IES Blog

Image Credit *Sally M* Under Creative Commons

IES runs a Cycle to Work scheme, I have taken the opportunity to buy two bikes through the scheme and I now cycle to work pretty much every day.  After getting hit riding to work on my bike by a white van the one thing that pretty much everyone asked me is why don’t you wear a helmet.

The website http://cyclehelmets.org/ gives some good information on the helmet use for cycling.  The data in this blog is taken from that website.

People’s view on the relative risk of cycling is far off the mark.  It is viewed as very risky to mix bicycles with motor vehicles but the data shows a different story.

Data giving risk relative to cycling based on fatality rates per participant in the UK shows perhaps unsurprisingly that you are you are 137 times as likely to die climbing as cycling.  Horse riding is also more risky, you are 29 times more likely to die.  More surprising though is the risk of tennis and football.  You are 4.2 times as likely to die playing tennis as cycling, for football the figure is 4.9 times.  Golf is safer though, only 0.83 times as likely to die as compared to cycling.

In the US there has been studies done on risk per time doing an activity which shows that you get 0.26 fatalities per million hours of cycling.  As I my commute is about 1hour a day I reckon it will take a while for me to reach a million hours of cycling.

Fatalities per million hours for other activities run at:
0.027 fatalities per million hours of living at home
0.15 fatalities per million hours of flying
0.26 fatalities per million hours of cycling
0.47 fatalities per million hours of passenger car use
1.07 fatalities per million hours of swimming
1.53 fatalities per million hours of living (all causes of death)
8.8 fatalities per million hours of on-road motorcycling
128.71 fatalities per million hours of sky diving

So cycling is 10 times more dangerous than being in your own home but it is 6 times safer than what people do with their time on average.  That sounds to me as if cycling is not dangerous at all.

The department of health have some statistics for the amount of head injuries for hospital admission the 2002/2003 period.

Proportion of all injuries that involve head injury:
All causes: 34.2%
Cyclists: 37.6%
Pedestrians: 43.7%
So cyclists being admitted to hospital are only slightly more at risk of a head injury than the average of all accidents and less likely to have a head injury than pedestrians.

The Highway Code in the UK advises the use of helmets without making it a law.  There is much debate with many non-cyclists to make helmet use law but I feel this would be a mistake.  In countries where helmet use is made law there has been a drop off in the number of people cycling.  Western Australia saw a 26% to 38% drop in overall cycle use but in children this rose to more than a 50% drop.  British Columbia in Canada saw a 28% drop in cycle use after their cycle helmet law was introduced.  Melbourne, Australia has invested in a bike hire scheme as Paris and London have done.  In Melbourne the bicycles lie in their dock stations unhired because of the helmet laws.  Who is going to carry a helmet with them just in case they want to hire one of the cities bicycles?  The only other option is to wheel the hired bike to a cycle shop to purchase a helmet.

By the way when I got hit by the van I didn’t hit my head.  My ribs were hurt though.  Plus helmets ruin my hairdo.  I rest my case

For more blogs on cycling laws see Treehugger and for more on this debate see Planet Green.

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Australia, cycle to work, cycling, cycling helmet, IES, safety

Reading Pete’s blog (Plastic Bags! on 18 May this year), I was interested to note his local green group planned to introduce a public bike program.  Having recently visited Amsterdam earlier this year (sadly no photographic evidence is available) I was really impressed (and quite envious) of the public transport links around the city where cars happily coexist with buses, trams and pedestrians on bikes.  As far as I ventured outside the city centre people were happily making use of the bike lanes.  A number of the staff here at IES cycle to work but in Glasgow I personally don’t fancy the idea of going up against the buses and cyclist-unfriendly traffic and the cycle paths are quite limited.  I do hope that things can improve for cyclists so that one day even I might finally stop relying on buses to get me around, this is why I sit up when I see any scheme which encourages cycling.

Recently NVA released 50 white bicycles across Glasgow to be freely used by the public to get around venues at the Glasgow International Festival of Visual Art.  This was a tribute to the original Provos Witte Fietsenplan (White Bike Plan) where 50 bicycles painted white were released across Amsterdam for public use to make a statement against consumerism, congestion and pollution.  I can only assume statements such as this encouraged the city to grow its own cycle networks and introduce one of the world’s first Public Use Bicycle (PUB) systems which I have seen in use in many other European cities including the new system that is currently being installed in London.

“The White Bicycle Plan proposes to create bicycles for public use that cannot be locked. The white bicycle symbolizes simplicity and healthy living, as opposed to the gaudiness and filth of the authoritarian automobile.” Provo manifesto

The outcome of the scheme, both in Amsterdam and in Glasgow 2010, of course was that a number of the bicycles were stolen but if this encourages the city to embrace cycling and provide more infrastructure then it will have been worth it, if we can achieve anything like Amsterdam then perhaps even I will finally stop hanging around at bus stops.

Tweet This Post

1 Comment

Tags:Art, Central Station, cycling, IES, NVA, white bikes

(image: es74273 under Creative Commons)

When you think of green building in the last ten years, you think primarily of two verticals - housing and office space. So there is one massive vertical missing in the equation - retail.

Retail development has traditionally been the slowest to warm up to the whole concept of green building, but according to a recent article in Retail Traffic Magazine, retail developers are finally turning the corner.

In fact, green retail construction has moved ahead at an increasing pace, even despite the sour effects of the economy. Retail developers have recognized that not only is it the right thing to do, it can also help their bottom line, and that of their customers, in the long run.

LEED has gotten a boost in the retail market as well. According to the article, the USGBC reports that there are more than 2,600 projects registered for LEED in the retail sector. This is quite remarkable, especially when you consider that developers don’t even have a true LEED standard specifically for retail. After more than a half-decade of waiting, though, those standards should be released sometime this year.

The truth is, retail developers have always been looking to save money on water and power – after all, making money is what retail is all about. So they’ve been further ahead of the curve than even the USGBC.

There is still much work to be done, but another good thing is that the developers are not the only ones who see the value of LEED certification – so do the marketing guys, who now have a huge selling point for their customers. The savings get passed on to them, and thus, to the rest of us.

Now if we can only get them to ditch those darn plastic bags…

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Building, green retail construction, housing, LEED, LEED Certification, office

(image via totalAldo photostream under Creative Commons)

By now, there should be little debate over whether going green can save you plenty of money in the short term, especially in the commercial real estate market.  Whether going green is truly the wisest long-term financial decision has been the subject of debate for some time.  Well, it shouldn’t be any more.  Witness this article from Rob Watson at Greener Buildings:

“The latest is from the Earth Advantage Institute in Portland, Oregon, which shows that third-party certified homes … command a whopping 18 percent price premium over non-certified homes … More interesting is that existing homes with green certification commanded an even higher premium of 23 percent compared with other existing homes sold, which indicates that the value of green grows over time. This value trend reflects the RealGreen Index data from the San Francisco Bay area, which shows that LEED Certified office and retail buildings have literally half the vacancy rate of non-certified projects.”

That’s backed up by the US Green Building Council:

“Executives reported that Green buildings have better financial performance than non-Green buildings in the following areas:

• Higher building values (72%)
• Higher asking rents (65%)
• Greater return on investment (52%)
• Higher occupancy rates (49%)”

There’s little question that going green can save you money on utility bills, for example.  But there have been questions as to whether green structures, particularly commercial buildings, make more money over the long term.  This should settle that debate.

The true value of any piece of real estate is its resale value.  The premium that green-certified buildings now demand should be enough of an impetus to get everyone on board, especially considering how brutal the real estate market has been over the past couple of years.  If commercial developers and property owners want to get back to the good old days of making serious money, they can do so in a hurry by arming themselves with this information.  So if you want to re-coup some lost green, you should go green.

Tweet This Post

1 Comment

Tags:Building, Green Building, LEED, real estate, saving money

According to Wikipedia, “Sustainable Building Consulting is a practice or service where an intermediary party or company is utilized as a way to forecast levels of sustainability during conceptual architectural stages.” In other words, consultants are a great way to maximize the sustainable potential of your project while ensuring your company is LEED compliant throughout the entire design process.

With mandates coming from states, cities and the federal government, companies are realizing that green building is no longer a fad, but a way of life. In the recent article, “How to use insurance to handle the risks of building to LEED standards”, Philip Glick stated, “Construction of environmentally friendly and sustainable buildings will represent a significant new market for the construction industry. However, it’s also likely that new risks are being created that can have an impact on the building owners, developers, contractors and design professionals involved in these projects.”

To combat these risks, a company preparing to move or even remodel their current space should utilize a consultant (always make sure this service is offered before signing on the dotted line) - ensuring they are following the most up-to-date standards throughout the entire design process.

An additional benefit of using a consultant is that they can explore the feasibility of potential sustainability strategies at a more in-depth level. Drawing on previous experience and knowledge in the field, sustainable design and LEED to help inform a building’s design, consultants can ensure the design process is successful and cost-effective.

At IES, we have a dedicated group of consultants who are available to instruct building managers and architects using IES’ software from the earliest stage of the design process. Without help, companies are often left to trust their vendors, which might cause issues when trying to obtain LEED or even government green building certifications.

Tweet This Post

1 Comment

Tags:Architects, Building, IES, LEED, Sustainability

To be truly sustainable, a building needs to last in excess of 100 years, and current design regulations and sustainability rating systems only require you to design against weather data that represents at best the next decade or so. Sustainable designs really need to make some assessment of the impact of climate change on determining built form suitability for the long term.

Therefore, I thought I’d take this opportunity to expand on my recent Weather Design and Data blog.

IES cannot tell you what is going to happen, however there is huge consensus around a 3oC global warming target as you will have no doubt heard. What does this mean to building design?  It seems reasonable to assume investors and insurers will consider this target and what it might mean for buildings in the future.

Let us take the CIBSE published UK weather predictions for a medium-high climate change scenario, which represents about a 3oC rise, and consider London, by far not the worst location in climate change terms, over the next 70 years.

Just glancing at the headline information you see that:

• The summer is extending and getting hotter in the Mahoney analysis (monthly average);

• The reduction in heating degree days -31% from now to 2080;

• The growth in cooling degree days + 65% from now to 2080;

• The climate classification shift – mixed humid to warm marine;

• How built form design focus shifts to be dominated by summer issues.

Just from this brief overview you can start to see how selecting and comparing weather data, especially climate change impacts, can allow you to assess fundamental built form suitability and its ability to adapt to climate change over the long term.

For locations outside of the UK this analysis is possible using morphed data from any epw weather file; a free tool allows you morph climate change scenarios worldwide.

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Building, CIBSE, climate, free, IES, Sustainability

In Architecture there is a persistent organic theme of using the environment to inform both urban and built form; obviously vernacular architecture is a demonstration of this, but in the latter half of the 20th century people have explored this theme in more detail, such that cause and effect is well explained.

In the past, greatest interest in this theme has occurred at times of energy crisis and now with climate change high on the global political and social agenda, there is a real demand for solutions that are climate responsive and adaptive to climate change.  Some of this is taught in Universities and so has a familiarity especially to Architects.

The main reason why Bio-Climatic analysis has not been applied extensively in the past is due to the breadth and depth of the subject and the fact that the logic is somewhat fuzzy.  Manually doing it properly is complex, difficult and very time consuming.  Thus few have been able to master it and turn it to everyday use.  However, the desire to utilise Bio-Climatic analysis is still alive and kicking.

Over the past few years, IES have researched this subject globally and developed the logic to a level where we can automate it, and have consequentially developed a Bio-Climatic tool, which we recently launched.

As part of the evolving VE Gaia product, Bio-Climatic analysis is used in conjunction with other Gaia tools to provide a rich source of knowledge about weather / climate data and the built environment.  It delivers complex knowledge and analysis about what may be appropriate design strategies by providing a detailed list of suggestions appropriate to the specific climate data chosen.

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Architects, bio-climate, Building, climate

In the USA - the birthplace of behavioural psychology - you may hear of people going to see a “shrink”. When we think about people who are actively involved in creating a sustainable World, we think of policy makers, industry leaders, innovators and engineers. So how can a “shrink” shrink our environmental impact?

It has long been established by psychologists such Erwin Schroedinger and BF Skinner that much of our behaviour is controlled by the unconscious mind, implying that we are driven more by our desires, instincts and emotions, as opposed to rational thought and our ‘civilised’ modern environment. (You only have to see the way that software developers descend on a fresh chocolate cake; akin to a pack of vultures!)  Many leading scientists strongly believe in the existence of ‘selfish genes’ inherent in every one of us, giving us a genetic tendency to “look after #1.”

If we think of that chocolate cake as a bountiful World full of natural resources, we can clearly see the same thing happening on a bigger scale. Entire nations clamour for the few fish left in our oceans (remember the cod wars?); global corporations compete for the ‘right’ to remove the remaining fossil fuels from the Earth only for energy providers to compete for their perceived right to burn as much of these resources as their considerable profit margins allow. If you wondered why the Copenhagen summit last year was such a failure, you only have to think about the human condition. We didn’t get to the top of the food chain by being considerate, sustainable and nice to each other.

As the developed World strives for a better quality of life and material values, the developing nations naturally want the same things. With the World population predicted to rise from 6.5b to over 9bn in the next forty years, there are already concerns about shortages in global food production and drinking water. How long will it take before we fully understand it is our greed-driven lifestyles and subconscious desires that form the root of the problem?

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Engineers, Environment, Sustainability, USA

America, and more specifically Massachusetts, will be joining the ranks of Europeans countries such as Spain, Denmark and Germany as it begins work on the nation’s first wind farm.  The wind farm will sit off the coast of Cape Cod, MA in the Nantucket Sound and consist of 130 wind turbines that stand around 40 storied tall.  The project dubbed Cape Wind has been in the works for close to a decade and was the focus of serious political and environmental debate.

The battle over Cape Wind included a great deal of passion from both sides arguing clean energy, the impact on shipping and fisheries, and of course the aesthetic appearance of some of New England’s most popular vacation destinations.   On one side were the opponents including Mass Governor Mitt Romney, American Indians (arguing that the project would cause disruption of sacred ceremonies), current Senator of MA Scott Brown and most distinguished the late Mass Senator Ted Kennedy who was well known for supporting green energy.  The project was backed by MA Governor Deval Patrick, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and of course the CEO of Cape Wind, Jim Gordon. 

Nine years after the politicians, citizens and community activists took their sides the dust settled and showed the Cape Wind Project to be the winner.  Although the project is projected to add a good deal of new jobs to New England as well as supply MA companies and homes with renewable energy, the billion dollar question lies at is it enough? While we realize that something must be done, is wind power the saving grace for our energy crisis or just a quick 1 billion dollar solution that doesn’t even out with the sacrifices required?

Tweet This Post

No Comments

Tags:Cape Wind, Renewables, wind farm

Ok, blog time again. I am going to take this opportunity to follow up from my blog before about plastic bags. I’m sure some of you will want to use one to suffocate me but I need to get it out there ok? Anyway.. so I am an active member of my local green group, The Beacon Hill Green Committee, meeting once a month or so to discuss and brainstorm ways to improve the “greenness” of the neigbourhood. This month, I was put in charge of an investigation into plastic bag policy. Now, lets look at what other countries have done.

Some countries just decide on an outrite ban but that means they need an alternative and paper bags aren’t much better. However, China did this and saved 37million barrels of crude oil per year though – if they can do it, why can’t everyone? (politics) Ireland chose a different approach, introducing a tax on the bags – 33 cents or so per bag (not sure about the number), but it was high enough to deter people from taking them resulting in a 94% decrease in plastic bag consumption. The accumulated tax then subsidised the cost of a pint of Guinness (in an ideal world).

So, to get back to my meeting. I looked into it for Boston, and there was talk about bringing in a ban or a tax but these things take time (politics), so I took it upon myself to do it another way – through education and awareness of the impacts that they can cause. I think my poster does that quite nicely – straight to the point, shocking and truthful…

Tweet This Post

3 Comments

Tags:Boston, recycle, recycling