Read on Twitter
Some good points here, in editorial from @globeandmail, a short thread: 1/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-the-difficult-math-of-accounting-for-climate-change/
Buildings account, today, for over 40% of GHG and, collectively, the built environment more than 75%; making zero carbon society = investing in better buildings, public transit, walkable and bikeable communities (cc @cathmckenna) (2018 article @obj_news) 2/ https://www.obj.ca/article/cities-and-climate-change
We need to start quantifying risk when it comes to infrastructure decisions: these decisions have lifetime, generational impacts that far outlive the election cycles that approve them. Consider decisions to allow building in flood plains that come under MZOs or 3/
On which dubious environmental planning has been done, as @cmckenney did just recently 4/ https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/mckenney-jock-river-flood-plain-1.5599749
This dev may have heightened risk for owners for generations; risk of flooding, failed infrastructure, lack of access to services due to flooded roads, higher risk of mould, loss of natural habitat that affects a broader community. These risks are quantifiable and 5/
Good insurance/financial planning should account for these over the lifecycle; those future owners should be presented with clear cut risks, in the form of higher insurance premiums. Same for the ”latest trend” in high rises: 6/
Owners should be presented w/clear understanding, before the deposit is paid, of the cost associated with failed window wall systems, risk potential of replacement, warranties (ie, there’s a reason #architect insurance in ON doesn’t cover this, it’s a massive risk) 7/
(Window wall construction is not like curtain wall, it’s generally the cheaper, leaky, distant relative) (for comparison, see Vancouver’s leaky condo crisis) 2016 blog post explains a bit here 8/ https://www.simplycharles.com/window-wall-failure-is-something-that-is-not-talked-about-but-there-will-be-lots-to-talk-about-when-they-fail/
And a more technical comparison is here, see page 3 9/ https://buildingtall.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Marquis_P_et_al_CON125_Window_Wall_Curtain_Wall.pdf
Point being: all of this is quantifiable. Actuarial analysis can, and should, assess the risks and price them accordingly, because it is unfair, in the public interest, to pass on these costs to an owner, caused by a designer or builder they didn’t hire, years down the road 10/
By all means, if ppl want to buy something and know the risk, they should be free to do so, but should be aware of the risks, just as they are when buying a car or house, ppl can choose certain elements of their insurance policy; you might choose not to insure 11/
Your 20 year old winter beater car against theft or damage bc it’s not worth the premiums but you can if you want to. It’s about making an informed choice. Back to the original editorial 12/
Risks associate with #climatechange are, largely, quantifiable. Increased risk of flooding, fire, weather extremes, grid failure, are all quantifiable; risks associated with higher utility bills that make “code minimum” unaffordable to operate in future can also be planned 13/
Assessing these risks can inform decisions we make ab public infrastructure and how we plan cities for future generations. That helps the public and dev industry make smarter decisions, bring housing affordability (as a lifecycle concept) to more people; making better 14/
Communities that are more resilient (see @oaarchitects #shift2021 theme) that can better withstand the challenges to come. Because those challenges are real. Wringing our hands in future won’t help; the time is now. #architectscanhelp /end
