If there’s one word that comes out of most architects’ ears, it’s this one: Sustainability. It is constantly being called for and it is still not really clear what it actually means.
Opinions differ on the subject, which is hardly surprising when the term is so vague. That is why the responsible bodies have decided to solve the whole thing empirically. Endless columns of figures in an unmanageable number of constantly changing regulations are supposed to provide a remedy – be it the EnEV, various DIN standards or the KfW loan model for energy-efficient refurbishment.
But what do these regulations and models really achieve? Can sustainability really consist of wrapping a building in insulation that has to be disposed of at great expense after a few decades? Or in the fact that structural damage often occurs because the complicated details are often not implemented correctly or not planned properly in the first place?
With all the focus on insulation values and alternative energy generation, one factor is shockingly neglected: aesthetic sustainability. Admittedly, this is difficult to verify and cannot be expressed in figures. However, a current example from Stuttgart shows that it is almost more important than the factors mentioned above.
