With regard to your article entitled “Civil Servants trained in Energy Conservation”, published on Friday 29 April 2011, the Ministry of Energy and Mining is to be commended for taking this initiative, with support from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It is enlightening that those trained to be energy monitors are taken from various ministries, government departments and agencies to lead their respective organizations in implementing our government’s special policy of achieving energy efficiency and conservation.

                When I first read of government’s intention to drastically cut the public sector’s energy bill by 15% during the current financial year, I thought this, like the previous year’s directive, was doomed to failure because nothing had changed this time around. I stand corrected: a change has indeed been made. Not only has a specific goal and time-frame been set, but one that is measureable and now seems achievable. I am encouraged, but still worried that further resources that are required are yet to be allocated.

I am, etc.

Posted by phcjam at 12:01 AM EDT

Updated: Monday, 16 May 2011 1:18 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Dear Editor,

                I am in agreement with Noel Mitchell’s letter entitled “Solar is the way to go”, which was printed in your paper, dated 27 April 2011. Jamaica should be utilizing much more solar energy than we presently do. But, utilization of photovoltaic (PV) panels (i.e. solar panels) is somewhat limited by their current inefficiency. Hence, large unshaded areas are required for their installation. Whenever a building exceeds three stories there is simply not enough roof space to accommodate all the panels needed to provide all of the buildings’ energy demand. So, individuals and small businesses most likely possess the required space to accommodate the panels, but initial costs may be unaffordable. Conversely “large buildings such as hotels, large office complexes”, some government ministries and hospitals will not have all the required space, though they may have the means to afford the installation. This is also the case with solar water heaters, and both are liabilities when hurricanes threaten.

However, an often overlooked yet effective solar technology is the use of daylight as a substitute for electric light. This is called “Daylighting”. You will realise that natural light was used to illuminate buildings before the advent of electricity. Today, it may simply entail the use of switches to control lighting fixtures adjacent to windows independent from areas deeper in a room: which will be darker. But, research has shown that occupants cannot be trusted to control these switches effectively; so, the current technology uses photocells to automatically dim or switch off electric lights as natural lighting levels increase. Again, space is an issue. Typically only spaces up to 4.5 or 6m in from windows can be “daylit”, though this can be increased by technology that is already in use at PCJ’s office building. Nevertheless, research again shows that daylighting will effect significant energy savings under these conditions, and especially in environments as our own.

So, it is possible to utilize solar energy for the greater part of our buildings’ energy demand. But, potential savings are even greater with use of more than one solar technology. Our government has proposing to use PV panels for street lights, which would be a worthwhile investment if and when it gets implemented. However, it may prove even more effective to provide incentives for the private sector to utilize more solar energy, while the government itself seeks to use more solar energy. Then, we could have a bright future, even when the price of oil is volatile.

Posted by phcjam at 12:01 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I write with regard to your article of Wednesday, 20 April 2011, entitled “Cut Energy Use, Finance ministry tells state bodies”.  The government is to be commended for seeking to reduce its energy use by 15% within this fiscal year. However, this initiative seems doomed to repeat the fate of the previous year: when the same directive was issued and most ministries and departments failed to realize the target. What really has changed?

It is not often that government initiatives have specific goals, are measureable and time-based. But, I do not believe this initiative is  realistic. Where are the resources needed to implement it? We are told of contingencies to deal with energy costs, and the cutting of budgetary allocations set aside for utilities. But, what has been provided to effect this programme of energy conservation, or the strict conservation measures to be implemented? This may be disclosed later as the budget debate continues. But, let me put this in perspective.

Building Codes for energy conservation typically seek to have new buildings effect a 30% reduction of energy use compared to existing buildings.  With the exception of the Petroleum Corporation of Jamaica and the proposed Students’ Loan Bureau, none of government’s buildings were designed for energy conservation. This significantly reduces their potential for energy conservation; unless government is aware of areas of wastage that can be addressed. Nevertheless, a 15% reduction in energy use may be attained with implementation of some type of energy management system and planned process for organizational change: where staff is trained to be supportive of the initiative.

This is not a residential environment, where a single individual can control the scheduled operating hours for appliances and lights. It is significantly more complex for an organization such as the government and needs to be approached as a distinct project: key milestones established, target dates set, general and specific responsibilities delegated and satisfactorily resources allocated. Automatic timers may be needed to control operating hours of major equipment and security lighting. Motion sensors may be needed in Lavatories and similar spaces. In fact, multi-building facilities such as the Ministries of Finance and Education, may need supervisory locations to monitor energy use.

In conclusion, our government needs to investigate and select an energy management system based on its associated lifecycle cost, plan a change process for the civil service, and allocate the requisite resources to achieve their stated goal of energy conservation.  Whether all this can be done within the financial year to allow time for achieving the goal is another matter. But, they cannot give the ministries and departments baskets to carry water and expect better results than before. The initiative will again fail if they fail to empower the ministries and departments.

I am, etc.

Paul Hay MBA, BA(Arch.)

Managing Partner

PAUL HAY Capital Projects

Caribbean Capital Projects Management

P. O. Box 3367

Kingston 8

Jamaica, W.I.

tel: 1 (876) 756-0631

cel: 1 (876) 324-4274

fax: 1 (876) 756-0631

web: www.phcjam.com

e-mail: paul.hay@phcjam.com

skype name: phcjam

profile: www.linkedin.com/in/phcjam

twitter: www.twitter.com/phcjam

Posted by phcjam at 9:07 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I read with interest your article in the Financial Gleaner, of 5 November 2010, entitled “ Ja slides to 81^st in Doing Business rankings”.  It is clear, from the World Bank’s assessment, that regulatory reforms were instituted in the majority of economies to improve ease of doing business and “New Technology underpins regulatory best practice”.  This in mind, I write to briefly explain how Singapore manages to lead the world: at least with regard to dealing with construction projects.

                As early as 1995, Singapore’s Ministry of National Development implemented a project called CORENET: which stands for Construction and Real Estate NETwork.  Its objective was to re-engineer processes in the construction industry to achieve faster turn-around times, as well as increased productivity and quality.  CORENET was implemented by the Singapore Building and Construction Authority in collaboration with other public and private organizations.  An I.T. infrastructure was developed to facilitate integration of processes in a building’s life cycle: such as Design, Procurement, Construction, and Maintenance.

                The current effort provides (1) information services to speed up business planning and decision making; (2) electronic building plan submission, checking and approval; as well as (3) IT standards for communication between involved parties.  The benefits involve provision of (a) one-stop convenience for private and public sectors alike; (b) one-stop submission of plans to multiple authorities from any location at any time; (c) online access to check submission status; and (d) single billboard for approving authorities to post submission status.

                While we argue how to approve submissions within 3-months, Singapore is doing it earlier.  But, this did not occur overnight.  It started with the political will to improve the system, then the allocation of resources and controls to achieve it.  It really depends on how important business is to the political directorate and whether it is willing to look beyond short-term fixes to a long-term overhaul  for the ultimate good of Jamaica, and those doing business in it.

I am, etc.

Paul Hay MBA, BA(Arch.)

Managing Partner

PAUL HAY Capital Projects

Strategic project planning & implementation

for Caribbean-based businesses

P. O. Box 3367

Kingston 8

Jamaica, W.I.

tel: 1 (876) 756-0631

cel: 1 (876) 324-4274

fax: 1 (876) 756-0631

web: www.phcjam.com

e-mail: paul.hay@phcjam.com

skype name: phcjam

profile: www.linkedin.com/in/phcjam

twitter: www.twitter.com/phcjam

Posted by phcjam at 11:49 AM EST

Updated: Tuesday, 15 March 2011 7:49 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I noticed a number of references to the National Building Code in the Bureau of Standards Jamaica advertisement in The Gleaner's Wednesday Business section, and wondered what has become of the promised legislation and national building-control framework.

In your Editor's Forum, published on February 7, experts discussed lessons learnt from the Haitian earthquake six months ago, and stated that "the failure of successive governments to pass legislation to introduce a national building code could put the lives of many Jamaicans at risk if the country gets hit by a major earthquake." Your editorial of February 10 even noted that "substantial work has already been done on a code for Jamaica. It ought to be possible to complete the relevant law, in relatively short order, and have it passed by Parliament."

No word of progress

In an article titled 'New Building Codes Coming', on April 4, it was even stated that "Cabinet has issued instruction for the drafting of legislation to establish a national control framework for the island." Three months later, there is still no word of progress made. Late in 2004, I was involved in one of the several working groups charged with the review and adoption of the International Code Council's [ICC] 2003 edition of the International Building Code [IBC]. So, I can speak to the dedication and effort made by local academics, architects, engineers and lawyers, who volunteered their time to complete that goal. Work was completed in approximately one year and emphasis shifted to training. In the meantime, ICC was consistently revised by IBC on a three-year cycle. So, the code reviewed has been revised twice so far - in 2006 and 2009.

The longer Parliament takes to deal with this matter, the more outdated the work becomes. I would hope that we could see Parliament pass the relevant law before the international code is again revised.

I am, etc.

Paul Hay BA (Arch.),

Dip(Bus. Admin.)

Managing Partner

PAUL HAY Capital Projects

Posted by phcjam at 7:00 PM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 15 March 2011 7:52 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

THE EDITOR, Sir:

With regard to the current debate about constructing a new Parliament building, it may prove informative to consider a similar case involving the construction of the new Australian parliament building completed 18 years ago.

Australia's provisional Parlia-ment House was built in 1927 in their then new national capital Canberra and was intended to last only 50 years. After 38 years in the facility, a joint select committee of parliament was constituted to consider the need for a new building. Five years later, in 1970, this committee recommended that the planning, design and construction of the new building should be overseen by a joint standing committee.

In 1977, the joint standing committee recommended that the new parliament building be completed for occupation in 1988 (75 years after the completion of the provisional parliament building) to coincide with the bicentenary of European settlement of Australia.

It took them two years to establish a comprehensive set of requirements for the building and a statutory body was established and charged as project managers for the design and construction of this building alone. The whole process took 23 years from constitution of the joint select committee to occupation of the new parliament building.

Granted our Parliament would be much smaller, but the neccessary planning, design and eventual construction will most likely take longer than a single parliamentary term, and maybe we need a specific event to commemorate, such as the 50th year of independence.

I am, etc.,

PAUL HAY

Managing partner

PAUL HAY Capital Projects

15a Cassia Park Road

Kingston 10

Posted by phcjam at 12:01 AM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 23 April 2011 2:00 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink