DET EUROPEISKE MILJØBYRÅET (EEA) HAR SLUPPET RAPPORT OM MILJØTILSTANDEN I EUROPA IDAG

Pressemelding , 30.11.2010

Advarer mot tradisjonell miljøpolitikk

Hvis ikke miljøpolitikken blir mer langsiktig og helhetlig, vil vi bruke opp ressursene og undergrave livsgrunnlaget vårt.
Det er hovedbudskapet i den mest omfattende gjennomgangen av miljøtilstanden i Europa noen sinne. Rapporten, som også omfatter norske forhold, offentliggjøres i dag av det Europeiske miljøbyrået (EEA).
Byrået peker også på mange viktige framskritt. Levealderen øker, og på mange områder klarer vi å produsere varer og tjenester renere og med mindre ressurser enn før. Men miljøpolitikken må endres hvis vi skal sikre nok tilgang på rent vann, ren energi og trygg mat Europa og resten av verden, advarer byrået.
Rapporten fra EEA ble lagt fram i Europaparlamentet i Brussel i dag. Norge er fullverdig medlem av EEA, og er ett av 32 land som har bidratt med faktagrunnlag til Miljøstatus i Europa 2010. Rapporten utgis hvert femte år av byrået, og årets utgave en den mest omfattende gjennomgangen av status og framtidsutsiktene for miljøet i Europa som noen gang er gjort.
- Dette er tankevekkende lesing. Miljøbyrået har ikke nøyd seg med å servere en grundig gjennomgang av miljøsituasjonen i dag. De peker også på framtidas utfordringer på en konstruktiv måte, sier miljø- og utviklingsminister Erik Solheim.
Et av utviklingstrekkene Miljøbyrået framhever er at europeernes ressursbruk fortsetter å vokse. Fra 2000 til 2007 økte Europas bruk av materielle ressurser med 7,9 prosent. Dette gjelder alle former for materielle ressurser som utvinnes i landet, importeres og forbrukes, for eksempel mineraler (inkludert metaller), fossile brensler og biomasse. En gjennomsnittlig europeer forbruker i dag fire ganger så mye ressurser som en afrikaner og tre ganger så mye som en asiat. Norge har i følge rapporten den tredje høyeste ressursbruken i Europa – bare Irland og Finland bruker enda mer. I 2007 brukte hver nordmann 37 tonn med ressurser, mens gjennomsnittet for EU-27 samme år var 16,5 tonn per person.
Miljøbyrået skriver også at målet om å stanse tap av biologisk mangfold i Europa innen 2010, for eksempel, ikke vil nås. Byrået mener også at det er usannsynlig at det overordnede mål om å begrense klimaendringer til en temperaturstigning på mindre enn 2 °C globalt i løpet av dette århundret, nås – delvis på grunn av klimagassutslipp fra andre deler av verden.
Rapporten synliggjør samtidig flere viktige framskritt det siste tiåret. Norge og EU-landene har redusert utslippene av klimagasser de siste årene og ligger godt an til å oppfylle Kyoto-forpliktelsene. Produksjonen av fornybar energi øker, og det er tegn på bedre luft- og vannkvalitet i store deler av Europa, selv om utfordringene fortsatt er store.
Europa har også blitt bedre på å håndtere avfall. Mindre avfall legges på deponi, samtidig gjenvinnes mer avfall enn noen gang.  De fleste EU-landene pluss Norge og Sveits har økt gjenvinningsraten av husholdningsavfall de siste 5-10 år, og Norge er blant de landene i Europa som scorer best på gjenvinning.
Mange av miljøutfordringene byrået tar tak i er ikke nye. Det nye, skriver EEA, er omfanget av utfordringene og hvor raskt endringene skjer.  Erfaring viser at det ofte tar 20-30 år fra et miljøproblem blir kjent og settes på dagsordenen til en får full forståelse av virkningene. Byrået sier verden ikke kan ha så lange tidsmessige etterslep i framtida.
- Det er mye å hente på å få gjennomført miljøpolitikken som er allerede lagt, og styrke miljøforvaltningen. Men miljøpolitikk må i enda større grad integreres i annen planlegging. Vi må også klare å bruke naturressursene enda smartere og mer effektivt, sier Solheim.
Rapport og utfyllende informasjon på Miljøstatus sine nettsider

LOCALS DISCUSSING THE FUTURE, SUSTAINABILITY & CITY DEVELOPMENT IN BERGEN

Tekst: Erik Madsen , BYAVISEN

see this article: http://byavisen.net/2010/10/aktuelt/%E2%80%93-bergen-b%C3%B8r-bli-en-moderne-storby
BERGEN BØR BLI EN MODERNE STORBY

BYBANEN: Bybanen vil stå sentralt i byplanleggingen fremover. Fremtidige bebyggelser vil trolig komme i områdene rundt bybanestoppene,.  Foto: Silje Stavrum Norevik

Nye byggeprosjekter bør settes i gang langs Bybanen for å gjøre Bergen til en mer moderne storby i fremtiden. Det mener både bystyrepolitiker Tor Woldseth (Frp) og rektor Marianne Skjulhaug ved Arkitekthøgskolen i Bergen.

Både Woldseth og Skjulhaug er opptatt av hvordan Bergen skal se ut i fremtiden.
– Det er altfor mange tomme, store arealer som vi kunne benyttet mye bedre. Vi trenger større bydeler slik at ikke de som bor i Åsane og Laksevåg skal måtte reise inn til byen like ofte, sier Woldseth, som sitter i komité for miljø, klima og byutvikling.
Han mener Bergen må kjenne sin plass som den nest største byen i landet.
– Vi må bestemme oss for hvilken by Bergen skal være. Skal vi utgi oss for å være en jord- og landbrukskommune eller en by? spør han retorisk, før han legger til:
– Bergen er Norges nest største by og vi må starte med å bygge flere boliger. Vi skal være en i større grad moderne storby. Byen er i tillegg lite egnet for jordbruk. Områdene hvor Bybanen passerer, vil være naturlige steder for nye boliger.
Politikeren er heller ikke fornøyd med landskapet som møter de reisende bybane-passasjerene på vei mot Flesland.
– Det er bare tull at mye av begivenhetene er bondeland og kuer. Oppover mot flyplassen med Nordåsvannet er det store areal som kunne vært brukt til nye boliger. Det finnes mengder med landområder som ligger godt til rette for flere boliger og fine eiendommer, sier han.
Nye stemmer
Også rektor Marianne Skjulhaug ved Arkitekthøgskolen mener områdene på veien mot Flesland ligger til rette for byforhold.
– Hele området mellom Nordåsvannet og Flyplassveien bør utvikles til en ny bymessig struktur. Området sør for denne veien bør settes av til ulike former for matproduksjon i kombinasjon med turområder, sier hun. Skjulhaug er opptatt av byens stolte bygningshistorie, men også hun ønsker forandringer innenfor den bergenske arkitekturen.
– Det er fantastisk å oppleve historiske og virksomme områder i byen. Bergens historiske bykjerne er dagens funksjonelle sentrum, noe som skiller seg fra hovedstaden vår, sier hun og fortsetter:
– Bergen har mange kvaliteter og har nok Norges mest karakteristiske bysentrum. Likevel ville det vært flott om noen nye stemmer kunne slippe til, som et eksempel har arkitekten Rambø tegnet et fantastisk forslag til avslutningen av Skuten som ville løftet den arkitektoniske ambisjonen i byen.
Viktig balanse
Rektoren trekker frem viktigheten av kontrastene mellom det historiske og det nyskapende for en by.
– Byen er et felles minne, en stor historiebok som gir oss tilhørighet og forståelse for hva og hvor vi kommer fra, samtidig som byens endringer vil åpne for en fremtid, forklarer hun.
Bybanen vil stå sentralt i byplanleggingen fremover. Fremtidige bebyggelser vil komme i områdene rundt bybanestoppene, ifølge Skjulhaug.
– Bybanen vil helt sikkert bli stammen i bystrukturen fremover. Men en fortetting av byen er ikke uproblematisk og krever mye av innbyggere, utbyggere og politikere. Byutvikling gjør at det må forskes på nye bymodeller som kan oppfylle de drømmene om å bo og leve et godt byliv, hevder hun.
Rektoren har også noen oppfatninger om Oslo og Bergen i forhold til moderne og nyere bygg.
– Nybygging fører med seg både gode og dårlige eksempler. Operaen er helt unik, ikke bare i nasjonal sammenheng, men internasjonalt også. For Bergen er det kanskje Grieghallen som var siste tilskudd av banebrytende karakter. Bergens styrke ligger i sentrumsnære områder med mulighet for å bo med barn og naturen tett på, forteller hun.

NYTT OG GAMMELT: I Bergen sentrum kombineres det gamle og det nye. Rektor Marianne Skjulhaug ved Arkitekthøgskolen i Bergen synes det hadde vært fint om nye stemmer kunne slippe til når det gjelder utviklingen av byen.

Nytenkning
Kyrre Holmeseth er masterstudent ved Arkitekthøgskolen i Oslo. Han er selv oppvokst i Bergen, og driver for tiden prosjekter i byen, uten at han vil røpe hva han jobber med.
Studenten mener Bergen bør være moden for en nytenking innenfor arkitekturen.
– Personlig mener jeg at vi må tørre å gjøre noen nye ting som kan sette oss litt på arkitektur-agendaen, slik at vi ikke bare lever på det gamle. Vi må ikke være redde for å ha bygg som ser annerledes ut, sier han og legger til:
– Bergen skiller jo seg ut ved måten byen forholder seg til den gamle bebyggelsen og hvordan vi bygger arkitektur i terrenget i fjellsidene. Balansen mellom gammelt og noe nytt kan skape interessante kontraster, forklarer han.
Bergensk patriotisme
Den særegne og stolte tilhørigheten hos byens innfødte vil gjøre det vanskeligere for nytenking når det kommer til arkitektur i Bergen, i følge Holmeseth.
– Bergensere sin personlighet er vel et lite resultat av at vi kommer fra en by med gammel og sterk historie. Det hadde nok blitt store protester om det skulle blitt gjort noe med Bryggen.
Holmeseth synes likevel balansen mellom fortiden og nåtiden kommer dårlig ut når det nye bygget til Gulating lagmannsrett skal stå klart neste år.
– I stedet for å gi et nytt byrom som åpner seg mot plassen og lille Lungegården, blir det nå et kraftig volum som stenger inne den gamle brannstasjonen, sier han.
Også Holmeseth tror holdeplassene langs Bybanen vil være med på og skape nytt liv og flere boligområder i fremtiden.
– De fremtidige stoppene langs banen bør kunne legge grunnlag for en større by, med steder hvor man ønsker å reise til, som man ikke finner i sentrum, forklarer han til Byavisen.

SIGNALBYGG: Grieghallen er det nyeste bygget av banebrytende karakter i Bergen, mener rektor Marianne Skjulhaug ved Arkitekthøgskolen i Bergen.

Foto: Silje Stavrum Norevik

Tekst: Erik Madsen , BYAVISEN

see this article: http://byavisen.net/2010/10/aktuelt/%E2%80%93-bergen-b%C3%B8r-bli-en-moderne-storby

NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENTS WORK ON GIVING ECONOMIC VALUE TO NATURE-SERVICES

Norge vurderer nå å lage en rapport som vil kartlegge den økonomiske verdien av de tjenesten naturen gir oss. Dette vil være en nasjonal oppfølging av FNs såkalte TEEB-rapporter.
- Vi vurderer å lage en norsk rapport om verdien av økosystemtjenester og naturmangfold, sier miljø og utviklingsminister Erik Solheim. Målet er at også de økonomiske verdiene av intakt og mangfoldig norsk natur blir vurdert før det tas beslutninger som kan ødelegge naturen, sier han.
Under det store naturtoppmøtet i Nagoya i Japan i dag ble den avsluttende TEEB-rapporten lagt frem. TEEB står for The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, et system for å kartlegge hva de tjenestene vi får fra naturen, som flomsikring, mat, rent vann og luft, pollinering og mye annet, er verdt i kroner og øre. Nå kan det altså også bli aktuelt å lage en slik oversikt nasjonalt.
- Å fastslå den økonomiske verdien av naturen vil vise at å ta vare på den er en god investering og fornuftig samfunnsøkonomi. Samtidig vil det trolig vise at mange tiltak som ødelegger naturen vil være dårlig samfunnsøkonomi i det lange løp. Taper vi for eksempel mangfoldet i beite- og slåttemarker mister vi ikke bare vakre blomsterenger, men også en rekke insekter som er svært viktige for pollineringen av planter som produserer frukt og bær, sier Solheim.


http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/md/aktuelt/nyheter/2010/Vil-vurdere-verdien-av-okosystemtjenester.html?id=621519

http://www.naturmangfoldaret.no/aktuelt/a-gjore-naturverdier-okonomisk-synlige

SOME MORE ARLENE BIRT : VISUAL COMMUNICATIONS OF FOOD BACKGROUNDS

Background Stories: Visual Communication of Food Backgrounds . 2006

Visit www.backgroundstories.com for the current project.
Masters Thesis from Design Academy Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
To encourage consumer awareness of how their food choices affect not only themselves, but also global environment and society, consumers need to feel a connection with the environmental, social and economical impacts of their foods.
This thesis is a case for a new direction in product labeling, corporate communication and advertising.
For the exploration of this topic, a focus is taken on foods. As an industry, food already has a high level of trace-ability, due to growing food safety concerns (especially following outbreaks of Foot and Mouth and other such diseases), and consumer demand.
As indicators to support this argument, social and environmental issues are growing in importance in both the corporate sphere and in the public eye. Corporate violations of social responsibility have threatened consumer trust, and thereby lead to a greater consumer demand for information, which thus causes increased transparency on the part of corporations. In business, there is a need to communicate on changes towards social-responsibility. In advertising, the changing role of the ‘brand’ and the continual evolution of advertising (currently away from image-based (ego) appeal) highlight a need for a new direction in marketing communication. Technology already allows such viewing behind the product: using search and tracking tools such as Google, GPS, RFID and RFD tags, consumers can pinpoint and track products through their virtual networks.

Designers are in a prime position to be able to communicate complex background information to consumers. Stefano Marzano of Phillips Design says that as designers, “if we can’t change the nature of people, we can affect their behavior: By designing the environment.”

Much like the Nutrition Facts label changed consumer behavior because it made direct connections between the nutrients of the food and individual health – over time – such communication on the backgrounds can change consumer purchasing behavior. The ‘dolphin-free tuna’ label is another example of this established connection: between buying tuna and harming dolphins. Prior to the money that was put into media to communicate the message behind the ‘dolphin-safe’ mark, consumers were unaware of the connection.

"TAPPED" - DOCUMENTERY ON NORWEGIAN BROADCASTING TONIGHT

This interesting documentary shown on NRK2 tonight (21092010) is an interesting comment on who owns nature resources and who will control and enjoy the businesses deriving from them.

see also this article on the movie : http://www.examiner.com/indie-movie-in-washington-dc/documentary-film-tapped-exposes-dangers-of-the-bottled-drinking-water-industry

Or visit the site of the Norwegian Broadcasting NRK2 : http://www.nrk.no/nett-tv/direkte/nrk2/

DELHI NULLAHS: THE FRACTAL METROPOLITAN LAYER

www.delhinullahs.org

'The fractal metropolitan layer' is an endeavor in progress by Morphogenesis, that aims to reveal the hidden opportunity that lies within our organically evolved cities by establishing a green and sustainable network as an alternative source of engagement with the city for the common man. The initiative aims to reclaim the derelict, the forgotten, the recyclable, and the toxic by involving all stakeholders, thereby collapsing the boundaries of decades of non-systemic thinking which have generated unsustainable urban growth. The contiguous, sewage-laden nullahs, the greens, the alleyways and the river are viewed as the arteries of a city that can be linked to create an environmental network which integrates livability issues of air, water, sewerage, heritage and walkability. These ecological potentials and vestigial organs of planning can be modulated, transformed, and spatial strategies devised to optimize the ecological, social, cultural, and economic dynamic that can be created through them.

The Morphogenesis Delhi Nullahs installation live at the India Habitat Centre

The installation aims to create awareness by engaging people, to speculate on what is and what can be, by bridging the gap between the reality of our cities as perceived from the outside, and the virtual image of what Delhi potentially is. The tree has been used as a metaphor and a fractal insert into the fabric of the city; representative of our symbiotic relationship with Nature, and its omnipresence in Delhi.

THE FOOTPRINT PROJECT

I think they discuss all the important aspects of food and cities through projects and workshops / "talkshops", (wish I discovered it earlyer!) .

Check it out :
www.foodprintproject.com
and for video casts : http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/8637192

BERGEN - LANDSCAPE, PRODUCTIVE LAND & NEEDS

The  city of Bergen is situated on the west coast of Norway and has been one of the most important national (and international) harbours in its history, with connection to the rest of the world mainly by sea in its first hundred years. 

The city is situated in a landscape with strong
caracter surrounded by 7 more or less steep
mountains, shaped in arcs called Bergens buene.
This hilly topography causes the caracteristic
humid climate the city is known for; mild humid
air from the North Sea and Atlantic comes in and
is pushed up along the mountain sides, causing the
temperature to drop and rain. The topography of
Bergen also makes city-planning challenging,
regarding settlement pattern and infrastrucutral
mobility strategies connected to settlement and
densification.

After centuries of beeing a city connected by sea
and horse (and by foot naturally), from 1900
Bergen developed connection-lines by rail.

Bergens banen crossing the mountain to the
eastern part of Norway (Oslo) was built in the
beginning of the 20th century. But also within its
city-limits and to neighboring municipalities (now
some included into Bergen Municipality) light rail
lines were developed, one of them turning in
todays light rail stop, access-point : Wergeland.

From the middle of the 20th century the private
car was more and more prioritated, and by massive
development of the road system a new settlement
pattern spread out caused by the accessibility of
the car.

Later plane traffic for people and goods has also
escalated. Connecting Bergen to the rest og the
world with oil.











This development of Bergen (prioritating private car infrastructure) has continued up until today,
and still seems to be the political mentality in the Region of Bergen.
Bergen Municipality masters an area of 465,68km2. 50% of this landscape is above 160m. 4,4% is
freshwater surface.

The urban areas are spread out over 108,5 km2, 23,3% of the total area of the Municipality,
divided into eight boroughs. With 267 860 inhabitants it is not a big city.

3,5% of Bergens area is farmland supporting only 11 780 people with food, on a vegetarian diet.
On a meat diet it is only sufficient to support 1980 peole through the year.

If all the 267 860 inhabitants was living on a vegetarian diet and it was all to be produced
within the Municipality it would require 333,58 km2, 71,6% of the landscape floor.

The Goverments amitions for the future is that we must be able to support ourselves
with 50% of consumed food within national borders to not put ourselves in a voulnerable position.
Based on these goals and ambitions to lower our eco-footprints
a change in local political mentality is required.

EcoBox by aaa

From the same TIMELINE from design act

EcoBox

by Atelier d’architecture autogérée
(FR) 2001
Self-managed eeo-urban network

The EcoBox is the initial project within a series of self-managed projects in the La Chapelle area of northern Paris which encourages residents to gain access to and critically transform misused or underused spaces. These projects actively involved municipal stakeholders to emphasize a flexible use of space and aim to preserve urban 'biodiversity' by encouraging the co-existence of a wide range of life-styles and living practices. Atelier d'architecture autogeree (aaa) began this process by establishing a temporary garden constructed out of recycled materials. The garden, EcoBox, has progressively extended into a platform for urban criticism and creativity, which is curated by the aaa members, residents and external collaborators and which catalyses activities at a local and trans-Iocallevel. EcoBox's principles of self-management have been furthered developed in the project Le 56/ Eco-Interstice by aaa. –NL

Image

EcoBox_1.jpg

Click image or title to play

Video: Interview 1/10 PreviousNext

Context and Beginning

LINKS
http://www.urbantactics.org/

Atelier d'architecture autogérée (aaa) was founded in 2001 as an inter- and extra- disciplinary network with a multiplicity of viewpoints : architects, artists, students, researchers, politicians, unemployed, activists, retired, inhabitants, and all concerned users. Members of aaa involved in EcoBox were: Constantin Petcou, Doina Petrescu, Denis Favret, Giovanni Piovene, and Giada Mangiameli, in collaboration with Borderphonics, Bordercartographe, artists, activists, students, and inhabitants of the La Chapelle area. aaa projects are embedded in their local contexts, reactivate everyday practices and initiate translocal platforms for cultural production. Other projects include: Le 56 / Eco-interstice (2005-2008), Mobile Geographies of Skills (2004-2005), and Cuisine Urbaine (2003-2004).

ECO-FOOTPRINTS AND GLOBAL BIO-CAPACITY

The measurement called "eco-footprint" is an abstract size or number based on the earths global bio capacity divided by the number of people living on the planet at any time. Meaning as time goes and we become more people our ideal eco-footprint shrinks, at the same time as our consumption increases and reduces the planets bio-capacity. In 2008 the individual ideal eco-footprint was 1,3 gha (global hectars), while the average Norwegian eco-footprint was 6,8. In the following article I will try to explain the logics behind the eco-footprint way of thinking based on THE LIVING PLANET REPORT from 2008.
Based on the illustration of "food-print" (from the article on "how food shapes our cities and landscape"), the first illustrations show the eco-footprint of an average Norwegian in 2009 (68 000m2/6,8gha in dark grey) and the ideal individual eco-footprint of 2008 (13 000m2/or 1,3gha in green). The illustration below shows the footprints outstretch of 50 people. Both illustrations shown in comparison to the football stadium of Bergen at Minde, the stop next to access-point:Wergeland.



The Ecological Footprint measures humanity’s demand on the biosphere in terms of the area of biologically productive land and sea required to provide the resources we use and to absorb our waste. In 2005 the global Ecological Footprint was 17.5 billion global hectares (gha), or 2.7 gha per person (a global hectare is a hectare with world-average ability to produce resources and absorb wastes). On the supply side, the total productive area, or biocapacity, was 13.6 billion gha, or 2.1 gha per person.
A country’s footprint is the sum of all the cropland, grazing land, forest and fishing grounds required to produce the food, fibre and timber it consumes, to absorb the wastes emitted when it uses energy, and to provide space for its infrastructure. Since people consume resources and ecological services from all over the world, their footprint sums these areas, regardless of where they are located on the planet.

Biocapacity is not evenly distributed around the world. The eight countries with the most biocapacity – the United States, Brazil, Russia, China, Canada, India, Argentina and Australia – contain 50 per cent of the total world biocapacity.
In prior years, Ecological Footprint accounts included an additional component reflecting the electricity generated by nuclear power plants. To improve methodological consistency, this component is no longer included in the accounts. This does not mean that the use of nuclear energy is free of risk or demands on the environment, only that these risks and demands are not easily expressed in terms of biocapacity.

Humanity’s footprint first exceeded the Earth’s total biocapacity in the 1980s; this overshoot has been increasing since then (Figure 23). In 2005, demand was 30 per cent greater than supply.
Humanity’s demand on the planet’s living resources, its Ecological Footprint, now exceeds the planet’s regenerative capacity by about 30 per cent. This global overshoot is growing and, as a consequence, ecosystems are being run down and waste is accumulating in the air, land and water. The resulting deforestation, water shortages, declining biodiversity and climate change are putting the well-being and development of all nations at increasing risk.
Humanity’s demand on the planet has more than doubled over the past 45 years as a result of population growth and increasing individual consumption. In 1961, almost all countries in the world had more than enough capacity to meet their own demand; by 2005, the situation had changed radically, with many countries able to meet their needs only by importing resources from other nations.
The Living Planet Index shows that wild species and natural ecosystems are under pressure across all biomes and regions of the world. The direct, anthropogenic threats to biodiversity are often grouped under five headings:
:: habitat loss, fragmentation or change, especially due to agriculture
:: overexploitation of species, especially due to fishing and hunting
:: pollution
:: the spread of invasive species or genes
:: climate change

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Humanity depends on healthy ecosystems, they support or improve our quality of life, and without them, the Earth would be uninhabitable. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) describes four categories of ecosystem services, starting with the most fundamental:
:: supporting services such as nutrient cycling
:: soil formation and primary production provisioning services such as the production of food, freshwater, materials or fuel
:: regulating services including climate and
flood regulation, water purification, pollination and pest control
:: cultural (including aesthetic, spiritual, educational and recreational) services.

The MA reported that biodiversity loss contributes to food and energy insecurity, increased vulnerability to natural disasters such as floods or tropical storms, poorer health, reduced availability and quality of water, and the erosion of cultural heritage.
Most supporting, regulating and cultural ecosystem services are not bought and sold commercially, so have no market value. Their decline sends no warning signal to the local or global economy. Markets lead to decisions about resource use that maximize benefits to individual producers and consumers, but often undermine the biodiversity and ecosystem services on which the production and consumption ultimately depend. The value of biodiversity to human well-being, while not readily quantifiable in monetary terms, could be the difference between a planet that can support its human population and one which cannot.

If overshoot continues to increase, what will the future hold?
Under assumptions of rapid global economic growth and a shift to a balanced mix of energy sources, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that annual carbon emissions will more than double by 2050. Moderate United Nations estimates show global population growing to 9 billion over the same period, while FAO projections show increasing consumption of food, fibre and forest products. Furthermore, if present management schemes persist, fisheries are projected to decline by more than 90 per cent by 2050.
Figure 31 shows the implications of these scenarios for humanity’s footprint through to mid-century. The 2005 overshoot of 30 per cent would reach 100 per cent in the 2030s even if recent increases in agricultural yields continue. This means that biological capacity equal to two planet Earths would be required to keep up with humanity’s resource demands and waste production.
This business-as-usual scenario is conservative as it assumes no unpleasant surprises: no biocapacity losses due to freshwater shortages, no feedback loops that cause a changing climate to reach tipping points, no damage by pollution, and no other factors that could cause biocapacity to decrease.

Ending overshoot means closing the gap between humanity’s footprint and available biocapacity. Five factors determine the size of this gap (Figure 33).
On the demand side, the footprint is a function of population size, the goods and services each person consumes, and the resource and waste intensity of these goods and services. Reductions in population, individual consumption, and the resources used or wastes emitted in producing goods and services all result in a smaller footprint.
On the supply side, biocapacity is determined by the amount of biologically productive area available, and the productivity of that area.
There are many different strategies that could reduce the gap between human demand on nature and the availability of ecological
capacity. Each of these strategies can be represented as a sustainability wedge that shifts the business-as-usual path towards one in which, when these wedges are combined, overshoot is eliminated.
One way of organizing wedges is to link them to the three factors that determine footprint. Some strategies in the per person consumption and technology wedges, such as insulating buildings, produce quick results for shrinking overshoot. Within a wedge, many interventions are possible. Individual consumption can be reduced by designing cities in which walking is preferable to driving. Technological innovations can increase the efficiency of resource use, such as meeting communication needs with cellular phones rather than landlines. Rehabilitation of degraded lands can increase agricultural yields while minimizing increases in footprint associated with agricultural expansion.
Alternatively, wedges can also be organized around major consumption categories such as food, shelter, mobility, goods and services, along with population size. The footprint of food, for example, might be reduced by optimizing the relationship between the distance it is transported and the efficiency with which it can be locally produced. The energy efficiency of residential and commercial buildings can often be dramatically increased, and utilities supporting them can be integrated so that wastes from one system serve as inputs for another.
The ecosystem approach is defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity as a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way. The ecosystem approach recognizes the relationships between healthy and resilient ecosystems, biodiversity conservation and human well-being. It sets out a series of 12 principles for decision making and action spanning the environmental, economic and social dimensions of sustainability.
It can be applied on any scale from local to global, and encompasses initiatives ranging from large-scale regional planning, such as integrated river basin management, to sustainable commodities management at the farm level. www.cbd.int/ecosystem/principles.shtml

:: Governments set the policy and economic frameworks within which people must live and the private sector must operate; these must encourage and reward sustainability and promote population stabilization
:: The private sector must be committed to good stewardship of the planet, should be committed to the “triple-bottom-line” approach of economic, social and environmental success, and must provide people with solutions that enable them to live sustainably
:: Civil society needs to be aware of the challenges, elect governments who will set policies in their best long-term interests, and exercise personal choice that demands and favors sustainable produce and products from the private sector.

That was it so far, further recommended reading can be the TEEB report;
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
(see the article on Minister of Finance called for further development of economic instruments to protect nature).

JANE JACOBS WALKS

Jane Jacobs was an urban thinker ahead of her time. When the great thinkers of the day were promoting freeways and auto-centric suburban development, she spotted what was being lost. To her, the best cities and neighborhoods were organic, constantly evolving communities, or networks of relationships. People knew each other and looked out for each other. Walkability was a key component in her vision of what made a city livable. One of her famous lines was that to know a city, or to know a neighbourhood, you needed to walk it.

She died just a few years ago, in her adopted home of Toronto. To honor her, friends in Toronto began the tradition of prompting people to host walks through their neighborhoods, pointed out what they like, or what Jane might have liked. In a recent interview that discussed neighbourhoods and Jane Jacobs, Richard Florida offers some reasons why we might love our home area:

So in essence a neighborhood is not just a set of individuals, but a set of relationships. I think that’s right. And the relationships are fluid. Some are longstanding and some you can plug into and play. And the places that enable those relationships to form are the places that do better.

Every time we come back to these neighborhoods that are exciting, that are great, there’s a long history behind them.

A Jane’s Walk is a chance to learn more of the local history and relationships that made local history. The experience of learning dozens of new things about your own city, and how cities work at the ground level is amazing. This year I’ll also try the experience of hosting, and sharing some recent history of my own neighborhood.

Find one in your city, or offer to host one… Click here for Canada or global cities. In the US try this direct link. They will happen simultaneously across North America and around the world on May 1 and 2, 2010.

Written by Wendy Waters at All About Cities

THE LOW CARBON FUTURE AND THE ECONOMY

Looking into a report (Smart 2020 report) from the climate group :
The Stern Review suggested that developed countries reduce emissions 20-40% below the 1990 levels would be a necessary interim target based on IPCC and Hadley Centre analysis (source: Stern, N (2008), Key Elements of a Global Deal on Climate Change, London School of Economics and Political Science, http:// www.lse.ac.uk/collections/climateNetwork/ publications/KeyElementsOfAGlobalDeal_ 30Apr08.pdf)

Luis Neves Chair, GeSI writes in the foreword;
"The ICT sector has both a profitable opportunity and a critical role to play with other sectors to design and deploy solutions needed to create a low carbon society. I urge you to review this report and focus your efforts on improving energy efficiencies wherever possible, to collaborate with us in steering regulations to
be more productive and to move boldly forward with technologies to improve our global climate. Acting now will be good for business, good for the economy and good for the world."


Summed up:
:: Smart motor systems
A review of manufacturing in China has identified that without optimisation, 10% of China’s emissions (2% of global emissions) in 2020 will come from China’s motor systems alone and to improve industrial efficiency even by 10% would deliver up to 200 million tonnes (Mt) CO2e savings. Applied globally, optimised motors and industrial automation would reduce 0.97 GtCO2e in 2020, worth ¤68 billion ($107.2 billion).4
:: Smart logistics
Through a host of efficiencies in transport and storage, smart logistics in Europe could deliver fuel, electricity and heating savings of 225 MtCO2e. The global emissions savings from smart logistics in 2020 would reach 1.52 GtCO2e, with energy savings worth
¤280 billion ($441.7 billion).
:: Smart buildings
A closer look at buildings in North America indicates that better building design, management and automation could save 15% of North America’s buildings emissions. Globally, smart buildings technologies would enable 1.68 GtCO2e of emissions savings, worth ¤216 billion ($340.8 billion).
:: Smart grids
Reducing T&D losses in India’s power sector by 30% is possible through better monitoring and management of electricity grids, first with smart meters and then by integrating more advanced ICTs into the so-called energy internet. Smart grid technologies were the largest opportunity found in the study and could globally reduce 2.03 GtCO2e , worth ¤79 billion ($124.6 billion).

TROUBLE IN THE SKY

It is fascinating how first the financial crisis, and now a volcano (crisis) shows us how much trouble we are in, caused by the way we have chosen to organize the world.

The clouds of ash from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano creeping in over Europe is showing us just how dependent we have made our selves of oil, represented by the aerial traffic. The flexibility and shorted time in travel the planes gives us, including transporting goods and important stuff like organs, makes them almost impossible to replace. The papers tell us about all the things we are running out of due to this incident of nature; organs like a hart needs to be inside its recipient within 4 hours after its last beat if it is to be a successful transplant. Almost impossible unless one live within 4 hours of the hospital doing the procedure, and the organ donor live within 4 hours to that same hospital too. But not only organ transplants have become threatened, if you live out on the islands or far into the fjords of Norway getting to the (right) hospital in time can be a challenge when the ambulance helicopters are stuck on the ground. Lives are suddenly at risk as the aerial traffic is paralyzed and on the ground. But in the future how will we adapt to this change that most likely will come? Oil fuel will become a scarce source of energy and this week shows us how vulnerable we are without it.
In Africa (Ethiopia) they are burning their roses now because without aerial traffic working in Europe they can´t get their product out to the consumers. How weird is that, flying flowers around the world? Things will change if we will make a serious attempt to lower our carbon footprint as dramatically as the goals have been set, to avoid further increased temperatures. What are people willing too give up, and how will they who loose their business adapt?

It will be interesting to see what our local politicians (with Torill Selvold Nyborg, as County Mayor, in charge) decide when they will attempt to agree on a KLIMAPLAN (plan for reducing green gas emissions,GGE) for our county that Bergen is a part of; Hordaland.
The KLIMAPLAN on a world basis is aiming to reduce their emissions based on numbers of 1991. This is argued by many to be quite an unfair share of responsibility. A global fair target will be emission rates pr. person (a footprint based on the individual), would reveal the enormous ecological space some parts of the world takes. GGE for a North American inhabitant is over 25 mill. tons pr year, while for an African it is under 5 mill. tons. A Norwegian based in Hordaland county is responsible for 13,6 mill. tons. If we in Hordaland cut our GGE with 5% every year we will in 2020 be responsible for 7,2 mill. tons individually. (source: Hordaland Naturvernforbund)
Key words to achieve this is short traveled food, bio-energy and a lower energy consumption. And political courage to dispose land and resources smarter in an ecological point of view.

ANTICIPATION TO FUTURE GREEN LIFE

I found this article on the site of the Norwegian Government "FUTURE CITIES". It is a survey done for the government concerning muncipalities "green actions" and the public responses to them;

En undersøkelse gjennomført av TNS Gallup for Framtidens byer viser at befolkningen i de 13 største byene i Norge ønsker seg kommuner som jobber aktivt for at de skal kunne leve mer klimavennlig.
- Undersøkelsen viser at når kommunene først tar grep og gjennomfører miljø- og klimatiltak, får de støtte av innbyggerne, sier miljø- og utviklingsminister Erik Solheim.
TNS Gallup har på oppdrag fra Framtidens byer spurt innbyggerne i de 13 største byene hvor fornøyd de er med kommunens klimapolitikk i dag, og hvordan de ser på andre mulige klimatiltak.
- Drammen får høyest oppslutning for sitt arbeid om å gjøre sentrum attraktivt og levende, mens Trondheim er den byen der flest er fornøyd med kommunens prioritering av kollektivfelt. Dette er tiltak som disse byene har arbeidet aktivt med, og det setter befolkningen tydelig pris på, sier Solheim.

Fornøyd med resirkulering
Innbyggerne i Framtidens byer er mest fornøyde med kommunens arbeid med tilrettelegging for kildesortering, gjenbruk og retur av spesialavfall. Folk er også positive til arbeidet med å bygge ut fjernvarme.
Minst fornøyd er innbyggerne med kommunenes satsing på sykkelveier, og med lokaliseringen av barnehager og andre kommunale tjenester slik at disse kan nås uten bil.

Vil ha kollektivtransport og grønne lunger
Beboerne i Framtidens byer er også spurt om hvilke tiltak de mener kommunen bør prioritere. Aller viktigst synes innbyggerne det er å bygge ut kollektivtransporten, og gi plass til grønne lunger for lek og rekreasjon. Når det gjelder disse to tiltakene er også innbyggerne relativt misfornøyd med kommunenes innsats i dag.

Over nitti prosent mener kildesortering og retur av spesialavfall må prioriteres. Like mange er for bygging av flere turveier og fortau, og ønsker at kommunen skal prioritere et levende og attraktivt sentrum.

Drammen på topp

Et lite flertall er misfornøyde med sin kommune når de blir spurt hva de alt i alt synes om kommunenes arbeid med å tilrettelegge for at de skal kunne leve mer klimavennlig. De i alderen 30-44 år er minst fornøyde, mens de som er 60 + er mest fornøyde.

Tilfredsheten varierer mye fra kommune til kommune. Innbyggere i Drammen kommune er mest fornøyde, og har en score for helhetlig tilfredshet med kommunens miljøtiltak på hele 4,1 på en skala fra 1 til 6. Stavanger komme på en god annenplass, med en score på 3,6.

Stolte av byen sin

64% av de spurte er stolte av sin egen by. Undersøkelsen viser også at de innbyggerne som i størst grad opplever å kunne påvirke kommunens klimagassutslipp, er mest fornøyd med kommunens klimapolitikk og mest stolt av byen sin.

- Norske kommuner har virkemidler til å redusere norske klimagassutslipp med hele 20 prosent. Denne undersøkelsen viser at befolkningen vil at kommunene faktisk bruker disse virkemidlene, sier Solheim.

IT´S ABOUT CONNECTING THE DOTS

OK, so easter is finally over and kindergarten will again serve me and give me some space to think starting tomorrow. Finally!
March has been a slow month for the diploma work so april will have to work better and charge this head with some good and new energy.
In my achitecture history task I mention Paul Downton and the Eco-City Builders organisation. On this page www.ecocitybuilders.org/amendment you can read the amendment of the citizens of Berkley, their (political?) approach to a more sustainable life in the city (whole version little lower in this text).
I think this was a good kick start after to much holidays, and inspirational to read it as the voices of "the citizens".

Looking at the proposals for the "The Heart of the City and Strawberry Creek at Center Street Project", it might not be quite what I expect to be the solution for f.ex access-point:Wergeland, but some of the intentions for the development are worth mentioning;
#Create opportunities for people to gather and engage in civic life and activities
#Encourage and support buildings that utilize sustainable design principles, including solar energy, rain and stormwater catchment and treatment, and other “green” design practices
#Increase current City stormwater capacity through the employment of permeable paving, natural plantings, and an underground cistern that will also serve to reduce flashing and runoff impacts farther downstream

The project adresses:
#Automobile dependence and transportation alternatives
#Pedestrian streets, public space, and street design
#The need to demonstrate effective ecological design, materials, and methods
#Education and outreach to the community
#Advanced and innovative watershed and stormwater management models
#Sustainable public infrastructure improvements
#Linkages between environmental restoration and sustainable development

[Full text of the proposed Ecocity Amendment to the Berkeley General Plan]

" The Ecocity Amendment to the General Plan

We, the citizens of Berkeley, are prepared to take part in what we believe will be the most consequential ecological endeavor of the 21st century: the rebuilding of our cities and towns in balance with nature. We understand the extreme importance of this task and accept responsibility for contributing to this healthy co-evolution of future generations and the bioregion. We also acknowledge that we are part of larger systems, both natural and social. Guided by the principles of ecology as we make decisions regarding our built environment and social structures, we will place this city upon a shared path of health and well-being. By implementing the Ecocity Amendment to the General Plan, the City of Berkeley will take the following measures to proactively reverse wasteful and ecologically damaging practices and facilitate balanced co-existence with nature, now and into the future.

Policies

The Berkeley Planning Commission and the Berkeley City Council should include the following four (4) policies in the Land Use Element of the Berkeley General Plan:

Ecocity Policy #1: Ecological Design (To facilitate the ecologically healthy city, we must design and build structures that are in balance with people and nature.)

Require the highest quality architectural and ecological design for new development projects. Require environmentally sensitive and sustainable design in new buildings, such as solar accessibility and orientation, and energy efficiency. Encourage development of public spaces in higher density city centers with ecological features such as public plazas, creek and forest restored urban environments and other amenities that enhance the pedestrian environment.

Ecocity Policy #2: Centers (Distance requires time and energy to traverse. The greater the distance people have to travel, the higher the use of resources and the greater the ecological damage. Therefore, we should be rebuilding and reorganizing into relatively compact centers, connected to efficient public transit.)

Encourage pedestrian orientation and community building by establishing centers throughout the City, ranging from small neighborhoods such as the Elmwood, to larger centers, such as 4th Street, and the largest center: the Downtown. These centers should increase appropriately in density and connect to efficient mass transit options.

Ecocity Policy #3: Heart of the City (Berkeley's central downtown core offers a powerful opportunity for successful innovation and economic development, and restoration of nature at the same time.)

On the blocks between the Downtown BART Station, Oxford Street, University Avenue and Center Street, establish the Heart of the City District in which taller buildings may be allowed, but only if the development provides transit oriented housing for a variety of income groups, exhibits environmentally sustainable ecologically sensitive design features, and incorporates natural elements, such as Strawberry Creek.

Establish provisions in the zoning ordinance for a Heart of the City Planned Unit Development (PUD) or Ecological Demonstration Project (EDP) permit process to review and approve innovative and ecological design in the Downtown that may not conform to the setback, height, parking, or other requirements of the zoning ordinance.

Ecocity Policy #4: Funding Environmental Restoration (To ensure balance between the built environment and the natural environment requires mechanisms and linkages between land development and land restoration.)

To ensure that new development funds environmental restoration:

Establish an Environmental Improvement Density Bonus for downtown projects that will generate funds for environmental improvements, such as creek restoration, reforestation, and wetlands restoration. Establish provisions that would allow additional floor area in downtown development in return for financial contributions to a local environmental fund for environmental restoration through direct purchase, purchase of easements or purchase of Transfer of Development Rights.

Establish a Transfer of Development Rights Ordinance to facilitate and fund ecological design, open space enhancements, creek restoration, natural habitat restoration and expansion of community gardens and public parks. Consider provisions that would allow development rights from ecologically sensitive or environmentally important property throughout the City to be transferred to Downtown development. Encourage a multi-disciplinary group of experts to prepare draft provisions for community, Planning Commission, and City Council consideration in drafting a TDR ordinance. "