Always nice to see the final product

A while back I did some work on a study as part of the Sustainable Development in the
21 st century (SD21) project. The project is implemented  by the Division for Sustainable Development of the United  Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs and  funded by the European Commission – Directorate General for Environment – Thematic Programme for  Environment and sustainable management of Natural  Resources, including energy (ENRTP).


The study was done by Kaarin Taipale (CKIR, Aalto  University School of Economics, under the supervision of David Le Blanc (UN-DESA). Others involved included Priyanka Kochar, Patricia Kranz, Ashok Lall, Steffen Lehmann, Noel Morrin, Chrisna du  Plessis, AbdouMaliq Simone, Sanjivi Sundar, Beate Weber, Zhiqiang Wu and Annemie  Wyckmann.

From the Executive Summary (which includes ten practical steps:

Urban issues have risen high on many agendas
that deal with global questions. Most of the world’s
resources are consumed in cities, where the majority
of people live. It has become obvious that the value
of a single “green” building or eco-labeled product is
marginal if it is not supported by sustainable urban
infrastructure and a culture of sustainability.
In all fairness, cities are at different stages in their
development, and many of them in the global South
have to struggle with enormous growth rates and
immigration. Some urban areas in the North have
opposite challenges of negative growth after old
industries have died out or left.
Inequity and segregation seem to be common
challenges to cities all over the world. Urban inequity
and segregation are also an indication of global
inequity. While more and more cities want to focus
on services and hi-tech, the dirty work of the world
remains to be done in the poorest cities with the most
meager resources to develop.
Cities compete with each other globally trying to please
investors. There is hardly any municipality that does not
in its official strategy claim that sustainability is one of its
key targets. However, it is a totally different story if one
asks into what actions this declaration translates.
Yes, sustainability criteria may be used at the City
Hall when envelopes are purchased – but what is
the point if every other product and service is the
outcome of an unsustainable process? Yes, there is
a Dow Sustainability Index – but what use is it if not
all companies, investments and financing support
sustainability? Yes, there may be a solar panel here
and there, but zero emissions mean nothing less than
100% renewable energy. Yes, there may be tree-lined
roads but as long as the pedestrian is not the king of
the street, the city is not sustainable!
The process towards sustainable cities starts with
profound analyses of the past and present culture
of the city. It builds on an inclusive and holistic
vision, applies integrated planning and transparent
governance, and monitors implementation rigorously.
Even a huge amount of excellent but disconnected
pieces does not make a well functioning whole.
Because money is not going to stop talking, its
language will have to become sustainability. A locally
rooted, democratized culture of sustainability has to be
the foundation of urban development.

Bike to car ration

And it is pretty good...

(thanks to Juan Inazio Hartsuaga)

Curious scenes: will we all look back and shake our heads in wonder?

Somalia, (revealing) spelling mistake, just sort of sad...

(from IISS)

Wait - didn't we say that ten years ago?

The English - and the Scottish for that matter - are both ahead and behind. But can we even imagine in 2012 where the report would come from in Australia that would say the same?

Councils should have a binding duty to develop and implement low carbon plans to help ensure the UK meets its emissions reduction commitments, a high-profile government advisory body has recommended.
A new report by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) to be published today warns limited funding and the current lack of any legal obligation on local authorities to address climate change means many are not taking action to support the transition to a low carbon economy.
...
It argues that councils are failing to take advantage of the "significant influence" they have over key emitting sectors, including residential and commercial buildings, surface transport and waste, which together account for around 40 per cent of UK greenhouse emissions.
The report calculates councils have the potential to reduce emissions in key sectors by 20 per cent by 2020 against 2010 levels – which equates to a 30 per cent cut on 1990 levels. Moreover, it claims these savings can be realised using relatively simple measures, such as helping property owners fit energy efficient technologies on existing buildings, ensuring new builds are highly energy efficient, investing in green vehicles, and promoting reduced energy consumption and waste among residents and businesses.
Local authorities can also tackle emissions in the power sector via the planning system, by approving and promoting renewable energy projects, the report states, as well as developing district heating schemes and small-scale low-carbon power plants.
Such action will not only help reduce emissions and position councils as low-carbon champions, but also create jobs and improve resilience to climate change, the CCC predicts.
In addition, the report reveals that in Scotland, where a statutory requirement to act has been introduced, all 32 local authorities have carbon management plans in place – a move the CCC said had helped encourage action across the public sector.

Surprise! Old culture warriors stuck in the last century

Bang for buck, bikes do it every time, notwithstanding the truly pathetic recent Steve Price article in which phrases like "cycle Nazis" were lazily recycled (time to move on Steve, or at least get out more). And the recent WA budget proves even more clearly that bike expenditure is not (and should not) be the froth of the old culture warriors:

THE WA Government has committed $28 million in the State Budget to be spent on cycling infrastructure in the Perth CBD over the next two years.Transport Minister Troy Buswell and Treasurer Christian Porter announced today the money would be used to improve Perth’s principal shared path network within a 15km radius of the Perth CBD and increase bicycle network grants across the State.
“With an estimated 300,000 cycling trips a month in the Perth metropolitan area alone, this funding will enable us to deliver targeted projects to address infrastructure gaps and provide safe routes for the many West Australians who cycle,” Mr Buswell said.
Mr Buswell said the priority principal shared paths to be built with the money included the Midland rail line from Bassendean Station to Midland Station; the Fremantle rail line from Shenton Park Station to Loch Street Station and from Grant Street Station to Marine Parade; and sections of the Mitchell Freeway from Glendalough Station to Reid Highway.
...
The Minister said the additional Budget funding would also mean the funding available for Perth Bicycle Network grants would double from $2million to $4million over two years, and increase Regional Bicycle Network grants to $1.5million in 2012-13 and to $2million in 2013-14.
...
The Treasurer said 2012-13 State Budget funding would supplement the $2.66million the State Government already spent annually on cycling, and was part of the $105million Budget allocation for initiatives to address traffic congestion in and around the CBD.

Green roofs in unlikely places

This is perhaps one area that local governments have not picked up in Australia - green roofs:

The city of Charlottesville added a green roof to City Hall and the police annex in 2008. The city’s website states that the vegetation covers 9,250 square feet of roof and features 18,540 plants distributed across its surface.
The Albemarle County Office Building on McIntire Road also had a green roof installed on it in July 2005. Gregor Patsch, water resources engineer for Albemarle, said that the roof frequently attracts students from UVa who want to see one first-hand.
“People seem to think it’s cool and they’re interested in it,” Patsch said. “I take quite a few visitors up there every year and there’s a group of local students in a class at UVa that come every year.”
Patsch also said that although there is no specific procedure for adding green roofs to government buildings, it is considered whenever a new structure is built or when a renovation or addition is made to an existing building. Patsch stated that the County Office Building has noticed increased stormwater retention benefits as well as a more stable roof temperature.“Compared to a non-green roof, the green roof is significantly cooler in the summer,” Patsch said. “Then in the winter, contrastingly, it is a lot warmer that a non-green roof.”
Patsch added that the county does not have the monitoring abilities to determine the monetary savings caused by the green roof but, he added, the benefits of the green roof could not be measured with purely numerical data anyway.
“There are a lot of benefits that go a lot further than energy savings,” said Patsch. “We’ve also seen some habitat benefits. We’ve seen some insects like butterflies and bees up there.”
Titanish agreed by saying that the energy savings are important, but the benefits of a green roof can range from fire protection to extending the life of the roof to improving air quality.
“This is a huge environmental benefit,” said Titanish. “It doesn’t seem like a lot on the surface… but less energy expended means less infrastructure that you need to supply the energy, that’s that much less coal that you’re firing up at the coal-fired plant to supply the energy, that’s that much less water you’re using to drive the turbines at the coal-fired power plant to supply the electricity... That’s huge.”

File under: only in the USA

In a world of many unbelievable things, this is a beauty. Ideology gone way overboard in South Carolina...(from the Heartland Institute, which is itself full of weird, strange and bizarre things)

Lawmakers in Columbia are pondering a proposed “Incandescent Light Bulb Freedom Act,” a measure that would skirt Washington’s heavy hand by allowing the traditional bulbs to be manufactured and sold in the Palmetto State provided they are labeled “Made in South Carolina.”
By restricting the manufacture and sale of “Made in South Carolina” light bulbs to the Palmetto State, the bill’s proponents hope to avoid any conflicts with the Constitution’s broadly interpreted Interstate Commerce Clause.
Energy Act Forbids IncandescentsApproved by a Democratically controlled Congress and signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush in 2007, the “Energy Independence and Security Act” requires, among other things, the nationwide phase-out of incandescent light bulbs over a period of several years.
Under the law, enacted in the name of promoting energy efficiency, the manufacture and importation of the popular 100-watt incandescent bulb was to end on Jan. 1, 2012, with the phase-out of 75-, 60-, and 40-watt bulbs to be carried out in 2013 and 2014. They are to be replaced by more energy-efficient light bulbs, with compact fluorescent lights (CFLs), halogen lights, and LEDs (light-emitting diodes) currently the only commercially available replacements.
Under the law, all light bulbs sold by 2020 must be 70 percent more energy efficient than their traditional predecessors.

It's green scissors not tape

This is getting crazy:

The Urban Development Institute of Australia (UDIA) says the listing of koalas as a threatened species in Queensland will create unnecessary delays for developers.

Actually, the real threatened species is common sense. Obvious and old agendas being rolled out and paraded as "green tape" undermine the genuine arguments about reducing the friction in our economy - a problem that involves sophisticated life-cycle assessment and a long-term approach. Otherwise, it is just amateur stuff pushing all of the normal disputes of any democracy down the pipeline for someone else to deal with...