projekts:
recent activity
there is a gap between recycling something and using something that is recycled. whereas the promise to recycle can be used as an excuse for consumption or destruction; the idea of using something recycled, in a way, has preempted some of the damage by lessening the raw materials taken. whether or not recycled materials are recycled again; their use presupposes a more positive move than the use fresh materials with a mere promise of recycling later.
tagged: habitat, recycling, sustainability
what role do we see ‘recycled’ material playing? a difficulty with large scale movements of construction is the necessity for systematization. this is something that was not addressed in the ‘rural studio’ projects as each dwelling was catered to a particular family and based on a particular found building module. it is not probable that one can come into a different cache of available scrap material for each house in order to give it individuality or spirit. is it necessary then to investigate recycling in terms of a mass process? are we to look for systems for recycling in which ‘building products’ are the outcome? or do we discover a product that is in consistent obsolescence (auto tyres –> rubber flooring) by virtue of its limited life span for a particular use and put it into a new life where it can last due to differing needs than its original intent?
> i concur with your assessment re: standardization and rural studio, hence my question concerning the availability of ‘found’ systems such as tanker truckers. however, i find that there is a strong industry today of recycled or ‘green’ construction materials that are manufactured according to the typical material standards and dimensions. picking these materials and throwing them into a conventional single-family unit is the default solution for ‘responsibility’ in home construction; i expect that we can go past this, considering it as a given. after working out an overall scheme that is responsible or sustainable (’sustainable’ understood in the true rather than the conventional sense?), then detailing in such materials can occur.
> re: “‘building products’ are the outcome”. perhaps something fruitful would come from looking where there is a manufacturing process which produces waste that is consistently uniform and likely to continue in the future. however, i don’t know how likely it is that a factory turns out 4′x8′ sheets of high strength polymers as waste without realizing yet that there is a possible market for them. whereas rural studio focused - to my knowledge - upon low-end, boutique architecture rather than on mass-production for the proles, they provide an example of such a system of reclaimed material in the cardboard pod [link]. while i don’t know if it is suitable to make the home revolve around a wall of biomass, unless such a statement is made to serve as an example to others, i think that seeking this type of existing unclaimed material instead of filling the home with new fiberglass or cellulose is a valid course of action.
> re: “consistent obsolescence”. this is something else along the lines of what i had in mind with the tanker trucks. ‘how many sanitized tanker trucks will be found..?’ i think it would be a considerable advantage if there is something that is wasted or outgrown in abundance which we can count on, if not forever, at least for 50,000 homes. see above mention of ‘cardboard pod’.
