I am freaking out worrying that skyscrapers are harmful to the environment. (homes)

[City_boi]

Please help me with this and please don’t x out of this with leaving a short reply! I am freaking out worrying that skyscrapers are harmful to the environment. I know I have made threads about this in other forum sections but I had so many questions and different threads so I just wanted to put everything down in one spot.

Ok, now I know density is more sustainable than urban sprawl for obvious reasons, but it seems like the most sustainable city-type would be a dense city filled with mid-rises. Now, while mid-rise cities are great, let’s face it, skyscrapers are awesome and awe-inspiring. Mid-rises can’t compete IMO.

My fear that the skyscraper is unsustainable has stemmed from reading stuff about all the energy it takes to build them and operate their elevators, all the embodied energy in structural stuff like steel and concrete, etc. So, to make this as simple and organized as possible, I thought I would make a list of things I have heard that claim a skyscraper is unsustainable and then give my opinion on each list item. Now, I love skyscrapers and but I feel that it would bother me if they were not earth-friendly, so please help me out with this.

Here are some things I have read that claim certain aspects of a skyscraper aren’t environmentally friendly:
(1.) Ken Yeang, a highly educated “eco-architect” who has written many books says that skyscrapers are one of the most unecological building-types there is and that they can never be fully green in totality. Therefore, we must negate their negative effect as much as possible.
(2.) A lot of energy has to be used to: get all that steel way up to the top of the building, operate the elevators, keep the hallways and lobby lit and heated/cooled, etc.
(3.) A lot of energy is used to create the concrete and steel that is used in building skyscrapers.
(4.) Ken Yeang is for biodiversity and thinks that the human-made environment should be benign and integrated into nature. He claims that failure to integrate our man-made systems into nature’s systems would mean that our man-made systems will remain artificial (as opposed to organic) items and potential polluters.

Now here is what I am thinking/wondering about each of these points:
(1.) Can ANY building other than a mud hut actually be 100% green?
(2.) Can’t we use greener energy to operate the machines that lift all the steel? Can’t a building create its own energy to operate elevators, lights, HVACs?
(3.) I read that there are greener alternatives to concrete and steel. The steel alternative is being used in a building in Dubai and supposedly has way less embodied energy. Plus, aren’t they using recycled steel from the Twin Towers to build the new WTC?
(4.) I totally understand his point about being organic and integrated into nature because, let’s face it, all other animals don’t produce inorganic waste. But, what is wrong with a skyscraper that creates all of it’s own energy, uses natural ventilation, and uses rainwater for toilets, etc? Sure it won’t be “organic” or “benign,” but it won’t be polluting and it will be using all of the available resources.

Now, please give your honest opinion on all of this. I really want and need your help. Please don’t be biased towards or against cities or skyscrapers. Just state what you believe to be true.

Thank you so much for staying ‘til the end. I greatly appreciate your time!

[Christian Missouri boy]

This is what I thought about and what makes sense to me. I dont think a skyscraper is any worse on the environment then anything else. You could build for example 1 skyscraper using lets say 10,000 tons of steel, or you could build 2 Mid-rises, also using 10,000 tons of steel, but taking up 2x the earths space, cutting down 2x the amount of trees, forcing 2x the amount of animals out of their homes, and still using your machines to move the steel the same amount. It makes sense to me that 2 mid-rises would take just as much energy as a skyscraper. Cities that build tall rather then sprawl kill half the amount of trees, not to mention the amneties that would be needed for a mid-rised city. More police staions to control response time, more gas stations for convenience, more Best Buys, Wal-Marts, Costco's to provide a close neighborhood shopping experience, and also more roads which I would imagine would in itself create a whole mess of pollution with taring the roads and the need to drive accross a sprawling city to get to a store that isnt near you. A city that is built tall also creates a better atmosphere for riding bikes, walking and motor scooters, rather then a mid-rised city that you have to drive all over cause its far too inconvienent to get on the scooter and go. Now this might really be pushing it, but it just seems logical that a mid-rised city, with all the roads and more buildings would also bring alot more unecasary heat, whether this be true, or even a bad thing, I dont know. And lastly, if I was a truck driver, I think I would rather a good built up city that was lets say 60 sq miles rather then a mid-rised city that took up 120 sq miles, once again less driving and I'm sure the drop off's/pick ups would be closer to each other, which would save a whole bunch of energy rather then having to drive to say, 3 different locations all of which are completely on opposite sides of a sprawled out city. It seems to make sense to me that way, I guess I'll leave it at that and let you decide if it makes sense to you that way too .

[Robhu]

I think I'll just move to Wyoming and look at short trees and brush and not worry about it.

[atlantagreg30127]

Originally Posted by City_boi

Please help me with this and please don’t x out of this with leaving a short reply! I am freaking out worrying that skyscrapers are harmful to the environment. I know I have made threads about this in other forum sections but I had so many questions and different threads so I just wanted to put everything down in one spot.

1) If the existence of skyscrapers is "freaking you out", there is only one solution - get rid of all the humans. People colonize. They build. With the exceptions of a few cultures, they usually build "up", too. As long as there are humans on the planet (there there are in continually growing numbers), there will be more and more skycrapers. Since it is unlikely you will make all humans on earth disappear, this isn't a problem you can control. I would suggest "freaking out" about things you might be able to control - such as contributing to charities that lack funding, etc.

2) Cross posting isn't allowed on these boards. Since per your quote above you admit to have posted this topic in varying areas already, we need to consider it a "case closed" on this one, as cross posting on the same topic in multiple rooms/areas is not allowed per our terms of service.