Engage Week 7: Madness to Method
Cornish, Ratcliffe, Krawczyk and other futurists understand the necessity for a flexible, understandable, applicable plan for the long-term survivability of the human race. Flexible is a keyword here: as Cornish explains in chapter 5, there are events and acts that are unexpected or seemingly trivial that can leave significant consequences. So far, many of our readings have focused on both private governmental requests-for-proposals, mandates and other such edicts that, while do focus on major problems for the future, are very broad and vague in their explanations or requests. That is not to say that no great ideas have been put forth, but many are generally in a pilot or testing phase, or else too broad to be replicated sufficiently across areas.
I digress to ask, then: what might we have now that might be a gamechanger, a curveball, an unexpected or seemingly inconsequential event or concept that might majorly influence how we develop our water and waste systems? What might have we overlooked in our quest to look at the heart of the problem? What may have been discarded or forgotten that might nevertheless make an impact?
Comments Off on Engage Week 7: Madness to Method
The future of architecture or stubbornness?
It seems that people like to live on waterfronts regardless of the susceptibility to severe flooding after major storms. However, a developer might suggest the vulnerability of waterfronts is something of the past.
Anderson’s article titled “Sandy Who?” shows mixed views on the construction of a residential complex off the Gowanus Canal. Despite warnings and concerns against the construction of the project; Lightstone Group, the developer, claims to have a building designed “invulnerable to flooding”.
When discussing contemporary city planning, Ratcliffe and Krawczyk stress that present and future needs for effective city planning must be based on an understanding of past failures.
Is Lightstone’s invulnerable project of building on a waterfront an example of an avant-garde construction techinique, or has the project failed to understand the failures hurricane Sandy has made evident? What’s the use of a flood-proof building when your neighborhood has the whole Gowanus Canal on the streets?
Tuesday March 8, 2013: Public Affairs Week
Hi Everyone: next Tuesday evening during Public Affairs Week we have a highly relevant panel that I am moderating. Please consider attending! RSVP not needed.
City Sustainability and the Prospects for Waste Disposal
Tuesday March 12, 6:00 p.m.-8:00 p.m.
Baruch College, Newman Vertical Campus
55 Lexington Ave (corner of 24th Street), Rm 14-220
MODERATOR
Samantha MacBride, Assistant Professor
SPEAKERS
Venetia Lannon is the regional director for Region 2
(New York City) for the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation. Prior to this, she was senior
vice president of the New York City Economic Development
Corporation, where she led the Maritime group. In
her previous work at EDC, she was an active participant
in the development and negotiation of the City’s 20-year
Solid Waste Management Plan. Before joining NYCEDC in
2003, Ms. Lannon was a deputy director at the New York
City Department of Sanitation’s Recycling Bureau where
she oversaw the composting program. Ms. Lannon holds
a Bachelor’s degree from Vassar College and a Masters in
Public Administration from Columbia University.
Ron Gonen is deputy commissioner of sanitation for the
City of New York where he is responsible for managing
New York City’s recycling and waste reduction programs.
He also serves as an adjunct professor at Columbia
Business School. Mr. Gonen is the co-founder of
RecycleBank. During his tenure as CEO from 2004-2010,
RecycleBank grew to a company that diverted over a
billion pounds from landfills. Prior to RecycleBank, Mr.
Gonen was in management consulting at Accenture and
Deloitte Consulting. He was recognized in 2009 by the
United Nations Environment Program as a Champion of
the Earth. He was the recipient of the 2010 University
Medal of Excellence from Columbia University and was
awarded the Social Enterprise Teaching Award by Columbia
Business School.
http://blsciblogs.baruch.cuny.edu/honors/files/2013/02/PAWbrochure-final.pdf – link to brochure
Comments Off on Tuesday March 8, 2013: Public Affairs Week
This Sunday: Big Data and Climate Change in Cities, March 10
RSVP Required.
Climate Change and Cities Datathon: Public Presentations and Judging
Description
This weekend, five teams of scholars, thinkers, writers, and practitioners will convene to participate in the Institute for Public Knowledge’s first Datathon. The theme, Climate Change and Cities, asks these groups to think about the nature of both meteorological and social data, and to consider ways that these different kinds of data can be used to help us better understand the relationship between climate change and our cities, and to help inform the decisions we will make as we plan for our collective future.
At noon on Sunday, March 10th, these five teams will present their findings in a session that is open to the public. A winning team will be selected by a panel judges:
Dalton Conley, University Professor at NYU
Duncan Watts, Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research
Maryam Hariri, City Planner, NYC Department of City Planning
- Title:
- Climate Change and Cities Datathon: Public Presentations and Judging
- When:
- Sunday Mar 10, 2013 | 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm
- Where:
- Institute for Public Knowledge, New York
- Location:
- Institute for Public Knowledge
- Street: 20 Cooper Square, 5th floor
- ZIP: 10003
- City: New York
- State: NY
Comments Off on This Sunday: Big Data and Climate Change in Cities, March 10
Energy, Composting, and Buildings: Of Possible Interest to the Class
Biogas in the Basement
Wed, 2013-03-06 10:23
Frustrated by unreliable waste collection, several high-rise apartment complexes in Kochi, India, are turning lemons into lemonade – or more accurately, biogas. Using technology pioneered in Europe, the buildings feature onsite biogas plants that process residents’ food scraps and other biodegradable waste into energy. While the resulting electricity from one 24-flat building currently using the technology is not enough to power the entire complex, it is powering the cooking appliances for the onsite security staff.
So every time residents see their doorman eating a microwave burrito, they can take pride in knowing that the discarded remains of their gourmet meal made it happen.
Source: The Times of India
Related Articles: A Lot to Digest: The State of Anaerobic DigestionComposting Council, Biogas Council Join Efforts on Organics Recycling
Syndicate
Mark Item As: Commentary
Source URL: http://waste360.com/blog/biogas-basement
Comments Off on Energy, Composting, and Buildings: Of Possible Interest to the Class
Engage: Who’s footing the bill?
The “New York Energy Policy” maps out the city’s plan to expand into the outer borough areas and rezone them to make them more appealing for commercial and residential development. While this will probably be a profitable endeavor for the growing businesses in that area and the city as a whole, there is an issue regarding expanding the existing power grid to supply the necessary energy. If we are already building new transformers and substations the logical plan would be to use exiting technology to waterproof the systems. In the article “Four Storms in Quick Succession Expose the Flaws in New York City’s Electrical System,” senior vice president of electrical operations, John Miksad, claimed that retrofitting the 10 substations shut down by Hurricane Sandy would cost $800 million dollars. Con Edison is hesitant to waterproof their systems because the consumer would have to cover the cost. Do you think that the city should, at least, cover the cost of waterproofing new critical energy distribution stations using the city’s budget or do you believe that the NYC residents and businesses should come together and pay for the protection?
NYC’s Electrical System
In “Four Storms in Quick Succession Expose the Flaws in New York City’s Electrical System”, it was brought up that the electrical infrastructure of NYC has vulnerabilities. Four out of the five previous storms have damaged the vulnerable systems. Certain solutions were proposed, such as making such utilities submersible. However, these solutions may not be enough to mitigate damage from a future natural disaster. Since the electricity is one of the city’s most important infrastructures, without it, many others that depend on it will fail as well. Upgrading the system will also create larger bills for customers. Do you think that upgrading the city’s electrical grid is worth the investment? Are you willing as a customer to pay much more on your monthly bill so that the utilities are more likely to survive future natural disasters? Should the city have a plan in the event of natural disasters in attempt to minimize damage? If so, why would it be worthwhile to implement such a plan that may or may not work? If not, how should the city protect itself against future catastrophes?
The Interdependencies and Dependencies among NYC’s Infrastructure
The reading “Infrastructure Impacts and Adaptation Challenges” reinforces New York City’s increased vulnerability because of its interdependencies and dependencies among infrastructures, making it further susceptible to extreme weather events mentioned in “Four Storms in Quick Succession Expose the Flaws in New York City’s Electrical System.” Looking at the flip side of the coin, do you think New York City can use the interdependencies among its infrastructures and turn it into an advantage in its infrastructure adaptation to climate change? If so, how? What do you think is lacking in New York City’s current plan for infrastructure adaptation to climate change? Do you think New York City is prepared to face another storm such as Sandy or will its infrastructure crumble once again because of the interdependencies and dependencies among them?
What would you do?
The paper titled “Infrastructure impacts and adaptation challenges” details case studies in three different cities and how these cities are adapting to the changing climate or advancing infrastructure in other ways. Pretend for a few minutes that you are the one in charge of deciding a few courses of action to implement in New York City. Realistically you would not have an endless budget, so which initiatives in specific would you implement if you could, and which do you believe are less pressing than the others? Additionally, which of the three cities models do you believe would be the best for New York to follow?
Engage: Successful waste management methods in NYC
After reading Incinerators in Disguise, we have come to an understanding that numerous waste treatment projects were essentially failures, whether it was shot down during the late proposal stages or others after it tried to manage, unsuccessfully, for several years. We can conclude that many projects are just claims. These projects that can benefit or negatively affect millions of people, have not been analyzed down to the microscopic details such as equipment failure or protection. How do you feel about proposals for solid waste management technologies in New York City? Do you trust the Department of Sanitation and mayor Bloomberg and the rest to inspect proposals and choose a technology that will really actually benefit our community, and in a city with such a large population, what waste management method and location will work into our city’s infrastructure without the people intervening negatively?
Engage: Italian Futurism and modern applied technologies
Although Italian Futurism is a movement of the early 20th century, it hasn’t vanished into irrelevance. Even though some aspects can look unseemly to us now, other key values have been left scratched into our culture. What connections do you see when examining our relationship with (/ feelings towards / implementation of / level of success with) current waste conversion technologies? Particularly with how we view the hi-tech, the relationship between humans and nature, and modernity?
Engage: Waste Incineration in our Community
Several of the proposals for incineration facilities disclosed in “Incinerators in Disguise,” were challenged by the residents and environmental justice groups of the community, as they formed coalitions against the waste-treatment companies’ claims of “zero emissions,” until they were rejected. The New York City Department of Sanitation’s Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for 2006-2025 seeks to reduce NYC’s reliance on “out-of-City landfill disposal options” and explores the possibility of new and emerging technologies being sited in New York City. Although case studies have proven that waste-treatment facilities falsely claim that their technology is “pollution-free,” and has “no emissions,” do you think an incineration facility, promoting technologies such as pyrolysis, gasification, plasma arc, and catalytic cracking, is capable of operating pollution-free? And if an incinerator such as the one mentioned by the DSNY were sited in New York City, how do you think residents of NYC would respond? How would you respond to an emerging incinerator in your community?
Engage: Best Waste Conservation Route for NYC?
In “Incinerators in Disguise”, a number of proposals and case studies for new waste conservation technologies are mentioned from around the world – each with their own pros and cons. However, none of the technologies mentioned have to do with the New York City area. After reading the New York City Department of Sanitation’s Request for New and Emerging Solid Waste Management Technology, based on some of the technical, NYC-specific information mentioned in the request and the examples of existing new technologies mentioned in “Incinerators in Disguise”, which, if any, of these technologies do you think would be a good fit for New York City? What characteristics should a NYC-specific solid waste management technology proposal have?
Climate Change: Why Do American’s Ignore it?
Hortong talks in detail about climate change in New York City including extreme heat waves and temperature. There are plenty of evidence of the climate change and much research being done to project and predict the extent of its possible effects. The problems of it are something Norgaard agrees with and argues need immediate action.
Norgaard talks about various factors contributing to American’s apathy and public silence in regards to climate change: strong individualism, fear, hopelessness, and guilt, lack of trust and participation in politics, and others. Which of the factors Norgaard talks about do you agree with/relate to the most, if any? As a college student, what are some things that can be done to make climate change become visible in “daily lives and in government planning” and allow more Americans to become more active in this matter?
Risked-Based Approach in a (World) Risk Society
The New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) is focused on adapting to climate change to protect New York’s present and future infrastructure. Yohe and Leichenko, however, argues that both mitigation and adaptation strategies are necessary.
Keeping in mind the ideas that Beck outlines, what do you think is the best approach (for the world, and namely New York City) to react to risks and climate change?
Inevitable Modern World Risk: Not an excuse to not take action!
In Dr. Ulrich Beck’s “Living in the world risk society,” Beck asks a simple, yet profound question: How do we live in times of uncontainable risks?
He continues to point out that global risks are inevitable, whether the government wants its citizens to believe it or not. However, at the end, Beck is unable to provide an exact question to his answer. Therefore, my question is: How would you incorporate Beck’s arguments about how to deal with modern world risks into a program we have already learned about, such as PlaNYC, that aims to make a better and cleaner NYC?
Elements of An Engaging Question
Hi Everyone,
This is just a reminder and review of the elements of a question that is meant to engage discussion for our readings each week.
First, the question should not be primarily factual. In other words, the question should not be an assignment to readers to go look up information and report back. It should engage discussion. It should be based on a premise that the person posting sets up. Why do they ask this question, based on what they have read and thought about? This is why at least one sentence setting up the question is needed. The question itself, furthermore, must cover at least two readings, even if the person posting has been assigned to specialize in one of the readings. One or more other reading(s) can be brought in via skimming if need be.
Looking forward to seeing everyone Tuesday!
Your prof
Samantha MacBride
Comments Off on Elements of An Engaging Question
Risk Management in New York City
How does Yohe’s & Leichenko’s risk management approach tackle Horton, Gornitz, & Bowman’s future projections of New York City?
Week 2 – Engage
Rosenzweig’s article is mainly about ways to adapt to the changing climate. How would the adaptations to our city, let’s say creating a bubble around Manhattan, change the concept and goal of Mannahatta?
Comments Off on Week 2 – Engage
Week 2: Engage
Rosensweig and Solecki focus on the programs created by Mayor Bloomberg to deal with climate change, namely PlaNYC and the New York City Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Jacob mentions how the processes of city planning must consider the components of cities (cars, buildings, waste, etc) as real objects and not just abstractions.
Is Mayor Bloomberg aware that the problem with city planning is in the “physical sciences” or are his programs just a temporary patch that fails to provide a sustainable solution for the long run?
Does the current system for planning and action to adapt and mitigate climate change for NYC described by Rosenzweig match with Jane Jacobs approach to city planning? Would this approach lead us to a lifestyle similar to that of the people Lenape and a return to the Manhatta of the past?
Comments Off on
Week 2: Engage
To what extent does Sanderson’s pre-colonial Mannahatta coincide with, as well as oppose, Jacobs’ “organized complexity” vision of Manhattan?
week 2 – Engage
Rosenzweig discusses public works projects such as PlaNYC in her article. How successful, if at all, would Jane Jacobs consider these projects in regards to city planning to improve New York City?
Powerpoints from Week1
Comments Off on Powerpoints from Week1
