Successfully reported this slideshow.

SMART Seminar - Envisioning Low Carbon Cities: Challenges and Opportunities

766 views

Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

SMART Seminar - Envisioning Low Carbon Cities: Challenges and Opportunities

  1. 1. Envi si oni ng Low Car bon Ci t i es: chal l enges and oppor t uni t i es Prof es s or Deo Pras ad,CEO: Co- operat i ve R earc h Cent re f or Low Carbon Li vi ng es Program D rec t or: Sus t ai nabl e D i evel opm , B ent E, UN SW
  2. 2. M k i n g c i t i e s b e t t e r o r ma k i n g b e t t e r c i t i e s : a - b u i l d i n g a n d p r e c i n c t a t a t i me – e n g a g i n gc o mmu n i t i e s i n t hi s c ha l l e n g e ma y b e t he k e ye na bl e r .Cont ent• Background• Materials, technologies and system integration• Whole building scale issues• Precinct to urban scale issues• Community scale issues• Policies and Tools• Co-operative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living: underpinning innovations in the built environment
  3. 3. Backgr ound: Dr i ver s and Response• Emerging concerns and responses – Oil prices and energy conservation (1970’s) – Environment and sustainability (1980=>) – Climate change (2000’s =>) o Mitigation challenges o Adaptation challenges (resilience) – Low Carbon (2010 =>) – Affordability, efficiency and productivity
  4. 4. Climate Change
  5. 5. Ci t y Pr obl em Ci t i es ar e t he gr owt h s: engi nes f or t hei r nat i onal econom esiMegatrends imply significant challenges for city decision makers Megatrends Sustainable Urban Development Globalization & Urbanization  Cities are competing globally  Global players / trade volume increase to make their urban areas  2030: 60% of population in cities attractive to live and to invest in  High density living demands for new patterns in infrastructure Compe- titiveness Demographic Change  65+ generation will nearly double Gover- by 2030 (from 7% to 12%) nance Environ- Quality  Need for adequate infrastructures ment of Life as well as health- and elder care  Challenge to balance between Climate Change competitiveness, environment and  Cities responsible for ~80% GHG quality of life, and to finance  Need for resource efficiency infrastructure solutions and environmental care  Achieve committed CO2 targets  What is feasible in terms of proven technology, and for what cost and RoI? |
  6. 6. Mega Issue -Urbanization • Asia will have an urban level of 54% by 2030 • 40 % of the poor are already in urban areas • The urban transition will receive a massive investment over the next 50 years • Infrastructure last for 80 –100 years • Ensure “zero emission”in housing and mobility 54% Source: World Population Prospects 3000 (2.6 billion) 2500 37% 2000 (1.4 billion) 1500 1000 24% 500i t a upoP na br U 0 1975 2000 2030 l
  7. 7. ..Urban transformation .
  8. 8. EcosystemsBuilt environments are parts of functioning ecosystems; Many endangered species of plants and animals can be found in urban areas; Improving the health of ecosystems in urban areas during building development can enhance services such as stormwater retention and treatment and improve environmental quality. Forest loss is increasing  Global construction consumes 875 million cubic meters of timber per year (Roodman& Lenssen, 1995). “The share of bird, mammal, and fish species that are now in danger of extinction is in double digits  11 percent of all bird species, 25 percent of mammals, and 34 percent of fish”. (World Watch, 2001)• ‘By the turn of the century it may be more economic to mine for building materials in the cities than outback’• Challenge is not just conservation but achieving optimal balance recreating amenity where needed (Positive Development)
  9. 9. Australia Building Sector EmissionProjection
  10. 10. GHG reduction model for commercial office buildings in AustraliaSource: Modelling building stock energy use and carbon emission scenarios. Greg Foliente and Seongwon Seo EcosystemSciences, CSIRO, Highett, Australia 2012
  11. 11. (World Business Council for Sustainable Development)
  12. 12. P er of One ow 15
  13. 13. Cool Roof s, Gr een Roof s ……Art Rosenfeld – also applied himself to urban cooling:•Raising the albedo of urban surfaces and increasing urban vegetation are easyways to conserve energy, save money and probably to reduce air pollution.Experiments have shown 20--40% direct energy savings by increasing thealbedo of a single building, and computer simulation indicates that the indirecteffects of wide-scale albedo changes will nearly double the direct savings.•At its maximum potential, a vigorous cool surfaces and shade trees programcould save annually $10 billion in energy and equipment costs, and eliminate27 million metric tons of CO2 emissions (California case study).
  14. 14. Energy generation onsite: Semi transparent PV Translucent BiPV . ECN building
  15. 15. BiPV for Korean Apartments Drawing on UNSW modelling work and Yonsei University understanding of high rise buildings and sustainable solutions
  16. 16. Australian showcase projects in major cities . High Rise BRISBANE 60 kWp . Kogarah SYDNEY . 160 kWp . Original 629kWp QV Markets MELBOURNE 190 kWp Olympic Village SYDNEY Additional 72kWp Melbourne University 190 kWp
  17. 17. Sol ar Kogar ah ( AJC)Kogarah SYDNEY 160 kWp . . . .
  18. 18. ‘D i esgni ng w t h Sol ar P er’ i ow – Im ages Publ i c at i on/Eart hSc an (Pras ad/Snow )
  19. 19. BI PV Roof Syst ems • .
  20. 20. PV as part of Building function 221kWp of blessed Vatican PV
  21. 21. Building integrated concepts for façades 13 kWp PV at Vocational School Tyrol, Austria
  22. 22. Micro wind
  23. 23. Gl obal exam es - Japan pl Ota, Gunma, Japan - over 500 houses totalling 2,16 MWp
  24. 24. Gl obal exam es - pl Net her l ands BIPV application : Roof Building name: Housing Area of Amsterfoot Location: Netherlands, Amsterfoot Building type: Residential Completion: 1999 Type of PV : Polycrystalline Quantity: 1323 kWp on 500 houses 900 solar hot water systems 80% houses face SW-SE arc
  25. 25. Achievable levels of PV power contributions to electricity consumption, using building surfaces with more than 80% of maximum output . . . .
  26. 26. P i s grow ng f as t and get t i ng V ic heaper
  27. 27. Next Generation integrated products 3 section façade: 1/3 Upper section with semitransparent PV 1/3 Middle viewing section with blind 1/3 Bottom opaque section below workplane Base case – electric Single office Ridge cap covers wires wire from solar panels goes to mechanical room 1 solar photovoltaic panel Develop concepts and shingles (to inverter) metal roof 3/4 in cavity, tyvek plywood design methodology 1 in spray insulation or polystyrene between studs for façade with PV Hot air 6 x 16 in duct 1
  28. 28. Chal l enges f or Net - zer o andLow- ener gy hom es/ bui l di ngs • Integration of solar technologies with the architecture and with the envelope. • Integration and optimization of solar with energy efficiency technologies – must not be separate. • Thermal storage and passive solar design – what are the obstacles; need to integrate in standards • And building resilience in future building stocks…..
  29. 29. Sm t ci t y- sm t gr i d… … … . … ar ar ……. .
  30. 30. W e B l di ng… … … hol ui …… Life Cycle Cost of a Commercial Building CABE, The impact of office design on business performance. 2004, The Commission for Architecture $ the Built Environment: London. | 33 |
  31. 31. • Client - Brookfield Multiplex • Location - 1 Shelley Street - King Street Wharf, Sydney• One Shelley Street NSW • Architect - Fitzpatrick & Partners (Base Building) Woods Bagot and Clive Wilkinson Architects (Fitout) • Project Value - AUD $390M (Base Building and Fitout) • Completion Date - April 2009 • NLA: 33,500 m2 • GFA: Over 75,000m2 GFA (35,000 above ground & 40,000 below) • Grade: PCA A Grade Office Space +
  32. 32. • Green features • Fresh air and cooling are combined in one efficient system • A passive chilled beam HVAC system to create energy efficient space cooling through decreased fan power and air quantity • Harbour heat rejection technology reduces water consumption through the elimination of cooling towers and no base building water demand other then the sanitary features • Dual pipe work has been incorporated into the building for future water recycling technologies.
  33. 33. Measuring Success – Traditional Measures1. Significant environmental benefits:  Water savings of 50% + against typical A Grade buildings  Energy savings of 55% against typical A Grade buildings  Paper savings of 36% against typical A Grade buildings  6 Star Green Star rated1. Flexible working – ABW has increased space utilisation, enabled physical changes to happen instantaneously.2. International attention – 3m + website hits, more than 20 industry awards, key publications including Frame and InDesign3. An ongoing study by UTS and UNSW to measure the success of the investment in the building. Why do a Study? “to better understand the relationships between green building, indoor environmental quality, occupant perception and satisfaction with the workplace.”
  34. 34. Indoor Environment Quality Detail – “IEQ”Summary of Parameters Temperature, noise and illumination Humidity VOC Formaldehyde CO Spatial CO2 Particulate Air movement
  35. 35. Aver age concent r at i on of VOC and i ncompar i son t he st andar d gui del i ne
  36. 36. Building use studies (continued) FormaldehydeNote: Formaldehyde was not detected in any sample at One Shelley Street – Guidelines shown in the graph NHMRC recommendation for formaldehyde(120 microgram/cubic meter) WHO recommendation for formaldehyde(60 microgram/cubic meter)
  37. 37. Satisfaction Index for Group 1 Gr oup 1 © BUS M hodol ogy et Post - occupancy 2011Source: Evaluation of occupants’ experience at Macquarie BankTenancies on behalf of Brookfield Multiplex and Macquarie. A study byLeena Thomas, UTS, 2009-2011
  38. 38. Comfort Index for Group 1 Gr oup 1 © BUS M hodol ogy et Post - occupancy 2011Source: Evaluation of occupants’ experience at Macquarie BankTenancies on behalf of Brookfield Multiplex and Macquarie. A study byLeena Thomas, UTS, 2009-2011
  39. 39. Conclusion A successful team collaboration resulting in an iconic, flexible, innovative, high performance space that enabled people a better work experience. A building designed from the inside out. Commitment to evidence based research to quantify high performance value across the triple bottom line. The most significant study undertaken in Australia and among the top internationally as a result of its long-term nature and scale of participants. A step to create better understanding of the relationship between high performance building, indoor environment quality, occupant perception and satisfaction with the workplace and worker productivity and health.
  40. 40. Si ngapor eZEB• S$10 million spent to retrofit of an existing facility to incorporate some of the latest energy-efficient inventions• The building is able to generate as much electricity as it consumes through renewable energy. This works out to a net energy consumption of zero over a typical year• The solar panels which constitute about 15% of the building cost• 60 percent of utility bills usually goes into air- conditioning. Sensors will detect the presence of users and will direct fresh air to their breathing zones. Recycled air will be used for ambient cooling
  41. 41. CASE STUDY: CANADACentre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS),University of British Columbia (UBC)• Four storey 60,000 sq ft facility• North America’s greenest building• Net positive on energy• Water self-sufficient• 100% access to daylight• Interactive ‘Living Laboratory’• LEED Platinum rating• Aims to create ‘Net Positive’ environmental impact• Aims to achieve ‘The Living Building Challenge’ certification
  42. 42. CASE STUDY: AUSTRALIATyree Energy Technologies Building, University of NewSouth Wales• Opened in January 2012• Key design features contributing to the Green Building Council of Australia 6 Star rating include:• Use of fly ash in concrete;• Installation of trigeneration and a large roof mounted photovoltaic array;• Substitution of borewater for non- potable uses together with rainwater capture and reuse;• Underground thermal labyrinths for pretreatment of incoming air; and• Desiccant dehumidification
  43. 43. UNSW TYREE EN GY TECH OLOGY ER NBUILD G - 150 kW P AR AY IN p V R
  44. 44. CASE STUDY: INDIATERI University• Passive solar design for natural light, ventilation & solar protection• Well insulated building fabric with high performance glazing• Rainwater harvesting and grey water recycling and reuse• Innovative technologies for cooling: Earth Air Tunnel, Variable Refrigerant Volume System, Thermal Mass Storage• 40% reduction in energy and 25% reduction in water compared to a conventional development
  45. 45. CASE STUDY: USAHar var d Uni ver si t y• Committed to reducing GHG emission by 30% from 2006 levels by 2016• 40 LEED certified university buildings• 16% of energy comes from a number of renewable energy sources• 55% campus waste diversion and 100% composting of landscape waste• 35-70% local food produce to students• LEED certification for existing buildings (operation & maintenance)• Harvard Office for Sustainability leverages collective knowledge on campus and oversees numerous sustainability initiatives
  46. 46. Need t o val i dat e progres s …. source: http://www.sydney2030.com.au/vision-in-2030/resources
  47. 47. 12,565 properties Energy use varies widelythroughout New York City within the same categoryare covered by the of building type, indicatingGreener, Greater Building the potential to achievePlan. relatively large savings.Source: New York City Local Law84 Benchmarking Report •Recent mandatory discloserAUGUST 2012 of energy in all buildings. •If all large buildings could improve to the 75th percentile, the theoretical savings potential grows to roughly 31% for energy and 33% for GHG emissions.
  48. 48. Eco Ci t y Devel opment - Masdar Ci t y– Project information: • Masdar City locates in Abu Dhabi with a planned area of 6.4 km2 and will be home to 45,000 to 50,000 people and 1,500 businesses, primarily commercial and manufacturing facilities specializing in environmentally friendly products. • The whole project will cost 22 billions USD.– Current status: • The project was Initiated in 2006 and construction began in 2008. • It was planned to complete the whole city through six phases. • Due to the impact of the financial crisis, Phase 1 of the city, the initial 1,000,000 square meters, will be completed in 2015. Final completion is scheduled to occur between 2020 and 2025.– Vision: Zero waste, Zero Car, Zero Carbon– Measures: • Automobiles will be banned within the city; travel will be accomplished via public mass transit and personal rapid transit systems. • Renewable sources (solar, wind and geothermal) will provide power for not only operating the city but also building the city. • The reuse of runoff and rainwater
  49. 49. Si no- Si ngapor e Ti anj i n Eco Ci t y ( SSTEC) Thel at est eco ci t y m odel i n Chi naProject Origin: • Tianjin Eco City is a inter-government direct cooperation project between China and Singapore • It has enables gained momentum from strong political commitment, while benefiting from Singapore’s extensive knowledge and experience in integrated urban planning and water resource managementProject Vision: SSTEC is envisioned as an “economicallysustainable, socially harmonious, environmentally friendly and resource-conserving” city which will become a “model eco and low carbon cityreplicable by other cities in China.”Scale and Timeline: By 2020, SSTEC is projected to house 350,000 permanent and 60,000temporary residents on 34.2 km2.This city will be developed in three phases between 2008 and 2020.Phase I is being implemented over 2008-2010, and will cover a start-uparea of 4 km2 and involve a projected population of 85,000.Phase II (2011-2015) and Phase III (2016-2020) will each beimplemented over 5 years. By 2020, the city will be fully developed. Thestart-up area has been completed and the Phase II currently is beingimplemented
  50. 50. Rai si ng m ni m i um per f or mance bar : EUNEW … S…• ‘European Parliament voted for ‘zero energy buildings…. Zero Energy Buildings is a key element in the renewed EU legislation on buildings. During the last plenary session the Parliament adopted new legal requirements for Europe’s buildings and their energy performance• From 2016 all new buildings in the EU will have to produce more renewable energy onsite for example by solar panels than they consume, the Parliament decided by recasting the Energy Performance Buildings Directive of 2002.• These zero energy buildings will include energy efficient buildings whose overall annual primary energy consumption is equal to or less than the energy production from renewable sources on site. By 2015 national targets will be set to fix minimum percentages of existing buildings to be zero energy’
  51. 51. Assessm . ent Tool s and t hei r useBREEAM LEED GBTOOL NABERS GREEN STARManagement Sustainable Sites Resource Energy use and Management consumption GHG emissionsHealth and comfort Water Efficiency Environmental Water use IEQ LoadingsEnergy Energy and IEQ Storm water Energy Atmosphere runoffTransport Materials and Quality of Storm water Transport Resources service pollutionWater Indoor Environmental Economics Sewage outfall Water Quality volumeMaterials Pre-operations Transport MaterialsLand use Community Landscape Land Use and Transportation diversity EcologySite Ecology Toxic materials EmissionsPollution Waste Innovation Indoor air quality Occupant satisfaction
  52. 52. Identifying emission source at metropolitan scale—red areas show higher ownership of cars per capita and hence higher carbon emissions
  53. 53. POLICY Building Codes Research Incentives methodologies Tradeable certificates Regulation Disclosure Measuring cultural capital Star Ratings Product diffusion modelling Social network (agentCOMMUNITY based) modelling Liveability Deliberative democracy Affordability Crowd sourcing Health Amenity Belonging
  54. 54. Innovations for a Sustainable Australian Built Environment
  55. 55. “ Zero carbon buildings Carbon neutral precincts Engaged communities Advanced manufacturing Affordable solutions Major economic impact “ End users across industry World class research team Pathways to utilisation
  56. 56. Recent Government reportsinclude: National Strategy for Energy Efficiency PM’s Task Group on Energy Efficiency Built Environment Industry Innovation Council Recommendations Our Cities, Our Future Challenges at Energy-Water-Carbon Intersections Productivity in the Buildings Network: Assessing the Impacts of Building Information Models CRC for Low Carbon Living responding to a major challenge
  57. 57. “ Links between low carbon research and industry have been piecemeal No strategic pathways, nor appetite for adoption of low carbon livingThe CRC will deliver: → A new breadth and depth of partnerships motivated to adopt low carbon living → An integrated and multi-disciplinary “ approach → The catalyst for driving change CRC funding will ignite this industry transformation
  58. 58. Government Manufacturing Development ProfessionalsEvidence base for Incubating next Enabling world Tools for~$1billion/yr generation multi- class low carbon Australia’sinvestment in purpose building property building designgovernment products development services industryprograms
  59. 59.  Integrated Building Systems • Integrated solar technologies for buildings • Low carbon materials • Integrated design, showcase, ratings and standards Low Carbon Precincts • Digital information platform • Integrated assessment of design • Precinct level demand forecasting for distributed infrastructure networks • Health and productivity co-benefits Engaged Communities • Transition scenarios and affordability • Drivers and barriers to community engagement • Living laboratories • Education and capacity building
  60. 60. LIVING LABORATORIES Property developments → Trialling new infrastructure solutions and technologies Community groups → Trialling behaviour change, social engagement programs Making it real → Research by doing → Program delivery & cost by partner → Ongoing metering and survey work by CRC First step to widespread adoption
  61. 61.  Community education → Living Laboratories Tertiary education → TAFE partnerships → University Professional Development → Peak bodies and professional institutes Doctoral research → 88 PhDs – identification process already begun → Competitive stipends to attract best → CRC students to work with industry and other research institutions → CRC students to undertake Graduate Certificate in Research Management
  62. 62. PATHWAYS TO MARKET THROUGH A NETWORK OF END USERSMajor manufacturers with Major developers with the Large public utilities activelythe skills and infrastructure track record and ethos to seeking improvements into commercialise new implement findings across delivery of water andintegrated building systems all 3 research programs energy to the community National standards and Architecture and engineering Community to adopt low building code organisations SMEs to ensure early uptake carbon living through to facilitate adoption across the professions effective media and (new materials, systems (automated assessment tool, communication strategies and designs, PIM) co-benefits calculator)Industry peak bodies to Governments to ensure UN Environment Programensure dissemination effective policy and to facilitate regional uptake.across their thousands of program developmentmember companies
  63. 63. “ “
  64. 64.  CRC engages with many thousands of SMEs through industry bodies Two way communication: end user advice, vehicle for implementation Led by Professor Ken Maher – Gold Medal winning architect and Chair of Hassell Group
  65. 65. COMMERCIALIS NATIONAL LOW CARBON ED OUTPUTS CAPABILITY IMPACTS→ Integrated solar → Six networked Nodes of → Verified carbon building products Excellence built on reductions strong partnerships (annual auditing)→ Low carbon materials → Industry and professions: → Communities engaged in→ Tools and techniques up-skilled to lead high low carbon living for integrated design performance integrated and planning design and planning → Evidence base that underpins government→ Training and education → Leadership: Working policy and programs packages with UNEP to act as→ NewGen Apps for knowledge hub for Asia → Reduced barriers to enabling low carbon Pacific effective collaboration lifestyles. The impact of our integrated approach will distinguish this CRC
  66. 66. Conclusions •.•. The case for a low carbon future is evident – we now need to capture the innovations for Australian industry. • Need good evidence base to support design and planning innovations as well as policy. • Need to develop the next generation of tools, technologies, techniques for delivery of affordable and sustainable built environment • Need to build capacity for Australia to lead the low carbon future and underpin our professional capability to compete globally. • Need to foster a multi-disciplinary approach to dealing with built environment problems. Value add through effective integration can be significant. Social innovations are as much of an opportunity as technological and design innovations. • Need to mainstream this change
  67. 67. Creating sustainable futures` www . webaddress. com . au

×