No, as it is based on the law of sound judgment. Architecture has always adapted itself to the climate and local materials. During the Golden Age, when there was plenty of energy, builders believed they could free themselves from the natural world and erect, glass towers in Cairo for example, counting on engineers to make up for their excesses with airconditioning, heating, and artificial lighting. Now that natural resources are becoming rarer and more expensive and climate change must be countered, we are moving back to basics - the sun rises in the east, the weather is cooler in Brittany than in Nice. Without forgetting comfort in summer. In habitats which are increasingly insulated, bioclimatic architecture is also very concerned with protection from the sun in summer. Each architectural creation must respond in the most suitable way to the local situation. The orientation and size of openings, sun shades, protection from the wind, buffer zones - everything which can be achieved through design and orientation of the building must be done. The engineer then plays a key role by achieving what the building cannot.
Futuristic house can also be fun!
Alain Liébard
What if architects built energy-saving houses, or even houses that produced energy? And what if this progress was not restrictive but fun? While investigating bioclimatic architecture, we found a new way of thinking about sustainable development, based on sound judgment... and pleasure. Here we meet Alain Liébard, president of the'Observatoire des énergies renouvelables' (Renewable energy observatory) and inventor of bioclimatic architecture.
Is bioclimatic architecture subject to fashion?
You are not the only one championing energy savings. What is special about bioclimatic architecture's contribution?
The principle of fun! All the experts agree about the need to save energy or develop alternative energies which do not give off CO2. But most of these arguments involve standards, constraints, restrictions. Many rely on people's guilty consciences. We would end up living in a thermos flask! But is that pleasant? As for us, we believe that pleasure is a stronger driving force than guilty consciences. We believe our role is to create atmospheres, to best manage a building's environment so as to make it pleasant to live in - the pleasure of natural light, for example. Also the pleasure of producing your own energy using renewable energies.
In 1974 architect Alain Liébard built the first solar low cost housing projects in Blagnac. He devotes his career to developing renewable energies and praises the steady growth of their contribution to the global energy footprint. In 1984, he was guest researcher at California's Berkeley university. He has chaired the "Observatoire des énergies renouvelables" (www.energies-renouvelables.org) since 1985 and in 1990 set up the officially recognized Energies for the World Foundation. Publishing director of the journal "Systèmes Solaires - Le Journal des Énergies Renouvelables", he is often published and teaches environment studies at the Paris la Villette architecture college. |
It is architecture which seeks a balance between a building's design, its environment and the human being who lives in or visits it. |
How can a house produce energy?
Solar or wind panels fitted on roofs and facing the rightway could meet the energy needs of the inhabitants, or even exceed them. No longer an energy consumer, but a producer, the user becomes more aware of energy issues and becomes more efficient, that is the virtuous circle. The future belongs to positive energy buildings, ones which produce more energy than they consume.
How is this different from a new age autonomous house?
It is the opposite. A positive energy building is connected to the networks, interacting with the electricity network, integrated into the town, often a heavily populated town. This is not necessarily a detached house. On the contrary, towers for example, lend themselves well to our approach, with their piled up space and their relatively low energy loss per square meter. You can imagine towers 500m or 600m high, less open to the outside but with a central atrium, with their own water purification and recycling station.
Is the traditional habitat affected by your approach?
Yes. There are fine examples of rehabilitation of traditional habitats (see illustration), where fitting conservatories to the south and cold glasshouses to the north instead of balconies increases climatic comfort and extends living space while reducing energy consumption.
How are European countries addressing this issue?
Their approaches are different but, on the whole, Europe is very advanced, particularly compared with the United States or Asia. In France, our culture is to develop theories before doing anything concrete, and so we have the HEQ (High Environmental Quality) standards. Germany has a more pragmatic approach. Many buildings are turning to "green architecture", which has given rise to a productive industrial supply chain. In Spain, in Barcelona, or in Sweden, in Malmö, the concept of a "sustainable town" is transforming town planning. Most often this is not to do with a political will, but bottom-up demand.
What are the obstacles to your approach?
People often point out the heavy set-up costs, which is 10-15% higher than for traditional solutions. But this is compensated for by the gains in energy consumption (of around 30-50%) as well as by the durability of materials. You must calculate the overall cost. The problem is that the project owners are not the ones who then pay the operating costs. But increasingly local authorities, individuals, and companies are using bioclimatic architecture. Our "Solar habitat, modern habitat" competition shows off the wealth and diversity of solutions.