The major thrust of the article is a not too glowing appraisal of those born between 1982 and 1995.

Far from growing up in prosperity and privilege, young people in South Africa have to become globally competitive despite an inadequate school system. Their inheritance in terms of economic and environmental capital is also far from desirable.

Given the state of the world that they inherit one can only hope that Generation Y will do things differently than their parents. Their adaptability and techno savvy will have to be complimented with life-long learning, innovation and a more holistic approach to tackling challenges.

Will they make it? Read here for a more detailed viewpoint.

Last week (10 – 17 May 2008) was National Science Week  and the theme for this year was “Tomorrow’s Science & Technology is in our youth’s hands.” It is our belief that in order to succeed in that notion, we must begin to put some of today’s science & technology education in our youth’s hands.

This in no way places less emphasis on the value of educators, but perhaps means a slightly changing role. Placing science education more in the hands of the youth is also a response to a remark by Nobel Prize winning Physicist Murray Gell-Mann that, “modern science education is like being taken to the world’s greatest restaurant and being fed the menu. Students are only being shown representations of ideas and told about great discoveries rather than being helped to learn deeply for themselves.”

We are very interested in finding ways to wet children’s appetite for science and to nourish them with enriched learning. For the last 2 years we have researched educational globally. We have looked at emerging trends, technological developments and new pedagogical methodologies. While we have a special interest in life-long learning, given the needs of South Africa, we have also looked in depth at science, technology and engineering education.

Apart from research and consulting, we launched Rossum Academy  at the beginning of the year. Rossum Academy is an extra-curricular Science, Technology and Engineering Academy for children of 8 – 18. Rossum currently runs several classes a week at the MTN Sciencentre.

So after much research and 6-months of hands on experience, what have we learned in terms of science and technology education for children?

Three trends
Firstly, and this hardly requires in depth study: The world for which education prepares anyone has changed a lot over the last 2 decades and is changing ever more rapidly. The IT revolution, the molecular explosion and the current phase of globalization has lead to information doubling at a faster and faster rate, and the half-life or relevance of other information becoming shorter and shorter.

The Physical Sciences National Curriculum Statement refers to it in the context of chemistry by stating: “Chemistry is a critically important science for the future of the country. However we need to recognize that its character today is very different from what it was, when most of us learned chemistry. Things regarded as important even 25 years ago, may not be any more. They may still be true, but there are more important things now.”

This is off course not only the case with chemistry but especially with fields such as technology and computer science.

Secondly, and this I believe cannot be emphasized enough: The students of today are very different from their predecessors. Author and educator Mark Prensky  put it as follows: “Today’s students have not just changed incrementally from those of the past, nor simply changed their slang, clothes, body adornments, or styles, as has happened between generations previously. A really big discontinuity has taken place. One might even call it a “singularity” – an event which changes things so fundamentally that there is absolutely no going back. This so-called “singularity” is the arrival and rapid dissemination of digital technology in the last decades of the 20th century.”

Today’s students, from Grade R to university, are the first generation that has spent their entire lives surrounded by digital technology such as computers, videogames and the internet. Prensky goes on to say that the most useful designation for this generation is Digital Natives. Most educators however are ‘Digital Immigrants’ and this places additional pressure on them to be relevant to their students.

While it may be argued that South Africa’s youth are less ‘inborn’ into computer and internet technology due to our tragically deficient capacity, the situation is changing fast. Our youth are however on the forefront of mobile use, both in terms of penetration and adoption of new technologies.

A third noticeable trend is the increasing number of pedagogical approaches put forward – specifically for science education. You would have heard of inquiry based, problem based and activity based instruction as well as modelling instruction, studio approach and constructivism or constructionism.

All of these methodologies have their validity and place, but what do they have in common? All of these pedagogical advancements call for greater student engagement and involvement. And the support for this type of thinking is widespread and in some cases not so new at all:

• “Anything that we have to learn to do we learn by the actual doing of it” – Aristotle
• “Knowledge is inextricably situated in the physical and social context of its acquisition and use.” – John Seely Brown (ex Director PARC, member National Academy of Education)
• “Making universities and engineering schools exciting, creative, adventurous, rigorous, demanding, and empowering milieus is more important than specifying curricular details.” – Charles Vest (President emeritus of MIT)

So John Dewey, Maria Montessori, Jean Piaget and Seymore Papert and from Aristotle to the president of MIT, they all advocate a more active and involved role for students in the classroom.

On a meta-level the pedagogical methodologies fulfilling these criteria can be called Interactive Engagement (IE). Besides the qualitative support for IE, various quantitative studies have been done to prove its validity. A recent one by Prof Richard Hake of Indiana University concluded that conceptual and problem solving test results strongly suggest that the the use of IE strategies can increase Physics course effectiveness well beyond that obtained with traditional methods.

Implementing Interactive Engagement
One of the best ways we have found to effectively implement interactive engagement, and this has been corroborated by countless school and universities around the world, is using educational building and robotics kits in the classroom. While the field of robotics itself will be one of the most important fields in the 21st century, the educational value of robotics as the premier integrator in education makes us very excited.

Among all the educational building kits out there, we have discovered Fischertechnik as offering the most complete end-to-end solution. While we use other equipment in Rossum Academy as well, the versatility and true-to-life nature of Fischertechnik’s mechanic components make it incredible value in an educational context. The greatest plus is that the same basic parts that are used in sets for 5-year old are used in the industry training models. From the simplest depictions of basic machines, to the principles of electricity and pneumatics al the way up-to complex control systems for a 3-axis robot, Fischertechnik is ideal. On the programming side, is has a very easy to use visual programming language, but is also compatible with Java, Robotics Studio and Python. It furthermore comes with a 3D designer where components and machines can be fully digitally designed.

There are several ways in which we believe educational building sets can be implemented to add great value in schools.

1) Demonstrations
At the most basic level, it is great for demonstration. In other words the educator builds something and uses it to demonstrate or for learners to conduct experiments. With sets such as Fischertechnik, there are virtually endless concepts that can be accurately demonstrated. It is of great value that models of actual devices are demonstrated, as this makes it easier for students to relate. This is important as the research of Prof. Eric Mazur at Harvard  has indicated that the value of demonstrations is greatly enhanced if learners first predict and discuss the outcome before demonstrations are conducted.

2) Studio approach
A second possibility is using educational kits as part of a Studio Approach to teaching Science and Technology. Originally developed at Rensselaer Polytechnic University for 1st year Physics is has subsequently been adopted and adapted at numerous leading universities and schools for various subjects.

The studio approach is characterized by the following:
Students sit at tables in groups of 4-6. There is limited formal lecturing and students engage in a range of short experiments or model building exercises, with questions that they need to complete. Educators move from group to group, monitoring the process, answering questions and making clarifying comments. Students thus get immersed in what they are studying. At university level the studio approach was designed for group of 100+ and the typical school classroom of 20 – 35 students can work effectively.

3) Technology lab
The third option, and that speaks to the matter of integration, is utilizing educational kits and other equipment to create a technology laboratory, with the tools being utilized by various subjects including Mathematics, Natural and Physical Sciences, Technology, Design and Computer Science.

There are various ways in which this can be practically implemented at schools and Dendrite Studios specialise in advising how to do that. Obviously the biggest advantage of a technology lab is that more resources and and tools can be acquired and as it benefits a lot more students, the cost per student is much lower. A lab can also be made available to students in the afternoons, just like a library or computer centre, thus allowing students the opportunity to explore on their own or to prepare for expo’s and robotics competitions.

Beyond old things in new ways
Several authors from Alan Kay to Mitchell Resnick to Bill Gates have noted that while new technology and especially digital technologies make a learning revolution possible, they certainly do not guarantee it.

The biggest reason held up for that is that technology is being used exclusively to the same old things just in a newer way. Take for example using PowerPoint instead of a blackboard, or word-processed assignments instead of hard written ones or e-mailing notes instead of printing and handing them out.

What is required for the effective education of today’s digital natives are doing new things in new ways. It is not enough to teach technological literacy – students must attain technological fluency. In other words not just knowing how to use technological tools, but also knowing how to construct things of significance with those tools.

Allowing for an inter-disciplinary approach, with a technology laboratory used by all students in all subjects, is the start of doing new things in a new way and putting science and technology in the hands of our youth.

Yet, steady progress has been made continuously and the last few years have seen the first emergence of household robotics – although few of them humanoids. The most ubiquitous household robot is Roomba, a vacuum cleaner manufactured by iRobot of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Other ‘helping’ robots that have made it into households are the Aquabot Turbo for cleaning swimming pools and the Zuchetti Lanwbot that mows the lawn. According to a recent Forbes magazine article, cleaning, lawn moving and pool cleaning robots are expected to be a $1,8bn industry by 2014.

Beside these ‘helper’ robots, a range of robots for entertainment or companionship has also become popular. These include Sony’s AIBO robotic dog, the cute and furry Furby by Tiger Electronics and iRobi, a robot that reads the news and recipes to you and even acts as a karaoke machine. One of the most advanced domestic humanoid robots, Honda’s ASIMO, has not yet become commercially available.
Outside the household, robots have also found their way into the military. There are more than 700 bomb-disarming robots deployed by the US Military in Iraq and Afghanistan. iRobot has also recently been awarded a $286million contract to deliver 3000 robots to be used for surveillance and scouting missions by the army.

But the ultimate vision for roboticists is complete self-navigating robotic helpers and robotic vehicles. These ambitions are currently actively pursued in research labs and competitions. The 2007 DARPA Grand Challenge entailed university teams having to make actual vehicles function completely driverless and then self-navigate around a 96km urban area course. The 2007 challenge was won by Carnegie Mellon University with Stanford in the second place.
Another major contest is RoboCup. This annual event seeks to promote research and education through a competition where teams design multiple robots that play variations of soccer against each other. The overall aim of RoboCup  is to “by the year 2050, develop a team of fully autonomous humanoid robots that can win against the human world soccer champion team.”
Over and above these challenges and competitions, robotic companies and research labs are popping up everywhere, a new one being Willow Garage funded by eGroups founder and early Google architect Scott Hassan.

Dendrite Studio’s interest in robotics is slightly less ambitious but just as exciting. We believe that robotics is a very engaging and successful way for children to learn mathematics, science, applied physics and technology in a context requiring design, innovation, problem solving and teamwork.
Working with robotics teaches or reinforces several concepts such as: ratios, diameter, radius and circumference, friction, light and the electromagnetic spectrum, basic electricity and circuits, control systems and logic.
In a country where the shortage of students with the interest in and adequate skills for science and engineering is bemoaned daily, robotics is great way to excite and equip students in these fields.

After the great success of our summer holiday program, Dendrite Studios will launch a full scale robotics academy, Rossum Robotics, on 13 February 2008. Classes will be at the MTN Science Centre and you can find more information on the PRODUCTS page.

It is however doubtful if more spending will improve matters. A 2007 research paper by Prof Servaas van der Berg of Stellenbosch University concluded: “Regional comparison shows that the weak performance of the school system cannot be ascribed to the resource endowment of the school or even to the poverty of the households from which their students are drawn.”
The study does however find that weak performance in South African schools’ can be associated with school management and functioning.

This beckons the question: If government is failing to provide better education, should the private sector not play a greater role? Two international academic studies shine light on the qualitative and quantitative value of private for-profit education.

Firstly work done by Prof James Tooley  of the University of Newcastle in 2006 indicates how private for-profit schools are catering for the needs of the poorest of the poor around the globe. From the shanty towns of Lagos, to the rural areas surrounding Accra or the slums of Hyderabad, poor parents are abandoning public schools for budget private schools.
In testing 24 000 students in some of the poorest areas, they found academic achievement much higher than in public schools (even after accounting for background variables). They also found teachers much more likely to be teaching when unexpected visits to classrooms were done. Furthermore, despite operating at a much lower per-pupil cost, these schools were more likely to have basic infrastructure.
According to Tooley, because these schools operate in highly competitive market, they are always on the look-out for innovation that leads to improved standards and thus potential increased market share.

A 2007 Harvard University study conducted in Philadelphia, USA, compared the performance of different schools under different ownership structures. All schools were previously poorly performing schools, thus the local authority’s willingness to take part in the experiment. 30 schools were given to for-profit companies to manage, while sixteen were given to non-profit organisations and another 16 remained under state control. After 4 years the results were clear – children in the for-profit schools were about 9 months more advanced in Mathematics and 2 months more advanced in reading than those in the non-profit and public schools. According to Prof Paul E. Peterson who conducted the study, “the Philadelphia results demonstrate that putting schools in private hands could lead to improvements in education. If results from the first four years continue to hold up, they make a strong case for giving the private sector a larger role in urban education.”

In South Africa less than 3% of school students are in private schools and with only a fraction of those in for-profit schools. This compares to percentages of student in non-public schools of more than 80% in Zimbabwe, more than 50% in Tanzania and more than 70% in Botswana. Tanzania and Botswana along with Seychelles, Kenya, Mauritius, Swaziland and Mozambique performed better than South Africa in the Southern African Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality’s second survey (SACME QII) of 2003 (Zimbabwe was not included in the study).

What is enough?
If one looks at the latest IPCC 4th Assessment Report you see that in order to stay below atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 450 parts per million, global emissions will have to be reduced by between 50% - 85% of 2000 levels by 2050. The 450ppm scenario is the best case discussed in the report and entails a temperature increase of 2,0°C – 2,4°C above pre-industrial levels by 2050 (note that we are already 0,7°C above pre-industrial levels so it means a further increase of 1,3°C – 1,7°C). The 20% emission reduction that is often mentioned by policy makers imply a 2,8°C – 3,2°C increase above pre-industrial levels. Another 70% increase in CO2 emissions, as we saw over the last 40 years, will lead to temperature increases of 4,0°C – 4,9°C.
If we don’t commit ourselves to the 450ppm concentration target, we should prepare for a very different world in terms of ecological diversity, where we live and what we grow. I believe it is fair to say aiming for a target of higher than 450ppm is ‘not enough’.

But, what does a commitment to 450ppm stabilisation mean? Or in other words, what does 50%- 85% CO2 emission reductions by 2050 mean for us here in South Africa?
The latest global emissions from fossil fuels was 23,751 million metric tons of CO2  which, with a global population of 6,635 billion people, gives emissions of 3,58 metric tons per capita per year.
If we assume the global population will by 2050 have grown to 8 billion (which is definitely a fairly conservative measure) and we go for the lower range of the 450ppm scenario, a 50% reduction, then by 2050 per capita emissions should be 1,484 metric tons.
South Africa currently produces about 383 million tons of CO2 and given our population of 48 million that equates to 7,979 metric tons per capita. To reach the 1,484 t target, South Africans will thus have to decrease their CO2 emissions by 81,4%. For countries like the USA and UK their required reductions are greater than 95%.

What we thus see is that we can’t merely think in terms of emission reductions and carbon sequestrations here and there. We will have to start thinking of a zero-carbon society. And as I definitely don’t get excited about returning to a pre-modern society, what we will have to think about is a fully modern, zero-carbon society. Only once we acknowledge the real extent of our challenge, can we effectively work towards solutions.

In the 1960’s John F Kennedy galvanised the US population with the goal of getting a man to the moon and back by the end of the decade. Having a fully modern, zero-carbon society by 2050, should be our generation’s animating vision.

*This blog was inspired by a recent blog by George Monbiot entitled, ‘What is progress’

The evening’s first speaker was Glynn Morris, the founder and managing director of Agama Energy. As a qualified engineer Glynn has worked in the field of energy consulting and renewable energy for almost 20 years.

“Energy is a cross-cutting issue and consequently every decision is an energy decision”. This bold statement opened Glynn’s presentation and 15-minutes later he had convincingly laid out his reasoning for why energy decisions are so paramount.

The main reason is that a realisation of energy’s impact allows us choices and choices are important at a time when decision have to be made about our energy future. According to the 2006 World Energy Outlook the two competing visions of our energy future are under-invested, vulnerable and dirty or clean, clever and competitive.

The latter option is no pipe dream and clever world-play but can be the outcome if we make a series of correct decisions going forward. These decisions mainly relate to: energy efficiency, renewable energy, on-site generation and energy management.

Energy efficiency is about getting more done (or at least the same done) with using less energy. Much efficiency improvements have been made for example in vehicle fuel efficiency, compact fluorescent light bulbs and more efficient heating and cooling techniques. A statistic that Mark Swilling mentioned in the 2nd session is extremely insightful: Current energy use by household refrigerators in California is only 20% now of what it was in 1974.

The second intervention to ensure a better energy future is to increase the portion of more sustainable energy in the primary energy mix. While recent talk on this topic has been dominated with electricity generation from sustainable sources such as solar, hydro or wind our thinking should begin with how sustainable energy sources can directly meet our needs. This includes in the building environment making optimal use of natural light and passive thermal design. A seemingly obvious but often forgotten concept is that what we require is not more electricity to power the light bulbs in our buildings, but a certain amount of lumens for a given period of time. And this light can in principle be provided by various sources, with natural sunlight the cheapest and most sustainable at all. Harvard marketing professor Theodore Levitt expressed this as follows: “people don’t want to buy a quarter inch drill. They want a quarter inch hole.” This also ties in with another concept that Mark Swilling mentioned which is to ‘decouple’ growth from material production. Glynn’s explicit focus on sustainable energy in the primary energy mix is thus crucial, and goes way beyond how we generate electricity.

This ties in with the concept of on-site generation and conversion. Currently a significant portion of energy gets lost in transmission between Mpumalanga where it is generated and Cape Town. A much more rational approach is therefore to maximise on-site or local generation. This is where technologies such as photo voltaic panels, heat pumps, solar geysers, bio-digesters producing ethanol etc. are important. Glynn was at pains to point out that although some of these technologies are a bit more expensive than the traditional approaches, the options are already available and is all a matter of choice. Just as the BP head office chose to invest in PV panels instead of fancy external cladding, home owners can opt for these technologies instead of more expensive finishes or kitchens. An example is a house in Red Hill near Simons Town that achieved complete energy self-sufficiency (not connected to the grid) at a cost of R80 000. This is what some people spent on a designer kitchen – so it is a matter of choice.

The fourth aspect that requires attention in order to achieve a desirable energy outcome is energy management through planning, metering and feedback. The old axiom ‘you cannot manage what you don’t measure’ is as true for energy as it is for finance. Only with systematic metering and analysis can you plan the energy supply effectively. Tying in with what Stef Raubenheimer said in the first session, much work still needs to be done locally in terms of base-line measurements and usage patterns.

In the final part of his presentation, Glynn highlighted some examples where innovative energy decisions have been implemented. A 1998 solar geyser project in Lwandle outside Somerset West is still providing hot water to residents of this informal settlement at a cost of only R24/month. The success and financial implication of BP Head Office has been highlighted before and remains the benchmark for high-end commercial developments. The Kuyasa project in Khayelitsha involved retrofitting houses with solar geysers, insulation and CFLs at a cost of R9000. A big portion of this was recouped by registering the project for carbon credits under the Clean Development Mechanism. It was one of the first such project in SA.

One intervention that is affordable and economically viable for all households are solar water heating systems. Discounted over a 20 year period the cost of hot water using this system works out to 2,4 - 4,7 cents per litre or as low as R59 per month. And the cumulative effect can be massive. Glynn estimates that if all households in Cape Town switch to solar water heating systems, the saving in electricity would be equal to the output of Koeberg.

An investment in renewable energy is thus affordable, offers a far greater level of predictability and is very much a choice. One that hopefully more and more people will make.

Mainstreaming green building

The evening’s second speaker was Bruce Kerswill, newly appointed chairman of the Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA). Bruce has played a pioneering role in establishing the GBCSA and is also Managing Director of Spire Property Services, a leading property management company in Cape Town.

Bruce’s presentation focussed on the establishment, goals, structure and progress of the council and on the adoption of a green building standard.

GBCSA got its start after Bruce went to Australia to investigate their green building rating system. The message he got there was that you cannot implement a rating system in isolation, their needs to be a coherent drive to promote green building. Hence the GBCSA has its stated mission as: “To drive the adoption of green building practices in the SA property industry, and move the industry towards sustainability through market-based solutions.”

The GBC is very much driven by the commercial property industry. The reason for this is twofold: Firstly as the largest owners of property in the country, getting commercial property companies on-board the green building agenda can make a big difference and secondly they have just been the people picking up this ball and running with it.

According to GBCSA a green building is one that significantly reduces or eliminates its negative effect on the environment and its occupants and is energy efficient, resource efficient and environmentally responsible. Green buildings can have a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions, water scarcity, pollution, peak oil and the unsustainable pattern of development.

The message that the council tries to convey is that green buildings

• Do not necessarily cost more
• Save on operation cost, especially on a life-cycle basis
• Create a healthier work environment
• Result in increased productivity for workers
• Can command premium rentals
• Represent ‘global best practice’

The council is registered as a Section 21 company with directors drawn from a broad range including property practitioners, professionals, contractors and suppliers and government. Their operational focus is to promote green building, make knowledge and resources available, educate people about green building and establish a green building rating system.

The rating system is the tool to differentiate between normal and green buildings and to establish how green a building is. It works by identifying different categories in which a building’s environmental performance can be improved, pinpointing specific initiatives that would improve performance, awarding points for implementing these initiatives and then awarding a rating based on the overall score.

The Australian Green Star framework for example looks at management, indoor environmental quality, energy, transport, water, materials, land and ecology, emissions and technology. Under materials there would be things such as recycling waste storage, reusing facades, amount of recycled material used, PVC minimisation and sustainable timber. For recycling waste storage a building can then get 2 points if it provides a dedicated, adequately sized storage area with good access for building occupants. According to overall scores buildings are classified from one star to six stars, with the latter requiring more than 75 points.

Green Star is only one of the rating systems in use around the world. The USA has LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and the UK BREEAM (Building Research Estimates Environment Assessment Method.

While the GBCSA hasn’t officially decided on a rating system they don’t want to develop their own system, but rather adapt an existing one. Green Star is a leading candidate because it was developed for Southern Hemisphere countries and is a second-generation system thus incorporating lessons from previous standards.

Despite only being launched earlier this year, the GBCSA has already made very good progress. They received great support from the SAPOA convention in May, they have appointed a full-time CEO, they have already ran Green Star accredited professional courses and they will open for membership in the first quarter of 2008.

The Green Building Council of SA has an informal slogan that green building “is good for business and good for the soul”. It was our core belief in developing this seminar series that sustainable design is not only needed in response to a fundamentally changing climate, but that building well can be really good for us a society. Rethinking how we design our buildings can do much in reshaping our communities and ensuring greater prosperity for all.

• Personal commitment and belief
• A green audit process for materials that incorporates life cycle analysis, embodied energy etc.
• A way of quickly transferring knowledge in the field
• More rapid changes in enabling legislation so that it doesn’t fall behind design trends
• 100% funding from Eskom for energy efficiency measures
• The development of technical skills

Andy Horn was the evening’s first guest speaker. Andy is the principal architect at Eco Design Architects in Cape Town. He is widely regarded as one of the leading experts in ‘green design’ in South Africa, and his Manifesto for Green Architecture  is a widely recognised publication. In 2006 he was honoured as one of 15 finalists in the Global Holcim Award for Sustainable Construction.

In his presentation Andy focussed on the 6 broad principles for a greener approach to architecture.

The first one is socio economic with the goal of promoting social, economic & cultural upliftment. Some of the ways to achieve this is to engage the community through consultative processes and thus building consent. A second way is by respecting and promoting a sense of place. A third way is by creating local job opportunities and a final way is by engaging in capacity building of local communities.

The second broad principle deals with land-use that must be respectful and in symbioses with the local environment and its resources. A prime example of where this has been done on an urban planning scale is the town of Genadendal. On an individual house level this could relate to the effective use of vegetation in and around the house and even with something like planted roofs. This principle can be further adhered to by using natural building materials from the local environment. This can include stone, cob, adobe brick and straw-bale construction. Several of South Africa’ oldest heritage buildings were built with natural building materials and their preservation is testimony to the strength, durability and effectiveness of natural building materials. Unfortunately today, the NHBRC does not want to accept these methods despite a multitude of successful projects over the last several years. No NHBRC approval means that banks won’t finance these types of construction methods which obviously greatly impede its mainstream adoption.

The third principle for green architecture deals with water and the protection, conservation, efficiency and re-use thereof. A big problem is the contamination and pollution of water sources. From the building industry the biggest contributors are adhesives and glues, paints and paintstrippers, asbestos, PVC pipes and sealants containing volatile organic compounds (VOC’s). In terms of water conservation a prime strategy is rainwater harvesting through tanks, mulch pits and diversion ditches. Another method for saving water is using an anaerobic methane digester. These are very common in China, India and some places in Europe and has successfully and cost effectively been implement on several projects in South Africa. Despite the water saving benefit, these devices produce methane gas and/or fertilizer that can be used again.

The fourth principle is the conservation, efficiency and renewable use of energy. Several basic design principles regarding orientation, passive design and proper insulation can already go far on a household level. As far as renewable energy is concerned, the use of solar geysers is the most common interventions, but photo voltaic panels and wind turbines are becoming more affordable and user friendly.

The fifth principle is health and specifically non-polluting environments and healthy materials. Besides general pollution and waste a big problem is the use of toxic materials in the construction process. There are however almost always very good substitute not-toxic materials available. A prime example is the use of non-toxic boron in treating timber poles and clay and lime finishes as plaster. In terms of commercial products such as paints, sealants and adhesives, one should look-out for products that are formaldehyde free and contains little or no VOCs.

The last principle for a greener approach to architecture is holism. The principle of holism looks at things in the context of the whole, seeking to understand the interconnections between the various parts that make up the whole. It is an over-reaching principle and in this context specifically looks at how things are intrinsically recyclable. Some of the strategies include waste recycling, retrofitting and re-use of existing structures and making use of ‘rubble’ for example in rubble trench foundations. Implicit to holism is a life cycle approach to design and viewing everything relative to its specific context.

Andy’s presentation was followed by Anna Cowen and Vernon Collis. Anna is an architect and Vernon an engineer and in their association they operate as a multi-disciplinary sustainable development consultancy. One of the core tenets of their work and something they made specific mention of in their presentation is their use of a variety of specialists in their project teams. These include different engineers, chemists, geologists, ecologists, horticulturist and permaculture practitioners. Some less traditional disciplines that they also co-opt are anthropologists, theatre practitioners and organisational change consultants. These multi-disciplinary teams have enabled Anna and Vernon to offer very innovative approaches and solutions to building challenges. Given the complexity of much of the challenges as elucidated in this series, the value of this approach on most projects becomes clear.

Anna and Vernon structured the first part of their presentation by introducing a framework for sustainability called The Natural Step that they use as lens through which they view all projects. The first sustainable principle according to this approach is to eliminate our contribution to systematic increases in concentrations of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust. This refers specifically to mining and the use of fossil fuels. In this context one can view the embodied energy of materials as indicative of the stress they exert on the natural system. As far as traditional building materials are concerned, aluminium has the highest embodied energy followed by copper, glass and reinforcement steel. On the lower end of the scale are bricks, timber and concrete.

The second sustainability principle is eliminating our contribution to systematic increases of substances produced by society. Most prevalent in the current climate is anthropogenic greenhouse gasses, but also other forms of pollution and toxic contamination.

Sustainability principle 3 is to eliminate our contribution to systematic physical degradation of nature through over harvesting, introduction and other forms of modification. Deforestation and depletion of the fish stock are examples of over harvesting and the introduction of alien species an example of introduction. Vernon recalled how on a visit to Thailand he went to the forests were Meranti grows – they are the natural habitat for Orangutans. Timber harvested from these forests were shipped out of the country to another port where they would be stamped FSC to indicate they come from sustainable sources.

The fourth Natural Step Sustainability principle is to eliminate our contribution to the systematic undermining of people’s ability to meet their needs. In this context a series of 9 fundamental human needs have been identified by Chilean economist Manfred Max-Neef. They are:

1. subsistence;
2. protection;
3. affection;
4. understanding;
5. participation;
6. recreation;
7. creation;
8. identity; and
9. freedom.

In trying to fulfil these needs there is a trap as many people try to satisfy one need but in fact impairs several others. Anna mentioned the example of the typical large, free-standing, suburban home. While it satisfies the need for identity, it impairs the needs for freedom, protection and subsistence.

In the remainder of their presentation, Anna and Vernon explained how they incorporate The Natural Step principles, a multi-disciplinary approach and Otto Scharmer’s U-process into their project execution. They did this by focussing on 6 diverse projects that they have been involved in. In all their projects one of the first steps they take is to do a mapping of the conventional and unconventional building materials in the region as well as a mapping of what enters and what leaves a site. This way they can see what materials to use in order to minimise ecological impact and they can see how they can have a positive effect on the area.

The first project showed was a sustainable subsidised housing scheme in Mbekweni outside Paarl. Here they made significant use of local material such as stones, timber, slate etc. They also designed the houses as double storey. By using an anthropologist they picked up the community’s reluctance for this as they believe spirits stay under the stairs. There were also concerns about getting large furniture on the top floor. By being aware of these concerns from the beginning they could respond to in the design process.

Another interesting project was an upmarket residential project in Devils’ Peak, Cape Town. The clients wanted two separate dwelling on the double erf and although there was an existing house it was structurally unsound and couldn’t be used. The old house was thus demolished – but carefully so that much of the materials could be reused. From bricks to sand to timber floors to slate was all reused. In fact, they did not allow any rubble removal trucks on site. The end result was not just a beautiful urban house, but a considerable cost saving.

Since traditional building contracts and remuneration schemes are not conducive for this ‘fresh’ approach Anna and Vernon designed their own contracts and work in close partnership with all the contractors and the client. The builder for example, is incentivised to use ‘rubble’ from the site and more labour by receiving a percentage of the overall cost saving on material.

At the Tsoga Environmental Centre project they used a rubble trench foundation using local waste material and monitored the amount of heavy vehicle kilometres and diesel consumed through this approach as opposed to going for a traditional concrete slab. The saving was over 90%.

A final project highlighted was a rural financial service centre and community meeting place in Centani, Eastern Cape. The client was Old Mutual Group and Wiphold. Instead of building a brand new building, they converted a burnt-out old Magistrates office and used timber, clay, latte and local labour for the project. In the process a huge amount of skills got transferred to the local community and the community immediately had a very strong connection with the building. As a final part of the project, the local community was taught about permaculture and this was integrated into the planning and design of the project.

By looking at Andy, Anna and Vernon’s work one can only agree with the statement that by taking a different, holistic approach you will stand amazed by the abundance and possibility of nature rather than the constraints and limits it imposes.

Some of the questions that got raised during Q & A:

Q: How do you see what you do become mainstream?
AH: It is mainstream in Europe and several other places, we are just a little behind. But, it is picking up speed.

Q: How do you apply natural building processes in larger scale / commercial projects?
VC: Every project is unique and you can’t get away with using only natural processes in large buildings (that is if you have to build them in the first place). The idea is also not to move away completely from mining etc. but to use less of it. You can however use the same principles and think creatively about every step of the way.
AH: Several of the oldest and largest buildings in the world were built with natural material so there is no reason why it can’t be done if you approach it in the right way.

Q: How do you cost these types of projects and how does your fees work?
VC: We don’t work for nothing – we are professionals and we want to get paid. We just reworked the entire costing process and look at it from the point of view of value rather than cost. When we explain to clients what we want to do and they understand it, they are happy. We often start out with what the cost would have been if you used only new materials and then divide the savings by using alternative material between the various parties. Often the overall project comes out cheaper, despite higher design and professional costs.

To conclude the session, another question was posed to the participants:
How can we as built environment professionals support each other to become a globally acclaimed, cutting edge sustainable professional community?

Some of the responses were:
Have NGO’s such as SACAP and SA Green Building Council help us
Recognising diversity of skills – rather than focusing on specific skills such as architecture
Change clients / developers’ mindsets by addressing real aspirations
Have more meetings like these to share best practices
Create a forum similar to Cape Town’s New Mobility Alliance

Gita Goven is a partner at ARG Design and is also the chairperson of the Sustainability Institute in Cape Town. Gita has been working in the field of sustainable design for many years and some of her practice’s projects have received multiple accolades. Gita entitled her presentation: Adamator Standing Guard – How can design support a new vision of Cape Town as an ecological city? The 5 main points she highlighted that must be addressed in order to achieve this are:

• Integrate urban design, planning & biodiversity in repositioning the spatial & economic apartheid city
• Balancing mixed use, mixed income & medium density with ecosystem functions of land use
• Decrease resource flows in the urban terrain
• Understanding the relationship between settlement, livelihoods & conservation
• Developing performance measures such as Green Coefficient (similar to genie coefficient) and ecological footprint.

There is a very good rationale for establishing Cape Town as an ecological city given its truly unique climate and biodiversity. It is one of only six Mediterranean regions on the planet and of all these it has the greatest biodiversity per hectare. Coupled with the breathtaking scenery it is one of the most sought after urban areas in the world.

Gita then gave an overview of some of the parameters they considered in their work on the Driftsand Nature Reserve on the Cape Lowlands. Earlier on she referred to the Cape Lowlands as the gardens of Adamastor. She also referred to some conceptual work they did for an upgrade of the Kosovo Informal Settlement. This includes different housing typologies and a different hierarchy of spaces. The proposal also includes a biogas & waste treatment site and an area for urban agriculture. As a final case study she looked at the Tsoga Environmental Centre. As opposed to most buildings where a significant amount of material and finishes are important from Europe and Asia, in this building they tried to maximise the use of local building materials. This included ceilings from locally grown latte, room dividers woven from local riet, foundation material from brick recovery process and a succulent covered earth roof on poles. Tsoga stands as a proud beacon of what can be done in informal settlements such as Samora Machel. (This projected received a Bronze Medal in the Holcim Sustainable Building competition.)

In conclusion Gita mentioned the following tools, targets & benchmarks that should be considered in sustainable design:

• Cities as managed ecologies;
• Design for climate change & mitigation;
• Ecological footprint and carrying capacity;
• Resource use regeneration and management;
• Waste as nutrients;
• New economic valuation techniques; and
• Incorporation of scientific and traditional knowledge.

Alex Robertson who is a retired partner at a leading Cape Town architectural firm has for the last couple of years acted as an architectural consultant to clients in the private and public sector. It was in this capacity that he became the consultant for BP South Africa when they were looking for a new head office in Cape Town.

In his presentation Alex focussed on the site selection process of the new BP head office and the design brief of the project. One of the important aspects of the brief was that BP wanted a building to reflect their environmentally responsible philosophy but the building should not cost any more than a typical A-grade office space. To achieve the former environmental consultants ARUP were tasked to compile a Resource Efficient Design (RED) brief calling amongst others for the use of recycled material, minimising pollution and having about a third of the energy consumption of similar buildings.

To do all of this at the normal budget required serious thinking, research and very clever design. After an architectural ideas competition, KrugerRoos Architects & Urban Designers got awarded the contact and the end result is arguably still the country’s leading ‘green’ commercial office complex.

Alex focussed on some of the efficient design characteristics of the BP building including: ventilation stacks at the building’s outer edges to allow airflow; double-glazed windows that are deeply-recessed reducing solar heat in summer while enabling sun penetration in winter; light shelves in the recesses providing extra shade from the heat while at the same time allowing light to be bounced deep into the interior; a huge central atrium for natural light, and; motion sensor controlled lighting. Besides these features, the building also boasts with a 1,3 million litre underground water tank that stores run-off water from the roof area and is used for irrigation. The photo-voltaic panels on the roof are the only efficiency feature that was brought in as an extra and was done by BP to make a statement about their intent. The PV’s were designed to provide 10% of the building’s electricity. Overall, the RED brief intended for the building to consume only 115 kWh/m2 of electricity per year. This is in contrast to similar buildings’ consumption of 350kWh/m2. *

According to Alex, these electricity targets have not yet been reached and there have been problems with the PV’s for example. But, the important factor is that there have been huge efficiency gains and that much has been learned through the project. The goal is thus to improve on every building and to design so that improvements can still be made throughout the lifetime of a building. Owing to constant improvements in renewable energy technology and greater experience in South Africa, it is now possible to make every building ‘greener’ than the previous one.

The BP head office in the V & A Waterfront is an A-grade office complex of international quality and is significantly ‘greener’ than its peers. One should be realistic about the commercial realities and demands of clients and owners and there will most often, as was the case on several aspects with BP, be compromises made. These compromises are unfortunate, but as long as every project improves from the previous ones, and does all the basic things right, we will already go a long way towards ‘building well’.

*ADMIN: A calculation on the saving between normal (350kWh/m2) and current BP electricity use (200kWh/m2) assuming a 9% electricity inflation and an area of 10 000m2 shows a saving in electricity bills of R4,2 million over a 20-year period using the net present value (NPV) method.

Some of the questions that got raised during the Q & A include:
Q: Was car use part of consideration in design of BP building?
AR: The first consideration was a suitable site and the one in Waterfront was chosen for various reasons. This meant that the building would not be as close to public transport as the old Head Office. At the time of planning, there was however advanced plans for a modern bus service between the city centre and the V & A but nothing materialised.

Q: Resource use on BP building is still extensive. Was retrofitting considered?
AR: Although the owner of the building that housed the previous temporary office was keen for that, the building was just not suitable. Furthermore there was no interim place were the staff could go to while retrofitting occurred.

Q: How do you bridge the gap between people’s aspirations and green technology?
GG: Much has to do with engaging in a consultative process and education. The Tsoga building stands as an example of a ‘green building’ that the local community is very proud of.

The following questions were not addressed at the session and we hope that someone will attempt to answer them in this forum:
Q: What has been people’s response to the concept of green living?

Q: Given that everyone refer to the need for greater density, what type of density are we talking about?