• Energy Research
• 12. Responsible consumption close
• AU close
• FR close
• IT close
• University of Queensland close

Points out that sustainability as such does not provide a clearcut guide to policy. First one has to decide what is to be sustained. If this is agreed, it must be in an operational from. However, difficulties may still emerge since opinions may differ about how to achieve. This is illustrated by differences in the views of economists about how sustainable development is to be achieved. Orthodox economists stress the importance of the accumulation of man-made capital to achieve this end whereas neo-Malthusians stress the importance of conserving natural resource and environmental capital. Both take an anthropocentric point of view. For political reasons the neo-Malthusian has had little support but it may eventually turn out to be correct. Economics is concerned with reducing economic scarcity and economists have traditionally suggested four main ways of doing this of which economic growth is one. However, neo-Malthusian economists believe that this may not be a sustainable strategy – it may result in future poverty. It should be noted that economic systems are embedded in social and natural systems and depend on these. Economic sustainability depends on the sustainability of these other systems. So from this point of view, it is just one of several bottom lines. Values must be considered in relation to sustainability. Economics is completely anthropocentric in its approach. Therefore, economic approaches to conservation and sustainability can be at odds with the values of deep ecologists or those willing to accord rights to other sentient beings or ecosystems independent of human wishes, or those who want to make use of value judgments other than those based on the measuring rod of money. Consequently economics evaluation is sometimes ineffective in resolving social conflict, including conflict about what should be sustained. As a rule economics alone should not be the final arbiter of social decisions. It is a part (often an important part) of the social evaluation process but not the bottom line, or just one of many lines.

Points out that sustainability as such does not provide a clearcut guide to policy. First one has to decide what is to be sustained. If this is agreed, it must be in an operational from. However, difficulties may still emerge since opinions may differ about how to achieve. This is illustrated by differences in the views of economists about how sustainable development is to be achieved. Orthodox economists stress the importance of the accumulation of man-made capital to achieve this end whereas neo-Malthusians stress the importance of conserving natural resource and environmental capital. Both take an anthropocentric point of view. For political reasons the neo-Malthusian has had little support but it may eventually turn out to be correct. Economics is concerned with reducing economic scarcity and economists have traditionally suggested four main ways of doing this of which economic growth is one. However, neo-Malthusian economists believe that this may not be a sustainable strategy – it may result in future poverty. It should be noted that economic systems are embedded in social and natural systems and depend on these. Economic sustainability depends on the sustainability of these other systems. So from this point of view, it is just one of several bottom lines. Values must be considered in relation to sustainability. Economics is completely anthropocentric in its approach. Therefore, economic approaches to conservation and sustainability can be at odds with the values of deep ecologists or those willing to accord rights to other sentient beings or ecosystems independent of human wishes, or those who want to make use of value judgments other than those based on the measuring rod of money. Consequently economics evaluation is sometimes ineffective in resolving social conflict, including conflict about what should be sustained. As a rule economics alone should not be the final arbiter of social decisions. It is a part (often an important part) of the social evaluation process but not the bottom line, or just one of many lines.

Integrating renewable energy into public space is becoming more common as a climate change solution. However, this approach is often guided by the environmental pillar of sustainability, with less focus on the economic and social pillars. The purpose of this paper is to examine this issue in the speculative renewable energy propositions for Freshkills Park in New York City submitted for the 2012 Land Art Generator Initiative (LAGI) competition. This paper first proposes an optimal electricity distribution (OED) framework in and around public spaces based on relevant ecology and energy theory (Odum’s fourth and fifth law of thermodynamics). This framework addresses social engagement related to public interaction, and economic engagement related to the estimated quantity of electricity produced, in conjunction with environmental engagement related to the embodied energy required to construct the renewable energy infrastructure. Next, the study uses the OED framework to analyse the top twenty-five projects submitted for the LAGI 2012 competition. The findings reveal an electricity distribution imbalance and suggest a lack of in-depth understanding about sustainable electricity distribution within public space design. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research.

Integrating renewable energy into public space is becoming more common as a climate change solution. However, this approach is often guided by the environmental pillar of sustainability, with less focus on the economic and social pillars. The purpose of this paper is to examine this issue in the speculative renewable energy propositions for Freshkills Park in New York City submitted for the 2012 Land Art Generator Initiative (LAGI) competition. This paper first proposes an optimal electricity distribution (OED) framework in and around public spaces based on relevant ecology and energy theory (Odum’s fourth and fifth law of thermodynamics). This framework addresses social engagement related to public interaction, and economic engagement related to the estimated quantity of electricity produced, in conjunction with environmental engagement related to the embodied energy required to construct the renewable energy infrastructure. Next, the study uses the OED framework to analyse the top twenty-five projects submitted for the LAGI 2012 competition. The findings reveal an electricity distribution imbalance and suggest a lack of in-depth understanding about sustainable electricity distribution within public space design. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research.

Significant changes in society were emphasized as being required to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, a need which was further intensified with the emergence of the pandemic. The prospective society should be directed towards sustainable development, a process in which technology plays a crucial role. The proposed study discusses the technological potential for attaining the Sustainable Development Goals via disruptive technologies. This study further analyzes the outcome of disruptive technologies from the aspects of product development, health care transformation, a pandemic case study, nature-inclusive business models, smart cities and villages. These outcomes are mapped as a direct influence on Sustainable Development Goals 3, 8, 9 and 11. Various disruptive technologies and the ways in which the Sustainable Development Goals are influenced are elaborated. The investigation into the potential of disruptive technologies highlighted that Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 are the most supportive development to underpin the efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. The study proposes the scenario where both Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 are integrated to form smart cities and villages where the prospects of achieving Sustainable Development Goals are more favorable due to the integrated framework and Sustainable Development Goals’ interactions. Furthermore, the study proposes an integrated framework for including new age technologies to establish the concepts of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 integrated into smart cities and villages. The corresponding influence on the Sustainable Development Goals are also mapped. A SWOT analysis is performed to assess the proposed integrated approach to achieve Sustainable Development Goals. Ultimately, this study can assist the industrialist, policy makers and researchers in envisioning Sustainable Development Goals from technological perspectives.

Significant changes in society were emphasized as being required to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, a need which was further intensified with the emergence of the pandemic. The prospective society should be directed towards sustainable development, a process in which technology plays a crucial role. The proposed study discusses the technological potential for attaining the Sustainable Development Goals via disruptive technologies. This study further analyzes the outcome of disruptive technologies from the aspects of product development, health care transformation, a pandemic case study, nature-inclusive business models, smart cities and villages. These outcomes are mapped as a direct influence on Sustainable Development Goals 3, 8, 9 and 11. Various disruptive technologies and the ways in which the Sustainable Development Goals are influenced are elaborated. The investigation into the potential of disruptive technologies highlighted that Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 are the most supportive development to underpin the efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. The study proposes the scenario where both Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 are integrated to form smart cities and villages where the prospects of achieving Sustainable Development Goals are more favorable due to the integrated framework and Sustainable Development Goals’ interactions. Furthermore, the study proposes an integrated framework for including new age technologies to establish the concepts of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 integrated into smart cities and villages. The corresponding influence on the Sustainable Development Goals are also mapped. A SWOT analysis is performed to assess the proposed integrated approach to achieve Sustainable Development Goals. Ultimately, this study can assist the industrialist, policy makers and researchers in envisioning Sustainable Development Goals from technological perspectives.

The buildings sector contributes 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and building energy use is anticipated to double by 2050. Building performance research has typically focused on the operational phase, with life-cycle impacts increasingly studied, but often in isolation. This paper presents a novel framework integrating building energy modelling with life-cycle analysis and life-cycle costing. This is applied to four facade glazing materials in a 15-story case study office building in Queensland, Australia – a sub-tropical and commercial example rare in literature but important for future building development. Results demonstrate that double-glazed low-emissivity material (Type 4) was the most energy and financially efficient despite higher embodied energy and carbon than alternatives. It yielded operational energy and greenhouse gas emission savings of 13% against the baseline, and 2% lifetime financial savings. Clear double-glazing (Type 3) had the poorest overall performance, attributed to its low U-value trapping heat within the building and increasing net energy and emissions. This was new evidence that clear double-glazing should be carefully considered in sub-tropical climates. The integrated approach identified a material with improved overall performance. If only embodied impacts (production, transport, disposal) were assessed, GT1 would appear the best option as it takes less energy and carbon to manufacture and transport yet has very poor operational performance. This paper extends existing knowledge on facade materials and will aid future work on sustainable, low-emission building design in other climates, economies, designs and industries.

The buildings sector contributes 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and building energy use is anticipated to double by 2050. Building performance research has typically focused on the operational phase, with life-cycle impacts increasingly studied, but often in isolation. This paper presents a novel framework integrating building energy modelling with life-cycle analysis and life-cycle costing. This is applied to four facade glazing materials in a 15-story case study office building in Queensland, Australia – a sub-tropical and commercial example rare in literature but important for future building development. Results demonstrate that double-glazed low-emissivity material (Type 4) was the most energy and financially efficient despite higher embodied energy and carbon than alternatives. It yielded operational energy and greenhouse gas emission savings of 13% against the baseline, and 2% lifetime financial savings. Clear double-glazing (Type 3) had the poorest overall performance, attributed to its low U-value trapping heat within the building and increasing net energy and emissions. This was new evidence that clear double-glazing should be carefully considered in sub-tropical climates. The integrated approach identified a material with improved overall performance. If only embodied impacts (production, transport, disposal) were assessed, GT1 would appear the best option as it takes less energy and carbon to manufacture and transport yet has very poor operational performance. This paper extends existing knowledge on facade materials and will aid future work on sustainable, low-emission building design in other climates, economies, designs and industries.