This general issue of Engineering Sustainability contains a fascinating collection of academically-focussed papers seeking to contribute to the UN Sustainable Development Goals and these laudable aspirations have been substantially achieved, albeit in theoretical findings and conclusions.
The built environment professions have diligently sought to meet a plethora of carbon reducing, responsible material sourcing, socially and environmentally friendly targets. To develop systems that respond therefore to the globally accepted UN SDGs and systems rests in the domain and responsibility of both academia and industry, as well as having intelligent clients and government agencies, and their advisors, that know what works.
Rigour in analyses, validation of results and the proposed conclusions/findings, followed by their application is a routine academic activity, but allows certain ‘trial and error’; similarly the test laboratory context does not always lend itself to reasonable scaling-up from prototype to full-scale application.
This Journal allows for the expression of views and offers potential solutions, permitting a range of authors to share views, present significant bibliographies, demonstrate academic rigour, explain testing systems and suggest real-life solutions. This issue of six international papers goes a long way to providing a platform for academic authors, addressing possible ways ahead and responding to the UN SDGs across the themes of Affordable and Clean Energy (SDG 7), Climate Action (SDG 13), Responsible consumption and Production (SDG 13) and the comprehensive SDG9 addressing Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure.
It would be a surprise if this Journal did not address SDGs, and that is why it should be essential reading for those who are studying in Higher Education, especially at Level 7 Masters level; it is not always expected that papers are grounded in academic research.
The initial paper by two Brazilian and three Australian University teachers is the most complex paper with the commensurate potential to provide industry with significant findings; their thesis on ‘Multi-objective optimisation of the level of prefabrication in construction projects’ (de Moura Jorge et al. 2024) describes an innovative method for the develop a framework for a multi-objective binary particle swarm optimisation (MOBPSO) tool to optimise the level of Off Site Manufacturing OSM as adopted in a project. The panacea of ensuring significant advantages of increased construction quality, productivity and efficiency is well established in this study.
The second and third papers attempt to address the outcomes of SDG 7, albeit in different contexts. The paper on ‘A new method for analysis of marine sustainable energy systems’ by (Wang, 2024), uses a new adaptive kernel density estimation (KDE) methodology based on linear diffusion processes for predicting the probability distribution tails of sea-state parameters. This complex study addresses sea severity statistically to provide vital information for the design, installation and operation of marine sustainable energy systems – truly a SDG7 study!
SDG7 features heavily, in a different context, in the paper by an Iranian Architectural Engineering student on ‘Thermal conductivity of an external wall with a simulated smart aerogel insulation system’ (Iravani, 2024). Modern technologies are more than ever adopting intelligent designs that respond to environmental variants to produce more desirable outcomes. In the building and housing industries, intelligent designs aim to conserve energy through temperature controls and energy storage and distribution systems. An intelligent aerogel insulation system is studied for exterior building walls. Kaveh Iravani presented succinctly this new approach to external walls in order to use environmental conditions for heating and cooling buildings and also to reduce their thermal losses. The author concluded that the external wall in its ‘new smart configuration’ showed 2.7 times more efficiency than its non-smart counterpart!
Papers read well when there is a systematic approach and good illustrations and graphical representations of the analyses and findings. The paper on ‘Performance evaluation of prefabricated retaining wall systems based on centrifuge tests’ written by (Qu et al., 2024) along with representatives from industry in China and his academic colleague from Cambridge University, meets that good illustrations expectation. SDG 13 is at the heart of this paper as it is evident that the component design of retaining wall systems not only directly affects costs but also has an optimal relationship with carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, designing retaining wall systems for different sites based on engineering characteristics is surely an effective sustainable development plan. Current prefabricated retaining wall systems are often difficult to apply in complex and variable construction sites due to issues such as inconsistent production dimensions and transportation difficulties. This novel prefabricated retaining wall system reports on centrifuge model tests performed to analyse its overall performance – a ‘must read’ for any geotechnical engineer.
The second SDG13 paper in this general issue on ‘Life-cycle-based considerations in design of driven piles in sand’ by American and Australian authors (de Melo et al., 2024) is another ‘soil mechanics read’. It conducts a life-cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impacts of driven shafts across 12No. different siliceous sand sites, selected from a database of static load pile tests. Through parametric studies, it investigates the influence of soil properties, pile geometry and on-site activities on environmental impacts. The multiple-criteria-based LCA sought to quantify several environmental flows e.g. energy use and carbon dioxide emission, and impact indicators and global warming potential (GWP) and acidification potential. Significantly this stimulating paper concludes, among others, that material production i.e. steel or concrete, on average, is the most impactful life-cycle phase, accounting for an average of 88.4% of GWP per unit capacity. The least impactful life-cycle phase, on average, is on-site operations, which accounted for approximately 1% of GWP per unit capacity!
The final paper in this broad mix considered SDG9 and SDG13 as important. Written by four Chilean academics, ‘Analysis of wood fly ash as a sustainable alternative to cement replacement in concrete’ (Ewert et al., 2024) had several direct applications in the Chilean environment – such findings would do well to be transferrable to differing climates. Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) can contribute to reducing the carbon dioxide footprint of concrete and one such is wood fly ash, known as biomass fly ash (BFA), which is waste from wood production. This paper describes the behaviour of concrete mixtures with replacements of eucalyptus BFA (BFAE) or pine BFA (BFAP) at 0, 10 and 20% by weight of cement. One of the key findings is that the replacement of cement with BFAE and BFAP up to 20% did not modify significantly the mechanical properties of concrete mixtures, as well as the compressive and flexural strengths in comparison with reference mixtures. In consequence, Chilean BFAP and BFAE are suitable for use in concrete mixtures, thereby reducing the carbon footprint – another important environmental benefit.
This comprehensive general issue proves that there are a range of international authors seeking a presence in this key Journal – perhaps one of the readers has a story to tell, especially if it sits well with the UN SDG. For further information, contact support@emerald.com
