I expect to revisit this philosophical question in many guises so here's hoping I can keep up with engaging titles....
Riding my bike yesterday, I recalled a couple of discussions in the last week which made for some interesting thinking.
The week kicked off with a benign lecture on energy sources. It was all a bit Year 12 physics re-visited however my attention was piqued when mentioned that the resting human only requires 80W of energy (a reasonably bright old school light globe) and most sedentary work requires 100W (a bright light globe). Walking is about 350W and those active things, who like to run, use about 1000W. The simple message - energy for "being" (even with bursts of activity) is very low. The lecturer then asked - why do we need so much more energy for "living"?
Fast forward to the tutorial discussion about the sustainability of the design of each of our houses. There was much discussion about northernly aspects (or lack thereof), building materials, water tanks, solar panels, 24/7 appliance usage and utility bills. One fellow student quipped that his share-house couldn't afford to run up high electricity bills ergo student poverty appears to be quite sustainable! Which elucidated the following gems from the tutor
(i) studies have shown that homes in more affluent areas often have lower "sustainability scores" simply because the occupants can afford to use more energy even though they may also live "better designed" homes
(ii) occupant use of a building ultimately enhances or degrades sustainability performance of a building - a five-star green star built building will only deliver on its promise (the design and construction) if it is used well.
So that's why the "five star living" concept is quite relevant - everyone can improve what they have even if it wasn't all that great in the first place. How do you use your level of affluence to influence your sustainability?
After we had all dissected the "environmental sustainability" of our houses, we were surprised to be asked "Does your house make you happy"? In the multiple tools measuring "sustainability" they have yet to develop an index of happiness associated with a building. Perhaps the next study trip will be to Bhutan?
No comments:
Post a Comment