Written by: Saram Maqbool
Posted on: May 18, 2023 | 
| 中文
Sustainable village houses built by Yasmeen Lari's Heritage Foundation, Pakistan
It's abundantly clear by now that we need to be more conscious about how we design our buildings, keeping in view the climate crisis. Sustainable and green are the buzz words of sustainable architecture these days. But what does it really mean? Is it enough for architects to put some trees on rooftops or cover building facades with living plants to make real change? How about creating a building in concrete and then cladding it with brick? Surely, 'using locally-sourced vernacular materials' for the façade, is a great way to practice sustainability.
These, and many more decisions taken by designers and building owners fall under the vastly expanding umbrella of Greenwashing. Put simply, this is when something is depicted as 'green' on the surface in an attempt to either convince oneself or others that sustainability is at the core of one's design. We see this from world-renowned architects, labeling their shiny new projects as sustainable and eco-conscious by showing trees and windmills on rooftops or creating photorealistic renderings of their buildings, perfectly in tune with the surrounding nature. Many do incorporate actual green features in their designs but seemingly fail to realize that the promises they’re making about their buildings’ positive impact on the climate, are meaningless when the design is assessed in a larger context.
Green roofs are better than concrete ones, but are not as big of a solution as many architects point it out to be
Sustainability in architecture entails reducing the carbon footprint of a building as much as possible. The idea is to minimize the impact these structures have on the environment. We usually see this in the form of energy generation via solar power, reuse of water, and utilization of natural daylight and wind, etc. While this makes sense for smaller projects like homes, there are much larger socio-economic aspects to be kept in mind when talking of mega projects.
Let’s take the Apple Park in California as an example. Designed by Norman Foster, this massive structure spans 2.8 million square feet, and that alone should be a cause for concern because it took over such a large expanse of land. However, the architects have heavily publicized the green features of their design, and they are indeed impressive. The whole site runs on 100% renewable energy and has a whopping 17MW of solar power. It’s also home to some 8,000 trees that should, in an ideal world, offset the effects of all the concrete. This is being touted as an excellent way to make up for all the carbon produced by the building each year. According to reports though, the 8,000 trees will remove around 700,000 pounds of carbon per year. Apple Park, on the other hand, will emit 82 million pounds of it. This means that the trees will only offset less than 1 percent of carbon emissions produced by the building. But that’s not how it’s being presented, and that is how greenwashing often works. Its location is also problematic, as it is likely to increase the city’s suburban sprawl. Add to that the 10,000 parking spaces and all the employees that will be driving to work each day, and we have a building that is surely awe-inspiring as an architectural project but not one that should boast how ‘green’ it is for the environment.
An aerial view of the Apple Park
This is a good example of The Sin of the Hidden Tradeoff from TerraChoice Environmental Marketing’s famous Six Sins of Greenwashing. This particular ‘sin’ relates to how people try to focus a buyer’s attention on only a single aspect of a product, while shifting attention away from other important factors. There are many such examples in architecture, a tower in Manhattan that is eco-friendly but caters to the rich and forces the poor out; an apartment building with green terraces that was built after clearing out trees and killing habitats, and the list is long.
The Six Sins of Greenwashing
So, what does real sustainability in architecture look like? Most of it looks simple and a lot of it isn’t even green at all. It can be seen in the works of Alejandro Aravena from Chile, who uses his expertise to design low-cost houses and public buildings that aren’t flashy and don’t scream ‘I’m green!’. These are designed for working-class people, giving them places to live and work. They make use of solar energy and are built with local materials, which adds more to their value. Sustainability can also be seen in the work of Pakistan’s very own Yasmeen Lari, who has helped thousands of lesser-privileged villagers by teaching them how to build homes using ancient, local techniques and natural materials like mud and lime. These houses have little to no carbon emissions and serve the additional purpose of uplifting the community. Unfortunately, Pakistan is still far behind the rest of the world in terms of sustainable architecture, and I hope institutions like the Pakistan Green Building Council can soon come up with regulations that lead to greener development in the country, as opposed to vast swathes of “garden city” housing projects being built on agricultural land boasting 100-feet wide main avenues of asphalt.
Low cost housing by Alehandro Aravena
The examples given above is not to argue that modern technology like solar cells isn’t helpful in achieving sustainable designs. On the contrary, most of the examples anyone can find when searching for green buildings use such systems. The Pixel Building in Australia, for instance, was the first carbon-neutral office structure in the country. It generates its own power and water and makes use of daylight as much as possible. Bahrain’s World Trade Center is positioned so that the giant turbines mounted to its sky bridges can capture desert winds and generate electricity. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and other green building certifications play their part as well. Having a LEED badge labels a project as sustainable and environmentally friendly. This gives building owners and designers additional motivation to reduce their structure’s carbon footprint, leading to a win-win situation.
The Pixel Building in Australia
So, is your favorite green building truly that, or has it been simply greenwashed? Remember, many of the truly green projects don’t even look the part. It’s not necessary to plant thousands of trees on a new site if they’ve been grown somewhere else, put on trucks that burn fuel, and then driven across a country to reach their destination. Instead, it’s crucial to review the larger picture and think more deeply as to how our buildings can create a positive change, be it via generating and sharing energy, creating jobs to boost the economy, or using daylight and natural wind in new ways.
You may also like:
Centers of No Attention: Comparing Pakistan's City Centers with European Squares
(November 22, 2024)
