Bahrain's Formula-1 racing circuit: energy and environmental considerations

The Bahrain International Circuit (BIC) and complex, at latitude 26.00N and longitude 51.54E, was built in 483 days and cost 150 million US$. The circuit consists of six different individual tracks with a 3.66 km outer track (involving 10 turns) and a 2.55 km inner track (having six turns). The complex has been designed to host a variety of other sporting activities. Fifty thousand spectators, including 10,500 in the main grandstand, can be accommodated simultaneously. State-of-the art on-site media and broadcast facilities are available. The noise level emitted from vehicles on the circuit during the Formula-1 event, on April 4th 2004, was acceptable and caused no physical disturbance to the fans in the VIP lounges or to scholars studying at the University of Bahrain's Shakeir Campus, which is only 1.5 km away from the circuit. The sound-intensity level (SIL) recorded on the balcony of the VIP lounge was 128 dB(A) and was 80 dB(A) inside the lounge. The calculated SIL immediately outside the lecture halls of the University of Bahrain was 70 dB(A) and 65 dB(A) within them. Thus racing at BIC can proceed without significantly disturbing the academic-learning process. The purchased electricity demand by the BIC complex peaked (at 4.5 MW) during the first Formula-1 event on April 4th 2004. The reverse-osmosis (RO) plant at the BIC provides 1000 m(3) of desalinated water per day for landscape irrigation. Renewable-energy inputs, (i.e., via solar and wind power), at the BIC could be harnessed to generate electricity for water desalination, air conditioning, lighting as well as for irrigation. If the covering of the BIC complex was covered by adhesively fixed modern photovoltaic cells, then similar to 1.2 MW of solar electricity could be generated. If two horizontal-axis, at 150 m height above the ground, three 75m bladed, wind turbines were to be installed at the BIC, then the output could reach 4 MW. Furthermore, if 10,000 Jojoba trees (a species renowned for having a low demand for water, needing only five irrigations per year in Bahrain and which remain green throughout the year) are planted near the circuit, then the local micro-climate would be improved with respect to human comfort as well as the local environment becoming cleaner.

Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

Impression management, fabrication and myth creation in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

Sustainable urban metabolism as a link between bio-physical sciences and urban planning: the BRIDGE project

Urban metabolism considers a city as a system with flows of energy and material between it and the environment. Recent advances in bio-physical sciences provide methods and models to estimate local scale energy, water, carbon and pollutant fluxes. However, good communication is required to provide this new knowledge and its implications to endusers (such as urban planners, architects and engineers). The FP7 project BRIDGE (sustainaBle uRban plannIng Decision support accountinG for urban mEtabolism) aimed to address this gap by illustrating the advantages of considering these issues in urban planning. The BRIDGE Decision Support System (DSS) aids the evaluation of the sustainability of urban planning interventions. The Multi Criteria Analysis approach adopted provides a method to cope with the complexity of urban metabolism. In consultation with targeted end-users, objectives were defined in relation to the interactions between the environmental elements (fluxes of energy, water, carbon and pollutants) and socioeconomic components (investment costs, housing, employment, etc.) of urban sustainability. The tool was tested in five case study cities: Helsinki, Athens, London, Florence and Gliwice; and sub-models were evaluated using flux data selected. This overview of the BRIDGE project covers the methods and tools used to measure and model the physical flows, the selected set of sustainability indicators, the methodological framework for evaluating urban planning alternatives and the resulting DSS prototype.

The interaction between the physical environments and people

Buildings affect people in various ways. They can help us to work more effectively; they also present a wide range of stimuli for our senses to react to. Intelligent buildings are designed to be aesthetic in sensory terms not just visually appealing but ones in which occupants experience delight, freshness, airiness, daylight, views out and social ambience. All these factors contribute to a general aesthetic which gives pleasure and affects one’s mood. If there is to be a common vision, it is essential for architects, engineers and clients to work closely together throughout the planning, design, construction and operational stages which represent the conception, birth and life of the building. There has to be an understanding of how patterns of work are best suited to a particular building form served by appropriate environmental systems. A host of technologies are emerging that help these processes, but in the end it is how we think about achieving responsive buildings that matters. Intelligent buildings should cope with social and technological changes and also be adaptable to short-term and long-term human needs. We live through our senses. They rely on stimulation from the tasks we are focused on; people around us but also the physical environment. We breathe air and its quality affects the olfactory system; temperature is felt by thermoreceptors in the skin; sound enters our ears; the visual scene is beheld by our eyes. All these stimuli are transmitted along the sensory nervous system to the brain for processing from which physiological and psychological reactions and judgments are formed depending on perception, expectancies and past experiences. It is clear that the environmental setting plays a role in this sensory process. This is the essence of sensory design. Space plays its part as well. The flow of communication is partly electronic but also largely by people meeting face to face. Our sense of space wants different things at different times. Sometimes privacy but other times social needs have to be satisfied besides the organizational requirement to have effective human communications throughout the building. In general if the senses are satisfied people feel better and work better.