We have some wonderful news to report here at Lunchbox! On March 22, Erika Mayer was awarded Carleton University’s first Co-op Employer of the Year award.

The Co-op Office holds an annual awards ceremony celebrating the graduating class of co-op students, where they hand out the Co-op student of the Year award. This year is the first time that employers are recognized with an award for their mentorship and dedication to hiring co-op students. Carleton’s Co-op Office launched the award to honour the three-way partnership of co-operative education: the university, the student and the employer.

In the fall, co-op students had the chance to nominate their employers for the award based on certain criteria. These included how the employer established a mentoring relationship, surpassed expectations and contributed to the student’s co-operative education.

Working as a co-op student at Lunchbox from September to December 2010, Aliza Sovani had many good things to say about her experience with both the company and Erika. “In September 2010, I began working for Lunchbox Consulting, a sustainable building consulting firm in Ottawa. I expected to gain better understanding of the green building industry within architecture, specifically the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system, which has now become a benchmark for green building in North America. It is easy to say that my expectations were surpassed.” Aliza nominated Erika for the Employer of the Year because of the great opportunities she was given as a student.  She expressed that Erika is strong-willed, driven, a leader, innovative and most of all an incredible mentor.

Erika was honoured to accept the award! She greatly supports the co-op program as it benefits both the student and the employer. She states that hiring students injects energy and new ideas into an organization and that student’s eagerness to learn is a positive addition to any workplace. Particularly for the sustainable architecture field, Erika says that it is important for employers to take on the mentorship role to give students the experience in an industry that is moving forward.

For more information on the story, you can look at articles featured in 24 hrs and Carleton University’s The Charlatan.

As a co-op student currently working for Erika at Lunchbox, I can definitely vouch for Aliza. Erika is a passionate and driven mentor that has provided us with an opportunity to learn and to contribute to the green building industry.

At Lunchbox Consulting, we decided to take on another green challenge and apply our knowledge in sustainable building and LEED concepts. In the fall, we researched principles of native dry gardens as well as irrigation alternatives and designed our own low-maintenance garden at the entrance of our office.

To add another green layer to the office space, we undertook a design-build project of a bar surface that would separate the kitchen and the meeting area. The bar needed to serve as a useful surface for displaying miscellaneous items and incorporate an area for seating. From the beginning, our driving inspiration for the construction of the bar was reclaimed wood. The use of old wood guided both the design and construction and also proved to be quite a challenge to work with.  However, it is the inconsistencies of the old wood that add character to the piece and that bring some green into our workspace.

The first step in this project was to source salvaged wood.  In the LEED Green Building rating system, two Materials and Resources’ points are available for Resource Reuse. The intent is to “Reuse building materials and products in order to reduce demand for virgin materials and to reduce waste, thereby reducing impacts associated with the extraction and processing of virgin resources.”

Old wood can be salvaged in many places, from people’s back yards to dealers of reclaimed wood. Old wood for sale comes most commonly from old barns, stables and warehouses that have been disassembled. Just outside Ottawa, Adams and Kennedy The Woodsource has a reclaimed wood division open on Tuesdays that sells various barn boards and old timbers.

Our wood came from Carleton University’s Meat Locker, a room full of construction junk that students can access for their studio projects. In the pile of construction supplies, we found some beautiful aged boards of rough-cut pine. Apparently they had been stored there for a very long time and it is uncertain where they are from. There were quite a few boards available for us, although many of them were very warped. The boards were given to us for free. If we consider the current price of pine into our total expenses, the reclaimed wood accounts for 20% of the total cost of building materials for the project. This exceeds the requirements of both Resource Reuse credits that require respectively 5% and 10%. Not only is the reuse of materials a way to reduce impacts of the building industry on the environment, it also saves you money. And that’s an easy sell!

The reclaimed boards from Carleton truly influenced the design of the bar, which consists of two perpendicular planes to make up the top surface and the supporting leg. In the original version, we had planned to use entirely the old wood.  However after compiling the few boards we had that were not overly warped, we decided to incorporate new wood into the design.

In our wood selection, we made sure to look at regionally sourced materials. By purchasing local wood, the demand for products both manufactured and extracted in the region is increased.  Buying local stuff also reduces the harsh impacts resulting from transportation.  Thus, it was important for us to support the use of regional resources and to look at local wood species. We went with maple, a local hardwood. The new wood not only helped fasten the old boards straight, but created a visual contrast that highlights the character of the old wood.

Weathered boards become denser and change shape and colour to a grey-ish brown with age. Though these features add character to the wood, they present challenges when it comes to construction. The warped nature of the boards makes it difficult to use the wood for straight surfaces without excessively altering them. By sanding or planing them down, the aged colour on the surface is lost. In addition, not many shops work with reclaimed wood. When there is a possibility of old wood containing hidden nails or screws, cutting or planing the wood can seriously damage power tools and equipment. Most shops prohibit the use of old wood. This makes it difficult to use the wood for projects when you are limited on how you can work with it. We called around a few places in the city such as wood suppliers and home building stores to see if we could get the wood cut there. Luckily, Rona allowed us to make a few cuts in their shop and that was enough for what we needed.

By dowelling with glue and heavily clamping the old boards to the new boards, it was possible to slightly un-warp the reclaimed part to become more flush with the new maple. Lateral metal bracing was attached to the underside of the top bar surface to strengthen the connection of the boards.

Additionally, we ensured that all adhesives and sealants complied with the VOC limits set in SCAQMD as enforced by LEED. Water-based and low VOC products reduce the amount of indoor air contaminants that are often odorous and potentially harmful to the comfort and well-being of workers and occupants.  For the bar project, we made sure to use wood-glue and water-based Varathane that had low VOC content.

The end result is a piece of furniture that both functionally and aesthetically works well in the space. Through this experience, we have learnt that working with reclaimed wood is about understanding the limits and challenges. It is ultimately about how you can creatively apply the aged wood to use the flaws as a driving part of the design.

With the next provincial election set for October 6, 2011, how will a change in government affect the province’s stand on sustainability and current green initiatives?

Let’s have a look at what McGuinty’s government has done so far to address green energy issues. First off, the Green Energy Act (GEA) was developed in 2009 with the ultimate goal of pushing the green economy in the province. The act intends to increase initiatives and attract investments in clean energy to contribute to green economic growth. With the GEA in place, over 50, 000 jobs are expected to be created over the next three years. Furthermore, the government puts great emphasis on renewable energy development in Ontario’s Long-Term Energy Plan. In a recent update, the government has integrated a 20-year plan called Building Our Clean Energy Future. The addition seeks to balance energy sources in the province by shutting down dirty coal plants and introducing more green energy power sources.

The most recent government green initiative was announced on February 24, 2011. Energy Minister Brad Duguid announced 40 new clean energy projects that again hope to create more jobs and stimulate the green economy as part of the Long-Term Energy Plan. The series of large projects consists of 39 wind and solar power set-ups as well as one hydro-electric station expected to collectively generate energy to power 200, 000 homes. With these green projects put forth, the present government is making a clear stand on sustainable energy.

However, with an election looming, is the announcement of these clean energy projects merely to enhance the green image of the Liberal party? The opposing parties certainly think so. Both the Tories and NDP argue that the Liberals have lost their credibility on green energy since they have failed to manage their current projects. For one, the Liberals failed to connect about 1, 000 solar projects to the distribution system. In addition, McGuinty’s government recently presented a memorandum regarding off-shore wind farms. Coincidentally, this memorandum is practically the same as one announced by the party before the 2007 election, which was scrapped shortly after their re-election. Are politicians thus using green initiatives simply for their image and to win the favour of Ontarians?

Where green matters are concerned in the government, the intentions, as well as the actual implementation of sustainable initiatives, aren’t always clear. With the election coming up, citizens of Ontario need a way to get the story straight on environmental issues from the different political parties.

For those who have concerns on the Province’s green actions, there is good news for you! Last month, a coalition of environmental groups that includes Environmental Defence Canada and Ontario Sustainable Energy Association (OSEA) came together to create a media campaign to clarify the political parties’ positions on green issues. The Come Clean campaign launched a website where people can submit questions to politicians on environmental topics. The answers are recorded online to keep track of where the different parties stand. In addition to the website, the campaign also involves radio ads which will raise questions on topics such as city greenbelts and the ban on pesticides.

As the election in October approaches, the Come Clean website will be an interesting resource to view all parties’ stand on everything green and allow citizens to get involved in questioning politicians about environmental topics that will effect all Ontarians. Since Come Clean was just launched at the end of February, not much information is up on the website as of yet. It will be interesting to see the developments and updates in the next months as the parties begin presenting their platforms. It seems as though a big issue with politics and the environmental is that green is often superficially involved in the government’s agenda to enhance its image. Thus, it would be best for the Come Clean site to promote asking questions related to green goals as well as specific green action to really put pressure on politicians to develop sustainable initiatives but to also put those words into action.

In April 2007, the federal government of Canada announced the nation wide phase-out of inefficient lighting by 2012. The ban of the sale of incandescent light bulbs across Canada came after the announcement of the Ontario provincial government’s plans to eliminate the inefficient bulbs earlier that month. At the same time, Australia became the first nation to set its initiatives to completely ban the use of incandescent bulbs by 2010. Following in the same footsteps, the European Union announced their plans for the ban that involved first stopping all manufacturing and importing of the bulbs in September 2009, for a full phase-out by 2012.

The year of the ban is now approaching and it is time for Canadians to make the switch to more efficient lighting. But what are the alternatives to the traditional source of lighting in millions of homes across the country? And what are other ways to improve the energy efficiency of lighting in homes and to reduce the electricity bill?

When looking at lighting options, we often chose fixtures and bulbs based on the lighting effect desired for the particular space. Effects such as a soft glow, shadow free, bright security or accent and mood lighting are taken into consideration when selecting lighting strategies. With many new technologies in green lighting, it is now possible to achieve the desired lighting effect with many cost-effective and energy efficient options. It is important to note when purchasing fixtures and bulbs, that there are two price tags to keep in mind: the purchase price and the cost of energy that is consumed over time. Many of the energy efficient lighting products have a more costly purchase price but a much lower cost for energy consumption. Natural Resources Canada’s Office of Energy Efficiency highlights various lighting options and other energy efficient strategies on their website.

Incandescent light bulbs are the norm when it comes to residential lighting. However, their inefficiency in energy consumption has made them be questioned by governments around the world. In the bulbs, a heat filament inside a tube is heated and produces light. The production of heat consumes a large amount of energy. In fact, over 90% of the total energy consumed by an incandescent bulb is dissipated in heat, thus very little of the total energy is being efficiently used for lighting.

The most popular alternative to the conventional light bulb is the compact fluorescent lamp (CFL). Fluorescent lighting involves a small amount of electricity that excites gas in a tube. An ultraviolet light is produced that bounces off the white coating inside the tube. The energy consumed to produce fluorescent light is much smaller than incandescent lighting. While CFLs deliver the same light output as incandescent bulbs, they use 75% less energy and last 9 times longer. With greater efficiency, comes greater purchase price. However, when comparing the cost over time of CFLs to incandescent bulbs, the results show a clear winner. Though CFLs cost more upfront, the electricity cost is much less making the total lifetime cost about one third of that of incandescent bulbs. This represents a savings of around $30 over the life of the bulb. The math makes things clear; CFLs are an energy efficient lighting solution. On the down side, there have been some opposing views on the new bulbs. CFLs offer a different quality of light and do not posses the warm glow of incandescent bulbs. CFLs have also been scrutinized for containing small amounts of mercury. Because of the toxic chemical the bulbs cannot be thrown out with regular garbage, which poses a problem with disposal. This negative drawback presents a long-term issue with the use of CFLs. Are they really then a green solution? Many CFL manufacturers are committing to lowering mercury levels in their bulbs.

Another alternative to look at is light-emiting diode, LED lighting. LED technology is progressing with the development of round bulbs that are beginning to replace the common light bulb. For instance, Philip’s A19 Ambient LED can be fit into just about any standard light fixture. Unlike CFLs, LEDs contain no mercury, and can achieve varying levels of ambient lighting. The lifetime of an LED bulb is also quite astonishing at 25,000 hours! To produce the same illumination as incandescent bulbs, LEDs consume a fraction of the electricity, meaning they last much longer and save you a lot of money.

Other than switching light bulbs, there are others ways to improve the efficiency of lighting at home. In inhabitat’s article entitled 6 Green Lighting Tips That Will Help You Cut Your Energy Bill, simple lighting strategies are highlighted to make your indoor lighting more green and to save you money. Other than making the switch to more energy efficient bulbs, here is what they suggest:
- Paint the room strategically. Use a light, reflective colour to maximize light in the space.
- Apply mood lighting. Use independent fixtures throughout the room.
- Take advantage of natural light. Optimize the entry of the sun to light up spaces.
- Use sunlight transport devices. Install a sunlight-collecting device that can distribute sunlight to different spaces inside the house.
- Turn off lights. Get into the habit of turning off lights when leaving a room to not waste electricity.

The phase-out of incandescent light bulbs is a bright idea that has got the country thinking of greener lighting alternatives. As of 2012, stores will no longer be able to sell incandescent bulbs. Major retailer Ikea has already stopped selling the bulbs. Since the ban is only for the sales of bulbs, we will still be seeing them around in homes for quite a few years to come. Although starting next year, people will have to re-think their selection of lighting and will be pushed to make more energy efficient choices. It is now time for us to play our part and to get into the habit of using more energy efficient lighting strategies.

Wind power represents a fast growing energy source that is being employed by many countries around the world. The World Energy Council has determined that over the past decade the global wind energy capacity has doubled and continues to grow by 30% every year. By 2008, Canada was positioned 11th in the world for achieving a wind power capacity of 2,369 MW.

The benefits of wind power as a clean, infinite energy source are clear. However, a recent news story in Ontario is an example of the resistance against the wind movement.
Wind turbine initiatives have been challenged when a resident of Prince Edward County, Ian Hanna, requested a review of the current rule for the setback of large turbines from residential dwellings. Hanna argues that the province did not consult with medical experts in evaluating the health impact of turbines on neighbouring residents when the 550 m setback regulation was ruled. Hanna along with anti-wind advocates claim that the low-frequency noise emitted by the turbines lead to certain health issues such as headaches, anxiety and sleep deprivation. If the court makes a decision in Hanna’s favor, the ruling can put a halt to future wind power projects in the province and will certainly hinder Ontario’s Long Term Energy Plan. The province’s plan for building a clean energy future included a target of 10,700MW of renewable energy from wind, solar and bio-energy by 2018. More on this story here.

The resistance of wind skeptics in Ontario brings up the ongoing controversy of wind power. The form of renewable energy has been the subject of many clean energy debates that even leave environmentalists divided. Let us review the arguments for and against the development of the clean energy source.

ANTI-Wind:

Many factors have contributed to arguments against wind power that vary from the efficiency of the system to the negative impacts on humans and the environment.
For one, wind can be deemed as an inconsistent energy source. Wind patterns are intermittent on any site and do not always coincide with electricity demand. Since energy produced from wind power cannot be stored, unless using batteries, the clean energy source is not always available when electricity is needed. A fact often disregarded is the energy needed for the turbines to function. When they are constantly consuming energy to function but only producing electricity intermittently, the efficiency of the wind turbines is put to question.
In order to have a significant energy contribution, it is necessary for wind turbines to take over vast sites. Wind farms cover large expanses of land, overwhelming the landscape and posing aesthetic issues. Not only does wind harvesting impose on the visual landscape, but it also impacts the surrounding environment presenting a threat to the land and to the wildlife, birds in particular.
Finally, the issue of health concerns often comes up. Symptoms of Wind Turbine Syndrome caused by the low frequency noise from the turbines include headaches, stress and insomnia. Other than noise pollution, anti-wind advocates complain of “shadow flicker” caused by the rotating blades when the sun passes behind the turbine.

PRO-Wind:

Though the efficiency of wind energy is questionable, there are many benefits of the renewable energy source to be highlighted. First and most importantly, wind represents a clean and infinite sustainable source of energy. Energy generated from the wind does not require fuel nor does it pollute. Unlike fossil fuel power sources, wind power does not produce harmful emissions and greenhouse gasses. Wind power truly is a clean and endless source of energy.
The cost to generate wind-powered energy is quite low relative to coal, gas, hydro and solar electricity generation. In fact, the payback for energy consumed in the manufacturing and transporting of materials to build a wind power plant is gained back in mere months.
Furthermore, the use of space by wind farms is not always imposing to the landscape as they are often built on land previously impacted by clearing. The mark of a wind farm on a site is quite minimal when compared to the imposition on the land for coalmines or other power stations. Since turbines to not take up the whole expanse of land, wind farms are often built on farmland where the fields can still be utilized for farming and cattle grazing.
In response to the anti-wind argument of noise pollution, research has shown that the noise emitted from the wind turbines is similar or even less than that caused by normal traffic and home appliances. The low frequency infrasound may annoy people, however this is not a cause for illness. As technology progresses, many of the newer wind turbines are proven to produce less noise than the older models.

Wind power is a clean, renewable source of energy that is being harvested by many countries around the world. As the wind industry grows, the heated debate on wind turbines continues. Should we not be embracing these new machines as part of a new, sustainable landscape? The wind turbines certainly make a powerful visual statement. However is the image of the turbines merely an illusion of a green future? Do they really represent the solution?

For more information on positions for and against wind turbines, you can check out these links:
A Problem with Wind Power
National Wind Watch
Prowind Canada

Solar Panels on the roof top of Ottawa City Hall

On January 11, 2011 the city announced their plans for a solar energy project, in partnership with Hydro Ottawa, involving the installation of solar panels on municipal buildings across the city. The initiative, which is the third solar energy project launched by the City in the past year, demonstrates the City’s commitment to making Ottawa green.

In late December 2010, the City installed small-scale solar generating systems on the roofs of Ottawa City Hall and OC Transpo’s Control Centre on Belfaste Road. The pilot project is expected to generate enough electricity for 2.5 homes and is already on the Ontario power grid.

Now the City plans to lease space on rooftops of 20 municipal buildings to Hydro Ottawa, including the Nepean Sportsplex and the Goulbourn Recreation Centre. The solar panels are expected to generate enough green energy to power 300 homes and $250,000 in revenue every year. “Installation of the solar panels makes economic sense because the city can sell power to the provincial grid, generating a revenue stream over the life of the project,” stated Councilor Maria McRae upon announcing the solar power initiative to the public. The project is waiting approval from council to move forward.

Last year, another significant solar power initiative in partnership with Energy Ottawa, a subsidiary of Hydro Ottawa, was proposed for the creation of two Solar Energy Parks.  The City Council approved the project involving the construction of solar parks on two pieces of land located near the Trail Road Waste Facility. If the project receives approval from the Ontario Power Authority, both sites are due to be operational by 2013. The Solar energy parks are expected to generate enough energy to power 1,500 homes every year.

When presenting the projects to the public, the City puts focus almost entirely on the financial benefits, which certainly is what’s needed to push programs such as these in effect.   However, it is important to note the environmental contribution that they are making to the City by promoting the development of renewable energy and adding some green to Ottawa’s image.

Not only do these solar power programs have sustainable value by decreasing the demand for fossil fuels and electricity, the 20-year investment will generate an annual return to the City.  This is something both taxpayers and environmentalist can be happy about.

Other solar power initiatives in the city have been developed to encourage citizens to do their part in harvesting energy from the sun. Sustainable Ottawa Community Energy Co-Op, a community based non-profit organization aimed at promoting renewable energy technologies in the National Capital Region, has launched a series of projects for solar energy systems on an individual scale.

Solar H2Ottawa was an initiative in 2010 that focused on informing consumers on the benefits of solar water heating and providing financial incentives.  Raising awareness on the systems is key in educating the community on how to make our buildings more sustainable, but providing a financial incentives certainly help to push the cause. Solar PV- Fit for You is another project that encourages consumers to take advantage of Ontario’s “Feed-in Tariff” and MicroFIT programs which allow citizens and businesses to make a payback from selling their solar generated power to the provincial power grid. Many people may not be aware of these grants offered by our government to encourage the development of renewable energy systems, and the Solar OV-Fit for You is really designed to help people make the most of those programs. The 1000 Solar Rooftop Challenge is a collaboration of residents, local businesses and non-profit organizations to encourage members of the community to install roof top solar panels. During the formal launch of the 1000 Solar Rooftop Challenge, Sustainable Ottawa announced: “We believe that together we are Powerful. We are committed to working collaboratively to help the people of Ottawa embrace a new future based on sustainable energy.” For more information on the initiatives and projects of Sustainable Ottawa, visit their website: www.sustainableottawa.ca.

Especially with the installation of the solar panels on the roof of City Hall, Ottawa’s solar energy projects are making a green statement and setting an example for citizens to contribute to sustainable development in the city.  With initiatives such as the Green Bin programs and the most recent solar energy projects, Ottawa is taking the right steps towards become a more sustainable city.  What will be next?

Proper insulation is a life and death matter in a cold climate (a direct quote from my architectural technology prof!) Amongst an array of responsibilities, insulation primarily serves to ensure that the heat in our homes remains inside to keep us warm. Insulation is categorized in three main typologies: Batt, Board, and Loose. This blog post will focus on new developments within the world of Batt Insulation.

“Exposure to insulation dust may be irritating to the eyes, nose and throat,” “Skin Protection Description: Protective gloves, long sleeved shirt, and long pants.” These are common health/safety warnings on the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) of typical batt insulation used in both commercial and residential applications. Is it possible for there to be an insulation without these warnings? I’d like to be the bearer of good news; it does exist! But first, before I let you in on this exciting product, let’s go over the more typical types of insulation, and the process in which they are made.

The most common type of batt insulation is glass fiber, which is made by melting glass and spinning this liquid to produce thin fibers that trap air (similar to cotton candy, but at a wayyy higher temperature!) The ability of insulation to trap air is what gives it its resistance or r-value. Most batt insulations range from R 3.3/inch to R 3.7/inch.  Another more sustainable alternative is Mineral Wool batt insulation which is made by the same process as glass fiber. Unfortunately, this product uses a phenol-formaldehyde binder in its manufacture, which in turn causes low levels of off-gassing of volatile organic compounds, thus polluting our indoor air quality and causing adverse effects on human health.

Now, for the big reveal:

Jeans.

Yes, blue jeans.

Let me explain. With an impressive r-value of 4.0/inch, the newest type of batt insulation is made almost fully from recycled content. Denim scrap from the factory or post-consumer recycled jeans are used to manufacture cotton batt insulation that is not only free of formaldehyde (no-off gassing), but it does not have skin/eye irritation warning signs! This insulation can be installed without gloves and safety glasses, meets the highest standards for fire and smoke ratings, fungi resistance, and corrosiveness, and even better, the product itself is 100% recyclable! The most common manufacturer of cotton insulation is UltraTouch based in North America; you can find more information on them and their sustainable product here.

Speaking of jeans, Levi Strauss & Co posted an exciting press release on November 3, 2010. I didn’t know too much about creating jeans but in the press release it shocked me to find out that the average pair of jeans uses 42 liters of water in the finishing process! How is this possible? Well according to Levi’s, “During the production process, a typical pair of jeans are ‘finished’ in large washing machines and dryers to create a unique look and feel. Using traditional garment washing methods, the average pair of jeans undergoes 3-10 washing cycles – adding up to approximately 42 liters of water per unit”!!

A team of innovative designers who wanted to make an environmental difference decided to take on the challenge of the same signature jeans Levi’s is famous for but instead they want to do it by using less water. I introduce the Levi’s brand’s new Water<Less jean.

The water<less jean reduces the amount of water used by an average of 28%, in some products by 96%! How did they do this? They reduced water’s role. In their own words, “In a nutshell, we rethought the traditional process and found a way to do it better – more sustainably.” Wise words from the most well-known and successful jean company in North America!
After reading this post I’m sure many of you are getting ideas in your head that this would be the best Christmas gift for someone special in your life. (I thought the same.) Unfortunately, we’ll all have to wait in anticipation as the first Water<Less products will be in stores this coming January 2011!

In the meantime consider installing cotton batt aka ‘blue jean’ insulation in your home over the holiday season to spread the joy of clean air and good health to all!

Food (noun) is defined as ‘any nourishing substance that is eaten, drunk, or otherwise taken into the body to sustain life, provide energy, promote growth, etc.’ Food is relatively accessible in North America; easy access to nutritious food is not. Consumers have become separated from the sources of their food as the food system evolved into a highest-profit-moneymaking business consisting of large-scale production, processing, transportation, and retail. This distancing of time between harvest and consumption has resulted in the inability of the average consumer to even recognize what they are eating in its raw form!

Urban gardens have existed in Canada for over 150 years in various forms. It was during the Industrial Revolution with the introduction of the car, suburbia, and processed foods that community gardening saw a major decline. The decades of the 1960’s and 70’s aimed at promoting environmental and energy-efficient solutions and thus came the revival of urban agriculture. In major Canadian metropolis’ there exist many established agricultural initiatives; Vancouver-based City Farmer was founded in 1978 on the basis of educating on and promoting healthy food, access to this food and allowing consumers to have ownership of their food. Likewise, The City of Montreal Community Gardening Program was established in 1975 under a similar mandate. Urban agriculture comes in many forms: community gardening, individual plots, rooftop gardening, backyard gardens, and urban farms. Nutritional and economic value, healthier lifestyle, a connection to nature, cultural identity: these are all benefits to the people living in the communities in proximity to urban agriculture.

On November 18, 2010 the Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC) blogged on the multiple benefits of the green roof: addressing stormwater run-off, the heat island effect, and building insulation. Urban agriculture is another benefit of this newly appreciated and traditionally unused area of a building. Two pioneering North American green rooftop projects will be highlighted in this post; these two projects showcase the possibilities of rooftop urban agriculture: The Toronto Royal York Hotel’s rooftop herb garden and the worlds largest rooftop farm, Brooklyn Grange.

Fresh thyme, lavender, chives, basil, mint, lemon balm, cherry tomatoes, zucchini, squash, peppers, and cucumbers: fine cuisine essentials that serve to tantalize one’s taste buds. The Toronto Royal York Hotel is located in downtown Toronto but in 1998 innovative head chef, David Garcelon, ambitiously proposed the idea of creating a 4 000 sq ft., fourteenth floor, rooftop herb garden; an idea which led to one of the first hotels in the world to have its own rooftop agricultural garden. Already, the prominent Fairmont Hotel Chain introduces sustainable best practices to the hotel industry so this proposition fit beautifully into their corporate commitment to minimizing the hotel’s environmental impact. The rooftop herb garden contains boxes and planters which provide taste, garnish, and produce for summer recipes; utilization of this rooftop herb and produce garden can be quantified by the inclusion of these ingredients in the approximately 6 000 meals a day served during the summer months!! Environmentally, being on the roof, the garden benefits from full sun and no requirement for insecticides though cautions do need to be made for protection from wind. In 2008, the hotel expanded the scope of their urban garden by installing beehives to harvest about 450 pounds of honey to sweeten their tea, soups, desserts, and cocktails!

One-year-old Brooklyn Grange farm has already acquired the prominent title of the world’s largest rooftop agricultural farm. This 40 000 sq ft. vegetable and flower farm atop a 7-storey building in Queens, NY openly promotes the benefits of rooftop urban agriculture. With over 40 different varieties of heirloom tomatoes, the farm sells to self-owned farm stands and a spur of restaurants in the Big Apple. Their reasoning for their rooftop project was in the difficulty of renting and expense in leasing vacant ground lots within the city and the fact that largely roofs are unused space. Moreover in five to ten years there is an increasingly probable chance that a developer may come and buy the land for development.

Brooklyn Grange is made up of 1.2 million lbs of soil and over 20 000 linear feet of green roofing material, totaling to 30 lbs per square foot of installed materials!!  In the case of Brooklyn Grange, technically, the green roof system consists of a layer of root-barrier, a thick layer of felt, drainage mats with small cups to hold excess water from heavy rainstorms to keep water use down, and a thin layer of felt to prevent the drainage mats from filling up with soil. The soil is composed of compost and lightweight porous stones that provide trace minerals needed by the produce.  Beyond the waterproof requirements for the roof and effective irrigation and drainage systems, with 7.5” deep beds of wet earth the load-bearing capacity of the roof is the most crucial factor in the design of a rooftop urban agricultural garden.

The environmental benefits of any form of urban agriculture are clear, increased urban green space, less transportation, less packaging, and ultimately less waste. Additional benefits include those of human health both of the city farmers and of the consumers. For those of you who were at Greenbuild 2010 in Chicago, you would have heard that Mayor Daley’s dream is to have a vertical farm right in the city!

Globally, ongoing debates continue about the regulations of urban agriculture and its relationship with rural farming. Debates are focused on where the line is to be drawn, should municipalities allow the production of small livestock within the city grid? Does theft of produce become a problem within the city? These questions are just another component of this ongoing debate that will ultimately reform the food system, from harvest through to consumption.

One hundred million to one billion birds die each year due to collisions with human-built structures across North America. It is approximated that one to ten million of these cases occur in Toronto. Collisions with structures are now the leading cause of death to migratory birds; it is the reflective and transparent characteristics of glass that make windows fatal to birds.

Wherein lies to solution? One must make glass visible to birds.

The Fatal Light Awareness Program [FLAP] is a registered global charity with aims of finding a solution to this problem. FLAP is especially involved in early morning bird rescue and collection during migration seasons but even more importantly, they successfully publicize the problem and reduce collisions by communicating to office tower staff, cleaning crews, security, and management to turn off the lights at night. FLAP is an organization that promotes community involvement in their initiatives. To find out more information on how you can volunteer, how to get your building managers involved, and what to do if you see a bird in distress visit their website at www.flap.org.

The FLAP website includes a variety of useful resources in helping with this sickening development, including a page on The Top 10 Ways to Make Glass Less of a Hazard for Birds. Included in this list are a variety of simple measures such as hanging strips of a material no more than five centimeters apart on the outside of a window for the full width of the glass, suggestions on where to place bird feeders, or hanging a silhouette of a hawk to scare birds away from the building. As you can see these measures are not realistic for the source of the vast majority of these collisions: high-rise office towers located in urban centers. Advanced technological solutions are continually being developed which use ultraviolet (UV) coatings, geomagnetic fields, and ultrasound.

Many of the bird collision-prevention products only cover a portion of the windows surface, therefore only addressing a portion of the problem. A new product that does address the problem fully is named ‘ORNILUX.’ ORNILUX insulated glass sheeting, at 32mm thick, is a bird-friendly product developed by Arnold Glas. The thin striped UV reflective coating is practically invisible to the human-eye but is clearly visible to birds because of their ability to see a broader UV spectrum than humans. According to the company website, “The patented and unique ORNILUX glass is worldwide the only solution to bird strike that can be supplied as transparent laminated glass or double glazed unit (with thermal properties of a modern IG unit).”

Check out images of the first installation of ORNILUX here.

Greenbuild Chicago 2010 is fast approaching!! The annual international conference and expo will be held from November 17 to 19 of this year. In short, Greenbuild is THE annual conference and expo organized by the USGBC to promote, showcase, and encourage green practice, products, and people. It is the industry’s largest gathering of representatives from all sectors of the green building movement. It is always fast-paced and jammed packed with workshops, education sessions, building tours and some of the best networking parties.

This is the second time Greenbuild will be held in Chicago, and for those of you who were there in 2007 – I think we’re all hoping that it will be better. The organizing committee has selected the same venue, Chicago’s LEED-certified McCormick Place, but this year has twice the square footage. Greenbuild 2010 promises to be bigger than ever with 40,000 expected attendees and nearly 2000 exhibit booths! The question on everybody’s minds is: can Chicago 2010 top last years star studded event held in Phoenix, Arizona? We’ll have to wait and see! One thing we know for sure is that the line up of speakers isn’t likely to disappoint.

This years opening keynote speaker is former US Secretary of State General Colin L. Powell. CEO and founding chair of the USGBC, Rick Fedrizzi, explains the value of obtaining Powell as a speaker: “His keen insights and global perspective are especially relevant to our movement in these times of great challenge and change. He exemplifies that leadership is about more than a title: It’s about taking charge during times of great crisis.” Author Paul Hauken will serve as the closing speaker for the expo. Hauken has authored four national bestsellers and is currently the CEO of OneSun Energy, a company that is focused on ultra low-cost solar PV based on green chemistry and biomimicry. Click here for more information on the previously mentioned speakers and a list of all others.

If you are still interested in attending Greenbuild 2010 Chicago it is not too late! Onsite registration is held every day of the conference. Registration options include but are not limited to: Full Conference & Expo, One-day Registration, Exhibit Hall Only, International Forum, Green Jobs Summit, and the Affordable Housing Summit. For more information visit the Greenbuild registration page.

Earlier this month Canadian green advocates were presented with some exciting news from the CaGBC: Greenbuild 2011 will be held in Toronto, Canada from October 4-7, 2011!! Bite Size Green will keep you up to date on any new developments concerning Greenbuild 2011 Toronto so be sure to bookmark this page and follow Lunchbox Consulting on twitter at http://twitter.com/lunchboxgreen.