景观和能源专辑引言

德克·西蒙斯（Prof.em. ir. Dirk Sijmons）教授

景观和能源专辑引言

Introduction for the special issue 'Landscape and Energy' Prof.em. ir. Dirk Sijmons

德克·西蒙斯（Prof.em. ir. Dirk Sijmons）教授

目前已经有195个国家签署了巴黎协定，致力于将全球气候变暖控制住并降低2℃，大多数人意识到实现该目标所需要的行动将会极大地影响到陆地景观乃至海洋风貌。不仅是那些属于能源转型类的项目（如风力涡轮机基地、太阳能基地、水力发电厂、潮汐发电厂、地热设施等），还有植树造林项目和生物量生产，将会逐渐改变地球面貌。这并不是一件容易的事。以景观这种象征性和富于意义的形式存在的空间将会成为该转型成败的战场。我确信，在全世界范围内风景园林师将开始发挥作用。

为了强调向无碳化社会转型需要一种全球视角，从全世界范围内征集文章似乎是一个很棒的主意。我们正在寻找活跃在能源与景观这个新前沿方向的风景园林师进行的项目。我们欢迎国际风景园林师联合会（IFLA）渠道所有种类的项目。这些项目可大可小，可以是建成的也可以是分析型的，可以是设计项目也可以是通过设计展开的研究。它们可能涉及发电项目、热量串联或生产生物燃料，也可能通过植树造林或者间接的政府政策来解决 CO2排放。读者们会发现即使是关于化石燃料景观和基础设施的清理也会受到欢迎。

从加拿大，我们收到了凯斯·洛克曼（Kees Lokman，英属哥伦比亚大学风景园林学助理教授）的文章，该文展示了有关城市代谢的开拓性理论可以如何被作为一种设计框架用于设想低碳未来。

从法国，我们收到了来自凡尔赛国立景观设计学校的成果，该成果的指导老师是阿尔兰·多罗（Auréline Doreau），伯特兰·佛兰（Bertrand Folléa），帕特里克·托基（Patrick Moquay），以及工作室的学生莫嘉娜·布朗扎克 （Morgane Braouezec），爱丽丝·斯蒂芬（Alice Stevens），史蒂夫·沃尔克（Steve Walker），奥费力·布韦（Ophélie Bouvet），利亚·维特（Léa Chauvet），吉特吉·杜马斯（Guillemette Dumars）和阿德里安·卢梭（Adrien Rousseau）一起，展示了凡尔赛ENSP的成果。这个关于为推动绿色增长而设立积极能源区的研究不仅内容非常有趣，也表明了凡尔赛国立景观设计学校已经有了一位专门的“风景园林与能源主席”。这一成果凸显了在风景园林杂志本期专辑中讨论该主题的迫切性。

最后，来自荷兰的是我自己的文章，该文简要介绍了两个通过设计展开研究的过程，一个是在4个尺度（欧洲、荷兰、4个地区、家庭）上设计转型，另一个是在北海上大规模利用风能的案例。

从《风景园林》这一中国期刊的视角看，展示上述最新动向有3个充足的理由。首先，作为即将成为世界上最大的 CO2排放国之一的中国有着最具雄心的能源转型计划以及已完工的庞大风力和太阳能项目。第二个原因是中国有着世界上最多的风景园林设计师。作为本刊的主办机构，仅北京林业大学，即本刊的主办机构，就培养了2700名风景园林学硕士生。第三个原因是在中国的风景园林实践还尚未参与到这些新项目中。

能源转型：问题的本质和重要性

对于这些签署了巴黎协定的国家而言，巴黎协定意味着到2050年需要减少80-90%当量的 CO2排放①。为达到这一目标，需要对整个能源系统进行大规模的转型。这一转型将对社会的每个角落都带来影响。因为这是一个全球性的任务，使问题的本质和程度得到理解（且切实可感！）的最好方式看似是以流程图形式进行一种合适的图解，展现2010年世界总体能源平衡情况。（图1）

图表的好处是作者们②假设每件事物均是这样发生的，且定义每件事物绝对都如此，即世界中能源的生产和使用能够最终传递到各种终端使用形式。这可能包括农业领域、工业领域、拐角处的木匠、包裹分发、采矿业、集装箱运输船的航行，这些都可以在能量记录中当作终端使用项。这意味着能量终端是由你和我这样的人来使用，类别包括家用、取暖、事物、交通、卫生、通信、照明、信息技术等。

从能源产生到广泛的能源使用终端，全球能源经济可以得到步步追踪。基于此，除了知道我们正面临的任务规模很大之外，还对它了解多少？如果能源转型能够成功完成，这个模型看起来将会或应该会是什么样？因为在桑基图中，线的厚度表明了能源流量的广泛程度，我们首先需要做的是通过节能的方式使整个图形变的更薄。节能是迄今为止最有效的减少 CO2量的方式。节约1兆瓦意味着可以进行减少3兆瓦的发电。为什么会有这样的情况？由于电力泄漏、传输、分配、转换所造成的电力损失意味着仅有少于1/3的发电真正地转变为有用功。另一个节能的理由是人类能否以一个可持续的方式生产人类当前水平活动（474EJ）所需能量的能力受到高度质疑。此外，简单廉价的能源时代已经结束了。尽管目前低价的石油可能仍然是廉价的能源，能源投资的回报（EROI）实际上在逐渐减少③。这个社会为了获取能源正在消耗越来越多的能源。

如果我们想要减少80%的 CO2当量，再生能源的比例将不得不显著增加。之后你可以提出在能源转型中，“发电”（203EJ）将在“直接燃料使用”上获得大量的能源收益。这可以通过未来社会的电气化来实现，也可以通过电能的化学“致密化”（例如转化为氢能）来实现，这会使电能在工业过程中发挥更实用价值。因此热量必须在能源转型中承担核心角色，但是它却经常被忽视。妥善地处理这些进程中的余热也是能源转型中至关重要的一部分。通过利用余热以及提高燃烧过程的效率，2/3的损耗是可避免的，这至关重要，并要系统研究。在图的最后一行，你可以看到石油能源（由发动机的运行而驱动飞机、汽车、卡车、和船），很可能是转型中最艰难的问题。最后，图形表明我们不应该只重视能源终端应用。例如，在建筑方面，让建筑不耗能甚至生产能源是不够的，也要关注（图中的上一步）建筑材料的可持续性，（图中的再上一步）以及这些建筑材料的制造过程中的 CO2足迹。这些努力中的每一步都将取得收益。

能量和空间：一种难以分解的关联

就像在阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦（Albert Einstein）的著名能量守恒公式E=mc2中质量和能量是相互关联的一样，能源和空间之间也相互关联。在人类历史的长河中，能源使用和空间使用、能源生产和空间设计一直存在明显的相互作用。改造地球，比如挖矿、组织、运作、重新设计，主要能源投入是通过人类和动物的肌肉力量和由燃料推助的机器。相反的，对于各种能源的产生，空间干预都是必要的，并且每一种能源的形式都与空间有关。自从人类掌握了火的使用，树木甚至整个森林都被砍伐来获得能量。例如煤炭、石油和天然气这些化石燃料都是“凝固的日光”，他们需要从地球中被释放，挖出、钻探和抽出，之后被运输和处理。荷兰景观中的沟渠和泥炭堆积就是对过去泥炭开采的无声的见证。露天的褐煤和煤炭矿是最大的人工制品之一。

在空间和能源的相互关系中，我们无法明确地说明哪个是主导，哪个是从属；也许两者都是。当我们想要按特定方式改变地球，我们会去寻找合适种类和数量的能源。一旦我们有了获取大量能源的途径，我们会开始构思以前无法想象的新的能源应用方法。能源和空间可以互相改变彼此，在历史的进程中也是一起改变的。以主导能源形式划分人类历史并不牵强，每个能源时期都有自己的空间表现特征。我们可以把从1800年开始的这个阶段的特征描述为“化石表现主义”时代。

在这个世纪，我们再一次地面临能源管理和空间秩序的重大变化。在过去的两个世纪里，我们的社会、经济和世界秩序都是在化石燃料充足的情况下建立的。这对现存空间的使用、外貌和感知都产生了前所未有的影响。但在未来的几十年，不可再生的化石燃料时代将开始萎缩。有充足的理由来使用其他的能源系统，一个由化石燃料逐步转向多元化的能源结构的系统；这个能源组合将由可再生系统例如风能、水电、太阳能、余热和生物能组成。这是一个巨大的任务：考虑到70到100亿的居民，我们需要在栖息地居住和工作的同时重建我们的栖息地。

在能源转型的背景下能源和空间之间变化的关系尚未被广泛讨论。空间的主要变化之一是，这些再生能源经常需要在大范围内进行收集；他们的能量密度远低于化石燃料。过去发电时只有地平线上的烟囱是可见的，但是这种景象将会显著改变。在家庭环境，在工作的地方，在休闲游览区：风力涡轮机和太阳能板将到处可见。对这些普遍的新时期可见标识的适应的过程将会引起压力与抗议。

能源部门倾向于将空间问题视为开发问题，而空间规划师则通常将能源供应看作是超出它们实际设计工作范围之外的技术设备问题。因为能源领域和空间领域很大程度上各行其是，导致错失了以智慧而令人满意的方式整合二者的机会。

借由本专辑，我们希望为打破上述僵局做出贡献。我们想让能源部门看到他们工作领域的空间维度。我们也想向空间设计者展示能源转型是一个名副其实的景观挑战。景观，相比空间来说是一个定性的概念。它很难被定义，更不用说量化了。景观是一个丰富的层状概念，它描述了人与自然的关系，以及人与人之间的关系。景观承载着价值观，从个人记忆到社会象征。这就是为什么景观常常成为那些发生在能源转型与空间之交界地带的争论战场。

Now that the Paris Agreement has been signed by 195 countries to keep global warming‘well below 2oC’, most of us realize that the actions needed to reach that goal will deeply inf l uence our landscapes and indeed our seascapes. Not only projects that belong to the necessary energy transition, such as wind turbine parks, solar energy fi elds, hydropower complexes, tidal plants, geo-thermal installations, but also re-afforestation projects and biomass production, will gradually change the face of the earth. This will not be easy. Space, in its symbolic and meaning-loaded guise as landscape, will be the battlefield where this transition will be lost or won. It is my conviction that, worldwide, landscape architects will have a role to play.

To stress that this transition to a decarbonized society needs a global perspective, it seemed a great idea to gather articles from all over the world. We were looking for projects by landscape architects who are active on this new frontier between energy and landscape. We welcomed all kind of projects in our international call through IFLA channels. The projects could be large or small, executed or more analytic, design or research-throughdesign. They might deal with electricity production projects, heat cascading, or producing biomass for fuels, but could also tackle the CO2question by re-afforestation or, more indirectly, by developing policy instruments. Even projects that deal with the cleaning up of fossil fuel landscapes and infrastructure were welcomed, as the reader will observe.

From Canada, we have a contribution by Kees Lokman (Professor of Landscape Architecture at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver) that shows how the groundbreaking theories on urban metabolism can be applied as a design framework for envisioning low-carbon futures.

From France, we show work from the ENSP Versailles, with the tutors Auréline Doreau, Bertrand Folléa, and Patrick Moquay, and the studio students Morgane Braouezec, Alice Stevens, Steve Walker, Ophélie Bouvet, Léa Chauvet, Guillemette Dumars, and Adrien Rousseau. This work about positive-energy regions for green growth is not only very interesting in terms of content, but also shows that the ENSP already has a special Chair for Landscape Architecture and Energy. This fact underlines the urgency of this theme in this special issue of 'Landscape Architecture'.

And fi nally, from the Netherlands, is my own article, a concise sketch of two research-by-design trajectories, Landscape and Energy, on designing the transition on three levels of scale (Europe, the Netherlands, four regions, and individual household), and on the North Sea case about massive offshore wind.

There are three good reasons to present this first 'tour d’ horizon' from the perspective of the Chinese journal 'Landscape Architecture'. The first is that next to being one of the world largest producers of CO2, China also has the most ambitious programs for the energy transition and spectacular wind and solar energy projects installed. The second reason is that nowhere in the world there are more landscape architects trained then in China. The Beijing Forestry University, the home base of this journal, e.g. alone has 2.700 master students in Landscape Architecture. The third reason is that the practice of Landscape Architecture in China is not yet fully involved in these new commissions.

Energy transition: the nature and magnitude of the problem

For those countries that signed the energy agreement, the Paris Agreement means a CO2eq①reduction of between 80-90% by 2050. Achieving this reduction would require a largescale conversion of our entire energy system. This transition will have an impact on the very fabric of society. Because the task is a global one, it seems the best way to make the nature and extent of the problem comprehensible (and tangible!) is an appropriate illustration in the form of a fl ow chart, which shows the overall energy balance of the world in 2010. （Figure 1）

The nice thing about the chart is that the authors②assume that everything, absolutely everything, that occurs in terms of the world’s production and use of energy can ultimately be passed on to the various forms of end use. That might include agriculture, industrial areas, the carpenter around the corner, packet distribution, mining, or the sailing of container ships; these can all be recorded in the energetic accounting book in terms of their end use. That means end use by people like you and me, in categories such as the home, heating, food, transport, sanitation, communication, lighting, IT, and so on.

From the sources to the wide range of end users, the global energy economy can be followed step by step. On this basis, what can you say about the task that we are facing except that it is very large? What would, or should, this fi gure look like if the energy transition were to be successfully accomplished? Because the thickness of the lines ina Sankey diagram indicates how extensive the fl ows are, the fi rst action that we would need to undertake is to make the overall fi gure thinner, by means of conservation. Energy saving is by far the most costeffective way of reducing CO2. A saving of 1MW means a difference of 3 MW in terms of energy generation. How can that be the case? Losses resulting from leaks, transmission, distribution, and conversion mean that less than one third of the generated energy is actually converted into useful work. Another argument for conservation is that it is highly questionable whether we will be able to generate all the necessary needed for the current levels of human activity (474 EJ) in a completely sustainable way. Moreover, the era of easy and cheap energy is over. Although the low prices for oil might suggest otherwise, the Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) is actually decreasing gradually③. It is costing society more and more energy to get energy.

If we want to get an 80% reduction in CO2eqthe proportion of ‘renewable’ energy will have to be very signif i cantly increased. You could then propose that in the transition, ‘electricity generation’ (203 EJ) will make substantial gains on‘direct fuel use’ (272 EJ). This can be achieved by the further electrif i cation of society, but also by the chemical ‘densif i cation’ of electricity (for example via conversion to hydrogen), which would make this electricity useful in industrial processes. Heat must therefore assume a central role in the debate about the transition, but it is often neglected. Properly dealing with the residual heat from all of these processes is also a crucial part of the transition. Those two-thirds of losses that can be prevented, for example by using waste heat and by improving the eff i ciency of combustion processes, will have to play a major role, and be systematically investigated. The bottom row of the diagram, where you see the energy source of oil (which is converted by motors to put in motion the passive systems of aircraft, cars, trucks, and ships), could well be the hardest nut to crack in the transition. Finally, the figure shows that we should not only be focusing on the end use. For example, in terms of buildings, it is not only about making buildings energetically-neutral, or even energy-generating, but also (taking a step back in the diagram) about the sustainability of the building materials, and (taking another step back) about the CO2footprint of how those sustainable building materials are manufactured. Gains can be made in each of these steps.

Energy and space: an indissoluble link

Just as energy and mass are linked in Albert Einstein’s famous formula E=mc2, energy and space can also be seen in relation to each other. Throughout human history, there has been a notable interaction between the use of energy and the use of space, between the production of energy and spatial design. To work the earth – to mine, to organize, operate, and redesign it – major energy investments have been made, via human and animal muscle power, and also with the help of machines that are powered by fuels. Conversely, for every form of energy generation, spatial interventions are required, and every form of energy has a spatial footprint. Ever since the taming of fi re, trees have been felled, and even entire regions have been deforested to get fuel. Fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas are ‘solidif i ed sunshine’, and they need to be released, dug up, drilled, and pumped out of the earth, and then transported and processed. The ditches and peat heaps in the Dutch landscape are the silent witnesses to the peat extraction of the past. Open-pit mines for lignite and coal are among the largest human artefacts.

In the reciprocal relationship between space and energy, it cannot unambiguously be said which is leading, and which is following; it might be both. When we want to work the earth in a certain way, we look for the appropriate type and amount of energy. And once we have access to a large source of energy, we think of new applications that we previously could not have imagined. Energy and space change each other, and they change together over the course of history. It is not far-fetched to divide human history into periods based on the dominant form of energy, and each energy period also has its own characteristic spatial manifestations. We can characterize the period, beginning around 1800, as the era of ‘fossil expressionism’.

In this century, we once again face major changes in our energy management and our spatial order. Over the past two centuries, our society, economy, and world order have been built upon an abundance of fossil fuel energy. This has had an unprecedented impact on the use, appearance, and perception of the available space. But in the coming decades, the self-evident nature of the fossil-fuel era will begin to erode. There are compelling reasons to work towards another energy system, one in which fossil fuels will gradually move to the margins of a diverse energy mix; this mix will be dominated by renewable sources such as wind, hydropower, solar energy, residual heat, and biomass. This is a monumental task: we needto rebuild our habitat at the same time that we continue to live and work in it, with our 7 to 10 billion inhabitants.

The changing relationship between energy and space, in the context of the energy transition, has not yet been extensively discussed. One of the major spatial changes is that these renewable sources often harvest their energy across large areas; their energy density is much lower than that of fossil fuels. It used to be that electricity generation was only visible as a smoke plume on the horizon, but that will change significantly. In the home environment, in the workplace, and in tourist and recreational areas: wind turbines and solar panels will be visible everywhere. The process of getting used to the ubiquity of these visible signs of the new era will lead to tensions and protests.

The energy sector is inclined to see spatial issues as a development issue, while spatial planners usually see the energy supply as a matter of technical equipment that falls beyond the purview of their actual design work. Because the two perspectives of energy and space largely proceed independently of each other, opportunities are missed to integrate them in an intelligent and desirable way.

With this special issue, we want to make a contribution to break through that impasse. We want to let the energy sector see the spatial dimension of their work field. And we want to show spatial designers that the energy transition is a genuine landscape challenge. Landscape, more so than space, is a qualitative idea. It is difficult to define, let alone quantify. Landscape is a rich and layered concept that speaks as much to the relationship between humans and nature as it does to the relationship between people themselves. Landscape is loaded with values, from individual memories to social symbols. This is why the landscape is often the battleground for heated discussions that take place at the interface between the energy transition and space.

Notes：

① CO2eq即表示所有的温室气体可以被换算的等量的 CO2量。 例如，甲烷的温室效应就是 CO2的25倍，所以CH4相当于25 CO2eq。

CO2eq.: all greenhouse gasses can be expressed in their equivalents of CO2. For instance Methane has a greenhouse effect that is 25 times stronger then CO2. So methane CH4 has 25 CO2eq.

② 乔纳森 M. 卡伦, 朱利安 M. 奥伍德: 能源的高效利用:跟踪全球能量流从燃料至能源服务 能源政策38(2010) 75–81

Jonathan M.Cullen, Julian M. Allwood The efficient use of Energy: Tracing the global flow of energy from fuel to service Energy Policy 38 (2010) 75–81

③ 查尔斯.哈尔和肯特. 莫根斯，能源和国富论:理解生物物理经济，斯普林格，2011

Charles Hall & Kent Klitgaard, Energy and the Wealth of Nations: Understanding the Biophysical Economy, Springer, 2011.