Week 12

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/science/earth/07empire.html

One of the biggest news in the city of New York is the $500 million renovation of the Empire State Building. The building serves approximately 13,000 people a day as part of this summer’s facelift of the 78 year old building, the owners have announced on April 6, which they also plan to, reduce the skyscraper’s energy use by 38% by 2013. The sustainable renovations will increase the $500 million cost by $20 million and will eventually translate into approximately $4.4 million in savings a year.

The owners of the Empire State Building hope that the new renovations will attract new larger clientele with higher rents. The retrofit was specifically catered to the building. Anthony E. Malkin claims that the “energy-efficiency improvements are meant to serve as a model for other office buildings around the world.” The building serves approximately 13,000 people daily for 18 hours seven days a week. But the benefits are not limited to those individuals, but the residual benefits may reach as far as the arctic.

The biggest energy costs are as of a result of the buildings extensive lighting, cooling, and heating systems. The new retrofit should reduce the building carbon dioxide output by 105,000 metric tons per year. Mr. Bloomberg claims, “They’re showing the rest of the city that existing buildings, no matter how tall they are, no matter how old they are, can take steps to significantly reduce their energy consumption.

These renovations are a step in the right direction for the city of New York. Although not all the buildings enjoy the same amount of media attention, nor the funding to accomplish such drastic renovation, they hope to encourage others in the city to take steps into a more sustainable future. Per the description outlined above, I find that this article fits into the chapter 5’s Energy and Materials Use and Green Architecture and Building topics and chapter 6’s Ecological Footprint Analysis. In reference to the subject groups, I find it meeting the description of education, communication, and consensus-building.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2009/03/greywater-regul.html
Lawmakers and gray water advocates are in the midst of a heated debate in the Sacramento, California. Homeowners are arguing for their rights to “to install systems that recycle the wastewater generated from their sinks, showers, bathtubs and laundry machines into their landscaping must conform to Appendix G of the California plumbing code, which requires that gray water systems not only be permitted by the appropriate administrative authority but installed underground with extensive filtering apparatus.”

According to the article, codes in California are too restrictive, and not conducive for active participation in gray water systems. This issue affects the residents of California, and subsequently, may set the standard for the rest of the nation. I find it met the subject group of institution and policy mechanisms.

Sacramento is taking steps towards to planning for future shortfalls in water supply. They understand the imminent problem and are aiming to solving via a very controversial solution. Their vision has put them in the forefront of new technologies and policy making.

This article could have grave affects on many people’s lives. If policies change, we may find many more people taking advantage of the opportunity, and help the cause of reusing gray water for landscaping purposes.