A classic Buckminster Fuller question highlighting an overlooked aspect of current sustainability metrics quantifying the amount of natural resources used per square foot of built environment.
It would be great hearing of other empirical metrics and parameters that better define the benefits and enhancements architecture can provide for our quality of life in the constructed ecosystem we are making for our future.
Quantifiable holistic approach for improving health and performance of the built environment without dogmatic ideological barriers. Focusing on common sense and practical solutions that can improve our living ecosystem.
1 Comment
I don't own a house, but the last project I did weighted about 2mil lbs.
I got to this information though carbon analysis tools. Embodied carbon is the more meaningful metric relative to this question, and is becoming popular as a measurement with sustainability focused firms. In fact even the local AIA chapter requires rudimentary embodied carbon analysis for building to be submitted for awards.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.