The role of green infrastructure at the city scale

Arturo Casal-Campos

Summary

• Water, energy and sustainability• Multifunctional green infrastructure• Project overview• Answers?

Water, energy and sustainability

• Extra treatment required.

• Reduce CSOs.• Rehabilitation of

watercourses.

• Amenity benefit to community.

• Ecosystem services.

• Uncertain cost of solutions.

The carbon footprint of GI:A call for integration

Multifunctional green infrastructureBuilding insulationCarbon sequestrationAmenity in citiesEnhanced water coursesStorm water managementVarious budgets

Project overview

• Aim: Assess the role of city scale GI in the fulfillment of key environmental (water quality and carbon footprint) and socio-economic objectives (whole life cost).

• Objectives:• Identify and select adequate methods and tools for the planning and

assessment of GI.• Select suitable case study areas representative of drainage conditions and

systemic problems within the NWL region.• Propose a variety of generic GI interventions that serve typical urban

development forms of the case study areas.• Optimise the selection and placement of SuDS for a number of performance

objectives: receiving water quality, energy use/carbon footprint of the system, and whole life costs.

• Elaborate recommendations for the planning and implementation of SuDS at the city scale (e.g. potential barriers).

Project overviewGI planning

Other assessment tools: CO2, CAPEX, OPEX

Impact of planned interventions

Optimizer Objectives

Project overview

Review stage: GI planning, performance criteria & assessment, IUWWS and GI models. Tools and identify data requirements. Uncertainties of model results. LITERATURE REVIEW.

‘Benchmark’ stage: Construct SIMBA 6 model for ‘benchmark’ case study. Prepare and test all the necessary tools for the assessment and simulation of GI. TEST APPROACH TO PROBLEM AND SET STRUCTURE.

• Case study stage: Selection of adequate case study and collection of data, ready to construct a SIMBA 6 integrated case study and set up all the necessary tools. Collection of results. PROJECT’S CORE.

• Reflective work stage: Assess and compare results and identify potential barriers to the implementation of GI schemes. Reflect on the relative merits and demerits of different interventions. ANALYTICAL STAGE.

Answers?

What level of investment is required to simultaneously improve the condition of urban watercourses and reduce the carbon footprint of the system? How do GI solutions compare with conventional solutions?

Are there any significant trade-offs between objectives?

What type of GI solutions are more effective in delivering specific objectives in the large scale? And for specific urban development forms?

What barriers could potentially constrain the implementation of specific GI solutions?

Are there any additional benefits to be realised in the control-side of the system?