A greying fellow reflects on... Sustainability
Part 5: Assessing and monitoring lifetime costing is an important contribution CICES members can make, but there are other things too
George Bothamley FCInstCES
WE have seen in previous reflections how important it is to assess and evaluate the sustainability of all potential options for a project or element of a project so that the most sustainable one can be selected to monitor and report on the actual outcome.
To do this a simple to use but roughly right calculator is needed.
Typically for each solution a comparison of at least three options will be required; option A repeat what we do now (or the do-nothing-different option) to establish a baseline; option B, one of the proposed better solutions and option C another proposed better solution.
There may be other proposed solutions, but usually all but two or three are identified as unviable or less sustainable at the outline development stage.
Even with only three or four solutions to assess before a meeting a slick and easy to use calculator is required.
There are many electronic calculating tools for the various aspects of sustainability, but most are quite complex and cover only one aspect.
For instance, the International Cost Management Standard (ICMS) framework splits project and subproject cost groups into nineteen categories (too many for quick approximate calculation) and six lifetime categories (about right), then into thirty sub-groups.
Simplicity
In the pre-digital age we achieved simplicity by having a matrix of eight or nine relevant headings, typically design and management, site operating costs, civil works, metalwork, mechanical and electrical processes, systems integration and commissioning and risks. If assessment is to be done for all solutions and from inception to completion of construction and beyond, a more easily used calculator than most examples currently available is needed.
In the pre-digital age we achieved simplicity by having a matrix of eight or nine relevant headings, typically design and management, site operating costs, civil works, metalwork, mechanical and electrical processes, systems integration and commissioning and risks.
Quickly assessed life-cycle costs were tabulated for construction, in-use maintenance and capital replacement, and end of life disposal. Simple look up charts made this task quick and easy to perform. Later, assessments for carbon were added and a degree of automation introduced to make the process even slicker.
This can perhaps be updated by extracting and approximating some of the data from some of the complex calculators to be found online. For instance, the government publication Greenhouse gas reporting: conversion factors 20221 has in its condensed set ten gas fuel items, five around 3000kg per unit and five around 2600kg per unit. Using 3000kg for all ten fuels would give a roughly right quick to use figure.
The document also contains twelve bioenergy, four biomass, numerous refrigerant fuels and thirteen car and motorcycle items, and no doubt lots of goods vehicle and maybe construction plant items – I lost the will to continue looking. Somewhere there will be a few average figures that could be used in a simple calculator.
Other examples that may contain useful data that can be simplified may be found at the International Cost Management’s Global Consistency, the RICS whole life carbon assessment for the built environment and One Click LCA’s life cycle assessment (LCA) and environmental product database (EPD), and other published electronic calculating tools. All appear to be too complex for quick roughly right calculations, but are likely to contain data that can be transferred to a more simple calculating tool.
Perhaps this simple calculating tool could be a matrix summarising life-cycle costs, carbon effect and sustainable issues backed by a few look-up tables to assist with automatic population of the summary. For instance, the civils element of the life-cycle costing may have standard monetary and carbon effect values initially based on typical proportional cost of process equipment at an early stage of selection, then approximate but firm values for units of concrete, aggregates and a few other items that can be applied to approximate quantities when known. Keep it simple by limiting the itemisation; the Pareto principal (80% of cost is in 20% of items) does work.
The RICS framework for defining social value, CEEQUAL’s evidence based sustainable assessment rating scheme for civil engineering infrastructure and HACT-UK social value bank calculator are all complex, for instance RICS framework has five themes, eighteen outcomes and thirty- five measures. But they may give some useful data for a simple calculating tool for environmental and social issues. The UN sustainable goals should also be referenced for sustainability monitoring. However, it is difficult at present to see a simple way of evaluating environmental and social sustainability, so it may be that a simple calculating tool will need space just for a factual statement of effect without evaluating impacts.
Collaborate
These reflections have related strongly on life-cycle costing and carbon effect calculation, which I believe is a necessary process to achieve sustainability goals and which CICES members are uniquely positioned to implement on all civil engineering project at all stages. The geospatial forum on the Sustainability White Paper has recognised the need for this evaluation at every stage and seek more input from commercial surveyors. Commercial members should push to be involved in every team from an early stage and collaborate with their geospatial colleagues.
For example, an issue I noticed some years ago is that preconstruction survey work was all done in a single exercise, resulting in some information produced but not required and some useful data never being produced. Field data was collected at an outline solution stage when the required information could be collected from a desk top study with perhaps limited field data for gaps identified to inform decisions at that stage.
Additional time and cost was required to get the extra information required, but in many cases was not carried out due to budget and programme restraints, resulting in additional risk to the project.Boreholes and underground services surveys were undertaken for options that did not need the information to decide on their rejection, but not in the areas of the selected solution. Additional time and cost was required to get the extra information required, but in many cases was not carried out due to budget and programme restraints, resulting in additional risk to the project. Commercial members can perhaps assist in persuading clients to avoid this inefficiency where it still occurs.
Other aspects of the sustainability policy that CICES members contribute to include providing support to partners and other organisations in their sustainability initiatives by contributing their specific expertise to consultations and work programmes. They should ensure that contracts allow for best practice in sustainability and that the contract provisions are implemented. Members should contribute to site, office and project culture where workers at all levels are empowered to challenge decisions around sustainable practices.
In their personal life members should seek to be involved with sustainability outside their main work, such as volunteering with local litter picking or tree planting groups or joining one of Sustrans several volunteer groups such as its biodiversity team, improved accessibility team assisting users who struggle with access due to restrictive barriers or for improving mapping alongside its GIS team. Most of these activities will enhance your professional development as well as contributing to your CPD.
I will be delighted if some of you are able to take up the challenge to create a Q4R (quick, robust, roughly right and relevant) app for lifetime costing and other tools for CICES to help with assessing and monitoring sustainability in civil engineering projects.
But I will be especially pleased if all of the CPD plans and records I see have items for developing your contribution to sustainability, for your professional capability by items such as gaining a better understanding of how NEC 4 option X29 works, and in your personal life by undertaking volunteering such as with the various Sustrans initiatives. I hope these articles will have enthused you to embrace fully the CICES sustainability strategy contained in the new white paper.
George Bothamley FCInstCES
---
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversionfactors-2022