Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research. Integrated Assessment modelling to understand tradeoffs in urban planning and infrastructure decisions Urban Systems Collaborative, Imperial College, London, 10 th September 2013. With thanks to: Jim Hall (Oxford University) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Slide 1
Integrated Assessment modelling to understand tradeoffs in urban
planning and infrastructure decisions
Urban Systems Collaborative, Imperial College, London, 10th
September 2013
With thanks to: Jim Hall (Oxford University)Stuart Barr, Ali
Ford, Claire Walsh (Newcastle University)Mark McCarthy (Met
Office)Mike Batty (UCL)
[email protected]
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchChallenge:
Adaptation of cities and infrastructure to global
changeSocio-economic changeGrowing global populationChanging
demographySocio-economic trends Ownership and
governanceUrbanization Concentrates infrastructureImplications for
external support infrastructureEnvironmental pressuresClimate
changeBroader sustainability tradeoffsRelationship with land
useDeterioration and replacementCentre for Earth Systems
Engineering ResearchSome complicities and
tradeoffsResponsePotential benefitPotential negative impactAir
conditioning Reduce heat stressIncrease energy needs and
emissionsDensification of citiesReduce public transport
emissionsIncrease urban heat island intensity and exposure to
grater noise pollutionDesalination plantsSecure water
supplyIncrease greenhouse gas emissions Irrigation Supplying water
for foodSalinisation of soil, degradation of wetlands, Biofuels for
transport and energy Reduce GHG emissionsEncourage deforestation;
replace food crops raising food prices; can increase local air
quality pollutants such as NOxCatalytic convertorsImprove air
qualityLarge scale mining and international resource
movementsCavity wall insulationReduce GHG emissionsIncrease damages
from a flood eventRaise flood defenceReduce flood
frequencyEncourage more development (positive
feedbacks)PesticidesControl vector borne diseaseImpact on human
health, increased insect resistanceConservation areasPreserve
biodiversity and ecosystemsLoss of community
livelihoodsInsurance/disaster reliefSpread the risk from
high-impact eventsReduce longer term incentive to adaptTraffic
bypasses or radial routesDisplaces traffic from city centre,
improving air quality and reducing noiseCan increase congestion and
journey times (consequently overall greenhouse gas emissions)
Vehicle user chargingDiscourage vehicle use to reduce greenhouse
gas emissionsLead to greater social inequality
Adapted from: Dawson (2011) Potential pitfalls on the pathway to
sustainable citiesand how to avoid them, Carbon Management, Vol
2(2)Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchWe can quite
readily identify a number of these issues and their potential
benefits/negative impacts. But whilst this is useful it does not
reveal the magnitude or feedbacks that can occur or provide
sufficient information to support the constructing of business
cases to implement adaptation strategies particularly when those
interactions are less intuitive.3Testing of policy options
Working with key London stakeholdersClimate impacts and
adaptation
Analyse risks of Flooding Drought Urban heat
Test adaptation optionsGreenhouse gas emissions
Multi-sectoral emissions accountingDetailed sub-modules for
transport (personal and freight)
Analysis of city-scale energy policiesLand use Transport
Model
EmploymentMulti-modal transportDeveloped land
coverPopulationPlanning constraints and attractorsRegional
economy
Dynamic resource interactions between sectors Specialist energy
sector moduleSocio-economic scenarios
City-scale climate scenarios
Temperature Precipitation Sea level rise Storm surge
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research4Climate vs.
Socio-economic change: Flood risk
Baseline 2100
Eastern axis 21002005
Centralisation 2100
Sub-urbanisation 2100
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
Socio-economic vs. Climate changeFlood risk for different land
use changeCentre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
Socio-economic vs. Climate changeAttribution of flood risk
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchThe proportion of
risk in 2100 in each Borough or Local Authority for the current
trends land use policy from (i) Retrofit: Existing development if
retrofit, (ii) Future resilience: Future development if constructed
to the highest flood resilience standard, (iii) Current standards:
Additional contribution to risk if there is no retrofitting of the
existing building stock and no imposing flood resilient
construction standards on new buildings, and (iv) Climate:
additional contribution from the UKCP09 medium climate change
scenario from sea level rise and changes to the frequency of
extreme flows. The pie charts are scaled according to the natural
logarithm of the total risk in the borough or local authority
(where the size 10 shown in the legend corresponds to 22k).
7Drought risk: Climate vs. Socio-economic change
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
- 34% (annually incremented) by 2100 (mid-point of sustainable
homes code)+300,000 Ml from 2020
+300 Ml/day from 2020
- 40% (annually incremented) by 2100Drought risk: Climate vs.
Socio-economic changeCentre for Earth Systems Engineering
Research
00.250.50.7511.25Carbon Dioxide (Mt/year)Energy
consumptionDrought risk: Potential mitigation tradeoffCentre for
Earth Systems Engineering ResearchWorth noting reducing water
demand can reduce water heating bills10
Average currentheat emissionsLand use: Adaptation vs.
Mitigation
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchCentralisation
scenario => 43% increase on risk in 2050s as a result of 11Land
use pressures
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
Tough decisionsCentre for Earth Systems Engineering
ResearchTransformation of urban systems to be climate sensitive
will requireMotivation and leadership
Much improved understanding of the mechanisms of interaction in
urban function, via: Land use TransportResource flows (energy,
water, nutrients)Building form and functionUrban climateInformation
networks
Recognition of the time scales of change and the legacy of past
decisions (planning, infrastructure, buildings)
Develop collective understanding of urban function and
collaborative platforms for exploration of transition
strategies
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchIA can help bring
these togetherNot just about technology Cities can be brittle -
14
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/ceser/researchprogramme/outputs/[email protected]
have come to recognise how integrated modelling of the type
delivered by the Tyndall Centre Cities programme can help to bring
different stakeholders together to develop common understanding of
processes and consequences of long term change.
That collective understanding is essential if we are to manage
change rather than become its victims.
Alex Nickson, Strategy manager: climatechange adaptation and
water, Greater London AuthorityCan IA information improve the urban
experience?Centre for Earth Systems Engineering ResearchChallenges
for using IA information to improve the urban experience?How far is
far enough in tracking down consistency, interactions and
feedbacks?
How should we estimate and communicate uncertainties?
Can we transfer IA insights and methods to other cities
worldwide?
How can IA information flows be best exploited by organisations
and individuals?
How can we build a global coalition of researchers and
practitioners equipped to address these problems?Centre for Earth
Systems Engineering Research
Integrated Assessment modelling to understand tradeoffs in urban
planning and infrastructure decisions
Urban Systems Collaborative, Imperial College, London, 10th
September 2013
With thanks to: Jim Hall (Oxford University)Stuart Barr, Ali
Ford, Claire Walsh (Newcastle University)Mark McCarthy (Met
Office)Mike Batty (UCL)
[email protected]
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research
