Freiburg is known as an ecocity. The newly built neighbourhoods of Vauban and Rieselfeld were developed and built according to the idea of sustainability. The citizens of Freiburg are known in Germany for their love of cycling and recycling.

This past December, as climate talks in Copenhagen commenced, I sat in talks in Istanbul listening to local government representatives, building professionals and academics discuss concrete actions that can and have been taken to reduce greenhouse gases in cities around the world. The 8th annual Ecocity World Summit posed a compelling alternative to the fights and frustrations that mired the climate talks of Copenhagen in conflict. Cities represent about 75% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, and the birth of the “eoocity” concept a few decades ago may have marked the beginning of our most tangible solution yet. From recycling, wastewater treatment and green building to smart urban planning, public transit and renewable energy generation, ecocity plans and ideas have emerged with a list of seemingly “no-brainer” action items to pursue.

While in theory, the “ecocity” may seem like a very straightforward concept, in practice the challenges prove tough to transcend. The urban and suburban sprawl that plagues regions in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand may seem like an almost insurmountable barrier to reducing carbon emissions. However, in Istanbul, a city of 13 million and growing, sprawl is compounded by the fact that much of the development is unplanned. This is also true for other mega-cities like Rio de Janeiro where families often add stories to their own homes, creating unsound structures that may collapse during natural disasters. Such unplanned settlements also make it difficult to create underground tunnels for a metro system, as there may be no record of where gas and electricity lines run underground. Traffic and a lack of environmental practices like wastewater treatment are also a major issue for such megacities.

Historical considerations also present challenges, as the rich cultural heritage of ancient cities demands a certain authenticity of design. Moreover, as cities like Istanbul go to dig tunnels for eco-features like an underground metro, they may discover archeological treasures that force them to stop digging.

In modern cities of intense density like Hong Kong, Tei Pei, and Singapore, a lack of space to erect renewable power generation and urban farming operations create challenges to meeting energy and food demands without importing food and energy. In many developing nations, a lack of laws to regulate pollution and a lack of enforcement for existing environmental laws also create little incentive to move towards renewable energy. Some regions lack the resources to produce renewable energy, forcing them to make a decision between a local energy economy and a clean energy economy.

Approaches to creating an ecocity to solve these problems vary. According to Elizabeth Rapoport of the University College of London, there are three main categories of ecocities. Ecovillages, such as Cerro Gordo in the U.S. are small pastoral communities. Masterplanned ecocities such as Tianjin, China and Masdar, Abu Dabi, are new cities that incorporate ecological principles from day one. Models in already retrofitted ecocities like Curitiba, Brazil and Freiburg, Germany have the greatest potential to transform the already developed world, where builders and planners will have to make improvements on the existing infrastructure and building stock. Taking lessons from other more advanced cities will be an important step in the process if cities want to avoid reinventing the wheel. Conversely, avoiding some of the mistakes that more established cities have made will be crucial for nascent cities in the developing world.

The term “ecocity,” like other trendy terms including “green” and “sustainable” will likely be the subject of abuse over the coming years and decades. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution for the cities of the world, the sooner the international community comes together to define an ecocity that really does live up to the name, the more clear direction and success cities will have in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and pollution while improving the quality of life for their residents. Hopefully the local governments involved in redesigning our cities can learn to work together more effectively than did the participants in Copenhagen. Unfortunately, that’s a low bar.

Vancouver is already known for savvy city planning.

Vancouver’s Mayor Gregor Robertson recently announced an ambitious 10-year plan to make Vancouver the world’s greenest city by 2020.  Robertson presented the plan to the “Gaining Ground-Resilient Cities” conference at the Vancouver Convention Center. Robertson says that Vancouver is still far too reliant on cars and on food from far away, and that every day, the city produces too much waste and consumes too much energy and water.

Its goals are:

• Setting up a low-carbon economic development zone to attract investment for advancing renewable energy, energy-efficient and low-carbon technologies, with the object of creating 20,000 new green jobs.
• Making all new construction in the city carbon-neutral and improving efficiency of existing buildings by 20% by 2020.
• Encouraging greater green mobility by having more than 50% of residents walking, cycling or using public transit to move around the city. (According to Robertson, green travel now comprises 37% of trips).
• Reducing the amount of solid waste per capita that goes to landfills or is incinerated by 40%.
• Maintaining the highest international standards for drinking water but reducing the per-capita consumption of water by 33%.
• Achieving the cleanest air of any major city in the world.
• Becoming a global leader in urban food systems and reducing the carbon footprint of food production by 33%. Robertson wishes to take advantage of the Agricultural Land Reserve surrounding the city.
• Giving every citizen easy access to nature by providing “incomparable access to green spaces” by expanding “the world’s most spectacular urban forest in Stanley park” so that by 2020 every person would live within a five-minute walk of a park, beach or greenway. Another 150,000 trees will be planted in the city within the next 10 years.
• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 33% from 2007 levels.  (According to Robertson, Vancouver currently produces less than five tons per capita – only a few European cities beat that).
• Reducing the ecological footprint of Vancouver by 33% on the way to realizing the “one-planet footprint.” Robertson said the city now has a “four-planet” level of consumption and waste, and the goal is to reduce this footprint from seven hectares to 1.8 hectares per person.

To date, many city planner look to Vancouver as an example of the best practices in urban development.  Apparently, they are just getting started.

The program is expected to greatly boost solar installations.

According to Vice President Joe Biden, the solar financing plan that sprouted in Berkeley in 2007 will become a national model. The program, called Recovery Through Retrofit, creates a framework for cities, counties and states to set up tax districts that allow residential and business property owners to install solar panels and make other energy efficiency improvements. The investment will be paid off over a 20-year property tax assessment.

Since Berkeley adopted its financing plan, cities around the nation have adopted similar models, and California, New York, Texas and 11 other states have passed legislation making it easier for municipalities to create their own financing plans. The federal plan and those adopted in most other cities allow property owners to make other energy-efficiency upgrades as well, including installing new windows, insulation and weather stripping.

Berkeley’s plan aims to eliminate the up-front cost of solar installation and to attach the debt to the home and not to the property owner (the assessment stays with the property, not the person). Property owners pay no money up front but pay about $180 a month on their property tax bill, an amount that is offset by the energy saved from generating solar power. The plan, along with federal, state and utility rebates, allows property owners to nearly break even on their investment. According to the city’s energy department, of the 40 original Berkeley participants, 38 have completed or nearly completed solar panel installation.

The Union of Concerned Scientists 2030 Blueprint asserts that consumers and businesses in every region of the U.S. save billions of dollars under the Blueprint.

The Union of Concerned Scientists recently released The Climate 2030 Blueprint which analyzes the economic and technological feasibility of meeting targets for reducing global warming emissions in the U.S., with a cap set at 26% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 56% below 2005 levels by 2030. The Blueprint suggests that deep emissions cuts can be achieved while saving U.S. consumers and businesses $465 billion in 2030.

Meeting this cap means the United States would limit total emissions to 180,000 million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2eq) from 2000 to 2030.   To reach the 2020 and 2030 carbon reduction targets, the Blueprint proposes a comprehensive policy approach (the “Blueprint policies”) that combines an economy-wide cap-and-trade program with complementary policies. This approach finds cost-effective ways to reduce fossil fuel emissions throughout the U.S. economy — including industry, buildings, electricity, and transportation — and to store carbon through agricultural activities and forestry.

The analysis relies primarily on a modified version of the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Modeling System, supplemented with an analysis of the impact of greater energy efficiency in industry and buildings by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.   In addition, they worked with researchers at the University of Tennessee to analyze the potential for crops and residues to provide biomass energy.

The analysis argues that the technologies and policies pursued under the Blueprint produce dramatic changes in energy use and cuts in carbon emissions as well as strong economic growth.

Solar installation is finding new financing tools through AB 811.

As California and the rest of the U.S. sink further into recession, one might wonder how anyone could possibly afford energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations. However, AB 811, passed last summer in the California state legislature, authorizes all cities and counties in California to designate areas where property owners can obtain low-interest government loans for the installation of solar panels and energy efficiency upgrades as long as they are permanently fixed to the property. The loans would be repaid as an item on the property owner’s property tax bill, thus the debt will stay with the property instead of the citizen. Clean energy investments funded through these programs will assist local governments in reaching the goals of Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Furthermore, the AB 811 mechanism requires little or no investment of general funds and represents very low risk because the loan repayment is a senior lien on the property ahead of the mortgage itself. The California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE) is currently developing AB 811 programs in several select cities in southern California and is aiming to assist cities in various capacities, from the early stages of program design to ongoing program management and administration. Such programs also have the potential to create new jobs in the clean energy and energy efficiency sectors.

How such programs will eventually pan out is yet to be seen. With property values in steep decline and local government coffers drying up, such lending programs could undoubtedly find better circumstances in which to make their debut. However, if California is going to address climate change and meet the requirements of AB 32, such programs may be just the tool the state needs to get on track for emissions reductions and they might even create some new jobs in the process.

A Short Guide to Setting Up a City-Scale Retrofit Program

Green For All and the Center on Wisconsin Strategy (COWS) have just released A Short Guide to Setting Up a City-Scale Retrofit Program (pdf, 308 KB), a guide to designing and implementing energy efficiency retrofitting programs on a citywide scale. The organizations aim to make these retrofits available to more households and to provide good, entry-level jobs with career tracks that are accessible to low-income communities and communities of color.

While current retrofitting programs have overwhelming economic and environmental benefits, many are unavailable to low-income individuals and many current retrofitting programs only create low-wage, short-term jobs.

The guide is a tool for local organizations, business leaders, entrepreneurs, elected officials and others to promote energy efficiency in their communities while providing pathways into sustainable careers in construction and green building. It outlines all of the important aspects of such a program, including policies, labor standards, community coalitions and long-term funding options.

More about the guide on Green For All’s website.

According to the report, green building is on the rise.

According to the U.S. Green Building Council, in 2008 at least eight states and 22 local governments endorsed green building policies. as compared with just one state in 2004.   Many of the measures require new government buildings to meet the council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. Other measures give commercial builders incentives, such as tax breaks and expedited permits. A few policies – such as one in Maryland’s Baltimore County – give tax credits to builders for green construction of homes.

Florida, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Oklahoma and South Dakota enacted laws in 2008 requiring that new, large state buildings meet LEED standards.  More than a dozen cities and counties did the same, including Chandler (AZ), El Paso, Tampa, Monterey, (CA), Fairfax County (VA) and Starkville (MISS).

According to The Green Building Impact Report, written by Robert Watson:

Land Use. Between efficient location and the myriad of alternative transportation options supported by LEED, nearly 400 million vehicle miles traveled have been avoided by the occupants of LEED buildings. This grows to more than 4 billion vehicle miles by 2020.

Water. Water savings from LEED commercial buildings is expected to grow to more than 7% of all non-residential water use by 2020. The equivalent of 2008 LEED water savings would fill enough 32-ounce bottles to circle the Earth 300 times.

Energy. LEED saves energy on many different levels, including energy related to operations, commuting, water treatment and the lower energy embodied within materials. In operational energy terms, LEED buildings consume approximately 25% less on average than comparable commercial buildings. By 2020, these energy savings amount to more than 1.3 million tons of coal equivalent each year, representing approximately 78 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) avoided emissions.

Materials and Resources. LEED has helped spur an entire industry in green building materials. Certified projects to date have specified a total of more than $10 billion of green materials, which could grow to a cumulative amount exceeding $100 billion by 2020.

Indoor Environmental Quality.  Indoor environmental quality is the most important contributor to the productivity attributes of LEED. Under a conservative calculation, companies with employees working in LEED buildings realized annual productivity gains exceeding $170 million resulting from improved indoor environmental quality, a number that will grow to nearly $2 billion of annual productivity improvements by 2020.

While some may have speculated that green building was a trend that would soon end, as it becomes embedded in local and state ordinances, it’s proving its durability as a good idea.

Download Green Building By the Numbers (pdf, 152 KB)

‘Green’ building codes sprout up across USA
(USA Today, 8/13/08)