As an architect you design for the present, with an awareness of the past, for a future which is essentially unknown. The green agenda is probably the most important agenda and issue of the day. And I'd like to share some experience over the last 40 years -- we celebrate our fortieth anniversary this year -- and to explore and to touch on some observations about the nature of sustainability. How far you can anticipate, what follows from it, what are the threats, what are the possibilities, the challenges, the opportunities? I think that -- I've said in the past, many, many years ago, before anybody even invented the concept of a green agenda, that it wasn't about fashion -- it was about survival.
身為建築師,你爲現在而設計, 帶著對過去的驚覺, 邁向基本上無從得知的未來。 「綠色議題」也許是現今最重要的議題 及問題 。 我想跟大家分享一些經驗, 過去四十年來--今年是我們的四十週年慶-- 探索和觸及一些關於 永續本質的觀察。 你可以預期多少、後續是什麼, 有哪些威脅,有哪些可能性個、 挑戰和機會? 許多年前我曾說過, 在有人發明這「綠色議題」的觀念以前, 建築跟流行無關,而是關於生存。
But what I never said, and what I'm really going to make the point is, that really, green is cool. I mean, all the projects which have, in some way, been inspired by that agenda are about a celebratory lifestyle, in a way celebrating the places and the spaces which determine the quality of life. I rarely actually quote anything, so I'm going to try and find a piece of paper if I can, [in] which somebody, at the end of last year, ventured the thought about what for that individual, as a kind of important observer, analyst, writer -- a guy called Thomas Friedman, who wrote in the Herald Tribune, about 2006. He said, "I think the most important thing to happen in 2006 was that living and thinking green hit Main Street. We reached a tipping point this year where living, acting, designing, investing and manufacturing green came to be understood by a critical mass of citizens, entrepreneurs and officials as the most patriotic, capitalistic, geo-political and competitive thing they could do. Hence my motto: green is the new red, white and blue."
但我從未說過,而且真正想說的重點是, 環保(綠色)真的很酷。 所有受到那個概念啟發的作品就某種程度來說, 都與歡慶的生活風格有關。 慶祝決定生活品質的地方 和空間。 我很少引述別人的話, 如果可以,我想找出一張紙, 去年底有人大膽提出一個想法, 那個重要的趨勢觀察者、 分析家、作家,一個名叫湯姆士佛里曼的人, 2006年左右他在《國際先鋒論壇報》上寫了一篇文章。 他說: 「我想2006年發生的最重要的事, 就是綠色生活及綠色思想席捲了商業街。 今年我們達到了一個引爆點, 當中綠色的生活設計、投資及生產, 使眾多民眾、企業家和官員 都認識到 這是他們做到的最愛國、最資本主義、最地理政治學 及最競爭性的事。 所以,我的座右銘是:綠色(環保)是新的紅白藍」
And I asked myself, in a way, looking back, "When did that kind of awareness of the planet and its fragility first appear?" And I think it was July 20, 1969, when, for the first time, man could look back at planet Earth. And, in a way, it was Buckminster Fuller who coined that phrase. And before the kind of collapse of the communist system, I was privileged to meet a lot of cosmonauts in Space City and other places in Russia. And interestingly, as I think back, they were the first true environmentalists. They were filled with a kind of pioneering passion, fired about the problems of the Aral Sea. And at that period it was -- in a way, a number of things were happening. Buckminster Fuller was the kind of green guru -- again, a word that had not been coined. He was a design scientist, if you like, a poet, but he foresaw all the things that are happening now. It's another subject. It's another conversation. You can go back to his writings: it's quite extraordinary. It was at that time, with an awareness fired by Bucky's prophecies, his concerns as a citizen, as a kind of citizen of the planet, that influenced my thinking and what we were doing at that time.
回顧過往我問我自己: 「關注地球及她的脆弱性是何時開始的呢?」 我想是從1969年7月20日, 當人類首次可以觀望地球的那天開始浮現的 。 就某程度來說,是巴克明斯特·福勒創造了那個詞的。 在共產體制瓦解之前, 我有榮幸跟許多 前蘇聯的太空人在蘇聯的太空城等地方見面 。 我回顧後發現有趣的是, 他們是第一批真正的環保主義者。 他們充滿一種開墾者的熱情, 為鹹海的問題而激動。 當時-- 發生了幾件事情。 巴克明斯特·福勒是那一種環保上師 -- 這也是當時尚未被創造的詞。 他是一個設計科學家,你也可以說他是一個詩人, 可是他預期了所有現在正在發生的事情。 這是另一個主題、另一段談話, 你可以追溯他的寫作,真的很非凡, 就是在那時 巴克的預言,激起了關注 他那身為公民,身為地球公民的擔心 影響了我的思想及當時正在做的事。
And it's a number of projects. I select this one because it was 1973, and it was a master plan for one of the Canary Islands. And this probably coincided with the time when you had the planet Earth's sourcebook, and you had the hippie movement. And there are some of those qualities in this drawing, which seeks to sum up the recommendations. And all the components are there which are now in common parlance, in our vocabulary, you know, 30-odd years later: wind energy, recycling, biomass, solar cells. And in parallel at that time, there was a very kind of exclusive design club. People who were really design conscious were inspired by the work of Dieter Rams, and the objects that he would create for the company called Braun. This is going back the mid-'50s, '60s. And despite Bucky's prophecies that everything would be miniaturized and technology would make an incredible style -- access to comfort, to amenities -- it was very, very difficult to imagine that everything that we see in this image, would be very, very stylishly packaged. And that, and more besides, would be in the palm of your hand.
有幾個作品, 我選這個因為它建於1973年,這是爲 康那利群島之一所畫的整體設計。 或許是恰巧遇上 地球資源叢書的出版, 及嘻皮運動, 這設計圖上有一些那樣的特性, 嘗試總合那些優點。 那些構成要素現在 成了共用的語法, 在30多年之後出現在我們的詞彙裡。 風力發電、回收、生物能源、太陽能電池-- 同時,在當時 有一種獨特的設計俱樂部。 那些真的有設計意識的人, 都深受迪特‧拉姆斯的作品, 與及那些他為百靈公司 所創造的物品啟發。 這是回到50年代中期 60年代的事了。 不顧巴克 所有的東西都小型化, 和科技會創造一個不可思議的風格的預言-- 貼近舒適度及優雅-- 很難想像 我們在這圖上所看到的一切, 將會被包裝得很時髦。 此外,還能放到你掌心裡,
And I think that that digital revolution now is coming to the point where, as the virtual world, which brings so many people together here, finally connects with the physical world, there is the reality that that has become humanized, so that digital world has all the friendliness, all the immediacy, the orientation of the analog world. Probably summed up in a way by the stylish or alternative available here, as we generously had gifted at lunchtime, the [unclear], which is a further kind of development -- and again, inspired by the incredible sort of sensual feel. A very, very beautiful object. So, something which in [the] '50s, '60s was very exclusive has now become, interestingly, quite inclusive. And the reference to the iPod as iconic, and in a way evocative of performance, delivery -- quite interesting that [in] the beginning of the year 2007, the Financial Times commented that the Detroit companies envy the halo effect that Toyota has gained from the Prius as the hybrid, energy-conscious vehicle, which rivals the iPod as an iconic product.
我認為數位革命 現在走到了一個點, 讓可聚集許多人來此的虛擬世界, 終於與實體世界有了連結 。 事實上,這連結已被人性化了, 所以,數位世界擁有親切感、 即時性及類比世界中的方位。 也許可以用 手邊這時髦,或是替代的產品來作總結, 就像是我們在午餐時間被慷慨給與的, 下一階段的發展Maxin, 這也是受到奇妙的感受所啓發的。 一個非常非常美的物品, 在50、60年代很獨特的東西, 現在卻有趣地成為,蘊含在內的元素 把iPod當成象徵性的指標, 他創造了難忘的性能與傳達經驗, 有趣的是 2007年初, 《金融時報》報導底特律的幾家公司, 都羨慕豐田從Prius得到的月暈效應, 節電油能混合汽車Prius也因此, 成為象徵商品iPod的競爭對手。
And I think it's very tempting to, in a way, seduce ourselves -- as architects, or anybody involved with the design process -- that the answer to our problems lies with buildings. Buildings are important, but they're only a component of a much bigger picture. In other words, as I might seek to demonstrate, if you could achieve the impossible, the equivalent of perpetual motion, you could design a carbon-free house, for example. That would be the answer. Unfortunately, it's not the answer. It's only the beginning of the problem. You cannot separate the buildings out from the infrastructure of cites and the mobility of transit. For example, if, in that Bucky-inspired phrase, we draw back and we look at planet Earth, and we take a kind of typical, industrialized society, then the energy consumed would be split between the buildings, 44 percent, transport, 34 percent, and industry. But again, that only shows part of the picture. If you looked at the buildings together with the associated transport, in other words, the transport of people, which is 26 percent, then 70 percent of the energy consumption is influenced by the way that our cites and infrastructure work together.
我想我們很容易誘使自己落入圈套, 無論是建築師或任何參與設計過程的人, 會認為解決問題的方法就在建築上。 建築是重要的,可是 那只是整體的部分結構。 換句話說,我將試圖說明, 如果你能做到不可能的事, 例如永恆運動, 你就可以設計一棟零碳房屋。 那將會是解決辦法。 可惜的是,那並不是解答, 只是問題的開始而已。 你不能將建築 從城市基礎建設 及交通運輸中切割出來。 例如,如果在巴克所啟發的詞彙中,我們回顧 並觀察地球, 拿個一般工業化的社會來看, 所消耗的能源可分成 建築佔44%、交通佔34%及工業。 不過那也只是其中一部分而已, 如果你把建築跟相關交通一起觀察, 換句話說,就是人們的運輸佔26%, 那麼70%的能源消耗 則會受到城市及基礎建設一起運作的影響。
So the problems of sustainability cannot be separated from the nature of the cities, of which the buildings are a part. For example, if you take, and you make a comparison between a recent kind of city, what I'll call, simplistically, a North American city -- and Detroit is not a bad example, it is very car dependent. The city goes out in annular rings, consuming more and more green space, and more and more roads, and more and more energy in the transport of people between the city center -- which again, the city center, as it becomes deprived of the living and just becomes commercial, again becomes dead. If you compared Detroit with a city of a Northern European example -- and Munich is not a bad example of that, with the greater dependence on walking and cycling -- then a city which is really only twice as dense, is only using one-tenth of the energy. In other words, you take these comparable examples and the energy leap is enormous.
於是,永續性的問題, 不能跟建築所歸屬的 城市的本質分開。 例如,如果你把兩個城市做比較, 一個新的城市, 我簡單稱為一個北美的城市-- 底特律是個不錯的例子,大量依賴汽車, 底特律城市以環狀的方式擴散, 耗用更多的綠地 及更多的道路,還有更多更多的能源, 就爲了運輸人們往返市中心-- 隨著市中心被剝奪 生活空間,成為商業中心,它也就死亡了。 如果你將底特律跟一個北歐城市比較, 慕尼黑是個不錯的例子。 大量依賴走路和腳踏車, 那麼這個密度多了一倍的城市, 卻只有使用底特律十分之一的能源。 換句話說,你看這兩個比較的例子, 就知道其中能源的差距很巨大。
So basically, if you wanted to generalize, you can demonstrate that as the density increases along the bottom there, that the energy consumed reduces dramatically. Of course you can't separate this out from issues like social diversity, mass transit, the ability to be able to walk a convenient distance, the quality of civic spaces. But again, you can see Detroit, in yellow at the top, extraordinary consumption, down below Copenhagen. And Copenhagen, although it's a dense city, is not dense compared with the really dense cities. In the year 2000, a rather interesting thing happened. You had for the first time mega-cities, [of] 5 million or more, which were occurring in the developing world. And now, out of typically 46 cities, 33 of those mega-cities are in the developing world. So you have to ask yourself -- the environmental impact of, for example, China or India. If you take China, and you just take Beijing, you can see on that traffic system, and the pollution associated with the consumption of energy as the cars expand at the price of the bicycles. In other words, if you put onto the roads, as is currently happening, 1,000 new cars every day -- statistically, it's the biggest booming auto market in the world -- and the half a billion bicycles serving one and a third billion people are reducing.
基本上,如果你想歸納,你可以說 在底線上隨著人口密度的增加, 能源消耗卻可大幅減少。 當然,你無法撇開 社會多樣性、大眾運輸、 方便行走的距離、 城市空間的品質等條件。 你可以再次看到上方黃色的底特律, 有驚人的用量,哥本哈根則在它之下, 哥本哈根雖然是人口密集的城市, 比起其他真正密度高的城市卻不太擁擠。 2000年,發生了一件蠻有趣的事, 你首次看見五百萬人或以上的巨型城市, 開始在發展中國家形成。 今天在46個典型城市中, 其中33個巨型城市都位於發展中國家。 所以你必須問自己--例如, 中國或印度,將帶來什麼環境衝擊。 假如中國,拿北京做例子, 你可以看到那交通系統及 因為汽車變得跟自行車一樣便宜 的消耗能源所帶來的污染 換句話說,如果每天都增加 1000輛新車在路上-- 數據顯示這是世界上最蓬勃的汽車市場, 而三億多人騎的五億輛自行車正在減少,
And that urbanization is extraordinary, accelerated pace. So, if we think of the transition in our society of the movement from the land to the cities, which took 200 years, then that same process is happening in 20 years. In other words, it is accelerating by a factor of 10. And quite interestingly, over something like a 60-year period, we're seeing the doubling in life expectancy, over that period where the urbanization has trebled. If I pull back from that global picture, and I look at the implication over a similar period of time in terms of the technology -- which, as a tool, is a tool for designers, and I cite our own experience as a company, and I just illustrate that by a small selection of projects -- then how do you measure that change of technology? How does it affect the design of buildings? And particularly, how can it lead to the creation of buildings which consume less energy, create less pollution and are more socially responsible?
這樣都市化的速度是驚人的快。 假如,我們思考自己的社會轉變, 從空地發展到城市整整花了200年, 同樣的過程卻只花了北京20年。 也就是北京以快十倍的速度行進著, 有趣的是,在大約60年之間, 我們看到預期壽命正在倍增, 同時都市化也變成三倍。 如果我回看全球局面, 以類似的時間長度來看其中的含義, 從科技的角度來看--就工具而言, 科技是設計師的工具 , 我將以我自己公司的經驗舉證 , 選幾個作品來說明-- 你如何測量科技的改變呢? 科技又如何影響建築的設計呢? 特別是,它如何引領 我們創造節能的、 低污染的且負有社會責任的建築呢?
That story, in terms of buildings, started in the late '60s, early '70s. The one example I take is a corporate headquarters for a company called Willis and Faber, in a small market town in the northeast of England, commuting distance with London. And here, the first thing you can see is that this building, the roof is a very warm kind of overcoat blanket, a kind of insulating garden, which is also about the celebration of public space. In other words, for this community, they have this garden in the sky. So the humanistic ideal is very, very strong in all this work, encapsulated perhaps by one of my early sketches here, where you can see greenery, you can see sunlight, you have a connection with nature. And nature is part of the generator, the driver for this building. And symbolically, the colors of the interior are green and yellow. It has facilities like swimming pools, it has flextime, it has a social heart, a space, you have contact with nature. Now this was 1973.
那個故事始於60年代後期70年代初, 我所選的例子是,一個企業總部大樓, 客戶是威利法柏。 地點是英格蘭東北部的商業小鎮, 與倫敦隔著合理的通勤距離。 首先,你可以看見的 這棟大樓的屋頂像是 很溫暖的棉大衣、一個隔熱的花園, 也是在讚揚公共空間的美好。 也就是說,群眾會有一個空中花園, 在這作品中,有濃厚的人文理想氣息, 或許這也涵蓋在我早期的手稿當中, 你看得到綠地、陽光, 跟大自然有連結 , 而大自然是這棟建築的發電機及驅動者之一, 象徵性地,地室內的顏色是綠色和黃色的。 它有游泳池等設施,有彈性工時, 有個社交中心地,一個能接近自然的空間,。 而這是1973年的設計,
In 2001, this building received an award. And the award was about a celebration for a building which had been in use over a long period of time. And the people who'd created it came back: the project managers, the company chairmen then. And they were saying, you know, "The architects, Norman was always going on about designing for the future, and you know, it didn't seem to cost us any more. So we humored him, we kept him happy." The image at the top, what it doesn't -- if you look at it in detail, really what it is saying is you can wire this building. This building was wired for change. So, in 1975, the image there is of typewriters. And when the photograph was taken, it's word processors. And what they were saying on this occasion was that our competitors had to build new buildings for the new technology. We were fortunate, because in a way our building was future-proofed. It anticipated change, even though those changes were not known. Round about that design period leading up to this building, I did a sketch, which we pulled out of the archive recently. And I was saying, and I wrote, "But we don't have the time, and we really don't have the immediate expertise at a technical level."
在2001年這棟建築得到了一個獎, 表揚一棟 使用了許多年的建築 , 打造這棟建築的人都回來了。 企劃主管及當時的公司總裁 他們說: 那建築師諾曼總是說, 要為未來做設計 , 而且,也不多花我們更多錢。 所以,我們就遷就他讓他快樂, 上方的圖片, 如果你仔細看 它其實是在說,你可以替這棟建築佈線, 這棟建築為改變而佈線。 1975年,圖片上的是打字機 當拍攝照片時,則變成了電腦。 這兩樣東西,在那時間點顯示出我們的競爭者, 必須建蓋新的大樓來迎接新科技。 我們很幸運, 因為我們的建築是可適應未來的。 它預期了改變,儘管那些改變並不可知。 大約在完成這棟大樓的設計之前, 我畫的一張草圖,最近才從檔案中拿出來, 我在上面寫著:「但是我們沒有那個時間, 也沒有現有的 技術專業可用」
In other words, we didn't have the technology to do what would be really interesting on that building. And that would be to create a kind of three-dimensional bubble -- a really interesting overcoat that would naturally ventilate, would breathe and would seriously reduce the energy loads. Notwithstanding the fact that the building, as a green building, is very much a pioneering building. And if I fast-forward in time, what is interesting is that the technology is now available and celebratory. The library of the Free University, which opened last year, is an example of that. And again, the transition from one of the many thousands of sketches and computer images to the reality. And a combination of devices here, the kind of heavy mass concrete of these book stacks, and the way in which that is enclosed by this skin, which enables the building to be ventilated, to consume dramatically less energy, and where it's really working with the forces of nature.
也就是說,我們當時並沒有相關的科技, 能把真的有意思的東西放進這棟建築裡。 如創造一種立體的泡泡-- 一種會自然通風的有趣外層, 會呼吸且真的能減少能量的消耗。 儘管,事實上,這棟建築 還是可稱為綠建築的開創先鋒。 有趣的是,如果我把時間快轉, 現在有環保科技可用且蓬勃發展。 去年落成的自由大學的圖書館, 就是一個例子。 從幾萬分草圖之一, 變成電腦圖再到實體。 裡頭混合著許多設備, 那些厚重的水泥書櫃, 還有被外層包覆的方式, 可讓圖書館自然通風 大量節能, 而且,真的能夠以大自然的力量運作。
And what is interesting is that this is hugely popular by the people who use it. Again, coming back to that thing about the lifestyle, and in a way, the ecological agenda is very much at one with the spirit. So it's not a kind of sacrifice, quite the reverse. I think it's a great -- it's a celebration. And you can measure the performance, in terms of energy consumption, of that building against a typical library. If I show another aspect of that technology then, in a completely different context -- this apartment building in the Alps in Switzerland. Prefabricated from the most traditional of materials, but that material -- because of the technology, the computing ability, the ability to prefabricate, make high-performance components out of timber -- very much at the cutting edge. And just to give a sort of glimpse of that technology, the ability to plot points in the sky and to transmit, to transfer that information now, directly into the factory.
有趣的是,這很受 使用者的喜愛。 這又帶我們回到生活品味的觀念上, 某種程度上,人們的心靈認同生態議題。 所以,這不是一種犧牲恰好相反。 我認為環保是很棒、很值得慶祝的事。 你可以測量環保的效能, 將這建築的耗能量 跟典型的圖書館做比較。 讓我舉出另一個環保科技, 在背景完全不同的地方-- 這是在瑞士阿爾卑斯山的公寓大樓, 用最傳統的建材預先打造, 那建材--因為有科技和電腦的協助, 可預製且製造高性能的木材結構, 是很先進的建材。 稍微來看一下這個技術, 將點畫在空中, 再將資料 直接傳輸到工廠。
So if you cross the border -- just across the border -- a small factory in Germany, and here you can see the guy with his computer screen, and those points in space are communicated. And on the left are the cutting machines, which then, in the factory, enable those individual pieces to be fabricated and plus or minus very, very few millimeters, to be slotted together on site. And then interestingly, that building to then be clad in the oldest technology, which is the kind of hand-cut shingles. One quarter of a million of them applied by hand as the final finish. And again, the way in which that works as a building, for those of us who can enjoy the spaces, to live and visit there. If I made the leap into these new technologies, then how did we -- what happened before that? I mean, you know, what was life like before the mobile phone, the things that you take for granted?
越過瑞士的邊界一點距離, 在德國有一間小工廠,你可以看到這裡有一個人站在電腦前, 剛才那些空中的點就傳輸過來了。 在左邊的是用來切割的機器, 它讓工廠 可以預製每一塊獨特的建材, 只留下幾公厘 讓工人在現場組裝。 有趣的是,接著那棟建築 將以最古老的技術覆蓋起來,有點像手工切製的瓦片。 以手工鋪上25萬片來完成最後的表面處理, 就建築而言,瓦片讓我們 可以享受到那兒居住 和參觀的空間。 我跳到這裡講這些新的科技, 那之前發生了什麼事呢? 我的意思是,手機及你認為理所當然的東西出現之前, 那生活又是怎樣的呢?
Well, obviously the building still happened. I mean, this is a glimpse of the interior of our Hong Kong bank of 1979, which opened in 1985, with the ability to be able to reflect sunlight deep into the heart of this space here. And in the absence of computers, you have to physically model. So for example, we would put models under an artificial sky. For wind tunnels, we would literally put them in a wind tunnel and blast air, and the many kilometers of cable and so on. And the turning point was probably, in our terms, when we had the first computer. And that was at the time that we sought to redesign, reinvent the airport. This is Terminal Four at Heathrow, typical of any terminal -- big, heavy roof, blocking out the sunlight, lots of machinery, big pipes, whirring machinery.
顯然,建築還是蓋起來了。 這是1979年建蓋的香港銀行的內部, 在1985年落成,能夠將陽光折射進入 這個空間的中心。 在沒有電腦的情況下,你必須製作實體模型, 例如,我們會將模型放在人造的天空下, 如果是風道,我們就會把它們 放在風道裡猛烈吹風, 及應用好幾公里的鋼索等等。 對我們而言那個轉捩點是, 當我們擁有第一批電腦的時候, 當時我們正在探索 重新設計及創造機場。 這是希司羅機場的第四航空站,很典型的航空站, 很大、很厚重的屋頂,完全阻擋了陽光, 許多機器大的運輸管、吵雜的機械聲。
And Stansted, the green alternative, which uses natural light, is a friendly place: you know where you are, you can relate to the outside. And for a large part of its cycle, not needing electric light -- electric light, which in turn creates more heat, which creates more cooling loads and so on. And at that particular point in time, this was one of the few solitary computers. And that's a little image of the tree of Stansted. Not going back very far in time, 1990, that's our office. And if you looked very closely, you'd see that people were drawing with pencils, and they were pushing, you know, big rulers and triangles. It's not that long ago, 17 years, and here we are now. I mean, major transformation.
史丹斯泰德機場則是個綠色的選擇, 使用自然採光,是個很友善的空間-- 你知道自己的位置,你也可跟外界有連結, 而整個循環的重點是,它完全不需要電燈-- 因為電燈會產生更多熱度, 繼而增加散熱的負擔。 而在那個特別的時機, 這是其中一台稀少的獨立計算機, 那是史丹斯泰德機場的結構圖。 1990年不太久遠的年代, 那是我們的辦公室。 如果你非常仔細地看, 你會看到人們用鉛筆畫圖, 他們還在用很大的尺和三角板, 那並不是很久以前的事,17年後看看我們現在已經這麼進步了, 真是巨大的轉變。
Going back in time, there was a lady called Valerie Larkin, and in 1987, she had all our information on one disk. Now, every week, we have the equivalent of 84 million disks, which record our archival information on past, current and future projects. That reaches 21 kilometers into the sky. This is the view you would get, if you looked down on that. But meanwhile, as you know, wonderful protagonists like Al Gore are noting the inexorable rise in temperature, set in the context of that, interestingly, those buildings which are celebratory and very, very relevant to this place.
回到以前,有一位維拉蕊‧拉肯女士, 1987年,她將所有的資料全部存在一張磁片上, 現在,每星期我們的資料,可等同於當時的八千四百萬張磁片, 存有過去、現在 及未來的企劃案。 長度可攀升到21公里高的天空, 這是你從那高度往下看的景象, 可是現在,你知道 像高爾那樣傑出的倡導者, 都在說氣溫將無法停止攀升, 在這樣的情況下, 很有趣地發現那些提倡環保的建築, 都和那地方關係很密切。
Our Reichstag project, which has a very familiar agenda, I'm sure, as a public place where we sought to, in a way, through a process of advocacy, reinterpret the relationship between society and politicians, public space. And maybe its hidden agenda, an energy manifesto -- something that would be free, completely free of fuel as we know it. So it would be totally renewable. And again, the humanistic sketch, the translation into the public space, but this very, very much a part of the ecology. But here, not having to model it for real. Obviously the wind tunnel had a place, but the ability now with the computer to explore, to plan, to see how that would work in terms of the forces of nature: natural ventilation, to be able to model the chamber below, and to look at biomass. A combination of biomass, aquifers, burning vegetable oil -- a process that, quite interestingly, was developed in Eastern Germany, at the time of its dependence on the Soviet Bloc.
這是柏林國會大廈建案, 我想這有一個眾所皆知的議題, 作為一個公共空間, 我們想找個辦法透過提倡的方式 , 重新詮釋社會及政治家的關係, 也許公共空間在隱藏的議題中有個能源宣言-- 某種不受限制的東西,完全不需要 我們所知道的燃料 , 使它完全是可再生的。 另一個人性化的草圖,進入公共空間的轉變, 幾乎屬於生態環境的一部份。 可是我們不需要爲實體製作模型, 顯然風道原本有它的需要, 可是現在的電腦技術, 能夠去探索、規劃,並觀察那會如何 在自然力量下運轉。 自然通風,我們能模擬地下的空間, 並且探討生質能源。 綜合生物質、地下蓄水層、燃燒植物油-- 一個在東德依靠蘇聯軍事時 發展出的過程, 重新轉化那技術。
So really, retranslating that technology and developing something which was so clean, it was virtually pollution-free. You can measure it again. You can compare how that building, in terms of its emission in tons of carbon dioxide per year -- at the time that we took that project, over 7,000 tons -- what it would have been with natural gas and finally, with the vegetable oil, 450 tons. I mean, a 94 percent reduction -- virtually clean. We can see the same processes at work in terms of the Commerce Bank -- its dependence on natural ventilation, the way that you can model those gardens, the way they spiral around. But again, very much about the lifestyle, the quality -- something that would be more enjoyable as a place to work. And again, we can measure the reduction in terms of energy consumption.
發展出 很乾淨幾乎零污染的能源。 你也可以再測量一次, 比較這棟建築 每年的二氧化碳排量-- 在建案開始時是7000公噸以上, 使用天然氣之後又少了多少? 最後使用植物油後只剩450公噸, 減少了94%--幾乎是零污染。 我們可以看到同樣的設計, 在康美銀行也奏效-- 仰賴自然通風, 你可以模擬那些花園 旋轉的造型。 同樣又是跟生活品味及品質有關-- 一個讓人更能樂在工作的地方。 而且還是能夠測量 其中的節能效果。
There is an evolution here between the projects, and Swiss Re again develops that a little bit further -- the project in the city in London. And this sequence shows the buildup of that model. But what it shows first, which I think is quite interesting, is that here you see the circle, you see the public space around it. What are the other ways of putting the same amount of space on the site? If, for example, you seek to do a building which goes right to the edge of the pavement, it's the same amount of space. And finally, you profile this, you cut grooves into it. The grooves become the kind of green lungs which give views, which give light, ventilation, make the building fresher. And you enclose that with something that also is central to its appearance, which is a mesh of triangulated structures -- again, in a long connection evocative of some of those works of Buckminster Fuller, and the way in which triangulation can increase performance and also give that building its sense of identity.
在這些建案之間有個革命, Swiss Re再次進展得更多一點。 這是在倫敦市中心的建案, 這一連串的圖片將呈現模擬的過程, 可是我發現有趣的是,首先它先呈現 你現在看見的圓圈及周圍的公共空間, 還有哪些方法, 可以將同樣大的空間放在那地點呢? 例如,你想要蓋一棟大樓, 以人行步道為界線, 可營造出同樣大的空間。 最後,你描繪出一個輪廓切出紋路, 那些紋路變成類似綠色的肺, 提供眺望的景觀光線、通風作用, 讓建築看來更新穎。 然後,你用對外表也有修飾作用的東西, 將整棟建築包起來, 那就是三角形的網狀體-- 再次與一些巴克明斯特·福勒的作品, 跨越時空互相呼應, 而三角形的設計可提高性能, 也給予這建築獨特的身分辨識度。
And here, if we look at a detail of the way that the building opens up and breathes into those atria, the way in which now, with a computer, we can model the forces, we can see the high pressure, the low pressure, the way in which the building behaves rather like an aircraft wing. So it also has the ability, all the time, regardless of the direction of the wind, to be able to make the building fresh and efficient. And unlike conventional buildings, the top of the building is celebratory. It's a viewing place for people, not machinery. And the base of the building is again about public space. Comparing it with a typical building, what happens if we seek to use such design strategies in terms of really large-scale thinking? And I'm just going to give two images out of a kind of company research project.
假如,我們仔細看這建築 如何向上伸展,空氣在中庭的流通, 現在利用電腦,我們可以模擬力度, 看到高氣壓、低氣壓, 建築本身就像機翼一樣運作。 它也有能力在任何時候, 不管風向如何, 讓建築維持通風和高效能。 跟傳統建築不一樣的是, 建築的頂端是讓人愉悅的空間。 它是一個觀景台,而不是機械室, 而建築的底層,也同樣是公共空間。 跟典型的建築比較, 如果我們嘗試採用這樣的設計策略, 並應用在大規模的思考上會如何呢 ? 我將分享兩張 類似公司調查計畫的圖片。
It's been well known that the Dead Sea is dying. The level is dropping, rather like the Aral Sea. And the Dead Sea is obviously much lower than the oceans and seas around it. So there has been a project which rescues the Dead Sea by creating a pipeline, a pipe, sometimes above the surface, sometimes buried, that will redress that, and will feed from the Gulf of Aqaba into the Dead Sea. And our translation of that, using a lot of the thinking built up over the 40 years, is to say, what if that, instead of being just a pipe, what if it is a lifeline? What if it is the equivalent, depending on where you are, of the Grand Canal, in terms of tourists, habitation, desalination, agriculture? In other words, water is the lifeblood.
眾所皆知死海正在死亡, 海平面正在下降有點像鹹海, 死海的海平面顯然比 周圍的海洋還低, 於是就出現了一個拯救死海的計畫。 設置運輸管, 有時浮現、有時潛藏, 從阿卡巴灣輸送水來補救 死海的海平面。 我們的想法是, 應用過去40年來累積的知識, 如果不要用輸送管線, 而是創造一條生命線呢? 假使這跟大運河一樣取決於 你所在的位置, 就觀光客、居住環境、海水、淡化農業來看? 換句話說,水就是命脈。
And if you just go back to the previous image, and you look at this area of volatility and hostility, that a unifying design idea as a humanitarian gesture could have the affect of bringing all those warring factions together in a united cause, in terms of something that would be genuinely green and productive in the widest sense. Infrastructure at that large scale is also inseparable from communication. And whether that communication is the virtual world or it is the physical world, then it's absolutely central to society. And how do we make more legible in this growing world, especially in some of the places that I'm talking about -- China, for example, which in the next ten years will create 400 new airports. Now what form do they take? How do you make them more friendly at that scale?
如果回到剛才的圖片, 你看到這個反覆無常且敵對的地區, 一個有如人道主義的整合設計概念, 很可能將敵對的派系因共同理想聚集在一起, 在最廣泛的意義上, 用完全環保且有生產力的建設來解決。 如此龐大的基礎建設 不能避免溝通, 無論那溝通是在虛擬 或實體的世界, 對社會來說都是核心重點, 在不斷成長的世界裡,我們如何更清楚地表達, 尤其是在我討論的一些地方-- 例如,中國在未來的十年, 將會建設400座新的機場, 那些機場將有什麼造型? 你如何讓大規模的機場對環境更友善呢?
Hong Kong I refer to as a kind of analog experience in a digital age, because you always have a point of reference. So what happens when we take that and you expand that further into the Chinese society? And what is interesting is that that produces in a way perhaps the ultimate mega-building. It is physically the largest project on the planet at the moment. 250 -- excuse me, 50,000 people working 24 hours, seven days. Larger by 17 percent than every terminal put together at Heathrow -- built -- plus the new, un-built Terminal Five. And the challenge here is a building that will be green, that is compact despite its size and is about the human experience of travel, is about friendly, is coming back to that starting point, is very, very much about the lifestyle. And perhaps these, in the end, as celebratory spaces.
香港機場,我形容它是一個在數位時代的類比體驗, 因為你總是會有參照標準。 如果我們將這點延伸擴大到 中國社會會如何呢? 有趣的是,結果將產生 一個終極的巨型建築。 這是目前地球上最大的建案。 250--抱歉!是五萬人每天工作24小時, 比希司羅機場還要大17%,包括現有的航空站 及未建蓋的第五航空站。 這當中的挑戰是要蓋一棟綠建築, 儘管巨大還是要精簡, 以人類的旅行體驗為訴求, 也強調友善的使用性,當然又回到原點: 跟生活品味非常有關聯。 也許最後這將會是一個令人快樂的空間,
As Hubert was talking over lunch, as we sort of engaged in conversation, talked about this, talked about cities. Hubert was saying, absolutely correctly, "These are the new cathedrals." And in a way, one aspect of this conversation was triggered on New Year's Eve, when I was talking about the Olympic agenda in China in terms of its green ambitions and aspirations. And I was voicing the thought that -- it just crossed my mind that New Year's Eve, a sort of symbolic turning point as we move from 2006 to 2007 -- that maybe, you know, the future was the most powerful, innovative sort of nation. The way in which somebody like Kennedy inspirationally could say, "We put a man on the moon."
如同修伯特在午餐跟我 談到的, 談論到環保及城市。 如同修伯特所說的而且完全正確,「這些是新的大教堂」。 某程度來說,這段演講的某一部份 是在除夕夜想到的。 當時我說到中國的奧運議題, 它的綠色理想與抱負。 我說出自己的想法-- 在那除夕夜想到的, 那是從2006到2007的象徵性的轉捩點 , 也許未來是 最強、最創新的一種國家。 像甘迺迪那樣說出啟發性的話, 「我們把人放到月球上去」。
You know, who is going to say that we cracked this thing of the dependence on fossil fuels, with all that being held to ransom by rogue regimes, and so on. And that's a concerted platform. It's more than one device, you know, it's renewable. And I voiced the thought that maybe at the turn of the year, I thought that the inspiration was more likely to come from those other, larger countries out there -- the Chinas, the Indias, the Asian-Pacific tigers. Thank you very much.
誰會來說, 我們突破了對石化燃料的依賴, 擺脫惡棍政權掌控的價格等等, 這是個商議好的平台。 不只是一種裝置且可再生, 我說出一個想法,也許在進入新的一年時, 我覺得這些啟發性的創想 將很可能來自其他更大的國家-- 如中國、印度及亞太老虎們。 謝謝各位!
(Applause)
(掌聲)