Sustainable in Practice and Product
Indigo Pine (a term that is now probably just as convoluted as "sustainability") drastically transformed my thinking on sustainable design. It is a common buzz word to throw around in class to facilitate group discussion, and understandably so, as it is a project we are all familiar with and can relate to. However, for that reason it may not always be critically discussed due to its overuse. Sustainability and Indigo Pine go hand-in-hand, so I venture to use it as an example for discussion one more time.
We were warned that the Solar Decathlon would not reward us for the sustainable measures we took in building the house. However it was not until after the competition that I realized the truth in this statement. The Department of Energy was preoccupied by the functionality of the house rather than the method by which it was transported and constructed (or, in most cases, reconstructed). The houses were instead praised for their measured energy performance, a result widely attributed to oversized PV panels. This practice of recognition for sustainable performance is abundant in our culture because it is easily quantifiable, translating to checks on a checklist. However, I learned through building Indigo Pine that sustainable design is so much more than a list of results and percentages. Instead, sustainability should be a term that encompasses all aspects of design, construction, and function.
The most exciting aspect of our solar house was that it challenged the conventions of construction, a topic that is not widely addressed in the field of architecture. In this way, it was truly sustainable. This reminds me of the discussion we had in class addressing how commonly create contradict sustainable solutions by achieving these solutions with very unsustainable methods. The Zhuhai Huafa Contemporary Art Museum is a prime example of how a sustainable practice can be completely negated by irresponsible use of materials. It is the same with the Solar Decathlon. Teams were rewarded for conserving energy during building performance, yet not penalized for using energy-inefficient methods of transportation and construction. I have learned from this project that if we want to truly design sustainably, we must design a sustainable process for achieving sustainable architecture.
Now that I used the word "sustainable" 15 times, I hope I have made a point and have not just diluted the word further.
We were warned that the Solar Decathlon would not reward us for the sustainable measures we took in building the house. However it was not until after the competition that I realized the truth in this statement. The Department of Energy was preoccupied by the functionality of the house rather than the method by which it was transported and constructed (or, in most cases, reconstructed). The houses were instead praised for their measured energy performance, a result widely attributed to oversized PV panels. This practice of recognition for sustainable performance is abundant in our culture because it is easily quantifiable, translating to checks on a checklist. However, I learned through building Indigo Pine that sustainable design is so much more than a list of results and percentages. Instead, sustainability should be a term that encompasses all aspects of design, construction, and function.
The most exciting aspect of our solar house was that it challenged the conventions of construction, a topic that is not widely addressed in the field of architecture. In this way, it was truly sustainable. This reminds me of the discussion we had in class addressing how commonly create contradict sustainable solutions by achieving these solutions with very unsustainable methods. The Zhuhai Huafa Contemporary Art Museum is a prime example of how a sustainable practice can be completely negated by irresponsible use of materials. It is the same with the Solar Decathlon. Teams were rewarded for conserving energy during building performance, yet not penalized for using energy-inefficient methods of transportation and construction. I have learned from this project that if we want to truly design sustainably, we must design a sustainable process for achieving sustainable architecture.
Now that I used the word "sustainable" 15 times, I hope I have made a point and have not just diluted the word further.
Comments
Post a Comment