Engineering the Future

In 2012, the world’s population exceeded seven billion and this number is only set to grow. Never before in humanity’s collective history have we seen such rapid population growth occur in such a brief period of time. In fact, the population increased by 5.5 billion alone since the industrial revolution. Of this seven billion, over half dwell in cities and, by 2050, it is estimated that 70 per cent of the world’s population will call urban centres home.

Having so many people living in one place at the same time creates social, economic and environmental issues. And while there are cities such as Singapore, Tokyo and Sydney that are examples of successful urban planning, they are, unfortunately, the exception rather than the norm. “People have always grouped together in settlements throughout the history of civilisation,” states Dr Tan Loke Mun, the former President of the Malaysian Institute of Architects. “But the growth of the megacity, a metropolis with over 10 million inhabitants, is a phenomenon of the last 100 years, and problems such as security, transport, waste management and pollution arise from such dense concentrations of humanity.”

“A classic example of the problem of megacities is the city of Shanghai, which has a population of over 14 million,” says Indra Ramanathan, a designer at IPartnership Sdn Bhd. “During the summer, when temperatures are high, the city stinks because of the density of humanity and the quantity of waste produced. This is one of the problems that arises when a city is not looked after.” In a similar vein, New York City, one of the world’s most densely populated urban centres, with a population of over 8.5 million living in a space of just 1.2 sq km, was listed as ‘America’s Dirtiest City’ in 2012.

Trouble on the Home Front
While Malaysia boasts a fairly positive environmental track record, increasing levels of urbanisation and industrialisation, brought about by the nation’s transition from a newly industrialised country to an economically developed country, are placing more pressure on natural resources and the environment.  From 2009 to 2013, Malaysia’s water usage rose from 8,551 to 9,854 million litres per day, with electricity generation rising from 107,116 to 132,070 million kilowatt-hours (source: Department of Statistics Malaysia).

Such demand on natural resources and the rapid urbanisation is made worse by weak enforcement and a lack of any formal “green standard”.  “Even if the government does encourage developers to go green with tax incentives, there aren’t any laws at present to make it mandatory,” says Dr Lim Teng Ngiom, an architect at Ngiom Partnership.

The Public Works Department and the Construction Industry Development Board of Malaysia are among several bodies that set their own standards, resulting in a fragmented situation. Having so many weakly enforced green standards can be damaging, as it results in developers cherry-picking the easiest green certification to obtain for the tax incentive. “The intention is no longer in the right place,” argues Indra. “Harsh as it may sound, certain laws and policies need to be almost forced down people’s throats to maintain a minimum standard. In Australia, you wouldn’t even think about constructing a building without implementing a green standard to it.”

Sowing the Green Seeds

To resolve these mounting issues, a group of Malaysian eco-warriors from the Institute of Architects and Engineers conceived in 2009 the Green Building Index (GBI), the nation’s first green rating system that provides a clear definition on what it means to be green and the requirements on creating a green-certified building. Today, the GBI is the nation’s industry-recognised green rating tool and is one of the fastest growing standards in the world.

“Prior to this, Malaysians didn’t know what green meant; they thought that planting a few trees around a building was enough to make it ‘green’,” says Dr Tan. “The GBI is essentially a step-by-step recipe that provides the guidelines on how to design a building that uses less energy, spits out less poison and waste, and can regenerate itself by recycling inputs. As buildings last a long time and are costly to renovate and tear down, it’s worth doing it right the first time round.

Under this scheme, developments that obtain a GBI certification are offered tax and stamp duty exemptions as an incentive to adopt more environment-friendly designs. Buildings are ranked on the GBI Rating System under six key criteria: energy efficiency, indoor environment quality, sustainable site planning and management, materials and resource usage, water efficiency and innovation in design.

Today, there are numerous building projects across Malaysia that have taken the initiative to reduce their carbon footprint, either independently or under the GBI system. Among these developments are SP Setia’s headquarters in Shah Alam, The Troika and the IB Tower in Kuala Lumpur, and even Dr Tan’s own home.

These sites make use of numerous designs and technologies, both new and old, to achieve the goal. “The first and cheapest thing you can do is to insulate the roof of a building so that it stays cool, especially in the afternoon,” states Dr Tan. “However, insulation tools only started seeing use in the last three years. Prior to this, nobody cared about insulation because it was invisible to the naked eye.”

Another growing trend has been increasing use of natural ventilation in buildings by allowing interiors to merge seamlessly with the green spaces within the site. “More developments are looking to have a closer connection with the natural environment and do their best to avoid removing existing vegetation,” observes Dr Lim. “These steps help cool the site and reduce the need for air conditioning.”

Other methods of improving energy efficiency include using ‘light shelves’, which allow more natural light to flow into an interior space, coupled with the use of special glass that minimises solar heat gain. “The glass used in my office is, unfortunately, of poor quality and, as the building faces the afternoon sun, it can become a toaster in there at times,” grumbles Indra. “If we were to use Low-Emissivity Glass (Low-E Glass), which cost more, it would still let in the same amount of light but without heating up the building.”

Not only do these green practices reduce a building’s environmental impact, they also make sound economic sense for both the corporate leader and the home owner. According to World Green Building Council Chairman, Tony Arnel: “Green building practices can reduce a building’s operating costs by as much as nine per cent, increase building value by 7.5 per cent and realise a 6.6 per cent increase in return on investment.”

A Greener Future?

While weak policy enforcement and ‘green washing’ – a term coined by Dr Tan for those putting up a façade of looking green – continue to persist, the outlook remains positive. Today, green architecture and technologies are more affordable and readily available to the public, developers are working to limit the damaging impact of their projects, and public awareness continues to grow.

“When we first started out, it was expensive to buy double-glazed windows and energy-saving light bulbs. I could not even afford it for my home,” recalls Dr Tan, referring to his GBI Platinum-certified house. “All that has changed. Most custom bungalows now come with double-glazed windows, which are 15 per cent more expensive than normal windows compared to being twice the price a few years ago. The price of energy-saving bulbs is now 1/10th of prices five years ago.”

The consensus among the experts is that green architects need to be more involved in national policy-making by working with economists and politicians in power. “The nation is on the right track, but architects can only mitigate the issues of massive population growth and resource depletion,” says Dr Lim. “To truly control these problems, it is up to politicians and industry leaders to make a difference.”