Some Thoughts - Continuation

I'm trying to break this up into two posts so that people will actually read this instead of getting about halfway and giving up (something I find myself guilty of all too often). So getting back to what I was talking about earlier, emissions.

Automobile manufacturers have been trying to reduce emissions to hit certain government regulations, and to help retard the slow death of our planet. No, I'm not a tree hugger. Moving on. Fuel efficient engines, hybrids, clean diesel, and even fuel cell technologies are at the forefront of this movement. Manufacturers are going "blue" actually instead of going "green." Mercedes has its BlueTec diesel program and its BlueEFFICIENCY petrol lines, Volkswagen with its BlueMotion, Hyundai and its i-Blue Drive program, and so on. Hybrids are being developed so that the same power is produced with less CO2 emissions. Similarly, engines with partial cylinder shutdown (for increased gas mileage and less CO2) and engines with forced induction are becoming more and more commonplace. Forced induction is turbocharging (exhaust gas driven, the most efficient means of forced induction) or supercharging (belt driven off of the crankshaft; basically it robs power initially to make power). For example, Volkswagen won an engine of the year award with a 1.4 liter four cylinder engine that is twincharged. It has both a supercharger and a turbocharger, and produces 170 horsepower. Two decades ago, Mercedes-Benz had a 3.8 liter V8 that produced similar numbers. Apparently, the replacement for displacement is technology. Granted, Mercedes had a 5.4 liter supercharged straight-8 cylinder engine that produced 180hp in 1934, but that's neither here nor there...

What I'm getting at is that engines are actually applying new technology at a mass-production scale. Engines are smaller, more efficient, emit less CO2, and are generally as powerful if not more powerful than their antiquated predecessors. This is (finally) where architecture comes into play. Why the hell isn't the construction world doing the same? I mean, sure it is in some instances, but the 82% or so of buildings that aren't designed by architects rarely have any technological advancements in their design. What I want to specifically speak ad nauseum about is air quality in buildings, as well as the toxic gases they emit. I want to make a direct correlation between the automotive world and the construction world, and see what buildings are doing to reduce emissions and lower carbon dioxide. What if the building could breathe, similar to an engine or an organic object? Could the building use particulate air filters, or variants of catalytic converters to reduce its CO2 output? Moreover, could the building actually inhale CO2 like a plant, and exhale oxygen? Buildings would come to life, and improve the quality of our air. Imagine the possibility in cities all over the world. New, modern engines have computers that can alter the maps of the engine, like air and fuel tables, cam positions, and timing retardation/advance. One map can be calibrated towards high horsepower and torque output, while another map may be for increased fuel economy. Perhaps something similar can be implemented for buildings; maps to improve air quality in the building during work hours, and another map to optimize oxygen generation at night when trees essentially go to sleep.

Working in China last year with the Broad Air Conditioning Corporation, the need for an application for regulation of building CO2 emissions and O2 generation has become increasingly apparent to me. If I were to work on this for my thesis, I would no doubt love to partner with Broad Air and create a prototype or two, and a couple patents while we're at it; Perhaps a SIP panel or a curtain wall system that acts like a living, breathing organism.