Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products Emily Royall Instructor Werner Lang csd Center for Sustainable Development UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture 2 UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products Emily Royall main picture of presentation Fig. 01 Artwork by Dale Chihuly, photographed by Thomas Hawk Introduction generating residual, inactive waste. Where biological processes are Biomimetics or Biomimicry is a continuously evolving to manipulate fashionable term whose ultimate hydrogen, carbon and oxygen to definition continues to evade us. The accomplish their objectives, humans purpose of this paper is to outline have cheaply contracted the unsus- a concrete theoretical and practical tainable power of oil. Biomimetics definition for Biomimicry and high- seeks to remedy such error design- light its architectural applications. ing efficient systems and products. In effort to clarify the Biomimetics Biomimicry is a spiraling, continuous process and illuminate its relation- process, taking nature as inspira- ship to sustainability, the Biomimicry tion to generate “organs” (individual “helix” will be introduced as a con- products) or “organisms” (systems tinuous model illustrating two integral and processes) for the purpose of products of the Biomimicry process: integration into a sustainable sys- organs and organisms. The “organs” tem. For example, Biomimicry could and “organisms” of Biomimicry will produce advanced photovoltaics (the be explored in reference to photovol- organ) inspired by photosynthesis, or taics and urban planning, citing dye a “smart house” system (the organ- sensitized solar cells and the sus- ism) modeled after bee algorithms, tainable city, Hammarby Sjöstad, as for the purpose of integration into case studies. a sustainable energy system. The model below illustrates this concept What is Biomimicry? using a double helix. Nature has already solved many of the mechanical and structural problems humans face today without 3 UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture lem solving. The typical conception of Biomimicry is often oversimplified Y into a linear process. First one asks the initial question, “How does nature R o solve my problem?” then observes r g C a the solution in nature, creating a de- I n sign that mimics the observation. For i s this misconception, Biomimicry has M m been severely criticized. I suggest I that what separates Biomimicry from standard problem solving is its con- n s u M s t a tinuous, spiral-like nature, providing i n a b a i l i t y no definitive solution, only products O g r and systems which can adapt to a I o changing environment. Additionally, Biomimetics is typically mistaken for B biotechnology. Biomimetics is not biotechnology because it does not implement “bio-assisted” processes Figure 02: The Biomimicry Helix Model by (such as using green algae to treat Emily Royall waste water). Finally, Biomimicry ity, integrates the organs and organ- is also often confused with art and The helix model of Biomimicry isms produced by Biomimcry into a aesthetics. Artists reproduce existing reflects a number of nuances. Pri- continuously evolving system. This patterns in nature for an aesthetic marily, the model is a spiral. This integral relationship with sustainabil- effect. This is not Biomimicry as the represents the idea of Biomimicry ity is also relatable by a basic biologi- organ created is not integrated with as a continuously evolving process, cal rule: nature seeks to minimize an organism in a sustainable system. infinitely seeking a closer fit to the the amount of energy consumed in a The organism product of Biomimicry ever-changing environment. The spi- given period of time (E/T). is the subject of the next section. ral reflects the continuous feed back and repeated fine tuning required to To understand the broad applicability The Organism adapt “organs” and “organisms” to of Biomimicry, it is helpful to consider the environment. Notably, the spiral nature as a mentor, measure and The process of Biomimicry yields motif is an important structural build- model. “organisms” in the sense that nature ing block in nature and is encoded can inspire the design of efficient into ourselves and environment. As Mentor: We can view nature not systems. As mentioned earlier, bio- Secondly, “organs” and “organisms” as a possession, but as a teacher. logical systems (and efficient man- make up the two strands of the helix, made systems) seek to minimize the reflecting their entwined equality. As Measure: We can use nature as amount of energy consumed over Organs include singular products an ecological standard to measure time. Because this basic concept is such as photovoltaic cells or fiber the fitness of our own designs. inherent to all sustainable systems, optics, and organisms are systems Biomimicry on this level can have such as smart grids or cities. Bio- As Model: Biomimicry studies na- applications for many fields including mimicry is equally capable of yielding ture’s models and emulates these government and business mod- both kinds of items. Finally, note the forms or processes. els. Business models can fashion branches of the helix connecting the themselves after natural processes organ and organism strand. These There are however, a few problems which are “waste-free, cyclical, and are “sustainability” branches, em- with Biomimicry. It is difficult to seg- very efficient, running on sunlight, phasizing the mutual dependence of regate Biomimicry from basic prob- use only what it needs, and focus- organs and organisms. Sustainabil- 4 Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products ing on resource productivity.” The Density:Dense metropolitan areas is expended when individuals travel context of this paper will deal with a show lower rates of vehicle own- shorter distances for the services more architectural application to the ership and usage. A nationwide they need. The centralized infrastruc- biomimetic production of systems; analysis of vehicle miles traveled in ture of an urban area contributes to urban planning. the U.S. revealed that the top ten the reduction of carbon emissions largest metropolitan areas produce and convenience of city-dwellers. In relating biology to urban plan- 23.5% of the total vehicle miles trav- Many biological systems such as ning we can reflect on the principles eled (VMT), while housing 26.3% of plant or animal cells operate on the illustrated by Richard Hopper in his the national population, reinforcing same principle, often minimizing 1970s article published in the Ameri- the notion that metropolitan resi- the distance of resources in effort to can Planning Association magazine. dents drive less than the average reduce E/T. Hopper suggests that all man made American. Additionally, although total and natural systems have inherent driving is concentrated in metropoli- In essence, metropolitan cities are carrying capacity that can be tan areas, the greatest driving per sustainable for much of the same person occurs in low density South- reasons that biological systems are 1. used as a limit for growth western and Southeastern regions. sustainable. Seeking to minimize en- The spread of urban sprawl notably ergy consumption over time, natural 2. ignored and exceeded with the conse- quence of degrading the system requires more energy usage per systems appear to use analogous capita and does not minimize E/T. mechanisms that humans have 3. expanded through new technologies and Austin, Texas is no exception. An created, (or have naturally evolved) methods of design or planning Austin resident will drive an average to solve similar efficiency problems. of 31.1 miles per day. The percent- Such is a credit to the concept of Essentially Hopper makes an argu- age of commuters walking to work Biomimicry which evidently, is not ment that is appropriate to Biomimic- is only 2.2%, and the percentage of entirely foreign. Naturally and histori- ry. In developing a sustainable urban commuters using Transit is a dismal cally, humans have built cities limited blueprint, one must include basic bio- 2.8%. Ironically, Austin ranks above by the land, exhibiting Hopper’s logical rules in mind. Hopper states average when measuring the extent principles of energy ceilings as well that there is a limit to the growth of of urban sprawl compared to other the biological principles of sustain- a system before it becomes unsus- major metropolitan areas. ability. Cities built before the indus- tainable (or exceeds energy over trial age of the 19th century were far time), and if this energy ceiling is Specialization:This is an area vital to more modest in their energy de- ignored the system may be degraded city life. Diversity of a city including mands. They were built into the land, over time. Additionally, the potential the specialization of retail enterprises integrating nature and industry as a energy ceiling of a system can be ex- and civic centers is fundamental working rural and urban landscape. panded through innovative technol- for the incubation of new ideas and Ancient European cities had com- ogy. These basic principles illustrate enterprises so prized in major metro- mon business areas, central squares the natural relationship between politan areas. The diversity of a city and localized infrastructure reducing cities and nature and providing some is made up of a plethora of special- the need to travel long distances for insight into