Posts Tagged ‘Research’
Open Survey: Melbourne Bike Share Impact on Individual Travel Behavior
Posted in Research, Seeking by Kate Archdeacon on December 14th, 2011
Photo by Daniel Bowen via flickr CC
CALL FOR MELBOURNE BIKE SHARE USERS!
Xin Yang is a postgraduate student studying in Master of Urban Planning from the University of Melbourne, currently conducting a research project on Melbourne Bike Share (MBS) program, “Evaluating the Impact of Melbourne Bike Share (MBS) Program on Individual Travel Behavior”. If you have ever used the (blue) MBS bikes before, please take just a little time (10-15 minutes) to participate in a brief online survey to have your say on your experiences with those blue bikes, and how you think things could be improved. Your time and assistance is greatly appreciated!
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/8Z63993
—
Social Exclusion Monitor: Community resilience
Posted in Research by Kate Archdeacon on November 9th, 2011
Source: Brotherhood of St Laurence
Image credit ‘The Brotherhood of St Laurence and the Melbourne Institute 2011′
More than one million Australians experience deep social exclusion.
Social exclusion occurs when someone experiences multiple, overlapping problems, such as unemployment, poor health and inadequate education, which stop them fully participating in society. Tackling social exclusion helps make Australia a better place to live for everyone.
The social exclusion monitor is a new approach to measuring social exclusion in Australia. Developed by the Brotherhood of St Laurence and the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (MIAESR), it uses the annual Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey of 13,000 people. The monitor finds that more than one million Australians deal with deep social exclusion. This means that they experience at least four different sorts of disadvantage in their lives, such as being on a low income, having little work experience, not being involved in community clubs or associations and not being socially active. You can use the monitor to better understand who is missing out in Australia and to gauge the effectiveness of government social policy.
Read more about the Social Exclusion Monitor; the eight key groups who experience social exclusion; and the project’s background research: www.bsl.org.au/Social-exclusion-monitor
—
Australian Stormwater Harvesting Guidelines
Posted in Movements, Research by Kate Archdeacon on August 22nd, 2011
Source: Clearwater
Are you undertaking a stormwater harvesting project or water augmentation project that requires you to consider water treatment?
Clearwater has prepared a simple diagram to help you familiarise yourself with the relevant national guidelines available on our website. There are no specific laws that dictate what stormwater can be used for or what quality standards stormwater must meet, however responsible parties have a duty of care to make sure their scheme will not place people or the environment at risk. Guidance on how to meet duty of care is provided in the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: Stormwater Harvest and Reuse (Phase 2). The Australian Guidelines provide guidance on water standards for various reuse and recycling scenarios, and were prepared in two phases.
Phase 1 – Managing Health and Environmental Risks (2006) which provides a framework for the management of recycled water. Phase 2 – A set of three guidelines providing more detail on:
- 1. Augmentation of Drinking Water Supplies (2008)
- 2. Managed Aquifer Recharge (2009)
- 3. Stormwater Harvesting and Reuse (2009)
Underpinning the Water Recycling Guidelines are the 2004 Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (currently being reviewed). This document provides the water supply industry with guidance on what constitutes good drinking water quality and are referred to both phases of the Australian Guidelines for Water recycling.
http://www.clearwater.asn.au/content/relevant-national-guidelines-stormwater-harvesting
—
Where Are They Now? Ben Nicholson, Groof
Posted in Models, Research by Kate Archdeacon on June 30th, 2011
Here at Sustainable Melbourne we’ve been contacting Sustainable Cities Round Tables (SCRT) presenters, to find out how their projects and ideas have grown and changed since Ferne Edwards first launched the Round Tables in May 2007.
Ben Nicholson gave a presentation at the SCRT in November 2008, after spending two months studying green roofs in cities around the world as a Churchill Fellow. During this time, Ben met green roofs advocates; planners, environmentalists and designers, and he visited research sites and commercial sites, some of which have been in existence since the early 1990s. In his presentation, “Vital Signs for a Healthy City”, he described Melbourne as an adolescent city at risk of on-going health problems due to its large energy requirements, poor water management lack of biodiversity. Green roofs would change this prognosis by cooling the city, increasing urban food-growing space and wildlife habitat, and conserving storm water and energy.
In 2007, Ben established his own green roof consultancy, Groof, providing designs and advice to green roof developments in Victoria and overseas.
We caught up with Ben to ask about the changes in green roof implementation and acceptance in Australia since his presentation in 2008. There have been some notable green roof and wall projects developed in that time, including the vertical garden we sat next to in the foyer of the Gauge building in Docklands. During our conversation, Ben reiterated the importance of solid research and demonstration projects for industry players to assist in the development and maintenance of a successful Green Roof program in Australia’s cities.
Below are some extracts from Ben’s Churchill Trust Report:
Just as the ant spends a lifetime crawling up and down a tree without ever comprehending the tree’s full scale or its place in the wider world, so we spend our lives in cities without ever comprehending their true size or the impacts they are having on the planet… imagine for a moment you are sitting on a hill, watching a tree grow that, one day, will be crawled upon by an the ant mentioned above. And from this hill, imagine that you can fast-forward time as quickly as you like, so you sit and watch this tree grow from a tiny seed to a sapling to a huge, spreading lemon-scented gum in only a few short minutes. Now imagine that from the same hill you are watching your own city grow up from its earliest days of a few tents and dusty tracks into the sprawling suburbs, skyscrapers, freeways, factories and warehouses that it has become today. From this perspective, it is suddenly much easier to comprehend the amount of disruption that has occurred to all the other living things and natural systems forced to make way for the people and non-living things that make up your city today. We may never be able to bring everything back, but from the vantage of this hill we can at least start to imagine what our cities would look like when transformed into thriving eco-systems.
In many cities around the world, harm is being reducing by people as they build each new piece of eco-infrastructure into the city fabric. To do this properly, people first ask:
- what does harm look like?
- where is it most concentrated?
- where is the worst of it coming from?
[…]
During the fellowship I learnt that the green roof and wall industry in each city has developed in the presence of local champions, detailed science, government support and an enlightened citizenry. The people in the cities I visited have developed policy responses and designed ‘eco-infrastructure’ that is unique to their local topography, climate and system of governance. In the more advanced cities, I observed some or all of the following activities taking place:
- Environmental indicators such as topography, temperature, rainfall and biodiversity are examined to understand the ways in which a city impacts upon its host environment. Using data sourced from early settlement to the current day, time-lapse analysis reveals the extent to which the city has affected its surrounds. Forecasting models are then used to predict future impacts with the key variable being extent of vegetation cover.
- Economic costs for the design, construction and maintenance of air conditioning/cleaning systems, water supply/removal systems and agricultural production/distribution systems are compared with the costs of using green roofs and walls to identify areas of city management that can be carried out more efficiently using green roof and wall technology.
- The benefits of green roofs and walls are tailored to address environmental and economic ‘trigger points’ specific to each city. These trigger points inform local green roof and wall design and assist in targeting the most effective locations for the placement of green roof and wall infrastructure.
- Demonstration and research projects raise awareness and provide information for public, private and government sectors.
- Political support for green roofs and walls leads to subsidies for the eco-infrastructure industry and the incorporation of built form standards and incentives.
- Environmental and economic indicators are regularly monitored to refine eco-infrastructure design and placement.
- Over time, the economic and environmental costs associated with the negative impacts of urbanisation are reduced and the benefits associated with an increase in vegetation cover are multiplied.
[…]
As eco-infrastructure projects begin to reduce harm, there will be an increase in the demand for high quality products and services. It is therefore up to the people and companies who stand to benefit the most from this demand to provide funding for eco-infrastructure research and demonstration projects in the early phase of the industry’s development. We can learn a lot from the failures and triumphs of other cities. Now is the time to transform our negative impacts into positive ones. And in doing so, we will transform ourselves from being harmful pests to welcome guests.
Download Ben’s report to read more about his research, including case studies from his tour and further reading and recommendations.
-
—
Does your organisation have a culture of sustainability?
Posted in Models, Research by timc on June 28th, 2011
Awake has recently developed the Sustainability Culture Indicator (SCI), an online survey tool designed to help organisations and groups evaluate the extent to which critical enablers of sustainability exist in their culture.
The information provided by the SCI allows the organisation to
- Identify the features of the organisation which are supporting, and hindering, the development of sustainability as a core aspect of the culture
- Ensure the design of activities and actions to promote sustainability are targeted to the areas of greatest need
- Set a baseline against which to track the impact of future efforts to embed sustainability
The factors measured in the SCI are derived from academic and organisational research, as well as being developed and refined through surveys conducted by Awake in several organisations and communities throughout Australia and New Zealand.
More information, including a sample report and brochure are available at the SCI webpage
—
Improving Urban Streams Through a Stormwater Retrofit Approach: Forum
Posted in Events by Kate Archdeacon on June 23rd, 2011
| 29 June , 2011 | ||
| 9:30 am | to | 1:00 pm |
Image: eXtension.org: Gardens, Lawns, and Landscapes via flickr CC
Clearwater in partnership with the University of Melbourne, Monash University and Melbourne Water invite you to a unique event where you will hear insights into the contrasting approaches of two innovative catchment-scale stormwater retrofit programs:
- Shepherds Creek project – Cincinnati, Ohio
- Little Stringybark Creek project – Melbourne, Australia
Both projects aim to improve the condition of receiving waters using novel incentives to engage the community. These incentives encourage the uptake of allotment and streetscape scale stormwater retention and treatment systems.
Key speakers include:
- Chris Walsh – Principle Research Fellow, University of Melbourne
- Tim Fletcher – Associate Professor Water Engineering, Monash University
- Bill Shuster – Research Hydrologist, US Environmental Protection Authority
- Darren Bos – Project Coordinator, Little Stringybark Creek project
- Helen Brown – UK Endeavour Award Fellow, University of Melbourne
Presentations throughout the day will be supported with facilitated discussion and the opportunity to meet and chat with three stormwater experts from the US EPA, over an informal lunch setting. The forum is ideal for water industry practitioners, environment staff, urban designers, town planners, engineers and contract staff. This forum will provide practical insights on: effective engagement of the community in stormwater management economic incentives for encouraging stormwater management at allotment scale design, construction and performance of streetscape and allotment-scale stormwater retention, harvesting and treatment systems the future of stormwater management objectives in Australia.
Price: $60 – includes arrival tea & coffee, morning tea and lunch
9:30 – 13:00, Wednesday 29th June
Visit the Clearwater website for more information and to register.
—
Q&A on the Carbon Tax: Port Phillip Community
Posted in Events, Policies by Kate Archdeacon on June 16th, 2011
| 18 June , 2011 | ||
| 2:00 pm | to | 5:00 pm |
WHAT: Port Phillip Community Q&A on The “Carbon Tax”
WHEN: 2-5pm Saturday 18 June 2011
WHO: John Thwaites, Peter Christoff, Sue Pennicuik, Rachel Powning, Frank O’Connor
WHERE: ST KILDA MEMO – 88 Acland St, St Kilda
—
Climate Change Is Real: an open letter from the scientific community
Posted in Movements, Opinion, Research by Kate Archdeacon on June 15th, 2011
Photo: California Academy of Sciences, the line attributed to Wallace Broecker, Scientist, by jinxmcc via flickr CC
…The Conversation launches a two-week series from the nation’s top minds on the science behind climate change and the efforts of “sceptics” to cloud the debate.
The overwhelming scientific evidence tells us that human greenhouse gas emissions are resulting in climate changes that cannot be explained by natural causes. Climate change is real, we are causing it, and it is happening right now.
Like it or not, humanity is facing a problem that is unparalleled in its scale and complexity. The magnitude of the problem was given a chilling focus in the most recent report of the International Energy Agency, which their chief economist characterised as the “worst news on emissions.” Limiting global warming to 2°C is now beginning to look like a nearly insurmountable challenge.
Like all great challenges, climate change has brought out the best and the worst in people. A vast number of scientists, engineers, and visionary businessmen are boldly designing a future that is based on low-impact energy pathways and living within safe planetary boundaries; a future in which substantial health gains can be achieved by eliminating fossil-fuel pollution; and a future in which we strive to hand over a liveable planet to posterity. At the other extreme, understandable economic insecurity and fear of radical change have been exploited by ideologues and vested interests to whip up ill-informed, populist rage, and climate scientists have become the punching bag of shock jocks and tabloid scribes. Aided by a pervasive media culture that often considers peer-reviewed scientific evidence to be in need of “balance” by internet bloggers, this has enabled so-called “sceptics” to find a captive audience while largely escaping scrutiny.
Australians have been exposed to a phony public debate which is not remotely reflected in the scientific literature and community of experts. Beginning today [Sunday June 13], The Conversation will bring much-needed and long-overdue accountability to the climate “sceptics.” For the next two weeks, our series of daily analyses will show how they can side-step the scientific literature and how they subvert normal peer review. They invariably ignore clear refutations of their arguments and continue to promote demonstrably false critiques.
We will show that “sceptics” often show little regard for truth and the critical procedures of the ethical conduct of science on which real skepticism is based. The individuals who deny the balance of scientific evidence on climate change will impose a heavy future burden on Australians if their unsupported opinions are given undue credence. The signatories below jointly authored this article, and some may also contribute to the forthcoming series of analyses.
Are you a scientist? Do you agree? If you’d like to add your name to the list, send an email to megan.clement@theconversation.edu.au The next installment in our series is from Karl Braganza at the Bureau of Meteorology. The greenhouse effect is real: here’s why.
—
Go to the original article on The Conversation to read the list of signatories – it’s far too big to include here!
—
Water Sensitive Cities: Winter School
Posted in Events, Research by Kate Archdeacon on May 25th, 2011
| 11 July , 2011 9:00 am | to | 15 July , 2011 5:30 pm |
The Water Sensitive Cities Winter School is a unique opportunity to hear from Australia’s leading researchers and thought-leaders on key actions in delivering water sensitive and liveable cities. Lectures and workshops will present latest solutions and concepts on required technologies for stormwater treatment, urban design and modelling, climate change adaptation, behavioural change, and social and government engagement. These cross disciplinary topics will all be linked to broader urban sustainability issues and lessons from the international community.
Many of today’s societal challenges may be classified as wicked problems where it is often inappropriate to reduce these problems to a perceived single dimension for which a solution is developed. The perceptions of the causes of these challenges differ from one discipline to another and yet they are all relevant. We now recognise the complex dynamics of the socio-technical dimensions of challenges we face today and our cities are expressions of our efforts in solving many of these wicked problems. Water management in our cities plays a key role in defining and shaping our cities’ future prosperity and well-being, as almost every aspect of our urban environment and quality of life is affected by the way we manage urban water.
Visit the Water Sensitive Cities program for the brochure, or Clearwater to register for the event.
Early Bird Registration closes May 31.
—
Using Treated Stormwater for Vegies
Posted in Models, Research by Kate Archdeacon on May 24th, 2011
Source: Clearwater
From “Is treated stormwater safe for growing food?“:
Treated stormwater is safe to use on your household vegetable patch according to a new report by the Centre for Water Sensitive Cities at Monash University. The study found that vegetables watered with treated stormwater, normally associated with having strong levels of heavy metals such as lead, and increased pollutants, were just as safe to eat as vegetables irrigated from mains water supplies.
Dr David McCarthy from the Centre for Water Sensitive Cities said that two major findings emerged from the study. “We found that using treated stormwater did not noticeably increase the level of contamination in the vegetables when compared with those irrigated with the mains water. Secondly, it seemed that the most likely route of pollutants entering the vegetables was through the soil or possibly through the atmosphere”, Dr David McCarthy said.
These findings were presented by Dr David McCarthy at a recent Clearwater event with project funding by the Smart Water Fund.
Click here to view a copy of the presentation which is available on our [Clearwater] website or for more information visit the Centre for Water Sensitive Cities.
—