Session 1 christina salmhofer

Stockholm Royal Seaport

Christina Salmhofer, Sustainability Manager SRS

Development Administration, City of Stockholm

2010 Oil depot

Container terminal

Port

Gasworks

2030 12,000 apartments

35,000 work-places

600,000 m2 commercial

space

Modern port and cruise

terminal

New infrastructure

236 hectares (660 acres)

sustainable urban district

Different pieces of the puzzle

Management tools

Sustainability program SRS, targets:

By 2030, SRS will be fossil fuel free

By 2020, CO2 emissions < 1.5 t/person

SRS will be adapted to future climate change

Requirements on developers

Monitoring and evaluation process

CCI road-map

Incentives

Stakeholder involvement

Capacity-building program

Good-will

Experiences: Road-map - scenarios for decision making

• As an assessment method

• Adopting emission reduction targets

• Preparing actions plans

• Implementing measures

• Monitoring and verifying results (long

term)

• A tool for prioritisation of actions

• The initial prioritisation may change over

time as the calculated impact of one

action may change

• Focus on climate

• Missing other urban/regional (benefits)

challenges: sustainability much more

than just climate issue

Experiences

• Difficult to assess and measure the

impact of transport-related

requirements

• transport systems are complex.

• added impact of two or more actions are

difficult to assess even if the impact of one

actions may be known.

• A sustainable transport system relies on

individual choices – how to predict

behavioural change?

• Will require a good set-up of “carrots and

sticks”

Experiences

• The future is difficult to predict

• Future energy mix depends more on fuel costs

than environmental impact

• Future car fleet – depends more on vehicle and

fuel costs than environmental impacts

we depend on strong political intervention to

reach our targets

• Credits – no useful tool

• CCI System Boundary • Difficult to reach climate neutrality within a given

geographical boundary

• Missing effects of embedded materials

• Missing the main problem – consumption

Challenges

• Involvement of key stakeholders and policy-makers

• Overcoming the barrier of long-term thinking and decision-making

• Assessment of behavioral change

• The transport sector

• Reflection of other urban benefits

• Improving the link between scenario development and robust

strategies

• How best to communicate results to the general public?

stockholmroyalseaport.com

twitter.com/royalseaport

Welcome!

”Together we can move

things to a new scale

across city and national

borders”

Baseline Energy • Energy use in buildings: max 80 kWh/m2 (including heating, cooling, hot

water, building electricity)

• Use of energy efficient appliances & systems (household appliances,

lighting, elevators, ventilation systems, etc)

• District heating and district cooling

• Electricity - Nordic energy mix

• Eco-labelled electricity used in all amenities

Swedish preconditions

Efficient energy-utilities for district heating and cooling

Very low fossil content in the Nordic electricity-mix

A very good understanding of energy efficiency among the general

public since the 70-ties

Strategies: Energy Non-area specific changes in the systems

• Bio-fuels in district heating – lower CHG emissions

• Increased renewable electricity – lower CHG emissions

Area specific requirements – Scenario 1

• Energy efficient buildings: 55 kWh/m2 (heating, cooling, hot water,

building electricity)

• Local energy production

• 2 kWh/m2 Solar PVs or

• 6 kWh/m2 heat exchanger

• 100 % eco-labelled electricity for all technical installations in buildings

• Reduced energy use in water and wastewater distribution

• Biogas production – from sewage and food waste (wastegrinder to

sewer)

Strategies: Energy Area specific requirements – Scenario 2

• Energy efficient buildings: 45 kWh/m2 (heating, cooling, hot water,

building electricity)

• Local energy production Solar PVs or heat-exchange ??

• Increased biogas production

• food waste (separate collection)

• organic waste from cruise ships (separate collection)

• 100 % eco-labelled household- and operational electricity

Baseline: Transport

Fairly good public transport in the area (subway and buss)

Fairly good infrastructure for pedestrians/cyclists

Parking for bicycles, residential: 1-2 parking/unit

Car-pools in the area with well-situated designated parking

Inner city location => high percentage using public transport (approx.

50% commuting to work)

Strategies: Transport Non-area specific changes in the systems

• Natural changes in the vehicle fleet

• ???

Area specific requirements – Scenario 1

• Reversed traffic hierarchy (physical planning, enabling)

• ICT for behavioural change (planning tools, information systems, etc)

• Limited access to parking

• Car pools

• Consolidation centre for goods

Area specific requirements – Scenario 2

• Implementation of traffic hierarchy through legislative measures

• Area specific restriction on vehicles (electrical vehicles for distribution, etc)

• Mobility management (congestion fees, smart box, proactive advisory service,

etc)

Baseline: Waste (solid + liquid) Solid Waste

• Residential: Vacuum waste collection system (3 fractions), separate recycling

room for remaining waste, e.g. electronics, glass, bulk waste

• Commercial: actors manage their own waste

• Organic waste mixed with combustible waste

• Waste generation about 10% lower than Stockholm average

• Very high volumes to recycling

• 0% to landfill

• Recycling of packaging (not materials)

Water / wastewater

Water and wastewater system in Stockholm is already CO2-positive!

• Water use: 150 l/person (residential) 45 l/person (offices and retail)

• Centralised wastewater treatment (99% BOD and P-removal and >50% N-

removal)

• Biogas generation from sludge (sludge used to cover mining landfill)

• Leakage into sewers estimated to 10% (Stockholm average 40%)

• Losses from water mains estimated to 10% (Stockholm average 25%)

Strategies: Waste Non-area specific changes in the systems

• Vacuum systems are required in all new developments

Area specific requirements – Scenario 1

• Local vacuum operated waste collection system with increased no of fractions

=> increased material recovery

• Food waste from homes and workplaces is collected (through churns)

• Gardening waste is recycled locally

• Local Reuse Center – decrease in residential bulk waste

• Lower waste generation in total (conscious consumption, lighter materials).

• Water use: 100 l/person (residential) 30 l/person (offices and retail)

Area specific requirements – Scenario 2

• Reduce waste generation in total (more IT - less paper, shifting packaging

materials, etc

• Material recovery

• Reuse nutrients from organic waste and water closets

Strategies: Waste Phase 2 Solid waste

• Source separation of organic waste from residential and commercial areas for

biogas production (a potential risk: minimising waste => reduced biogas

production)

• Active incentive system to avoid waste generation and promote reuse instead of

recycling (computers, furniture, appliances, etc.)

• Water fountains in public areas, offices, etc to reduce use of water bottles

• Collection of aluminium packaging and products (excl cans)

• Replace locally distributed printed material with digital media

• Organic waste from public open space used as mulch to avoid composting

Water and Wastewater

• Source-separation of nutrients at toilet (vacuum system) and recycling of

nutrients to replace commercial fertilisers

• Collecting organic waste and black-water from ships to produce biogas and

replace commercial fertilisers (A-credit)

• Stormwater management