Large scale sustainable practices are extremely difficult to gain support for and implement.
Are you wondering what you can do in your everyday life to help protect the planet's future?
The California Academy of Sciences has produced a set of suggestions of everyday choices we can make to make a difference. The document is broken up into home, transport and food. Each section has an easy, medium and difficult range of solutions to diffuse the problems the planet is facing.
Documents such as these would be incredibly effective in educating the public about simple measures they can take to help the environment in ways they may not have thought of before. The government needs to fund the spreading of information on these issues such as this document, to begin to make real changes.
http://www.calacademy.org/sustainable_future/pdfs/sustainability_made_simple.pdf
Sustainability can also be marketed to the public by way of advertising. This was successfully achieved by New Zealand banking company Westpac who released a serious of advertisements on sustainability. The company most likely had an alterer motive of gaining more clients through becoming sustainable and 'green', however it is still a step in the right direction, providing information to the general public about sustainability.
If Westpac can do it, why can't the government? A 30 second ad in prime-time TV would surely get the message across...
In the space of a 1 minute ad, they cover waste reduction, pollution issues, the importance of volunteer work and reducing power. Another interesting point to note is that the information is coming from a child that has learnt about sustainability at school. It is the children that are concerned, and the adults that aren't doing anything to stop it. Here one of the Westpac sustainability advertisements:
Monday, 6 June 2011
Friday, 3 June 2011
Zero Energy
The Pearl River Tower due to be complete sometime this year is said to be the "worlds greenest skyscraper".
The 2.3 million square foot and 309m high tower redefines what is possible in sustainable design.
The structure integrates sustainable design principles by incorporating passive solar and wind design, sustainable technology and structural techniques to create a near zero energy building that is "as beautiful as it is green". The tallest ever zero-energy building is likely to generate more power than it consumes on the grid.
How is the Pearl River Tower sustainable?
Green designs such as this one are iconic. If Auckland was to establish a building like the Pearl River Tower, the future of the city would be headed in a direction of cutting-edge sustainable design.
Green Launches. (2010). http://www.greenlaunches.com/architecture/chinas-pearl-river-tower-will-be-the-worlds-tallest-zero-energy-building.php
SOM. (2010). http://www.som.com/content.cfm/pearl_river_tower
Inhabitat. (2010). http://inhabitat.com/worlds-greenest-skyscraper-pearl-river-tower-almost-complete/pearl-double-pained-glass/
The 2.3 million square foot and 309m high tower redefines what is possible in sustainable design.
The structure integrates sustainable design principles by incorporating passive solar and wind design, sustainable technology and structural techniques to create a near zero energy building that is "as beautiful as it is green". The tallest ever zero-energy building is likely to generate more power than it consumes on the grid.
How is the Pearl River Tower sustainable?
- Strategically located to take advantage of solar and wind patterns
- Designed in a way to funnel wind into integrated internal wind turbines
- Integrated photovaltaic panels (keep heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems energised)
- Rotating motorised louvres to keep the building cool
- Double-skinned and triple-glazed
- Grey water collection system
Green designs such as this one are iconic. If Auckland was to establish a building like the Pearl River Tower, the future of the city would be headed in a direction of cutting-edge sustainable design.
Green Launches. (2010). http://www.greenlaunches.com/architecture/chinas-pearl-river-tower-will-be-the-worlds-tallest-zero-energy-building.php
SOM. (2010). http://www.som.com/content.cfm/pearl_river_tower
Inhabitat. (2010). http://inhabitat.com/worlds-greenest-skyscraper-pearl-river-tower-almost-complete/pearl-double-pained-glass/
Thursday, 26 May 2011
The Great Green Wall of China
The Green Wall of China is a barrier composed of trees, shrubs, and grass that was built in inner Mongolia to block off the Gobi desert and to diffuse sandstorms that were blowing over northeast Asia and into the United States.
The Green Wall was initiated in 1978 and is proposed to stretch 4,480 kilometers to protect cities and cropland from floods and desert. The desert was heading South East at a rate of 3 kilometers a year, straight towards Beijing in 2008 (the year of the Olympics). Millions of trees were planted in 2007 in preparation for the event which seemed to temporarily diffuse the situation, however the roots of the problem is the overpopulation and unsustainable development in Asia.
If the plan is completed accordingly, by 2050 trees will cover 42% of China's landmass. This will create the largest 'man-made carbon sponge' on the planet, a mitigation approach to decreasing carbon emissions.
The Chinese government are tightening logging restrictions to ensure that they meet this target and is increasing reforestation efforts through aerial seeding of remote areas. The deforestation and logging of forests in China is what led to the sandstorms in the first place, which is why it is important that the government enforce policies to adapt to the problem rather than mitigate, which should in turn stop deforestation.
This video explains the deforestation and potential adverse economic effects:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2009/mar/11/green-wall-forest-logging
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/06/living_green_wall.php
http://www.planetizen.com/node/25141
The Green Wall was initiated in 1978 and is proposed to stretch 4,480 kilometers to protect cities and cropland from floods and desert. The desert was heading South East at a rate of 3 kilometers a year, straight towards Beijing in 2008 (the year of the Olympics). Millions of trees were planted in 2007 in preparation for the event which seemed to temporarily diffuse the situation, however the roots of the problem is the overpopulation and unsustainable development in Asia.
If the plan is completed accordingly, by 2050 trees will cover 42% of China's landmass. This will create the largest 'man-made carbon sponge' on the planet, a mitigation approach to decreasing carbon emissions.
The Chinese government are tightening logging restrictions to ensure that they meet this target and is increasing reforestation efforts through aerial seeding of remote areas. The deforestation and logging of forests in China is what led to the sandstorms in the first place, which is why it is important that the government enforce policies to adapt to the problem rather than mitigate, which should in turn stop deforestation.
This video explains the deforestation and potential adverse economic effects:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2009/mar/11/green-wall-forest-logging
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/06/living_green_wall.php
http://www.planetizen.com/node/25141
Sustaina-babble
Do you ever question how 'green' or 'sustainable' products or buildings really are?
Greenwashing is a word used to describe the deceptive use of green marketing in order to promote businesses or products as environmentally friendly. It is argued that some companies spend more time on advertising how 'green' they are, rather than spending money on green practices. This is more common than you may think.
Greenwashing examples:
http://www.wordspy.com/words/eco-bling.asp
Greenwashing is a word used to describe the deceptive use of green marketing in order to promote businesses or products as environmentally friendly. It is argued that some companies spend more time on advertising how 'green' they are, rather than spending money on green practices. This is more common than you may think.
Greenwashing examples:
- In 2009, European McDonald's changed their logo colours from yellow and red to yellow and green.
- Grocery chains charging money for plastic bags to 'save the environment'.
- Environmentally friendly images (lakes, rolling hills, beaches) on food and drinks that have made no attempt to lessen their environmental impact.
- Solar panels on buildings that they either don't use or have not attempted to lessen their energy consumption in any way.
This last point brings about the idea of 'Eco-bling'. This term can be described as the ineffective use of green technology - equipment that has been added onto an existing poorly-designed building that does little to reduce the building's use of natural resources.
A new Sainsbury supermarket concept that is 'sustainable and eco-friendly' is a primary example of eco-bling. The supermarket claims that its new kinetic energy system captures energy from cars as they enter the carpark and uses this energy to generate power. Scientists have tested the concept of these 'kinetic road plates' and concluded that the energy extracted from the car comes to 0.002 kilowatt-hours. However, the energy used by the car on its trip to the supermarket would be at least 8 kilowatt-hours. The savings from parking at the 'green carpark' amount to one four-thousandth of the energy used by the trip to the supermarket (less than 1% of an energy saving).
Policies need to be put in place to ensure that green or sustainable practices are making a decent enough energy saving to be able to promote their practices as 'green' as it cannot be determined by the general public through the excessive amount of products and businesses that are greenwashing or eco-bling-ing.
In parts of the UK, the Merton Rule has been established. This requires any residential development of more than 10 units, or any commercial building over 1000 square meters to reduce its carbon emissions by a certain percentage through the use of on-site renewables. If rules like this one were established by the Auckland Council, a low carbon future would be achieved.
http://www.wordspy.com/words/eco-bling.asp
Wednesday, 25 May 2011
Koala numbers drop 80%
The koala population has dropped 80% in the last 10 to 15 years and scientists are looking at declaring the species as endangered.
The koala population is rapidly declining as a result of climate change and will continue to irreversibly effect the population, particularly from droughts. Droughts in Australia are drying out the koala's number one food source - eucalyptus leaves which they eat to obtain moisture. They are also incapable of dealing with the increasingly hotter, drier temperatures in Australia which results in the animals experiencing heat stress and dehydration, exhausting them so much that they virtually drop out of their trees.
One of the reasons for this decline is also the lack of habitat for koalas after land is being cleared for urban development, depriving them of their traditional habitat. This is another reason to build up rather than out and reduce human-related emissions as much as possible. We need to be more selfless and realise that humans arent the only species on the earth! In Brisbane houses are even being built in 'koala corridors', areas of land that have been created to foster the species as a result of urbanisation.
What would happen to our national symbol, the kiwi, if temperatures were to increase a couple of degrees in New Zealand? The kiwi's body temperature is around 37 to 38 degrees which is almost the same as the koala (36.6 degrees). The kiwi's traditional habitiat is in damp, dark forest land which we must do everything in our power to protect, as kiwi's are already endangered and at further risk as a result of climate change and urban sprawl.
What can we do? DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE AND URBAN SPRAWL
It may be as simple as being energy efficient, use public transport, walk, cycle, think about carbon miles (be concious of where your food and your clothes are coming from)...
The fate of the koala and the kiwi may be in your hands.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10728038
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/kiwi-bird-facts.html
The koala population is rapidly declining as a result of climate change and will continue to irreversibly effect the population, particularly from droughts. Droughts in Australia are drying out the koala's number one food source - eucalyptus leaves which they eat to obtain moisture. They are also incapable of dealing with the increasingly hotter, drier temperatures in Australia which results in the animals experiencing heat stress and dehydration, exhausting them so much that they virtually drop out of their trees.
One of the reasons for this decline is also the lack of habitat for koalas after land is being cleared for urban development, depriving them of their traditional habitat. This is another reason to build up rather than out and reduce human-related emissions as much as possible. We need to be more selfless and realise that humans arent the only species on the earth! In Brisbane houses are even being built in 'koala corridors', areas of land that have been created to foster the species as a result of urbanisation.
What would happen to our national symbol, the kiwi, if temperatures were to increase a couple of degrees in New Zealand? The kiwi's body temperature is around 37 to 38 degrees which is almost the same as the koala (36.6 degrees). The kiwi's traditional habitiat is in damp, dark forest land which we must do everything in our power to protect, as kiwi's are already endangered and at further risk as a result of climate change and urban sprawl.
What can we do? DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE AND URBAN SPRAWL
It may be as simple as being energy efficient, use public transport, walk, cycle, think about carbon miles (be concious of where your food and your clothes are coming from)...
The fate of the koala and the kiwi may be in your hands.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10728038
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/kiwi-bird-facts.html
Tuesday, 19 April 2011
"Live the change you want to see in the World"
I managed to stumble across this web page as I was researching for another topic. This website is created by a couple (Patrick and Mel) who have dropped everything in their 'normal' lives to go and live in the Apache County Arizona (the high desert) and start a new simple life that requires as little energy as possible and creates a self-sustaining lifestyle.
What Patrick and Mel are doing:
In their website they explain everything in great detail under 'Articles' and have uploaded their plans etc. Check it out: http://www.byexample.com/
What Patrick and Mel are doing:
- Currently living in a travel trailer with plans to build their own small, simple homestead.
- Plans for an off grid solar powered house. It is important to them that the house is as energy efficient as possible as this is the major factor in consumption.
- Built a passive solar greenhouse.
- Solar design barn with rabbits and chickens. They have plans to expand the barn and include goats and pigs.
- They produce their own food with a garden with raised beds.
- Rely entirely on solar power system for all energy needs.
- They manage all their own waste by reusing as much as they can and transforming.
- In the process of building a freshwater well.
- Live simply.
- Be happy and at peace.
- Start with the basics.
- Make do with what's available now.
- Avoid going into debt.
- Keep tax liabilities as low as possible.
In their website they explain everything in great detail under 'Articles' and have uploaded their plans etc. Check it out: http://www.byexample.com/
Is microgeneration the key to a sustainable future?
Microgeneration is the generation of power and low carbon heat for a household, small business or community to meet their own needs. Microgeneration units tend to be solar panels or wind turbines (or a combination) which are located on or next to the building to create an efficient self-sustaining energy source.
A new report shows that microgeneration could generate as much energy as five nuclear power plants, and for every 1 million homes that establish microgeneration units, 3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide could be saved (McDermott, 2008). An incentive basis is being talked about establishing in the UK with reports suggesting a fixed rate of money to be offered to those houses that install a microgeneration unit and feed it into the electric grid. Efforts must therefore be concentrated on the expansion of renewable energy technologies and the centralised production and distribution in order for this to be a viable solution to begin to combat global warming.
Microgeneration will however not appeal to all members of the public. A journalist from The Daily Mail states that wind turbines: "... barely produce enough electricity to power a hairdryer in many houses. They also do nothing to tackle greenhouses gases, while there are far better ways to cut down on energy bills" (Laumer, 2006). Clearly awareness needs to be raised about the advantages of microgeneration to the mass public to stop the reporting of these negative/single minded views!
McDermott, M. (2008) Tree Hugger. Could Microgeneration be as powerful as Nuclear Energy?http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/06/microgeneration-as-powerful-as-nuclear.php
Laumer, J. (2006) Tree Hugger. Home Wind Turbines are a Worthless, Dangerous, Wasteful Vanity http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/11/home_wind_turbi.php
A new report shows that microgeneration could generate as much energy as five nuclear power plants, and for every 1 million homes that establish microgeneration units, 3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide could be saved (McDermott, 2008). An incentive basis is being talked about establishing in the UK with reports suggesting a fixed rate of money to be offered to those houses that install a microgeneration unit and feed it into the electric grid. Efforts must therefore be concentrated on the expansion of renewable energy technologies and the centralised production and distribution in order for this to be a viable solution to begin to combat global warming.
Microgeneration will however not appeal to all members of the public. A journalist from The Daily Mail states that wind turbines: "... barely produce enough electricity to power a hairdryer in many houses. They also do nothing to tackle greenhouses gases, while there are far better ways to cut down on energy bills" (Laumer, 2006). Clearly awareness needs to be raised about the advantages of microgeneration to the mass public to stop the reporting of these negative/single minded views!
McDermott, M. (2008) Tree Hugger. Could Microgeneration be as powerful as Nuclear Energy?http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/06/microgeneration-as-powerful-as-nuclear.php
Laumer, J. (2006) Tree Hugger. Home Wind Turbines are a Worthless, Dangerous, Wasteful Vanity http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/11/home_wind_turbi.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)