Human Resource Skills on Development of Safe Sustainable Storey Buildings
There are multiple reasons why education and training are important to a successful sustainable
building program. In order to get building professionals onboard and increase enthusiasm among
laypeople, it is necessary for people to be educated about the pros and cons of green building.
Providing people with educational material allows them to make their own informed decisions
(Telegen, 2005).
One of the most common conclusions people make about sustainable building is that the
costs are prohibitive or at least significantly more than traditional construction methods. There
have been a few studies that have come out recently claiming that green building, on average,
costs less than 2% more upfront (Kats 2003). When the long-term lifecycle of the building is
considered, this number may decrease, making it more economically sound to build sustainably.
In the Boston area, a resolution to this issue is in the works. The Green Roundtable, a
non-profit organization dedicated to championing the green building cause, has neared
completion on a sustainable design resource library that was to be online by September 2005
(Green Roundtable website 2005). The resource centre, called Nexus, was deemed to house
exhibits on green design and construction, a resource library, showroom floor, educational
opportunities, and social events. Admission to the centre, which will be located in downtown
Boston, close to many public transportation options, will be free (Green Roundtable Newsletter
2005). It is not enough to simply make information available. The information should come from
a trusted source, and most importantly, it must be accurate. The opening of the Nexus centre
should create an access point for interested parties to find accurate, honest information on
sustainable building.
While considering the resource centre as a solution to the lack of accessible information
and materials on sustainable design, the issue that there will still be an information gap persists.
It would be irresponsible to urge the governor to adopt green building legislation, potentially
requiring all Massachusetts public facilities to be built to LEED standards, without a solid, well-
informed foundation of facts and figures. Since the green building movement is relatively new
(within the last twenty years), it is necessary to be cautious and always ask questions. If a few
studies claim green building increases costs by 2%, and a few other studies claim the cost
increases are more at a 20% range, how will the roundtable know which claim is the correct one
(Telegen, 2005).
There is an information gap in sustainable design with regards to costs because critical in-
formation is not readily available. Examining the life cycle cost of a building also plays a role
and can be tricky. It is not as easy to determine the exact overall life cycle cost savings a building
may accumulate over the course of twenty years. Forecasts may certainly be made. Because of
this, and because the green building movement is not robust in terms of years, it may be more
difficult to obtain long-term data. This is where case studies and research play a critical role
(Telegen, 2005).
Insufficient/lack of communication is another aspect to the education and training barrier. This
includes a deficiency in the integration of various design and construction professionals (like
architects, contractors, building users and owners, and engineers). When information sources
cannot connect with an audience, a rift is created and there is a noticeable lack of reliable
information. Politics, turf and authority issues, and competing priorities round out this list of
causes for this barrier (Telegen, 2005).
References
CEPMC (2013) Statement from CEPMC on the Product Environmental Footprint Guide, 26
April 2013.
Mora E. 2007. Life cycle, sustainability and the transcendent quality of building materials.
Building and Environment. 2007;42:1329–1334
Dakwale V, Ralegaonkar R, Mandavgane S. Improving environmental performance of building
through increased energy efficiency: A review. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2011;1:211– 218
Gil-Martin M , Gonzalez-Lopez M, Grindlay A, Segura-Naya A, Aschheim M, Hernandez-
Montes E. Toward the production of future heritage structures: Considering durability in build-
ing performance and sustainability – A philosophical and historical overview. International Jour-
nal of Sustainable Built Environment. 2012; 1:269–273
Hooton R, Bickley J. Design for durability: The key to improving concrete sustainability. Con-
struction and Building Materials. 2014; 67:422–430
Fujita K, Takewaki I. Sustainable building design under uncertain structural-parameter environ-
ment in seismic-prone countries. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2011;1:142– 151
Lange D, Devaney S, Usmani A. An application of the PEER performance based earthquake en-
gineering framework to structures in fire Engineering Structures. 2014; 66:100–115
Müller H, Haist M, Vogel M. Assessment of the sustainability potential of concrete and concrete
structures considering their environmental impact, performance and lifetime. Construction and
Building Materials. 2014; 67:321–337
Cabeza L, Rincóna L, Vilariño V, Péreza G, Castella A. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life
cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014; 29:394–416
Porter K. An Overview of PEER’s Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology
Department of Civil Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
Hoogmartens R, Passel S, Acker K , Dubois M. Bridging the gap between LCA, LCC and CBA
as sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2014; 48:27–33
76
Pajchrowski G, Noskowiaka A, Lewandowska A, Strykowskia W. Materials composition or en-
ergy characteristic? What is more important in environmental life cycle of buildings? Building
and Environment. 2014; 72:15-27
Azari R. Integrated energy and environmental life cycle assessment of office building envelopes
Energy and Buildings. 2014; 82:156–162
Ramesha T, Prakasha R, Shuklab K. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: An overview. En-
ergy and Buildings. 2010; 42:1592–1600
Stephan A, Crawford R, Myttenaere K. Towards a comprehensive life cycle energy analysis
framework for residential buildings. Energy and Buildings. 2012; 55:592–600
Negro P, Mola E. Performance-Based Engineering Concepts: Past, Present and Future. 2006.
First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.
Olmatia P, Petrini F, Gkoumas K. Fragility analysis for the Performance-Based Design of
cladding wall panels subjected to blast load. Engineering Structures. 2014; 78:112–120
Lagaros N, Garavelas A, Papadrakakis M. Innovative seismic design optimization with reliability
constraints. Computer Methods Appl. Mech. Engineering. 2008; 198:28–41
Contini G, Mola E, Negro P. Practical Performance-Based Assessment of an Existing Plan-Wise
Irregular Building. The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008,
Beijing, China Re
