Class Catch Up: End of Class

So the end has come and gone and I haven’t finished talking about the last few classes. Here we go with the final class catch up!

On Friday, we heard from the fifth and final group presentation, discussing sustainable consumption by looking at consumption patterns between two countries and the energy and environmental impacts that the consumption creates. They chose to compare Norway and Pakistan, by showing the energy sources that are used currently and what Pakistan has planned for the future. While Pakistan is looking to increase its coal consumption, it is also working on improving its wind and solar infrastructure. Once that is more built up and developed, they will take coal plants offline. However, Jevons paradox may come into play. This paradox states that as technology progresses, the increase in efficiency with which a resource is used tends to increase the rate of consumption of that resource. Therefore having more electricity will probably increase consumption, but having durable goods and more sustainable production will help to lessen this impact. I don’t know where Pakistan is receiving the funds to upgrade its renewable infrastructure, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the U.S. is supporting this initiative so that Pakistan doesn’t have to rely on Iranian oil.

One of my classmates then presented on Green Economy. The goal of green economy is to have high human development with low ecological impact, incorporating social equity. However, our current economic practices are focused predominately on human development without an eye on our ecological footprint. Our investments are done for money, while in a green economy investments would be driven to reduce carbon emissions and protecting our environment. This is a new economic paradigm that can drive growth of income and jobs, without creating environmental risk, whereas our current paradigm is creating poverty, climate change, and food stress. But how do we create this transition? The UN Environmental Program states that we can create this shift if we spend 2% of the global GDP on ten programs with include: manufacturing, renewable energy, waste, cities, transportation, and more. But how do we get countries to agree to redirect 2% of their GDP? Many countries don’t have that possibility and countries like the U.S. should probably contribute more. Politically, though, that’s nearly impossible.

Another classmate from Mexico who is a landscape architect studying in the Netherland talked about using value mapping in ecosystem services. There is a lot of research on planning and decision-making, but not on using this tool for landscape architects. The style of mapping that she used is different than the spider value map I discussed in my last class blog. The location she used in her example comes from Sermange, France, where the central part of the town has been important for water. While I didn’t fully understand the kind of map she used, this tool is very helpful, I think, for landscape architects to make sure they are thinking holistically.

Chris then presented on how life has changed and continues to change. One of these examples was going back to alternative money, such as complementary currencies. In Ithaca, New York, some people (at least used to) exchange time with each other for services instead of using money. Another was Japanese garden art which thinks about the natural world and how to just enhance the natural beauty. He discussed Sigmund Kvaløy’s (a Norwegian eco-philosopher) thoughts on complication vs. complexity: nature is complex, but we don’t need to make our systems complicated to fit into this complexity. One of Sigmund Kvaløy’s greatest comparisons was between Life Necessities Society vs. Industrial Growth Society. In LNS, there is trust and belonging, and countries would help each other succeed in new kinds of technology if it’s useful. With IGS, there is overdevelopment – where energy intensity is down, but due to increased house sizes and the number of houses, the energy use is actually increasing. After GNP reaches a certain point, a nation will start experiencing “debenefits” such as pollution, health issues, overconsumption, overworking, etc. I definitely feel this is the case in the U.S. But how do we reverse this trend in a way that society would agree?

On Monday, we heard from Sandy Halliday who has a degree in philosophy and in engineering, working for GAIA Architects as a researcher. She titled her lecture “A Short History of Good Ideas,” covering the ideas that she felt are important to keep in mind when creating a more sustainable world. Here is her list of twelve ideas:

1. Infinite growth on a finite planet is an impossibility
2. There is only one earth
3. War against nature is inevitably a war against ourselves
4. Everything must go somewhere (aka, keep in mind our waste!)
5. There are limits to growth… but no limits to development
6. If we suspect a problem, we should talk it up, not down
7. You don’t put solar panels on a HGV
8. You can give a lifetime guarantee for every piece of tech you don’t install
9. Any issue should be handled in a way that’s as decentralized as possible in a way that is still effective
10. Socially useful production that delivers on needs
11. Growth economics are unsustainable
12. Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Production

On our final day of class before the exam, Chris went through a few more sustainability ideas and problems to be aware of. The most important issues is that sustainability is often an afterthought in projects, and often, people only focus on technology as the solution, when it isn’t the full package. The other is that people don’t know what they don’t know. The project creators might not realize that bringing sustainability into the conversation in the first place will make things better than if it’s added on at the end. Sustainability can be seen as participation, meaningful work, healthy places, and as reducing inequity. He also covered his work on the Punakha Hospital in Bhutan and how he incorporated state of the art design, sustainable building design, and traditional elements all into the same plans.

The last guest speaker was Saleem Drera, who is from the U.S. but is working in Norway with Scandinavian Advanced Technology on using thorium over uranium for nuclear power. He covered some of the largest nuclear disasters that we have heard of to then explain how thorium is different. It is not fissile on its own and its waste is not radioactive for as long as uranium waste. I think it would be interesting to see where research goes on this nuclear technology, though I still don’t think it is the best energy source when compared to solar or wind.

That fully wraps up the class! We had our final on Wednesday, a little over a week ago. I still can’t believe it’s done and that I may not see some of my classmates again… I have one more blog post to post about my adventures and then it’s all over. I think that’s why it has taken me so long to get this out. Thanks for bearing with me!