Closed loop materials cycles
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•657 views
Conference presentation: M. PEDERSEN ZARI. ‘Closed Loop Materials Cycles: Architectural Education to Affect Change’, presentation at the Building Materials Reuse Association (BMRA) Conference on Deconstruction, Building Materials Reuse, and C&D Recycling, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, May 2007.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Closed loop materials cycles
Similar to Closed loop materials cycles (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Closed loop materials cycles
- 1. Closed Loop Materials Cycles: Architectural Education to Affect Change Maibritt Pedersen Zari Centre for Building Performance Research, School of Architecture, Victoria University of Wellington. PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand. 0064 4 463 6901, maibritt.pedersen@vuw.ac.nz
- 2. Unwanted materials from construction and demolition activities are a major component of global waste streams.
- 3. No one wants to be part of an industry that is responsible for so much pollution and resource use.
- 5. www.zerowaste.co.nzwww.mfe.govt.nz Construction and Demolition waste target requires a 50% reduction in waste to landfill by 2008
- 6. www.zerowaste.co.nzwww.dhb.govt.nz The Building Act 2004 requires efficient and sustainable use of materials and reduction of construction waste.
- 8. Engaging the wider community can be difficult.
- 9. Educating the next generation of professionals while involving the wider community could be an important vehicle for change.
- 10. • The project and the work • Involving and engaging the wider community Closing the Loops Project
- 11. Closing the Loops – The Context
- 12. Closing the Loops – The Process
- 14. James Dinsdale
- 15. Katrina Tamaira
- 16. Charlotte Hoare
- 17. Matthew Webby
- 18. Wang Yi
- 19. Caleb Sillars
- 20. Robert Alexander
- 21. Karina Madsen
- 22. Charlotte Bowie
- 23. Kate Williams
- 24. Closing the Loops – The Successes and Difficulties www.hapene.com
- 25. Involving and engaging the wider community
- 26. Zero Waste Trust NZ ‘An End To Waste - Zero Waste by 2020" is our personal invitation to all New Zealanders to support the adoption of a national Zero Waste vision: a vision that will create employment and wealth and protect precious resources for future generations.’ www.zerowaste.co.nz
- 31. Exhibition of Student Work
- 35. Maibritt Pedersen Zari maibritt.pedersen@vuw.ac.nz Centre for Building Performance Research School of Architecture Victoria University of Wellington PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand Conclusions
Editor's Notes
- Introduce myself – (why here, background etc) From New Zealand – Victoria University. Population of 4 million Three architecture degree courses offered at the nation’s universities. We are in Wellington, the capital of NZ. I am in this part of the world as part of a research trip. I have worked in the area of deconstruction as part of the CIB Task Group 39 called Deconstruction and am part of the new CIB Working Commission W115 Construction Materials Stewardship. I will come back to that. My current main area of research is however biomimicry, that is the emulation of flora and fauna and even entire ecosystems as a basis for design. I still maintain an active interest in deconstruction however as part of minimising resource use and waste and I hope we will see how these two interests have combined as we go along. So I am very pleased to have the change to talk with you here.
- The crux of the matter… What we already know. We are all familiar with this, particularly as this group of people. The interrelationship between global materials cycles, the degradation of the natural environment, and the role of the architect or designer complicit in this are immediately apparent when one considers that up to 50% of natural resources used are employed in the built environment, most materials are wasted before they are used even once and waste attributed to construction and demolition activities can be up to 50% of the total. In New Zealand that figure is near that.
- The reaction to that. This is certainly true for me, particularly as someone who is in part responsible for the knowledge of graduates in this area. I started to feel very strongly about this as I went through my education especially as I started to put this into the context of wider environmental impact the built environment is responsible for. We know that vast amounts of energy are used to power this process linking the built environment intimately with greenhouse gas emissions. Possibly 50% according to Ed Mazria. Other serious impacts on the natural environment such as the creation of other pollutants and the loss of natural habitat and biodiversity are easily linked with the current way materials are used and there is a lot of research out there on that. So – its very inspirational to be in a forum such as this where there are so many people engaged with doing positive work in the area of reducing resource use and waste. In New Zealand there is significant work being done in many areas to improve the sustainability of the built environment, but in terms of deconstruction specifically Victoria University prepared a report…
- for CIB TG39 on Deconstruction called THE STATE OF DECONSTRUCTION IN NEW ZEALAND Authors: John B Storey, Morten Gjerde, Andrew Charleson, Maibritt Pedersen (Centre of Building Performance Research, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand). One of a number of countries that took part in reporting on deconstruction in our countries and the final reports are not small publications. Won’t go into that – synopsis is available on the internet and the report for our country (large doc) is available if you email me. (search on website) looked into case studies such as this one St Josephs Organised and careful deconstruction. Moved to make way for the road . Took longer but made money in the end. Materials reintegrated into new church and some on-sold (jarrah floors) Part of that research identified major and difficult waste streams and made contact with city councils to discuss what their problem wastes were. Also identified that one of the barriers was finding uses for the waste materials and adding value to them as opposed to just collecting them. Because of our geography and isolation and relatively sparse population there is a unique economic situation in NZ. Also at the other end it is difficult for designers to find suitable products to specify that take into account life cycle and if appropriate are made from recycled materials and are able to be recycled.
- This report sits in a wider national context: Three main documents I want to mention: 1/ The New Zealand Waste Strategy: Towards zero waste and a sustainable New Zealand was published by the ministry for the environment in 2003. NZ still focused to a certain extent on waste management rather than waste minimisation. This is part of an effort to address that. A few years old now and was really a vision and an action plan for reducing and better managing waste. This strategy is not legally enforceable currently, but is actually a waste minimisation proposal by the Ministry for the Environment which sets targets for Territorial Authorities to accept and follow if they choose to. Targets for waste minimisation across all waste areas are set up to 2020. The Strategy’s C&D waste minimisation target requires a 50% reduction by weight in construction and demolition waste going to landfills by 2008, however it offers no construction and demolition (C&D) waste specific strategies for accomplishing this objective. “The strategy acknowledges the limits of the information on which the targets are based. It indicates that the targets should be considered as "goal statements rather than mandatory requirements". The targets are to be reviewed by December 2003. In the meantime councils are encouraged to set their own targets in line with those in the strategy. This request recognises that it may be impractical for local targets to be the exact equivalent of the provisional national targets.” Problematic in implementing these targets as no advice was given. Good start though… http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/waste-mgmt-infosheet-oct05/waste-mgmt-infosheet-oct05.html Brought about an initiative called govt3 along with industry pressure. Govt3 has 16% of market share – most core ministries are a part of it. Will soon not be voluntary and is intended to be mandatory for local government too in the near future. Buildings and Waste Minimization are 2 of the 4 main focuses of Govt 3 (transports and office consumables and equipment are the others). Govt3 funded the NZ Green Building Council to develop an NZ green rating tool – NZ Greenstar 1st tool last month – offices. NZGBC less than a year old. All government buildings will have to use this.
- 2/ the recent new Building Act governing the New Zealand Building Code, which in NZ is non-prescriptive made sustainable energy and material use including a building waste element part of the Building Code. Should be in place early next year. Energy use in buildings should be efficient –focus on CO2 emissions. Buildings should use renewable sources of energy. Material use in buildings should be efficient and sustainable. Nominated intended life of building is a possibility. Waste generated during the construction process should be reduced. Water use in buildings should be efficient and promote water conservation.
- 3/ Solid Waste Minimization Bill – going through parliament at the moment and should get through with government support. Links made with that and reducing climate change gas emissions. Our Prime Minister is very big on sustainability and using the purchansing power of the government to influence the market. Even indication from the Ministry for the Environment that they want to go beyond sustainable buildings to environmentally restorative ones. Green Party Waste Minimisation Bill The Green Party has a goal of achieving a Waste Free Aotearoa New Zealand by 2020, with clear and significant progress by 2010, through specific Waste Minimisation legislation. While the Waste Mininisation Bill seeks to discourage landfilling, and encourage recycling and producer responsibility, the underlying rationale behind the legislation is reduction of waste at source. As important as recycling and resource recovery are, they are unlikely to restore more than a modest portion of the damage done during production. Improving product durability and minimising waste in production, packaging, and transport are the only strategies for tackling resource depletion, environmental degradation, and climate change, and reducing the number of hours we work in order to reclaim the quality of our lives. Key principles Full social and environmental costs should be taken into account when making decisions about the creation, management and disposal of waste. Production and consumption must reflect a cyclical approach, as is seen in natural ecosystems, in order to reduce the rate at which we use energy and resources. Manufactured products should be durable, with components that can be reused or recycled, and should be easy to repair, upgrade or modify. People need both accurate information and empowering education to participate effectively in creating a Waste Free Aotearoa New Zealand. Greater use of appropriate technologies and ongoing innovation are necessary to move from a wasteful society to a creative sustainable society that does more with less for longer. Tangata Whenua must be supported both in their role as kaitiaki and in protecting their taonga and tikanga against the negative impact of waste. Government, citizens and business must work together and show individual leadership and responsibility in implementing the waste reduction hierarchy of reduce, reuse, recycle. The bill sets in place: 1. A Waste Minimisation Authority The Bill establishes a centralised agency, similar in purpose to the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, dedicated to facilitating the move to a less wasteful society. This would have a coordinating educational and facilitation role as well as being tasked with providing advice to the Minister. It would be responsible for setting and monitoring targets for the reduction in the amount of waste disposed of in landfills, cleanfills and incinerators, approving and monitoring extended producer responsibility programmes and administering the landfill levy which form key components of the Bill. 2. Waste Control Authorities The Bill also more clearly specifies the roles of territorial authorities, giving them more power with respect to waste minimisation and management. These would constitute, either individually or jointly with other territorial authorities, Waste Control Authorities. The Waste Control Authorities would adopt and implement waste minimisation and management plans and be responsible for ensuring that all parts of society, including the waste minimisation and disposal sectors, implement measures that will result in greatly decreased waste disposal coupled with increased resource recovery. The Waste Control Authorities would have a major role in facilitating the move to a less wasteful society at the local level but are also empowered to enforce requirements of this Bill through bylaw making and licensing provisions. 3. Bans of materials to landfill Phased in bans will be introduced on the disposal of those materials for which there currently exists recovery systems, diverting them from waste disposal facilities and using them more productively. Provision is made for the subsequent addition of more materials. 4. Landfill levy The Bill creates a levy on every tonne of waste which is sent for disposal. This is intended :o send economic signals deterring wasteful behaviour and to provide funding for the implementation of waste minimisation initiatives. 5. Extended Producer Responsibility The Bill provides for extended producer responsibility programmes to be required for certain products. These require the producer of the product to take responsibility for the product throughout its lifecycle, from design through to the products’ end-of-life. 6. Organisational Waste Minirnisation plans All organisations will adopt and implement Waste Minimisation plans to facilitate a decrease in the amount of waste they produce. This requirement is phased in over a 10 year period, starting with the largest organisations and ending with the smallest. 7. Public procurement policies All public organisations will implement green procurement policies which give priority to purchasing products and services which either decrease the generation of waste or support markets for recycled materials. Furthermore, public organisations will report on their resource use, waste generation and what happens to the waste they produce each year. 1. A Waste Minimisation Authority The Bill establishes a centralised agency, dedicated to facilitating the move to a less wasteful society. This would have a coordinating educational and facilitation role as well as being tasked with providing advice to the Minister. It would be responsible for setting and monitoring targets for the reduction in the amount of waste disposed of in landfills, cleanfills and incinerators, approving and monitoring extended producer responsibility programmes and administering the landfill levy which form key components of the Bill. Gives Local Authorites great power So there is a general context in New Zealand of attempts to improve the sustainability of the built environment at the government and national level an also a number of more local initiatives.
- So there are initiatives going on and a lot of work and progress is being done in this area. I think it is fair to say however that the problem exists that it seems to be difficult to engage the wider built environment professional community in issues such as waste minimisation. Waste minimisation, deconstruction and materials reuse are not really sexy topics in New Zealand, although there are noticeable shifts in opinion and political will in other areas of environmental sustainability particularly in climate change. Show of hands – educating etc. Is that statement true. Part of that report - One of the barriers identified around education, attitude, opportunities for engagement.
- The information we gained from doing the report on deconstruction lead to a rethinking of how to get the message of closing the loops to students especially because we know that only very small amounts of waste building materials from construction and demolition / deconstruction are re-used or recycled in New Zealand, and if the possibility existed to widen that message. An education way of closing the loops…. Closing the loops on education too. I will explain what we did. With the large negative impact of the production and disposal of materials in the construction and demolition of the built environment, the role of architectural education becomes crucial in addressing the current linear cradle to grave mentality towards the use of materials. We know that is often what happens at the design stage that determines what will happen at end of life and if the possibility for sensible and economic deconstruction will exist. I want to show you the successful example we have developed at Victoria University that does just that. How educators can approach the issue of closing material loops, inspire critical thought and contribute to solutions is the subject of this presentation and I will offer up an example of how we have approached this in New Zealand. I expect there will be points that are relevant to those of you who are not university educators but are involved in trying to bring about change in the built environment professional community.
- The possibility that the built environment can become a closed loop of materials use where some new materials are made from resources traditionally considered to be wastes has been investigated by students at the School of Architecture VUW in a project called Closing the Loops. This hands on, biomimetic, systems thinking approach to an architectural education programme has become a framework for the essential education of future architecture professionals, but also a vehicle to raise the profile of the need to eliminate waste and reuse materials effectively in the greater built environment professional community in New Zealand, along with a successful way to showcase innovative potential solutions which can be very inspiring for people. (click) Essential the crux of the work is to turn this into this… In moving from a linear cradle to grave mentality to a more cyclic cradle to cradle approach as discussed, one way to do this is to utilise waste as the raw material source in the production of new building materials. This prevents use of more new materials and avoids the dumping of old ones.This idea is the focus of the students’ work in a project which has run in various forms since 1998. Students have been set the task of focusing on problem waste items as identified by local councils and waste minimisation organisations around the country and have focused on a single problem waste in others. Recently the idea of a biomimetic approach to the design process has been introduced into the project. I’ll get back to. Students are asked to find inventive and effective ways to use waste materials to produce new products. This project’s aim is two fold: reduce waste while addressing materials use in the built environment. There is another more subtle objective to the project too, which is to include and inspire the built environment professional community in Wellington and link waste minimisation and other environmental agendas with the built environment. This last point has worked very successfully to date. (click) The rest of the presentation will be in these two parts: the project itself and some of the really inspiration work that come out of it, and how this has served to involve the wider community. The assignment aims to foster resourcefulness rather than resource use in the thinking of course participants, raise awareness of the need to close the loops on material use in the built environment and the need for resource conservation and using materials effectively. This assignment also provides hands-on experience of designing, making, testing and refining viable materials / products.
- Before I get to the details of what they have to do, I wanted to point out that the project is set within a context of eco-effectiveness and looking to nature for inspiration. I am sure many of you will be familiar with these books by McDonough and Braungart and Benyus and the ideas in them, so I won’t go into them, but the key point is that students are encouraged to engage in a life cycle approach that is effective overall rather than simply efficient for one particular stage. They are encouraged to understand where things come from and where they go and to come up with ideas that might have another aspect of improving the sustainability of the built environment to them. They are encouraged to think about how an ecosystem works, particularly in the context of this project about how materials cycle in nature, that waste of one organism is often is used as food for another and to look for good examples of that that might be inspirational. An example is an ant community. As part of their daily activities they: safely and effectively handle their own material wastes and those of other species grow and harvest their own food while nurturing the ecosystem of which they are a part construct houses, farms, dumps, cemeteries, living quarters, and food-storage facilities from materials that can be truly recycled create disinfectants and medicines that are healthy, safe, and biodegradable maintain soil health for the entire planet. They are, as biologist E. O. Wilson has pointed out, the little things that run the world. So in this context, theses student designers expand their visions from the primary purpose of a product and consider the whole. What are its goals and potential effects, both immediate and wide-ranging, with respect to both time and place? What is the entire system, -cultural, commercial, ecological - of which this will be a part? Whole systems design analyzes every building system and integrates them so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Find setting the project in this context has worked well to inspire and enthuse. Gets students to start designing in a lifecycle way rather than just thinking about it.
- The brief they are given it to turn a waste into a new and usable product. The built environment has to be in there somewhere, so for example they can: Utilise building material waste to make another building material / product, Utilise building material waste to make a non-building product or Utilise a non-building material waste to make a building material/product. Typically they are given a list of ‘problem waste’ that we identified from the earlier report I talked about. I also organize meetings with the ministry fro the environment and NGO groups each year to identify any new problem waste that have been identified, so they can input into the brief design for the project. Usually: Plasterboard (gib) Timber waste / offcuts Composite wood product waste (MDF, chip board etc) Hard plastic (1, 2 and 5) Soft plastic – ‘Cling Film’ (4) Polystyrene Tyres / rubber waste Paper / cardboard Have tried it with one single material too, plasterboard which created more innovation in the single material, but less scope for the individual student. They must research a material they choose to find out about its typical life cycle and come up with ideas for it to be kept in the loop so to speak and out of landfill. There is a field trip they go on to look at ‘trash palace’ an eco designed recycling centre and have a series of guest talks from local architects and the countries most eccentric inventor I am sure who has made an entire polystyrene recycling plant from old washing machines and wool shed machinery (we have a lot of in our part of the world). They then gather the materials they need and get experimenting. It is a very hands on project which students respond to well. Quite a messy and fun part, where they try to be as innovative and outside the box as possible. Not all of the students who do this project are actually architecture students but come from as far a filed as politics, development studies, environmental studies, geography and biology. Student are encouraged to test the properties of their materials and consider whole lifecycle of the new product as how it interacts with existing industry. Tutors are local high profile architects with a reputation for sustainable designs. They give an interim presentation three weeks before hand in where guests are called in who are expert in a variety of areas. Typically this group might include local architects, senior academic staff and PhD students, ministry for the environment staff, local council waste minimisation officers, and representatives from non governmental organisations focused on waste minimisation, even industry representatives. This gives them a chance to improve upon the work before exhibition. They are assessed on both process and product.: Process: The research, development and testing process will all be assessed both from the report and the tutor's knowledge of the evolution of the project. Product: The final product will be assessed for its potential for resource conservation its refinement and its suitability for its designated purpose. The degree of difficulty of the programme undertaken and the ingenuity and inventiveness displayed in addressing the programme will be taken into account.
- The work - Look at some specific examples… Rebekah Nancekivell, an architecture student, won the overall prize 2005. She designed a series of planters for seedlings made from a mixture of earth, compost and crushed gypsum waste. They are to be planted directly into the ground where they then biodegrade. Because of gypsum’s unique ability to assist in the breakdown of clay bound soils, these planters not only find a novel use for waste but allow for soil enrichment and provide an environment where plants can take root in the compost rich planters as they decompose in the more hostile local clay soils.
- Another plasterboard product… James Dinsdale, an industrial design student, also took the soil enhancing benefits of gypsum into account when he designed ‘Eco Bin’ a compost bin system made from crushed gypsum waste sandwiched between layers of fabric. The idea behind the product was that people would buy packs of the gypsum encrusted fabric, form them into any shape they needed and then wet the fabric down whereby it would harden into usable bins. The gypsum bins enrich the compost as they start to decompose. This flexible, ‘wet to harden’ system was thought to have great potential as easily transportable and buildable shelters in disaster relief operations. James won one of the Winstone Wallboard prizes.
- Following two will be explained by the students themselves…. Katrina Tamaira, a development studies student won the overall prize for 2006 for her plastic corrugated roof sheet made from combining layers of problematic packing cling film / shrink wrap waste. The finished prototype behaved in a manner similar to new plastic roofing sheets with increased light diffusion properties. The potential of the product to utilise photodegradation was also explored to minimise eventual waste to landfill.
- Charlotte Hoare ‘Polywrap has been developed to provide an adaptable and efficient lagging system that will reduce energy consumption associated with heating water. Made from of waste polystyrene and ‘Cling Film,’ Polywrap is a viably sustainable material which addresses New Zealand’s waste problems. With excellent insulating ability Polywrap retains internal temperatures within water pipes keeping them up to 15˚c warmer, as well as preventing them from freezing and cracking during winter months’.
- Matthew Webby designed a high-value product emphasising the decorative aspects of jointing in laminated MDF board off-cuts. This avoids the traditional covering up of MDF with finishes such as paint and prevents MDf off-cuts going to landfill where the chemical make up of the glues tends to be problematic.
- Wang Yi – another kind of thermal blind – reflects heat into r out of room as required. Simple idea – needed more refinement
- Caleb Sillars designed a product reducing the amount of time a polystyrene cup needs to biodegrade by employing the degrading effect of NZ’s harsh UV light, in a aesthetically pleasing and useful way. The thermal blind uses the insulating characteristics of polystyrene cups and has been designed to be reversible, in order to expose cups to the maximum amount of sunlight possible. The blind is able to concertina open and closed by using the stacking capability of the cups.
- Robert Alexander designed a highly mouldable material from recycled rubber and polystyrene. Such a material could be used to provide insulation to hot water pipes. The potential of the material as a shock absorbing flooring material was also explored.
- Karina Madsen, an environmental science student, also won a Winstone Wallboard Prize. Her idea was to take waste plaster board off cuts and make laminated bricks. These form interior wall or ceiling systems that have good acoustic properties and high thermal mass (they are able to store the heat of the sun and re-radiate it). She also experimented with the absorptive qualities of gypsum to soak up colour from natural dyes. The resource conservation potential of this simple solution was thought to be extensive, as sorting of off cuts and reprocessing of the waste is minimized.
- Charlotte Bowie, an industrial design student, was the recipient of the WasteMINZ best report prize where she thoroughly documented her project looking into the addition of waste plaster board to adobe earth bricks to increase their strength.
- Kate Williams - Plastic bags were woven and tightened over a timber frame to make a versatile shading screen. Proposed uses included use as an exterior shading eave over windows or as self supporting shade structures over picnic or play areas. The system was designed to be easily demountable using only an allen key, so bag weave can be replaced. The bags last for approximately one year and get a head start their long decomposition process by being exposed to the sun’s UV light breaking down faster than if buried in a landfill.
- Successes: Hands on Involvement Research component Suits the range of backgrounds of students and is a change for them to become a really enthusiastic and cooperative class. Some materials out of landfill Publicity Sponsorship Onward progress. (Crystal? – Patent in the states?) Difficulties: Finding materials, technical problems, coming up with ideas Biomimicry is itself much wider than looking at how waste is cycled in ecosystems. Find it is difficult for students to engage on a more specific level, but in general terms this was the easiest aspect for students to look into and mimic. One student did design a project (bacteria glowing for earthquake stress). Easiest for students to take ecosystem principle to mimic rather than specific organisms which is how they are directed now.
- So already we have heard that many people in the community have already been part of the project, local architects, academics, grass roots recyclers, waste minimisation organisations, local and national government. Involves: Input into the brief as we have heard by government and NGOs. Guest talks from a variety of people and groups. Guest critic of project work from people with different backgrounds.
- Idea to provide prizes and open up the course and the project to the community was put forward a few years ago. The sponsors differ from year to year…. And usually we have a number of offers. Sponsorship of prizes Judging for prizes Direct sponsorship of the exhibition opening night Such as Zero Waste Trust NZ, which has over half of local councils committed to a policy of zero waste by 2020. Is an international movement but NZ is actually a world leader in this respect – the newly formed international office in in NZ too. Zero Waste Trust NZ ‘s role is to promote the idea, to support councils, groups and business in transition. They network to keep people and groups informed and cooperate with the government in waste issues
- In a similar way wasteMINZ an Ngo involved in education, project work and and publication of waste related research have sponsored prizes and been part of the critic and judging process. Even publishing of articles - get to.
- The work has been published in various publications as well – mostly in sponsors materials and VUW materials. This leads to enquires long after the exhibition ends and spreads the message even further.
- Other involvement has come in the form of: Sponsorship of scholarships which has enabled students to take work further, Sponsorship of website development Hosting of exhibition if it travels
- Even been approached by industry wanting to participate through sponsoring prizes and interaction between students and their people focused on waste minimisation. talking to students. Also approached now….
- Finally, and probably most importantly, people are invited to engage in the project through the exhibition. The opening night is usually a large and boisterous occasion with upward of several hundread guests invited from the local community involve in the built environment. It’s a change to both see the work and importantly to encourage dialogue and networking to normalise the idea of waste minimisation, reuse, deconstruction and related areas in the built environment, while offering up inspirational and usually very clever ideas for exactly how to do that.
- Our opening night celebrity… Opening the exhibition is usually left to a high profile person – last year it was the minister for building issues and the year before it was the minister for the environment. In the past mayors and other politicians have attended.
- The night itself receives media attention, and the prize giving is usually the climax of the night where everyone, while ding on the organic fare find out the winners of generous prizes.
- Many frequent the exhibition while it is on and in recent years the exhibition has travelled to other venues and been displayed in conferences in order to reach a wider audience as well. We use the networks we have built up through the process of doing this project to advertise and utilise further opportunities. Part of a website was funded by a local council to get the work up online, and we even made it to national television last year. I’ll leave the students to talk about their work –they are a bit inarticulate but they get there in the end.
- Last slide – questions etc. How it affects change… SOAD community VUW community Wellington community NZ community Victoria University would like to thank Porirua City Council for funding used to initially collate and develop the website content. We would also like to thank WasteMINZ, Zero Waste Trust New Zealand and Winstone Wallboards for their generous support and assistance in this project. We also acknowledge the help of Poly Palace and The Ministry for the Environment. Positive message, with practical solutions.