The Role of the Ecological Footprint Assessment in Guiding Sustainable Metropolitan Growth

Transcription

1 The Role of the Ecological Footprint Assessment in Guiding Sustainable Metropolitan Growth Ignacio San Martin, Dayton Hudson Professor Chair of Urban Design and Director Metropolitan Design Center

2 Metropolitan Design Center Structure

3 The City and The Region: An Integrated Binary To think of a City as an independent en1ty apart from the region it inhabits is one of the most profound impediments to achieve the integra1on livable ci1es and regions. There can t be successful Ci1es without having successful regions. To have a successful urban policy you need to have a successful regional policy.

4 Ecological Footprint Per Country The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's ecosystems. It represents the amount of biologically produc:ve land and sea area necessary to supply the resources a human popula:on consumes, and to mi:gate associated waste. World WWF Living Planet Report 2010

5 World Cities Population and Ecological Footprint

6 The Logic of the Ecological Footprint

7 Water Footprint

8 Twin Ci'es Ecological Footprint * WWF Living Planet Report 2006 Ignacio San Martin, Dayton Hudson Professor and Director Shengyin Xu, LEED AP, Research Fellow College of Design, University of Minnesota

9 Methods for Calculating the Ecological Footprint Use in calcula'ng individual or households EF from individual consump'on ac'vi'es Derives EF from na'onal averages and not from local data Derives EF from local consump'on data and uses life cycle and material flow in CO2 emissions List of typical Categories and and components (aaer Simons, Lewis and BarreE (2000) Bold are added components use to calculate the Twin Ci'es EF Ignacio San Martin, Professor and Director Shengyin Xu, LEED AP, Research Fellow College of Design, University of Minnesota

10 Twin Cities Ecological Footprint Results Ignacio San Martin, Professor and Director Shengyin Xu, LEED, AP, Research Fellow College of Design, University of Minnesota TC Ecological Footprint = gha/person EF Comparison values using different methods Percentage contribution Transportation % Electricity % Food % Goods & Services % Compound Method: Extrapola@on of all categories from US ecological footprint. Hybrid Method: Carbon calcula@on for Energy, Housing, Transporta@on; extrapola@on of Food, Goods, Services. Component Method: Carbon calcula@on for all categories. Uses GFN 2004 CO2 sequestra@on factor. Component Method 2: Carbon calcula@on for all categories. Uses GFN 2006 CO2 sequestra@on factor. Component Method 2a: See Component Method 2: Satellite waste calcula@on from IPCC. Component Method 2b: See Component Method 2: Satellite waste calcula@on from EPA.

11 Per Capita Twin Cities Ecological Footprint Percentage contribution Transportation % (14% gasoline) Electricity % (20% industrial/commercial) Food % Goods & Services % Minnesota Popula'on 5,303,925 Twin City Popula'on 2,849,567 Area 87,000 sq mi or 22, hectares Ignacio San Martin, Professor and Director Shengyin Xu, LEED, AP, Research Fellow College of Design, University of Minnesota

12 Projected Growth 7-County 2030 Ignacio San Martin, Dayton Hudson Professor College of Design, University of Minnesota

13 Projected Land Use and Settlement Densities Minneapolis - Anoka (North) Population Dendity Minneapolis - Ramsey - Washington (East) Minneapolis - Dakota (Southeast) Minneapolis - Scott (Southwest) Minneapolis - Carver (West) Minneapolis - Hennepin Northwest)t)

14 Projected Metropolitan and Regional Growth Ignacio San Martin, Dayton Hudson Professor College of Design, University of Minnesota

15 Ignacio San Martin, Dayton Hudson Professor College of Design, University of Minnesota Population and Type of Growth USA Population City % Suburban % de Increase Center Change Change Change Atlanta, GA 1,152,248 22, % 1,129, % Twin Cities, MN 429,972 29, % 400, % (60% 2030) Chicago-Gary, I 917, , % 805, % Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 1,184, , % 915, % Phoenix-Mesa, AZ 1,013, , % 675, % Denver-Boulder, CO 601,366 87, % 514, % Austin-St. Marcos, TX 403, ,940 47% 212,596 52,7 % Source: US Demographics

16 Comparative Scale: Phoenix and Minnesota Metro Regions Phoenix Metro and Minnesota Metro 2040