“We can’t solve problems
using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them” (Albert
Einstein). As we all know the
industrial revolution was a time of rapid growth and new developments. Most of
these inventions and technologies improved quality of life, and therefore were
a positive addition to society. Today we are informed of the damaging impact that
the interiors and the architectures industries have had on our natural
environment and need to develop a new tactic to design with respect for nature.
40% of all carbon
emissions are generated through buildings. Construction, maintenance, heating,
lighting and refitting interiors all contribute to this. There is a longing
ideal that if we all went back to living in bamboo tree houses the world would
become more sustainable as nature and humans would once again be balanced. But
realistically, we all know that our society wouldn not go back to living in
those conditions. The cradle-to-cradle concept, however, has a different method.
McDonough and Braungart break up all matter into two types of nutrients:
Biological nutrients, which are products that are (biodegradable, natural, ex.wood),
and technical nutrients, which are (manmade, ex. plastic). Both of these have value,
in contrast to the common idea of using only compostable materials in
construction. In my concept I want to use both of the nutrients created by
McDonough and Braungart, because this will allow companies to reuse manmade
construction materials and allow them to compose new materials from existing
ones. Instead of ignoring and
discarding these manmade materials that we already have available, why not keep
them in a “close loop cycle”, where they can be used over and over again?
Instead of putting valuable materials in landfill, we could be breaking down
and reusing valuable resources.
What if we start to
design with the life of a product (or building) in mind and think about what
will happen to it after its ‘life’? A wealth of opportunity arises.
Manufacturers will start reusing parts or packaging from products that are over
their lifespan and non consumable. Is it really necessary to knock down
existing buildings in an attempt to build new structures just to stimulate the
architect’s ego? It makes business sense to reuse. In the long run, everyone
wins. The producer, the consumer and our environment.
In the past decade,s
designers have been debating efficiency; How to get the most out of the least
resources. Efficiency and sustainability seem to have got so overwhelmed with
technical solutions that other design qualities have been compromised. We begin
to excuse ugly monumental buildings and interiors if they are ‘energy
efficient’. How can we be inspired by interiors that are minimal in every
aspect? Michael Braungart says “what would life be like if everything were
efficient? Its just the minimum.” (Lets Cradle Congress, Nov 07)
As an interior designer,
I have learned that there will always be constraints on materials, space and
money. The overwhelming factor is almost always money. Meaning the building
that costs the least is the winning plan. What if we considered the value of
our natural surroundings not as a given, usable resource but as an
indispensable one, such as coal or oil? A resource that will eventually run
out. If we measure value by scarcity, meaning the greater the availability is
of something, the cheaper it becomes, eventually the natural unharmed world
will be invaluable.
With the idea of reusing
structures and their building components, could help the interior and the
architecture industry become sustainable.
Not only should designers take into consideration what materials they
should use to build a new structure but they should also take into consideration
nature. If we start to consider
how our environment works when designing a building we could become more
efficient. For example we can utilize
mother nature by the placement of windows. In cooler climates, we can design buildings that that have
more windows on the south side of the structure in order to allow natural
lighting to enter the structure. This
could eventually reduce the energy use.
This concept will ensure
that less money would be used if we reuse the structures that are already built
and when building new structure less money will eventually be used because it
will be built in aspects of efficiency and sustainability.
Hey, Olivia; You have done a nice job of explaining the ecological vs. market value issue of natural resources. I've always thought it was interesting how we define "cheap construction," because invariably, cheap construction simply passes on the expense not taken in the building phase, to the consumer who pays dearly for the use of a cheaply made building in energy, water, etc. I like this idea you have to be more future minded when building, but think the idea needs some details: how does this work? How are reusable materials defined and utilized?
ReplyDeleteHave a great weekend!
Dr. Armstrong
DeleteObviously, if we reuse structures that are already built instead of building new ones, we would not have to use resources to produce materials for this new structures. However, if structures were to be torn down, a company could be formed to house all of the building components that could be reused in other structures. Obviously, building components are probably really hard to keep in one form, especially if they are for commercial building but we could use scraps of the building components like wood, glass, metal, steel etc. to upcycle and make new products out of this materials. There are other materials that could be upcycled within the interiors of the structure. For example the company could upcycle carpet, wood flooring, or any type of furniture with in the structure.
Olivia,
ReplyDeleteGood explanation on the facts, but what is a specific idea that you have for this new type of construction and how will it be re used in the C2C lifecycle?
Larissa,
DeletePlease read my responds to Dr. Armstrong on the C2C lifecycle.
I like this idea, Olivia! You clearly see where the issues are in your industry. Do you think construction companies will take more care into tearing down buildings than they do now? It's seems likes the most efficient way to demo a house is to just break it down to nothing, is this where the components would be broken down and used for new structures like you said in yore response to Dr. Armstrong?
ReplyDeleteLindsey,
DeleteI honestly think with the movement towards a sustainable environment new structures will be focused to be built completely eco friendly which will later help out our environment. And yes that is exactly how I see it for the C2C cycle.
Olivia,
ReplyDeleteVery interesting idea and I understood it more once I read your explanation to Dr. Armstrong. Do you think companies will be willing to use recycled materials in their buildings?
Kelsey,
DeleteI do think more companies will be willing to use recycled materials because of the movement towards sustainability. Also because most of the materials that are already being made from recycled materials are as durable or better than the original component.