F-gases in refrigerants are known contributors to global warming, and the EU F-gas Regulation 2024/573, which came into force on 11 March, aims to further curb the use of refrigerants with high GWP. The regulation mandates that, from 2027, chiller, air conditioning and heat pump systems under 12kW must have GWP limits of 150, and, by 2032, there will be a full F-gas ban in these systems. From 2027, larger split systems and chillers must have a GWP below 750.

This is part of wider plans to end the use of F-gas, with the EU parliament voting in January to phase-out HFCs, which make up 90% of F-gases, by 2050. This will be enforced by the reduction in HFC quotas set out in the revision of F-Gas III (EU) 517/2014. From 2025, the quotas allocated for HFCs by the European Commission will lead to a reduction of 22% compared with 2024, rising to 12% from 2036. This will result in price rises for remaining refrigerant, which the EU hopes will incentivise a move to low-GWP systems.

The UK is currently drafting its own legislation to align with these rules. It is expected to publish a stakeholders’ consultation document this summer, with a draft regulation published in the autumn.

The Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard (NZCBS), due in the autumn, will also place limits on the GWP of refrigerants used. A consultation proposed a maximum GWP of 675, which is the GWP of R32, a common refrigerant. It also proposes that refrigerants be accounted for within embodied carbon calculations.

The regulations are driving demand for systems using natural refrigerants, such as ammonia, propane and carbon dioxide, which have near-zero GWP. This is the experience of Edoardo de Pantz, managing director at Acquaria, which manufactures propane (R290) heat pumps and chillers. ‘The market is running faster than the regulations are. The whole supply chain is asking for near-zero GWP heat pumps,’ he says.

BESA technical director and Institute of Refrigeration president Graeme Fox says the upcoming ban on high-GWP refrigerants has led to a sharp uptick in propane systems.

Propane has higher flammability than higher-GWP refrigerants, with an A3 safety classing, and Fox says installers will need to upskill to work safely with the refrigerant.

The EU F-gas regulations state that installers will need a refresher course within five years of the implementation date of the latest regulations (April 2029), and every seven years thereafter. But Fox notes that small systems with a GWP of more than 150 will be banned within three years – before the date when installers have to complete the course. He says manufacturers may stop supplying higher-GWP equipment, even before the implementation date

‘Technicians could be installing highly flammable refrigerants before they’ve had the necessary training, which is very much a concern to the industry,’ says Fox.

In response to the lack of awareness around propane, BESA has published a technical bulletin on R290 in air conditioning equipment and its practical application. Fox says R290 air-to-water monobloc heat pumps designed for housing need special consideration. The refrigerant’s flammability means it must be more than 1.5 metres from an openable window or door, according to manufacturers, says Fox, and because it is heavier than air, it must be more than 1.5m from air bricks and downpipes, to prevent leaking propane from infiltrating the house.

‘In most houses, you’re going to really struggle to get anywhere near the outside of that house and avoid an air brick by 1.5 metres either side of the unit,’ says Fox.

There are also implications for the retrofit of split air conditioning heat pumps in retail outlets or office applications, he adds. A typical application in these sectors is a grid of R407c condensers placed about 300mm apart, perhaps on a gable end. Currently, if one unit fails it can be replaced a similar unit, which is fairly straightforward.

However, it would be impossible to swap in a propane unit, because older units use A1-rated refrigerant that does not require Atex-rated electrical equipment, such as fan motors and electrical meters, so the neighbouring unit is a potential ignition source. (Atex is the name given to the two European directives for controlling explosive atmospheres.) ‘There are very serious implications for retrofit and retrospective repair work with the location of these new units,’ says Fox.

The issue can no longer be left to the AC contractor, he adds, because – under the Building Safety Act – the principal designer has to take responsibility: ‘They have to be aware of it.’

Currently, the European standard BS EN378 governs the safety and environmental standards of air conditioning, refrigeration, chillers, and heat pump systems, and this can be used with three EN60335 product standards that provide more specification details. Several CIBSE guides refer to BS EN378, including AM17 and Commissioning Code R, Guide B and Guide B3. A new version of the European standard is expected later this year (see page 13 to find out more about EN378).

An area Fox believes the EU has overlooked is the application of systems in airports, railway stations and military bases, where flammable A3 refrigerants cannot be used because of the danger of ignition – via sparks from trains and tracks, for example.

‘The EU has a line in the regulations that says higher-GWP refrigerants, such as 410a, can be used if safety standards don’t allow A3 refrigerants, but there’s no point having the exemption if you can’t get the equipment because the quota for these refrigerants is reducing so quickly,’ he says. ‘There needs to be a mechanism to bypass the quota and supply that equipment in these locations.’

For propane chillers, Fox says that – in addition to leak detection and good ventilation – the designer would have to ensure that fans, leak detectors, lights, switches and any power points are Atex-rated.

He is hopeful that issues identified with the latest F-gas regulation will be fed back into the UK’s upcoming consultation document.

‘Just because something is technically feasible doesn’t mean it’s practically applicable,’ he says. ‘We have to be aware of the nuanced application issues that engineers have on the ground.’ 

The post Safe and practical applications: natural refrigerants appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

To ignore the ICSG’s guidance is to risk breaking the law, as the Building Safety Act – introduced in October 2023 – has competency requirements for all individuals and organisations working in construction, with few exceptions. 

The ICSG is chaired by Hanna Clarke, digital and policy manager at the Construction Products Association (CPA), who sat on the ICSG predecessor, the Competence Steering Group (CSG). This was set up by the Industry Response Group after Grenfell to look at competences of those on higher-risk buildings.

The CSG addressed competency shortcomings identified in the 2018 Hackitt review, Building a safer future (bit.ly/44Qc90o), and set up 12 working groups that – from June 2020 until October 2023 – published competency standards and frameworks for construction disciplines, including engineering.

Following its work responding to the Hackitt review, the CSG is now transitioning into the ICSG, which has a remit to develop new standards, competence frameworks, accreditation procedures and learning materials. The working groups will remain, to continue instilling competence in their sectors, but some have moved.

‘Two years ago, the Competency Steering Group decided that it needed to be long term and continue to work collaboratively with the industry on competency,’ says Clarke.

‘The CSG broke ground in bringing so many siloed sectors together in unprecedented collaboration. ICSG’s task will be to build on this, bringing in more disciplines and stakeholders, and increasing our engagement and visibility.’

The CSG created Working Group Zero, an oversight committee that looked at how competency would be regulated. Out of that came the Industry Competency Committee (ICC), which sets the competency standards and will be advising the Building Safety Regulator. The ICSG will look to raise industry standards and find where the gaps are in competency, says Clarke.

‘The ICC is like a mirror that is held up at industry, and it will challenge us,’ she adds. ‘We can give guidance and identify the areas where the problems are, and where we need support We’re looking to provide a much more joined-up approach.’

Defining competence

Hanna Clarke has gone from fine art to construction

The CSG published three reports, including Setting the bar (bit.ly/44ReBUC), which defined competence as ‘the combination of skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours that enable a person to undertake responsibilities and perform activities to a recognised standard on a regular basis’.

A similar definition is in the Building Safety Act: it requires ‘appointed individuals to possess the required skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours for their roles, while organisations must demonstrate and evidence their (and their supply chain’s) capability, competence and capacity to fulfil their obligations under Building Regulations’.

Clarke says the focus on behaviour is key: ‘Individuals must not work outside their ceiling of competence.’

She gives an example in the finishes and interiors sector, where a ‘Responsible No’ initiative (bit.ly/4buf812) is encouraging organisations to state when they are not competent to do work, rather than just saying ‘it will get the job done’.

‘The liability is now high if it’s seen that you are doing things that are outside of your demonstrable competence,’ warns Clarke. ‘If you say you can do something, you must back it up, whether you’re an individual or a team.’

Competency standards

Working Group Zero also led to the creation of a Code of practice for core criteria for building safety in competence frameworks, BSI Flex 8670.v3 (bit.ly/3WQCFFa). Flex is a more open approach to developing standards that allows feedback to be adopted by authors before the final standard is published.

Compliance with the standard can be achieved by mapping new or existing sector-specific frameworks against the core competence criteria and scope.

‘BSI 8670 is vital to know,’ says Clarke. ‘It’s a glorified checklist for the building safety principles you want to include in any competency framework. If any building services industry framework does not reference BSI 8670, the Building Safety Regulator will want to know why.’

The standard formed the core of the  UK Standard for Professional Engineering Competence and Commitment Contextualised for Higher-Risk Buildings  (UK-SPEC HRB) published by the Engineering Council. It sets out competences expected of engineers who work in the built environment sector, particularly on HRBs. Assessment to UK-SPEC HRB, and admission to the Engineering Council’s HRB Register, provides assurance to building owners that an engineer is competent to carry out work that complies with Building Regulations. CIBSE is one of three institutions licensed to award professional HRB registrations (bit.ly/CJHRBreg).

The flex standard will be published as BS 8670-1 and will sit alongside BS 8670-2 (bit.ly/CJBS86702), which is a standard being developed by Working Group 12, the products group. It will feature the core requirements for construction product’s competencies and frameworks, and is based on a CPA white paper authored by Clarke, Built environment – proposed construction product competence standard.

There are five levels of competence for a range of activities, such as product performance. Levels are graded from E to A, and someone with the highest level of competence can understand the systems and rules, and sign off the product. It means organisations can communicate the levels of competence at which designers and installers are working to the rest of the industry.

A new BSI technical committee, CPB/1 Competence in the Built Environment, manages standards output and has published PAS documents for the two dutyholder roles defined in the Building Safety Act – principal designer (PAS 8671) and principal contractor (PAS 8672) – and a PS 8673 for those managing safety.

Clarke has an unusual background for someone working in building safety. She has a fine arts degree and was an exhibiting artist when she got interested in construction processes while temping at a facilities management company. ‘I was an administrator, but I got curious,’ she says. ‘I kept asking questions about whether we’d done this right. I got into compliance and then data architecture, and started building planned maintenance systems for different buildings.’

She joined the CPA as an executive assistant and project coordinator, and became involved in the competency steering group. ‘The irony of this whole journey is that I can prove my competency to no-one,’ she says. ‘My competence is in asking people a lot of questions and saying “have we thought about this”.’

About the author
Hanna Clarke is digital and policy manager at the Construction Products Association

The post ‘Asking the right questions’: meeting building safety requirements appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

Retrofit has also become a companion to life sciences development, mainly because of a lack of new spaces that can handle the structural and services demands of life sciences buildings. There has also been a shift in demand for city-centre locations, driven by proximity to universities, hospitals and a skilled workforce.

Cambridge, Oxford and London, deemed as the life sciences’ ‘golden triangle’, are great examples of this. Both offices and retail have seen a decrease in demand, creating an opportunity to repurpose these spaces for science laboratories, where the demand remains strong. 

The retrofit challenge

All types of laboratories need supplementary ventilation and some form of fume extraction, and this can be a particular challenge for a retrofit in a built-up area.

The higher ventilation rates required to extract fumes from laboratories means risers need to be larger than those for offices to accommodate more intensive services, and ceiling void space needs to increase by 50cm to make room for larger duct work. Existing buildings that already have high floor-to-floor space, such as shopping centres, are more easily retrofitted as laboratories.

In the past, a lot of buildings were thought to be structurally unsuitable, as external vibrations hindered the ability for optical microscopes in labs to achieve stable images. However, recent technological advancements such as active vibration damping, which operates in a similar way to noise-cancelling headphones, have helped overcome such structural issues.

Specification of ventilation starts with a suitable selection of fume cupboards and biosafety cabinets, for the specific application and chemicals that are anticipated to be used. Ducted fume hoods are typically the most effective for removing fumes.

The placement of hoods must be carefully considered to capture contaminants effectively, by ensuring that there are no obstructions blocking airflow to the hood. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling is often needed to validate the design before implementation. 

A minimum air change rate must be achieved for safety purposes in laboratories and this is typically three times more than conventional office buildings, requiring larger HVAC facilities. 

It is important to consider where the fumes are discharged and their proximity to other air intakes and receptors.

Conventionally, air intakes must be separated from discharges by at least 10 metres, and fumes are discharged vertically at least three metres above other parts of the building. However, for city centres with an abundance of developments, more detailed assessments are often required.

When direct, ducted systems cannot be incorporated, recirculating systems with activated charcoal air filters and scrubbers can be considered, although these are expensive alternatives.

Higher ventilation rates and fume-extraction systems will have a significant impact on a building’s energy use, so it is essential that buildings services pay particular attention to energy efficiency.

As a first step, it is important to work with the scientists who will be occupying the buildings in the design stages, to optimise the parameters and the airflow design, and prevent overdesign. 

Where possible, spaces should be lab-enabled, rather than fully fitted-out. This will provide end users with an adaptable blank template they can fit-out however they want. This is more attractive than receiving a fully fitted-out space that may not meet specific requirements and could put occupiers off at due diligence stage, or lead to expensive refit financial and carbon costs.

Modulating the airflow to match actual demand reduces energy consumption during low-activity periods, while still providing adequate ventilation when needed.

Variable air volume flowrate systems and demand-control ventilation can adjust the ventilation rates based on real-time occupancy and contaminant levels. Implementing scheduling controls can also optimise ventilation operation based on occupancy patterns and laboratory usage schedules.

Rob van Zyl

Natural ventilation can be used in certain situations. There are other considerations such as prioritising recirculation over full ventilation by using activated charcoal filters or liquid scrubbing to wash the air as it passes through. Heat recovery systems must also be implemented wherever practical, to capture and reuse heat or coolness from exhaust air to precondition incoming fresh air.

Typically, the requirement for safe removal of fumes is to discharge fumes at least three metres above the highest point of buildings, and this means having tall and unsightly stacks.

In the UK, planning regulations impose restrictions on the height of stacks and exhaust vents as part of the overall planning permission process. This is primarily to address concerns of air pollution, visual impact, and potential adverse effects on the environment and neighbouring properties.

Planning authorities need evidence to show that vertical stacks are tall enough to adequately control the dispersion of pollutants and they will want to see how the visual impact of stacks on the surrounding landscape have been considered.

Stack heights need to be specified to minimise impact on air quality. They will be based on factors such as the type of emissions, local air quality standards, and the proximity of sensitive receptors, such as residential areas, schools, or hospitals.

The speed at which air is discharged from a ventilation system – the efflux velocity – can determine stack height. By increasing the velocity of vertical discharge, fumes can be pushed higher and the stack height reduced. CFD modelling can be used to predict whether or not the concentration of released fumes will exceed the required parameters of the nearby receptors. It should be borne in mind that higher efflux velocities require more energy. 

The importance of heat recovery

As there is a requirement for labs to have a lot of air circulating in the building, it is important to recover as much of its heat as possible. However, effectively capturing and using waste heat can be difficult in practice. In some cases, the temperature difference may be insufficient to extract heat efficiently, limiting the feasibility and effectiveness of heat recovery.

Integrating heat recovery systems can be difficult, as it will introduce pressure drops. It can also create foul air that can be corrosive, which means the ductwork must be made with corrosion-resistant materials that will not be damaged by this. 

Science buildings are one of the sectors being considered by the Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard (NZCBS). Simon Wyatt, sustainability partner at Cundall, is leading the NZCBS¹ sector group and is collaborating with market leaders to create assessment frameworks for buildings in the sector. It is still early days for the sector, and there is a lot more data that is needed before benchmarking of life sciences buildings is taken seriously.

About the author:
Rob Van Zyl is a management board partner at Cundall

References:

1. UK Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard www.nzcbuildings.co.uk

The post Science in the city: the challenge of retrofitting labs appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

For this interview, which marks his retirement from CIBSE, Hywel was clear he wanted to focus on issues facing engineers in the months and years ahead.

The main concern for engineers, he says, must be with meeting the requirements of the Building Safety Act. He calls it the biggest upheaval facing the construction industry since World War II and has spent much of the past six months explaining to audiences the magnitude of the changes.

Anyone familiar with Hywel’s public speaking will know he is a great orator. He has a skill for communicating the most complex information in a clear and engaging manner, and does so with warmth and wit.   

Having spoken extensively, Hywel is concerned that the industry doesn’t understand the significance of the changes. ‘What worries me is that people think the Building Safety Act is a response to Grenfell and a fire in a block of flats. It isn’t – it’s a wholesale reform of the Building Regulation regime for all buildings, from a studio shed to The Shard,’ he says.

Some sectors are having to come to terms with the safety regime change sooner than others. Last month, the chief executive of Local Authority Building Control, Lorna Stimpson, wrote to the Building Safety Regulator warning that councils would stop providing services unless a deadline for building control officers to prove competence was extended. She said that ‘a significant number of building control professionals will not achieve successful certification and, therefore, registration before the 6 April deadline’. In response, the Health and Safety Executive extended the deadline for passing the assessment by 13 weeks, to 6 July. 

Hywel has sympathy with local authority building control, but feels they were forewarned. ‘I know the public sector is under pressure, but given all that’s happened over Grenfell, and the length of time the public sector has been on notice that things are going to change, I can’t avoid feeling frustrated it got to this point,’ he says.

Another area of irritation is the delay in government response to recommendations in the Independent Review of the Construction Product Testing Regime. However, Hywel says professionals can’t sit and wait for government to devise a new regime. ‘There’s a lot industry can do to take ownership’ he says. ‘Competent engineers shouldn’t be asking civil servants to tell them what to do. People have to demonstrate that they have exercised reasonable skill and care.’

One area of building safety in which there does appear to be engagement is the registering of higher-risk buildings (HRBs), which had to be done by 6 October. Almost 14,000 buildings have been registered – 2,000 more than expected.

Hywel says his Christianity guides his working life

‘It suggests that people out there managing these buildings are paying a bit more attention,’ Hywel says. ‘It’s better than saying “I’m not sure it’s an HRB. I’ll wing it until somebody turns up with a summons”.’

After registering, HRB owners have six months to compile a safety case report that identifies risks to their buildings. People have to look at their building and think ‘what could possibly go wrong’, says Hywel.

As chair of the Building Regulations Advisory Committee, he helped set out the new safety regime, and will continue to be prominent as a member of the Building Advisory Committee, which is responsible for keeping the Building Safety Regulator abreast of emerging issues in the sector.

He was also recently part of the working group that created the guidance on damp and mould for rented housing providers, which followed the death of two-year-old Awaab Ishak as a result of mould in his home.

In addition, Hywel is working for the Construction Industry Council, which brings together professional bodies to speak with one voice. He feels his consensual approach may be the reason his advice is sought. ‘I appear to have this quite unusual status,’ he says. ‘I’m widely respected, trusted for keeping my mouth firmly shut, and apparently have some ability to broker a degree of understanding and consensus between different parties.’

His retirement event was held at St Andrew Undershaft church in the City of London, where Hywel, who has a wife Jackie and three children, has worshipped for 20 years. His faith is an important influence on his attitude to work. ‘Whatever you do, do it with all your strength, as to the Lord. That’s all I try to do in my life,’ he says. ‘If I’ve made a difference, it’s not because I’ve set out to do that, it’s because I’ve tried to do things well.’

The post Making the world a safer place: Hywel Davies retires from CIBSE appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

One factor that contributed to the tragic loss of life in the Grenfell Tower fire was that the single stair core became unusable as a means of escape because of smoke. There has been debate about the need for a second means of escape ever since.

Second staircases were consulted on in December 2022. A further speech committed to an 18m threshold in July 2023 and the latest statement follows speculation about the detailed policy. 

Gove has stated that ‘the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) will publish the new guidance on second staircases before April, making clear the need for a second staircase in new multi-occupancy residential buildings that have a top occupied storey above 18m, and confirming that evacuation lifts will not be called for as a matter of course, providing housebuilders with the clarity they need to progress developments’.

What does that actually mean for developers? It does not change their responsibility for the safety of their building.  Government and the BSR are very clear that a developer applying for approval of full plans for a new residential building must show why they think the building will be safe to occupy. We must also be clear that there is no such thing as absolute safety. Second means of escape, sprinklers, evacuation lifts, even compartmentation and fire stopping may reduce risk, but they do not offer absolute safety.

Building Regulations in England and the rest of the UK are currently at variance with many other jurisdictions around the world in allowing taller residential buildings to be constructed with a single means of escape. Last July’s announcement that new residential buildings above 18m in height would need a ‘second stair’ left many questions open, such as whether this would be a requirement or just guidance in the Approved Document.

How might developers of residential buildings respond to the latest statement? It seems clear that the BSR will expect them to provide a second means of escape – but what will that look like? That depends on the fire-evacuation strategy, already required in the package submitted for approval of full plans known as Gateway 2, and signed off by developers at submission. 

Two functional requirements of the Building Regulations consider escape and access: ‘appropriate means of escape from the building to a place of safety outside the building, capable of being safely and effectively used at all material times’ (B1) and reasonable provision for fire-fighting. (B5). The developer needs to decide whether they are looking to reduce evacuation times by providing a basic second staircase. Or are they providing an alternative access route for firefighters? That requires both a second stair and firefighting lift. Each building needs a decision by the client and design team.

Gove’s statement says that evacuation lifts ‘will not be called for as a matter of course’. It could be taken to mean that, as a rule, they are to be expected, but a case may be made not to include one. It implies that it’s up to the client to decide how to provide for those who cannot evacuate using the stairs, and for the BSR to accept that decision (or not?).

If the development contains social housing or student accommodation, there may be a public sector equality duty to consider in relation to the evacuation strategy. If it is entirely for sale or lease, how will that market react to the chosen strategy? 

When complete, it will need a BSR building assessment certificate confirming it is safe to occupy, requiring a safety case specific to the building. With an ageing population, safe and equitable access and means of escape is also a demographic issue. Buildings will need to be adaptable.

It may be that the only feasible design with a realistic prospect of approval in many cases will incorporate two full cores offering genuine accessibility, resilience and redundancy in the event of a catastrophic incident. 

This would align with the stance of the National Fire Chiefs Council². Rather than clarify the issue the Department has handed it back to the BSR and developers to resolve. And then to clarify through the first tranche
of applications, appeals, determinations and maybe a judicial review?

References:

1. Written Ministerial Statement: bit.ly/3PfvMsv
2. NFCC Opinion paper bit.ly/49FmD43
3. House of Commons, Building Safety Update, Statement made on 24 October 2023 Statement UIN HCWS1090)
4. February 2024 statement: Written statements – Written questions, answers and statements – UK Parliament

The post Means of escape: plans for second staircases in higher-risk buildings appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

The objective of Part 4 is for every higher-risk building (HRB) to be managed competently, with a proper risk identification, assessment and management process formally established. It requires that the information needed to manage the building safely and to demonstrate safe management is brought together in a robust digital record of the building, and that this is maintained. 

The Higher-Risk Buildings (Keeping and Provision of Information etc.) (England) Regulations 2024 introduce the regulatory framework for the golden thread. The act requires the golden thread to be stored digitally throughout the life-cycle of the building, so that the information is accessible and can be quickly updated and handed over when assets change owner. This will drive a shift to treating building information as ‘belonging’ to the building itself, and not to the owners. Golden thread information must be:

• Kept digitally and securely 
• A ‘single source of truth’
• Available, in a readily usable form, to people who need it to do a job, including emergency services
• Proportionate (taking into account the stage the building is at in its life)
• Explicit about how building safety risks are being assessed and managed.

The golden thread information will support the safety case and safety case report, required to support the AP’s application for a building assessment certificate. This is the legally required means to gain regulatory approval to occupy a residential HRB. This requires the AP to identify building safety risks – fire and structural – and to explain how these are being eliminated, mitigated and managed. 

Section 85 of the act requires that the ‘Principle Accountable Person’ (PAP) for an occupied HRB prepares a ‘safety case report’ containing: ‘(a) any assessment of the building safety risks made under section 83 by an Accountable Person for the building; and (b) a brief description of any steps taken under section 84 by an Accountable Person for the building’.

Building safety case reports should be a clear summary of the information that the Building Safety Regulator needs to see to determine whether the building is safe to occupy, and to demonstrate that the golden thread is in place and properly managed and maintained.

Each safety case report must include at least the following information:

• Details of all APs and responsible persons for the building
• A description of the location, shared facilities (if any), and nearby buildings and transport routes
• Details of how the PAP and other APs have assessed building safety risks, the findings of those assessments, and any follow-up actions or recommendations
• An explanation of the safety management system, including emergency management and evacuation procedures
• How identified building safety risks are being managed and mitigated to ensure resident safety and keep the whole building safe
• References to other key documents and supporting building safety information that the regulator may reasonably need 

The PAP must maintain and revise the safety case report ‘as necessary or appropriate’ and notify the regulator of all updates (with a copy, if requested).

These regulations mark the conclusion of the process of implementing and introducing the new building safety regime for HRBs in occupation. Triggered by the Grenfell Tower tragedy, they are intended to improve standards in HRBs and to re-establish trust in the sector following the revelations that emerged at the inquiry. Now to deliver across 14,000 HRBs. The real work starts here.

1. Higher-Risk Buildings (Keeping and Provision of Information etc.) (England) Regulations 2024 –
   bit.ly/3SvGxZC

The post Grasp the thread appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

Over the past few years, with various clients, I have had the opportunity to lead the process to redraft their standard suite of employer’s requirements (ERs). Whenever I start the process, I explain to stakeholders that they should view their existing ERs as if they were a busy room where everyone is speaking at the same time – clauses added over time, often causing contradiction and lack of clarity. 

Rather than trying to untangle the client’s existing document – which would be like stepping in to break up a pub brawl in Albert Square – I look to create a new room (my template) and, one by one, invite clauses from the existing, unruly room to justify their place. 

My point? For so long, clarity has been missing from the D&B process and it starts at the beginning of the golden thread with the ERs! 

D&B contracts are mostly procured under a single-stage tender process, passing risk to the contractor as soon as possible. Tenderers are often given three months to understand and appraise the tender documents and design, obtain subcontract prices, and provide the contractor’s proposals and a fixed-contract sum, which the tenderer and their supply chain must frequently stand by for more than two years. 

Some clients have governance processes that require up to 12 months added time between tender return and commencement of the contract – this is approaching three years of crystal-ball pricing. 

Contractors then start the works swiftly, often forcing construction to begin in parallel with design, which has consequences for the clarity of design, build and record information. 

Regardless of whether the tenderer wins with an unnecessarily high-risk allowance, or underprices and spends the next two years cutting corners, the employer is not the winner. 

Given recent global and national economic challenges, it’s no wonder that so many contractors who have ‘won’ single-stage tenders in better times are now struggling to digest the commercial realities of these contracts. 

Adopting a two-stage process would shorten the gap between locking in the price and commencement of works, allowing the contractor and their team to understand the site better and to decipher the ERs before launching the project. This can provide a better platform for true value for money to be the star of the show. I encourage my clients to pursue this process on projects that merit its inclusion, but this is a culture change for the industry.

D&B contracts have been used and abused as a design while you build solution. For HRBs, however, the Building Safety Act introduces the legal obligation to obtain Gateway 2 approval (realistically a design and procurement freeze) before starting work on the site. This is the perfect opportunity for D&B contracts to be used as intended – design and then build. 

Let me be as bold as to say I cannot see much commercial justification for procuring a D&B contract for a HRB via a single-stage tender. I believe the combination of a two-stage tender and a D&B contract is entirely congruous with the intentions of the Building Safety Act (see panel,‘Looking at the advantages’).

D&B is here to stay and should be viewed as a good contracting solution to deliver the intentions of the Building Safety Act – but only if it is procured in the correct way. 

About the author
Jonathan Harris is equity partner at calfordseaden

The post A call for clarity: adopting a design-then-build approach appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

NCSC’s seventh annual report was published in November 2023, highlighting key milestones in the year ending August 2023. The report also looks ahead to future challenges.

In 2023, we witnessed growing interest in artificial intelligence (AI) and the rise of ChatGPT (other AI tools are available). Such systems have the potential to bring many benefits to society, but there are also some broad, dystopian predictions of how AI will affect almost every aspect of our future lives.

The field of AI is much broader than large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, presenting a range of cyber threats. The NCSC has focused on understanding the cyber-security challenges and opportunities of AI for many years. 

While much debate around AI focuses on broader existential risks, its rapid development also brings many immediate security concerns. As this technology develops further, ongoing cyber research aims to understand its vulnerabilities and keep track of how our adversaries are seeking to exploit AI irresponsibly and unethically, often for malign ends. The NCSC is working with industry, academics and international partners to provide clear guidance to help us all understand and manage these risks. 

While the risks of AI are significant, it is basically a type of software – and while it creates new challenges, we have learned many lessons from previous generations of cyber-security practice that can be used to secure this rapidly developing technology. 

AI also presents the cyber-security sector with significant opportunities to develop new and innovative defences against hostile actors.

On 1 and 2 November 2023, the UK hosted the first AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park, with governments, leading technology organisations, academia and civil society coming together to consider rapid national and international action in response to AI development. The resulting ‘Bletchley Declaration’ acknowledges the need for inclusive and collaborative action to address risks around the most advanced and cutting-edge ‘frontier’ AI.

The summit emphasised the importance of a ‘secure by design’ approach to cyber security in AI development. This is the key principle behind the new Guidelines for secure AI system development, published by the NCSC, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and 21 other international agencies at the end of November. 

The guidelines are primarily for providers of AI systems, but are also relevant to stakeholders who are using AI within systems to enable informed decisions to be made about their design, development, deployment and operation. They make recommendations about the considerations and mitigations that will reduce risk in organisational AI-based systems development.

AI is not the only consideration, however. Last month, the NCSC met representatives of the UK cultural sector to discuss protection of institutions’ online collections, which pool millions of digital records and increase public accessibility to materials with unique social and cultural value. This makes the cultural sector an attractive target for opportunistic threat actors looking to exploit and disrupt these assets through ransomware, causing a loss of income not only for the organisation concerned, but also for society at large.

Even closer to our sector, the NCSC and US recently issued guidance to address active and malicious exploitation of Unitronics programmable logic controllers in the water, energy, food and healthcare sectors. Key messages include the need for multifactor authentication and use of unique strong passwords, and not defaults. This is but one example of the threat to UK national infrastructure posed by cyber operations.

I wish readers a secure new year and encourage you all to check in with the NCSC website soon.

Relevant links:

• NCSC website – www.ncsc.gov.uk
• The Bletchley Declaration – bit.ly/BLDEC23
• Culture sector cyber summit – bit.ly/NCSCSum23
• ‘IRGC-affiliated cyber actors exploit plcs in multiple sectors, including US water and wastewater systems facilities’, US Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (IRGC is the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) – bit.ly/Cybthr23

The post A secure new year? Keeping buildings safe from cyber attack appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

Speakers and exhibitors focused on key topics, including the impact of the Building Safety Act, embodied energy, heat pumps and digital tools. There was time for celebration, too, with the CIBSE Building Simulation Awards and Society of Digital Engineering Awards held during the event.

Among the seven stages at London ExCeL was, for the first time, Light2Perform, and content around building safety was provided by CABE’s Built Environment Live, which ran alongside the main event. 

Build2Perform Live was opened by CIBSE vice-president David Cooper FCIBSE, who told delegates that it had attracted a record number of registrants. He was followed by a keynote from the team developing the Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard (NZCBS), which includes Julie Godefroy, head of net zero policy at CIBSE, and Katie-Clemence Jackson, sustainability associate at QODA and chair of the NZCBS technical steering group. 

The group aims to achieve a robust definition for net zero buildings in the UK and create a rule book to assess new and existing buildings. A new tool is also being developed to balance ‘top-down’ budgets and ‘bottom-up’ performance levels to produce net zero carbon pathways and limits.

‘We have modelled different scenarios of decarbonisation to help set new limits and requirements in the standard, treating operational energy and embodied carbon as one entity’, said Clemence-Jackson. Godefroy spoke about future updates. ‘We need to look at district heating and cooling networks, and how we assess these and set limits,’ she said.

Andrew Moore, from the Health and Safety Executive, led a talk on the Building Safety Act. He explained that there are significant new requirements to demonstrate competence on all regulated building work, not just on ‘higher-risk buildings’. ‘Competence cuts across the whole of the industry. It’s a key driver to improving the built environment, to reach all of our strategic aims, not just building safety,’ he said.

‘We want to see how you ensure that your work is in compliance with the Building Regs; industry needs to step up and take responsibility for its designs.’

TM65’s growing influence

CIBSE’s TM65 series has helped engineers understand and calculate embodied energy in designs and systems. A further four TM65 documents are set to be published around calculating embodied energy, including local addenda for the USA and the UAE. 

Francisco Sierra, senior lecturer at UWE Bristol, highlighted the lack of data in the UAE on embodied carbon. He said the TM65 aligns with local decarbonisation policies.

Amazon’s senior programme manager for sustainable buildings, Phil Birch, outlined how the company has used TM65 to align with its Climate Pledge. ‘We’re doing countless calculations to work out the embodied carbon of our primary buildings, as well as the MEP we use. It’s about data-driven decision-making; without data you’re just another person with an opinion,’ he said. 

Amazon is working with Introba to create TM65.3, which will cover embodied carbon in logistics buildings to improve the accuracy of calculating the carbon footprint of these spaces. Other future versions, such as TM65.4 will cover embodied carbon in office HVAC systems, are in progress. 

Kristina Allison MSLL MCIBSE, vice-president of the SLL discussed ‘practical journeys throughTM66 (which she co-authored) and TM65.2’, a circular guide and tool that helps asess lighting embodied energy.

Kristina Allison MSLL MCIBSE, vicepresident of the SLL

Making cities resilient

Reducing emissions from the cities will be fundamental if issues around global climate change are to be solved. This was the message from physical geographer Gerald Mills, who highlighted that 70% of the world’s CO₂ emissions are from cities.

Mills, associate professor at University College Dublin, stressed that a combination of adaptation and mitigation was required to ensure the world’s cities could cope with the impacts of current and future hazards. He cited the example of the French city of Nîmes, which has implemented measures to create accessible outdoor cool spaces. Heat gain has been reduced by maximising shade via tree canopies, increasing the amount of water cover, and enhancing ventilation.

Other speakers included Darren Woolf, head of building physics for Wirth Research and visiting professor at Loughborough University, who explained the role of the UK Urban Environmental Quality Partnership. Hosted by CIBSE, members are working on publications covering topics such as urban vegetation systems, outdoor thermal comfort, city wind microclimate guidelines, and modelling of outdoor air quality.

The challenge of tackling overheating in the UK’s housing stock was examined by Passivhaus designer Joseba Perez de Larraya Sola, of Pollard Thomas Edwards, and Kai Salman-Lord, senior engineer at Max Fordham. They looked at how greater use of shading devices for buildings could help tackle this problem, especially in a residential setting. The pair have been heavily involved in the launch of a new guide from the Good Homes Alliance, Shading for housing, which seeks to embed shading as central to a building’s design and built in from the start.

Staying cyber secure 

An important issue that is often overlooked in the industry is cybersecurity. Sweco digital manager Andrew Krebs shed light on the pervasive impact that breaches  of digital security can have, saying ‘it affects everything we are doing, from safety to decarbonisation’.

Carl Collins, head of digital engineering at CIBSE, highlighted the existing gaps in securing energy systems, pointing out a lack of understanding of how building elements interact: ‘We need to really understand the connectivity of what we are installing, and the information to which it has access.’

He urged the audience to seriously consider security, and drew parallels with the comprehensive approach taken towards other potential threats, such as fire. 

CIBSE’s technical officer Hywel Davies HonFCIBSE expressed concern over the apparent lack of interest in cybersecurity. ‘It is often referred to as the monster in the room, but it only becomes scary when you don’t think about it. Understand where threats may come from and address it,’ he said.

A session introduced by Julie Godefroy gave an overview of the Retrofit Revisit project, supported by Historic England and CIBSE and co-led by Studio PDP and CIBSE. The project applied building performance evaluation techniques to 10 homes that had been subject to a deep retrofit over the past 10 years. It particularly looked at energy performance and indoor air quality, and found that the retrofitted homes still performed extremely well in terms of energy use. ‘Energy performance has not significantly degraded at all, which is a very positive finding. It’s much better than the national average, and many of the homes perform more or less in line with Leti targets,’ Godefroy said. 

Air leakage was slightly higher, with degradation of doors and windows being the key contributor. Feedback from residents was that conditions were comfortable, but summer comfort rated less well than winter comfort. There were some issues around system maintenance, said Godefroy, with complex services generating more problems.

The risk of mould from ambient conditions, was assessed by measuring relative humidity and surface temperature, and tests looked at the movement of moisture through the fabric. Mould related to ambient conditions was rated as very low risk across seven of nine homes tested and there was generally low CO₂ across all homes, indicating good ventilation. 

Pumped for growth

Independent consultant Roger Hitchin shared research by the IEA Heat Pump Technologies programme on non-domestic heat pump retrofits. The Annex 60 programme (Heatpumpingtechnologies.org/annex60) is an international collaboration aimed at identifying and quantifying technical options for non-domestic retrofits, and providing advice and tools to help decision-makers. 

‘There is very little guidance for building owners and tenants,’ said Hitchin. ‘We want to provide high-level guidance so they can look at different heat pump systems.’

The event attracted leading building services brands from across the industry

The project will link to case studies and Hitchin is particularly keen to include studies showing comparative costs. An online tool will invite users to describe the building and its HVAC systems and the degree to which fabric will be upgraded. It will then come up with a shortlist of solutions worth investigating.  

Ken Gordon, CEO of the Ground Source Heat Pump Association(GSHPA) , spoke of the upcoming revised TM51 guidance on GSHPs, which would include information on shared ground loop systems. These are increasingly popular because they offer economies of scale, said Gordon.

Accessible acoustics

In a discussion about wellbeing in the built environment, Foster & Partners associate partner Milena Stojkovic FCIBSE said: ‘We have a responsibility to create environments that are healthy and inclusive to use.’

There has been a shift away from traditional accessibility measures focused on physical impairment to a more inclusive approach for neurological conditions, said Rob Turpin, head of sector healthcare at the BSI. Challenges have been identified relating to lighting, acoustics, route preview, signage, and clarity in buildings.

Turpin introduced PAS 6463 Design for the mind, a world-first standard that covers designing for neurodiversity. He hopes it will be a catalyst for international standardisation.

Tin Oberman, senior eesearch fellow at UCL, discussed the importance of soundscapes and inclusive acoustics. He and Turpin highlighted that the majority of auditory research acoustics have been driven by healthy-hearing participants, and knowledge about how most people perceive sound is missing. 

Speakers noted that the event did not create the most accessible acoustic environment. Rachel Smalley, head of inclusive design at Jacobs, said future approaches must ensure the environment is suitable for a diverse population, and that requirements are integrated from the outset.

Tim Galloway, deputy director, building safety programme, HSE

Crossing generations 

A Young Engineers Network (YEN) panel focused on how to foster collaboration between older and younger members, including ‘buddy’ systems and mentoring. 

Ruth Tatanga MCIBSE, chair of YEN London emphasised the importance of examining what seniors can learn from younger colleagues, and Jack Kenny, senior M&E consultant at RLB, agreed. 

‘Play to the strengths of both generations, foster flexibility, and provide opportunities without rigidity,’ he said.

• For more information on Build2Perform Live, visit bit.ly/CJLIVE23

The post Platform for change: insights from CIBSE Build2Perform Live 2023 appeared first on CIBSE Journal.

First, the application must contain sufficient information to show how the building will satisfy all applicable functional requirements of the Building Regulations. These requirements must be satisfied with justification for why the evidence of compliance is relevant, not a list of which parts of the Approved Documents (ADs) or other standards or guidance have been followed. 

The application must also demonstrate how construction activity will be managed, to give the BSR confidence that what was designed and approved is what will be built. It will expect to see sufficient credible evidence captured during construction to demonstrate this and to support the building completion certificate application when construction is finished.

A rigorous change control process must also be followed for any changes to the approved design on site, with major changes requiring reapproval by the BSR. Documents submitted and approved previously must be updated to reflect changes, as part of the golden thread.

Any application for building control approval must be signed by the applicant. If the application is made by a representative, on behalf of the client, the client must provide a signed statement confirming agreement to the application being made and its contents. 

A number of supporting documents will have to be supplied, as listed in the Building Regulations (Higher-Risk Building Procedures) (England) 2023. These include a competence declaration, Building Regulations compliance statement, fire and emergency file, construction control plan and change control plan, and a mandatory occurrence reporting plan. Where the building is to be built in phases and completed in stages, the application also requires a partial completion strategy.

The competence declaration must confirm that the client is satisfied that the principal designer, principal contractor and any other person appointed to the work are competent to carry out their roles. It must provide a written record of the steps the client has taken to be satisfied of their competence. The BSR will not examine conclusions, but if it later transpires that these checks are insufficient, enforcement action may follow. 

The Building Regulations compliance statement is intended to demonstrate how the planned building work will comply with all functional requirements of the Building Regulations, with relevant reasons for why it complies. This must be considered carefully and demonstrated before construction starts to obtain Gateway 2 approval. The statement should reference specific guidance, standards and design codes, or detail individual compliance solutions, supported by relevant design details, calculations, specification, and other pertinent information, often developed during the contractor design phase.

The BSR notes that ‘following ADs is a common means to try to ensure building work complies with Building Regulations’. But, it adds, ‘while this approach may be entirely appropriate for typical building work scenarios, it does not guarantee compliance, as the ADs are not relevant to all situations’. Dutyholders must consider how they comply with Building Regulations appropriately for specific projects. Each project must show how the functional requirements are met, and the compliance statement must give evidence of this for each requirement.

The regulator is looking for detailed evidence of compliance with the functional requirements via design solutions, not just plans or setting out drawings. It is clearly not going to accept elements of the design being assigned to contractor-designed portions, as it will be impossible to assess compliance. 

This requires a significant change of approach to designing HRBs, with detailed consideration of all aspects of compliance and detailed planning of the construction phase. In RIBA Plan terms, Stage 4 needs completing before application for approval of full plans at Gateway 2. Given the government’s acceptance of Dame Judith Hackitt’s findings, the only real surprise about Gateway 2 is that so many seem surprised by it. 

The post The narrow gate: gaining design approval for higher-risk buildings appeared first on CIBSE Journal.