-------------------------------
Now in my fourth year as owner of a photovoltaic array, I've noticed this year is the brightest to date.
And, not by just a little bit.
As of June 30, 2009 had generated 56% of my annual estimate, versus the second highest year [2006] mid-year total of 51.3%.
Since a bright, sunny day equates to about 0.5% of my annual estimate, that means 2009 is now over 9 bright sunny days ahead of 2006.
Both 2007 and 2008 were less bright, and equated to about 9 sunny days behind 2006, and 18 sunny days behind this year.
A comparison of year-end totals might be more telling, but it's too early to know what 2009 will produce.
But, looking at 2006 versus 2007 and 2008 is also instructive.
The year 2006 was about 14% ahead of both years.
What does all this mean?
Probably not much, except that it may be just as likely for 2009 to represent evidence of global warming, as for the years 2007 and 2008 to represent global cooling.
Better yet, normal variations between years are just that - normal.
But, that's just an educated guess, knowing how fickle the weather patterns can be around these parts.
-----------------------------------
I am glad that more PV solar arrays are being put into service every year.
Not long ago, I received an e-mail from friends in our old San Francisco neighborhood which advised that an organization known as OBOG [One Block Off the Grid] was soliciting interest in having PV arrays installed in the Bay area.
It seems if an aggregate of 100 mega-watts can be committed to, then special pricing and permitting can be obtained, thus saving substantial investment costs.
That is a creative solution which I hope succeeds.
More locally, this announcement appeared of a plan to construct a major PV power generation facility near Cle Elum in Kittitas County.
Now, that would be a breakthrough of major proportions!
------------------------------------
Showing posts with label LEED. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LEED. Show all posts
Friday, July 10, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
Triple Bottom Line: What Does TBL Mean?
---------------------------
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...But not an idea whose time has come..." - Victor Hugo
---------------------------
In Real Estate, the concept of a 'Triple net lease' is fairly common:
'A triple net lease (Net-Net-Net or NNN) is a lease agreement on a property where the tenant or lessee agrees to pay all real estate taxes, building insurance, and maintenance (the three 'Nets') on the property in addition to any normal fees that are expected under the agreement (rent, etc.).
In such a lease, the tenant or lessee is responsible for all costs associated with repairs or replacement of the structural building elements of the property.'
Why not extend this concept more widely?
For example, to our Waterfront?
----------------------------
Likewise, in economics, an externality or spillover of an economic transaction is an impact on a party that is not directly involved in the transaction.
In such a case, prices do not reflect the full costs or benefits in production or consumption of a product or service.
Why not also use this concept in trying to help estimate a full cost accounting approach to Waterfront Redevelopment?
Think that might mean a different mind-set for the Port of Bellingham?
----------------------------
This is where the TBL concept can be helpful, not just a idle talk and shallow promises, but as a purposeful strategy.
Here, I've paraphrased several points from Wikipedia:
The so-called triple bottom line ("TBL" or "3BL") refers to "people, planet, profit" and captures an expanded set of criteria for measuring success; not just counting economics, but also impacts on ecological and social values.
With the ratification of the United Nations and ICLEI* TBL standard for urban and community accounting in early 2007, this became the dominant approach to public sector full cost accounting.
In the private sector, a commitment to corporate social responsibility and ecological issues implies a commitment to some form of TBL reporting.
[• ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the 'International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives']
The concept of TBL demands that a company's responsibility be to stakeholders rather than shareholders, where "stakeholders" refers to anyone who is influenced, either directly or indirectly, by the actions of the firm.
According to the stakeholder theory, the business entity should be used as a vehicle for coordinating stakeholder interests, instead of just maximizing shareholder (owner) profit.
"People, planet and profit" succinctly describes the triple bottom lines and the goal of sustainability.
"People" (human capital) pertains to fair and beneficial business practices toward labour and the community and region in which a corporation conducts its business.
A triple bottom line enterprise seeks to benefit many constituencies, not exploit or endanger any group of them, but trying to actually quantify this different bottom line is relatively new, problematic and often subjective.
"Planet" (natural capital) refers to sustainable environmental practices.
A TBL endeavor reduces its ecological footprint by, among other things, carefully managing its consumption of energy and non-renewables and reducing manufacturing waste as well as rendering waste less toxic before disposing of it in a safe and legal manner. Literally, this implies a responsible "cradle to grave" approach.
"Profit" is the bottom line shared by all commerce within a sustainability framework, and the economic benefit enjoyed by the host society.
Not to be confused with the limited internal profit made by a company or organization, it is the lasting economic impact the organization has on its economic environment.
A true TBL approach can't be interpreted as traditional corporate accounting tempered with social and environmental impact reports
--------------.
The following business-based arguments support the concept of TBL:
• Reaching untapped market potential: TBL companies can find financially profitable niches which were missed when money alone was the driving factor. Examples include:
• Adding ecotourism or geotourism to an already rich tourism market such as the Dominican Republic
• Developing profitable methods to assist existing NGOs with their missions such as fundraising, reaching clients, or creating networking opportunities with multiple NGOs
• Providing products or services which benefit underserved populations and/or the environment which are also financially profitable.
• Adapting to new business sectors: Since many business opportunities are developing in the realm of social entrepreneurialism, businesses hoping to reach this expanding market must design themselves to be financially profitable, socially beneficial and ecologically sustainable or fail to compete with those companies who do design themselves as such.
• Fiscal policy of governments usually claims to be concerned with identifying social and natural deficits on a less formal basis. However, in a democracy at least, such choices may be guided more by ideology than by economics.
With the emergence of an externally consistent green economics and agreement on definitions of potentially contentious terms such as full-cost accounting, natural capital and social capital, the prospect of formal metrics for ecological and social loss or risk has grown less remote through the 1990s.
While many people agree with the importance of good social conditions and preservation of the environment, there are also many who disagree with the triple bottom line as the way to enhance these conditions.
Imagine that!
Some main arguments against TBL are:
• Division of labour is characteristic of rich societies and a major contributor to their wealth, leading to the view that organisations contribute most to the welfare of society in all respects when they focus on what they do best. .
• Effectiveness: It is observed that concern for social and environmental matters is rare in poor societies (a hungry person would rather eat the whale than photograph it).
Thus by unencumbered attention to business alone, Adam Smith's 'Invisible Hand' will ensure that business contributes most effectively to the improvement of all areas of society, social and environmental as well as economic.
• Nationalism: Some countries adopt a nationalistic approach with the view that they must look after their own citizens first. This view is not confined to one sector of society, having support from elements of business, labour unions, and politicians.
• Libertarian: As it is possible for a socially responsible person to sincerely believe that the triple bottom line is harmful to society, the libertarian view is that it would be arrogant to force them to support a mechanism for the improvement of society that may, or may not, be the best available.
• Inertia: The difficulty of achieving global agreement on simultaneous policy may render such measures at best advisory - and thus not enforceable.
• Application: According to Fred Robin's The Challenge of TBL: A Responsibility to Whom? one of the major weaknesses of the TBL framework is its ability to be applied in a monetary-based economic system. Because there is no single way in monetary terms to measure the benefits to the society and environment as there is with profit, it does not allow for businesses to sum across all three bottom lines.
Legislation permitting corporations to adopt a triple bottom line is reportedly under consideration in some jurisdictions, including Minnesota and Oregon.
Some businesses have voluntarily adopted a triple bottom line as part of their articles of incorporation or bylaws, and some have advocated for state laws creating a "Sustainable Corporation" that would grant triple bottom line businesses benefits such as tax breaks.
-------------------------
A few years ago, a group of about 75 community leaders assembled for the purpose of hearing about the new proposed LEED Standards for Neighborhoods from its author, a Seattle architect.
The presentation was very well received, building as it did on the more limited LEED standards for single buildings, and extending the sustainability concept to entire areas.
After the presentation, each table of attendees was given the assignment of rating Bellingham's Waterfront Redevelopment Project's potential for achieving the proposed new LEED* standard.
[The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), provides a suite of standards for environmentally sustainable construction.]
The results were nothing short of astonishing!
Every table saw that the Waterfront Redevelopment had the clear potential for meeting the highest LEED Standard - Platinum!
I don't know what happened to that finding, because it is hard to find it among the things the Port has said and done since then.
Briefly, the idea did reappear when the developer of Victoria, BC's 'Dockside Green' Project came to Bellingham to explain how that undertaking had been conceived.
Fortunately, it's first phases have now achieved the highest LEED standards yet seen anywhere - 63 out of a possible 70 points!
Again, nothing but dead silence from our Port about even trying to put similar goals into practice.
Except, I do recall some claims about the Waterfront becoming a model 'green' redevelopment that would attract national and international attention, become a learning center and generate new businesses.
Such hopeful talk now seems only a fading echo, with the stance our Port has taken with advancing its 'partnership' with the City.
Hey, I know doing a big TBL project ain't easy, especially one that will require major clean-up costs, and still be over 10 times the acreage and 2 to 4 times the developed square footage of Dockside Green [a mere 15 acres].
And, I know the current economic hard times don't help either.
But, externalizing excessive costs to the City, seeking exemptions from developers for impact fees, and trying to cut corners in applying the Waterfront Futures Group Recommendations are NOT the solution!
The Port needs to change its thinking on how to go about achieving its Waterfront Redevelopment using true TBL concepts.
Thank goodness we have an opportunity to elect 2 of 3 new Port Commissioners this year!
Hopefully, a new Commission majority can then search for and find a new Executive Director with the experience and vision to get the Waterfront job done in a true TBL fashion.
I'm voting for John Blethen and Mike McAuley to replace Scott Walker and Doug Smith as Port Commissioners.
I hope you will do likewise.
----------------------------
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxically behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
---------------------------
• The LEED rating system currently has 6 categories:
1 - Energy & the Atmosphere - 17 points maximum
2- Water Efficiency - 5 points maximum
3- Materials & Resources - 13 points maximum
4- Indoor Air Quality [most complex] - 15 points maximum
5- Sustainable Sites [adjacencies] - 14 points maximum
6. Innovation [ideas outside the box] - 5 points maximum
-----------------------------
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...But not an idea whose time has come..." - Victor Hugo
---------------------------
In Real Estate, the concept of a 'Triple net lease' is fairly common:
'A triple net lease (Net-Net-Net or NNN) is a lease agreement on a property where the tenant or lessee agrees to pay all real estate taxes, building insurance, and maintenance (the three 'Nets') on the property in addition to any normal fees that are expected under the agreement (rent, etc.).
In such a lease, the tenant or lessee is responsible for all costs associated with repairs or replacement of the structural building elements of the property.'
Why not extend this concept more widely?
For example, to our Waterfront?
----------------------------
Likewise, in economics, an externality or spillover of an economic transaction is an impact on a party that is not directly involved in the transaction.
In such a case, prices do not reflect the full costs or benefits in production or consumption of a product or service.
Why not also use this concept in trying to help estimate a full cost accounting approach to Waterfront Redevelopment?
Think that might mean a different mind-set for the Port of Bellingham?
----------------------------
This is where the TBL concept can be helpful, not just a idle talk and shallow promises, but as a purposeful strategy.
Here, I've paraphrased several points from Wikipedia:
The so-called triple bottom line ("TBL" or "3BL") refers to "people, planet, profit" and captures an expanded set of criteria for measuring success; not just counting economics, but also impacts on ecological and social values.
With the ratification of the United Nations and ICLEI* TBL standard for urban and community accounting in early 2007, this became the dominant approach to public sector full cost accounting.
In the private sector, a commitment to corporate social responsibility and ecological issues implies a commitment to some form of TBL reporting.
[• ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the 'International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives']
The concept of TBL demands that a company's responsibility be to stakeholders rather than shareholders, where "stakeholders" refers to anyone who is influenced, either directly or indirectly, by the actions of the firm.
According to the stakeholder theory, the business entity should be used as a vehicle for coordinating stakeholder interests, instead of just maximizing shareholder (owner) profit.
"People, planet and profit" succinctly describes the triple bottom lines and the goal of sustainability.
"People" (human capital) pertains to fair and beneficial business practices toward labour and the community and region in which a corporation conducts its business.
A triple bottom line enterprise seeks to benefit many constituencies, not exploit or endanger any group of them, but trying to actually quantify this different bottom line is relatively new, problematic and often subjective.
"Planet" (natural capital) refers to sustainable environmental practices.
A TBL endeavor reduces its ecological footprint by, among other things, carefully managing its consumption of energy and non-renewables and reducing manufacturing waste as well as rendering waste less toxic before disposing of it in a safe and legal manner. Literally, this implies a responsible "cradle to grave" approach.
"Profit" is the bottom line shared by all commerce within a sustainability framework, and the economic benefit enjoyed by the host society.
Not to be confused with the limited internal profit made by a company or organization, it is the lasting economic impact the organization has on its economic environment.
A true TBL approach can't be interpreted as traditional corporate accounting tempered with social and environmental impact reports
--------------.
The following business-based arguments support the concept of TBL:
• Reaching untapped market potential: TBL companies can find financially profitable niches which were missed when money alone was the driving factor. Examples include:
• Adding ecotourism or geotourism to an already rich tourism market such as the Dominican Republic
• Developing profitable methods to assist existing NGOs with their missions such as fundraising, reaching clients, or creating networking opportunities with multiple NGOs
• Providing products or services which benefit underserved populations and/or the environment which are also financially profitable.
• Adapting to new business sectors: Since many business opportunities are developing in the realm of social entrepreneurialism, businesses hoping to reach this expanding market must design themselves to be financially profitable, socially beneficial and ecologically sustainable or fail to compete with those companies who do design themselves as such.
• Fiscal policy of governments usually claims to be concerned with identifying social and natural deficits on a less formal basis. However, in a democracy at least, such choices may be guided more by ideology than by economics.
With the emergence of an externally consistent green economics and agreement on definitions of potentially contentious terms such as full-cost accounting, natural capital and social capital, the prospect of formal metrics for ecological and social loss or risk has grown less remote through the 1990s.
While many people agree with the importance of good social conditions and preservation of the environment, there are also many who disagree with the triple bottom line as the way to enhance these conditions.
Imagine that!
Some main arguments against TBL are:
• Division of labour is characteristic of rich societies and a major contributor to their wealth, leading to the view that organisations contribute most to the welfare of society in all respects when they focus on what they do best. .
• Effectiveness: It is observed that concern for social and environmental matters is rare in poor societies (a hungry person would rather eat the whale than photograph it).
Thus by unencumbered attention to business alone, Adam Smith's 'Invisible Hand' will ensure that business contributes most effectively to the improvement of all areas of society, social and environmental as well as economic.
• Nationalism: Some countries adopt a nationalistic approach with the view that they must look after their own citizens first. This view is not confined to one sector of society, having support from elements of business, labour unions, and politicians.
• Libertarian: As it is possible for a socially responsible person to sincerely believe that the triple bottom line is harmful to society, the libertarian view is that it would be arrogant to force them to support a mechanism for the improvement of society that may, or may not, be the best available.
• Inertia: The difficulty of achieving global agreement on simultaneous policy may render such measures at best advisory - and thus not enforceable.
• Application: According to Fred Robin's The Challenge of TBL: A Responsibility to Whom? one of the major weaknesses of the TBL framework is its ability to be applied in a monetary-based economic system. Because there is no single way in monetary terms to measure the benefits to the society and environment as there is with profit, it does not allow for businesses to sum across all three bottom lines.
Legislation permitting corporations to adopt a triple bottom line is reportedly under consideration in some jurisdictions, including Minnesota and Oregon.
Some businesses have voluntarily adopted a triple bottom line as part of their articles of incorporation or bylaws, and some have advocated for state laws creating a "Sustainable Corporation" that would grant triple bottom line businesses benefits such as tax breaks.
-------------------------
A few years ago, a group of about 75 community leaders assembled for the purpose of hearing about the new proposed LEED Standards for Neighborhoods from its author, a Seattle architect.
The presentation was very well received, building as it did on the more limited LEED standards for single buildings, and extending the sustainability concept to entire areas.
After the presentation, each table of attendees was given the assignment of rating Bellingham's Waterfront Redevelopment Project's potential for achieving the proposed new LEED* standard.
[The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), provides a suite of standards for environmentally sustainable construction.]
The results were nothing short of astonishing!
Every table saw that the Waterfront Redevelopment had the clear potential for meeting the highest LEED Standard - Platinum!
I don't know what happened to that finding, because it is hard to find it among the things the Port has said and done since then.
Briefly, the idea did reappear when the developer of Victoria, BC's 'Dockside Green' Project came to Bellingham to explain how that undertaking had been conceived.
Fortunately, it's first phases have now achieved the highest LEED standards yet seen anywhere - 63 out of a possible 70 points!
Again, nothing but dead silence from our Port about even trying to put similar goals into practice.
Except, I do recall some claims about the Waterfront becoming a model 'green' redevelopment that would attract national and international attention, become a learning center and generate new businesses.
Such hopeful talk now seems only a fading echo, with the stance our Port has taken with advancing its 'partnership' with the City.
Hey, I know doing a big TBL project ain't easy, especially one that will require major clean-up costs, and still be over 10 times the acreage and 2 to 4 times the developed square footage of Dockside Green [a mere 15 acres].
And, I know the current economic hard times don't help either.
But, externalizing excessive costs to the City, seeking exemptions from developers for impact fees, and trying to cut corners in applying the Waterfront Futures Group Recommendations are NOT the solution!
The Port needs to change its thinking on how to go about achieving its Waterfront Redevelopment using true TBL concepts.
Thank goodness we have an opportunity to elect 2 of 3 new Port Commissioners this year!
Hopefully, a new Commission majority can then search for and find a new Executive Director with the experience and vision to get the Waterfront job done in a true TBL fashion.
I'm voting for John Blethen and Mike McAuley to replace Scott Walker and Doug Smith as Port Commissioners.
I hope you will do likewise.
----------------------------
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxically behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
---------------------------
• The LEED rating system currently has 6 categories:
1 - Energy & the Atmosphere - 17 points maximum
2- Water Efficiency - 5 points maximum
3- Materials & Resources - 13 points maximum
4- Indoor Air Quality [most complex] - 15 points maximum
5- Sustainable Sites [adjacencies] - 14 points maximum
6. Innovation [ideas outside the box] - 5 points maximum
-----------------------------
Monday, June 29, 2009
A Tale of Two Cities: Role Models for Bellingham?
-----------------------------
A recent article in Crosscut was fascinating as it juxtaposed the positive and negative characteristics of two northwest cities, Seattle and Vancouver, BC.
What was really interesting was that expert representatives of each city had to advocate for the OTHER city!
That's an idea which requires serious role-playing and an honest effort to see, understand and support arguments and positions they would normally argue against.
Similar to a debating team format, where pro and con sides are selected in advance and the quality of arguments is monitored and rated by an audience and a jury, the method attempts to separate preconceived positions from rational concepts that can be widely understood and accepted.
Socrates would have loved this format, and probably would have been keen to argue both sides of the question himself.
It was that capacity for didactic argument and reasoning that made Socrates so unpopular in some influential circles, that were not at all comfortable with hearing opposing positions from the same person!
Yet that technique seems a very valuable one since it does identify legitimate pros and cons for reasonable consideration.
----------------
Here is a short list of good things about each city, remembering that the discussion is mainly about the built environments.
Vancouver, BC is great because it has:
Stanley Park
Real townhouses
No auto court six-packs
31 miles of mass transit
Consistent, visionary planning
More downtown residents
Skinny Towers that don't block views
More public waterfront access
Walkable neighborhoods
Bikeable streets
No downtown freeways
More cosmopolitan feel
More multi-cultural feel
More "granny flats"
Better new neighborhoods
Bike-borrowing program
More integrated design
More design focus on livability
Families downtown
Seattle is great because it has:
Unique neighborhood character
Downtown ferries
Pike Place Market
Hilly terrain
Local civic patrons
More money
Free downtown buses
Parking strip gardens
Olmsted legacy
Better residential architecture
More architectural risk-taking
Better downtown office towers
A less homogenized feel
More cultural institutions and events
University campuses integrated into the city
Streetcars
Major medical and research complexes
Westlake Plaza (Vancouver had no equivalent)
Seattle Center
As for the cons, both criticized their hometowns for significant failures.
Steinbrueck said of Seattle: "We've given up on families in the urban core."
Price said Vancouver's dirty secret was: "We've reached a very high level of mediocrity."
After the Q&A, the audience was asked to decide who won the debate. It was Gordon Price by a hair, which balanced things out nicely: Steinbrueck was voted the winner in Vancouver. Which produced the kind of result soccer cities can be happy with: a tie.
------------
This topic -now being addressed locally by a housing 'toolkit' -is already of interest locally, as it has rightfully has been for a quite a while.
Examples include our Comprehensive Plan, including the 23 Neighborhood Plan updates [now 24], every annexation discussion, every development proposal of any size, design standards & guidelines, waterfront & other redevelopment schemes, etc.
And this good, certainly better than the public ignoring discussions that could impact the city and its neighborhoods in ways that may not be desirable.
But, there is also the feeling among some that even discussing such a topic is tantamount to opening Pandora's box.
They seem to feel that avoidance is better, that delay is preferable, that blind fear is justified, and that the 'City' cannot be trusted.
That stance is just so much BS!
Some opponents are avowed single issue advocates, some recall experiences in other places that purportedly caused huge problems, some are so focused on ADUs [accessory dwelling units] that they can't get past that block.
And, some advocates have the simple misfortune to be classified as 'developers'.
Both advocates and opponents are correct in that some risks will be taken, even if they turn out to be imaginary.
The bottom line is that if the City really wants to do infill better, it needs better tools to do it.
If this is only about mixed use and multi-family housing areas it falls far short; single-family homes must be part of the mix because there do exist lots that are suitable for modest additional housing.
The Real question is, as it has been, how far do we want to go in telling someone else what they can do with their property?
There are practical limits on what makes sense here, folks.
Besides, we have a professional Hearing Examiner to provide consistent review and compliance with City ordinances and design criteria.
Then, there is the neighborhood review process which gets the true input from those likely to be most affected.
Regarding the perceived 'complexity' of the proposed 'Toolkit', when has that claim NOT been made?
There has to be some thoughtful guidelines to be fair and consistent.
Besides, use of the Toolkit is voluntary, not mandatory!
The Toolkit is available for those who wish to use it, period.
So, what is the problem -really?
It is certainly NOT the loss of our single-family neighborhoods!
Did you know that the proposed Toolkit was essentially 'borrowed' from Seattle, a city renowned for the excellence of its neighborhoods.
Let's get serious about this issue and get on with the business of creating more design options, green practices, affordability and land use efficiency.
At some point, citizens will need to connect the dots that this exercise has not happened out of thin air.
This project has been the result of many public planning sessions, careful thought and hundreds of hours of professional staff time.
To dismiss it with knee-jerk reactions is simply not responsible or appropriate, and demeans the effort expended as well as the reasonable intent behind it.
To mouth the words 'I'm all for infill', and then badmouth reasonable attempts to actually implement it, seems disingenuous at best.
Every Toolkit, ordinance or guideline developed will never please everyone, although each will undoubtedly obtain as much public process and consensus as is possible.
I do hope the City will approve this Toolkit in some form after its planned due process, because it does represent a step forward for the City.
Otherwise, we are spinning our wheels and wasting everyone's time.
If, for some reason, the final version of the Toolkit proves unworkable or otherwise undesirable, it can always be modified or rescinded.
Let's don't forget that.
-----------------------------------------
A recent article in Crosscut was fascinating as it juxtaposed the positive and negative characteristics of two northwest cities, Seattle and Vancouver, BC.
What was really interesting was that expert representatives of each city had to advocate for the OTHER city!
That's an idea which requires serious role-playing and an honest effort to see, understand and support arguments and positions they would normally argue against.
Similar to a debating team format, where pro and con sides are selected in advance and the quality of arguments is monitored and rated by an audience and a jury, the method attempts to separate preconceived positions from rational concepts that can be widely understood and accepted.
Socrates would have loved this format, and probably would have been keen to argue both sides of the question himself.
It was that capacity for didactic argument and reasoning that made Socrates so unpopular in some influential circles, that were not at all comfortable with hearing opposing positions from the same person!
Yet that technique seems a very valuable one since it does identify legitimate pros and cons for reasonable consideration.
----------------
Here is a short list of good things about each city, remembering that the discussion is mainly about the built environments.
Vancouver, BC is great because it has:
Stanley Park
Real townhouses
No auto court six-packs
31 miles of mass transit
Consistent, visionary planning
More downtown residents
Skinny Towers that don't block views
More public waterfront access
Walkable neighborhoods
Bikeable streets
No downtown freeways
More cosmopolitan feel
More multi-cultural feel
More "granny flats"
Better new neighborhoods
Bike-borrowing program
More integrated design
More design focus on livability
Families downtown
Seattle is great because it has:
Unique neighborhood character
Downtown ferries
Pike Place Market
Hilly terrain
Local civic patrons
More money
Free downtown buses
Parking strip gardens
Olmsted legacy
Better residential architecture
More architectural risk-taking
Better downtown office towers
A less homogenized feel
More cultural institutions and events
University campuses integrated into the city
Streetcars
Major medical and research complexes
Westlake Plaza (Vancouver had no equivalent)
Seattle Center
As for the cons, both criticized their hometowns for significant failures.
Steinbrueck said of Seattle: "We've given up on families in the urban core."
Price said Vancouver's dirty secret was: "We've reached a very high level of mediocrity."
After the Q&A, the audience was asked to decide who won the debate. It was Gordon Price by a hair, which balanced things out nicely: Steinbrueck was voted the winner in Vancouver. Which produced the kind of result soccer cities can be happy with: a tie.
------------
This topic -now being addressed locally by a housing 'toolkit' -is already of interest locally, as it has rightfully has been for a quite a while.
Examples include our Comprehensive Plan, including the 23 Neighborhood Plan updates [now 24], every annexation discussion, every development proposal of any size, design standards & guidelines, waterfront & other redevelopment schemes, etc.
And this good, certainly better than the public ignoring discussions that could impact the city and its neighborhoods in ways that may not be desirable.
But, there is also the feeling among some that even discussing such a topic is tantamount to opening Pandora's box.
They seem to feel that avoidance is better, that delay is preferable, that blind fear is justified, and that the 'City' cannot be trusted.
That stance is just so much BS!
Some opponents are avowed single issue advocates, some recall experiences in other places that purportedly caused huge problems, some are so focused on ADUs [accessory dwelling units] that they can't get past that block.
And, some advocates have the simple misfortune to be classified as 'developers'.
Both advocates and opponents are correct in that some risks will be taken, even if they turn out to be imaginary.
The bottom line is that if the City really wants to do infill better, it needs better tools to do it.
If this is only about mixed use and multi-family housing areas it falls far short; single-family homes must be part of the mix because there do exist lots that are suitable for modest additional housing.
The Real question is, as it has been, how far do we want to go in telling someone else what they can do with their property?
There are practical limits on what makes sense here, folks.
Besides, we have a professional Hearing Examiner to provide consistent review and compliance with City ordinances and design criteria.
Then, there is the neighborhood review process which gets the true input from those likely to be most affected.
Regarding the perceived 'complexity' of the proposed 'Toolkit', when has that claim NOT been made?
There has to be some thoughtful guidelines to be fair and consistent.
Besides, use of the Toolkit is voluntary, not mandatory!
The Toolkit is available for those who wish to use it, period.
So, what is the problem -really?
It is certainly NOT the loss of our single-family neighborhoods!
Did you know that the proposed Toolkit was essentially 'borrowed' from Seattle, a city renowned for the excellence of its neighborhoods.
Let's get serious about this issue and get on with the business of creating more design options, green practices, affordability and land use efficiency.
At some point, citizens will need to connect the dots that this exercise has not happened out of thin air.
This project has been the result of many public planning sessions, careful thought and hundreds of hours of professional staff time.
To dismiss it with knee-jerk reactions is simply not responsible or appropriate, and demeans the effort expended as well as the reasonable intent behind it.
To mouth the words 'I'm all for infill', and then badmouth reasonable attempts to actually implement it, seems disingenuous at best.
Every Toolkit, ordinance or guideline developed will never please everyone, although each will undoubtedly obtain as much public process and consensus as is possible.
I do hope the City will approve this Toolkit in some form after its planned due process, because it does represent a step forward for the City.
Otherwise, we are spinning our wheels and wasting everyone's time.
If, for some reason, the final version of the Toolkit proves unworkable or otherwise undesirable, it can always be modified or rescinded.
Let's don't forget that.
-----------------------------------------
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Waterfront Redevelopment: Changes in the Wind?
----------------------
Apart from the upcoming elections in which 2 of the 3 incumbent Port Commissioners are being challenged, Jim Darling, the Port's Executive Director for the last 15 years has now resigned, effective July 10.
Port commissioners are expected to name an interim replacement at a June 2 meeting, but the search for a permanent replacement is expected to take months.
Does this mean the new Director will be chosen after the elections?
I hope so!
Mr Darling has served well in his capacity, but the challenge presented by acquiring the G-P and other contaminated industrial properties, committing to their proper clean-up, and then redeveloping the 220-acres waterfront with the City's partnership, has proved to be large, protracted and contentious.
This, plus the prospect of a new job while remaining in the area would be tempting to anyone in a similar situation.
I wish Mr Darling well in his new endeavor, plus, I salute him for moving on and not becoming so entrenched that his effectiveness is adversely impacted.
But, my main concern is that the Waterfront Redevelopment continues to move forward!
There is too much at stake to let this ambitious, but important undertaking fail.
While there have been significant differences between Port and City about scope and procedures, these are minor when compared to the vision of our community.
And, the enormous expenses -actually investments- envisioned will be repaid many times over when that long-term effort is completed.
We should not worry about a good return of this investment; and the returns will not only be economic ones, but also ecological and social in nature -as they must be.
Mr Darling's departure may portend other timely changes as well, including the election of up to 2 new Commissioners - that would constitute a new majority!
I believe Scott Walker has done a good job, but has been in office too long at 18 years and counting- even longer than Darling.
John Blethen would make a very able replacement who who has demonstrated a long-term and active commitment to the Waterfront Futures Group, the current Waterfront Advisory Group and related community efforts for over 30 years.
Blethen gets it; his successful business experience combined with his remarkable volunteering services give him the kind of perspective I'd like to see in implementing a waterfront redevelopment that is truly sustainable and would be just right for Bellingham.
Also, Doug Smith's service has been commendable, but he's been there as long as Darling has as well.
Mike McCauley is my choice to succeed Smith, and has both the smarts and energy to come up to speed quickly.
In his time in Bellingham, Mike has been both active and effective in neighborhood and related issues, which is refreshing example for younger folks.
Mike does his homework, has technical training, thinks logically and carefully and is willing to spend the time necessary to the job.
-------------
Aside from the daunting fiscal crisis now facing our nation and community, which is a concern to everyone, the idea of creating a truly sustainable, 'triple bottom line' new waterfront neighborhood must be committed to.
That is the single concept that is most essential to the unqualified success of our new Waterfront District!
It means a lot of things that together save money, preserve the environment, create jobs with new businesses, provide enjoyable public space and access to the Bay, and add revenues to the City, Port and County that will both pay back their investment costs and sustain each jurisdiction's respective levels of service.
So, rather than fret and worry about these changes -both real and possible- as problems, I see them as distinct opportunities!
That is because sufficient good work has already gone into this concept, that it is no longer dependent upon only its initiators
for its execution.
And, with a 25-year project expectation, it never could have been!
Both Jim Darling and former Mayor, Mark Asmundson, knew that when the opportunity for this partnership presented itself.
And, since that time, several members of the City Council & Staff have also moved on -myself included.
So, having new elected officials should not be a problem in the greater scheme of things, particularly in a community enhancing project of long duration, and even longer benefits.
The point is, a well-conceived project definition is a difficult thing to achieve by itself, even without ever building anything.
That work is well underway, although there do remain some significant points to clarify and make more certain -that must be done to pin down the costs, which will have to fit both the Port's and City's budgets and timely pay-off their debts.
I can think of no better candidates for Port Commissioner, who can help do this, than John Blethen and Mike McCauley.
They have the skills, the interest, the time and the commitment, and will bring 'fresh eyes' to the task.
Hopefully, they will also have a say in who gets hired as the Port's new permanent Executive Director, after they take office.
---------------------------------
For those interested, here's a list, including my previous 13 posts on this subject, by date published:
Waterfront Redevelopment: Changes in the Wind? 5/27/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: Are Circadian Rhythms To... 4/29/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: A Grecian Flat Earth Day... 4/22/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: Can We Get On With It No... 11/19/08
Time for Big Changes at the Port of Bellingham! 11/16/08
Waterfront Redevelopment: Impasse or Opportunity? 11/10/08
Waterfront Redevelopment: A Rant About Election Ga... 8/19/08
On City Government, Football & Other Contact Sport... 1/12/08
Breaking Good News About NOAA 11/28/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Mother Goose & the Docto... 9/9/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Navigating Charbydis & S... 9/8/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: BEYOND LEED to a Triple ... 9/6/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Incorporating Waterfront... 8/20/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Mayoral Candidate Forum ... 8/1/07
------------------------------------
Apart from the upcoming elections in which 2 of the 3 incumbent Port Commissioners are being challenged, Jim Darling, the Port's Executive Director for the last 15 years has now resigned, effective July 10.
Port commissioners are expected to name an interim replacement at a June 2 meeting, but the search for a permanent replacement is expected to take months.
Does this mean the new Director will be chosen after the elections?
I hope so!
Mr Darling has served well in his capacity, but the challenge presented by acquiring the G-P and other contaminated industrial properties, committing to their proper clean-up, and then redeveloping the 220-acres waterfront with the City's partnership, has proved to be large, protracted and contentious.
This, plus the prospect of a new job while remaining in the area would be tempting to anyone in a similar situation.
I wish Mr Darling well in his new endeavor, plus, I salute him for moving on and not becoming so entrenched that his effectiveness is adversely impacted.
But, my main concern is that the Waterfront Redevelopment continues to move forward!
There is too much at stake to let this ambitious, but important undertaking fail.
While there have been significant differences between Port and City about scope and procedures, these are minor when compared to the vision of our community.
And, the enormous expenses -actually investments- envisioned will be repaid many times over when that long-term effort is completed.
We should not worry about a good return of this investment; and the returns will not only be economic ones, but also ecological and social in nature -as they must be.
Mr Darling's departure may portend other timely changes as well, including the election of up to 2 new Commissioners - that would constitute a new majority!
I believe Scott Walker has done a good job, but has been in office too long at 18 years and counting- even longer than Darling.
John Blethen would make a very able replacement who who has demonstrated a long-term and active commitment to the Waterfront Futures Group, the current Waterfront Advisory Group and related community efforts for over 30 years.
Blethen gets it; his successful business experience combined with his remarkable volunteering services give him the kind of perspective I'd like to see in implementing a waterfront redevelopment that is truly sustainable and would be just right for Bellingham.
Also, Doug Smith's service has been commendable, but he's been there as long as Darling has as well.
Mike McCauley is my choice to succeed Smith, and has both the smarts and energy to come up to speed quickly.
In his time in Bellingham, Mike has been both active and effective in neighborhood and related issues, which is refreshing example for younger folks.
Mike does his homework, has technical training, thinks logically and carefully and is willing to spend the time necessary to the job.
-------------
Aside from the daunting fiscal crisis now facing our nation and community, which is a concern to everyone, the idea of creating a truly sustainable, 'triple bottom line' new waterfront neighborhood must be committed to.
That is the single concept that is most essential to the unqualified success of our new Waterfront District!
It means a lot of things that together save money, preserve the environment, create jobs with new businesses, provide enjoyable public space and access to the Bay, and add revenues to the City, Port and County that will both pay back their investment costs and sustain each jurisdiction's respective levels of service.
So, rather than fret and worry about these changes -both real and possible- as problems, I see them as distinct opportunities!
That is because sufficient good work has already gone into this concept, that it is no longer dependent upon only its initiators
for its execution.
And, with a 25-year project expectation, it never could have been!
Both Jim Darling and former Mayor, Mark Asmundson, knew that when the opportunity for this partnership presented itself.
And, since that time, several members of the City Council & Staff have also moved on -myself included.
So, having new elected officials should not be a problem in the greater scheme of things, particularly in a community enhancing project of long duration, and even longer benefits.
The point is, a well-conceived project definition is a difficult thing to achieve by itself, even without ever building anything.
That work is well underway, although there do remain some significant points to clarify and make more certain -that must be done to pin down the costs, which will have to fit both the Port's and City's budgets and timely pay-off their debts.
I can think of no better candidates for Port Commissioner, who can help do this, than John Blethen and Mike McCauley.
They have the skills, the interest, the time and the commitment, and will bring 'fresh eyes' to the task.
Hopefully, they will also have a say in who gets hired as the Port's new permanent Executive Director, after they take office.
---------------------------------
For those interested, here's a list, including my previous 13 posts on this subject, by date published:
Waterfront Redevelopment: Changes in the Wind? 5/27/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: Are Circadian Rhythms To... 4/29/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: A Grecian Flat Earth Day... 4/22/09
Waterfront Redevelopment: Can We Get On With It No... 11/19/08
Time for Big Changes at the Port of Bellingham! 11/16/08
Waterfront Redevelopment: Impasse or Opportunity? 11/10/08
Waterfront Redevelopment: A Rant About Election Ga... 8/19/08
On City Government, Football & Other Contact Sport... 1/12/08
Breaking Good News About NOAA 11/28/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Mother Goose & the Docto... 9/9/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Navigating Charbydis & S... 9/8/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: BEYOND LEED to a Triple ... 9/6/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Incorporating Waterfront... 8/20/07
Waterfront Redevelopment: Mayoral Candidate Forum ... 8/1/07
------------------------------------
Monday, December 31, 2007
The Future of Architecture: 2050-2100
-------------------
The last 2 blogs mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarizes what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now.
Here are his predictions for the Next Half-Century 2050-2100
-------------------
Despite the predictions of science fiction in the 20th century, humanity will not create new colonies on the moon or on distant planets. Indeed, the rising difficulties on earth will capture most resources away from space travel and the folly of human space conquest. The focus instead will be on keeping this planet safe for life. Population numbers will peak 50 years from now, kept in check by the availability of resources, disease and war. Almost every country in the world will see some sort of population stabilization or decline due to the enactment of population policy, mandatory education regarding birth control options and resource scarcity.
The effects of global climate change will be difficult for even the richest countries to adapt to. Great changes to society will emerge. The world will be a much poorer place from a diversity standpoint, both in the diversity of natural systems and species, but also in terms of cultural diversity and language. Future generations will scorn the excesses and arrogance of the people of our generation. And yet, finally, through it all will emerge a truly sustainable society, transformed scarcely 50 to 75 years from today. The level of the living building will become the baseline for all buildings in the future. Our communities will produce no pollution through energy use and no waste from things they create for use. A true eco-economy will have emerged that balances the use of resources with the earth’s capacity to handle its harvest. While we will continue to suffer from effects of the 19th and 20th centuries in a multitude of ways, in the end, despite hardships not seen since the middle ages, I believe we will endure. I think we will prove smarter than the bacterium, even though we have not yet proven so. Our true intelligence will be displayed, not by creating additional earths or crazy schemes to inhabit other planets, but by living peacefully on our own blue rock. And when we look back we will see the efforts of many great people, sustainable design philosophers and regular folks, an army of individuals who realized that they needed to do things differently. Perhaps this army includes a few who will read this book.
Along the way fundamental belief systems must change to reconcile with our true place in nature. We will finally learn that our economy is a subset of natural systems, not the other way around. People will make the shift from the short view to the long view of the world. They will shift from the promotion of technology for the sake of itself to technologies that enhance life of all kinds, for all time. They will make the paradigm shift to the realization that we are wholly dependent on an intricate web of life for our survival. They will even shift the metaphors and language that they use to describe themselves and their relationship to nature. They will realize once and for all that their place in the world is no higher, or no lower than any creature on the planet, and that all are part of the same act of creation.
Our biggest challenges will be to overcome the inertia of the status quo and the cult of inevitability. We will have to say no to certain types of progress, and insist, as citizens of a democracy, on other kinds of progress that benefit us. We must find ways to foster co-operation among the citizens of all nations and insist on ideals as important as universal standards of living and the rights of all species to survive in dignity. We must, as Linda McQuaig writes, rekindle ‘the notion that we can collectively achieve great things, indeed that we can achieve even basic things that were regularly achieved centuries ago – lke providing work, shelter and food for everyone in the community’. In this case, it must be the world community. We must also abandon the ‘cult of the individual’ that produces a race to the bottom for society, we must abandon our blind worshiping of the market just as strongly as the belief that some government can save us.
In other words, we must take responsibility for our actions, our appetites and our mistakes. We must push our leaders to set examples and hold them accountable, and find a way, a system that rewards us for self-restraint. We must push for the adoption of revolutionary ideas, not just slow evolutionary ideas. The future we desire requires a culture of peace and forgiveness, rather than a rhetoric of war and punishment. We must help the developing world skip over a century and a half of polluting technologies and industrialization that we created. We must fight for universal equality rights, for the disparity we have today is shameful and contributes to a multitude of problems for all of us. We must find ways to slow and stabilize population growth and promote the well-being and education of women and children. And from this day forward we must save everything we can through a system of conservation and stewardship un-paralleled in history. No small order. But we can do it.
And through it all our architecture will continue to be a critical part of what makes us unique along with other habitat builders. The future of architecture will remain the same as before in many ways, while being completely different in others. Architecture will continue to play its role as our protector, sheltering us from the elements and giving us comfort. It will continue to play its role as a manifestation and expression of our culture and ideals and inspire us to dream and create. But in the future our architecture will also reconnect us to the natural world and, indeed, become part of it, restoring and enhancing the places we build. The future of architecture is bound inextricably to the future of living buildings. The future of architecture is sustainable.
-------------------
The last 2 blogs mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarizes what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now.
Here are his predictions for the Next Half-Century 2050-2100
-------------------
Despite the predictions of science fiction in the 20th century, humanity will not create new colonies on the moon or on distant planets. Indeed, the rising difficulties on earth will capture most resources away from space travel and the folly of human space conquest. The focus instead will be on keeping this planet safe for life. Population numbers will peak 50 years from now, kept in check by the availability of resources, disease and war. Almost every country in the world will see some sort of population stabilization or decline due to the enactment of population policy, mandatory education regarding birth control options and resource scarcity.
The effects of global climate change will be difficult for even the richest countries to adapt to. Great changes to society will emerge. The world will be a much poorer place from a diversity standpoint, both in the diversity of natural systems and species, but also in terms of cultural diversity and language. Future generations will scorn the excesses and arrogance of the people of our generation. And yet, finally, through it all will emerge a truly sustainable society, transformed scarcely 50 to 75 years from today. The level of the living building will become the baseline for all buildings in the future. Our communities will produce no pollution through energy use and no waste from things they create for use. A true eco-economy will have emerged that balances the use of resources with the earth’s capacity to handle its harvest. While we will continue to suffer from effects of the 19th and 20th centuries in a multitude of ways, in the end, despite hardships not seen since the middle ages, I believe we will endure. I think we will prove smarter than the bacterium, even though we have not yet proven so. Our true intelligence will be displayed, not by creating additional earths or crazy schemes to inhabit other planets, but by living peacefully on our own blue rock. And when we look back we will see the efforts of many great people, sustainable design philosophers and regular folks, an army of individuals who realized that they needed to do things differently. Perhaps this army includes a few who will read this book.
Along the way fundamental belief systems must change to reconcile with our true place in nature. We will finally learn that our economy is a subset of natural systems, not the other way around. People will make the shift from the short view to the long view of the world. They will shift from the promotion of technology for the sake of itself to technologies that enhance life of all kinds, for all time. They will make the paradigm shift to the realization that we are wholly dependent on an intricate web of life for our survival. They will even shift the metaphors and language that they use to describe themselves and their relationship to nature. They will realize once and for all that their place in the world is no higher, or no lower than any creature on the planet, and that all are part of the same act of creation.
Our biggest challenges will be to overcome the inertia of the status quo and the cult of inevitability. We will have to say no to certain types of progress, and insist, as citizens of a democracy, on other kinds of progress that benefit us. We must find ways to foster co-operation among the citizens of all nations and insist on ideals as important as universal standards of living and the rights of all species to survive in dignity. We must, as Linda McQuaig writes, rekindle ‘the notion that we can collectively achieve great things, indeed that we can achieve even basic things that were regularly achieved centuries ago – lke providing work, shelter and food for everyone in the community’. In this case, it must be the world community. We must also abandon the ‘cult of the individual’ that produces a race to the bottom for society, we must abandon our blind worshiping of the market just as strongly as the belief that some government can save us.
In other words, we must take responsibility for our actions, our appetites and our mistakes. We must push our leaders to set examples and hold them accountable, and find a way, a system that rewards us for self-restraint. We must push for the adoption of revolutionary ideas, not just slow evolutionary ideas. The future we desire requires a culture of peace and forgiveness, rather than a rhetoric of war and punishment. We must help the developing world skip over a century and a half of polluting technologies and industrialization that we created. We must fight for universal equality rights, for the disparity we have today is shameful and contributes to a multitude of problems for all of us. We must find ways to slow and stabilize population growth and promote the well-being and education of women and children. And from this day forward we must save everything we can through a system of conservation and stewardship un-paralleled in history. No small order. But we can do it.
And through it all our architecture will continue to be a critical part of what makes us unique along with other habitat builders. The future of architecture will remain the same as before in many ways, while being completely different in others. Architecture will continue to play its role as our protector, sheltering us from the elements and giving us comfort. It will continue to play its role as a manifestation and expression of our culture and ideals and inspire us to dream and create. But in the future our architecture will also reconnect us to the natural world and, indeed, become part of it, restoring and enhancing the places we build. The future of architecture is bound inextricably to the future of living buildings. The future of architecture is sustainable.
-------------------
The Future of Architecture: 2015-2025
-------------------
The last blog again mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarizes what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now.
Here are his predictions for Twenty Years From Now - 2015-2025
------------------
• The green building movement will finally emerge into its adult stage and become the dominant paradigm of architecture and development in the West. Twenty years from now what was the gold level of performance in LEED will be the standard level of performance for all buildings in the U.S. and Canada. Multiple examples of the living building will exist, further raising the bar to performance. Most buildings will use 40% to 50% less energy than their counterparts today. The best buildings will use 80% to 90% less energy than their counterparts today and use 50% less water.
• A national labeling system for green building materials and products will be created based on the database created in the previous decade. This label will become a mandatory part of any product sold in the U.S. and Canada similar to the nutrition labels found on all foods. Consumers will demand to know what is in the products they buy and all ingredients will be listed. There will be a backlash against materials containing known carcinogens, mutagens and teragens.
------------------
Example: Environmental Impact Rating – Unit Size – 1 square foot
Overall Weighted rating – 7.7* [based on weighting by the EPA]
Water Consumption – 3.4 gallons
Energy Consumption – 18,000 BTUs
Criteria Air Pollution Score – 87
NOX –82
SOX – 78
PPM – 90
CO2 – 96
Criteria Water Pollution Score – 52
Toxicity Rating – 46
Life Expectancy – 7-9 years
Recyclable – NA
Contains: Straw, water, linseed oil, formaldehyde, g-Terpene, ethyl acetate, camphor, benzyl acetate
------------------
• Biomimicry will emerge as a vibrant specialization in the economy.
• The national park system will double in size to protect the few undeveloped areas left in the continent. A worldwide effort at ecosystem sanctuaries will gain momentum.
• Studies linking productivity and well-being to the built environment will finally transform the market. Building owners will now engage productivity experts to review designs and suggest ways to improve buildings.
• Resource scarcity will start to become a serious problem in a large part of the world. Resource based conflicts will erupt in the third world on an increasing scale. The effects of global change will weaken the agriculture and food production systems of the world. The public at large will finally understand the connection between their lifestyles and the effect on the environment. Political parties will start to be influenced to a greater extent by environmental groups.
• The rising costs and safety concerns of aging nuclear power plants and spent fuel will spell the end to that industry. Most western countries will dismantle their existing plants because of citizen pressures and the result of a few spectacular failures in safety. Hundreds of thousands will be exposed to unhealthy levels of radiation during this time.
• Traditional energy costs will rise more, but will be stabilized in the West by the continued emergence of renewable energy. Wind power will be the cheapest form of energy available. By the end of the second decade photo-voltaics will drop to the point that this power source will be competitive with conventional energy sources. The amount of photo-voltaics and wind turbines will quadruple in use and will start to become a noticeable part of the landscape. Much of the third world will begin to leapfrog over the mistakes of the West.
• All design and engineering schools will teach the principles of sustainable design as a central part of their curriculum. A new generation of designers will emerge that will take the design of our buildings and communities to a whole different level of performance.
• The hydrogen economy will become a proven component in many countries around the world. Fuel cells will start to become as ubiquitous as television is today, further transforming society. The major automakers will stop making the internal combustion engine near the end of the second decade as the hydrogen infrastructure is completed.
-------------------
The last blog again mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarizes what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now.
Here are his predictions for Twenty Years From Now - 2015-2025
------------------
• The green building movement will finally emerge into its adult stage and become the dominant paradigm of architecture and development in the West. Twenty years from now what was the gold level of performance in LEED will be the standard level of performance for all buildings in the U.S. and Canada. Multiple examples of the living building will exist, further raising the bar to performance. Most buildings will use 40% to 50% less energy than their counterparts today. The best buildings will use 80% to 90% less energy than their counterparts today and use 50% less water.
• A national labeling system for green building materials and products will be created based on the database created in the previous decade. This label will become a mandatory part of any product sold in the U.S. and Canada similar to the nutrition labels found on all foods. Consumers will demand to know what is in the products they buy and all ingredients will be listed. There will be a backlash against materials containing known carcinogens, mutagens and teragens.
------------------
Example: Environmental Impact Rating – Unit Size – 1 square foot
Overall Weighted rating – 7.7* [based on weighting by the EPA]
Water Consumption – 3.4 gallons
Energy Consumption – 18,000 BTUs
Criteria Air Pollution Score – 87
NOX –82
SOX – 78
PPM – 90
CO2 – 96
Criteria Water Pollution Score – 52
Toxicity Rating – 46
Life Expectancy – 7-9 years
Recyclable – NA
Contains: Straw, water, linseed oil, formaldehyde, g-Terpene, ethyl acetate, camphor, benzyl acetate
------------------
• Biomimicry will emerge as a vibrant specialization in the economy.
• The national park system will double in size to protect the few undeveloped areas left in the continent. A worldwide effort at ecosystem sanctuaries will gain momentum.
• Studies linking productivity and well-being to the built environment will finally transform the market. Building owners will now engage productivity experts to review designs and suggest ways to improve buildings.
• Resource scarcity will start to become a serious problem in a large part of the world. Resource based conflicts will erupt in the third world on an increasing scale. The effects of global change will weaken the agriculture and food production systems of the world. The public at large will finally understand the connection between their lifestyles and the effect on the environment. Political parties will start to be influenced to a greater extent by environmental groups.
• The rising costs and safety concerns of aging nuclear power plants and spent fuel will spell the end to that industry. Most western countries will dismantle their existing plants because of citizen pressures and the result of a few spectacular failures in safety. Hundreds of thousands will be exposed to unhealthy levels of radiation during this time.
• Traditional energy costs will rise more, but will be stabilized in the West by the continued emergence of renewable energy. Wind power will be the cheapest form of energy available. By the end of the second decade photo-voltaics will drop to the point that this power source will be competitive with conventional energy sources. The amount of photo-voltaics and wind turbines will quadruple in use and will start to become a noticeable part of the landscape. Much of the third world will begin to leapfrog over the mistakes of the West.
• All design and engineering schools will teach the principles of sustainable design as a central part of their curriculum. A new generation of designers will emerge that will take the design of our buildings and communities to a whole different level of performance.
• The hydrogen economy will become a proven component in many countries around the world. Fuel cells will start to become as ubiquitous as television is today, further transforming society. The major automakers will stop making the internal combustion engine near the end of the second decade as the hydrogen infrastructure is completed.
-------------------
Sunday, December 30, 2007
The Future of Architecture: 2005-2015
--------------------------------
My December 28 blog mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarized what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now. Here are his predictions for the the Next Ten Years: 2005-2015
--------------------------------
• Over the next decade there will be a continued doubling of support for Green Building initiatives around the U.S. and Canada. However, even at this rate this will still represent only 20% to 30% of the buildings being built each year. By 2015 the sustainable design movement will be mainstream, but will still have a lot of room to grow.
• A growing number of local and state jurisdictions will adopt green building practices as their base standard. Near the end of the decade stricter standards such as California’s Title 24 Energy standards will become commonplace in all states.
• The USGBC will continue to grow in influence in the first half of the decade through its LEED rating tool. However, a growing backlash will occur by individuals interested in sustainability but who do not want to use the USGBC’s tools due to cost and complexity. The USGBC will have to find ways to reinvent itself and resist bureaucratic complacency to continue with its success. Competitors to LEED will emerge by the end of the decade.
• Almost every architecture school will develop curriculum specifically centered on sustainability. Engineering schools, reacting to pressure from the industry, will also begin sweeping changes to how their students are taught.
• The architecture profession will begin to build incredible buildings that combine environmental performance with beauty and trend-setting design. Many of the perceived barriers to green will be lifted.
• The era of the generalist sustainability consultant will diminish to be replaced by individuals with both highly technical knowledge and a holistic grasp of the issues.
• By the end of the decade most design firms will have a few green projects built, thus beginning to diminish the distinction between green firms and non-green firms.
• Alternatives to PVC products, ubiquitous today, will appear on the market and meet with widespread usage.
• The US Green Building Council will completely redesign its LEED tool and near the end of the decade will significantly raise the bar for performance. The Platinum level of performance will then be the same as the Living Building.
• Many of the economic barriers to green will continue to be removed by the end of the next decade further accelerating the adoption of green building strategies.
• A majority of contractors and developers will now be familiar with green building practices and will start to reduce their resistance to sustainability ideas and principles.
• The U.S. and Canada will create a widespread national database of materials that helps make it easier to select environmentally products.
• Product manufacturers will, almost without exception, be marketing the environmental advantages of their products and many will make great strides to reduce the embodied impacts of their products. More companies will adopt Natural Step and other sustainability frameworks as part of their operating principles.
• PVC will be banned from production and lawsuits similar to the tobacco industry’s litigation history will ensue. Other toxic chemicals will be banned as ingredients to consumer products.
• Near the end of the decade we will see the emergence of technologies that will soon change many aspects of our built environment. The first fuel cell cars will be released to the public and the beginnings of a hydrogen infrastructure will be tested. More buildings will also begin to include fuel cells and photo-voltaics, which will continue to slowly drop in price. Green power from wind farms will soon be readily available to almost all consumers. Smart glazing will be introduced and will see limited demonstrations in buildings.
• Energy costs will rise throughout the decade making alternative energy more cost effective, further accelerating its acceptance.
• The environment will continue to see widespread decline and the beginnings of climate change effects will be confirmed.
• War, conflict and new diseases will increase throughout the world due primarily to resource scarcity.
--------------------------------
My December 28 blog mentioned the book 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
The last chapter, The Future of Architecture, summarized what the author thinks may transpire in 10, 20 and 50 years from now. Here are his predictions for the the Next Ten Years: 2005-2015
--------------------------------
• Over the next decade there will be a continued doubling of support for Green Building initiatives around the U.S. and Canada. However, even at this rate this will still represent only 20% to 30% of the buildings being built each year. By 2015 the sustainable design movement will be mainstream, but will still have a lot of room to grow.
• A growing number of local and state jurisdictions will adopt green building practices as their base standard. Near the end of the decade stricter standards such as California’s Title 24 Energy standards will become commonplace in all states.
• The USGBC will continue to grow in influence in the first half of the decade through its LEED rating tool. However, a growing backlash will occur by individuals interested in sustainability but who do not want to use the USGBC’s tools due to cost and complexity. The USGBC will have to find ways to reinvent itself and resist bureaucratic complacency to continue with its success. Competitors to LEED will emerge by the end of the decade.
• Almost every architecture school will develop curriculum specifically centered on sustainability. Engineering schools, reacting to pressure from the industry, will also begin sweeping changes to how their students are taught.
• The architecture profession will begin to build incredible buildings that combine environmental performance with beauty and trend-setting design. Many of the perceived barriers to green will be lifted.
• The era of the generalist sustainability consultant will diminish to be replaced by individuals with both highly technical knowledge and a holistic grasp of the issues.
• By the end of the decade most design firms will have a few green projects built, thus beginning to diminish the distinction between green firms and non-green firms.
• Alternatives to PVC products, ubiquitous today, will appear on the market and meet with widespread usage.
• The US Green Building Council will completely redesign its LEED tool and near the end of the decade will significantly raise the bar for performance. The Platinum level of performance will then be the same as the Living Building.
• Many of the economic barriers to green will continue to be removed by the end of the next decade further accelerating the adoption of green building strategies.
• A majority of contractors and developers will now be familiar with green building practices and will start to reduce their resistance to sustainability ideas and principles.
• The U.S. and Canada will create a widespread national database of materials that helps make it easier to select environmentally products.
• Product manufacturers will, almost without exception, be marketing the environmental advantages of their products and many will make great strides to reduce the embodied impacts of their products. More companies will adopt Natural Step and other sustainability frameworks as part of their operating principles.
• PVC will be banned from production and lawsuits similar to the tobacco industry’s litigation history will ensue. Other toxic chemicals will be banned as ingredients to consumer products.
• Near the end of the decade we will see the emergence of technologies that will soon change many aspects of our built environment. The first fuel cell cars will be released to the public and the beginnings of a hydrogen infrastructure will be tested. More buildings will also begin to include fuel cells and photo-voltaics, which will continue to slowly drop in price. Green power from wind farms will soon be readily available to almost all consumers. Smart glazing will be introduced and will see limited demonstrations in buildings.
• Energy costs will rise throughout the decade making alternative energy more cost effective, further accelerating its acceptance.
• The environment will continue to see widespread decline and the beginnings of climate change effects will be confirmed.
• War, conflict and new diseases will increase throughout the world due primarily to resource scarcity.
--------------------------------
Friday, December 28, 2007
More On Green Design: Principles, Future & Practical Advice
-------------------------------
"Writers are at their best as terrorists- Sometimes social terrorists, sometimes political, sometimes terrorists of the heart. If a writer is good, he will be all three at once. His weapons are words well used to disturb and to clarify thought, emotion and action." - John Ralston Saul
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...But not an idea whose time has come... - Victor Hugo
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxically behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
-------------------------------
My November 3 blog mentioned a Green Built Conference held at the Ferry Terminal.
Since then, I've read & reviewed an excellent book, 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
Here are a few insights before I share this book with the Library Board, the Council, and the Waterfront District Redevelopment Project.
• On Green Economics:
"By the time the design for most human artifacts is completed but before they have actually been built, about 80-90% per cent of their life cycle economic and ecological costs have already been made inevitable." - Joseph Romm
• The City of Austin, Texas was first to adopt a rating system for sustainability of buildings, using 1 to 5 stars, assigned according to 5 criteria; energy efficiency, materials efficiency, water efficiency, indoor air health & safety and community health & safety.
• LEED means 'Leadership in Environmental & Energy Design'.
• The LEED rating system currently has a maximum of 69 possible points.
A LEED Certified building must have 26 to 32 points
A Leed Silver building must have 33 to 38 points
A Leed Gold building must have 39 to 51 points
A Leed Platinum building must have 52 or more points.
Buildings which exceed this highest level are called 'Living Buildings', like the EPICenter at Montana State University in Bozeman, MT.
• The LEED rating system currently has these 6 categories:
1 - Energy & the Atmosphere - 17 points maximum
2- Water Efficiency - 5 points maximum
3- Materials & Resources - 13 points maximum
4- Indoor Air Quality [most complex] - 15 points maximum
5- Sustainable Sites [adjacencies] - 14 points maximum
6. Innovation [ideas outside the box] - 5 points maximum
• The LEED system is a rigorous design tool and its application is simple and cheap.
However, its documentation is time-consuming and expensive.
Most firms charge a $40 to $60 thousand flat fee per project, with no proportionality to building size.
Many projects simply use LEED as a checklist, then turn it in after completion to determine after the fact what certification level is met.
• The Packard Foundation Building in Palo Alto, CA was built after six different levels of buildings were designed for comparison, including the 5 levels described above plus a conventionally constructed building.
The results are dramatic, and available online as the 'Packard Sustainability Matrix & Report'.
• Sustainable Design differs from Traditional Design in three ways:
I. Results [environmental & human impacts]
II. Rationale [6 Principles as below]
Principle 1: Respect for the Wisdom of Natural Systems - The Biomimicry Principle
Principle 2: Respect for People - The Human Vitality Principle
Principle 3: Respect for Place - The Ecosystem/Bio-Region Principle
Principle 4: Respect for The Cycle of Life - The "Seven Generations" Principle
Principle 5: Respect for Energy and Natural Resources - The Conservation and Renewable Resources Principle
Principle 6: Respect for Process - The Holistic Thinking Principle
III. Process [holistic]
• Chapter 16, The Future of Architecture, relates the author's expectations of what may be occurring in the next 10, 20 and 50 years, and represents a realistic 'wake-up' call that demands everyone's attention.
Rather than relay the details here, I'll leave it to readers to discover what may await us in the years ahead.
Suffice to say, at some point in the current century, Sustainable Design will not likely be an option!
• Finally, the several Appendices contain very useful information about the topics below.
In particular, 'Who's Who in Green Design and the discussion of Phases of Green contain very valuable insights.
Appendix A - The Green Warrior Reading List
Appendix B - Who's Who in Green Design
Appendix C - The Phases of Green Design
Appendix D - The Elements of Green Design Methodology
Appendix E - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Summary
------------------------------------
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality-tied to a single garmet of destiny-whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." - Martin Luther King
"If we keep going the way we are going, we are going to end up where we are headed." - Groucho Marx
------------------------------------
"Writers are at their best as terrorists- Sometimes social terrorists, sometimes political, sometimes terrorists of the heart. If a writer is good, he will be all three at once. His weapons are words well used to disturb and to clarify thought, emotion and action." - John Ralston Saul
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...But not an idea whose time has come... - Victor Hugo
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxically behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
-------------------------------
My November 3 blog mentioned a Green Built Conference held at the Ferry Terminal.
Since then, I've read & reviewed an excellent book, 'The Philosophy of Sustainable Design' by Jason F. McLennan.
Here are a few insights before I share this book with the Library Board, the Council, and the Waterfront District Redevelopment Project.
• On Green Economics:
"By the time the design for most human artifacts is completed but before they have actually been built, about 80-90% per cent of their life cycle economic and ecological costs have already been made inevitable." - Joseph Romm
• The City of Austin, Texas was first to adopt a rating system for sustainability of buildings, using 1 to 5 stars, assigned according to 5 criteria; energy efficiency, materials efficiency, water efficiency, indoor air health & safety and community health & safety.
• LEED means 'Leadership in Environmental & Energy Design'.
• The LEED rating system currently has a maximum of 69 possible points.
A LEED Certified building must have 26 to 32 points
A Leed Silver building must have 33 to 38 points
A Leed Gold building must have 39 to 51 points
A Leed Platinum building must have 52 or more points.
Buildings which exceed this highest level are called 'Living Buildings', like the EPICenter at Montana State University in Bozeman, MT.
• The LEED rating system currently has these 6 categories:
1 - Energy & the Atmosphere - 17 points maximum
2- Water Efficiency - 5 points maximum
3- Materials & Resources - 13 points maximum
4- Indoor Air Quality [most complex] - 15 points maximum
5- Sustainable Sites [adjacencies] - 14 points maximum
6. Innovation [ideas outside the box] - 5 points maximum
• The LEED system is a rigorous design tool and its application is simple and cheap.
However, its documentation is time-consuming and expensive.
Most firms charge a $40 to $60 thousand flat fee per project, with no proportionality to building size.
Many projects simply use LEED as a checklist, then turn it in after completion to determine after the fact what certification level is met.
• The Packard Foundation Building in Palo Alto, CA was built after six different levels of buildings were designed for comparison, including the 5 levels described above plus a conventionally constructed building.
The results are dramatic, and available online as the 'Packard Sustainability Matrix & Report'.
• Sustainable Design differs from Traditional Design in three ways:
I. Results [environmental & human impacts]
II. Rationale [6 Principles as below]
Principle 1: Respect for the Wisdom of Natural Systems - The Biomimicry Principle
Principle 2: Respect for People - The Human Vitality Principle
Principle 3: Respect for Place - The Ecosystem/Bio-Region Principle
Principle 4: Respect for The Cycle of Life - The "Seven Generations" Principle
Principle 5: Respect for Energy and Natural Resources - The Conservation and Renewable Resources Principle
Principle 6: Respect for Process - The Holistic Thinking Principle
III. Process [holistic]
• Chapter 16, The Future of Architecture, relates the author's expectations of what may be occurring in the next 10, 20 and 50 years, and represents a realistic 'wake-up' call that demands everyone's attention.
Rather than relay the details here, I'll leave it to readers to discover what may await us in the years ahead.
Suffice to say, at some point in the current century, Sustainable Design will not likely be an option!
• Finally, the several Appendices contain very useful information about the topics below.
In particular, 'Who's Who in Green Design and the discussion of Phases of Green contain very valuable insights.
Appendix A - The Green Warrior Reading List
Appendix B - Who's Who in Green Design
Appendix C - The Phases of Green Design
Appendix D - The Elements of Green Design Methodology
Appendix E - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Summary
------------------------------------
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality-tied to a single garmet of destiny-whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." - Martin Luther King
"If we keep going the way we are going, we are going to end up where we are headed." - Groucho Marx
------------------------------------
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Some Comments & A Review of Green Principles
Before talking about Green Principles, a few comments:
• Reconveyance: The timing of the County's meeting to explain its reconveyance proposal for forest lands in the Lake Whatcom Watershed is suspect at best.
They actually picked the day AFTER elections to publicly explain what is going on!
So the October 'surprise' that got rushed into September will now be explained in November?
It had better be good!
• FCC Shenanigans: I strongly agree with Dave at MegaAwesome. The FCC is out of control and trying to give away the public's airways rights to mega corporations.
Check out PBS.org and see what Bill Moyers has to say about it from his program last night.
Then write your Congressional Representatives. But do it quickly!
• Doorbelling for Dan Pike today found some people who had either not voted or decided.
It was damp, wet and cold, but I'm really glad I did it.
Some people actually thanked us for doing it. That felt good.
And, I like Pike's chances of becoming Mayor!
==========================
'Those who do not read, have no advantage over those who cannot"
- Mark Twain
"Will we be able to face our children and assure them that we did not lack the courage to face these difficult situations, did not lack the stamina to pursue the correct solutions?" - Pierre Trudeau
-------------------------------
On Green Principles:
I reviewed three books I bought at the Green Built Conference held at the Ferry Terminal:
• Developing Sustainable Planned Communities - An Urban Land Institute Publication
• The Philosophy of Sustainable Design - Jason F. McLennan
• Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design - Kira Gould & Lance Hosey
Each had interesting and valuable information, focused on different areas.
But, the second volume is the one I would read first.
Jason McLennan has some insights that are just brilliant!
I plan to share these books with the Library Board, plus the Waterfront District Redevelopment Project
Here are the 16 Chapters and 5 Appendices included:
Chapter 1 - The Philosophy of Sustainable Design
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...
But not an idea whose time has come...
- Victor Hugo
Chapter 2 - The Evolution of Sustainable Design
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxcally behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
Chapter 3 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for the Wisdom of Natural Systems - The Biomimicry Principle
"For a long time we thought we were better than the living world, and now some of us tend to think that we are worse...but neither perspective is healthy. We have to remember how it feels to have equal standing in the world, to be "between the mountain and the ant...part and parcel of creation." - Janine Benyus
Chapter 4 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for People - The Human Vitality Principle
"The biggest tragedy is not the waste of natural resources, though it is tragic. The biggest waste is the waste of human resources." - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Chapter 5 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Place - The Ecosystem/Bio-Region Principle
"Can we not create, from a beautiful natural landscape, an environment inhabited by man in which natural beauty is retained, man housed in community?" - Ian McHarg
Chapter 6 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Energy and Natural Resources - The Conservation and Renewable Resources Principle
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality-tied to a single garmet of destiny-whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." - Martin Luther King
Chapter 7 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for The Cycle of Life - The "Seven Generations" Principle
"If we keep going the way we are going, we are going to end up where we are headed." - Groucho Marx
Insert - A Brief Survey of Green Buildings
Chapter 8 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Process - The Holistic Thinking Principle
"Most people are more comfortable with old problems than with new solutions." - Charles Browe
Chapter 9 - The Technologies and Components of Sustainable Design
"the only way to make change, is to make that which you hope to change obsolete." - Buckminster Fuller
Chapter 10 - Shades of Green - The Levels of Sustainability
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead
Chapter 11 - Productivity and Well-Being
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
Chapter 12 - Greening Your Organization
"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it." - Goethe
Chapter 13 - Green Economics
"By the time the design for most human artifacts is completed but before they have actually been built, about 80-90% per cent of their life cycle economic and ecological costs have already been made inevitable." - Joseph Romm
Chapter 14 - The Sustainable Design Process - Holistic Thinking
"Instead of seeing the rug being pulled out from under us, we can learn to dance on a shifting carpet." - Thomas F. Crum
Chapter 15 - The Aesthetics of Sustainable Design
"In anything at all, perfection is finally attained, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine De Saint Exupery
Chapter 16 - The Future of Green Architecture
"It is horrible to see everything that one detested in the past coming back wearing the colors of the future." - Jean Rostand
Appendix A - The Green Warrior Reading List
"Writers are at their best as terrorists- Sometimes social terrorists, sometimes political, sometimes terrorists of the heart. If a writer is good, he will be all three at once. His weapons are words well used to disturb and to clarify thought, emotion and action." - John Ralston Saul
Appendix B - Who's Who in Green Design
Appendix C - The Phases of Green Design
Appendix D - The Elements of Green Design Methodology
Appendix E - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Summary
------------------------------------
• Reconveyance: The timing of the County's meeting to explain its reconveyance proposal for forest lands in the Lake Whatcom Watershed is suspect at best.
They actually picked the day AFTER elections to publicly explain what is going on!
So the October 'surprise' that got rushed into September will now be explained in November?
It had better be good!
• FCC Shenanigans: I strongly agree with Dave at MegaAwesome. The FCC is out of control and trying to give away the public's airways rights to mega corporations.
Check out PBS.org and see what Bill Moyers has to say about it from his program last night.
Then write your Congressional Representatives. But do it quickly!
• Doorbelling for Dan Pike today found some people who had either not voted or decided.
It was damp, wet and cold, but I'm really glad I did it.
Some people actually thanked us for doing it. That felt good.
And, I like Pike's chances of becoming Mayor!
==========================
'Those who do not read, have no advantage over those who cannot"
- Mark Twain
"Will we be able to face our children and assure them that we did not lack the courage to face these difficult situations, did not lack the stamina to pursue the correct solutions?" - Pierre Trudeau
-------------------------------
On Green Principles:
I reviewed three books I bought at the Green Built Conference held at the Ferry Terminal:
• Developing Sustainable Planned Communities - An Urban Land Institute Publication
• The Philosophy of Sustainable Design - Jason F. McLennan
• Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design - Kira Gould & Lance Hosey
Each had interesting and valuable information, focused on different areas.
But, the second volume is the one I would read first.
Jason McLennan has some insights that are just brilliant!
I plan to share these books with the Library Board, plus the Waterfront District Redevelopment Project
Here are the 16 Chapters and 5 Appendices included:
Chapter 1 - The Philosophy of Sustainable Design
"An invasion of armies can be resisted...
But not an idea whose time has come...
- Victor Hugo
Chapter 2 - The Evolution of Sustainable Design
" One reason we are in so much trouble is that our modern culture is paradoxcally behind the times, still assessing the world the way it did in the nineteenth or even eighteenth centuries: as a place of inexhaustible resources, where man is at the pinnacle of creation, separate from and more important than anything around him." - David Suzuki
Chapter 3 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for the Wisdom of Natural Systems - The Biomimicry Principle
"For a long time we thought we were better than the living world, and now some of us tend to think that we are worse...but neither perspective is healthy. We have to remember how it feels to have equal standing in the world, to be "between the mountain and the ant...part and parcel of creation." - Janine Benyus
Chapter 4 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for People - The Human Vitality Principle
"The biggest tragedy is not the waste of natural resources, though it is tragic. The biggest waste is the waste of human resources." - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Chapter 5 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Place - The Ecosystem/Bio-Region Principle
"Can we not create, from a beautiful natural landscape, an environment inhabited by man in which natural beauty is retained, man housed in community?" - Ian McHarg
Chapter 6 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Energy and Natural Resources - The Conservation and Renewable Resources Principle
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality-tied to a single garmet of destiny-whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." - Martin Luther King
Chapter 7 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for The Cycle of Life - The "Seven Generations" Principle
"If we keep going the way we are going, we are going to end up where we are headed." - Groucho Marx
Insert - A Brief Survey of Green Buildings
Chapter 8 - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Respect for Process - The Holistic Thinking Principle
"Most people are more comfortable with old problems than with new solutions." - Charles Browe
Chapter 9 - The Technologies and Components of Sustainable Design
"the only way to make change, is to make that which you hope to change obsolete." - Buckminster Fuller
Chapter 10 - Shades of Green - The Levels of Sustainability
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead
Chapter 11 - Productivity and Well-Being
" While an upgrade that cuts energy use in half can save one dollar per square foot in annual energy costs, it can generate more than ten dollars per square foot in new profits every year if it boosts productivity even five per cent!" - Joseph Romm
Chapter 12 - Greening Your Organization
"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it." - Goethe
Chapter 13 - Green Economics
"By the time the design for most human artifacts is completed but before they have actually been built, about 80-90% per cent of their life cycle economic and ecological costs have already been made inevitable." - Joseph Romm
Chapter 14 - The Sustainable Design Process - Holistic Thinking
"Instead of seeing the rug being pulled out from under us, we can learn to dance on a shifting carpet." - Thomas F. Crum
Chapter 15 - The Aesthetics of Sustainable Design
"In anything at all, perfection is finally attained, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine De Saint Exupery
Chapter 16 - The Future of Green Architecture
"It is horrible to see everything that one detested in the past coming back wearing the colors of the future." - Jean Rostand
Appendix A - The Green Warrior Reading List
"Writers are at their best as terrorists- Sometimes social terrorists, sometimes political, sometimes terrorists of the heart. If a writer is good, he will be all three at once. His weapons are words well used to disturb and to clarify thought, emotion and action." - John Ralston Saul
Appendix B - Who's Who in Green Design
Appendix C - The Phases of Green Design
Appendix D - The Elements of Green Design Methodology
Appendix E - The Principles of Sustainable Design - Summary
------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
