a roadmap to sustainability_reap_ismail khater

8/2/2019 A Roadmap to Sustainability_REAP_Ismail Khater

1/28

1


2/28

2

A roadmap to Sustainability

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ................................................................ 2

Table of Figures ................................................................... 2

Introduction ........................................................................ 3

Smarter LCA through transparency ...................................... 6

The consumer paradigm shift ............................................ 10

Digital vs. paper ........................................................................................ 13

Packaging ................................................................................................. 17

Transportation & Infrastructure ............................................................... 20

Green building certification ...................................................................... 22

Conclusion ......................................................................... 25

Bibliography ...................................................................... 27

Table of FiguresFig. 1: possible overshoot scenarios .......................................................................................... 4

Fig. 2: British attitudes towards green shopping ....................................................................... 8

Fig. 3: phases of a LCA ................................................................................................................ 9

Fig. 4: phases to a new paradigm ............................................................................................ 11

Fig. 5: the papermaking process .............................................................................................. 13

Fig. 6: paper vs. e-reader ......................................................................................................... 15

Fig. 7: Four levels of eco-design innovation ............................................................................ 19

Fig. 8: infrastructure disasters ................................................................................................. 20

Fig. 9: green building certification logos .................................................................................. 24


3/28

3

Introduction

There has been a paradigm shift in humanity away from views of the Earth as an endless

source of resources to instead looking at it as a broader living ecosystem that we are slowly

destroying. The shift is evident in everything from popular movies to eco-friendly products,

from international political treaties regarding environmental policies to waste management

strategies within small communities.

It is hard to separate fact from fiction about what is considered truly sustainable. Every

business has a different take on what they deem to be the solution. Some are just twists

while others have real essence. In this paper I tend not to focus on the green but rather on

humans. Individuals have to change towards a new way of thinking that will enable them

to grasp the problems faster. By realizing the problems, they would be able to make more

intelligent choices, which will lower the need for adaptation through more environmental

mitigation. I believe the true beginning towards a sustainable way of living starts with the

social and sustainable awareness, where people can train their instinctive responses to

notice the slow and gradual ecological changes. We have no ready-made detectors for, non

instinctive response to, these hazy sources of harm. The human brain adapted to spot

dangers within sensory field. But to survive today we must perceive threats that are beyond

our threshold of perception. We must make the invisible visible. As Daniel Gilbert, Harvard

psychologist puts it scientists lament the fact that global warming is happening so fast, but

the fact is its not happening fast enough. Because we barely notice changes that happen

gradually we accept things we would not allow if they happen suddenly. [1]

Beneath disputes about defining, designing, or measuring sustainable consumption lie the

critical questions of how to actually motivate the public to consume more environmentally

and socially sound products and how to motivate producers to deliver these improved

goods and services. To date, life cycle assessments have had limited impacts on actual

consumption patterns. I believe this can be changed by supplying extreme transparency in

information, and also user friendliness and education of social and sustainable awareness.

Transparency would make consumers purchase greener products when they have credible

information that allows them to feel confident in their ability to evaluate whether or not

their choice is actually having an impact. Most consumers do not have access to information


4/28

4

on the environmental or social impacts of the products they purchase, or do not trust the

information that is provided by firms, or simply find it hard to understand them.

Even, for some people, when they understand the impacts and consequences and savings of

their decisions and choices of consumptions, it is sometimes hard to do the right thing. This

is due to the human way of having habits, finding it hard to change even when knowing the

real cost. Ethical and cultural changes need to happen, where the link between the cost and

ecological impact need to be bridged. It is exactly like buying a stolen merchandize, ethically

most civilized people would reject to buy such commodities, knowing that they were stolen

and therefore offered with a cheaper price. So the same applies to all non-sustainable goods

and all non-sustainable makers, where the maker can be seen as a thief, when they steal the

earths ecosystem biodiversity, and next generations right to live the way we should have.

In the book Limits to Growth the authors talked about the concept, which is crystal clear

to any thinking human being, that there is a limit to the physical growth on this physically

finite planet. While pessimists say that the results of the ecological and economical

overshoot will cause a collapse, there is still hope for oscillation.

Fig. 1: possible overshoot scenarios


5/28

5

We need certain ecological abilities to be able to survive these days. These must be a joint

intelligence, one that we learn and master as a species, and that exist in a distributed

fashion among a wide range of networks of people. We are faced with assured challenges

that are too complicated, too diverse and too delicate to be understood and overcome by a

single person.

Their acknowledgment and solution require intense efforts by an enormously diverse range

of experts, business people, and activists; by all of us. We need to learn what dangers we

face, what their causes are, and to see the new opportunities these solutions offer. We need

the collective willpower to do all this as a group. Whether among friends or family, within a

company, or through an entire culture, a collective, distributed intelligence spreads

awareness. One approach to boost our joint ecological intelligence is to become familiar

with a wider range of ways to classify and think about impacts from products. Ideally, we

want to understand an items unpleasant consequences in three interlocking spheres, the

geo (soil, water, air and climate), the bio (our bodies, those of other species and plant life)

and the sociosphere (human concerns such as conditions for workers). [2]


6/28

6

Smarter LCA through transparency

A life cycle assessment (LCA) is a technique to assess all impacts related with all the phases

of a process from-cradle-to-grave. It starts from raw materials through materials processing,

manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. LCAs can

help avoid a narrow point of view on environmental, social and economic concerns, through

compiling a list of relevant energy and material inputs and environmental releases,

evaluating the potential impacts associated with identified inputs and releases and

interpreting the results to help you make a more informed decision. [3] There are many

variants of LCAs. The most commonly known one is from cradle to grave, which is a full

assessment of a product from start of manufacturing to the disposal phase. This type could

include a cradle to gate, which means from start of manufacturing to the factory gate. This

type could be for instance a windshield wiper blade, which will be added to the cradle to

grave assessment of the whole car. Within the production of the same blade, a gate to gate

partial LCA could be looked into. This means that for example the rubber part would be

evaluated separately, which would result an assessment of only the added value of it. There

is also the cradle to cradle LCA, which is kind of a cradle to grave assessment, but the end of

life disposal step of the product is a recycling process.

Furthermore, with the help of life cycle assessments producers tend to make better

decisions regarding the environmental protection. All the different stakeholders, ranging

from industry, governments, researchers and customers to other groups, get a better

structured stream of information between them while sharing LCA outcomes. This

information could then be used to improve industry processes internally, and then utilized

for marketing strategies externally. [4]

There are significant benefits of having LCA done by manufacturers. They would be able to

tackle the weak points in the cradle to grave process by pointing them out from the LCA

analysis. One good example is what Procter & Gambles (P&G) global sustainability

department did a couple of years ago. They aimed to integrate sustainability into their

strategy, and found out through the LCA of laundry detergents, that by far, the biggest

contributor to the products entire energy footprint was the consumer himself. This is due

to the need of using heated water to do the laundry. As a result, the companys R&D unit


7/28

7

developed Tide Cold Water (known in Germany as Ariel Kalt-Aktiv), a laundry detergent

that cleans clothes without consumers having to heat the water in the washing machine.

This would result savings of 34 million tons of CO2 emissions annually if every U.S.

household used the product, according to Len Sauers, VP for Global Sustainability at P&G.

[5] This innovative technology also comes with no trade-offs, as Sauers puts it, as the money

saved from not having to heat the water pays for the price difference of a box of detergent.

Other examples can be seen in packaging sizes and products compaction, the list is never

ending. Each and every detailed step of an LCA is an opportunity to explore whether some

industrial upgrade, a different chemical or a novel process might improve the products

overall footprint.

LCAs are one of the pioneering tools to create transparency in the ecological revolution,

getting hands on the analysis makes us able to compare and judge products. But how would

the regular citizen do that? What does it require to be able to comprehend such an analysis?

The answer is: a lot of knowledge and education. I honestly think that the majority of the

population would not even bother reading through the never ending steps and cycles of a

LCA. Dara ORourke, an industrial ecologist, saw that problem and had a visionary project to

bring transparency to the marketplace in the form of a software innovation calledGoodGuide. GoodGuide provides the worlds largest and one of the most reliable source of

information on the health, environmental, and social impacts of consumer products. [6]

GoodGuide integrates hundreds of complex databases that evaluate everything from

companies policies on animal testing to the carbon emissions in its supply chain to the

specific chemicals concern in its products. It does that by drawing a huge amount of data on

products and companies. By telling the story of a product in a convenient user friendly way,

GoodGuide provides the information that customers need. If a customer wants to explore

and go into more details of a product, and see how they came up with the summary rating,

lets say the specific environmental impacts of a product during manufacturing, transport,

use or disposal, it is possible, by simply opening the drop down menu of a category.

A survey of 25,000 customers by Marks & Spencer found that about a quarter of shoppers

are simply not interested in whether an item is or isnt green. Ten percent, on the other

hand, will go out of their way to get a more ethical item. The most telling group in that

survey was the large majority of shoppers who lie somewhere between the two extremes.


8/28

8

Roughly two-thirds of shoppers care about ethical choices but want the decision to be easy,

or are vaguely concerned about ethics but feel their shopping preferences wont matter. [7]

Radical transparency targets that two-thirds by making ethical choices easier, offering a

shopper relevant data in a neat summary as he or she holds the item in their hand. This has

been possible through new technologies such as the apps downloadable on Smartphones,

such as the one by GoodGuide. One could get the info downloaded by simply taking a

snapshot of the barcode of a product, that easy it is. While older shoppers may not have or

want to use this technology, or are simply too set in their habits, younger generations are

far more motivated to embrace it. A New York teen online survey, that polled a random and

representative sample of 767 U.S. teens (13 to 19 years old, the mean age was 14.6), there

are some of the most remarkable findings.[8] The survey shows us that teen awareness of

environmental issues is on the rise. Seventy-four percent of teens, nationally, believe its

their responsibility to help save the environment. Teens see themselves as part of the

problem and as part of the solution83% agrees that if someone showed them how they

could help the environment, they would do it if it was easy. Teens want to be

environmentally conscious consumers: 69% nationwide say they would buy products or

services that help the environment if they were more widely available; an even greater 85%

of New York teens concur.

Fig. 2: British attitudes towards green shopping


9/28

9

Another upcoming technology and tool is Earthster. Earthster is the first free open source

web based platform designed to provide the most current data and sophisticated

assessment tools to measure and manage a products social and environmental impacts

throughout the supply chain. [9] Their aim is to accelerate supply chain innovations that

improve social and environmental impacts, with far reaching benefits for companies,

consumers, and the planet. Its concept is based on collaboration, as an example, a company

publishes its information on its product, lets say glass, then another company that produces

windows and use this glass can take this information and plug it into their analysis. Once a

part of a process is upgraded, there would be no need to re-do the whole analysis, every

manufacturer would update their part that will show up automatically in other products

that use the network. While these technologies are creating the means to be able to

evaluate and choose, it is up to the purchasing power to give their preferences, driving all

industries into sustainability.

Fig. 3: phases of a LCA


10/28

10

The consumer paradigm shift

What is a paradigm change? Think of a Paradigm Shift as a change from one way of thinking

to another. It's a revolution, a transformation, a sort of metamorphosis. It doesnt just

happen, but rather it is driven by powerful forces of change. When there is a product that

we buy that is pricier than their competitive because of its lower impact on the

environment, a lot of people do not see the benefit as an incentive. When people cannot

make a direct relation between what they buy and what they get, there lies the problem. If

the information was available, if the data was given complete and in an easy way to

understand, that would probably change the way people act on the global environmental

problems. This is the core essence of the paradigm shift that needs to happen in the

consumers mind, through radical transparency.

In my opinion, in order to fasten the process of solving the global ecological problems

(before its too late), we need to change our habits and attitudes. Education and sustainable

awareness form the spirit of ethical and cultural change. How would you feel about the next

t-shirt you buy if you knew that the cotton it was made of had a load of pesticides, which

harmed the land and the workers? Cotton crops alone account for about 10 percent of the

world's use of pesticides. To prepare soil so that fragile young cotton plants can grow,

workers spray the soil with organophosphates (linked to central nervous system damage in

humans), which kill off any plant that might compete with the cotton or any insect that

might eat it. Once soil has been so treated, it can take up to five pesticide free years before

even Earthworms return, a fundamental step in recovering soil health. Then there's the

paraquat (herbicide) sprayed by crop dusters on cotton just before it's harvested. About half

of those chemicals typically miss the cotton and ends up in streams and fields nearby. [10]

If I can afford, I would buy one organically grown cotton T-shirt rather than two non-organic

ones. But how would I know that I am doing the right thing? Could it just be another

greenwash? What if this organic T-shirt, so to claim to be green had been through the

same process right after harvesting? For example getting bleached and dyed and finished

with industrial chemicals that include toxins, which are known not to stick to the cotton and

get rinsed off into the factories wastewater, which ended up in the nearby local river and

caused higher rates of leukemia. The more complete analysis of the hidden impacts reveals


11/28

11

multiple ways in which the T-shirt may not be so green after all. Although an organic shirt is

all to the good, when undesirable impacts of a product stay hidden, the organic part at

best marks the first step towards a business becoming more socially responsible or

sustainable.

Another example would be which hot drink cup to choose in your nearby local coffee shop.

A paper cup consumes 33 grams of wood, while a polystyrene one uses about 4 grams of

fuel oil or natural gas. Making the paper cup consumes 36 times the electricity and 580

times the volume of wastewater, compared to plastic. But the plastic cup produces pentane,

a gas that increases the ozone depletion and greenhouse gases. When we add the human

health to the equation it gets even more complicated for a comparison. [11]

So the answer to Paper or Plastic cup should be, none! Bring your own cup, that way you

really avoid the problem and save the earth without creating a problem, and that is what I

mean by paradigm change.

Fig. 4: phases to a new paradigm


12/28

12

When it comes to our shared conservation objectives, the group integration rules might be

summed to knowing your impacts, favoring improvements and sharing what you learned.

Such a crowd intelligence would result in an ongoing upgrade to our ecological awareness

through knowledge of the true consequences of what we do and buy, the decision to

change for the better and the spreading of what we know so others can do the same. If each

of us in the human flock follows those three simple rules, then together we might create a

force that improves our human systems. No one of us needs to have a master plan or grasp

all the essential knowledge. All of us will be pushing toward a continuous improvement of

the human impact on nature. Signs of the emergence of this shift in collective consciousness

are noticeable globally, from executive teams working to make their companies operations

more sustainable to neighborhood activists distributing reusable shopping bags to replace

plastic ones. A good outcome is seen wherever people are engaged in creating a way of

interacting with nature, where there is transformation of our short term habits into a long-

term trends. Sophisticated investigations into the countless dangers human activity

generate to our planet's ecosystems, like the growing study of global warming, are only just

a beginning. Such efforts help raise our sense of urgency, educate us more on the problemand showing us what the end result needs to be in order to be sustainable. But we cannot

stop there. We need to shift our ways of thinking, which will require some sacrifices of

habits and lifestyles. We need a paradigm shift to our economic understanding, which is not

based on consumption and growth. We need to continue and improve our pursuit of

environmental intelligence.


13/28

13

Digital vs. paper

Each year, the world produces more than 300 million tons of paper. Americans use

85,000,000 tons of paper a year. [12] In todays society people rely significantly on

electronic devices. The print industry is trying hard to stay in business, and find it very hard

to keep up with the weekly released technologies and gadgets. The debate of whether

paper or electronic devices have a smaller environmental footprint did not come to an end,

with people standing on both sides of the dispute. In my analysis I will try to stay as

unbiased as possible, even though I have made my decision and find it an unfair

comparison.

Fig. 5: the papermaking process


14/28

14

The carbon footprint of the industry that the Book Industry Environmental Council (BIEC)

announcement referred to was 12.4 million metric tons of carbon equivalent, or 4.01 kg CO2

per book. The largest contributor to this footprint, according to their report, is the logging

and manufacturing of paper, which constitute 87.3% of total carbon emissions. [13] E-

reading is certainly paperless, but it doesnt mean it is has no carbon footprint. For example,

Apples iPad, according to the company, has a carbon footprint of 130 kg (carbon

equivalent), which is equal to the footprint of 32.4 paper books. [14] When I wanted a fair

comparison I thought the best way is to look at a LCA analysis between paper books versus

an e-reader. Fortunately I found one, which veiled that on a yearly basis the equivalent of

the carbon footprint of an e-reader equals to the use of about 4,000 paper prints in an

office. [15]

Electronics are rechargeable and reusable, and no trees were harmed in their makings.

Forests are chopped down to print bills, books and newspapers, which are typically used

only once and tossed aside. But on the other hand papers dont create e-waste or use toxic

substances like arsenic, lead, mercury and polyvinyl chloride.

The reason I have made my decision is that regardless of how efficient paper can become, it

is not able to replace the use of electronics. You have many aspects into consideration,

which are not accounted for in any LCA. For instance, any of the new gadgets (take the iPad

for example) are not only designed for reading books. In most cases this is just an

application extra on the device. Think of all the other types of media used on these devices,

ranging from static web browsing to movies and audio playing. You connected to the

internet with instant and mobile access to all forms of information. Convenience has

typically dictated the decision. So to be fair you have to count these functions too. If I

already have one of those devices, or even a laptop, wouldnt it make more sense to use it

than buy a printed book?


15/28

15

The electricity used for reading on an electronic device is the same amount used from a

conventional light bulb, which is needed to read a book. In this argument I would say that

both can be replaced with renewable energies.

More notably is the human behavior, which is always in need of change, and the main

aspect that can make the shift in any industry. The majority of the population prefers the

use of a printed book, with arguments like convenience in reading on a train or crawled up

in their bed. An electronic reading device can do the same; it is just a matter of adjustment

and breaking the habit. I had this as a goal myself four years ago and managed to get rid of

the use of paper 98% of the time, the 2% are when I cannot find a soft copy or when I have

to print a ticket or deliver a hard copy when requested to. Even in Architectural design,

where I have been trained the old school way using ink and paper for sketching, I managed

to change the habit and use computer software directly to design. The outcome was slightly

slower in the beginning, but after some practice it turned out to be much faster, as the

results had to be converted into a digital form anyway. It also opened design possibilities

that are far more advanced than designing on paper. Designing on paper seamed after those

years as a ridiculously inefficient tool, and I encourage anyone in any design field to put the

effort and try it out for a month and see if they can ever turn back to the old habits.

Back to reading books, all the above can apply there as well. When you read a scientific

article or book and stumble upon a word that you do not know the meaning of, what would

Fig. 6: paper vs. e-reader


16/28

16

you do? The old way would turn to a scientific dictionary. But as it turns out, looking the

term or phrase online would give you better results, as you can see examples and explore

the meaning until you really understand it. So at the end you did use a computer or

electronic device. Most e-readers, if not all, provide a thesaurus integrated in the device or

connects you to one online, by only highlighting the word you wish to look for while reading.

Newspaper production starting from the paper manufacturers to ink manufacturers,

printing equipment manufacturers, printing and publishing companies, individual and

corporate consumers, waste collection and sorting companies, municipalities, material

recovery facilities, to recycled paper goods manufacturers is just not worth it, when the end

customer usage is restricted to a maximum of a few hours for two to four users.

Are eBooks really greener than physical books? The debate is still going on and the final

word hasn't been said yet. In my opinion we need to start thinking of ways to reduce the

footprint of e-reading if we want to make sure the industry will meet the goal of carbon

neutrality. Right now it looks like the best chance would work with e-reader producers and

get them to green up their devices, as manufacturing is a major contributor to the carbon

footprint of these devices 58% in the case of the iPad. Wouldnt it make sense to shift the

efforts into that?

There are definite outcomes associated to bringing paper use to an end. A paperless office

or library means less space, changing the building design into a more compact arrangement,

and therefore having less impact on the environment. Waste transportation would be

reduced significantly. Transfer of documents would be much easier and faster, in fact, this

would eliminate all the single journeys of individuals to bookstores once all books are

available online, saving tons of carbon emissions. Trees would be cut down less. But most

importantly, no more paper cuts.


17/28

17

Packaging

Packaging is an essential for most products, but serves no purpose after retail, making it the

most common type of waste. The uses of the three Rs (reduce-reuse-recycle) have been the

main elements of the waste hierarchy in any packaging product development. [16] Even

when doing so, there is still a lot of room for improvement in package design and material

use. If you take a cereal box for example you could wonder why it has so much volume. Why

does it have so much air in it, and is it necessary to have it? The impact of this type of waste

does not only narrow down to the fact of using too much material, it also creates a

difference in how much can be transported on the back of a truck, which means more

transportation for less goods and increasing its environmental impact. Another example

would be toothpaste tubes, which are sold in carton boxes. Are those extra boxes

necessary? What is the marketing difference compared to the ecological impact? In most

cases the ingredients and marketing data printed on the outer paper box are repeated on

the tubes anyway.

Obviously there are many companies that have invested in packaging R&D and have done

significant improvements, but unfortunately it is not enough. The core of any development

of packaging development should start with trying to eliminate the package and preventing

the waste. Packaging should be used only where it is needed, and when it is, with minimized

material, mass and volume. The next step would be reusing. If the package can be reused, it

would lower its environmental impact over its life cycle, making it more favorable than the

last resort, recycling. Recycling in my opinion has been a shift from the main goal

(prevention), which made the public think that recycling is definitely a good thing. Recycling

is relatively good, which is when compared with energy recovery and disposal. Now think

about recycling compared to not using the package from the first place, which one would

make more sense?

In my argument I am not pointing at the packaging industry as a whole bad thing, in

contrary, I am arguing that the industry should use better and more expensive materials!

Packaging can be designed to be an asset after use, rather than a liability, for customers. It

can be designed at the outset to travel in either a biological or technical closed loop. A

customer would pay more for the package if he knows for fact that this money will be

returned to him if he follows the return instructions on the product, of course it must be


18/28

18

convenient. Besides, investing more in a package design and the materials used in it would

also benefit the marketing of it. Costumers would definitely choose the nice reusable

package over the eco-friendly ugly cheap one. It would be so valuable that the manufacturer

would buy it back. So instead of buying the cheapest possible package, you would buy the

best one knowing that you would get it back. Cradle to grave design makes the package

unwanted waste that must be dealt with at some cost to the end user. Cradle to cradle

would mean either the same reuse or a direct transfer into another product. I am sure that

most people are aware of the first type, like the reuse of bottles. But imagine a whole

different scenario that is far more integrated, where a shipping company like UPS would

create a low priority transportation system for packaging. It would make more sense to

travel back loaded rather than empty. Qualified designed damper foam for transporting

electronics could be then used in the construction industry as an insulation material with

minimum energy for reshaping.

There are polymers that have been tested and can be reused up to 90 times with the same

performance characteristics. And paper based packaging can be designed for reuse too.

Designing with washable ink makes this easy and possible. Another way of package design

would be using it as a biological one rather than a technical nutrient. When more than 35%of linear polyesters are added to PET, the material becomes biodegradable. [17]

The bottom line the consumer is the ultimate decision maker. They have to like the

environmental story told with the product packaging. There are multiple solutions to every

environmental packaging problem. There is no universally right answer, and there are

answers that may not satisfy the consumer. Some solutions are better than others. Each

attacks the problem and solves it in a different way. The key is to focus on the ecological

education first, so the costumer can recognize and appreciate the efforts and designs and

encourage the paradigm shift to a cradle to cradle attitude for it to be swift. A transparent

production line, openly stating the whole methods, materials, and LCA of a product would

make the education process possible, as well as a costumer friendly way of comparison that

does not require a PHD in chemical engineering. So there is a need to define any products

green actions in terms of meaningful, quantifiable results for the buyer. Just because it says

it on a package doesnt mean shoppers will believe it. Vague, complicated, or obscure

product packaging claims should be secluded. Statements should be simple, short,


19/28

19

understandable, and to the point. Carbon footprint issues should be considered. Can the

shopper make the connection between the given data and saving the environment?

Fig. 7: Four levels of eco-design innovation


20/28

20

Transportation & Infrastructure

Transportation, and specially emissions from vehicular transport, is considered a major

contributor to greenhouse gases (GHGs) and energy use. A big percentage of the worlds

petroleum is burned in transport. Indicators commonly used to demonstrate this include

vehicular usage in terms of the extent of travel, and type and amount of energy used to

provide such travel. Transport is the fastest-growing emission sector. By subsector, road

transport is the largest contributor to global warming. As for aviation, the rapid growth of

air travel contributes to the pollution, and besides the emissions it is also causing long wave

heat trapping through their vapor trails, contrails. In the EU, greenhouse gas emissions from

aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006. [18]

Reducing our unsustainable way of living by finding energy efficient alternatives and

technologies is one way looking into the transportation problem, which will not help us

while there is growing population, trips and mobility. The approach in which some industries

are handling the dilemma is just another dead-end. [19] Whats the use of running a 20%

more efficient vehicle, where theres an increase of 25% in the number of automobiles. By

now this is called the conventional way. This just means the exact same quantity of carbon

emission. The same calculation concept can be applied to growing travel distances and the

infrastructure expansion. With the rising number of suburbs comes high car dependency.

Due to the insufficient population in suburbs it is not feasible to provide them with standard

cultural, health, educational and other facilities, which makes them lose time and

productivity as well in commuting. In addition, inefficient street layouts cause high per

person infrastructure cost, which can also be converted into high per-capita use of energy,

land and water. Another health aspect caused by these types of developments is higher

rates of obesity due to less walking and biking.

Fig. 8: infrastructure disasters


21/28

21

Already some pioneering teams have avoided the conventional outdated ways of solving the

problem, using the old patching up and repair methods. Instead, they jumped into thinking

of innovative systems that handle and tackle the core of the crisis. However, the real

solutions require collaboration and integration of many sectors and expertise, ranging from

vehicular designers to city planners. Decision makers should put an end to the urban sprawl.

Cities should focus on concentrating its growth and development, for example through

vertical expansion and use of brownfields. Within a structurally efficient limit, vertical

expansion creates higher densities, which require less infrastructures. While the inefficient

street layout of the suburbs depend on cars, has high per capita infrastructure and energy

cost, the short distances in compact cities can be managed by alternative transportation

methods, ranging from walking, cycling to public transportation options. Moreover, this will

result in a huge amount in pollution reduction, less health damage, is also less time

consuming and most importantly decreases the overall energy consumption of the city.

If we are able to achieve the concept of a compact city, a lot of doors for innovative solutions

can be opened, where complete elimination of GHG emissions is achieved. A ground-breaking

technology that fulfills the mentioned prerequisite is the Personal Rapid Transit system (PRT).

PRT, also called personal automated transport, is a public transportation mode featuring small

automated vehicles operating on a network of specially-built guide ways. Those paths are set in

a network, where stations are on sidings. These sidings are reached through merging and

diverging points, allowing other cars to travel non-stop, avoiding in-between stations. While the

typical PRT cars or pods are designed to carry 3-6 passengers, the network can also support

larger vehicles for peak hours and regular routs. [20]The system needs no asphalt therefore the

natural water cycle can be realized through rainwater infiltration and no runoffs. Conventional

transportation methods require a lot of space for human error and maneuverability, whereas

the automated PRT system on the other hand uses significantly less space. In addition to being

accessible 24/7 that can be compared to a taxi service or vertical elevator, the system operates,

in contrary of conventional public transportation systems, only when occupied. Compared to

noise pollution produced by car movement on asphalt, PRT has least noise levels. Due to its

operating mechanism, it is considered as one of the most efficient systems in the world and

therefore it is feasible to run on renewable energies with the current technology advancement.

An existing operating example is the PRT system in Masdar City, Abu Dhabi, which is a car free

city. [21]


22/28

22

Green building certification

The use of energy in buildings accounts for about 40% share of the total end use of energy.

[22] This includes energy used for controlling the climate in buildings and for the buildings

themselves, but also energy used for appliances, lighting and other installed equipment.

One of the longer-term cycles can be seen in the green building movement. We are nearing

the end of that long era in the building business where, to maximize their revenue,

developers set their budget for a buildings costs as low as possible, and architects,

contractors, engineers, and everyone else who will construct a piece of the complete

building compete for their share of that fixed budget. That system encourages bidders to

find ways to cut their costs to the bare minimum to increase their profits. For instance, the

subcontractor for the heating and cooling system has every reason to install the cheapest

installation he or she can find that will do the job and just meet building codes, rather than a

higher priced one that will save energy and money over the long utilization of the tenants,

the real customers of the building.

Disclosure of the ecological downside of commercial buildings has arrived in the

construction sector in the form of a green building certificate, for instance LEED (Leadership

in Energy and Environmental Design). LEED is an internationally recognized green building

certification system, providing third-party verification that a building or community was

designed and built using strategies aimed at improving performance across all the metrics

that matter most: energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, improved

indoor environmental quality, and stewardship of resources and sensitivity to their impacts.

LEED is flexible enough to apply to all building types commercial as well as residential. It

works throughout the building lifecycle design and construction, operations and

maintenance, tenant fit-out and significant retrofit. LEED for Neighborhood Development

extends the benefits of LEED beyond the building footprint into the neighborhood it serves.

It promotes a whole-building approach to sustainability by recognizing performance in the

key areas of sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and

resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, location and linkage, awareness and education

and innovation in design. The rating system of LEED is divided into platinum, gold, silver and

just certified. [23]


23/28

23

As a result, like any other product scoring system, LEED gives the consumer a sense of how

the building is performing in all the above mentioned criteria. While some post-occupant

studies have shown improvements in energy and resource use in buildings, they have yet to

be conducted on a very large scale, providing for weak statistics on the matter. Once a LEED

certification is granted, it does not have to be renewed. If the energy use of a building does

not change even after certification, should the building be allowed to call itself LEED

certified? One large problem lies in the fact that post-occupancy results do not play a role in

granting the certification. This may allow many individuals to market their properties as

green without the building having any significant reduction in electricity usage.

Another major downside of the LEED certification is its globalization strategy. While the

certification may have good results in one climate, which does absolutely not indicate that it

can be used anywhere. Therefore, local systems of performance based rating are

encouraged to be created for every region and country, to aim for its climate, culture and

economy. In the course of my stay in the UAE I have seen cases of buildings that were

designed to meet the standards and get accredited with LEED, under the appeal of the

developers. In my opinion, using LEED in the Emirates caused more harm than good. Clients

were charged more for the design, the certification itself costs a lot of money, energy valueswere set to U.S. standards and water saving points were too little for the desert

environment. Other examples are like having bicycle racks and shower facilities integrated

in the building design for the purpose of achieving its credit points. Those add-ons are a

total waste, as they are not used because of the regions climate and its culture. But

afterwards, a new and local system was created called Estidama, which means

sustainability in Arabic. They focused more on integrated design principles that helped

reducing the extra costs of construction. Estidama had the credit load distribution set to

mirror the regional vernacular requirements, for instance having a larger number of credits,

prerequisites and standards for water conservation.

While these examples are relatively easy to understand, there is another set of radical

changes that need to happen in both the design and the marketing industries. To sincerely

create a sustainable design, one has to start from within, in this case the design, up to the

marketing phase till operation and maintenance. All members and actors have to be

involved from the beginning of a project. Whole systems thinking needs to replace isolated


24/28

24

conventional systems to adapt sustainable processes. Interactive processed will have to

replace linear ones. Time and energy will have to be loaded in the earliest stage possible.

Life-cycle costing will replace the emphasis on upfront costs method.

As for the accreditation, all systems I have been exposed to, LEED, BREEAM, GreenStar and

Estidama, have the same 3 to 5 rating stars, points or pearls. These ratings do not translate

directly into customers needs and understandings and therefore loose a part of their value

through their ambiguity. A home buyer would want to see those ratings divided into

categories like energy saving, water conservation, and so on, also accompanied by the

optimal use setup and configurations, like that you get when you buy a new laptop. In order

to speed up and encourage the improvement of the building sector, transparency has to

exist, in abundance. The construction industrys bar for green is in continuous upgrade.

Industrial designers envision a coming generation of living buildings that will operate like

an accessory to nature, producing more clean energy and water than they use.

Fig. 9: green building certification logos


25/28

25

Conclusion

At present, consumer concerns have relatively little effect on the ingredients in products

and how they are manufactured. But in a radically transparent marketplace, that equation

shifts, allowing shoppers to make more informed decisions based on information that

previously have been hidden. Companies may decide for a number of reasons to use

ingredients of concern, but once shoppers know what items contain those ingredients, they

are less likely to buy them. And that will ultimately tip the scales of how things are made.

One can start acting on the situation now; by doing what we already know is best. Buy the

refills, not throw-away. Get the larger size, not the single use. Buy from a stand, rather than

plastic wrapped. These minor things do make the difference, similar to the incident when

trans-fats disappeared from the market after publishing their side effects to the public.

Additionally, use virtual conferencing tools to dispose of your transport footprint.

There is no doubt on the role of governments to regulate and direct the market towards

the right path. There is a need to continuously upgrade their policies, on a faster pace.

Codes need to be more stringent, environmental taxes need to be higher, ecological

violations need to be dealt with harsher. Changing electricity prices according to peak hour

consumption will increase cautious use by the consumers. The world governments like for

example the Kyoto protocol or the World Bank and other major stakeholders need to have a

more substantial role in implementing their views and policies. In the past supporter groups

concerned with everything from saving the rainforest to hunting down sweatshops would

approach governments to pass regulations to promote their plans. Recently many have

changed their strategies, trying to persuade consumers to boycott products that contribute

to harming the environment. This strategys core is creating joint consumer action to shift

markets to the kinds of products aligned with what they endorse. Such a market strategy

can be far more effective and work much faster than regulation.

Even though current marketing strategies can be very tricky, it is everyones responsibility to

educate themselves and avoid being a victim of selling tactics, such as the contrast effect.

The contrast effect is known among marketers to manipulate consumers minds into

perceiving a product to have a better profile only by inducing a kind of dislike for a

comparable product. In order to make a product look good, they show the shopper an


26/28

26

inferior product first. This is achieved by shifting their scales for computation of value with

the basis for comparison; all value is in contrast to something else. Individuals, who tend to

think of themselves as helpless victims and blame the corporations for their own

misjudgments should utilize the upcoming era of transparency to become active agents in

achieving the desired improvements. Everyone should feel that their decisions matter.

Everyone is able to make a difference. We all bear the responsibility to deliver a sustainable

future to the next generations. You are valuable not only to your family, friends, race, nation

but you are valuable to Earth. In order to achieve this ecological revolution everyone should

participate. Its all in our hands.

With greattransparencycomes greatresponsibility


27/28

27

Bibliography

[1] Daniel Gilbert. www.randomhouse.com. [Online].

http://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/gilbert/blog/200607its_the_end_of_the_world_

as_we.html

[2] Daniel Goleman, Ecological Intelligence.: Penguin Group, 2010.

[3] wikipedia.org. [Online]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessment

[4] stonecourses.net. [Online]. http://www.stonecourses.net/environment/benelca.html

[5] fastcompany.com. [Online]. http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-

business-pgs-chemistry-test.html

[6] goodguide.com. [Online].http://www.goodguide.com/about

[7] economist.com. [Online]. http://www.economist.com/node/10491144

[8] relightny.com. [Online]. http://www.relightny.com/press/Teen_Survey_Results.pdf

[9] earthster.org. [Online]. http://www.earthster.org/

[10] John C. Ryan, Stuff: The Secret Lives of Everyday Things.: World Future Society, 1998.

[11] Martin B. Hocking, Paper Versus Polystyrene: A Complex Choice.: Science, 1991.

[12] recycling-revolution.com. [Online]. http://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-

facts.html

[13] greenpressinitiative.org. [Online].

http://www.greenpressinitiative.org/documents/trends_summary.pdf

[14] apple.com. [Online].

http://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.p

df
http://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/gilbert/blog/200607its_the_end_of_the_world_as_we.htmlhttp://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/gilbert/blog/200607its_the_end_of_the_world_as_we.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessmenthttp://www.stonecourses.net/environment/benelca.htmlhttp://www.stonecourses.net/environment/benelca.htmlhttp://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-business-pgs-chemistry-test.htmlhttp://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-business-pgs-chemistry-test.htmlhttp://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-business-pgs-chemistry-test.htmlhttp://www.goodguide.com/abouthttp://www.goodguide.com/abouthttp://www.economist.com/node/10491144http://www.economist.com/node/10491144http://www.relightny.com/press/Teen_Survey_Results.pdfhttp://www.relightny.com/press/Teen_Survey_Results.pdfhttp://www.earthster.org/http://www.earthster.org/http://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-facts.htmlhttp://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-facts.htmlhttp://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-facts.htmlhttp://www.greenpressinitiative.org/documents/trends_summary.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://www.greenpressinitiative.org/documents/trends_summary.pdfhttp://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-facts.htmlhttp://www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-facts.htmlhttp://www.earthster.org/http://www.relightny.com/press/Teen_Survey_Results.pdfhttp://www.economist.com/node/10491144http://www.goodguide.com/abouthttp://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-business-pgs-chemistry-test.htmlhttp://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/127/green-business-pgs-chemistry-test.htmlhttp://www.stonecourses.net/environment/benelca.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessmenthttp://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/gilbert/blog/200607its_the_end_of_the_world_as_we.htmlhttp://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/gilbert/blog/200607its_the_end_of_the_world_as_we.html


28/28

[15] media.leidenuniv.nl. [Online]. http://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-

final-report.pdf

[16] wikipedia.org. [Online]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packaging_and_labeling

[17] packworld.com. [Online]. http://www.packworld.com/article-16013

[18] wikipedia.org. [Online].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_and_the_environment#Total_climate_effects

[19] John R. Ehrenfeld, Sustainability by Design.: Yale University Press.

[20] wikipedia.org. [Online]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transit

[21] faculty.washington.edu. [Online].

http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/Masdar.htm

[22] iea.org. [Online].http://www.iea.org/g8/2008/Building_Codes.pdf

[23] usgbc.org. [Online]. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19
http://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://images.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/iPad_2_Environmental_Report.pdfhttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdfhttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdfhttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdfhttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packaging_and_labelinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packaging_and_labelinghttp://www.packworld.com/article-16013http://www.packworld.com/article-16013http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_and_the_environment#Total_climate_effectshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transithttp://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/Masdar.htmhttp://www.iea.org/g8/2008/Building_Codes.pdfhttp://www.iea.org/g8/2008/Building_Codes.pdfhttp://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19http://www.iea.org/g8/2008/Building_Codes.pdfhttp://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/Masdar.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_and_the_environment#Total_climate_effectshttp://www.packworld.com/article-16013http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packaging_and_labelinghttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdfhttp://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/irex-dr1000-lca-scan-final-report.pdf

a roadmap to sustainability_reap_ismail khater

Documents