as carbon targets indicate for developed countries there needs to be applied a common retrofit solution on a national scale in order to cut down emissions of greenhouse gases. so how construction firms can prescribe ecoefficiency as a rule to massive retrofits in domestic market? is a cost benefit analysis fully capable to incept transition or is there something else more appropriate?
Construction companies can think of rain water harvesting and sequestering carbon through specific species
in my opinion massive retrofit addressed from subsidy reform can motivate stakeholders to integrate low carbon measures in their homes. efficiency driven from ecology and economy can mean applying energy efficient solutions like domestic lighting (led) and natural light in buildings and from an economic perspective it should address cost efficiency like selection of best available technology in terms of market choices and renewable resources uptake. we must highlight that conventional markets have more or less failed due to our choices are not equipped mostly with operational apologies for the common good and that behavior destroys the lithosphere. we don't want to lose the resiliency of our planet as we do not have another to accommodate so the best use of solar energy and rest renewable resources has to confront issues of rapid population growth like landscape domestication and immigration status rather than thinking how to extract oil and gas from underground storage. the last is still explored but is for my mind a "bad necessity"
this is my opinion nothing more
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Civil Engineering
- Construction
- Construction Engineering