Captain Planet

Aright people, you earned it, my senior year of high school Halloween costume....yes that's me in the middle with the red diaper...

Regional Credits for LEED 2009

One of the ongoing criticisms with LEED was that it was too standard and not regionalized. For example, you should get more credits for saving water in Phoenix than in NYC. LEED 2009 addresses this:

http://www.usgbcny.org/initiatives/leed-2009-bonus-credits.html

FYI, I wont be able to make the EGB event tonight because I am getting screwed at work yet again.

Obama and Coal

Interesting look from both sides....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7770979.stm

Why would anyone "overlook the geological blessing of coal?" It's American, indigenous, and plentiful at a time when energy independence is at a premium.

We all know how many of us would respond, but is it not a valid argument?

Another Good Place to Find Methane...

That's right, you guessed it...

"The trillions of farm animals around the world generate 18 percent of the emissions that are raising global temperatures, according to United Nations estimates, more even than from cars, buses and airplanes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/science/earth/04meat.html?_r=1&emc=eta1

Amazon

I couldn't really believe this when I saw it. Brazil is cutting deforestation by half 'in response to climate change' (couldn't possibly be in response to short term profit as this would be a significant short term loss). Some of the numbers here are pretty striking...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601130&sid=a9J6Yb8ybZZE&refer=environment

Bike Racks

One think NYC is in serious drought of is bike racks. I usually end up using a sign post, an awning post, or sometimes even a tree. A substantial addition of bike racks on every block would create less of a mess when multiple bikes need to be parked in the same area. On that note, I was interested to see a 'bike check' down at BLVD on the Bowery when I swung by there for a Tuesday night Green Drinks. Of course I noticed it AFTER I had already locked my bike up but oh well.

David Byrne, out of all the weird and cool things he's done, also has an enthusiasm for bike racks:

http://www.davidbyrne.com/art/bike_racks/index.php

Electric Cars

Here's an interesting snippet from Forbes about the return of the Volt and electric car...

http://video.forbes.com/fvn/fueldemand08/er_energy110508

And here's an article about a contract to build a bunch of electric charging stations in Cali...

http://www.forbes.com/technology/sciences/2008/11/20/electric-cars-agassi-tech-science-cx_wt_1120cars.html

I wanted to highlight this not only in response to Tim's post, but also because it highlites a crucial element from my presidential policy, which was making the switch away from combustion engines (even if the electric ones are powered indirectly from coal). The next step is upgrading the power grid and swapping to renewable electric generation.

Slowly but surely, my friends...

The American Home

One of the sessions I was able to attend at the GB conference was Kevin O'Conner (host of This Old House) along with Ted Benson (modular homes) and Steve Kieran (architect). The whole theme was the transformation of the American home through the 20th century, and the idea that the pendulum of consumption has swung to its extreme and has no direction to go but back towards normalcy. For example, in 1900, the number of homes in the US was 16mil, compared to 105mil in 2000, which is close to twice the percent increase of population during that time (75mil to 280mil). In addition, the median home size in 1900 was for 7 people (seven!) whereas in 2000 is was 2 people (currently, close to one quarter of all homes in the US are single person homes). We all know the average family size is currently 2.6 people, well, in the middle of the century it was 4.6 people. It's not that hard to grasp the drastic drop in family size, unless you compare it to the fact that average home size has more than doubled since the middle of the century (currently 2300sf). That suggests the average person has over 3 times as much space in their home than they did mid century (from 300sf to 1000sf). Bigger homes for less people.

It is this trend, the trend of excess consumption that has allowed the US to be the world leader in resource consumption and the world leader in emissions. Please do not get me wrong in my accusations, I am not scolding large dwellings in this setting (I'll save that for a different setting), but I am scolding the efficiency of our built environment. Ted Benson had a great quote which was:
"Economic bubbles and cheap energy deepen the ruts and make us stupid. That's what happened to many of us in the 80's and 90's. Energy was cheap, homes got big, people got silly. We built some beautiful homes in that era but they weren't the smartest. But recessions, like this one, and high energy costs jerk us on to new paths and create opportunities, because we get very creative."
The trick, which was mentioned in several forums, is to make the connection from the capital cost of building to the O&M cost that the building developer passes on to the future building owner. Developers need to be more conscience and responsible of the way their building will operate, and purchasers need to be more knowledgeable of what they are buying, and if it is built efficiently with properly sized HVAC systems and adequate insulation so that the price they are paying isn't skewed by the ongoing energy costs.
None of this is new and innovative, but merely an organized onservation from the past 110 years, and what we have become. Learning from history can sometimes give us good perspectives on what what causes our trends and what we have to focus on to fix them.

To view the presentation (unfortunately sans slides) go to: http://www.greenbuild365.org/GreenExpoVideoDetail.aspx?GreenExpoID=34

Greenbuild 365

Just a quick note that many of the master speakers from GreenBuild 2008 (including Majora Carter) were videotaped and you can watch their presentations here:

http://www.greenbuild365.org/pagemaker.aspx?PID=67

You can also see presentations from last year as well. GreenBuild 365 is also a good source for training in a variety of areas.

I wanted to share this because there were several people who had expressed interest in going to the conference but couldn't.

Cenocell

Cenocell is a great development in the use of SCMs (supplementary cementitious materials) to the effect of changing the S from "supplementary" to completely "substitutionary." Many currently used ready mixes already contain a good portion of ash or slag (both considered 100& post-industral recycled), but what is so spectacular about this Cenocell is not only is it 100% SCM, but that it doesn't require aggregates, which are the primary source of compressive strength in typical mixes (I'm sure they would still use steel reinforcement for tensile strength). 7000psi is definitely a high strength mix (although certain large applications require much higher).
The price ($50/yd) actually isn't that outrageous, and I'm sure it will come down after time, but the only catch is it needs to be heated to cure. That means all members have to either be precast when brought to site, or there must be some sort of large oven machine on site. Keep in mind the need to 'bake' it increases the embodied energy (however it's quite possible the net embodied energy is less).
Only other concern would be in regard to leachate, since fly ash contains metals that could leach hazardous materials if coming into contact with acids.
Regardless, this could be really big, the fact that there is a 'renewable resource' that is so light and strong by itself. Thanks Doyoyo (cool name, too).

LEED ND

One of the biggest criticisms of the USGBC and specifically LEED was that for a while it focused too much on a small scale and neglected principles of regional strategies and sustainable planning. However it recently developed LEED for Neighborhood Development and as of today, the 2009 draft version is open for public comment. See below.

----------

LEED for Neighborhood Development 2009 Open for Public Comment

USGBC is pleased to invite the public to comment on the LEED for Neighborhood Development Rating System, which integrates the principles of smart growth, new urbanism and green building into the first national system for neighborhood design. The program is a collaborative effort between USGBC, the Congress for the New Urbanism, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

This rating system is built upon the LEED for Neighborhood Development Pilot Rating System, which nearly 240 projects have been using since July 2007 as part of a successful pilot program. Eighteen projects have been certified. Their invaluable feedback, combined with countless hours of USGBC volunteer time, has produced a more sophisticated, market-responsive rating system. 

Any member of the public may submit comments. To view the rating system draft and comment, please go the LEED Rating System Drafts webpage. The public comment period will be open from November 17th through January 5, 2009 at 11:59 PST.

For more information about the LEED for Neighborhood Development program please visit our website

http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=148

Masdar

http://www.24dash.com/news/Housing/2008-11-17-Team-behind-worlds-first-zero-carbon-zero-waste-city-to-visit-UK

I would imagine there would be some concern over the one of the Es (equity) as I'm sure it would cost a pretty penny to live in this place once it's built (merely because of the prestige). Also with the current financial mess, are foreign investors that unaffected that they are still willing to invest?

Shrooms

I gotta give Damon props for opening my eyes to TED.org (it's all I've done the past 3 nights). This one blew my mind. This guy uses mushrooms to sequester CO2, biodegrade oil spills and provide energy. Be careful, he talks really fast, but I present to you...Paul Stamets:

http://ted.org/index.php/talks/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world.html

Sky Wind

How about a wind farm in the sky? That's where the big winds are. Check this out...

http://www.skywindpower.com/ww/index.htm

Any skepticism you have is probably valid. I asked a friend of mine who works at a global wind-power company and he said it's pretty far from being 'viable.' There are a lot of safety implications as you can imagine. Maintenance is also considerably more difficult. However once it goes it has great potential.

Bailout = Loan

Remember, the potential GM bailout is actually a loan, not a handout. Yes, it's coming from our tax dollars, but with the understanding that it will be paid back over time. Now for this to actually happen the payback structure would have to be so tightly engineered that the company would be able to handle the ongoing future payments and still stay afloat. A major restructuring of the company will be needed anyway from preventing it from tanking, which means many will lose their jobs regardless (not nearly as many as if it tanked tho). If GM goes bankrupt AFTER the bailout, then we are doubly screwed. That being said it's all or nothing here...

Fresh Kills

Most of you are probably aware of the enormous Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island (which used to take all of NYC's waste back in the middle of the century). In recent years, there have been grand plans to transform the area into a park while creating roads, recreation areas, landfill mitigation (and energy harvesting) and the possibility for renewable energy (AKA wind turbines). That part everybody knows (a dumb Philadelphian like myself just discovered this after I moved to NYC, shortly after I found out Staten Island was actually part of NYC and not Jersey)

Now I know there was a large push from both the public and local reps for providing wind energy on the site (from various articles), and but when the DGEIS (draft generic environmental impact statement) came out in May and then the Public Hearing occured in September, wind power was basically ruled out. Other than a few vague articles I found saying that people were upset, the issue pretty much died. They did mention landfill gas reclamation for energy, but no wind.

Now here we are looking at a real life example of a huge capital project that could become a symbol for minimizing dependance on coal (small but something) and give the public what they are asking for (unlike the Puerto Rico lecture where many were opposed) . I wouldn't be so concerned if it wasn't for the fact that the reasoning given in the EIS was so breif. I saw no potential site maps with wind load studies. You can see for yourself in the "renewable energy supply" of the energy section (pages 15-6 and 15-7)

http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_your_park/fresh_kills_park/pdf/VOLUME%20I/15_Energy.pdf

Many of the narrative talks of 'potential' but ended up not really being included in the master plan.

Now I am asking if anybody has heard anything in the past month or so regarding recent developments, if anything noteworthy came of the public hearing (can't find anything on the NYS Assembly website http://assembly.state.ny.us/Press/). I'm guessing it got pushed on the backburner after the financial mess.

The main reason why I am bringing this up, other than the fact that it is a great land use and environmental case study is that so many of us feel very strongly that pushing renewable energy is a priority. If we really want to make bold statements like "we should reduce our demand for oil" or "reduce greehouse gas emmission" then cases like these are the steps we need to take to get there. We need thousands of these steps to even come close to making a dent.

Now for all I know, this has already been adressed and for all I know it's already been thoroughly proven not feasible to put wind turbines on the island. My point is that I haven't seen the arguments. Have you?

Green Build

Now that we can all stop biting our fingernails over the election, can I get a current headcount of people attending GreenBuild '08 in Boston on Nov 19-21? Since I have a close friend who's on the planning committee, I have access to a lot of the 'extra-curricular' events and can easily reserve tickets for people if I know people are coming.

Again, this is an amazing networking tool for those of you in design, building, materials, etc. There will be hundreds of companies and thousands of people there. Some keynote speakers are social iconoclast Desmond Tutu and also Janine Benyus (author of Biomimicry). Barack Obama will also be there (just kidding). It will definately be an overwhelming source of insight and information, and you will probably meet a lot of great people. For anybody looking for a job, this is a good place to look (since it's in Boston, I'm sure a ton of companies from NYC will be there).

For students (any student, or under 25) the price is $225 for the entire expo (access to educations sessions and keynote speakers) or just $25/day if you just want to browse the exhibit hall trade show. See here on info on how to register:

http://www.greenbuildexpo.org/Register/

None of those costs include lodging. Anthony or other guys, if you want, honestly you can crash in my hotel room at no charge (may have to buy me a drink or something) since my company is putting me up (I have will have atleast one couch and plenty floor space). I can guarantee hotels/motels will be very hard to find because not only is this going on but another building expo (BuildBoston) is happening concurrently. Friends may be your best bet but if you really want to go but don't have a spot to crash, let me know, I may be able to help you find something.

If you go, please visit my company's booth (Lend Lease), just don't ask me anything too difficult.

Trash

Since I love talking about trash so much (I was considering being Oscar the Grouch for Halloween), let me add another perspective to a topic I brought up before that we discussed briefly. A report issue by the RCBC (recycling council of British Columbia), recently came to the conclusion that waste-to-energy efforts are not helping in achieving the end goal of reducing waste from landfills. This was discussed before when we were talking about such facilities fighting over waste. Why create a demand for waste?

http://www.rcbc.bc.ca/documents/resources/policypaper_101024_wteoption.pdf

One topic that I think deserves more focus is one mentioned in Cradel to Cradel (and reiterated by Annie Lonnox) which is the idea that everything (both product and packaging) should be designed specifically not only for durability but also deisgned specifically to be recycled. Most product unfortunately were not designed to be burned, which is the princible of waste-to-energy via combustion (either raw material or methane). This emits harmful toxins into the air and creates a demand for waste. Bad bad bad.

One thing I am trying to push at work is recyclable packaging. Certain things, like fancy kitchen cabinets, for example, are shipped with cardboard corner and edge protectors, then wrapped in plastic fiber bands, then wrapped in thick plastic shrink wrap. Certain things to focus on are reducing such plastics, and definately limiting styrofoams. I will keep you all posted with developments I observe to be relevant.

Piezometrics

Let me just comment in terms of the physics of dance floor energy. Since piezometrics is in essence using a cushion to harness energy from the source, when energy is absorbed from human contact with the floor, it takes more energy to maneuver. The same principle applies when trying to run in the sand as opposed to the asphalt (takes much more effort because the sand absorbs your mechanical energy). In this sense, breakdancers may not appreciate this technology as their moves require the maximum thrust off of a solid surface. I would imagine that walking from one end of a long room to another along a piezometric floor would leave somebody more winded than with a hard solid floor. On the other hand, this would make somebody burn more calories per distance walked, which could be a good thing as well.

I guess this still classifies as using a renewable source, even though it is indirectly powered by redbull & vodka, which I wish was renewable...

Crude Reality

I realize this viewpoint does not represent the majority of the class, but I bring it up not to be a devil advocate but because I think it holds some weight and atleast deserves discussion. Plus the better you understand it, the better you can argue against it (which I obviously welcome).

I would like to follow up my comments about energy independence as it relates to alleviating geo-political tensions and promoting local economy. Let me quickly summarize my point that within the next 50 years or so, as we make the transition to a majority of renewable resources, as we are weaning ourselves off fossil fuels (but still using them nonetheless), the resources we do use should be our own (or atleast a bigger portion than as of current). I would encourage you all to browse the EIA, as there is a buttload of relevant info. Let me direct you to three charts in particular relating to crude oil:

The amount of crude oil we import, by country:
"http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_a.htm"

The amount of crude oil USA produces:
"http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbbl_a.htm"

The amount of crude oil USA currently has in reserves:
"http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_pres_a_EPC0_R01_mmbbl_a.htm"
"http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/rcrr01nus_1a.htm"

As a summary, we annually import about a 5 billion barrels, we produce 2 billion, hence we use 7 billion. We currently have 20 billion in reserves that fluctuates as we use some and find more (but generally decreases since the 70s, see second chart from reserves). So if we use half a billion barrels more domestic crude annually than as of current (i.e. from Alaska), that would be enough to offset all of Saudi Arabia, which is the biggest single country source after Canada and Mexico. Yes, that will deplete our reserve faster, but again, this is in terms of keeping us domestic during our transition period.

Now, comment away!....