"A lot of concrete, few trees: Germany's cities are
poorly prepared for higher temperatures and more extreme weather. A study is
now calling for the conversion.
When Matthias Lerm looks into German cities, he sees sins
upon sins. "A lot of what is regulated in the construction industry still
stems from the reconstruction period," he says. From times when the main
thing was to quickly create a lot of living space.
"Today we are realizing
what has been neglected" - climate protection, for example, or the
adaptation of entire cities to higher temperatures and more extreme weather. It
often takes 30 years before such mistakes are noticed.
Lerm heads the city planning office of Magdeburg, and he is
also one of two chairmen of the "Sustainable Building Commission" at
the Federal Environment Agency. And on Monday in Berlin, he presented a study
intended to clear up the sins of the post-war period.
German cities and German houses should be built differently,
better. They should cope better with the consequences of climate change - and
at the same time contribute less to global warming. The way is long, the time
is short.
30 to 40 percent of all climate-damaging emissions are
caused by buildings, be it through the heating energy or the energy consumption
that gobbles up their construction. The rubble that is produced during
construction and demolition alone accounts for around half of the German waste
volume.
54 hectares of land fall victim to the construction of
houses and roads - every day. These are often areas that were previously used
for agriculture.
So far, Germany has
failed to meet all of the targets intended to curb land use, mostly quietly.
"Without the focus on buildings, sustainable development and climate
protection will not succeed," says Dirk Messner, President of the Federal
Environment Agency. A paradigm shift is needed.
Messner and Lerm are not alone, this Monday they are sitting
together on the podium of a press conference, with the two responsible
ministers: Clara Geywitz from the SPD, the building minister. And Steffi Lemke,
the Green Environment Minister. Both Messner and Lerm believe that this
constellation alone is a huge step forward. However, how noticeable this
progress will be in German cities remains to be seen. Because the two ministers
are reluctant to make specific demands.
"We will need other cities for the climate crisis"
Geywitz, who above all wants to create a lot of living space
quickly, calls for a "culture of conversion" that also means that
more existing buildings are renovated. She believes that in the future,
construction must be "as climate-friendly as possible". Building
nothing at all won't help either.
Lemke, on the other hand, warns of the consequences if
nothing changes: "We will need other cities for the climate crisis than
those that are heating up faster and faster with concrete and asphalt."
With all planning, it is now a matter of first and foremost
taking care of the inner development of the cities and only then of the
"external development", for example in the form of new development
areas. "We're tackling the task together," says Lemke, looking at the
colleague from the construction department. "It's no coincidence that
we're sitting here together."
However, that is also true in other respects, because the
FDP is not included. It was only two weeks ago that this coalition partner
called for a "construction booster for Germany". The Liberals' plans
also aim to densify the cities, for example using existing wasteland in
municipalities or adding floors to buildings. But the FDP no longer wants to
know much about previous climate specifications for buildings: "The energy
standards in new buildings have exceeded the profitability threshold,"
says the booster paper. The coalition has set itself the task of raising these
standards, and the associated building energy law is currently being revised.
The coalition still has a few debates to do with climate-friendly living.
However, the experts from the Federal Environment Agency and
the Sustainability Commission have far more in mind than just energy-efficient
houses. Authorities head Messner fanned out a whole "sustainability
hexagon" with six dimensions from low-emission building materials to the
quality of life in the districts.
The study also proposes a "primary building materials
tax": it should make fresh building materials so expensive that recycled
material becomes more competitive.
But the construction minister hastened to kick out the
proposal because of the high construction costs. And the Green Minister of the
Environment doesn't want to know anything about such a tax either. The study,
says Lemke, is "an important contribution to the social discourse".
Revolutions in urban planning certainly sound different."
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą