As a nation we are experiencing rapid urbanization and population growth rates that have lead to a significant increase in urban development. With this increased densification comes an expansion of impermeable areas that drastically reduce the land through which water can easily be absorbed into the ground. Leaders throughout the country are recognizing this growth in urbanization and Melina Scholefield (City of Vancouver) calls us to “[reimagine] what water means in our city” (CoV, 2017). Green infrastructure defines a set of tools and practices to combat the water quality and ecological consequences of increased development. Green infrastructure practices are “effective, economical, and [enhance] community safety and quality of life” (American Rivers, 2008).
The United States Environmental Protection Agency has found that “[urban] development affects both the quantity and quality of water” by changing the natural flow of stormwater runoff in a watershed (EPA, 2018). It is clear that when rain hits impervious surfaces including roofs, streets, and parking lots, large quantities of surface runoff divert and carry pollutants that harm plants and wildlife. Green infrastructure techniques such as rain gardens, permeable soils, and green roofs mimic the natural process of the water cycle and filter out pollutants before releasing the remaining runoff to storm sewers or waterways. The aforementioned techniques generate positive water quality effects but also increase the livability of our cities. Streets and buildings are made more inhabitable by improving their aesthetic appeal as well as reducing ambient air temperatures.
The City of Vancouver (CoV) has implemented a plan of action to transform its community and become the “Greenest City” by 2020 (CoV, 2012). Known for one of the highest precipitation levels in the world, the CoV recognizes that rising precipitation is inevitable due to increased global climate change. Sir Nicholas Stern, Chief Economist for the World Bank, has “estimated that failure to tackle the climate crisis could cost the global economy $6.6 trillion a year” (CoV, 2012). The “Greenest City” action plan consists of smaller plans like the “Rain City Strategy” that in particular targets green infrastructure development in an urban environment. The CoV’s “Rain City Strategy” hopes to transform the way rainwater is managed with a goal of improving water quality and livability. The South East False Creek project is one of the leading examples of green infrastructure put into practice in the CoV.
Source: (Luker, 2017)
The figure above highlights key green infrastructure elements that include:
100% LEED certified buildings
Green roofs and permeable pavers
Habitat Compensation Island
Public parks, plazas, and gardens
Emma Luker’s report on lessons learned in the Olympic Village development provide evidence of improved water quality from the green roofs, permeable pavers, and habitat compensation island. Furthermore, the public parks, plazas, and gardens promote increased neighbourhood social interaction and provide additional community network opportunities (Luker, 2017).
Sustainable development has been adopted nationwide and cab be seen implemented by corporations that preach environmental sustainability. Mountain Equipment Co-op has displayed its commitment to environmental sustainability by installing green roofs on one of their Toronto retail locations. The state-of-the-art living roof features “planted indigenous meadow plants, flowers, and grasses that do not require frequent watering” (MEC, 2018). The figures below visualize the roof naturally passing rainwater collected on the roof to the creek below.
Additionally, the soil planted on MEC’s green roof pulls heat trapping C02 out of the atmosphere, effectively offsetting the effects of global warming as well as insulating the building to reduce heating requirements.
Green infrastructure solutions can be applied at varying scales, from a house or building level, to a broader landscape level. The restoration of the natural water cycle through green infrastructure techniques has proven to be effective and economical, and with increased urbanization green infrastructure will be at the forefront of urban sustainable development.
References
American Rivers. (2008). What is Green Infrastructure? Retrieved from https://www.americanrivers.org/threats-solutions/clean-water/green-infrastructure/what-is-green-infrastructure/
CoV. (2017). Green infrastructure: Sustainably managing our rainwater. Retrieved from https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/green-infrastructure.aspx
CoV. (2012). Greenest City 2020 Action Plan (Rep.). Retrieved November 30, 2018, from City of Vancouver website: https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/Greenest-city-action-plan.pdf
EPA. (2018). Smart Growth and Water. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/smart-growth-and-water#background
Luker, E. (2017). Lessons Learned from Rainwater Management Strategies Used in the Olympic Village Development(Rep.). Vancouver: Greenest City Scholars Program.
MEC. (2018). Mountain Equipment Co-op (MEC). Retrieved November 30, 2018, from http://www.greenroofs.com/projects/mountain-equipment-co-op-mec/
Human coastal populations are steadily increasing and make up over 70% of the world’s population, yet are increasingly vulnerable to the threat of climate change induced extreme weather events and sea-level rise. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts a worst-case sea level rise of 0.59m by 2100, but new studies suggest this value may be exceeded in half the time. Regardless of the predicted values, the future effects of climate change on coastal areas will be seen through fisheries and marine habitats, local economies, water resources, increased frequency and intensity of storm events, increased coastal erosion, and increased flood risk. It is imperative to mitigate the effects of climate change where possible by building resilience into coastal communities, including employing strategies for shoreline protection and flood prevention [1]. Increased resilience provides the ability to adapt to change and recover from disruptions from an economic, environmental, and social perspective [2].
Traditional coastal engineering strategies approach the issue of coastal protection with hard, engineered structures to disrupt sediment transport and mitigate flooding. While these built structures may protect the shoreline, they may also have unintended consequences such as the destruction of natural habitat, proximate erosion, and biodiversity alterations and loss [1]. These unintended consequences provide the opportunity for alternate solutions to coastal protection which are sustainable, reliable, and cost-effective while addressing the threat of accelerated sea level rise due to climate change and the minimization of the effects of hard engineered structures on local ecosystems [3].
In this blog, green infrastructure refers to “natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services” [4]. Ecosystem services refers to the benefits humans gain from healthy ecosystems. The integration of green infrastructure in coastal protection can offer shoreline erosion mitigation and foster healthy ecosystems, which provide ecosystem services.
Effective Strategies
An effective strategy to implement green infrastructure into coastal engineering is the development of a hybrid approach to coastal protection. A hybrid approach applies systems-thinking to integrate both hard engineering and green infrastructures and addresses each options strengths, challenges, and effects. Hybrid engineering structures address the limited capacity of natural ecosystems during extreme events and the economic and social costs of hard engineering. As the depth of knowledge on in the interaction between hard engineering and green infrastructure increases, the opportunities for innovative hybrid solutions will increase [2].
Building Materials and Design Considerations
The integration of natural materials in the design of coastal protection can include “sand, sand-fill, wetland plants, oyster reefs, aquatic vegetation, stones, and coir fiber logs” [2]. Using a combined approach of coastal engineering and ecosystem engineering allows for the use of local ecological species to compliment engineering solutions to achieve coastal resilience. For example, oyster beds, mussel beds, willow floodplains, and marram grass can be used to trap sediment and attenuate waves [3]. Simultaneously, hard engineering structures can be designed to better meet the needs of local ecological species and enhance ecosystem functioning by providing a more suitable habitat [2] [3]. Another example of a hybrid approach is the adaptation of dikes and dams to enhance ecological habitat, ecosystem functioning, and sediment precipitation [2] [3]. Further, the construction of artificial structures to support the restoration of shellfish reefs or coral reefs can build coastal resilience by providing ecosystem services of wave attenuation and erosion mitigation [2].
Figure 1 – A planted marsh with a rock sill [7]. Source: National Park Service, Coastal Adaptation Strategies Handbook.
Interdisciplinary Communication
A key component of effective design of hybrid systems is interdisciplinary communication between involved parties, including engineers, ecologists, First Nation communities with traditional local knowledge, and project stakeholders.
Precautions
There is no universal solution for improving coastal resilience as all shorelines are unique, so many different design strategies must be considered to improve coastal resilience. Since very little data is available, the observation of previous studies and projects is important to learn which approaches are most successful in different locations and circumstances. It is widely understood that more research is needed to further develop strategies for building coastal resilience into future hybrid projects [2].
Research must be done to determine the efficacy and unintended consequences of designs, including the effects of the construction of the design. Likewise, it’s important to ensure the effects of the solution have been considered on a temporal and spacial scale, meaning the unintended consequences of the design have been considered in the long term and also for nearby ecosystems [1].
Implementation, Policy, and Tools
As more information is gained, developments can be made in policies, zoning, design codes, and decision and planning tools [2]. Strategies to integrate green infrastructure into coastal engineering design include “building the case for natural coastal protection” and bringing green infrastructure “into the mainstream decision process” [6].
By improving research and building better models which account of combined risks, a clearer understanding of the magnitude of coastal protection from green infrastructure can be used to make decisions. Likewise, the valuation of ecosystem services from green infrastructure can inform economic arguments for decision makers. The development of policies, planning tools, and decision-support tools which consider the benefits of green infrastructure will bring hybrid approaches to coastal engineering into the mainstream development planning process [6].
Challenges of Hybrid Designs
The major challenge associated with the application of hybrid designs to coastal engineering is the lack of data, testing, and design practices. Due to the unique nature of coastlines, there is no clear design code or even best practice guideline to inform which solutions may be best in a situation [3]. Further, hybrid designs do not provide the same degree of ecosystem services as strictly green infrastructure applications may provide, and may still produce negative impacts on local ecology. Also, since the hybrid projects are relatively new, the permitting process may be more difficult than for traditional, established infrastructure projects.
The existing data that is available suggests the application of solely green infrastructure is best for low energy shorelines [6]. In situations where engineering criteria, local site conditions, or hydro-dynamic conditions necessitate the use of strictly hard engineering solutions, small ecological considerations can be applied to the design such as modified structures which enhance biodiversity habitats. While the solution may be small, the consideration of local biodiversity may mitigate the ecological impact of habitat destruction during construction and aid with community acceptance and permitting [3].
Figure 2 –Pots creating habitat on a seawall [8]. Source: M. Browne and M. Chapman Ecologically Informed Engineering Reduces Loss of Intertidal Biodiversity on Artificial Shorelines
Benefits of Hybrid Designs
A hybrid approach combines the best components of built and natural infrastructure for coastal resilience. In addition to coastal protection, a hybrid approach combines the cost-effectiveness and ecosystem services of a green infrastructure approach with the known capacity and smaller space requirements of a hard engineering approach [2]. Ecosystem services may include water quality improvements, habitat creation or preservation, wave attenuation, sediment capture, vertical accretion, erosion reduction, and mitigation of storm surge and debris movement [5].
From a cultural perspective, the potential green spaces included in a hybrid design provide low maintenance, pleasing aesthetics and can serve as social gathering points in communities, contributing to physical and mental wellness of community members [2]. Similarly, the stewardship and enhancement of coastal ecosystems can play a role in the well-being of coastal resource dependent careers [6].
Figure 3 – Images of natural ecosystems and built infrastructure [2]. Photo Credits: NOAA for all images except Dunes (credit: American Green), Sea Wall (credit: University of Hawaii Sea Grant), and Levee (credit: J. Lehto, NOAA).
Summary
Coastlines are places of great economic, social, and environmental value, but are also vulnerable to flooding and erosion from extreme weather events and sea level rise. As coastal engineering solutions are applied to address this vulnerability, it is important to consider environmental stewardship to provide solutions that meet the needs of both society and the environment. Natural ecosystems can serve as green infrastructure alongside hard engineering infrastructure as a hybrid approach to coastal resilience. However, more research is required to better understand the opportunities for effective implementation of such hybrid approaches and the value of ecosystem services provided. This information can be used to further develop planning tools, policies, and engineering best practices to promote the successful use of green infrastructure and ecological considerations in coastal engineering applications as the demand for coastal resilience increases.
References
[1] Chapman, M. and Underwood, A. (2011). Evaluation of ecological engineering of “armoured” shorelines to improve their value as habitat. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, [online] 400(1-2), pp.302-313. [Online]. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022098111000736 [Accessed 25 Nov. 2018].
[2] Sutton-Grier, A., Wowk, K. and Bamford, H. (2015). Future of our coasts: The potential for natural and hybrid infrastructure to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities, economies and ecosystems. Environmental Science & Policy, [Online]. 51, pp.137-148. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901115000799 [Accessed 25 Nov. 2018].
[3] Borsje, B., van Wesenbeeck, B., Dekker, F., Paalvast, P., Bouma, T., van Katwijk, M. and de Vries, M. (2011). How ecological engineering can serve in coastal protection. Ecological Engineering, 37(2), pp.113-122. [Online]. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857410003216 [Accessed 25 Nov. 2018].
[4] Silva, J., Wheeler, E. (2017). Ecosystems as infrastructure. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 15(1) pp.32-35. [Online]. Available at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1679007316300767 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2018]
[6] Spalding, M., Ruffo, S., Lacambra, C., Meliane, I., Hale, L., Shepard, C. and Beck, M. (2014). The role of ecosystems in coastal protection: Adapting to climate change and coastal hazards. Ocean & Coastal Management, [Online]. 90, pp.50-57. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569113002147 [Accessed 25 Nov. 2018].
[7] National Park Service, Coastal Adaptation Strategies Handbook. Examples of hybrid engineering. 2018.
[8] M. Browne and M. Chapman, Flower pots creating novel habitat on seawalls in Sydney Harbour. 2018.
Although a large proportion of the world’s population live in large cities, in Canada, 40% of the population live in mid-sized cities (50,000 to 550,000 people) [1]. Mid-sized cities often face different challenges when it comes to sustainable transportation compared to large cities, but are important to focus on as well.
Community members living in mid-sized cities are often heavily reliant on vehicles. Most mid-sized cities in Canada are relatively new and were built during the automobile era, which allowed for infrastructure to be spread out. Zoning laws in cities also make it hard for its residents to use multimodal modes of transportation due to the large size of neighbourhoods and how far away they are from daily amenities.
The reason that public transportation works so well in large cities is because there are a lot of people traveling in the same places, which means that buses can run more often and be more reliable. In smaller towns, it is a challenge to get people to take public transportation because they often have to bike or even drive long distances to get to the bus stop, making the use of public transport a hassle. In addition, traffic delays in mid-sized towns aren’t problematic enough to promote other modes of transportation, because people ultimately want to choose the fastest and most efficient ways to travel.
Being from a mid-sized town myself, I was curious to look into the green transport initiatives that my hometown, Kelowna BC, is taking. The Kelowna metropolitan area has a population of nearly 200,000 people and it is rapidly increasing. It is expected that 50,000 people will move to Kelowna in the next 20 years [2]. With a rapid increase in population comes a lot of opportunity for sustainable initiatives going forward.
The City of Kelowna hopes to increase the ease of public transport use in the future by prioritizing buses over other traffic at key locations, and increasing the frequency and reliability of public transport. Rapid transit systems such as bus rapid transit, or light rail traffic are not economically feasible for the City of Kelowna at this point, but may be examined more in the future. The majority of Kelowna residents currently feel that automobile transport is the only viable transportation option, and one of the City’s main goals is to shift this mindset in the coming years [3].
Green Infrastructure in the City of Vancouver focuses on sustainably managing rainwater runoff due to the high volumes of annual rainfall that Vancouver receives. According to the City of Vancouver, Green Infrastructure “mimics natural water processes. It works with plants, soils, trees, and built structures to capture and clean rainwater before returning it to our waterways and atmosphere.” The following video explains Green Infrastructure in the City of Vancouver in more detail.
In rural areas, rainwater would typically be absorbed into the ground and would either slowly drain into a stream or river, or be transpired through plants. In large cities however, rainwater often becomes contaminated with pollutants on impervious surfaces such as roofs or pavement and is then released back into rivers or streams at an “unnatural” pace. This can disrupt the natural process that rainfall would typically undergo, and if large rainfall events occur, rainwater can often end up in the sewage system, resulting in contaminated water.
Some examples of green infrastructure that have been implemented in the City of Vancouver include green roofs, rain-friendly streets, swales, rain gardens, and parks. Green roofs are considered “living roofs” and are covered with various plants and trees in order to reduce rainwater runoff. Green roofs can also help to insulate buildings, and provide habitat for smaller forms of wildlife, and pollinators. Rain friendly streets, swales and rain gardens are all infrastructures designed to reduce rainwater runoff. Lastly, parks also mitigate rainwater runoff and are a beautiful space that communities can enjoy.
Some of the benefits of green infrastructure include improving water and air quality. With additional green space in cities, less rainwater is contaminated due to runoff, and green space can help sequester CO2. Green space also helps to reduce the risk of flooding and better manages rainwater. Green infrastructure can also help cities become more resilient to climate change. Incorporating green infrastructure elements reduces heat island effects in cities and helps to keep them cool during extreme heat waves. Sewer infrastructure costs can also be decreased with green infrastructure implementation, because the volume of runoff entering the sewage system is reduced. The lifetime of sewage systems is therefore increased, and less maintenance is required. Lastly, green infrastructure can help improve the mental and physical health of communities, by creating an inviting open green space for exercise and enjoyment.
Reference:
“Green Infrastructure, Sustainably Managing our Rainwater,” City of Vancouver: https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/green-infrastructure.aspx
Making up almost 30% of Canada’s GHG emissions, transportation is a vital concept to address regarding environmental stewardship in cities. Transit maintains the range and time-competitiveness of driving, while also complimenting active modes of transport such as walking and cycling by extending the range one can travel.
Four of many areas that can be indicative of the health of a city include: the quality of air, quality of water, land use, and GHG emissions. The City of Vancouver’s Transportation 2040 plan in combination with their Greenest City 2020 Action Plan aims to make the city greener in part by means of encouraging use of transit for Vancouverites, and also implementing policies to better our transit system.
Air
The City of Vancouver has a Greenest City goal of having the cleanest breathing air of any major city globally. A specific and vital part of this action plan item is their target of reducing transit-related emissions. Particularly, the Greenest City 2020 Action Plan depicts the city’s goal of using 100% renewable, non-fossil fuel energy by 2050. To further address the city’s air quality beyond emission control, the City of Vancouver also aims to minimize road noise, vibration due to vehicles, and air pollution from car exhaust. Not only will these reductions benefit the overall urban air quality, but they will particularly benefit residents and businesses along transit corridors.
Water
Water pollution due to oil and fuel spills is another sizeable problem, especially in the city, with the high number of vehicles on the road. Spills and leaks from vehicles are washed off the road from* rainfall and this polluted runoff seep into soils, lakes, and wetlands. This in turn detrimentally impacts water and soil quality. The City of Vancouver’s goal of reducing road vehicles by encouraging the alternatives of non-fossil fuel transit and active transportation modes should translate to less oil and fuel spills, and resultantly a healthier ecosystem.
Land
Although Translink is in control of the city’s bus systems, the City of Vancouver shows support of the development of transit systems to encourage users by making transit-supportive land use decisions. A few examples of said decisions include the building of transit-supportive streets and public spaces, and the protection of corridors and sites for future routes and stations.
GHGs
Although the City of Vancouver does not have policy in place to directly control the number of vehicle users, they do support reduction of GHGs indirectly by deterring policies. Some of these include: increasing the regional fuel tax, implementing a transportation carbon tax, increasing the vehicle registration fee, and creating more road pricing.
Something everyone has in common is the need to get around. Transit is inexpensive and as such accessible to everyone. In upgrading to clean energy use, and updated transit policies and planning, there lies potential for a sizable environmentally friendly impact for our city.
References
City of Vancouver. (2012). Transportation 2040.
Trumbull, Nathaniel, and Christine Bae. “Transportation and Water Pollution.” University of Washington Growth Management Forum, 28 Jan. 2000. Retrieved November 12, 2018, from courses.washington.edu/gmforum/topics/trans_water/trans_water.htm.
With pressures of climate change becoming a major global issue, the idea of resilient cities has become somewhat of a buzzword. I would like to focus on one overarching theme in resilient city literature and solutions: flexibility. 100 Resilient Cities defines urban resilience as “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.” This is achieved “By strengthening the underlying fabric of a city and better understanding the potential shocks and stresses it may face.”
Change is inevitable, so our cities must be able to absorb impacts, react and adapt accordingly. However, infrastructure is usually something seen as permanent and lasting (de Haan). In mechanics, one learns that brittle fracture is much more dangerous than ductile fracture. It acts as a warning of the damage to come, and can absorb more energy prior to fracture, resulting in a stronger and more resilient structure. Why not apply this at a city scale?
In general, flexibility means the possibility to introduce certain options with the assumption of changing configuration of system parameters or system components in time (Kośmieja and Pasławski). De Haan points out that “the complexity of, especially nowadays, infrastructure systems suggests that we step away from attempts to control circumstances and prepare for their consequences.” My interpretation of flexible infrastructure lies in understanding that there are different possible outcomes and acknowledging that cites (and environments) change.
Flexibility can come in different scales. For example, buildings can be designed to be more seismically sound by including literal flexible materials within them, such as timber. This can be seen in Tūranga, the new central library in Christchurch, New Zealand, designed by Schmidt Hammer Lassen of Denmark. The building includes a “seismic force-resisting system [that] is made up of a series of massive concrete walls that can rock and shift to isolate the building from peak accelerations during an earthquake.” Along with the use of pre-tensioned steel cables that stretch and flex, allowing the building to right-itself in the event of swaying, this structure is virtually earthquake-proof.
At a larger scale, the Østerbro neighbourhood of Copenhagen is a resilient neighbourhood that incorporates flexibility in rainfall systems. Due to climate change, Copenhagen has dealt with increasing levels of high-intensity rainfall that original systems could not cope with. In the creating of resilient infrastructure, these increased rainwater levels were seen as an opportunity, rather than an issue that needed to be removed. As the old rainwater management systems could not be changed (an example of the rigidity of non-resilient infrastructure), and due to minimal space restrictions, new innovations needed to be implemented locally and in tandem with increases in public green spaces. For example, in Tåsinge Plads, a square in the community, rainwater is diverted away from roofs and squares to keep the water out of sewers, while the storm water is collected in green urban areas to support the incorporation of wild urban nature in the community. In the few paved areas, ‘water parasols’ were created for children as play elements, that double as catchment basins that pump water through small channels to green spots (these are the inverted umbrella-like black structures in the image below). Here, it is important to see that flexibility is not just physical, it is a mindset – and one must bring a systems thinking approach to planning for flexibility.
One of my favourite examples of resilient infrastructure can be seen in Rotterdam. Similar water issues are being dealt with here, where water squares have been created to act as social spaces, but in the event of flooding, can also hold excess water. The flexibility in this site is clear, with multiple functions that addresses urban social living along with sustainable solutions simply, without the need for any advanced technical solutions or materials.
Urban resiliency is a buzzword for a reason: it is vital that cities address issues of our changing environments immediately, as well as do what is possible to prevent further global environmental degradation. A key component to this change is to introduce flexibility in approaching problems and at different scales. The Anthropocene is upon us, human activity is indeed the strongest geo-technical force at this moment, but why not try and make this impact a positive one?
If you are traveling in Shanghai, one of the largest cities around the world, you may be able to choose a new means of transportation by installing an app on your cell phone. The bike sharing systems, operated by several bike-sharing companies deployed in most large cities in China, is more and more popular because of the assets of lower carbon emission and higher mobility. The same trend could also be found around the world.
Bike sharing system is significantly beneficial to the reduction of carbon emission. The research carried out by UCL has shown that the public bike system has reduced 25240 tons of carbon dioxide in 2016. That emission could have been caused by the other parts of the transportation system, however, because of the bike sharing system have more advantages over the other non-human powered transportation system, people would switch to biking.
The bike could solve the problem caused by the last mile, which is a drawback of the public transit system, you could never make the stop just next to your home. However, with the help of the bike sharing companies, the bikes would be distributed to almost every part of the city based on the data processing and monitoring platform. That would make it easier for people to find a bike nearby. Also, the modern bike sharing system could allow people to leave the bike at the corner when they finish the trip, making it a lot easier to plan and even carry out a short distance trip. Another merit given to the biking system is most major cities around the world would try to update their scenery, making people more likely to ride a bike. Based on these assets, people would be more willing to choose the shared bike to travel instead of waiting for a bus or driving by themselves. In fact, according to Zhang’s research, people get more mobility with the help of the bike sharing system.
In order to lower down the carbon emission in urban areas, we couldn’t only try to limit the usage of petroleum or electricity powered transportation vehicles. The basic needs of the people should be considered. However, the shared bike could reach the balance easily. The bike sharing system is a large network operated by multiple companies. The bike is distributed either by the last user or by the staff of bike sharing companies. In that way, you could find a shared bike waiting for you almost everywhere. After you arrive at your destination, what you should do is to lock your bike and report to the sharing system and the bike could be registered by the next user.
The bike sharing system could mitigate the gap between the long distance public transportation system and the destination, which would be a strong competitor against the taxi. For example, if the target place is out of reach on foot but still in reach of the bike, people may use the biking system instead of the public transportation system because the stops of the transportation system may not be just next to the place they plan to go. Another advantage of the bike sharing system is that they could provide the service other than just moving people to the place they want to go. They could offer a special service of enjoying the trip.
Now according to the bike sharing data around the world, bike sharing is a very promising substitute of the public transportation system. Some cities around the world, like Vancouver and Melbourne, is perfect for bike riding. These cities have flat roads and less urban vehicle transportation flow. In the meantime, these cities have good sceneries for people to appreciate.
Reference: Zhang, Y., & Mi, Z. (2018). Environmental benefits of bike sharing: A big data-based analysis. Applied Energy, 220(December 2017), 296–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.101
If you visit Wuhan, one of the largest city in China and you take a bus these days, you may be impressed by the nearly zero-noise experience and the strong feeling of acceleration. That is because 30 percent of public transportation buses have been updated into electric buses. This data is from Changjiang Times, a local newspaper.
According to Government of Wuhan, Wuhan now is trying to build more than 70000 new charging facilities for both electric buses and other electric vehicles by 2022. And with the help of several universities in Wuhan, the government is even more capable to push this trend in the whole province.
The electric vehicle has several environmental and social benefits. Except for the low emission, electric vehicles have multiple advantages not only to the environment but also to the power supply system. With zero emission feature, the electric vehicles would make the city greener, however, the large number of electric vehicles on the road or at home could be a great buffer for the city power supply system. Electricity price could be managed to let the owners charge the vehicles during valley period, also, the electric vehicles could provide additional power to the power grid during peak hours, helping optimize the power system designation! With the support of electric vehicles, the power supply of the grid could be steady and less energy would be lost.
Nowadays, China is encouraging the use of electric vehicles in the whole country by giving the bonus to the electric vehicle manufacturers and consumers. Now over 17.29 million electric vehicles are running on the roads in most mild-climate provinces in China. Yes, the battery couldn’t work at low temperature. But this long mission is faced with many doubts from the EV scholars in China. ‘Though EV seems to be green, it is hard to quantify the impact of the electric vehicles on the energy usage and the environment. ‘Dr. Yuan, Xinmei, an expert of electric vehicles who is also a professor at Jilin University said. However, he is still positive about the future of EV and now he is conducting research to find out the truth of EV.
Another factor that would make it even more tricky to decide the EV’s position in the environment is where the electricity comes from, said Dr. Yuan. In China, the electricity mostly comes from burning coals which could cause serious pollution, making electricity not so green compared with Canada where electricity mostly come from hydropower or wind power. ‘This would be a long journey, from the regulations to the energy structure we all have to make a change, but EV would be the best solution finally. Dr. Yuan told the author.
Though EV is more and more popular in China. This country may go through a period when there might not be great benefit brought by the EV, but finally, with the help of an optimized electric power generation system, the EV could contribute much to a clean environment.
Reference: Yuan, X., Li, L., Gou, H., & Dong, T. (2015). Energy and environmental impact of battery electric vehicle range in China. Applied Energy, 157, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.001
The United States has been a global leader of reclaimed water. A variety of applications from commercial use to indirect potable use are being operated by local authorities, though most of them are in the southern parts of the country such as Florida, Arizona, and California. Considering the biggest driver of most reclaimed water projects is water scarcity, the regional unbalance of the number of applications would be reasonable.
So, if you hear about the legislation of Reclaimed Water Rule in the State of Washington in 2018, it might be surprising. Actually, the state has over a quarter-century history of reclaimed water. In 1992, the Reclaimed Water Act was enacted and approximately 30 reclaimed water facilities are currently operating in the state (1)(2). The purpose of the new rule is to streamline the process of permit acquisition and clarify the methods and standards (3).
The objectives of reclaimed water use in Washington State are various such as discharge regulations, impaired water bodies, and water supply needs. Current reclaimed water applications in Washington State include irrigation (agriculture, forest, golf course, turf, and urban landscape), urban use (street sweeping, dust suppression, and toilet flushing), and environmental use (groundwater recharge, wetlands enhancement, and stream-flow augmentation) (2).
2. City of Yelm
One of the local authorities utilizing reclaimed water is the City of Yelm. The initial motivation of the project was to prevent groundwater contamination caused by septic systems within the city. Because the Nisqually River, which received the discharge from the wastewater treatment plant, supported Pacific Salmon and cutthroat trout, the second treatment was not satisfactory for those fish. So, the city decided to construct the Yelm Water Reclamation Facility. Reclaimed water is produced with advanced treatment including chemical coagulation, upflow sand filters, and chlorine disinfection after the second treatment. One of the applications is to discharge it into the artificial surface and submerged wetlands which eventually recharges groundwater. In winter, excessive reclaimed water is utilized for power generation (1).
In spite of the above successful story, though, the facility stopped to provide reclaimed water for six weeks in the summer of 2017 after the staff confirmed that the Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) exceeded the reclamation water standard. The main cause of the malfunction was inadequate maintenance. Though the facility was built with state-of-the-art technology in 1999, required upgrades had not been done due to financial constraints. Furthermore, the facility had been operated by consultants, instead of experienced staff (4).
3. King County
Another applicational example is King County, which includes the City of Seattle, operating water reclamation projects since 1997 (1). The main driver of reclaimed water is to enhance resiliency to drought and climate change, and a growing population (1). However, King County admits the difficulty of finding enough users for reclaimed water because of their abundant water supply (5). Nevertheless, the county is keen on expanding reclaimed water projects.
The main usage of reclaimed water in King County consists of irrigation (e.g. soccer field, golf course, landscape), industry (e.g. building heating, on-site processes), and environment (wetland enhancement) (6). One of the recent projects is wetland enhancement at Chinook Bend Natural Area. The main driver of the project was to enhance native plants and control reed canary grass (7). Existing culverts, pipes, and wetland were converted to open channels and the new four-acre wetland which enhances the environment at Chinook Bend (7).
4. Conclusion
The lack of water resources, growing population, and advanced technology have contributed to the increasing numbers of water reclamation applications in the southern US. Moreover, the necessity of adaptation to the expected effects of climate change has also encouraged municipalities which are not necessarily lacking water supply to engage in water recycling. Though the country still does not have a national regulation for reclaimed water, the United States Environmental Protection Agency issued a report in 2018 which encourages local authorities suffering from water scarcity to utilize reclaimed water for potable use (8). Although there is no current movement of potable use in Washington State, it is quite intriguing that the state has been keen on expanding their applications before the expected catastrophe brought by climate change happens.
References
(1) Cupps, K. and Morris, E. Case Studied in Reclaimed Water Use: Creating new water supplies across Washington State. 2005
(5) Wastewater Treatment Division, Department of Natural Resources and Parks, King County. King County Recycled Water Program Strategic Plan 2018-2037. 2018
(8) The United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mainstreaming potable water reuse in the United States: strategies for leveling the playing field. 2018
Human behaviour is often neglected in the design of our urban systems, simply due to its complexity. New and emerging research is now focusing on how behavioural decision-making can be linked to our environmental needs. For recycling and consumption of products, it is important to consider them as behaviours, such as healthy eating and exercise; while we know those behaviours are good for us, we may not always behave that way due to numerous psychological reasons.
So how effective is it to truly consider psychology in design? In a study called “It Matters a Hole Lot”, changing the shape of the recycling container lid, increased correct recycling by 34%, allowing for less contamination in waste streams. This shows that visually manipulating the users’ behaviours educates and also enforces correct behaviours.
Researchers at UBC experimented in residential buildings on how the distance to recycling and composting bins can affect the volume recycled. Results showed that conveniently placing the recycling bins 1.5 meters away from residence doors can increase recycling up to 141%. The same researchers state that education is a traditional mechanism on increasing recycling and composting, instead, they believe that convenience has been observed to be of a much larger impact as observed in their study.
In contrast, the availability of recycling services can enable people to produce more waste and affect their behaviour, as a consumer, knowing that it can be recycled later on. The act of recycling does not guarantee that recyclables will not end up in the landfill and thus must be our last resort. In Recycling Gone Bad, researchers determined that recycling behaviour is linked to the rebound effect, defined as the reduced costs accompanying technological improvements in efficiency may have the unintended consequence of increasing consumer demand. An example of the rebound effect: the recycling symbol, invented by the beverage industry, may encourage the consumption of these beverages as it removes the guilt linked to increased consumption.
It is important to focus on reducing waste overall and not invest all of our recourses in proper recycling. Throw-away culture has enabled a behaviour of purchasing goods that exceed our needs and often end up as waste. While recycling is critical to a closed-loop economy, behavioural changes must be considered. In order to break the throw-away culture cycle, one must adopt the first R of the 5R’s pledge. Refusing samples, gifts, plastics bags, etc. instead of accepting them simply because they are free, will allow us to overcome our culture that is not able to say no. Our society must become comfortable saying no – if a gift is of no use to you, refuse it. Acquiring a lesser amount of belongings will lower the demand for their production and inevitably divert them from our landfills.
Next time you are at a conference, take a look around you and count how many tote bags, full of brochures, will end up at our landfill. In the United States, the promotional products industry is estimated to be $24 billion. If companies are looking for their attendees to remember the conference long after, they could invest in the experience as opposed to free swag. A good meal, at a conference, goes way farther and shows the company’s commitment to the quality of the conference.
But what if we changed people’s behaviour to use less? A study from the University of Arizona discovered through their experiment that utilizing people’s desire to “fit in” can also influence their behavioural decision making. When hotel guests were informed through signage (as shown below) that previous guests, in the same room, have reused their towels, it allowed for a 33% increase in towel reuse.
Strategic changes to people’s unsustainable consumption must understand habitual behaviour. Habitual behaviour is ingrained and automatic to situational cues and often proves many interventions as ineffective. One area that is being explored in intervening unsustainable behaviour is nudge theory, which uses “positive reinforcement and indirect suggestions as ways to influence the behaviour and decision making of groups or individuals.” Nudge theory is seen here at the University of British Columbia, where a 25-cent levy was introduced on non-reusable cups to gently encourage consumers to bring their own cups. Is 25-cents enough to influence someone’s behaviour in this day and age? This remains a topic of controversy in many settings where a levy was introduced.
The amount of tax imposed on single-use plastics has been highly controversial, throughout the world, and not many nations have been successfully able to phase out plastic bag usage using a tax system. Although, Ireland has been a great leader on this front:
In 2002 Ireland became the first country to impose a plastic bag levy. It led to a 90% drop in use of plastic bags, with one billion fewer bags used, and it generated $9.6 million for a green fund supporting environmental projects. In addition there is much less roadside litter from plastic bags. Ironically, with the success of the program, and people bringing their own reusable carriers to shop, the proceeds from the levy have fallen and there is less money for supporting environmental projects.
As for today’s designers & engineers, it is important to consider the behaviour of users we are designing for. Nudge theory can be applied to less energy usage in buildings, less water usage and less plastic consumption. Psychology is applicable to all fields of design in which humans are involved. Ignoring the ways humans behave is simply foolish and a waste of our resources at such a critical time of our environmental crisis. Educating consumers remains to be insufficient for altering decisions and intentions are often not reflective of behaviours.
