I was reading referring to this post from TheGuardian . It’s a thinking checkpoint again for those who are enthusiastic on Environmental management and sustainable urban living. If we are thinking on Rio20+ and its urgency to be fulfilled, then certainly we are rethinking the fastest way to cut down our per capita carbon footprint. There are many aspects we need to look at, one of them, crucially, is Economic.
Take for instance on Malaysia’s setting, if Government is going to take this urban planning issue, it takes more than delivering “sustainable” homes for the next few decades, there is many environmental as well as economic case for promoting denser, low carbon city neighborhood.
Most of the new towns for example on Kuala Lumpur satellite Cities will be situated far away from city center, resulted that KL and Selangor , its satellite city-state has been overly condensed with no proper urban planning at the earlier stage since the 1980s and 1990s. Few eco-towns eventually will have good public transport links to major cities. The danger of new eco-town or satellite town, in this case, will be too small and isolated to become anything tangible enough to prove results on the economic surface neither environmental due to the complicated logistics.
One thing Che Wall, the Director of Lend Lease Sustainability Solutions, or also the founding chairman of World Green Building Council, states on his experience and learning from the pushing of Green Building Councils,
” I’m looking for someone to ask “How do we influence the banking industry, how do we influence a sector which actually makes or breaks a project: If you can’t get finance, you can’t have a building. The local context isn’t just about climate issues or ecological issues, it’s about government issues, it about societal issues and its absolutely appropriate that the model adapts to suit the way that those societies work.”
His statement here states bold evidence on what many of us have witnessed, Greenwashing or Green Marketing, Or Green Politics we call it have turned things around and confuse the consumers on this “Sustainable design” There is bigger problem than trying to get engineers and architects to find a smarter way to work. We will only get so far by placing responsibility on a small group of people who play in a very confined space in this race. The underlying effort is real, what motivates people to put their money into the building. Land release strategy and many red tapes are what we need to understand to push this across.
Or Green Politics we call it have turned things around and confuse the consumers on this “Sustainable design” There is bigger problem than trying to get engineers and architects to find a smarter way to work. We will only get so far by placing responsibility on a small group of people who play in a very confined space in this race. The underlying effort is real, what motivates people to put their money into the building. Land release strategy and many red tapes are what we need to understand to push this across.
There is no written formula in implementing a perfect strategy for an urban redesign. The best we can do is a cherry pick the ideas from each country and aggregate them that suit their own circumstances.
The long-term solution is really about urban redesigning the existing cities. If the government focused its energies on creating denser, more carbon-friendly eco-quarters in existing cities, the economic benefits over the long term would outweigh the initial costs. It’s the magic formula for higher density, good public transport links, and easy access to jobs that profits both city residents and the wider economy. Many cities owe their success to this formula – which cannot be replicated in small-scale eco-towns. We could see many new projects such as the Mazda city who claims to be zero carbon city, it could be a perfect prototype but we are talking about time here.
The current market needs to move to redesign the existing cities, educating the people to understand their homes, understand the economics behind it. We should not impose so much time on thinking of zero carbon building or new buildings. Like what shanghai expo has always said, Better Cities Better Lives. When 98% of the problem is existing infrastructures or city buildings, why do we spend so much time on the 2% remaining new buildings?
Jenkins is also right to say cities can become “the new green” – but they are not yet eco-angels. Cities account for 75% of the world’s carbon emissions. The government must focus its climate-change agenda on Britain’s cities precisely because they are the most prolific polluters. Reducing the carbon footprint of the existing built environment must take priority. At the same time, cities must be empowered to develop green ideas – from congestion charging to home insulation – at a local level.
The key point to urban redesign is immediate education to the urban populations, the ultimate race is to awaken a nation on this climate change situation, as much as the frontiers can push the race, it would not last long if the value is not held on by human race at last. We are talking about Race towards Cutting Carbon Footprint, in the fastest way, most economical way, not some rebranding green strategy to see which building is greener or some sort here.
It’s a long way for Malaysia but it’s a great awakening for any country in this world.
