Carbon footprint.. 2

[MIStructE_IRE]

Everywhere we turn now the carbon footprint and environmental consequences of everything are being considered.

Obviously when it comes to buildings, the most environmentally friendly thing to do is simply not build it. However, since we’ve got to build things, surely the most environmentally friendly thing to do in that case is to build simple squares. No inverted skyscrapers, no cantilevers, no ridiculous architectural feats of any kind… Do you think this will change the mindset of architects in the future? Might make our jobs easier - and take some of the risk out of the industry if things become simpler.

 

[dik]

I suspect it will have to... with the biggest change in the transportation industry.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[Trenno]

Unless we all agree on comprehensive, industry standard ways of quantitatively measuring embodied carbon, it's much too easy to present a "green" story of statistics if and when needed.

 

[Brad805]

I am not so sure. It is not easy to get into the Architectural digest with simple. I would like to see more focus on the size of spaces and multi function rooms. I do not recall an arch meeting where at the end of it it was said, ok, how can we cut out some space?

 

[dik]

I suspect the criteria will change.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[Brad805]

I hope so Dik. We talk endlessly about the supply end of the problem, but gloss over the demand side. Progress will be difficult unless we address both supply and demand.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Personally, I don't think much will change. Most likely we'll see more of the following (which we're already seeing):

a) Different material industry groups trying to promote themselves as the most "carbon friendly". And, using all their political connections and lobbying efforts to try to "game the system" into recognizing ways that work for their material and punish other materials.

b) A big emphasis (from architects) to sell their clients on various environmentally "friendly" aspect that they can help them sell their work. I'm talking solar panels on roofs, energy efficiency, water catch basins, roof top gardens, recycled or reclaimed materials. It doesn't actually have to be environmentally friendly at all, it just has to make the client "feel" like they've done their part.

c) Increased regulations that push energy efficient windows, light bulbs, heating, AC and such. Same thing for appliances and such.

 

[dik]

I'm afraid you may be correct, Josh, with more havoc to follow. I'm afraid, the recent tornadoes with nearly 100 fatalities are a sign of the future. Like Covid... no one seems to address it on a world 'scale'.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[IDS]

I also agree with Josh, but I don't see that as being havoc. It's merely a continuation of the way things have been for ever.

The only way to make real improvements however is to recognise the future cost of GHG emissions by putting a price on the activities that create them, which will change the design decisions of both architects and engineers.

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[dik]

I suspect strongly that things will have to change, drastically.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[Tomfh]

Nothing's going to happen. The sham carbon certification industry will continue to greenwash projects (the same way they certify Bill Gates and Al Gore's mega mansions as "carbon neutral"), and life will go on.

 

[MIStructE_IRE]

It will certainly be interesting to see. There’s a lot of very stretched justifications going on already.

 

[Tomfh]

I'm afraid, the recent tornadoes with nearly 100 fatalities are a sign of the future

It’s no different to the past 150 years. This death toll doesn’t even make the top 20.

Attributing statistically normal tornados to climate change is junk science.

 

[XR250]

I mean, don't we have a surplus of buildings anyway with all this telecommuting stuff.

 

[dik]

The tornados, fires, floods, etc. including the recent inundation in BC, Canada seem to be so coincidental. I'm expecting them to be even more coincidental. From CNN:

"Weather and climate disasters in the US have taken more than 500 lives and cost over $100 billion so far this year, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.

In the first nine months of 2021, the US has already faced 18 disasters that have cost more than a billion dollars each, according to a report from NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information.
This is the seventh consecutive year the US has had more than 10 disasters totaling more than a billion dollars.
September alone brought "devastating impacts from four of the 18 disasters: flooding from Hurricane Ida, landfall of Hurricane Nicholas, and ongoing drought and wildfires tormenting communities in the West," NOAA said."

It's just a coincidence. We've accomplished in decades what has normally taken millions of years.

and a picture...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[JoshPlumSE]

I suspect strongly that things will have to change, drastically.

Things are definitely changing (at least here in the US). Take a look at the following chart showing how dramatically the use of coal power has reduced in just over ten years.

That's a major (and necessary) change. Granted, it will take multiple dramatic changes like that to see improvement with each decade. Maybe an increase in nuclear power, renewables and such. If we do that, then 30 years from now we could be really turning the corner. Especially if we can get nuclear fusion to work commercially at some point.

 

[dik]

On a positive note, it looks like it's been on a decline since the 80s.

Still not there, and the consequences may be mounting.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[dik]

and the tons per capita, for countries with populations over 100M...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[TLHS]

I'm seeing emmissions being quantified in more decision matrices from organizations. If it gets used in selection scoring, or carbon starts getting included in costing in various ways, I think we're going to see a push towards higher wood buildings in parts of the world where it's readily available.

6 floors is pretty normal now for traditional framing, and there are mass timber design practices for 12-18 floors. I'm also seeing more and more prefab wood panel systems getting used on sites near me that traditionally would have been steel or concrete.