decentralization key to the sustainable future by thomas tsang

decentralization KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Thomas H. Tsang

decentralization KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Thomas H. Tsang

Decentralization: Key to the Sustainable Future Copyright ÂŠ 2014 Thomas Tsang New School of Architecture & Design, San Diego Book Layout by May Ho No part of this publication may be reproduced, store in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means --- electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise --- without prior written permission of Thomas Tsang. Requests for permission to quote from this book should be directed to: Thomas Tsang 401 Van Buren Drive Monterey Park, CA 91755 Used by permission. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

MASTER OF ARCHITECTURAL THESIS SUBMITTAL BY THOMAS H TSANG

APPROVED BY

Kurt Hunker, Graduate Architecture Program Chair

Jim Engelke, Graduate Architecture, Instructor, Dean Emeritis

Howard M Blackson III, Graduate Architecture, Instructor

Dedication This thesis is lovingly dedicated to my parents Norman Tsang and Kit Yee Ho Tsang and my family. Their love, encouragement and ininite support have sus-

tained me always. I also want to give special thanks to my loving wife May Ho for assisting me to help publishing my thesis and my boys Joel and Noah for their understanding that I can spend limited time with them during the program.

contents 9 abstract 11 introduction

51 discussion 79 limitation & further discussion

17 review of literature 81 conclusion 29 methods 35 indings

85 bibliography 89 photo credit

abstract This study investigated the negative effects of the growing utility infrastruc-

ture and how decentralization would beneit the environment, architecture, urban planning, and the occupants. Empirical evidence such as maps, statistics,

satellite photos, government records, historical data, and ield conditions were examined and compared. The indings from this study were consistent with my theory that decentralization would have a positive impact. However, the decentralization of the three main utility infrastructures studied (water, sewage, energy/electricity) for this inquiry was only part of a much larger system. Therefore, further studies need to be conducted in order to maximize the full potential of the theory.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Whether we tend to centralization or decentralization in city planning is a practical question, not a question of value. Yet it is just the question of value that is decisive. We must set up new values, ix our ultimate goals so that we may establish standards. For what is right and signiicant for any era - including the new era is this: to give the spirit the opportunity for existence.â&#x20AC;? by Mies Van der Rohe

introduction In the past two decades, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Green Building Designâ&#x20AC;? has become the trend of contemporary design practices due to the rising awareness of environmental concern, such as depletion of natural resources. The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)1 was begun in 1993 to promote sustainability in building design and operations. The idea behind sustainable buildings is to reduce the harmful effects on the environment and design better architecture for the occupants. The result was a Green Building Rating System2 that was developed with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). It served as a guideline for designers to create sustainable buildings. Although the strategies were developed with

good intentions, it is only a irst step toward saving the environment. In fact, in many cases building owners used the LEED strategy primarily as a marketing tool for their building projects, rather than a way to save environmental resources.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)

The Green Building Rating System (LEED)

Therefore, much more is needed to accomplish the goal of designing, constructing, and maintaining sustainable buildings. For my research, I am proposing a radical step to preserving our environment. This will involve decentralizing the built environment from the utility infrastructure in order to reduce demand from the system. This will also minimize disturbance to the environment and prevent the depletion of natural resources.

Infrastructure3 was irst developed thousands of years ago by humans

as a product designed for convenience and management. We all realize that we are living in a world with limited land and natural resources. Therefore, the growth of infrastructure is not a sustainable way to support the growing population. This growth not only harms the environment, but it also begins to reverse the outcome of convenience. Due to human limitations, we are unable to plan so far ahead that we can predict extensively into the future. As a result, for example the Los Angeles infrastructure that was built 50 years ago4-6 can no longer handle the current rapid population growth. There are countless projects currently underway to upgrade the existing infrastructure within the city, and this will continue to be part of our daily lives. Although most of us do not notice them, each upgrade project will cost the city millions of dollars and the cost will eventually be passed onto residents. In addition, the construction causes street and road closures, resulting in a signiicant, counterproductive loss of time and money throughout the area. In the following sections, I will discuss each utility infrastructure that should be decentralized. I will use data that I collected from Public Records to gener-

INTRODUCTION

Aquaduct

Map of downtown rome during the Roman Empire

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

ate maps and charts as empirical evidence. I will then compare the indings to discuss the problems of each utility infrastructure. Finally, I will present a conclusion on how each system should be decentralized. Following each section of the utility infrastructure, there will be case studies on the following items: •

On-site systems

•

Problems of infrastructure

•

Beneits of a decentralized building project in case studies

Surveys and interviews will not be employed in this research study due to the fact that the general public lacks knowledge about infrastructure and the interviewee opinions would be merely subjective.

The conclusions in the last are based on the indings of this study and

my interpretations of all outcomes from the correlational studies. In addition to the beneit to the environment, I will also discuss how a decentralized utility infrastructure can beneit not only the population but also during emergencies caused by natural or manmade disasters. While city planning also plays an important role in the goal of a sustainable environment, it will only be mentioned in the Discussion section. Therefore

this research will focus solely on the beneit of decentralization of the utility infrastructure.

INTRODUCTION

Los Angeles in 1941

Los Angeles in 1850

Los Angeles in 2010

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

review of literature Population growth, diminishing natural resources, and tainted landscapes already have been for many years have become a part of modern life. Although some people may not be concerned, others take a more proactive stance in discerning the problems and trying to solve them. In the 1990s, one of

the signiicant movements promoted by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) resulted in development of the Green Building Design Strategies (USGBC, 2009). As the USGBC took its irst step toward awareness of environ-

mental issues, sustainable design ideas began to increase in other countries as well. This movement led to countless books about sustainable building design, including the one I selected for this research project that was coauthored by an architect and an engineer (Kwok and Grondzik, 2007). Although the book discusses various sustainable building design strategies to help architects achieve â&#x20AC;&#x153;Green Building Statusâ&#x20AC;? on projects, I believe these strategies are also an ap-

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Los Angeles River during 1700-1920

proach to decentralize the utility infrastructure and transform architecture into self-sustaining systems.

This study investigates the beneicial effect of decentralization of utility

infrastructure on environment and self-sustaining architecture. As a result, the researchers select only three major components (water, sewage and energy) that keep the building operating when the main utility infrastructure stops functioning properly. In addition, this study investigates the weakness of the infrastructure, the high maintenance cost (LePartner, 2009), and the problem of construction related to the infrastructure (Graham, 2010; Luke, 2010; Marvin, 2010; Little, 2010; Sims, 2010). WATER The urge to build a convenient and functional water system can completely destroy a natural ecosystem, as occurred with the birth of the City of Los

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Los Angeles River in 1925

Los Angeles River looding in 1914

Angeles in 1850 (Varnelis, 2009). Unfortunately, mistakes of our forefathers went unheeded and so subsequent planners perpetuated the same mistakes. For example, in the 1930s, the Los Angeles River7-10 was created as an oversized con-

crete trench in order to eficiently handle the watershed during life-threatening storms11 (Fletcher, 2009). As water became a critical resource, the City of Los

Angeles (CLA) Department of Public Works (DPW), had to face the problem of uncontrolled watershed and the ongoing drought, so it planned to develop a new infrastructure system to recharge the runoff back to the aquifer captured from the system for future consumption (CLA, 2013). However, in order to build a system that could address the problem, another challenge was created. Building the new system to recharge the runoff from the watershed concrete trench would consume a large amount of natural green area within the property of serial city parks.12 The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by the pro-

fessional irm CH:CDM City hired chose language that emphasized the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Los Angeles River, view from 6th Street Bridge

beneit to people and the environment, without discussing the potential negative impact to the environment (CH:CDM, 2005). As population grows (LA Times, 2014; US Census Bureau, 2014)13, governments and utility companies must address the needs of an increasing number of people by expanding the existing systems. Even with the latest technologies

Data from 2011 U.S. Census

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

and knowledge about the environment, natural habitats are often destroyed in order for governments and utility companies to resolve the need for expansion. Yet, we already have the knowledge to address this issue (Kwok et al., 2007; Drexler, 2012; Judge, 2002; Van Lengen, 2008; Perez, 2012). A strategy can be utilized according to the characteristics of the speciic site that involves a speciic system type to deal with the issue. At the same time, the existing infrastructure can remain intact as a backup system for the on-site system to avoid further disruption to the environment.

14a

Aerial view of the Hyperion

14b

Map of the project area of Hyperion

SEWER The California Coastal Commission (CCC) was established as a result of Proposition 20, enacted in 1972, to protect public and private property, wildlife,

marine isheries, other ocean resources, and the natural environment along the coast of California. Since then, the state has found it necessary to protect the ecological balance of the Coastal Zone in order to prevent its deterioration and destruction (California Coastal Commission, 2013). But due to the immense increase in, the Hyperion Sewer Treatment Plant located at El Segundo14, south

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Hyperion Plant in 1920

Workers working at the Hyperion Plant in 1920

Hyperion Sewage in 1937

The Hyperion in 1952

New Hyperion Treatment Plant in 2008

The Hyperion in 2010

Hyperion Treatment Plant Education Center

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

of LAX along the beachfront that was intended to accommodate all the sewage from the City of Los Angeles now needs to be expanded in order to ac-

commodate the city’s growth (CLA DPW, 2013)15-20. Unfortunately, the mission

statements and strategic plans of DPW and CCC signiicantly contradict each

other. While the DPW attempts to accommodate the needs of residents, the CCC undertakes seemingly deceptive actions, such as using the term “green building design” in an effort to essentially procure a LEED plaques for its own building21 to trade on the damage caused by the expansion. Apparently this is

a compromise reached by both the ‘developer’ and the ‘jurisdiction’ in order to seemingly protect the environment but also be able to proceed with the projects. Sewer, unlike water and energy, has a substantially negative and detestable connotation (Graham, 2010; Judge, 2002; Levy and Panchyk, 2000). There-

fore, it is usually perceived as a signiicant problem by landowners who want to avoid use of their property for the sake of sewers and sewage solutions. However, it is highly important that proper sewers be designed and constructed to provide necessary services for future generations. Although it may seem like an intrusion and inconvenience today, it will help to avoid countless problems later. Given the undeniable necessity for healthy sewer system, instead of increasing the burden on existing infrastructure, it is more advantageous to design innovative strategies and technologies that can be installed as on-site systems to address the issue of expansion (Kwok et al., 2007; Drexler, 2012; Judge, 2002; Van Lengen, 2008). Therefore, along with proper design and structures, one of the most important aspects to ensuring effective sewer systems is to educate the public about the necessity of expenditures today that will eventually provide greater convenience for all.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

ENERGY/ELECTRICITY With the invention of electric light and electricity transmission technology by Thomas Edison in the 1800s (Levy et al., 2000), power infrastructure has become another manmade system that is indispens-

Transmission Tower Drawing

Olive Switching Station

able. One of the outcomes was the birth of utility companies to provide electricity, such as the Los Angeles Edison Electric Company. As early as 1886, the predecessors of the Los Angeles Electric Company, Holt & Knupps and Electric Light Works, known today as Southern California

Power Plant in 1928

Edison (SCE) started the electricity business of providing electricity to consumers in Southern California (SCE, 2014). Since then, thousands of irst-in-nation

stormproof steel towers22-24 were strategically planted within Southern California

to generate proit for the company and provide power for consumers. Though necessary additions to the landscape, there are now so many towers required to accommodate the population that becomes an environmental concern.

Unfortunately, throughout history there has been an ongoing conlict between human interests and the environment, and the former virtually always prevails. As evidence of their intrusion on the environment, almost all areas where steel towers were placed are now barren land25-28. The utility company intentionally wants the land surrounding the towers to be clear of vegetation so that the

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

maintenance crews can easily perform their jobs on the struc-

tures and to avoid ire hazards from dry brush. In fact, the utility company recently performed a routine tree trimming in my 25

SCE Plant

Transmission Tower Construction

neighborhood near a park and now only the main trunk of the mature pine trees remain29 (Author, 2014). With global warming and climate change as top priorities for the government and

Transmission Towers in Monterey Park, CA

the public, and the U.S. Envi-

ronmental Protection Agencyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Heat Island Effect study (USEPA)

providing oficial proof of the problem, it is surprising that the government allows utility companies to eliminate natural veg28

Transmission Towers in Monterey Park, CA

etation from so many sites. Similar to their use with water and sewer systems, design strategies and on-site systems can be employed to reduce electric consumption or generate energy for individual use (Stein,

Transmission Towers in Monterey Park, CA

Reynolds, Grondzik and Kwok,

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

2006; Guzowski, 2010; Drexler, 2012). By adopting the approach of zero energy design with minimal consumption of electricity from the power grid and utilizing renewable energy to produce electricity, consumers can experience lower energy bills and the luxury of maintaining power even when the power plant or power lines fail during a disaster. PROBLEMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE Along with the negative effects created by the infrastructure mentioned in the previous sections, there is one unique problem that all infrastructure shares,

and that is inance. Although immediate gratiication is the trend, our government never seems to have the funds, for repairing or replacing the aged system (LePartner, 2010). Thus, bonds and loans fund almost all infrastructure or building projects. Often when a ix needs to be performed or additional parts need to be

added to the existing system, the agency helplessly awaits other building projects to reach completion in order to receive revenue, from the project to get the new building project underway (Author, 2014). And, in addition to the inan-

cial issues that plague the U.S., state governments also face problems as they must adhere to prevailing wages and union worker requirements that escalate the cost of maintenance and construction. Loss of time and business is another side effect created by the construc-

tion and repair of existing infrastructure. Nearly ninety-ive percent of the utility infrastructure is buried under public streets and the other ive percent lawfully in-

vades private property as “easement” that restricts and prohibits development by the property owner. Also, once the construction commences, property and business owners are at the mercy of the approving agency or utility company to complete the job as quickly as possible and restore life back to normal. Af-

fected businesses can never make up their revenue, and commuters’ loss of

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Example of aging infrastructure

Retired digester at Hyperion Treatment Plant

Example of aging infrastructure

Retired digester at Hyperion Treatment Plant

Trafic congestion due to construction

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

time reduces productivity, which further works to bring down the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). CONCLUSION

The composition of a city is very complicated and involves politics, inances, power struggles, and the needs of its residents. In order to avoid many of the problems that often plague city projects when repairing or replacing infrastructure and utilities, it is important to understand how the infrastructure system actually operates. By facing the issues that can arise, such as population growth, diminishing natural resources, and tainted landscapes, it is possible to bridge the disconnection between the reality of our common problems and the readily available technologies and knowledge that provide the solutions. Therefore, it is important to take a proactive stance in discerning the problems, devising advantageous solutions, and effectively protecting the environment through sustainable design strategies. This will allow decentralization of the utility infrastructure and transformation of architecture into self-sustainable systems.

METHODS

methods My research project of â&#x20AC;&#x153;Decentralization of the Infrastructureâ&#x20AC;? used the City of Los Angeles as the main study area. Therefore, my research method for this study required me to gather the relevant data from speciic public departments, the private utility company, and university libraries to ensure credibility and accuracy of the data and area of coverage in order to support my inquiry. By compiling databases of the data that I collected, I was able to prepare maps, charts, calculations, and observation reports to analyze the material and achieve a more complete understanding of the impact of infrastructure overdevelopment on the environment. This was based on the comparison of

the reconstructed historical setting against todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current setting. I was able to validate my presumption by obtaining indings on the following questions: 1)

How does over-development of infrastructure affect the environment and natural habitat? 2) To what extent did the effect of the impaired environment and

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

eco-system affect humans? 3) How can decentralization be beneicial to the environment? 4) What are the advantages of being independent and decentralized from the infrastructure? 5) How can decentralization come into play in redevelopment of blighted neighborhoods? 6) How does a damaged environment affect climate change and contribute to heat island effect? Since the framework of inquiry was mainly a phenomenon analysis, a qualitative research method was primarily utilized throughout this project, includ-

ing interpretation of the public records and indings. Field observation reports, case studies, and data from public records were used as empirical evidence to support my claim that decentralization can perform the same function as

infrastructure and it can be beneicial to the environment by controlling the expansion on the existing system. Correspondingly to my belief, the outcome was positive and supported my hypothesis that decentralization can be beneicial to the environment. Since I was investigating a subject that decompresses a large scale, I employed a grounded-theory approach to conduct the research on my subject

matter. This allowed me lexibility in data collection, analysis, and ine-tuning my theory. Also, because the framework of my subject matter included both major and minor systems across the land that could be considered as part of the infrastructure system, I took a qualitative ontological position to identify the importance of positioning this research within a particular geographical and historical context. I used this along with an epistemological approach to narrow down the basic utilities needed to keep a building functioning in three categories (water, sewer, and energy) in order to determine the feasibility of decentralization. A quantitative method was also used in my research since my inquiry attempted to discover the cause-andâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;effect relationships between expanding

METHODS

the existing infrastructure and the effect on the environment. Even though I was not conducting an experiment to collect a set of data for analysis purposes, I

did collect statistical and scientiic data from other credible research and stud-

ies to aid in compiling charts and tables as part of the investigation. I deined the independent variable in my study as the extent of future expansion of the spe-

ciic type of infrastructure, and the dependent variable as the projected effect on the damaged environment at that speciic area. With the variables deined,

I used the data to evaluate the potential cause-effect relationship between the pre- and post-development effect on the environment. In other words, I com-

pared the current condition of the speciic site and the projected effect from the indings.

As previously mentioned in the introduction, surveys and interviews were not employed in this research due to the fact that the general public lacks knowledge about infrastructure and thus, intervieweesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; opinions would mere-

ly be subjective. During the process of methodology assessment, I attempted to explore whether surveys and interviews could be employed in my project and found that most of the participants were either not interested or only pos-

sessed a very supericial concept about infrastructure, even though most of the interviewees had been trained in engineering at the graduate education level. However, a couple of interviewees employed by public agencies had knowledge and experience with infrastructure, and were able to give me extensive input and opinions on the subject. Since the outcome from the examination of the survey method and interview was so extreme that the results fell either at one end of the scale or the other, without a middle ground, I declined to include this tactic in my inquiry to avoid lopsided results.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

DATA COLLECTION Data collection consisted of public records, reports, strategic plans, archive documents, and agency standards from various public departments, private companies, and university libraries. In addition, a geographical infor-

mation system (GIS), satellite photos, and ield observations were employed to create a database for the speciic area in this study. A structured observation protocol was developed to support the ield-condition documentation. This was

accomplished by using the GIS provided through public and state agencies and also local public government agencies as the primary source. This generated the most up-to-date information to load the map at the selected site as baseline. The same GIS generated map was also utilized in a documentary process for correlation studies. Satellite images from the Internet were used for remote areas and off-limit areas that did not allow any ield observations.

Data was collected from the following public entities: City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LADWP), Bureau of Engineering (BOE), Bureau of Sanitation (BOS), California Coastal Commission (CCC), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Geographical Information System (GIS) from both the County of Los Angeles and CDFW, as well as the private utility company Southern California Edison as the primary source for compiling the database. My secondary sources of data were collected from universities and private libraries, such as Huntington Library and Young Research Library (UCLA) that collect extensive and reliable documentation from historical archives. This enabled me to reconstruct maps that illustrate the historical settings prior to all the development of the infrastructure that took place during the previous century. For study that involved calculations and numbers, I adopted the California Building Codes and Title 24 Energy Code to support my basic calculations and to generate an accurate assump-

METHODS

tion of the projected utility consumption that would increase the burden on the existing system. For case studies, I selected multiple recent publications from university

presses and other credible professional publications in the ield of study that documented the contemporary development, design strategies, and utilization of onsite systems including water reuse, waste treatment, and energy conservation. I carefully selected cases that applied to my framework with illustrations of real-life examples to further support my claim that decentralization from the infrastructure was feasible. Due to the fact that the academic journals and university research papers were exceedingly technical and scholarly, I decided to eliminate such data in consideration that my target audiences would be policymakers, design professionals, and the general public. Furthermore, my main goal was to educate the general public about my theory. So most of the articles, publications, and internet references that I adopted for this research project were more readilyavailable sources that could be easily found using Internet search engines and in online bookstores without having to access restricted university databases to review the original work. Finally, a triangulation method was used to combine the following tactics:

analyzed indings from correlation studies on historical-interpretive maps and

contemporary GIS maps, ield observations, documentation of public records, and original design. As a result, all the relevant knowledge was compiled to achieve a thorough understanding of the reality of the major utility infrastruc-

tureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s function and its impact on the environment. The outcome was drawn based on all analyzed indings from the documented empirical phenomenon.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Map of project area at Owen Lakes

FINDINGS

indings For organization, the indings are presented under three categories: wa-

ter, sewer, and energy. The results are presented by negative impact indings

irst, followed by case study solutions, and then case study indings are presented in the discussion section. WATER

Through an analysis of maps, satellite photos, and statistics the indings are as follows: a.

Existing river that served as natural habitat and eco-system was replaced by concrete paving and engineered structure.

Natural lake was eliminated to provide for continued city growth.37

With an average of 35 rain days in Los Angeles38 and an estimated 53 million gallons per day (MGD) that run through the storm wa

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

tershed system, a total of 185.5 million gallons of storm water has been wasted and discharged into the ocean per year for de cades (Author, 2014). d.

City of Los Angeles plans to expand the water reuse/recycle program to use some of the recycled water for non-potable use such as irrigation. Part of the efluent will be treated by a more advanced iltration system for charging back to replenish

the ground water. To accomplish this, the City of Los Angeles plans to upgrade and expand existing wastewater treatment facilities and use the same infrastructure to simultaneously handle both the efluent and the watershed. Due to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposed

approach of combining both water conservation and wastewa-

ter management, the indings will be discussed in the next section under sewage. e.

Based on the report from the County of Los Angelesa , there are 609,017 parcels for single-family units, 109,665 income parcels, and 65,014 commercial parcels in the City of Los Angeles39. There are a total of 783,696 parcels, and conservatively assuming each parcel is 10,000 square feet, the decentralized on-site system can process 2,238,400 acre-feet of storm water each year with an avenge annual precipitation of 14.93 inches of rain (Author, 2014)b.

a b

Per capita water use in the City of Los Angeles is 123 gallons per

day (LA Mayor Ofice, 2014)40.

Total reclaimed water in the City of Los Angeles is 74 million gal-

lons per day (LA Mayor Ofice, 2014)41.

Los Angeles County Assessors report 2013 1 acre-foot = 325,851.43 US Gallons

FINDINGS

38a

Historical data from California public records on 2013 California Average Rainfall

38b

Historical data from California public records on 2013 California Seasonal Rainfall

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Los Angeles County Assessors report 2013

Los Angeles per caipta water use in the past 30 years

Los Angeles total reclaimed water from 20072013

SEWAGE From the analysis of public records

and statistics, the indings are as follows:

Due to the population growth, the waste treatment plant was expanded from a single building with a small leach

ield to a waste treatment facility currently ranked number six in the world. In order to accommodate population growth, planning for expansion of the existing wastewater treatment plants began in 2004. Based on the 2004 projection, construction on the project will start in 2025 42

Wastewater map

(CH:CDM 2004). Hyperion Treatment Plant upgrade â&#x20AC;˘

Twelve egg-shaped di-

gesters will replace six existing conventional digesters. Each new egg-shaped digester will 43a

Hyperion Plant

be 85 feet in diameter and 110 feet above mean sea level, including the 15-foot mixing unit on top (CH:CDM 2004). The 2006 estimate shows total capital cost will be $303 million

43b

Hyperion Plan

(CH:CDM 2006).

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

•

Secondary clariier module expansion will be installed in an area

approximately 300 feet wide by 300 feet long, and the three new modules will be located on the existing parking lot of the site for the emergency storage basins. The 2006 estimate shows total capital cost will be $105 million (CH:CDM 2006). Tillman Treatment Plant expansion •

Four new primary clariier tanks or channels and four new low

equalization tanks/channels will be installed in an approximately one-acre area east of the existing primary clariiers. The primary clariier tanks/channels and new low equalization tanks/chan-

nels will be approximately 200 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 15 feet deep with two-foot thick concrete. Construction of the

additional primary clariiers, low equalization tanks, and aeration basins will involve excavating the expansion site and installing the new infrastructure. The excavated clay and construction debris •

will mainly be discarded in local landills (CH:CDM 2004).

Four new aeration basins will be installed in an approximately

one-acre vacant area. Each new aeration basin will be 300 feet long, 36 feet wide, and 16 feet deep with two-foot thick •

concrete (CH:CDM 2004).

Twelve secondary clariier channels will be installed in an

approximately 1.5 acre vacant area adjacent to the existing secondary clariier (CH:CDM 2004).

Los Angeles – Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAG) expansion

•

Four primary clariier tanks or channels will be installed in an

FINDINGS

Digester plan

Digesters on site

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

approximately 0.5 acre area west of the existing primary clariiers. The primary clariier tanks/channels will be approximately 140 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 15 feet deep with two-foot thick •

concrete walls (CH:CDM 2004)46-48.

Three new aeration basins will be installed in an area of

approximately 1 acre west of the existing aeration basins. The existing pond will be reconigured to accommodate the new

aeration basins. Each new aeration basin will be approximately 300 feet long, 36 feet wide, and 16 feet deep with two-foot thick •

walls (CH:CDM 2004).

Five secondary clariier channels will be installed in an area

approximately one acre west of the existing secondary clariiers. Each secondary clariier channel will be approximately 170 feet

long and 20 feet wide with a 10-foot average depth and two-foot •

thick walls (CH:CDM 2004).

The new advanced treatment process will include installation of

two microiltration (MF) trains and six reverse osmosis (RO) units.

Each MF train will be approximately 250 feet by 40 feet wide and contain 14 standard-sized units. The MF trains will be installed in an area west of the existing pond on approximately 0.5 acre of land. Each RO unit will be approximately 45 feet long by 40 feet wide installed on approximately 0.5 acres at the same site as the •

existing chlorine disinfection units (CH:CDM 2004).

An ultraviolet (UV) disinfection process will be added at LAG to

replace the existing disinfection contact system. Six UV units will be installed on approximately 0.25 acre of the existing facility. Construction of the UV disinfection process facility will involve the

FINDINGS

Treatment plant locations

LAG birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s eye view

LAG plan

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

demolition of a portion of the existing sodium hypochlorite •

contact basins (CH:CDM 2004).

Construction activities will consist of excavating pits, constructing

formwork, and pouring concrete. Piping and accessory structures will also be constructed for supporting function. Construction •

debris will typically be recycled or disposed at local landills.

By 2006 estimates, total capital cost will be $105 million (CH:CDM

2006). Since the problem of drought is worsening each year, both storm water and wastewater engineers aware of the problem planned to install new infrastructure to reuse the treated efluent along with the watershed. Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant •

Expansion of the existing wastewater treatment plant will increase

•

the current capacity from 450 mgd to 500 mgd (CH:CDM 2006).

There will be reuse of up to 42,000 acre-feet per year of recycled

water for non-potable reuse, as well as management of up to 42 percent of the dry weather and 47 percent of the wet weather •

urban runoff generated in the City (CH:CDM, 2006).

By 2006 estimates, capital cost will be $303 million (CH:CDM 2006).

Tillman Water Reclamation Plant •

There will be reuse of up to 53,000 acre-feet per year of recycled

water, as well as management of up to 42 percent of the dry weather and 47 percent of the wet weather urban runoff •

generated in the City (CH:CDM, 2006).

By 2006 estimates, capital cost will be $120 million (CH:CDM,

2006).

FINDINGS

49a

Total capital costs for IRP alternatives

49b

Annual O&M costs for IRP alternatives

Single family monthly cost for water, wastewater and stormwater

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Glendale-Burbank Interceptor Sewer (BIS) •

It will be comprised of approximately 5¾ miles of 8-feet diameter

interceptor sewer and associated structure that will provide sewer relief for the North Outfall Sewer (NOS) from the vicinity of Grifith •

Park (LA Zoo) to the vicinity of Toluca Lake (CH:CDM, 2006).

By 2006 estimates, capital costs will be $196 million (CH:CDM,

2006). Northeast Interceptor Sewer Phase II (NEIS II) •

The component of the NEIS II will consist of a 5.3 mile interceptor

sewer pipe and associated structures, including diversion structures, drop structures, a maintenance hole structure, and air •

treatment facilities.

The NEIS II construction will use tunneling methods at depths up to

180 feet below ground surface. The inished inside diameter of the wastewater conveyance pipe will be eight feet. Tunnel construction will occur from construction shaft sites (CH:CDM 2004).

Valley Spring Lane Interceptor Sewer (VSLIS)

•

It will be comprised of approximately 8½ mile interceptor and

associated structures that will extend from the Toluca Lake area, northwest to Tillman. All the above mentioned infrastructure solutions for reuse of the recycled water will result in potential odor impacts related to increased wastewater

treatment capacity requiring additional air-iltration facilities to be built to miti-

FINDINGS

Map of Valley Spring Lane Interceptor Sewer

gate the potential problem. Total length of the underground recycle water pipe line will be 289 miles if the Intergraded Resource Plan is to be executed (DPW, 2013).

The average per capita wastewater low in the Los Angeles area is esti-

mated at 90 gallons per capita each day (gped) (LABOE, 2006). ENERGY/ELECTRICITY a.

Electricity consumption per capita in the U.S. was 13246.04 kilo watts in 2011, a 30 percent increase since 1981 (The World Bank, 2013).

Energy consumption per capita in California is 209 million BTUs (EIA, 2014).

Technical loss of electricity during transmission in power lines is 22.5 percent (Stein at el, 2006).

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

San Onofre nuclear plant shut down due to the fact it was

problematic for customers, investors, and the regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s long-term electricity needs (LA Times, 2014)54.

San Onofre nuclear plant operated for approximately 30 years (NY Times, 2014).

In 2012, fossil fuel power plants generated the following emissions during the process: 6,078 short tons of sulfur dioxide, 92,566 short tons of nitrogen oxide, and 59,369 short tons of carbon dioxide per year.55

Southern California Edison (SCE) has power to alter regulations to its own standards without any legislation or hearings (The Monterey Park Cascades, 2014).

Utility companies such as SCE proceed with plans for their own construction projects and simply make remedies if complaints are iled (Author, 2014).

Nuclear Power Plant

FINDINGS

52 California Power Map

55 California electricity proile

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

DISCUSSION

discussion In response to Bauen, Hannes Meyer’s “materialist” essay, Mies van der Rohe made a very important point about city planning. Van der Rohe wrote: Whether we tend to centralization or decentralization in city planning is a practical question, not a question of value. Yet it is just the question of value that is decisive. We must set up new values, ix our ultimate goals so that we may establish standards. For what is right and signiicant for any era – including the new era – is this: to give the spirit the opportunity for existence (Frampton, 1992).

Perhaps the question of centralization or decentralization is a political question, or maybe it is more of an environmental issue. According to the

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Storage Tank

study prepared by the engineering irm CH:CDM, the City of Los Angeles inally became aware that storm water running through the concrete-paved Los Angeles river storm water management system actually wasted water. The City decided to install a new centralized underground water storm water storage tank along with ground water charging facilities to charge both the storm runoff and the treated efluent back to the aquifer.56-57 However, even

expanding the infrastructure to such a scale of operation, the system can still

handle only 100,000 acre-feet or so of storm water and efluent. On the other hand, from the calculations, the decentralized onsite system is able to perform at least twice as much of the proposed expansion and upgrade on the existing infrastructure since the on-site system can be fully implemented. If such a large infrastructure needs to be expanded, it will damage more of the natural habitat as acres of green ields were destroyed to accommodate the new

facilities. In addition, there will be a tremendous increase in construction debris, waste, and harmful fumes generated by the construction. Further, based on one study report, it will cost billions of dollars in capital costs, operations, and maintenance to execute the plan without any assurance that it will succeed.

DISCUSSION

However, the green ields, natural habitats, and wildlife will invariably be displaced by the manmade structures. The following sections will concentrate on solutions to address the possibility of decentralization through employing different types of onsite systems. WATER

Capturing rainwater and utilizing lowing springs from creeks and rivers

is not a new concept that can only be performed by todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s technology and infrastructure. There are actually multiple ways to achieve this. The following case studies will illustrate different types of systems that range from primitive to advanced technologies. Venetian Cistern A Venetian cistern can be constructed in a courtyard with a pit approxi-

mately 10 feet in diameter and ive feet deep with a well structure made of

bricks or masonry in the middle with the gaps or holes at the bottom for water to low through to the storage well. The rest of the pit is then illed with layers of sand and rocks in various sizes by layer

to ilter the incoming 58

Venetian Cistern

storm water. With ei-

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

ther an electric or manual pump, water can be served on demand to the building (Lengen, 208).58 Bamboo-Cement Water Reservoir An above grade water reservoir can be built using a large bamboo basket with mortar that has a drainage pipe on top to collect rainwater from roof

Bamboo tank

Collecting rain water from roof

Stormwater Collection System

gutters and a pipe outlet at the bottom to dispense the water. In this case, the bamboo acts as steel rebar

to hold the cement irmly together, similar to concrete construction (Lengen, 2008). The collected rainwater can be used for irrigation and non-potable use without treatment, or after iltering and

boiling to remove the contaminants and bacteria for consumption.59-60 Onsite water recharge system Simple design strategies such as using pervious surface, bio swale, and retention ponds can effectively mitigate excessive storm water if the onsite cistern or rainwater capturing system reaches the maximum capacity (Kwok

DISCUSSION

et al, 2007). Or a more sophisticated engineered system can be utilized with a drywell system that includes a retention basin as a pretreatment interceptor that is able to remove harmful chemical and particles before charging back to the ground to replenish the aquifer. With an engineered system, it can be designed and located underground below the basement level of a high-rise building with minimum site area needed in a condensed urban setting (International Rainwater Harvesting Alliance, 2014).61 SEWER Sewer is a basic problem for all societies, and except for some developing and undeveloped countries, virtually all developed countries approach the problem with an expensive infrastructure to solve the health and environmental issues. The centralized sewer system is not a new invention of the 20th century. In fact, the sewer infrastructure started back in Roman times.62 Since then, generation after generation has adopted the concept of centralized infrastructure to address the sewer problem. Regarding

the City of Los Angelesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; plan for expansion of the existing infrastructure to provide enough service to meet the rate of growing population, the sewer system would pose a problem to the environment. This is especially true for the 62

Map of downtown Rome during the Roman Empire

proposed expansion at the Hyperion Treatment Plant that is located at the Santa Monica

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Bay beachfront. The expansion plan contradicts the mission statement of the California Coastal Commission to protect the marine ecosystem, access to the ocean, and the aesthetic of the coastline (CCC, 2014). In addition to the environmental concerns, there are also political issues, potential power struggles between two agencies, and consideration of the length of time to complete a project of this scale. Also, by the time approvals are obtained from all the

stakeholders, the construction costs are usually inlated by millions of dollars in planning and design fees. On the other hand, in many third world countries and even in developed countries such as the U.S. and Europe today, decentralized onsite systems are still in use and operate successfully. In order to illustrate onsite systems that can perform the same functions as the infrastructure, the following case studies depict various ranges that are applicable to real life cases.63 63

Onsite ecological sanitation

Ecological sanitation The city of Stockholm has supported the â&#x20AC;&#x153;ecological sanitationâ&#x20AC;? system within their middle class housing neighborhoods where the liquid waste is centrally collected, stored, and spread on farmland as fertilizer. In contrast, con-

DISCUSSION

ventional sanitation systems have focused on treating pathogens and keeping human excreta away from people. However, during the process, large amounts of water are wasted to carry the waste to the central plant for treatment, and in some cases both land and marine ecosystems are destroyed due to an ill-designed infrastructure that discharges untreated efluent and waste back into the environment (Judge, 2002). When there is insuficient natural

fertilizer such as human or animal excreta returned to the land, then artiicial fertilizers, chemicals, and other engineered products are often used, which can diminish soil nutrients. The concept of the ecological sanitation system is achieved by installing toilets equipped with two bowls, a front one for the collection of urine and a rear one for feces. It is possible to equip both dry sanitation toilets and water closets this way.64 The collected urine is led 64

The sewer system

through a sewer system to a storage tank to sepa-

rate it from the solid waste for a minimum of six months to ensure the pathogens are eliminated (Judge, 2002).

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Minimum Impact House, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Drexler Guinand Jauslin Architekten, a German architectural irm, de-

signed the Minihouse to operate as a wastewater-free house to treat and recycle water and wastewater onsite without any support from utility infrastructure. Occupants of the house consume potable water and generate wastewater from the main city water supply. An underground cistern is installed to collect storm water, and an onsite waste treatment system

treats the wastewater generated by the occupants. The treated efluent

is then mixed with the rainwater for both irrigation and lushing toilets. With the onsite system intact, the Minihouse can reduce the potable water consumption from the public supply by 80 percent (Drexler et al, 2012). However, authorities have not agreed to exempt the Minihouse from its legal re-

Minihouse concept drawing

DISCUSSION

How Minihouse impact house work

The Minihouse

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

quirement to use the general local sewage network due to a law passed in the nineteenth century to guarantee the proper disposal of wastewater. In fact, the purpose of the law was to keep the expensive infrastructure running at a proit rather than serve the residents of the area (Drexler et al, 2012).65-67 LIVING MACHINE, Virginia, USA LIVING MACHINES are a proprietary, engineered waste treatment system designed to process a buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sanitary drainage on site. The treatment is ac-

complished via a series of anaerobic and aerobic tanks that house key bacteria that consume pathogens, carbon, and other nutrients in the wastewater thereby making it clean and safe for reuse or reintroduce into the local landscape (Kwok et al, 2007).

Unlike other waste water treatment systems, Living Machine requires an exterior system. The design is based on the principle of an ecosystem that is engineered with plants and beneicial bacteria that rely on a living system

rather than a mechanical system, hence space and supply of sunlight is mandatory. However, the same company also designed a Hydroponic Living Machine System for inside a building or located in a greenhouse adjacent to a

Living Machine water reuse concept diagram

DISCUSSION

Living Machine water reuse diagram

Living Machine water reuse low diagram

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Living Machine system at SFPUC

Living Machine system at Portland

building. Both systems basically operate in the same manner except the latter passes the waste water into a series of Hydroponic Reactors. These reactors are illed with a textile material covered with vegetation, supported on

racks, and aerated with ine bubble diffusers, providing the oxygen required

DISCUSSION

for treatment while keep71

How a composting toilet works

ing the tank contents mixed.68-72 Since plants are the key element for both of the Living Machine systems, utilizing the Living Machine system can not only treat the wastewater generated by the occupants but also help reduce carbon dioxide and keep the air clean. Composting Toilet A composting toilet, also known as a biological toilet, is a waterless system that is more radi-

Phoenix Composting Toilet System

cal since it is a unit by itself. The composting toilet manages the chemical

breakdown of human excrement, paper products, food wastes, and other carbon-based materials. A soil-like inal product called â&#x20AC;&#x153;humusâ&#x20AC;? is generated as

the end result after the oxygenated waste is converted. The humus can then be used as fertilizer for non-agricultural plants. The advantage of the compost-

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

ing toilets includes reduced potable water use, and a septic tank system or connection to an outdoor onsite treatment system (Kwok et al, 2007). The composting toilet system has been successfully used in many buildings nationwide, especially for residential houses in remote locations that lack supporting infrastructure. Waterless urinals are often used in conjunction with the composting toilet system, particularly in commercial settings (Kwok et al, 2007).73-74 ENERGY/ELECTRICITY Currently in many areas of the world, and even in some areas of the U.S., there is a lack of electrical power plants and distribution infrastructure to provide a supply of electricity. Nonetheless, there are numerous technologies to generate electricity for localized use though they may not be popular in urbanized areas. Sustainable environments have become a priority in the world as renewable energy becomes more popular. With todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s technologies, it is possible to pump water or generate heat, provide enough power to charge batteries, and for lighting, refrigeration, and communications equipment. The California Title 24 code for energy conservation prescribes design standards that include increasing insulation in buildings, setting minimum insulation re-

quirements, and air conditioning unit eficiency requirements. By using these strategies, it can result in reduced energy consumption while utilizing energy in a more eficient way.

However, the power utility company holds a different view. For example,

SCE recently shut down the nuclear power plant in San Onofre due to inancial issues unrelated to environmental concerns. SCE is more concerned about the

investorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; beneit and its own operation costs than anything else (NPR, 2014). In addition, the utility company acquires much political power so it can create its

DISCUSSION

Demolished trees at Monterey Park, CA

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

own rules for its own beneit. For instance, one neighborhoodâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s trees are being demolished due to safety concerns for SCE workers (Monterey Park Cascade, 2014).75-77 In fact, a history of collaboration between SCE and the City of Monterey Park dates back to 1965 with a license agreement that allows use and access to the area known as Edison Trails. This is where the gigantic stormproof power towers, supporting high voltage overhead cables cut through the southern part of Monterey Park into the City of Montebello and City of Rosemead.

With complaints iled by numerous residents on the recent SCE operation

on cutting down numerous trees that planted at Edison Trails, the utility company agreed to offer the City an $80,000.00 grant for trail enhancements including planting young trees and installing a new playground facility at the adjacent park to trade on the cutting of 50 feet tall mature pine trees (Monterey Park Cascade, 2014).This demonstrates collusion between a public agency and a powerful private entity. The following case studies are examples of systems that can help indi-

vidual buildings to be self-suficient in power generation: Aldo Leopold Legacy Center, Wisconsin, USA

Aldo Leopold Legacy Center is the irst contemporary carbon-neutral

and zero-energy architecture in the U.S. The goal of the building is to achieve carbon neutrality and have energy independence without support from the infrastructure. The architect focused on utilizing sustainable energy from nature, such as power from the sun and wind combined with a design to achieve the goal of independence. The building is meticulously oriented with different design strategies to maximize the utilization of the unlimited energy resources of solar, wind, and geothermal energy. The design team integrated the heat-

Aldo Leopoid Legacy Center site plan

Section drawing

Sectino drawing

Aldo Leopoid Legacy Center

ing, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and photovoltaic system after designing the building with passive strategies (Guzowski, 2010). Onsite solar energy was harvested through active hot-water photovoltaic array in addition to the above-mentioned passive strategies. Geothermal technology and heating are used by harvesting ire wood on site to reduce

energy budget costs. As a result, the building is able to operate solely by harvesting solar and geothermal energy without relying on the utility company. Although the initial cost of the setup was more costly than a building without a

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

self-sustainable system, the cost will eventually be covered if the building continues to operate over the next 25 years.78-81 Solarsiedlung am Schlierberg, Freiburg, Germany The German architect Rolf Disch designed the Solar Community at Schliergerg using a combination of passive solar strategies and renewable energy sources from the sun, wind, and biomass. This complex is a communityscale sustainability plan to promote renewable energy, and minimize or even eliminate dependence on fossil fuels (Guzowski, 2010).82-85 The architect believes:

The function determines the aesthetics. This is true of the whole coniguration. It also becomes apparent in the ventilation components that are integrated into the façade and which serve the purpose of heat recovery in the winter and of cooling the building units at nighttime in the summer, as well as in the components for heat insulation, soundprooing and sun shading (Disch, 2009).

The result of the design is the Solar Community oriented on an east-west axis with solar panels covering the whole south facing side of the gable roof to optimize both the passive and active solar strategies. The oversized overhanging photovoltaic roof also serves as a sunshade to reduce the heat gained in the building and generate more electricity than the complex consumes. Thus, the Solar Community at Schlierberg demonstrates that it is possible to achieve not only a zero-energy (or even “plus-energy”) design, but also an intersection of energy and human health through design details, systems, and mate-

rial speciications. For example, “A de-central ventilation system based on the principle of heat recovery makes sure the air quality is constantly good: the house is breathing” (Guzowski, 2010).

DISCUSSION

Overall site plan

Section drawing

Birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s eye view

Elevation

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

PROBLEM OF INFRASTRUCTURE Although a utility infrastructure is capable of providing for the needs of a community and keeping a city functioning, it is not invincible and actually has shortcomings. In big cities around the world, urban infrastructures are vital networks and absolutely necessary for the functioning of the twenty-irst cen-

tury urban complex. Communities and their underlying economies rely on the ability to support different functions of society (Little, 2010). However, in recent U.S. history, there are numerous times the infrastructure has failed to perform as it should due to forces from natural disasters. Since September 11, 2001, there have been concerns of possible terrorist attacks that could cripple the infrastructure of the country. In addition, infrastructure has been suffering from the economic downturn since 2007. This section will discuss the problems caused by the failure of infrastructure. The Electricity Network Collapse of August 2003 in North America There was a major loss of electricity during a blackout that occurred in

August 2003. Although the problem was ixed in approximately eight hours,

several states as well as large areas of Ontario and Quebec in Canada suf-

fered from power outages that lingered for two days. Forty-ive million people in eight states and ten million people in Ontario were affected due to the accident, or to be exact, a software glitch in the system. The widespread electrical power loss disrupted many cities and created a gridlock in New York City, Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, Rochester, Erie, Cleveland, Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, and hundreds of other smaller cities and towns.86 With a total of ifty-six million

people affected by the incident, it created an estimated 6-10 billion dollars in lost output, wages, sales, and earnings for just a relatively short period of time (Luke, 2010).87-91

Widespread electricity power loss in New York

Blackout during evening

89 Commuter forced to stay overnight in public area

90 Subway employee evacuate commuter from subway

People affected by power loss

Distressed crowd due to prolong power loss

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Luke referred to corruption of the government and the utility company: The under-regulation of the American electrical industry, and disinvestment in the technical infrastructures of the electricity grid follow from the neoliberal consensus emerging triumphant all across the United States in its commercial,

inancial, and monetary centers. This attitude follows both “the pauperization of the state” and “the commodiication of public goods,” and this fragility of

today’s electrical gird comes from liberal democratic governments’ all too “willing submission to the inancial markets.” In all cases, this capitulation is leading to the gradual degradation or a rapid meltdown in vital public services, as the August 2003 blackout shows (Luke, 2010).

If what Luke claimed is true, it should not be dificult for the general public to notice the problem. In fact, in 2011 a similar incident occurred in Southern California that is often referred to as the Great Blackout of 2011. It was a widespread power outage that affected large areas of Southern California as well as western Arizona, northern Baja California, and Sonora. It began on the afternoon of September 8, 2011 and became the largest power failure in California history. Five utilities were affected including San Diego Gas & Electric, Imperial Irrigation District, Coision Federal de Electricidad, Arizona Public Service, and Western Area Power Administration. A total of seven millions of people were affected, with the most seriously affected regions being San Diego and the Tijuana metropolitan area that were brought to a standstill. The twelve hour gridlock caused by the blackout cost an estimated 12 - 18 million dollars. Baker reported the aftermath in the San Diego Union Tribute on September 18th 2011: About 1.9 millions of sewage spilled into the Los Penasquitos Lagoon after a

pump station that doesn’t have an on-site emergency generator stopped working. That prompted oficials to close all beaches north of Scripps Pier through

DISCUSSION

Del Mar, Solana Beach and into the Cardiff area of Encinitas at least until Saturday…. …Generators also failed at two hospitals, including the lone generator at Scripps Mercy Hospital in Chula Vista… …Flashlights were used to illuminate some areas of hospital… …The blackout proved costly for local restaurants, many of which had to discard food and lost business… (U-T San Diego, 2011).92-93

Similar incidents have occurred throughout U.S. history and numerous investigations have taken place but there is still no solution or even clear answer as to what the problem was. Thus, as long as there are large infrastructures, outages and other problems will continue.

Power outage at San Diego, CA

Power outage at Gardena, CA

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Hurricane Katrina, 2005 Hurricane Katrina was the deadliest catastrophe in U.S. history. The effects of the hurricane that took place in August 2005 still exist today.94-97 In fact, the storm claimed 1835 lives with 705 people still missing and presumed dead (Department of Health and Hospital, 2008). It affected most of the southern states and extended its damage as far north as Canada. Infrastructure damaged from the disaster included seawalls, roads, emergency pumps, water supplies, sewers, and power as well as communication and cell towers. Over 15 million people were affected by Katrina whether it was due to infrastructure, evacuations, or the economy. The aftermath of Katrina was further compounded by extensive looting, violence against rescuers, and civil unrest, which became the norm within the vicinity of New Orleans. The social order was in chaos during that time and crumbled along with the infrastructure. Even the New Orleans Police Depart-

ment (NOPD) was not insulated from the unrest, with many oficers resigning or walking away from their duties, including two who committed suicide due to lack of support or resources to respond to calls resulting from the disaster. There was even an emergency order forcing all police oficers to live inside the affected area, leaving them unable to return to their own families. As Sims quoted in his paper “Disoriented City”: Organizational sociologist Karl Weick has termed a “cosmology episode,” a situation in which people suddenly and deeply feel that the universe is no longer a rational, orderly system. A cosmology episode occurs when all of the key elements of social order mentioned above break down, to the point where even the fundamental categories that the impacted people use to organize the world are called into question-in other words, their cosmology. Under such circumstances, organizations

DISCUSSION

Widespread Flooding

Capsized boat at harbor

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

may experience dificulties with sense making-the ability of individuals within an organization to make their actions meaningful in relation to a wider organiza-

tion. When this breakdown, organizations ind it dificult to come up with collective representation of situations, which in turn can make it dificult for them to take collective action to respond to events (Sims, 2010).

This analysis of the social order breakdown illustrates one of the weaknesses that occurs from broken infrastructure. If dependence on the infrastructure results in catastrophic loss when there are problems, it is necessary to consider an alternative.

DISCUSSION

Survivors at temporary shelter at a stadium

Survivors outside the stadium

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

LIMITATION & FURTHER DISCUSSION

limitation & further discussion Due to the scale of the infrastructure, this study can only investigate a

small area and experiment is not a feasible option. Also, speciic information is extremely dificult to obtain from the private utility company and government

agencies. However, this inquiry is able to narrow down the subject into a manageable size for analysis, which provides a good starting point to consider the relationship between infrastructure and environment. For future study on the same subject, it would be helpful to obtain approval to work with public agencies in order to gain more access to valuable information.

As discussed in the indings and discussion sections, there are additional

research questions that can be investigated. These questions may include consideration of how decentralization increases occupant survivability when a disaster shuts down the infrastructure.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

CONCLUSION

conclusion Environmental issues are debated by grade school children to scholars, and laypeople to professionals. There is an abundance of news on “green” initiatives, but if people truly cared about the environment, why is infrastructure expanded? The size of infrastructure is approximately the same size of the earth, considering the transcontinental undersea communication cables, power grids, freeways and roads, and even satellites in outer space that connect countries and people to keep the world functioning. Due to the size of the infrastructure, it requires huge investments of money to maintain this “overpriced convenience.”

As mentioned in the indings, the capital cost gets a new project started,

but billions more dollars are required to keep the system continually delivering service. Since cities in the U.S. rarely possess the funding, they sell bonds as a common solution to the problem. However, ineficient bureaucracy and an

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

overregulated atmosphere waste the tax money earmarked for infrastructure construction projects or upgrades. As a result, infrastructure fails due to lack of maintenance and upgrades. For example, the tragic collapse of the I-35W Bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis resulted in the loss of lives.c Due to the ongoing gloomy economy, many neighborhoods and communities around the country have become blighted. In fact, thousands of cities now need to be redeveloped and revitalized in order to generate income and sustain the growth of the population. If the then-designed infrastructure is only able to serve a limited percentage of the population, it is necessary to plan and implement accommodations for the new growth. When decentralization is implemented, infrastructure is no longer a constraint or restriction to new development. Urban revitalization and reitting of suburbs will actually result in more assurance of ongoing services for the population. With environmental issues a top priority across the country and around the world today, expanding the infrastructure seems like a hypocritical act since it causes considerable harm to the environment. Thousands of facts and countless studies have demonstrated that overdevelopment is hostile to both the environment and citizens. It not only destroys natural habitat by clearing

green ields and cutting down trees that contribute to the heat island effectd, it also forces wildlife to wander into urban areas and attack humans.e Further, it causes extensive pollution of the environment and inevitably harms inhabitants. The question of centralization or decentralization continues to persist in both a political and environmental context. The City of Los Angeles decided to install a new centralized underground storm water storage tank along with ground water charging facilities to charge both the storm runoff and the treated efluent back to the aquifer. But gigantic infrastructures such as this inevitac

August 1, 2007 thirteen people were killed. US Environmental Protection Agency e California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Public Safety Incidents, 2014 d

CONCLUSION

bly need to be expanded, damaging more of the natural habitat as acres of

green ields are destroyed to accommodate the new facilities. It also causes a tremendous increase in construction debris, waste, and harmful fumes generated by the construction. The cost can exceed a billion dollars in capital costs, operations, and maintenance to execute the plan. However, as the green ields, natural habitats, and wildlife are displaced by manmade structures,

there is no assurance that the infrastructure will succeed. Thus, decentralization becomes a better option since it is not just sustainable for the environment, but has less impact on the economy. Utilizing a decentralization approach can provide a solution to infrastructure problems and be a key to the future of water, sewer, and power services for all.

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

bibliography Ascher, Kate, THE WORKS ANATOMY OF A CITY, PENGUIN BOOKS, New York, 2005 Barden, Lane, “THE RIVER THE LOS ANGELES REIVER PICTURING LOS ANGELES: CONDUITS, CORRIDORS, AND THE LINEAR CITY, PART 1” in THE INFRASTRUCTURAL CITY ed. Varneis, Kazys, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2009 California Coastal Commission, California Coastal Commission Strategic Plan 2013-2018, 2013 CH:CDM prepared for City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Sanitation and Department of Water and Power, Integrated Resources Plan Environment Impact Report, 2005 City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Sanitation, Water Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) Annual Stakeholders Meeting, 2013 Drexler, Hans and El khouli, Sebastian, HOLISTIC HOUSING Concepts, Design Strategies and Processes, Munich, Germany: Edition DETAIL, 2012 Fletcher, David, “FLOOD CONTROL FREAKOLOGY” in THE INFRASTRUCTURAL CITY ed. Varneis, Kazys, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2009

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Graham, Stephen, “When Infrastructures Fail” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Graham, Stephen, “Disruption by Design: Urban Infrastructure and Political Violence” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Guzowski, Mary, Towards ZERO ENERGY ARCHITECTURE NEWSOLAR DESIGN, London: Laurence King, 2010 Judge, Emma, Hands On Food, Water and Finance, London UK: ITDG Publishing, 2002 Judge, Emma, Hands On Energy, Infrastructure and Recycling, London UK: ITDG Publishing, 2002 Koolhaas, Rem, “Advancement versus Apocalypse” in ECOLOGICAL URBANISM ed. Mostafavi, Mohsen with Doherty, Gareth, Zurich Switzerland, Lars Muller Publishers: 2009 Kwok, Alison and Grondzik, Walter, THE GREEN STUDIO HANDBOOK The Environmental Strategies for Schematic Design, Oxford UK: Elsevier Inc.: 2007 Lateral Ofice, White, Mason and Sheppard, Lola, “NEW NEW DEAL: INFRASTRUCTURES ON LIFE SPPORT” in INFRASTRUCTURE AS ARCHITECTURE DESIGNING COMPOSITE NETWORKS ed. Stoll, Katrina and Lloyd, Scott, jovis Verlag GmbH: 2010 Lehrman, Barry, “RECONSTRUCTING THE VOID” in THE INFRASTRUCTURAL CITY ed. Varneis, Kazys, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2009 LePartner, Barry B, TOO BIG TO FALL America’s Failing Infrastructure and the Way Forward, Lebanon NH: University Press of New England, 2010 Levy, Matthys, Engineering the city : How Infrastructure Works Projects and Principles for Beginners, Chicago, Chicago Review Press Inc.: 2000 Little, Richard, “Managing the Risk of Cascading Failure in Complex Urban Infrastructures” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Luke, Timothy, “Power Loss or Blackout: The Electricity Network Collapse of August 2003 in North America” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Marvin, Simon and Medd, Will, “Clogged Cities: Sclerotic Infrastructure” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Mumford, Lewis, THE CITY IN HISTORY Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects, New York, Harcourt, Inc.: 1961

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Perez, Lorena, ECO DESIGN OUTSIDE Green Outside the House, New York, Firely Books Ltd.: 2012 Sims, Benjamin, “Disoriented City: Infrastructure, Social Order and the Police Response to Hurricane Katrina” in DISRUPTED CITIES ed. Graham Stephen, New York, Routledge: 2010 Stein, Benjamin; Reynolds, John; Grondzik, Walter; Kwok, Alison, Mechanical and Electrical Equipment for Buildings 10th, New Jersey, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: 2006 US Environmental Protection Agency, Case Studies of Individual and Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater Management Programs, 2012 Van Lengen, Johan, The BAREFOOT ARCHITECT Handbook for Green Building, California, Shelter Publication: 2008 Varnelis, Kazys, “INTRODUCTION NEWTWORKED ECOLOGIES” in THE INFRASTRUCTURAL CITY ed. Varneis, Kazys, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2009

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

PHOTO CREDIT

photo credit 01

U.S. GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL

03a

Morgueile.com (non-copyright photo)

03b

Wikipedia.com

Courtesy of UCLA Young Research Library

Courtesy of LA Metro

Courtesy of Metro Dorothy Peyton Gray Transportation Library and Archive

Not used

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Data from United States Census Bureau

14a

Google Earth

14b

Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning GIS-NET3 public

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation

Google Earth

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation

Southern California Edison

Author

Associate Press

Author

Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning GIS-NET3 public

Data from National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

PHOTO CREDIT

Data from Los Angeles County Assessor

Data from City of Los Angeles Mayor Ofice

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering

43a

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering

43b

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering

Author

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Not used

Los Angeles Times

U.S. Energy Information Administration

City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering

Author

INBAR-hansfriedrich.wordpress.com

International Rain Water Catchment System Association

Robert Benazzi and Chris Olson

Wikipedia

Author

Wikipedia

DECENTRALIZATION: KEY TO THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

Hans Drexler

The Looper

Worrell Water Technologies

Living Machine System, L3C

Advanced Composting Systems

Author

Aldo Leopold Foundation

P2P Foundation

Associate Press Phot, Tina Fineberg

Associate Press Photo, Tina Fineberg

PHOTO CREDIT

Associate Press Photo

OnScene.TV

Wikipedia

US Department of Commerce NOAA

Imagekid.com

Texas Tribune, Annise Parker