Glass has always been an unlikely material for large buildings, because of how difficult it becomes to control temperature and glare indoors. In fact, the use of fully glazed exteriors only became possible with advances in air conditioning technology and access to cheap and abundant energy, which came about in the mid-20th century. And studies suggest that on average, carbon emissions from air conditioned offices are 60% higher than those from offices with natural or mechanical ventilation. — Fast Company
Philip Johnson, after building his own Glass House in New Canaan, Connecticut, had this bit of advice to offer others in the field: "Don't build a glass house if you're worried about saving money on heating."
The advancement of modern architecture was predicated on the seemingly magical properties of glass, not least for the fact that it carries the unique ability to function as a container with an optimizable level of opacity. Towards the middle of the 20th century, a style informally known as 'Corporate Modernism,' typified by floor-to-ceiling glass and thin steel construction, quickly became the design of choice for many of the world's tallest skyscrapers. The popularity of air-conditioning during this same time period meant that many of these buildings were designed independent of any passive cooling solutions.
Glass architecture, Henrik Schoenfeldt argues, should be considered a thing of the past. Ever since the temperature recordings of London's Crystal Palace of 1851, a multi-acre glass and steel construction, it has been common knowledge that glass architecture requires significant energy use to achieve modern standards of comfort. Though "the obvious shortcomings of glass buildings rarely received the attention they warranted," Schoenfeldt writes, the mayor of NYC is now giving this issue the attention it deserves by declaring that glass skyscrapers "have no place in our city or our Earth anymore.” Similar initiatives will need to be made for other cities, first by banning newer developments with an unsustainable use of the material, and second by retrofitting older structures with more contemporary methods of passing cooling.
One step in the right direction would be heavier use of performance based codes instead of the bullshit prescriptive crap we use now. No incentive to innovate and no need to understand why we do what we do beyond "it's code required".
All 10 Comments
Would it perhaps be easier to attack the problem on the energy supply side of the equation rather than the consumption side? Retrofitting millions, maybe billions of square feet of buildings isn't exactly going to be cheap, if it can be done at all.
On a related note, the mayor of NYC is an ignoramus.
Not only that, but what is the embodied energy cost of the actual construction, materials, etc used to retrofit the buildings. It’s hilar
Not only that, but what is the embodied energy cost of the actual construction, materials, etc used to retrofit the buildings. It’s hilar
Not only that, but what is the embodied energy cost of the actual construction, materials, etc used to retrofit the buildings. It’s hilar
*Hilarious that jackass politicians think they can wave a magic wand and demand technological advancements...as if people haven’t already been working on these problems for decades...
Some glass buildings have energy features and some don't. It's not just glass, it's the overall design of the building. What would help is an easy way of figuring out what features save energy and which don't. And which buildings are efficient and which aren't--the answers would be surprising to many.
Though I'm not sure what happened to brise-soleil -- which became a stable of Brazilian modernism but not American for some reason (one of many points that separate Le Corbusier the architect from Le Corbusier the scapegoat/strawman)
Exterior shading devices on USA high rises largely disappeared around the turn of the '60s to the '70s due to a confluence of rising construction costs, developer parsimony/greed, improved glass technologies, and changing architectural fashion.
Mayor's do not have control over power systems like they have control over local building codes or zoning. But this is also about cost......efficiency is much cheaper in the near-term than developing new power generation systems and deploying those systems.
I worked for a number of years on designing glass skyscrapers for Dubai where the design solution was to install massive sun-shaders or try to develop PV integrated facades/shaders....but the math never worked out, the building costs were insane, and many of the technologies unproven or gimmicky.
In most USA cities, the city governments do have oversight of the local utility company, which is almost always a monopoly. A utility monopoly has basically zero incentive to innovate cleaner or less expensive power supplies unless the government applies its leverage. Is the NYC mayor or any USA mayor doing anything about this? No, not really.
Bingo! They fought the solar startups by me tooth and nail
Efficiency is typically defined as the lowest possible construction cost. After all, the tenants are the ones paying the maintenance.
I have no problem with this; glass skyscrapers, by and large, add very little to the world that finds its way onto my list of priorities.
Make all new buildings look like this one and save the earth!
Yay, false dichotomy!
I've been curious about this. Can glass skyscrapers be energy efficient or not? Reduce their carbon footprint? After fifty plus years of building them and discussing environmental concerns we still don't know?
But the context is also the future. Look at all the high rises that have been built the last decade in NYC and elsewhere. We have every reason to believe the trend will continue, likely in ways that exceed our imagination.
I'd like to see numbers. Architects have a lazy habit of talking about energy use in generalities that only serve to cover over other design motives. This article talks about buildings built 80-150 years ago. There are non-trivial differences in building technologies now. For one, buildings now are designed with expectations of occupant comfort, and heavy use of heat generating electronics.
There are also huge differences in AC needs between a financial services processing office with dense occupancy and heavy use of high powered servers, versus a naturally ventilated small office. It's not clear in that article where the 60% greater energy use figure comes from, which makes it suspicious to me. When talking about energy use, real numbers and realistic comparisons are all that matter.
In fact, instead of specifying building materials, building codes could specify energy use density. Which they do! I feel like sometimes the urge to restrict glazing is more about a desire to make a statement than a difference.
One step in the right direction would be heavier use of performance based codes instead of the bullshit prescriptive crap we use now. No incentive to innovate and no need to understand why we do what we do beyond "it's code required".
Good to finally hear this kind of thing. Glass skyscrapers suck on so many levels, not least of which are economic. When residential, they end up being a wall of curtains, which tend to be dictated by design not to have a country quilt effect. Plus, caulk joints are not the best way to keep the elements out. Compare a masonry curtain wall to a glass curtain wall. Then there's the effect of making all cities look alike, and their inability to weather elegantly. Just a dumb idea all around.
@Thayer-D
I think our colleagues will figure out how to make drab generic cityscapes in whatever materials are permitted.
:D
You're right of course. Modernism turns out shitty human environments in every material (when it's the only style!)
https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/05/beautiful-cities-economic-growth-data-beauty-premium/589480/
We believe glass skyscrapers are being reexamined. We think glass architecture is always being reexamined. Teams of builders and architects are continuously researching ways to make structures safer and more eco-friendly. Now that people realize Frank Lloyd Wright's 1930 plans to build glass towers is doable, glass skyscrapers will continue to have a place on earth, despite Mr. Schoenfeldt's arguments to the contrary.
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.