DOCSLIB.ORG

A Review of Low Carbon Precincts to Identify Pathways for Mainstreaming Sustainable Urbanism in Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Review of Low Carbon Precincts to Identify Pathways for Mainstreaming Sustainable Urbanism in Australia RP2003 Scoping Study: (Phase 1: Interim Report) A Review of Low Carbon Precincts to Identify Pathways for Mainstreaming Sustainable Urbanism in Australia Authors Giles Thomson Title A Review of International Low Carbon Precincts to Identify Pathways for Mainstreaming Sustainable Urbanism in Australia. ISBN Format Keywords Low Carbon Precincts, Sustainable Urbanism, Urban Planning Editor PN Publisher Series ISSN Preferred citation Peer Review Statement This scoping study has been approved by CRC RP2003 project leader Peter Newman. RP2003: 1 Contents Peer Review Statement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Contents ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Approach ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Project scope ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 What is meant by ‘low carbon’? .................................................................................................................................. 13 What is meant by a low carbon ‘precinct’? .......................................................................................................... 13 Known limitations ........................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Lack of consistent definitions and data ................................................................................................................ 15 Differentiating between aspirational and actual achievements ........................................................... 15 English language bias ....................................................................................................................................................... 15 Approach to examining exemplary low carbon precincts ................................................................................................. 16 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Method ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Long list of projects for consideration ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Criteria for Selection ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Short list of exemplary low carbon precincts ......................................................................................................................... 18 Criteria for Selection ......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Case study exemplars ............................................................................................................................................................................ 21 BedZED, UK ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 21 BO01, Malmo, Sweden .................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Castleward, Derby, UK .................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Coopers Road Estate, UK ................................................................................................................................................................ 23 Dockside Green, Canada ................................................................................................................................................................ 25 Eco Viikki, Finland ........................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Graylingwell Park, Chichester, UK .............................................................................................................................................. 27 Greenwich Millennium Village, UK ............................................................................................................................................ 28 Grow Community, Bainbridge Island Washington State, USA ......................................................................................... 29 Hammarby Sjostad, Stockholm, Sweden ................................................................................................................................. 31 Hanham Hall, Carbon Challenge, UK ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Masdar, Abu Dhabi, UAE ................................................................................................................................................................ 33 Millennium Water (Vancouver’s Olympic Village), Canada ............................................................................................... 35 One Brighton, UK ............................................................................................................................................................................. 37 RP2003: 2 Peterborough Carbon Challenge, UK ........................................................................................................................................ 39 solarCity Linz-Pichling, Austria .................................................................................................................................................. 40 Sonoma Mountain Village, USA .................................................................................................................................................. 41 Stockholm Royal Seaport, Sweden ............................................................................................................................................. 42 Vauban, Freiburg, Germany .......................................................................................................................................................... 43 Vuores, Finland ................................................................................................................................................................................. 44 Case study discussion and conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 47 Low Carbon Precinct emissions sources ................................................................................................................................. 47 Emissions related to embodied carbon .............................................................................................................................. 47 Emissions related to operational energy ........................................................................................................................... 48 Building performance: ............................................................................................................................................................. 48 Transport: ....................................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report
    FINAL REPORT X WARRNAMBOOL CITY COUNCIL ZERO NET CARBON DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES & FEASIBILITY REPORT WHO WE ARE HIP V. HYPE Sustainability provides advice that is commercially grounded, yet ambitious. We pursue exceptional outcomes that are socially, economically and environmentally sustainable and enable action across government, institutions and organisations. We seek to partner with those who are willing to think strategically to achieve better. We lead, collaborate and support others to deliver impact and build Better Cities and Regions, Better Buildings, and Better Businesses. DISCLAIMER This document and any information provided have been prepared in good faith based on the best and most up-to-date advice available. HIP V. HYPE Sustainability cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information presented in this document. Any images included are for illustrative purposes only., REV DATE DETAILS NAME/ SIGNATURE POSITION This document and all its contents are © COPYRIGHT HIP V. HYPE GROUP PTY LTD 2020 (except photographs credited otherwise). 1.0 18.05.20 Report 2 Gavin Ashley, “HIP V. HYPE”, the 4 “H” device and all related names and logos (draft) Lead are trademarks of HIP V. HYPE GROUP PTY LTD. This document is the intellectual property and confidential information of HIP V. HYPE 2.0 22.07.20 Report 2 Gavin Ashley, Sustainability PTY LTD and their related entities and are not to be Lead copied, reproduced, shared or disclosed without the prior consent in writing of HIP V. HYPE GROUP PTY LTD 3.0 11.12.20 Final Report Gavin
    [Show full text]
  • Decoupling 2 Technologies, Opportunities and Policy
    www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] web: www.unep.org DECOUPLING 2 TECHNOLOGIES, The followingOPPORTUNITIES is an excerpt AND of the report POLICY OPTIONS decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth Produced by the International Resource Panel This document highlights key findings from the report and should be read in conjunction with the full report. References to research and reviews on which this report is based are listed in the full report. The full report can be downloaded from www.unep.org. If you are reading a hardcopy, the CD-Rom can be found in the back cover. Additional copies can be ordered via email: [email protected], or via post: United Nations Environment Programme Division of Technology Industry and Economics, 15 rue de Milan, 75441 Paris CEDEX 09, France www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 Acknowledgements Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] web: www.unep.org Editor: International Resource Panel The following is an excerpt of the report Working Group on Decoupling Lead Authors: Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker (lead coordinating author), Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel, Karlson ‘Charlie’ Hargroves, Christian Hudson, Michael Harrison Smith, and Maria Amelia Enriquez Rodrigues. Contributors: Anna Bella Siriban Manalang, Kevin Urama, Sangwon Suh, Mark Swilling, Janet Salem, Kohmei Halada, Heinz Leuenberger, Cheryl Desha, Angie Reeve, David Sparks. decoupling The report went through a peer-review process coordinated by Maarten Hajer, together with the International Resource Panel Secretariat.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovered Wood As Raw Material for Structural Timber Products
    Proceedings of the 2020 Society of Wood Science and Technology International Convention Recovered Wood as Raw Material for Structural Timber Products. Characteristics, Situation and Study Cases: Ireland and Spain Daniel F. Llana1,2* – Guillermo Íñiguez-González1,2 –Marina de Arana-Fernández1 –Caitríona Uí Chúláin3–Annette M. Harte3 1Department of Foresty and Enviromental Engineering and Management, MONTES (School of Forest Engineering and Natural Resources), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain [email protected]* [email protected] [email protected] 2Timber Construction Research Group, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain 3College of Science and Engineering, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland [email protected] [email protected] Abstract The circular economy is an efficient system to reuse materials reducing the amount of waste generated. In order to implement it in the timber sector, the InFutUReWood (Innovative Design for the Future – Use and Reuse of Wood (Building) Components) is a European project studying the possibilities for reuse and recycling of timber from demolition for structural applications. Nowadays in Ireland and Spain, most of the wood waste is reduced to chips. In Ireland, chips are mainly used for energy production, pallet blocks, and composting, while in Spain are used for energy production and particleboard manufacture. Possible structural applications depend on the amount, dimensions, and condition of recovered timber. Most of the recovered timber in Ireland has medium size cross-sections, while in Spain it is mainly large cross-section. Cross laminated timber (CLT) is a good option for reuse and experimental tests are ongoing in Ireland on CLT manufactured from old timber trusses.
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Reduction and Recycling Bill 3019
    11 Oct 2011 Waste Reduction and Recycling Bill 3019 Motion agreed to. Bill read a first time. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms van Litsenburg): In accordance with standing order 131, the bill is now referred to the Community Affairs Committee. WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING BILL Resumed from 3 August (see p. 2346). Second Reading Hon. VE DARLING (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Environment) (12.52 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. Mr POWELL (Glass House—LNP) (12.52 pm): Here we are again—different day, same story, debating another broken Labor election promise. As if the asset sales were not enough, or the fuel tax, or at the federal level the carbon tax, today we debate a waste tax—a business-destroying, anti-waste reduction, anti-recycling, bureaucratic nightmare of a waste tax. It is another cost-of-living increase for each and every Queenslander and Queensland business. Labor is on the record as saying that it had no intention of introducing a waste levy in this term of government—the same as the LNP. When questioned by the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors in the lead-up to the last election, the answer was a clear no. I do not know why I am surprised that Labor has reneged on yet another election promise. What did the Treasurer say about asset sales in the lead-up to the March 2009 election? ‘No, we have no plan to sell off assets.’ What did the Treasurer say about introducing a fuel tax? ‘Make no mistake about it.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf?__Blob=Public Ationfile
    United Nations ECE/TIM/2015/INF.3−FO:EFC/2015/INF.3 Economic and Social Council Distr.: General 15 October 2015 Original: English Economic Commission for Europe Food and Agriculture Organization Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry European Forestry Commission Seventy-third session Thirty-eighth session Engelberg, 2–6 November 2015 Engelberg, 2–6 November 2015 Item 6(d) of the provisional agenda Rovaniemi Action Plan implementation Implementation of the Rovaniemi Action Plan for the Forest Sector in a Green Economy Note by the secretariat Summary This document provides an overview of activities reported by several member States and the secretariat/organizations supporting the implementation of the Rovaniemi Action Plan for the Forest Sector in a Green Economy. Delegates will be invited to take note of these activities and to provide guidance on further work to be undertaken and the format of reporting for monitoring the implementation of the Rovaniemi Action Plan. I. Introduction 1. The Rovaniemi Action Plan for the Forest Sector in a Green Economy was adopted on 13 December 2013 at the joint session of the UNECE Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry and the FAO European Forestry Commission (“Metsä2013”) in Rovaniemi, Finland. 2. The Rovaniemi Action Plan proposes an overall vision, strategies and areas of activity to enhance the transition of the forest sector in the UNECE region towards the emerging green, bio-based economy. GE.15- ECE/TIM/2015/INF.3 FO:EFC/15/INF.3 3. The Rovaniemi Action Plan is not an obligatory tool and is only meant to encourage actions based on the specific principles, objectives and activities, grouped under the following five pillars: • Sustainable production and consumption of forest products; • A low-carbon forest sector; • Decent green jobs in the forest sector; • Long-term provision of Forest Ecosystem Services; and • Policy development and monitoring of the forest sector in relation to a green economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Delivering Low Or Zero Carbon New Homes – the Role of Energy Services Companies
    Can Energy Services Companies deliver low carbon new build homes? Sharad Saxena, Mark Hinnells Lower Carbon Futures, Oxford University Centre for the Environment Mail [email protected] Abstract The UK has set for itself an ambitious target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 60% by 2050. To achieve this target, carbon reductions would need to be made by all sectors including the residential sector which presently accounts for 27% of CO2 emissions. Energy Services Companies (ESCOs) could address the barriers to energy efficiency and microgeneration through design build, finance, operation and maintenance provision (DBFO). Energy services contracting will only be chosen where the reduction in cost of supplying energy services can more than offset the additional transaction cost compared to conventional supply. Previous work has identified three broad models of energy services: the Facilities Management or performance contract model for business commercial and public sector customers; the Community Model where decisions are taken on behalf of a group of customers (predominantly householders) in the same location; and the Supplier model where existing energy suppliers could evolve their offer to domestic customers. The Community model in new build has particular interest, in that it offers a viable route for the development of ESCo services to households. The paper explores the social, technological, economic and policy issues (a STEP analysis) that will play a key role in the emergence of ESCOs in new build housing in the UK. Key findings are: • London appears to be a key market within the UK, and in particular in dense build (eg flats) the whole development may be on a communal solution.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Ideas and Issues
    Climate Change Ideas Forum – Ideas Received and ECDC Response In autumn 2019 East Cambridgeshire District Council declared a climate emergency. We acknowledge that we have a significant role to play in protecting and improving the environment for future generations and want to encourage residents to be part of our progress in achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. On the 16th December 2019 we launched the Climate Change Ideas Forum. Members of the public wishing their ideas to be considered for the Council’s first Environment Plan were encouraged to submit their ideas by 31st January 2020. A total of 202 responses were submitted by members of the public these related to a number of broad themes, this positive response demonstrates both the huge interest the public has in environmental matters and the wide and diverse ideas and suggestions people have to put forward. There were lots of great ideas and we are deeply grateful to those that took the time and effort to submit an idea for consideration and for their generous support. The following pages summarise the ideas received and the Council’s response thus far. The Ideas Forum remains open for any new ideas the public may have, all those received from 1st February 2020 will be considered for the next iteration of the Council’s Environment Plan. Cycling / Walking / Cycle Ways / Paths Summary of Comments/ Issues Cycle provision from Little Downham to Ely through the leisure village which was originally planned. Cycling provision on the bypass form Broad Street through to Stuntney. Improving and clearing of current cycle paths and promote education campaign to encourage their use.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility of Recycling Timber from Military Industrial Buildings
    Feasibility of Recycling Timber from Military Industrial Buildings Scott F. Lantz Robert H. Falk Abstract This paper discusses an alternative to the demoli- Without mobilization missions to justify their con- tion and landfilling of conventional timber frame tinued maintenance many of these buildings have buildings-the dismantlement and recycling of lum- been standing idle, awaiting disposal. These buildings ber and timber. A case study is presented in which two are estimated to contain hundreds of millions of large buildings at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition board feet of old growth timber and lumber, as well Plant were successfully dismantled and a substantial as a myriad of other components; some of these volume of the timber and lumber recycled. This case components are valuable and/or highly regulated study illustrates several aspects of the recycling proc- with regard to disposal. ess: factors that influence the decision to recycle, The current situation in the military is contrary to regulatory and contractual challenges, labor and the past trend of adding buildings to the industrial safety issues, economic factors that affect the emerg- inventory and continuing to use existing buildings. In ing market for recycled timber and lumber, short- and the past, any disposal of buildings was incidental to long-term advantages and disadvantages of disman- other ongoing operations and as such was often han- tlement as opposed to conventional demolition, and dled on an individual basis, both administratively and recommendations for making the recycling of timber with regard to disposal practices. The typical disposal and lumber elements of excess buildings a feasible practice for such facilities has been demolition, with disposal option.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement 74Th COFFI Final 2016 09 16
    STATEMENT submitted by the Delegation of Germany to the 74th Session of the UNECE Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry 18 to 20 October 2016 in Geneva Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture Bonn, 2016 1. General economic trends 1 1.1 German economy in good shape Germany is enjoying solid growth. Despite the difficult international environment, Germany’s economy grew by a total of 1.7 % last year. Unemployment is at its lowest level since the country’s reunification. Last year, real gross wages and salaries per employee recorded the highest increase for more than two decades. The budget of the Federation, the Länder, the municipalities and the social insurance funds was close-to-balance in 2015 for the fourth year in succession. Working from what is a fundamentally favourable situation, the Federal Gov- ernment is continuing its economic and fiscal policy aimed at investment and sustainable growth. A key role here is played by digitisation. The Federal Government is embracing the digital transformation and is working with businesses, trade unions, the scientific community and civil society to put the conditions in place for successful digitisation. There is a need to adapt the regulatory framework of the Social Market Economy to the requirements of the digital world and – both at national and at European and international level – to create scope for innovation and to permit the individual to retain control of his/her data. The upturn in the German economy softened somewhat in the second half of last year. The slower growth in the emerging economies meant less dynamic exports and corporate invest- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Net Positive Report 2012/13 APPENDIX – DETAILED PERFORMANCE DATA
    INVOLVING OTHERS, LEARNING FROM THEIR IDEAS AND EXPERIENCES, AND EXPANDING OUR PLAN WITH THEIR THINKING Net Positive – the sTART OF OUR JOURNEY REPORT FOR 2012/13 Navigate through the report using the tabs found at the bottom of each page. ABOUT NET POSITIVE TIMBER ENERGY INNOVATION COMMUNITIES FOUNDATIONS HOW WE MANAGE 3 9 15 22 28 34 NET POSITIVE 49 Introduction Responsible sourcing Customer energy Closed loop Our community EMPLOYEES 3 11 saving 24 projects Governance 17 30 Part of our day 35 49 From our Group Forest projects New business models Chief Executive 12 Customer 24 Performance in Diversity 36 Stakeholder engagement 4 communication 2012/13 Health and safety 37 49 Working with others 17 Eco-products 33 Why Net Positive? 12 25 Employee Audit, assurance and risk 5 Reducing our property Progress against engagement 38 51 Compliance with our energy use Learning stores targets Our four priorities timber policies 18 26 33 Public policy 6 13 51 Progress against SUPPLIERS AND Our carbon footprint PARTNERS Our Net Positive Progress against 19 targets Business ethics journey targets 27 Supplier standards 39 52 7 14 Progress against targets Performance in Operating Company Measuring progress 21 2012/13 40 performance summary 8 53 ENVIRONMENT About our reporting 54 Waste 41 Assurance statement Transport 42 55 Water & Chemicals 43 Packaging 44 Sustainable property and construction 44 Peat 45 PROGRESS againsT TARGETS 46 WElcOME TO OUR NET POSITIVE REPORt – THE START OF OUR JOURNEY. Kingfisher launched Net Positive in October This report explores our progress in the financial year February This report contains our key performance data for 2012/13.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement 76Th COFFI Stand 2018 09 27
    MARKET STATEMENT submitted by the Delegation of Germany to the 76th Session of the UNECE Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry 5 to 9 November 2018 in Vancouver Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture Bonn, 2018 1. General economic trends 1.1 A strengthened economy ready to embrace the future 1 On January 31, the Federal Government adopted the 2018 Annual Economic Report, which is entitled “A strengthened economy ready to embrace the future” and has been released with the following comment: “The German economy is in very good shape. The Federal Govern- ment is expecting GDP growth of 2.4 % after adjustment for inflation, which means that the upswing is set to continue. The good news is that the number of persons working in jobs sub- ject to social security contributions rose strongly last year, by more than 700,000. And em- ployees in Germany are benefitting from the economic upswing. Real net wages and salaries per employee have risen by an average of more than 1.6 % per year since 2013. Germany is closely intertwined with its neighbours, which is why our economy will prosper the most when Europe is successful, developing well and reforming itself where this is necessary.” Annual Table 1: Selected key figures for macroeconom- 2016 2017 projection ictrends in the Federal Republic of Germany 1) 2018 % change on preceding year Gross domestic product (output approach GDP, real) 1.9 2.2 2.4 Total employment 1.3 1.5 1.1 Unemployment rate in % (Federal Employment Agency 6.1 5.7 5.3 definition) 2) GDP by expenditure (real) 2.1 2.0 1.9
    [Show full text]
  • Kentucky's Forest Branching
    Kentucky’s Forests 2012 Conservation Writing and Jim Claypool Art Contests Sponsored by the Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation and Kentucky Association of Conservation Districts 2012 What is a Forest? Forests are more than “just a bunch of trees”. They are complex communities that support a rich variety of plants and animals – over 750 wildlife species and over 1,800 different kinds of plants. They protect fragile soils from erosion, purify water and even, by reducing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, improve air quality. Forests cover 47 percent of Kentucky’s land area – some 12 million acres. They provide employment for more than 35,000 Kentuckians, and wood industries add an estimated $8.5 billion to Kentucky’s economy each year. The forest is made up of a series of levels of life, arranged from the tops of the trees to the ground on which they grow. Each level constitutes a habitat where different species of plants and animals live. Altogether, the parts of the forest and the plants and the animals living in them make up the complex ecosystem we call, simply, a “forest.” The top level, called the canopy, is formed by the crowns – the leafy tops – of the tallest trees. This is where photosynthesis – using sunlight to manufacture food the tree can use – is carried on most actively. It’s also the home of thousands of insects. These in turn attract thousands of insect-eating birds. Squirrels are also active in the canopy because seeds and nuts are plentiful there. The next level is the understory.
    [Show full text]