Visit to ecobuild India 2013 ~ some stuff good. some, not so much

ecobuild 2013Yesterday was my day to visit Bombay Exhibition Centre at Goregaon for this year’s ecobuild India 2013.

I was a bit surprised to see some of the participating vendors because there was nothing remotely connected to sustainable architecture in their products.  Others, however, showcased more appropriate stuff.

Was disgusted by a company–which shall remain unnamed–that was promoting artificial thatch imported all the way from Thailand. Can greenwashing get more brazen than this?

On a positive note, I was impressed by products from Corvi and K-lite — coincidentally both are manufacturers of LED lights.  The former have a limited catalogue but all their fittings are dimmable with standard dimmers which is a major plus point in my book.

The show wasn’t very large but I presume it will grow over the years. I just think they should vet the products or else the show, as a whole, will soon lose credibility.

Glaring mistakes ~ another reason to reject glass façades

conventional v/s curtain wall

In hot climates, the overall energy usage rises as you increase the glazed area. Curtain walls, therefore, are highly inappropriate.

I have ranted about glass façades for a long time and this editorial by Sunita Narain of DTE has inspired me to add a couple of paragraphs to the original one.  Among other things, she has written about a recent study by IIT-Delhi which found that, in our hot climate, the manufacturers’ claims of special coated glass or double/triple glazing being able to reduce heat gain are rather hollow.

One of the other specious arguments put forth in an attempt to portray glass curtain walls as green systems is to say that it reduces the electricity consumed for lighting. This is a half-truth. Leave aside the uncomfortable glare that people working inside such buildings have to put up with, let us make s simple comparison.

Consider a 10m² conventionally designed space. Assuming that we don’t take passive cooling techniques into account, the air-conditioning load will be in the region of 3,500W (1 ton).  Lighting the same space, on the other hand, will need just 50W with fluorescents or 40W if we’re using LED fittings.

Now, imagine a similar sized curtain-walled space. The maximum saving that can be achieved by reducing lighting is a puny 50W. However–and this is the big problem–air-conditioning requirements will probably have risen to a whopping 5,000W.  Even with all the specially coated and multi-layered of glass in the world, the total requirement is unlikely to be anything less than 4,500W.

So yes, we may not use as much electricity for lighting but, I’m afraid, the energy usage for cooling will go right through the roof and no amount of marketing spin can get around this simple fact.

Building walls with the rat trap bond ~ they're really cool

Just in case I’ve got you visualising rodents scurrying about where they’re not wanted, ease your mind; the rat trap bond I’m talking about is simply a method of laying bricks when building a wall.  It’s similar to the common “Flemish” bond but instead of putting the bricks on their face, they are placed on their edges. This leads to cost savings because less bricks and cement are needed which, in turn, reduces the embodied energy of the wall.

The Rat Trap Bond

Bricks are laid on edge to create an air gap between two layers

Laurie Baker took every opportunity to try and make people realise the value of this method but, by and large, the 20-25% saving in brick doesn’t seem to have been appealing enough.  The rat trap method of construction was popular in England until the start of the 20th century but sustained lobbying by the brick-making industry convinced people that that it was not strong enough to build load-bearing walls.

That is rubbish of course; it’s strong enough for one and two storey buildings as has been proven over and over again by Laurie Baker’s lasting work. But masons too are not usually happy about adopting this system and come up with all sorts of excuses to try and avoid it. I have to admit that, till date, I have not pushed hard enough against their inertia but now I’ve just got one more reason to do so.

For the ShKo bungalow at Karjat, I plan to use the rat trap walls and wanted to know just how much difference they would make thermally. Nobody seems to have done a calculation of the difference — at least there was none that I could find. So, armed with some data from thermal calc and the energy evaluation component of ArchiCAD, I tried to do just that.

Taking just a simple 3m x 3m structure with no openings, I ran a calculation for both types of wall. Result: average U-value of the structure’s outer shell dropped about 15% compared to conventional walls and the energy required for cooling also fell by about 8%. The difference was exaggerated because the model had good roof overhangs to shade the walls.

Still, when you think about it, 8% is nothing to scoff at.  In addition, the embodied energy is reduced quite dramatically and, of course, Laurie Baker’s original reason for using the rat-trap bond still stands — the wall is simply cheaper to build.

Now, I just have to go and steam-roll the masons into learning a new technique.

The Architect and the Plantsman ~ thoughts on collaboration with other professionals

This Wall Street Journal article on the collaboration between reclusive Swiss architect Peter Zumthor and ascetic Dutch landscaper Piet Oudolf made me think about my own (much less famous) interaction with A.Y. Retiwalla for the Karjat Resort a decade ago. Unlike the collaborators here, neither of us had heard of the other before and were brought together by the client, Dr. Beramji. Still, the mutual respect and acceptance of ideas was similar and it ultimately led to something that was appreciated by all.

The restaurant, shortly after construction

The restaurant, shortly after construction

The restaurant about five years later

The restaurant about five years later

No egos were bruised during our meetings — they were left outside

Mr. Retiwalla was already well established in his line and it is to his credit that he discussed things with a relative youngster like myself, purely on merit. Ideas flowed freely between us and, with Dr. Beramji taking a keen interest in every aspect of the project, the tripartite meetings were very enjoyable.

Designing for Noise ~ we architects need to use our ears

designing for noiseAs Queen’s 1980s song, Radio Ga Ga, laments, “we hardly need to use our ears“.  Actually, we abuse our ears or, at the very least, ignore the abuse that others heap upon them.

Unfortunately, while we are easily able to close our eyes, nature hasn’t equipped us with lids to effectively shut our ears.

But what does architecture and design have to do with all this?

Usually, unless an architect is designing something with an overt acoustic requirement like, say, an auditorium or a recording studio, only visual aesthetics are considered.  However, as Julian Treasure points out in this TED talk, the auditory aspect is more crucial than we realise.

He illustrates just how detrimental the effects of noise can be, not only in special environments like hospitals or schools, but in homes and offices as well.  For myself–even though I’m quite aware of the debilitating effects of loud noise–the talk was quite an eye-opener.

See the video on TED | Why architects need to use their ears

ShKo Bungalow at Karjat ~ design completed

The design for the ShKo bungalow at Karjat has finally been completed. It’s taken a lot longer than most because, apart from the complex slope, there was a severe constraint of building within a small portion of the entire one acre plot — the rest is prone to occasional flooding from the adjoining river.

Like other architectural designs, this too makes maximum use of local materials and of passive cooling.  External stone walls are at least 24″ (60cm) thick and provide a formidable barrier to heat-gain even in a place like Karjat.  Deep verandahs on the South and West don’t allow direct egress of strong sunlight from mid-mornings till evening. And high roofs with openings at upper levels allow constant ventilation to take place.

Rainwater harvested from the roof will be collected in the basement that is automatically formed by the sloping land. It will also be used to flood the pool which will not, hopefully, have any chemicals used to disinfect it. The current plan is to do natural filtration but the eventual system will depend on getting a reliable and qualified consultant to carry this out.

View from the gate

Picture 1 of 5

The entrance is set within a recess adjoining the car-port. Deep roof overhangs protect most walls from direct heat-gain. All external walls are at least 24" (60cm) thick and made of local stone to keep the interiors cool even in summer.

Comparing LED & CFL Fittings ~ total cost of ownership is more than just the purchase price

For the MChi interior site in Bombay (Mumbai), I found some really nice LED light fittings but they are more than three times the cost of identical CFL fittings. Now we all know that LEDs consume very little electricity  and they have an extremely long life but I wanted hard numbers to convince my clients – after all, they are the ones paying for everything.

It didn’t take long… At the light shop, it was pretty obvious that the 18W LED fitting threw as much light as an identical one housing 36W of CFLs.  Frankly I was a little surprised by the 1:2 power consumption ratio because I always assumed it was more like 2:3. However, LED technology is making such rapid strides that yesterday’s facts are already redundant. Putting all the costs into a spreadsheet immediately produced a very compelling argument in favour of the former.

An Example of Total Cost of Ownership - LED v/s CFL

While the life of an LED bulb is in the region of 50,000 hours, the calculation over such a long period (while in favour of LEDs) is rather unfair because even at 5 hours per day, that means 27 years.  Instead, I’m working with 30,000 hours which represents a more realistic 16 years.

Even accounting for the fact that the LED driver (an electronic device that regulates the power that LEDs receive) doesn’t have a 50,000 hour life, the calculation still showed a huge saving.

The calculations here are not likely to remain valid for long because the cost of power is sure to rise even further and that of LEDs can only go downwards.

And here are some images of what the house is going to look like when complete.

View of Living Room

Picture 1 of 5

Blocked in China – Not ~ the great wall hasn't been closed to me

Not blocked in China

Not blocked in China. And won't be unless they decide to have something against sustainability.

Reading an article on censorship in China, I came across a website that tests if any site is blocked in the land of the dragon.  Google, Twitter and a whole host of other popular sites that we take for granted are inaccessible to the average Chinese citizen who might not know how to use proxy servers.

Just for fun, I tried btsquarepeg.com and, not unexpectedly, got the all-clear.  The server tests whether a website is accessible in five different regions and I wonder if there are any sites that are blocked selectively.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
- Voltaire

Meanwhile, our telecom minister has said that India won’t ever block social media while also saying that companies like Google or Facebook have to remove offensive content or be liable for prosecution.  That’s tough. A halfway house is never easy to implement.  I completely support the removal of universally unacceptable things like child pornography but most content companies do that in any case so what our government is talking about is the usual “hurting religious sentiment”.  Our people have become notoriously thin-skinned over the last couple of decades and we really need to re-learn how to laugh at ourselves.

ShKo Bungalow at Karjat ~ a site visit before conceptualising the design

Survey plan for the ShKo property

Survey plan for the ShKo property

Last week ended with a site visit to Nasrapur, Karjat. This is the fourth design in the same general location after the [RaBV], [BAli] and [LGEs] bungalows so I’m extremely familiar with the area and climate.  Part of this particular one-acre plot is prone to flooding during the monsoon, and the only portion that is safely outside the flood zone (even considering the massive downpour of 26th July 2005) is on a mound near the road.  On this rise stands the ruin of an old shed which I had seen earlier but was unable to explore properly because, until recently, it was overgrown with Mucuna pruriens — locally known as khaj khujri. This climbing shrub causes extreme itching on contact with young foliage or seed pods and I wasn’t about to take my chances.

View from the river side towards the mound where we will build

View from the river side towards the mound where we will build the ShKo Bungalow

Unlike other plots in this cooperative society, this particular site doesn’t have too many mango trees — mostly due to the flooding aspect. We intend to plant native trees such as Millettia pinnata or karanj which thrive in such conditions.

I am really looking forward to starting the design. Conceptually, I’m looking at a string of structures — some of them without walls — forming a sort of “C” shape around a water body.  The river, unfortunately, is too far away and not visible from the mound.  The mountains of Matheran and the Garbat plateau, though, give a splendid view to the West.

High-Rises and Sustainability ~ And, let us not forget, quality of life

SkyscrapersReading an article in Architecture Week about the impact that urban towers have on the natural environment, got me sitting on one of my pet hobby-horses.

I have never been convinced by arguments that high-rises are better and more sustainable than low-to-medium height buildings. I suppose some people get a kick out of defying gravity by erecting very tall structures but that, to my mind, is pure hubris.  Even if we dismiss the recently publicised link between the building of skyscrapers and a bubble economy, I still say it doesn’t make sense — purely from the sustainability point of view.

It may sound anachronistic but the fact remains that living high above the ground makes you lose touch with it.

One of the favourite arguments by proponents of tall buildings is, that they free up open space by reducing the physical footprint of built-up areas  However, at least in the Indian urban context, this is a fantasy that all but the most delusional will reject. In Bombay (Mumbai) where I live and work, every single patch of land is covered to the maximum. What little is left open–because it is mandatory–soon gets swallowed up by parking.  There may be a token play area, swimming pool or jogging track, but blank expanses of unpaved space where children can play freely, are conspicuous by their absence.

The second argument in the urban context is: as land is scarce and expensive, having high-rises propels affordable housing. Bunkum! You don’t need to look beyond Tokyo, Singapore and Hong Kong to realise that cities with the most high-rises also have the most expensive property in the world.

The other favourite argument of the tall-buildings-are-good school of thought is that they reduce energy usage in comparison to low-rise sprawl. Unfortunately, data shows that the opposite is the case..While the energy cost of transportation will certainly be higher if people live in far-flung areas, the overall energy footprint of a high-rise dweller is far greater.

Tall buildings–especially those that have large parts clad in glass–need much greater cooling in a tropical climate like ours.

Why is this?

High-rises have a huge amount of embodied energy in their construction and materials. Adding to that, the energy cost for “lifting” people and water against gravity is constant and very high.  This more than compensates for the additional carbon footprint that a suburban dweller uses — especially if the suburban dweller is able to rely on public transport for the daily commute. Ninety five percent of this city’s citizens do exactly that.

And what about quality of life? Given a choice, families–especially those with young children–would invariably prefer a place where the young ones can grow up with enough place to play. But that is altogether another story.

Further Reading: