An architect who creates just three typical buildings over their career will be responsible for carbon emissions equivalent to the lifetime emissions of 162 typical Americans, the COP26 summit in Glasgow has been told — The Architects' Journal
During a talk on “Adaptive Transformation” at the Danish Pavilion at COP26, Enlai Hooi, who works as the Head of Innovation at Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects in Copenhagen, said that professionals in the building industry carry a far greater responsibility for the world’s health than other individuals. Hooi referenced The Architects’ Journal’s RetroFirst campaign, an initiative that advocates for retrofitting existing buildings over demolition and rebuilding, calling for government reforms in taxation, policy, and procurement.
This is especially important as Hooi pointed out that prevailing building culture and methods make the adaptation and reuse of existing buildings seem riskier to developers and investors.
“What if we focused instead [of new build] on transitioning our existing buildings into an appropriate architecture for the future and reducing what we build new?,” Hooi said.
“We have an obligation as architects to ask: what qualities exist in the [existing] building?” he added. “The qualities of existing buildings can offer much more sometimes than what can be built from scratch from an economic framework but also from a historical, heritage framework as well. What’s the least we can do for the greatest effect?”
.JPG_-_panoramio.jpg){kind=link}
8 Comments
I emit at least a quarter of that after Cuban food.
I'd say it's more the client than the architect emitting all that carbon...
i'd advise the public not to hate architects too much. that's how you turn people to the dark side.
So now we are blaming ourselves for the choices rich developers make within the legal frameworks established by our governments? Pretty disingenuous.
Seems analogous to blaming every day people's decisions on cars and recycling for the environmental situation when big corporations are responsible for most global emissions.
It's more like blaming coal miners living on company land, getting paid in company scrip that is only accepted at the company store, and who are bereft of other choices.
Exactly Miles. Shaming the coal miners when they can't convince ol boss man to switch over to natural gas instead.
I had lentils last night, so yeah
The whole talk can be found here, relevant slide at min 8. The larger point and business case he makes for focusing on adaptive reuse and renovation etc., seems pretty compelling. And includes some of the policy type suggestions that speaks to arch and other's point about the larger economic/legal framework.
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.