CTroyMathis
19 January 2003, 11:37 PM
Green Giants On the Horizon
By Benjamin Forgey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 18, 2003; Page C05
Quick info gather required to view article, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8979-2003Jan17.html
Skyscrapers were the quintessential 20th-century buildings, soaring demonstrations of commercial power and human ingenuity.
Factories occupying hundreds of acres were the century's great building blocks, engines of the economies of mighty nation states.
Sports stadiums were the people's palaces, spectacular structures for presenting spectacles -- athletic and otherwise -- to vast audiences.
These building types all were exemplars of technological inventiveness. They were proud and, above all, big. And they were wasteful and harmful, sometimes extremely so.
Skyscrapers circulated stale and often dangerous air among employees. Grim factories spewed damaging chemicals into air and water. Stadiums helped befoul both air and soil with their car-driven fans and huge parking lots. And, oh yes, all consumed vast amounts of energy.
But -- oh yes! -- in the 21st century, all can -- and should -- change for the better. This is the basic message of "Big & Green: Toward Sustainable Architecture in the 21st Century," an exhibition that opened yesterday at the National Building Museum.
Splendidly combining photographs, scale models and words, this provocative exhibition is a must-see for anyone at all interested in the future of architecture, building technologies, urban planning and both the global and local environments.
Buildings of all types, we are told at the beginning of the show, consume about 50 percent of the world's energy. It follows, then, that to do something significant about the environment, we have to change the ways we think about, construct, occupy and maintain our structures. And we have to change these attitudes and practices in a big way -- hence, the show's emphasis on size and scale.
Even a decade ago, an exhibition devoted to architecture and the environment by necessity would have focused on small-scale changes, on bermed houses and individual efforts here and there to harness the natural power of the sun and wind. It was called solar architecture back then, and it was seen as cranky and utopian.
Today, however, it's called sustainable architecture and it is in the process of becoming mainstream. Worsening environmental conditions, stricter laws (especially in Europe), major technological advances and potential profits have spurred architects and engineers worldwide to take on the challenges. They're designing big buildings to use less energy, provide clear air, upgrade water quality and, in general, contribute to the well-being of the planet.
Take, for instance, Ford's River Rouge factory in Dearborn, Mich. Designed by Albert Kahn, the complex was a prime example of a totally integrated industrial facility. To paraphrase a proud Henry Ford, it was where iron ore came in one door and left through another as a car. But the place was a big polluter and, in the emerging global economy of the 1980s, it became an economic dinosaur.
The show highlights plans by architect William McDonough to transform the immense complex into an avatar of environmental responsibility. Buildings literally surrounded by green -- they'd even have forested roofs -- would save energy, contribute to clear air and reuse rainwater.
Or, for example, take a look at a proposed football stadium for the New York Jets designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates. Located in Manhattan close to mass transit, it would greatly reduce auto emissions on game days. With solar cells and wind turbines built into its huge metal-screen facades, it actually would generate enough energy to meets its own needs and send the excess directly into the city's electrical grid.
Or examine almost any one of the many skyscraper designs, both built and proposed, that dominate the exhibition. (The show might well have been called "The Sustainable Skyscraper.")
In Malaysia, local architects T.R. Hamzah and Ken Yeang designed and built a cylindrical tower with adjustable louvered windows for heat reduction and openings to catch prevailing breezes -- the original form of air conditioning. Like other tall building designs in the show, this one incorporates "sky gardens" with lots of greenery to clean and cool the air, and improve the 9-to-5 moods of all who work there.
For Tokyo, the British architectural firm headed by Richard Rogers proposed an aerodynamic tower whose shape would accelerate breezes for ventilation and, more dramatically, for powering energy-generating turbines. Likewise, British architect Norman Foster's formidable firm designed a prototype residential tower (for no particular site) whose massive, cupping shape would help to power the giant wind turbine that is its crown.
These three skyscraper designs and quite a few others in the show are extremely pleasing to the eye. They suggest that, as Buckminster Fuller long ago predicted, sustainability, technology and aesthetics can be natural allies. There is no good reason why a sustainable city or region should be any less pleasing to our sense of beauty than, say, a hill town in Italy. Or any less stimulating than contemporary Manhattan or Tokyo.
By concentrating largely on cutting-edge design, the exhibition underlines the extraordinary worldwide renaissance that has taken place in modern architecture in the last decade or so. And by treating buildings -- even stunningly beautiful ones -- as more than free-standing aesthetic baubles, the show gives a strong social context to contemporary architecture.
Early in the 20th century, the key test of social utility for the pioneer generation of modern architects was the creation of housing for disenfranchised masses of industrial workers. This exhibition makes a strong case that, early in the 21st century, a new generation of architects finds the same sort of extra-aesthetic purpose in the ideas of sustainability -- making buildings that give back more to the earth than they take from it.
The great test of architectural sustainability is, of course, collective -- the ways in which we link individual buildings together to form sustainable neighborhoods and regions. Unfortunately, the exhibition does not do much to advance our thinking on this crucial issue. Even though the displays in its final section on urbanism rightly emphasize things such as transit connections and mixed-use, they seem somewhat disconnected from the real world. They're impressive as large-scale projects, but not necessarily convincing as real-life communities.
So, much remains to be seen. This fine exhibition, curated by David Gissen of Penn State University, is an early status report on a vastly encouraging phenomenon. It is exciting and challenging and, if all goes well, it will turn out to be predictive of a sensible, stimulating future.
Big & Green: Toward Sustainable Architecture in the 21st Century continues through June 22 at the National Building Museum, 401 F St. NW, open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Sunday. Admission is free.
By Benjamin Forgey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 18, 2003; Page C05
Quick info gather required to view article, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8979-2003Jan17.html
Skyscrapers were the quintessential 20th-century buildings, soaring demonstrations of commercial power and human ingenuity.
Factories occupying hundreds of acres were the century's great building blocks, engines of the economies of mighty nation states.
Sports stadiums were the people's palaces, spectacular structures for presenting spectacles -- athletic and otherwise -- to vast audiences.
These building types all were exemplars of technological inventiveness. They were proud and, above all, big. And they were wasteful and harmful, sometimes extremely so.
Skyscrapers circulated stale and often dangerous air among employees. Grim factories spewed damaging chemicals into air and water. Stadiums helped befoul both air and soil with their car-driven fans and huge parking lots. And, oh yes, all consumed vast amounts of energy.
But -- oh yes! -- in the 21st century, all can -- and should -- change for the better. This is the basic message of "Big & Green: Toward Sustainable Architecture in the 21st Century," an exhibition that opened yesterday at the National Building Museum.
Splendidly combining photographs, scale models and words, this provocative exhibition is a must-see for anyone at all interested in the future of architecture, building technologies, urban planning and both the global and local environments.
Buildings of all types, we are told at the beginning of the show, consume about 50 percent of the world's energy. It follows, then, that to do something significant about the environment, we have to change the ways we think about, construct, occupy and maintain our structures. And we have to change these attitudes and practices in a big way -- hence, the show's emphasis on size and scale.
Even a decade ago, an exhibition devoted to architecture and the environment by necessity would have focused on small-scale changes, on bermed houses and individual efforts here and there to harness the natural power of the sun and wind. It was called solar architecture back then, and it was seen as cranky and utopian.
Today, however, it's called sustainable architecture and it is in the process of becoming mainstream. Worsening environmental conditions, stricter laws (especially in Europe), major technological advances and potential profits have spurred architects and engineers worldwide to take on the challenges. They're designing big buildings to use less energy, provide clear air, upgrade water quality and, in general, contribute to the well-being of the planet.
Take, for instance, Ford's River Rouge factory in Dearborn, Mich. Designed by Albert Kahn, the complex was a prime example of a totally integrated industrial facility. To paraphrase a proud Henry Ford, it was where iron ore came in one door and left through another as a car. But the place was a big polluter and, in the emerging global economy of the 1980s, it became an economic dinosaur.
The show highlights plans by architect William McDonough to transform the immense complex into an avatar of environmental responsibility. Buildings literally surrounded by green -- they'd even have forested roofs -- would save energy, contribute to clear air and reuse rainwater.
Or, for example, take a look at a proposed football stadium for the New York Jets designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates. Located in Manhattan close to mass transit, it would greatly reduce auto emissions on game days. With solar cells and wind turbines built into its huge metal-screen facades, it actually would generate enough energy to meets its own needs and send the excess directly into the city's electrical grid.
Or examine almost any one of the many skyscraper designs, both built and proposed, that dominate the exhibition. (The show might well have been called "The Sustainable Skyscraper.")
In Malaysia, local architects T.R. Hamzah and Ken Yeang designed and built a cylindrical tower with adjustable louvered windows for heat reduction and openings to catch prevailing breezes -- the original form of air conditioning. Like other tall building designs in the show, this one incorporates "sky gardens" with lots of greenery to clean and cool the air, and improve the 9-to-5 moods of all who work there.
For Tokyo, the British architectural firm headed by Richard Rogers proposed an aerodynamic tower whose shape would accelerate breezes for ventilation and, more dramatically, for powering energy-generating turbines. Likewise, British architect Norman Foster's formidable firm designed a prototype residential tower (for no particular site) whose massive, cupping shape would help to power the giant wind turbine that is its crown.
These three skyscraper designs and quite a few others in the show are extremely pleasing to the eye. They suggest that, as Buckminster Fuller long ago predicted, sustainability, technology and aesthetics can be natural allies. There is no good reason why a sustainable city or region should be any less pleasing to our sense of beauty than, say, a hill town in Italy. Or any less stimulating than contemporary Manhattan or Tokyo.
By concentrating largely on cutting-edge design, the exhibition underlines the extraordinary worldwide renaissance that has taken place in modern architecture in the last decade or so. And by treating buildings -- even stunningly beautiful ones -- as more than free-standing aesthetic baubles, the show gives a strong social context to contemporary architecture.
Early in the 20th century, the key test of social utility for the pioneer generation of modern architects was the creation of housing for disenfranchised masses of industrial workers. This exhibition makes a strong case that, early in the 21st century, a new generation of architects finds the same sort of extra-aesthetic purpose in the ideas of sustainability -- making buildings that give back more to the earth than they take from it.
The great test of architectural sustainability is, of course, collective -- the ways in which we link individual buildings together to form sustainable neighborhoods and regions. Unfortunately, the exhibition does not do much to advance our thinking on this crucial issue. Even though the displays in its final section on urbanism rightly emphasize things such as transit connections and mixed-use, they seem somewhat disconnected from the real world. They're impressive as large-scale projects, but not necessarily convincing as real-life communities.
So, much remains to be seen. This fine exhibition, curated by David Gissen of Penn State University, is an early status report on a vastly encouraging phenomenon. It is exciting and challenging and, if all goes well, it will turn out to be predictive of a sensible, stimulating future.
Big & Green: Toward Sustainable Architecture in the 21st Century continues through June 22 at the National Building Museum, 401 F St. NW, open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Sunday. Admission is free.