Dewlaney, K S; Hallowell, M R and Fortunato Iii, B R (2012) Safety risk quantification for high performance sustainable building construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(8), pp. 964-971. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
A recent study found that Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified buildings have a recordable injury rate that is 9% higher than traditional, non-LEED buildings. A follow-up study showed that there are distinct aspects of the design elements and means and methods of construction used to achieve LEED certification that have negative impacts on worker safety. The research described in this paper builds on previous knowledge by quantifying the percent increase in base-level safety risk resulting from the design strategies and construction methods implemented to earn specific LEED credits. A total of 26 interviews and 11 validation interviews were conducted with designers and contractors who had completed an average of four LEED projects, 100 traditional projects, in their average of 18 years of experience in the architecture, engineering, and construction industry. The results indicate that design elements and means and methods of construction implemented to achieve 12 of the 49 LEED credits increase the frequency of injuries or exposure to known, high risk environments. The most significant impacts are a 36% increase in lacerations, strains, and sprains from recycling construction materials; a 24% increase in falls to lower level during roof work because of the installation of on-site renewable energy (e.g., PV panels); a 19% increase in eye strain when installing reflective roof membranes; and a 14% increase in exposure to harmful substances when installing innovative wastewater technologies. These results can be used to understand the safety impacts of sustainable building design, will enhance designer awareness, and help contractors to better prioritize safety resources.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | LEED; risk; safety; sustainability |
| Index terms: | exposure, renewable energy, sustainable building, sustainable building design, validation, construction method, interview, certification, injury, design strategy, roof, construction industry, construction material, environmental design, recycling, falls, designer, quantification |
| Subjects: | sustainable construction, professional development, health risk and incident analysis, design practice, public and environmental health, industry analysis, administrative processes, measurement and scaling, health conditions and diseases, building construction, waste management, design methods, profession, data collection methods, energy systems, sustainability and energy, building materials |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Design Practice, Contract Administration, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here