Green Building in North America: Opportunities and Challenges Opportunities Two Green Building in North America

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Green Building in North America: Opportunities and Challenges Opportunities Two Green Building in North America GREEN BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA GREEN BUILDING IN NORTH OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES SECRETARIAT REPORT TO COUNCIL UNDER ARTICLE 13 OF THE NORTH AMERICAN AGREEMENT ON ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION www.cec.org/greenbuilding CEC COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION 393, RUE ST-JACQUES OUEST, BUREAU 200 MONTREAL (QUEBEC) CANADA H2Y 1N9 100% This Article 13 report was prepared by the Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The information contained herein does not necessarily refl ect the views of the CEC or the governments of Canada, Mexico or the United States of America. The report is published in the three languages of the CEC: English, French and Spanish. However, as the text was originally prepared in English and thereafter translated, in the case of disputed meaning, reference should be made to the English version. Reproduction of this document in whole or in part and in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes may be made without special permission from the CEC Secretariat, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The CEC would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication or material that uses this document as a source. Published by the Communications Department of the CEC Secretariat. © Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 2008 ISBN 2-923358-47-3 (Spanish edition: 2-923358-48-1; French edition: 2-923358-49-X) Printed in Canada Legal Deposit-Bibliothèque national du Québec, 2008 on Rolland Enviro100 paper containing Legal Deposit-National Library of Canada, 2008 100% post-consumer fi ber and produced using biogas energy. This paper is certifi ed For more information: EcoLogo, Processed COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION Chlorine Free and FSC recycled. 393, rue St-Jacques Ouest, bureau 200 Montreal (Quebec) Canada H2Y 1N9 T 514 350-4300 F 514 350-4314 [email protected] Cert no. SGS-COC-2332 www.cec.org Cover Photos: KMD Architects, Bill Touchberry, Heifer International, UBC Sustainability Offi ce/Matsuzaki Architects Inc., David Morillón TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 1. INTRODUCTION 9 2. GREEN BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA 15 A. FEATURES OF GREEN BUILDING 16 B. HOW WIDESPREAD IS GREEN BUILDING? 17 C. RATING SYSTEMS 18 D. A PROCESS OF CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT 18 3. A FOUNDATIONAL DRIVER FOR CHANGE 21 A. THE NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CURRENT BUILDING PRACTICES 22 B. BENEFITS OF GREEN BUILDING 23 4. CLIMATE CHANGE CRISIS AND BUILDINGS 33 A. GREEN BUILDING AND GHG EMISSIONS 34 B. CALLING FOR AGGRESSIVE IMPROVEMENT IN NORTH AMERICA 36 5. GREEN BUILDING ENERGY SCENARIOS FOR 2030 39 A. MODELING AGGRESSIVE ENERGY-SAVING SCENARIOS 40 B. COUNTRY-SPECIFIC RESULTS 42 C. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 47 6. DRIVERS AND BARRIERS TO IMPROVEMENT 49 A. MOMENTUM TOWARD GREEN BUILDING IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA 50 B. MOMENTUM TOWARD GREEN BUILDING IN MEXICO 52 C. BARRIERS TO GREEN BUILDINGS 54 7. PROMOTING MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL COOPERATION 59 8. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NORTH AMERICA 63 THE SECRETARIAT’S RECOMMENDATIONS ON MAKING GREEN BUILDING STANDARD PRACTICE IN NORTH AMERICA 65 APPENDIX: ADVISORY GROUP STATEMENT 71 The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) is an international organization PREFACE created by Canada, Mexico, and the United States under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). The CEC was established to address regional environmental concerns, help prevent potential trade and environmental confl icts, and promote the effective enforcement of environmental law. The Agreement complements the environmental provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). At the behest of Executive Directors William Kennedy and Adrián Vázquez, Tim Whitehouse and Geoff Garver of the CEC Secretariat prepared this report pursuant to Article 13 of the NAAEC. Article 13 is a section of the NAAEC that gives the CEC Secretariat authority to prepare reports on important environmental issues and present them to the governments and people of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Previous Article 13 reports have addressed the effects of transgenic maize in Mexico, environmental challenges and opportunities of an evolving continental electricity market, an agenda for preserving transboundary migratory bird habitat on the Upper San Pedro River, an agenda for cooperation to address long-range transport of air pollution in North America, and the death of migratory birds at the Silva Reservoir in Guanajuato, Mexico. The CEC Secretariat would like to acknowledge the many individuals and organizations that contributed time and energy to the successful completion of this report. Special mention goes to the CEC Advisory Group on Green Building, chaired by Jonathan Westeinde, whose members have worked under a very tight deadline to develop the Statement and Advice on Recommendations that represent the core of this Secretariat report (see listing of Advisory Group members on page 10). The Secretariat would like to thank each one of them for their extraordinary dedication and collegiality over the course of the last two years. The Secretariat would also like to thank the authors of the background papers that were developed as part of this process (see list on page 11) and the many government and public participants who provided comments at the workshop and the symposium. 3 A draft of this report was provided to the NAAEC Parties, the Advisory Group and the background paper authors for confi dential review and comment. Comments were received from Martin Adelaar, Jennifer Atlee, Alison Kinn Bennett, Odón de Buen, Guillermo Casar, Roger Peters, José Picciotto, Marta Niño Sulkowska, Leanne Tobias, Cesar Trevino, Douglas Webber, Jonathan Westeinde, and Fernando Mayagoitia Wintron. Environment Canada and the US Environmental Protection Agency provided additional comments from interagency reviews of the draft report. The CEC Secretariat would also like to thank Nils Larsson and Jean Cinq-Mars of iiSBE and Joel Ann Todd, a green building consultant, for their advice in designing the study, selecting the Advisory Group and authors of the background papers, and preparing for and conducting the fi rst Advisory Group meeting in June 2006. Finally, the Secretariat would like to thank the Secretariat staff members who helped in the development of this report. These include: Doris Millan, Sophia Noguera, Katia Opalka, José Otero, Paolo Solano, and Jeffrey Stoub. EXECUTIVE INTRODUCTION In this report, the Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) recommends that SUMMARY North American leaders make green building a foundational driver for environmental, social, and economic improvement in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. What is green building and how can it become such an important instrument for change? Green building1 refers to the use of environmentally preferable practices and materials in the design, location, construction, operation and disposal of buildings. It applies to both renovation and retrofi tting of existing buildings and construction of new buildings, whether residential or commercial public or private. By continually improving how we locate, design, build, operate, and retrofi t buildings, North American leaders can signifi cantly improve the well-being of North America. Advanced energy-saving technologies applied in buildings can result in enormous reductions in demand for fossil fuels and emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Better design and building practices can also help address environmental challenges such as natural resource depletion, waste disposal, and air, water, and soil pollution. Green building can also help achieve gains in human health and prosperity. Despite this potential for transformation, green building represents only a small percentage of building in North America. By some estimates, green building currently accounts for about two percent of the new non-residential building market in the United States and 0.3 percent of the residential market. In Canada, green building trends are generally thought to be similar to those in the United States. In Mexico, there are no reliable fi gures showing the extent to which green building exists in the marketplace. Although the green building market is expected to grow rapidly in all three countries in the coming years, a substantial shift from the status quo is needed to make these high-performance buildings the norm in North America. GREEN BUILDING AND THE ENVIRONMENT In Canada, Mexico, and the United States, commercial and residential building operations account for about 20, 30, and 40 percent of the primary energy consumption, respectively. They typically also account for 20 to 25 percent of the landfi ll waste and 5 to 12 percent of the water consumption. The United States Green Building Council estimates that green building, on average, currently reduces energy use by 30 percent, carbon emissions by 35 percent, water use by 30 to 50 percent, and generates waste cost savings of 50 to 4 90 percent. GREEN BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA: GREEN BUILDING IN NORTH Substantial research supports the health and productivity benefi ts of green features, such as daylighting, increased natural air ventilation and moisture reduction, and the use of low-emitting fl oor carpets, glues, paints and other interior fi nishes and furnishings. In the United States, the annual cost of building-related sickness is estimated to be at $58 billion. According to researchers, green building has the potential to generate an additional $200 billion annually in the United States in worker performance by creating
Recommended publications
  • NW Regional Technical Advisory Body 3Rd
    North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 3rd Waste Management Monitoring Report Working towards sustainable waste management in the North West August 2007 Contents Foreword . .2 Executive summary . .3 1. Introduction . .4 2. Municipal waste . .7 3. Commercial and industrial waste . .15 4. Construction, demolition and excavation waste . .19 5. Management of waste at facilities and sites . .20 6. Fly-tipping and enforcement . .27 7. Special waste . .29 8. Agricultural waste . .32 9. Radioactive waste . .33 10. Identification of waste management facilities of national, regional and sub-regional significance . .34 Glossary . .35 Abbreviations . .36 Technical Appendices 1. Additional tables and figures . .38 2. Progress report on implementation of the North West Regional Waste Strategy Action Plan . .44 Photo credits Front cover top: Merseyside Objective 1Programme Front cover bottom: Envirolink Northwest Back cover top: David Jones Photography/Merseyside Waste Disposal Authority 3rd Annual Monitoring Report – Working towards sustainable waste management in the North West 1 August 2007 Foreword The North West Regional Technical Advisory Body (NWRTAB) is (Environment Agency). This has produced a report with broader publishing its 3rd Annual Monitoring Report. This year we have scope and hopefully a better read. sought to broaden the appeal of the document and extend its scope The report covers a period of considerable activity on both policy to encompass matters wider than just core statistics about waste making and development and practical waste management, which activity in the North West. includes: The core purpose of the NWRTAB is to collect, collate and interpret o Movement of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) through its data and other information about waste activity in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Encouraging Green Building Practices a Discussion Paper About Community Resilience November 2015
    Encouraging Green Building Practices A Discussion Paper about Community Resilience November 2015 Planners in local government have a Brief: The construction, operation, and number of tools available to encourage demolition of buildings and infrastructure green building practices that will reduce is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and have other positive emissions. How we build today locks us environmental impacts. Key strategies in to a future of high or low emissions include: requiring new construction to depending on the choices we make. meet LEED standards, providing financial Planners have a number of tools to incentives for green building practices, encourage practices that not only mitigate emissions but also reduce other and revising engineering and design critical environmental impacts. standards. Introduction Problem Washington is a leader in green building Washington State has set a goal of practices nationwide, and many reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) initiatives at the state and local level emissions to 50% below 1990 levels by have been undertaken to encourage 2050. If it is to meet this goal, reducing energy efficiency, use of alternative the emissions that result from electricity energies. Despite this, the state’s and heat used in buildings will be a key emissions from this sector have held factor. In Washington, roughly 40% of steady over the past several years, with GHG emissions result from building slight decreases in emissions from energy use. Additionally, GHGs heating (RCI in the Figure 1 below) being embodied in construction materials have offset by increases in emissions from the potential to make up a significant electricity usage. proportion of the State’s emissions, and efforts to reduce these emissions during the construction and demolition phases are critical to a holistic approach to green building.
    [Show full text]
  • Siting of Renewable Energy Facilities Within the Montachusett and North Middlesex Regions
    LEED Certification Introduction As a voluntary certification program for buildings, homes and communities, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), provides third-party verification of green buildings. Beginning in March 2000, the goal of the LEED Certification program was to conserve energy and water, reduce landfill waste and greenhouse gas emissions and provide a healthier and safer indoor environment for occupants. The program is run through the U.S Green Building Council (USGBC), which is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization “committed to a prosperous and sustainable future for our nation through cost- efficient and energy-saving green buildings”. To date USGBC has 77 chapters, 13,000 member companies and organizations, and more than 181,000 professionals who hold LEED credentials as of June 2014. 117 According to USGBC, LEED is “the most widely recognized and widely used green building program across According to USGBC, LEED v4 the globe”. Today, there are more than 53,000 LEED will “open up LEED to a wider projects, comprising more than 10.1 billion square feet of range of building types and construction space. USCBC claims that by becoming LEED manufacturing industries, certified, buildings can experience lower operating costs delivering the benefits of green building up and down the supply and increased asset values, and can become qualified for chain. It will advance tax rebates, zoning allowances, and other incentives. 118 environmental footprint issues, LEED Certification can be pursued across a variety of like climate change, and encourage optimization of industries and sectors, and through its implementation, energy and water use.” can promote economic growth in the clean energy, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and green business sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • What Makes an Eco-Town?
    What makes an eco-town? A report from BioRegional and CABE inspired by the eco-towns challenge panel Written and published in 2008 by the BioRegional Development Group and the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). Graphic design: Draught Associates Front cover image: Great Bow Yard housing scheme © Design for homes/ Richard Mullane All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, copied or transmitted without the prior written consent of the publishers except that the material may be photocopied for non-commercial purposes without permission from the publishers. This document is available in alternative formats on request from the publishers. BioRegional is an entrepreneurial charity CABE is the government’s advisor on architecture, which invents and delivers practical solutions urban design and public space. As a public body, we for sustainability. We develop sustainable encourage policymakers to create places that work products, services and production systems for people. We help local planners apply national – and set up new enterprises and companies design policy and advise developers and architects, to deliver them; initiate and guide the persuading them to put people’s needs first. We show development of sustainable communities; public sector clients how to commission projects that and seek to replicate our approach through meet the needs of their users. And we seek to inspire consultancy, communications and training. the public to demand more from their buildings and Our aim is to lead the way to sustainable living spaces. Advising, influencing and inspiring, we work to – through practical demonstration. create well designed, welcoming places.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction
    2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Constructi on Towards a zero-emissions, effi cient and resilient buildings and constructi on sector Acknowledgements The 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction was prepared by the International Energy Agency (IEA) for the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GlobalABC). The report was co-ordinated by the United Nations Environment Programme and was made possible by the generous support of the governments of Canada, France, Germany and Switzerland. ISBN No: 978-92-807-3768-4 Job No: DTI/2265/PA Cover Images: © Shutterstock Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2019. The United Nations Environment Programme and GlobalABC members acknowledge the IEA’s role in generating the analysis in this report based on IEA data and the data of GlobalABC members. The IEA shall retain ownership of its underlying data and analysis included in this report. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The IEA and the United Nations Environment Programme would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the IEA and the United Nations Environment Programme. The electronic copy of this report can be downloaded at www.iea.org or www.globalabc.org. Citation: Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, International Energy Agency and the United Nations Environment Programme (2019): 2019 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero-emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector.
    [Show full text]
  • 9.3 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
    General Plan 9Sustainability Sustainability is a core value of the Community Vision, and an intrinsic component of all elements of the Carlsbad General Plan. The very same policies that further sustainable development also enhance quality-of-life and public health; increase energy efficiency and eliminate waste; enhance biological resources; and further other initiatives central to this plan. The purpose of sustainability in Carlsbad— and its incorporation throughout the General Plan—is to take responsibility for development and projected population growth and their potential impact on the 9-1 City of Carlsbad environment. By implementing sustainable 9Sustainability design measures and policies, Carlsbad can reduce its contribution to global climate change, minimize its reliance on fossil-fuel sources, decrease consumption of natural resources, while promoting active living and access to healthy food and demonstrating its commitment and leadership on sustainability. Because policies more directly related to topics such as mobility and land use are addressed in other elements, those elements should be consulted along with the Sustainability Element for a full understanding of General Plan sustainability initiatives. This element, like others in the General Plan, is policy and action-oriented, with limited background material. A comprehensive analysis of sustainability in Carlsbad was performed in 2010 as part of the work effort leading to this General Plan, and is presented in Working Paper #1: Sustainability. 9-2 General Plan 9.1 Introduction Background and Purpose Sustainability can be defined as “development that meets the needs of the 9Sustainability present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Since sustainability is an integral part of the Carlsbad General Plan, sustainability policies are included within each of the elements as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Seizing the Opportunity of Green Development in China
    Supporting Report 3 Seizing the Opportunity of Green Development in China 229 230 CHINA 2030 Contents Abbreviations ............................................................ 232 Chapter One WHY GREEN DEVELOPMENT? ............................................ 233 a. The traditional model of development is no longer feasible .....................233 b. New opportunities arise ................................................236 Chapter Two “GREEN” AS A SOURCE OF GROWTH ...................................... 238 a. How “green” contributes to growth? ......................................238 b. Source 1: Green transformation of traditional sectors .........................240 c. Source 2: Expansion of emerging green industries ............................243 d. Source 3: Expansion of the service sector ...................................245 e. Additional opportunities for China’s under-developed regions ..................247 Chapter Three “GREEN” IMPROVES THE QUALITY OF GROWTH .......................... 249 a. Improving the quality of China’s growth by reducing environmental degradation ...249 b. Environmental co-benefits of green development .............................253 c. The benefits of investing in environmental protection .........................254 d. Adapting to a changing climate by increasing resilience to risk ..................255 Chapter Four FACTORS FAVORING AND IMPEDING GREEN DEVELOPMENT IN CHINA .....257 a. Factors favoring green development in China ...............................257 b. Factors impeding green development
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
    Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS EPA 904B10001 | June 2010 Disclaimer The Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments (Toolkit) is not intended to provide guidance on local government codes/ordinances. The information here, however, can help communities evaluate their existing codes/ordinances and apply the information to create more environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable communities. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot attest to the accuracy of non- EPA Web sites provided in the Toolkit. Providing references to non-EPA Web sites, companies, services, or products does not constitute an endorsement by EPA or any of its employees of the sponsors of the site or the information or products presented. Furthermore, EPA does not accept any responsibility for the opinions, ideas, data, or products presented at non-EPA Web sites, or guarantee the validity of the information provided. Cover credits: Top row of photos courtesy of Loren Heyns with Neighborhood.org. Bottom photo courtesy of Neighborhood.org. Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments i Acknowledgments The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is grateful for the invaluable assistance of a number of organizations and individuals who helped develop the Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments (Toolkit). Approximately 40 individuals contributed to the development of the Toolkit by participating in a March 2009 workshop hosted by the Southface Energy Institute in Atlanta, Overcoming Barriers to Green Permitting: Tools for Local Governments. The workshop was facilitated by Michael Elliott, Director of Research, Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution, Georgia Institute of Technology.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report Here
    Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains September 12–13, 2011 Arlington, Virginia Final Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Troy Hawkins, Chair Maria Burka Heriberto Cabezas Bruce Hamilton Darlene Schuster Raymond Smith ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ignacio Grossmann Thomas Theis Eric Williams Bert Bras Raj Srinivasan Bhavik Bakshi Saif Benjafaar Alan Hecht SUPPORT STAFF Susan Anastasi Michelle Nguyen Erin Chan Dan Tisch Donna Jackson Sonia Williams TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………1 About the Workshop, Goals, and Overview………………………………………………….......3 Workshop Schedule………………………………………………………………………………4 Summary……………….………………………………………………………………………....7 Appendix A: Goals of the Workshop............................................................................................................... A-2 List of Participants...................................................................................................................... A-3 Biosketches................................................................................................................................. A-5 Position Statements................................................................................................................... A-26 Notes from Breakout Group Sessions....................................................................................... A-69 Appendix B: “Welcome to the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains Workshop”....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bioregional One Planet Sport Part 1
    BioRegional One Planet Sport Part 1 Beyond London 2012 ONE PLANET SPORT Part 1: Beyond London 2012 Supported by: 1 Introduction The London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games Some of very positive sustainability outcomes from are seen as one of Great Britain’s greatest success the Games so far have been the resources produced stories of this century so far. Key ingredients to support sustainability learning and practice, these were the sporting success of the home team, the include the following: spectacular opening and closing ceremonies and the delivery of gigantic and striking venues set in a • The launch of the Learning Legacy website, magnificent new urban park reclaimed from partial which contains a wealth of detailed lessons, dereliction. And, not least, the welcoming, inspiring written by practitioners working to deliver atmosphere that endured throughout Games time. the Games. These Games demonstrated that a mega event • The Commission for Sustainable London can support real progress towards sustainable 2012 has produced excellent annual reports development and act as an inspiring exemplar. providing independent monitoring on progress Despite some challenges and shortfalls, there was a against sustainability. serious and continuous commitment to sustainability • The ISO 20121:2012 Event sustainability from the time London put together its bid almost a management system2 and the Event decade ago through to the Games themselves in the Organisers Sector Supplement (EOSS)3 summer of 2012 and, thus far, their on-going legacy. provide a useful management process and list of KPIs respectively. “Sustainability needs to be built- • Having been a part of the London 2012 in and embedded rather than a journey, from bid to legacy, we want to label on the outside, and this is one share our experience and learning to ensure of the successes..
    [Show full text]
  • Relocating Education for Sustainability: from the Campus to the Community
    RELOCATING EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY: FROM THE CAMPUS TO THE COMMUNITY A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Nicholas A. Morris December 2016 © Copyright, 2016 by Nicholas A. Morris All Rights Reserved ii A dissertation written by Nicholas A. Morris B.S., Muskingum University, 2001 MAED, Walsh University, 2004 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2016 Approved by ___________________________________, Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Natasha Levinson ___________________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Averil McClelland __________________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Andrew Lepp Accepted by ___________________________________, Director, School of Foundations, Kimberly S. Schimmel Leadership, and Administration ___________________________________, Interim Dean, College of Education, Health Mark A. Kretovics and Human Services iii MORRIS, NICHOLAS A., Ph.D., December 2016 CULTURAL FOUNDATIONS IN EDUCATION RELOCATING EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY: FROM THE CAMPUS TO THE COMMUNITY (217 pp.) Dissertation Advisor: Natasha Levinson, Ph.D. For 25 years higher education has been challenged to provide a path toward sustainability. This challenge is both lofty and necessary. During this time, higher education has yet to make noticeable change. I argue that this failure is because the movement is based on an inaccurate conceptualization of sustainability and false assumptions of the capacity of higher education. If we dig into the conception of sustainability itself and determine a more appropriate perspective, we may be able to reset the aims of the movement. If higher education can make this transition, it may need to recognize that it is not quite the dominant educational force it intends to be.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Planning for a Low Carbon Future © TCPA & CHPA 2008
    URBAN PLANNING FOR A LOW CARBON FUTURE © TCPA & CHPA 2008 Prepared for the TCPA & CHPA by Nick Dodd from URBED www.urbed.coop Conceived and commissioned by Michael King (CHPA) and Robert Shaw (formerly of TCPA and now Faber Maunsell). The TCPA is an independent charity working to improve the art and science of town and country planning. The TCPA puts social justice and the environment at the heart of policy debate and inspires government, industry and campaigners to take a fresh perspective on major issues, including planning policy, housing, regeneration climate change. Our objectives are to: — Secure a decent, well designed home for everyone, in a human-scale environment combining the best features of town and country — Empower people and communities to influence decisions that affect them — Improve the planning system in accordance with the principles of sustainable development For more information see www.tcpa.org.uk The Combined Heat and Power Association (CHPA) is the UK’s leading advocate for CHP, district heating and microCHP, aiming to promote the role of these technologies in enhancing energy security, tackling climate change and managing energy costs. The CHPA is a long-established not-for-profit trade association, which acts as a focus for the CHP industry in the UK, providing support across its membership and working to establish and maintain the strong and stable market conditions necessary to grow the application of CHP technology. For more information see www.chpa.co.uk English Partnerships is the national regeneration agency helping the Government to support high quality sustainable growth in England by creating well-served mixed communities where people enjoy living and working.
    [Show full text]