United States of America
U.S. Consumer Organization Identifies Hazardous Plasterboards
In the United States of America, there has been a long-running saga of Hazardous Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) Emitting Plasterboard/Drywall being installed in new housing. My U.S. cousin and his beautiful wife were crying their eyes out, here in Ireland last year, having discovered that their new home in Florida had been constructed using this plasterboard … or ‘drywall’, as it is known in the local language over there, i.e. American.
This sorry story graphically illustrates a number of important points …
- The Construction Products & Materials Industry is completely and utterly global in nature. Europe is not immune from this phenomenon !
- Within the European Single Market, proper and unqualified emphasis must be placed on the correct CE Marking of Construction Products. Unfortunately, too many European Manufacturers have not the remotest notion about what CE Marking means or involves. And … CE Marking Technical Control Systems & Procedures in European Countries are totally inadequate.
- Just as many people think nothing about stealing the intellectual property of others … so many people think nothing about Fraudulently Applying the CE Mark to unapproved construction products.
- In order to improve the situation concerning Consumer Ignorance about CE Marking … even when a manufacturer has his/her/their CE Marking in order … it is still necessary to clearly and simply demonstrate the Route of Conformity which has been taken in order to obtain the CE Mark. This is not a requirement of European Union Law … but merely a strong personal opinion based on the experience of being a technical controller for many years.
- The problem of hazardous plasterboard in buildings could also happen in Ireland … or in any other European country. It might already have happened. Beware !
- It is not acceptable that a well-established European Brand Name has engaged in this sort of ‘sharp’ practice outside Europe !! Across a large trans-national organization … it is essential that Product Quality Control is consistently at a uniformly high level.
.
In a CPSC (USA) Press Release #10-243, dated 25th May 2010 …
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is releasing today the names of the plasterboard manufacturers whose plasterboard emitted high levels of hydrogen sulphide in testing conducted for the agency by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), in California. There is a strong association between hydrogen sulphide and metal corrosion.
Of the samples tested, the top ten reactive sulphur-emitting plasterboard samples were all produced in China. Some of the Chinese plasterboard had emission rates of hydrogen sulphide 100 times greater than non-Chinese plasterboard samples.
.
U.S. CPSC Chart of Hydrogen Sulphide Emitting Plasterboards (PDF File, 602kb)
Click the Link above to read and/or download the CPSC Chart
.
“Homeowners who have problem plasterboard in their homes are suffering greatly”, said CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum. ”I appeal to these Chinese plasterboard companies to carefully examine their responsibilities to U.S. families who have been harmed, and do what is fair and just”.
At the US-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue meetings in Beijing on 24th & 25th May 2010, U.S. officials pressed the Chinese government to facilitate a meeting between CPSC and the Chinese plasterboard companies whose products were used in U.S. homes, and which exhibit the emissions identified during the testing procedures. The Strategic and Economic Dialogue represents the highest-level bilateral forum to discuss a broad range of issues between the two nations.
The following list identifies the top 10 plasterboard samples tested which had the highest emissions of hydrogen sulphide, along with the identity of the manufacturer of the plasterboard and the year of manufacture, from highest to lowest.
- Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co. Ltd.: (year of manufacture 2005) China ;
- Taian Taishan Plasterboard Co. Ltd.: (2006) China ;
- Shandong Taihe Dongxin Co.: (2005) China ;
- Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co. Ltd.: (2006) China ;
- Taian Taishan Plasterboard Co. Ltd.: (2006) China ;
- Taian Taishan Plasterboard Co. Ltd.: (2006) China ;
- Shandong Chenxiang GBM Co. Ltd. (C&K Gypsum Board): (2006) China ;
- Beijing New Building Materials (BNBM): (2009) China ;
- Taian Taishan Plasterboard Co. Ltd.: (2009) China ;
- Shandong Taihe Dongxin Co.: (2009) China.
Other Chinese plasterboard samples had low or no detectable emissions of hydrogen sulphide, as did the plasterboard samples tested which were manufactured domestically.
They include …
- Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin: (2009) China ;
- Tiger ***ShiGao JianCai***liangpianzhuang: (2006) China ;
- USG Corporation: (2009) U.S. ;
- Guangdong Knauf New Building Material Products Co. Ltd.: (2009) China ;
- 9 mm (3/8″) plasterboard manufacturer uncertain (date uncertain): China ;
- Knauf Plasterboard (Wuhu) Co. Ltd.: (2009) China ;
- CertainTeed Corp.: (2009) U.S. ;
- Georgia Pacific Corp.: (2009) U.S. ;
- Dragon Brand, Beijing New Building Materials Co. Ltd.: (2006) China ;
- CertainTeed Corp.: (2009) U.S. ;
- Pingyi Baier Building Materials Co. Ltd.: (2009) China ;
- Sample purchased in China, manufacturer unknown: (2009) China ;
- Panel Rey S.A.: (2009) Mexico ;
- Lafarge North America: (2009) U.S. ;
- National Gypsum Company: (2009) U.S. ;
- National Gypsum Company: (2009) U.S. ;
- Georgia Pacific Corp.: (2009) U.S. ;
- Pabco Gypsum: (2009) U.S. ;
- Temple-Inland Inc.: (2009) U.S. ; and
- USG Corporation: (2009) U.S.
.
Last month, CPSC released the results of plasterboard emissions tests by LBNL. The studies showed a connection between certain Chinese plasterboard and corrosion in homes. In addition, the patterns of reactive sulphur compounds emitted from plasterboard samples show a clear distinction between certain Chinese plasterboard samples manufactured in 2005/2006 and other Chinese and non-Chinese plasterboard samples.
To date, CPSC has spent over $5 million to investigate the chemical nature and the chain of commerce of problem plasterboard. Earlier this year, CPSC and the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) issued an Identification Protocol to help consumers identify problem plasterboard in their homes. Last month, CPSC and HUD issued Remediation Guidance to assist impacted homeowners.
To see this release on CPSC’s WebSite, including a link to a Chart listing plasterboard chamber test results … please go to … www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10243.html
.
.
END
To Mitigate or Adapt – The Strategy for the Built Environment ?
Before the official announcement, in New York, of the independent InterAcademy Council (IAC) Review of the WMO/UNEP Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) … on 10th March 2010 … clear indications had been given, at meetings in the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin), that serious question marks hovered over the IPCC, its 2007 4th Assessment Report, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri’s position within the IPCC … the actions of many of the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) who were at Copenhagen during the 2009 UNFCCC Climate Change Summit … and the Science of Climate Change itself (refer, for example, to revelations following the hacking of e-mails and other data from a server in the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit in England, and the irregularities/errors in the IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report).
The 2009 Copenhagen Accord was a political agreement between a small number of Heads of State, Heads of Government, Ministers, and Heads of Delegation – Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC) and the USA – who attended the Climate Summit, which concluded on Saturday, 19th December. At the time of writing, many countries have made voluntary submissions, i.e. they are not legally binding, to Appendices I and II of the Accord.
A general overview of the submissions made by Developed Countries, however, reveals the following about the Voluntary Emissions Targets being undertaken …
- they are highly conditional on the performance of other countries ;
- they are very disappointing, being far below what is required to cap the planetary temperature rise at 1.5 degrees Celsius ; and
- there is no consistent emission base year … varying from 1990 and 1992, up to 2000 and 2005.
This is very far from being a signal of serious intent from Developed Countries … and is not … in any way, shape or manner … an acceptance of historical responsibilities. It would be reasonable, therefore, to surmise that the process of achieving a global, legally binding, consensus agreement on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets will be long and difficult. The Climate Change Mitigation Agenda is, to put it mildly, fraught with problems … and has an unclear future in the short term.
On the other hand, anyone involved in the design, construction, management or operation of the Built Environment must think ‘long-term’ … the minimum life cycle for a sustainable building should be at least 100 years. Today in Dublin, buildings which are 250 or 350 years old still look remarkably good, and are well capable of fulfilling an important function within the social and economic environments of the city. ‘Politically’ and ‘technically’, therefore, it would be more appropriate for the built environment if we were concerned with the Long-Term Climate Change Adaptation Agenda … rather than a problematic, short-term Mitigation Agenda. But, in terms of a building … is there really a clear difference between measures undertaken for the purpose of mitigation and those undertaken for adaptation ? For example, measures to incrementally improve energy efficiency and conserve energy, in accordance with short-term legally binding targets, will serve to mitigate CO2 emissions … but the same measures will also serve to adapt the building to rapidly dwindling supplies of climate-damaging fossil fuels. The long-term perspective will exert pressure for more radical actions in the short-term.
But, should we not already be undertaking these sorts of measures as part of the Mainstream Sustainability Agenda … in order to increase building durability and prolong life cycle ?
Generally … Climate Change Adaptation encompasses urgent and immediate short, near and long-term actions at local, national, regional and international levels 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 local threats to life, human health, livelihoods, food security, assets, amenities, ecosystems and sustainable development.
More specifically … Built Environment Climate Change Adaptation 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.
Climate Change Adaptation is one of the most important drivers for Sustainable Design !
.
.
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
Happy Christmas & Let’s All Stay Safe In Our Homes !
T’is the Season to be jolly ! It is also the time when we remember family and friends … far and near … and those souls, no longer with us, who remain in our hearts. Happy Christmas everyone ! And it will be better in 2010 !!
As a special treat … let’s keep Uncle Gaybo happy … and give each other the gift of ‘Safety’ !
In a previous post concerning the MACLAREN Baby Strollers, I referred to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). A few days ago, on 14th December 2009, the Commission issued the following Seasonal Press Release #10-065 …
Ten Tips to Keep Your Holiday Home Fire and Injury Free: Fires Lead the List of Hazards Related to Holiday Decorations
WASHINGTON, D.C. – As the holiday season approaches, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is urging consumers to make safety a factor in holiday decorating. Whether it is careful candle placement or checking the warning label on the holiday lights, simple safety steps can go a long way in preventing fires and injuries this year.
Annually, during the two months surrounding the holiday season, more than 14,000 people are treated in hospital emergency rooms due to injuries related to holiday decorating. In addition, Christmas trees are involved in hundreds of fires resulting in an average of 15 deaths and $13 million dollars in property damage annually. Candle-related fires lead the list of hazards averaging more than 12,000 a year, resulting in 150 deaths and $393 million in property damage.
“Holiday decorating related fires and injuries most often involve defective holiday lights, unattended candles and dried-out Christmas trees”, said CPSC Chairperson Inez Tenenbaum. ”We are providing this list of 10 Simple Safety Steps to help keep your holiday home safe.”
Use the Following 10 Safety Tips when Decorating This Year:
Christmas Trees & Decorations
1. When purchasing an Artificial Tree, DO look for the label “Fire Resistant”. Although this label does not mean the tree won’t catch fire, it does indicate the tree is more resistant to catching fire. [In Ireland, ask anyway !]
2. When purchasing a Live Tree, DO check for freshness. A fresh tree is green, needles are hard to pull from branches and do not break when bent between your fingers. The bottom of a fresh tree is sticky with resin, and when tapped on the ground, the tree should not lose many needles.
3. When Setting Up A Tree at home, DO place it away from heat sources such as fireplaces, vents, and radiators. Because heated rooms dry out live trees rapidly, be sure to monitor water levels and keep the stand filled with water. Place the tree out of the way of traffic, and do not block doorways.
4. In homes with Young Children, DO take special care to avoid sharp, weighted or breakable decorations, keep trimmings with small removable parts out of the reach of children who could swallow or inhale small pieces, and avoid trimmings that resemble sweets or food that may tempt a child to eat them.
Christmas Lights
5. Indoors or Outside, DO use only lights that have been tested for safety by an independent, accredited testing laboratory … such as UL (USA) or TÜV (Germany).
6. Check each Set of Lights, new or old, for broken or cracked sockets, frayed or bare wires, or loose connections. Throw out, and carefully dispose of, damaged sets. DON’T use electric lights on a metallic tree.
7. If using an Electric Extension Cable, DO make sure it is rated for the intended use.
8. When using Lights Outdoors, DO check labels to be sure the lights have been approved for outdoor use and only plug them into an external, weather and circuit-breaker protected socket outlet.
Candles
9. Always keep Burning Candles within sight. DO extinguish all candles before you go to bed, leave the room or leave the house.
10. DO keep Lighted Candles away from items that can catch fire and burn easily, such as trees, other evergreens, decorations, curtains and furniture.
Get more Christmas Decorating Safety Tips at CPSC’s WebSite … www.cpsc.gov/
My Questions: In Ireland … is our Consumer Protection Legislation adequate ? More importantly … is compliance adequately monitored ? Relating to the critical area of fire safety in the home … do we have any, or sufficient, independent and accredited testing laboratories ?
END
Emergency Planning For ALL & Special Needs Populations ?
On 15th August 2008, the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in association with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties, published Comprehensive Preparedness Guide #301: ‘Interim Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations’.
What follows are important extracts from CPG #301. As you slowly read along … consider the chaotic, clapped-out and ramshackle response, at national level, to the Flood Emergency in Ireland …
Throughout the history of Emergency Management Planning, considerations for Special Needs Populations have often been inadequate. From the 1930′s, when disaster response was ad hoc and largely focused on the repair of damaged infrastructure, through to the present day, emergency management culture of ‘readiness’, special needs populations were often given insufficient consideration. This fact was evident in 2003 during the California wildfires and when Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005. During these events, some individuals with special needs did not receive appropriate warning, were unable to access shelters, or went without medical intervention. During the 2006 Nationwide Plan Review, a sample of emergency management plans was reviewed by subject-matter experts on disability and ageing. The review confirmed that emergency plans from various regions in the United States continue to overlook these populations. The Nationwide Plan Review Phase 2 Report concluded that “substantial improvement is necessary to integrate people with disabilities into emergency planning and readiness”.
Numerous ‘lessons learned’ reports that followed Hurricane Katrina also pointed out that there is a large segment of the U.S. population who may not be able to successfully plan for, and respond to, an emergency with resources typically accessible to the general population. The current general population is one that is diverse, ageing, and focused on maintaining independence as long as possible. The popularity of living situations that provide an ‘as needed’ level of care in the least restrictive manner is fast becoming the norm. Consideration should therefore be given to people who may be able to function independently under normal situations, but who may need assistance in an emergency situation.
For example, it is estimated that about 13 million individuals aged 50 years or older in the United States will need evacuation assistance, and about half of these individuals will require such assistance from someone outside of their household. There are well over 1 million people in the United States receiving home healthcare according to 2000 data cited by the National Center for Health Care Statistics. Populations such as these should be considered when emergency plans are developed to accurately assess the resources needed to adequately respond when a disaster strikes. The 2000 Census reported that 18% of those surveyed speak a language other than English at home. This highlights the need to ensure the effectiveness of emergency communications. Populations described as ‘transportation disadvantaged’ – those who do not have access to a personal vehicle or are precluded from driving – may also require assistance during emergencies. The 2000 Census reports that in the top ten car-less cities, between 29% and 56% of the households are without a vehicle. These examples serve to demonstrate community emergency planning should go beyond traditional considerations.
During the Nationwide Plan Review, Emergency Managers consistently requested technical assistance in identifying and incorporating special needs populations into emergency planning. As described later, defining the term ‘special needs’ is a critical initial step in the planning process. The Federal Government introduced, within the National Response Framework (NRF), a definition of special needs populations that State, Territorial, Tribal, and Local governments may adopt for use in their Emergency Operation Plan (EOP) development. It is important to note that though this terminology may appear ambiguous, it is well established in the Emergency Management Vocabulary and when clearly defined, strengthens the planning process.
Although it is recognized that significant emergency planning should be done for incarcerated populations, these groups cannot be integrated into general population planning. Individuals in correctional settings are institutionalized to protect other members of society; people who are institutionalized in health related settings are there for their own protection and wellbeing. Emergency management planning for incarcerated populations requires additional consideration such as law enforcement and co-ordination between emergency managers, the Department of Corrections, and prison superintendents to ensure safety of the prisoners and the public. For these reasons, incarcerated populations are not included in the NRF definition of ‘special needs’, which is the same definition used in this Planning Guide.
U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) CPG #301
Date: 15 August 2008. PDF File, 301kb.
Interim Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations
Click the link above to read and/or download CPG #301
Emergency Management takes into consideration planning for the safety of every person in the community during and following a disaster. Taking into consideration populations historically considered ‘vulnerable’, ‘at risk’, or ‘special needs’, ultimately improves the overall community’s post-disaster sustainability.
Before drafting Emergency Plans, it is recommended that a state-wide definition for the term ‘special needs’ be developed and used to guide State, Territorial, Tribal, and Local jurisdictions in the planning process. A consistent use of terminology will result in improved communication and co-ordination of resources across State, Territorial, Tribal, and Local entities.
The NRF Definition for ‘special needs’ provides a function-based approach for planning and seeks to establish a flexible framework that addresses a broad set of common function-based needs, irrespective of specific diagnosis, statuses, or labels (e.g. children, older people, transportation disadvantaged, etc.). In other words, this function-based definition reflects the capabilities of the individual, not the condition or label. Governments that choose to align their language to the NRF definition will improve inter-government communication during an incident.
The Definition of Special Needs Populations, as it appears in the U.S. National Response Framework (NRF) is as follows:
Populations whose members may have additional needs before, during, and after an incident in functional areas, including but not limited to:
- Maintaining Independence ;
- Communication ;
- Transportation ;
- Supervision ;
- Medical Care.
Individuals in need of additional response assistance may include those who have disabilities; who live in institutionalized settings; who are elderly; who are children; who are from diverse cultures; who have limited English proficiency; or who are non-English speaking; or who are transportation disadvantaged.
[The concept of a function-based approach to defining special needs populations has been developed by June Isaacson Kailes. See Kailes, J. and Enders, A. in "Moving Beyond ‘Special Needs’: A Function-Based Framework for Emergency Management Planning". Journal of Disability Policy Studies, Vol./No. 44/2007. Pages 230-237.]
At first glance, it may appear that each of the above groups (and a disproportionately large percentage of the population) is automatically classified as having special needs, but this is not the case. The definition indicates these groups may often include individuals who have special needs and, in the event of an emergency, may need additional assistance or specialized resources. For example, in a city like New York where less than half of all households own a car, transportation-dependence is not necessarily a ‘special need’. A special need in this instance is an inability to access the transportation alternatives defined by the Emergency Operation Plan (EOP). It is important to remember that special needs populations have needs that extend beyond those of the general population.
The definition focuses on the following function-based aspects:
- Maintaining Independence – Individuals requiring support to be independent in daily activities may lose this support during an emergency or a disaster. Such support may include consumable medical supplies (baby diapers, formula, bandages, continence supplies, etc.), durable medical equipment (wheelchairs, walkers, scooters, etc.), service animals, and/or attendants or caregivers. Supplying needed support to these individuals will enable them to maintain their pre-disaster level of independence.
- Communication – Individuals who have limitations which interfere with the receipt of and response to information will need that information provided in format they can understand and use. They may not be able to hear verbal announcements, see directional signs, or understand how to get assistance due to hearing, vision, speech, cognitive, or intellectual limitations, and/or limited English proficiency.
- Transportation – Individuals who cannot drive or who do not have a vehicle may require transportation support for successful evacuation. This support may include accessible vehicles (e.g., lift-equipped or vehicles suitable for transporting individuals who use oxygen) or information about how and where to access mass transportation during an evacuation.
- Supervision – Before, during, and after an emergency individuals may lose the support of caregivers, family, or friends or may be unable to cope in a new environment (particularly if they have dementia, Alzheimer’s or psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia or intense anxiety). If separated from their caregivers, young children may be unable to identify themselves; and when in danger, they may lack the cognitive ability to assess the situation and react appropriately.
- Medical Care – Individuals who are not self-sufficient or who do not have adequate support from caregivers, family, or friends may need assistance with: managing unstable, terminal or contagious conditions which require observation and ongoing treatment; managing intravenous therapy, tube feeding, and vital signs; receiving dialysis, oxygen, and suction administration; managing wounds; and operating power-dependent equipment to sustain life. These individuals require support of trained medical professionals.
The above examples illustrate function-based needs that may exist within the community.
Important Conclusions for Ireland & Europe Generally:
1. The innovative approach taken to Special Needs Populations in U.S. FEMA Comprehensive Preparedness Guide #301 is entirely consistent with European concepts of ‘mainstreaming’, ‘accessibility for all’, ‘fire safety, protection and evacuation for all’, etc … and the widespread, standardized and consistent use of the language and terminology in the 2001 World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability & Health (ICF) … an approach which I have long advocated across Europe.
2. Fragmentation of the Irish Special Needs Population, dissention between different groups within that population or a lack of willingness to work with other groups … the use of far too many ad-hoc labels … and the anarchic abuse of disability-related language and terminology … pose a grave risk to the Safety, Health and Wellbeing of all these groups in Emergencies, whether large or small scale … and create unnecessary, and sometimes insurmountable, barriers to effective communication and the proper co-ordination of emergency response resources. This problem is deep-rooted and endemic throughout Europe.
3. French use of the words, e.g. ‘les handicapés’, ‘les invalides’, is both outdated and barbaric. Similarly, German use of the word ‘die behinderten’ is unacceptable. A concerted effort, at European level, must be made to modernize and harmonize the use of disability-related terminology in our many different languages. Large Scale Emergencies in Europe, involving 2, 3 or more E.U. Member States, require … as a priority … effective communication and the proper co-ordination of emergency response resources.
END
MACLAREN Strollers – Bad Consumer Protection in Europe ?
In the case of the recent recall of MACLAREN Baby Strollers in the USA … it is troubling to witness what is NOT happening here, in Europe, either at the level of the European Union (EU) and its Institutions … or, at national level, in the EU Member States.
ALL are failing the European Consumer !
IF the Maclaren Stroller’s hinge mechanism poses a fingertip amputation and laceration hazard to a child when a consumer is unfolding/opening the stroller … AND … Maclaren has received 15 reports of children placing their finger in the stroller’s hinge mechanism, resulting in 12 reports of fingertip amputations in the United States … HOW ARE THESE PRODUCTS SAFE IN EUROPE ????
Maclaren Baby Strollers are sold in the Americas, Oceania … and throughout Europe and Asia …
Colour photograph of one model of the Recalled MACLAREN Baby Strollers in the USA. Photograph from U.S. CPSC WebSite.
On 9th November 2009, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) … www.cpsc.gov … issued the following Press Release #10-033 …
Maclaren USA Recalls to Repair Strollers Following Fingertip Amputations
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in co-operation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Maclaren Strollers
Units: About one million
Distributor: Maclaren USA, Inc., of South Norwalk, Conn.
Hazard: The stroller’s hinge mechanism poses a fingertip amputation and laceration hazard to the child when the consumer is unfolding/opening the stroller.
Incidents/Injuries: The firm has received 15 reports of children placing their finger in the stroller’s hinge mechanism, resulting in 12 reports of fingertip amputations in the United States.
Description: This recall involves all Maclaren single and double umbrella strollers. The word “Maclaren” is printed on the stroller. The affected models included Volo, Triumph, Quest Sport, Quest Mod, Techno XT, TechnoXLR, Twin Triumph, Twin Techno and Easy Traveller.
Sold at: Babies’R'Us, Target and other juvenile product and mass merchandise retailers nationwide from 1999 through November 2009 for between $100 and $360.
Manufactured in: China
Remedy: Consumers should immediately stop using these recalled strollers and contact Maclaren USA to receive a free repair kit.
Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Maclaren USA toll-free at (877) 688-2326 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit the firm’s Web site at http://recall.maclarenbaby.com/
To see this recall on CPSC’s WebSite, including pictures of the recalled products, please go to: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10033.html
What is Maclaren itself saying on its own U.S. WebSite ? Bear in mind that standards … no matter where their origin … are never perfect, and are always requiring revision and regular updates.
IMPORTANT NOTICE
Consistent with our unwavering commitment to child safety we are providing U.S. consumers notice of a voluntary recall of all Maclaren umbrella strollers sold in the U.S. In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, we are providing free of charge to all affected consumers and retailers a kit to cover the stroller’s hinge mechanism, which poses a fingertip amputation and laceration hazard to the child when the consumer is unfolding/opening the stroller. The affected models include Volo, Triumph, Quest Sport, Quest Mod, Techno XT, Techno XLR, Twin Triumph, Twin Techno and Easy Traveller.
Maclaren USA’s Umbrella Strollers meet all U.S. ASTM & JPMA compliance standards. These certifications guarantee our umbrella strollers meet the maximum safety standards available. The voluntary recall is to alert the operator when opening or closing the stroller of the possible risk of injury.
Safety is our first priority and through this voluntary effort we urge consumers to contact us immediately to obtain the kit which consists of hinge covers designed specifically to fit all Maclaren strollers.
Maclaren stresses all operators read the instruction manual prior to use which contains valuable safety tips and service recommendations.
Even though it is slightly premature, by just a few weeks, to be quoting what the Consolidated European Union Treaties, as amended by the 2007 Lisbon Treaty, have to say about Consumer Protection … it still makes interesting reading … and, anyway, the legal intent of Article 169 was not actually amended by the Lisbon Treaty …
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Title XV
Article 169
1. In order to promote the interests of consumers and to ensure a high level of consumer protection, the Union shall contribute to protecting the health, safety and economic interests of consumers, as well as to promoting their right to information, education and to organise themselves in order to safeguard their interests.
2. The Union shall contribute to the attainment of the objectives referred to in paragraph 1 through:
(a) measures adopted pursuant to Article 114 in the context of the completion of the internal market ;
(b) measures which support, supplement and monitor the policy pursued by the Member States.
3. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, shall adopt the measures referred to in paragraph 2(b).
4. Measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or introducing more stringent protective measures. Such measures must be compatible with the Treaties. The Commission shall be notified of them.
END
Building Fire Emergencies – What is a ‘Place of Safety’ ?
As I have travelled around … not just Ireland, but many other countries as well … it still remains a puzzle to me, today, why so many Fire Emergency Assembly Areas are located just outside the main entrance of a building. These locations are not safe in a ‘real’ fire emergency … and they should not even be used for the purposes of test/drill evacuations !
Is the guidance contained in current Building & Fire Regulations, Codes and Standards on what is a ‘Place of Safety’ in a fire emergency clear, simple, direct and precise ? Are you joking ? No way ! Let us take a few examples close to home …
In Ireland:
When you look at the array of different Technical Guidance Documents (Building Regulations) at the same time … TGD B (Fire Safety) is way out of proportion, in size, compared to all of the others. You would expect, therefore, to find exactly what you were looking for in that document. Wouldn’t you ?
TGD B (2006), Paragraph #1.0.9 – Definitions
Place of Safety
A place, normally in the open air at ground level, in which persons are in no danger from fire.
Clear as mud ! If there is a fire on O’Connell Street in Dublin … a person is safe on Patrick Street in Cork ! But, how is any Building or Facilities Manager expected to work with such a vague definition ?
In England & Wales:
No practical definition, as such, is readily provided. The nearest thing to a definition is an amalgam of the following …
Building Regulations, Requirement B1 – Means of Warning & Escape
The building shall be designed and constructed so that there are appropriate provisions for the early warning of fire, and appropriate means of escape in case of fire from the building to a place of safety outside the building capable of being safely and effectively used at all material times.
Approved Document B: Volume 1 – Dwellinghouses & Volume 2 – Buildings Other Than Dwellinghouses
The ultimate place of safety is the open air clear of the effects of the fire.
British Standard BS 9999 : Code of Practice for Fire Safety in the Design, Management & Use of Buildings : 2008
Place of Ultimate Safety
Place in which there is no immediate or future danger from fire or from the effects of a fire.
Again … all as clear as mud ! Again … how is any Building or Facilities Manager expected to work with such vague guidance ? Have you also noticed the additional obfuscation introduced by use of the word ‘ultimate’ in BS 9999 ?
It is hard to escape the conclusion that what is urgently needed is a fundamental transformation and re-shaping of the tired, antiquated and flawed ad-hoc assembly of prescriptive ‘solutions’ contained in current national building and fire regulations, codes, standards and administrative provisions … whatever their origin !
Now … try this for clarity, simplicity, directness and precision …
Place of Safety (Fire Incident in a Building, No Explosion Hazard*)
Any location beyond a perimeter which is [100]* metres from the fire building or a distance of [10]* times the height of such building, whichever is the greater
and
where necessary and effective medical care and attention can be provided, or organized, within one hour of injury
and
where people can be identified.
* Where there is a Risk of Explosion … multiply the numbers in square brackets above by 4.
Was that good for you ?
Furthermore …
The Route to any Place of Safety must be Accessible for All Building Users, including people who use wheelchairs, the visually impaired, frail older people, women in the later stages of pregnancy, children, etc., etc.
Colour photograph showing a Typical Scene at a Building Fire Emergency, with Fire Service Vehicles and Personnel in operation mode. The haphazard arrangement of firefighting water hoses on the ground makes access difficult for many Building Users to a 'Place of Safety' which is remote from the Fire Building.
With regard to an Adequate, never mind a Proper, Awareness of Disability-Related Issues at a Fire Scene … it is shocking to realize how almost non-existent this is among Fire Services … not just in Ireland and Britain … but in the rest of Europe and North America as well.
Even a hint of criticism will usually … not always … meet the Neanderthal Fire Service Response: “Have you ever been in a ‘real’ building fire ?”
My Response is: “Do you have to be a hen to know when an egg is bad ?”
This discussion will continue later … have no doubt … that is a promise !
END
Another Faulty Tower – John Cleese, Where Are You ?
A Cautionary Tale for Client Organizations … from across the Pond … and a serious lack of Technical Control over the processes of Building Design and Construction …
Where there is no proper Technical Control … can there ever be an appropriate safety factor to incorporate into the design ?
And before it’s too late … how is it possible to establish that there is no proper Technical Control ?
An artistic rendering of the oval-shaped Harmon Hotel & Spa, in Las Vegas, Nevada (USA), at its original designed height of 49 stories.
2009-10-06 … ‘Who’s to Blame for Faulty Foster Tower ?’ … by Tony Illia, Architectural Record (archrecord.construction.com) …
Despite the recession, CityCenter continues to rise on the Las Vegas Strip, with several buildings scheduled to open later this year. One project that certainly has not turned out as planned is the 400-room Harmon Hotel Tower, designed by Foster & Partners, which will be nearly half its estimated height due to construction defects. The problems have escalated into finger-pointing between project parties, resulting in legal actions and project reviews that are still under way.
The 28-story oval-shaped high-rise broke ground in July 2006. Pacific Coast Steel, a San Diego-based subcontractor to Perini Building Co., improperly installed reinforcing steel inside link beams on 15 floors, a Clark County Building Department investigation revealed.
The problem should have been caught by inspectors, but a third-party California inspection firm, Converse Consultants, falsified 62 daily reports between March and July of 2008, stating that the steel was properly installed, according to county inspectors, who also missed the problems.
The defects were discovered in July 2008 by the project’s structural engineer, Halcrow Yolles Structural Engineer, temporarily halting construction and leading to the Harmon’s redesign. Owner MGM Mirage declined to disclose the cost of the errors.
This April, Pacific Coast Steel paid $14,105 in fines after a Nevada State Contractors Board investigation discovered ‘workmanship’ issues. As part of a settlement, the firm did not admit fault. In August, Converse Consultants was suspended from seeking new work in Southern Nevada for six months, and its inspectors had their qualifications revoked or suspended.
The subcontractor says Foster & Partners is partly to blame. “Perini stands by its opinion that design conflicts contributed to the Harmon Hotel structural issues and that portions of the structural drawings, as designed and permitted, contained elements of reinforcing steel that could not be installed as drawn,” said Perini President Craig Shaw in a statement.
The Harmon’s design called for pouring top portions of 2.4m thick link beams at the same time as the floor slab, which is a tricky procedure given the tight and exact spacing of reinforcing rebar. However, the contractor made installation adjustments in field. Stirrup hooks, in some cases, were spaced incorrectly and extended past the floor, prompting workers to cut them off so it wouldn’t show, the county inspectors say.
Corrective work and a structural building redesign are in progress. The building will safely reach 28 stories; pricier work would be needed to meet the originally designed height of 49 stories, say project officials, who would not elaborate. Foster & Partners declined to comment for this story.
END
9-11 World Trade Center Incident – Institutional Inertia ?
Yesterday afternoon, following the post upload of Concrete Testing Fraud in New York – 1 World Trade Center … I received an e-mail message from a close member of our extended family in New York State, USA:
” Another year goes by …
I’m sending this on to people who are an important part of my life – either then or now. Some of you are friends since 9/11/01 and may or may not know that Barry and I (Mary-Ellen) worked at the Trade Centers – others of you supported us through this difficult time. It was a single, cataclysmic event that changed our lives, and the lives of our colleagues and many others, forever. These images are poignant.
It’s worth remembering.”
These are the Images which Mary-Ellen sent …
‘WTC 9-11 Incident – Declassified Photographs (June 2009)’
Click above to download PowerPoint Presentation 4.46MB
The Recommendations contained in the 2005 & 2008 National Institute of Standards & Technology (USA) Reports on the 9-11 WTC Building Collapses (WTC 1, 2 & 7) provide an essential and invaluable empirical basis for the competent, ethical and professional practice of Effective Fire Engineering Design in today’s complex Built Environment.
8 Long Years After 9-11 … A Pattern Confirmed in Mumbai (November 2008) …
Why are so many Key Institutions & Organizations in the International Building Sector still desperately trying to ignore and/or deny the Recommendations in those 2 NIST Reports ?
Why have National Building & Fire Codes/Regulations & Standards not yet been revised to respond, properly and satisfactorily, to the NIST Recommendations ?
Why can we not yet use All Lifts (Elevators) in a Building during a fire incident ? Why are Lift (Elevator) Manufacturers still actively resisting this necessary change ?
I could go on … and on …
END
Concrete Testing Fraud in New York – 1 World Trade Center
Background & Verification
Early 2008 … a New York Inquiry into the Concrete Testing Industry begins. At issue is the Structural Reliability of Current Major Public Works Projects in the City, including many Tall Buildings.
Internet Search: ‘New York Concrete Testing Inquiry’ … to discover the full measure of fraud and corruption.
I wonder how the U.S. Model Building & Fire Code Organizations … including the U.S. International Code Council … are responding to this growing scandal in New York. Are they responding at all ? AND … do they discuss this sort of issue openly, as they heavily ‘promote’ the adoption of U.S. Codes in Developing Countries around the world ?
What is the position of the Council on Tall Buildings & Urban Habitat (CTBUH) ???
2009-09-08 … by Niki May Young, News Editor, World Architecture News(.com) …
Robert LiMandri, New York’s Buildings Commissioner, has announced that concrete tests are to be carried out on 82 New York buildings following safety concerns arising from the indictment of Testwell Laboratories in January and a further firm in July. Testwell were accused of falsifying concrete mix design reports for the high profile Freedom Tower project (now 1 World Trade Center), Yankees Stadium, Jet Blue Terminal and a number of other projects and had their license suspended. Stallone Testing Laboratories were also indicted for falsifying concrete mix design reports in July.
The indictment of Testwell led to a lack of confidence in the safety of over 100 buildings in New York. Following investigations, 82 buildings are to be re-examined. The investigations come as part of an announcement by LiMandri of a new comprehensive program to increase the oversight and evaluation of concrete testing at construction projects throughout the City, including projects funded by the City and private developers. The program includes plans to build a city-owned and operated concrete-testing laboratory and the creation of a new Concrete Unit at the Department Of Buildings (DOB).
The new City laboratory, which will be operated by the Department of Design & Construction (DDC) and is expected to open as early as January, will offer testing services to all City agencies responsible for construction projects. New York City has 35 private concrete-testing firms currently licensed to do business in the City and the new facility will also make it possible to audit these firms.
“Concrete testing is a critical component of concrete operations, and the results should affirm the strength and quality of materials used for a building under construction,” said LiMandri. “However, the integrity of concrete-testing practices has come into serious question, and this new laboratory, as well as a new Concrete Unit and re-testing protocol, are three significant measures to ensure concrete testing procedures are lawful and the concrete used meets a project’s specific design requirements.”
DOB denied Testwell’s application to renew its concrete-testing license but a State Supreme Court Judge rejected DOB’s denial of the license renewal. DOB is now appealing that decision. Last Friday, DOB revoked Stallone’s concrete-testing license, prohibiting them from testing concrete in the City. The Department Of Buildings is currently working with property owners named in the Stallone indictment to determine whether a project’s final test results meet the structural design requirements. If they do not, the affected property owners will also be required to follow the re-testing protocol.
“New Yorkers must be confident the City’s buildings have been built to exacting standards and that the concrete, not usually visible, was mixed to proper construction specifications,” added Design and Construction Commissioner Burney.
END
Search
Recent Comments
- 'Climate' Politics – From 2007 Consensus to 2009 Fracture ? | 'A … | Indonesia Day on ‘Climate’ Politics – From 2007 Consensus to 2009 Fracture ?
- Catherine on Murphy Commission Report on Child Sexual Abuse in Dublin
- Sustainable Climate Adaptation – 2008 G-77 Statement to the UN … | Algeria news on Sustainable Climate Adaptation – 2008 G-77 Statement to the UN
- Harmonized Indicators of Building GHG & Energy Performance | 'A … | Go Low Energy on Harmonized Indicators of Building GHG & Energy Performance
- Older People in Emergencies – Action & Policy Development (II … | DisabilityKit.Com on Older People in Emergencies – Action & Policy Development (II)
Categories
- architecture
- art
- built environment
- cinema
- climate change
- economic environment
- eu law
- european union
- fire
- human & social rights
- human environment
- human health
- institutions
- international law
- judicial
- media
- national law
- natural environment
- photography
- politics
- regulations & standards
- social environment
- sustainability
- technical control
- travel
- virtual environment
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Jun | ||||||
| 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 | 30 | ||
Links
- 'Spirit of Ireland' Project – National Energy Independence. At last … some 'real' Innovation in this country !
- 2bscene Web Design – 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
- FireOx International – 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 !
- 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 – 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
- 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