With a new entry every fortnight, blog posts written by various Earthscan from Routledge authors will be displayed both on the Routledge website and on our Facebook page here. Each post within Facebook will be open to comments so please feel free to voice your thoughts!
 

Click on the thumbnail above to view more images.


The Power of Reflection: Predicting the Value of Solar Thermal Systems

By Chris Laughton, author of Solar Domestic Water Heating.

In my book Solar Domestic Water Heating I highlighted the complexity of accurately predicting the performance of a solar assisted heating system. Whilst there are some useful rules-of-thumb for calculations, there are also many caveats involved in using them. Indeed, all simple calculation methods that are published for solar energy systems have notable margins of error that must also be considered.

To tighten up our prediction accuracy we would need to consider how to better measure-up prospective sites, and in particular how we assess them for annual solar radiation levels. The first step in this process is to begin with a reliable prediction of the raw solar radiation that is likely to fall to earth based on historical meteorological records. We then make mathematical allowances for the collector’s orientation. Whilst these characteristics are important, the aspect that site assessors can most readily improve is their shading assessments.

For example, one often-overlooked factor in shade analysis is the reflectance of solar radiation. Yet the simple act of reaching for our sunglasses to shade our eyes when looking at brightly-coloured objects shows how our own bodies already understand the magnitude of reflectance. The average of reflected radiation of the earth as seen from space, the albedo, is 0.2. In other words, 20% of incident radiation is reflected. Indeed, it is only because light is reflected that we perceive it to have a colour at all. Most performance figures assume the reflectance value as being present for inclined collectors, which increasingly benefit from reflected radiation as their pitch angle is steepened. However, it is where there is a strong difference in colour between the average green/brown/blue spectrum assumed in the average albedo that the predictions start to go awry. This can be by as much 20% in cases such as where a large brightly-coloured building is placed in front of a façade-mounted collector. Snow can also temporarily increase reflectance to similar values, although often the snow also covers the solar thermal collector entirely and so cancels such gains out. The reverse effect occurs where solar installations are situated near black surfaces such as bituminous tarmac that tend to reflect lower than the average albedo. For most installations, the effects of reflectance will only cause a small deviation from the assumed average value; but if we want to tighten the margins then this is an area we should not overlook.

Shading at first seems more clear-cut. Most people assume that if there is a percentage loss of sky above the horizon then this equates to a loss of solar radiation arriving at the collector. However, the quantity of radiation from each part of the sky varies with its compass direction (azimuth) and its height. To put it another way, the sunpath varies with the time of day and seasons and so different parts of the sky are valued differently. In general, the lowest parts of the sky give the weakest radiation contribution. These areas are conversely at the highest risk of shading from distant landscapes objects. Nevertheless, the effect is cumulative; and what is not always appreciated is that at every point in the UK mainland at least 2% of the sky is already obscured by the landmass that sits above sea-level. This reduction can be far greater than this minimum percentage due to additional landscape features such as hills and buildings above the horizon. It is shading objects near to an array that have the greatest effect, as these are most likely to cause hard shadows by blocking out the direct (beam) solar radiation.

It is no longer considered sufficient to record a simple silhouette outline of distant objects as the width and distance of nearby objects is also important. Objects can cause hard shadows even from over 100 metres away. The industry has now developed electronic and digital methods to capture such information quickly transferring the data into computer simulation software to accurately predict performance.
 

Ecobuild Confernece Booklist Catalogue 2013

With a new entry every fortnight, blog posts written by various Earthscan from Routledge authors will be displayed both on the Routledge website and on our Facebook page here. Each post within Facebook will be open to comments so please feel free to voice your thoughts!

The Rise and Rise of Utility-Scale Solar Power

BY PHILIP WOLFE, author of Solar Photovoltaic Projects in the Mainstream Power Market

Solar power has long been seen as a small-scale, expensive and marginal contributor to the world’s electricity supplies. Many might therefore be surprised that utility-scale solar capacity grew by almost 60% in 2012 to over 9,000 megawatts, posting a third consecutive year of record growth (1). This was achieved despite declining subsidies in the major markets, and the recent – probably temporary – weakness in traditional energy costs.

So why has solar power become the fastest-growing energy source, not only for rooftop systems but also mainstream power supply? The main reason is dramatic continuing reduction in costs, which have fallen by half in less than two years.

The long-term trend in the price of traditional energy sources like oil and gas, conversely, is remorselessly upwards. This leads to a crossover – known in the industry as ‘grid parity’ – where solar power costs become cheaper than fossil fuels. Grid parity is much closer than most people realise; it is projected to roll across Europe over the next six years, and it has probably already been reached in locations with good sunlight levels and high energy costs.

The transition from a subsidised to a financially-driven market is broadening the geographic take-up of mainstream solar generation. Europe’s share of global new capacity fell to 50% for the first time in 2012. It is likely to be much lower in 2013, with several massive solar power stations of 300 to 800MW being built in the South-Western United States. Growth in Asia is also dynamic, particularly in India and China, and take-up is accelerating in South America and Africa.

The smart money is already anticipating the viability of utility-scale solar generation. Warren Buffett’s MidAmerican Energy made several acquisitions in the sector in 2012, ending the year as the world’s seventh largest owner of utility-scale solar power stations. Its project pipeline could take it to number one by 2015, based on developments announced to date.

The traditional utilities, by contrast, have mostly been slow entrants to the solar power sector. Only in France and Japan do they control 50% or more of this capacity. About 15% of US and Canadian solar stations are held by utilities, and the percentage in other countries is no more than 5%. This may change once they realise the contribution that solar generation is likely to make. I talked last year to a senior manager at one of California’s largest utilities, who was initially unfamiliar with the term ‘grid parity’. Having explained their reverse auction mechanism for buying both green and traditional ‘brown’ power, he noted with some surprise that solar power was now often offered at prices not dissimilar to fossil-fuelled electricity. “That’s grid parity” I told him.

Solar power has a unique ability to continue down the cost learning curve. The main constituents of solar power plants are the solar cells which convert light into electricity. Like other semiconductors these get ever cheaper as production volumes increase, with a so-called ‘progress ratio’ of 82% – in other words the cost reduces by 82% for every two-fold increase in the cumulative installed capacity.

Combine this with an almost universal fuel source – daylight – and a benign environmental impact and it seems inevitable that solar energy will become the world’s dominant energy source within our lifetime.
 

Architecture- sent quarterly

Building and Construction - sent quarterly

Earthscan (Energy, Environment and Sustainability and Sustainable Built Environment) - sent monthly

Landscape - sent quarterly

Planning and Urban Design - sent quarterly

Property and Real Estate - sent quarterly

With a new entry every fortnight, blog posts written by various Earthscan from Routledge authors will be displayed both on the Routledge website and on our Facebook page here. Each post within Facebook will be open to comments so please feel free to voice your thoughts!

Human Dependence on Nature

BY HAYDN WASHINGTON, author of Human Dependence on Nature

I think we need to talk about something obvious - that humanity is dependent on Nature to survive. Yet our society largely acts as if this is not so. We ignore or deny that our roots lie in the Earth. Thereby hangs a tale. How do we depend on Nature and why do we deny or ignore this dependency? This is worth digging deeper into.

The energy that powers our very cells, the nutrients that make up our bodies, the ecosystem services that clean our water and air, these are all provided by the Nature from which we evolved and of which we are a part. Yet this is the same Nature that our numbers and technology are impacting on to such a degree that extinction rates are 1000 times above normal, ecosystems are degrading and collapsing, and we have an ecological footprint of 1.5 Earths. Yet the truth is we only have one Earth.

We depend on Nature in many ways - physical, biological, ecological, psychological and spiritual. Obvious it may be to some of us, yet paradoxically as societies we tend to deny these dependencies. There is a deep, insidious and common tendency to anthropocentrism within our society, a worldview that has been distributed by globalisation. It seems that humanity is running around, effectively yelling ‘Me! Me! Me!’. Yet we are not the only species on Earth, and I argue we have a deep and abiding responsibility to our evolved cousins.

I finish up in my book by playing devil’s advocate and asking ‘Do we have a problem?’. I do this as many people seem happy to delude themselves that everything is ‘just fine’. I think we have to accept the grim reality that we face. However, at the same time, it is not all about ‘doom and gloom’. Fear is actually not a good motivator to action, as people freeze up and turn their minds to other things. So we need to provide a vision of a ‘Great Work’ of Earth repair (as theologian Thomas Berry espoused). We need to provide a framework for solutions to help solve the environmental crisis. Key to all of these however is accepting we have a problem and facing up to it! We can solve the environmental crisis if we accept we have one.

Now I did not write my book written for academics, but for the educated layperson who is interested (and worried) about what we are doing to the world. I try to show how we can break through the denial of our dependency on the Earth, and rather accept and celebrate this, and thus help solve the environmental crisis. We have a dependency, a deep connection and a responsibility to the Nature we share this world with and evolved from. Let’s celebrate our wondrous heritage and make sure future generations will be able to do this too!

Those of you who received our February newsletter will have a discount code for 20% off when you buy online. If you are not already registered you can sign up for future newsletters here.
 

With a new entry every fortnight, blog posts written by various Earthscan from Routledge authors will be displayed both on the Routledge website and on our Facebook page here. Each post within Facebook will be open to comments so please feel free to join in with the conversation.

HORSE BURGERS AND HEADLESS CHICKENS

BY JOHN WEBSTER, author of Animal Husbandry Regained: The Place of Farm Animals in Sustainable Agriculture
 

Our latest food scandal, the discovery of horsemeat in processed foods ranging from burgers to lasagne, has stirred up a media storm; a melange of justified anger and irrational fear, cries for effective action and the hunt for sacrificial scapegoats. The essentials are as follows. It is legal in Europe to shoot and butcher horses for human consumption, although not if they have been treated with certain drugs, including phenylbutazone (“Bute”). There are standards for what may and may not be included in processed foods like sausages and burgers. In the UK this does not include horsemeat - on grounds of culture rather than public health: the horse is our friend. Moreover we have the right to know what we are eating. The illicit substitution of horse for beef in processed meat products is international fraud on a massive scale, the guilty parties should be punished and the strongest measures taken to minimise future risk. The multinational trade in industrialised meat products has undoubtedly increased these risks, which greatly strengthens the case for buying from your local butcher who can guarantee the provenance of his meat. However improved surveillance methods (e.g. DNA-based analysis) have greatly increased our chances of catching the criminals. Many of us will, in the past, have enjoyed a variety of tasty meat dishes in blissful ignorance that they contained remnants of horse.

All this may be taken as read. My concern is with the shriller and sillier suggestions now riding the wave of media concern, These range from advice to eat only “whole” meat, like joints and steaks, to the command that we should all become vegetarian. Viewed in terms of Earthscan or planet husbandry, both are emotional outbursts that shout down reason. The farming of animals for food in the form of meat and dairy products (and clothing and traction and fuel) did not evolve in the last 50 years to provide luxuries for a niche market but has always been an essential element of sustainable mixed agriculture. Traditionally the grazing animals harvested food (like grass) the farmer could not digest from land he did not own, the pigs and chickens scavenged food his family dropped or threw away. The aim was self-sufficiency and sustainability based on the best use of all resources and minimising waste. Modern industrialised agriculture has become unsustainable because of its profligate use of water and fossil fuels and its destruction of soils. Intensive livestock farming, especially the intensive fattening of beef cattle on grain and soya, is the worst example of wasting land, food and other resources that could be put to better purposes. However, food from animals does not have to be wasteful if the animals of today, like the animals of the past, are given food that we choose not to eat or cannot digest: food that is complementary rather than competitive. In Somerset, where I live, dairy cows in pastoral systems receive over 70% of their rations in the form of complementary food and produce about 50% more food directly available for human consumption as milk, cheese (etc) than they consume. This makes them very valuable creatures indeed (although seriously overworked).

The suggestion that we should avoid processed meats is wrong-headed because it is profligate. Meat processing, done properly, is a good thing because it minimises waste. Dishes ranging from sausages to faggots and haggis, from known and trusted sources, should contribute to the diet of all ethical omnivores. The traditional cottager made the worthy claim to harvest every bit of the pig but the squeak.

The cry that we should all become vegetarians is equally unsustainable in terms of planet husbandry. Each individual has the right to be vegetarian and nearly all affluent omnivores should eat less of food of animal origin, both for our own health and for that of the planet. However the call to abolish animal farming altogether ignores the fact that grazing lands make up about 70% of the world’s agricultural area. Well managed, this land is vital to the sustainability of the planet, in terms of water management, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and amenity. The husbandry of animals to provide food and other resources is essential to the husbandry of this land. It is however a big mistake to assume that this land can be sustained simply from the sale of meat. The other big mistake is to deny those who manage the land the right to obtain income from their animals. Food production from animals is an integral part of sustainable agriculture (it is an essential element of organic farming). The trick is to reward the sustainable management of land in a way that recognises the importance of the food animals but not in such a way that income from the sale of food comes to dominate everything else.

Of course, to achieve this, we should all eat less meat.

The Climate Bonus

BY ALISON SMITH, author of the new book, The Climate Bonus: Co-benefits of Climate Policy

A few small steps towards a global climate agreement were taken at Doha, but progress is painfully slow. We need to cut emissions much faster, but we are held back by the widespread fear that climate action is a costly burden on society. Yet this need not be the case: well-planned climate action can provide a wide range of valuable co-benefits, from cleaner air to safer and more secure energy. This ‘Climate Bonus’ can provide a much stronger motivation for climate action than the threat of climate change alone.

One of the greatest co-benefits is clean air. Air pollution kills millions of people each year, yet this could be drastically reduced by cutting our use of fossil fuels. Halving global greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 to 2050 could also cut premature deaths from exposure to particle pollution by 42%, avoiding more than 5 million early deaths per year by 2050. This will yield massive financial savings by cutting lost working time and the cost of hospital treatment for conditions such as asthma, bronchitis, heart disease and cancer.

Two-thirds of all attributable deaths – 21 million deaths per year – are due to lack of exercise and unhealthy diets, so low-carbon lifestyles - walking and cycling instead of driving, and cutting over-consumption of meat and dairy produce - could save even more lives than cleaner air. More controversially, a low-consumption ‘buy-less, work-less’ lifestyle can also improve health and well-being by reducing stress levels and giving more time for family, friends and leisure activities.

Using energy and materials more efficiently – for example by installing insulation, recycling materials, reusing goods and avoiding waste - not only cuts carbon emissions but also reduces other forms of environmental damage, such as pollution and landscape damage from extracting and processing fossil fuels and metal ores. At the same time, cutting waste can save money for consumers and make businesses more profitable, as well as reducing the huge amount of waste we throw into unsightly landfill sites. And with oil prices soaring as conventional oil reserves dwindle, forcing reliance on dirtier and riskier sources such as tar sands, deepwater and arctic oil, home-grown renewable energy can help to provide safer, cleaner and more secure energy for the future.

Although opponents of climate policy often claim it is a job-killer, most studies show that new low-carbon jobs in areas such as renewable energy, energy efficiency and recycling would outweigh those lost in high-carbon industries such as fossil fuel production, mining and metal smelting. And with the increasing scarcity of many vital resources such as rare metals, phosphorous, water and fertile land, a resource-efficient economy will be stronger and more prosperous in the long term.

Climate policy can also help to preserve our vanishing tropical forests, through forest carbon payment schemes where landowners are paid for the carbon stored in trees. This has multiple benefits: as well as safeguarding biodiversity, forests also reduce the risk of floods and landslides; protect local water supplies; supply fuel, fruit and timber to local people (provided that it is harvested sustainably) and provide beautiful places for recreation. Climate-smart agriculture also provides co-benefits: reducing the over-application of fertilisers, for example, not only cuts emissions of nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas, but also cuts air and water pollution and saves money for farmers.

By carefully designing climate policy to maximise these co-benefits, and to minimise any conflicts (for example by sensitive siting of wind turbines, and enforcing safeguards to ensure that biofuel production is sustainable), we can turn the threat of climate change to our advantage, by using it as a stimulus to move to a cleaner, safer, healthier and more prosperous society.

The new Earthscan Series on Sustainable Design
BY STEFFEN LEHMANN, series editor of the new Earthscan Series on Sustainable Design.

I am pleased to introduce the new Earthscan Series on Sustainable Design, which I am editing. The first two titles are Designing for Zero Waste (2012) and Motivating Change (forthcoming in 2013), both of which I have co-edited with Dr Robert Crocker. The next volume will be Low Carbon Cities (currently in production).

All books in this series are authored and edited by leading academics and practitioners in the field of sustainable design. Although there has been an immense amount of theory- and technology-focused writing published on the topic of sustainable design, many of these books have failed to introduce readers to the wider challenge of what the rethinking of design, production, and operation and re-use/recycling of all products, buildings and cities really means. Sustainability is not a passing fashion, and people are constantly searching for more reliable information and relevant ideas, and thinking of emerging systems in this area.

The Earthscan series aims to develop a theoretical framework for how different theories of sustainable design might engage with the practice of architects, designers, urban planners and related professions. The books equip readers with the tools for realising the full potential of the good intentions of sustainable design and offer a novel alignment of interdisciplinary perspectives on the problems of global consumerism and strategies to avoid resource waste.

The books in this series will be essential reading for professionals and students, researchers and experts, industry and government agencies, and are a highly useful addition to the literature, focusing on key topics in sustainable design, urban development and city transformation.

One of the issues explored is the question: how can we move towards environmentally sustainable design and reduced consumption quickly enough? There have been dire warnings about the implications of global climate change and a strain on the full range of resources from fuel to food. But there is neither regulations nor political will to make the changes to meet the growing challenges for urban communities for the next 20 years and beyond.

How much longer can we sustain the high-consumption lifestyle we are used to? To get the full picture on consumerism and over-consumption, we need to understand interconnected global systems of production and consumption. We hope to embed notions of sustainable consumption with architects, designers and urban planners, who all face different challenges depending on where they are in the world.

Choosing sustainable building materials and systems goes beyond considering durability. We need to take lifecycle analysis and supply chain into account, and specify the most appropriate materials for a project – the least polluting, most easily recyclable, most energy efficient (least embodied energy) – from sustainable sources. We need to refocus on avoiding waste creation in the first place and rethink the way we design and construct products, buildings and cities to facilitate re-use and disassembly at their end of life.

This change of focus makes the concept of zero waste both powerful and controversial. From a purely economic point of view, producing waste is unproductive. But reversing the existing, wasteful business system and manufacturing practices is not a fast, easy or cheap process. If we can begin at the beginning and design waste out of the picture, we can recover not only the final product, but also the energy, materials and time embodied in the product or building.

The zero waste ethos is a big call – radical in its ramifications – and it requires more than a top-down, government-imposed approach. To be successful, zero waste needs to be embraced and implemented by citizens, community groups, business and industry. It is already technologically possible to build a zero-waste and zero-carbon-emission city.

The question is: are we willing to transform from consumers into citizens?

Professor Steffen Lehmann, PhD, is the series editor of the Earthscan Series on Sustainable Design and an internationally highly respected architect, urbanist and scholar. Steffen is currently professor of Sustainable Design at the University of South Australia, where he is also director of the Zero Waste Centre for Sustainable Design and Behaviour and director of the China−Australia Centre for Sustainable Urban Development. See more on Steffen’s work at: slab.com.au.

Each post within Facebook will be open to comments so please feel free to join in with the conversation.

The first entry by Rob Dietz and Dan O'Neill, authors of the new book Enough Is Enough, can be found below! 

What if "Enough" Supplanted "More"? A Simple Concept for a Seismic Economic Shift

BY ROB DIETZ AND DAN O'NEILL, authors of the new book, Enough Is Enough: Building a Sustainable Economy in a World of Finite Resources.
 

Economic growth is the highest priority for almost every nation on Earth. Politicians compete with one another to see who can promise the fastest growth. Newscasters report rising economic indicators with glee. Economists in both government and academia promote an agenda of endless growth. But there’s something odd about all this cheerleading for growth.

Even though many wealthy nations have achieved consistent economic growth since the end of World War II, their citizens aren’t getting any happier. And all of this growth has come with huge environmental costs, such as climate destabilization, pollution, and the depletion of natural resources that are critical to life on Earth. The mania for more has become counterproductive and even destructive.

More is certainly a good thing when you don’t have enough. For instance, if you can’t find enough to eat, then more food is better. If the alarm wakes you up before you’ve gotten enough sleep, hitting the snooze button and resting for a few more minutes feels great. But what about times when you do have enough? Eating more food leads to obesity, and sleeping too much could be classified as a medical condition. More, then, may be either helpful or harmful, depending on the situation, but enough is the amount that’s just right.

Suppose that instead of the never-ending pursuit of more stuff, more jobs, more consumption, and more income, we aimed for enough stuff, enough jobs, enough consumption, and enough income. What if enough took the place of more as the organizing principle for the economy?

To make such a change work, we would need to eliminate the "growth imperative"—the collection of policies that make the economy dependent on growth. Currently if there is not growth, then there is recession, and the whole economic tapestry quickly begins to unravel. But it doesn’t have to be this way. With a different set of policies we can create an economy that does not require growth to guarantee jobs, to maintain a stable financial system, or to meet people's needs. For example, we can use the benefits of technological progress to reduce working hours and lower unemployment, instead of using them to produce and sell more stuff. We can grant the Bank of England the power to manage the money supply directly, instead of allowing private banks to create most of our money in the form of interest-bearing loans. By reforming certain key economic institutions, we can decommission the growth imperative and build an economy that works for people and the planet.

Such changes will be difficult to implement. For starters, there seems to be a stalemate in politics in which leaders are content to exchange platitudes rather than address the profound problems facing society (e.g., climate destabilization, poverty, and inequality). And there's the power of inertia—we've become accustomed to growth, and despite all the evidence that the strategy of continuous economic growth has outlived its usefulness, we are hesitant to try something new. But in this age of uncertainty, marked by the threat of financial collapse, unemployment, corporate scandals, and relentless news of environmental calamities, who would complain (except maybe a few bank CEOs and other super-rich beneficiaries of the status quo) if we adopted policies to stabilize the economy and improve the lives of the vast majority?

Imagine an economy that can meet people's needs without undermining the life-support systems of the planet. Imagine an economy founded on fairness instead of foolishness. Imagine taking action to begin the transition. One thing's for certain: the changes will only materialize when we achieve widespread recognition that enough is enough.

eBooks from Taylor & Francis - Helping you to choose the right eBooks for your Library

As we enter 2013, we are seeing more and more institutions and libraries investing in electronic information products and resources. There is increasingly less space for physical books, and students are now accessing more information remotely.

A 2012 IFLA report rightly makes the point that 'eResources present a number of challenges not encountered with the selection and acquisition of traditional analogue materials'. For this reason, at Taylor & Francis we endeavour to offer you as much support as possible to help you integrate our eProducts into your library as easily as possible. And with our eBooks, we have made things super simple.

At first glance, the sheer scale of our eBook backlist and frontlist can be quite daunting. We have over 30,000 eBooks across the Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences and Law, from leading imprints, including Routledge, Focal Press and Psychology Press.

With eBooks covering everything from Language & Linguistics and Philosophy of Film to Commercial Law and Development Economics, there is a lot to choose from. For that reason, we have made our purchase options nice and flexible; subject eCollections, interdisciplinary eFocus packages, Pick n' Mix and more ...

Give our new video a watch and get a snapshot of what T&F eBooks could do for your library: