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.

Some Thoughts - New Thesis Ideas

So after the last class, I've been thinking a lot about my current thesis proposal. For the longest time, all I've really wanted to do was come up with a comprehensive plan for my parent's home in New Jersey. Don't give me crap for it, it's a great place. In the woods, 5 acres of property, South Branch of the Raritan River in front of the house, 100 feet of elevation, and surrounded by a Wildlife Preserve. It is serene, quiet, and is pretty much a vacation whenever I go home. The house was built in 1830, is solid stone (2 feet thick, might I add), and has the thermal value of a single pane of glass. I mean, the R4 windows are more insulative than the walls. I thought it would be awesome to go off grid with the house, and have a modernized zero energy home, that was at one point a fishing lodge before the Civil War. The whole thing could have been expanded upon and been a great project (I still really want to do this post-graduation), but for a thesis, I have a much better idea, or so I currently think.

The professors were saying that it would be helpful and/or interesting to relate thesis to something that I have been interested in before my relatively brief architectural stint. To all of my friends, that "interest" is almost as obvious as asking if Carnegie Mellon has a large Asian student population; I'm talking about cars. I'm really into cars. Sport compacts, muscle cars, supercars, and so on and so forth. I had an '03 civic Si that was pretty extensively modified, and now I have a '95 E36 BMW M3 that is equally as modified. I was trying to relate cars (and modifying them) to architecture, when somehow gas mileage popped into my head. The Si was supposed to get 28 miles per gallon on the highway as it was stock from the factory. The M3, 25 mpg. The Si was upgraded with a bigger intake, camshafts, a raceheader (no catalytic converter), free flowing exhaust, and the car got between 34 and 36 mpg highway. Similarly, the M3 has an intake, raceheader, trackpipe (no cat), exhaust, cams, bigger injectors, and a tune, and that gets 30 mpg on the highway. Coincidence? I think not. Clearly the EPA is trying to screw us out of our miles per gallon and make us pay for more gas, thanks Haliburton (I'm just kidding... ...kind of).

Now that I was thinking about fuel economy and efficiency, I also started thinking about the amount of pollution that cars put out, and the efforts involved in reducing those figures. In the automotive world, there are a number of different strides being taken in different areas, all with a similar goal in mind: reducing carbon emissions. Increased efficiency of engines, different filtration techniques, and hybrid technology all comes to mind.

I'll elaborate more on this, but for now I have class to go to. Second installment later this evening.

Position Paper v1.1 - 1+3+9

Modern Zero-Energy retrofits can apply to homes that predate active heating and cooling systems.

Houses constructed before the advent of active systems like air conditioning took advantage of passive systems that were predicated on localized climate conditions. In a sense, these older homes are zero energy homes. In today's modern age, it is important to reduce energy consumption, have a low carbon footprint, and exist harmoniously with the environment.

With no air conditioning, and possibly no electricity depending on time of construction, homes had to rely on siting and construction methods in order to provide comfortable living. Contemporary homes use modern technologies to create what are essentially hermetically sealed boxes, that blast cold air in the summer, or hot air in the winter. Though having the ability to be leaders in energy conservation, the majority of newer homes are just as inefficient as older homes that still use systems (such as oil heat and "dirty" coal) that are inefficient and detrimental to the environment. Updating older homes with new technology while still maintaining the character of the house would bring homes nearly a century old or older into the modern age. A zero energy retrofit for these older homes would show that older design strategies can work in conjunction with modern materials and technologies. Additionally, it can highlight the fact that zero energy homes need not look futuristic, but can blend into any house or building without drawing attention to itself. Varying levels of retrofits can exist, from simple home improvements all the way up to zero energy, zero emissions full retrofits. By going off-grid or by producing more environmentally friendly energy than the house needs to remain self-sustainable, the house can give back to the energy grid and help the community. These strategies have the potential to be implemented in individual suburban homes, or in tightly packed urban communities.