and Consumption Figure 3.39 Urban Density and Transportation-Related Energy Consumption

Many developed countries have broadened their eff orts to promote sustainable buildings by incorporating other conservation strategies, such as the improved management of water and waste and steps to enhance the quality of indoor environments. For example, in 2008, the State of California adopted the fi rst green building standards in the United States. Developing countries should take note, however, that it takes years to create adequate capacity to enforce energy effi ciency and green standards. Moreover, it is important to sequence sustainable building interventions in ways that suit local capacity and priorities.

The big picture: Urban spatial development

Ultimately, individual cities and regional urban clusters must become more effi cient in using natural resources, including energy. In cities, sustainable urban energy planning and practices should be integral parts of the implementation of resource-effi cient growth, which, it is hoped, complements sustainable development agendas at regional and national levels. To achieve intelligent resource-effi cient growth, cities may need to drop expansionary urban spatial development linked to motorized transportation and refocus development in neighborhoods to ensure that key services are within walking distance or the range of bicycle travel and public transportation. Details on the impacts of urban spatial development on urban energy effi ciency are discussed in chapter 5 and in sector note 3. In essence, the key message is that urban energy requirements may be reduced by increasing urban densities, which reduces the extent of major municipal infrastructure, such as roads, water and wastewater systems, power lines, and gas pipelines. Infrastructure capital and operations and maintenance costs also fall under condensed systems. Figure 3.39, for example, illustrates the general relationship between urban density and transportation fuel consumption. Density also has drawbacks and limits, however, and must be planned on the basis of existing physical, socioeconomic, and natural conditions.

Figure 3.39 Urban Density and Transportation-Related Energy Consumption

Source: Adapted from Kirby (2008).

Conclusions

Because energy cuts across multiple sectors, the planning and implementation of sustainable energy measures in urban settings are complex. Though many energy investments may be justifi ed on the basis of the fi nancial or economic returns, environmental concerns should be factored into project assessments. Some general recommendations for promoting sustainable energy and increasing energy effi ciency and clean energy include the following:

• Ensure that the energy sector works properly. Energy sector restructuring, utility commercialization, pricing reform, and other measures may reduce energy costs, while reducing

energy waste. These eff orts are most eff ectively led at the national level.

• Explore options to retrofi t the existing stock of infrastructure. This may be accomplished by auditing energy sources and organizations, changing procurement guidelines, contracting energy service companies, devising public agency targets for energy effi ciency, and so on. Access to fi nancing is key to realizing these gains.

• Consider the options in addressing the new built environment. This might entail adopting energy effi ciency standards for buildings and equipment, improving city planning and design processes, strengthening land use schemes, and so forth.

• Seek options to bundle city programs. For example, combine the procurement of equipment to negotiate better prices, combine similar services across cities, and boost the city’s infl uence at the national level.

• Seek ways to incentivize public agencies and staff on sustainable energy options. Off er environmentally sustainable awards, publish agency energy and environmental performance records, provide incentive grants, and so on.

• Create mechanisms for sharing cities’ experiences across the country. This could be done through associations, case studies, newsletters, and so forth.

Notes

1. This sector note refl ects the International Energy

Agency’s defi nition of cities as a general and interchangeable reference for urban areas, which may be large metropolitan city-regions, such as

New York City, or small urban settlements that have only a few thousand people (see IEA 2008).

The exact defi nition of urban areas varies by country. 2. For example, the supply and prices of grid-based electricity are generally regulated by regional or national governments. 3. In general, building energy codes are regulated at the regional, provincial, state, or national level, but compliance depends on local enforcement. 4. Energy-effi cient alternatives often require greater expense in the short term, but save money in the long term. They require capital investment at the start-up, but their overall life-cycle costs are lower.

Less effi cient alternatives are often less expensive in the short term (requiring a smaller capital investment), and cities may choose them to provide a less expensive and easier solution for a wider population in a shorter time frame even though this may not be the optimum solution in the longer term. 5. Electric lighting is a good example. By the time the electricity has reached a light bulb, an average of about 70 percent of the energy content of coal has already been lost through conversion, transmission, and distribution. A compact fl uorescent lamp delivers the same amount of lighting service (that is, brightness per square meter) using about 20 percent of the electricity of an incandescent lamp. 6. Passive houses using ultralow energy for space cooling and heating have been successfully demonstrated in Europe and the United States (Rosenthal 2008). 7. Distributed energy resources also exist in urban areas. These are based on parallel, stand-alone electricity generation units within electricity distribution systems. The units are located at or near end users. Examples include gas microturbine systems, wind turbine systems, fuel cells, and rooftop photovoltaic systems. Distributed generation may be benefi cial for electricity consumers and, if properly integrated, the electricity utility. 8. Market barriers to investment in energy effi ciency refer to factors, usually social and institutional, that prevent the realization of the full economic potential of energy effi ciency opportunities. The barriers help explain the diff erence between observed energy effi ciency choices and decisions and the corresponding choices and decisions predicted by economic theory. Some common market barriers include misplaced incentives, lack of access to fi nancing, high transaction costs, regulatory price distortions, lack of information, and misinformation. 9. For additional information on those and other cases, see European Commission (2003) and

Taylor and others (2008). 10. District heating systems are the only modern urban energy infrastructure that is entirely bound

to cities. The ownership structure has undergone signifi cant changes, but city governments still exert great infl uence on the development and management of these systems. 11. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental

Design) is a green building rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council. It provides a suite of criteria for environmentally sustainable construction. The main fi nancial benefi ts of meeting the criteria include the lower costs of energy, water, and waste disposal. 12. See the Alliance to Save Energy’s 2007 Watergy

Handbook (Barry 2007) for a discussion on the barriers and opportunities for tapping into water and energy effi ciency in water utilities.

References

Bai Xuemei. 2006. “Solar-Powered City: Rizhao, China.”

In State of the World 2007: Our Urban Future, ed.

Worldwatch Institute, 108–09. Washington, DC:

Worldwatch Institute. http://www.worldwatch. org/taxonomy/term/467. Barry, Judith A. 2007. “Watergy: Energy and Water

Effi ciency in Municipal Water Supply and

Wastewater Treatment; Cost-Eff ective Savings of

Water and Energy.” Handbook, Alliance to Save

Energy, Washington, DC. http://www.watergy.net/ resources/publications/watergy.pdf. C40 Cities. 2009a. “Lighting: Växjö, Sweden.” C40

Cities Climate Leadership Group. http://www. c40cities.org/bestpractices/lighting/vaxjo_ streetlight.jsp. ————. 2009b. “Buildings: Melbourne, Australia.” C40

Cities Climate Leadership Group. http://www. c40cities.org/bestpractices/buildings/melbourne_ eco.jsp. CBSC (California Building Standards Commission). 2009. “2008 California Green Building Standards

Code.” CBSC, Sacramento, CA. http://www. documents.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/2009/part11_2008_ calgreen_code.pdf. City of New York. 2007. PlaNYC: A Greener, Greater

New York. New York: City of New York. http:// www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/ full_report.pdf. European Commission. 2003. Harnessing the Power of the Public Purse: Final Report from the European

PROST Study on Energy Effi ciency in the Public Sector. Stockholm: Borg and Co. AB. http://ec.europa. eu/environment/gpp/pdf/harnessing_power_ prost_study.pdf. ICLEI (ICLEI–Local Governments for Sustainability). 2008. “International Local Government GHG

Emissions Analysis Protocol.” Release version 1.0,

ICLEI, Toronto. http://www.iclei.org/fi leadmin/ user_upload/documents/Global/Progams/GHG/

LGGHGEmissionsProtocol.pdf. IEA (International Energy Agency). 2008. World

Energy Outlook 2008. Paris: IEA. Kats, Greg. 2003. “The Costs and Financial Benefi ts of

Green Buildings: A Report to California’s

Sustainable Building Task Force.” California

Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento, CA. http://www.cap-e.com/ewebeditpro/ items/O59F3259.pdf. Kirby, Alex. 2008. Kick the Habit: A UN Guide to

Climate Neutrality. Nairobi: United Nations

Environment Programme. Lantsberg, Alex. 2005. “Sustainable Urban Energy

Planning: A Road Map for Research and Funding.”

Consultant report, CEC-500-2005-102, California

Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA. http:// www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-5002005-102/CEC-500-2005-102.PDF. Mairie de Paris (Mayor’s Offi ce of Paris). 2007. “Paris

Climate Protection Plan” [Plan climat de Paris].

Mairie de Paris, Paris. http://www.paris.fr/portail/ english/Portal.lut?page_id=8118&document_type_ id=2&document_id=66812&portlet_id=19237. NYSERDA (New York State Energy Research and

Development Authority). 2002. “NYSERDA

How-to Guide to Eff ective Energy-Effi cient Street

Lighting: For Planners and Engineers.” Nyserda,

New York. http://www.rpi.edu/dept/lrc/nystreet/ how-to-planners.pdf. Rosenthal, Elisabeth. 2008. “The Energy Challenge: No

Furnaces but Heat Aplenty in ‘Passive Houses.’”

New York Times December 27: A1. Singh, Jas, Dilip R. Limaye, Brian J. Henderson, and

Xiaoyu Shi. 2010. Public Procurement of Energy

Effi ciency Services: Lessons from International

Experience. Washington, DC: World Bank. Taylor, Robert P., Chandrasekar Govindarajalu, Jeremy

Levin, Anke S. Meyer, and William A. Ward. 2008.

Financing Energy Effi ciency: Lessons from Brazil,

China, India, and Beyond. Washington, DC: World

Bank. USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development). 2005. “Watergy Program Pioneers Performance

Contract to Save Water, Energy in S. Africa.”

Energy Update 2 (April/May): 6–7. World Bank. 2001. “China: Opportunities to Improve

Energy Effi ciency in Buildings.” Report, Asia Alternative Energy Programme and Energy and Mining

Unit, East Asia and Pacifi c Region, World Bank,

Washington, DC.

————. 2007. Cost of Pollution in China: Economic

Estimates of Physical Damages. Washington, DC:

World Bank. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/

INTEAPREGTOPENVIRONMENT/Resources/

China_Cost_of_Pollution.pdf. Worldwatch Institute. 2006. State of the World 2007:

Our Urban Future. Washington, DC: Worldwatch

Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org/taxonomy/ term/467.

SECTOR NOTE 2 Cities and Water

Overview

Water is indispensible to human activity. Ancient civilizations fl ourished around water sources, including ancient China, Egypt, and Rome. Water has shaped the destinies of great cities, such as Beijing, Cairo, Frankfurt, London, New York, Paris, Rome, and Sydney. However, many pioneering cities, such as Babel and Sheba in the ancient Middle East, diminished or disappeared because water sources dried up. Water plays an important role in economic growth, quality of life, and environmental sustainability. Some people defi ne water as a divine gift, while others view it as an economic commodity. In any case, water is a limited resource that must often be processed to become usable, and there are costs associated with its transportation, distribution, and management. Water has social value, and access to suffi cient water to survive is a human right. In this context, politicians and managers typically take steps to guarantee that the poor have access to an equitable share of water services, particularly in developing countries. Water is a shared resource that plays a vital role in the development of other economic sectors.

Given the importance of water, there is a need for integrated management at the sectoral level and at the macrolevel to ensure that the resource is used in optimal and sustainable ways (that is, integrated water resources management). To ensure resource optimization and sustainability, governments must address key aspects of integrated water sector management and cross-cutting issues among various sectors. These aspects and issues involve policies, regulations, planning activities, sector investments, fi nancing methods, service provision, and institutional factors.

The input-output model for the water sector is shown in fi gure 3.40, which specifi es input parameters, desired outputs, relevant interventions, and undesired outputs that must be minimized. All interventions in a city should lead to desired objectives, which include (1) accessibility for all residents, including the poor; (2) adequate service quality; (3) high operational effi ciency; (4) service reliability; (5) supply security and sustainability; (6) environmental preservation; and (7) service aff ordability. These objectives are interlinked, and trade-off s must be recognized. Interventions may be related to planning, water resource protection and enhancement, infrastructure, service delivery, and management. These interventions are subject to relatively unchangeable input constraints (independent inputs) such as the characteristics of water resources, hydrology and hydrogeology, climate and atmospheric conditions, demographic and economic conditions, and social norms and historical rights. Parameters that are manageable include policy, legislation, regulations, institutions, physical systems technology, spatial planning, stakeholders, and economic and fi nancial aspects. Undesirable impacts should be mitigated or eliminated. These