Air systems procurement
Squeeze on
the breeze
Specifying air movement systems can be a real challenge,
not least because of the competitive tendering process
typically used to acquire them. However, Ian Vallely detects a
wind of change blowing through the fan procurement process
T
here is a real danger that the process of Engagement
‘better buying’ employed by some contractors Buro Happold says it tries
could result in a switch of emphasis in large to engage manufacturers at
ventilation projects – from energy efficiency the early stages of a project to
to lowest price – as the project moves into the ensure the right solution is found
procurement and construction phases. for the scheme, and to avoid over-
This, some argue, is because ‘better buying’ is specifying systems and unnecessarily
nothing more than a euphemism to describe the process adding control complications and
of squeezing bigger discounts from suppliers. costs.
Stuart Long, technical director of consulting Says Reilly: “If the project is tendered
engineers RPS Gregory, says that – unless there is a in the correct fashion and adequate cost is
specific client brief requiring adherence to particular built into the cost plan, the retention of high-
criteria – it is usually difficult for the consultant to insist efficiency plant/controls has a much higher
on high-performance fans, high-efficiency motors, and success rate. This puts the responsibility on us,
the like: “Left to their own devices, it is my opinion as designers, to ensure that our specifications are
that most mechanical contractors will almost without detailed and robust enough to survive any ‘better
question opt for cheapest first cost.” buying’ measures.”
However, he says: “Thankfully, end-user clients and He adds: “Given the recent changes in government
those in the public eye are now much more receptive legislation on energy consumption, this process is
Shutterstock
to a life-cycle cost approach, which facilitates new becoming easier and we find that clients, developers
technologies and clearly illustrates their long-term and contractors are more aware of the importance of
impact.” conserving energy.”
George Reilly, senior building services engineer Hurleypalmerflatt works with air-movement
at Buro Happold, believes that “better buying” manufacturers to develop energy efficient ventilation
implemented solely for commercial gain has a solutions with low life-cycle costs. Jim Harrison, a
Within
detrimental effect on efficiency and quality. director at the company, explains: “A current case in
budgetary “We are responsible for specifying the correct point is the use of efficient fans in high-density IT
constraints
product for each project and defining the key design cabinet cooling systems. I believe that, if consultants
criteria for it. We should always make our clients aware stress that fan selection is based upon achieving
we should be
of any additional running and/or maintenance costs improved energy performance ratings in relation to
aspiring for the of implementing ‘better buying’, in order to give an both LEED and BREEAM, and any changes could affect
best possible
indication of increased life-cycle costs to reflect true the ratings, then both contractors and clients will sit
savings.” up and listen.”
performance
However, Mike Rhead, a partner in Armstrong Nonetheless, with the limited time available to
and pursuing Rhead, does not see life-cycle costs as a realistic them, isn’t there a temptation for consultants to focus
excellence in all
performance measure. He says: “If we looked at the on defending their selection of big items such as air-
lowest life-cycle cost for every element of design, we handling units and chillers rather than spending time
that we do.
would never get a design finished – this is a naive way fighting for better controls or the most energy efficient
– Ant Wilson of thinking of how consultants design projects.” versions of component products such as fans? >
50 CIBSE Journal June 2009
www.cibsejournal.com
CIBSEjun09 pp50-52 Air.indd 50 28/5/09 14:59:06
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72