The Environmental Change Institute does it again. Another killer report, if the govornment want to reduce emissions 80% by 2050 then this is a guide to how that can be done in the housing sector. The bastards left out transport!

“The Low-carbon Strategy from the Environmental Change Institute at Oxford University identifi es the policies needed to deliver an 80 per cent cut in carbon emissions from UK homes by 2050. These cuts are achievable but will require a quantum leap in commitment from Government and a radical new approach.

The policies have been designed not only to dramatically reduce carbon emissions, but also to be delivered equitably. The poorest households will be prioritised for assistance and fuel poverty will be wiped out. The scientifi c consensus is that for the UK to play its part in helping the world avoid a rise of more than 2°C, we must reduce our carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. The household sector represents 27 per cent of our total emissions and achieving deep cuts here is an imperative.

The low-carbon revolution starts at home.“

Full report Brief summary

There is a very interesting debate going on over at Grist.

A “speculative 15,000 square foot mansion in Manalapan, Fla., will be the first home of its size to be certified green by the U.S. Green Building Council and the Florida Green Building Council.” Is that a good idea for USGBC? That’s my question to you. Obviously people are going to build big homes — and it is better if they have green features. But should USGBC single out such “eco-mansions” for positive recognition?

My response to this is bellow, i agree that a low energy home is better than a high energy one but i think there is a more important argument.

It strikes me that when we talk about many topics such as: 1. Business Energy Usage 2. Green Buildings 3. National ‘Intensity’ targets. We are talking about emissions relative to the past. We need to talk about emissions relative to our planet, in other words, one big paradigm change of the climate challenge is saying no to relative targets: we dont live a a relative planet the logic dosent work. If we accept relative targets for buildings (90% bigger than that size, when smaller sizes are possible) then why not for businesses? If for businesses then why not for countries? If for countries then why not for the world…answers are all the same.

The world business council on sustainable development (which has published many facinating reports) has just released a report entitled ‘Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Business Realities and Opportunities’ (PDF) advocating green building and debunking some of the myths about how much this costs.

Geneva, 21 August 2007 – Survey finds green costs overestimated by 300% and a need to foster zero net energy construction. Key players in real estate and construction misjudge the costs and benefits of “green” buildings, creating a major barrier to more energy efficiency in the building sector, a new study by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) reports.

Respondents to a 1400 person global survey estimated the additional cost of building green at 17 percent above conventional construction, more than triple the true cost difference of about 5 percent. At the same time, survey respondents put greenhouse gas emissions by buildings at 19 percent of world total, while the actual number of 40 percent is double this.

So save a copy to your hard drive and keep it safe for the next time you want to argue for higher building standards…remember this is from an organisation where CEO’s get together it is not a green group.

It remains surprising, to this day, that human civilisation is so dependent on climate. Often these links are not obvious, this being particularly the case in industrialised nations. However, these links are real, and more and more areas are being investigated for climate vulnerability.

A project–Noah’s Ark–by the European Commission to investigate the impacts of climate change on Europe’s cultural heritage has just been launched.

This EC project takes a detailed look at climate impacts, using the latest knowledge of material science. A brochure with programme outline and an simple explanation of the work can be downloaded from here (PDF)

The project is however, limited in scope to Europe, another organisation very much involved with architectural preservation is UNESCO. A report earlier in the year by UNESCO on the threat posed by climate change to world heritage sites received a great deal of attention. More on UNESCO and climate change here.

The threats posed by climate change to natural and cultural sites on UNESCO’s World Heritage List are outlined in a new UNESCO publication, “Case Studies on Climate Change and World Heritage”^*. The report features 26 examples – including the Tower of London, Kilimanjaro National Park and the Great Barrier Reef – case studies that are representative of the dangers faced by the 830 sites inscribed on the World Heritage

Amory lovins on more efficient:
Buildings
Industry
Transportation
Implementation
And the implications of this new energy efficient world if attained.

1. Advanced Energy Efficiency, Lecture 1: Buildings

2. Advanced Energy Efficiency, Lecture 2: Industry

3. Advanced Energy Efficiency, Lecture 3: Transportation

4. Advanced Energy Efficiency, Lecture 4: Implementation

5. Advanced Energy Efficiency, Lecture 5: Implications

Hat tip to Joneri

The UN Environment Program (UNEP) have just released a report outlining the potential for climate change mitigation through efficient (or ‘green’) building design.

The report “Building and Climate Change: Status, Challenges and Opportunities” is the latest in a long line of interesting reports on this subject.

A quick look at the Global and US emissions by end use sector explains this. Just over a quarter of US emissions (27%) are attributable to building energy demand. Globally the proportion of emissions consumed by buildings is 15%, this exclude energy used in the construction process.

Further Reading:

1. The UK government has a target for 60% reduction of GHG’s by 2050, a project by the Environmental Change Institute (ECI) called The 40% House describes how this can be done.
2. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) has taken a look at Urban environments in it’s latest report. This report deals with climate change as a central theme but also deals with a plethora of urban challenges. My idea that ‘It’s also low carbon’ could be a useful philosophy for a campaign is reinforced by the many synergies identified between climate mitigation and smart urban policy.
3. In 2005 the Sustinable Development Comission took a look at what we are going to do with all our old building in the UK. Can they be upgraded cost effectively or will they have to go?

Architechture 2030, has launched The 2010 Imperative; a venture being sponsored by The American Institute of Architects (AIA), The Home Depot Foundation, US Green Building Council (USGBC) and New York Academy of Sciences.

A facinating project with an impresive launch…

Tens of thousands of people from all over the world gathered here on February 20, 2007 to participate in the Global Emergency Teach-in conducted by Architecture 2030. During this interactive webcast, 2030 issued The 2030 Challenge and The 2010 Imperative, specific achievable strategies to transform the built environment. These strategies are designed to immediately stabilize emissions in the Building Sector, and then reverse them to acceptable levels over the next ten years.

Presentations at the launch where given by James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Space Insitute; one of the worlds leading atmospheric modeling centres. Also by Edward Mazria, founder of Architechture 2030 and Chris Luebkeman senior fellow of the Design Futures Council.

Presentations by:

• James Hansen
• Chris Luebkeman
• Edward Mazria