News & Discussion: Sustainable Development

All other development discussion.
Message
Author
CloCkWeRX
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 4:37 pm
Contact:

Green Development & Adelaide

#1 Post by CloCkWeRX » Tue Jan 03, 2006 5:10 pm

What's out there in the way of green development in Adelaide?

I came across:
http://www.climatechange.sa.gov.au/rese ... reensquare

and attended a few of their meetings; but didn't find out as much as I'd have liked about green development, particularly what the building industry is doing and what's taking place in new bits of Adelaide.

So; what's out there?

User avatar
Howie
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4790
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:55 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 40 times

#2 Post by Howie » Tue Jan 03, 2006 7:50 pm

Conservatory on Hindmarsh Square will be a 5 star energy rated building i believe... a few others projects have also been noted for their sustainability.

Hopefully as time goes on these buildings will be the norm across Adelaide.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2097
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 54 times

News & Discussion: Sustainable Development

#3 Post by Ho Really » Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:03 pm

Solar trial for city
August 30, 2006 11:22am
AAP

ADELAIDE would become Australia's first solar city with initiatives to save residents up to $200 a year on their power bills, Prime Minster John Howard said today.

Mr Howard said the Federal Government would provide $15 million for the trial project which would involve installing solar panels and smart electricity metres in about 1700 homes in Adelaide's northern suburbs.

The trial would save about $5 million in energy costs and cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30,000 tonnes each year.

The solar panels would be produced in Australia by BP Solar in Sydney using technology developed by Origin Energy in Adelaide.

Homeowners would be able to buy the solar panels using discounted loans.

Mr Howard said the solar cities concept had captured the national interest.

"It is a creative proposal that will involve people in Adelaide and help promote the benefits of better energy choices to communities right across Australia," he said.

He said Adelaide was a natural choice as a solar city given the demand on its electricity network from the growth of air-conditioning in homes and its abundant sunshine.
Like to see more of this.

Cheers

User avatar
Howie
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4790
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:55 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 40 times

#4 Post by Howie » Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:04 pm

As do i.. just in non-marginal seats preferably.

User avatar
tidus0
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Seaford

#5 Post by tidus0 » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:48 pm

aswell as it obiligary to have a rainwater tank in every new home i think they should make solar power (even if it is only a small amount) obligary aswell. Think about it rarely anymore blackouts meaning ETSA finally lose.

User avatar
duke
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:15 pm
Been thanked: 11 times

#6 Post by duke » Fri May 11, 2007 8:38 pm

How do you get to be one of the lucky ones to get in on this trial?

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2849
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 82 times

CBD can't use green generators

#7 Post by rhino » Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:22 am

And now for something completely ridiculous:

CBD can't use green generators
CAMERON ENGLAND
December 18, 2007 12:45am


ENVIRONMENTALLY friendly power generators are unable to be connected to Adelaide's electricity grid in case they cause faults in the system, ETSA Utilities says.
ETSA confirmed it has a policy of not allowing generators with a capacity of more than 30kw to be connected to the grid in the Adelaide CBD.
This means power generators such as gas-fired cogeneration plants, which produce significantly fewer greenhouse gas emissions than large power plants but can fit in city buildings, cannot feed excess power back into the grid.
A high-profile property developer, who preferred to remain anonymous, said while other states had incentives to install environmentally friendly power generation, the situation in the Adelaide CBD was the opposite.
He had projects which could use cogeneration but ETSA's policy, whereby it would only allow such plants if grid protection measures were paid for by the user, meant their viability was in question.
"They don't like electricity being generated and pumped back into the grid," he said.
"In reality we don't want to do that anyway because we'd be over-speccing the cogeneration system.
"There should be some incentive to generate power in your own building because that's going to take a load off the peak demand, your poles and wires and your generation at maximum times."
ETSA said the policy only applied to large commercial generators, while household solar systems could be connected to the grid.
"Large generators (above 30kw) connected to the grid provide fault energy to network short circuits," an ETSA spokeswoman said.
"ETSA Utilities' high voltage (HV) distribution network and our customers' HV distribution networks in the CBD of Adelaide are near their fault energy limit and consequently, to ensure the network remains safe for our customers and our employees, we are unable to permit the addition of new, large, embedded generators to the CBD network."
Cogeneration systems are currently in place in the Women's and Children's Hospital and the Botanic Gardens Conservatory.
Cogeneration uses gas to generate electricity and waste heat produced runs heating and cooling systems.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

Re: CBD can't use green generators

#8 Post by Omicron » Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:28 pm

:roll:

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 16 times

More Food for Thought: Inefficient Energy Use in Buildings

#9 Post by AG » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:03 am

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 58,00.html
Disposable office blocks 'a huge waste of energy'
Stephen Lunn | April 21, 2008
CONSTRUCTING city buildings to be obsolete after 30 years is a scandalous building industry practice - and one of the most extreme examples of energy inefficiency in modern society, according to international futurist Patrick Dixon.

He says most offices being built today use 20th-century energy measures, when considerable cost savings are available with the right mix of modern design and technology.

Dr Dixon, chairman of British-based Global Change Limited and adviser on the latest global trends to such companies as Microsoft and BP, will address a building conference in Melbourne today.

He will stress the need to plan for a time when energy is twice as expensive as today after carbon taxes are added. However, it is the inefficiency of modern buildings that rankles most.

"I do think it's a scandal," Dr Dixon says. "If you buy a home in Australia, you take out a mortgage and in a decade or two you plan to sell it almost as you found it. But office buildings are constructed to be pulled down after 30 years, perhaps 40 years at most.

"Forty per cent of all the energy costs a building will ever use over its life are in putting it up and knocking it down," he says.

"So we can make huge energy efficiency gains just by building them to last at least 50 years, and to retrofit buildings rather than demolishing them and starting from scratch."

Dr Dixon says that, of Sydney's 2000 office buildings, 97 per cent have a four-star energy rating, compared with many new buildings at five or six stars.

He argues that energy producers and consumers should be encouraged to develop strategies to smooth out the spikes in electricity demand.

And he notes that 10 per cent of an Australian energy company's assets are required only 1per cent of the time - or about four days a year - to accommodate the peak demand on the hottest days.

Consumers might be using the equivalent of six months of their total electricity costs during the hottest 100 hours of the year.

"You have to pay for that capacity sitting idle for most of the year," Dr Dixon says. "That is a huge cost."

Some practical steps can be taken, he says, including using smart-meter technology to allow consumers to use cheaper electricity at off-peak times.

"And electricity companies could also sign special contracts to provide for weather-sensitive pricing," Dr Dixon says. "If the temperature is forecast to reach acertain level, the price of electricity could go up, again encouraging people to think about when they are turning on their appliances."

Countries such as Australia could also find big energy savings through the design of houses, office buildings and factories.

"There can be electricity consumption savings of between 30 and 50 per cent simply by installing and maintaining more sophisticated temperature controls," he says.

"And importantly, the costs involved can be recouped in as few as three to five years."
What I find interesting is that when people think of energy efficient buildings, most only think of the final product. A huge proportion of the energy used by a building is during construction and demolition stages. So while the final product might be a environmentally friendly and sustainable unit, the process involved in building it is not.

Constructing buildings so that they have a longer life is one solution to the energy inefficiency issue, but most buildings are inflexible designs which may not be suitable to modern demands, requirements and standards. Sometimes it is more economical to demolish a building and construct a new one. What really needs to be addressed is the construction cycle itself, there needs to be some vast improvements and innovations in order to reduce the amount of energy consumed during this period. Regardless of whether you can have buildings standing for longer and renovated when necessary, inevitably there will always be the need for the construction of new buildings to meet new demands.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

News & Discussion: Sustainability

#10 Post by stumpjumper » Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:51 pm

The lifecycle costing of buildings is complex.

Basically, the 'lifecycle cost' of a building comprises cost of construction - cost of materials and labour, which are the historic or embedded energy costs; the running cost or cost in use - energy costs, maintenance costs; and demolition cost - decommissioning and dismantling, less the value of material salvaged.

Apart from the 'physical' lifecycle costs, there are economic costs and benefits which attach the the owner - cost of finance, opportunity cost of capital invested, benefit of rental income, profit or loss on sale etc. Because these factors unlike the physical costs depend on the owner's finances they can be put aside in considering the lifecycle costing.

It's clear that the longer a building can be used without significant increase in cost in use, the 'cheaper' the building becomes.

Other factors which make a building cheaper are lower construction cost, lower cost in use and higher value of salvage.

Some of these costs and values vary independently of other factors. Cost in use may vary according to the usage of the building and to accepted comfort requirements (light and noise levels, heating and cooling, for example). Salvage value varies with demand for materials.

However, these variations are minor in effect compared with the cost of replacement, even on the same site.

So, putting it simply, longer use through effective adaptive reuse is the cheapest way to reduce the cost of the buildings needed for society to operate. The same (adaptive reuse) goes for other physical infrastructure - bridges, even roadside poles etc.

Naturally, the provision of new housing to satisfy demand and the construction of new administration, sales etc facilities also to satisfy demand in new areas.

But the continued use of existing buildings is not what many in the development industry want to hear, and that industry goes to considerable lengths to convince the government and the community that new buildings are constantly required where old ones already exist.

In this context the construction of buildings with an intentionally short useful life can be questioned, although there are circumstances where this is preferable, and the cost of the practice can be ameliorated by building in away that dismantling and reconstruction with a high level of salvage and reuse of materials is possible.

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 16 times

#Article: The greening of SA's councils

#11 Post by AG » Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:26 am

The greening of SA's councils
Article from: The Advertiser
JILL PENGELLEY
December 23, 2009 10:30pm

THINGS are greening up at the grassroots level. While climate change is debated on the world stage, local councils in South Australia are directing change.

They've trained residents to drag three different rubbish bins to the kerb and it's time to move on to the next challenge: the power game. The same authority that hands out library cards and dog tags has its eye on capturing the sun and wind.

Onkaparinga City Council, which spans Adelaide's southern fringe, proposes something for everyone, from household solar panels to miniature "sun farms" and a larger commercial power plant. There are already about 1200 photovoltaic (solar panel) systems installed across the south - mostly on houses.

Last week, the council agreed to investigate a scheme whereby preferred suppliers would be appointed to sell solar systems to ratepayers at a bulk-purchase rate.

The smaller sun farms would involve the installation of up to 30kW solar panel systems on public buildings or vacant land. Community members could buy a stake and receive dividends from profits.

The 5mW commercial scheme planned for Lonsdale would power about 2000 homes.

Onkaparinga chief executive Jeff Tate says while the council will not own and run power companies, it has the vision and ability to bring investors together.

"This links in to us trying to build a new economic base in the south; we're now targeting different industry sectors," he says.

"Residents and businesses of the city, if they'd like to become involved, we'd find a way for that to happen as well.

"It could be a co-operative. It could be a company is formed and people become shareholders."

The green energy plans depend on the willingness of residents and business to invest, and the council now will begin to gauge interest.

Solar Energy Society president Monica Oliphant says the Federal Government should provide incentives for larger renewable energy projects to encourage investment.

At the individual level, householders are paid a "feed-in tariff" for any unused power they generate, which goes back into the grid.

However, larger renewable power schemes do not attract the tariff.

"Renewables are still quite expensive," Professor Oliphant says.

"A lot of people might not want one on their roof but wouldn't mind putting a bit into a community project. "But the Government does not want to go to a feed-in tariff for larger systems because they're afraid of what it might do to electricity prices."

She also says it is important to look beyond solar power, to wind turbines and waste gases, to allow for times and places the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine.

Professor Oliphant says most local council projects are "small stuff" but Onkaparinga's proposed 5mW system is impressive and would involve more than one source of power. "That's not small-scale stuff - that's good," she says.

"They're probably a leader in what they're thinking."

With scientists and politicians still divided on climate change, Professor Oliphant believes it can be tough to persuade homeowners to change the world at their own expense.

ASSOCIATE Professor John Boland, who works in environmental mathematics at UniSA, says local government is doing great work in a range of green directions.

"To be honest, some of the best initiatives in many different areas are at the local government level," he says. "I find it quite happily surprising that they seem to be driving these projects.

"There's no feed-in tariffs for big installations like that, only for domestic dwellings, and yet they're pushing it without the best economic drivers there could be."

In the Campbelltown City Council area, the State Government is working with the council on developing Lochiel Park - a green village with just 100 sustainable houses.

The other two-thirds of the project is parklands. The project will serve as a model for other urban developments and help educate the public and the property development industry about sustainable housing and land development.

Professor Boland says even small projects, such as a solar panel on a council library, can be used to educate the community.

Salisbury City Council's stormwater project is another standout scheme and a national and international leader.

A series of wetlands created to hold and clean stormwater now is home to more than 100 bird species, including 50 migratory types that visit from as far away as Korea and Japan.

Frogs, fish, yabbies and turtles all live in the waters which 20 years ago would have been allowed to run out to sea. Now, much of the water is stored in an underground aquifer for later re-use.

Next year, all of Salisbury's parks and reserves will be irrigated with recycled stormwater.

Local Government Association environment and development director Michael Barry says people may be divided on climate change, so such schemes will not motivate everyone.

"Everyone's got the right to their own opinion about climate change, but the things that are facts are the cost of energy, the cost of water - the shortage of water is not in dispute in SA," he says.

"We'll encourage communities to respond because it's in their interests financially, even if they're not won over philosophically."

Mr Barry says councils from Victor Harbor to the South-East and Eyre Peninsula are looking to the sun, wind, rain and methane to make environmental and financial savings.

"We do think it's local government's job to help their communities contribute in whatever way they can on these issues," he says.

fabricator
Legendary Member!
Posts: 537
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:13 pm
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: #Article: The greening of SA's councils

#12 Post by fabricator » Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:34 pm

The greening of SA's councils
Article from: The Advertiser

The 5mW commercial scheme planned for Lonsdale would power about 2000 homes.
Wow 5 miliwatts, enough to power 1/4 of a led, should read 5 MW (megawatt).

Good to see practical local solutions that people can actually get involved in. Unlike Rudd and his climate change debacle, China think its hilarious they sabotaged the entire thing.
AdelaideNow: Now with 300% more Liberal Party hacks, at no extra cost.

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

Re: #Article: The greening of SA's councils

#13 Post by Omicron » Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:10 pm

I'm not yet convinced that solar/wind/geothermal energy markets are viable without substantial Federal government grants and subsidies paid directly to consumers. Time and again we are shown that artificially-induced demand is not sustainable, and yet everyone seems to want governments to do just that.

User avatar
monotonehell
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5466
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Adelaide, East End.
Has thanked: 192 times
Been thanked: 288 times
Contact:

Re: #Article: The greening of SA's councils

#14 Post by monotonehell » Sun Dec 27, 2009 3:10 am

Omicron wrote:I'm not yet convinced that solar/wind/geothermal energy markets are viable without substantial Federal government grants and subsidies paid directly to consumers. Time and again we are shown that artificially-induced demand is not sustainable, and yet everyone seems to want governments to do just that.
Oh I don't know, it seems to work for coal fired power stations who receive around ten billion dollars from the federal government each year. (check out the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Program if you want the details)

IF alternative power sources got even a slim portion of what we spend on the coal industry they'd be up and running quickly.
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

Re: #Article: The greening of SA's councils

#15 Post by Omicron » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:20 pm

monotonehell wrote:
Omicron wrote:I'm not yet convinced that solar/wind/geothermal energy markets are viable without substantial Federal government grants and subsidies paid directly to consumers. Time and again we are shown that artificially-induced demand is not sustainable, and yet everyone seems to want governments to do just that.
Oh I don't know, it seems to work for coal fired power stations who receive around ten billion dollars from the federal government each year. (check out the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Program if you want the details)
Ten billion paid to coal power stations under the GGAP is news to me?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests