|
owner
 " Life is too short. SMILE while you still have teeth. " comment To stop the music, just click on the lil coffee cup at the bottom right-hand corner~ To comment, just click on '_ comments' beside the date and time on top of each post 감사합니다, kamsahamnida ♥~ Credits
| Assignment : Reader Response Draft 1
In the article “Advancing Sustainable Infrastructure with Envision”, Nelson (June 2015) shares about the Envision rating system. It is the new reference model adopted worldwide for the best practices for all types of infrastructure, ascertaining their sustainable achievement. She explains that the rating system consists of 60 credits and awards will be presented in 4 ranks based on the credits achieved. The author reveals that currently there are six projects that have received the award after completing third-party verification. She also emphasizes on the usefulness of Envision where it can be used in any point in the project life cycle such as providing guidance in the decision-making process. Even though Envision is a new rating system, I have to agree with the usefulness and effectiveness of it that the author is trying to suggest in this article.
Envision was introduced in the 2012, created by the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI) and the Zofnass Program for Sustainable Infrastructure at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design. The idea behind Envision is related to LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design), a green building certification program that certifies building with outstanding sustainable achievements. Nelson quoted from an interim city engineer, Deborah Weintraub, commenting “Envision expands our over a decade long use of green rating systems for buildings to civil engineering projects.” Non-habitable structures, such as bridges, highways, treatment plants and other types of civil infrastructure are not what LEED was designed for. Therefore, with the need to be designed with sustainability in mind, Envision was launched. With that, it further expands the concept of sustainability to infrastructure.
Clark (June 2014) interviewed the president and CEO of the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure, Bertera for her blog where she mentioned that Envision should be think as another LEED system. Envision is an assessment tool designed and structured just for infrastructure projects, basically covering what LEED is unable to rate for. One example mentioned in her blog is a Dallas-based civil engineer Mikel Wilkins, who used Envision on a pipeline project in 2009. He commented that through the rating system, they managed to produce a better plan and measure the cost throughout the project lifecycle. He then ended off by praising Envision as a system that works regardless of the scale of the projects. Nelson brought up in the article regarding the incorporation of triple bottom line in the rating system that is well reflected in Wilkins’s example. Sustainable projects often come in high costs, thus the triple bottom line concept evaluates the benefits over the full life cycle, allowing limited budget projects to become cost-effective as well as creating the most public value. This verifies Envision as a well-rounded system that is similar to LEED however, catering only for infrastructure projects.
In addition, Envision is highly flexible and it covers a wide range of infrastructure project types. The project types include, Energy, Water, Waste, Transport, Landscape, and Information. Taking the previous example, Wilkins also talked about after they opted for Envision, the credits in the system helped them to mark out more targets. And from there, they managed to come out with more plans to implement green infrastructure. Likewise to what Nelson emphasises in the article, Envision guides the decision makers. It allows them to see best practices in civil engineering from another perspective. As a result, it will allow them to spot opportunities to make a project more sustainable.
In conclusion, Envision is undeniably a helpful tool as it targets sustainable infrastructure and by including the triple bottom line into their rating system, it helps to overlook at the three aspects where other rating systems do not. The concept of Envision is akin to LEED however, both rating systems are on different tracks even though they are leading towards the same goal. By the end of this essay, I have to agree with the author how useful Envision is, and I believe with Envision and the other rating systems, more improvements can be done for infrastructure and buildings and together, working towards a sustainable future.
(673 words)
References
Nelson, D. (2015). Advancing sustainable infrastructure with Envision | civil + structural ENGINEER. Cenews.com. Retrieved 19 September 2015, from http://cenews.com/article/10098/advancing-sustainable-infrastructure-with-envision
Sustainableinfrastructure.org,. Institute For Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI): Rating System. Retrieved 21 September 2015, from https://www.sustainableinfrastructure.org/rating/index.cfm
Clark, A. (2014). LEED for roads: greener infrastructure gains momentum. GreenBiz. Retrieved from http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/06/26/envision-greener-infrastructure-momentum
Rowe, J. (2015). How to Envision Green Infrastructure’s Triple Bottom Line. AutoDesk Sustainability Solutions. Retrieved from http://sustainability.autodesk.com/blog/triple-bottom-line-for-green-infrastructure/
Xlgroup.com,. (2014). Envisioning Sustainable Infrastructure: An Interview with Tim Psomas | XL. Retrieved 23 September 2015, from http://xlgroup.com/fast-fast-forward/articles/envisioning-sustainable-infrastructure-an-interview-with-tim-psomas
Landoll, C. (2013). Green Certifications for Your Non-Building Projects. The WaterShed Company. Retrieved from http://www.watershedco.com/blog/green-certifications-for-your-non-building-projects/
Beach, S. (2014). ISI Envision: Sustainable Infrastructure Rating System. Permatrak.com. Retrieved 24 September 2015, from http://www.permatrak.com/news-events/bid/100073/ISI-Envision-Sustainable-Infrastructure-Rating-System
 |  |
3 Comments:
Serene,
Good morning. To start it off, I think that this is well-written. From the summary that you had provided, I am able to get a gist of what it is all about. I have to be honest that I have yet to read the article. Regarding the thesis statement that you had provided, I think that it is not 'strong' enough as I find it to be a little too vague and lacks reasoning behind your agreement. There is also a mixture of both present and past tenses in your write-up. As you had started off with the present tense, you should remain constant through out. I am not really good at spotting mistakes and the above mentioned mistakes are all that i could figure out as of now. I will update you again if I managed to come across any in the near future.
Anyway, keep up the excellent writing. Im looking forward for your updated post!
Best regards
M Fadhli
Hi serene,
After reading your post I like the general flow of your reader response. It is very factual and informative. To put in grammer wise, my grammer is not really great, but just as fadhli mentions, i also noticed that there is some grammer issues whereby you started off with present but following onwards it became somewhat past tense. I also feel that your argument could be stronger and include your point of view as well. With that, let's back up on our thesis tgt
Sha
Hi serene,
After reading your post I like the general flow of your reader response. It is very factual and informative. To put in grammer wise, my grammer is not really great, but just as fadhli mentions, i also noticed that there is some grammer issues whereby you started off with present but following onwards it became somewhat past tense. I also feel that your argument could be stronger and include your point of view as well. With that, let's back up on our thesis tgt
Sha
Post a Comment