INFRASTRUCTURE
Evaluating design priorities In the government’s pledge to build 40 new hospitals by 2030, the UK healthcare sector has been presented with a chance to adjust its approach. Here, healthy design principles can be instilled in buildings from the outset, to ensure that the challenges afflicting the sector do not re-occur in future. However, with a multitude of factors now to consider, it is important to assess the current attitudes of industry professionals before investment begins in order to see where priorities lie. It is for this very reason that REHAU
surveyed 520 M&E (mechanical and electrical) designers and architects for its latest guide, Designing Healthy Healthcare, which forms part of the wider Designing Healthy series. The campaign is based on deep insights into the drivers and challenges faced by architects, specifiers and contractors when designing buildings today, with reports also spanning apartments, hotels and educational facilities. Of those surveyed, 25 per cent worked primarily in healthcare. The guide’s findings highlight the
growing importance of sustainability in building design, with the factor receiving top billing on priorities when specifying building materials. This was closely followed by cost, indicating the growing pressure to incorporate cost-cutting measures into building design. On the topic, 44 per cent of respondents believed that wellbeing is ‘often’ value-engineering out of a building’s design at a later stage, while a further 32 per cent stated that this is ‘always’ the case. With these statistics in mind, it appears
that economic cutbacks in the sector present a risk of encroaching on the all- important principle of patient and staff wellbeing. Here, there is an even greater argument for the necessity of incorporating healthy design principles from the outset. By doing so, building performance will remain at optimum levels despite the possibility of cost-cutting measures coming into place later down the line. An overwhelming 98 per cent of those surveyed were willing to pay more for a product that had a longer expected lifespan, indicating the potential for long- lasting, high-performance building materials to remedy this challenge.
Off-site construction A primary consideration for healthy building design should be the construction phase itself – namely, the location in which it takes place. Until recently, construction in the healthcare sector has largely taken place on site, though there is a strong case for this to be moved away from site in the interest of both sustainability and occupant wellbeing.
92 Noise levels can have a significant impact on patient comfort. Without the challenge of navigating an
active hospital environment, off-site construction has the potential to speed up new builds, while also reducing the amount of embodied carbon that goes into each project. This also ensures that patients receive minimal exposure to the noise and disruption generated by construction work. Returning to our research, 58 per cent
believed that demand for alternative construction methods would increase in light of the recent COVID-19 pandemic, with faster construction, quality control and lower costs all cited as primary drivers. This post-pandemic culture shift may be the impetus that the sector needs to adopt off-site construction as the industry-standard method going forwards.
District heating networks Some of the largest hospitals in the UK house upwards of 1,000 patients at any given time. Naturally, for this reason, simply heating and cooling a facility itself represents a significant portion of energy demand for most health estates. Given that 4.6 per cent of global carbon emissions can be attributed to the healthcare sector, adopting greener approaches to this process has the potential for significant carbon savings on a worldwide scale. One such alternative could be district heating networks, wherein heat and hot water are provided to multiple buildings via an underground network of pre- insulated pipework, all sharing a singular heat source. This method has been proven to be far more efficient than heating buildings individually, leading to a reduction in carbon emissions.
The government has demonstrated significant support for this technology in recent years through schemes such as the £338 m Heat Network Transformation Programme and £288 m Green Heat Network Fund. As such, many would many infer that district heating networks will form a key part of the nation’s heating strategy in the coming years. Our survey seems to confirm this, with 70 per cent of respondents expecting demand for the technology to rise in the next five years. Within this, it is important to
differentiate between the different forms that heat networks can take. The majority of systems currently in place in the UK are third generation, with water circulated between 70˚C and 90˚C and a gas combined heat and power (CHP) system as the source. However, fourth generation technology continues to enjoy growing uptake, making use of more sustainable heat sources such as heat pumps, solar thermal systems, and waste heat recovery systems from nearby data centres. Water is also instead supplied between 40˚C and 60˚C, resulting in lower heating losses during operation, and in turn greater carbon savings. Material specification can also have a bearing on the installation and function of these systems. District heating networks can use either steel or polymer pre- insulated pipework to distribute heat and hot water. Yet it should be noted that the lower temperature of fourth generation systems complements polymer pipework. Moreover, our own research indicates that the lower weight of polymer pipework results in lower embodied emissions for each build. For a typical journey from London to Manchester, specifying
By adopting a granular approach to all aspects of building design, a number of possible contributors to noisy hospital environments can be removed
IFHE DIGEST 2023
©Christoph Burgstedt -
stock.adobe.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 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97
