ºÚ¶´ÉçÇø

QSs have branded developers and contractors the construction industry's worst offenders on sustainability issues. They also said the industry as a whole is performing poorly in minimising the energy used during the building process and in transporting materials.

The findings come in a RICS survey, given exclusively to QS News, which asked QSs to assess how well the construction industry has progressed towards becoming more energy efficient and socially and environmentally responsible.

Isabel McAllister, associate director of sustainability at Cyril Sweett, who worked on the research, said a key problem was that materials now come from further away. "The rise of the global market has worked against reducing energy costs relating to the transportation of materials. Whereas slate may have been delivered to site from Wales or Cornwall, it might now come from Spain or China."

Reducing waste was another problem area highlighted in the survey. The QSs gave the industry a low score of just over two out of five for its efforts at waste minimisation.

McAllister said a conflict between government and local authority practice was to blame: "To crush and screen waste on a site requires a waste management licence from the local authority. These are not readily granted as concrete crushers create huge amounts of noise, dust and disturbance for the local community."

If a contractor wants to import materials classified as waste, the site needs a waste management licence and the cost of crushing and screening equipment is high, she added.

The areas where QSs felt most progress had been made were in designing buildings to use minimal energy and reusing existing buildings rather then resorting to new builds.

The QSs said the government was the best at implementing sustainable construction initiatives, closely followed by architects and designers.

Some specialist contracts exclude green practices.

Isabel McAllister. Associate Director of sustainability, Cyril Sweett.

McAllister said many QSs were insufficiently up to speed on these issues. "If QSs have not dealt with a sustainable construction method before, they often put in a large cost contingency to offset the risk as perceived by the QS. This is an obstacle to delivering more sustainable construction."

She also said some planners were holding back progress towards more sustainable building practices. "Planners are a very mixed bag on this issue. Some are well informed about sustainable construction methods and green features, others are reluctant to grant applications to things they do not understand and reject proposals out of hand."

McAllister called for planners to be better educated, particularly because planning law relating to energy efficiency "is changing all the time".

The QSs surveyed urged clients to invest in sustainable approaches and the government to take a greater lead, for example by using sustainability criteria in PPP/PFI projects.

McAllister said: "There are minimum green requirements on anything publicly procured in accordance with OGC rules... However, some specialist public contracts, such as building a bomb-proof bunker, may dictate a particular type of construction method that excludes green practices on the basis of function requirements or cost."

McAllister called for more investment in building control officers and strengthening the building regulations. She added that schemes such as BREEAM and EcoHomes Post Construction Reviews could be used to make a difference.

The RICS said this week that the construction and operation of building services is responsible for a third of all UK carbon dioxide emissions.