Old is gold !

Ethics or aesthetics ?? In the face of the energy crisis, the need of the hour is to be ethical, responsible, inculcate sustainable design blah blah. Even if buildings are ugly, as long as they save on energy, who cares right ?

But is it really a Sophie's choice ? Can we only be sustainable by sacrificing the beauty of our creation as architects ? Not if we get the grey cells going.

Let me tell you about the recent trends in architecture in India, specially in commercial and institutional buildings. Huge towers of glass and steel, they are designed to copy the " modern" look similar to lets say.... Manhattan .And what is really wrong with that ? I mean we can't live in mud houses or havelis anymore right ? We need to adapt to the recent trends. But what does fashion have to do with modern ?

Modern means to be up-to-date, new or contemporary. Ummm, how is it different from fashion.Say shoes, sneakers are cool and trendy, but you wouldn't wear them to a job interview right. Juvenile example I must say but fitting nevertheless. What is the main factor ? Context. So in a nutshell, modern means fashion with context. When we design a building, it is very important to consider the context before blindly following the trends in the name of 'modern '

As I see, there are two very important recent Architecture myths- old or new, in terms of traditional techniques against new ones. And the second one as i mentioned earlier - ethics or aesthetics, as in do we sacrifice our beauty and creativity for the sake of sustainability.

Let me illustrate through couple of example from my own home town, both of recently constructed 'modern' buildings, one a fashion design school and another a commercial complex, but poles apart in terms of sustainability or green building.

Collateral damage ?

In my first post, I talked about how important is it to find the right balance in the path for sustainability. It is the need of the hour, no doubt, but sometimes it comes at a higher cost, like life.

http://news.msn.com/in-depth/emerging-solar-plants-scorch-birds-in-mid-air

I came across this a few weeks back and was astonished.It is about a solar plant in California,US.
The plant consists of 300,000 mirrors reflecting sun rays onto boiler towers which produces enough electricity to power 140,000 homes. WOW! Can't beat that.

The catch ? The bright reflected light attracts insects, which in turn attracts birds. These birds are charred to death due to the high intensity rays.Wildlife officials have witnessed group of birds flying into the path of the rays and getting scorched to death.Sun rays or death ray ?

The question remains...is sustainability worth loss of life ? Birds constitute an important part of our ecosystem and environment. If this was an isolated incident, it could be ignored as part of collateral damage. But the deaths are in thousands and beyond negligible quantity.

Another incident of Solar plants threatening wildlife- probable extinction of desert turtles.

http://www.kcet.org/news/redefine/rewild/reptiles/solar-plants-may-make-deserts-too-hot-for-tortoises.html

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/20/solar-energy-plants-in-tortoises-desert-habitat-pit-green-against-green/

According to research, solar plants cause the urban heat island, causing the surroundings to heat up and become inhabitable for the desert turtles, which have been listed as an endangered species.Also they take up the space, leaving thousands of turtles without a home in their natural habitat.

What to do now ? Logic suggests we do the best we can to salvage the loss, but in the end continue with the plants. Why ? Because the gain over exceeds the loss. Power for 140,000 homes isn't a small thing. Isn't that the sustainable future ?

NO

Sustainability isn't just harnessing free solar energy. Yes its a major part, but sustainability means to exist. And not just human existence, of all living being including wildlife. Sustainable is to save the Earth, not just provide renewable energy at the cost of wildlife.We are trying to conserve our energy resources, but what about conserving the birds and turtles ?? They are as much part of the Earth as we are and we can't dismiss them as collateral damage

Balance is the key to sustainability. We need to find some way to have the solar plants and save the birds. Maybe have some ways to distract them from the area....just a thought...but we can't just let the murder continue in the name of sustainability.