FutureAir

Author: Simone Rothman

BLDGS = DATA

April 2019

The workplace, once a stereotypical stuffy cubicle inside of a larger brick cubicle, has garnered much attention over the past couple of years.

In fact, so many progressive workplace improvements have been made over the last decade that now some mythical bubbles are beginning to pop. For example, while the open concept workplace may actually lead to a reduction in productivity, and not everyone wants or needs a standing desk. However, without attempting alternative approaches to workspace design, there would never have been a way to understand what works and what does not. Well, maybe there is but we just don’t know about it…yet.

Founded in 2010, WeWork builds shared offices with a mission to create community spaces. A recent Bloomberg Businessweek article detailed the ways that WeWork has been collecting and analyzing information about how people move and operate within the workplace with the mission of using buildings more efficiently. WeWork recently implemented devices as a test bed in their own office headquarters, in San Francisco, to better understand how and when space is used.

Enabled by a recently acquired data software company, Euclid, WeWork located thermal sensors under conference room tables to detect how many people are in a room, at any given time. WeWork also maps cellphone data to understand where people spend their time both physically by location and digitally through phone usage. These various tools are not intended to target individual employees, rather they help WeWork understand how people and buildings respond to work environments on a large scale. With the relevant data, workspaces can adapt to fit employers needs for productivity and the environment’s needs for buildings to be energy efficient. Employees sport tee shirts that read, “Bldgs = Data.”

WeWork is right…buildings do equal data. We can not change the things we do not see. As a society that relies heavily on the scientific method, we still need hard evidence to pinpoint variables that must change for more productive, and frankly, practical solutions. The proper tools are not quite readily available to gather building data. WeWork will use their research to advise on ways to improve energy efficiency and the health, productivity, and well-being of a building’s occupants.

WeWork’s data begins to demonstrate where resources are wasted. This information is key to understanding how to preserve energy for our planet and, ultimately, for ourselves. If we study how we work and spend our time then perhaps we can get closer to a solution to the things that reduce our quality of life. Perhaps we can structure our lives and our buildings to meet our human needs.

Buildings equal data, and humans do too.

Every Move You Make, WeWork Will Be Watching You, Bloomberg Businessweek

Written for FutureAir By Mollie Wodenshek

Image Credit: Inkee Wang

Healthy Materials

March 2019

Parson’s Healthy Materials Lab gave a talk entitled: The New Frontier of Materials: Human Health & Design that we at FutureAir believe is worth documenting.

Speakers outlined the dangers of the built environment. No one intends to pollute indoor air in building construction, but the chemical cocktail trapped inside poses an invisible threat—it is a silent epidemic.

The speakers presented a metaphor between the food we eat and the air we breathe. Just like the food we ingest, the air we breathe also becomes a part of our bodies and enters our system. So if we label the ingredients on food items should we not also label the ingredients in the air? Shouldn’t we identify where these air pollutants come from—which products, which materials? We have a right to know which items contribute to the composition of the poisonous indoor environments we spend more than 90%of our time in.

The goal of the Healthy Materials Lab is to bring awareness to the health threats posed by poor air in our indoor environments. They do this by producing and conducting case studies, and their website is pretty much an encyclopedia for all things chemical toxins in the home. Finally, they partner with companies in the construction field to incentivize healthy building material choices.

Ultimately, the chemicals of concern may never go away, but we can make and encourage better decisions that lead to healthier realities. An important point that was raised was that most members of the Healthy Materials Lab are designers in practice. They want to create beautiful environments that are also sustainable and healthy. With the current climate crisis, it seems we all have to double down and integrate a sustainable practice into our work and lives to build a world we can live and thrive in.

Written for FutureAir by Mollie Wodenshek

Image Credit: Builder Magazine

A Green Skyline is on the Horizon

September 2017

Our country may have pulled out of the climate change accord, but New York City certainly hasn’t. The city made its commitment to reducing its emissions clear the day after Trump announced his stance. A new initiative was announced that would require building owners to address their fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, placing limits on buildings 25,000 square feet and up. The mandates are intended to target the least efficient buildings in the city and will create thousands of green jobs.

“The plan is estimated to reduce emissions by 7 percent overall, the equivalent of removing 900,000 cars from the road annually,” Think Progress writes. Heat and hot water are the focus of this initiative as they make up “42 percent of the city’s total emissions.” This plan will allow New York City to reach the Paris Climate Agreement goal of 80 percent reduction in emissions by 2050.

Building owners who don’t meet regulations, replacing boilers, water heaters, and other elements, by designated years (2020 or 2030 depending on the building type) will face penalties. NYC.gov reports that the legislation will help provide financing that allows owners to pay for energy investments through their property tax bill. The plan also ensures that tenants will not be displaced and rents will not be raised to meet these mandates.

These types of initiatives have already proved effective and worthwhile to all involved. As Think Progress states, “Other efficiency programs, including the Energy Department’s Better Buildings initiative, have shown dramatic returns on investment in efficiency. Since 2011, $4.2 billion has provided energy savings that will save $8 billion in the next 18 years.”

Unfortunately, the Better Buildings initiatives are at risk to federal budget cut proposals. Funding for the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy office could be cut in half. But, as Mayor de Blasio says, “No matter what happens in Washington, we will not shirk our responsibility to act on climate in our own backyard.”

Keeping the United Nations cool

September 2017

Among New York’s best mid-century modernist buildings, the United Nations is one of our favorites.

Designed by a team of architects led by Brazilian, Oscar Niemeyer and Swiss-French, Le Corbusier in 1947, the UN’s first headquarters in New York City opened with great fanfare in 1952. Designated international territory under high security, this iconic landmark building was the first skyscraper with a curtain wall.

Controlling the temperature with this stunning curtain wall, it seems, has always been a challenge. From day one, the costs to heat and cool the building were astronomical – estimated at $10 million a year in 1990. By 2008, in an effort to reduce global warming impact and save money, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon launched “Cool UN”. This initiative raised thermostats by five degrees and shut down HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) systems on weekends.

In one of the early design schemes, Le Corbusier did design a “brise-soleil” system to shade the two glass facades, but the UN did not approve and instead the glass panels were coated with heat-absorbing Thermopane. Even with operable windows and 4,000 Carrier units, the east and west offices were often baked by exposure from the afternoon sun.

In 2014, the UN completed a major renovation of its building. This process took more than six years, and included an upgrade of the HVAC systems and glass facades, with the main objective to reduce energy waste. The United Nations has plenty of challenges, but architecture was certainly one they did not expect.

We can only imagine the loss of productivity from one other critical issue: cooling the very important people working there. Surprisingly, they are not alone. According to IFMA, the number one complaint from occupants working in buildings in the US is “too cold” and number two is “too hot”.

To be sure, the UN building would have been much better served if Le Corbusier’s suggestion was implemented as designed, or if the glass facades were simply built facing north and south, rather than east and west. Strategic design decisions like these can considerably affect the overall performance of a building. Designing for health, productivity and well-being of the occupants within must be considered as essential as the elegance and sustainability of the architecture.

Photo credit: archdaily

References:
Basile, Salvatore. Cool: How Air Conditioning Changed Everything. Fordham University Press. 2014.
https://www.curbed.com/2017/5/9/15583550/architecture-air-conditioning-skyscraper-wright-lever-house
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=27536#.WVVM_hPysUs
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/24/nyregion/international-symbol-neglect-u-n-building-unimproved-50-years-shows-its-age
http://www.ifma.org/docs/default-source/surveys/hvacsurvey2009.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Mourning the Old Air

September 2017

I grew up in Portland, Oregon and can’t remember a Labor Day as hot as the one that just passed. Now that I live in Los Angeles, I thought I would escape the swelter by going north to visit my family, but it broke a hundred degrees in both cities that week. And in the midst of these heat wave, fires started in both of my homes.

Flying into Portland, I was struck by a showy sunset. I was right in line with the glowing clouds in a way I’d never been, so that they formed another horizon at eye-level. Directly above was the fluorescent orange sun, and below was a hem of bright pink and the city lights under that. The sun hadn’t quite dipped, but night seemed to have settled already.

I didn’t know then that what I was seeing was a thick layer of smoke.

The Eagle Creek fire, around the Columbia River Gorge east of Portland, is still only seven percent contained over a week later, covering about 34,000 acres. The main highway is closed for the next week. And, heartbreakingly, many of the trails I hiked as a child will be inaccessible or destroyed. The region is mourning the loss of these sites of shared, natural beauty.

At the same time, the La Tuna fire in Burbank ignited. People in the city had to evacuate their homes. When I landed in Burbank the next week, it was only thirty percent contained, but colder air was sweeping in. As of September 9, it was one-hundred percent contained. 7,194 acres were burned around the Verdugo Mountains.

On my fourth day in Portland, the heat broke and my family and I were excited to finally get outside. We went to Portland’s iconic food carts—until we saw the ash falling into our food. We packed up our dinner and ran to our car—covered in ash by that point—to somewhat better, filtered indoor air back at home. We realized the smoke cover was the reason for the drop in temperature. The air quality there is still poor. The smoke swirls around the Gorge and hangs over Portland.

One main reason these fires grew so large is because of global warming. According to Accuweather, “September usually marks the beginning of the end for wildfire season, when Pacific storms start rolling onshore bringing cooler, wetter weather to the Northwest.” But the heat waves have increased fire danger and created a dryer landscape, prime for more dangerous wild fires.

Michelle Nijhuis writes for the New Yorker, “…wildfires are bigger and more destructive than they used to be, and the fire season now stretches beyond the summer and well into the school year—in some places, even nudging into what we used to think of as winter. Climate change, combined with a century of overenthusiastic fire suppression and the resulting buildup of fuel, has turned the once occasional emergency of wildfire into a chronic condition.”

Smoky air and poorer air quality may be something we have to get used to, and plan our health around—according to the Accuweather article—taking breaks to go indoors and drinking lots of water.

Coolant Chemicals in the Courts

August 2017

On August 8, ​the​ United States Court of ​Appeals​ ​ruled against restrictions to ​products​ ​that contain​ ​hydrofluorocarbons​ ​(HFCs)​​.​ ​HFCs​ ​are​ ​a​ ​harmful​ ​greenhouse​ ​gas​ ​that​ ​trap​ ​heat​ ​in​ ​the atmosphere.​ According​ ​to​ Inside​ ​Climate​ ​News, ​​the​ ​ruling​ ​was​ ​in​ ​favor​ ​of​ ​two​ ​foreign HFC​ ​manufacturers (Mexichem Fluor and Arkema),​ ​holding​ ​that​ ​the​ ​“EPA​ ​had​ ​no​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​regulate​ ​the​ ​gases​ ​under the​ ​Clean​ ​Air​ ​Act.” This was bad news for Honeywell International and Chemours, companies that have been manufacturing less harmful coolant chemicals called hydrofluoroolefins.

The​ ​court​ ​ruling​ ​“​shows​ ​that​ ​at​ ​least​ ​some​ ​judges​ ​think​ ​the Environmental Protection​ ​Agency​ ​needs​ ​more​ ​specific​ ​authority​ ​from​ ​Congress​ ​to​ ​act​ ​on​ ​HFCs.”​ ​The legal​ ​loophole​ ​in​ ​a​ ​nutshell:​ ​the​ ​EPA​ ​has​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​regulate​ ​ozone-depleting​ ​gases,​ ​but not​ ​other​ ​harmful​ ​substances.​ ​HFCs​ ​were​ ​the​ ​alternative​ ​to​ ​the​ ​older​ ​chemicals​ ​that​ ​were harmful​ ​to​ ​the​ ​ozone​ ​layer.​ ​And​ ​though​ ​HFCs​ ​don’t​ ​deplete​ ​the​ ​ozone,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​still considered​ ​greenhouse​ ​gases​ ​that​ ​are​ ​incredibly​ ​impactful​ ​on​ ​climate​ ​change.​​ ​“Congress has​ ​not​ ​yet​ ​enacted​ ​general​ ​climate​ ​change​ ​legislation,”​ ​Judge​ ​Brett​ ​Kavanaugh​ ​wrote.​ ​In response,​ ​“Judge​ ​Robert​ ​Wilkins,​ ​an​ ​Obama​ ​appointee,​ ​dissented,​ ​saying​ ​that​ ​the​ ​EPA was​ ​due​ ​deference​ ​for​ ​what​ ​he​ ​said​ ​was​ ​a​ ​reasonable​ ​interpretation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​statute.”​ ​

Chemical and Engineering News states that “the EPA rule would have banned the use of HFC-134a as an air conditioner refrigerant in most cars and trucks sold in the U.S. starting with model-year 2021.” All avenues​ ​for​ ​appeals​ ​to​ ​this​ ​ruling​ ​are​ ​being​ ​explored.

The​ ​original​ ​Obama-era​ ​ruling​ ​was​ ​an​ ​important​ ​piece​ ​of​ ​the​ ​puzzle​ ​to​ ​meeting the​ ​Paris​ ​Climate​ ​Accord​ ​goals,​ ​and​ ​would​ ​have​ ​significantly​ ​cut​ ​our​ ​carbon​ ​emissions. This​ ​commitment​ ​to​ ​phasing​ ​out​ ​HFCs​ ​was​ ​furthered​ ​by​ ​meetings​ ​in​ ​Kigali​ ​in​ ​2016, when​ ​the​ ​Montreal​ ​Protocol​ ​was​ ​updated.​ ​The​ ​Montreal​ ​Protocol​ ​was​ ​a​ ​treaty​ ​signed​ ​in 1987​ ​that​ ​successfully​ ​phased​ ​out​ ​an​ ​older​ ​generation​ ​of​ ​refrigerant​ ​gases​ ​that​ ​are harmful​ ​to​ ​the​ ​ozone​ ​layer.

As​ ​the Inside Climate News ​article​ ​states,​ ​“the​ ​Trump​ ​administration​ ​has​ ​given​ ​no​ ​indication​ ​of whether​ ​it​ ​intends​ ​to​ ​bring​ ​the​ ​Kigali​ ​amendment​ ​before​ ​the​ ​Senate​ ​for​ ​ratification.”​ ​But there​ ​was,​ ​and​ ​still​ ​could​ ​be,​ ​hope​ ​to​ ​maintain​ ​the​ ​Obama-era​ ​rulings​ ​during​ ​the​ ​Trump administration.​ ​Chemical​ ​manufacturers​ ​that​ ​have​ ​worked​ ​with​ ​Trump​ ​are​ ​investing​ ​in more​ ​climate-friendly​ ​alternatives​ ​to​ ​HFCs.​ ​Climate​ ​change​ ​ingenuity​ ​and​ ​the​ ​bottom​ ​line are​ ​by​ ​no​ ​means​ ​mutually​ ​exclusive.​ ​The​ ​way​ ​we​ ​cool​ ​ourselves​ ​could​ ​be​ ​a​ ​bipartisan issue.​ ​American​ ​companies​ ​have​ ​the​ ​potential​ ​to​ ​act​ ​as​ ​leaders​ ​in coolant technology.​

Our Deep Dependence On A/C

August 2017

Air conditioning has become a convenience that we take for granted across the United States. It is responsible for the comforts of modern living beyond just room temperature. And it is connected to almost every industry in ways that aren’t always visible. But it wasn’t always that way. A recent New York Times article titled “How Air Conditioning Conquered America (Even the Pacific Northwest),” by Emily Badger and Alan Blinder, tracks our dependence on air conditioning since the 1950’s—and it goes much deeper than you might expect.

Air conditioning has made economic growth practical in the hottest regions of the United States. “It made possible industrial work like printing, food processing and electrical manufacturing that would be hard to manage in sweltering heat. And it created the possibility for white-collar jobs in mechanically cooled office buildings.” Imagine production and progress being feasible in the humid south without central air.

Cooling technologies have everything to do with infrastructure and city planning. Sprawl is viable, and traffic is tolerable, because of air conditioning in cars. It made places like Phoenix, which is considered a relatively new city, possible. Types of building designs are also informed by air conditioning in regions like the Southwest, where wood housing is now used instead of just concrete construction.

Of course, these kinds of design decisions are problematic and unsustainable. “‘With the advent of air-conditioning, we lost a lot of the common sense,’ said Kirk Teske, the chief operating officer at HKS Architects, with headquarters in Dallas. He worries that regions like the Northeast may lose it, too, setting up future challenges for office workers and residents when blackouts or other natural disasters come.”

And individual air conditioning use is on the rise as global temperatures increase (which in turn contributes to global warming in that disastrous loop). Even regions that historically never relied on air conditioning are now closer to the consumption of hotter regions like the South. In the Midwest, central air is built into 94% of new single-family homes. And across the US, window units are used in older buildings. In the Pacific Northwest, where there have been record-breaking heat waves this summer, more and more households are purchasing these units. “In 1990, just a third of households there used central air or window units. Now twice as many do.”

Air conditioning is connected to all of our modern conveniences, the infrastructure of our cities, and the economic growth of our country, including our digital lives (cooling is necessary for server farms and data centers). Our reliance on air conditioning isn’t going to shrink, but we can think more conscientiously about our use and design, and create a new kind of common sense.

Want Energy Solutions: Fix Air Con

July 2017

The irony that air conditioning contributes to global warming is hard to miss: as temperatures increase, the more we use air conditioning—and the more we use air conditioning, the more we heat the planet. And yet this piece of the puzzle is largely missing from the climate change dialogue. According to this New York Times article by Lisa Friedman, one reason is that coolant chemicals (refrigerants) don’t make for a very sexy dinner party conversation.

In 1987, the Montreal Protocol, an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances, namely CFCs, that are responsible for ozone depletion, was signed. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) became the alternative. While HFCs are less directly harmful to the ozone layer, they are still greenhouse gases and, according to the EPA, are designated as having “high global warming potential (GWP).”

An amendment to the Montreal Protocol was reached in Kigali last year, geared to eliminate the use of HFCs. Another NYT article, reporting on the deal, states that HFCs “function as a sort of supercharged greenhouse gas, with 1,000 times the heat-trapping potency of carbon dioxide.” Phasing out HFC’s could mean “avoiding an estimated half degree Celsius of warming by 2100.” The richest countries, including the US, are supposed to freeze HFC consumption by 2018. But the United States’ relationship to this amendment is unclear at this point.

Reimagining cooling is essential to approaching the problem of climate change and one of the major factors that could lead to emission reduction. If we change how we cool ourselves, we could significantly lower our potential warming from the predicted 4 to 5 degree increase.

The Montreal Protocol caused such a shift in the production and science around cooling, motivated by our clear impact on the environment, that it gives this writer hope another agreement like it can be reached. The new amendment is one step of many, but it is a big step.

Factories that manufacture air conditioners are also a large contributor to carbon emissions. Friedman’s article goes on to discuss the efficiency of air conditioning production: demand for air conditioning is increasing, which means the energy needed for production will increase as well. “1.6 billion new air-conditioners by 2050 means thousands of new power plants will have to come on line to support them.”

The demand for air conditioning is growing rapidly. Without innovation, this will only contribute further to global warming, and hence to an even greater demand for cooling technologies—an endless loop. That’s why these issues of cooling chemicals and efficiency are starting to be approached in creative, interdisciplinary, and comprehensive ways, across the interconnected fields of science and design. Innovation and policy changes go hand-in-hand when it comes to air products, which, to me, is a pretty sexy dinner party topic.

How air conditioning shaped architecture

June 2017

Air conditioning and modern architecture are more connected than what you think and the article “How air conditioning shaped modern architecture – and changed our climate” proves it. The writer, Patrick Sisson, provides us with an entertaining and didactic tour around architecture, technology and air. What we found very exciting about this piece is that while Sisson demonstrates how numerous building typologies adapted to the sudden freedom provided by air conditioning, he also emphasizes that artificial cooling has fueled today’s energy and environmental crisis.

In other words: yes, air conditioning allowed architects to design towers without atriums or light wells; yes, air conditioning “meant workers didn’t need to sit near a window and hence “offices could suddenly have larger floorplates, encouraging collaboration and denser construction”; yes, air conditioning made sealed buildings possible –hence, receiving no city dirt and dust through open windows. But of course, all these “advantages” had a flipside: “The adoption of the “windowless wall” created the fluorescent-lit, dull and dim office spaces many workers abhor” and major health implications were derived from the unhealthy air quality inside closed-off buildings. But what’s even worst: “the most damaging part of this shift has been the cost, in energy and carbon emissions, of our cool new world. By 2014, 87 percent of U.S. homes had some form of air conditioning”. The cooling of buildings and vehicles in the United States “contributes to half a billion metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year. We consume more energy for residential air conditioning than all other countries combined, although, with other countries such as China and India in pursuit of glass-walled visions of modernity, that is going to change, and not in a good way. Due in large part to indoor climate control, buildings utilize half of total U.S. energy consumption”.

All in all, we certainly agree with Sisson when he states: “Air conditioning promised a cooler, more modern environment indoors. But unless architects and designers continue to develop more green, efficient ways to keep our buildings cool, it will be increasingly difficult to escape the warming environment outside”.

For the complete article click here.

Photo Credit: “Curbed”

Last days of Lovegrove at Pompidou Centre

June 2017

“Convergence”, the remarkable installation of Ross Lovegrove’s iconic work, is on view through July 3rd at the Centre Pompidou in Paris. This impressive exhibition looks back at Lovegrove’s “quest for new paradigms in creation, at the crossroads of art, design, technology and nature.” In his own words: “design brings together art, science and technology (…) Design is in a constant state of reinvention. Because it involves transforming natural resources into useful objects, designers are central to the ecological issues that affect our emotional and aesthetic state, and our collective awareness. We are a rapidly, continuously evolving species that has to adapt.”

Here we share an interview with Lovegrove about “Convergence” that Télé Matin has recently aired. If you want to get a glimpse of the amazing designs that are exquisitely displayed by the designer himself, it’s an inspiring must see!

Credits: Centre Pompidou, Télématin, France 2, Sylvie Adigard.