AIA Portland Presents 2nd Annual Portland 2030 Challenge Design Awards

First-Place Winner: Lincoln Hall, Boora

Runner-Up: Clif Bar Headquarters, ZGF

Honorable Mention: Port of Portland, ZGF

First-Place Winner: Lincoln Hall, Boora

Runner-Up: Clif Bar Headquarters, ZGF

Honorable Mention: Port of Portland, ZGF

First-Place Winner: Lincoln Hall, Boora

Runner-Up: Clif Bar Headquarters, ZGF

Honorable Mention: Port of Portland, ZGF

First-Place Winner: Lincoln Hall, Boora

For the second year in a row, Architecture 2030, in collaboration with AIA Portland and their Committee on the Environment (COTE) and the BetterBricks Initiative of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, presented the 2030 Challenge Design Awards in recognition of design excellence towards meeting the 2030 Challenge reduction targets. The awards were presented at Portland AIA COTE’s annual Green Champion Summit. Winners were selected from projects submitted for the AIA Portland 2011 Design Awards.

In addition to reduced energy consumption, which is the hallmark of meeting the 2030 Challenge, submissions were required to include a calculation of operational carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions- building on the previous two years when the calculations were optional. For the general Design Awards, jurors were made aware of these CO2 calculations so to consider them along with other design elements.

The following Portland 2030 Challenge Design Awards were presented at Portland AIA COTE’s annual Green Champion Summit:

First-Place Winner: Lincoln Hall, Boora Architects

Runner-Up: Clif Bar Headquarters, Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects

Honorable Mention: Port of Portland, Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects

AIA Portland’s adoption of the 2030 Challenge design targets and its incorporation of the CO2 emissions calculations into the competition demonstrate a commitment to a low-carbon future and step forward in understanding the full meaning of design excellence.

Architecture 2030 welcomes all AIA components adopt 2030 Challenge targets as part of their competitions.

New York and Boston Now Offering AIA+2030 Education

This year’s nationwide rollout of the AIA+2030 Professional Education Series now includes two of the largest chapters in the nation, The Boston Society of Architects/AIA and AIA New York which is producing a new Sustainability by Design Series for meeting the 2030 Challenge in New York City.

With the addition of these two chapters, the AIA+2030 Professional Education Series is now being offered to 25% of AIA members nationwide. To date, eighteen chapters have signed on to offer this comprehensive, ground-breaking curriculum that includes strategies to reach or exceed the 60% fossil fuel reduction target of the 2030 Challenge. AIA+2030 gives design professionals the knowledge and leverage to create next-generation, super-efficient buildings—and provide firms with the skills that will set them apart in the marketplace.

Find out more about the “wildly popular” AIA+2030 Series and how to participate at  http://www.aiaplus2030.org/.

Ed Mazria Wins 2011 Purpose Prize

Collaborative Efforts Accelerate the 2030 Challenge

Key Initiatives Launch This Week
Collaborative Efforts Accelerate the 2030 Challenge

This week, big announcements are coming from two Architecture 2030 initiatives, the 2030 Challenge for Products and 2030 Challenge for Planning, which, through real-world collaboration with small businesses, industry experts, and local government are furthering our progress towards a major transformation in the Building Sector.

Keep reading (or click on the links) to learn about the 2030 Challenge for Products Information Hub and the official launch of the Seattle 2030 District.


The 2030 Challenge for Products Information Hub Goes Live

Today, September 7th, Architecture 2030, in partnership with BuildingGreen and the Healthy Building Network, launches the 2030 Challenge for Products Information Hub – a comprehensive clearinghouse for information, industry news, tools, and resources for dramatically reducing the embodied carbon of building products and materials.

The Information Hub, hosted by BuildingGreen, is the definitive source for:

  • Facts and in-depth information on the embodied carbon of building products,
  • Industry updates and related articles from Environmental Building News,
  • Conducting initial research on Product Category Rules (PCR), Environmental Product
    Declarations (EDPs), and Life Cycle Analyses (LCAs), and
  • Tools, calculators, databases, and information on relevant standards.

To visit the 2030 Challenge for Products Information Hub, click here.

To learn more, download 2030 Challenge for Products: Critical Points here.

Download an embodied carbon Request for Information (RFI) letter to send product manufacturers here.

For questions about the 2030 Challenge for Products, contact Francesca Desmarais (desmarais@architecture2030.org).

Seattle 2030 District Celebrates Launch Tomorrow

After months of planning and collaboration between businesses, property owners, managers, tenants, and numerous professional and community stakeholders, the Seattle 2030 District will officially launch tomorrow, September 8th.

This interdisciplinary public-private collaborative is working to create a groundbreaking high-performance building district in downtown Seattle incorporating the performance targets of the 2030 Challenge for Planning. At the launch, the Founding District Members will represent over 100 buildings and 23 million square feet of building space.

The Seattle 2030 District has already drawn high praise, having been selected by the Obama Administration as one of three Community Partners for the White House’s Better Buildings Challenge, as well as having the Clinton Climate Initiative among its Founding Members.

Visit the official Seattle 2030 District website here.

For questions about the Seattle 2030 District, contact Brian Geller (brian@2030district.org) or Vincent Martinez (vincemtz@architecture2030.org).

What are the 2030 Districts?

2030 Districts are unique private/public partnerships in designated urban areas across North America committed to reducing energy use, water use, and transport emissions

Overseen by Architecture 2030, 2030 Districts are in the vanguard of grassroots collaborative efforts to renovate hundreds of millions of square feet of existing buildings and construct high-performance infill development and redevelopment.

2030 Districts bring property owners and managers together with local governments, businesses, and community stakeholders to provide a business model for urban sustainability through collaboration, leveraged financing, and shared resources.

Together they benchmark, develop, and implement creative strategies, best practices, and verification methods for measuring progress towards a common goal: the targets called for by Architecture 2030 in their 2030 Challenge for Planning.

White House Partners with Seattle 2030 District as New Website Goes Live

The Seattle 2030 District has been selected as one of the three nationwide Community Partners for the White House’s Better Buildings Challenge. This announcement came as part of Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) America’s closing plenary on June 30th, 2011 and directly followed the launch of the District’s website.

The press conference announcement is available to view on the District’s new webpage. The website features news and multimedia about the District, a member resources page, information for prospective members and upcoming events among other resources.   

The Seattle 2030 District Planning Committee is an interdisciplinary public-private partnership working to create a high-performance building district downtown. Using the 2030 Challenge for Planners, issued by Architecture 2030 in 2008, as the foundation, the committee has sought to develop realistic, measurable, and innovative strategies to assist district property owners, managers, and tenants in meeting aggressive goals that reduce environmental impacts of facility construction and operations.

The Seattle 2030 District’s goals are as follows:

Existing Buildings and Infrastructure Operations
• Energy use: a minimum 10 percent reduction below the national average by 2015, with incremental targets, reaching a 50 percent reduction by 2030.
• Water use: a minimum 10 percent reduction below the national average by 2015, with incremental targets, reaching a 50 percent reduction by 2030.
• CO2e of auto and freight: a minimum 10 percent reduction below the current district average by 2015, with incremental targets, reaching a 50 percent reduction by 2030.

New Buildings, Major Renovations and New Infrastructure
• Energy use: an immediate 60 percent reduction below the national average, with incremental targets, reaching carbon neutral by 2030.
• Water use: an immediate 50 percent reduction below the current national average.
• CO2e of auto and freight: an immediate 50 percent reduction below the current district average.

Rather than being required to achieve the goals of the District individually, or through legislative mandates, property owners will be provided a variety of innovative resource deployment tools and information sharing. This approach enables ongoing collaboration to make high-performance buildings the most profitable building type in Seattle.

Visit the Better Buildings Challenge webpage to learn more about the role of Community Partners.

View the White House Press Release

Learn more about the Seattle 2030 District 

Architecture Canada | RAIC Website Features 2030 Challenge Achievements

A new Architecture Canada | RAIC website featuring Canadian building projects that meet and exceed the 2030 Challenge has posted its first two case studies and promises eight additional projects available to view soon. These featured projects are “the best energy-efficient commercial buildings that have been constructed in Canada so far.”

North Vancouver City Library:

Restoration Services Centre:

 

The North Vancouver City Library and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Restoration Services Centre (pictured above) have reduced energy use by an estimated 72% and 61% respectively beyond the National Average Energy Use Intensity (EUI) for their building types. Case studies on the website provide an overview of the project along with in-depth building information covering each project’s energy conservation features, information on products and materials, water conservation and drawings of site integration, floor plans, section drawings, and energy system strategies.

According to the website:
“Every project featured has been included because of the commitment made by its Owner, the Builder and the entire Design Team to create a building that reduces or eliminates its consumption of resources. Success is measured by the building’s energy use index; it can also be measured by the satisfaction and enthusiasm of every individual using or inhabiting the building.

These case study buildings have taken the first step to becoming energy neutral; their building envelopes are as efficient as possible and the implications and realities of net zero energy have been considered. The next step is to integrate renewable energy systems into the majority of new and existing buildings.”

For more information or to submit projects for possible inclusion, please visit the Architecture Canada | RAIC 2030 Challenge Case Studies page, and read more in Canadian Architect.

Photos above by Tom Arban.

Nuclear Energy: Fact Check 2

Your Questions Answered

On March 22, Architecture 2030 distributed the E-News Bulletin, Nuclear Energy: Fact Check in order to inform critical discussions taking place around nuclear energy in the United States. The response was tremendous, with numerous questions and requests for clarification.

This Special Bulletin aims to answer those questions and bring further clarity to the issue.

1. For clarification, labels on the following graph, originally titled “energy losses“, have been amended to read “electrical energy losses“.
Assumptions: Average U.S. nuclear plant efficiency is calculated at 32.6% (Source: EIA [1][2]), and transmission losses at 6.5% (Source:EIA [3]).

For a definition of Delivered Energy, click here.

2. The following graph illustrates U.S. Energy Consumption in 2035, as projected by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
Notes: In 2035, nuclear energy is projected to provide 2.9% of total U.S. delivered energy; 8.0% of total projected U.S. energy consumption is attributed to nuclear energy. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA)

In 2035, nuclear energy is projected to provide 15.7% of total U.S. delivered electricity; 19.9% of total U.S. electricity consumption is attributed to nuclear energy (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA)

3. The following Additional Facts are from research conducted by Architecture 2030 to address specific questions related to the original Nuclear Energy: Fact Check (2030 E-News Bulletin #28).
  • The mean construction time (construction start date to first date of commercial operation) for the 104 nuclear reactors is 9.3 years. Over forty percent of the reactors (41.35%) had construction periods greater than 10 years, and 7.69% had construction periods over 15 years. The last nuclear reactor to come online (Watts Bar 1 in Tennessee) actually had a construction period of 23 years and almost 7 months. (Source: Architecture 2030 and EIA)
  • The latest application for a new nuclear reactor (June 2009: Turkey Point Units 6 and 7, Homestead, FL) estimates the total project cost between $12.8 billion to $18.7 billion for the two reactors (combined capacity of 2,234 MW). (Source: NRC and EIA)
  • In 2009, nuclear fuel cost 0.57 c/kWh. A nuclear reactor is refueled every 18-24 months (replacing a third of its core) at a cost of $40 million. (Source: NEI)
  • A typical nuclear power plant generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel annually. The U.S. nuclear industry generates a total of 2,300 metric tons of used fuel per year. (Source: NEI)
  • The U.S. currently holds 62,490 metric tons of used nuclear fuel (uranium). Illinois, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina are the states that hold the largest amounts at 7,670, 5,650, and 3,780 metric tons, respectively. (Source: NEI)
  • On March 3, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy requested to withdraw the license for Yucca Mountain, ending the only U.S. program for a high-level nuclear waste repository. A Blue Ribbon Commission has been established to study alternative options for long-term storage of high-level nuclear waste. (Source: DOE)
  • The capacity factor of nuclear plants in 2009 was 90.5%. (Source: NEI)

Reported by Architecture 2030 Researchers:

Vincent Martinez
Director of Research
Francesca Desmarais
Principal Researcher

Nuclear Energy: Fact Check

How Much Does the United States Use?

With the nuclear reactor crisis in Japan continuing to unfold, an important discussion has been taking place in the U.S. about the current and future role of nuclear energy and our aging nuclear reactors. We have noticed that in the media, there is sometimes a gap between what is being stated as fact, and what is actually fact. For example, prominent U.S. officials have stated recently, “We get 20 percent of our energy right now in the United States from nuclear power.”

In fact, nuclear power is responsible for 8.6% of total U.S. energy consumption.

Twenty point seven percent of total U.S. electricity consumption, including electrical energy generation and transmission losses, is attributed to nuclear power. The 20.7%, or 8.39 QBtu, is made up of 2.19 QBtu of electricity delivered to the place of use, and 6.2 QBtu of energy losses from generation (waste heat) and transmission.

The following graph illustrates total U.S. energy consumption (delivered energy and electrical energy losses from generation and transmission), total U.S. electricity consumption, and the total U.S. energy consumption attributed to nuclear power:

Assumptions: Average U.S. nuclear plant efficiency is calculated at 32.6% (Source: EIA [3][4]), and transmission losses at 6.5% (Source:EIA [5]).

The following graph illustrates U.S. Energy Consumption in 2035, as projected by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Notes: In 2035, nuclear energy is projected to provide 2.9% of total U.S. delivered energy; 8.0% of total projected U.S. energy consumption is attributed to nuclear energy. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA)

In 2035, nuclear energy is projected to provide 15.7% of total U.S. delivered electricity; 19.9% of total U.S. electricity consumption is attributed to nuclear energy (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA)


More to Know About U.S. Nuclear Energy:

  • There are 104 nuclear reactors currently operating in the U.S. (Source: NEI) [1]
  • The 104 reactors have a net summer capacity of 100,755 MW. (Source: Architecture 2030 & NEI) [2]
  • Nuclear energy provides 3.1% of total U.S. delivered energy; 8.6% of total U.S. energy consumption is attributed to nuclear energy. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA) [3][4][5]
  • Nuclear energy provides 17.1% of total U.S. delivered electricity; 20.7% of total U.S. electricity consumption is attributed to nuclear energy (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA) [3][4][5]
  • It takes approximately thirty-seven 1000MW nuclear reactors to produce one Quad (quadrillion Btu) of delivered energy. (Source: EIA, Table 6.1.2) [6]
  • The last nuclear reactor to be built in the U.S. was Watts Bar 1 in Tennessee in June 1996 (1,123 MW). (Source: NEI) [1]
  • Of the 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S., 4.8% are older than 40 years, 38.5% are older than 35 years, and over half are older than 30 years. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA, Table 3) [7]
  • Nuclear reactors in the U.S. are licensed to operate for 40 years. Owners can file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for operating extensions. (Source EIA) [8]
  • It costs approximately $300-500 million to decommission a nuclear plant. (Source: NEI) [9]
  • There are 13 potential reactors that are currently under review for a new commercial license. (Source: EIA) [10]
  • The EIA estimates that the initial capital cost (overnight cost) of a new reactor is $5,339 per kW, or $5.3 billion for a 1000 MW reactor. Financing cost, long construction periods, and escalating costs can push the total cost well above the overnight cost. (Source: EIA, Table 2) [11]
  • Subsidies for ongoing nuclear reactors range from 0.74 – 4.16 c/kWh for investor owned utilities (IOUs) and 1.53 – 5.77 c/kWh for publicly owned utilities (POUs). Subsidies for new reactors range from 5.01 – 11.42 c/kWh for IOUs and 4.20 – 8.68 c/kWh for POUs. At the higher end of these ranges, the subsidies exceed the value of the energy produced. The subsidies come from a wide range of sources: federal loan guarantees (Title 17 of the Energy Policy Act, EPACT, 2005), accelerated depreciation, subsidized borrowing costs, property tax abatements, depletion allowances for uranium mining, under-priced water for cooling, and production tax credits. In addition, the federal government helps significantly with security, risk, waste, and decommissioning management. (Source: UCS) [12]
  • The IAEA estimates that approximately 20 percent of nuclear reactors around the world are currently operating in areas of significant seismic activity. (Source: IAEA) [13]
  • The mean construction time (construction start date to first date of commercial operation) for the 104 nuclear reactors is 9.3 years. Over forty percent of the reactors (41.35%) had construction periods greater than 10 years, and 7.69% had construction periods over 15 years. The last nuclear reactor to come online (Watts Bar 1 in Tennessee) actually had a construction period of 23 years and almost 7 months. (Source: Architecture 2030 and EIA)
  • The latest application for a new nuclear reactor (June 2009: Turkey Point Units 6 and 7, Homestead, FL) estimates the total project cost between $12.8 billion to $18.7 billion for the two reactors (combined capacity of 2,234 MW). (Source: NRC and EIA)
  • In 2009, nuclear fuel cost 0.57 c/kWh. A nuclear reactor is refueled every 18-24 months (replacing a third of its core) at a cost of $40 million. (Source: NEI)
  • A typical nuclear power plant generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel annually. The U.S. nuclear industry generates a total of 2,300 metric tons of used fuel per year. (Source: NEI)
  • The U.S. currently holds 62,490 metric tons of used nuclear fuel (uranium). Illinois, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina are the states that hold the largest amounts at 7,670, 5,650, and 3,780 metric tons, respectively. (Source: NEI)
  • On March 3, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy requested to withdraw the license for Yucca Mountain, ending the only U.S. program for a high-level nuclear waste repository. A Blue Ribbon Commission has been established to study alternative options for long-term storage of high-level nuclear waste. (Source: DOE)
  • The capacity factor of nuclear plants in 2009 was 90.5%. (Source: NEI)

Reported by Architecture 2030 Researchers:

Vincent Martinez
Director of Research
Francesca Desmarais
Principal Researcher

Introduction to the 2030 Challenge

Everything you need to know about the 2030 Challenge in under two minutes.
Video produced by WD Partners