Atch’s Weblog

            My previous article “Going Green…Vertically” might have raised some arguments about greening your high-rise buildings. Trees are supposed to be more than nice-looking objects to rest our eyes on. But, what is wrong if you still want to grow some vegetables on your condo balcony? The answer is no. For a ‘Going Green’ campaign to be successful, it needs to sustain three basic requirements, which are environment, social, and economics. In terms of environment, having more and more trees is definitely a plus as it helps to filter the outside air, reduce urban heat island effects, provide sound insulation, shade your balcony from strong afternoon direct sunlight, and so on; not yet to mention about enhancing visual quality of the skyline. For social and economics, putting more green space vertically, will surely lead to series of discussions.

            Early this year, I invited a green architect from Sydney, Australia to give a lecture at the Association of Siamese Architects (ASA). His name is Tone Wheeler from Environa Studio. Of course, Sydney is located in a warm and arid area, which is totally different from Bangkok in terms of climate. Green buildings in Australia then need to focus on stormwater collections. Tone showed us a picture of his design of an apartment where he installed large concrete gutters to collect stormwater and store it in the tanks right beneath each balcony. The stormwater is then used to feed the vegetables that the apartment’s owners grow for food on their balconies. There is no electric water pump needed for the irrigation since the water is downfed by gravity. This sounds like ‘self-sufficiency economy’ to me. However, instead of talking about economy or money saving from self-cultivation, Tone chose to mention about it in terms of environment. He said that 25% of CO₂ emission from the transportation sector is due to the delivery of food from its origin to store in our refrigerators. Therefore, if we can provide cultivation area that is closed to our living complex, we could cut down energy used for the transportation of foods and refrigeration. Reduced land use can prevent further deforestation, desertification, and other consequences of agricultural encroachment on the nature. Of course, most importantly, we will have really fresh foods ready on our dining tables every day. The buildings we live in will be fully self-contained, self-sustained, and self-sufficient.

            Actually, Tone’s idea of the so-called ‘Urban Farming’ is not really new. Dr. Dickson Despommier, a professor of environmental sciences and microbiology at Columbia University, U.S.A. used to mention about ‘Vertical Farm’ or ‘Sky Farm’. He suggested that the world will need more farming area in order to produce enough food for its population by the year 2050. To achieve this, vertical space in urban area could be used for growing vegetables. Natural energy such as wind and solar can be used to supply enough power to run this skyfarm. In addition, water collecting units and a black-water treatment system as well as an optional biofuel generating power plant can be integrated into this building.

            The idea of ‘Urban Farming’ has led me to look at ‘vertical green’ in a different point of views. I later came across an experimental design competitions held by the Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art (SMoCA) in Arizona, U.S.A., in an attempt to gather innovative ideas on revitalization of strip malls. The winner is MOS Architects from Connecticut. The concept called “Urban Battery” as shown in the pictures. It is actually ‘vertical algae farm’ integrated with wind turbines and solar cell panels. For those who don’t know much about renewable energy, algae can be grown in order to produce biodiesel. A 300’ by 300’ lightweight structure supports a series of thin plastic bags housing algae; of course, the green one, to make it look really green. The reason that they put it vertically instead of horizontally in a swamp is because; when algae grow, light only penetrates by one inch through water. By going vertical, they can increase the surface area and the volume that gets exposed to sunlight.

            It seems all these people who created such innovative ideas about vertical green are trying to achieve all requirements of sustainability. Sometimes we need to talk louder about environmental crises and the ways to solve them right before business people start to calculate the return on investment. Today, the society listens to bad news about environmental problems and climate change more carefully than it did decades ago. The examples of vertical green shown here might not be really profitable at the first place; however, the ‘Wow factor’ incorporated into the ideas and applications will spur major development of vertical green in the near future. 

ผู้ช่วยศาสตราจารย์ ดร. อรรจน์ เศรษฐบุตร 

Asst. Professor Atch Sreshthaputra, Ph.D.

Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University

Chairman of Green Building Program. The Association of Siamese Architects.

          Do you remember your childhood dreams? Like many other kids, I wished I could live and play on a very big tree, and then eat and sleep tight in a wooden treehouse high above the ground. The outside of my windows would be only other big trees and the blue sky. I believe that this is still the dream of many people. Unfortunately, not all of us would have enough time to even think about chasing the dream we had in the past. Some might now end up living alone in a substandard, 30-square-meter, studio-type high-rise condo in the city.  It is even worse that the room might have only a small window with nothing to see outside, except other surrounding tall concrete structures, or even worse—fully-glazed office towers that either reflect strong sunlight into our eyes, or display ugly advertisement stickers that violates not only our privacy right, but also the right to see beautiful night sky without blockage.

            Like many world-class, fast-growing cities, Bangkok has no plan on how to create or at least maintain nice visuals of its skyline. Of course, high-rise buildings are unavoidable for downtown development; however, would it be nice if the developers and architects place more concerns on how their buildings look? Actually, a tall building in the city is not a private property of those who pay to build it, but it belongs to our environment—visual environment. The way it looks creates great visual impacts on everyone in the city. Even though, it is quite subjective to assess visual environmental quality of a tall building in terms of its aesthetic value, some architects think they can help us differentiate one nice-looking building from other ugly ones by just growing trees on the towers!!. It is quite shocking for me to see all these pictures of so called ‘green skyscrapers’ designed by a world renowned Malaysian architect named Ken Yeang. I am not really sure whether he is playing around with our sense of perception about aesthetics or just wants to communicate his idea of green skyscrapers literally and boldly.

I am sure that his design is worth looking at and arguing with; but please don’t let it remind you of the treehouse you dreamt of in your childhood. It is totally different as a treehouse is actually a house on a tree, but the vertical green is vice versa.

            I believe that, under the global warming situation we are facing these days, people are trying to be ‘green’ as much as they could. Growing more and more trees is the first chapter of any ‘Living Green’ bibles; however, creating the ‘Vertical Green’ like this might be the last chapter, only in case other endeavors for ‘going green’ campaigns are all failed. Actually, this ‘vertical green’ has nothing seriously wrong, and it sometimes look nice to see natural green in the blue sky among ugly concrete or reflective glass towers. However, could any botanists please tell us if the trees are really happy to stay there on the balcony of the 30^th floor on high-rise condominiums? I don’t think we can grow them up there easily. Not only will the trees not grow well at high elevation due to the lack of natural soil, high-speed wind will also tear down the leaves. It is also sad to know that the condominium owners would try very hard to save their lives, but not hoping for them to grow larger. Trees that are not allowed to grow are ‘bonsais’, of which the purpose is for decorations…or in the other words, they are just something to look at. If we are happy to look at them, then they serve their purpose by help improving visual quality of the environment, don’t they?

            If we are all agree that having ‘green in the sky’ or ‘vertical green’ will help to improve visual quality of the skyline and create positive impacts on cultural and social environment, then all these trees on the balcony should be honored, as they had sacrificed their lives for our pleasure– like birds in our cages, and fishes in our bowls; not to mention all kinds of creatures in Dusit Zoo that have to tolerate the political turmoils at the House of Parliament as well. So, who is responsible for this sacrifice? Global warming, again? Or is it just yet another innovative marketing idea of condominium developers who try to save the world and improve visual quality of the skyline; right after they have created enough visual pollutions by having reflecting-glass towers or ugly advertisement stickers everywhere in the city. Here you might wonder what the point is. I will leave you to think carefully, if you have to choose between reflective-glass office towers, advertisement stickers, heat-absorbing concrete structures, or this ‘vertical green’, what should it be for Bangkok skyline? For me, it is still difficult to decide unless I can look closer into every pros and cons of each option. Let me discuss about this later on.     

ผู้ช่วยศาสตราจารย์ ดร.อรรจน์ เศรษฐบุตร 

Asst. Professor Atch Sreshthaputra, Ph.D.

Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University

Chairman of Green Building Program. The Association of Siamese Architects.