Last Posts re: Issues from Living Building Challenge Presentation

And, here are a few more posts re: this dialogue  (again, pls read from the bottom, to top)   ~

B2,

I concur with everything you've expressed.  Overconsumption and overpopulation are both huge drivers of humanity's race to biophysical depletion.  The false religions of market capitalism and higher technology keep leading our captains of industry astray, and millions of us plebes as well.  But I seen an antidote - beyond becoming conscious and living light as a feather on the land - which we all should do anyway:  Rallying around regional community-based sustainable economic development (call it Regenerative Regionalism if you like).  This would bring many of us back to our senses and restore meaning to millions of people's work lives.  The primary goal of each region has to become providing for its people's basic needs:  food, shelter, clothing, education, healthcare, etc. while simultaneously restoring space for other creatures.  Everything else is frosting.  Regions would be self-defined at scales so that they could internally meet the needs of a healthy industrial society.  Meeting material and social needs regionally would reduce our inclination to engage in the more predatory forms of extraction and inequity, and would bring back around to home the one-way flows that unfettered global trade allows.  By the way, I'm all for global peace, global cultural interaction, and even global trade - once regional needs are being met.  So for example, we in the Chesapeake region should only qualify to be able to purchase equipment from Japan, or bananas from Honduras if we could demonstrate that we had substantially tackled homelessness, Central America demonstrates that everyone there has access to food, and Japan demonstrates that it is restoring its jungles.  I remember meeting a Sikh religious leader, Sri Baba Ji, at my friend Andy's home in Takoma Park.  He surprised everyone in the room by saying that having houses is nice - but far from essential! 

 

-- Jim Schulman, AIA, BMRA

cell: 202/544-0069

RegionalArchitect@gmail.com

Sustainable Community Initiatives, Founder

Community Forklift, LLC, Founder

On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 10:00 AM, William Updike <updikew@yahoo.com> wrote:

I have many jumbled and unclear thoughts about this conversation, so I'm not sure that what I say will be particularly insightful or helpful.  One challenge as I see it is that even with the some thoughtful and intentional living, none of us are living anywhere close to what could be subscribed as true sustainability--both personally and because we live in a nation (and pay taxes to support it) that thrives on the extraction of natural capital.  I find it difficult to see a way out of that quandary.  We can build Living Buildings, which is certainly better than building brown things, but it is still construction and consumption.  I think Hutchins said it best at one of the Living Future conferences--when everyone was going around the room talking about what sustainable building would look like, Bill raised his hand and said NOT building would be sustainable building.  The architects and developers in the room lost a few heart beats that they'll never get back!   Even a Living Building has a huge lifecycle cost that would take years if not decades to "pay" for (even as we continue to un-sustainably consume while living in the Living Building).  This is why I will only ever call things green building and will never use the term sustainable building. 

We don't need much complexity or technology to build a simple Living Building--the workers huts that Hutchins has been building in Nepal with the eco-foundation would certainly qualify--they have simple beauty, are made from waste and natural (and thus inherently non-toxic) materials.  I appreciate the theory that people think we don't have to go back to a more simple lifestyle to live sustainably, but I'm not sure I agree.  Those that live in the Nepali huts are certainly closer than I will ever get.   Even folks living simply in this country, collecting all their own energy (and storing it in toxic batteries!) and water, and growing their own food, having no car, not using any animal products, never traveling by anything other than their feet (bikes need oil and grease and steel after all) are still not living sustainably (see note above regarding taxes).  There probably aren't a lot of those folks around regardless.   I wouldn't point back to Charles Mann's 1491--I would send people to Daniel Quinn's Ishmael instead.   After all, many of the native civilizations failed due to overconsumption and not being able to adapt to the climate changes of the time.

The problem as I see it is not a spiritual one (though a deeper thinking about our place in the world certainly helps us live more "green" if not truly sustainable.   We are a messy mix of frontal lobe and animal brain--lofty and selfish.   We are co-creators (to borrow Sandy's term) but also destroyers.   Even the best of us are flawed and are responsible for the loss of species.   Because of this, I'm afraid that at this historical moment there is no getting around that there are just too damn many of us on the planet.  Until we are all elevated to that higher spiritual place of balancing our beauty and our brutishness, we need to stop breeding.   I can't see any way around that.   That said, it may just be a lack of imagination on my part.   I struggle with not being a glass half empty kind of guy. 

So, random and perhaps unhelpful thoughts.   Fascinating conversation though!  It's because of folks like you all on this list that I can get up in the morning, dust myself off, and keep trying to figure out a path to living lighter on our little blue planet.

Best,
Bill Updike

thank you for the thoughtful responses!!!   let me try this angle  ~

the image i use re: appropriate technology, which, some of you have heard -  in our society, we tend to live in buildings as powerboats, unconsciously flipping switches, focused on a fixed point, independent of place.  whereas, we can live as when sailing -  paying attention to the world around us, the breezes, currents, clouds, know our vessel and work with it to respond to the always changing world.  the vessels we live in can put us in more intimate relationships.

i would not say that complexity has anything to do with these two ways of being.  i would say it comes down to consciousness, and the level we seek engaging with the world around us (and our companions).  which is what Sandy says about 1.8 cents into his notes below.

re: another aspect of this conversation -  we're a part of nature, w/ a twist -  we alone have the capacity to negate our nature............ and more complex technologies are temptations, taking us further adrift........when we've become lost.  we are born deeply united, and, then slowly become separated (reflect on your life; raise a child).  our work as adults is to heal our separation(s). i think of healing as becoming reconnected with those parts of ourselves we've lost.  our life's journey is finding home, which only has meaning as we begin the journey after the above mentioned separation occurs.  the paradox -  home can only be found spiritually, yet, it is in this dimension/reality/existence that we're offered doors back home........... through the natural world and our loved ones.

what does that have to do with our conversation?   i offer that the root of our world crisis is spiritual, as reflected in diminished consciousness.  we need to re-awaken to our child's eyes and heart, where everything is alive and full of possibility, and play in the moss and grass (implicitly humble, as Alan suggested).  the pot drips what's in it..........then we'll build and create places that nurture and heal all...............regardless of complexity.

phew............ sorry if i got carried away!   but, i now see the light! -   the point is consciousness, not complexity.

~  b

More Posts re: Post-LBC Presentation

Many thoughtful responses have bounced around in our listserve........ here are a couple  (pls read from the bottom, up)   ~


This is a wonderful dialogue.  My two cents:

There is an ecological mindset that almost all of us have grown up in... that human activity is f..king everything up, and that in order to change that we have to stop that human activity.  I believed this for many years, feeling that we needed to regress in order to heal.  I no longer think that way, but rather believe that way out is through.   This is part of what I was trying to express in my talk the other night, but perhaps it was too diffuse.   

My friend Gerould Wilhelm, an amazing system ecologist, opened my eyes many years ago to what he calls the "Eden principle:"  the idea that if we humans withdraw from nature, nature will take care of itself.  The reason that line of thinking is hopelessly flawed is that we humans are, and have been, an integral part of the natural world for a couple million years.   When you look at the native ecology of pre-Columbian America, it was incredibly vibrant and fecund and anything but devoid of human activity (I recommend Charles Mann's 1491 for any of you that haven't read it).   In every climate zone, native peoples actively participated in and co-evolved with their place.  Our particular place was dominated by oak/hickory/hemlock forests that were highly managed with annual burns and the regular harvesting of nuts, berries, grains, large and small fauna and downed trees.   The result was a vital open woodland that early european settlers had never seen the likes of... you could drive a wagon through it for days on end.  Human activity is not inherently harmful or antithetical to the health of natural systems.   

Technology is any human artifact used for a purpose.  Bricks are technology and so is a fork, so were the fires used by the people who inhabited this land before us.  One of the concepts in my talk was the idea that the development of technology is an extension of the evolutionary process (not analogous to evolution, but a real expression of it).  With the jump to life as co-creator facilitated by the human brain, language and opposable digits, evolution marches on through the development of technologies.   Technology is not separate from nature; it is nature.  One of the unfortunate consequences of our species evolution in this regard has been our progressive isolation from the rest of nature and the subsequent emergence of the cultural memes that lead us to believe we can dominate and exploit it and each other.  I believe there is a way through this if we don't self destruct first (and if we do self destruct, I am confident that the evolutionary process, including the rise of consciousness and technology will continue here or elsewhere in the universe).  The way is integrally linked with our technology.   Without technology I would not be able to express these words to you now, there would be no books, no internet, no farming, no advance in knowledge and no buildings (even a wigwam).  The advance of knowledge and consciousness rides on the back of technology.  It is the emergence of higher consciousness occurring around the globe in all peoples facilitated by technology that shines a light on the path through.   If we approach our work, our power as co-creators, the development and use of our technology with humility and reverence, understanding that we are inseparably connected to everything, we can actualize the full potential of our creativity so that it regenerates and enhances rather than degrades life.  For us who dwell in the world of building technologies, I believe this means we think deeply about what is appropriate technology for the work at hand whether that's harvesting the straw and clay from surrounding fields give our building form, employing building science to design advanced building envelopes, integrating thoughtful feedback loops for occupants or intentionally creating places of delight or harmony with our environment.  

The cost conversation is always a difficult one and requires education.  I offer a few attachments to this email to start that discussion.  One is a few slides from another presentation I often give where I use the metaphor of a microscope with different lenses to widen the field of view around the cost discussion to shift out of the "first cost" mindset.   Another is a document called the Packard Matrix, which was developed for the Packard Foundation in 2002 years before the Living Building Challenge when Living Buildings were an aspirational idea, but which does a good job of looking at whole life cost.  The third is a few slides from the marketing presentation of another one of my current projects, a net zero energy cohousing community called Three Groves Ecovillage (www.threegrovesecovillage.com), where we lay out the cost benefit of spending more up front for homeowners.

Sandy

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Alan Abrams <alan@abramsdesignbuild.com> wrote:

the technological approach is seductive and even addictive, and the deeper you probe, the deeper you must go.  methodologies have great value, but they soon turn into parochialism.  In a sense, what I am describing--this analytic exercise, this regularization, codification--and its relationship to society, economics, and government--is a natural and organic process.  but it's easy to forget that it is not an end to itself--it is only another stage of evolution.  

where I think I'm going with this is parallel to Bill's dad, that simplicity and durability--and paradoxically--adaptability--are the essential attributes.  That the journey into complex methodologies and  rigorous systems and checklists are informative--are noble endeavors in themselves--but ultimately they lead us off course.

none of this negates what Sandy concluded--that is to be aware of the impact of your decisions.  We are not going to save the world with bricks and studs, whether we hit LEED platinum or passive house, or even LBC--because making every brick scarred the earth, and harvesting every stud raped a forest.  Is it enough to say a prayer, like the shochet before he cuts the throat of a lamb?  All our technology, all our wisdom and experience, all our methods and checklists and point systems cannot completely negate the destructive act of creating a home.

if any of this is true, then perhaps the first step in building is humility.

AA

A Conversation Ignited by a Presentation on a Living Building Challenge Project - Part 1

Our collaborative, and a few other friends, meets monthly to discuss a burning question re: the work we all do...............and drink beer (and have dinner), which we call beer talks.  The conversation is always lively and far-reaching, given the diverse group, including architects, builders, landscape architects, renewable energy consultants, gardeners, developers,  DC DOE Green Building program manager, etc.

At this past beer talk, a presentation was made, giving the background story for the Alice Ferguson Foundation's Potomac Watershed Study Center, where they are taking on the Living Building Challenge.  The presentation laid out the underlying consciousness of the project, and, opened a door into considering how we, as professionals, hold such an awareness.  Pls view the project here -

          http://fergusonfoundation.org/living-building-on-the-potomac/

What follows is my first post-beer talk reflection.  I will soon post subsequent responses.......... only one per post, to keep each posting brief.

hi friends..............a Paul Hawken quote, to get this rolling -

we will have the ability in a very short time to create buildings that are literally as complex as a plant or a flower, that are biophilic in the true sense of the word.

when i was at the Living Building Challenge conference a few years ago, i was already stunned at just how complex the LBC projects were (including residential)............. and, perhaps, we're moving towards more complexity, as Paul states?

i think i took to heart one of my dad's great ironies.............he was a fighter pilot, yet, he always advocated seeking the fewest working parts (re: lifespan, maintenance, operation).  b2 suggests i'm a luddite, which, given what i've been called over the years, isn't so bad...........

i dunno............ is complexity our destiny?  will we all have brains like Keith's?!

we can't create simple homes, organic,  flowing from and with the life-force of place, establishing resonant relationships, heated with a wood stove (wood from the land), cooled by meadow breezes (w/ a bit of discomfort, which keeps us human) cha cha?

i realize cities and large programs dictate something else - a fine place for LBC - but, as i'm a lowly residential architect, do we want to move towards complex (aka, expensive - i forgot to say the other night, extra cost is the primary reason my clients won't do LBC) homes?  or simplicity?   or.........?????   

i realize this is a big can of worms, and, seeking brevity, can't explore nuance........... i tried to say enough to open the floor for your responses!

~  b

(Brief) Collaborator Profile - SALVAGING CREATIVITY

Pat Sells, at Salvaging Creativity, modesty aside, could have named his business, Brilliant Salvagers.  This railing at my home is just another day in the shop for Pat and his team.  His work is so good that we now design for places where his work can be showcased.  Also, we prefer to use steel at exterior locations - such as screened porches - as wood rots quickly in our climate.

Here is their Facebook page  ~

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Salvaging-Creativity/154124401291070

Building and Living With The Natural World, part 3

Our buildings can be made of real materials - soil, wood, stone, water. Think of building materials as the food we eat:  The more our food lived a healthy life - with no pesticides, hormones, etc.; wasn't processed with chemicals or in-organic additives, etc.; was grown under the sky and fed intrinsically nurturing food - the more it feeds and nurtures us.  Being surrounded by real materials, simply rendered, surrounds us with a vibration or resonance our bodies and minds have always known.

Building forms can be sensual and alive, as our body, not rigid and hard and lifeless (think drywall).  Surfaces can have vitality, hold an intention atuned to the what we want to experience in each room: Be soft, or vibrant, or rough, or glassy/reflective, or…….. 

In the way that our breath is perhaps our most vital aspect of living, our buildings can breathe, drawing in the world around us.   A building can pull in the breezes, gather daylight into most parts of the building. One room can open into a garden while another expands out to a distant view.  At another level, just as we breathe in and out, one space can be expansive, while another space can be inward-focused.  Buildings can provide place for inner, reflective solitude, and outward-reaching gatherings.

Our buildings can be as a wave, which is the meeting of the deep energy of the ocean with the firm soil of the earth.  A wave puts us in one of the most ancient dynamics of the earth.  Our buildings can also put us in-between realms - a building can be just inside the edge of a forest overlooking a meadow, or a bay window in a bedroom looking onto a city street  - opening up reflective chords.

There are many ways our buildings can be interwoven into the natural world. The first and essential step is to awaken our awareness to this possibility.  A simple exploration of this opening:  Go into the woods, find a small, intimate space, and sit.  Be still.  Listen.  As when dropping a pebble into a still pond, soon your mind will be clear of ripples.  You'll be deep in the pond (the place), and the world around you will begin to embrace you.  Animals will resume their goingson, birds will land on branches nearby; you'll slowly become a part of the place.  Then you can begin to consider how the spaces you create and live in can be an extension of the centered place this consciousness was born in.

Generous cities: biomimicry and urban design

Biomimicry pioneer Janine Benyus argues that generosity and not competition is the building block of nature.: http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/generous-cities-biomimicry-and-urban-design.html

That's an idea that could transform most of society!!

www.HeliconWorks.com

article in Natural Awakenings - WE ARE NOT THIS BODY

http://content.yudu.com/Library/A25e26/NaturalAwakeningsDCM/resources/5.htm


That's the link........on page 27........this article i wrote explores our heart-space, where we connect with loved ones and places.


www.HeliconWorks.com