The green infrastructure valuation toolkit user guide

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Building natural value for sustainable economic development: The green infrastructure valuation toolkit user guide TOOLS AVAILABLE IN THE CALCULATOR et al, April 2010) Tools Input data Tool basis Tool 1.1: Building energy saving – heating. [ Quantification and Monetisation functional for only residential properties] Estimates the energy saved in having trees sheltering residential and commercial buildings thereby reducing the heat loss. Tool 1.2: Reduction in carbon emissions from building energy saving – heating. [Quantification and Monetisation functional for only residential properties] Estimates reduction in carbon emissions associated with energy savings for heating by multiplying energy reduction (in kWh) by 0.203 Tree cover and types planted within 10m of buildings. Size of trees. Residential building numbers and types. Commercial building numbers and types. Application of Chicago 1994 study. For estimation, use 3% energy savings for each residential property
Building natural value for sustainable economic development: The green infrastructure valuation toolkit user guide Adapting cities for climate change: the role of green infrastructure. Gill, Handley et al, 2007 Evaluating Green Roof Energy Performance. Jeffrey Sonne, Ashrae Journal 2006 Carbon stored and sequestered in woodland and forest (including soils) Carbon storage and sequestration in soils Key benefit transfer values Average heating energy savings per tree Further research needed c.10tC/ha for grassland - further research needed 1.3% (Chicago) 3-9% (UK) emissions if natural gas was the heating fuel. This study also suggests that the benefit would be more significant in buildings with curtain walls of which U-value is much lower than a standard wall and in residential buildings. Further work is needed to provide useable values for the carbon stored in different land use types, including soils. This is very complex and context-specific – there is great variety in soil type and usage, and hydrology, climate and ecology are important factors. It is unrealistic to expect highly accurate estimates to be possible for all land-use types, but it should be possible to obtain better ‘ball park’ figures for broad groups. 4 Wong N. et al, 2003. Investigation of thermal benefits of rooftop gardens in the tropical KNOWLEDGE GAPS The main area for further work is clarification of the current research - to bring together a consistent view on the science - and work to link temperature rises on economic activity, measured by gross value added. Coupled with work cited here on using green infrastructure to adapt to climate change, this would allow an estimate to be made of the gross value added impact of urban greening strategies, influencing green roofs, tree planting and green space protection/enhancement. Further work is also desirable to model local impacts of green infrastructure on local temperature regulation in the UK, to inform tree planting strategies in relation to species type, location, scale of planting and so on. UK based evidence on the cooling impact of trees on buildings could help complete tool 1.5. A number of bespoke academic studies have also been undertaken in the UK and elsewhere assessing the cooling impact of trees on particular buildings, however it is difficult to generalise findings: The Centre for Urban Forestry Research (part of the US Forest Service, a USDA agency) reports that well placed, mature trees can save consumers up to 30% of annual cooling costs and save 10-25% of energy used for heating 20 . Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors sponsored research 21 finds that based on the typical UK climate, the savings on energy costs from green roof installation are negligible, with the energy savings possible with a 10cm deep green roof capable of being delivered with just 3mm extra insulation. Another study 22 predicted 4.45% annual heating energy savings for a typical office building in Scotland, equivalent to a reduction of 400 kg of annual CO2 environment. Building and Environment 38: 267-270. 5 Nowak, McPherson and Rowntree, Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: results of the Chicago urban forest climate project, USDA,1994 6 Gill, Handley et al, Adapting cities for climate change: the role of green infrastructure, 2007 7 Rawlings for DETR, Environmental rules of thumb, 1999 8 Gill, Handley et al, Adapting cities for climate change: the role of green infrastructure, 2007 9 Jacobs, Valuing England’s terrestrial ecosystems services, 2008 10 Natural England, Research report NERR026: Carbon management by land and marine managers, 2008 11 Brainard, Lovett and Bateman, Carbon sequestration benefits of woodland, 2003 12 Nowak, McPherson and Rowntree, Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: results of the Chicago urban forest climate project, USDA,1994 13 Defra, Safeguarding our soils, 2009 14 Macha, D., and L. Cihacek.. Carbon storage in plant and soil components of selected grass monocultures. AnMtgsAbsts2009.53321. ASA, CSSA, SSSA, Madison WI, 2009 15 Chang et al, 2007 "A preliminary study on the local cool-island intensity of Taipei city parks." Landscape and Urban Planning 80(4): 386-395. 16 Yu and Hien, 2006, Thermal benefits of city parks. Energy and Buildings 38, 105-120. 17 Heisler, Energy savings with trees, 1986 and Jones (2003) cited in Landscape consultants (2004) 18 Forestry Commission 25
Page 1 and 2: Building natural value for sustaina
Page 23: Building natural value for sustaina
Page 75 and 76:
Building natural value for sustaina
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 82 and 83:
show all

The green infrastructure valuation toolkit user guide

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?