article.sapub.org Open in urlscan Pro
204.188.229.162  Public Scan

URL: http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.arch.20180801.01.html
Submission: On September 22 via manual from NL — Scanned from DE

Form analysis 0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

 * PAPER INFORMATION

 * Next Paper
 * Paper Submission




 * JOURNAL INFORMATION

 * About This Journal
 * Editorial Board
 * Current Issue
 * Archive
 * Author Guidelines
 * Contact Us

Architecture Research

p-ISSN: 2168-507X    e-ISSN: 2168-5088

2018;  8(1): 1-11

doi:10.5923/j.arch.20180801.01

 




BIOMIMICRY AS AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO SUSTAINABILITY

 * Abstract
 * Reference
 * Full-Text PDF
 * Full-text HTML

Mwila Isabel Nkandu, Halil Zafer Alibaba

Department of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Mersin, Northern
Cyprus



Correspondence to: Mwila Isabel Nkandu, Department of Architecture, Eastern
Mediterranean University, Mersin, Northern Cyprus.

Email:






Copyright © 2018 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International
License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/




Abstract

Nature has spent billions of years solving and refining many of the problems we
as humans are facing today and so it is only logical for us to learn from
nature’s existing solutions to solve our issues of sustainable design. Although
there are many studies and approaches to designing more sustainable buildings,
there is limited research on ecologically sustainable design approaches that can
alleviate waste of resources by understanding the adaptation methods in natural
systems. This research aims to examine biomimicry in architecture as a potential
solution to sustainable building design. It analyses the basic principles and
advances in biomimicry in architectural design and discusses five case studies
to study how biomimicry has so far been applied in the built environment. It is
expected that this research will reveal how looking to nature for inspiration
can contribute to more sustainable building design by considering the structural
efficiency, water efficiency, thermal environment and energy supply.



Keywords: Ecological sustainability, Nature –inspired, Architecture, Zero- waste
systems, Regenerative design



Cite this paper: Mwila Isabel Nkandu, Halil Zafer Alibaba, Biomimicry as an
Alternative Approach to Sustainability, Architecture Research, Vol. 8 No. 1,
2018, pp. 1-11. doi: 10.5923/j.arch.20180801.01.


ARTICLE OUTLINE

1. Introduction2. Literature Review3. Methodology4. Findings    4.1. Organism
Level        4.1.1. 30 St Mary Axe A.K.A Gherkin Tower (2003)    4.2.
Behavioural Level        4.2.1. The East gate Centre, Harare, Zimbabwe    4.3.
Eco-System Level        4.3.1. The Cardboard to Caviar Project in Wakefield
UK        4.3.2. Sahara Forest Project Qatar, Tunisia and Jordan        4.3.3.
The Eden Project (2001) in Cornwall, England5. Discussions6. Conclusions



1. INTRODUCTION

After over three billion years of research, nature has already evolved and
solved many of its problems. Animals, plants and other organisms have engineered
themselves to survive and thrive this far without producing any waste and being
very efficient with resources. Therefore, mimicking nature’s forms, systems and
processes offers an opportunity to maximise resource efficiency while mitigating
the negative impact of buildings on the environment (Benyus. 1997).Biomimicry is
the emulation or imitation of nature in its many forms, systems and processes to
solve the most pressing challenges faced by our world today. Biomimicry methods
have so far proven to optimize in terms of sustainability and efficiency
particularly in the fields of design and construction. However, this
increasingly prominent approach has also generated development in other fields
as diverse as aerodynamics, robotic navigation, medicine, clothing design and
the detection of water pollution (Michael Pawlyn, 2011).Early examples of
biomimicry can be seen in Leonardo Da Vinci’s sketches of a flying machine
inspired by the wings of a bat. Another example comes from Fillipo Brunelleschi
who studied the strength of eggshells and designed a thinner, lighter dome for
the cathedral in Florence in 1436. In 1809, Naval architect Sir George Cayley
designed ship hulls more streamlined by studying dolphins. A more famous example
occurred in 1948 when George De Mestral, a Swiss engineer took his dog out
hunting and it emerged from the bushes covered in burrs. After examining the
tiny hooks of the burrs, he discovered a hook system used by the plant to spread
seeds by attachment inspired by this, De Mestral created Velcro. Throughout
history, architects have mainly taken inspiration from nature solely for
building forms and aesthetics. Biomimicry in architecture, however, is an
applied science that procures not only the aesthetics component of nature but
also takes lessons from nature to solve issues in the building functionality. A
multi-disciplinary approach follows a set of ethics rather than taking a
stylistic approach. Sustainability is advancing to a new level that accommodates
the design of buildings that are essential to the natural environment and should
support nature’s work rather than work against it. It has gained a lot of
popularity in the last 10 years to solve issues of sustainability while
minimizing the negative impact on nature (Pedersen. 2005).There are three
objectives, according to Head (2008) to reaching the so-called “Ecological Age”
by the year 2050, these include; “CO2 emission reduction by 80%, ecological
footprint reduction to 1.44ga/person and to increase human development index
improvement.” There is a responsibility on architects to develop optimal
ecological methods for design, construction and performance. This involves
integrating natural ecological systems into their designs keeping in mind the
human behaviour patterns.This study will take a critical look at biomimicry in
architecture. It is an investigation into its key principles and concepts. It is
a framework for understanding the approaches and levels of biomimicry in design.
It discusses some distinct advantages and disadvantages immanent in each
biomimicry level as an approach to sustainable building design. The research
will look at five existing projects in which the designers looked to nature for
inspiration to solve issues faced in their design process to provide insight on
the level of biomimicry designers have developed. The aim of this research is to
shed light on biomimicry as an approach; to showcase how it can help better the
issue of sustainability and regenerative design in architecture. According to an
examination conducted by M. Pedersen Zari at Victoria University in New Zealand
in 2007, two distinct approaches to biomimicry as a design approach exist:
Problem-Based Approach and Solution-Based Approach. These approaches each have
their own advantages, disadvantages and outcomes in terms of overall
sustainability. This Problem-Based approach was found to have different naming
in various literatures such as “Design looking to biology” (Pedersen Zari,
2007), “Problem Driven Biologically Inspired Design” (Michael Helms, Swaroop S.
Vattam and Ashok K. Goel, 2009) and “Top-down Approach” (Jean Knippers, 2009)
all having the same meaning. In this approach, designers look to nature for
solutions. Where a designer recognises their design problem and looks to how
organisms and systems in nature have solved similar problems. One possible
drawback of this design approach is that the issue of how buildings correlate
with each other and the ecosystem they are part of is not investigated.
Therefore, the underlying causes of non-sustainable or even degenerative built
environment are not necessarily addressed. Despite this, the Problem-Based
approach may be a good way to begin the transition of the built environment from
inefficient to a more sustainable environment (McDonough. 2002).The
Solution-Based approach is also referred to as “Biology influencing design”,
“Bottom-Up Approach” or “Solution-Driven Biologically Inspired Design”. In this
approach, biological knowledge influences human design. One advantages of this
approach is that the knowledge of biology may influence the design in ways other
than the predetermined design problem. One disadvantage is that an in-depth
biological research must be conducted then the information gathered must be
determined as relevant in a design context. (Pedersen Zari, M. 2007)After
examination carried out by Janine Benyus in her 1997 book, it is apparent that
the approaches discussed above further divide into three levels of mimicry,
these are; form (Organism), process (Behaviour) and eco-system. These levels
help define the kinds of biomimicry that have evolved. They provide a framework
for designers who wish to employ biomimicry methods to improve the
sustainability for the built environment to identify which approach to take.
This will help designers determine which aspect of “bio” to “mimic” (Pedersen
Zari, M. 2007). The organism level entails the designer looking at the form of a
specific organism analysing how it functions; the designer can choose to mimic a
part or the organism as a whole. The behaviour level, involves the imitation of
how an organism interacts with its immediate environment in order to build a
structure that can fit in without resistance in its surrounding environment. The
third level, involves mimicking of how an organism interacts with the
environment and how many components work together; this tends to be on the urban
scale or a larger project with multiple elements rather than a solitary
structure (Biomimicry guild, 2007).

Table 1. A Framework for the Application of Biomimicry (adapted from Pedersen
Zari, 2007)
     




2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The term ‘Biomimicry’ was first coined in 1962, but has just recently gained
popularity. ‘Biomimicry’ comes from the Greek word bios, meaning life, and
mimesis, meaning to imitate. One of the first written descriptions of Biomimicry
came from Janine Benyus in 1997; she describes Biomimicry as “The conscious
emulation of nature’s genius” (Benyus J.M. 1997), while for Pawlyn it is
“Mimicking the functional basis of biological forms, processes and systems to
produce sustainable solutions” (Pawlyn M., 2011). Many believe a biomimicry
approach can not only drastically reduce the CO2 emission but save on cost. “It
is possible to cut carbon emissions and save money.” says Michael Pawlyn. “The
key to it is innovation.” There are characteristics of the way buildings is
designed, produced and viewed and it is our job as architects to ensure the
coherence of the buildings we design with its users and the environments it is
in. We cannot alienate ourselves from the immediate surrounding we are building
in. “The most irrevocable of these laws says that a species cannot occupy a
niche that appropriates all resources- there has to be some sharing. Any species
that ignores this law winds up destroying its community to support its own
expansion” (Benyus J.M. 1997).In her book published in 1997 “Biomimicry:
Innovation Inspired by Nature”, Janine Benyus formulated a set of questions that
can be used to establish the level of biomimicry our designs (Bob & McLennan.
2004). When face with a problem in the process of designing something we must
ask ourselves “Is there a precedent for this in nature?” if so then the answer
to the following questions must be ‘Yes’;Ÿ Does it run on sunlight? Ÿ Does it
use only the energy it needs? Ÿ Does it fit form to function? Ÿ Does it recycle
everything? Ÿ Does it reward cooperation? Ÿ Does it rely on diversity? Ÿ Does it
utilize local expertise? Ÿ Does it curb excess from within? Ÿ Does it tap the
power of limits? Ÿ Is it Beautiful? McDonough and Braungart believe that
biomimicry as a design approaches presents a solution for a more ecological,
sustainable and regenerative built environment.“From my designer’s perspective,
I ask: Why can’t I design a building like a tree? A building that makes oxygen,
fixes nitrogen, sequesters carbon, distils water, builds soil, accrues solar
energy as fuel, makes complex sugars and food, creates microclimates, changes
colours with the seasons and self-replicates. This is using nature as a model
and a mentor, not as an inconvenience. It’s a delightful prospect…” (McDonough
and Braungart, 1998).According to Baumeister (2014), it is only when all three
levels of biomimicry (Organism, Behaviour and eco-system) have been taken into
account will the design ‘behave like a well-adapted organism’ and ‘create
conditions conducive to life.


3. METHODOLOGY

The type of research used in this study comprises of examination of the latest
researches relating to Biomimicry in architecture. The study investigates the
how and why various designers applied Biomimicry methods into their projects. It
will look at the three levels of Biomimicry and conduct case studies under each
level. Of the five projects that were analysed, one represents the Organism
level, one represents the Behavioural level and three represent the Eco-system
level. The projects are as listed below:Ÿ Organism level: 30 St Mary Axe A.K.A
Gherkin Tower, United Kingdom Ÿ Behavioural level: East gate mall, Zimbabwe.Ÿ
Eco-system Level: Cardboard to caviar project, United Kingdom, Sahara forest
project, Qatar, Jordan and Tunisia and the Eden project, United KingdomOverall,
these five case studies have been carefully chosen and thoroughly analysed in
order to understand the way in which biomimicry is integrated effectively into
the design project. They were selected because they successfully represent the
way in which 21st century architects and designers are taking inspiration from
nature and applying in into their design producing design that are much more
efficient and ecologically sustainable than most design projects today. Close
attention has been paid to the eco system level because it holds the most
potential to produce buildings that are not only highly sustainable but also
regenerative. Doing so will show how biomimicry is and has been applied to
architect and provide an insight on the possible ways to expand and delve deeper
into the design approach.Given the fact that Biomimicry in architecture is still
an emerging discipline, many designers are still trying to understand and find
ways to apply this approach in their design and so there are very few examples
that implemented it at a grand scale. Therefore, these projects have been
mindfully chosen as they represent the current general way designers have
integrated of biomimicry in architecture theoretically and practically to show
the potential impact biomimicry can have as an ecological sustainable design
practice in a wider context.


4. FINDINGS

4.1. ORGANISM LEVEL

The organism level approach may help to understand the negative environmental
impact that human activities have on the worlds and its many of its ecosystems.
For billions of years organisms have withstood and adapted to many changes over
time. Humans therefore, have a wide variety of examples to study and draw
solutions for problems that have already been addressed, particularly in the use
of energy and materials effectively. As Baumeister (2007) points out, “The
research has already been done”. (Alberti et al. 2003)A disadvantage, however of
mimicking an organism is that without mimicking how it interacts and contributes
to the ecosystem at larger context, it has the potential to produce designs that
are below average in terms of the impact it will have on the environment. (Reap
et al. 2005)The case study being conducted under the organism level is the 30 St
Mary Axe.

4.1.1. 30 ST MARY AXE A.K.A GHERKIN TOWER (2003)

This building takes inspiration from the Venus Flower Basket Sponge (see Figure
1 below). This sponge sits in an underwater environment with strong water
currents and its lattice-like exoskeleton and round shape help disperse those
stresses in various directions and its round shape reduce forces due to strong
water currents.

Figure 1. Venus Basket sponge (left) Gherkin tower (right)

The curved sides allow winds to pass easily around the building, rather than
deflecting down to street level to blast pedestrians. Because more air can flow
around the side of a cylinder than the corner of a rectangle, its speed
increases, causing a higher negative air potential at the back of the building.
Architects Norman Foster and Sons used this to drive a natural ventilation
system.Inspired by the hexagonal skin of the Venus flower sponge, the main
structure of the building is aluminium coated steel diagrid structure. Yoram
Eilon, vice president of engineering firm WSP Cantor Seinuk, describes the
Diagrid structure as “a series of triangles that combine gravity and lateral
support into one, making the building to be stiff, efficient and lighter than a
traditional high-rise”. The Diagrid divides the tower height into a series of
modules this is referred to as a vertical cantilever. This freestanding
structure has no columns, which allows for uninterrupted interior office space
with revolving triangular atriums (see Figure 2 below). (Vikram bengani, 2015)

Figure 2. Diagrid structure with core in the centre (left) and Construction of
core and Diagrid structure (right)

Figure 3. Floor plan showing lightwells (left), Sketches showing movement of
natural light and air through lightwells (right)

Figure 4. Section of the building (Left) and typical floor layout (Right)

The building has a 5-degree rotation between each floor plate to incorporate
wedge shaped lightwells. These lightwells allow light and air to reach each
floor of the building. (See Figure 3 above)A double skin façade was selected in
order to maximize sun exposure. The outer skin of the building is composed of
mullions and triangular shaped windows, while the inner wall is made of sliding
glass doors made accessible only to maintenance. In between the two walls is a
space with a row of horizontal shading devices. These double walls also contain
venting flaps to allow hot air to travel up and out of the building (Sahil
Virmani, 2014). The design of this tower presents some advantages that make it
very effective. Firstly, the building has minimal windblast of pedestrians at
street level, due to the cylindrical shape of the tower, which allows wind to
pass smoothly around it. Another advantage of the is the efficacious
implementation of passive cooling , heating, ventilating and lighting techniques
through the use of double skin façade. In addition, the use of rotated floor
slabs produce lightwells, which provide each floor with natural day lighting and
ventilation. (Vikram bengani. 2015)However, this design does pose some
disadvantages and threats. A massive building such as the Gherkin Tower made of
glass gives rise to a few problems that presents a danger to its users, as was
the case when one of the numerous glass panels fell off in 2005 when a window
fell from the 28th floor to the plaza below. Another drawback in the design of
glass skyscrapers is the sun glare from the glass. This creates discomfort for
the pedestrians and drivers below and can result in accidents as the strong
glare may disrupt your vision. Despite this, the gherkin tower does prove more
efficient than most buildings its size, credit can be given to the biomimicry
design methods used by the designers. (Martin Wainwright, 2005).

4.2. BEHAVIOURAL LEVEL

The behavioural level is based on the fact that a vast number of organisms have
learnt to operate within the capacity of specific environmental conditions and
within the limits of energy and material availability, they encounter the same
environmental conditions that humans do and therefore need to solve similar
issues that humans face. These limits as well as pressures that create
ecological niche adaptations in ecosystems mean not only well-adapted organisms
continue to evolve, but all well-adapted organism behaviours and relationship
patterns between organisms or species (Reap et al. 2005).

4.2.1. THE EAST GATE CENTRE, HARARE, ZIMBABWE

Indigenous Zimbabwean masonry and the self-cooling mounds of African termites
inspired the East gate centre design; it stays regulated year round with
dramatically less energy consumption using design methods. Zimbabwe has a
temperate climate because of its altitude with temperatures ranging from 7-27
Degrees Celsius this makes passive heating and cooling a possible alternative to
mechanical methods. This mid-rise building designed by architect Mick Pearce in
collaboration with Arup engineers, has no conventional air-conditioning or
heating. It uses less than 10% of the energy of a conventional building its size
through passive cooling and heating techniques (Michael Pawlyn, 2011).Termites
constantly open and close a series of heating and cooling vents in the mounds
throughout the course of the day; this keeps the building temperature regulated
all day (See Figure 5 below). The East gate building operates in the similar
way; outside air is drawn in through vertical ducts on the first floor and is
either warmed or cooled by the building mass depending on which is hotter the
building concrete or the air. It is then pushed into the building’s floors
through the central spine of the two buildings before exiting via chimneys at
the top. (Abigail Doan.2012) (See Figure. 6 below).

Figure 5. Showing air circulation in a typical termite mound

Figure 6. Air circulation in East gate buildings

There are two buildings are joined together by steel bridges this makes the
building open to the local breezes. The bridges are suspended on cables from
steel lattice beams, these bridges span over the atrium below. On top of the
bridges lies a glass roof. Both buildings have protruding stone elements to
protect the windows from the surface area of the building façade to improve heat
loss by night and minimize heat gain by day. Below is a study conducted in 1998
of the way the East gate building successfully regulates the temperatures of the
internal area of the building, the outside air and of the concrete slab (Figure
7) (Michael Pawlyn, 2011).

Figure 7. Thermal regulation of the concrete slab. In East gate mall

After a detailed simulation, the engineering company (Arup engineers) gave
Pearce a set of rules to follow in his design:Ÿ The external walls on the North
façade must not have any direct sunlight falling on them.Ÿ The window to wall
ratio are must not exceed 25%.Ÿ Windows must be light filter, controlling glare,
noise and security.Ÿ Because of noise pollution and unpredictable wind pressures
and temperatures, windows must be sealed with ventilation relying solely on the
duct system. (Shiva Shankar. 2016)

4.3. ECO-SYSTEM LEVEL

Benyus (1997) and Vincent (2007) describe the mimicking of ecosystems as an
integral part of biomimicry. An advantage of mimicking at this level of
biomimicry is that it can be used in conjunction with other levels of biomimicry
(organism and behaviour). The most important advantage of such an approach to
biomimetic design however may be the potential positive effects on overall
environmental performance.

4.3.1. THE CARDBOARD TO CAVIAR PROJECT IN WAKEFIELD UK

The cardboard to Caviar project (also known as the “ABLE project”) is an example
of a closed loop system in which no waste is produced and a much greater
productivity is yielded. Graham Wiles initiated this project, at every stage of
the project; he applied the biomimetic principle of using waste as a resource to
feed another process. The project begins with collecting empty cardboard boxes
from restaurants and using them as horse bedding in the stables. The soiled
cardboard is then collected and used to establish a wormery composting system.
With the abundance of bait, Wiles decided to establish a small-scale Siberian
sturgeon fishery. The sturgeon then produces caviar, which is sold back to the
restaurants. This demonstrating the possibility to turn what would be considered
a waste material into a high value product while also generating numerous
social, economic and environmental benefits (Michael Pawlyn, 2011).

Figure 8. Cardboard to Caviar project

4.3.2. SAHARA FOREST PROJECT QATAR, TUNISIA AND JORDAN

A greenhouse project that took inspiration from the Namibian fog-basking beetle,
which has found its own way to evolve its own fresh water in a desert and to
regulate its body temperature by accumulating heat by day and collecting the
water droplets formed on its wings by the fog. The greenhouse design emulates
this beetle to combat climate change in an arid climate. (Michael Pawlyn 2011).

Figure 9. Sahara Forest project Tunisia

The Exploration Architecture design team, strived to design an eco-system that
was not only sustainable but also regenerative. Three core components drove the
design of the greenhouse; the major one being a creating a saltwater cooled
greenhouse, concentrated solar power (CSP) and technologies for desert
vegetation. (An Oasis of Green Building. n.d)Saltwater cooled greenhouses
present suitable conditions for year round cultivation. To create a saltwater
cooled greenhouse Charlie Paton created system to provide evaporative cooling
and humidification in the greenhouse structure using saltwater. The evaporated
air condenses to fresh water allowing the greenhouse to remain heated at night.
This system produces more water than the interior plants need so the excess is
spewed out for the surrounding plants to grow.The salt extracted from the
evaporation process are crystallised at different stages to extract various
elements. The first things to crystallise out the evaporated saltwater is
calcium carbonate followed by sodium chlorite; these elements can both be
compressed into building blocks. Many other elements present in seawater are
reused in other ways to minimize the waste (Michael Pawlyn 2011).Concentrated
solar power involves concentrating the heat from the sun with solar tracking
mirrors to create steam that drives conventional turbines; this produces zero
carbon electricity, which is twice as effective as photovoltaics (Biomimicry and
the Sahara Forest Project. n.d).This project offers a solution to restoring
forests and creating a solution for vegetation of deserts as a source of food,
water and energy in an otherwise resource –constrained area of the world.“…the
Sahara Forest project is a model for how we can create zero carbon food,
abundant renewable energy in some of the most water stressed parts of the of the
planet as well as reversing desertification in certain areas” (Michael Pawlyn
2011).

4.3.3. THE EDEN PROJECT (2001) IN CORNWALL, ENGLAND

Grimshaw architects designed this project, they are a company in which Michael
Pawlyn practiced and was a core part of the architectural team that designed the
Eden project in the year 2000. Grimshaw Architects looked to nature to build an
effective spherical shape. It has two huge artificial enclosures; each enclosure
emulates a natural biome. Soap bubbles inspired the forms of the biomes and
cellular structures inspired the hexagonal frames. A biome is a natural
occurring community of flora occupying a major habitat. The artificial biomes in
the Eden project feature a humid tropic rainforest and Mediterranean biome.
(Michael Pawlyn, 2011)

Figure 10. Eden Project

The Humid Tropics Biome recreates the natural environment of a tropical
rainforest. The warm, humid enclosure is home to hundreds of trees and other
plants from rainforests in South America, Africa, Asia and Australia such as
fruiting banana plants, coffee, rubber and giant bamboo; it is kept at a
tropical temperature and moisture level. The dome is 240 metres long, 55 metres
high and measures 110 metres across at its widest point. (Michael Pawlyn,
2015)The Mediterranean biome has varied plant life from temperate rainforests in
Southern Africa, the Mediterranean and California. The Mediterranean biome
covers (1.6 acres) and measures 35 metres high, 65 metres wide, and 135 metres
long and houses familiar warm temperate and arid plants such as olives and grape
vines and various sculptures (Michael Pawlyn, 2015).

Figure 11. The Eden project

Figure 12. ETFE pillows

Figure 13. Cross section of Eden project

Figure 14. Schematic site section

Each of the biomes consists of several geodesic domes joined together. These
domes are made of hexagonal pillows, made from three layers of a material called
Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) welded together along the sides and on top
of one another. These layers have air pumped into them this increases the level
of insulation without affecting the amount of sunlight shining through the
material. The amount of air in between the layers is adjustable, during the
winter, the pillows are pumped with more air to increase the amount of
insulation and they are partially deflated during the summer to allow more
cooling in the space. The pillows are built to detach easily from the steel
frame, so they can be replaced should a more efficient material come along. One
advantage of the geodesic dome shape is that it adapts easily to most ground
surfaces. (Murray-White, 2010)The use of inflated Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene
(ETFE), a material that is both light and strong, (1% of the weight of double
glazing) provides other benefits such as a lighter steel frame, letting in more
sunlight and adding solar gain also and it costs 1/3 less than the traditional
glass solution. The final superstructure weighs less than the air it contains.
(Michael Pawlyn, 2015.


5. DISCUSSIONS

This study looked at how biomimicry fits into sustainable design practices in
order to provide efficient ecological designs with moderate use of materials and
energy at a macro scale. It also looked at how biomimicry is currently applied
in theory and in practice specifically in the field of architecture. It
discusses the two different approaches to biomimicry in architecture and
presents some advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Biomimicry as an
architectural design method presents a suitable solution to the current
sustainability predicament without affecting the environment negatively. The
five case studies conducted in this research, reveal that biomimicry aids in
resource efficiency. It has great potential to pave the way in the production of
ecological sustainable designs, zero waste systems and an overall regenerative
built environment thereby not only positively affecting human life as a whole
but also working with nature instead of against it.An effective biomimetic
approach to architectural design requires the development of design methods that
take into consideration the modelling of behaviour, the constraints of materials
and the influence of environmental factors. This requires an in-depth
understanding of form, material and structure not separately but rather as
having complex interrelations.Some critics argue that biomimicry is an
indefinite and broad way to approach sustainability, stating that, to apply it
effectively requires an extensive study with the help of multiple disciplines.
While others criticise that the principle of biomimicry separates man from
nature without acknowledging his eminent role in the eco system. The concept of
biomimicry is still in the developing phase and is not largely applied as a
design method. To execute it successfully at a grand scale requires the
co-operation of multiple disciplines such as biologists, ecologists and
designers who can establish the relationships between the organism and systems
in nature and the needs of humans in order for them to make ethical decisions
for a more sustainable built environment.


6. CONCLUSIONS

The built environment accounts for a majority of the world’s global
environmental and social problems with vast proportions of waste, material,
energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (Mazria, 2003, Doughty and Hammond,
2004). There is a rapidly growing demand for an effective ecological sustainable
design approach without compromising the needs of the society. Although there
are currently numerous approaches to sustainable design in architecture, very
few have proven effective at a macro scale. Biomimicry offers a relatively new
solution to our issues of sustainability. It demands the integration of multiple
disciplines working together to produce buildings and systems that are not only
more beneficial to its users but also give back to nature. Once implemented
well, imitating could prove advantageous in the field of architecture and human
life as a whole. The greatest limitation of this study is that although many
architects are interested in taking inspiration from nature, a widespread
application of biomimicry as a design method remains largely unrealised because
of this there are a very small number of existing projects that have truly
integrated biomimicry at a grand scale in theory and in practice. This is
because biomimicry as a sustainability approach is very much still an emerging
discipline in the development phase. Nevertheless, there is an obvious positive
attitude towards biomimicry and this shows a potential for the increased
integration of this discipline in architectural design. As there is a growing
need for buildings that work with nature to create a regenerative built
environment, architects can no longer ignore the relevance of bio-inspired
theories and approaches to achieve a more sustainable future. By using the
framework in this paper, a clearer distinction is seen between the different
levels of biomimicry and that they all present different potentials.


REFERENCES


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]  Abigail Doan. 2012. Biomimetic architecture: Green Building in Zimbabwe
Modelled after Termite Mounds. Retrieved from:
https://inhabitat.com/building-modelled-on-termites-eastgate-centre-in-zimbabwe/.[2]  Alberti,
M., Marzluff, J. M., Shulenberger, E., Bradley, G., Ryan, C., & Zumbrunnen, C.
(2003). Integrating Humans into Ecology. Bioscience, 53, 1169-1179.[3]  An Oasis
of Green Building. Retrieved from
https://www.saharaforestproject.com/qatar/.[4]  Baumeister, D. (2007). Evolution
of the Life's Principles Butterfly Diagram. In M. P. Zari, Biomimetic Approaches
to Architectural Design for Increased Sustainability. [Personal
Communication].[5]  Baumeister, D. (2014). Biomimicry Resource Handbook - A
seedbank of best practice.[6]  Benyus J.M. (1997). Biomimicry Innovation
inspired by nature. New York. Marrow.[7]  Berkebile, B McLennan, J. (2004). The
Living Building; Biomimicry in Architecture, and Integrating Technology with
Nature.[8]  Biomimicry Inspired by Nature Guild (2007). Innovation Work Book,
Biomimicry Guild.[9]  Biomimicry and the Sahara Forest Project. (n.d). Retrieved
from https://www.saharaforestproject.com/biomimicry/qatar.[10]  Eastgate. (n.d).
Retrieved from: http://www.mickpearce.com/Eastgate.html.[11]  Gamage, A. (2015).
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in
Architecture.[12]  Helms, M., Swaroop, S. V., & Goel, A. K. (2009). Biologically
inspired design: process and products. Elsevier, 606-622.[13]  Knippers, J.
(2009). Building & Construction as a Potential Field for the Application of
Modern Biomimetic Principles. International Biona Symposium. Stuttgart:
[Personal communication].[14]  Martin wainwright, 2005. Gherkin skyscraper sheds
a window from 28th storey.[15]  Gherkin skyscraper sheds a window from 28th
storey. Retrieved from:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2005/apr/26/urbandesign.arts.[16]  McDonough,
W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to Cradle-Remaking the Way We Make Things.
New York: North Point Press.[17]  Green Architect, Designer of the Eden Project:
A Case Study. (2010). Retrieve from
http://www.sustainablebuild.co.uk/designer-eden-project-case-study.html.[18]  Pawlyn.
M. (2011). Biomimicry in Architecture. London. UK: RIBA Publishing.[19]  Pawlyn.
M. (2015). Using nature's genius in architecture. Retrieved from:
https://www.ted.com/playlists/28/sustainability_by_design.[20]  Sahara Desert
Project to grow 10 hectares of food in Tunisian desert (n.d). Retrieved from
https://inhabitat.com/sahara-desert-project-to-grow-10-hectares-of-food-in-tunisian-desert/.[21]  Salma
Ashraf El Ahmar, “Biomimicry as a Tool for Sustainable Architectural Design:
Towards Morphogenetic Architecture” (master’s thesis, Alexandria University,
2011), 22.[22]  Sahil Virmani. (2014). Biomimicry. Retrieved from:
https://issuu.com/sahilvirmani07/docs/bio.[23]  Vikram bengani. (2015). the
gherkin: Case study .Retrieved from:
https://www.slideshare.net/VikramBengani/the-gherkin-case-study.[24]  What is
biomimicry? (n.d). Retrieved from https://biomimicry.org/.[25]  Zari, M. P.
(2007). An ecosystem based biomimetic theory for a regenerative built
environment. Sustainable Building Conference. Lisbon: [Personal communication].

Home  |  About Us  |  Terms and Conditions  |  Privacy
Policy  |  Feedback  |  Sitemap  |  Contact Us
Copyright © 2018 Scientific & Academic Publishing Co. All rights reserved.