TRP the Subject of Two Case Studies By
Ted Reiff
During April and May, 2005, TRP was visited by representatives
of two well known universities: Professor David J. Hess
of the Science and Technology Studies Department at New
York's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and a team of five
graduate students from the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. In
both cases, the visitors were gathering information on the
emerging field of building materials reuse, including deconstruction,
salvage, recycling and distribution.
We are making both studies available to our readers in PDF
format on the TRP web-site. From the home page, go to the
"Press Room" and click on "Studies and Reports."
"Sustainability, the Politics of Design and Localism"
by Dr. Hess includes numerous case studies, the purpose
of which, according to Hess, is to "examine organizational,
technological, design, and social change where the goals
of environmental sustainability and economic localism intersect."
The entire collection of case studies is available on Dr.
Hess' web-site: home.earthlink.net/~davidhesshomepage/sustlocCasesTOC.html.
In "Final Project Report: Research on Building Deconstruction,"
Cal graduate students Bill Endicott, Amy Fiato, Scott Foster,
TaiLin Huang and Peter Totev thoroughly analyze a TRP deconstruction
project in Orinda, California. The case study begins on
page 20, but the entire 47 page report is well worth reading.
Studies like these typically contain less hype and more
factual data than can be found in press releases and propaganda
put out by the people and organizations in the reuse business.
As a consequence, they raise legitimate questions and, in
some cases, offer viable solutions.
New, embryonic businesses tend to attract hucksters and
quick-buck artists to the detriment of ethical entrepreneurs
and operators. I was one of the early pioneers in wind farms,
and can vouch for the “snake oil” that was promoted
and sold to unsuspecting consumers and landowners. The building
materials reuse industry is no different. We have had some
shady characters making unrealistic claims about deconstruction
costs, tax deductions, weight diversions, sustainability,
and economic development. Having neutral academicians and
students looking at our industry and using proven metrics
to analyze the pros and cons is truly a positive step towards
professionalizing the business.
Here's my parting comment (or, more honestly, parting shot)
at my friends in the smash-and-dash demolition industry:
I challenge you and your very mature industry to bring the
rigors of the university to your business practices. By
doing so I think you will recognize that it is time to “velvetize”
your crowbars.
To any subscriber who is part of academe: I welcome your
comments and, more importantly, your research and analyses.
You may contact me at any time with your thoughts and ideas.
|
