A comparison of structural and behavioural adaptations to future proofing buildings against higher temperatures

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 34 Citations

Abstract

The uncertainty surrounding projections of climate change has left the building design community in a quandary. Should they assume a worst case scenario, and recommend adaptations to designs that might prove to be unnecessary and quite possibly costly? Or should they increase the risk to the occupants by selecting a less pessimistic vision of the future? It is well known that structural adaptations, such as additional thermal mass, can help moderate internal conditions as can behavioural adaptations, such as opening windows. Here the relative magnitudes of structural and non-structural (behavioural) adaptations are reflected upon, with the specific intent of discovering whether non-structural adaptations might have a great enough effect to offset any errors from selecting what proves to be (in 40 years time) an erroneous choice of climate change projection. It is found that an alteration to how a building is used is as equally important as common structural adaptations, and that the risk of choosing what turns out to be an incorrect climate change projection can be dealt with by seeing non-structural adaptations as a way of nullifying this risk.
LanguageEnglish
Pages159-166
Number of pages8
JournalBuilding and Environment
Volume55
DOIs
StatusPublished - Sep 2012

Fingerprint

Climate change
building
projection
climate change
Temperature
architectural design
comparison
uncertainty
scenario
community
Uncertainty
Hot Temperature

Cite this

@article{2adad4185dc74a149325bc3feccac368,
title = "A comparison of structural and behavioural adaptations to future proofing buildings against higher temperatures",
abstract = "The uncertainty surrounding projections of climate change has left the building design community in a quandary. Should they assume a worst case scenario, and recommend adaptations to designs that might prove to be unnecessary and quite possibly costly? Or should they increase the risk to the occupants by selecting a less pessimistic vision of the future? It is well known that structural adaptations, such as additional thermal mass, can help moderate internal conditions as can behavioural adaptations, such as opening windows. Here the relative magnitudes of structural and non-structural (behavioural) adaptations are reflected upon, with the specific intent of discovering whether non-structural adaptations might have a great enough effect to offset any errors from selecting what proves to be (in 40 years time) an erroneous choice of climate change projection. It is found that an alteration to how a building is used is as equally important as common structural adaptations, and that the risk of choosing what turns out to be an incorrect climate change projection can be dealt with by seeing non-structural adaptations as a way of nullifying this risk.",
author = "David Coley and Kershaw, {T J} and M Eames",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.12.011",
language = "English",
volume = "55",
pages = "159--166",
journal = "Building and Environment",
issn = "0360-1323",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of structural and behavioural adaptations to future proofing buildings against higher temperatures

AU - Coley, David

AU - Kershaw, T J

AU - Eames, M

PY - 2012/9

Y1 - 2012/9

N2 - The uncertainty surrounding projections of climate change has left the building design community in a quandary. Should they assume a worst case scenario, and recommend adaptations to designs that might prove to be unnecessary and quite possibly costly? Or should they increase the risk to the occupants by selecting a less pessimistic vision of the future? It is well known that structural adaptations, such as additional thermal mass, can help moderate internal conditions as can behavioural adaptations, such as opening windows. Here the relative magnitudes of structural and non-structural (behavioural) adaptations are reflected upon, with the specific intent of discovering whether non-structural adaptations might have a great enough effect to offset any errors from selecting what proves to be (in 40 years time) an erroneous choice of climate change projection. It is found that an alteration to how a building is used is as equally important as common structural adaptations, and that the risk of choosing what turns out to be an incorrect climate change projection can be dealt with by seeing non-structural adaptations as a way of nullifying this risk.

AB - The uncertainty surrounding projections of climate change has left the building design community in a quandary. Should they assume a worst case scenario, and recommend adaptations to designs that might prove to be unnecessary and quite possibly costly? Or should they increase the risk to the occupants by selecting a less pessimistic vision of the future? It is well known that structural adaptations, such as additional thermal mass, can help moderate internal conditions as can behavioural adaptations, such as opening windows. Here the relative magnitudes of structural and non-structural (behavioural) adaptations are reflected upon, with the specific intent of discovering whether non-structural adaptations might have a great enough effect to offset any errors from selecting what proves to be (in 40 years time) an erroneous choice of climate change projection. It is found that an alteration to how a building is used is as equally important as common structural adaptations, and that the risk of choosing what turns out to be an incorrect climate change projection can be dealt with by seeing non-structural adaptations as a way of nullifying this risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860446015&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.12.011

U2 - 10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.12.011

DO - 10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.12.011

M3 - Article

VL - 55

SP - 159

EP - 166

JO - Building and Environment

T2 - Building and Environment

JF - Building and Environment

SN - 0360-1323

ER -