City Limits London.Pdf

City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London Project Partners Chartered Institution of Wastes The Institution of Civil Engineers w w w .ice.org.u k IWM (EB) Management Environmental Body The Institution of Civil Engineers IWM (EB) is a registered environm ental body that sponsors original research, developm ent, education and inform ation dissem ination projects in furtherance of professional and sustainable waste m anagem ent practices. (ICE) is the pre-em inent engineering institution in the world. It has 78,000 m em bers and provides a voice for civil engineering, professional developm ent and prom oting best practice in the industry. In 2000, ICE and CIWM agreed to instigate and co-ordinate a program m e of activities funded by landfill tax credits, of which City Lim its form s part. Biffaward w w w .biffaw ard .org The Chartered Institution of Wastes Management w w w .ciw m .co.u k In 1997 Biffa Waste Services agreed to donate The Chartered Institution of Wastes landfill tax credits to the Managem ent (CIWM) is the pre-em inent Royal Society for Nature Conservation (RSNC) to adm inister under the fund nam e Biffaward. To date, Biffaward has distributed m ore than £44m m illion to 554 projects throughout the UK. body in the UK engaged in waste m anagem ent issues. It represents over 4,000 professional waste m anagers and aim s to protect and enhance the environm ent through developing scientific, technical and m anagem ent standards. City Lim its is a natural follow-on to CIWM's Millenium Com petition and its interest in im proving the quality of data available for strategic decision-m aking in the m anagem ent of London's wastes. <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">Greater </li><li style="flex:1">Best Foot Forward Ltd </li></ul>w w w .bestfootforw ard .com London Authority w w w .lon d on .gov .u k Best Foot Forward Lim ited (BFF) is a sustainability consultancy based in Oxford. BFF have developed the The Mayor and the London Assem bly constitute a strategic citywide governm ent for London, and is the statutory authority for the Greater London region. Responsibilities include the police, transport, fire and em ergency planning, regeneration, planning, sustainability and environm ental issues, cultural affairs and health concerns. EcoIndex™ m ethodology, based on ecological footprinting, which is used to calculate the environm ental im pact and sustainability of a product, organisation, process or activity. BFF's ecological footprint of the Isle of Wight was voted Overall Winner at the Biffaward Awards 2001. Iwww.citylimitslondon.com Title page City Limits City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London Com m ission ed by IWM (EB) Chartered Institution of Wastes Management Environmental Body Prep ared by Best Foot Forw ard Ltd w w w . c i t y l i m i t s l o n d o n . c o m 12th September 2002 www.citylimitslondon.com II City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London Biffaward Programme on Sustainable Resource Use Th is rep ort form s p art of th e Biffaw ard Program m e on Su stain able Resou rce Use. Th e aim of th is p rogram m e is to p rov id e accessible, w ell-research ed in form ation abou t th e flow s of d ifferen t resou rces th rou gh th e UK econ om y based eith er sin gly , or on a com bin ation of region s, m aterial stream s or in d u stry sectors. Inform ation about m aterial resource flows through the UK econom y is of fundam ental im portance to the cost- be generated and classified in ways effective m anagem ent of resource flows, especially at the stage when the resources becom e 'waste'. In order to m axim ise the Program m e’s full potential, data will In addition to the projects having their own m eans of dissem ination to their own constituencies, their data and inform ation will be gathered together in a com m on form at to facilitate policy m aking at corporate, regional and national levels. that are both consistent with each other, and with the m ethodologies of the other generators of resource flow/ waste m anagem ent data. Acknowledgments Steering Group IWM (EB) w ish to ack n ow led ge th e gen erou s h elp an d su p p ort of th e p roject Steerin g Grou p . Osw ald A. Dod d s MBE (Chairm an) IWM (EB) Fran s Berk h ou t University of Sussex An d rew Cru d gin gton The Institution of Civil Engineers Joh n Fergu son Chartered Institution of Wastes Managem ent Herbert Girard et Schum acher Society Iv an Good Project Team IWM (EB) Nick y Ch am bers Rich ard Heap Dav id Good e Greater London Authority Peter Jon es Nicola Jen k in Biffa Waste Services Ltd Kev in Lew is Way n e Laram ee Craig Sim m on s Bru n a Tam ai Environm ental Services Association Sim on Read London Waste Action George Vergou las Pau l V. Vern on (design) Dav id Streeter Association of London Governm ent An d rea Wh ite Royal Society for Nature Conservation / Biffaward III www.citylimitslondon.com Acknowledgments and Foreword City Limits Foreword Th e p u blication of th is stu d y of Lon d on 's ecological footp rin t is p articu larly tim ely follow in g as it d oes th e Un ited Nation s' Wor ld Su m m it on En vir on m en t a n d Developm en t in Joh an n esbu rg. It becam e clear 10 y ears ago at th e Ea r th Su m m it in Rio th at w e can n ot con tin u e to u se global resou rces at cu rren t lev els w ith ou t p u ttin g fu tu re gen eration s an d global ecosy stem s at risk . Recent estim ates suggest that on a global scale we are now using resources faster than they can be replenished. We are eating into the earth's capital assets, which will inevitably reduce options for future generations. In m y draft London Plan published in June I set out m y vision for London over the next twenty years. It is based on three interwoven them es of econom ic growth, social inclusivity and fundam ental im provem ents in London's environm ent and use of resources. This vision underlies all m y strategies. Alongside the London Plan I am producing five environm ental strategies on Air Quality, Biodiversity, Energy, Noise and Municipal Waste Managem ent. These collectively show how London can develop sustainable solutions and this study of This study of London's footprint is particularly im portant because it is the first such analysis of a m ajor world city. For the first tim e we have an overall picture of London's m etabolism , how resources are used and where action m ight be taken to increase our efficiency and becom e m ore sustainable. The report reinforces the challenges that face us but also provides vital clues to ways in which we can reduce our im pact on the wider world. London's footprint will be particularly valuable in enabling all of us to find possible solutions. This vision seeks to achieve the m axim um possible from the forces to which the city is subject and which it can influence. It is a challenging vision involving clear choices, priorities, resources, determ ination and the resolution of conflict. But the alternative - a failure to secure econom ic growth and to m atch it with social For all these reasons I welcom e the publication of this study and I com m end it to everyone involved in achieving m y vision of m aking London an exem plary, sustainable world city. inclusion and sustainable use of resources - would have serious long-term consequences for London, and the wider world. We ca n n ot con tin u e to Ken Liv in gston e May or of Lon d on u se globa l r esou r ces a t cu r r en t levels with ou t pu ttin g fu tu r e gen er a tion s a n d globa l ecosystem s a t r isk. www.citylimitslondon.com IV City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London Executive Summary The City Limits project set out to achieve the following objectives: Chairman’s Statement The m ain aim of this project was to research and analyse resource use data for London. Resource flow and ecological footprint analyses served to provide inform ation on which to m ake evidence-based policy. The results show that changes are necessary if London is to becom e a sustainable city. Scenario results indicate that a com bination of consum ption reduction and technological innovation can achieve the resource efficiency im provem ents required to realise a sustainable London by 2050. · To qu an tify an d catalogu e th e en ergy an d m aterials con su m ed by Lon d on an d Lon d on ers, an d w h ere p ossible m ap th e flow s of th ese resou rces. · To calcu late th e ecological footp rin t of th e citizen s of Lon d on . Deciding the detail of how we m ight achieve the necessary changes needs to involve society as a whole. This is essentially a political process and the report does not, therefore, m ake specific policy recom m endations. It is hoped however that the findings of this study will assist in the form ation of effective policies and help all of us understand the action needed to achieve ecological sustainability. · To com p are th e ecological footp rin t of Lon d on ers w ith oth er region s. Another aim of the project was to assess the availability and quality of data necessary for this type of analysis. While m ore research and better datasets would greatly assist in assessing and m onitoring our progress towards sustainability, the report shows that there is already enough data in the public dom ain to reliably indicate that London lifestyles are not currently sustainble. We therefore hope that this study both stim ulates further data research and inspires future analyses. · To com p are th e ecological footp rin t of Lon d on ers w ith th e globally av ailable 'earth sh are' to estim ate ecological su stain ability . · To qu an tify th e ecological su stain ability of a ran ge of im p rov em en t scen arios. On behalf of IWM (EB) I would like to thank all involved in the project - the funders, the project team and all those who provided data or otherwise helped. I com m end the report to you and hope that it stim ulates real debate and change. · To assess th e av ailability an d qu ality of d ata requ ired to carry ou t th is ty p e of an aly sis, an d in certain in stan ces m ak e recom m en d ation s to im p rov e d ata requ irem en ts for Osw ald A. Dod d s MBE Ch airm an IWM (EB) Sep tem ber 2002 resou rce flow an d ecological footp rin t an aly ses. Vwww.citylimitslondon.com Chairman’s Statement and Executive Summary City Limits The main findings of the project were: • The population of Greater London in 2000 was 7.4 m illion. • The ecological footprint of Londoners was 49 m illion global hectares (gha), which was 42 tim es its biocapacity and 293 tim es its geographical area. This is twice the siz e of the UK, and roughly the sam e siz e as Spain. • Londoners consum ed 154,400 GigaWatt hours (GWh) of energy (or 13,276,000 tonnes of oil equivalent), which produced 41 m illion tonnes of CO2. • The ecological footprint per London resident was 6.63 gha. This com pares with the UK average ecological footprint of 6.3 gha, and exceeds the global 'earthshare' of 2.18 gha. • Londoners consum ed 49 m illion tonnes of m aterials. On a per capita basis, this represents 6.7 tonnes. • 27.8 m illion tonnes of m aterials were used by the construction sector. • The ecological footprint of London tourists was estim ated at 2.4 m illion gha, which equates to an additional 0.32 gha per Londoner. • 26 m illion tonnes of waste was generated, of which 15 m illion tonnes was generated by the construction and dem olition sector, 7.9 m illion tonnes by the com m ercial and industrial sector and 3.4 m illion tonnes by households. • The predicted 'earthshare' in 2050 is estim ated at 1.44 gha per capita. For Londoners to be ecologically sustainable by 2050, a 35% reduction by 2020 and an 80% reduction by 2050, of their ecological footprint will be needed. • 6.9 m illion tonnes of food was consum ed, of which 81% was im ported from outside the UK. • Ranges of 'business as usual' and 'evolutionary' scenarios were prepared to reflect current practice and existing im provem ent targets. • Londoners travelled 64 billion passengerkilom etres (pass-km ), of which 69% was by car. r• Water consum ption reached 876,000,000,000 litres, of which 28% was leakage. 'Revolutionary' scenarios were prepared to dem onstrate that a com bination of technological and Food 41% behavioural changes could achieve interim sustainability targets for 2020. Materials & waste 44% Ecological footprint of Londoners, by component, showing actual size and the UK. Degraded land 0.7% Water 0.3% www.citylimitslondon.com VI City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London Contents Ecological Footprint Analysis Results 19 <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">III </li><li style="flex:1">Biffaward Program m e </li></ul>on Sustainable Resouce Use Acknowledgm ents Foreword III IV V Ecological Dem and: The Ecological 19 Footprint Executive Sum m ary Direct Energy Footprint Materials and Waste Footprint Food Footprint 20 20 25 25 26 26 26 <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">1</li><li style="flex:1">Con ten ts </li></ul>35566 List of Tables, Figures & Vignettes Introduction Greater London Personal Transport Footprint Water Footprint Project Context Report Structure Built Land Footprint Tourism Footprint Results Ecological Sustainability Assessment 27 78Resource Flow Analysis Results Direct Energy The Ecological Sustainability of London 27 27 27 28 Ecological Supply: The Biocapacity of London Ecological Supply: The Biocapacity of the World Com parisons with Other Ecological Footprints <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">10 </li><li style="flex:1">Material Flows (including Food) </li></ul>12 13 Food flows Priority waste stream s 14 16 16 16 Waste London in the World 28 29 31 Transport Water London and other regions London and other cities Land Use Scenario Results Electricity 32 32 <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">17 </li><li style="flex:1">Su m m ary </li></ul>resou rce flow s Household Waste 34 36 37 38 Passenger Transport th rou gh Lon d on in 2000 Transportation of Food Household Water Consum ption 1www.citylimitslondon.com Contents City Limits Methodology <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">39 Project Aims </li><li style="flex:1">45 Ecological Footprint Analysis </li></ul>Methodology 39 Data Collection 45 45 What is an Ecological Footprint Analysis? 39 39 39 Methodology The Living Pla net Report and Footprint of Na tions Accounts Data Availability and Quality <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">46 </li><li style="flex:1">The Com ponent Approach: The EcoIndex™ </li></ul>Methodology Com m ercial confidentiality and cost 46 46 The Snap Shot Approach 40 Proxy Measures The Geographical and Responsibility Accounting Principles <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">47 </li><li style="flex:1">The ecological footprint of the Greater London </li></ul>geographical area 40 The Double Counting Demon <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">40 </li><li style="flex:1">Double Counting in the Resource Flow Analysis </li></ul>47 47 48 49 49 The ecological footprint of Londoners Adjusting for double counting <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">40 </li><li style="flex:1">Double Counting in the Ecological Footprint </li></ul>Analysis Aligning the responsibility principle Ecological Supply: The Biocapacity Analysis 40 Filling the Data Gaps Com parison of Londoner's Ecological Footprint to Other Studies 41 Resource Flow Analysis Methodology <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">49 </li><li style="flex:1">Need for a com parative m ethodology </li></ul><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">41 </li><li style="flex:1">Direct Energy Flows </li></ul>41 41 Derivation of data sets 50 Scenarios Methodology Proxy m easure used and lim itations <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">41 </li><li style="flex:1">Material and Waste Flows (including Food) </li></ul>41 42 43 43 43 43 43 43 Derivation of m aterial flows datasets Product codes Proxy m easures used and their lim itations Per capita Em ploym ent num bers 51 52 Endnotes Gross Dom estic Product (GDP) Waste generation Appendix 1 Data Providers and Assistance Other Contacted Organisations Appendix 2 Derivation of waste data <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">44 </li><li style="flex:1">Transport </li></ul>55 57 44 44 Derivation of data sets Data Availability and Quality by Com ponent Proxy m easures used and lim itations <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">44 </li><li style="flex:1">Water </li></ul>Appendix 3 Conversion tables Abbreviations Glossary 44 44 Derivation of data sets 58 59 60 Proxy m easures used and lim itations <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">44 </li><li style="flex:1">Tourism and Day Visitors </li></ul>References www.citylimitslondon.com 2City Limits A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of Greater London List of tables Results Resource Flow Analysis Results 78<ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">Table 1: </li><li style="flex:1">Energy consum ed in London, by fuel type and CO2 em issions </li></ul><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">Table 2: </li><li style="flex:1">A sum m ary of m aterial flows through London </li></ul><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">9</li><li style="flex:1">Table 3a - 3g: A detailed breakdown of resource flows through London, by m aterial category </li></ul>12 12 13 14 15 16 16 16 Table 4a: Table 4b: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 8: Table 9: Table 10: Food flows through London Food consum ed in London, by type Priority waste stream s in London, by type and m anagem ent m ethod Waste generated in London, by sector and type Waste generated in London, by type and m anagem ent m ethod Transport in London, by m ode and CO2 em issions Water consum ed in London, by sector Land area in London, by use Ecological Footprint Analysis Results 19 20 21 25 26 26 Table 11: Table 12: Table 13: Table 14: Table 15: Table 16: The ecological footprint of Londoners, by com ponent The direct energy ecological footprint of Londoners, by com ponent The sub-com ponents of the m aterials and waste ecological footprint The food ecological footprint of Londoners, by com ponent The personal transport ecological footprint of Londoners, by m ode The water ecological footprint of Londoners, by sector Ecological Sustainability Assessment 27 27 30 31 Table 17: Table 18: Table 19: Table 20: The biocapacity of London The ecological sustainability of Londoners London's personal transport use, by m ode, in com parison to other UK regions London's dom estic gas and grid electricity consum ption, in com parison to other regions Methodology Resource Flow Analysis Methodology <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">42 </li><li style="flex:1">Table 21: </li><li style="flex:1">An exam ple of how NST codes were correlated with ONS ProdCom </li></ul>codes, using the DTLR's m iscellaneous m anufactures category Ecological Footprint Analysis Methodology 46 47 47 47 48 48 Table 22: Table 23: Table 24: Table 25: Table 26: Table 27: An exam ple analysis for the footprint of UK car travel, per pass-km The excluded raw construction m aterial sub-com ponents The excluded industrial energy sub-com ponents The excluded freight transport com ponent The excluded industrial m aterials and waste sub-com ponents London land types, by hectare and yield factors Scenarios Methodology <ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">50 </li><li style="flex:1">Table 28: </li><li style="flex:1">Per capita ecological footprints and percentage 2020 reduction targets required to achieve </li></ul>ecological sustainability for Londoners by 2050, with and without a 12% biodiversity allowance

City Limits London.Pdf

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support