Tag Archives: twitter

Day 2 COMPETITION – can you guess what it is yet?

We had a great response to yesterday’s competition and congratulations to the winner: Cindy FrewenWuellner from Urbanverse.

And so to today’s MASCo WALCOT Photoshoot Competition (in association with Andy Marshall from fotofacade!).

The same rules: see if you can guess what these are and email us with an answer or best guesses at masco@mascowalcot.com or reply on Twitter 

The prize: a copy of Andy Marshall’s beautiful photobook “The Architectural Photographer’s Mantra” AND a copy of the new MASCo WALCOT brochure.

So…here we go: What are these?

The Olympic Park…Legacy or Heracy?

 

 

A worrying development for Olympic Park sustainability

As a contributing consultant to the Stratford Olympic Park  whole sustainability debate,  it came as a shock when I read on Twitter an item by Demolition News .

The article touched a nerve when it suggested a potential goldmine for the demolition industry if the experience of the Portuguese was anything to go by. Even though it may have been a piece of conjecture by a journalist trying to encourage a very depressed sector, it nevertheless highlights a nagging suspicion that the whole sustainability case made for the Olympic Park is a public relations exercise to get the project through.

Compromising East London for the Greater Good

The Games and the development process are a magnificent economic boost to London and the depressed economy in recovery. However, it was always justified by the philosophical stance that it would jump-start the East London community who have borne the brunt of the short-term disruption. The Legacy, it was claimed, would have durable and long-term benefit.

In the preparation of those sustainability studies, many compromises were agreed by those of us who wanted to make the Games genuinely sustainable. We were persuaded to be pragmatic for the greater good; in effect, to agree to many positions and outcomes that averted confrontation or obstruction…all for the greater good.

Is sustainability going to be demolished?

Jumping ahead, and having accepted compromise for other gains, it looks increasingly as though much was bullied through, the sincerity of the promised legacy has yet to be proved. The Demolition News article touches a sensitive nerve that the powerful forces of the demolition industry are circling in their cynical belief that, at the end of the day, they will have their way. If they are right, we were decieved, and will look very naïve in our sincere trust and good faith to make the Games successful.

There is no Sustainability Legacy  if we allow the dereliction of Stratford or, post games, the destruction of the architecture we hoped would bring international acclaim and sustainable prosperity to East London.

New windows for old

sustainability

 

 

Ok, so the scenario is we throw  2-3 million windows away annually, according to the BRE (Building Research Establishment): Glass Waste report.

A close colleague has developed a  system using state of the art technology devised by NASA that enables the upgrading of existing glazing in Georgian and Victorian windows to be retained.

The end product meets all building regulation compliance  and enables the retention of original windows.

Conclusion:  double glazing salesmen can never again tell you that your old windows need replacing on grounds of non-compliance with modern building standards.

Another myth dispelled and lots of windows redirected from landfill! More from MASCo Sustainability on Twitter.

DEFRA Waste Consultation

sustainability

So it was that Jonathan Essex of Bioregional and I arrived in Whitehall at the offices of DEFRA to take part in the latest consultation to discuss the EU Waste Framework Directive and the Waste Hierarchy.

Sadly, carefully worded thoughts are too dull to catch the popular imagination. Conversely, sensationalist headlines alienate the scientific community and responsible policy makers. So, taking the plunge and steering between the two extremes, someone had to call for commitment to environmental challenges and demand things change before it is too late. Let me restate that same point. Commitment has to mean confronting awkward and inconvenient truths that may involve disruption to comfortable lives and require significant altered behaviour. Al Gore may have his detractors but the title of his themed environmental crusade addresses the real issue. Will we accept the inconvenience?

Behind the scenes, in the corridors of power in dry committee rooms, argument hardly rages but quietly progresses, dealing with the great environmental issues of the day.

Before you lose the will to live I should explain.

The prevailing policy affecting waste and the construction industry is wedded to the obsession of recycling in the name of diversion from landfill. Successive government agencies have each rowed in behind the recycling posture, with Treasury subsidy following and providing reinforcement. Conveniently, this approach is easily monitored and measureable by targets, which gives Ministers the opportunity to claim tangible achievements, whilst actually failing to address the fundamental problem.

Waste is defined and modelled as a pyramid with Reuse (and the unspeakable reclamation) at the top of the narrow pinnacle presiding over the broad base of recyclates and incineration (crushing and burning demolition materials). The reality once more is that we pursue target driven objectives relentlessly endorsed by tax incentive, and gloss over the implicit deception because it is reassuring to believe we are successful as recyclers.

The deception continues in the very language we use and the way we discuss the issues. The Germans call the process of material recovery either up cycling or down cycling to expose the truth of the situation. We settle for pretending that recycling is good, whilst actually applying the lowest common denominator approach, and never truly addressing the problem that recycling destroys reusable building materials. Whilst we continue to recycle (crush and burn), we will never achieve the higher recovery of embodied carbon values which would be obtained by driving the emphasis of activity higher up the waste hierarchy.

Demolition on Olympic scale

If all this seems arcane, let me demonstrate the experience of the Olympic Park. The sustainability studies boast 90 percent recovery levels of recycled materials and go immediately into boasting the sustainability credentials of the project. Politicians and the Olympic Delivery Authority instantly congratulated themselves as successful in achieving two core buzz targets – sustainability and recycling. The reality is that traditional demolition teams have mechanically crashed (sorry, reduced) buildings to the ground, sent the concrete and bricks to an onsite crushing facility and segregated the timber and burnable elements for energy generation via incineration. The embodied carbon saving is minimal but the Government loves the headlines saying they are successful recyclers. Hardly anything is reclaimed and reused and so the self-deception goes on!

Jonathan Essex and I both made these points at last week’s consultation exercise held by DEFRA in Whitehall. The exercise could potentially redefine the waste hierarchy in favour of reclamation over recycling but DEFRA needs much more representation from the salvage industry to confirm that this is what we want, and to balance the almost 100 percent of construction stakeholders who are pushing for recycling over reuse.

Get your views off quickly to DEFRA whilst the door is open and before it can be diluted by vested interests that pursue profit before social and environmental considerations.

MASCo Twitter: Follow our thoughts and views on reuse.