<%BANNER%>

Establishing Methods of Measurement for Regenerative Development at an Urban Density

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0025009/00001

Material Information

Title: Establishing Methods of Measurement for Regenerative Development at an Urban Density
Physical Description: 1 online resource (35 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Hart, Joe
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: ecosystem, regenerative
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: As the popularity of sustainable development has progressed as a means of moderating and reducing environmental impact, the concept of regenerating the environment has emerged as a more recent attempt to redirect the movement towards increasing the ecological productivity of the environment as opposed to improved degradation. Increasing trends toward urban living prompts the need to focus on the urban environment and regenerative development at that scale. The objective of this thesis is to establish variables and methods of measuring regenerative development in an urban context. The process of determining these issues consisted of a literature review, collection of urban consumption data, analysis of existing regenerative evaluation methods, and recommendations for an urban regenerative development measurement method. This study concluded that in order for a measurement tool to address the urban density, it must address transportation and displaced energy impacts, as well as the method?s ease of use and measure of ecosystems services. Furthermore, the interests and values of the user play a significant role in determining the type of measurement selected.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Joe Hart.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Ries, Robert J.
Local: Co-adviser: Kibert, Charles J.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0025009:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0025009/00001

Material Information

Title: Establishing Methods of Measurement for Regenerative Development at an Urban Density
Physical Description: 1 online resource (35 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Hart, Joe
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: ecosystem, regenerative
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: As the popularity of sustainable development has progressed as a means of moderating and reducing environmental impact, the concept of regenerating the environment has emerged as a more recent attempt to redirect the movement towards increasing the ecological productivity of the environment as opposed to improved degradation. Increasing trends toward urban living prompts the need to focus on the urban environment and regenerative development at that scale. The objective of this thesis is to establish variables and methods of measuring regenerative development in an urban context. The process of determining these issues consisted of a literature review, collection of urban consumption data, analysis of existing regenerative evaluation methods, and recommendations for an urban regenerative development measurement method. This study concluded that in order for a measurement tool to address the urban density, it must address transportation and displaced energy impacts, as well as the method?s ease of use and measure of ecosystems services. Furthermore, the interests and values of the user play a significant role in determining the type of measurement selected.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Joe Hart.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Ries, Robert J.
Local: Co-adviser: Kibert, Charles J.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0025009:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 ESTABLISHING METHODS OF MEASUREMENT FOR REGENERATIVE DEVELOPMENT AT AN URBAN DENSITY By JOE M. HART JR. A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009

PAGE 2

2 2009 Joe M. Hart Jr.

PAGE 3

3 To my wife, Danielle, for her love, support, and inspiration

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The culmination of my education was made possi ble by the efforts of se veral individuals. I would like to thank my parents and grandpare nts for their unconditional love as well as instilling the importance of education from the start of my education. I would like to extend my gratitude to Dr. R obert Ries, my committee chair, for his time and effort in assisting me with the development of my topic. I would also like to thank Dr. Charles Kibert, my committee co-chair, for fosteri ng my interest in sust ainable development. Lastly, I want to express my appreciation to my committee member, Martin Gold, for his continued support and providing me with an inspiring and enjoya ble educational and professional experience. Finally, I am grateful to Robert Lamb, Ma tthew Hill, and Ayesh Bhagvat, who have consistently lent their support and helped shape my education.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 4LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ ...........6LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... ..........7ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... ...............8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. ......9Regeneration at the Urban Density ...........................................................................................9Problem Statement ............................................................................................................. .....10Study Objectives .............................................................................................................. .......112 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................12Regenerative Design ........................................................................................................... ....12Urban Context ................................................................................................................. ........163 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... ..18Scope ......................................................................................................................... ..............18Limitations ................................................................................................................... ...........18Methodology ................................................................................................................... ........194 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ....................................................................................24Sample Data ................................................................................................................... .........24Ecosystems Services Method .................................................................................................25Input/Output Method ........................................................................................................... ...25Findings ...................................................................................................................... ............26Transportation ................................................................................................................ ..26Displacement of Energy ..................................................................................................27Measuring Ecosystem Services .......................................................................................27Ease of Use ................................................................................................................... ...28Urban Regeneration Method ...................................................................................................295 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................31LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ ...33BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................35

PAGE 6

6 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Olgyay Construction Impacts Evalua tion (per year) using Sample Data ..........................254-2 Olgyay Operational Impacts Evalua tion (per year) using Sample Data ............................254-3 Olgyay IBS and IES Summary Results .............................................................................254-4 Input/Output Evaluati on using Sample Data .....................................................................25

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Population Change from 1950-2000 ..................................................................................102-1 Bill Reed’s Regenerating System Diagra m from the Integrative Design Collaborative and Regenesis, 2004 ........................................................................................................... 163-1 Philadelphia, PA .................................................................................................... ............213-2 Street in Washington, D.C. .......................................................................................... ......214-1 Sample Urban Regenerative Development Data ...............................................................244-2 Urban Regeneration Measurement Method .......................................................................30

PAGE 8

8 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Bu ilding Construction ESTABLISHING METHODS OF MEASUREMENT FOR REGENERATIVE DEVELOPMENT AT AN URBAN DENSITY By Joe M. Hart, Jr. August 2009 Chair: Robert Ries Cochair: Charles Kibert Major: Building Construction As the popularity of sustainable development has progressed as a means of moderating and reducing environmental impact, the concept of regenerating the environment has emerged as a more recent attempt to redirect the movement towards increasing the eco logical productivity of the environment as opposed to improved degrada tion. Increasing trends toward urban living prompts the need to focus on the urban environment a nd regenerative developmen t at that scale. The objective of this thesis is to establish variab les and methods of measuring regenerative development in an urban context. The proce ss of determining these issues consisted of a literature review, collect ion of urban consumption data, an alysis of existing regenerative evaluation methods, and recommendations for an urban regenerative development measurement method. This study concluded that in order for a meas urement tool to address the urban density, it must address transportation and displaced energy impacts, as well as the method’s ease of use and measure of ecosystems services. Furthermore, the interests and values of the user play a significant role in determining the type of measurement selected.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Though movements for environmentally sensitiv e development have existed for centuries at various scales, recent awareness regarding cl imate change, resource depletion, and overall environmental degradation has brought about a much stronger emphasis on creating long-term solutions to these issues. As the popularity of sustainable development has progressed as a means of moderating and reducing environmental impact, the concept of regenerating the environment has emerged as a more recent attempt to redirect the movement towards increasing the eco logical productivity of the environment as opposed to slowing the rate of degradation. Proponents of the regenerative approach argue that limiting environmental impact alone is not sufficient in respect to the amount of damage that has and continues to occur. Regeneration at the Urban Density Regenerative development remains primitive in its development and has predominately pertained to individual, small scal e sites. The application of this concept to an urban density is both pertinent and problematic, as an expected 60 percent of the population is predicted to be living in urban environments by the year 2030 (Girardet 2004). As displayed by Figure 1-1, the consistent in crease in urban populat ions provides strong confirmation of the need to addr ess the sustainability of these types of development. Though many cities currently operate with enormous levels of resources and energy use, the high ratio of land to people in urban areas provides a signifi cant opportunity for the shared consumption and generation of energy. The high consumption levels coupled with the larg e demand for living in urban environments creates a significant need for establishing regenerative urban settings.

PAGE 10

10 Problem Statement Because developments with urban density ha ve such high potential for improving resource use and generation, the application of regenera tive techniques may prove to be extremely effective. However, difficulties in the coll ection of data and frag mentation of relevant professional fields have significantly hindered th e development of regenerative studies. The application of existing research in regenerative capabilities to an urban context is essential to address the growing urban envi ronments across the globe. While existing efforts have been made to measure regenerative development, they have lacked key elements for the application at an ur ban density. Determining the necessary variables for developing a framework for measuring urban regenerative development is necessary to maintain progress in the field as well as fo ster increased collection of consumption and regeneration data. Figure 1-1. Population Cha nge from 1950-2000 (Source: rtc.ruralinstitute.umt.edu/RuDis/RuDe mography.htm. Last accessed June, 2009).

PAGE 11

11 Study Objectives The primary objective of this thesis is to develop an appropriate framework for measuring regenerative development within an urban context through the through the study of existing regenerative evaluation methods a nd determination of relevant vari able at the urban density of regenerative development.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Various movements within the ‘sustainable development’ concept have emerged over the last several decades in attempts to create a more sustainable environment relative to contemporary development. While countless research exists under the umbre lla of sustainability, ‘regenerative design,’ has developed as a prom ising approach, though th e considerable amount of data required to determine a regenerative st atus may be hindering the topic’s development. However, the study of related movements, such as ‘positive development’, ‘permaculture’, and ‘urban sustainability’ may prove to be beneficial in the application of regenerative development to an urban setting. Regenerative Design Ian McHarg’s “Design with Na ture” is often considered a central source of ecological design. While natural building techniques have a lengthy history, this became one of the first form and comprehensive studies of ecological design. In it, McHarg attempts to bring environmental consciousness to the developed world by applying environmental theories to actual environments and determining ideal urba n settlements (1969). Se veral key individuals began developing upon this concept of ecologi cal design in the 1980s: John and Nancy Todd from the biology field, and John Lyle, a landscape architecture professi onal. Addressing the scientific issues in ecological design, “Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design” offers techniques and concepts relevant to the built environment (Todd 1984). As part of this contribution, Todd provi ded nine precepts for biological design:

PAGE 13

13 1. The living world is the matrix for all design 2. Design should follow, not oppose, the laws of life 3. Biological equity must determine design 4. Design must reflect bioregionality 5. Projects should be based on renewable energy sources 6. Design should be sustainable through the integration of living systems 7. Design should be co-evolutionary with the natural world 8. Building and design should he lp to heal the planet 9. Design should follow a sacred ecology (1984) Elaborating upon these precepts, Todd provide s valuable examples of ecological and regenerative strategies for urban settings, including solar sewage wa lls, garden parks, city lakes, bioshelter parks, aquaculture, and rooftop farm s (1984). In “Design for Human Ecosystems,” John Lyle offered the “principles, methods, and te chniques for shaping landscape, land use, and natural resources in ways that can make human ecosystems function in the sustainable ways of natural ecosystems (1985, p.v). Using a basis for energy flows developed by Howard Odum, Lyle perceived this systems approach as rele vant to ecological desi gn. According to Lyle, Odum’s technique would be a useful tool for designing man-made ecosystems and describing the flow of materials and energy (1985, p.233). With th e structure of all activities broken down into a common form of energy, the inputs and output s are able to be more closely and more comprehensively managed. The application of th ese concepts to the built environment allows stakeholders to recognize that the development of the environment requires an unbelievable amount of energy to construct and operate. Elaborating upon the theories of ecological design, ‘regene rative design’ was later developed by Lyle and based on the concepts of ecological design and systems ecology. “Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development” later provided a standard for the theory of designing the built environment in such a way that attempts to increase the ecological productivity of development. Using energy as a me tric for regeneration, Lyle uses case studies

PAGE 14

14 to assess energy consumption and offers the possi bility of using strategi es such as renewable energy as a method for creating a regenerative site (1994). By locally increasing the productivity of a site through renewable ener gy and ecosystem services, the re sulting system is meant to maintain the vitality of the environment. While consumption information was collected in detail for case studies such as the Center for Regene rative Studies, little to no energy data was established regarding the generation of energy. Though details are not provided, Lyle offered that “the keys to sustainability lie in the urban landscape” (1994, p.286). Since Lyle’s contribution in 1994, little progress has been made in the field of regenerative design, with the exception of the contributions of Bill Reed, current President of the Integrative Design Collaborative. Recognizing the shifts that have occurred toward a more sustainable building atmosphere, Reed developed a diagram (Fi gure 2-1) which defines the progression of environmentally based development and “clearly lays out a road map that informs us about where we are today in the pro cess of shifting design paradigm s and what the evolutionary trajectory may look like” (Kibert 2008 p. 124). Though the topic has generally developed sepa rately from regenerative development, ecosystems services became a relevant metric fo r integrating true ecosystem based design into regenerative development through the efforts of i ndividuals such as Robert Costanza and Victor Olgyay. Costanza et al. provide d a cohesive list of ecosystem s services and offering the importance of measuring their value with “The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital” in 1997. According to this wor k, “ecosystem functions refer variously to the habitat, biological or system properties or pr ocesses of ecosystems. Ecosystem goods (such as food) and services (such as waste assimilation) represent the benefits human populations derive, directly or indirectly, from ecosystem functi ons” (Costanza et al. 1997, p.253). The estimated

PAGE 15

15 value of seventeen major ecosystem goods and se rvices categories was established. Building upon Costanza’s work in 2004, Victor Olgyay and Ju lee Herdt developed “The application of ecosystems services criteria for green buildi ng assessment,” which developed an ecologically derived baseline to determine the negative or positive output of buildings. Likely the most advanced regenerative measurement tool to date, the criteria was es tablished with the use of the ‘index of building sustainability ’ (IBS) and the ‘index of effici ency in sustainability’ (IES) metrics. “The IBS is the fraction of the annual carrying capacity of the pr oject’s land that is consumed by a building,” and “the IES is the quantity of land re quired to meet a sustainability index of 1” (Olgyay and Herdt 2004, p.391). Thes e metrics were developed based on the notion that “an ecologically derived baseline can be used to measure negativ e impacts as well as positive impacts of buildings and will be referred to as the ecosystems services method. The measurement also allows vastly different project types and sizes to be used and compared on an equal basis” (Olgyay and Herdt 2004, p. 389). Using very similar language to that of re generative design, Janis Birkeland’s ‘Positive Development’ approach suggests that urban development should be built in such a way to “add both ecological and social value beyond conditions that existed pr ior to development,” and that “genuine sustainability would require that urban development provide net positive social and ecological gains to compensate for previous lost natural capital and carrying capacity” (2008, p.1). Acknowledging the input/output method of m easurement, the positive development theory opposes the metric of energy as the measure of positive net energy, posing that “units of energy (or money) cannot capture the essence of sp ace, time and ecological waste in the built environment” (Birkeland 2008, p.2). Birkeland al so offers several strategies for achieving

PAGE 16

16 positive development status at a city scale, including living machines, which can “create a virtuous cycle where waste, in effect, cleans the air and water and builds soil” (2008, p.3). Figure 2-1. Bill Reed’s Regenerating Syst em Diagram from the Integrative Design Collaborative and Regenesis, 2004 Urban Context Though few studies have been developed to address urban regenerative development, many urban sustainability efforts have been devel oped which could offer insights into large scale regenerative studies. Due to the rising demand of urban living, determinin g vital elements of its consumption and conservation measures is be neficial to determining its regenerative development potential. Urban ar eas offer unique complications to regenerative development efforts, including high pollution rates and many ot her activities which have a negative effect on plant populations, animal survival, and ecological processes (Kendle and Forbes 1997). Urban climates offer increased difficulties in reducing energy due to higher heat energy produced from human processes (Kendle and Forbes 1997). De spite significant disruption to the natural

PAGE 17

17 ecosystem, however, urban environments still offer unique potential for ecological processes which can offer a higher disturbance tolerance, higher adaptation rates, and broader food ranges (Kendle and Forbes 1997). Ratings such as the “Green Metro Index” developed by the World Resources Institute (1993) and the “Environmental Sustainability In dex” later developed by Dan Esty (2001) have offered great insight into meas uring urban sustainability, but these ratings were generally qualitative evaluations and could not be used to measure regenerative development (Portney 2003). Many cities to date have developed su stainability initiatives which reflect similar qualities to that of regenerative development. San Francisco’s initiative, for example, suggested focus on factors such as biodive rsity, food and agriculture, and transportation (Portney 2003). Though these are key variables for determini ng regenerative development, however, these initiatives do not capture quantitative data fo r measurement. Adding to the difficulties of measurement, many cities operate on resour ces developed outside the city boundaries, consuming undetermined amounts of additional en ergy. Dating back many years, urbanization of cities such as Athens, Greece was “made pos sible by the bio-productivity of forests and farmland outside the city” (Gir ardet 2004, p.37). Tokyo, for example, “imports 78% of its energy, 60% of its food, and 82% of its timber from other countries” (Girardet 2004, p.91). For this reason, many researchers put emphasis on self -sustaining cities. E nvironmentalist Aromar Revi, for example, has developed the notion of RU rbanism, which aims to adapt cities to their local ecosystems and their potential to supply re sources on a sustainable basis (Girardet 2004). Movements toward self reliant city systems such as this would make measurement and evaluation of energy consumption much more pr actical. Until such systems exist, however, external displacements of energy are a ke y element of a city’s comprehensive consumption.

PAGE 18

18 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Scope Though the definition of an urban setting vari es between disciplines and organizations, a standardized value was required for uniformity within this study. Because cities often have similar characteristics at comparab le densities, population density was used as the determination of an urban area. As the most objective source, the United States Census Bureau’s classification of an urban density was used. According to Census 2000, the Census Bu reau classified urban areas as those which consisted of “core census block groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000 people pe r square mile, and surrounding census blocks that have an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile” (U.S. Census Bureau 2000). These values were established as a minimum classification. To keep the data as accurate as possible, data was only collected for cities which had population de nsities of a minimum of 1000 people per square mile and a maximum of 10,000 people per square m ile in order to keep the collected data relevant to average urban densities. Although the factors affecting the environmental impacts of cities encompass a large spectrum of issues, this study intended to limit th ese issues to those directly involved in the planning, development, and/or bu ilding processes. Therefore, factors such as commercial product consumption were excluded from this study. Limitations While the generalized strategies for achievi ng regenerative design ha ve been established, very little has been developed in practice to verify the feasibility of creating sites that truly generate more energy than was put into their development. Because there has been no standardization of regenerative development characteristics, conf irmation and analysis of these

PAGE 19

19 practices has been difficult to accomplish. Many claims of ‘regenerative design’ developments utilize regenerative techniques; however, there is often no data to back up these assertions. While the limited nature of established case st udies makes determining specific data it more difficult for measurement analysis, the ability to determine variables and methods of measurement is still possible. Also, fragmentation between relevant fields of study has brought about difficulties in the progression of regenerative development. Professionals in design, construction, planning, ecology, and agriculture all provi de essential information to the regenerative development; however, interaction between thes e disciplines is very inade quate. More communication and sharing of knowledge between th ese areas would provide a more streamlined process for the success of regenerative development. Methodology The methodology used for this thesis consisted of a literature review collection of urban consumption data, analysis of existing rege nerative evaluation methods, and recommendations for an urban regenerative deve lopment measurement method. A detailed literature review on regenera tive development, urban planning, and developmental impacts was first developed to as sess the current state of regenerative and urban development. A sample set of data was then collected to represent an urban area attempting to be regenerative. The characteristic s of this potential city reflec ted the potential embodied energy of urban development processes, including construction, ut ilities, food production and consumption, transportation, and the initial im pact of producing photovoltaic energy systems (PV Embodied Energy), as well as the energy from materials and processes which are developed outside the boundary of the c ity (Displaced Energy). Energy which could potentially be

PAGE 20

20 generated from urban processes wa s also listed, including food production and renewable energy production. Additionally, prospective ecosystem se rvices within an urban setting were listed, including gas and water regulation, pollination, hab itat, culture, and recreation. The construction impact values represent estimates of the em bodied energy of the extraction, production, and construction of the building materials and proces ses. Operational energy values are estimated from city utility consumption data. The values derived for food production and consumption reflect estimates of the energy required to grow food in urban environments as well as the amount of energy representing the actual amount of food produced and consumed. Although many of the values reflected accurate averages and information, the actual variables for this input were only intended to be estimated for the evaluation of measurement methods. The sample data reflected a moderate to hi gh level of urban dens ity at 10,000 people per square mile with a 50 square mile area. This level of density is reflective of cities such as Philadelphia, PA and Washington, D.C. When de velopment becomes this concentrated, cities tend to share resources to a higher degree. While public transportation is often integrated when cities reach the minimum level of urban density (1000 people/square mile), the number and frequency of routes are generally much higher an d comprehensive in terms of their efficiency when density starts to reach tens of thousands. Furthermore, st ructures generally become much higher and have multiple uses.

PAGE 21

21 Figure 3-1. Philadelphia, PA (Source: http://phillyskyline.com/bldgs/comcast/comcast_uc784.jpg .Last accessed June, 2009). Figure 3-2. Street in Washington, D.C. (Source: http://www.grandboulevard.net/to d/pedestriansTOD%20PIC%201.jpg Last accessed June, 2009).

PAGE 22

22 Once sufficient data was collected, Olgyay’s ec osystems services method and a standard input/output method were assessed as possible fr ameworks for determining urban regeneration. Estimated simulations were used for data entry into the evaluation methods. The simulation of generalized urban characteristics was then applied to the ecosystems services method, as well as a standard input/o utput evaluation, in order to determine the applicability of the criteria at su ch an increase in scale. Becaus e it can be translated to all three metrics, Gigajoules per hectare per year was used uniformly for all values. In order to operate on a standard baseline of site capacity, Olgyay used a global average ecosystem productivity value established by Wacker nagel and Rees which was also used for this evaluation. This value, set at 100 GJ/ha/yr, is the quantity of land required to absorb the CO2 emissions produced from the materials and ener gy used and consumed during the development process (Olgyay 2004). For existing urban development, determin ing construction impacts can be extremely difficult. The embodied energy invested in such la rge levels of development is rarely researched and recorded, especially in cases where the urban environment has existed for decades. Furthermore, the generally fragmented and priv atized nature of development makes a unified measurement nearly impossible during development. Considering the scale of development and substantial level of inefficien t development, the ability to surpass the total impacts of construction would likely never occur. Because urban centers progress, transform, and adapt, estimations and values of construction impacts at an active status may more effectively be used as a metric for establishing goals. The impacts of construction for a city were calculated as follows:

PAGE 23

23 Material (quantity) x (embodi ed energy)/(ecosystem productivit y in GJ/ha/yr) = ecosystem services consumed (ha/yr) Operational impacts were then calculated in a similar manner using data from city utility consumption. An input/output measurement method was then evaluated similarly to the first simulation. The same estimated data was used to deduct th e total energy consumption from the total energy generation to produce a straightforward obs ervation of known energy activity without incorporating the relativi ty of land area and average ecosystem productivity. Joules were used as a standard variable in order to maintain th e same metric throughout the evaluation to obtain accurate results. Once the simulation of measurement methods took place, the methods were evaluated for use at an urban density. The benefits and probl ems were then addressed, with recommendations made for future development. Based on thes e recommendations, a third method of measurement was formed as a possible urban re generative development tool, and recommendations were offered for the development of the topic.

PAGE 24

24 CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS The urban data which was collected for use in measurement applications was summarized, and the sample data was then simulated and summarized in the Ecosystem Services and Input/Output Measurement Methods. Sample Data Urban Sample Data Size 50 square miles Density 10000 ppl/sq. mi. Characteristics Energy Consumption GJ/yr Construction 310000000 Utility 211000000 PV Embodied Energy (initial) 1100000 Food (Production + Consumption) 42000 Transportation 80000000 Displaced Energy 15000000 Energy Generation GJ/yr Food Production 550 Example: 25 story vertical farm with 100,000 sf footprint, 10000 sf community gardens Local PV Energy 60000 Example: 10 MW photovoltaic system Example Ecosystem Services Gas Regulation Water Regulation Pollination Culture Habitat Recreation Figure 4-1. Sample Urban Rege nerative Development Data

PAGE 25

25 Ecosystems Services Method Table 4-1. Olgyay Construction Impacts Ev aluation (per year) using Sample Data Construction Impacts Description GJ/yr GJ/ha/yr Hectares (ha) Acres Urban Sample 310000000 10031000007660267 Table 4-2. Olgyay Operationa l Impacts Evaluation (per year) using Sample Data Operational Impacts Description GJ/yr GJ/ha/ yrHectares (ha) Acres Urban Sample 211000000 100 2110000 5213924 Table 4-3. Olgyay IBS and IES Summary Results Summary of IBS and IES Results Description Construction Impacts Operational Impacts IBS IES IBS IES Urban Sample 239.38 7660267 162.945213924 Input/Output Method Table 4-4. Input/Output Eval uation using Sample Data Input/Output Consumption GJ/yr Construction Impacts 310000000 Operational Impacts 211000000 Transportation Impacts 80000000 Renewable Embodied Energy 1100000 Food Production Impacts 42000 Displaced Impacts 15000000 Total 617142000 Generation GJ/yr Renewable Energy 60000 Food Production 550 Total 60550 Energy Consumed 617135450

PAGE 26

26 Findings The analysis of existing methods of measurement as a benchmark for assessing regeneration at an urban density resulted in several issues wh ich needed to be addressed: Transportation Impacts Displacement of Energy Ease of Use Measurement of Ecosystem Services Olgyay’s recently developed criteria for determ ining the level of regenerative development may be effective for individual, small scale devel opment such as the farm house it uses as a case study, many factors cause his evaluation to lack e ssential factors that cont ribute to a regenerative development at an urban densit y. A standard input/output meas urement gives an opportunity to input any necessary factors, but it lacks stru cture and requires extens ive data, research, and knowledge. While both techniques offer valid elements, neither is ideal for use at an urban density. Olgyay’s method offers an easy structure for th e measurement of regenerative capacity. The method, however, was developed with basic elements consistent with use in the context of small scale or individual projects. When constructi ng a small scale structure, the measurement of embodied energy for that process is generally mu ch simpler than for a dense organization of structures representing multiple structures. While the construction and operational impact analyses may be measured in a similar fashion, they represent a much mo re complex network of measurements. Factors of trans portation energy and the transfer/d isplacement of energy between projects are significant elements at the city scale which are not reflected with this evaluation. Transportation When measuring the consumption of an urban city, the time and effort spend traveling to points within the city is extensive and is a significant contribution to overall energy

PAGE 27

27 consumption. Individual vehicle use between sites and public transportation are adjustable factors in the development of a city. If planned correctly, urba n environments can significantly limit and possibly eliminate the need for c onsumptive transportati on methods. Because transportation is a crucial part of urban energy waste and can be regulated, it must be addressed in the measurement of regenerative development. While this requires additional calculation not addressed in the establ ished methods, this can easily be ad ded to the evaluation within the operational impacts. Displacement of Energy Though it may be partially true for all scales of development, the displacement of energy plays a significant role in the embodied energy of an entire urban system. While specific projects within a city may be developed to be regenerative, much of th e energy that may have been used at that site may be redirected outside city boundaries or to another portion of the city. For example, increasing the eco logical productivity of non-productiv e sites (i.e. parking lot to community garden) creates a positive energy flow for that particular site, but it may lead to increases in energy for other va riables (i.e. increase in transportation due to more limited parking. Measuring Ecosystem Services Olgyay’s method for addressing ecosystem servi ces focuses on an ecosystem’s capacity to absorb waste as the most appropr iate metric relative to the de velopment industry (Olgyay 2004). While waste absorption is a key ecological factor for construction, it also limits the ability to address established urban regenerative techniques that have an effect on the overall productivity of a given land area. Olgyay’s criteria use a baseline global ecologi cal productivity in order to measure with a standardized land area. The 100 GJ/ha/yr figure derives from an assumed energy-to-land ratio,

PAGE 28

28 which is the amount of energy that can be produ ced per hectare of ecolo gically productive land (Wackernagel and Rees 1996). In a traditional urba n environment, the verticality creates issues where multiple levels of a structure may be eco logically productive (i.e. vertical farming). Additionally, the typical developm ent of urban environments repr esents a type of land whose productivity is likely to be below the global average. This variati on could create skewed results. Because the evaluation assesse s regenerative development based on a standardized ecological carrying capacity of land, many esta blished regenerative design techniques go unrecognized through this evaluation. If properly initiated, practices such as roof gardens and living machines may create positive net energy flows which would never be established through Olgyay’s measurement. The input/output evaluation provides a framew ork which is both accurate and adaptive. The ability to specify any factors to be measured allows the user to include as many variables that can be measured using the same metric. This means primary regenerative techniques such as food production and renewable en ergy generation are easily factored as part of attempts at a positive energy flow. Ease of Use There are two main issues with the use of an input/output system in urban regenerative development. Although the system has the ability to be very preci se, the amount of data required to achieve such accuracy is tremendous. If all va riables are not measured and/or are unable to be measured, the result becomes an inaccurate representation of energy flow. Also, the open interface requires significant knowledge in every f actor applied. This becomes very difficult to practically use this evaluation, un less experts from several fiel ds are readily available during evaluation. While the ecosystems services method is more generic, it provides an interface that is much easier to use.

PAGE 29

29 Urban Regeneration Method In order to address the previously mentione d concerns, a new measurement evaluation was developed which combined the structures of the ecosystems services evaluation and input/output method. The net energy value in Joules of a ll consumptions and generations (construction and operational impacts, transportati on, displacement, food production, etc.) which can be measured in the same metric (Joules) was first calculated. This single value was then compared to an ecological carrying capacity of land area much like the method used by Olgyay, determining a single IBS and IES value, as opposed to separate values for construction and operation impacts. The construction and operation im pacts were combined to addre ss the evolving na ture of urban environments. Because construction is traditiona lly a constant factor in urban development, incorporating its value on an annual basis ma y be more accurate. This also provides a straightforward measurement process while allowi ng the user to address the urban impacts as a whole system. These resulting values are able to incorporate the use of regenerative development strategies and all valid consump tion and generation values while maintaining a standard metric that is proportional to land area.

PAGE 30

30 Sample Evaluation Consumption Inputs GJ/yr Construction Impacts 310000000 Operational Impacts 211000000 Transportation Impacts 80000000 Renewable Embodied Energy 1100000 Food Production Impacts 42000 Displaced Impacts 15000000 Total Impacts 617142000 Generation Inputs GJ/yr Renewable Energy 60000 Food Production 550 Total Production 60550 Total GJ GJ/ha/yr Hectares (ha) Acres 617135450 1006171354 15201363 IBS IES 475.04 15201363 Figure 4-2. Urban Regenera tion Measurement Method

PAGE 31

31 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Using existing regenerative development meas urement methods and ex tensive research of regenerative design techniques, urban planning, and ecosystem serv ices, a set of variables were determined to be of essential value for the evaluation of regenerati on at the urban density, including transportation impacts, displacement of energy, ease of use, and measurement of ecosystem services. The actual nature of urban regenerative development measurements, however, will be dependant upon the intentions and values of its users. Because there appears to be a dichotomy be tween designers of regenerative development who desire a focus on returning ecosystem services and those who wish to create a positive net energy in development, different evaluations must exist in order to respectively address these discrepancies. Those wishing to generate ecosystem services will have difficulty in finding standard metrics for many services which may be considered vital to urban environments, such as recreation and culture. In cases such as th is, many assumptions would have to be made, and the use of measurement may not be the appropr iate type of evaluation. However, several services that are directly related to urban development will likely be predominantly used, including waste assimilation and food production. As these metrics can be more easily defined, they could be integrated into a structure very similar to Olgyay’s measurement and evaluated against construction, operation, tr ansportation, and disp lacement impacts. In instances where factors are known, specific, and measurable, a st andard input/output eval uation would be more useful in making direct comparisons. If future research stems more in formation regarding the measurement of ecosystems services, any deve lopment in urban regenerative development evaluation must adjust accordingly.

PAGE 32

32 Until more progress in ecosystems services measurement is made, a combination of input/output and ecosystems servi ces evaluation may be most bene ficial in obtaining to most accurate results. The ability to integrate regene rative development techniques as part of the net energy before applying to carrying capacity can create a more comprehensive reflection of an urban system. As the sustainability movement becomes more commonplace, regenerative development will ideally become a new goal to strive for in creating long-term environmental solutions. If systems for its evaluation are already in place by the time this occurs, the transition may be much smoother. Because the concept of regenera tive development is relatively new, existing measurement of the embodied energy during and af ter development has yet to be established as common practice and creates strong difficulties in determining regenerative status. Multidisciplinary cooperation during the urban planning process is cruc ial to develop cities in an ecologically sustainable and rege nerative manner. While the data required for determining the feasibility of a regenerative urban environment may not be currently av ailable, the basis for understanding how to measure its st atus and what factors are app licable to its measurement is well within reach.

PAGE 33

33 LIST OF REFERENCES Best Food Forward Ltd. (2002). “City Limits: A res ource flow and ecologi cal footprint analysis of Greater London.” Seacourt Limited, Oxford. Birkeland, Janis. (2008). “Positive Developmen t: The Australian National Sustainability Inititative.” ACT Urban Devel opment Autumn Series, 1-10. Costanza et al. (1997). “The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural cap ital.” Nature, 387, 253-260. Despommier, Dickenson. (2008). “Vertical Farm ing.” Encyclopedia of Earth, Washington, D.C. Franko, Richard et al. (2007). Developing Sustainable Plan ned Communities, Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C. Girardet, Herbert. (2004). Cities People Planet: Liveable Cities for a Sustainable World, WileyAcademy, Great Britain. Holmgren, David. (1994). “Energy and Perm aculture.” The Permaculture Activist. Kendle, T. and Forbes, S. (1997). Urban Nature Conservation, E & FN Spon, London. Kibert, Charles. (2008). Sust ainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey. Kremen, C. and Ostfeld, R. (2005). “A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services.” Front Ecol Environ, 3(10), 540-548. Long, J., Rain, D., and Ratcliffe, M. (2001). “P opulation Density vs. Urban Population.” U.S. Census Bureau, Salvador. Lyle, John. (1985). Design for Human Ecosyste ms, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. Lyle, John. (1994). Regenerative Design for Sustai nable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. McHarg, Ian. (1971). Design with Nature, Natural History Pre ss, Philadelphia. Olgyay, V. and Herdt, J. (2004). “The applicatio n of ecosystems services criteria for green building assessment.” Solar Energy, 77, 389-98. Portney, Kent. (2003). Taking Sustainable Citi es Seriously: Economic Development, the Environment, and Quality of Life in American Cities, MIT Press, London. Ruano, Miguel. (2002). EcoUrbanism: Sustai nable Human Settlements: 60 Case Studies, 2nd Ed., Editorial Gustavo Gili, Barcelona.

PAGE 34

34 Thomas, Randall. (2003). Sustainable Urban Desi gn: An Environmental Approach, Spon Press, London. Todd, N. and Todd, J. (1984). Bioshelters, Ocean Ar ks, City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design, Sierra Club Books, San Francisco. U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). “Census 2000 Urba n and Rural Classification.” U.S. Census Bureau. Wackernagel, M. and Rees, W. (1996). Our Ec ological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth, New Society Publishers, British Columbia.

PAGE 35

35 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Joe M. Hart, Jr. was born and raised in Dayt ona Beach, Florida. After graduating with honors from Atlantic High School, he was accepte d into the Architecture program at the University of Florida in 2003. Upon graduating with a Bachelor of Design in Architecture with a minor in environmental studies, Joe immediately began graduate st udies at the University of Florida’s M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Co nstruction in hopes to ob tain a comprehensive knowledge of the development process through th e completion of a Master of Science in Building Construction. With a st rong interest in sustainable de velopment which was established as an undergraduate student, Joe continued his environmental studies wi th the Certificate of Sustainable Construction program, which culminat ed with his attainment of a LEED Accredited Professional Certification in Apr il 2009. Joe married his girlfriend of 11 years in February of 2009. Upon completion of his graduate studies, Joe plans on utilizing his knowledge to continue contributions to the field of sustainable development.