Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 2 May 2023
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government
Modern Construction Methods: Discussion
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome you all to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Today we will have the first of two meetings at which the committee has agreed to look at modern construction methods. I thank you all for your attendance to assist us with this. The committee recently visited the Mount Lucas to have a look at some of the learnings there and at the training on modern construction methods. It was quite an impressive day. We learned a little bit about it and I hope we will all learn a little bit more about it this afternoon.
We are joined by the following witnesses: from Coillte, Mr. Mark Carlin, managing director, and Mr. Des O'Toole, marketing and communications director; from the National Standards Authority or Ireland, Ms Geraldine Larkin, CEO, Mr. Enda McDonnell, Mr Seán Balfe and Ms Yvonne Wylde; from the Office of Public Works, Mr Ciaran O'Connor, State architect and commissioner, and Mr. Gerard Harvey, assistant principal architect; from SOLAS, Mr. Andrew Brownlee, CEO, and Mr. Tony Dalton, director of further education and training at Laois-Offaly ETB. Opening statements and briefings have been circulated to members.
I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where the Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in meetings. For those witnesses attending in the committee room, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their contributions to today's meetings. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. Both members and witnesses are expected not to abuse the privilege they enjoy.
It is my duty as Chair to ensure this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that witnesses comply with any such direction. Members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
I now invite Mr. Carlin to make his opening statement on behalf of Coillte, followed by Ms Larkin of the NSAI, Mr. O'Connor of the OPW and Mr. Brownlee of SOLAS, in that order. Following the statements, members would usually have seven minutes each to put their questions and get answers from the witnesses. As we do not have a full attendance today, I should be able to allow more time for each member.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
I thank the Chairman and members for the opportunity to engage with the committee on modern methods of construction. I am joined by my colleague Mr. Des O'Toole, who works extensively with our forest industries to develop and promote the use of home-grown timber in applications such as modern methods of construction, which is the main topic of discussion today.
Our forests have never been more important to society in addressing many of the challenges we face today, including climate change and biodiversity loss, and in providing a valuable source of products and materials that will help to drive sustainable living. Recognising this, Coillte recently launched a new long-term vision for our future forest estate that aims to balance and deliver the multiple benefits from our forests across four strategic pillars, namely, climate, nature, wood and people. Our ambition is to create new forests and manage existing forests for greater carbon capture and to provide more habitats to protect and enhance biodiversity. Additionally, we will increase forest recreation areas for everyone to enjoy. We will also support the creation of new homes by continuing to deliver sustainable Irish wood products that will underpin the decarbonisation of our built environment.
Ireland's built environment currently represents 37% of overall annual greenhouse gas emissions, with 14% of these being in the form of embodied carbon, that is, the carbon required to construct our buildings. Timber products have a dual advantage over traditional building products in that they have a lower embodied carbon and a higher level of stored carbon. A recent report by the National Council for Forest Research and Development, COFORD, looked at both the embodied carbon and the carbon stored in building materials. The report clearly identifies a net carbon saving of 8 tonnes of carbon dioxide when we build a timber-frame home rather than a traditional one. This equates to a two and a half times net carbon saving for each new home built.
The benefits of building with wood for mitigating climate change are well understood, but we can do much more in this regard. Today, only about 25% of housing units in Ireland are built with timber frames, whereas the figure is closer to 80% in Scotland and is even higher in Scandinavia. Therefore, there is an opportunity in Ireland to embrace timber-based modern methods of construction at a meaningful scale. In addition to the obvious climate benefits of building with wood, there are many other advantages. The off-site prefabrication of timber frames and mass timber, such as glued laminated timber, glulam, and cross-laminated timber, CLT, provides a quality-controlled environment that results in less waste and fewer environmental impacts from construction. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, 8.2 million tonnes of construction waste was generated in 2020. Prefabrication significantly reduces on-site waste, thereby supporting our circular economy. Using prefabrication is also much less labour intensive, enabling us to build homes faster than with traditional methods of construction. For example, a typical timber-frame home is more than six times quicker to build on-site, taking only one week to construct the main structure.
In order to be able to take advantage of the many benefits of building with wood, key enablers must be put in place. The first enabler relates to policy and regulation. It is worth noting that unlike our European counterparts, Ireland does not have a culture of using wood in construction. Our building regulations currently have a 10 m height limit for the use of timber, which equates to only three storeys. Mass timber buildings of up to 24 storeys are being constructed elsewhere. The regulations must be changed in Ireland. We are also of the view that embodied carbon needs to be measured and quantified for all new builds. We must prioritise low-carbon materials and fast-track the introduction of embodied carbon targets and thresholds.
Another enabler relates to education and promotion. The traditional methods with which we construct our buildings are being challenged. We need to promote a better understanding of the benefits of building with timber and provide the necessary technical guidance and support to our design professionals to allow them to build with these new technologies.
Demonstrator buildings are another enabler. There is an opportunity to demonstrate the advantages of building with wood in our public building and social housing projects.
These projects will help to drive demand, grow skills and increase confidence in these building technologies, which will allow the industry to build capacity and increase investment.
Looking forward, we are very well positioned to take advantage of the opportunity to increase the use of wood in modern methods of construction. We have an increasing softwood fibre resource in Ireland, so we can increase our self-sufficiency in meeting our future timber requirements. We have a leading forest products industry that has the technology and capacity that is needed to produce the quality timber products in order to build low-carbon homes. Accelerating the use of wood in construction is no longer a desire, it is now a climate imperative. Ireland has an opportunity to be at the cutting edge of the next timber-building revolution.
To conclude, we offer members of the committee an open invitation to visit Beyond the Trees, Avondale House and Forest Park. Here, Coillte have pushed the technical boundaries, using homegrown Sitka spruce and Douglas fir to showcase what is possible in construction when forestry, sawmilling, innovation and engineering work together.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Carlin. I have actually visited that site. It is highly impressive, even for someone who is not going there with the objective of looking at the technical innovations. It is a good family day out as well. I will now move to Ms Larkin, who is from the National Standards Authority of Ireland, NSAI.
Ms Geraldine Larkin:
I would like to thank the committee for the invitation to assist in its consideration of the issues relating to modern methods of construction, MMC. I am the CEO of the National Standards Authority of Ireland. I am accompanied by my colleagues, Mr. Seán Balfe, head of sustainability and built environment, Mr. Enda McDonnell, director of standards and metrology and Ms Yvonne Wylde, head of standards technical in NSAI. We are here today to assist the committee in its work and to address any questions its members may have. Because the committee will be addressed by colleagues from the Office of Public Works, OPW, Coillte and SOLAS, I will confine my comments to the NSAI’s role in supporting Government policy, as well as the needs and benefits of providing technical support for modern methods of construction.
It is worth noting at this point that the term modern "methods of construction" can have a very broad definition that can encompass all aspects of construction, from the use of innovative building systems, 3-D printing and off-site manufacture to the application of building information modelling tools, BIM, and the use of drones to monitor construction.
NSAI, as the Irish national standards body, was established by the National Standards Authority of Ireland Act of 1996. Our role in the areas of standardisation and certification contributes to the technical infrastructure of the State. As we move towards a more sustainable future, it is essential that we embrace innovative construction techniques that are not only efficient but that also deliver the advantages of sustainability, consistent quality, flexibility and freedom of design. Technical support is essential to realise the full potential of modern methods of construction from the stages of innovation and research, through training, standardisation and, ultimately, compliance.
A collaborative partnership approach between Government, industry and academia to promote innovation and improve the adoption of modern construction methods is key to optimising the benefits of modern methods of construction. NSAI, through its participation in Housing for All, Ireland 2040 and other Government initiatives, is well positioned to contribute to MMC initiatives through standardisation and certification supports. This is what NSAI is good at, and it is what we have been doing for the construction sector for many years. It is what we plan to continue to do for modern methods of construction.
Housing for All has identified the adoption of modern methods of construction as central to the delivery of its targets. Action 13.11 of the action plan focuses on the continued enhancement of the NSAI’s Agrément system for modern methods of construction in residential construction, and it is expected that more actions will evolve as other initiatives are agreed upon. Agrément certification is a process for certifying innovative construction products and systems where no standard exists. As such, it is a voluntary certification scheme operated by NSAI that provides manufacturers with a method of showing that the product is a proper material and that it thereby complies with Irish building regulations.
To meet an increasing demand for Agrément certification, NSAI is expanding its offering to cover certification at the construction stage and sign-off of modern methods of construction products and systems, in addition to product certification itself. The necessary skills and knowledge already within NSAI and the plan for new services provide a sound base to enable industry to adopt and integrate new technologies in a safe and compliant way that will deliver on the Housing for All initiative. Working with industry and regulators, supports for small and medium-sized businesses, SMEs, will be developed for a suite of complementary assessment services.
To date, the NSAI Agrément has certified 17 companies producing MMC systems supplying the residential construction sector in Ireland, with seven more under assessment currently.
In the area of standards development, the NSAI has ongoing construction-related standardisation work which directly and indirectly supports, or has the potential to support, MMC. At international level, work commenced in 2021, on standards for prefabricated buildings, ISO/TC 59/SC 19 prefabricated building. The NSAI has established a "mirror" committee to monitor and contribute to the work and also to monitor related European work. Other areas where the Irish construction sector is already working with the NSAI to develop standards to support the adoption of MMC include updating structural design Eurocodes and product codes to allow for evolving technologies including cross-laminated timber, CLT; amending the standard for retrofitting of existing buildings and the code for the design of timber dwellings; developing standards related to building information modelling, BIM, and the circular economy, and a new Irish standard, which is yet to be named, for universal design of dwellings.
In summary, the NSAI's technical support activities across standardisation and certification for the construction sector are essential for the value it brings to citizens and businesses in everyday life. As an organisation, we are used to change and as MMC takes us in a new direction I assure the committee of our continued commitment, through our work, to support the construction sector.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Larkin. I invite Mr. O'Connor to make his contribution on behalf of the OPW.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
I have some slides I would like to show as part of the presentation. We were asked by the Government at the end of June, last summer, to do 500 units and that was then brought up to 700. We are in the process of executing those. The first group of units will be handed over in two weeks' time and the units will continue to flow throughout the summer to the end of the year. We have learned a lot in that whole process. We have brought an industry that we could say was at junior infants level to secondary school level. The question is where it goes hereafter.
The slides show pictures of the model first, and then the finished housing units on the left side. They are fully fitted out and they are delivered with all the stuff in them. They are effectively what is called "plug and play". You plug in your electrics, sewers and video, all that element. How do we get that? We developed a plan that would work. The plan is based on meeting the housing standard as well as the building regulations. We set a centralised standard because the problem we found was that the industry was working to different standards, and some with effectively no standards. To create a level playing field, we centralised a standard, fixed a design to give certainty to manufacturers and to aid speed of delivery, and we put in certain options within that. That then met all the different standards.
The standards and quality were set up. To achieve that, we have a 60-year structural lifespan. We are in compliance with the building regulations, allowing for the future of renewables. We are insulated to an A2 standard. We are fully wired, plumbed, and tested. All of that stuff is done, including the generation of heat from the extraction of air in the unit itself. It is fully finished, so when it is delivered to the site all that has to happen is for it to be physically connected to the system.
The next slide is a key one for people to pick up on. The one on the left is two-dimensional panelising, and the one on the right is 3D. There is a big difference. People get confused. I notice RTÉ got confused between the two of them the other evening. Both have a job to do and both have a role to play. It is not an either-or, nor is one system a silver bullet to solve housing problems, but in conjunction with each other they can both work very well. The difference with the 3D is that the building comes complete and is just physically fitted on the site. What happens with the 2D is that it is like a LEGO kit. It arrives on the site and then it is assembled. They are the differences.
The key benefits of that were speed of delivery, programme certainty and a turnkey approach. We reduced site works, improved health and safety standards and there was a high quality of control. The buildings are also portable and can actually be lifted up. If, for instance, Ireland wanted to give these to Ukraine as part of its rebuilding, they could be lifted, put onto a ship and sent over there. They could also be kept here.
We looked at exemplar site layouts and decided to do different varieties. We combined two units. The benefit was that we got higher densities but it also gave the option that one building could be connected to the other in the future and, therefore, meet a whole standard for a house. As I said, we got the densities up to between 35 and 45 units per hectare, which means we are at sustainable residential development in urban areas. The infrastructure that has gone in is all permanent and built to social housing standard. Requirements for car parking, parking for disability and all other elements are complied with in full. There is also compliance with the design manual for roads and streets.
We then brought in an element we have been developing internally in the OPW related to sustainability and biodiversity. All this material is kept on-site. It is not being brought off-site at a cost. Planting has been brought in, which creates a buffer between neighbours and the new development. It is similar to an approach we took for the new forensic science building near Celbridge. There are no invasive species and there is biodiverse planting and no landfill element. The insulation is to an A2 standard.
A number of sites are currently at phase 1 and phase 2. Phase 1 was the first 500 houses and phase 2 was the follow-on 200 houses. Members can see from the slides that we have a variety of different sites spread throughout the country, all of which will finish in a certain time period. The first will be ready in Cork on 18 May and will be followed by sites in Claremorris, Thurles, Doorly Park, Cavan, Clonminch and Rathdowney. What do these sites look like? We might first look at the Mahon site in Cork. None of the sites we had were Housing for All sites. They were all left over from other areas and were nearly all local authority sites. OPW supplied four key sites, which amounts to about 40% of the total. The Mahon site had been used for illegal purposes such as fly tipping and all sorts of other things. All of that has been cleared up and 64 new units have gone in with roads and so forth all meeting modern standards. The photos in the slides were taken last Thursday.
The next slide shows Farnham Road in County Cavan. Members can see a drone shot showing the 28 different units in position. The landscaping is about to commence. Moving on to Thurles, I must compliment the local Deputies on being very welcoming, as were the local GAA club and other groups. It was a pleasure to deal with that group and it should be mentioned because that was not always the case. The next slide features Claremorris and shows 28 modular houses coming to conclusion. The last example is Doorly Park where 22 houses needed to be put in. What was tricky about this site is that it is beside Lough Gill and we had to make sure there was no pollution and so forth. That has all been done.
This leads us to the major benefit. While the State invested money in developing these homes as a result of an emergency, we were anxious to get to the point where this would be of development benefit to Ireland Inc. going forward. We have, therefore, looked at how to do two- and three-storey houses and we have now cracked that. We are about to go out to tender for one of the sites on which we will use two-storey units.
The trick has always been about how we make and connect these building safely without having to erect scaffolding on site. We have come up with a unit that we break into four pieces. Members can see from the slide the red lines dotted along a wall within the building.
We then make up those four units and transport them to site, where they are craned in and locked together. Looking at the next slide, the tricky part always was how to get this to work. We have to get the units under bridges that are 4.5 m in height. Therefore, there is an element that drives the design that no one would be conscious of. We developed a system whereby we can do a monopitch roof, which is a single-sloped roof, or a dual-pitched roof, and we can get over the box-like effect that most of the units have by connecting the unit. Through the layout of the plan, the units can also face in different directions because of orientation and the like. We have worked through all of those elements. We have detailed up that building, which is going out to tender in the next week and a half. We are hoping to have prices back two weeks after that.
The next slide details what the unit looks like. It can have various finishes. The interior could have a timber finish, a metal finish or whatever. The outside also has different finishes. The example shown in the slide has a brick slip finish, which is actually clipped onto the system as it is put up. The advantage of that is that there is no scaffolding on site. The unit comes in, and we have worked out where the joints go and all of that. It has a standing seam roof, which gets over the problem of roofs that give you trouble over time.
The next slide sets out how the installation translates into different settings in different parts of the country, including Dublin and a variety of areas around the country, and how the energy element and the renewables work. We are able to get a building energy rating, BER, of A2 for the unit throughout. This is a good rating to get.
The next slide illustrates how the layout is done. We can produce a number of the singular units. We are also in discussions with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth about bringing in two-storey units, which will still provide the same number of bed spaces. As already stated, however, the key is the spin-off that Ireland Inc. can get from all the effort and work that is done. It will give us the densities that we need and the longer term use, but it will also open up an area of the building industry that was not open previously. We have also had discussions with our colleagues in Coillte about the use of timber and elements of that. I have been involved with Coillte in producing a book called Woodspec. Mr. O'Toole and I are working on that at the moment. It will set the new standards for Irish timber. We are trying to get all of those cross links in place.
I will finish with a slide which shows the five different manufacturers. When we started off, there were 12 companies that said they could manufacture the units. We have ended up with five that can really do it. They have been working very well. Some of them are producing 18 to 25 units a week. That is significant. It took a bit of time to scale that up. The biggest problems that we had were not with the units, but the sites. If we had had the sites earlier, the buildings would have been ready earlier. As I said earlier, from junior infants to secondary school, as it were, we now have an industry that can stand on its own two feet, but what it needs is a pipeline of work, security in funding, and a commitment that it is part of the wider context. I will finish there.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. O'Connor. That is fascinating. It seems that a great deal of progress has been made. I now invite Mr. Brownlee to make his opening remarks on behalf of SOLAS.
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
On behalf of SOLAS, I thank the Chair and the committee members for the opportunity to speak with them today and discuss how FET is supporting MMC and the Government’s Housing for All strategy. I am joined by Mr. Dalton, director of further education and training for the Laois and Offaly Education and Training Board, ETB, SOLAS, which has led the development of the national construction campus at Mount Lucas.
SOLAS has responsibility for funding, planning, and co-ordinating FET in Ireland. It also serves as the co-ordinating provider for craft apprenticeships and works with the Higher Education Authority, HEA, to jointly manage the National Apprenticeship Office to oversee the national apprenticeship system. Through the 16 ETBs, the FET system offers access to a wide range of learning opportunities and supports in every corner of the country, regardless of background or formal education level, and offers a learning pathway to take learners as far as they want to go. It currently serves a base of around 200,000 unique learners every year. More specifically, the FET sector has long played a key role in ensuring a skilled labour force for the construction sector through the delivery of targeted training programmes.
More specifically, the FET sector has long played a key role in ensuring a skilled labour force for the construction sector through the delivery of targeted training programmes annually. These programmes are provided through national apprenticeship programmes, upskilling and reskilling courses, shorter technical skills training through the construction and quarry skills certification schemes and safety awareness training through Safe Pass, including via a recently launched online renewal system. SOLAS currently co-ordinates 22,470 craft apprentices and it issued over 125,000 Safe Pass cards and 21,000 construction skills certification scheme or quality system certification scheme cards to individual construction workers in 2022.
As has been well flagged, the construction sector in Ireland and indeed across the world is currently experiencing a significant skills shortage. The skills I describe are a requirement not only for new entrants but also for workers upskilling in the newly emerging aspects of construction, such as retrofitting and modern methods of construction, MMC. In 2022, SOLAS commissioned research that provided an analysis of the skills required for residential construction and retrofitting up to 2030. The report provided key insights into the construction skills and the number of new construction workers required to deliver on the Government's Housing for All action plan. It estimated that 50,831 new entrants to the sector will be required over the period 2023 to 2030.
In response to this and the continuing need to build capacity in the construction sector, SOLAS has been investing in the expansion of education and training provision in this area. Working with the national construction campus at Mount Lucas, ETBs and a broad range of construction stakeholders, we are enhancing our construction training infrastructure and implementing new and comprehensive construction skills pathways around MMC, including construction assembly and installation operatives; nearly zero energy building, NZEB, including building energy rating assessors, certified passive house tradespersons and retrofit technicians; and digital construction skills, including building information modelling, BIM.
Part of the challenge is making construction careers more appealing to young people, taking advantage of the exciting opportunities and new ways of working provided by MMC. SOLAS has supported ETBs to deliver construction-related modules and taster courses as part of transition year offerings, and it has also made available over 800 free Safe Pass places for transition year students in ETB schools in 2023.
In support of the Government's retrofitting plan, SOLAS is establishing six centres of excellence for NZEB and retrofitting training. To date, three centres of excellence, in Waterford–Wexford, Mount Lucas and Limerick, are fully operational. The one in Cork will open fully on 22 May 2023, with those in Sligo and Dublin coming on stream at the end of 2023. In 2022, over 2,000 received training and certification in NZEB-related interventions, with over 5,000 targeted for 2023.
In a follow–up to action 23.9 of Housing for All and the decision from the construction industry capability group, Ireland's first MMC demonstration park will be developed in the National Construction Training Centre at Mount Lucas and managed by Laois and Offaly Education and Training Board.
MMC describes an approach to constructing buildings using methods such as off-site manufacturing, modular construction panels or light steel framing, structural insulated panels or cross-laminated timber. The modern methods of construction demonstration park offers industry a centralised location to collaborate and examine new building methodologies. It will also offer an opportunity for industry to share best practice and align to the development of those new construction skills pathways.
In summary, FET and apprenticeships have a significant contribution to make in supporting the growth of MMC, ensuring the future skills pipeline exists to expand housing construction in line with Housing for All and enabling the national retrofitting programme by upskilling workers. I thank the members for their time and look forward to discussing this in more detail.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Brownlee. Our next invitation will be to the demonstration park, when it is developed.
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank all the witnesses for their comprehensive opening statements. I represent Ballymun, Finglas, Glasnevin and Santry, so it is not our first rodeo when it comes to modular construction. The development of Ballymun involved panelling construction. The first modular, rapid-build homes were built in 2017 in Baile na Laochra in Ballymun. Therefore, we come with a bit more of a jaundiced eye, look beyond the fancy pictures and are starting to see the reality of rapid-build construction. There is considerable potential but I am worried about both the cost and speed.
Can the OPW give an indication of the unit cost?
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is that a one-bedroom or a two-bedroom unit?
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If you take the unit plus the serviced site and infrastructure costs, what is the final bill coming in at per unit?
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is difficult to get a final build cost for anything, but for traditional builds or timber-frame builds-----
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is interesting. Mr. O'Connor is suggesting that it comes in at a similar price.
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Taoiseach was quoted as saying that he was disappointed that some of the timeframes do not seem like they can be delivered on. There was a batch due in November and another in January and February. The Taoiseach made his comments two weeks ago. Can the OPW give us an update on that aspect?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
I met the Taoiseach four weeks ago to give him an update. The situation that arose was that we had the units but we did not have the sites. If you do not have sites and services, you cannot build. The problem was not so much the units; they were the easy bit. The hard bit was getting the sites fully serviced and ready, because when you have the unit, all you do is arrive there with a truck and crane it into position. You cannot crane it into position unless the road and all the other services are in place. That was the issue. To give the Deputy an example-----
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We want to learn from the process then. Mr. O'Connor is correct that the product can be dropped in, but the difficult bit comes before that. Mr. O'Connor is saying that some of them will be ready from two weeks from now. Is that correct?
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
So the total turnaround side from the beginning-----
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is significantly shorter than a traditional build.
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On standards and the different levels of technology, as stated earlier, there were a number of sites, including Baile na Laochra, St. Helena's Drive, Cherry Orchard and Belcamp Lane. There were a number of sites identified. Some when ahead and others did not. Was there any investigation of how those units are now standing, what happened or what the length of time involved was? Some of those units took longer to develop than would have been the case with traditional builds.
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would imagine that, as the body responsible for spending money on new units, the OPW must have given some consideration to the State's previous endeavour with regard to modular builds.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
We did, but some of what people would have referred to as modular would be more of a flat-pack system than the three dimensional element that I illustrated and that is craned in. There has been huge confusion about which one is involved. Without being too technical, with the volumetric build everything is finished and it just dropped on site. The other unit goes in as a flat pack and has to be assembled. You need slimmer things on site, but you might be a bit quicker in the factory making them all. However, you do not have the whole unit.
To give the Deputy an example, of the sites that were offered to us, 85% were unsuitable for building on so we had to survey-----
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What were the aspects that the OPW would have regarded as unsuitable?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The site conditions in many cases. There were 45° slopes on certain sites and there were certain sites that had no services and were so remote that a separate bus service would have had to be set up in order to bring people to the nearest village.
Those elements were part of the consideration; it was not just a matter of building. We worked with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth about local schools. We met the local authorities and elected representatives. The process was slower than we would have hoped for and the key was obtaining the sites. That is why the OPW gave four sites, which we have been using, and we have been adding the others subsequently.
Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. O'Connor might explain for the record the difference between a modular, rapid-build, modern-build, or whatever you want to call it, construction and the standard social housing developments standards.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witness for their presentations. I know it is not the first time that some of them have appeared before the committee on this issue. This is one of those areas where the more we can advance and accelerate the high-quality, cutting-edge technologies in particular, the better. Not all 1960s system builds were bad. In fact, in many cases the systems were good but the maintenance of them over periods of time was poor, which led to many difficulties. However, there is a sense of frustration and my questions are really about, from all the witnesses' different organisational perspectives, what is it that we and the Government need to do to try to accelerate the good products the witnesses are all working with and describing. We have seven years to meet a very significant emissions reduction target in the built environment, including our embodied carbon. We are way behind on that. From previous sessions with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage we have learned that the preparations for things like measuring embodied carbon in building products in a standardised way so that it can be processed in the system is some time off. In other jurisdictions, such as in London, some of the Scandinavian countries and Poland, they are way ahead of us in the sense that they have managed, both through the public and private sectors, to support companies with state-of-the-art building technology at scale, creating good quality jobs and not only delivering really good quality homes at a lower price per square metre in some cases and faster but also doing so with much reduced carbon. Many of us here are really keen to know from the witnesses' expert views what is it that needs to happen now to see more of this in Ireland.
I have some specific questions for anyone who wants to answer. Timber frame is not a modern method of construction. It is one of the things that often frustrates me that it has been around for many decades and yet only 25% of our new-build homes are using what is quite an outdated method of construction. How do we go from 25% to a much higher figure, and that is just on the frame? Given that 20% or 25% of our new-build homes are one-offs, many of the homes in between are built by small and medium-size builders and then we have the big manufacturers, who are essentially using a lot of this technology anyway. How do we get more of that good technology used but also into all of the different areas of the industry?
Sometimes the problem is not the technology but the assembly on site. I will not ask any of the witnesses to comment on Dublin City Council's recent difficulties with one building contractor and one new building technology, but it does show you can have a really good product, but if the training of the workforce is not correct, then difficulties can arise. Thankfully, Dublin City Council's architects' department and building control section caught the issue and it has been rectified, but at considerable cost. How do we also make sure not only that we get more of those products into the building system but also that our construction workers are fully trained up to do all of that?
I do not imply any criticism with my next question because I do not underestimate in any way the huge challenges. We need to learn more from the slowness. The previous time we spoke about modular accommodation for Ukrainian refugees, there was a hope that some of that product would have been on site last year. I accept that some of the sites were super-tricky, but not all of them have those same problems either in terms of local dynamics or site abnormalities. Again, are there other lessons we could take from that?
Accepting that we have to use more of this low-carbon technology, what would be the one or two key recommendations to Government the witnesses would have that we could include, for example, in our communications and correspondence with it?
We need to start having incentives and phase-out timelines for the good and bad technologies. For example, low-carbon cement is already available at the same price as high-carbon cement, and we know the value of timber when it is used properly. What are the one or two key drivers that would allow us accelerate the use of these technologies in a way that produces very good-quality homes without diminishing standards in any way? I will open that up to go around the houses, if that is okay.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Who wishes to take that one?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
I am happy to answer that, while I can still remember. There were a combination of elements as regards the timeline. For example, we had units in storage that we could have had on site and there were certain areas where the sites did not come through because of councillors taking a particular view. That was just part of it.
The pipeline and secure funding are key to the future. We approached the industry last year. The key thing was elements of it were not so busy because there was a slowdown in hotel building and other things. That part of the industry was prepared to discuss matters with us whereas other sections were too busy and said "We do not want to be bothered now. Leave us alone. Off you go." However, if we saw a pipeline was coming we could do that. It is similar to our work with Coillte on the wood specification book and turning that into an interactive way a new generation of people can draw their information. That would help to develop a wood culture. We are missing a wood culture in Ireland. I was lucky enough to work in Canada, Scandinavia and Germany before coming back home. Those countries have that culture. They do not treat timber as if it is a second-class material but they have also got the material set up right and their building regulations tie in. We need to align with those.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Given that we have a tight timeline, particularly with public procurement, do we need to move to a place where if people are providing a building technology that has a lower embodied carbon, they get a higher scoring point on the tendering process, for example? Is that one recommendation as regards concrete? Do we need to combine that with a very publicly announced phase-out of either volumes of concrete or certain types of concrete? What are the actual measures that would help? Cultures do not change on their own; they need a nudge or push.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The Deputy hit on a number of elements. When you apply for planning in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, you have to state, as part of the planning application, what the building's embodied carbon will be and what its use of carbon will be over 50 years. That single move has transformed the applications. To get that to work, however, structures need to come in behind it. The analogy is, as I said, that we need to move from secondary school to third level. We have an industry but we need to develop it, give it a sequence of work to do that and then have the technical support. We would be happy to freely give all the information we have to whoever wishes to make use of it.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will come back to the other questions in the second round.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
I will come in on the Deputy's question regarding how to accelerate low-carbon technologies and the use of timber. We are hearing two things today, namely, the necessity to build houses as quickly as we can but in a sustainable low-carbon way. I agree fully that the culture in Ireland is to build using more traditional methods. That is something we have to look at in terms of education and promotion. We also need to look at regulation. There are limitations in Irish legislation that limit what we can do, especially as regards building with wood, which are not seen throughout Europe.
It is also very important that we are able to demonstrate what we can do. We tried to do that in Avondale because there were many perception issues, including that engineered wood products could not be created using Irish timber from spruce and pine. We set out to prove we could and we did that. It is about demonstration. As the Deputy said, timber frame has been around a very long time but does not seem to be getting the cut-through. Again, we need to demonstrate that potential by looking at some of our public housing schemes to show that it can be done. We can see that it can be done a lot quicker. Some 25% of the time is saved by means of off-site construction. It is a lot cleaner and there is less waste.
Demonstration is another aspect.
Technical standards and training will be important for the people, particularly architects and specifiers - people who make the decisions on what materials to use. That will be important. I agree with the Deputy on the promotion of low carbon, in particular by looking at the embodied carbon and measuring that when making decisions, especially on green procurement.
The Deputy’s other question was on timber frame. We are currently at around 25%. We need to increase that figure and we should be able to do so. It is an open goal for us to increase it to 80%. Mr. O’Toole may wish to comment on what we can do in that area.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
On timber frame, as Mr. Carlin said, it accounts for about 25% of total units. Looking at it another way, timber frame accounts for about 48% of scheme homes, that is, three-bedroom semi-detached homes, if we want to define them in that way. To get from 48% of scheme homes to in the region of 80%, which would be similar, as Mr. Carlin said, to the Scottish experience, we estimate, in round numbers, about an additional 200,000 cu. m of construction-grade sawn wood is required to service that market, if it were all homegrown timber or any timber.
There is potential here to increase the use of timber. We have a growing supply. There is also a huge potential to increase the use of homegrown timber. With respect to the timber-frame sector and its capacity, we estimate that approximately €65 million has been invested by the timber-frame sector alone over the past five years and something similar is the pipeline for the coming years. We believe it has the capacity to get to that 80% figure.
On getting people to use homegrown timber, this involves giving them the confidence that homegrown is suitable for the majority of components used in a timber-frame home. We are working with one of the leading sawmills and one of the leading timber-frame manufacturers on a project called Home-Grown Homes, where we are demonstrating the suitability of homegrown timber across a range of standard components, whether it be truss rafters or studs in the walls, for example. There are no technical barriers to using homegrown timber in timber frame. There are some design challenges, particularly with prefabricated roof trusses, for example, where it may be necessary to increase dimensions of the timber in the bottom chord or wherever it may. There are huge opportunities.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Brownlee wishes to address the question on training.
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
Obviously, our perspective is from a training and upskilling perspective. On NZEB and retrofitting skills, on which a couple of speakers have touched, industry buy-in is the key now. We have the centres of excellence up and running. The training infrastructure is in place and places are available. Demand to date, while it has been growing, is still not at the level we need to reach the overall target of eventually retrofitting 45,000 homes a year. We need to work with those in the sector and find some way of incentivising them to send their workers away to undertake the training courses at Mount Lucas and other places across the country. The first thing we need to think about is how to persuade the construction industry, given that there is an awful lot of work out there for it, to buy into that future opportunity.
On the skills in MMC, that is the whole idea behind the demonstration park. The demonstration park absolutely cannot just be a place for showcasing new technologies and new building techniques. That means nothing unless it is linked to the training and education that is available alongside it. The idea of basing that in Mount Lucas and letting Laois-Offaly ETB develop and run it is to link it to the training. I will ask Mr. Dalton to say a few words on that.
Mr. Tony Dalton:
The key for the demonstration park is that it should become the next iteration of what we visited previously around Europe and in the UK, a live testing and training site that is linked directly to the NZEB, retrofit and other training provided on-site currently.
On the question on how to get the man and the van - the small guys who make up the construction sector - there are a couple of things. We have to demystify the digitalisation of construction and the construction sector. That is a real challenge. Construction Professionals Skillnet pointed out last year that its biggest challenge is that people working in the sector do not know what MMC is.
As part of breaking that cycle, one has to develop a single, coherent pathway which provides construction skills for new entrants, the existing workforce and construction professionals. It is microcredential-based, it is an exit-entry option, and it gives people a really accessible and visible pathway to developing their skills. We are starting to see a bounce, but the incentivisation scheme for the training places is going to be critical going forward, if we are to meet the targets.
Finally, on one other point that was mentioned about how one makes sure the training is appropriate, and how one makes sure it is the right training. That is about the entire sector with regard to education and training providers, including the higher education institutions, ourselves as ETBs, and all of the authorities. These include the likes of NSAI, which is here today, and the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. They are critical in developing training programmes, because we have to ensure the training programmes are appropriate for industry, but also carry a currency for learners so there is a value in it for them. That is really what we are seeing as probably our biggest challenge over the next 12 to 18 months. We are getting there. We have a tertiary approach to it, and we are getting there, but it is about ensuring these programmes are accessible. Contractors will not come off site to allow their workers to go training. The old adage of the 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. training centre is gone. It has to be mornings, evenings, weekends, online, blended and a real hybrid model of provision going forward.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Dalton.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Chair, and the witnesses for being here today. In particular, I thank SOLAS, which was a part of the group that hosted two of us in Mount Lucas recently, where we saw with our own eyes the National Construction Campus, and all the fantastic work that is going on. Following on from the remarks by Mr. Brownlee and Mr. Dalton around how the model of learning has changed, it was really interesting to hear how much was being done on-site, where guys are being physically brought out and they are allowed to learn there and then, and how that is getting such great buy-in from construction companies. We probably need to look at more of that.
On that day, we spoke a lot about apprenticeships, and I see in the statement today the 50,000 additional construction workers that we are going to require in our economy between now and 2030 was referenced. I have looked at this a little bit since we last met, and based on my research, I am concerned that the State is not leading by example when it comes to taking on apprenticeships. I would like to ask each organisation here how many apprenticeships are currently in their organisations.
Innovation, which we have spoken about, and new technology have to have a huge role to play in construction, and in future-proofing the construction industry. The two main benefits, as I see it, are the reduction of both carbon and time. As we know, we are faced with two significant crises in both of those areas. I am yet to be convinced on the time perspective, and part of that has been explained by Mr. O'Connor in respect of modular homes, which we had the presentation on. This was more with regard to the site-servicing element than the delivery of the units themselves. That is fair enough, but we still have to wait for those sites to be serviced, so how can we figure this out? How can we speed this up? If this is not going to be a game changer in terms of saving time, then it is not going to be a game changer.
Mr. O'Connor spoke about moving from junior infants to second level and, hopefully, on to third level with regard to rapid delivery homes. The private sector was classes ahead of us on this, and that is because we already have hotels, holiday camps and examples of this working around the country for the last five years or more. They are presumably doing it because it saved in costs. Did it save in time there? Is there something we can learn there from the site-servicing perspective?
I know Coillte has gone through this with us, but are there a couple of key takeaways we could have on what we could do to shift the dial on the 25% timber frame? What can we do, as members, to help us get there? Is the three- versus 24-storey legislation a sticking point? Does that need to change if we are to get genuine buy-in across the construction sector?
I have a small question for the National Standards Authority of Ireland. SME supports were spoken about, and I am wondering what they will look like. From SOLAS's perspective, the numbers it is giving us about people coming through its doors are all super impressive. How many of these are front-line construction? How many of them are people working physically in construction rather than in the construction industry? How many people are bricklayers or whatever, versus sales representatives in wholesalers?
That is a lot of questions, but the last speaker got an extra ten minutes, so I hope I will get the same.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Thank you for watching the clock, Deputy Higgins. We can allow time. We have plenty of time. To whom was the first question directed?
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Maybe everybody could answer me on apprenticeships before we get into the individuals. If witnesses do not have a response available, they might send it on afterwards.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
In Coillte we operate a graduate programme every year. We are bringing on new foresters and engineers to the tune of about ten or 15. We are also looking to hire a directly interoperative workforce and to develop people through that. One of the things we are seeing within our sector, which is not unique to forestry and sawmilling and our supply chain as it is similar with construction, is workforce capacity challenges going forward. The forestry sector will double in size in the next ten to 15 years. It is a high-class problem in one way. We will have readily available supply in terms of being able to use more wood and to build with more wood to drive our bio-economy, but we need to be careful in terms of attracting people into the industry as well. We need more foresters, more ecologists and more engineers, so we have to work extensively on promoting career opportunity within forestry and, particularly, diversity within forestry, which has been a real challenge for us. We also need more operatives within the supply chain, harvesting operators and people to plant trees all the way through the workforce. We are working across the industry at the moment on that workforce capacity challenge. I think this is an opportunity as well, if we can get this right, in terms of a just transition because forestry can offer well-paid green tech jobs in the rural sector. However, we need to approach this strategically and make sure we have an apprenticeship scheme in place. We have graduates coming in as well.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does Coillte currently have an apprenticeship scheme?
Mr. Mark Carlin:
Not formally, no. We are looking at setting that up. This is larger than just Coillte. We have to work not only with the relevant Departments but also right across the sector to build something meaningful. We have had apprenticeships in the past but it has not been at the right scale. We need to do something a lot bigger now with the numbers of people we have to come in.
Ms Geraldine Larkin:
As regards the NSAI, we have a small, modest graduate scheme across the entire organisation. We take on a number of interns as well. As a lot of the work we do relies on expertise and expert decision making, we tend not to go towards the apprenticeship space. Our focus is more at gradual level.
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
We are a kind of strategy and a funding and oversight body so we do not have some of the technical requirements some of the other agencies have. We are, however, very conscious that we are the statutory authority for apprenticeships. We have taken on three apprentices from the newer apprenticeships. We have a cybersecurity apprentice, we have a recruitment apprentice and I think we have a software development apprentice, so we have three in the organisation. We have just over 200 people in all and three apprentices in there.
On Deputy Higgins's question as to how many of our apprentices go into the construction sector, the 22,500 are craft, that is, plumbers, electricians, bricklayers, so the vast majority of them will end up at some point in the construction industry sector. What we are trying to do - it is a big focus of people like Mr. Dalton - is to move away from that sense that one has to be a skilled tradesman to work in the construction sector. We are trying to develop offerings for retrofit technicians and construction technicians, building up a skills pipeline that does not involve that long, four-year apprenticeship route and trying to fast-track the skills needs we all know we have.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It was great when I was in Mount Lucas to see so much happening in the retrofitting space and people learning those skills, but many of those people were not necessarily people who would be carrying that out. Does SOLAS keep statistics on that?
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Great. Does the National Standards Authority of Ireland wish to answer the query about the SME supports?
Ms Geraldine Larkin:
Directly related to the subject matter in terms of Agrément and MMC, we have produced guidance on how to approach an Agrément application that walks through that process.
Looking across the NSAI more generally and considering what else we can do by way of supports to the SME community, and looking at the future move towards digital in terms of building information modelling, BIM, and carbon reporting, we have developed a number of programmes that take SMEs through the core quality management standards, for instance, ISO 9001, which is the backbone of many standards. Its promotion can encourage an SME that is not engaged with standards or certification to go on that journey and start the initial gap analysis. We work that through with simple spreadsheets and explainer videos. We also apply that in ISO 27001, which is information security. That looks at areas across the spectrum, including in construction and other areas, where businesses might find themselves in that space. It is about broadening that exposure to standards and certification. We also aim to encourage SME participation in our standards committees because that is where there is access to cutting-edge knowledge. We have engaged with Engineers Ireland and we offer continuing professional development learning points for those who join our standards committee. The intention is to promote and actively reward those who might participate in the development of standards which is, of course, the other side of the future work in this space.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
I thank the Deputy. This is an open goal for us. The benefits of timber frames are very obvious from a carbon point of view. A recent Council for Forest Research and Development, COFORD, report calculated that a timber-frame house is 2.5 times more beneficial from the point of view of embodied carbon and stored carbon. That level of benefit increases to 3.5 times for apartments. We are building some of our houses with timber frames but we are not cutting through at all into apartments because of issues around height. Mr. O'Toole can address the specifics in that regard in a moment.
I do not think timber frame is well understood. People sometimes think it is some form of log cabin. They do not understand exactly what timber frame is. It is a modern method of construction, and it is very difficult to tell the difference in a finished building. The good thing is we do not have to persuade buyers. We just have to persuade local authorities, developers and investors that this is the right thing to do. There are carbon benefits. We have just talked about capacity and off-site construction is the way to do this because it is 25% faster. There is an inevitability here. The material cost is probably about the same but when it comes to second fixing and finishing out the project, it is a lot cheaper because it is a lot faster. I am confident we can make this jump quickly. Scotland has a very similar society and 80% of its house building includes timber. There is no reason that cannot happen in Ireland. Timber frame is not a new technology. It is here right now. We have invested heavily in timber frame. We have a growing softwood resource here in Ireland that we can utilise. We do not have to import the materials. We have a sawmill sector which has invested €200 million in the past five years. It is one of the most technologically advanced sawmill sectors in Europe. We have a timber-frame sector that is ready to deliver. It is all set up for us to take advantage. Mr. O'Toole might address some of the specifics and key takeaways on how to drive forward with timber frame.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
I thank the Deputy. There is a question about how we get to 80%, and there are a few barriers. It is about creating a regulatory environment that supports the use of timber-based MMC. Some of our climate policies, building regulations and technical guidance documents do not necessarily fully align. It is evident that there has been an advance in part B of the latest technical guidance document, which closed for public consultation in recent weeks, but it appears to be becoming more prescriptive rather than performance-based, certainly in the language.
I will give one example. Deputy Higgins mentioned the height restriction. The draft technical guidance document in its current form, as it has been published for consultation, limits the use of combustible materials above 11 m to materials of class A2. That should apply to the linings but not the entire structure from which the wall elements are constructed. We need to look at some issues in the regulatory environment. Deputy Ó Broin mentioned the prioritisation of embodied carbon regulation earlier. We see that as essential. It must be fast-tracked. The draft energy performance of buildings directive looks set to bring in embodied carbon regulation for buildings that are more than 2,000 sq. m in approximately 2027 and for all buildings from 2030, but 2027 is four years away. Other jurisdictions have already brought this regulation in. Denmark is the most recent. It brought in CO2 limits for new buildings that are more than 1,000 sq. m in January of this year. It is advancing. I do not know where we are as regards bringing that legislation in Ireland, but we need to move fast.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I noticed Ms Larkin making notes when we were discussing TGD-B. Does she or one of her team wish to contribute on that discussion on building with timber and the 11 m? At one of the events in Avondale it seemed to be a contentious issue. Does anyone wish to expand on that?
Ms Yvonne Wylde:
We have an Irish standard for timber frame construction. At the moment, its scope is 10 m and one hour is the maximum fire resistance. We normally produce standards in the context of the regulatory environment. It would be rare for a standard to conflict with the regulations or even the guidance on the regulations. We would not conflict with them. At the moment a committee is in place and it is working on revising the standard. I do not think it would be possible for it to change the scope of it tomorrow. More technical work would have to be done on it, but there is nothing to stop a standard being developed to allow for building in timber to greater heights. The Eurocodes are already available. There are structural design codes which already offer ways of designing buildings to meet safety and fire standards. Those codes are available and can be used. Although I.S. 440 does not cover buildings taller than 10 m, there are codes of practice which allow designers to design buildings above 10 m in compliance with the building regulations.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We should discuss that further as we have heard of 14 and 18 storey timber frame buildings.
I have gone way off time. Deputy Duffy is next, but first Mr. Balfe wanted to make a comment.
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
The technical guidance document is just that. It is a guidance document. It points out it is for simplified buildings and that there are other means of showing compliance. Agrément certification might be one but other engineering design methodologies can be used to demonstrate that buildings higher than four storeys or 10 m which use timber frame manufacturing technology can meet the requirements of the building regulations.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Balfe for that clarification.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We did not get to one of the questions so I might come back in on the next round if that is okay.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is fine. We will have time.
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for the work they are doing across the spectrum of the areas we are discussing today. Their endeavours are appreciated by all. I congratulate Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Harvey and their teams on the homes they have created and on setting new standards. It is really interesting. Fair play to them.
I have been fortunate enough to work with Mr. O'Toole who has shown me the wonders of our timber sector but also enlightened me on the barriers to increasing the use of timber in modern methods of construction. My question is for NSAI and Coillte and concerns the realisation of cross-laminated timber - or CLT as we know it - using Irish C16 timber. Ms Larkin's statement referred to Agrément certification being a process for certifying innovative construction products and systems where no standard exists.
She also stated that the NSAI provides manufacturers with methods of showing that a product is a proper material, thereby complying with Irish building regulations. Her statement also noted that the NSAI is updating structural design Eurocodes and product codes to allow for evolving technologies, including cross-laminated timber, CLT. My question is simple: has a process begun to procure Agrément certification for CLT produced from Irish-grown C16? I ask this in the context of CLT being a modern method of construction. Dr. Annette Harte's CLT research shows that we can make it here. We export the raw materials for CLT to the UK in large quantities. If it has begun, will Ms Larkin provide the committee with a timeline of when the Agrément certification or certifications will be produced to allow the construction sector to realise the potential of Irish C16 timber in the construction sector akin to other jurisdictions? I know of some where more than 20 storeys can be built. In the context of saying you can build beyond what the regulation states, and I know from experience and working in the sector, you will not get a fire certificate because it will be said that it does not match, or at least that is my experience. You can go outside of it but in my experience, it is very difficult. Is a process under way so we can use our timber to make C16? I have had meetings with the Department, and Mr. Seán Armstrong said the timber industry can move forward if there is an Agrément certification to show we can produce C16. Is that happening?
Ms Geraldine Larkin:
I may start at the end of Deputy's Duffy's question. Typically, an Agrément application takes between six and 12 months. I say typically because it depends on the amount of information provided and the evidence in support of a particular application. That is the answer regarding timeline. Some take longer than that, I should add, when we are waiting on manufacturers to provide us with information. That being said, as of now, there are no Agrément applications with us proposing the use of CLT. We are demand-driven, which my colleague, Mr. Balfe, will expand on. We respond to the applications we receive, rather than based on the particular manufacturing system.
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can a State body, for example, Coillte, then apply for that? I am sorry to put the witnesses on the spot. I learned from Mr. O'Connor that we have harvested our timber and wood since the mid-1980s. That is nearly 40 years. CLT is modern enough, and I am sure it has been in the system for a good 20 years. Somehow, those things have not been connected where somebody in the State will tell somebody else in the State to get the Agrément certification for CLT so we can use it. At the moment, we are dead in the water.
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
Agrément certification is a voluntary process and is product-specific. The Deputy mentioned Coillte or another body applying for it - the manufacturer is the one who needs to apply. Part of the process is looking at the procedures for the design and manufacturing of the product itself. Coillte does not manufacture CLT, as far as I know, so it would not be appropriate for it to apply. It is product-specific and part of the process is examining the manufacturer's quality controls.
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If there is a project in which Irish C16 is being produced, can a certificate be put against that?
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I know of a project in which they are trying to make it happen. Can an Agrément certification be gotten for that product specifically and then other people can use it or is it whoever produces it?
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there a cost involved? What is it?
Mr. Des O'Toole:
I will try to shed some light on why there may have been no application for an Agrément certificate but first I will respond to the comment on the level of exports. The Irish forestry sector produces a range of products, including fencing, pallets and construction-grade material which is the material which could go into C16. Last year, we produced approximately 700,000 m3 of construction-grade timber and 265,000 m3 of that was exported, predominantly to the UK. It is probably 35% or 37%. It is not as much as one would think. We do have supply. As Mr. Carlin said earlier, we also have forecast growth.
On the status of Agrément, the Deputy rightly pointed to the work by Dr. Annette Harte from the University of Galway. A series of tests has been undertaken on the suitability of home-grown and it is largely coming up trumps, which is great. Cross-laminated timber, CLT, manufacturers throughout Europe have a European technical assessment, ETA, which is similar to an Agrément certificate so tests, such as fire tests, have been undertaken for those products. There are no Irish manufacturers. The scale of investment required is €50 million to €90 million for a typical modest-scale CLT manufacturing plant. The European market is estimated at about 1.8 million m3. The 71 plants in Europe are already producing CLT. Largely, they have ETAs which are accepted across Europe and that is why those medium and high-rise buildings are built. I do not believe they would undertake additional certification and the costs associated with that for what European CLT manufacturers would perceive as a small market, which currently limits height to 11 m for the reasons we discussed earlier. Demand is relatively small. The UK market is estimated at 100,000 m3 and the European one is 1.8 million m3. The Irish market is only a very small faction of the UK market. I do not believe anyone will undertake additional tests for a small market on the outer extremes of Europe. I would suggest we consider an alternative. There might be opportunities with Mount Lucas. In order to stimulate demand, our design practitioners, fire officers, fire engineers and our regulatory authorities must become familiar with the technology and we must get them to understand what potential it has. We need proof of concept. We need demonstration buildings. If there was some mechanism to allow an ETA to be acceptable, through a demonstration project that is highly designed, supervised and monitored, there may be a way to get something through the system so that we can show the people who have these concerns what is possible. That is how to do it. Coillte would be willing to work with local authorities, the Office of Public Works, Mount Lucas, industry or whoever. We have done it ourselves with Avondale and we are willing to do it again. There is great opportunity here for Irish timber. We just need to find a pathway through the regulatory environment to see the market and to see what is possible.
Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
As Deputy Ó Broin said, we have 2030-2050 targets. I believe we will double our roundwood output in the next 15 to 20 years. We have a home-grown sustainable material. For the State to pony up €50,000, if you will forgive me for putting it like that, it does not seem like a lot of money for it to invest into its future. It could be done that way.
Whichever State arm decides to take on that role, we will get there anyway. As Mr. O'Connor said, if there are demonstrator buildings like Avondale and others, it promotes what we have to offer.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would like to come back to that. I am hearing that this is possible but not straightforward, which can often act as a barrier to doing something.
Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank everyone who has come in for all the work they are doing in this important area. I have a few more things to ask about timber framing and taller buildings. Some people might have concerns about timber frames in taller buildings. What are they?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
It is a fire issue for escape purposes. The generation of smoke would be one element of it. People have been mentioning cross-laminated timber, CLT. Because it is laminate, it works in a different way structurally. Timber burns at a constant rate. If it is a hardwood, it burns at 0.5 mm per minute in a fire, so you can calculate exactly how long timber will last. It does not buckle like steel does under a certain temperature. The problem is that level of science has not yet really been applied to this type of issue. We have good examples from Norway. It is a country very like Ireland with a similar population which is very dispersed. It has gone to much higher heights. It has a tradition of using timber over long periods and is not afraid to do that. In Ireland, we need people to be less fearful, but we have to operate on a broad front. There is no point in just giving out about fire officers. They have a job to do, so the question is what they can work with us on, do and achieve. A cross-departmental and public view of how to move this forward is needed. I know examples from Holland that I have seen on holidays which have been built to 17 storeys. It is achievable but there are additional costs to go with it for the initial stage. As Mr. O'Toole said, the market here is very small. The question here is whether it is just imported or an industry is developed here in Ireland.
Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The interesting thing is that if we go back far enough, in this city, nearly everything was built out of wood. That was stopped because of the reasons relating to fire. Much more recently, there were, unfortunately, some high-profile cases, maybe built around 15 years ago or a little bit longer, which had issues with how they were built and the fire separations not being put in properly. That obviously gives rise to people having concerns because, in relatively recent history, our track record of timber frame construction in certain areas and the building regulations and inspections was actually quite poor. We are lucky that, in a number of instances, the fires broke out in the daytime when no one was asleep, so the smoke spread in developments and apartments in multiple areas did not end up with fatalities in most instances. I think it ended up with fatalities in one instance. Given those developments were from about 15 years ago, has any analysis been done of timber frame construction since then to show there have not been issues since the problems with the builds in 2004 and 2005? Since then, have we managed to do these correctly with regard to building regulations and so on? If we have, that might give more confidence to the area.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
On the regulatory side, there have been huge changes in recent years. The standards have gone up. The issue is making sure there is good site supervision. We are not great in Ireland. We agree on things in principle but we often fall out about the particulars and how strict we are. For instance, when I worked in Germany, if people broke one of the building regulations, they were struck off and that was the end of them, so no one messed with that situation. We have an unusual way of looking at authority at times in Ireland, with people saying that is for the other fellow to do but not for them to do. We have to grow up and behave in an adult way rather than have that methodology. We have to do things properly. That day is gone. People should not be allowed to get away with non-compliance. We are getting out of our teenage years and, it is hoped, moving into adulthood as a nation.
Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Given that we do not have any high-profile cases in terms of timber frame construction going wrong in the last ten or 15 years, I wonder if it is being documented. Are we in a situation where we can say there were very serious mistakes in 2004 and 2005 but since then we have had successful, well-built timber frame housing? Given that, we could look at greater heights with more confidence. That is just a comment.
My next question about modular homes is for Mr. O'Connor. What more can be done to help resolve the challenges on the sites so we can deliver more homes with off-site construction? Mr. O'Connor referred in his presentation to sites for homes that are being delivered for the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. Does he have any insight into delivery for the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage or for the local authorities, of social housing beyond the ask for the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth? Where is that delivery or what is the timeline on it?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
If I take the Deputy's last question first, that is the whole reason we wanted to go to the two storeys. To be fair, we got a good response from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth which could have said it was nothing to do with it and that it only wanted the emergency stuff. It would have been a serious miss, the State having put in that level of effort and got a lot of issues resolved in a very short time. The Mahon project will be open in two weeks' time, 11 months from when the Government gave us the go-ahead to do it. Social housing is taking three to five years. It is not quite comparing like with like. I always believe that if we have enough focus and brain power, we will solve the problem. We have cracked the nut of how to do it. The question now is to build the confidence. I have been talking to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage about how there could be spin-off and benefit. I hope that will continue. We will work together collaboratively.
With regard to the sites element, the view was taken that no social housing sites could be used. That excluded the more normal, sensible sites and we were left with these sites that were left over. Each local authority was asked which site it had. There was some off-loading going on where people said, "We've had that site for years, let's get rid of it." That was why we were finding that 85% of the sites offered to us were not usable. Maybe it was not the best use of our time to have to go looking at them. I accept it was an experiment to some degree. Going forward, we should not be afraid of that and we should look at housing for all sites, but for everybody as well, for our own people and for whoever else needs the housing. I would hope that the benefit would be more widely spread than just the Ukrainian end use.
Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would like to ask SOLAS a question. Can we hear a bit more about getting more people into construction technician or retrofit courses? How does it tie in with modern methods of construction, MMC? Does SOLAS have modelling or projections for the impact on traditional wet trade apprenticeships if there is as huge increase in the volume of modern methods of construction, off-site construction? In the 2022 report, the recommendations in page 9 state that entirely new forecasts may be needed by early 2023. Now that it is May 2023, does SOLAS have a view on that? How can we get the skills we need when there is so much flux? How can we model around the huge changes modern methods of construction will bring and their impact on the levels of traditional skills? It is critical that we have a skilled workforce. Does that mean more construction technicians and more generalists?
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
That is a really good question. The research we commissioned at the end of last year, which I referenced in my opening statement, was pretty much prepared on the assumption of the status quowhereby MMC levels would remain relatively static.
It was based on an assumption that residential construction would continue as is. The report states that if we can ramp up the use of MMC, the scale of demand for the apprenticeship and traditional skilled construction worker pipeline will diminish. That is one of the ways one can get to the figure of 50,000 figure by 2030.
The other potential way to do it relates to work permits but, regardless of that, we need to ramp up capacity for craft apprenticeship provision. We are already dealing with significant waiting lists because of Covid, when we had to close for nine of the first 15 months. We have got the number waiting more than six months down from approximately 8,500 to approximately 4,500. That is still too many people waiting to get into training, however. We increased capacity in phase 2 of the job training, which is what Mr. Dalton and his colleagues run on behalf of FET, from 4,500 pre Covid to 5,600 last year. We are trying to take that to 8,000 this year to address the backlog and ensure that, by the end of the year, no one will have to wait more than six months. We are investing in new workshops and taking on more instructors. We now have electrical hubs in Drogheda, Tullamore and Limerick. Thanks to the goodwill of SIPTU and our instructors, we moved from a two-intake model to a three-intake one as part of a Covid emergency response. They did that out of goodwill. We are currently discussing with the unions how we can embed that as an ongoing model for the delivery of craft apprenticeships. Obviously, it allows us to deliver a 50% increase in capacity, which is important.
The Deputy referred to the wet trades. It is a dilemma because the demand for wet trade apprentices now is very low. Employers do not believe it takes four years to train a painter and decorator or a plasterer, so they have tended to follow more informal in-house training. We need to find a way to get away from that. We need to consider the length of those programmes and how we can run them more effectively and efficiently and get industry to buy in. It is a skilled profession and we do not want to have a bunch of unskilled self-trained people involved in it. We are actively working on that with our partners.
Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a short question on that. Some of those things have been apparent for a long time. The models have not been updated. What needs to happen for those things to be updated to the needs of 2023? Much of it is based on models that made sense several decades ago but have not made as much sense in recent times. It used to be an attractive option for people who might have left school early but now that people have the option of going straight into paid employment, including on building sites, it is no longer an attractive option. What needs to happen for this to be modernised?
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
The wider craft apprenticeship programmes are in a good place. They are internationally respected and have a standard four-year model with eight phases on the job and off the job combined. On programmes such as those for electricians, bricklayers, mechanics, carpenters and joiners, the length of training is appropriate. There is always scope to continually consider that and we are currently revalidating those programmes with QQI. By and large, however, there is general acceptance that it is a good model. When it comes to painting and decorating and plastering, it is a different proposition. As the Deputy stated, the industry has moved on. People do not accept it should take so long to train people in those areas. We are working on a shorter model which will involve a two-year programme. Apprenticeships are national programmes, however. They involve union stakeholders, employer stakeholders, education and training providers and SOLAS. In order to move to a different model of apprenticeship, everyone needs to agree to it.
It is something on which we are actively working, however. Everyone recognises that we need a different model.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Deputy O'Callaghan. We will go back now to the second Fine Gael slot. I call Deputy Higgins.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I had an unanswered question from the previous round for the OPW, which I will pose again to Mr. O'Connor. It is really around how we can save time and whether any lessons have been learned from the site services perspective. We have had more detailed discussions since then, and I can see the point Mr. O'Connor made with regard to these sites not being Housing for All sites and there being some problems within them. It would be really interesting to hear whether there are any learnings we can bake into the plan going forward that could really become a time saver for us.
Following on from my comments earlier about apprenticeships and to let people know in case they are not aware, to mark Construction Work and Skills week this week, Intreo has a construction jobs, apprenticeships and training expo this Friday in the National Basketball Arena in Tallaght. I was at the expo that was held in Tallaght Stadium last year, which was hugely successful. It was great to see how much private sector engagement there was; it would be great if we had a little bit more public sector engagement at this. It is about finding that pipeline of apprenticeships coming through and seeing how we can harness them into being the additional 50,000 workers we need in this industry. I will hand over to Mr. O'Connor.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
As a rough rule of thumb on the time, we are talking about a 12-week process for the units and 16 weeks for building on the site. As long as there are no obstacles, that is achievable. We were at a beginning phase and people had different issues. Some people did not want the units near them. For other people, the sites were not appropriate. As I said, they were out in the middle of nowhere.
Trying to get that methodology and getting the system to work without bumps took a while but now, for instance, we have a guy who is producing 18 units per week. When he started off, he was managing four units. He has now ramped up since the end of November to 18 units. That is a huge increase. That is because he has gotten all the guys used to what they have to do and he has all the materials. We had to enter in two or three times when we had to use muscle to buy materials in order that the contractor could keep going. For instance, one particular fire trim was needed at the junction between two units and no one could get it from abroad. We ended up saying we would get it and we got it because one small element was holding up everything else. Once all those little wrinkles are gotten out of it then it runs like a machine after that. We are now in the process where we are running like a machine in that we are up to that number of units. Certainly, for the examples I have shown, the five key guys who are working with us at the moment are operating at pace. There is, therefore, no issue with the units. The trick now is having enough sites to put them on.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. I thank Mr. O'Connor. It is great to hear that things have been streamlined and that wrinkles have been ironed out and things are moving much faster, particularly on the manufacturing side. Forgive me if this is not Mr. O'Connor's side of the business but from a site services perspective, what stumbling blocks were there for which we now have a blueprint for a way forward and best practice or how to get around them so that they are not obstacles on other sites? Obviously, each site has its own parameters and challenges to overcome. Is there a playbook now for some of the challenges we met when getting those site services, how we overcame them and our advice to other local authorities or entities or whatever it may be?
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Sure.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay.
Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is super. I thank Mr. O'Connor.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Deputy Higgins. We will move now to Deputy Ó Broin.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses very much; it is all very interesting. I have a couple of questions. To pick up on Deputy Cian O'Callaghan's point, obviously, one of the challenges is that we are trying to talk about ways of accelerating the use of these technologies but we always end up having a conversation about the need to strengthen building controls, which is a separate day's argument.
In the review of Part B - I presume Mr. O'Toole has seen some of the documents - is there any indication that consideration has been given to some modest changes in the restriction, for example, of timber structures even for medium-sized or medium-height buildings?
Sometimes it takes something like that to change for other things to fall into place. If there were such a change, people would be interested all of a sudden in going beyond the one or two storeys that Mr. O'Connor has talked about. Is there resistance to change?
I have spoken to several building control and fire safety officials and have learned their view is that once what is permissible is changed, the standards have to reflect that. For example, if going above the 10 m, certain types of sprinkler systems, cores or concrete stairwells might be needed. These things are not insurmountable but there will be no change until whatever is deemed permissible under Part B is dealt with. I would be interested in hearing the delegates' thoughts on that.
Mr. O'Connor had the joy of not having to secure planning permission because there was a planning exemption and it was a very particular kind of project. If the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage were to say it would like to determine the viability of the methodology for one or several medium-sized social housing projects – I can think of a few in my constituency – it would be ideal. How do we get what has been done with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in very specific circumstances mainstreamed into several exemplar social housing projects? That would seem to be the logical first step, even if Part B remains as it is. In Clonburris, for example, there will be a 250-unit social and affordable housing project. It has gone through planning and will be a fantastic site. That presents a significant opportunity to determine whether what we are discussing is doable at the scale in question.
My other question is on the cost. Having regard to social housing, it is a bit generous to say the costs are comparable. Last year's costs for standard new-build social housing projects, whether for social housing investment programme, SHIP, construction or turnkey or Part V construction, are considerably below €3,750 per square metre, where a comparison can be made. Obviously, the figures for apartments and medium-rise buildings are different. I presume the argument is one of scale and that once you start moving beyond the €500,000 or €700,000, you start to see costs more reflective of what local authorities are currently paying. I am interested in whether there has been any comparison with European jurisdictions that are doing both types of construction at scale. Some of the architects and local authority representatives I spoke to in London before Covid, or three years ago, said that they were able even then to do medium-rise, high-density, infill affordable housing developments using cross-laminated timber or similar products and that they were coming in at €1,000 less per square metre. Here, the cost comparison is at an earlier stage, but are costs becoming more competitive elsewhere? If the technologies are of an equally high standard in all areas and the units are quicker to produce, have lower embodied carbon and come in at a comparable cost or cheaper, there are, all of a sudden, so many reasons to proceed. It becomes hard to argue against it.
I am really interested in hearing our guests' thoughts specifically on what regulations we should change to positively incentivise, particularly in the public sector, the use of the new building technologies. What do we need to start phasing out, and over what period? I regularly converse with concrete manufacturers and distributors about our need to set a date by which we will have to have to reduce our overall concrete consumption in new builds by about 80%. Of the 20% remaining, a lot will have to be low carbon. I am really interested in specific ideas on the regulations that need to change and on what reasonable periods of phase-out would be. Unless we proceed by way of regulation and incentivisation, and unless we set a date by which current practices will no longer be possible, as with gas boilers, things will continue to move very slowly. I am very interested in people's thoughts on these questions.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
When we reflect on regulation, the Chair's phrase "possible but difficult" sums it up very nicely, because the thinking he was referring to can lead to inertia and a lack of drive for change. We need to move from "possible but difficult" to "safe, absolutely, but simple and easy".
We can see that there are more designers, specifiers and architects looking to use wood than ever. We have a supply in Ireland that we should be proud of. As a result of what we have done, it will increase, so we can be self-sufficient. Not every country can say that. We have a timber industry that is very well invested in, will be invested in further and will deliver what we need. We just really need regulation to promote rather than impede building with wood. One thing that has been set up recently - it is a very good initiative - is the cross-departmental working group. With that working group working with industry, I think we will be able to identify the enablers required and to drive them through. I might leave the specifics with my colleague.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
I thank Deputy Ó Broin for the question. On the indications in terms of the feedback from the consultation, as of yet we are not aware of the number of responses that were received or the content therein. I did manage to see quite a few individual submissions that were in circulation prior to the closing date, and similar issues, broadly speaking, were raised. As regards the one about the class A2 material for buildings over 11 m in height and the point raised earlier about the building regulations, or certainly the technical guidance documents, there are alternative means. We have heard this before but, certainly from what I read in the revised draft document, the alternative means have actually been taken out of the draft guidance documents. That is a step backwards. That is just a personal observation. Certainly from the document I read, it does not look like that alternative means of design is allowed any more. That is stepping back.
Finally, the requirement for an Agrément certificate came up as well quite a few times with people, as did the definition of proper materials and ETAs accepted in Europe and so on. In the short term, if we want to see more of these systems used, it will take time for all those submissions to be reviewed and digested to see what changes can or cannot be made for the regulations and how. Ms Wylde mentioned the timber frame IS 440. That has been worked on for the past number of years. It is nearing completion. To go back now and start the whole process again, looking at whether we can go to 15 m or 18 m, will take time, no matter what we do. If we want to move forward at a speedier pace than is likely because of the regulatory reviews that still have to happen, I think we need to look at alternative solutions, maybe through demonstration buildings and ETAs with demonstration buildings and get some of these buildings up so we can see what is involved.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I apologise for my ignorance, but does that mean that Mr. O'Toole is suggesting a possibility of buildings that would not meet the current regulatory requirements and that we find a way around them? He is saying they would be as safe but would not be compliant with the rules of our system as they stand.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
We are a bit of an outlier in how our technical guidance documents are written. They are very prescriptive. Some other European jurisdictions use more performance-based eurocodes. It is just done slightly differently. In order to bridge the gap, I think we need to showcase the technology, get our design practitioners familiar with the systems and get our fire officers and local authorities in to see and understand the detailing and how these systems work. Maybe through derogation or some sort of demonstration buildings that are minded in terms of where they are erected - Mount Lucas might be an opportunity to do that - I think we need to do something. If we wait for the regulations to be reviewed, amended and changed, it will take time.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On that, as Ms Wylde and Ms Larkin will know, I have a particular interest in building control and fire safety. For me, those things should never be negotiable, and I know that is not at all what Mr. O'Toole is saying.
If Government policy was to move towards the option of buildings above 12 m in height that are predominantly timber based, and we want to have the highest possible fire safety standards in place that are fully compliant with all of the requirements and that are even better than our current requirements - because there are some areas of the new regulations I would like to see strengthened - that would be good. I am a supporter of the Dublin Fire Brigade, which has called for sprinklers in complex multi-unit buildings. Is there a way of reviewing the regulatory codes and technical guidance documents that would not be as slow? I do not mean that in any critical way, but that does not in any way compromise quality. I know there is a process that has to be gone through, but we also have a legally binding requirement by 2030 to reduce our emissions in the built environment year on year, especially in our inner urban areas. If we are going to restrict new buildings two or three storeys and with concrete ground floors, we will be at odds with ourselves.
Ms Yvonne Wylde:
The building regulations are very simple. They are expressed in possibly five lines. As Mr. Balfe says, the technical guidance document gives additional guidance for simple buildings. What Mr. O'Toole talks about is a possible solution. We can still meet the building regulations with innovative materials, not through the Agrément process or by meeting a standard, but it would take some kind of pilot. Competent architects, contractors, building control officers – or building control officers who would be brought to that level of competency – would have to get together. The pilot would involve a team, where they are all coming at it with a view to whether they can get this to work and then learn from it. It is not a question of not complying with the building regulations. That is possible. It is getting through the blockage of people not knowing what is going on here, and so they are afraid to say it is okay. It may not be okay. It is about bringing people together to look closely and see what they are worried about and what needs to be done to address that worry.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Let us take the project Mr. O'Connor worked on and translate it across to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in the context of a local authority or local authorities bringing forward sites. I think of Clonburris, where the servicing is happening and where there is URDF funding. The planning permission has been provided. Is that the next stage that the Government simply decides that we need to find a legally appropriate mechanism for running this on a social housing project? Is the 60-year lifespan for buildings sufficient? I am looking at social housing stock with a lifespan of more than 100 years if it is properly maintained. Sometimes it does not last that long because it is not maintained.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
Sixty years is just a line we set. If we were doing conventional Garda and other work, it would be a 70-year life. We just went to a point where we knew we could make it to, so it could last a lot longer than that, but that is what we went for.
I took a note of the points Deputy Ó Broin mentioned. He is right that we did not have to formally go through planning. With all of them, we met the local authorities, agreed the road layouts and service elements and, in a number of cases put in place provision for cycleways to come through the sites in the future. We did all of that because we were very conscious that in a year or two we are going to have to go back in to maintain and have planning permission to enter. We have done that on all the sites. We have met all the local authorities, so it will not be a surprise to anyone. All the connections were done in the same way.
As Deputy Ó Broin stated, the size of sites is very important. For it to be any way economic, there would need to be 100 or more units on a site. Because people did not want to have ghettos, they were anxious to keep the size of the units small in terms of the quantum. If we take it in just straight economic terms, there should be at least 100 units, going up to 300 units to be economic. In a way, we had to sort of plough through, but with the constraints of things outside of economics. They were fair enough. They were social issues that people want to do, and local people were happy with them. That was an issue. That is a lesson learned. If we were to do it at scale, there would really need to be more than 100, and preferably 300 or more. We would then a major benefit in the context of time, speed and quantum.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a supplementary question for Mr. O'Connor and the witnesses from Coillte. Obviously, there are procurement rules and planning requirements. Might it be possible for the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to say that under the five-year pipeline for the provision of social and affordable new builds, a certain percentage would be taken out and put into a separate multi-annual framework agreement whereby the providers of these building technologies would not just bid for an individual job of 50 or 100 units but also for work as part of that pipeline? That would give whomever is successful under the framework the certainty to allow them to scale up year on year. Is that where we need to be going?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
An element of that is needed. Our economy is small in size. As Mr. O'Toole said, trying to set up CLT production in Ireland at the moment is not economic. It is about looking at what we can do. When we met industry representatives last summer, they all were afraid that we would place only one order and then disappear. They asked why they should give up what they are doing in such circumstances. We told them we would guarantee they would get a particular quantum. That transformed both their response and the way we could work with them. They were very collaborative and open and it worked very well.
It is important to note that the industry cannot be grown from a seed and be expected to produce a tree in one year. It has to be developed, and this is one way to do it. We would have to look at how it would match up with European requirements on procurement and the like. We need to look at working it to suit our country. We need to make use of our natural resources, including Coillte. The French and the Germans do not make a big thing of it; they just go and do it. We should take a similar approach. It is the way forward, but we cannot develop it just on the basis that it is a nice idea.
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
The Deputy spoke about the direction of the construction industry in general, including the need to reduce carbon content and the drive to lower emissions. The product with the least embodied carbon is the product that is already in place. We need to restrict demolition of buildings. That whole area needs to be tightened up, with a move to repurposing rather than demolishing. If a building has to demolished, it should be dismantled, which would involve taking the products away, refurbishing them and putting them back on the market. That whole area has potential to reduce carbon emissions significantly.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Balfe is speaking to the converted in addressing that point to the Chairperson and me. A report the committee did on vacancy and dereliction made precisely the same point. If I had my way, anybody who wanted to demolish a building would have to justify it, our planning system would be able to refuse permission on the grounds that there is not a valid justification for demolition and there would be the possibility of requiring reuse of material that is removed. We recommended that in the report. We need a little of what we are talking about today and a lot of reusing existing buildings. The census shows there are 166,000 vacant dwellings across the State. Granular data suggest that in the case of some 50,000 or 60,000 of those units, their reuse for residential purposes could be achieved if there were a real drive to do so. We will still need to build a lot of new units as well. A mixture of both is needed. Mr. Balfe certainly has my support and that of the Chairperson on that.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Absolutely. This discussion has been fascinating. It has been quite technical, however, and I am trying to look at it from the perspective of members of the public who might be watching or anybody who does not have the technical expertise of the people in this room. How will modular and modern methods of construction impact on affordability in the long run? We have heard a number of ways in which they might, but can any of the witnesses say whether they will? That is the bottom line for people looking to buy a home.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
In most countries, the different methods are comparable cost-wise. In some, the type of construction we are discussing is slightly cheaper. It is not the case that it will be like building prefabricated buildings and will be really cheap. The productivity is taken off site, which means it is not weather dependent, and there are benefits from that. However, there is not a huge difference in cost.
If one compares it to the Dutch, the Danes, and the Germans, it is sort of similar. It is not surprising that it is a similar amount of work.
There is a little detail where we have an issue and we might need to sort it out. For every unit we put in in modular construction, the electrician who does the electrics has to do the electrical connection on the site. Most other European countries do not have that rule, so it means we have to insist that the electrician comes from wherever it was manufactured. They have to go all the way to Cork, do the connection and then go back again. That is not an efficient way to do it, but that is what the Irish rules require us to do. It is those little things that we need to get the glitches out of.
There is another one. An Garda Síochána will charge around €2,500 to act as a guide for any of the large products being brought on a truck. Other countries have come up with a way to resolve that by doing it at night-time. These are small things, but they all add up incrementally.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. O'Connor might help us with that. One does not have to do that at the moment. When an electrician wires a house in Dublin, a guy in Cork can test and certify it. One does not need the-----
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is the rule at the moment.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How do we address that? Is it through SOLAS, RECI or the Electro-Technical Council of Ireland, ETCI?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. We are at the start of that this, so these are the kinds of things where we can say, "this is where we can shave a week off, and this is where we can save as the volume goes up."
I have another question which might be asked by somebody who is watching or has an interest in this. If I walk around a volumetric home, am I going to notice that this is not the same as what I would call conventional? Remember, we call block built conventional. I am talking about a scheme home being built at the moment. Would I know the difference?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
I could tell the Cathaoirleach a little story about that. In Germany, they did very well with modulars in the beginning. Then people said they knew it was modular because the room was a certain width and they could not make it bigger. In Germany, for second houses, modular is very popular, but it is less popular for one's permanent house, because some people feel modular has dimensional constraints. When we looked at that two-storey, we deliberately tried to work out how one would break that. That was part of that design process, where one does not let it look like the box that came off the back of the truck. There are different ways to do that. We think we have managed to do that. Certainly, with that two-storey unit, one would not be able to tell when it is finished that it is different.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. In regard to putting them together and building at higher densities, I notice the drawings Mr. O'Connor put up. I appreciate it is very early days. They are in a line. Is there a space we can go to where these can be joined together and on top of each other, so we have these not very high rise but multi-unit options?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
There is, but that would bring one into some of the fire issues. For instance, to do that in Ireland at the moment, one would have to put up a concrete frame that one could plug them into like drawers, and build up. Other countries allow one to use the timber structure. Also tied into it is an elevator and a concrete stairs. They provide the lateral stability to the building. There are different ways to do it. It is like all things. If we just put our brains to it, we can sort it. We have a lot of other countries to use as examples.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I want to come back to that question, which Ms Wylde raised in her last contribution. We have a lot of the brains in the room here. We have a lot of people who know about this. Are they all sitting down together? Is there a format or working group, working on this with Departments, industry and expertise? Is that group set up?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Ms Wylde referenced it in her last contribution. Is that an agenda item? How are we dealing with TGD-B and the regulations and the possibility and the opportunity that is here? Is that being worked on at the moment? When are we going to see an output from that? My sense, from speaking to people in the industry who are working on this, is that there is a huge opportunity. A lot of people want to deliver this and want to do it. We are never going to make it if it just the OPW doing 40 or 50 units at a time.
We need to go to that scale of 300 units. What is the message to us legislators who can push these things? What should we be doing to make this work?
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is responsible for the development of technical guidance document B. There was previously a group involved. The committee might remember an bord snip, which abolished the Building Regulations Advisory Group. That group sat with the Department with responsibility for housing and gave its input. It comprised industry representatives who were able to give inputs such as the ones the Cathaoirleach has mentioned, including increasing the height of timber-frame buildings and whatever else. I cannot speak for the Department but as I understand it, it is looking to re-establish that board. I do not know when it will happen.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Balfe might talk me through that. What would that board do? We would have a building regulation advisory board. What was its title?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We could approach that group and say we may be importing CLT because we are not yet ready to manufacture it here and we want to build four-, five- or six-storey buildings in CLT and ask it what we need to do to enable that to happen. It seems there is a gap here somewhere.
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
The board was not specifying buildings of the type the Cathaoirleach is talking about but it was advising the Department on how to develop the technical guidance documents. It had input from representatives of various industries, including from Coillte, the concrete industry and those types of representatives who would advise the Department and fight their corner, if you like, or make some of the arguments Mr. O'Toole is making for higher timber-frame construction.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How long has the working group on which Mr. O'Connor sits along with representatives of the NSAI been meeting? Have there been any outputs, recommendations or changes made to building codes or whatever we wish to call them?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The working group has been in place for about a year. There are meetings approximately every three months. Different people are asked to present on different issues. There have been talks about the reduction of waste and the improvement of the carbon footprint. The Cathaoirleach is asking what needs to happen to makes these things happen at speed. It is like everything in that we need to set goals and provide a certain time for them to be achieved. That would be my approach. Otherwise we end up circling all the time. We know what the issue is but are not solving it.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is what I am concerned about. What would our representatives from Coillte say is the number one goal they would like to see as a result of this group?
Mr. Des O'Toole:
At the Build with Wood conference in Avondale in November, a request was made for the establishment of a cross-departmental working group with industry participation to look at these issues and try to develop a roadmap to solve these problems and move forward. I will make an observation on what has happened in the room today. We are hearing from everybody that there is a willingness to try to get together and solve the problems. We had a regulatory and demonstration discussion earlier. I am using this opportunity to see can we get that cross-departmental working group established and agree terms of reference. We could put a 12-month timeframe in place to resolve the issues. That is doable and there are enough interested parties in this room to make it happen.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will focus on that before I come to Ms Larkin. A group made up of some players, including Mr. O'Connor, representatives of the NSAI and some Departments, meets at the moment.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Where could we get the list of people who sit on that group to see where the gaps are? We could consult others out there. As Mr. O'Toole has said, we need to ask if other people need to sit on the group to move things along.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
May I add to the Cathaoirleach's question in the interests of clarity?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is the group we are talking about different from the construction sector working group in the innovation subcommittee?
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am sorry for cutting across the Cathaoirleach. That group has been in place for approximately four or five years. We get the minutes of meetings on request but they are very brief. The group has been doing a lot of good work, including on some of the outworking of Mount Lucas. However, it has been going on for quite some time.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
It was a broad view. EY did a study and arising out of that, this group that was set up. The Deputy is right. We are seeking a balance. There are groups, such as the cement industry, which do not want certain changes and have legitimate arguments and fears that we need to address.
There is no point saying we will throw people overboard when we do this because concrete will be needed. The question is where it is used, where its best benefit is and how we transition that industry. Those issues need to be teased out so that people do not feel we are going in there to assassinate them.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I understand that.
Ms Geraldine Larkin:
I will add that in addition there is a cross-departmental group led by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. All these groups are interconnected. There is no one silver bullet. It is a matter of every one of these issues progressing, including a demonstrator park, the Build Digital Project in Galway, and the work we are doing on an Agrément perspective. All of these are coming together. A lot of work has been done and there is a lot of consensus in this room around solving what is the biggest challenge of our time.
If this is a journey, the next step is detailed engagement with industry, and those Agrément-approved bodies and others who are providing solutions in this space, to look at what we can do on a practical, proactive basis. We have structures and frameworks. Agrément allows us an opportunity to consider and approve different types of structures. From a NSAI perspective, and I take the points made regarding the size of the Irish industry, our point is that we do not have any of those. It is probably a matter of putting our heads together collectively to ask how we approach this, even taking the solutions and regulations we already have.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am aware that everybody is up to their eyes at work. Everybody's workload is immense and the issue is huge. We do not want to rush into this and find out in ten years' time that we rushed that in order to try to make up a short bit. From what I have heard, I sense there is something missing. I still cannot understand what it is.
Mr. O'Connor mentioned the volume the OPW would need to get 300 units. Was that a reference to this becoming a much more viable model? If we take the bigger construction companies in the country, including the likes of Glenveagh and Cairn, which are building houses on that level on certain estates around the place, are they using these methods yet, even though they are working at those volumes?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
Companies like Glenveagh and others that are quite progressive are currently using the flat-pack system because that has been established and proven whereas what we have been working on is less proven and does not really have a track record in Ireland. Some of those firms have been in direct contact with us and have asked us to share information, which we have. I can immediately think of three such firms which came to see us in the past six months. They were obviously looking to see what the market is and how it will work. They were interested in costs, time delivery and what we thought of the different suppliers.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
You can go to three-storey volumetric but anything above that would be-----
Mr. Se?n Balfe:
There are apartment blocks in Sandyford built with volumetric construction that are higher than three storeys. They were built similar to the ones mentioned by Mr. O'Connor. You can go to whatever height you like. Student accommodation at 42 storeys has been built in Wolverhampton as a modular building.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Even if a standard duplex is being built, my understanding is even that could not be done if there are separate units of accommodation that are fully timber. The ground floor would have to be a standard concrete floor and there would then be two storeys of timber on top. That is the case, even for something like that. Mr. O'Connor mentioned Milford Manor. It is important we keep that in mind because when something is done very badly, we get something as appalling as that. That was not the only one of its kind, although that builder also had a bad track record when it used traditional build as well, which is all a matter of public record. It is about the idea a fully timber duplex cannot even be done now.
We have kept our guests here far too long. All of that good work of the construction sector working group and the outworkings of the innovation subgroup have taken us to a point where people seem to know what we can and cannot do. We always like asking this question at the end of sessions and putting our guests on the spot. What is the one thing that Government could do to start to accelerate this? We are in the middle of a housing crisis that is getting worse. We are grappling with a climate crisis and missing our targets. In addition, we are finding it difficult to get young people into the traditional constructions trades. One of the reasons for that is they do not like having to travel from one end of the country to other and working outside, whereas if people are able to walk, cycle or drive to the factory close to their village or town in the midlands, that is a much more attractive proposition, whether it is the high-skill jobs or the standard manufacturing jobs. How do we inject some urgency into this? I take Ms Larkin’s point. There is a fair amount of consensus, and we had the folks from Enterprise Ireland and the chair of the innovation subgroup in at a previous committee meeting. It seems to be we are at the point now where somebody somewhere in power needs to kick-start the thing to the next phase. What does that jolt look like? One of the reasons we do these hearings is not just because we find these interesting but because we do short reports and we write to the Minister stating what we think the Minister should do. If we want to kick it to the next level and start to elevate it to a greater level of urgency, what is the action? I take Mr. O’Toole’s point on the cross-departmental group. That is clearly one action. Are there specific things people think?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The Deputy’s suggestion of the proportion of work in a beginning phase until the industry is developed is an obvious one. That part of the industry will not continue to develop unless it has an economic horizon. That is important. Once it gets beyond that embryonic state and on its own feet, then let whatever happens happen.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
From my point of view, it is the low-carbon technologies, so whatever they are. Obviously, wood is one of those, but it is not the only one. In that sense, if Mr. Carlin asked me to clarify just in terms of his answer and as he represents Coillte, if it is action for wood, that fits. Our guests know this much better than we do, but the public conversation, inasmuch as it is happening, is very confused. As I said at the start, we use phrases like “modern methods of construction” but people have been prefabricating stuff since the 1940s. All of the great public housing all over Europe was prefabricated, though I know it is a different kind of prefabrication. The important thing is whether we can build larger volumes of good quality homes more quickly and with the lowest embodied carbon. That is where some of us on the committee are at and that is what these sessions are trying to tease out, without in any way compromising building control and fire safety standards.
Mr. Mark Carlin:
I thank the Deputy for that clarification. There is not one silver bullet. I am reluctant to say that, if it was regulation or demonstrator buildings, we would all sort it in the morning. On low-carbon, quick-build efficiency, we are looking at an element of regulation, both in terms of removing some of the impediments but putting in some of the promotion, particularly accounting for embodied carbon and promoting low carbon. There is demonstrator. I think we can get on in the next 12 months with demonstrator buildings. There are public buildings and schemes being built. They should be built with low carbon and we can demonstrate that. There is then the space of some of the technical specifications as well, which can be turned around quite quickly.
I think there is much willingness here. I suggest a coalition of the willing working together, probably with some independent chair, to try to drive it forward within a tight timeframe with clear terms of reference, such as the goals in each phase, to make sure something is done in the next 12 months. Some things might fall outside the 12 months and that is okay. That could be in a subsequent phase. We need clarity on what we want to do in the next 12 months.
Certainly, one of the big takeaways from the Build with Wood conference that Coillte organised with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine was that there is a real appetite here. If the right environment is put in place, the timber sector and, certainly, the construction sector are ready to kick on.
It is about trying to understand what the impediments are and what the quick wins would be. This is not just about industry. It cannot do it on its own but it has to be involved. It has to be involved with a cross-departmental group and it has to work with urgency. I would reflect on bringing independence into that.
Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is not that I think we are looking for silver bullets, because we know this is not straightforward. The only reason Mr. O'Connor was able to come here to make the presentation he made today is that we had a rural refugee crisis and somebody, somewhere, decided that we need to get 500 units of accommodation very quickly, said that somebody should sort it out, and a bunch of people were tasked to do it. To go from that to building more complex buildings that are for long-term residential use or others is another step. Somebody, somewhere in the system, has to decide that this is where we take it to the next level. It is not a silver bullet but more about who gives the next push. When we had Enterprise Ireland in, it made the point that many of the pieces are in place, but a push has to come from somewhere. I hear the point Mr. Carlin is making and take it on board.
Ms Yvonne Wylde:
I remember when electricity was coming to Ireland or when the sugar factories were built and the Government looked around to see where best practice was. It brought that information in and everybody learned from that. I am not saying that the best practice is abroad at all but the Government took the initiative to find the best practice and then let everybody learn from that. Buildings are being built with these technologies. Somebody has to take the risk. I think the Government has to take the risk and the decision because if one leaves it to market forces, one is leaving huge risk. Building high-rise houses, or any houses, is a huge safety issue. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is trying to make sure that buildings are safe. If one tries to speed things up, one has to put extra controls in to make sure the buildings are safe, whether that is through a higher level of control at the beginning, extra monitoring in the life of the building, or whatever it is to take away that risk or address and alleviate it. Those are some observations.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is interesting because I was wondering if we could go to somewhere that is years ahead of us on this and say we will take its standard, risk assessment and what it has done, and transpose that to our own situation. If one is using Irish timber, does it have the same characteristics as Polish timber or German timber?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It would.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
On the competencies, there are Irish design practitioners, architects, fire engineers and consultants who design mass timber buildings in other jurisdictions. I am not saying every engineer can design for timber. There is further work to do on the education and promotion of general architects and engineers anyway. We have expertise in Ireland. We have proven we can do it.
On the strength grade, C16 is just a grade. One can design a full timber-framed house that is C16. It does not have to be C24 or TR26. It is just a design solution that needs to be applied. One can manufacture CLT and one can make timber frames in C16.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are architecture students in UCD or Trinity at the moment learning how to build with timber as part of their architectural studies?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The Cathaoirleach has just hit a button because we have been involved, with Mr. O'Toole and others, in timber awards for students.
It has fluctuated. Sometimes timber is in, and sometimes it is less so. It is in at the moment, so everybody wants to be part of it. Ten years ago, it was seen as something else.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
A niche kind of thing. That is where it is going.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
The green agenda has refocused that. I am involved with the review of architectural training within my institute. We are insisting that people are trained in the circular economy for the five years of college. That brings in the whole area of timber and other materials. That will come through the system over the next four to five years. That is happening. The Institution of Engineers of Ireland is looking at a similar process.
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
In a similar vein, we are now embedding NZEB and BIM training as part of the apprenticeship programme. Every apprentice who will be coming out will have those skills, and we can update the curriculum in terms of future needs as well. I want to make a related point on that question. We were asked about regulation earlier on, and it was more about regulation of buildings and building control. Effectively, we are the regulator of construction skills and of construction workers across the sector. To get on any site, you need a Safe Pass card. People can now go through an online renewal scheme. We are modernising the curriculum there. There is also the potential to update the requirements around Safe Pass to reflect MMC requirements, NZEB and retrofitting skills. There is potential to look at that over the next few years. Legislation is also being passed to move to a licensing model for construction and quarry skills, the construction skills construction skills, CSCS, cards and quarries skills construction skills, QSCS, cards. Applicants complete a once-off training scheme. They get their cards and go back every five years for renewal. As long as they can prove who they are, they can get the card renewed. Similar to Safe Pass, we will be moving to an ongoing assessment and relicensing scheme. That gives us the opportunity to build in requirements to have the MMC-relevant skills, green skills and retrofitting skills that we need for the modern construction industry. It is another aspect of regulation that might be worth thinking about as we move forward.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I want to ask the representatives from Coillte about timber production. We hear a lot about licensing issues in forestry and the shortage of ecologists to look at licensing. I am interested in the supply chain of timber that we will need over the next 20 to 30 years. What was the figure that the witnesses referenced in total construction grade timber produced?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We produced 700,000 cu. m?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is the supply chain in place - solid and good - for the next while?
Mr. Mark Carlin:
The challenges over the past few years, in terms of licensing, has impacted some felling operations. Going forward, forestry regulation also needs to be streamlined. The trees are in the ground and growing, however, and supply will increase. It is estimated that it will double in the next ten to 15 years. There is real potential to grow the figure of 700,000 cu. m construction timber produced. What we are saying is that there is no impediment to not only building more with wood, but using it host of different areas as well. We are in for a period of innovation around natural fibres, including wood fibres, cellulose and lignin, in terms of packaging and a host of other substitutes for fossil-based products. The World Bank has predicted that demand for wood fibre will quadruple by 2050. It is critically important that we are prepared for that. We are prepared in one way. We have invested heavily in our forest industry. We have trees in the ground and they are growing. We need to make sure we have regulation that provides the proper protections, but is streamlined in order to be able to mobilise that wood resource. Looking forward into our afforestation, it is incredibly important that we not only plant more trees for wood and wood fibre, but also to address biodiversity concerns and loss, and climate change. Trees are a fantastic way of dealing with the carbon crisis that we are facing, of sinking new CO2, storing that in wood and wood products, and also, as we have said, substituting it for more fossil-based products. It is critically important in the mix of trees. It is important that we continue to drive forward. We are only at 11.6% forest cover. The average across Europe is 40%.
We have long-term ambitions in Ireland to get to 18% and that will necessitate the planting and growing of another 450,000 ha of forestry, so there are land availability challenges with that. We need more trees for a host of different reasons and they have multiple benefits. We are discussing wood today but they are also beneficial for biodiversity, recreation and carbon.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
When we talk about the timber that is suitable for construction, we have referred to the C16 strength reference, for example. I mention the likes of Sitka spruce, which has a poor reputation in this country but we probably misplanted it and there are legacy issues. Is that the type of timber that is suitable for construction? It is quite good at carbon sequestration. Is that the kind of timber we would use in CLT, for example?
Mr. Mark Carlin:
It is. In the world today, of the timber for construction and a host of other products, including pallets and fencing, 80% of the demand is for soft wood. Ireland is unlucky in one way in that it has a limited number of native soft woods, such as Scots Pine, juniper and yew, none of which are suitable for production. That is why we used imported and non-native spruces and pines in the first place. That is the long fibre we need as it has a fantastic strength to weight ratio and it grows quickly - three times quicker than in parts of Europe - and the faster the tree grows the more carbon dioxide it sequesters and then we can use that wood. It is incredibly important we have the right mix going forward and our native species are really important as well because they are a good long-term storer of carbon dioxide and they also have an important biodiversity and amenity value.
The Cathaoirleach has heard the phrase "right tree, right place, right objective" before, but the most important thing is to understand the right objective in the first place. If the objective is to produce wood, then it is spruces and pines you are looking for, and they are good for the climate as well. If the objective is more amenity, recreation and biodiversity, then we must look at the native species. With the climate challenges we have, even some of our native species will be under threat in terms of choosing species for the long term. In England, they are considering a move away from English oak because they have to do so due to challenges with climate change. It is a unique time for forestry and it has never been more important in what it can offer in wood, climate and nature and for people in recreation. There are also climate change challenges and we must understand what those changes are so we can have climate-fit forests for the future. We need all trees for all different reasons and that is the key.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will move to SOLAS and the issue of the site workers and the chain of workers we will need over the next two to three decades. Modular and off-site construction open up a range of types of jobs that would not have been conventional building site type jobs. I am talking about design work and working indoors where it is not wet or lashing rain on top of you like it is on some sites. Is SOLAS going to the schools and telling them this is a career? How does somebody get into that line of work?
As for trades, there are people in trades making far more money than very qualified professionals. The work can be tough and it is hard on the knees and back, etc., but it is a good job for the future and we know what the line on housing is. The figures show we need to build 30,000, 40,000 and 50,000 houses per year, so there is a line of work in it. Tell me how SOLAS is engaging with schools or third-level institutions on that.
Mr. Andrew Brownlee:
It is a massive opportunity and it is one of the things I was thinking of proposing as the one idea to move forward. The Cathaoirleach is right and the modern and future construction careers do not need to involve being outside all day on a site. We are talking about different environments and ones that can appeal equally to females as well as to males. There are big opportunities to get many more young people interested in careers in construction.
One of the big things we have been working on is developing offerings in partnership with our education and training boards, ETBs, as part of transition year.
Limerick and Clare ETB, for example, has developed offerings for the hospitality sector, Kerry ETB has developed offerings around construction, and Longford Westmeath ETB is developing an offering around advanced manufacturing. There is a big opportunity to develop TY tasters - modules that can be offered initially in transition year but, over time, we need to look at reform of the senior cycle so they can be offered as integrated credited modules which can give people their first step into a career in construction. There is a big opportunity in that.
One of the big milestones we saw in recent years was getting further education and training and apprenticeship options on the landing page of the CAO website. When people are having conversations with their families around the dinner table or with their peers, guidance counsellors or teachers at school, all of the options will be on the table at the same time. An apprenticeship is a great option. As was said, a career in construction is a great option. It will become an even more appealing option because the type of work that can be done in the sector will only broaden and become more interesting and exciting.
We are already doing stuff. The TY bit is easy because people want to fill their TY with lots of different work and education experiences. In a way we have an open door there. The tough nut to crack as part of senior cycle reform is trying to build vocational and technical options and pathways as an integrated part of our senior cycle or leaving certificate examination. People will then start to take it more seriously and give us the numbers we need to see coming through in the talent pipeline.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have one more question about the employment aspect and then I will move on to the type of energy used in modular buildings.
I can see the desire in some quarters to say we should shorten the apprenticeship. We would end up with a kind of modularised construction worker because these things are flat-pack. They can be put together, plug and play as was said, as regards much of the electrics, plumbing and so on. Doing an apprenticeship is not just about the discipline. People must learn on site how the site works including health and safety and all those things. In the rush to get someone out the other end and qualified quickly, we do not want to cut short the other learning applications that go with learning a trade. That is just an observation.
As regards energy use, when we talk about the risk of fire in timber frame buildings, if we were to go to air-to-heat technology and not use any fossil fuel type combustion - no gas cooking - and just use electric cooking, electric heating and so on, that derisks it as well. Is that something that is being considered? Is the volumetric all electric?
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
Electric energy or heat pumps can be used to give underfloor heating. All those options are available and they are developing and getting better every year. Those are all things for the future. If I look back ten years at what has happened with air-to-water heat pumps, their efficiency has grown, their cost has dropped and their ability to integrate into the building is much simpler. We have come a long way and that will only accelerate going forward.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On vertical extensions and building with wood, where a conventional block building is built on a foundation, the foundations may not be suitable for adding two more storeys onto the concrete building. A vertical extension built with timber would be lighter so the foundations may be suitable. Does that run foul of current regulations or standards? Could I put two timber-built storeys on top of two block-built storeys or would I be creating a headache for myself?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is possible and those kinds of jobs can be done within regulations and standards at the moment.
Mr. Ciar?n O'Connor:
On the issue the Cathaoirleach raised about fire, one of the problems, and I think Deputy Ó Broin mentioned it, that arose was that, while the plasterboard in the internal finish gets over the fire issue as the timber is behind the plasterboard, people were not using the right thickness of plasterboard. Part of that was just people taking shortcuts. It has to be installed at a certain thickness to meet that standard and someone has to ensure it is done that way. Those are the little things. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage felt put upon by everyone complaining about the fire regulations, but it would reply that we must look at the 20% of builders who do not do their job very well.
That is what we have to look at. It is trying to get a balance between the high end of the market and perhaps the weaker end of the market.
Mr. Des O'Toole:
To comment on whether you can build on existing buildings to increase the number of storeys, it is quite common in London where, or example, there are limits on the weights of buildings that can be built over the underground system. It is quite common over there to repurpose old buildings and create residential accommodation in industrial warehouses, for example. They build one or two extra floors on top because of the lightweight nature. Their regulations are slightly different over there but I think we would still be limited in terms of the current 10 m rule and the proposed 11 m rule. Height still overrules everything.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Even though it would be only of that height in timber because it is built above a two-storey property?
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We will put it to the working group to work that one out.
Mr. Tony Dalton:
To come back to the modularisation of provision, it is the future of provision, notwithstanding the value of what we may call a major award, be that a level 5, 6 or 7. The flexibility of provision is something we as providers and education and training bodies must address because it makes the programme far more accessible. As we move into the future, what we may call green or future construction jobs, some of which may not yet exist, will take a modular approach and will probably change the way people experience the learning process. That will change over time. While apprenticeships and major awards at apprenticeship are critically important, they are set in stone. How we provide that will have to change.
Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Unless anybody else has any questions or further comments, I thank everyone for their attendance, which has been very helpful. Next week, we will meet architects and others involved in design. We will try to put together a fairly brief report of recommendations.