Mar 13, 2012

THEME 3 - Cities and Urbanisation in the UK

  • Urban Sprawl

How did Britain become an urban nation from it's rural roots? The industrial revolution has seen our cities swell beyond all recognition.



  • New Manchester
In one human lifetime Britain's industrial landscape has changed beyond recognition. Manchester has reinvented itself. Factories have been replaced by leisure and culture, and the biggest and tallest statement of the new aspirations is Beetham Tower.



  •  The changing face of London
Aerial shots and archive footage are used to introduce London Docklands and to outline its long history. During the late 1930s, London Docks was the busiest port in the world but, by the late 1970s, the docks had become obsolete and the area had become a derelict wasteland. Archive footage is also used to show how the docks were transformed during the 1980s and 1990s by the London Docklands Development Corporation into a successful centre for trade.

Feb 1, 2012

THEME 2 - The Energy Issue - The case Of Nigeria

Curse of the Black Gold

Hope and betrayal on the Niger Delta



Abridged version of article by Tom O'Neill published in National Geographic 
Photograph by Ed Kashi

Click in picture above to watch the photo gallery


Oil fouls everything in southern Nigeria.

It spills from the pipelines, poisoning soil and water. It stains the hands of politicians and generals, who siphon off its profits. It taints the ambitions of the young, who will try anything to scoop up a share of the liquid riches—fire a gun, sabotage a pipeline, kidnap a foreigner.


Nigeria had all the makings of an uplifting tale: poor African nation blessed with enormous sudden wealth. Visions of prosperity rose with the same force as the oil that first gushed from the Niger Delta's marshy ground in 1956. The world market craved delta crude, a "sweet," low-sulfur liquid called Bonny Light, easily refined into gasoline and diesel. By the mid-1970s, Nigeria had joined OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), and the government's budget bulged with petrodollars.

Everything looked possible—but everything went wrong!

Dense, garbage-heaped slums stretch for miles. Streets are cratered with potholes and ruts. Vicious gangs roam school grounds. Peddlers and beggars rush up to vehicles stalled in gas lines. This is Port Harcourt, Nigeria's oil hub, capital of Rivers state, smack-dab in the middle of oil reserves bigger than the United States' and Mexico's combined. Port Harcourt should gleam; instead, it rots.
Beyond the city, within the labyrinth of creeks, rivers, and pipeline channels that vein the delta—one of the world's largest wetlands—exists a netherworld. Villages and towns cling to the banks, little more than heaps of mud-walled huts and rusty shacks. Groups of hungry, half-naked children and sullen, idle adults wander dirt paths. There is no electricity, no clean water, no medicine, no schools. Fishing nets hang dry; dugout canoes sit unused on muddy banks. Decades of oil spills, acid rain from gas flares, and the stripping away of mangroves for pipelines have killed off fish.

Because its refineries are constantly breaking down, oil-rich Nigeria must also import the bulk of its fuel. But even then, gas stations are often closed for want of supply. The sense of relentless crisis has deepened since last year, when a secretive group of armed, hooded rebels operating under the name of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, or MEND, intensified attacks on oil platforms and pumping stations, most operated by Shell Nigeria. Militants from MEND and other groups have killed soldiers and security guards, kidnapped foreign oil workers, set off car bombs in the delta city of Warri to protest the visit of Chinese oil executives, and, to show off their reach, overrun an oil rig 40 miles (64 kilometers) offshore in the Gulf of Guinea. The attacks have shut down the daily flow of more than 500,000 barrels of oil, leading the country to tap offshore reserves to make up for lost revenue. According to the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, escalating violence in a region teeming with angry, frustrated people is creating a "militant time bomb."
From a potential model nation, Nigeria has become a dangerous country,

addicted to oil money, with people increasingly willing to turn to corruption, sabotage, and murder to get a fix of the wealth. The cruelest twist is that half a century of oil extraction in the delta has failed to make the lives of the people better. Instead, they are poorer still, and hopeless.
"It's not fair," Felix James Harry muttered in a meetinghouse in the village of Finima on the western end of the island, close to the oil and gas complex. "We can hardly catch fish anymore. Surviving is very hard. We can't support our families anymore,"
"The forest where the gas plant is protected us from the east wind," Solomon David, the community chairman, said. "Now, the rain and wind ruin our thatched roofs every three months. They lasted more than twice as long before." Another fisherman mentioned how construction and increased ship traffic changed local wave patterns, causing shore erosion and forcing fish into deeper water. "We would need a 55-horsepower engine to get to those places." No one in the room could afford such an engine.
Forced to give up fishing, the young men of the village put their hope in landing a job with the oil industry. But offers are scarce.  
Bernard Cosmos spoke out: "I have a degree in petrochemical engineering from Rivers State University in Port Harcourt. I've applied many times with the oil companies for a good job. It's always no. They tell me that I can work in an oil field as an unskilled laborer but not as an engineer. I have no money to get other training."
Isaac Asume Osuoka, director of Social Action, Nigeria, believes that callousness toward the people of the delta stems from their economic irrelevance. "With all the oil money coming in, the state doesn't need taxes from people. Rather than being a resource for the state, the people are impediments. There is no incentive anymore for the government to build schools or hospitals.
Across the delta, people are hoping that someone will pay attention to the region's problems and intervene.

Who is to blame?

The answers are as complicated and murky as the water trails in the delta.
When the oil curse began with that first great gusher in the creekside village of Oloibiri, 50 miles (80 kilometers) west of Port Harcourt, Nigeria was still a British colony. At independence in 1960, few observers expected that Nigeria would mature into an oil giant. But in subsequent decades, the oil companies, led by five multinational firms—Royal Dutch Shell, Total, Italy's Agip, and ExxonMobil and Chevron from the U.S.—transformed a remote, nearly inaccessible wetland into industrial wilderness. The imprint: 4,500 miles (7,200 kilometers) of pipelines, 159 oil fields, and 275 flow stations, their gas flares visible day and night from miles away.
No one can deny the sheer technological achievement of building an infrastructure to extract oil from a waterlogged equatorial forest. But mastering the physical environment has proved almost simple compared with dealing with the social and cultural landscape. The oil firms entered a region splintered by ethnic rivalries. More than two dozen ethnic groups inhabit the delta, among them the Ijaw, the largest group, and the Igbo, Itsekiri, Ogoni, Isoko, and Urhobo. These groups have a history of fighting over the spoils of the delta, from slaves to palm oil—and now, crude oil. The companies disturbed a fragile landscape that supported fishing and farming. Engineers and project managers constructing pipelines through a mangrove swamp, or laying roads through marshland, could disrupt spawning grounds or change the course of a stream, threatening a village's livelihood.
Recent reports by the United Nations Development Program and the International Crisis Group identify some of the questionable strategies employed by oil companies: paying off village chiefs for drilling rights; building a road or dredging a canal without an adequate environmental impact study; tying up compensation cases—for resource damages or land purchases—for years in court; dispatching security forces to violently break up protests; patching up oil leaks without cleaning up sites.
 The delta is littered with failed projects started by oil companies and government agencies—water tanks without operating pumps, clinics with no medicine, schools with no teachers or books, fishponds with no fish. "The companies didn't consult with villagers," says Michael Watts, director of the African Studies Program at the University of California, Berkeley. "They basically handed out cash to chiefs. It wasn't effective at all."
More oil fields continue to open, many of them offshore where the infrastructure, though far more expensive than on land, is much safer from sabotage and theft. The deepwater fields are attracting aggressive new investors as well. China, India, and South Korea, all energy-hungry, have begun buying stakes in Nigeria's offshore blocks. "Most Western companies in Nigeria will find it difficult to compete, especially with China," Goldman says. That's because oil purchases by the Chinese come with their commitment to finance large infrastructure projects, such as rehabilitating a railroad line.
The largest new petroleum endeavor on the delta is taking shape along the Nun River, a tributary of the Niger. Operated by Shell, the Gbaran Integrated Oil and Gas Project, scheduled to begin producing in 2008, will encompass 15 new oil and gas fields, more than 200 miles (320 kilometers) of pipeline, and a sizable gas-gathering plant. New roads are already gashing the forest. Mounds of long black pipes await burial. Near a bank of the Nun, Nigerian soldiers crouch behind a ring of sandbags, a .60-caliber machine gun facing the road as they guard the entrance to the construction site of the gas plant.
Activists with human rights groups are pressuring Shell to learn from past mistakes and treat this high-profile project, which affects 90 villages, as a chance to work better with communities.

Where does all the oil money go?

That question is asked in every village, town, and city in the Niger Delta. The blame spreads, moving from the oil companies to a bigger, more elusive, target: the Nigerian government. Ever since it nationalized the oil industry in 1971, the government has controlled the energy purse. In a joint venture arrangement, the state, in the name of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, owns 55 to 60 percent of multinational oil operations onshore. The windfall in revenues from this arrangement has grown in real dollars from 250 million a year to more than 60 billion in 2005. During that time, even though the government has evolved from a military dictatorship to a democracy (the latest attempt at civil governance began in 1999), what has not changed is what an International Crisis Group report calls a "cancer of corruption." A Western diplomat quoted in the report was even more direct, referring to "the institutionalized looting of national wealth." The money involved is staggering. The head of Nigeria's anticorruption agency estimated that in 2003, 70 percent of oil revenues, more than 14 billion dollars, was stolen or wasted.
On paper, a mechanism does exist for distributing oil revenues somewhat fairly. Newspaper articles and court cases document spectacular misuses of the money by military men and public office holders. For the delta's 30 million people—most of whom struggle on less than a dollar a day — seeing this kind of money coming into their states with essentially none of it reaching them has created conditions for insurrection.
In 1996, Osuoka joined Environmental Rights Action, an advocacy group that helps communities defend their resources and learn their legal rights so they can avoid Oeliabi's fate. "We're seeing that environmental damages often happen silently, with their effects not coming out until years later," Osuoka said.

Between 1986 and 2003, more than 50,000 acres (20,000 hectares) of mangroves disappeared from the coast,

largely because of land clearing and canal dredging for oil and gas exploration.
Oil companies operated in the delta for years with little environmental oversight. There was no federal environmental protection agency until 1988, and environmental impact assessments weren't mandated until 1992. What pressure the government exerts now is directed mostly at halting gas flares. Delta oil fields contain large amounts of natural gas that companies have traditionally elected to burn off rather than store or reinject into the ground, more costly measures. Hundreds of flares have burned nonstop for decades, releasing greenhouse gases and causing acid rain. Communities complain of corroded roofs, crop failures, and respiratory diseases. After first ordering companies to eliminate flaring by 1984, the government keeps pushing back the deadline. Shell, the main offender, recently announced that despite making considerable progress, it could not meet the latest target date of 2008. On land, there are oil spills, polluting groundwater and ruining cropland.


The cataclysm is upon the delta

The number and severity of attacks in the delta have been building, led by youth groups demanding access to the oil wealth in their territories. In the Niger Delta, escalating violence has undermined the country's financial stability and its ability to supply crude to the Western world. Shipments from new offshore rigs are making up for some of the oil lost to sabotage, but rebels identified with MEND have threatened to shut down everything.
No one is sure how many delta people have picked up the gun to fight for their rights. Estimates range from the low hundreds to the low thousands. What is certain is that each time the military reacts with extreme measures, the number rises.
No solution seems in sight for the Niger Delta. The oil companies are keeping their heads down, desperate to safeguard their employees and the flow of oil. The military, ordered to meet force with force, have stepped up patrols in cities and on waterways. The militants are intensifying a deadly guerrilla offensive, hoping that rising casualties and oil prices will force the government to negotiate


Jan 25, 2012

THEME 3 - Green Building


Case Study: BedZED

BedZED from the south - credit BioRegional


Beddington Zero Energy Development is the UK’s largest mixed use sustainable community. It was designed to create a thriving community in which ordinary people could enjoy a high quality of life, while living within their fair share of the Earth’s resources.
BedZED was initiated by BioRegional and ZEDfactory, and developed by Peabody housing association. It was completed and occupied in 2002. The community comprises 50% housing for sale, 25% shared ownership and 25% social housing for rent.
People move to BedZED with typical lifestyles, and over the years change their behaviour significantly. The holistic design works on three levels:
1.the design solves problems such as heating and water usage;
2. the design and services offered help people make sustainable choices such as walking rather than driving; and
3. the community have created their own facilities and groups to improve quality of life and reduce their environmental impact.

Mechanical & Engineering systems - credit_ARUP

Key Facts

Energy: 81% reduction in energy use for heating, 45% reduction in electricity use (compared to local av.).

Transport: 64% reduction in car mileage 2,318km/year (compared to national av.).

Water: 58% reduction in water use 72 litres/person/day (compared to local av.).

Waste: 60% waste recycled.
Food: 86% of residents buy organic food.

Community: residents know 20 neighbours by name on average.






Beyond green buildings: creating different ways of living


Improving the energy efficiency of buildings will not deliver the step change in carbon savings we need for true sustainability unless wider societal change takes place, according to Pooran Desai, the co-founder of the organisation that was instrumental in delivering the UK's best known sustainable community Beddington Zero Energy Development (BedZED).
"If society is to successfully achieve meaningful improvements in sustainable living, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we need to look beyond what is being built and focus on creating different ways of living. Constructing greener buildings is only part of the solution," argues Desai.

Societal change

"Current building regulations deliver reasonable levels of energy efficiency. Therefore, constructing to standards that are well beyond the minimum often does not deliver the environmental benefits we might expect," Desai explains. "As an industry we continue to overestimate the impact of buildings on greenhouse gas emissions and underestimate aspects such as transport, food, waste and behaviour. Although we must improve on them, current building regulations reduce emissions from space heating by almost 70% over a Victorian home. Code level 4 reduces space heating by a further 15% on this baseline, while the marginal benefit of progressing on to code level 6 is only another 5% which in fact amounts to only about 0.5% of greenhouse gas footprint – into the realms of diminishing returns."

Buildings in use

"In fact, regulations that focus on the building fabric and resulting emissions might be the best approach rather than wider codes, because the major part of emissions from buildings are not determined by what is built but all the things people do in those buildings – the appliances they choose to fit and how they are used – which arguably are not usefully considered to be part of the remit of building regulations or building standards. These issues are about sustainable living, and cover everything from food to recycling to transport. Behavioural change, or making it easy for people to lead sustainable lifestyles, needs to play a key role in the way a building is occupied and utilised. Finally, the decarbonisation of the energy supply will need to be addressed if greenhouse gas emissions are to be reduced significantly. Ultimately, building codes are only useful to the extent that they support sustainable lifestyles."

Different view

"What is needed is a way of looking at a new infrastructure for society that supports a different type of lifestyle. The built environment has an important part to play in achieving sustainable consumption, but focusing purely on the way a building is constructed and used sends misleading messages.
"Although I am a great supporter of building standards, if not viewed in context, they can misdirect effort. Achieving a BREEAM Excellent rating is a good idea, and should be encouraged, but there is often little point in going the extra mile and gaining BREEAM Outstanding whilst lifestyle issues are not addressed," says Desai.

Ecological footprint

Desai bases his observations on work undertaken at BedZED. Monitoring during the project was showing average electricity consumption 45% lower than in the surrounding area and heating 81% less. By reducing car parking spaces and introducing London's first club car, surveys showed a 65% reduction in private car mileage.
At the time, there was a lot of debate on regeneration of the Thames Gateway, with some 200,000 homes forecast to be built. Desai and his team started modelling the environmental savings which could come from implementing the strategies taken at BedZED across the Thames Gateway. They also started using ecological footprinting as a headline indicator of sustainability, including food and waste impacts as well as carbon.

Behaviour change

"By targeting CO2 savings in the planned new homes, by building to high energy efficiency standards, although a 32% reduction in CO2 emissions from the homes was achievable, this translated to an overall reduction in ecological footprint of a shockingly low 4%. It was only when we started reducing transport, waste and food impacts and including behaviour change that we really started to achieve some decent overall ecological footprint savings," says Desai.
"Yet, the development of sustainable communities remains dominated by green building design. We often hear statements such as 'our buildings contribute nearly half of all our CO2 emissions' followed by the assumption that we will make large environmental gains by constructing buildings to high environmental standards. As an industry, we continue to fail to appreciate from where our environmental impacts arise."

Buildings versus what people do in them

To be effective, Desai believes we need to develop a better understanding of the relative contributions of building fabric versus appliances, food, transport, consumer goods, waste and the other parts which make up our lifestyles. The energy consumption in buildings is partly to do with what we build, and a growing part is what people do in those buildings – the domestic, commercial and industrial appliances which are fitted and how they are used. There is only limited value in considering the energy consumption from these appliances as part of the building. Desai suggests the following analogy: just because the majority of food is consumed in buildings, there is only a limited amount we can do in trying to drive sustainability of the food system through building design or standards. There is not much to be gained from saying buildings are responsible for 95% of impacts associated with food.
"Although it is essential that we make our buildings greener, particularly by refurbishing older stock, it actually won't reduce our overall environmental impact nearly as much as we might first assume," he says.

GHG not CO2

Desai believes that we can start to unpick the confusion around CO2 emissions figures and how it relates to other measures such as greenhouse gases and ecological footprint. The most quoted government figures for CO2 emissions are what should really be described as "direct CO2 emissions" or "territorial CO2 emissions".
These figures represent the CO2 directly emitted by any region or country from burning fossil fuels within its own territorial boundaries. This amounts to around 8.8 tonnes of CO2 a person a year in the UK. However, the territorial CO2 emissions figures don't include international shipping or aviation which add a further 0.7 tonnes a person a year. Adding in the net impact of goods and services we import into the UK gives us a CO2 footprint of 12.08 tonnes.
Even this figure does not include the basket of greenhouse gases (GHG) such as methane and nitrous oxides in addition to CO2. The UK's GHG footprint is 16.34 tonnes of CO2 equivalent a person a year – 86% larger than the original territorial CO2 emissions figure of 8.8 tonnes. If territorial CO2 emissions is used as a guide, the global warming effect of emissions from imported goods, agriculture and international travel is underestimated, and the importance of fossil fuels burned directly, for example, to heat and power our buildings, is overestimated.

Creating sustainable lifestyles

"If we look at ecological footprinting as the headline indicator of sustainability, things look even more different as our CO2 footprint accounts for only 65% of our ecological footprint. A person living in a home built to current building regulations might be releasing 1.5 tonnes of CO2 to provide their heat and power. This equates to 17% of territorial CO2 emissions, 12% CO2 footprint, 9% of GHG footprint but only about 6% of ecological footprint," explains Desai.
The necessary step change in environmental savings can only be made when society focuses on creating whole sustainable lifestyles – making it attractive and affordable for people to live without being dependent on cars, where recycling is made easy and where everyone has easy access to local, organic, seasonal produce – for which BioRegional coined the term One Planet Living. This framework is now being applied internationally to create communities focused on sustainable lifestyles not just green buildings, including the recently completed 172 apartment, car-free One Brighton development by Crest Nicholson and BioRegional Quintain.
Desai concludes by saying: "We need energy efficient buildings but we don't need to perform expensive engineering or architectural gymnastics to get decent savings, after which we can focus on other aspects of our lifestyles."





Dec 30, 2011

THEME 2 - CASE STUDY - The Energy issue in the United Kingdom


1. From net oil exporter to net oil importer

a. Oil and Gas Production in the United Kingdom









b. Oil Export and import:

c. Production of electricity





d. Oil and gas production




UKCS: UK continental Shelf
1 therm is about 30 KWH

SOURCE: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/482767/OGA_production_projections_-_November_2015.pdf



e. Tracing the origin of Britain's fuel and energy

Most of the fuel and energy we depend on comes from a relatively small number of key installations. Just a few large facilities provide most of the fuel, gas and electricity which drives the rest of the country. Includes aerial shots of Stanlow Oil Refinery in Cheshire, Bacton Gas Terminal in Norfolk and Drax Power Station in Yorkshire. With a few major facilities providing much of our energy, the electricity transmission network is highly important. Published as part of the Britain From Above website: bbc.co.uk/britainfromabove/.






Dec 5, 2011

THEME 1/2 - CASE STUDY - BRAZIL

FACTS AND FIGURES



Click on the flag to go to
"Fast Facts" about Brazil in National Geographic





Below are some tables and graphs about
agriculture in Brazil.

What are the main trends in production and sales?


a.
b.

c.










d.

e.



f.