November/December 2022 - 18

Since the fall of 2019 DFI has produced the so-called ITS
Money webinar series, which, through case studies, highlights
the idea that increased testing saves money. While the
additional testing does add to the project costs, these case
studies are excellent testimonials showing that with the
additional testing the design could be optimized, resulting in
lower overall project costs, despite the additional money spent
on testing. Often the design optimization resulted in smaller
foundations, which means that the outcome was not only
economically attractive, but also more sustainable as it had a
smaller carbon footprint and used fewer raw materials.
Sometimes it goes even further than that, such as when testing
of an existing foundation eliminates the need of a new foundation
entirely and thus no new raw materials are required.
This was illustrated in an ITS Money webinar in 2021 that
focused on foundation testing, particularly the old timber pile
foundations of Amsterdam's canal houses. To date these webinars
have presented more than 50 case studies, which makes
the concept of ITS Money more and more convincing, even to
the most ardent sceptics. But it also demonstrates something
else: it is economical to install a more sustainable foundation,
and therefore the goal should be to install sustainable
foundations. This was one of the messages that was conveyed
by a group of U.S. executives that participated in a DFI webinar
this spring on why sustainability is something that the management
of a company in the deep foundation industry should
focus on. In that webinar Seth Pearlman, the North American
director of Menard, stated the obvious fact that " most people
won't take action unless there is a financial benefit to do so. "
But he then continued by saying that " by looking at both costs
and sustainability, we will find inherent compatibility, " which
is the same message that follows from the ITS Money webinars.
While the financial benefits may be the major impetus to
implementing something, there are other considerations as
well, and history provides solid examples. When quality
improvement programs were first introduced in the 1980s
they were widely seen as programs that just increased the cost
to do business. But over time these programs not only became
an integral part of the business process, but it also became
obvious that " doing it right the first time " (the concept
promoted by Philip Crosby, a quality management practitioner
and author) not only made sense, but it also reduced the cost of
doing business. The SDGs just repackage that focus area into
the concept of responsible use of raw materials (SDG 12).
Similarly, the safety programs initiated in the 1970s were
initially viewed as nothing more than costly elements of doing
business, but before long, companies started to use safety
statistics to attract staff and manufacturers started to
highlight safety features on their equipment as a proven way
to generate sales. In addition, over time these programs
expanded to cover health and safety. Paying attention to those
aspects simply made sense, and the SDGs repackage this focus
area into the concept of good health and wellbeing (SDG 3).
18 * DEEP FOUNDATIONS * NOV/DEC 2022
The above demonstrate not only that there is a financial
benefit to implementing sustainability in the way we conduct
business in the geotechnical industry, but it also shows that
sustainability contains many elements that are already
routine parts of our business processes. That is why the views
on sustainability held by some in our industry are so surprising,
and maybe the explanation for those views is that
sustainability is seen as nothing more than climate action
(SDG 13), but hopefully this article has shown that sustainability
is much more than that. Further in this special issue of
Deep Foundations, the feature articles focus on different ways
the industry can approach sustainability from foundation
reuse to performing carbon calculations, using energy
foundations in buildings and shaping engineering education.
Finally, the implementation of the SDGs (hopefully assisted
by the guides that EFFC and DFI will generate) is not the end
station. Once sustainability is embedded in the way we do
... it is economical to install a more
sustainable foundation, and therefore the
goal should be to install sustainable
foundations.
business, we may want to (or in certain cases will be required
to) report to the stakeholders (and possibly the regulators) on
the results. This is referred to as environmental, social and
governance (ESG) reporting. As with all reporting, its purpose is
not only to document (e.g., to the stakeholders) a company's
activities, it is also an effective way to demonstrate that a
company is meeting ESG goals and that its efforts are genuine
and not just empty promises. The latter is more important than
many realize. At a time when it is increasingly hard to find the
staff a company needs to maintain its current level of activity,
candidates are more and more concerned about the way a
company conducts its business. The ESG reporting may well
turn out to be a great tool to bring these candidates on board.
And without these new hires it may be impossible to continue
to conduct business, or, in other words, the business may not
be sustainable. So, the implementation of the SDGs in business
processes may well turn out to be essential to sustain a
company. Just another reason why sustainability simply
makes sense, also for the foundation industry.
Gerald Verbeek has a B.Sc. in civil engineering and an M.Sc. in
structural engineering from Delft University of Technology. After 20
years in the oil and gas industry, he started Verbeek Management
Services in 2004, which helps European companies do business in
North America. As part of that he is active in promoting soil and
foundation testing philosophies and equipment. In the area of
foundation testing, his work is through Allnamics USA.
November/December 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of November/December 2022
