Nature Based Strategies for Urban and Building Sustainability

project.

Section I

Nature Based Strategies for Urban Environment

Outline

Chapter 1.1 Introduction to Urban Sustainability Issues: Urban Ecosystem

Chapter 1.2 Ecosystem Services in Urban Environments

Chapter 1.3 Incentives for Nature-Based Strategies

Chapter 1.1

Introduction to Urban Sustainability Issues

Urban Ecosystem

John W. Dover

Abstract

Urbanization has environmental and economic advantages for humans, but also substantial disadvantages, including increased problems with physical and mental health/stress, a modified climate, water and energy management, and air pollution. Ecosystem services delivered by vegetation (green infrastructure) have the potential to help tackle these challenges. While opportunities to create more vegetation cover at ground level are limited in dense urban areas, using the relatively unused vertical domain, i.e., greening the surface of building structures (roofs and walls), has the potential to significantly increase the surface area of vegetation available.

Keywords

Air pollution; climate change; ecosystem services; green infrastructure; human health; urban environment; urban heat island; sustainable urban drainage; energy conservation

Chapter Outline

Introduction: The Urban Ecosystem 3

Mental Health and Stress 5

Climate Change 5

Urban/City Climate 6

Water Management 7

Energy Management 7

Air Pollution 8

Conclusion 9

References 10

Introduction: The Urban Ecosystem

Humans, like most social species, engineer their habitat and farms; hamlets, villages, towns, and cities can be seen as a progressive modification of natural ecosystems along an urban or human ecosystem gradient; and one, moreover, with a vast ecological footprint that relies on huge inputs of materials and energy from geographically dispersed areas (Rees, 1997). Ecosystems are composed of biotic and abiotic components and their interactions; and are increasingly modified by anthropogenic activities. The urban ecosystem results from the interaction of the human social system (in its widest sense: including culture, behavior, and economics) and built elements with the other main ecosystem processes of energy flow, flow of information (evolutionary origin and change), and materials cycling (Grimm et al., 2000).

The term, ecosystem services, has become popular to describe the goods and services provided by biodiversity to humans, and human well-being (Braat and de Groot, 2012) (Fig. 1; and Chapter 1.2: Ecosystem Services in Urban Environments). Urban vegetation, and other associated biodiversity components, often referred to as green infrastructure, can be seen as a delivery mechanism for ecosystem services. Initially green infrastructure was seen purely as a strategic network of open green spaces and its links; this has evolved over time to embrace a wider set of features:

Green infrastructure is the sum of an area’s environmental assets, including stand-alone elements and strategically planned and delivered networks of high quality green spaces and other environmental features including surfaces such as pavements, car parks, driveways, roads, and buildings (exterior and interior) that incorporate biodiversity and promote ecosystem services.

Dover (2015).

Figure 1 Multiple ecosystem services can be delivered by green infrastructure to address a range of challenges facing urban areas.

The concentration of human populations into urban areas from a dispersed, rural pattern has obvious advantages such as improved cultural development, and resources can be distributed more efficiently whether this is food, energy, goods, services, or transport. There are, equally, downsides such as the large impact resulting from even temporary disruption to those same resources, the easy transmission of disease, the need for continuous disposal of large quantities of waste and the release into the environment of toxic by-products, the stresses of large numbers of people living in close proximity, and the extreme modification of soils, the land surface, and water bodies and its concomitant impacts (Rees, 1997). As higher proportions of the global population become urbanized and densification increases, the need to mitigate the impact of the downsides becomes more important (Haaland and van den Bosch, 2015). The challenge of creating a more sustainable urban environment is substantial in the face of these requirements, but the predicted impact of global climate change makes meeting these challenges both more difficult and more pressing (Haines et al., 2006).

The remainder of this chapter will expand on some of the major issues confronting urban areas, and how green infrastructure helps ameliorate them. It is not intended to be exhaustive or comprehensive, and a wider exploration can be found elsewhere (see Dover (2015) and references therein).

Mental Health and Stress

Urban upbringing and living brings with it the potential for negative impacts on mental health and well-being (Guite et al., 2006), in particular mood and anxiety disorders, increased incidence of schizophrenia, and mental fatigue (Paykel et al., 2000; Watts et al., 2010). Poor mental health may also result in poorer physical health (Hert et al., 2011).

Exposure to vegetation, or even views of vegetation, is known to have a number of positive outcomes including reductions in: mental distress, stress levels, tension and anxiety, health inequalities, postoperative recovery time, and use of painkillers (Grahn and Stigsdotter, 2003; Mitchell and Popham, 2007; Ulrich, 1984; White et al., 2013). Improved feelings of well-being (Luck et al., 2011), cognitive development of children, (Dadvand et al., 2015) and general health and exercise are also associated with access to green space (Bird, 2004).

Climate Change

Global climate change impacts vary depending on geographical position, with increased rain in some places and drought in others. While all areas are anticipated to increase in average temperature, some areas will be harder hit (IPCC, 2015). The increased frequency and severity of heat waves and flooding is expected to increase mortality and property/infrastructure damage (Patz et al., 2005). It is also likely to exacerbate the impact of air pollution (Jacob and Winner, 2008) and health issues such as asthma (D’Amato et al., 2010). Green infrastructure is identified as one of the basket of approaches that can be used to adapt societies to climate change (IPCC, 2015).

Urban vegetation removes the climate change gas carbon dioxide from the air, sequestering it (Pataki et al., 2011). If subsequently incorporated into the soil, or into long-lived species such as trees, then its rerelease can be considerably delayed. Nowak & Heisler (2010) estimated that park trees in the United States stored 75 million tons of carbon and removed 2.4 million tons annually, with soils holding a further 102 million tons. Setälä et al. (2016) in Finland estimated that soil under evergreen trees in established parks were particularly good, holding 35.5 kgC m−2, compared with deciduous trees (23.4 kgC m−2); both were better than new parks without trees (14.9 kgC m−2). Sequestration by four parks in Rome was equivalent to 3.6% of the total CO2 emissions for the city in 2010, and trees in woods, along avenues, and even hedges were found to be important (Gratani et al., 2016). Green roofs can also store carbon; Getter et al. (2009) found a Sedum roof, sequestered about 375 gC m−2; this, with energy efficiency gains, was expected to exceed the embedded carbon debt used in construction of the roof after 9 years.

Urban/City Climate

Urban areas have more clouds, rain, and snow than the surrounding countryside (Shepherd et al., 2002; Taha, 1997). The main driver is the difference in the nature of the surface of towns and cities compared to the countryside, although factors also include local topography and the increased density of heat sources (Nitis et al., 2005; Taha, 1997) including air conditioners in hot countries with high population density areas (Shahmohamadi et al., 2011).

Urban areas typically have very large areas of concrete and tarmac (sealed surfaces), which absorb heat from the sun and then release it slowly over night. An additional issue in areas with many tall buildings is a reduced sky view factor (Oke, 1981); there is less sky to radiate heat out to. Urban areas are therefore hotter than rural areas, especially at night, and the effect is greater in larger settlements (Oke, 1973). Typical differences between rural and urban temperatures are in the order of 8–9°C (Stülpnagel et al., 1990), the urban heat island (UHI) effect (Rosenthal et al., 2008). Impacts of UHIs include increased mortality during heat waves (Li and Bou-Zeid, 2013), and causing/exacerbating other complaints such as asthma, heat stress, circulatory illnesses, and insomnia (Stülpnagel et al., 1990; Tomlinson et al., 2011).

Vegetated areas are cooler than sealed surfaces because plants evaporate water from their stomata (evapotranspiration). Rosenzweig et al. (2006) noted that UHIs are really a mosaic of hot and cool spots and suggested that UHI archipelago was a more appropriate term. Handley and Gill (2009) found areas of Manchester (UK) with a greater proportion of sealed surface had much higher maximum surface temperatures than areas with a higher proportion of vegetation (e.g., town centres >30°C cf. woodlands <20°C). UHIs are not static phenomena, being affected by seasonal and weather changes, which, e.g., can move them downwind (Gedzelman et al., 2003).

Grass, on its own, has a substantially lower surface temperature compared with a sealed surface, but is even lower in combination with tree shade (Armson et al., 2012). Pergolas (Watanabe et al., 2014) and green façades (walls) are also useful in heat shading and reduction and, while green roofs may not have a direct impact on people at street level, like trees (O'Neill et al., 2009), they do have the potential to help reduce the UHI and the temperature regime of urban areas overall (Alexandri and Jones, 2008; Zölch et al., 2016).

Water Management

The increased area of sealed surface in urban areas reduces the infiltration of rainwater into the soil (Arnold and Gibbons, 1996); rainfall is, hence, diverted to drains and attempts to enter the sewer systems. During storms, the resulting rush of water can cause flash flooding with feces and other contaminants flushed-out into streets, houses, and businesses (Coulthard and Frostick, 2010). The resulting financial, social, and health issues are obvious and potentially devastating (Rietveld et al., 2016). There’s also expected to be significant impacts on waterbodies, reducing water and habitat quality (Whitehead et al., 2009). With climate change predictions including increased precipitation for some areas, combined with an increase in the frequency of extreme events, it is clear that stormwater management is a crucial and pressing matter.

Sustainable urban drainage systems are used to reduce the amount of water entering sewers. The concept is simple: infiltrate rain where it falls, if that is not possible, capture it, contain it, and release it slowly. Vegetation is an integral part of the concept, it captures rainfall, slowing its descent to the ground, what remains on leaves may be evaporated off. On reaching ground level it enters the soil and some is transpired off. Urban vegetation, whether it is at ground level, on a roof (Liptan and Strecker, 2003) or on a wall (Ostendorf et al., 2011), will contribute to a reduction in flooding. The more complex the vegetation structure, the greater will be the delaying action (Livesley et al., 2014). Green roofs act in exactly the same way as ground-level vegetation, storing some water in the growing medium with the excess being slowly directed to ground level (Hutchinson et al., 2003; Simmons et al., 2008). This water can itself be stored in a pond or rain garden for later use or infiltration (Schmidt, 2009). Various structures such as permeable pavements, swales (vegetated ditches), rain gardens, retention ponds, and constructed wetlands can all incorporate vegetation which will help slow water flow, promote infiltration, and may also remove toxic compounds (Jackson and Boutle, 2008).

Energy Management

Energy from fossil fuel burning releases carbon dioxide (CO2). Reducing energy consumption and energy conservation reduces CO2 emissions and the anthropogenic contribution to UHIs and air pollution. Extreme events linked to climate change will probably increase energy consumption through additional heating when the weather is cold and the use of air conditioning when hot. The latter will also increase UHIs as the hot air from buildings is expelled into the local environment.

Shelter from wind (using trees, tall shrubs, or free-standing green walls) reduces its cooling effect on buildings and the intensity of draughts that penetrate them (Akbari, 2002; Heisler, 1986). Vegetation can also provide direct insulation using green walls and green roofs (Cheng et al., 2010; Simmons et al., 2008). Green roofs are easier to fit to buildings during construction, rather than retrofitting, when any additional structural support can be incorporated. Green walls are straightforward to retrofit and can be free-standing with no loading implication for buildings. Shading windows with deciduous trees or climbers (Dimoudi and Nikolopoulou, 2003; Ip et al., 2010) can reduce air conditioning costs in the summer and yet allow sunlight through to provide solar heating in the winter. Shading air conditioning units has been claimed to reduce energy consumption by up to 10% (Parker, 1983), though Parker et al. (1996) suggested that gains may be more modest and would require a larger area to be cooled than simply the air conditioning unit itself. Building orientation affects energy saving; in the northern hemisphere shade trees planted on the west and south sides of buildings save energy in the summer but on the north side may actually increase it (Donovan and Butry, 2009).

Air Pollution

The health effects of outdoor air pollution are increasingly under scrutiny, and RCP (2016) concluded that its impact is a whole life issue, starting in the womb by affecting growth, development and intelligence, and continuing throughout life. Mortality in the United Kingdom was estimated at 40,000 deaths per year and economic loss £20 billion per year.

The main pollutants of concern are particulate matter (PM) primarily from combustion sources, but also from wear and tear of tires, clutches, brakes, catalytic converters, etc., and the nitrogen oxides (NO2 and NO) collectively known as NOx. It is typical for studies of air-pollution and health to have difficulties in isolating whether particulates or NOx are the primary actors for some conditions. Nitrogen oxides also lead to the formation of a secondary pollutant, low-level ozone (O3), in a photochemical reaction with VOCs (volatile organic chemicals). Outdoor VOCs may be anthropogenic pollutants, e.g., from unburnt fuels, or chemicals released from industrial processes (Dore et al., 2008) or derived from natural sources (Corchnoy et al., 1992).

Inspired PM of 10 µm in aerodynamic diameter and below is considered to be of major importance in relation to human health. Smaller particles penetrate deeper into the lungs, with the smallest being able to pass across the lungs and enter the circulatory system and to the major organs of the body. These ultrafine particulates can also enter the olfactory nerves via the nose, and thus be transported directly to the brain (Maher et al., 2016; Solomon et al., 2012). The names and different size ranges typically quoted reflect their penetrability into the body:

• PM10 Thoracic/Coarse (can reach the bronchioles)

• PM2.5 Respirable/Fine (can reach the alveoli)

• PM0.1 Ultrafine (can enter organs)

(1 µm=0.001 mm; 0.1 µm=100 nm)

Particulates can be composed of carbon, from combustion, but may also include a wide range of metals (Espinosa et al., 2001), and carry carcinogens such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons (Burkart et al., 2013). Health effects include hypertension, impaired lung function, sudden infant death syndrome, asthma, respiratory and cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and dementia (RCP, 2016). In terms of mortality, globally, the impact of PM2.5 is estimated at 3.15 million deaths per year (Lelieveld et al., 2015).

Nitrogen oxides, and in particular nitrogen dioxide, emitted from vehicle exhausts (primarily diesel) have been shown to have a range of health effects including increased mortality risk (Chiusolo et al., 2011), asthma (Brauer et al., 2002), decreased lung function in children and adults (Bowatte et al., 2016; Ierodiakonou et al., 2016), low birth weight (Brauer et al., 2008), and cognitive development (Freire et al., 2010). Increased mortality is a feature also associated with exposure to ozone (Brunkeef and Holgate, 2002) together with pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, adverse impacts on asthma sufferers, and decreased lung function (Berman et al., 2012).

It has been known for some time that vegetation can help remove pollutants from the air. Leaf surfaces can collect particulates and some gasses/volatiles (e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls, PCBs), can be directly absorbed through the cuticle. Ultrafine particulates and gasses (e.g., NO2) can enter via the stomata (Barber et al., 2002; Fowler, 2002). As might be expected, the volume of vegetation, e.g., (tall vs small trees), their spatial relationships, and the type of vegetation will affect pollutant uptake, and different plants and even varieties are likely to have different uptake profiles (Lovett, 1994; Nowak, 1994; Stülpnagel et al., 1990).

Conclusion

The intensively modified urban habitat that humans have carved-out of the natural environment is underpinned not only by the normal underlying biotic and abiotic factors and associated ecosystem processes, but also by the human social system and a massive ecological footprint. The failure of the system to cope with the waste streams resulting from that footprint have resulted in significant disbenefits that impact on humans at a range of scales from the very local to the global. The extreme levels of vegetation removal and consequent surface sealing from buildings, roads, and other infrastructure have impacted on the ability of urban areas to self-regulate. Nevertheless, the ecosystem services delivered by vegetation (green infrastructure) have the potential to help us address some of the major environmental and social challenges of our times. Unfortunately, given the density of buildings and the expense of land, it is often difficult to create new areas for planting at ground level in towns and cities, and this is exacerbated by the complexity of below-ground infrastructure. Fortunately there is still the vertical domain, and recent technological innovations give us the opportunity to employ the various services provided by greenery by, almost literally, greening the epidermis of built structures (Sitta, 1983).

References

1. Akbari H. Shade trees reduce building energy use and CO2 emissions from power plants. Environ Poll. 2002;116:S119–S126.

2. Alexandri E, Jones P. Temperature decreases in an urban canyon due to green walls and green roofs in diverse climates. Build Environ. 2008;43:480–493 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.10.055.

3. Armson D, Stringer P, Ennos AR. The effect of tree shade and grass on surface and globe temperatures in an urban area. Urban For Urban Gree. 2012;11:245–255 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.05.002.

4. Arnold CL, Gibbons CJ. Impervious surface coverage - the emergence of a key environmental indicator. J Am Plan Assoc. 1996;62:243–258 http://doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975688.

5. Barber JL, Kurt PB, Thomas GO, Kerstiens G, Jones KC. Investigation into the importance of the stomatal pathway in the exchange of PCBs between air and plants. Environ Sci Technol. 2002;36:4282–4287 http://doi.org/10.1021/es025623m.

6. Berman JD, Fann N, Hollingsworth JW, et al. Health benefits from large-scale ozone reduction in the United States. Environ Health Perspect. 2012;120:1404–1410 http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104851.

7. Bird, W., 2004. Natural fit. RSPB, Sandy.

8. Bowatte G, Lodge CJ, Knibbs LD, Lowe AJ, et al. Traffic-related air pollution exposure is associated with allergic sensitization, asthma, and poor lung function in middle age. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016;139:122–129 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2016.05.008.

9. Braat LC, de Groot R. The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosystem Serv. 2012;1:4–15 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.011.

10. Brauer M, Hoek G, Vliet PV, et al. Air Pollution from traffic and the development of respiratory infections and asthmatic and allergic symptoms in children. Am J Respirat Critical Care Med. 2002;166:1092–1098.

11. Brauer M, Lencar C, Tamburic L, Koehoorn M, Demers P, Karr K. A cohort study of traffic-related air pollution impacts on birth outcomes. Environ Health Perspect. 2008;116:680–686.

12. Brunkeef B, Holgate ST. Air pollution and health. Lancet. 2002;360:1233–1242.

13. Burkart K, Nehls I, Win T, Endlicher W. The carcinogenic risk and variability of particulate-bound polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with consideration of meteorological conditions. Air Quality Atmosp Health. 2013;6:27–38