwell that is subject to accidental loads, even if the stairwells are located within the same structural barrier such as the core. The current ‘walking path’ measurement allows stairwells to be physically next to each other, separated only by a fire barrier. Reducing the clustering of stairways that also contain standpipe water systems provides the fire service with increased options for formulating firefighting strategies. This should not preclude the use of scissor stairs* as a means of increasing stair capacity – provided the scissor stair is only credited as a single stair.
[ * F-42 Two separate stairways within the same enclosure and separated by a fire rated partition.]
d. Egress systems should have consistent layouts with standard signage and guidance so that the systems become intuitive and obvious to all building occupants, including visitors, during evacuations. Particular consideration should be given to unexpected deviations in the stairwells (e.g. floors with transfer hallways).
Affected Standard: NFPA 101. Model Building and Fire Codes: The standard should be adopted in model building and fire codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard.
NIST WTC Recommendation 19.
NIST recommends that building owners, managers, and emergency responders develop a joint plan and take steps to ensure that accurate emergency information is communicated in a timely manner to enhance the situational awareness of building occupants and emergency responders affected by an event. This should be accomplished through better co-ordination of information among different emergency responder groups, efficient sharing of that information among building occupants and emergency responders, more robust design of emergency public address systems, improved emergency responder communication systems, and use of the Emergency Broadcast System (now known as the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System) and Community Emergency Alert Networks.
a. Situational awareness of building occupants and emergency responders in the form of information and event knowledge should be improved through better co-ordination of such information among emergency responder groups (9-1-1 dispatch, fire department or police department dispatch, emergency management dispatch, site security, and appropriate federal agencies), efficient sharing and communication of information between building occupants and emergency responders, and improved emergency responder communication systems (i.e. including effective communication within steel and reinforced concrete buildings, capacity commensurate with the scale of operations, and interoperability among different communication systems.
b. The emergency communications systems in buildings should be designed with sufficient robustness and redundancy to continue providing public address announcements or instructions in foreseeable building-specific or large-scale emergencies, including widespread power outage, major earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, fires, and accidental explosions. Consideration should be given to placement of building announcement speakers in stairways in addition to other standard locations.
c. The Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) should be activated and used, especially during large-scale emergencies, as a means to rapidly and widely communicate information to building occupants and emergency responders to enhance their situational awareness and assist with evacuation.
d. Local jurisdictions (cities and counties or boroughs) should seriously consider establishing a Community Emergency Alert Network (CEAN), within the framework of IPAWS, and make it available to the citizens and emergency responders of their jurisdictions to enhance situational awareness in emergencies.* The network should deliver important emergency alerts, information and real time updates to all electronic communication systems or devices registered with the CEAN. These devices may include e-mail accounts, cell/mobile phones, text pagers, satellite phones, and wireless PDA’s.
[ * F-43 Types of emergency communications could include life safety information, severe weather warnings, disaster notifications (including information on terrorist attacks), directions for self-protection, locations of nearest available shelters, precautionary evacuation information, identification of available evacuation routes, and accidents or obstructions associated with roadways and utilities.]
Affected Standard: NFPA 101, and/or a new standard. Model Building and Fire Codes: The standard should be adopted in model building and fire codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard to the extent it is within the scope of building and fire codes.
NIST WTC Recommendation 20.
NIST recommends that the full range of current and next generation evacuation technologies should be evaluated for future use, including protected/hardened elevators, exterior escape devices, and stairwell descent devices, which may allow all occupants an equal opportunity for evacuation and facilitate emergency response access. Affected Standards: NFPA 101, ASME A 17, ASTM E 06, ANSI A117.1. Model Building and Fire Codes: The standards should be adopted in model building and fire codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard.
.
.
END
Corporate Social Responsibility – Updated EU Strategy 2011-14
2011-11-15: The European Commission, in Brussels, recently published a New European Union Policy Document on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) … COM(2011) 681 final – Brussels, 2011-10-25.
To access this document … just go down to the EUR-Lex Link on the right hand side of this Page.
The Updated EU CSR Strategy for 2011-2014 signals an important change of direction … more a re-balancing of emphasis … which enterprises, of all sizes, should immediately be aware of … and whether or not these enterprises are located within Europe … or outside, as far away as China, India, Japan, South Africa, the USA or Brazil, etc.
The Updated CSR Strategy also confirms how the merging of the different and interrelated aspects of Sustainable Human & Social Development, i.e. social, economic, environmental, institutional, political and legal … is progressing nicely, and gathering some momentum. We have discussed this issue here many times … and promoted it elsewhere in our work, particularly during the last decade. How time flies !
[ In this last regard, reference should also be made to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2011 Human Development Report: 'Sustainability and Equity - A Better Future for All', which was launched in Copenhagen on 2 November 2011.]
.
A New Definition for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) …
The European Commission puts forward a new definition of CSR as ‘the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society’.
Respect for applicable legislation and for collective agreements between social partners are prerequisites for meeting that responsibility. To fully meet their corporate social responsibility, enterprises should have in place a process to integrate social - environmental - ethical - human rights and consumer concerns into their business operations and core strategy in close collaboration with their stakeholders, with the aim of:
- maximising the creation of shared value for their owners/shareholders, and for their other stakeholders and society at large ;
- identifying, preventing and mitigating their possible adverse impacts.
The complexity of that process will depend on factors such as the size of the enterprise and the nature of its operations. For most small and medium-sized enterprises, especially micro-enterprises, the CSR Process is likely to remain informal and intuitive.
To maximise the creation of shared value, enterprises are encouraged to adopt a long-term, strategic approach to CSR, and to explore the opportunities for developing innovative products, services and business models that contribute to Social Wellbeing and lead to higher quality and more productive jobs.
To identify, prevent and mitigate their possible adverse impacts, large enterprises, and enterprises at particular risk of having such impacts, are encouraged to carry out risk-based due diligence, including through their supply chains.
Certain types of enterprise, such as co-operatives, mutuals, and family-owned businesses, have ownership and governance structures that can be especially conducive to responsible business conduct.
.
The Updated EU CSR Strategy elaborates an Action Agenda for 2011-2014 …
1. Improving Company Disclosure of Social and Environmental Information: the new strategy confirms the European Commission’s intention to bring forward a new legislative proposal on this issue.
2. Enhancing Market Reward for CSR: this means leveraging EU Policies in the fields of consumption, investment and public procurement in order to promote market reward for responsible business conduct.
3. Enhancing the Visibility of CSR and Disseminating Good Practices: this includes the creation of a European award, and the establishment of sector-based platforms for enterprises and stakeholders to make commitments and jointly monitor progress.
4. Improving and Tracking Levels of Trust in Business: the European Commission will launch a public debate on the role and potential of enterprises, and organise surveys on citizen trust in business.
5. Better Aligning European and International Approaches to CSR: the European Commission highlights the following …
- OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises ;
- 10 Principles of the UN Global Compact ;
- UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights ;
- ILO Tri-Partite Declaration of Principles on Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy ;
- ISO 26000 Guidance Standard on Social Responsibility.
6. Further Integrating CSR into Education, Training and Research: the European Commission will provide further support for education and training in the field of CSR, and explore opportunities for funding more research.
7. Improving Self- and Co-Regulation Processes: the European Commission proposes to develop a short protocol to guide the development of future self- and co-regulation initiatives.
8. Emphasising the Importance of National and Sub-National CSR Policies: the European Commission invites EU Member States to present or update their own plans for the promotion of CSR by mid 2012.
.
.
European Commission COM(2011) 681 final – Brussels, 2011-10-25 (PDF File, 136 kb)
.
.
END
Sustainable Fire Engineering – IABSE Lecture 1 December 2011
2011-11-14 …
On Thursday evening, 1st December 2011, at 19.00 hrs … in the Dublin Institute of Technology … I will present an IABSE-Ireland Sponsored Lecture on the subject: ‘Sustainable Fire Engineering IS THE FUTURE !’.
This Presentation has been in continuous development across a snaking international path … Dubayy (UAE) in 2008 … Lund (Sweden) and Bengaluru (India) in 2009 … Dilli (India), Zurich (Switzerland) and Dublin (Ireland) in 2010 … Paris (France), the IFE’s International Fire Conference in Cardiff (Wales) and the ASFP-Ireland Fire Seminar in 2011 … and on 1 December next, in Dublin, I will be introducing some tough new realities for fire engineering generally … not just in Ireland …
Colour photograph showing the impact of witnessing the 9-11 WTC Incident in New York. Sustainable Fire Engineering must be 'reliability-based' & 'person-centred'. But ... do building designers, including fire engineers, actually understand that the people who use their buildings are 'individuals' ... each having a different range of abilities ? Photograph by Marty Lederhandler/AP. Click to enlarge.
.
IABSE Irish National Group Sponsored Lecture
Dublin Institute of Technology, Bolton Street – Michael O’Donnell Room (259)
Thursday, 1 December 2011 @ 19.00 hrs / 7.00 p.m.
CJ Walsh: Sustainable Fire Engineering IS THE FUTURE ! (Lecture Flyer, PDF File, 259 kb)
.
The aim of Sustainable Fire Engineering is to realize a safe and sustainable built environment.
Responding ethically, in built and/or wrought form, to the still evolving concept of sustainable human and social development … a principal objective of Sustainable Fire Engineering is to design for maximum credible fire and user scenarios … in order to maintain a proper and satisfactory level of fire safety and protection over the full life cycle of, for example, a building … and for a Sustainable Building, that life cycle is 100 years minimum.
Sustainable Fire Engineering must, therefore, be ‘reliability-based’ & ‘person-centred’.
This presentation will examine the authentic language and meaning of sustainability … and will then track how this impacts on the professional practice of fire engineering. Special mention will be made of Fire-Induced Progressive Collapse.
.
See you all there ! And I will be looking forward to a lot of challenging feedback on the night !!
.
.
END
NIST’s Recommendations on the 9-11 WTC Building Collapses
2011-10-25: Since shortly after my visit to Lower Manhattan in mid-October 2001 … we have maintained an Archive Page on ‘Structural Fire Engineering, World Trade Center Incident (9-11) & Fire Serviceability Limit States‘ … at SDI’s Corporate WebSite. And I have referenced here … many, many times … the Recommendations contained in the 2005 & 2008 Final Reports of the U.S. National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) on the 9-11 World Trade Center Building 1, 2 & 7 Collapses.
In this post (and a series of future posts) … I find it most necessary that the 2005 & 2008 NIST Recommendations now be presented for everyone to read. Yes, some of Recommendations apply specifically to Tall and Very Tall Buildings … and Building Designers in India, China, Brazil, Russia & South Africa (BRICS), the Arab Gulf Region, Europe and North America, etc., should be fully aware of their contents.
BUT … I am also strongly convinced … precisely because I am an Architect, a Fire Engineer and a Technical Controller … that most of the NIST Recommendations apply to ALL Buildings … so catastrophic was the failure exposed on that fateful day (11 September 2001) … in all of our common design and construction practices … and our operation, maintenance and emergency response procedures !
.
PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
1. Extract from Paragraph #9.2, Chapter 9, NIST Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers – Report Reference NIST NCSTAR 1 (2005) …
- NIST believes that these Recommendations are both realistic and achievable within a reasonable period of time, and that their implementation would make buildings safer for occupants and emergency responders in future emergencies.
- NIST strongly urges that immediate and serious consideration be given to these Recommendations by the building and fire safety communities – especially designers, owners, developers, codes and standards development organizations, regulators, fire safety professionals, and emergency responders.
- NIST also strongly urges building owners and public officials to: (i) evaluate the safety implications of these Recommendations for their existing inventory of buildings; and (ii) take the steps necessary to mitigate any unwarranted risks without waiting for changes to occur in codes, standards, and practices.
2. At the time of writing … it is important to point out that although they are related Structural Concepts … and there is still, to this day, a lot of confusion about these concepts in the USA … it is important to clearly distinguish between …
Disproportionate Damage
The failure of a building’s structural system (i) remote from the scene of an isolated overloading action; and (ii) to an extent which is not in reasonable proportion to that action.
Fire-Induced Progressive Collapse
The sequential growth and intensification of distortion, displacement and failure of elements of construction in a building – during a fire and the ‘cooling phase’ afterwards – which, if unchecked, will result in disproportionate damage, and may lead to total building collapse.
3. Recommendation 2, below, would certainly need to be understood and implemented within today’s additional design constraints of Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience to Severe Weather Events. Therefore … Design Wind Speeds must be increased, accordingly, for ALL Buildings.
4. As such a high level of performance is expected … indeed demanded … of a Sustainable Building … Sustainable Fire Engineering must be ‘reliability-based’. In other words, it must have a rational, empirical and scientifically robust basis … unlike conventional fire engineering, which is yet aimlessly wandering around in pre-historic caves !
5. Finally … there is no use trying to hide the fact that progress on implementing the NIST Recommendations, within the USA, has been lamentably slow. Outside that jurisdiction, the response has ranged from mild interest, to complete apathy, and even to vehement antipathy. The implications arising from implementation are much too hard to digest … for long established fire safety professionals and researchers who are unswervingly committed to the flawed and out-of-date practices and procedures of conventional fire engineering and, especially, for vested interests !
However … is it either in society’s interest, or in the interests of our clients/client organizations … that, to give you a simple example which is relevant close to home, British Standard 9999 (published on 31 October 2008): ‘Code of Practice for Fire Safety in the Design, Management and Use of Buildings’ takes absolutely no account of any of the NIST Recommendations ? As far as the British Standards Institution is concerned … 9-11 never happened … which I think is an inexcusable and unforgivable technical oversight !
For this reason, the General Public in ALL of our societies and Clients/Client Organizations in ALL countries should also be fully aware of the contents of these Recommendations …
.
Colour photograph showing the two World Trade Center Towers immediately after the impact of the second plane. At a fundamental level, this was a very serious 'real' fire incident ... which was extensively, and very thoroughly, investigated by the U.S. National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) ... and resulted in the important 2005 & 2008 NIST Recommendations. Click to enlarge.
.
2005 NIST WTC RECOMMENDATIONS
GROUP 1. Increased Structural Integrity
The standards for estimating the load effects of potential hazards (e.g. progressive collapse, wind) and the design of structural systems to mitigate the effects of those hazards should be improved to enhance structural integrity.
NIST WTC Recommendation 1.
NIST recommends that: (1) progressive collapse be prevented in buildings through the development and nationwide adoption of consensus standards and code provisions, along with the tools and guidelines needed for their use in practice; and (2) a standard methodology be developed – supported by analytical design tools and practical design guidance – to reliably predict the potential for complex failures in structural systems subjected to multiple hazards.
a. Progressive collapse* should be prevented in buildings.
[ * F-19 Progressive collapse (or disproportionate damage) occurs when an initial local failure spreads from structural element to structural element resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it.]
The primary structural systems should provide alternate paths for carrying loads in case certain components fail (e.g. transfer girders or columns). This is especially important in buildings where structural components (e.g. columns, girders) support unusually large floor areas.*
[ * F-20 While the WTC towers eventually collapsed, they had the capacity to redistribute loads from impact and fire damaged structural components and sub-systems to undamaged components and sub-systems. However, the core columns in the WTC towers lacked sufficient redundant (alternative) paths for carrying gravity loads.]
Progressive collapse is addressed only in a very limited way in practice and by codes and standards. For example, the initiating event in design to prevent progressive collapse may be removal of one or two columns at the bottom of the structure. Initiating events at multiple locations within the structure, or involving other key components and sub-systems, should be analyzed commensurate with the risks considered in the design. The effectiveness of mitigation approaches involving new system and sub-system design concepts should be evaluated with conventional approaches based on indirect design (continuity, strength and ductility of connections), direct design (local hardening), and redundant (alternate) load paths. The capability to prevent progressive collapse due to abnormal loads should include: (i) comprehensive design rules and practice guides; (ii) evaluation criteria, methodology, and tools for assessing the vulnerability of structures to progressive collapse; (iii) performance-based criteria for abnormal loads and load combinations; (iv) analytical tools to predict potential collapse mechanisms; and (v) computer models and analysis procedures for use in routine design practice. The federal government should co-ordinate the existing programmes that address this need: those in the Department of Defence; the General Services Administration; the Defence Threat Reduction Agency; and NIST. Affected Standards: ASCE-7, AISC Specifications, and ACI 318. These standards and other relevant committees should draw on expertise from ASCE/SFPE 29 for issues concerning progressive collapse under fire conditions. Model Building Codes: The consensus standards should be adopted in model building codes (i.e. the International Building Code and NFPA 5000) by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard. State and local jurisdictions should adopt and enforce the improved model building codes and national standards based on all 30 WTC Recommendations (2005). The codes and standards may vary from the WTC Recommendations, but satisfy their intent.
b. A robust, integrated predictive capability should be developed, validated, and maintained to routinely assess the vulnerability of whole structures to the effects of credible hazards. This capability to evaluate the performance and reserve capacity of structures does not exist and is a significant cause for concern. This capability would also assist in investigations of building failure – as demonstrated by the analyses of the WTC building collapses carried out in this Investigation. The failure analysis capability should include all possible complex failure phenomena that may occur under multiple hazards (e.g. bomb blasts, fires, impacts, gas explosions, earthquakes, and hurricane winds), experimentally validated models, and robust tools for routine analysis to predict such failures and their consequences. This capability should be developed via a co-ordinated effort involving federal, private sector, and academic research organizations in close partnership with practicing engineers.
NIST WTC Recommendation 2.
NIST recommends that nationally accepted performance standards be developed for: (1) conducting wind tunnel testing of prototype structures based on sound technical methods that result in repeatable and reproducible results among testing laboratories; and (2) estimating wind loads and their effects on tall buildings for use in design, based on wind tunnel testing data and directional wind speed data. Wind loads specified in current prescriptive codes may not be appropriate for the design of very tall buildings since they do not account for building-specific aerodynamic effects. Further, a review of wind load estimates for the WTC towers indicated differences by as much as 40 % from wind tunnel studies conducted in 2002 by two independent commercial laboratories. Major sources of differences in estimation methods currently used in practice occur in the selection of design wind speeds and directionality, the nature of hurricane wind profiles, the estimation of ‘component’ wind effects by integrating wind tunnel data with wind speed and direction information, and the estimation of ‘resultant’ wind effects using load combination methods. Wind loads were a major factor in the design of the WTC tower structures and were relevant to evaluating the baseline capacity of the structures to withstand abnormal events such as major fires or impact damage. Yet, there is lack of consensus on how to evaluate and estimate winds and their load effects on buildings.
a. Nationally accepted standards should be developed and implemented for conducting wind tunnel tests, estimating site-specific wind speed and directionality based on available data, and estimating wind loads associated with specific design probabilities from wind tunnel test results and directional wind speed data.
b. Nationally accepted standards should be developed for estimating wind loads in the design of tall buildings. The development of performance standards for estimating wind loads should consider: (1) appropriate load combinations and load factors, including performance criteria for static and dynamic behaviour, based on both ultimate and serviceability limit states; and (2) validation of wind load provisions in prescriptive design standards for tall buildings, given the universally acknowledged use of wind tunnel testing and associated performance criteria. Limitations to the use of prescriptive wind load provisions should be clearly identified in codes and standards.
The standards development work can begin immediately to address many of the above needs. The results of those efforts should be adopted in practice as soon as they become available. The research that will be required to address the remaining needs also should begin immediately and results should be made available for standards development and use in practice. Affected National Standard: ASCE-7. Model Building Codes: The standard should be adopted in model building codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard.
NIST WTC Recommendation 3.
NIST recommends that an appropriate criterion be developed and implemented to enhance the performance of tall buildings by limiting how much they sway under lateral load design conditions (e.g. winds and earthquakes). The stability and safety of tall buildings depend upon, among other factors, the magnitude of building sway or deflection, which tends to increase with building height. Conventional strength-based methods, such as those used in the design of the WTC towers, do not limit deflections. The deflection limit state criterion, which is proposed here is in addition to the stress limit state and serviceability requirement; it should be adopted either to complement the safety provided by conventional strength-based design or independently as an alternate deflection-based approach to the design of tall buildings for life safety. The recommended deflection limit state criterion is independent of the criterion used to ensure occupant comfort, which is met in current practice by limiting accelerations (e.g. in the 15 to 20 milli-g range). Lateral deflections, which already are limited in the design of tall buildings to control damage in earthquake-prone regions, should also be limited in non-seismic areas.*
[ * F-22 Analysis of baseline performance under the original design wind loads indicated that the WTC towers would need to have been between 50 % and 90 % stiffer to achieve a typical drift ratio used in current practice for non-seismic regions, though not required by building codes. Limiting drift would have required increasing exterior column areas in lower stories and/or significant additional damping.]
Affected National standards: ASCE-7, AISC Specifications, and ACI 318. Model Building Codes: The standard should be adopted in model building codes by mandatory reference to, or incorporation of, the latest edition of the standard.
.
.
END
Personal Ethics – The Heart of Sustainability Implementation !
2011-02-15 …
Regular visitors, here, will have very little doubt about my understanding of Sustainable Human & Social Development … which is an intricate, open, dynamic and continuously evolving concept. And about my firm conviction that Sustainable Design involves far more than merely substituting the word ‘sustainable’ … for ‘green’, ‘ecological’ or ‘environment-friendly’ … or any number of insipid alternatives which still regularly appear in the popular and/or academic media ! Who, in their right minds, wouldn’t be confused ?!?
‘Sustainability’ is Not … and Cannot … be just another graft onto Conventional Design Practice … whether that be Spatial Planning, Architectural / Engineering / Industrial Design or e-Design !
Sustainable Design & Construction … is the ethical response, in built or wrought (worked) form, to the concept of ‘Sustainable Human & Social Development’.
.
SUSTAINABILITY IMPLEMENTATION
Opinion: At the Heart of Implementation which is Authentically ‘Sustainable’ … (a colleague of mine is very fond of using that word ‘authentic’) … must lie a Personal Code of Ethics. By that, I do Not mean … and I am Not referring to … a Professional Code of Conduct … which is mainly about the self-protection and self-preservation of a professional class !
Everyday Reality: If we examine, for a moment, two interesting examples … Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation or the 9-11(2001) Collapses of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 & 7 in New York … such is the great timelag between general societal recognition of a critical design challenge … and then, the passing of relevant national legislation which can really only demarcate a minimal threshold of performance … and next, the associated production of standardized design guidelines … and finally, the imposition of effective monitoring and verification procedures … that the only practical approach is to base Sustainability Implementation on a robust Personal Code of Ethics … with an overt emphasis on Continuing Personal Development (CPD).
I hasten to add that this is not how we (society) are currently educating the design disciplines … and this is not how the professional institutes are operating.
.
PERSONAL CODE OF ETHICS
For many years, in my presentations around Europe, the Arab Gulf Region, India and South America … I have been actively promoting the WFEO/FMOI (UNESCO) Model Code of Ethics as a suitable template for use by all of the design-related disciplines. Recently, however, our Organization … Sustainable Design International … has undertaken a major review of this 2001 Code, and produced a 2011 Update which tackles the following matters of major concern in our world of shameful waste and socially inequality:
- Sustainable Human & Social Development ;
- Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation ;
- Strengthening the Voice of Vulnerable Social Groups, particularly People with Activity Limitations.
.
WFEO/FMOI (UNESCO)
World Federation of Engineering Organizations – Fédération Mondiale des Organisations d’Ingénieurs
MODEL CODE OF ETHICS
Since 1990, WFEO/FMOI has worked to prepare a Code of Ethics under the supervision of Donald Laplante (Canada), David Thom (New Zealand), Bud Carroll (USA), and others. It is expected that the Model Code, adopted in 2001, will be used to define and support the creation of codes in member and related professional institutions. This version of the Model Code was updated by C.J. Walsh (Ireland) in 2011.
CONTENTS
I. BROAD PRINCIPLES
II. PRACTICE PROVISION ETHICS
III. ETHICS OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
IV. CONCLUSION
INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE
- Sustainable Development & Climate Change
- Protection of the Public, and the Natural Environment
- Faithful Agent of Clients and Employers
- Competence & Knowledge
- Fairness and Integrity in the Workplace
- Professional Accountability & Leadership
.
WFEO/FMOI MODEL CODE OF ETHICS
I. BROAD PRINCIPLES
Ethics is generally understood as the discipline or field of study dealing with moral duty or obligation. This typically gives rise to a set of governing principles or values, which in turn are used to judge the appropriateness of a particular conduct or behaviour. These principles are usually presented either as broad guiding principles of an idealistic or inspirational nature or, alternatively, as a detailed and specific set of rules couched in legalistic or imperative terms to make them more enforceable. Professions which have been given the privilege and responsibility of self regulation, including the engineering professions, have tended to opt for the first alternative, espousing sets of underlying principles as codes of professional ethics which form the basis and framework for responsible professional practice. Arising from this context, professional codes of ethics have sometimes been incorrectly interpreted as a set of ‘rules’ of conduct intended for passive observance. A more appropriate use by practicing professionals is to interpret the essence of the underlying principles within their daily decision-making situations in a dynamic manner, responsive to the needs of the situation. As a consequence, a code of professional ethics is more than a minimum standard of conduct ; rather, it is a set of principles which should guide professionals in their daily work.
In summary, the Model Code presented herein elaborates the expectations of engineers and society in discriminating engineers’ professional responsibilities. The Code is based on broad principles of truth, honesty and trustworthiness, respect for human life and social wellbeing, fairness, openness, competence and accountability. Some of these broader ethical principles or issues deemed more universally applicable are not specifically defined in the Code, although they are understood to be applicable as well. Only those tenets deemed to be particularly applicable to the practice of professional engineering are specified. Nevertheless, certain ethical principles or issues not commonly considered to be part of professional ethics should be implicitly accepted to judge the engineer’s professional performance.
Issues regarding protection of the natural environment, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable development know no geographical boundaries. The engineers and citizens of all nations should know and respect the ethics of sustainability. It is desirable, therefore, that engineers in each nation continue to observe the philosophy of the Principles of Sustainable Ethics, as delineated in Section III of this code.
II. PRACTICE PROVISION ETHICS
Professional engineers shall:
- hold paramount the safety, health and wellbeing of the public, particularly people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups in society … and the protection of both the natural and the built environments in accordance with the Principles of Sustainable Human & Social Development ;
- promote health and safety within the workplace ;
- offer services, advise on or undertake engineering assignments only in areas of their competence, and practice in a careful and diligent manner ;
- act as faithful agents of their clients or employers, maintain confidentially and disclose conflicts of interest ;
- keep themselves informed in order to maintain their competence, strive to advance the body of knowledge within which they practice and provide opportunities for the professional development of their subordinates and fellow practitioners ;
- conduct themselves with fairness, and good faith towards clients, colleagues and others, give credit where it is due and accept, as well as give, honest and fair professional criticism ;
- be aware of and ensure that clients and employers are made aware of the environmental and socio-economic consequences of actions or projects, and endeavour to interpret engineering issues to the public in an objective and truthful manner ;
- present clearly to employers and clients the possible consequences of overruling or disregarding engineering decisions or judgment ;
- report to their association and/or appropriate agencies any illegal or unethical engineering decisions or practices of engineers or others.
III. ETHICS OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
Engineers, as they develop any professional activity, shall:
- try with the best of their ability, courage, enthusiasm and dedication, to obtain a superior technical achievement, which will contribute to and promote a healthy and agreeable surrounding for all people, including indigenous peoples and other vulnerable social groups, in open spaces as well as indoors ;
- strive to accomplish the beneficial objectives of their work with the lowest possible consumption of raw materials and energy and the lowest production of wastes and any kind of pollution ;
- discuss in particular the consequences of their proposals and actions, direct or indirect, immediate or long term, upon human health, social equity and the local culture and system of values ;
- study thoroughly the environment that will be affected, assess all the impacts that might arise in the structure, dynamics and aesthetics of the eco-systems involved, urbanized or natural, as well as in the pertinent socio-economic systems … and select the best alternative for development which is environmentally sound, resilient to climate change and sustainable ;
- promote a clear understanding of the actions required to restore and, if possible, to improve the environment that may be disturbed, and include them in their proposals ;
- reject any kind of commitment that involves unfair damages for human surroundings and nature, and aim for the best possible technical, socio-economic, and political solution ;
- be aware that the principles of eco-system interdependence, biodiversity maintenance, resource recovery and inter-relational harmony form the basis of humankind’s continued existence and that each of these bases poses a threshold of sustainability that should not be exceeded.
IV. CONCLUSION
Always remember that war, greed, misery and ignorance, plus natural disasters and human-induced pollution, climate change and destruction of resources, are the main causes for the progressive impairment of the environment and that engineers, as active members of society, deeply involved in the promotion of development, must use our talent, knowledge and imagination to assist society in removing those evils and improving the quality of life for all people, including indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups.
.
INTERPRETATION OF THE WFEO/FMOI MODEL CODE
The interpretive articles which follow expand on and discuss some of the more difficult and inter-related components of the Code, especially with regard to the Practice Provisions. No attempt is made to expand on all clauses of the Code, nor is the elaboration presented on a clause-by-clause basis. The objective of this approach is to broaden the interpretation, rather than narrow its focus. The ethics of professional engineering is an integrated whole and cannot be reduced to fixed ‘rules’. Therefore, the issues and questions arising from the Code are discussed in a general framework, drawing on any and all portions of the Code to demonstrate their inter-relationship and to expand on the basic intent of the Code.
Sustainable Development & Climate Change
Engineers shall strive to enhance the quality, durability and climate change resilience of the Human Environment (including the built, social, economic and virtual environments), and to promote the Principles of Sustainable Human & Social Development.
Engineers shall seek opportunities to work for the enhancement of safety, health, and the social wellbeing of both their local community and the global community through the practice of sustainable development.
Engineers whose recommendations are overruled or ignored on issues of safety, health, social wellbeing, or sustainable development, shall inform their contractor or employer of the possible consequences.
Protection of the Public, and the Natural Environment
Professional Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and wellbeing of the public, including people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups in society … and protection of the natural environment. This obligation to the safety, health and wellbeing of the general public, which includes his/her own work environment, is often dependent upon engineering judgments, risk assessments, decisions and practices incorporated into structures, machines, products, processes and devices. Therefore, engineers must control and ensure that what they are involved with is in conformity with accepted engineering practices, standards and applicable codes, and would be considered safe based on peer adjudication. This responsibility extends to include all and any situations which an engineer encounters, and includes an obligation to advise the appropriate authority if there is reason to believe that any engineering activity, or its products, processes, etc., do not conform with the above stated conditions.
The meaning of paramount in this basic tenet is that all other requirements of the Code are subordinate, if protection of public safety, the natural environment or other substantive public interests are involved.
Faithful Agent of Clients and Employers
Engineers shall act as faithful agents or trustees of their clients and employers with objectivity, fairness and justice to all parties. With respect to the handling of confidential or proprietary information, the concept of ownership of the information and protecting that party’s rights is appropriate. Engineers shall not reveal facts, data or information obtained in a professional capacity without the prior consent of its owner. The only exception to respecting confidentially and maintaining a trustee’s position is in instances where the public interest or the natural environment is at risk, as discussed in the preceding section ; but even in these circumstances, the engineer should endeavour to have the client and/or employer appropriately redress the situation, or at least, in the absence of a compelling reason to the contrary, should make every reasonable effort to contact them and explain clearly the potential risks, prior to informing the appropriate authority.
Professional Engineers shall avoid conflict of interest situations with employers and clients but, should such conflict arise, it is the engineer’s responsibility to fully disclose, without delay, the nature of the conflict to the party/parties with whom the conflict exists. In those circumstances where full disclosure is insufficient, or seen to be insufficient, to protect all parties’ interests, as well as the public, the engineer shall withdraw totally from the issue or use extraordinary means, involving independent parties if possible, to monitor the situation. For example, it is inappropriate to act simultaneously as agent for both the provider and the recipient of professional services. If a client’s and an employer’s interests are at odds, the engineer shall attempt to deal fairly with both. If the conflict of interest is between the intent of a corporate employer and a regulatory standard, the engineer must attempt to reconcile the difference, and if that is unsuccessful, it may become necessary to inform his/her association and the appropriate regulatory agency.
Being a faithful agent or trustee includes the obligation of engaging, or advising to engage, experts or specialists when such services are deemed to be in the client’s or employer’s best interests. It also means being accurate, objective and truthful in making public statements on behalf of the client or employer when required to do so, while respecting the client’s and employer’s rights of confidentiality and proprietary information.
Being a faithful agent includes not using a previous employer’s or client’s specific privileged or proprietary information and trade practices or process information, without the owner’s knowledge and consent. However, general technical knowledge, experience and expertise gained by the engineer through involvement with the previous work may be freely used without consent or subsequent undertakings.
Competence & Knowledge
Professional Engineers shall offer services, advise on or undertake engineering assignments only in areas of their competence by virtue of their training and experience. This includes exercising care and communicating clearly in accepting or interpreting assignments, and in setting expected outcomes. It also includes the responsibility to obtain the services of an expert if required or, if the knowledge is unknown, to proceed only with full disclosure of the circumstances and, if necessary, of the experimental nature of the activity to all parties involved. Hence, this requirement is more than simply duty to a standard of care, it also involves acting with honesty and integrity with one’s client or employer, and one’s self. Professional Engineers have the responsibility to remain abreast of developments and knowledge in their area of expertise, that is, to maintain their own competence. Should there be a technologically driven or individually motivated shift in the area of technical activity, it is the engineer’s duty to attain and maintain competence in all areas of involvement including being knowledgeable with the technical and legal framework and regulations governing their work. In effect, it requires a personal commitment to ongoing professional development, continuing education and self-testing.
In addition to maintaining their own competence, Professional Engineers have an obligation to strive to contribute to the advancement of the body of knowledge within which they practice, and to the profession in general. Moreover, within the framework of the practice of their profession, they are expected to participate in providing opportunities to further the professional development of their colleagues.
This competence requirement of the Code extends to include an obligation to the public, the profession and one’s peers, that opinions on engineering issues are expressed honestly and only in areas of one’s competence. It applies equally to reporting or advising on professional matters and to issuing public statements. This requires honesty with one’s self to present issues fairly, accurately and with appropriate qualifiers and disclaimers, and to avoid personal, political and other non-technical biases. The latter is particularly important for public statements or when involved in a technical forum.
Fairness and Integrity in the Workplace
Honesty, integrity, continuously updated competence, devotion to service and dedication to enhancing the life quality of society are cornerstones of professional responsibility. Within this framework, engineers shall be objective and truthful and include all known and pertinent information in professional reports, statements and testimony. They shall accurately and objectively represent their clients, employers, associates and themselves, consistent with their academic experience and professional qualifications. This tenet is more than ‘not misrepresenting’ ; it also implies disclosure of all relevant information and issues, especially when serving in an advisory capacity or as an expert witness. Similarly, fairness, honesty and accuracy in advertising are expected.
If called upon to verify another engineer’s work, there is an obligation to inform (or make every effort to inform) the other engineer, whether the other engineer is still actively involved or not. In this situation, and in any circumstance, engineers shall give proper recognition and credit where credit is due and accept, as well as give, honest and fair criticism on professional matters, all the while maintaining dignity and respect for everyone involved.
Engineers shall not accept, nor offer covert payment or other considerations for the purpose of securing, or as remuneration for, engineering assignments. Engineers should prevent their personal or political involvement from influencing or compromising their professional role or responsibility.
Consistent with the Code, and having attempted to remedy any situation within their organization, engineers are obligated to report to their association or other appropriate agency any illegal or unethical engineering decisions by engineers or others. Care must be taken not to enter into legal arrangements which compromise this obligation.
Professional Accountability & Leadership
Engineers have a duty to practice in a careful and diligent manner, and accept responsibility and be accountable for their actions. This duty is not limited to design, or its supervision and management, but applies to all areas of practice. For example, it includes construction supervision and management, preparation of drawings, engineering reports, feasibility studies, sustainability impact assessments, engineering developmental work, etc.
The signing and sealing of engineering documents indicates the taking of responsibility for the work. This practice is required for all types of engineering endeavour, regardless of where or for whom the work is done, including but not limited to, privately and publicly owned firms, large corporations, and government agencies or departments. There are no exceptions ; signing and sealing documents is appropriate whenever engineering principles have been used and public wellbeing may be at risk.
Taking responsibility for engineering activity includes being accountable for one’s own work and, in the case of a senior engineer, accepting responsibility for the work of a team. The latter implies responsible supervision where the engineer is actually in a position to review, modify and direct the entirety of the engineering work. This concept requires setting reasonable limits on the extent of activities, and the number of engineers and others, whose work can be supervised by the responsible engineer. The practice of a ‘symbolic’ responsibility or supervision is the situation where an engineer, say with the title of Chief Engineer, takes full responsibility for all engineering on behalf of a large corporation, utility or governmental agency, even though the engineer may not be aware of many of the engineering activities or decisions being made daily throughout the firm or agency. The essence of this approach is that the firm is taking the responsibility by default, whether engineering supervision or direction is applied or not.
Engineers have a duty to advise their employer and, if necessary, their clients and even their professional association, in that order, in situations when the overturning of an engineering decision may result in breaching their duty to safeguard the public, including people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable social groups. The initial action is to discuss the problem with the supervisor/employer. If the employer does not adequately respond to the engineer’s concern, then the client must be advised in the case of a consultancy situation, or the most senior officer should be informed in the case of a manufacturing process plant or government agency. Failing this attempt to rectify the situation, the engineer must advise in confidence his/her professional association of his/her concerns.
In the same order as mentioned above, the engineer must report unethical engineering activity undertaken by other engineers, or by non-engineers. This extends to include, for example, situations in which senior officials of a firm make ‘executive’ decisions which clearly and substantially alter the engineering aspects of the work, or protection of public wellbeing or the natural environment arising from that work.
Because of developments in technology and the increasing ability of engineering activities to impact on the environment, engineers have an obligation to be mindful of the effect that their decisions will have on the environment and the wellbeing of society, and to report any concerns of this nature in the same manner as previously mentioned. Further to the above, with the rapid advancement of technology in today’s world and the possible social impacts on large populations of people, engineers must endeavour to foster the public’s understanding of technical issues and the role of Engineering more than ever before.
Sustainable development is the challenge of meeting current human needs for natural resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective waste management while conserving and, if possible enhancing, the Earth’s environmental quality, natural resources, ethical, intellectual, working and affectionate capabilities of people and the socio-economic bases essential for the human needs of future generations. The proper observance of these principles will considerably help to eradicate world poverty.
.
WFEO/FMOI Model Code of Ethics, Adopted 2001.
This Version, Updated 2011 & Communicated to UNESCO.
[Footnote to the Code]
Sustainable Human & Social Development: Development which meets the responsible needs, i.e. the Human & Social Rights*, of this generation – without stealing the life and living resources from future generations, especially our children, their children, and the next five generations of children.
*As defined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
.
.
END
‘Antilia’, The New Mumbai High-Rise Building – What A Mother !
It is difficult for any foreign news item, no matter how important, to penetrate the current economic media haze in Ireland and Europe … but latest reports from India put the casualty list after the Five-Storey Residential Building Collapse at Lalita Park in East Dilli’s Laxmi Nagar Area … which occurred on Monday evening (local time), 15 November 2010 … at 69 people dead, 82 injured, with perhaps as many as another 20 people still missing.
The Occupants of 38 Similar Neighbouring Properties have been told to immediately vacate the buildings by Dilli’s Municipal Authority.
Colour photograph showing the scene of the Five-Storey Residential Building Collapse at Lalita Park in East Dilli's Laxmi Nagar Area, which occurred on Monday evening (local time), 15 November 2010. Click to enlarge.
.
Faulty Construction appears to have been the principal cause for this serious collapse, according to media reports. It may also have been an extra storey illegally added to an original, weak building structure … and/or heavy water logging of the building’s basement from the nearby Yamuna River during recent storms.
Dilli … its local name … is a very old and large city, and is the Capital of India. New Delhi refers to the relatively more recent British Imperial Quarter … the urban plan of which and its principal buildings were designed by the British Architect, Edwin Landseer Lutyens (1869-1944).
.
Within India, today, there is a strong political desire to achieve ‘Developed Country’ Status by 2020. However, in Developed Countries … Collapse Level Events (CLE’s) are completely unacceptable … witness the public reaction to the collapses on 9-11 in New York.
The 2005 National Building Code of India … a copy of which is close at hand in my Dublin Office … is not mandatory. It closely resembles the informal (i.e. not legal), but prescriptive, ‘Draft’, ‘Revised Draft’ and ‘Proposed’ Irish Building Regulations dating from the 1970′s and 1980′s … another Irish solution to an Irish problem ! The 2005 Indian Code has been drafted to deal with a large range of simple building types, their construction and related issues … certainly not any sort of Iconic, High-Rise Building of Innovative Design. Anyway, the Code is still only at the initial stages of being adopted in India’s different States. AND … there is not yet in place a National System of Local Building or Independent Technical Control … never mind an ‘Effective’ System of Control !
In a lightly regulated European legislative environment … it may come as a surprise to find out that the level of non-compliance on building sites in France, for example, has been placed as high as 68%, according to a colleague from CSTB (Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment) … the rate of non-compliance which was found by Energy Ireland (SEAI) on Irish building sites was 70%.
In India’s unregulated legislative environment … higher levels of non-compliance should be expected amongst indigenous building organizations. AND … the percentage rate of non-compliance with foreign building organizations should be assumed to at least match those European figures quoted above.
There is a further complication in India and most of the rest of the developing world, however, because U.S. building design consultants will typically use one of the United States of America’s National Model Building Codes (including the International Building Code, which is also a U.S. National Model Building Code) … in preference to local building codes … whatever the local codes do, or do not, say. We have a long experience of this approach in Ireland ! BUT … the U.S. Model Building Codes are not being adapted to suit local site conditions, building practices, safety factors, etc. It sounds messy … and it is very messy !!
.
A few quick words about INDIA (Bhārata or Bharat, in Sanskrit) … a federal republic and a burgeoning country of extreme contrasts … which has a population of some 1,173,108,018 People (July 2010 estimated, U.S. CIA’s World Factbook).
Rapid economic development has driven India to prominence on the world stage … despite pressing problems such as significant overpopulation, extensive poverty and a startling degree of social inequity, environmental degradation, such as deforestation, soil erosion, overgrazing, desertification, air pollution from industrial effluents and vehicle emissions, water pollution from raw sewage and run-off of agricultural pesticides … and the widespread corruption which is a natural consequence following an extended period of harsh external imperial domination. India became an independent country in 1947.
For the last few years, I have been travelling to this beautiful, complex land … from Chennai (Madras) and Bengaluru (Bangalore) in the south … to Dilli in the north. Over 70 years before … my father, a native of Midleton in County Cork, was a teacher in Kolkata (Calcutta) and further north than Dilli. He was trapped, there, from coming home during the 2nd World War (1939-1945).
For me, it has been a warm and rewarding experience to meet the people of India.
And … I am also very grateful for the hospitality shown by FSAI (Fire & Security Association of India). Working together, we have successfully set a future direction for the FSAI’s National Fire Safety Agenda in India.
.
Less recently in the news and, it seems, always for the wrong reasons … Mumbai (Bombay) … where of the approximately 14 Million (1.4 Crore, an Indian Unit of Measure) People living in this western city … capital of the State of Maharashtra, and the financial and entertainment capital of the country … an estimated 7,500,000 (75 Lakhs, an Indian Unit of Measure) People survive in its Slums.
Mumbai is also located in a Seismically Active Zone, due to the presence of 23 fault lines in the region …
Colour image showing the Seismic Zones on a Map of India. Taken from Indian Standard IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002. Click to enlarge.
.
During past years, a pattern of extraordinarily violent ‘Hive-Attacks’ have been carried out in Mumbai, with the aim of causing widespread terror amongst the general population and disrupting the city’s important Social & Economic Environments. The attacks have involved the strategic targeting of Built Environment Places of Public Resort, Iconic Buildings, High-Rise Buildings, Buildings having a Critical Function, Transport Infrastructure and Service Utilities:
- On 12 March 1993 … a series of 13 co-ordinated bombings … up until that date, the most destructive bomb explosions in Indian history … beginning at the Stock Exchange Building … resulted in 257 deaths and over 700 injuries.
- On 11 July 2006 … 209 people were killed and over 700 injured when seven bombs exploded on the city’s commuter trains.
- Commencing on 26 November 2008, and lasting for three days … a series of ten co-ordinated attacks resulted in 175 deaths, 308 injuries, and severe damage to a number of luxury hotels and historical landmarks.
.
Colour photograph showing 'Antilia' - the recently occupied Private, Iconic, High-Rise Mansion of Innovative Design belonging to Shri Mukesh Ambani in Mumbai. Click to enlarge.
How strange it is, then, in this particular city … that at the end of October 2010 … after seven years of construction … an Indian businessman, Shri Mukesh Ambani, and his family … should choose to occupy their own 27 floor/173 metre tall Private Mansion … an Iconic, High-Rise Building of Innovative Design … within the near-sight of millions of slum dwellers ! The building is called ‘Antilia’ … the name of a mythical island in the Atlantic Ocean, lying to the west of Portugal ?!?
OK … Let’s Get the Easy Bits Over First …
1. Architecturally … and somebody, somewhere needs to say this … ‘Antilia’ is a mother of an ugly building. There is an old joke about a committee starting out to design a horse, and ending up with a camel. In this case, a group of people started to design an impressive building, and ended up with a spotty rhinoceros !
2. From the point of view of Sustainable Human & Social Development … consider the resources used in the design, construction and operation of this mother … an architectural phallic symbol of obscene opulence and cheap looking ’bling-bling’ … in close proximity to extensive and deep-rooted slum poverty. It may be ‘Green’(?) … BUT … this building is certainly Anti-Sustainable ! Is it any wonder that a Class Action has recently been taken against the U.S. Green Building Council and its LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Building Rating System in the U.S. Courts ?
The Difficult Issues …
3. Structural Resilience … I would really like to be assured, by a person competent to do so, that ‘Antilia’ has actually been designed to withstand “a magnitude-8 earthquake” (according to local media reports), i.e. no significant damage will occur to the structure or fabric of the building.
AND … that ‘Antilia’ has been designed to properly resist disproportionate damage in the event that any “military grade explosions” (according to local media reports) happen in the building, i.e. no significant damage will occur to the building’s structure.
But … why only “military grade explosions” ? If an ‘incident’ does take place in the building, it will not be the poorly equipped Indian Army who will be placing the ‘ordinary’ explosives … and the Army will not have the required expertise to place the explosives in the most vulnerable part of the structure.
Never assume that the people who plan these sorts of ‘incidents’ are anything other than highly motivated, intelligent and technically competent !
4. Fire Protection & Safety … this requires much repetition … but the 2005 National Building Code of India cannot deal adequately with this type of building … an Iconic, High-Rise Building of Innovative Design. AND, most obviously … the 2005 Indian Code does not incorporate any of the important Recommendations contained in the 2005 & 2008 NIST(USA) Reports on the 9-11 WTC Buildings 1,2 & 7 Collapses. I have suggested that this be done, with urgency, during an upcoming revision to the Code … but there is resistance !
9-11 in New York exposed a catastrophic failure … at all levels … in all of OUR common practices and procedures (architectural, engineering, first emergency response, regulatory, legislative, etc., etc) … used to design, construct and operate buildings generally !
.
So … what does ‘Antilia’ … say about the Man … the Institutions of Governance and State Administration within Maharashtra … and India generally … at this time ???
Has this Man been well served by His Advisors … technical and otherwise ????
.
.
END
EU Commissioner Connie Hedegaard in Dublin – Hot Air ?
At lunchtime on Friday, 29 October 2010 … European Union (EU) Commissioner, Ms. Connie Hedegaard, in charge of European Commission DG CLIMA (the new Directorate General for ‘Climate Action’) … addressed the Institute of International & European Affairs in Dublin.
While Connie’s Speech was not subject to the Europa House Rule … the Question & Answer Session, afterwards, was.
Note: IIEA’s Europa House Rule … Irish equivalent of the Chatham House Rule … ‘ When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Europa House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.’
.
Colour photograph of European Commissioner Connie Hedegaard, DG CLIMA (Directorate General for Climate Action), who visited Dublin recently on Friday, 29 October 2010.
Most importantly, I wanted to find out whether Europe will maintain its air of insufferable arrogance at the upcoming UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) Cancun Summit, which will be held in December (2010) … and be excluded from critical stages in Global Climate Change Negotiations, as was the case in Copenhagen last December (2009) ??? I was not reassured that we have learned from those humbling experiences !
One small case in point … in Europe, we are still messing around with talk of limiting the rise in Global Average Temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius above Pre-Industrial Levels. However … it was demanded last year, in Copenhagen, that this rise be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius … or lower … particularly by the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) ! Have we listened ? No ! NGO’s in Ireland … please also take note !!!
.
However ! Some good news for a change … the European Commission will produce, sometime early next year in 2011, a strategy document on ’2050 – A Low Carbon Society in Europe’ … that is just a gist of the title, so please don’t quote me … which will also contain related EU Performance Targets for 2030. 2020 is just around the corner, folks !!
Also … Climate Change Adaptation, in Europe, will be given far more of a policy emphasis. Up to recently, there has been little interest in this subject. But the truth is dawning … Mitigation is failing, and Europe is already suffering from the adverse impacts of Climate Change. Practical ways and means are now being identified, therefore, to integrate Adaptation widely into other European Union Policies and Instruments.
In 2009, the European Commission’s White Paper: ‘Adapting to Climate Change - Towards a European Framework for Action’ [COM(2009) 147 final] was published. Next year, following consultations, the Adaptation Framework will make its appearance … and will be promoted with vigour ! So I hope !!!
.
During the Question & Answer Session which followed Connie Hedegaard’s Speech, I raised the following two issues …
1. Missing from the 2009 Adaptation White Paper … the Press Releases, Speeches, and Memos, etc. on the DG CLIMA WebSite … and her Speech at the IIEA on Friday … is any serious or meaningful reference to Sustainable Human & Social Development in all of her work on Climate Action. I strongly suspect, now, that she does not fully understand the meaning of the concept … which involves far, far more than being ‘use-efficient with the earth’s resources’ !
And … would Connie ever consider acquainting herself … properly … with the EU Treaties ? She might then discover the many substantive references to ‘sustainable development’ … and none to the ‘green’ society, ‘green’ this, or ‘green’ the other !!
2. As usual, European Union (EU) Climate Change Data & Statistics were confidently presented by Connie at the IIEA … some, not a lot ! However, there is a major question mark hanging over those statistics … are they Reliable ?? At European level … the experts in the proper management of data and statistics work in EuroStat, which is located in Luxembourg. I visited, there, at the end of June 2010.
However, Europe’s Climate Change Statistical Databases are managed by the European Environment Agency (EEA), which is located in Copenhagen. Does the EEA have the required expertise to manage these Statistical Databases ? No ! Is EuroStat being excluded from making an input into the management of these Databases ? Definitely … Yes !
In question, and in serious doubt … this is the recent EEA’s European Topic Centre on Air & Climate Change (ETC/ACC) Technical Paper 2010/4: ‘Approximated EU Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2009 – Short Report for EU-15 & EU-27′ … please examine it carefully for yourself.
ETC/ACC Technical Paper 2010/4 was the basis for the Official Statement by Connie Hedegaard, dated 2010-09-10, on the Estimates for EU Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2009, published by the European Environment Agency (EEA) ! She said …
” The sharp drop in overall EU Greenhouse Gas Emissions last year is not a surprise seen in the light of the economic crisis. But the EU Emissions had already been falling steadily for several years before the recession hit, putting us well on track to meet or even over-achieve our Kyoto Protocol Targets. This is thanks to the armoury of policies and measures implemented over the past decade, which have succeeded in breaking the automatic link that used to mean that economic growth translated into higher Emissions. However, as the economy picks up again we can expect the drop in Emissions to level off or even be reversed temporarily. It is therefore very important that the EU and Member States continue implementing the climate and energy package and the other measures needed to meet our 2020 Targets. And of course I hope that the new strong figures also can inspire the necessary debate on how fast the EU can reach even more ambitious targets.”
.
Just to get you started … please note how the Kyoto Industrial GHG’s (HFC’s, PFC’s and SF6) have … not ! … been handled in this Technical Paper …
September 2010 – ETC/ACC Technical Paper 2010/4
Approximated 2009 EU GHG Inventory – Short Report for EU-15 & EU-27
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (671kb)
.
Embarrassing, isn’t it ??? VERY !!!
.
.
END
E.U. ’2 Degree Celsius’ Climate Change Target Is Not Enough !
2010-06-01: Europe got its ass whipped at the United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, last December 2009. Why aren’t all the Institutions of the European Union learning … really fast … from this hard lesson ???
This is also a question for the Stop Climate Chaos Campaign here in Ireland !?!
.
Back on 10th January 2007 … the European Commission issued COM(2007) 2 final … a Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions … having the title: Limiting Global Climate Change to 2 Degrees Celsius – The Way Ahead for 2020 and Beyond. [ This document is freely available for download ... at EUR-Lex (a link to the WebSite is provided at the right hand side of this Page). ]
On Page 3 of the Communication, you will read the following …
‘ The EU’s objective is to limit global average temperature increase to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. This will limit the impacts of climate change and the likelihood of massive and irreversible disruptions of the global ecosystem. The Council has noted that this will require atmospheric concentrations of GHG (greenhouse gases) to remain well below 550 parts per million by volume (ppmv) CO2 equivalent (eq.). By stabilising long-term concentrations at around 450 ppmv CO2 eq., there is a 50% chance of doing so. This will require global GHG emissions to peak before 2025 and then fall by up to 50% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. The Council has agreed that developed countries will have to continue to take the lead to reduce their emissions between 15 to 30% by 2020. The European Parliament has proposed an EU CO2 reduction target of 30% for 2020 and 60-80% for 2050.’
What a really sloppy, imprecise expression … and explanation … to give to a critical Climate Change Performance Indicator !! And … please note the overly optimistic ’50% chance’.
On the evidence of Europe’s ‘real’ climate change mitigation performance to date … there is no chance, whatever, of hitting that target.
.
In Copenhagen, the Group of 77 & China and the Small Island Developing States (SIDS), in particular, demanded that the planetary temperature rise be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius !
Outside Europe … irreversible climate change is already happening … and people must adapt in order to survive !!!
For example … climate change is seriously affecting the people of the Sundarbans. Located at the mouth of the Ganges River in Bangladesh and West Bengal in India, this area is part of the largest delta in the world. Sundarban means ‘beautiful forest’ in Bengali, as the region is covered in mangrove forests …
.
Under the Aegis of the European Environment Agency ... these 3 Photographs were taken by Mikkel Stenbaek Hansen. In each case, click to enlarge !
.
Colour photograph showing Ruhul Khan, who has lost three houses in recent years. His former homes were located to the left of the picture, an area now covered by water.
.
Colour photograph showing that the rising sea level brings salt water inland, damaging the soil’s fertility. Some residents have adapted by using their farmland for fish breeding. Others are experimenting with crop species that are resilient to salt water.
.
.
END
Sustainable Climate Adaptation – The Post Copenhagen Priority !
[It was necessary to commence this post ... only after visiting India. See the first post of 2010-01-18.]
Well … we really saw it all at Copenhagen during those two long weeks in December 2009. Wasn’t it great to watch ?!? News, gossip, political ’shenanigans’ and spin … along with riots in the streets and walk-outs in the corridors … a veritable circus … an unmitigated farce !!! A crime against humanity ????
Following the UNFCCC Summit … the PEW Center on Global Climate Change, in the USA (using their own words: an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to providing credible information, straight answers, and innovative solutions to address climate change), offered this ‘credible information’ …
‘ A new political accord struck by world leaders at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen provides for explicit emission pledges by all the major economies – including, for the first time, China and other major developing countries – but charts no clear path toward a treaty with binding commitments.
The basic terms of the Copenhagen Accord were brokered directly by President Obama and a handful of key developing country leaders on the final day of the conference, capping two weeks of harsh rhetoric and pitched procedural battles that made the prospect of any agreement highly uncertain. It then took nearly another full day of tense negotiations to arrive at a procedural compromise allowing the leaders’ deal to be formalized over the bitter objections of a few governments.
… ‘
Now compare this News Article, by Satyen Mohapatra, from the Hindustan Times, New Delhi, India … dated Saturday, 9th January 2010 …
India Brought China Onboard at Copenhagen
New Delhi: Environment & Foreign Minister Jairam Ramesh, on Friday, said India had brought China onboard at Copenhagen.
“India brought China onboard at Copenhagen. The U.S. actually owes a lot to India”, he said here at an interaction.
Despite taking a leadership role during the negotiations, Ramesh said, the Chinese were not ready to talk directly with the US, but always as part of the BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) Group.
Recounting how the Accord was reached at Copenhagen, Ramesh said it was “floundering on three issues: whether the goal of arresting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050 should be expressed in terms of temperature or emission reduction or concentration of GHG in the atmosphere; what would be the international monitoring and verification regime for the mitigation actions of the BASIC countries; and whether the Accord would be legally binding”.
“We got 2.5 out of three”, he added.
And then … consider the opening of a statement by Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla, Cuban Minister for Foreign Affairs, at the last session of the Climate Summit on Friday, 18th December 2009 …
Mr. Chairman:
It has been four hours since President Obama announced an agreement that does not exist. He is disrespecting the international community and behaving as an imperial master.
The document that you, Mr. Chairman, repeatedly claimed that did not exist is showing up now. We have all seen drafts surreptitiously circulated and discussed in secret meetings, outside the rooms where the international community has been transparently negotiating through its representatives.
As it happens, Mr. Chairman, the non-existent document does exist. I deeply regret the way you have conducted the works of this conference.
I can anticipate that the delegation from the Republic of Cuba has decided not to accept the declaration you are introducing. I do not need any additional consultation in any other framework or format; therefore, I declare that at this conference there is no consensus on this document.
I add my voice to that of the representatives of Tuvalu, Venezuela and Bolivia. Cuba considers the text of this apocryphal draft extremely insufficient and inadmissible. The unacceptable goal of 2 degrees Centigrade would have incalculable catastrophic consequences, particularly for the small island nations. It would also have a grave impact on numerous species of the biodiversity.
The document that you are unfortunately introducing contains no commitment whatsoever on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
I am aware of the previous drafts, which again through questionable and clandestine procedures, were negotiated in small groups and which at least made reference to a 50% reduction by 2050. I have here with me those previous drafts that it would be worthwhile making public in this room and releasing to the media and the representatives of the civil society.
The document that you are introducing now leaves out precisely those already meagre and insufficient key phrases contained in those drafts. This document does not guarantee, in any way, the adoption of minimal measures conducive to the prevention of an extremely grave catastrophe for the planet and for human beings.
To Cuba, the content of this document is incompatible with the universally recognized scientific criterion which deems it urgent and unavoidable to ensure at least a 45% reduction of emissions by the year 2020, and no less that 80% or 90% by 2050.
This shameful document that you bring to us is also insufficient and ambiguous with regards to the specific commitment of the developed countries to reduce emissions even when they are responsible for the global warming resulting from the historic and current level of their emissions, and it is only fit that they undertake meaningful reductions right away. This document fails to mention any commitment by the developed nations.
…
Confused ? Depressed ?? Frustrated ???
.
Some Observations from the 2009 UNFCCC Copenhagen Climate Summit:
1. The 2009 Copenhagen Accord is a voluntary political agreement among a small number of countries … an arrangement of convenience. It has no status within the international framework of the 1992 Convention on Climate Change and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol … it is a non-document. It does, however, provide political cover for Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC) … along with the USA … whose politicians have no wish to be bound by legally binding, meaningful GHG Emission Reduction Targets benchmarked back to 1990 levels … most especially, GHG Emission Reductions which would be stringently and independently verified by competent external agencies. The Accord also has the potential, within it, to derail the entire UNFCCC process.
The Accord is not, therefore, being presented on this WebSite.
2. The Developed Countries (i.e. the 1992 UNFCCC Annex I Countries) demonstrated that they had a small understanding of, but very little sympathy for, the concepts of ‘equity’, ‘fairness’, ‘historical responsibility’ and ‘climate justice’.
3. It is now clear that the European Union’s Climate Change Targets of (i) a maximum 2 degree Celsius rise in global temperature is too high … a maximum 1.5 degree Celsius rise should be the target, with an essential reference to a ‘safety factor’ in all calculations … and (ii) a 20% Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Reduction by 2020 is far too low. The time for playing games with numbers is over … GHG Emission Reductions by the EU Member States should be open to stringent and independent/external verification … not just by the European Commission (which is insufficient, on its own, in this particular case) … but also by competent indigenous agencies in the BASIC Group of Countries. To heal the rifts at Copenhagen … greater openness and transparency is required from Europe !!
Spinning of EU GHG Emission Reduction Performance by the European Environment Agency (EEA) … to make it appear that Europeans are doing more, and better, than we actually are … should be firmly knocked on the head, i.e. forbidden !
And in Ireland, to bring this subject closer to home, we urgently need to find another home … one central location, properly managed … for the relevant/related GHG Databases currently held by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Energy Ireland (SEI). Here … let us recall a pertinent extract from the European Union Treaties … ‘statistics shall conform to impartiality, reliability, objectivity, scientific independence, cost-effectiveness and statistical confidentiality’. This issue has been discussed in previous posts. So … say no more !!!!
4. Developed Countries continue to show a feigned interest in Climate Change Adaptation. Too much of their energies and resources are still being directed at fully exploiting the ‘flexibilities’ in meeting Kyoto GHG Emission Reduction Targets. They are wealthy enough … and they believe (mistakenly) that they possess all of the institutional capacities necessary to deal with any adverse impacts caused by Climate Change, including Variability and Extremes. We have found recently in Ireland, however, during the National Major Flood and Snow Emergencies that we certainly do not have these capacities. If anything, we now know that the relevant institutions in this country are incompetent, disorganized and dysfunctional.
Bearing in mind that the minimum life cycle for a Sustainable Building (just to take one important component of the Built Environment) is 100 years … the abject failure to reach a legally binding consensus agreement at Copenhagen … means that National Adaptation Strategies must now be planned and formulated … urgently … on the basis of, at the very least, a 3-4 degree Celsius rise in global temperature.
.
What is Climate Change Adaptation ?
This encompasses, generally, all actions to reduce the vulnerability and strengthen the resilience of the Human Environment, including ecological and social systems, institutions and economic sectors … to present and future adverse effects of climate change and the impacts of response measure implementation … in order to minimize the threats to life, human health, livelihoods, food security, assets, amenities, ecosystems and sustainable development.
Built Environment Climate Change Adaptation, more specifically, means … reliably implementing policies, practices, projects and institutional reforms in the Built Environment … with the aim of reducing the adverse impacts and/or realizing the benefits directly/indirectly associated with climate change, including variability and extremes … in a manner which is compatible with Sustainable Human and Social Development.
Many opportunities can arise from Adaptation.
.
Why is a Sustainable Approach to Climate Change Adaptation Necessary ?
As an example and very briefly …
In Ireland, it has been proposed as an Adaptation Project … to divert water from the Shannon, a very large river in the west of the country … to Dublin, the capital city, which is located on the east coast … in order to deal with the expected shortage of water which will be caused by Climate Change in the medium term … among other factors.
“Fine”, you might say … and you may later add: “an interesting civil engineering infrastructural project”, as you visualize, in your mind’s eye, impressive Roman Aqueducts in the south of France or outside Rome.
BUT … if you then consider that there are no residential water charges in Dublin (so the concept of water conservation is almost unknown among householders); water supplied to houses in the Dublin Region are not yet metered (so there is no urgency to locate and deal with water leakage inside the private property boundary); there are enormous unintended losses, i.e. leaks, from the public potable water distribution system (approximately 40% even in the good times, and recently well in excess of 60% following the National Snow Emergency !); there are no requirements in our National Building Regulations to harvest any rainwater in any buildings or on any hard surfaces in the vicinity of those buildings … and, finally, Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) is not yet a standard procedure, at any level, within National and Local Authorities Having Jurisdiction.
So … just how ‘sustainable’, in reality, is the Shannon-Dublin Water Diversion Scheme as a Climate Change Adaptation Project ???
.
.
END
2010 ACRECONF in Delhi (Dilli), India – 8th & 9th January
It was a great pleasure to be invited to speak on the subject of Sustainable Fire Engineering at the 2010 ACRECONF in Delhi (Dilli), India. This ground breaking conference in Asia took place at the India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, Delhi … on the 8th & 9th January last. Back during August (2009) in Bengaluru … the ACRECONF Chairman, Mr. Ashish Rakheja, told me that he expected an attendance of somewhere between 500-600 people at the Delhi Conference. Over the two days of the actual conference, approximately 1800 delegates participated … an enormous response by architects, civil and service engineers, developers, client and construction organizations, etc., etc., from right across the country … and from the deep south.
Colour photograph showing some of the many participants at the 2010 ACRECONF in Delhi, as they enjoy talking and networking during the morning coffee break of the second day at the conference. The venue was the India Habitat Centre on Lodhi Road. The weather was chilly for the time of year, and there had been a heavy fog earlier in the morning. Click to enlarge. Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2010-01-09.
For me … refreshing, extremely impressive, and certainly the highlight of the conference … was a multi-media presentation … on the second morning, just after the coffee break … by Mr. Karan Grover, the renowned Indian Architect. He is quite an individual !
Before the break, delegates had been treated to an elaboration of the Environmental Design Innovations incorporated into the 71 storey Pearl River Tower (Guangzhou, China), by Mr. Varun Kohli of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM) in New York. Construction of the Tower is now well under way. Afterwards, however, an important discussion took place concerning the issue of fire safety, and fire engineering generally, in Sustainable Buildings. It became clear to all of the participants that this issue is a major oversight … an intentional gap … in the design of these buildings. I made the point, forcibly, that Sustainable Fire Engineering is open to innovation and design creativity. There will be an important follow-up to this discussion.
Colour photograph showing a silly tourist on a bicycle rickshaw, as he is brought sightseeing around the Bazaar District in Old Delhi. Click to enlarge. Photograph taken by Mr. Daljeet Singh, Ministry of Tourism, with CJ Walsh's camera. 2010-01-09.
Unfortunately, the conference was peppered with references to ‘Green’ Buildings … an outdated marketing concept (!) … which, within its limited world-view, gives people the false comfort of not having to deal with thorny issues such as ‘social justice, solidarity & inclusion for all’. I have discussed this issue many times in previous posts.
Even more unfortunately, where the Brundtland Definition of ‘Sustainable Development’ was actually presented in one session … as usual, it was only the first half of the definition which made any appearance. The second, and more important, half of the definition had mysteriously vanished without trace … which made the whole effort a meaningless exercise ! What a waste !! No wonder there is such confusion over the concept … at all levels … in most countries !!!
It was not surprising, therefore, that what was not stressed enough, during the entire conference, was that Sustainable Design Solutions must be appropriate to local geography, climate, economy, culture, social need and language(s)/dialect(s), etc. The LEED Building Rating System (USA), for example, is not being properly adapted to local conditions in India !
A final issue … another major oversight … another intentional gap … in the design of buildings … Accessibility-for-All ! Even though India ratified the 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 1st October 2007 … this essential aspect of design … certainly in Sustainable Buildings … received no mention whatever during the conference … except by yours truly, in my presentation.
Overall … a magnificent achievement for the organizers !
.
.
END
Search
Recent Comments
- therese on Accessible Toilet Room in a Japanese Public Place – Kanazawa
- noel on Fixing ‘Priory Hall’ in Dublin – Practical Solutions Needed Now !
- dt on Beautiful Sunset – Turgutreis, Bodrum Peninsula, Turkey
- Cathy on A More Balanced Presentation of Recent UN Gaza Flotilla Report
- Jolyn on New EU Construction Product Regulation 305/2011 – Halleluiah !
Categories
- architecture
- art
- built environment
- cinema
- climate change
- design
- economic environment
- eu law
- european union
- fire
- human & social rights
- human environment
- human health & safety
- institutional environment
- international law
- judicial
- media
- national law
- natural environment
- photography
- political environment
- regulations & standards
- social environment
- sustainability
- technical control
- travel
- virtual environment
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Jan | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | |||
Links
- 'Spirit of Ireland' Project – National Energy Independence. At last … some 'real' Innovation in this country !
- 2bscene Web Design & Development – Dublin, Ireland.
- AL JAZEERA – News & Views from the ARAB WORLD (1431 H)
- ALBA – Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América / Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America
- Amnesty International – Irish Section
- CJ Walsh: Architectural, Design & Technical Control Practice (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Contact Us – Sustainable Design International Ltd. (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Cuba Support Group – Ireland
- Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) – Ireland
- E-PRTR – European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register … a Europe-wide register providing easily accessible key environmental data from industrial facilities in EU Member States and in Iceland, Liechtenstein & Norway.
- EL NACIONAL – News & Views from VENEZUELA
- EU Fundamental Rights Agency – The Agency focuses on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (EU) and its 27 Member States.
- EUR-Lex – Full, direct and free access to all European Union (EU) Legislation
- European Consumer Centres' Network (ECC-Net) – European Union (EU) wide network of Consumer Protection Centres, co-sponsored by the European Commission and the Member States. The network comprises 29 Centres … one in each of the 27 EU Member States
- EUROPEANA – Access to Europe’s Cultural & Scientific Heritage though a Cross-Domain Digital Portal
- FireOx International: Fire Engineering Consultancy, Research & Design Practice (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- GRANMA INTERNACIONAL – News & Views from CUBA
- HÜRRİYET – News & Views from TURKEY
- Ireland – Information about our Public Institutions, including Pretty Pictures of our green countryside !
- Irish Seed Savers Association … Working to Conserve Irish Biodiversity. They research, locate, preserve & use traditional varieties, cultivars of fruit, vegetables, potatoes & grains.
- James Taylor – Singer & Songwriter
- JOURNAL DE BRASÍLIA – News & Views from BRAZIL
- Kanchi (Ireland) – Changing Society's View of Disability for the Better
- NAVBHARAT TIMES – News & Views (in Hindi) from INDIA
- PRAVDA – News & Views from RUSSIA
- Robert F Kennedy Centre for Justice & Human Rights (USA)
- Rocky Mountain Institute (USA) – Super Energy Efficiency by Design
- RTE Lyric FM – Classical (in its widest meaning !) Music on Irish Radio
- Senator Shane Ross – Ireland's Principal Economics Troubleshooter. What happened to George ?
- Survivors of Institutional Abuse Ireland [SOIAI] – WE (collectively) did not cherish all the children of OUR nation equally !
- Sustainable Design International: Experts in the Theory & Implementation of Sustainable Human & Social Development (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Tom Doyle's Blog :: TALK
- UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) + Kyoto Protocol + COP-15
- United Nations Human Rights Council – Established 15 March 2006
- WikiLeaks – A non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public.
- WISE – Water Information System for Europe … a single location (portal) where geographically-mapped information on water-related issues can be found for the whole of Europe.
- XINHUA News Agency – News & Views from CHINA
Archives
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008