ReGen Village, Amsterdam - closed loop settlement

I was so excited to read about the ReGen Village Amsterdam; It is a new community aims have zero waste. I always thought zero waste is a big claim, because realistically it is hard to achieve.

Back to the topic, ReGen Village, Amsterdam is a community of the future. It is a housing project that aims to achieve zero waste by building designated areas for residents to grow their own food, composting their own waste and producing their own energy in one neat ecosystem. This is done by farming technologies such as aquaponics, aeroponic, food forest and permaculture. The neighbourhood will grow many times more food compared to a traditional farm of the size with fewer resources.

Moreover, the village also has plans for sustainable energy production. It will be powered by a mixture of "geothermal, solar, solar thermal, wind, and biomass"

I can't wait to see the village is completed and its performances on a report. In particular - the social, environmental and economic performances of this village. If the outcome is as good as it sounds, I hope to see this concept in Australia in some of our suburban area.

Reference
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3060167/this-new-neighborhood-will-grow-its-own-food-power-itself-and-handle-its-own-waste/4
http://bigthink.com/stefani-cox/regen-village-in-amsterdam-will-have-zero-waste

Carbon Tax - Explained with Sally and Colin

Carbon tax was introduced by the former Federal Government 1 July 2012 as part of its carbon policy. It was later abolished due to the carbon repeal bills passed by the Senate on 17 July 2014 and effectively removed the price on carbon.  The carbon tax were a cost that business with high carbon emission were require to pay for the production. As a consequence, the increase in carbon price led to increase in production prices to accommodate these costs.

The video put together by Earth Media tells a story using two chicken to explain carbon pricing. Comparing a chicken grown on fossil fuel against a chicken grown on solar-power, it explains why we "can expect low-carbon renewable energy sources to become more cost effective when we make emitting carbon more expensive"

After watching this video, I completely  agree with their point of view. We should deploy carbon tax to discourage the use of fossil fuel and reduce carbon footprint. On the other hand, we should encourage the use of renewable and sustainable energy source. It is unreasonable for environmental conscious consumers to spend extra in order to support these practices. It is ashamed that the carbon tax bill has been repealed. We were on the track of supporting 'greener' practice.


Reference
https://youtu.be/zD64kaTY5Vg
https://www.energyaustralia.com.au/faqs/about-us/carbon-repeal

Edible six pack rings- Bio degradable rings

This is a very very interesting article/product I came across on social media the other day (like most of my contents).  It is an article about a product called "Saltwater Brewery" use of edible/biodegradable rings on six-pack rings feed marine life if they end up in the ocean.

The concept behind the "edible rings" started with a good cause. There has always been a issue of not degradable plastic waste ended up in our water systems, damaging the environment and hurting our animal friends. Sadly, according to The Ocean Conservancy 2015 Ocean Trash Index - it offers a few staggering facts - one of the most common trash item ingested by turtles is plastic ): Not only turtles suffered our careless disposal of waste, the index indicated the amongst the 561,895 volunteers to pick up 16,186,759 pounds of rubbish, 57 marine mammals, 440 fish and 22 sharks, skates and sting rays were entangled in plastic. These facts are so heartbreaking. Facts like these makes the concept like edible size pack rings seem vital.

One of the implementation issue is cost of making it; the cost is higher compared to plastic. But that being said; the product is as resistant and efficient as plastic packaging.

I think the concept of this idea is great - more people should make the packaging 100% biodegradable and compostable. But at the same time, we can't just make everything biodegradable and not manage our waste which ends up in our ocean floor. We have to manage our waste efficiently so it doesn't end up in the ocean in the first place. In addition, I'm not completely comfortable about the fact that even though that it is biodegradable, it may still pollute the water if there is a large amount of it. Not to mentioned that even if its edible, I'm not convinced that it is safe/health for our marine animals to eat it.



Reference
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/saltwater-brewery-edible-six-pack-rings-beer-plastic-marine-life_us_573b796ce4b0ef86171c5fe4?section=australia

So it is true. Coca Cola Amatil are evil; CCA vs The Container Deposit Scheme

Container Deposit Scheme CDS will commence from July 2017
Essentially the scheme is:

"Under the scheme, anyone who returns an empty eligible beverage container to an approved NSW collection depot or reverse vending machine will be eligible for a 10-cent refund. A network of depots and reverse vending machines will open across NSW to receive the empty containers."

From a environmental point of view, the benefit of the of the container deposit scheme to start in July next year outweighs the disadvantages. The CBS scheme proposed by the Baird government has chosen to support a community-back recycle scheme; for drink containers as it aims to reduce litter by 40% by 2020. In addition, some of the benefits for the CBS also includes:

• Creates 1,500 jobs
• Generates $160 new investment in new collection systems
• Saves ratepayers $23-$62m annually
• Raises over $65m for charities a year

Coca Coca Amatil and Carlton and United were one of the beverage giants opposed Braid government's proposed cash for containers recycling scheme. One of the argument against the new CDS is, it will encourage cross border smuggling of used cans. They argue that a truck full of crushed cans could generate up to $130,000 a load. I can't denied that it is an disadvantage for the beverage companies, but that reason is not strong enough to oppose the CDS scheme. 

In addition, the opposing beverage companies proposed more rubbish bins. From my perspective, I don't see how does proposing more rubbish bins is aligned with the CBS objective. Not that it should, but the idea of proposing more rubbish bins means it allows more room for consumption and I don't see how it would benefit individual health and the environment.

I'm was never a big fan of any soft drinks and now that I'm aware of this, I'll think twice before buying products from CCA

Reference
http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/waste/cds-intro.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/how-beverage-companies-joined-forces-to-attack-baird-recycling-scheme-20150206-1389dx.html
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/baird-backs-kids-over-big-beverage-10-for-every-drink-bottle-you-can-find-20160507-gooqih.html
http://www.governmentnews.com.au/2016/05/coke-reassures-investors-nsw-container-deposit-scheme-approved/

How energy-efficient building benefit cities?

Based on an article by Eric Mackres on "4 surprising ways energy-efficient buildings benefit cities" it was interesting to learn more about how buildings with energy efficient qualities can enrich our cities. 

The talks about the New WRI research examines how these building can help to shape sustainable cities of the future. The research examines four economic, social and environmental opportunities building efficiency creates:

1. "Better social and financial return"
2. "Huge economic opportunities - particularly for developing nations in Asia, Africa and Latin America"
3. "An affordable way to curb climate change"

One of the statistics that surprised me in this article is how building is one of the most affordable ways to cut emissions. In addition of cutting infrastructure cost and household expenses, building efficient can is one of the cheapest ways to reduce clime change- causing emission. This is because efficiency improvement in building often have low or no marginal cost. This means a return on investment in terms of energy cost savings can be as quickly as six months to a year. 

4. "Reduced illness and death due to air pollution"

Looking at the mapped out statistics for "Mortality linked to Outdoor Air Pollution in 2010" make me feel so sad about my hometown in China. Considering China is the biggest exporting countries, low labour cost production & relatively not strict on environmental control, inevitably the toxic air pollution. No wonder there is a market for people buying buying "bottled air" from Australia. 

p.s Thoughts on bottled air from Australia - Please stop producing products that can only be used for 10mins and it gets sent to landfill. Knowing well that majority of the these consumers will not recycle these bottles.  
Reference
https://www.greenbiz.com/article/4-surprising-ways-energy-efficient-buildings-benefit-cities
http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/entrepreneur/australian-entrepreneurs-sell-cans-of-clean-australian-air-to-china-20160502-gojw1x.html

Organic composting at home - Bokashi bins

I think this is my second or third post about food waste to date - I'm really fascinated in this area of waste and knowing that there are rooms for improvement. 

My other post was about organic food waste treatment on a larger commercial scale. But today, I want to talk about organic composting on a residential scale.

What is Bokashi Compost Bins

The best features I found out about are:

• No stink
• Minimises organic waste
• Direct food waste from landfill
• Nutritious to the garden. 

As a student, the Bokashi Compost is quite expensive at an initial investment - prices at $85 for one single bucket, with an ongoing cost of bokashi one mix for adding it in the bin. For the long term is worth the value and it's definitely better for the environment by directing organic food from landfill. In addition, it also requires digging trenches or holes into the garden beds to bury the organic solid waste which is to me a bit of a hassle. If I do need to bury these organic waste, maybe I should try John's idea pouring it down on a paper tube buried in the garden beds. 

I was thinking, what happens if residents live in high density residential development with little space for garden - in particular the older built apartments are units. Optimistically, if this becomes the trend and many people started composing at home, I think it would be good to donate it or sell it to council to be used as a fertiliser for open space maintenance.

I guess involving the citizen in the public sector would definitely come across a few major problems. One of the issue would be with maintenance and the problem with who would be responsible if the compost didn't perform and kills the plant. 

Reference
http://www.bokashi.com.au/

Say it again!? House with NO-BILLS!?

You can live in a house with no-bills! That sounds way to good to be true.

Mirvac, one of the biggest development will commence development of it "House with No Bill's in Melbourne this year and will be completed by mid to late 2017. The development is set to be a $130 million Jack Rd development in Cheltenham. The development will provide houses based on a standard family home, that consist of 3 bedroom & 2.5 bathroom and a single garage.

Artist impression of "House with No-Bills" source: Mirvac

The basis of the development is to address and reduce the environmental and also considers social impact. On Mirvac's website, it also address the affordability and climate change are key issues in Australia, and the "House with No Bill's aims to address these challenges through market based solution.

The "No Bills" only refers to energy and gas bills, excluding water bills. 

Some of the sustainable technologies/equipment they will adopt are:

• Passive design to reduce impact and gains from nature
• increased roof insulation
• Solar PV panels and batteries requiring little maintenance requirements
• Energy efficient appliances
• No gas consumption
• Efficient lighting layout
• Smart meter and monitoring system so the homeowner can keep an eye on consumption
• Battery to store energy generated when there is a surplus - the battery system will likely have the capability of isolating from the grid during blackouts so that the home will still have electricity supply
• Excess energy is sold back to the grid, which offsets the costs when electricity is required, resulting in a net $0.00 bill over the year.

Phase 1 - Zero Cost Electricity & Gas

Phase 2 - Zero Cost Water & Waste 


Although designing with sustainability has been around for some years, but it's not seen in a large development in Australia. It is to be said achievable - no electrical bills. I also think it's very unnecessary to mention about no gas bill, as it is not intended to be used. That being said, I think it's a great initiative for developers to be more responsible for the environmental, social and economic outcomes for their customers and users. It's definitely beneficial for the environment in the future, powering the house using sustainable energy.

Reference
http://www.mirvac.com/Sustainability/House-with-No-Bills/
http://www.mirvac.com/uploadedFiles/Main/Content/Sustainability/House_With_No_Bills/16-05-11%20House%20With%20No%20Bills%20Media%20Release%20FINAL.pdf

http://www.afr.com/real-estate/mirvac-plans-a-low-energy-house-with-no-bills-20160511-gosgcs

Update on thoughts- 03/06/16 
I think it's a great step for Australia development, but to be critical, I have to compare with the Amsterdam model. They are not just marketing solar energy, but also tackles other elements of sustainability such as processing organic waste and urban farming. So I think the Amsterdam model is a much better, advance and thought out model compared to the Melbourne model. But then again, both of the them are yet to be built and evaluated - so I can't really judge or comment on it's potential performance and application. That being said, I really look forward to following up on its performance.