Green Buildings

In Tokyo’s well-off Ginza neighborhood stands the Nakagin Capsule Tower – a 13- and 11-storey twin-tower structure composed of 140 prefabricated capsule units designed to be replaceable.
The Nakagin, built in 1972, was once hailed as an example of sustainable construction and architecture. It was designed to last for long – all the owners had to do was replace its capsules.
That, in fact, did not happen. The building is now plagued by poor waterproofing, bad plumbing and asbestos contamination. In April 2007, the building’s management voted for its demolition on grounds of worsening living conditions in the building.
Naturally, the plan was opposed by architects and historians, citing the building’s cultural value as one of the first modern-day examples of recyclable housing.
Joining the debate was a then-growing community of advocates for green buildings and sustainable architecture.
In various forums on green Web sites, the issue of the Nakagin demolition was discussed. Majority from these communities favored preservation in appreciation of the building’s design principle.
Those who favor demolition are finding proposals for a replacement 14-storey building with a bigger floor area as more feasible.
Pro-demolition parties also say the building is not earthquake resistant – a factor which increases in relevance now, given the latest calamities having struck Japan.
Cost effective renovation
Prior to the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami that hit Japan in March, efforts for the preservation of the building had been in the works.
Architect Jin Hidaka, one of the proponents behind a project to preserve the Nakagin, cited many gains that preservation could bring, not least of them monetary ones.
“If you have to buy 100 capsules, you need $4.45 million and the cost of renovation as your investment. The cost of renovation for one capsule is approximately $94,000, and with 100 capsules, you need $9.4 million,” explains Mr. Hidaka.
“Now, if you could sell a capsule for over $150,000 it will give you a 5 percent return.”
Mr. Hidaka will raise the issue of preserving the building at the UIA World Congress of Architecture in Tokyo this September.
Dubbed as the “Olympics of Architecture,” the congress will highlight climate change this year.
The theme “Design 2050” will envision building and construction within the next 30 years, and underscores the concept of forecasting as a major driver of change in designs for a better quality of living in sustainable built environments.
Resilience for sustainability
Jason Hartke, vice president for national policy of the pioneering leading green building group United States Green Building Council, said sustainability varies from building to building but all buildings can aspire for both sustainability and resiliency nevertheless.
“When do we keep the existing building versus building new? In many respects, the first consideration is structure – if it does what it needs to do structurally, we can integrate the sustainability and resiliency strategies,” said Mr. Hartke.
Resilience in green building anticipates risks, including man-made or natural calamities and climate-change related crises, which a structure must withstand.
The council is currently coordinating with the University of Michigan on an in-depth study in identifying and assessing the link between green building strategies and resilience.
“As much as 40 percent of the strategies that are outlined in our rating system address greenhouse gas mitigation,” said Mr. Hartke. “But we are looking at how those same strategies impact and help improve, or create a more resilient structure.”
Interestingly, most of the strategies in the council’s prestigious Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design or LEED rating system already overlap with resiliency strategies such as those for storms, flooding, rising sea levels, droughts, wildfires and even power interruptions.
“It doesn’t matter so much whether it is a natural disaster or man-made disaster. These resiliency strategies need to be considered in terms of prevention, preparation and planning to make sure that we have a reduced and mitigated impact,” Mr. Hartke explains.
Therefore, the more resilient a structure is, the more sustainable it is, and the lower impact it will have on the environment. Mr. Hartke’s take on it is “we cannot have a sustainable future if we’re not building on the strong foundation of resiliency.”
This resiliency in sustainability framework gains even more weight in the face of the Japanese tragedies and the rebuilding challenges it currently faces.
“We’ve got this mindset that these disasters are coming up. [There is] a challenge to stop being surprised by disaster and the patterns of disaster,” said Mr. Hartke.
“In the case of Japan, in fact over the last several decades, they have done [and] implemented many significant measures to be more resilient in the face of an earthquake or some other disaster.”
As for the possibility of Japan rebuilding green, it is doable, Mr. Hartke notes, once the full rescue and basic humanitarian aid have been completely carried out.
He cited the case of Greensburg, Kansas which built sustainable structures after being wiped out by a tornado in 2007, and has now transformed itself as a green city.
And so the Nakagin Tower fights to keep its existence in a country which is still in the process of picking up the pieces. It would be ironic if it falls apart amidst all the rebuilding.