Sustainable Building Article
Sustainable Building Article
(OP)
Our Built Environment
http://voyeur.realviewtechnologies.com/#folio=124
What do you think of this article? How would you rate the engineering content?
http://voyeur.realviewtechnologies.com/#folio=124
What do you think of this article? How would you rate the engineering content?






RE: Sustainable Building Article
In a sentence: Vague generalities lacking any specific thesis or plan of action.
In-depth Soap box: I would guess the writer doesn't spend much time doing grunt work like calculations and drafting. I've grown especially jaded to these types of articles, and they are more common than uncommon it seems. Generalities about the "built-environment" and various other industry buzz words just drive me nuts. My clients don't care about any of that. They've got a new rooftop unit to put on a building, or an addition, or new building, and they want it done so that they don't have to worry about it so that they can go home on-time and not sweat things.
And as I continue my soap box, I get frustrated with organizations like ASCE (and I'm sure comparable international ones) that speak up "man-made global warming" (which is such a lie it's ridiculous). They only do it because it is good for members of their trade. That and things like the ASCE report card which grades bridges and infrastructure. Do you really think they are going to give out an "A". I don't, because that would mean they aren't needed.
I see all these things through a critical lens because that article, to me, isn't actually trying to solve a problem, and as an engineer, that's what I do. It is, at best, trying to bring attention to a wide, vague, and generalized issue. I am a one-man shop and the folks I generally work with are small too. None of us care about sustainability, the "green" industry, or "urbanization". To us, those are often things that people that have too much time on their hands think about. That's not to say they are all bad, but I feel the pendulum is swung too far towards these broad strokes of vague articles I see.
You could wax poetic all you want about urbanization, but how about you show me a good frieze block/insulation detail for a wood roof and get that standardized in the code so that the next hurricane or earthquake doesn't wreak havoc on people. We've got a lot of people spending time worrying about "urbanization" initiatives while we can't get the residential code to have competent load paths? What are we doing? This is like the US where they are currently arguing about where transgender men should be able to use the bathroom while terrorists are dropping people into vats of nitric acid...I mean are we that tone deaf?
Point is, before I end my soap box, to me articles like this distract from real issues to point to theoretical vague issues that coalesce with what society thinks we should be doing because society doesn't understand boring things like load paths. So, while we wax poetic about the future of 'urbanization' to fit in and get published or funded for research or impress that next client, we will let an unlicensed person draw a house plan, built by a contractor who has no knowledge of load paths, signed off by an inspector that isn't an engineer.
/soap box
PS - If you are the writer, realize I am only one person and I don't say anything to offend. It is just how I personally take these articles.
RE: Sustainable Building Article
(But I don't agree with you about global warming.)
RE: Sustainable Building Article
RE: Sustainable Building Article
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Sustainable Building Article