Letters
Reasons to be cheerful amid the economic gloom Reading the May issue of the Journal, I feel real empathy with the predicament of building services engineers fearful for their jobs in a recession (‘Pay hits the doldrums’, page 46). But do these articles show that we have really progressed industry’s thinking of ‘boom and bust’ cycles and the effects on skills retention? As a 1989 BS engineering Bath University graduate, the early 1990s were a sombre time to enter the profession. I was fortunate with my employer; but by 1994, with industry figures advocating in the trade press that BS engineers ‘take a study year out’, I followed their advice. And, with my eyes opened to other possibilities, I did not return to the profession. However, I retain a fascination with
the current engineering possibilities in built-form design that, in 1989, felt remote. ‘The grass is not greener’ in other industries, nor are they immune from the effects of recession. Of course salary is important, but is it not equally important to give BS engineers good clear reasons to stay? The next decade should bring real changes, with energy distribution and micro-generation technologies becoming mainstream, more clients seeing real economic benefits of good built-form design, and a growing recognition by government of its role in supporting these positive changes – and BSEs are key to making these happen. What better future messages could an industry have to appeal to its profession and public? So perhaps now is the time to start to identify and articulate clearly these messages, and to give BSEs real reasons for cheer. Then, perhaps through the next economic cycle, progress in better skills retention will become demonstrable. Richard Graham Head of strategic development, Balfour Beatty Rail
Where is CIBSE’s response? Doug King’s article (‘Tailor-made efficiency’, April Journal, page 42), and the Royal Academy of Engineering report it is based on, call upon the government, education, and the professional institutions to bring about some radical changes to help realise a low carbon economy.
22 CIBSE Journal July 2010 Specifically, CIBSE is asked to ‘embrace all
aspects of low carbon building design – not just energy efficient design of mechanical and electrical systems’. In light of the publicity generated by the RAE report, and having published this call for action in the magazine, I was disappointed that CIBSE did not take the opportunity to respond in the Journal. In the first instance I would like the CIBSE
view of the issues raised in the RAE report - does CIBSE think these are pressing issues?
plug away at making the point that our young people need real experience on site during construction, and during operation. The current interest in operational engineers
is long overdue. It has been held back by the now 60-year-old M&E people who were lucky enough to get the ‘full Monty’ when they were 20 and assumed that everyone since knows what they know. If designers cannot get direct experience, then the next best thing is that get input from quality operational engineers during design. So many of the features designed into
new buildings make them expensive to own, prone to failure, and no good to house a business. The maintenance market cannot cope with these designs. Sometimes they cannot cope because, to stay in business, they have to be the cheapest bid – which also means that they are reactive, not proactive. So I ask that designers look at
what happens to their buildings after occupation and contemplate whether they would want to be introduced to the occupants as the creators of their misery! John Rose MCIBSE
In the longer term, I would like to know what the vision of the institution is to meet these challenges and what outcomes we will see as a result. David Clark Max Fordham Consulting Engineers
Can hands-off designers really specify M&E? Do you think that a person who has never driven a car could design one? If you have never cooked could you create a recipe? Then why does CIBSE accept that a designer can design and specify the mechanical and electrical (M&E) services in a building without ever experiencing their operations? If we want great M&E designers we have to
Put controls in users’ hands Building management systems (BMS) are so stuck in the past. It’s about time the industry utilised the vast computing capacity we now have, to enable ordinary people to ‘drive’ buildings – only then will we be able to make them work efficiently. Controls are at the centre of most problems I come across in existing buildings; they’re not set up for the user. I find it takes a long time to get into the BMS, and then to explore how much or little data it gives me. Shame on makers of controls, and shame on those who write the specs! Anon
CIBSE Journal welcomes article proposals from any reader, wherever you are – whether it be letters, longer opinion pieces, news stories, people or events listings, humorous items, or any ideas for possible articles.
Please send all letters and any other items for possible publication to: bcervi@cibsejournal. com, or write to Bob Cervi, Editor, CIBSE Journal, Cambridge Publishers Ltd, 275 Newmarket Road, Cambridge, CB5 8JE, UK. We reserve the right to edit all letters. Please indicate how you wish your letter to be attributed, and whether you wish to have your contact details included.
www.cibsejournal.com
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