Human activity, our daily and routine behavior, is responsible for releasing billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. We emit greenhouse gases at a rate never seen before and, what’s worse, without any sign of slowing down. As a result, over the past decade, we have reached the highest global average temperature values since records have been kept.
One of the main commitments must be to identify and significantly vary the rules that govern these enormous technological monsters that are airports.
It is true that disasters related to climate and extreme weather phenomena have always existed. However, these They are becoming increasingly frequent and intense. As the global temperature increases, more heat waves, droughts, typhoons or hurricanes occur, causing massive destruction worldwide.
The vast majority of experts agree that It is essential to reduce these greenhouse gas emissions. Otherwise, temperatures could rise by up to three degrees Celsius on average by the end of this century. That scenario would most likely be catastrophic, causing irreversible damage to our ecosystems. Our way of life, that routine behavior, will inevitably be affected. We won’t live it, but our grandchildren, the children of our children, will undoubtedly live worse than we do.
In this context, there are numerous studies that place the construction sector among the main responsible for the degradation of our natural environment. One of them states that The construction and daily use of buildings consume nearly 50% of natural resources., It produces 40% of the energy produced and 16% of the water on our planet. Similarly, this human activity produces almost 30% of the greenhouse gas emissions into our atmosphere. More than transportation or industry.[1]
If the full life cycle of a building is taken into account, these percentages are even higher. This ACV analysis[2] It assesses the potential environmental impacts of the set of connected unit processes – material and energy-wise – during the building’s lifetime, from its design to its demolition or reuse.
These data demonstrate the enormous responsibility which has our professional practice (engineering and architecture) on the environmental crisis we are experiencing today.
In a huge exercise of simplification, historically the position adopted as a response to this impact has manifested itself in two clear trends:[3]
The first of these, which we could call low-tech, It is based on the “passive” form of the buildings. and promulgates the use of ecological materials, self-construction, and the communal character of buildings, primarily residential and small facilities. Lucien Kroll, Svere Fehn (the building belongs to its place)[4] or Paolo Soleri They were pioneering architects in this way of thinking.
The other trend, led for decades by great figures such as Sir Norman Foster, Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers, is the “high-tech” – recently renamed as “eco-tech””- whose hallmarks are the large and spectacular steel and glass facilities – curiously in any latitude – that base their ecological approach on the use of technology and control of facilities.
For some reason, this latter trend, misunderstood due to its immediacy, is associated with a passenger terminal at an airport of the present day. The experienced design teams responsible for its implementation are increasingly trying to domesticate the environment – in the quest for user comfort – through additional proposals based on this overdose of technology.
In addition, it should be taken into account that the environment in which the passenger terminals are located, The airport system as a whole is a closed system, Almost autistic, whose planning, growth – by definition constant – and maintenance rules rarely follow “sustainable” criteria, causing a huge impact on the rest of the systems and, of course, on the populations in which they are located.
One of the main commitments, as members of those teams tasked with thinking up The airport of the future, It should be to identify and sensibly vary those rules that govern these enormous technological monsters. Somehow, the engineering and architectural professionals involved in their conception and development must be aware that, for example, a building that processes passengers and luggage should absolutely not be considered a modern cathedral.[5] That reversing the pyramid “active systems / passive systems / form” (see the attached figure) is possible even in the icon that represents a control tower.
An example that completely contradicts all these stereotypes is the airport in Málaga. Its design could not be more sustainable (Recall the landing of Latécoère and Lemaître) But their growth and development are a faithful reflection of how contemporary airports, with rare exceptions, although paradigms of technology and progress, also represent an unsustainable model of development.
[1] Gauzin-Müller, Dominique, (2002). Ecological Architecture Ed. Gustavo Gili. Pp. 15
[2] The ACV, Analysis of the Life Cycle, attributes to buildings the environmental effects derived from the consumption of raw materials and the energy required for their manufacture, the emissions and waste generated in the production process, as well as the environmental effects resulting from end-of-life disposal.
[3] Gauzin-Müller, Dominique, (2002). Ecological Architecture Ed. Gustavo Gili. Pp. 16
[4] Montaner, Josep Maria, (1997). After the Modern Movement. Architecture of the second half of the 20th century. Ed. Gustavo Gili. Pp. 92
[5] A colloquial way of referring to contemporary airports, implying their importance due to their size, mass use, and spectacular appearance. N. of A.
