The “Green Movement”
is a notable trend growing rapidly in Asia. Although many may heard of it, only
some truly understands what it really means. Green is not, by definition, the
same as sustainable. Green is a relative measure that does less harm. A
building is regarded Green if it consumes or emits less than a preordained
benchmark. Being sustainable on the contrary is to live within the Earth’s
carrying capacity, not consuming and emitting any faster than what can be replaced
or repaired naturally, in plain English to cause no harm (Kishnani, 2012). Statistics
may show the increasing growth of Green buildings in Asia, notably China, but much
of them are using “Sustainable” interchangeably with the word “Green”.
As we know, becoming
a Green building in Asia requires several qualifications before one is rewarded
with a certificate. A building must attain credits by conforming a checklist of
conditions that makes up the evaluation. Certification costs money and time,
but it promises saving and a measure of status (Kishnani, 2012). In 2005,
Singapore’s Green Building Council (GBC) made it compulsory for all new
buildings to be certified. Today, approximately 12 percent of the total built up
area in Singapore is declared Green. Automatically, Malaysia was drove to keep
up with the trend.
The catastrophe of accelerated
climate change is an important government concern now. Our government have set
targets for abatement but none can be achieved without involving the building
sector. Nonetheless, Asia relatively causes the least harm to environment given
its size in comparison to other continents. When the case of “Green Movement”
was heard across Asia, it sounded almost ironic since much of Asia lives within
its ecological constrains. Buildings from generations before us are made of low-impact
materials, built by empirical builders without the intervention of architects. Yet
we speak of Green buildings as something new.
Chapter 3.1.1
Seizing the Market
When one speaks of
sustainability, we quite spontaneously look to traditional and natural materials.
Still, we spare no effort in reviving the oblivion – bamboo. The fact that the
public is ignorant to its sustainable capabilities is not as disturbing as the
fact that architects did not attempt to educate them. If only the society understands
more, the level of acceptance would’ve been more pleasant.
In modern days, bamboo
is celebrated for its unnatural rate of growth. There is no known plant that can
match its ability to grow up to 1.25 meter height in just 24 hours. To become
mature enough for construction, a fir tree needs to grow between 12 to 15
years, while an oak tree needs at least a century. Bamboo takes only 3 years to
reach its maximum apex for strength. What’s even more surprising is that
harvesting neither kills the plant nor damages the surrounding, in fact it regenerates with denser fiber and
the roots stay intact to prevent erosion. Perhaps, the title “sustainable
natural resource” wasn't given without a reason. A recent study conducted by Zero
Emissions Research Institute (ZERI) unfolds that bamboo not only sequesters 4
times more carbon dioxide than ordinary trees, it also produces 35 percent more
oxygen than trees of similar size. Owing to its narrow nature, a bamboo forest sequesters
17 times as much carbon as a typical tree forest.
The prime driving force
to bamboo’s commercial value is indeed its sustainable capabilities. In just a
decade ago, bamboo flooring (see Image 3.2) was introduced to the market and
posed a serious contender to hardwood flooring (see Image 3.3). The difference
in price and appearance isn't patent. The only logical conclusion is that people
feel a certain guilt when causing ravage to the environment. As early as 2007,
half of the 1200 building professionals in Asia participated in a survey
responded they had “High” or “Very High” levels of commitment to Green. In fact, nearly
all said they prefer to work in an industry that values the environment. Therefore
when given an opportunity to do something good for the nature, they would take
it. Obviously, employing bamboo in place of wood for construction is definitely
a more fruitful effort to save forests than just recycling papers.
Image 3.2
Bamboo Flooring
Image 3.3
Hardwood Flooring
Concrete stands in
the way when the suggestion for bamboo building arises. For millennia, the society
trusted it for its remarkable strength and durability. In spite of that, cement
production is responsible for 2700 million tons of carbon dioxide emission
yearly. But that’s not all, concrete performs poorly under hot and humid
tropical climates in Malaysia. Its high thermal mass accumulates heat during
the day and releases them at night. Consequently, the active cooling used, be
it residential or commercial buildings, contributes to nearly 40 percent of carbon
dioxide production in Malaysia, 80 percent of all energy used by a building. Soon,
the public will come to a rude awakening that it is possibly the most cataclysmic
choice out there. However, to completely wipe out concrete from our lives seem
somewhat absurd, considering our dependence since the colonial age. Fairly speaking,
there are several characters concrete has but bamboo doesn't Since the idea of
setting concrete aside sounded ridiculous, the environmental impact can at
least be mitigated by involving bamboo in construction alongside concrete.
Be that as it may, do
the people trust bamboo’s safety? Durability is by far the most concerned reason
when it comes to bamboo construction. Nevertheless, bamboo is more than meets
the eye.
-Not Completed Yet-
No comments:
Post a Comment