Green Wash(2)

As is discussed in the latest blog, greenwashing has been quite common since 1990s, not only in architecture, but in many other products as well. At the same time, plenty of organizations and individuals are making attempts to reduce the negative impacts of greenwashing by exposing it to the public.

In accordance with some organizations opposite greenwashing, a significant increase could be discovered in the use of greenwashing in the past decade. For example, the advertising consultancy company, TerraChoice Environmental Marking, published a report denoting a 79% raise between 2007 and 2009, and varied ways the greenwashing beginning to manifest itself.

As is pointed out by the Home and Family Edition, 95% of the products claiming to be sustainable or green are found to commit one or more “sins of greenwashing”, which includes sin of the hidden trade-off, of No Proof, of Vagueness, of Irrelevance, of Lesser of Two Evils, and of Fibbing.

In addition, a point system is set up by the US Green Building Council’s leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating program. Some companies claim that environmentally minded policy changes could help them gain points in the program. It seems the point system is applied as an example of the “gateway effect” that the drive to products as environmentally friendly is on company policies.

Meanwhile, many state authorities have enacted regulations to limit the greenwashing trend. The Australian Trade Practice Act could be one example. It includes punishment of companies, which give misleading environmental claims. Any companies who are found guilty of such could face fines up to $1.1 millions, and pay for all expenses incurred when setting the record straight about their actual environmental impact.

In many cases, greenwashing could cost a considerable number money, time and efforts, but is without any real benefit to both environment and human beings themselves. Enacting regulations and giving punishment to those who are guilty of relative issues might be one of the best ways to limit the negative greenwashing tendency, and should be supported.

Reference:

http://sinsofgreenwashing.com/

Naish, J (2008). "Lies...Damned lies...And green lies". Ecologist 38 (5): 36–39.

Green Varnish： An Irony to Green Wash?

The other days, an installation named Green Varnish attracted my attention, while surfing the Internet. This significant “green” fabric is located in the courtyard of the Contemporary Art Museum of Saint Louis, with thousands of plants on it, designed by Nomad Studio. With an area of 200 sqm, the natural tapestry plays with the architectural space, while provoking it.

This work is directed by William E Robert, whose has mainly concentrated on social and environmental impact of landscape architecture. Thus, the design purpose of Green Varnish is not only to provide visitors with relaxing space, but also to explore the necessity of hiding inconvenient realities with “politically correct” beauty. It seems the work illustrates the tendency of the whole society to ignore any relevant information, which represents an inconvenience.

As is mentioned by William, human being has already brought too much negative impacts to nature. On the contrary, the actions they take to solve environmental problems are quite passive and pro forma.  Nowadays, more and more vocabularies like “sustainable” “resilience” and “smart” are abused in architecture, as well as other products. The Green Varnish seems to be an ironic gesture towards the “greening” trend.

Actually, those “green wash” thing has been very common since 1990s. For instance, in 2009, the European McDonald’s changed the color of their logos from red and yellow to green and yellow. A spokesman for the company explained the change as a clarification of responsibility for the preservation of nature resources. However, any further sustainable actions could hardly be discovered. Similar issues happened in Kimberly Clark’s claim of “Pure and Natural diapers in green packaging. Organic cotton is used in the outside of the product, but the same petrochemical gel is kept on the inside.

To deal with those “green wash” issues, relative regulations are legislated in many countries successively. Let’s talk about those legislations in the next blog.

Reference:http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34111784/ns/business-us_business/t/mcdonalds-rolling-out-green-logo-europe/

Water Efficiency Labeling and Standards

Except building ourselves with knowledge of water saving and avoiding waste by reducing leaks, being water efficient through the products we use. By applying water-efficient products, citizens could not only contribute to the protection of environment, but also save money on both energy and water bills. In Australia, citizens could eliminate the water efficiency by checking the Water Efficiency Labeling and Standards (WELS) scheme, with the use of an easy-to-understand star rating scheme.

When picking out a product, it is necessary for us to look for the potential savings that come with a high star rating. The more stars an appliance has, the more water efficient the product will be. On the website of Sydney Sustainable Living, an example is give. If a tree-star rated showerhead is taken into use, people could save the average home $150 a year in water bill, with a cost of only 20$.

The owner of my apartment happened to change a washing machine for us last week, (since the door of the former one was broken…). In comparison with those two machines, both of them achieve 4.5 stars, but the new one may save one liters in each wash. That is to say, over 200liters of water could now be saved in one year. At the same time, the new machine saves 85kwh per wash. If cold water is used, the energy consumption may decrease by 52%. Thanks for the broken door.
      




Reference: http://www.sydney-sustainableliving.com/learn-explore-grow/saving-water/

water waste at home

The apartment I live in is located on Anzac Parade, and has been used for over ten years. Since most equipment and furniture are quite old, plenty of unsustainable issues take place at home. For example, we attempt to close the taps every time we finish using water, but leaks still happen.

One or two drops may not seem like much at first glance, but imagine, a large deal of water could be wasted over a long period of time. According to the institution of Sydney-sustainable Living, one leaking tap can waste up to 3L in an hour, that is 2000L in a month. It is necessary to fix leaking taps or replace washers as soon as taps/shower heads begin to drip. Moreover, similar issues could happen in the toilet. Placing a sheet of dry paper at the back of the bowl could be a quick way to find out whether there is a leak. Fortunately, in my bathroom, the paper remains dry between flushes, which indicates the toilet does not drip.

On the website hunterwater.com, water usage in each household (including waste water) could be calculated, in accordance with your daily activities. In my calculation, the total amount of water used annually is approximately 339 kL, which indicates 232L water is used by each member per day. The amount is below the average usage (300L/day), but it is only because we do not have gardens and cars. Except the 500L water waste per week, caused by dripping tap, inefficient shower is another problem. On average, more than 25% of household water use is for showering. The standard shower equipped in my apartment rose supplies up to 20L every minute. However, if a low flow shower is installed, only 9L or less water will be used per minute. In addition, an 8-minute shower for each member of my household might be too long. Hope we could try to shorten it to 4 minutes, as recommended. It could not only save water, but save on the energy cost associated with heating water.

In the next blog, I would discuss the WELS Star Rating Scheme.

Reference: 

http://www.sydney-sustainableliving.com/learn-explore-grow/saving-water/

http://www.hunterwater.com.au/Save-Water/Water-Usage-Calculator.aspx

Waste Management (2)

As we discussed in the latest blog, the authorities and its legislations play a key role in urban waste management. Nevertheless, citizen’s awareness, as well as media is also important.

It remains me of the experience in Tokyo last year. In public spaces, rubbish bins and cleaners could hardly be discovered, but the city is still clean. Talked with friends in Japan, some reasons of this phenomenon could be achieved.

Few rubbish bins could be found in street in Japan

1.     Japanese citizens are used to collecting waste in rubbish bags, and bringing them back home for further management.

2.     A well-developed mechanism of waste classification and collaboration is built in Japan. Wastes are strictly classified into four categories: combustible wastes, incombustible wastes, oversized wastes and bottles and cans. Under those classification. Strict rules of waste collection are made for each classification. The combustible waste, including paper, rubber and plastic containers is collected twice a week. Incombustible waste, such as long plastic, metal and glass is collected once a month. Oversized waste, like furniture, and bottles and can are also collected regularly by council.

Rubbish will be collected by council each week

3.     To those who refuse to follow regulations, the council will give punishment, or even pay a visit and persuade.

4.     Sometimes media intervention could play a key role. Immediate exposure of negative behaviors could raise people’s awareness of waste management and form a good habit.

Again, waste management is quite complicated in any context. It demands collaborations among all stakeholders. Only when the state scientifically legislates, local councils efficiently conduct and citizens clearly build themselves with relevant knowledge and awareness, proper waste management could be realized.


Reference: 
http://jpninfo.com/9826
http://www.docin.com/p-379303605.html