|
Art and Environmentalism
- Compatible?
By Michael
Lehmberg, AIA
Some
would say that the last ten years have seen
a growing scientific consensus that we are
living well beyond the levels our planet Earth
can sustain. Or, that humankind's adverse
impact on healthy planetary ecosystems continues
to increase, and that there is serious and
problematic ecological decline. We should
be striving for a more sustainable way of
life. After all, world populations and standards
of living will only get higher, demanding
that economies churn harder to consume more
resources to produce more goods.
But others would say
the environment is not at risk. Global warming
is more a natural climatic phenomenon that
a human induced one, that species decline
and extinction is a normal process, that
human ingenuity and technology will solve
problems of pollution and toxic waste through
economic incentives. Consumption and production
should not be stifled by environmental regulations;
life expectancy is longer than it ever has
been.
Does science have a
role to play in determining this debate,
or is it simply employed into the service
of whichever belief system is being promulgated?
Is this debate reduced to simple politics;
with the liberal, no-growth, environmentalists
at odds with pro-business, pro-growth, conservatives?
As architects, designers,
and business people, we find ourselves put
squarely in the middle of this dilemma,
torn between competing interests. As creative
environmental designers, our concern and
sensitivity for quality "environments"
extends to the natural world as easily as
the constructed one. As pragmatic and ambitious
practitioners, we rely on continued growth
and land development to fuel our business
operations. What is the best way to judge
whether we are achieving a rational balance
between the need to preserve what's there,
and create what's not? Perhaps the real
question should be: what is our risk tolerance?
Current estimates suggest that man has
destroyed some 25% of the planet's natural
resource over the last 50 years. We are
the first generation to knowingly leave
our world in a worse state than we inherited
it. Clearly, even without the projected
growth in the global population, this rate
of attrition cannot be sustained for the
next 50 years. It's time to do something
about it.
Sustainable Design
is the profession's response to this concern.
Whatever your set of beliefs, prudent business
strategic planning suggests the embrace
of sustainable design principles. To examine
what this means, The International Institute
for Sustainable Development has offered
the following set of definitions:
* A sustainable society
is one that can persist over generations,
one that
is far-seeing enough, flexible enough, and
wise enough not to undermine
either its physical or its social systems
of support.
* In order to be socially sustainable, the
combination of population,
capital and technology in the society would
have to be configured so that
the material living standard is adequate
and secure for everyone.
* In order to be physically sustainable
the society's material and energy
throughputs would have to meet three conditions:
- Rates of use of renewable resources
do not exceed their rates of regeneration;
- Rates of use of non-renewable resources
do not exceed the rate at which sustainable
renewable substitutes are developed;
- c. Rates of pollution emission do not
exceed the assimilative capacity of the
environment.
|
|
What is curious about
these statements is they are economic in
essence, not environmental. Sustainability
in this sense is more focused on preserving
assets than land, trees, water, air, etc.
These values are not at odds with a pro-growth,
pro-business, standpoint. What's important
to acknowledge is that land, trees, water,
air, etc. are assets, to be treated with
as much care and risk aversion as any source
of wealth. This single issue represents
the fundamental diversion in viewpoints;
what constitutes the elements of wealth?
Social equity, the foundational principle
of Democracy, is also considered a key component
of sustainability, and completes the concept
of the triple bottom line of Equal status
to:
1. The Environment
2. Economic activity
3. Social considerations
Sustainability and
the Building Industry
It does not take any
special insight, or scientific supporting
data, to observe that the environmental
components of the "triple bottom line"
are typically not afforded equal status
to financial components in the Building
Industry. Without “taking sides”
in the great debate, the following startling
facts remain.
Buildings are the largest
consumers of natural resources and raw materials,
as well as the largest generators of pollution
and waste. The fact is that 50% of atmospheric
carbon emissions are related to buildings,
and the underlying trend in building energy
consumption is up. Stabilizing global atmospheric
carbon-dioxide levels will need in the order
of a 60% reduction by the developed world
by 2050; well into the life of many of the
buildings we are constructing now.
With the world population expected to double
by 2100 before it stabilizes at about 12
billion, current resource consumption levels
spread more evenly mean a reduction of almost
90% by the developed world to 10% of current
consumption levels. As people's standard
of living expectations continue to increase
both within the developed and developing
worlds, and the world is becoming increasingly
technically dependent, much more will have
to be done with much less. Furthermore,
the use of any particular natural resource
needs to be considered in whole life terms.
This includes its extraction from nature,
its processing, transport, in-use, by-products,
recycling and reuse ability, and final disposal.
Avoiding unnecessary
risk is sound business practice. Placing
the great wealth of our environmental resources
at risk is unnecessary and quite foolhardy.
Values and belief systems aside, assets
and resources have to be assigned appropriate
value and protected vigorously, lest bankruptcy
is in the plan. The architectural community
has responded to this challenge by developing
the principles and concepts of Sustainable
Design. The knowledge and resources are
widely available and there for any firm
to do the taking, all it takes is one very
good business decision.
|
