|
This guide is one of a series commissioned by The Scottish Ecological Design Association (SEDA) on design and detailing for more sustainable construction. [1] It targets the use of chemicals in our built environment and offers guidance on designing and detailing to reduce toxic loads in buildings.
The guides result from the award to SEDA, in 2004, of a Sustainable Action Grant from the Sustainable Development Directorate of the Scottish Executive.[2] Previous guides offer guidance on:
• design and detailing for deconstruction (2005), which aims to assist in reducing the vast waste stream for which the Construction Industry is responsible.[3]
• design and detailing for airtightness (2006), which aims to assist in reducing the energy wasted through infiltration in typical construction.[4]
This guide seeks to help all involved to minimise the toxic loads in construction, products, buildings and the built environment and to create buildings that are healthier for occupants and enhance the environment.
The issue of chemical toxicity is not trivial. In 2002, 2.17 megatons of toxic chemicals were released into the environment by US industry alone. Many of them were known or suspected carcinogens.[5] They arise from building materials, paints, finishes, furnishings, cleaning fluids, cosmetics and a range of other means. Less than 3% have been tested for carcinogenicity. Many people believe that this represents an unacceptable, uncontrolled experiment on the environment. The construction industry has an important role to play in changing behaviour and in changing attitudes.
Awareness and management of chemical toxicity in built development is, at least in principle, now recognized as good practice in terms of site health and safety, but we are still a long way from establishing toxicity as a life-cycle concern that embraces manufacture to end-of-life, and beyond. This is despite a substantial body of evidence to indicate that many construction materials are potentially hazardous to health and deleterious to the environment throughout their life-cycle.
The design of buildings that do not impose a toxic load on constructors, users or the environment is a crucial aspect of policy implementation if Scotland is to meet its commitments to enhance well-being, health and biodiversity.[6] In regulatory terms this is a relatively new area but there are a number of recent studies that include extensive referencing in respect of policy and legislation.[7]
There is a huge resource of contemporary research on chemical toxicity. This is summarized here with extensive guidance on the sources of further information. However, importantly, the basis of this guide is merely a presumption for chemical avoidance rather than a scientific analysis. It aims to enable those who wish to err on the side of caution to do so. Details and specifications are included covering five typical construction types. These are for illustrative purposes only and are not proposals. A discussion on costs is also included.
It would be wrong to limit guidance such as this to only describing toxics and the alternatives, and leave out the “higher order” guiding principles. It is through an overall approach that inroads are most likely to be made in design offices, and in the design and manufacture of goods. The overall wisdom of simplification replaces, or renders unnecessary, certification schemes and specification sheets.
back to top |
contents
| next chapter
Footnotes:
1. SEDA www.seda2.org
2. Now the Greener Scotland Directorate of the Scottish Executive: www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/SustainableDevelopment
3. Designing and detailing for Deconstruction (2005) www.seda2.org/dfd/
4. Designing and detailing for Airtightness (2006) www.seda2.org/dfa/
5. U.S. EPA Toxics Release Inventory www.epa.gov/tri/
6. Royal Commission on Health and Pollution (RCEP) Study on Urban Environments, Well-being and Health (2003) www.rcep.org.uk/urbanenvironment.htm
7. Halliday, S.P and Stevenson, F. (2003) Sustainable Construction & the Regulatory Framework, Gaia Research, Edinburgh ISBN 1-904680-19-4.
back to top |
contents
| next chapter
|
The best known woodstain products contain chemicals which are a significant health hazard. There are now a number of alternative mineral paint products available, with good health and environmental credentials.
Source: H Liddell
|
Health warnings on woodstain and paint stripper containers highlight the danger of the chemical toxicity contained within.
Source: J Gilbert
|
The Earthship projects have as one of their core materials recycled tyres. However, used tyres are contaminated with benzene and represent a health risk to both the constructors handling them and potentially also those living within this containment.
Source: Sandy Halliday
|
|
