[GreenYes] Building the Change: The 2030 Climate Challenge that AIA and USCM adopted

[Gary Liss <gary@no.address>]

Apologiesfor Cross-Postings

You can subscribe to get this newsletter directly 
at 
<http://www.natlogic.com>http://www.natlogic.com. 
For the original article (including graph of 
buildings, transportation and industry 
contributions to climate change gases, go to: 
<http://www.natlogic.com/resources/nbl/v15/n03.html>http://www.natlogic.com/resources/nbl/v15/n03.html

>Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 00:20:38 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Gil Friend <gfriend@no.address>
>
>Building the Change: The 2030 Climate Challenge
>New Bottom Line: Strategic Perspectives on Business and Environment
>October 2006
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Ed Mazria presented the opening keynote at the 
>recent 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.x4a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.westcoastgreen.com>West 
>Coast Green in San Francisco September 28, and 
>offered what was probably the most compelling, 
>moving and useful global warming presentation 
>I've heard yet. (No offense, Al, but Ed got more 
>usefully into what to do for high leverage impact.)
>
>'When the US balked at Kyoto,' he explained, 
>'the stated concern was impact on industry and 
>competitiveness. But US industry has held 
>emissions relatively flat for the last 20 years 
>(partly through efficiency, partly through export of industry and emissions).'
>
>But the lions share of US emissions -- 48% -- 
>and the fastest growing sector is emissions from 
>buildings (about 1/6 of that in their 
>construction, and 5/6 in their operations) The 
>usual energy pies show US energy yse 
>approximately evenly divided between buildings, 
>transportation, industry and ommerce. But 
>transportation, industry and commerce all 
>involve buildings, so slicing the pies 
>differently ties nearly half of US energy use to 
>buildings. Moveover, building decisions are 
>long-lived -- They can have impact for decades.
>Mazria.jpg
>




>'We are the problem,' Mazria told 7000 building 
>industry professionals, 'and we are the solution.'
>
>The US builds 5 billion square feet of new 
>construction each year, renovates an equivalent 
>amount, and tears down 1.75 billion, in a total 
>building stock of some 275 billion square foot. 
>'In the next 30 years, we'll take down 52 
>billion of that, renovate 150 billion, add 150 
>billion. By 2035, 80% of our built environment will be new or renovated.'
>
>What a huge opportunity to turn the entire building sector around!
>
>So Mazria has posed the 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.y4a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldchanging.com%2Farchives%2F004475.htmltarget%3D_blank>2030 
>challenge. Three steps, clear and simple:
>
>1. All new building projects and major 
>renovations meet a fossil fuel energy 
>consumption performance standard of 1/2 the 
>national (or country) average for that building type.
>
>2. A minimum amount of existing building area be 
>renovated to use one-half the fossil fuel energy they currently consume
>
>This is a win-win-win for everybody, Mazria 
>says. There's no downside. ' If you do that, you 
>don't need the new power plant' -- which is 
>awfully important, since China alone is building 
>a coal-fired power plant each week)
>
>3. To bend curve down, take the new building 
>standards down a notch every 10 years; at 2010, 
>the reduction target for new construction and major renovations would be 60%
>2015: 70%
>2020: 80%
>2025: 90%
>2030: carbon neutral, requiring no fossil fuel energy to operate
>
>How hard is this? Mazria answered his own 
>question. 'You can't fail. We've made it fail 
>proof. You can only get an A. It's simple, with three ways to play:'
>
>1. Design and innovation
>If you think about site, shape, put the glass on 
>right side, shade the glazing, shape of 
>openings, daylighting, natural ventilation, 
>adjust materials properties and colors, you 
>should be able to get 50% from low cost/no cost 
>improvements -- changes that are basically information.
>
>2. Add technology
>Solar hot water (hot water currently accounts 
>for 15% of household energy consumption), PV, 
>wind, geo, movable insulation, mechanical 
>shading, high efficiency systems & appliances. 
>These may add cost, but provide an attractive payback.
>
>3. Purchase renewable energy or certified 
>renewable energy credits (RECs) (30% maximum)
>
>Since the 2030 Challenge was issued in January 
>2006, the 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.z4a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aia.org>American 
>Institute of Architects (with 78,000 members) 
>has adopted it verbatim, and added education 
>commitments. The US Conference of Mayors -- led 
>by Daley of Chicago, Chavez of Albuquerque, Diaz 
>of Miami and Nickels of Seattle -- adopted it 
>unanimously, and is calling on all cities to 
>implement. New Mexico is requiring these 
>criteria of all state buildings. And efforts are 
>underway to get the US EPA to include these 
>energy reduction targets in their 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.94a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energystar.gov%2Findex.cfm%3Fc%3Devaluate_performance.bus_portfoliomanager>building 
>performance benchmarks.
>
>And so the revolution proceeds. Fourteen mayors 
>have formed a coalition to stop more than a 
>dozen new coal plants planned in Texas. New 
>England governors & Eastern Canada premiers have 
>pledged by 2010, reduce emissions to 1990 
>levels. But their emissions are continuing to 
>increase, even proclamations proclamations and 
>laws and executive orders. 'We need to put in 
>practice what we say,' Mazria says. California's 
>cap on GHGs to 1990 levels by 2020 isn't just a 
>target, it's the law. 'The only way to meet that 
>goal is to get a handle on the building sector.'
>
>There was faint praise, if any, for the 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.pcrr58aab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usgbc.org>US 
>Green Building Council, home of the LEED? rating 
>system for green buildings. 'The AIA stepped out 
>ahead of the USGBC, and adopted targets' Mazria 
>noted. 'The GBC done nothing since, but will 
>develop Standard 189 with ASHRAE to set a 
>minimum benchmark. That's bad news, and years from now.'
>
>The AIA has called on USGBC to incorporate minimal GHG reductions into LEED:
>Certified: 50%
>Silver: 65%
>Gold: 80%
>Platinum: Carbon neutral
>
>'Ask the GBC to get on this, Mazria ehorted. 
>'LEED should be leadership; we have to do this 
>tomorrow, not next year. New Mexico isgoing to 
>require this in state buildings; ask California 
>to do the same. And ask ASHRAE 189 to establish the 50% benchmark.
>
>Finally, Mazria turned his attention to 
>eduction. ' There are 100,000 architecture, 
>engineering and lansdscape architecture students 
>in the US, and they're getting very little education in ecology and design.'
>
>So he's also cooked up a '2010 imperative' for professional schools
>1. Beginning 2007, add one sentence to curricula 
>and student project directives:
>All projects will be designed to engage the 
>environment in way that dramatically reduces or 
>eliminates the need for fossil fuel
>
>'and within one year,' Mazria asserts, 'the 
>entire education system will be changed.'
>
>2. Achieve complete ecological literacy in 
>design education by 2012 (though I'll confess 
>I'm not clear how he proposes this to happen that quickly).
>
>3. Achieve carbon neutral campuses for all design schools:
>- implement sustainable design strategies
>- generate on site power
>- purchase renewable energy and RECs
>
>Finally Mazria proposed a third challenge -- the 
>'Feb 2010 Imperative,' calling for a global 
>design teach in 'some day in February 2007.'
>
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.84a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fclimatecrisis.org%2F>'An 
>Inconvenient Truth' shakes people loose. The 
>2030 challenge offers what I call 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.74a75ybab.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.natlogic.com%2Fresources%2Fnbl%2Fv13%2Fn03.htmltarget%3D_blank>sufficient 
>goals -- and provides a doable plan for meeting them. Let's go!
>
>(c) 2006 Gil Friend. All rights reserved. [061001]
>New Bottom Line is published periodically by 
>Natural Logic, Inc., and is archived at http://www.natlogic.com
>
>May be forwarded or cross-posted intact -- 
>including this notice -- via email as long as no 
>fees are charged. Publishing -- whether on a Web 
>site or in print -- and commercial distribution 
>in any form require our advance permission; but 
>feel free to link to us. Thank you. Our 
>apologies if you receive multiple copies.
>
>Gil Friend, systems ecologist and business 
>strategist, is President and CEO of Natural 
>Logic, Inc. -- offering advisory services and 
>tools that help companies and communities 
>prosper by embedding the laws of nature at the heart of enterprise.
>
>Contact Information
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>email: <mailto:gfriend@no.address>gfriend@no.address
>phone: 510-849-5467
>web: 
><http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=8w475ybab.0.qisb59n6.9v5vwtn6.4360&ts=S0205&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.natlogic.com>http://www.natlogic.com 
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Powered by
><http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=news01>
>[]
>
>Natural Logic Inc. | PO Box 119 | Berkeley | CA | 94701

Gary Liss
916-652-7850
Fax: 916-652-0485
www.garyliss.com 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GreenYes" group.
To post to this group, send email to GreenYes@no.address
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to GreenYes-unsubscribe@no.address
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/GreenYes
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---