Refurbishing Old Buildings for Sustainability - Case Study Example

SSЕSSМЕNТ 2 SUSТАINАBILIТY RЕFURBISНМЕNТ РLАN Submitted By: NAME: INSTITUTION: COURSE: INSTRUCTOR: DATE: © 2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The built environment throughout the world is faced with the challenge of keeping down energy consumption in old buildings which are found to make a significant percentage of all the constructions in the world. Buildings must therefore be kept in good conditions so as to minimize general costs as well as enhancing employee effectiveness in their duty performance. Tom (p23) states that the practice has commonly been to refurbish existing buildings as opposed to building new ones in an effort of making them more energy efficient. Based on this argument, Curtin University has formulated a strategic plan that has clear objectives on sustainability and built environment. According to these objectives, the University aims at sustainably refurbishing more than eighty percent of her buildings by 2030 (Acuff et al, p87). Proponents argue that the University is set to benefit from major cuts in energy consumption and emissions of greenhouse gases after full implementation of the objectives (Cristina et al, p104). The present report puts into perspective the Curtin University’s objectives in line with refurbishing old buildings for sustainability. This is in reference to Building 201, built some 40 years ago and is in dire need of retrofitting. INTRODUCTION In simple terms, sustainability implies to the careful and efficient use of resources while making sure that the available quantities are not exhausted at once (Spengler, p163). Sustainability is a concept that has found popularity in the built environment by improving energy efficiency as well as minimizing costs of maintaining buildings and their installations. Numerous research findings have strongly illustrated that refurbishing old buildings can be more cost effective than building a new facility, particularly when the current global economic challenges are put into consideration (Price, p184). Moreover, existing buildings have been more than once considered to be “the landmarks” of identifying major cities of the world. Because of this therefore, demolishing these historical old buildings has always been frowned upon. In spite of the value and strong attachment accorded old buildings, they are found to consume a big percentage of ‘energy, resources and investment’ if not properly maintained (May, p41). It is therefore important for developers and property owners across the globe to come up with initiatives of refurbishing and retrofitting old buildings for comfort and sustainability. In line with the foregoing arguments, building owners are forced to improve the quality and the performance of their buildings if they have to remain relevant in today’s economy. Looked against this backdrop, the Curtin University’s Property Department is bound to implement in full her strategic plan for sustainability and built environment. The starting point in this case will be to refurbish Building 201 in line with objectives 2 and 4. For this purpose, the present report explores the current performance index of Building 201. Then the appropriate possible initiatives to refurbish and retrofit Building 201 in compliance with customer requirements are suggested before presenting a brief summary of the report. CURRENT PERFORMANCE OF BUILDING 201 Derived from the Curtin Strategic Plan, it is the wish of the University’s Property Department to implement strategy 1 and 5 which aim to ‘improve the quality of the university environment’ and ‘optimise the use of university buildings and land’ respectively. Additionally, the Property Department wishes to achieve objectives 2 and 4 of the Curtin Strategic Asset Management Plan which aim to ‘provide facilities and services that are fit for purpose’ and ‘operate in a sustainable manner’ respectively. Based on the foregoing strategies and objectives, the Curtin University’s Property Department has found Building 201 to be totally performing below per. The department therefore considers Building 201 to be under-achieving in terms of sustainability and user needs (Acuff et al, p77). This evaluation is based on the consideration of the milestones discussed below. Comfort Levels and User Satisfaction For a building to be of satisfactory standards, it has to meet some comfort levels for the user. These levels have to do with internal environmental quality intended for the people using the building as well as the levels of operational energy and water being consumed by the building users. On evaluating Curtin’s Building 201 against these benchmarks, the Property Department of the University considered the Building as under-achieving in relation to sustainability objectives (Cristina et al, p100). This verdict was particularly informed by a number of factors, key among them being the age and shape of the Building. To begin with, the Building 201 is a 40-year old seven-storey structure rectangular in shape and thus very limited in capacity considering the current student numbers residing in the campus. For this reason, some ad hoc internal structural changes have been effected over the years to meet the occupants’ comfort levels to some degree. Unfortunately, these efforts have only succeeded in impacting negatively on the original natural ventilation design paths and flows, hence greatly affecting the internal environmental quality of the building in question. According to observations made by Paradis (p200), the Internal Environmental Quality (IEQ) of a building plays a fundamental role in making a building habitable. This is so because Internal Environmental Quality is a component of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) among other attributes as noted by May (p16). While Indoor Air Quality implies to the air quality within and around buildings and structures (Price, 92), Indoor Environmental Quality encompasses the general environment surrounding a building which has a significant impact on the wellbeing of the occupants (Spengler et al, p86). Every building has the right ‘design specifications’ for maintaining good Indoor Environmental Quality at the inception of its lifecycle. Internal design alterations effected later in the lifecycle of the buildings are bound to affect the original Indoor Environmental Quality characteristics. This is exactly what is bedeviling Building 201 after having seen a multiplicity of internal layout changes to cope with the heavy student enrollment (Spengler et al, p98). The original seven-storey 40 year old building cannot simply withstand the pressure an increased student populace. As indicated by Paradis (p172), Indoor Air Quality is largely affected by excessive presence of exhaust gasses emanating from an overwhelming occupancy. In addition to these gasses, the heavy student population is a massive energy stressor to Building 201 and thus presents adverse health risks. Moreover, congested rooms and halls in Building 201 has significantly compromised user satisfaction due to affected “lighting, visual quality, acoustics and thermal comfort” as elucidated by Cristina and friends (p106). Hence the occupants of Building 201 are ‘disgruntled, de-motivated and less healthy’ as they conduct their daily chores. Consequently, the Building 201 is economically under-achieving. Energy and Water Consumptions In present times, sustainability in buildings is geared towards an economic dimension where entrepreneurial institutions have to be concerned with their survival and success. Buildings are designed with an insight of how best they can acquire and maintain a competitive business niche in the corporate world. Those old existing buildings that were constructed without this insight are currently facing refurbishment and retrofitting initiatives to make them more efficient with sustainable energy and water consumptions (Benson et al, p19). Pitted against these benchmarks, the Building 201 of Curtin University leaves a lot to be desired. Firstly as illustrated in the foregoing paragraphs, the internal design alterations that have been effected to the Building 201 over its lifetime have negatively impacted on the building’s comfort levels and user satisfaction. Similarly, the same alterations have been instrumental in making energy and water consumptions unsustainable in the said building. Due to increased student population, the original design and size of the rooms in Building 201 have been completely altered resulting in an increased demand for extra energy and water installations. As a result of these extra installations, natural thermal and ventilation as well as air-conditioning systems have become inadequate in Building 201. As a corrective measure therefore, more and more mechanical heating and cooling appliances have been introduced into the building, effectively more than tripling the energy and resource utilization (Dickinson, p20). The energy use in this Building is particularly critical because of its excessive figures beyond the accepted global levels. Take for instance the figures of energy consumption during the month of September 2010. While the average global values range between 141kWh/m2/year and 153kWh/m2/year, Building 201 consumed close to 301.53kWh/m2/year with an average value of 223.72kWh/m2/year during the said month (cited in). These figures far much exceed the global consumption rate which is reported to fall between 45% and 50% of energy consumption. Likewise, the water consumption levels in Building 201 are also seen to be extremely excessive and a health risk of building users. Research has variously shown that poor water quality is a haven for water borne diseases especially if water pollution is a menace (Harris et al, p45). Compared to the global consumption of water in the construction industry which is put at about 50%, Building 201 is operating at a higher percentage given that its energy consumption is also high. This argument finds validity in the fact that water and energy have a strong linkage as illustrated by Lenzen and Treloar (p128). According to their point of view, extremely high amounts of energy are consumed in treating and pumping drinking water as well as waste water. Similarly, extremely large volumes of water are used for cooling energy generating gadgets (Dickinson, p27). For this reason, energy and water consumption in Building 201 seems unsustainable and something has to be done urgently to forestall the negative effects. Since inaction will drive Building 201 to inefficiency, non-competitiveness and probably mass exodus of tenants, then refurbishing and retrofitting is the only way to go. INITIATIVES TO REFURBISH AND RETROFIT BUILDING 201 As indicated in earlier sections of this report, buildings account for a large proportion of energy (and water) and resource use as well as greenhouse gas emissions. The only viable and cost-effective method of reducing these consumptions and emissions has been through retrofitting buildings (May, p84). And this is the trend followed currently in the world’s construction industry where building owners and property developers are refurbishing existing old buildings as opposed to constructing new facilities. This has been occasioned by the excessive cost implications involved in the design, plan and implementation of new construction works. Moreover, refurbishing and retrofitting existing buildings has been able to achieve sustainability objectives more cheaply and easily (Benson et al, p109). May (p86) further argues in support of this by stating that: “older buildings are capable of improving energy efficiency by some percentage through simple fixes”. This is an example of retrofitting which can be achieved through a number of initiatives. Materials The choice of materials used in constructing a new building or even refurbishing an old existing construction is very crucial. This is because sustainability of any building is solely dependent on the type of materials used to complete the construction works. According to Cristina et al (p105), selection of materials used in buildings must put into consideration the impact the materials will have on the environment as regards to ‘global warming, resource depletion and human toxicity’ for example. To forestall the negative impacts on Building 201 necessitated by poor choice of construction materials like the ‘in-situ concrete frame and masonry walling’, it is important to select more environmentally friendly materials that are more sustainable. For instance, May (p91) claims that “the new single-ply roof” systems are cheaper to maintain because they ‘require less water and energy, and have less life-cycle costs’ as opposed to earlier two-ply roof system. Thus using only specified materials and systems in refurbishing and retrofitting Building 201 will simplify and reduce maintenance requirements, while meeting the University’s sustainability objectives (Hawken et al, p107). Energy and water saving strategies From the outset, the Building 201 of Curtin University has been indicated to be under-achieving in terms of energy and water consumption. This is characteristic of most old buildings made of masonry, which are indicated to be more suitable in their handling of dampness and thermal fluctuations compared to most recent buildings (Dickinson, p24). Because of its in-situ concrete frame and masonry walling, maintenance and repairs to the Building 201 easy and significant in improving its lifespan. But in spite of this, buildings of the nature of Building 201 are known to have ‘a high thermal mass’ and probably the reason why they are inefficient in energy consumption. This is attributed to the fact that in periods of winter, extra heating devices may be required to keep internal temperatures comfortable (McCormack et al, p130) while in times of summer the reverse will apply. These additional gadgets will seriously increase energy consumption in the Building 201. To effectively save this extra energy consumption cost in the building, proper shielding and insulation systems need to be instantly installed. The associated benefit of this strategy is an immediate increase in employee and customer comfort in addition to reduced heating and cooling bills (Harris et al, p49). If this does not work for any reason, complete replacement of the old existing heating systems with new ‘standard heating systems’ that have efficiencies of up to 97% may be an acceptable option (Dickinson, p52). Similarly, removal of ‘old, worn-out and inefficient’ boilers to pave way for the modern state-of-the-art model is more cost-effective. Climate change particularly resulting from global warming is responsible for a myriad of occurrences. The present depleting reserves of fresh water in the world is blamed on the effect of climate change. Due to the increasingly alarming scarcity of clean water for drinking, buildings the world over need to comply with sustainability objectives from the outset. In view of this, Building 201 should be refurbished and retrofitted to become a sustainable facility capable of minimizing water wastage (Lenzen and Treloar, p132). Numerous strategies are suggested for this achievement particularly through air-tight maintenance programmes like ‘treating site runoff, recycling water for on-site use, or using water efficiently whenever appropriate’ (Harris et al, p54). Additionally, it can be cost-effective to “integrate rainwater collection and storage systems into the architecture” of the Building 201 during the refurbishing and retrofitting phase. The best way to do this is by incorporating the system into the building façade as snuggly as it could possibly be in order to eliminate all voids and dents that can increase vulnerability of drinking water to pathogenic organisms (Benson et al, p91). Another water sustainability strategy for the Building 201 is the use of dry fire hydrants installed in open water reservoirs to suction untreated water to fight fires (Dickinson, p62). This makes use stagnant water that would have otherwise gone to waste and instead save the ‘municipal water’ sources for domestic purposes. Better still, dry fire hydrants do not require electricity and are therefore more suitable in areas prone to natural catastrophes that can easily lead to rampart power cuts. In line with this, Harris et al (p63) observe that dry fire hydrants are double-thronged because they “help in saving precious drinking water as well as conserving energy by using rainwater that does not need to be processed for fighting fires”. Indoor Environmental Quality Due to congestion witnessed in Building 201 as result of increased student population, the Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) of the building greatly affected. This is more so due to the lowered Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) because of the increased emissions of gases and other pollutants that pose health hazards to building occupants (Spengler et al, p171). Internal Environmental Quality in Building 201 can thus be improved through the application of numerous strategies including the use of “day-lighting as opposed to mechanical lighting; natural ventilation against mechanical ventilation; and ‘tight building envelop’ versus the traditional building envelope as enumerated by Price (p96). An improved Indoor Environmental Quality in Building 201 will contribute towards a highly dedicated happier and healthier tenancy. Sustainable Construction Technologies The foregoing has clearly explained the various initiatives that can be adopted in refurbishing and retrofitting old buildings like Building 201. To help achieve these initiatives, other sustainable energy technologies have also been suggested. Take for instance the technology of ‘building commissioning’ which requires that all building systems satisfy certain design specifications in line with the owner’s tastes and preferences. McCormack et al (p142) further explain that this technology aims at bettering the building facility to be able to deliver a safe and healthy living environment, boasting of improved energy efficiency and drastically reduced operating costs. In support of this explanation, Keung (p45) maintains that energy efficiency in a new building can be improved by up to about one-third through building commissioning. It is my belief that applying a formal building commissioning process in Building 201 will be the most valuable thing to do. The use of ‘Integrated Building Automation and Control Systems (BAS)’ technology is another undertaking that can prove beneficial to Building 201. Through this technology, all the systems in the building including ‘HVAC, fire, lighting and security’ could be linked into a single comprehensive system (Price, p103) where electronic surveillance of every aspect is possible. The constant utilization of renewable sources of energy in buildings is associated with a marked protection of the environment as opposed to what is the case when non-renewable sources of energy are used (McCormack et al, p138). Referred to as ‘Renewable Distributed Energy Technologies’, this idea offers consumers the opportunity of accessing cheap and reliable source of energy for sustainability. There is the simple technology of ‘heating a space’ passively by using two masonry walls, sandwiching a space in between and facing one or two layers of glass (Paradis, p159). The glass is for warming the air in the space using sun’s rays. This technology is referred to as ‘Thermal Mass Walls’ which functions to reduce energy consumption in buildings. This technology is closely related to another one called ‘Window Films’ technology which helps to protect occupants against the effects of “shattered glass” in the event of blasts or explosions. The window films keep the shattered glass in place preventing the pieces from breaking off, thus enhancing safety and security for the occupants’ comfort (Keung, p39). To improve the Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) in buildings, the technology has been to apply day-lighting. The practice here is to use numerous glasses in windows so as to expose the occupants of a building to natural light and thus reduce unnecessary energy costs as noted by Keung (p59). This technology however is not very safe to occupants during periods of accidents or acts of terrorism because of the excessive use of glass. In case of blasts resulting in broken glass, the impact is known to be most devastating around buildings as discovered in extant literature (Lenzen and Treloar, p120). But this glass hazard can be mitigated by performing simple activities like using ‘blast resistant glasses’ or avoiding excessive exterior ornamentation (Keung, p86). As mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this report, use of technology in constructions to ensure that buildings use only natural ventilations instead of mechanical ventilation which is found to highly energy-dependent has become a very common practice (Harris et al, p51). This technology has also been associated with the provision of ‘acceptable indoor air quality’ conducive enough to maintain a ‘healthy, comfortable and productive occupancy’. Apart from applying natural ventilation, installation of ‘dedicated exhaust systems’ is another popular technology aimed at keeping indoor air quality at comfortable levels as well as protecting the occupants’ health (Lenzen and Treloar, p126). Additionally, Keung (p65) lauds the ‘tight building envelop’ technology for its contribution on sealing gaps and cracks through which air gets access in the traditional construction. With the benefits of this technology therefore, refurbished and retrofitted old buildings like the one in report will have improved comfort due to enhanced ventilation and efficient energy consumption (Dickinson, p71). Recommendations to the Properties Department on Building 201 With the refurbishment and retrofitting process of Building 201 underway, certain recommendations to the Properties Department of Curtin University may come handy. For starters, it is clear that building owners as well as property developers across the world are currently obsessed with the idea of refurbishing and retrofitting old buildings in an effort to make them more energy efficient and sustainable into the future. Take for example recent rush by builders and construction companies to embrace the technology the new single-ply roof system as a technical solution to inefficient energy consumptions in buildings. The same technology is also considered to be a solution to external walls that need refurbishment for energy conservation through proper insulation. It is thus my informed recommendation to the department to adopt this technology in order to minimize energy consumption. Similarly, insulation upgrades of the old building can be an added advantage in addressing the problem of inefficiency and unsustainability in energy consumption. If for instance insulation building windows is upgraded properly, there is a marked increase in personal comfort and productivity as a result of reduced air-flows and noise in the interior of buildings. This will provide occupants with a very conducive living environment (Acuff et al, p89). To further minimize energy inefficiency in Building 201, it is important to start with the lighting system. Inefficient lighting systems may need immediate upgrading requiring a total overhaul of the existing systems and replacing them with more efficient ones. Better still, the building could be installed with ‘occupancy sensors and time clocks’ to automatically switch off when there is no one in the building (Paradis, p147). In the event that these recommendations are not implemented, use of energy saving bulbs as well as sensitizing building occupants to be turning off lights whenever leaving a room may prove to be a viable strategy of improving energy efficiency. Another very popular and cost-effective solution to saving energy consumption in buildings is the use of rooftop solar panels which directly convert the sun’s radiation to electricity. In the views of Harris et al (p78), solar energy is the cheapest source of power after the initial installation cost. In this way, the building will have an extra source of energy at minimal maintenance expenses. In the improvement of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ), it is recommended that the Property Department installs ‘air filters’ intended to trap dust particles that act as food molds to grow. Similarly, all rugs and carpets in the building must be routinely cleaned to ensure that they don’t harbor favorable environments for the growth and development of disease pathogens. This will effectively improve indoor air quality for comfortable and safe habitation (Lenzen and Treloar, p147). This effort can also re-emphasized by the installation of a HVAC system to provide the building with adequate air flow, heating and cooling as noted by Dickinson (p29). In addition to this solution, the HVAC system will be handy in the management of moisture as well as control of humidity in the building. Care in this case must be taken to ensure that the system does not function in the negative by increasing the overall energy consumption. Cost of Suggested Initiatives The initiatives I have suggested for refurbishing and retrofitting Building 201are all intended to result into a much minimized cost in the long run. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Throughout this report, the issue of constructing sustainable buildings has been dealt with at length. In the executive summary, Curtin University’s objectives by 2030 as regards sustainability were clearly articulated. These sustainability objectives were also drawn from the University’s strategic plan which dwells mainly on minimizing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from their buildings. In the introduction section of this report, a working definition of the term sustainability was given in relation to the built environment. It also emerged that refurbishing and retrofitting old buildings is more cost-effective than constructing new facilities as demonstrated by Tom (p21). Based on this revelation, a comprehensive evaluation of the current performance of Building 201 at the Curtin University was conducted to determine the need for a refurbish and a retrofit programme for the building. Indeed the Building 201 was found to be under-achieving in terms of sustainability and user needs. The evaluation process put into consideration measures of comfort levels and user satisfaction as well as energy and water consumptions. Based on these identified benchmarks, the Building 201 was found to be in dire need of a refurbishment and retrofitting programme. After careful and serious consideration of the performance index of Building 201, several refurbishment and retrofitting initiatives were suggested for implementation. Among these initiatives, some turned out to be very fundamental in the process and included the right choice and use of retrofitting materials, energy and water saving strategies as well as Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ). Also, a discussion of various sustainable construction technologies and a list of recommendations to the Properties Department on Building 201 were presented. On the issue of suitable materials for retrofit, it emerged that materials that are environmentally friendly at minimum cost should be selected for this cause. Initiatives for cutting energy and water consumption were found to be many and varied but mostly revolved around the use of efficient installations. The same was suggested for IEQ. All the sustainable construction technologies identified aimed at minimizing costs in buildings as well as making them efficient and sustainable in energy utilization. Thus the recommendations made to the Property Department at Curtin University if adopted will only make refurbishment and retrofitting of the Building 201 cost-effective and efficient in energy use into the future. WORKS CITED Acuff, Z., Harris, A., Larsen, L., Magnus, B., and Pumphrey, A. Building Green for the Future. Case Studies of Sustainable Development in Michigan, Urban Catalyst Associates, 2005 Benson, A., Vargas, E., Bunts, J., Justin, O., Hammond, K., Reeves, L., Chaplin, M and Peter, D. Retrofitting Commercial Real Estate: Current Trends and Challenges in Increasing Building Energy Efficiency, 2011 Cristina, B., Stefano P., Corgnati, I. B., and Vincenzo, C. Energy saving potential by retrofitting residential buildings in Europe. HVAC Journal; 2012 Dickinson, M. A. Progress In Defining The Water-Energy Nexus: What's Next? Alliance for Water Efficiency, IAPMO Emerging Technology Symposium, 2012 Harris, J., William, T., and Beverly, D. Securing Buildings and Saving Energy: Opportunities in the Federal Sector. U.S. Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program, 2010 Hawken, P., Lovins, E and Lovins, H. Natural, Capitalism – Creating the next Industrial Revolution. Little Brown and Co., 1999 Keung, J. Existing building retrofit, A Guide. The Centre for Sustainable Buildings and Construction. Building and Construction Authority, 2010 Lenzen, M and Treloar, G. J. ‘Embodied energy in buildings: wood versus concrete. Energy Policy, 2002: Vol. 30, pp. 249–244. May, J. C. My office is killing me!: the sick building survival guide. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006. McCormack, M. S., Treloar, G. J., Palmowski, L., and Crawford, R. H. “Modelling direct and indirect water consumption associated with construction”. Building Research and Information, 2007: 35(2) Paradis, R. Retrofitting Existing Buildings to Improve Sustainability and Energy Performance. National Institute of Building Sciences, 2012 Plimmer, F., Pottinger, G., Harris, S., Pocock, Y and Waters, M. Knock It Down Or Do It Up? Sustainable house building: New build and refurbishment in the Sustainable Communities Plan. IHS BRE Press, 2008 Price, B. ‘Maintenance for energy efficiency and ongoing HVAC system tuning’, Ecolibrium, 2007 Spengler, J. D., Samet, J. M. and McCarthy, J. F. Indoor Air Quality Handbook. NY: McGraw– Hill, 2001 Tom, S. “Managing Energy and Comfort.” ASHRAE Journal, 2008; 50(6): 18-26. Read More

Comfort Levels and User Satisfaction For a building to be of satisfactory standards, it has to meet some comfort levels for the user. These levels have to do with internal environmental quality intended for the people using the building as well as the levels of operational energy and water being consumed by the building users. On evaluating Curtin’s Building 201 against these benchmarks, the Property Department of the University considered the Building as under-achieving in relation to sustainability objectives (Cristina et al, p100).

This verdict was particularly informed by a number of factors, key among them being the age and shape of the Building. To begin with, the Building 201 is a 40-year old seven-storey structure rectangular in shape and thus very limited in capacity considering the current student numbers residing in the campus. For this reason, some ad hoc internal structural changes have been effected over the years to meet the occupants’ comfort levels to some degree. Unfortunately, these efforts have only succeeded in impacting negatively on the original natural ventilation design paths and flows, hence greatly affecting the internal environmental quality of the building in question.

According to observations made by Paradis (p200), the Internal Environmental Quality (IEQ) of a building plays a fundamental role in making a building habitable. This is so because Internal Environmental Quality is a component of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) among other attributes as noted by May (p16). While Indoor Air Quality implies to the air quality within and around buildings and structures (Price, 92), Indoor Environmental Quality encompasses the general environment surrounding a building which has a significant impact on the wellbeing of the occupants (Spengler et al, p86).

Every building has the right ‘design specifications’ for maintaining good Indoor Environmental Quality at the inception of its lifecycle. Internal design alterations effected later in the lifecycle of the buildings are bound to affect the original Indoor Environmental Quality characteristics. This is exactly what is bedeviling Building 201 after having seen a multiplicity of internal layout changes to cope with the heavy student enrollment (Spengler et al, p98). The original seven-storey 40 year old building cannot simply withstand the pressure an increased student populace.

As indicated by Paradis (p172), Indoor Air Quality is largely affected by excessive presence of exhaust gasses emanating from an overwhelming occupancy. In addition to these gasses, the heavy student population is a massive energy stressor to Building 201 and thus presents adverse health risks. Moreover, congested rooms and halls in Building 201 has significantly compromised user satisfaction due to affected “lighting, visual quality, acoustics and thermal comfort” as elucidated by Cristina and friends (p106).

Hence the occupants of Building 201 are ‘disgruntled, de-motivated and less healthy’ as they conduct their daily chores. Consequently, the Building 201 is economically under-achieving. Energy and Water Consumptions In present times, sustainability in buildings is geared towards an economic dimension where entrepreneurial institutions have to be concerned with their survival and success. Buildings are designed with an insight of how best they can acquire and maintain a competitive business niche in the corporate world.

Those old existing buildings that were constructed without this insight are currently facing refurbishment and retrofitting initiatives to make them more efficient with sustainable energy and water consumptions (Benson et al, p19). Pitted against these benchmarks, the Building 201 of Curtin University leaves a lot to be desired. Firstly as illustrated in the foregoing paragraphs, the internal design alterations that have been effected to the Building 201 over its lifetime have negatively impacted on the building’s comfort levels and user satisfaction.

Read More