Technical Report: Draft 1 Smart Meter

Background

This proposal is with regards to the Call for Proposal (CFP) by Energy Market Authority (EMA) in developing technical solutions for a smart metering trial.

Known globally for being a "clean and green" country, Singapore continues to improve on this aspect through educating the community as well as implementing sustainable solutions to current problems. The masterplan target by the Inter-ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development(IMCSD) is to make at least 80% of its buildings green by 2030(mnd.gov.sg, 2011).  Transparency of the building's energy performance would provide building owners relevant data to analyse(BCA website, 2017), bridging the goal to more greener buildings in the future.

According to EMA (2016), the current metering system by a typical building in Singapore is to read the electricity, gas and water meter individually. The facilities management staff members are required to obtain the different meter reading from a different location in the building manually. Thus, the current process of obtaining the energy consumption data could be tedious and time-consuming for the facilities management staff members.

As there are many meters located in different places in the hospital, collecting of data can be time-consuming. By implementing a smart metering system in Singapore hospitals, it allows the facilities management staff members to have access to energy consumption data remotely (EMA, 2016). This saves the facilities management staff members from the tedious process of locating all the different meters to get the essential data they need.

Problem statement 

An integrated utilities metering system in public hospitals should aim to make data collection of energy consumption to be more efficient and transparent for the facilities staff members.

However, collating gas, electrical and water consumption data remotely (ema.gov.sg, 2016) for the facilities management staff members in the hospital is currently not implemented.

By implementing a smart metering system, the facility management staff members are able to retrieve and access the energy consumption remotely for smoother operation flow.

Purpose statement

The aim of this report is to propose the implementation of Anacle smart energy management solution to the hospitals in Singapore. The solution includes installation of smart meters which helps the facility management team to manage their energy consumption efficiently and the data analyst to study the pattern of it. The solution would also improve the BMS and the operational needs in the hospital.

Reader's Response: Draft 3

According to the article, “Use of cladding buildings here have grown in recent times: Experts,” Faris Mokhtar (2017) reports the opinions of experts regarding the usage of cladding in the midst of the Grenfell Tower fire incident which took the lives of many. “Engineering experts” claim that cladding reinforces the aesthetics and durability of the building. However, cladding potentially extends as a fire hazard. Different climates require different cladding methods. Here in Singapore, the cladding procedure has standards to ensure fire safety by the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF).  Although Faris used the Grenfell tower incident as an example that cladding is more detrimental than beneficial, he could have further investigated if the building had passed the standards of cladding to make fair judgement overall.

Firstly, Faris should have investigated in more detail what really happened as well as the history of Grenfell tower's implementation on cladding. Grenfell tower has a history of close to 50 years with regular upgrades and refurbishment in recent years. This included new exterior cladding of the building which was done last May 2016. However, from the article "London fire: What happened at Grenfell Tower? (2017)," it was reported that the cause of the fire was narrowed down to the cladding of the building. Specialists spoke up to say that the standard for the materials used could be more fire-resistant. It was also later inspected that both the cladding and insulation of the building did not pass the preliminary tests conducted by the police concluding that insulation specimens burnt more quickly than the cladding tiles. Harrabin (2017), an environment analyst commented that even though cladding can be used for better insulation and other benefits, it should be used with caution and implemented correctly. The building owners for Grenfell towers, however, did not adhere to the regulations.

Secondly, Faris could have also further investigated about the rationale behind the choice of materials used in cladding. Building owners are encouraged to make their building more sustainable and this was the case for the Grenfell tower. Their motive to upgrade their building was to make things greener. However, along with the upgrade comes the cost. Trying their best to shrink down the overall cost, they failed to adhere to the standards of the cladding. From the article "Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version'(2017)," reports indicate that the originally proposed material substituted was a less fire-resistant class which saved them thousands of pounds. The material used to be implemented was revealed to have never passed the standards in the United States. This raises some questions about the standards that were put in place by government officials in the UK. How building owners were able to purchase materials that were easily susceptible to fire.

Lastly, the writer could also look into other possibilities such as the policies on cladding that were currently put into place. Regulations in the British standards of cladding has been scrutinised. It was reported that the government officials had been warned by various engineers and fire safety experts in the country regarding the cladding regulations. Efforts were futile as the constant reminders only fell on deaf ears. Glanz (2017) recounts a Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order- a law that dropped the necessity for official inspectors to approve that buildings had met certain standards. Instead, they stirred to "self-policing". The Grenfell Towers incident could have been avoided had the authorities cared more for their people. Implementing stricter regulations and conducting regular tests in cladding of the buildings could go a long way.

After studying the case of the Grenfell Tower incident, I was able to better comprehend what really happened. Faris' report was true to some extent that the cause of the fire that broke out was due to the cladding. However, this was only because of the weak policy implemented by the British standards. The cause of the downfall of Grenfell Tower was the accumulation of failed supervision by the building owners and the lenient policy by the government on cladding. 

References

T. Symonds, D. De Simone. (2017, June 30). Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version'. BBC News. Retrieved September 21,2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40453054

London fire: Six questions for the investigation. (2017, July 19). BBC News. Retrieved September 21,

2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40279944

London fire: What happened at Grenfell Tower? (2017, July 19). BBC News. Retrieved September 21,

2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40272168

M.Faris. (2017, June 17). Use of cladding in buildings have grown in recent times: Experts. TODAY. Retrieved September 18, 2017, from http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/use-cladding-buildings-here-have-grown-recent-times-experts

D. D. Kirkpatrick, D. Hakim, J. Glanz. (2017, June 24). Why Grenfell Tower Burned: Regulators Put Cost Before Safety. The New York Times. Retrieved September 21, 2017, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/24/world/europe/grenfell-tower-london-fire.html?mcubz=3

Updated:
13/10/2017

Reader's Response: Draft 2

According to the article, “Use of cladding buildings here have grown in recent times: Experts,” Faris Mokhtar (2017) reports the opinions of experts regarding the usage of cladding in the midst of the Grenfell Tower fire incident, which took the lives of many. “Engineering experts” claim that cladding reinforces the aesthetics and durability of the building. However, cladding potentially extends as a fire hazard. Different climates require different cladding methods. Here in Singapore, the cladding procedure has standards to ensure fire safety by the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). Although Faris used the Grenfell tower incident as an example that cladding could pose a threat, he could have further investigated if the building had passed the standards of cladding to make fair judgement overall.

Grenfell tower has a history of close to 50 years with regular upgrades and refurbishment in recent years. This included new exterior cladding of the building which was done last May 2016. However, in the article "London fire: What happened at Grenfell Tower?(2017)", it was reported that the cause of the fire was narrowed down to the cladding of the building. Specialists spoke up to say that the standard for the materials used could be more fire-resistant. It was also later inspected that both the cladding and insulation of the building did not pass the preliminary tests conducted by the police concluding that insulation specimens burnt more quickly than the cladding tiles. From another source titled "London fire: Six questions for the investigation," Harrabin(2017), an environment analyst commented that even though cladding can be used for better insulation and other benefits, it should be used with caution and implemented correctly. The building owners for Grenfell towers, however, did not heed to the regulations.

Building owners are encouraged to make their building more sustainable and this was the case for the Grenfell tower. Their motive to upgrade their building was to make things greener. However, along with the upgrade comes the cost as well. Trying their best to shrink down the overall cost, they failed to adhere to the standards of the cladding. From the article "Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version'(2017)," reports indicate that the originally proposed material substituted was with a less fire-resistant class which saved them thousands of pounds. The material used to be implemented has said to have never passed the standards of the United States. This raises some questions about the standards that were put in place by government officials in the UK. How were building owners able to purchase materials that were easily susceptible to fire.

Regulations in the British standards of cladding has also been scrutinised. From the article "Why Grenfell Tower Burned: Regulators Put Cost Before Safety(2017)," it was investigated that the government officials have been warned by various engineers and fire safety experts in the country but only fell on deaf ears even after the Lakanal House incident which occurred in 2013 which left many injured and killed six victims. Glanz(2017) recounts a Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order- a law, that dropped the necessity for official inspectors to approve that buildings have met certain standards. Instead, they stirred to "self-policing". All of this incident could have been avoided had the authorities cared more for their people. Implementing stricter regulations and conducting regular tests in cladding of the buildings could go a long way.

After studying the case of the Grenfell Tower incident, it is true to some extent that the cause of the fire that broke out was due to the cladding. However, this was only because of the weak policy that is being implemented by the British standards. It was the accumulation of failed supervision by the building owners of Grenfell Towers and the lenient government policy on cladding that contributed to the fatal incident of the fire.

References

London fire: What happened at Grenfell Tower? (2017). Retrieved September 21,

        2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40272168

London fire: Six questions for the investigation. Retrieved September 21,

        2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40279944

Author, T. Symonds (2017), D. De Simone (2017). Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version'. September 21,

        2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40453054

Author,  D. D. KIRKPATRICK(2017), D. HAKIM(2017), J. GLANZ(2017). Why Grenfell Tower Burned: Regulators Put Cost Before Safety. Retrieved September 21,

        2017, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/24/world/europe/grenfell-tower-london-fire.html?mcubz=3