The ups and downs of life cycle thinking
– Part One
May 2016

A few years ago, I remember a government official privately saying to me, with tongue firmly in cheek, that materials degradation was the engine of the economy. Why make the incandescent light bulb last longer when a shorter life means that you sell more light bulbs? Now more than ever it is clear that such an approach is unsustainable; the planet’s resources are finite and we must think about how we can sustain our standard of living without destroying the very environment that makes that living possible in the first place. No longer can the model of “Make-Take-Dispose” survive.
When it comes to aluminium in building, the sustainability credentials of the material are evident, from the relative ease of recycling the metal, which uses some 5% of the energy needed to extract the material in the first place, to the fact that you can truly recycle metals like aluminium with no loss of properties (so no down-cycling here!) and, practically speaking, for an infinite number of times.

The International Aluminium Institute (IAI) funded “Towards Sustainable Cities” programme continues to deliver excellent qualification and, more importantly, quantification of the in-use benefits of aluminium in architecture and the built environment. A number of reports have already been published and, at the recent Qualicoat Congress, the series editor Michael Stacey of Michael Stacey Architects, presented the first report published in 2014, Aluminium and Durability. Through an examination of numerous case studies, starting with the aluminium dome of the San Gioacchino Church, built almost 120 years ago, and culminating in the Renzo Piano Building Workshop’s High Museum of Art Expansion, built in 2005, via a programme of non-destructive testing of the coated surface of the windows and cladding of several UK buildings, Michael argues that the evidence indicates that aluminium components used on the exterior of buildings could have a life expectancy of over 120 years.

While acknowledging that further research is needed, Michael proposes that from this evidence base, the service life of aluminium windows, cladding and curtain walling should be increased from 40 years to at least 80 years. His conclusion is supported with several principles of designing for durability, including the need for dimensional coordination to avoid cut ends and make-up pieces and the specification of a weather-tested system. Clearly also important are good workmanship and the specification of a well-tested and quality controlled finish. Access for cleaning and maintenance should also be built in, particularly now that this is a requirement in the UK under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations.

Michael’s presentation to the Qualicoat Congress was followed by Philipp Ambruch of Rudolf Ambruch Fassadenpflege GmbH and the German façade cleaning trade association, Gütegemeinschaft Reinigung Fassaden e.V. (or GRM if you prefer…). Philipp was concerned with preserving the value of facades through sustainable cleaning methods. He showed how regular cleaning can restore the surface of a façade and stated that the expected useful life of a regularly cleaned aluminium façade is up to 80 years, tying up neatly with Michael’s research. To that end, GRM has produced a quality standard, with supporting quality assurance and test specifications. Despite the fact that cleaning will extend the useful life of the façade and thereby increasing office rental incomes, building sales prices and the reputation of the coater, as Michael’s research has also showed, not all building owners undertake the regular cleaning required.

In the second part of this article, we will explore this situation in the context of the third report in the IAI series, Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking, with the increasing importance of Environmental Product Declarations for construction products.