The worlds reluctance to believe the climate emergency is an alarming, irreversible danger, illustrates the blissful ignorance of climate inaction by large corporations, governments and individuals. Through this blog I wish to explore regenerative initiatives within my own profession- the built environment. With respect and acknowledgment to the science, that predicts a terrifying inevitable future; we must have a dual line that grieves lost hope, yet also motivates architects to implement swift, effective measures.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
Sustainability is thought to be an integral aspect of contemporary architectural design, after all, in university sustainable design is the key topic of critiques and a mainstream thought process. However, through my post graduate experience, I now believe architects abandon this rudimentary teaching. Not only do firms increasingly strive for financial success over good design, they add a cretinous sustainability ethos on their website, that is almost never discussed or implemented in real time. If, in good faith, firms actualised sustainable design- as it must be an essential, non-negotiable part of architecture- they are still boasting about a minimal achievement in the scheme of the climate emergency.
Architects must stop floating the idea that they can simply charter sustainable practices, to mitigate the climate emergency (1). Enforcing sustainable practices, although an innocent rationale, is not going to sequester billion metric tones of carbon dioxide from the earth. We have surpassed the point of reversing our environmental neglect, thus it is imperative architects depart this mindset and employ new measures, that are not a band-aid fix, and are not merely ‘less bad’ than their polluted counterparts (2).
Regenerative architecture may be the answer. Regenerative architecture and its philosophical metaphors, promote a new preventative and resilient paradigm, to mitigate the current climate, to a clean trajectory. Regenerative architecture operates to reverse environmental damage and have a net-positive impact on the climate, through carbon sequestration buildings (3). You’ll be happy to know that the methodologies and technologies we need all exist, we just need to use them in the right ways. The adoption of an air-cleansing building skins, cladding systems that purify water and green roofs to capture emissions, must be enforced as the new norm in design. A building that actively breathes and works as one with nature is a no-brainer. To heal the planet, we must be one with the planet.
From the discussion above and the blatant science, I believe there is a need for every current building project today to have a renewable, self-efficiency paradigm. The following entails what architects are doing about the truly shocking information, on the trends in climate change. Is regenerative architecture the solution? And can a building give back to its occupants?
“It is too late to avert an environmental catastrophe- We can no longer work with that assumption or hope”. Professor Jem Bendell (4).
Architects Declare is the global movement to declare a climate emergency, it collectively allows architects to address the issue with great urgency (5). Since launching in Australia last year it has been signed by 937 architecture firms (as per time of writing this). From this figure you’d suspect that every project in 2020 is implementing buildings, cities and infrastructure that reset the paradigm. Right? If you talk the talk, you must walk the walk? But, since its declaration signed firms I have worked in myself, and larger firms such as Zaha Hadid have been continuing to develop projects (such as Port Authority building in Belgium or Oppo offices in Shenzhen) that work against this manifesto (6).
“Architecture is currently stuck in the outdated mitigation paradigm where, at best, studios are striving for architecture that does no additional harm to the environment and only sustains its own existence.” Michael Pawlyn of Architects Declare (7).
Architects clearly know they have to change, as they are declaring in this movement. The catalyst for change is within every architects professional and personal responsibility. Architects must stop designing at the expenditure of the environment and encourage clients to have a moral compass for future generations. Thus, the Living Building Challenge has been developed to set a standard for regenerative and self sustaining buildings. It does not dwell on basic best-practice issues, instead it focuses on critical high-level goals. Since the challenges 2009 development, there has only been 16 projects registered and 1 project that has achieved full certification, in Australia (8). From now, the signatories need to practice what they preach, and reach for this gold standard. This is vital, so the Architects Declare philosophy is not to be seen as mere greenwashing.
The pioneering Australian building to achieve full Living Building Challenge certification is, the University of Wollongongs, Sustainable Buildings Research Centre (SBRC). This regenerative building seeks the highest performance, in the management of combined building features and maximum generation of renewable resources. The biophilic design elements, subconsciously improves students mental health by injecting nature into architecture. It is undoubtably a beautiful building (see below), but it is also incredibly smart, as it operates in unison with the natural patterns and processes of the land (9).
As previously stated, architects are notoriously building dense concrete, liquid-rock structures. This typical construction method is incapable of supplying its own needs, and requires all energy, materials and necessities to be brought in and all waste taken away. If buildings were to think like trees, such as SBRC, they would be able to collect energy from the sun, harness wind, collect rain water, capture air pollution, feed nutrients down to ground level and above all else sequester carbon emissions (10). Moreover, if we as architects thought about architecture as apart of an ecosystem, our cities would be a significant contributor, in preventing the foreseeable trends of climate change.
It is to be noted, the SBRC had limited issues with clients unethical desires, low budgets and site selection. COX Architects had the perfect brief to design a challenging, yet attainable, conscious building. So, how do we lift the bar more broadly, incentivising positive design on buildings with less ambitious clients or lower budgets? (11)
The climate debate encapsulates social and economical inequality, and architects are also challenged with these same disparities in project home builders, poor urban planning and apartments riddled with defects (12). In similar respects to climate change, the satisfaction and happiness architecture provides is at its lowest, when we neglect carbon sequestering design, for high-end, concrete consumption. Architects collectively have a responsibility that their designs are “fit for purpose” and not a result of fast and cheap, sub-standard construction.
Most clients do not acquire the knowledge of what regenerative design is. It is a popular belief that adding solar panels will be enough. To challenge a clients intentions and question if their needs are necessary could potentially push clients away from young, upcoming firms. Hence, why it is imperative ALL architects work as a collective, to convince clients the viability of harnessing renewable resources and becoming independent from other buildings that pollute our earth (13). Having these conversations, as well as showing stakeholders pre existing regenerative design, is vital to create a wave of change. Inevitably, designing regeneratively is the new era of prevailing, contemporary design. Smart clients will want to be at the forefront of this movement, as it alone will generate happiness and health to all occupants of a building.
“Buildings that think like trees, that become indispensable to their urban ecosystem; and human-made environments that work together to serve us as well, as resiliently, generously, flexibly and beautifully as a rainforest”. Mary Casey (14).
The National Construction Code in Australia has recently been updated, yet there is no specific reference to climate change adaptation. It is evident that the national building and energy codes do not satisfy the actual and future targets that architectural design should be aiming for. To avoid planning for a future climate dystopia, Australia and the globe, require mandatory legislative requirements, that address climate change and future proof worse-case climatic events. However, the lack of adequate policies should not deter architects away from making proactive research to expand our understanding on regenerative, biomimicry and adaptive design. When policymakers do not change we must look at success stories such as those from the Living Building Challenge, to help deliver new, informed designs(15).
“In order, to achieve positive building footprint we must move from the cradle to grave paradigm that aims to reduce, avoid, minimise or prevent the use of fossil energy to a regenerative paradigm that aims to increase, support, and optimise the use of renewable”. Lyle, 1996 (16).
Globally, the creation, operation and alteration of the built environment is responsible for 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions (17). Architects have a great opportunity to be the catalyst, within the built environment, for systemic change. To reduce the damages caused by urban sprawl and building construction, we must fortify a healthy ecosystem within a building (18). Evidently, regenerative design is a road map that supports the climate to a clean trajectory, more than the reductionist efficiency model- sustainability. Regenerative architecture inevitably must become mandatory, architects need to focus on creating a self-sustaining ecosystems that mimic biomimicry disciplines. Although, the future will evidently not be rosey and we can not reverse our past mistakes, we must dare to channel a cleaner future, better than the one currently predicted.
Resources:
(1) The Australian Institute of Architects (2008). Sustainability Policy. https://www.architecture.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Sustainability-Policy.pdf (cited May 27, 2020).
(2) Bendell, J (2018). Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy. http://lifeworth.com/deepadaptation.pdf (cited May 27, 2020).
(3) Shady A (2016). Towards regenerative and positive impact architecture: A comparison of two net zero energy buildings, Sustainable Cities and Society, Volume 26, 2016, Pages 393-406, ISSN 2210-6707.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670716300701)https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670716300701?via%3Dihub (cited May 27, 2020).
(4) Bendell, J (2018). Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy. http://lifeworth.com/deepadaptation.pdf (cited May 27, 2020).
(5) Australian Architects Declare Climate & Biodiversity Emergency (2020). Architects Declare Signatures. https://au.architectsdeclare.com (cited May 27, 2020).
(6) Alter, L (2020). Zaha Hadid Architects designs swoopy new Oppo offices in Shenzhen https://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/zaha-hadid-architects-designs-swoopy-new-oppo-offices-shenzen.html (cited May 28, 2020).
(7) Crook, L (2019). “We fooled ourselves that sustainability was getting us where we needed to go” says Michael Pawlyn of Architects Declare. Dezeen. https://www.dezeen.com/2019/10/07/michael-pawlyn-architects-declare-interview-regenerative-architecture/ (cited May 28, 2020).
(8) Living Future (2020). Living Building Challenge – Australian Projects https://living-future.org.au/living-building-challenge/aus-projects/ (cited May 28, 2020).
(9) Living Future (2020). Living Building Challenge – SBRC PROJECT https://living-future.org.au/living-building-challenge/aus-projects/#sbrc (cited May 28, 2020).
(10) Kennedy, C (2009). Carbon Dioxide: Earth’s Hottest Topic is Just Warming Up. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/carbon-dioxide-earths-hottest-topic-just-warming (cited May 28, 2020).
(11) Felipe, R (2019). Architecture Bulletin Vol 76- No. 3. Climate Crisis. Architecture. https://www.architecture.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Architecture-Bulletin-Vol-76-No-3-climate-crisis.pdf (cited June 3, 2020).
(12)Winkel J (2017). Climate Change and Social Inequality*. Department of Economic & Social Affairs https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf (cited June 3, 2020).
(13) Botterud A (2017) Renewable Energy Integration (Second Edition). https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/renewable-energy-resource (cited June 3, 2020).
(14)Felipe, R (2019). Architecture Bulletin Vol 76- No. 3. Climate Crisis. Architecture. https://www.architecture.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Architecture-Bulletin-Vol-76-No-3-climate-crisis.pdf (cited June 3, 2020).
(15) Felipe, R (2019). Architecture Bulletin Vol 76- No. 3. Climate Crisis. Architecture. https://www.architecture.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Architecture-Bulletin-Vol-76-No-3-climate-crisis.pdf (cited June 3, 2020).
(16) Shady A (2016). Towards regenerative and positive impact architecture: A comparison of two net zero energy buildings, Sustainable Cities and Society, Volume 26, 2016, Pages 393-406, ISSN 2210-6707.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670716300701)https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670716300701?via%3Dihub (cited May 27, 2020).
(17) Architecture 2030 (2020).Buildings generate nearly 40% of annual global GHG emissions. https://architecture2030.org/buildings_problem_why/ (cited June 3, 2020).
(18)N.M. Katsoulakos (2016). Environment and Development- Urban Sprawl. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/urban-sprawl. (cited June 3, 2020).
Image Sources:
(Image 1) Glass, S (2019). Climate March to stand up against climate change. Washington, DC. April 29, 2017. https://www.archdaily.com/931349/how-architecture-responded-to-climate-change-in-2019 (cited June 3, 2020).
(Image 2) Turner, G (2019). Breathe Architecture at Melbourne Climate Change Protest. Melbourne, VIC. September 23, 2019. https://greenmagazine.com.au/architects-declare-australia-climate-emergency-movement/ (cited June 3, 2020).
(Image 3) University of Wollongong (2016). University of Wollongong’s Sustainable Buildings Research Centre. https://www.uow.edu.au/sbrc/ (cited June 3, 2020).
