One of the reasons that sustainability measures can be so easily sidelined in our efforts of prioritization is that value of the contributions of natural systems or the liabilities of their predicted absence never factor into the bottom lines of our society. In a culture of buying and selling products, natural capital rarely makes it to the balance sheet. The proposal of trying to effectively “price” the natural world offers an interesting solution to our unfettered assault on environmental assets, but even if it were ever enacted it is unlikely to have significant long term affects on how we live. Trying to commoditize the natural environment only tries to describe it within the confines of a limited language. The fact is that the natural environment has no finite value, but instead is uncompromisingly essential. Continue Reading…
Archives For environment
Pop culture’s interpretation of “green” urban landscapes have a tendency to draw a literal representation of a more sustainable city. These “Garden City” visions can include plants growing from virtually every spatial nook and cranny possible. With flowing strands of climbing plants scaling facades and trees not only lining the streets, but poking out of sky gardens stories off of the ground, the idea of a more environmentally responsible cityscape is often presented to the public as being the result of the integration of flora and fauna.
While incorporating foliage and creating micro-climates carry a number of benefits, a truly green city has to revolve around the integration of systems to help it emulate a natural ecology. Plants should be treated as one component of a network of sustainable efforts in order to be properly utilized. This vision is not really “wrong” as much as incomplete and runs the risk of misleading people into thinking that making cities sustainable is as simple as adding plant life. There is no real solution that involves only planting our way to stewardship.
After decades of trying to build an industry based around a diversion from the chemical-laden farming practices of agro-giants, organic farming still makes up an infinitesimal portion of America’s produce. Despite the apparent strength of naturally oriented stores and markets, when it comes to planting acreage and shopping baskets, organics do not hold a meaningful presence at the table—largely due to lower yields and their affect on profitability. Due to its inherent control over growing conditions, indoor farming could be the medium that allows organic produce to harvest more of the national market share.
I recently read a fascinating post by Steve Savage, over on Sustainablog, who did some analysis of farming data collected by the USDA. His reported conclusions give us a glimpse of organic food’s place in American agriculture—and you need a magnifying glass to see it. According to Savage, harvested organic produce currently comprises a mere 0.52% of all cropland in the country in 2008. To an architect in New York City, where organic products seem to be available on every corner, the number caught me by surprise. Continue Reading…
In a way, professional expertise can be a double-edged sword. When a focused group of people dedicate themselves to an industry niche they become able to unlock and extract potential due to their heightened knowledge and experience. We call them “experts,” and defer to their opinion and assessment for engaging with the field in the future. At the same time, “experts” can also wield their power for ends that are less innovative or progressive. The same aura of experience that can ignite enthusiasm in consumers or investors by saying, “Sure, there’s no reason we can’t do that” can also stifle revolutionary thinking by claiming that advances “simply can’t be done.” When we hear an expert say it’s impossible, most of us can’t really argue.
This barrier of plausibility ends up being an industry excuse that bars advancement and sustainability encounters it all the time. Why is our water not cleaner? Why is public transit not fiscally self-sufficient? Why can’t we survive on only renewable energy? Because it simply can’t be done, or at least so we are told. Continue Reading…
When it comes to the question of how to heat and cool our homes, there is a great answer right under our feet. A client recently expressed interest in exploring geothermal for a home renovation in Rhode Island and I wasted no time in jumping on the opportunity to cement it as one of our goals for the project. Despite Americans’ slow adoption of the technology, geothermal offers an efficient and sustainable way to let the earth do most of the work in heating and cooling a home. It also offers one of the best solutions to target energy efficiency and the reduction of reoccurring fossil fuel use. Continue Reading…
Allow me to wish Happy New Year to all new arrivals and faithful patrons alike. I think most of us would agree that 2010 was better than 2009. It certainly was for Intercon. The discourse on the site exceeded my expectations in both volume and quality, making it a pleasure to post new material as well as read the responses. Continue Reading…
Contemporary designers continue to explore new ways that the forgotten wilderness of the roofscape can be utilized as usable space with a greater purpose. Roof designs can become an integral part of a network of sustainable systems for a green building to purify its connection with its surrounding environs (be them urban or rural.) New York City has recently pushed past its green roof initiative to include “Blue Roofs” in its new campaign for a cleaner city, but despite the endorsement, convincing residents to invest in roof systems may still face resistance.
Many developing countries look to our utility grid with envy. Our access to technology and capital allow us to stretch services to just about anybody, but there is a point where a locality’s dwindling population density no longer warrants connection to the greater grid. With the amount of unavoidable renovation on the horizon and our increasing goal of making a more sustainable system, our grid should be retooled by density-driven metrics. Those areas that fall below a certain density threshold should not only have to supply their own services on site, but do so with sustainable systems.
In the heart of Cambridge, Massachusetts, a hop, skip and jump away from Harvard University, presiding over the restored Joan Lorentz Park, the Cambridge Public Library now stands with a new image of modern grace. Attached to the existing library designed in 1887 by Van Brunt & Howe, the new work of metal and glass offers us a model for sustainable, public projects. Designed by William Rawn Associates, the building is not only a case study of integrating sustainability into a house of knowledge, but moreover, the product of diligent research by a team that is interested in sharing that knowledge and progress with the profession at large.
Use of the term is growing. As focusing on our effects on the environment becomes more publicly accepted/pertinent/politically correct, sustainability continues to be a label that is slapped on the side of another box and fit into another soundbyte with less and less of a care as to how it is defined and ultimately received by the public. While having more people become part of a larger discourse about sustainability is a good thing, if we do not take the time to step back and realize what values and concepts we are trying to instill in the word then we run the risk of confusing and ultimately deterring potential allies and supporters. I thought I would take a stab at a definition for what sustainability has come to mean to me as an architect and a writer thus far.