The Daily Mail reports:
Pupils at an ‘eco-school’ will have to be taught in temporary accommodation because the three-year-old ‘environmentally-friendly’ building which cost £7million to construct is leaking.
Dartington Primary School near Totnes in Devon was opened to great fanfare three years ago as one of the first ‘zero-carbon’ teaching facilities in the country.
The building’s architects even won a prestigious international design award for their creation of ‘one of the greenest schools in Britain’.
But now Devon County Council may sue architectural firm White Design because the building is leaking so badly the school’s 320 pupils can no longer be taught inside it.
Did nobody at the school board even glace at the plans? They should all be sacked.
Here’s a thought. Why not make the building an office complex for the Climate Change Ministry? That way they could enjoy the fruits of their labor. Oh and build a real school for the kiddos.
And it releases Heat while it cures. The Heat will melt the polar caps and we will all die.
I read somewhere eco-freaks think concrete is one of the worst evils in the world because it somehow emits CO2. Yeah cinderblocks stuffed with insulation would do the trick.
Being green is the only real career opportunity for the ignorant.
Environmentalism is affirmative action for mentally deficient people.
One example of environmentalism is the pseudo science field of climate change, where consensus trumps the scientific method. To be a climate scientist the only requirement is to be close to simpleminded as possible, otherwise groupthink breaks down.
“The wide ciderblock walls of my elementary school insulated us well against the Texas Heat.”
Me too in South Carolina. We could see the asbestos insulation applied to the blocks. Worked great.
My question: what’s unsustainable about concrete? You can build building out of cinderblocks and it will hold up to anything you can throw at it, up to and including vehicles and tornados. Surely a single wall that will last for ages is more “environmentally friendly” than short-lived wood panels. The wide ciderblock walls of my elementary school insulated us well against the Texas Heat. Why wouldn’t they do the same against British cold?
Then, as for the roof, come on. That’s just unacceptable. We’ve been building roofs out of all sorts of materials since the dawn of time, and there’s no excuse for making a building that leaks so much that it’s condemned after 3 years. There’s nothing unusual or unsound about the concept of making a building energy efficient. It’s their nonsensical adherence to “green” tenets and “sustainability” over actual sustainable and suitable construction. Or it could just be shoddy workmanship. Either way, it’s ridiculous
The kids should be compelled to take classes there. They will never forget the meaning of “green” and “environmentally-friendly.”
I just looked at the school’s website and glanced at a few pictures, including Google Maps. The structures have *unvarnished* wood shingles and siding (with already evident warping), and large flat sections of roof. In the dry Desert Southwest of the US, that may last for a few decades, but in a humid climate such as Devonshire, and occasional snow accumulations, that kind is ‘sustainability’ is not going to last very long.
No (direct) connection, but recently I was in a meeting where members of several university departments convened to start up a common project. One was an architect; he introduced himself by saying, “The purpose of my work is to combat climate change”. I understood from the details the combatant revealed that his main adversaries were living and parking space, lighting, and ventilation.
It looks like the authors of this school building were in addition besieged by lead, tar, and other roofing materials.