Your article on the John Madejski Academy (BSj 10/07) outlines what has become a fairly conventional natural ventilation strategy for schools.

We have designed an alternative strategy for the Springs and Park academies in Sheffield, which are also nearing completion. These have controlled mechanical ventilation units with heat recovery in each classroom.

It’s difficult, if not impossible, to compare the overall costs of these strategies but I feel that for high-occupation spaces such as classrooms, the assumption that natural ventilation is the lowest energy solution needs to be challenged. It’s not maintenance-free, either, with all the actuators and dampers needed to control ventilation rates.

With the side benefits that come with mechanical ventilation removing radiators, controlling noise, recovering heat, removing the need for large vertical shafts, reducing the window openings required as well as the main benefits of controlling temperature and air quality, I’d like to see how each approach is viewed by the staff and pupils who have to live in these spaces. Perhaps we could run a survey after these schemes have been up and running for a while.

Andy Peters, director, Ramboll Whitbybird

Source

Building Sustainable Design