The eco-balance of buildings

Photo: The office building “Danube House” in Prague was planned so that energy consumption would be as low as possible. Besides the house-technical possibilities, the triangular form of the building also helps. A high atrium in the middle brings additional light into the building, acts as a warmth buffer in the winter, and keeps the complex cool in the summer.

Let us stick to the currently paramount discussion on CO2 emissions and its drastically necessary reduction: two major causes of CO2 are motorised transportation and energy consumption. Smart architects have long been developing solutions that will decrease energy consumption through heating and cooling to a minimum. The question of renewable energy, for example, the use of solar energy or geothermal power, also offers good and functional examples. Modern building services, where use is aligned with need, is also available. It would be best to develop a building, for example, that produces more energy than it (or its users) uses through photovoltaic elements.

However, more is necessary to be sustainable. What makes up Erick van Egeraat’s city image, are buildings that have, in part, been standing for centuries and are still being used. “Producing” buildings also uses energy. In other words, the longer a building can be used, the longer its life cycle is, the sooner it will contribute to sustainability.

Some quickly developed buildings with little emphasis on quality are already condemnable after 30, 40 years. Just think of the “eyesores” of the 60s and 70s. Tearing down an old building also uses energy (and money), whereby the key question is how much of the construction material can be reused, and how much can be disposed of at what cost. Therefore, not only should construction time and length of use be a part of the eco-balance of a building, but also the building’s “deconstruction”.

Sustainable development
A commandment of economic reason