Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies

Recommendations

Info

5.3.2 Cool Pavements Current Status The status of cool roof policy is far more advanced than cool pavements and few formal policies exist in this area. The LEED Green Building Rating System provides credits for buildings using cool pavements through its Sustainable Sites Credit, and through a scheme called the Green Alley Initiative the City of Chicago replaces all old pavements with porous paving as part of their renewal strategy [076]. On a residential level programs such as Earth Craft Homes exist, developed by the Greater Atlanta Home Builders Association and Southface Energy Institute, the program awards points for homes that use permeable pavements [076]. One paper by LBNL discusses cool pavements alongside cool roofs and made a case for a new policy to implement cool surfaces on all new build and resurfacing projects in temperate and tropical climates in the US [201]. Potential Barriers � Technical Research: Lack of research and modeling of benefits � Economic Research: Too few cost benefit analysis studies undertaken � Organizational Support: Lack of awareness of technology in the public and private sectors � Institutional Support: Lack of industry support to communicate benefits, promote technology transfer and address barriers. Scale and Magnitude Due to the nature of policy uptake, roads and pavements are typically under the control of local government, so policy would have to be rolled out on a local scale. Where policy exists in the US it has been borne from a pilot project or community project instigated a local government which has been deemed successful and rolled out on a larger scale through procurement; design guidelines; building standards and codes; or council issued resolutions. Outside the US, similarly to cool roofs, little information and policy exists relating to cool pavements and more research and promotion is required before this situation can be remedied. Conclusion Some policy exists for this technology, predominantly in the US, and it is the least developed when compared to the other technologies featured in this section due to the lack of research, both technical and economic, and lack of support from organizations and institutions. Due to the substantial drawbacks of using policy and legislation to enforce changes to building materials, primarily the lengthy timescales, a strategy which may help promote cool pavements is to target the decision makers and influencers in the resurfacing industry such as roofing specialists, construction contractors and architects and educate them on the benefits of cool materials. [081]. Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies Page 93
5.3.3 Green Roofs and Urban Green Areas Current Status Some local level policy exists for green roof technology but it is less established than the more familiar cool roof technology. Many guidebooks have been published to educate the public and building owners about green roofs and some governments offer financial incentives for their installation [197]. Cities in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Japan and the cities of Toronto and Vancouver in Canada have by‐laws which mandate green roofs on all new residential buildings [198]. In the US most states have some kind of urban planting program. Germany has the most formal arrangement for incorporating green roofs into building codes and nature conservation acts, direct and indirect financial incentives and ecological compensation measures [212]. As such Germany is a particularly good example and is considered to be the world leaders in the green roof industry due to their advanced green roof technology (where it originated 30 years ago [214]) and practices. Their industry is estimated to be worth $77 million annually and they are reported to have 50 million m 2 of green roofs in their cities which make up 14% of total roof area [211, 212]. As a result of its inception in Germany, it has become popular in Europe where there is a steady trend in the design of sustainable buildings. The benefits of urban parks are well understood and discussed in many papers and architects are increasingly designing them into urban areas, but again no formal policy exists with regards to their implementation [210]. Potential Barriers General barriers to Green Roofs and Urban Green Areas are: � Cost: o there is an underdeveloped method of costing green roof technology, initial, life‐ cycle or cost benefit analysis. In Germany annual storm water fees offset the price; o the cost benefit analysis of trees require further research including their planting, maintenance and disposal; o developers may protest over the extra cost of a green roof. Developers may be more intent on delivering a low cost building and may not consider the long term energy savings of a green roof which recuperates the initial cost; � Repairs: repairs on a green roof are more difficult than a traditional roof; and maintenance of trees and greenery can be expensive and therefore an unattractive; � Aesthetics: some people do not like the appearance of a green roof; � Associations: there are a lack of associations to advocate green roof technology; � Collaboration: there is a lack of collaborative R&D efforts to develop green roof technology; � Technical Capability: manufacturing firms have insufficient technical capabilities to produce green roof technology; Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies Page 94
Page 1 and 2:
Assessment of International Urban H
Page 3 and 4:
Comments iii Bibliographic Report a
Page 5 and 6:
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii Bibliographic
Page 9 and 10:
ix Bibliographic Report and Study o
Page 11 and 12:
xi Bibliographic Report and Study o
Page 13 and 14:
The mitigation technologies were fo
Page 15 and 16:
a forward path; provides an economi
Page 17 and 18:
2.1.1 Population Size/Density Popul
Page 19 and 20:
workday effect and weekends. Studie
Page 21 and 22:
Some UHI impacts are positive such
Page 23 and 24:
correlation with vehicles and traff
Page 25 and 26:
2.2.4 Peak Power Peak power describ
Page 27 and 28:
temperature and climate, thus chang
Page 29 and 30:
3 QUANTITATIVE MODELING & SIMULATIO
Page 31 and 32:
The following papers use a number o
Page 33 and 34:
Another study in Japan simulated ai
Page 35 and 36:
This paper applied a model to calcu
Page 37 and 38:
3.2 Simulations of UHI 3.2.1 Introd
Page 39 and 40:
A study in France sought to find ou
Page 41 and 42:
Traffic flow was calculated using c
Page 43 and 44:
Implementation Issues 4 North & Asi
Page 45 and 46:
These studies were founded primaril
Page 47 and 48:
(humidification and heat sink insta
Page 49 and 50:
emissions and the tree topology rel
Page 51 and 52:
At a City scale one study focuses o
Page 53 and 54: This section reports the findings f
Page 55 and 56: Recent steps taken in cities in the
Page 57 and 58: � Most US States encourage tree p
Page 59 and 60: o 29 German cities offer subsidies
Page 61 and 62: 4.5.1 Review for Cool Roofs: 4.5.1.
Page 63 and 64: the global emitted CO2 offset poten
Page 65 and 66: standards to promote the cool roofs
Page 67 and 68: The expected savings generated in c
Page 69 and 70: � The degree to which the change
Page 71 and 72: enefits are complex to measure dire
Page 73 and 74: controls of the active cooling/heat
Page 75 and 76: temperature increases due to paveme
Page 77 and 78: curb‐side planting. Data gatherin
Page 79 and 80: location, orientation, growth/morta
Page 81 and 82: seasons, climate types, etc. Furthe
Page 83 and 84: the summer than the winter, thus ra
Page 85 and 86: A study in Japan tested the effect
Page 87 and 88: One US study written in 1998 seeks
Page 89 and 90: This section reports the findings f
Page 91 and 92: planning approach. Medium resolutio
Page 93 and 94: Urban design and planning is a comp
Page 95 and 96: 5 CRITICAL REVIEW OF UHI COUNTERMEA
Page 97 and 98: � Implementation Issues: The esti
Page 99 and 100: savings are used over solutions tha
Page 101 and 102: � 10.5 MtCO2 emissions per year f
Page 103: � Preparation: Substantial prepar
Page 107 and 108: 5.4 Economic Review The magnitude o
Page 109 and 110: 5.5 Opportunities for Scale Up (Bar
Page 111 and 112: technology, it evaluates the availa
Page 113 and 114: Availability: the level and type of
Page 115 and 116: integration would make them accepta
Page 117 and 118: Awareness: Planners and designers w
Page 119 and 120: would seek to incentivize UHI count
Page 121 and 122: homeowner for example to choose whe
Page 123 and 124: Planning issues for new builds, the
Page 125 and 126: 5.6.4 Energy Efficiency Measures Pl
Page 127 and 128: � Political will - The government
Page 129 and 130: not to create dedicated policy vehi
Page 131 and 132: � When developing costing analyse
Page 133 and 134: 7 GLOBAL SCIENTIFIC PANEL 7.1 Intro
Page 135 and 136: an understanding of planning policy
Page 137 and 138: Role Name Institution Country of Or
Page 139 and 140: Role Name Institution Country of Or
Page 141 and 142: sustainable architecture. He is an
Page 143 and 144: energy buildings, natural and mixed
Page 145 and 146: Name: Hashem Akbari Current Positio
Page 147 and 148: momentum in cities are measured and
Page 149 and 150: Ms MacDonald was formerly Director
Page 151 and 152: Name: Dr Dale Quattrochi Current Po
Page 153 and 154: Name: Joe Huang Current Position: L
Page 155 and 156:
State University. He is former Pres
Page 157 and 158:
Bank for Reconstruction and Develop
Page 159 and 160:
planners/designers are equipped wit
Page 161 and 162:
Paper Ref Title of Paper Author Ins
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
show all

Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?