greening Paris - and Mumbai, Beijing, Chicago...

From Inhabitat, two innovative building projects in Paris.

Anti Smog is a project that takes "air rights" to new levels of sustainability:

[Architect] Callebaut describes the process as an intention to “absorb and recycle by photo-catalytic effect the cloud of harmful gases (Smog) from the intense traffic near Paris.” Under the smog eating exterior, the building houses public spaces with a central courtyard and natural lagoon, a place Callebaut envisions for teaching opportunities about urban ecology and renewable energy. The Solar Drop also harvests rainwater from green space on the roof for use inside the building.

Energy Plus is an office building intended to be zero-energy, generating all its energy requirements:

How does this building achieve its goal? For starters, the building will be heavily insulated - enough to reduce its energy use to about 16 kilowatts per square meter, which is considerably lower than that of a standard building. Cold water from the Seine river will be pumped throughout the offices eliminating the need for a standard air conditioner unit. And to actively contribute to the highest standard of energy efficiency, designers have engineered the building to have the largest solar array in the world installed in the roof. It is this solar array which will provide all the energy needs of the building, as well as providing additional energy to be fed back into the grid.

And the Wall Street Journal showcases the energy-saving strategies of nine cities from around the world. As usual, Africa doesn't feature.

the cryosphere ain't what it used to be

What is the cryosphere? You may well ask. Or go to The Cryosphere Today and watch the sea ice disappear before your eyes. Animations, graphs and photos from 1979 to present day. [via kottke.org]

facts on china

We all know that China has recently become the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide, but here are a few things you might not know:

1. There are hotel rooms in Beijing that switch off all lights and appliances when you aren't there.
2. Shanghai's maglev train is the fastest in the world.
3. Beijing has street cleaners who ride on bicycles.
4. Cars in Shanghai cost more to licence than to buy.
5. 60 percent of the world's installed solar capacity is in China.
6. Beijing's National Indoor Stadium, to be used for the 2008 Summer Olympics, has 1100 solar panels.
7. In 2005, China ranked 10th in the world with 1,266 megawatt in-grid wind power installed capacity.
8. By the end of 2004 China had produced 200,000 off-grid wind turbine generators, and was ranked number one in the world.

Here are a few more thoughts on China's environment challenge.

designing for sustainability

California architect Sym van der Ryn calls the environmental crisis a design crisis:

"It is a consequence of how things are made, buildings are constructed and landscapes are used." Sustainable Design finds new ways to design our built environment so that the earth can be restored and healed and the human spirit strengthened. If poor design is a major part of the problem, good design is certainly a key part of the solution.

Which is not to say that I, as a consumer, am absolved of responsibility for the choices I make. I can choose good design or bad design. There are more efficient lightbulbs, fridges, cars and a whole range of products that have reduced impact on the environment than the standard fare. If we all made better choices, if we insisted on buying products that were low-impact, and if we altogether reduced consumption of products that use energy and water in their manufacture and operation, the environment would thank us.

Some choices have obvious impacts. A 4x4 uses more fuel and contributes more to greenhouse gases than a Toyota Prius. But to expect consumers to understand the implications of all their choices is asking a bit much. Improved labeling of products will raise awareness, but in many cases the manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers themselves don't understand enough to adequately guide consumer decisions.

It's partly because of the complexity of the issues that it's not enough to rely on market forces to get us out of the environmental crisis. Intervention is needed on a number of levels to ensure that design decisions are carbonsmart. At its most basic level, this is the purpose of the gathering of scientists right now in Bali. The politicians and their negotiators are there to make sure that geopolitical interests are taken into account, but the process would otherwise be a reasonably technical debate about how to guide design decisions so that they consider the impacts of carbon on the environment.

If Bali COP 13 and the next two years of negotiations manage to produce a workable solution, then it will be down to individual countries to meet agreed climate change targets. Countries will establish incentives and other mechanisms to guide consumers and businesses and designers, who - the theory goes - will make low-carbon choices or pay more dearly for choices that exact a heavy ecological cost.

South Africa has established a very positive national policy framework for moving towards more sustainable design practice with regard to urban planning. What is missing, aside from specific emissions targets, is education of local government authorities who are responsible for approving planning applications. Design professionals, after educating themselves through efforts like those of Dendrite Studios, need to motivate sustainable designs to government authorities. Although national policy supports sustainable design, local guidelines and standards often contradict this, and need to be amended. This can be a challenge, but is an important step in reordering urban life to be environmentally sustainable.

slow train coming

There is nothing yet to force Cape Town developers to incorporate sustainable features in their buildings. At least, no regulations; but there's a quiet revolution gaining momentum that will soon change the building industry.

The first office building to be built in Cape Town with anything resembling green credentials was the BP head office, completed around 2003 in the V&A Waterfront. With solar panels, rainwater collection and a few energy-saving design features, the building remains the city's most well-known green building. It would not achieve a very good rating under formal green accreditation schemes such as LEED, BREEAM or Green Star, but it was a trail blazer.

This BP building helped raise awareness of green building design among Cape Town's architects and engineers, but it only happened because of the global transformation of BP's image 'Beyond Petroleum'. In fact, the absence of a strong local driver for the development of green buildings in Cape Town may be one reason why some of the BP building's green systems aren't working as intended.

Sustainable processes and technologies are pointless if there is no commitment to keep them going. If you want waste to be reduced, sorted and recycled, you need people who occupy the building and manage its operations to believe in waste management as part of a broader sustainability strategy.

Today, the context is different. While there is still no legislative imperative to get sustainable systems installed and operating in South Africa's buildings, there is another force at work. Just as the groundswell of public opinion has forced more politicians to consider environmental issues and brought them, however reluctantly, to the Bali negotiating table, public opinion is also shaping the markets that guide developers.

If it achieved nothing else, the BP building did play a role in evolving public awareness that is now encouraging Aquacor to plan the Red Brick Building in Cape Town's inner city. The property developer is placing strong marketing emphasis on the incorporation of solar water heating, grey water recycling, energy-efficient lighting and on-site electricity generation in the block of flats. With construction only scheduled to begin in March 2008, recent advertisements claim that 70% of the units are already sold.

Probably the first building in Cape Town that will take green building to the next level will be the planned extension of the Cape Town International Convention Centre. (Rendering of the extension is in the foreground of the picture, taken from Skyscraper City.) Competing in a global market, the CTICC has no choice but to ensure that it achieves some level of environmental accreditation under an internationally recognised scheme. Increasingly, convention organisers are including green credentials in their venue selection criteria. For the first time in Cape Town, this will subject a developer to a formal commitment and an auditing process that guarantees the inclusion of more than token green technologies in building designs.

The public is becoming more discerning, and the days of 'greenwashing' will soon be over. The green building revolution will be supported by the Green Building Council of South Africa, which is developing a South African accreditation system, but in the absence of a legal framework the real force for change is the investing public.

boldly go where no public utility has gone before

This week's Bali COP debate around protection of rainforests is vital to a comprehensive climate change strategy, but as the Climate Action Network points out, there is far too little discussion of how to address the needs of people who depend on forests for their livelihoods - many of whom are from poor communities.

It's all very well to suggest that the rest of the world should pay Brazil not to chop down the rainforest, but that's a fraught strategy that can lead not only to disempowerment of local people, but also to struggles over national sovereignty. A large proportion of deforestation activity is illegal anyway, and beyond the ability of national governments to control.

Just who owns the rights to these oxygen factories? They are geographically-bound public utilities of global significance. We might just as well say that the world population should pay Brazil a monthly fee for the air we breathe. It's an invisible, global commodity trade that currently has no monetary value, so let's monetize it and see if that stops deforestation.

The UN could set up a financial system for micropayments from individuals, using an equivalent of the Internet's Paypal, and using mobile phones to transfer funds - who doesn't have a mobile phone? - and provide discounts to people who pay annually in advance. Just for good measure, developing countries could provide their citizens with a Basic Income Grant so that nobody need go without oxygen for want of money.

Imagine the illegal activities that would spring up, like trading oxygen credits on the black market. Enterprising individuals would set up hermetically sealed rooms, or entire buildings, and produce their own oxygen from the most efficient plants they could find. They would build up a supply, stop payments to the UN, and sell bottled oxygen cheaper than the UN rate.

Dedicated agencies (in South Africa, a special branch of the Green Scorpions) would be set up to enforce oxygen regulations and bust the grow houses. Some derelict city districts would become unenforceable no-go zones, guarded by gangsters sniffing pure oxygen.

Even residents of respectable suburban neighbourhoods would watch suspicious activity at rental houses on their streets, fearing an invasion of undesirable characters coming and going under the protection of the night. There would be accusations and denials in the press. Occasionally, a house would be sold, and the buyer would find evidence of an oxygen operation (known colloquially as an O2): unusual plumbing and electrical fittings; dampness and mould on the walls and ceilings; traces of liquid fertilizer.

A public outcry would follow. The local Councillor would assure residents that everything possible would be done to rid the city of this scourge of the carbon age, and eventually an official inquiry would find that the Councillor had been on the take.

"Politicians," we'd say. "Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em." And we'd think back to Bali 2007 and curse the crackpot who came up with the Oxygen Protocol, and the politicians who endorsed it.

biking to Bali

Bali News reports:

The Indonesian President, Dr Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, officially launched the “Bicycle for Earth Goes to Bali”, last week in Jakarta. A team of 50 riders will cover 1447 kilometres in 23 days visiting 44 Indonesian cities. They will finish in Bali to coincide with the start of the United Nations Climate Change Conference on December 3.

The President and the First Lady took part in the first stage of the ride along with, Indonesian government ministers, celebrities, members of the public and of course the official Bicycle for Earth Goes to Bali team of 50 riders.

During their trip the team will raise awareness amongst the Indonesian public, on how riding a bicycle for transport can help fight climate change. Global cycling advocacy groups, including the Global Alliance for EcoMobility in which the bike industry is involved, are trying to get the bicycle as an environmental friendly alternative on top of the agenda at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in December.

Delegates gathering in Bali for the UN talks on climate change, beginning on Monday, will be working up a sweat, and not only because they are charged with updating the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. As more of a symbolic gesture to raise awareness than to significantly reduce carbon emissions, Indonesia plans to make ministers from around the world use bicycles to get about the resort island. [via the cycling dude]

As pointed out in a Wired article last month, some argue that the protocol itself is largely symbolic, since "it has not slowed global greenhouse-gas emissions". Climate science argues that to stop global warming we need to reduce the amount of GHG in the atmosphere, which means we have to reduce the rate of output to levels below the rate at which natural systems can absorb what's in the atmosphere. We've been above that rate for some time, but a study published in May this year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that "greenhouse-gas emissions accelerated through the early part of the decade". The study concludes: "The emissions growth rate since 2000 was greater than for the most fossil-fuel intensive of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emissions scenarios developed in the late 1990s."

So we are moving even farther away from our target. The turnaround could never be quick, given the current levels of investment in carbon-intensive activities and processes, which is why a concerted effort is needed now. Let's hope those cycling ministers in Bali get the picture.

compostable utensils

I can't believe it's taken this long, but I have finally eaten my first meal with biodegradable utensils, at the Stellenbosch Organic Farmers' Market today at the Stellenbosch Waldorf School. The supplier claims that compostable plates, bowls, knives, forks and spoons will degrade in ideal composting conditions within six months or less, depending on what they are made from. The cutlery is made with plastarch (PSM): modified cornstarch combined with several other biodegradable materials. The cornstarch is modified in order to obtain heat-resistant properties, making PSM one of the only bioplastics capable of withstanding high temperatures. They even feel stronger than a lot of petroleum-based disposable knives and forks that I have used.

Other products suppplied by Green Home are made from polylactic acid (PLA) or bagasse. Frankly, I am amazed that more caterers and retailers aren't using these products.

RED is the new green

After posting on Wednesday about biophilia, I came across another paper on the topic that adds a new twist to the whole concept of sustainable design.

Restorative Environmental Design [126 KB PDF], or RED, proposes a reformation of not only our conventional development paradigm but also prevailing approaches to sustainable design. It's "a framework of development that combines the objectives of avoiding adverse environmental impacts while also promoting positive connections between people and nature in the built environment."

The gist of the argument by Stephen R. Kellert of Yale University is that most sustainable design guidelines, such as LEED or BREEAM, are based on the objective of achieving "low environmental impact", which is not enough to achieve true sustainability in the long term. Noting the work of William McDonough, who argues that "a broader and more sustainable design approach must move beyond simply avoiding environmental damage, seeking to generate ecological health as well", Kellert uses the biophilia hypothesis to suggest that McDonough's approach should be extended "to include humans in this ecological health equation, recognizing how people’s physical and mental well being and productivity in the built environment is also contingent on the quality and quantity of their experiential connections with natural systems and processes".

The implication of this argument is the need for a fundamental change of mindset in how we design the urban environment:

The environmental crisis of damaged natural systems and impoverished humannature relations is fundamentally a design crisis that can only be resolved through constructing more efficient and environmentally benign buildings and landscapes. Restorative Environmental Design goes beyond avoiding harm and damage to natural systems and human health to also seeking the restoration of positive and beneficial contact between nature and humanity. Lacking this more affirmative dimension of design and development, sustainability will rarely if ever be achieved no matter how much improvement occurs in resource conservation, energy efficiency, waste minimization, or pollution abatement. Absent the positive human experience of nature, people will not commit the energies, emotions, and resources necessary over time to sustain buildings and landscapes no matter how technologically sophisticated.

Quoting from Judith Heerwagen, Kellert suggests that well-designed buildings with biophilic features "contain the ‘essence’ of natural objectives without being exact copies. They draw on design principles of natural forms". Reading this, I can't help thinking of the vernacular design of rondavels: the round, thatch-roofed, mud-walled homes of Southern Africa. Built entirely of locally-sourced, natural materials and containing no corners or straight edges in their design, and often built on hillsides with spectacular views of the surrounding countryside, they surely represent the ultimate in biophilic design.

As Kellert would have it, the key to successful modern design is to translate these ideas to the urban context, and he believes it can be done. I hope he's right.

habitable buildings

The biophilia hypothesis maintains that humans have a built-in affinity for natural things, feeding our desire for keeping pets, climbing mountains, hiking in forests, and being where we can enjoy natural views. This attraction can explain why we like keeping plants in our homes and places of work, and presents an opportunity for architects and engineers to address the social aspects of sustainability at the same time as energy and health issues, through building design.

Having the right plants inside can directly improve air quality, but biophilia suggests that a whole range of design features could improve well-being through exposure to natural elements. In an introduction to biophilia in the Rocky Mountain Institute Newsletter of Spring 2004 [962 KB PDF], Corey Griffin writes:

Today, the technology and knowledge exists to create a building that touches the earth lightly during both construction and day-to-day operations. However, what has been often neglected by creators of low-impact “green” buildings is the need for spaces to be habitable. Occupants of built environments don’t want simply to work, play, eat, or sleep in a functional building. They want to be inspired, invigorated, comforted, and reassured by their surroundings. They want spaces that will make them more productive and healthy, and they want spaces in which they love to be—spaces that, as RMI’s Amory Lovins puts it, create “delight when entered, pleasure when occupied, and regret when departed.”

Biophilic design elements to achieve this could include:

• the use of dynamic and diffuse daylight,
• the ability to have frequent, spontaneous and repeated contact with nature throughout and between buildings,
• the use of local, natural materials,
• a connection between interior and exterior surfaces,
• natural ventilation,
• a direct physical connection to nature from interior spaces, and
• direct visual access to nature from interior spaces.

Griffin also mentions previous work on the hypothesis that provides some motivation for society's choices of landscape design and urban configuration, suggesting a link with our ancestral needs for food, shelter and places to explore. Perhaps our strong tendency towards urban sprawl is an instinctive response to the unnatural aspects of the concrete-and-steel urban jungle. If so, it's vital that attempts to increase urban density to support various aspects of sustainability should incorporate biophilic design elements, lest we become like caged tigers, sapped of life and spirit. OK, I'm being dramatic, but if we need that natural connection to be happier, healthier people, then we damn well better incorporate it in our sustainable cities of the future.

[Update on 3 Dec 2007: BLDGBLOG shows us the air brain, a high-tech version of "plant filters" to clean the air inside buildings. Nice and neat and... sanitized. Not at all like going out in the garden and getting your hands dirty.]