Hi everyone, the new issue of CI has gone to print and should be out by early next week. Having just caught up on what's been happening in the green building and energy world for the first time in a few weeks, here's some stories that caught my eye.
The architect Mark Stephens begins a series of guest blog posts on going off grid
Welcome to this first in a series of guest blog posts that came about following the many enquiries and questions I receive as part of my everyday work and through the Ask the Architect service. This particular question came from Sylas Harper with the basic premise being that people haven’t got much money at the moment but they still need somewhere to live, and that throughout the country there are derelict houses that could be turned into homes. What I’m talking about here is living off-grid — a home that is not connected to mains electricity, water, gas or sewage. A home that is self-sufficient, sustainable and lowers the demands placed upon the planet. Once the enclave of the hippy or the hermit; the concepts behind living off-grid are now completely mainstream; solar panels and wind turbines are now commonplace and it is essential that we look for ways to lower our carbon dioxide emissions and to live a more sustainable life. As a theoretical experiment it may not be possible to adopt all of the points I’ll raise, but some of the aspects could be adopted by anyone seeking a more ecologically aware existence.
Now the initial question was posed thinking of the traditional Irish cottage wrecks dotted throughout the country, but with the recent news on the ghost estates throughout Ireland I came to the opinion that these ghost estates are the modern day equivalent of the derelict homes left to rot and be visible for generations to come. Surely there’s some way of getting ghost estates back into the hands of the ones that should be owning them - ie the people - especially now that all these homes are now effectively owned by the Irish tax payer via Nama. The Irish cottage concept is equally valid, and the points raised in these guest blog posts will equally apply to all types of housing.
Maybe it’s too big a jump to ask to get these ghost estates occupied and in-use? The argument could be made that living off-grid is possible for a sole dwelling but for an entire community of people? Well, Nick Rosen in his excellent book How to Live Off-Grid (ISBN:978-0-553-81819-2) discusses thoroughly the arguments and concepts for off-grid living and through his off-grid journey meets individuals and entire communities living beyond the constraint of national services. I cannot recommend this book highly enough — if you’re interested in off-grid living in any way, buy it now!
So what are we talking about here? We basically have four facets to living off-grid:
1. WHERE
We need somewhere to do it; that is an enclosure that gives us protection and shelter from the elements; a defendable space that we can call our own - a private space to retreat to and a public space to interact with others.
This will be the argument behind the first main blog post — I’ll be looking at what you will need to look for to provide your ideal off-grid dwelling. This blog post will also incorporate passive house concepts; a dwelling adhering to passive house concepts (airtightness, high levels of insulation etc) will obviously require less energy to heat than a more conventional house.
2. POWER
We will need to provide power to the houses without relying on the national grid. It’s too much to ask people to live in houses powered by candles, to go to bed as soon as it gets dark or wander around your house with LED lamps strapped to the head. The dwellings will need to be powered in a reliable yet sustainable way.
Therefore, the concept of this second blog post will be investigating methods of providing enough energy to adequately provide light and heat to the house and providing hot water for baths and showers.
3. WATER & FOOD
Each dwelling will also require a potable water supply, and the third blog post will investigate what will be required to bring water to a site with no discernible, potable water supply. I will be looking at methods of extracting water from the ground (wells) and water harvesting/purification to provide water for drinking as well as the ‘grey’ water for flushing toilets etc. I’ll also be taking a little detour to see how any land associated with the dwelling (or even communal land) can be used to grow vegetables/fruit and again contribute to a more sustainable and self-sufficient life.
4. EFFLUENT
Each dwelling will need to safely dispose of its effluent; this will probably be the biggest problem (as evidenced by the current strict standards regarding obtaining planning permissions involving a new septic tank). But equally this theoretically should be the easiest problem to solve as Ireland doesn’t have a national sewage infrastructure and the use of individual septic tanks and effluent treatment units is well established (ground conditions permitting). I’ll also be looking at composting toilets and reed bed systems.
The plan is to do one of these guest blog posts every week, so hold onto your hats for an interesting ride and a theoretical experiment in off-grid living with the first blog-post looking at where we are going to do it.
Comments welcome.
Mark Stephens RIBA MRIAI is a UK and Ireland trained chartered architect, based in Foxford, County Mayo, Ireland. He specialises in one-off, residential houses, extensions, restorations and refurbishments. His slant is a modernist approach using traditional forms and materials; his work also combines a contemporary architecture with an ecological and sustainable soundness.
Sorry for the slow stream of blog posts recently, I've been out of the office a lot. I spent yesterday looking at some innovative home systems for dealing with wastewater in Dundalk, and I'll try to blog about that soon. But for now, here's a bumper bunch of links.
Interesting profile of a small Welsh town designed in 1925 with some green principles in mind: Sustainable Cities Collective
A Tumbleweed tiny house. Photo by Jack Journey. Copyright Tumbleweed Tiny House Company.
Environmentalists occasionally complain to us here at Construct Ireland for featuring big houses - houses that are too big to be green, arguably. Our view is that no matter how big a building is, if it boasts interesting or innovative green features it's worth writing about - after all, other (and potentially better) buildings can learn from it. And few buildings are perfect from a green perspective - some might be too big, but others don't use the cleanest fuels, or don't pay attention to airtightness, or have various other flaws.
Still, there's a contradiction between making a building as energy efficient as possible and at the same time, as big as possible - if you genuinely want to save energy, why make it unnecessarily huge? I'm always a bit uncomfortable seeing "green" houses that aren't just massive, but that stick out aggressively and make no effort to fit into their surroundings.
But at the same time, I also dislike the idea that people should be crammed into uncomfortably small spaces for the sake of saving energy - that's no way to convince the average person to go green, and besides, creating green buildings should also be about creating comfortable buildings - spaces that are a pleasure to live and work in, that people want to use, and that convince others to follow their example.
But I'm nonetheless intrigued by the small house movement. Not because I think everyone should live in tiny houses, but because there's an art to getting the most from spaces. That doesn't mean living somewhere cramped, it just means making spaces feel bigger through clever design - a concept I've yet to see much of in Ireland.
Take a look at this apartment in New York - it may be tiny, but the clever use of space (such features like storage stairs) makes it seem bigger. I was once impressed to see how loft beds made a 40 square metre cottage I visited in Mayo feel much bigger. In a way, it made me think that the conventional option - of not even thinking at all about making the most of internal spaces - is just lazy.
Here's some profiles of interesting small homes that seem very well designed.
The Tiny House Blog is also worth checking out. And if you want to see what a really tiny house looks like, check out this video from Tumbleweed tiny houses - it's far too small for most people to bear, but it's nonetheless fascinating.
Stunning eco apartments in Switzerland: Treehugger
Is it acceptable to allow some air infiltration through a building structure as a means of ventilation? Green Building Advisor
Renowned green architect Michelle Kaufmann blogs about a discussion with architect and passive house expert Walter Unterrainer: Michell Kaufmann Studio
Frank Gehry's Novartis building in Switzerland (at centre). Photo by Brad P .
Renowned architect Frank Gehry appears to know more about green building and architecture than he originally let on. Back in May, Gehry criticised the cost of green building as well as Leed, the US's environmental rating system for buildings. I covered his comments at the time and was quite critical writing: "Gehry has designed some of the most iconic buildings of our times, but I think his comments are reflective of a wider lack of understating among many architects when it comes to green building and architecture."
Thankfully, Gehry has now given an interview with US broadcaster PBS in which it becomes quite clear that he knows a lot more than his initial comments let on. He's actually quite insightful. Some highlights are below, but I'd highly recommend reading the full interview - Gehry goes on to speak about green materials, minimising construction waste and using stationary bicycles to provide energy in one of his projects, among various other topics.
Some choice quotes from Gehry:
A lot of our clients don’t apply for the LEED certification because it’s complicated and in their view, they simply don’t need it.
They don’t use the LEED program over there, the government just says this is what you can and can’t do, and things have to be built in a sustainable way. So really it’s a political thing: People taking responsibility on an individual level combined with government programs that give mandates that say “this is how we’re going to require people to build.” Our federal government is trying to take steps in that direction. I just met with someone from the Obama administration, they are trying to enact tougher standards, but they’re having some trouble.
...The Swiss government said the Novartis building couldn’t be air-conditioned. So we had to come up with another way to regulate the temperature. We built it entirely out of glass and cooled it with a geothermal system. The roof panels were made with photovoltaic glass that generates energy. And there is an opening at the top that lets hot air out — like a teepee. In the end, there’s no one way to do it, you have to be creative.
...Maybe you need the point system to energize this type of building, but I’m not sure it’s necessary. The best way would be a political initiative that requires people to address these issues in order to get a building permit. Then the government can incentivize sustainable building through subsidies and various other things. But this is a global issue, so you need programs that not only we agree on but also that the Russians and the Chinese agree on.
...On certain projects, on big public projects, people definitely are interested in making them greener, but on smaller projects with tight budgets it can be harder. People don’t feel like they’re making enough of a dent for it to be worth it.
The new issue of CI hits the shelves this week. Here's a round up of some interesting stories that have broken while we've been away from the blog, working on the latest issue.
Irish green tech firm Solar Print to create 80 jobs: Irish Times
Major BBC investigation suggests the global asbestos industry is targeting developing nations: AFP
British homeowners to pay higher stamp duty for energy inefficient homes? Daily Mail (yes I know it's the Daily Mail - unfortunately they were the only news outlet I could find who weren't running this story behind a paywall)
Isover launches Irish energy efficiency awards: Silicon Republic
How SEAI's Accelerated Capital Allowances scheme has helped one Irish firm reduce the running costs of its data centre by 30%: Silicon Republic
European Commission publishes voluntary green public procurement for product categories including thermal insulation, CHP, street lighting and floor coverings: Envirocentre.ie
Bord Na Mona grows its renewable energy portfolio: Silicon Republic
Green-minded architects and builders are familiar with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which certifies timber as sustainable. It's attracted its fair share of criticism, as a quick look at the blog FSC Watch indicates (the blog even has a section devoted to certification in Ireland). Still, FSC certification is one of the few ways specifiers have of knowing how well a forest is managed when they're choosing timber.
Now another certification scheme, the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), is getting up and running on these shores. In an email to Construct Ireland, PEFC Ireland 's William Merivale wrote:
There are two distinct areas of our work. Firstly we are involved with drafting an Irish forest management certification standard which we expect to be ready for submission to PEFC International for endorsement by late summer/early autumn, and once endorsed both State and private forest owners will be able to apply to have their forests certified by PEFC. (You may be aware that in the UK the Forestry Commission and a significant area of private forest managed by Scottish Woodlands/Tilhill have recently opted for dual certification to both FSC and PEFC and we are confident this will happen here as well.) Secondly we promote chain of custody certification to as wide a range of businesses involved in the manufacture/supply chain of wood-based products, and to their consumers.
Hopefully the arrival of PEFC will improve awareness of forest certification further - I've been surprised once or two recently, talking to people who work in various parts of the timber industry, at their lack of awareness of these certification schemes. Saying that, one architect I spoke to made the valid point that certification marks like FSC or PEFC discourage specifiers from doing detailed research on where timber comes from and deciding based on that - he argued they encourage laziness in timber selection, essentially. It's a reasonable point, but he also acknowledged - rightly - that the likes of FSC and PEFC are necessary for the many specifiers who want a green product but don't have the time or motivation to do serious research.
Most flat plates and some vacuum tube systems show efficiencies of around 80%, but when you look at the EN certificates for most popular Chinese vacuum flask systems, they are often in the mid 60s or less. Many people assume that this reflects poor quality Chinese manufacture, but in fact it is a quirk in how we measure “zero loss efficiency” which is at noon, and ignores the effect of the sun facing tubes at different angles at different times of the day. This factor is included in test results, described as transversal incidence angle modifier, or IAM.
The efficiency of a panel is usually given for noon when the sun is directly facing the panel. With a flat plate panel, efficiency falls off either side of noon, but with vacuum flasks, the efficiency actually increases. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, the curved surface of a tube passively tracks the sun. Secondly, whereas at noon, the sun shines between tubes, as the sun moves towards 40 degrees off due south, there is increased reflection from tube to tube, dramatically increasing absorption. The effect of this change in incidence angle modifier is measured as part of the test procedure for EN12975 certification. To show efficiency at any particular time of the day, the zero loss efficiency should be multiplied by the IAM.
The following chart shows a comparison between the IAM of a typical flat plate system and an Ecologics 58mm flask system at different angles as the sun moves from Noon to evening. A mirror image of this graph happens between sunrise and noon. At its most extreme point, with the sun at an angle of 60 degrees, the output of a flat plate would be reduced by 10%, whereas the flask system’s efficiency is actually increased by 44%.
The difference between flasks and tubes Chinese vacuum flasks are like a thermos flask with two layers of glass and a vacuum between these layers. There are many advantages to this:
The vacuum element is a single piece of glass, whereas many other vacuum systems have a single layer of glass with a join between the copper heat pipe and the glass forming a seal to maintain the vacuum. With extreme temperatures, especially in stagnation, this seal can fail.
Flasks are modular. When they lose their vacuum (typically expected after 15 - 20 years) only the flask itself need be replaced. Tubes require the replacement of tube, heat pipe and collector as a single unit.
Replacement flasks are in common sizes of 47mm and 58mm diameter, produced in numerous plants in China, so you are not reliant on one supplier for spare parts. By comparison, most tube systems are not interchangeable.
Replacement flasks are typically about €5 each, whereas replacement tubes are considerably more expensive.
Chinese flask systems may be more sustainable than either tube or flat plates. Flat plate panels usually have a life expectancy of about 35 years after which the entire panel needs to be replaced with enormous disruption. An aluminium or stainless steel manifold on a vacuum tube system should last as long as the roof, with just a requirement to exchange flasks every fifteen to twenty years. This also dramatically reduces the embodied energy of the components required to maintain the solar water heating system over the lifetime of the house.
For these and other reasons, Chinese flasks have been widely adopted, and many – but not all – are of excellent quality and durability.
BER assessments Modern houses with their improved energy efficiency could benefit more from vacuum systems because the central heating is operating for a shorter season, and vacuum systems have a longer operating season which complements this nicely.
A problem arises when you try to use the figures for vacuum flask systems in DEAP for BER assessments and Part L compliance. Commercial solar simulation software takes the IAM figures into account, but despite requests to SEAI going back almost two years, there is still no way to incorporate IAM in Deap.
You might think that you could simply take the ratio between the two average IAMs as a multiplier. The reality is more complicated because the multiplier should reflect the amount of time that the sun spends at each angle, and efficiency will also change as fluid temperature and ambient temperature changes throughout the day. You also get different effects depending on the roof pitch, orientation, and the amount of sunshine.
We ran identical panels through simulation software with each of the IAM curves shown in the graph, using various roof pitches and locations in Ireland. These showed a net increase in output of between 16 and 19% as a result of the altered IAM.
Not all vacuum flask systems have the same IAM curve, and it would be difficult to develop a formula that would reflect the effect. However, it would seem reasonable to allow BER assessors to increase the zero loss efficiency used in Deap provided they or the panel manufacturer can produce documentary evidence supporting this change for the conditions.
In the case of the example shown in the graph above, the multiplier would bring the zero loss efficiency from 66 to 78.4%. When you take into account the true efficiency, combined with the improved heat loss coefficient of vacuum systems, it becomes apparent that vacuum flask systems are extremely efficient at all times, often at a lower capital cost, and with lower long-term maintenance costs.
IAM for tubes with an enclosed flat plate Lastly, it should be stated that this situation does not apply to vacuum tube systems which have a small flat plate inside a single glass tube. Their IAM more closely resembles that of a flat plate panel.
Quentin Gargan is a lecturer on the Fetac solar training in Cork Institute of Technology and is a founding director of Ecologics Solar Solutions. He has worked with both vacuum flask systems and Austrian flat plates, and would argue that commercially he has no axe to grind.
A hugely underwhelming 20,988 building energy ratings (BERs) have been issued for new homes in total since the scheme started, according to the latest SEAI domestic BER status report.
BERs have been mandatory since 1 Jan 2007 for all new homes either at the point of offer on a new house or prior to the first occupancy in the case of a self-builder.
Such a low figure may in part be explained by planning exemptions - if you applied for planning prior to 1 january 2007 and your house was substantially complete by 30 June 2008, you would have been exempt from the requirement to have a BER.
And of course the housing market has tailed off spectacularly over the last few years. However 51,274 house completions were logged in 2007, 26,420 in 2008, and 20,357 in the first three quarters of 2009, according to the Department of the Environment's housing statistics bulletin.
Many if not most of the 51,274 houses built in 2008 were probably exempt from the BER requirement. It's also possible that some of the housing completions from 2009 and even 2010 were "substantially complete" - namely constructed up to wall plate level - by 30 June 2008. In spite of all of the permutations of exempted properties, the thought nonetheless persists that a total of less than 21,000 BERs for new homes is some distance short of total compliance.
How can this be verified? Is there a way to get data not just on house completions, but on the planning application and completion dates in each case? What hope can we have that the 2008 building regulations are being complied with if people aren't even bothering to get a BER?
You may remember the Solar Decathlon, a US competition that challenged university teams to design the best solar-powered house. We previously profiled the competition in a lengthy photographic feature.
The sliding metal shutter shades of the Lumenhaus can be used to protect the house from glare and overheating, or pulled back to let sunlight in fully
For the first time this year a separate Solar Decathlon was held in Europe - Madrid specifically - and Virginia Tech's Lumenhaus (above), which also entered the US competition, emerged victorious. Green Building Advisor has more on the Lumenahus, and the official website has lots of information on all the houses (just click on the boxes). Team Finland won the architecture award at the competition (more info on the house here), and there's loads of info on the University of Florida's traditional-looking but ultra-modern house here. There's also an in-depth profile of the University of Nottingham's house in current issue of Construct Ireland.
Sorry for the brevity here on a subject that deserves much more attention - we're getting down to the heavy work on the July issue of the mag, so updates to the blog and news section might be sparse over the next week or two. But we've got an exciting issue coming up, with profiles of a couple of stick-built timber frame houses (including one that is staggeringly air tight), a piece on the most sustainable way of dealing with ghost estates and an opinion piece by Bord Gais CEO John Mullins on the company's green plans.
Solar assisted air conditioning comes to market: Treehugger
Slideshow of the Cooper-Hewitt national design awards in the US: Treehugger (some of the products and buildings are quite green)
Profile of the first legal third party appeal of a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design - the leading US environmental rating system for buildings) rating: Green Building Law
Profiles of nine "near carbon neutral" communities: Jetson Green
Solar PV integrated into ceramic roof tiles: Jetson Green
Dubbed the Infrax building, this is the new headquarters of the West Flanders Energy Company in Belgium, and I'm posting it for the simple reason that it's quite stunning and reasonably green. I've taken the info that follows on the building's technical features from the website of architects VK.
...The West Flanders Energy Company commissioned the building of a new high-quality office in Torhout, complete with a warehouse and storage space. WVEM wanted its new premises to be sustainable and have low energy consumption to underscore the example the company sets for society…
...The office building has three levels, with ground level extension used as a communal dining hall. The building covers 4800 m2…
…Extensive insulation of the building shell and the use of high-quality insulated glazing gave the entire building an overall insulation level of K35. The building is heated at low temperature by concrete core activation on the upper levels and floor heating at ground level. Small low-temperature convectors are used to fine-tune the temperature in each zone. The offices on the upper levels do not have lowered ceilings. In summer the concrete core activation provides very comfortable and energy-efficient cooling of high temperatures. The calculations for the design were produced using detailed comfort and energy simulations of the office….
...Soil was integrated in the design as a sustainable source of energy. A borehole energy storage (BES) field combined with a high-performance water pump provides basic low-temperature heating in the building in winter…
…At ground level the building has mechanical ventilation, while the upper levels are equipped with a hybrid ventilation concept, because for 60% of the office time a building can be ventilated naturally without compromising on comfort. A hybrid ventilation concept means the building is ventilated mechanically in winter and summer and naturally at other times of the year. The result is a significant saving of energy. Heat recuperation occurs in the central air group…
…The hybrid ventilation system has been integrated in an intelligent facade concept. This concept is a highly integrated design of architecture and engineering. The ventilation facilities have been integrated in a double facade system, comprising an insulated inner shell and a glazed outer skin. The cavity between the two can be drenched with outdoor air. Outside summer and winter, the cavity air heated by the sun is used to deliver fresh air to the offices by manually opening 'viewing windows’. 'Light windows' allow ample daylight to penetrate deep into the offices. The windows are set well back in the intelligent façade to shield them from direct sun radiation. What's more, the double facade structure provides better acoustic insulation between the busy ring road and the offices...
…Photovoltaic solar cells integrated in the facade provide the energy required to drive the primary pump of the BES field. This makes it possible to cool the offices by means of the BES field and concrete core activation without extra energy consumption. The offices have been equipped with energy-efficient lighting fixtures, complete with daylight control and presence detection sensors…
...The office building has been equipped with water-efficient sanitary furniture and plumbing to minimise the demand for water. Rainwater captured on the roof is reused in the building to flush toilets and urinals. The parking spaces for cars are pervious. Water originating from the metalled surfaces is infiltrated on site in green basins integrated in the car park landscape.
Sorry for the lack of blog updates last week - I had some trouble with our blog software and a blog post I published seemingly disappered. Anyway, here's a quick round up of recent links to get things kick-started again, mostly courtesy of Inhabitat and Treehugger.
Database will detail money saved from green retrofits in New York: Inhabitat
World's fastest train rolls off production line: Inhabitat
Work starts on UK's largest prefabricated straw bale building: Inhabitat
Can we use biomimicry to design cities? Treehugger
Toyota working on electric vehicle with Tesla: Inhabitat
University of Nottingham unveils solar-powered house: Inhabitat
A profile of Finland's entry into Solar Decathlon Europe: GreenBuildingAdvisor.com (Construct Ireland previously profiled the US Solar Decathlon here)
Green roofs now mandatory in Copenhagen: Treehugger
The Olympic Stadium, London, under construction. Photo by tompagenet .
I listened to Peter Bonfield, the chief executive of the Building Research Establishment, talking in Dublin last year about sustainability at the now-under-construction Olympic park in London. He was speaking at the annual conference of the BRE's Irish arm, and two aspects in particular impressed me: the amount of material being recycled, and the genuine efforts being made to ensure the facilities will benefit local communities in the long term - social sustainability, you might call it. For example, the upper half of the main stadium (above) is a temporary structure that will be removed after the games, ensuring it's not out of place in the surrounding community and that local people will feel comfortable using it.
Which brings me to an interesting video from the Guardian on the sustainable features of the Olympic park facilities.
If you want an alternative take on the social impact of the Olympics, read George Monbiot here and here .
In Novemeber 2008, George Monbiot wrote regarding the American "thinker" Sharon Astyk:
In an interesting new essay, she points out that replacing the world’s energy infrastructure involves “an enormous front-load of fossil fuels”, which are required to manufacture wind turbines, electric cars, new grid connections, insulation and all the rest. This could push us past the climate tipping point. Instead, she proposes, we must ask people “to make short term, radical sacrifices”, cutting our energy consumption by 50%, with little technological assistance, in five years. There are two problems: the first is that all previous attempts show that relying on voluntary abstinence does not work. The second is that a 10% annual cut in energy consumption while the infrastructure remains mostly unchanged means a 10% annual cut in total consumption: a deeper depression than the modern world has ever experienced. No political system - even an absolute monarchy - could survive an economic collapse on this scale.
Re-reading Monbiot's piece recently, it got me thinking about how much carbon would be emitted by a massive national insulation and retrofitting effort here in Ireland - by the manufacture and transport of the materials, the vans on the road etc. I'm not for a second suggesting this work shouldn't be done - it should and must. It's the only way to future-proof our buildings against energy insecurity and to help ensure they are responsible for producing as little carbon dioxide as possible - I'd much rather rely on a highly energy efficient building to keep energy use low than on consumer behaviour. And besides, there's an important comfort argument to be made here too - everyone would prefer a well insulated, warm home to having to reduce energy use even further in a draughty energy inefficient home.
But the question is, how do we keep the carbon footprint of retrofitting itself to a minimum? Is the key using as many locally produced, low embodied energy materials as possible? Or perhaps to ensuring batches of houses are done at the same time to ensure transport efficiency? As far as I can tell, nobody has really attempted to answer the question of how to minimise the carbon footprint of retrofitting, or done a thorough carbon audit of retrofitting work. Anyone?
You know the drill. Would love to hear any comments readers might have - particularly on magnesium based cements, or on straw bale technology and its suitability to the Irish climate.
Frank Gehry's Dancing House, Prague. Photo by RyanGWU82.
Renowned architect Frank Gehry caused a a bit of a stir last month during a speaking engagement in Chicago. Asked about the role of green architecture and buildings in tackling climate change, he said: "I think the issue is a political one."
He went on to criticise LEED, the US's rating system for the environmental impact of buildings, for rewarding "bogus stuff", and added that the costs of green buildings are "enormous", and that "they don't pay back in your lifetime."
Treehugger has an interesting report on the response from architecture writer Fred Bernstein, who defends Gehry's criticism of LEED, writing in ArchNewsNow:
One example is CityCenter, the Las Vegas complex that contains more than 5,000 hotel rooms, plus casinos and shopping malls and restaurants and nightclubs - altogether, 18 million air-conditioned square feet smack in the middle of the Mojave Desert. I can't imagine a greater environmental disaster than this complex (which, in addition to requiring vast resources to build and operate, is designed to draw travelers from around the world). And yet it was awarded LEED Gold status.
What I found most interesting was Gehry's claim that the costs of green building are "enormous" - this is patently untrue. Construct Ireland has published numerous articles over the years that prove green buildings - or at least buildings that are quite green - can be built at little extra cost (see this project for example). Consider the mixed-use complex in Foxrock we featured in the March issue of the magazine, which will be online shortly. It's built to an almost-passive energy standard and makes abundant use of green materials, but Seamus O'Loughlin of contractors Viking House told us his price was the same as that offered by conventional builders - who were planning to build to the 2005 energy standards - who also bid for the project.
Gehry has designed some of the most iconic buildings of our times, but I think his comments are reflective of a wider lack of understating among many architects when it comes to green building and architecture. Of course some have been building green properly for a long time, but many have only started to talk about sustainability as the term has become trendy in the last five years or so. While some have genuinely made the effort to educate themselves, others haven't and just throw the lingo around. I've spent hours browsing architects' websites looking for potential case studies for Construct Ireland, and though many talk a lot about sustainability and energy, when you get to the details they usually reveal a lack of in-depth knowledge about what green building really is. In fairness to Gehry, at least he isn't pretending to be green when he isn't.
US group offers to meet Ireland's wave energy targets: Irish Times
OMA Architects has created an ambitious proposal for a European-wide power network that it claims would reduce the conintent's carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. Check out a fascinating image gallery of the design here: Guardian
The Emilio Ambasz Prize for green architecture, top three: ArchDaily
Bill Gates donates $300,000 to cloud-seeding geo-engineering technology: The Times
Slideshow - the greenest of the winners of the Canada governor general's medals in architecture: Treehugger
I've been keenly waiting to see the finished Monte Rosa Hut in Swtizerland since I saw the first design illustrations, and the building is now finally finished. This Swiss mountain hut, a five-storey timber frame building on steel foundations, is designed to be 90% energy self-sufficient - it boasts an 85 square metre solar PV array with excess energy stored in "lead-acid accumulators". There's more details here and here. Photos courtesy of ETH-Studio Monte Rosa/Tonatiuh Ambrosetti.
