Why Green Architecture Hardly Ever Deserves the Name

[Alan Ray, RLA]

About time someone made this public!  http://archdai.ly/11gzgPt

Please note your observations…..

[Leslie B Wagle]

I have to admit that my native skepticism of “big glorious movements” kicked in some time ago on this whole thing, and it wasn’t helped by having heard from a relative who has to go to work in one of these, and people can’t stand it so badly that the workforce has shrunken with preference for just working from home instead. Of course, even valid new ideas always have some “kinks” to work out, but generally as they prove themselves, there is a natural reward of people flowing that direction over time. But get-on-bandwagon type push programs always seem to have their dark sides.

[Roland Beinert]

Alan, the link you provided for the article didn’t work for me. The article is still on the Archdaily website, though: http://www.archdaily.com/396263/why-green-architecture-hardly-ever-deserves-the-name/?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=widget&utm_name=most-visited
The article makes a lot of good points. Modernism is a global movement. It tries the same methods everywhere for very different climates, and favors things like glass curtain walls and flat roofs even in regions where these features really don’t work well at all. What we call traditional architecture is really a set of styles adapted to many different regions. It’s no wonder modernist “green” buildings aren’t living up to expectations. If you put style above everything else, you’re bound to fail at green design.

[Alan Ray, RLA]

Roland, thanks for posting the site for the article.

not shure why my link did not work…..

[Alan Ray, RLA]

I’ve seen a lot of fakes and frauds in my time…..

all designed to profit a few in the name of what’s good for all.

[Rob Halpern]

This does not surprise me.

I have worked with a number of architects and engineering firms who tout their numbers and computer analyses when designing something, but not one has ever gone back to the built project to measure whether it met the promise, let alone attempt to learn from it for the next project. When you speak with the people who maintain such facilities, they are often disappointed that what was promised is not how reality turned out.

In my own work this has left me always assuming the worst (OK, you assure me the light level indoors will be 20,000lux but I’ll assume it never reaches that level…..)

My favorite example: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/us/where-indoors-can-become-too-m…

But compare that story with how the project is talked about among architects: http://www.archdaily.com/108119/ad-classics-united-states-courthouse-richard-meier-partners-architects/

[Alan Ray, RLA]

 Rob, that’s a very good example….”at least there’s a breeze outside”….

 I guess that “adiabatic cooling” system didn’t quite work out….

 

[Alan Ray, RLA]

henry, how could you even question the integrity of such a noble cause?

I predict that leed will be but a foul memory in a decade….

[Jason T. Radice]

It’s architecture. It’s green. Problem solved?

[Rob Halpern]

Or go a step further:

http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=125443&CultureCode=en

[Alan Ray, RLA]

Dood! and UGLY!!!!!

 

[Jason T. Radice]

I have mold in my walls. I have a green building.

[Rob Halpern]

No, probably a black one

[Alan Ray, RLA]

….and these learned one are teaching this stuff?

[Leslie B Wagle]

4th paragraph of story: this is another building operated by the same corporation (not the one I knew of in the earlier post which was in another city). Still, what a bad pattern.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100946015

[Author]

Posts