© 2007 Ari Burling ariburling.com

It's the architecture!

by Edward Mazria

How do we dramatically cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, lessen our dependence on fossil fuels and become more energy-efficient without arguably wrecking the U.S. economy?

So far, no one's come up with a viable answer, largely because we keep looking at global warming from the same angle. The result is tunnel vision - we keep missing the forest for the trees with remedies like cleaner cars, fewer smokestacks, more renewable energy sources. Each is necessary, but solves only part of the problem.

What we need is a paradigm shift in the way we view energy consumption in this country. It's architecture - residential, commercial and industrial buildings and their construction materials - that account for nearly half of all the energy used in this country each year. And it's the architects who hold the key to turning down the global thermostat.

The government doesn't recognize this. The scientific community and public do not recognize this. The architects themselves do not recognize this. Why not? The answer is simple. Most people don't understand what architects really do and most architects don't have a deep understanding of the relationship between architecture and the natural environment.

Missing the Obvious

The biggest problem with the current thinking on global warming is that solutions have been focused on areas where nominal reductions in energy consumption and emissions can be achieved. For example, environmental watchdogs and the media have made sport utility vehicles (SUVs) the chief villain of the green movement. But if you took every SUV off the road tomorrow and replaced them with hybrids, the impact on global warming would be minimal.

That's because the entire fleet of SUVs, mini-vans and light-duty trucks in this country account for only 6 1/2 percent of the total U.S. energy consumed each year. That doesn't mean we should abandon efforts to produce more efficient, environmentally-friendly SUVs and automobiles (reducing emissions in all sectors as well as our dependence on foreign oil is critical), but it does illustrate a huge blind spot in America's energy consciousness. Those who develop and promote the framework for environmental initiatives have boxed us into a narrow view of the problem, thereby limiting the scope of potential solutions.

They've overlooked the biggest source of emissions and energy consumption in this country. It's architecture.

The Big Picture

Addressing global warming is like solving a Rubik's Cube puzzle. It takes the right combination of elements to complete a picture of a plausible emissions reversal program that won't overburden the U.S. economy. In the process of divining a solution, data has traditionally been divided into four sectors - industry, with the highest energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, followed by the transportation, residential and commercial sectors.

The loudest voices call for major reforms in the transportation sector beginning with greater fuel efficiency and pushing the auto industry to develop new fuel sources and vehicles, such as fuel-cell cars and light trucks.

The industrial agenda focuses on more efficient technologies for production, coupled with the use of less polluting natural gas (to replace coal) and non-polluting renewable resources (wind, biomass, geothermal and solar) for electric power generation. In the residential and commercial sectors, the emphasis has been on enacting standards and providing incentives to increase the energy efficiency of building shells, appliances, lighting fixtures and mechanical and electrical systems.

Taken together, these strategies are all worthwhile and necessary, but only address a portion of the U.S. contribution to global warming. For example, it would take increasing gas mileage of every passenger and light-duty vehicle on the road to an average of 40 mph over the next ten years just to stabilize the projected increase in their gas consumption at today's levels.

The environmental lobby, the electric utility industry and the current administration are miles apart when it comes to the use of renewable energy technologies for generating electricity. The environmental community would like to see about 8.6 percent of the total U.S. demand for electricity in 2020 generated by renewable (wind, solar, biomass and geothermal), while industry and the Energy Information Administration (EIA) project only 2.3 percent. However, 8.6 percent of electricity produced by renewables in 2020 would only supply about 30 percent of the EIA projected increase in electric demand. Meanwhile, in the residential and commercial sectors, stringent prescriptive building codes have already been adopted by many states, so substantial code-driven energy and emissions reductions in these sectors are unlikely.

None of these strategies reverses our emissions, though they mitigate the impact of emissions as our future need for energy spirals upward. Think of it as deficit spending. As our national debt mushrooms, we're making payments on the interest without touching the principal.

We need to turn down the global thermostat, but it's locked. Who holds the key? It's the architects.

The Case for Architecture

By graphically rearranging the traditional way of reporting energy use and gas emissions, the key to visualizing the issues and the actions necessary to address the situation becomes clear. Creating a new sector termed "Architecture," which combines the residential and commercial sectors and that part of the industrial sector containing industrial buildings and building materials, a new and very different picture emerges. This picture clearly illustrates the problem and the sectors that must be carefully investigated in order to effect a change.

In this new picture, Architecture consumes approximately 48 percent of all the U.S. energy produced and is responsible for 46 percent of all U.S. CO2 emissions annually, almost double any other sector. It's also the fastest growing energy-consuming and emissions sector (Figure 3).

Buildings are among the most long-lived physical artifacts society produces. They are typically used for 50-100 years, so their inertia has a major impact on future energy use and emissions patterns. Today's architecture will be with us for a long time.

Architects design most buildings and specify all the materials used in their construction. The design of a building - its form, fenestration, construction materials and finishes - largely determines the building's lifetime energy consumption and gas emission patterns. The mechanical and electrical systems incorporated into a building design will convert today's fossil fuel energy to make that design habitable - to heat, cool, light and ventilate spaces as well as power equipment. Buildings can be designed to use large or small amounts of imported energy and in some cases no imported energy at all.

Today, architecture has become estranged and totally divorced from nature. Most structures are designed to be isolated from their surrounding environment. They require an uninterrupted supply of fossil fuel energy in order to operate. Otherwise, if their energy supply is discontinued, they become uninhabitable - too hot, too cold, no light, etc. They insulate themselves against the environment for as long as possible in an effort to preserve their internal conditions. The construction standards and building codes in force today fully support this design strategy.