The Ecological Footprint of each person varies from country to country. Even more so varying per person. The Ecological Footprint is averaged from each resident and this helps countries to improve their sustainability and well-being. Though what has it got do do with Earth Overshoot day?

There are two parts in calculating the Ecological Footprint: the demand on nature and the supply of nature:

• Demand includes the consumption of natural resources and the amount of forests able to absorb its waste, particularly carbon emissions.
• Supply represents the productivity from land and sea sources.

When a populations demand on resources is greater than that region’s biocapacity, there is a deficit. The region will meet it’s demand through importing supply or liquidating ecological assets to sustain itself, however on a global level there are no additional supply to import from off world.

So when is the date?

This, as the Global Footprint Network calculates, is our world’s Ecological Footprint, and is expressed in two ways. The first through global hectares (gha) per person and the second is how many Earths are needed to meet our demand.

At Global Footprint Network, they calculate how long it takes humanity to use up the amount of supply 1 Earth can generate in a year. This is represented as a date where we go ‘over the budget’ and called Earth Overshoot Day. This day has been getting earlier from December 29 each year since the 1970’s, mainly due to population growth. However, with the goal being #MoveTheDate we can slow this down.

In 2017, Earth Overshoot Day was the 1st of August. In 2019, it was the 29th of July.

And in 2020, it’s the 22nd of August.

This improvement is related to the coronavirus pandemic from this year. However this still means we have a third of the year to go. Subsequently overdrawing on our ecological assets.

At Anderson Energy Efficiency our Purpose Statement is:

Helping to reduce the carbon footprint of buildings

Through our experience in Building Energy Efficiency Assessments, we assist clients to not only achieve Code Compliance, but a building that is more sustainable and helps reduce demand on our Earth’s supply.

We owe it to future generations to do our best to minimise our Ecological Footprint, so they can have the opportunity to enjoy earths resources like we have today.

If you’d like to know how your personal Ecological Footprint compares, try this quick quiz to estimate how many Earth’s you would use: https://www.footprintcalculator.org/

The post Earth Overshoot Day 2020 appeared first on Anderson Energy Efficiency.

When we ask, “Other than price, were there other factors that guided your decision?”, we often hear “No, the other company gave a competitive price for the same thing”. Though the client may not realise what “the same thing” means, this is a classic example of how the feeling of “saving money” powers a decision.
The final decision is ruled by how one “feels” about the information one receives. That decision is then justified by logic.

So, if we told you that we can estimate a clear dollar figure (at our fee proposal stage), of how much we can potentially help you save on construction costs, how would you feel? Would that figure (of how much you can potentially save) be of interest to you and your client?

A few days back, one of our clients told us that the dollar estimate would help convince their economic buyer about our competent services. He said that on their recent project, our Consulting helped them save “approximately $100,000 dollars” in construction costs. He further mentioned that this saving was achieved with our Verification Method JV3 Assessment, and it is a “no-brainer” to spend slightly more on JV3 in order to save hundreds and thousands during construction (compared to ‘inexpensive ‘ Deemed to Satisfy method, which can induce higher construction costs due to its various insulation and glazing stringencies). Now, which consultant will they choose, every time they think of “saving money”?

Will they feel pinched spending $2000 upfront for a JV3 assessment to save $100,000 in construction? Or will they save on DtS (half of JV3 costs) upfront, and end up spending $100,000 extra on construction?

If you would like to know more about how to choose the right consultant, contact us and we’ll send you a free PDF copy of “How to Select an Energy Efficiency Assessor”.

The post Choosing “cheap” consultants: Saving Money or Increasing your Construction Costs?! appeared first on Anderson Energy Efficiency.

It may be easier to consider the way more Sustainable Buildings will become reality. We can only achieve Sustainable Buildings incrementally, with small “course correction” moves that can steer us closer.

Driving a car, you are constantly moving the steering wheel to stay on the road. We know that fixing the steering wheel is not safe, even on a straight road. With continuous course-correction we can reach our destination safely.

In the sustainable buildings space, there are many examples of doing “it” better. The annual ‘Sustainable House Day’ provides many examples in a more accessible fashion.

There are several obstacles to achieving “truly” sustainable buildings. What causes buildings to be less sustainable? Is it always cost? Do we give cost more importance than is eventually warranted? That is, over the whole time that a building is used, how does the total lifetime benefits of something compare with the incremental extra cost?

For elements of sustainable buildings this benefit-cost exercise can be calculated. How can we know if something is “worth it”? What do we include and exclude in the calculations? What assumptions and data do we use?

Is a solar PV system more sustainable?

For example, a potential component of sustainable buildings is solar PV. The first question to ask is: Does adding solar PV bring the building closer or further away from being sustainable?

Now we could try to define “sustainability”, but inherently the word implies the ability to “stay”, to keep doing something nearly forever, with neutral impact. Moreover, the question we can ask: is this topic clearly seen as part of a desirable future? With less of the “bad” things, and more of the “good” things (like clean air, clean and adequate water, adequate and durable building materials, etc.)? Is there a straightforward, ongoing process of upkeep and maintenance? At the end of it’s useful life, can the item be upgraded or recycled?

So back to solar PV, in many respects the ability to generate electricity from sunlight is “magical”. However the reality is: the process involves several complex parts to work together. If one of these parts stops working, then the PV system stops working. The only way for solar PV to be sustainable is by ongoing maintenance. So long as the spare or replacement parts and expertise remain available, the solar PV system should be able to last as long as the building.

What is the lifetime cost of solar PV? What is the lifetime benefit? kWh electricity generated, avoided grid power cost saving, reduced impact from generating mains electricity, and even shading of the roof by the solar panels. The answers depend on the situation. Is it a “no-brainer”, or is there more to consider?

Buildings are more sustainable now

Sustainable buildings may not include all the parts of current building design. But the good thing is that today we are building more sustainable buildings than in the past. This is partly due to Sustainable Buildings being part of the National Construction Code, and improved construction materials and practices.

We are already on the journey of Sustainable Buildings!

Anderson Energy Efficiency’s Vision Statement is:

Advancing Sustainable Buildings across Australia

In summary, this is the journey that we are on. If you think this goal is necessary and desirable, come and join us to help make this happen. The only way to achieve sustainable buildings is to stay on the journey, incrementally – by choosing better ways; one project at a time, and one decision at a time.

The post Sustainable Buildings as a Journey appeared first on Anderson Energy Efficiency.