High-rise buildings are not a good idea, says Ronald Rovers. But the countless arguments he gives against them are ignored by policymakers and developers. That’s incomprehensible, he explains once again.
Over the past year, I’ve had the opportunity to speak several times to city officials and committees in major cities about high-rise buildings and why they shouldn’t allow them in their municipalities. But the message isn’t getting through—or at least, they’re ignoring the countless arguments for why it’s better not to do so.
Why, I wonder. Is it cheaper? Is it faster? Is it more visible? In the case of a 50-story tower with, say, 200 apartments, only one permit is needed, of course, instead of 200. And the alderman has a result that’s visible to everyone in the city. Finally, the developer can increase the value of a small piece of land fiftyfold. Cash in! Could it be something like that?
But high-rise construction is counterproductive! Material usage per square meter of usable floor space increases rapidly with height—especially if a parking garage is required as a result. Energy consumption per square meter of floor space also increases with height, while the net usable area actually decreases. All in all, it is completely impossible to turn a tall tower into a net-zero energy building
As a counterargument, some claim that high-rise buildings increase density, but that has been proven to be nonsense. And the idea that low-rise buildings would take up too much land is also nonsense. The entire world population could easily fit in France if they lived like people do in Paris within the ring road.
So the benefits are negated, but the consequences of high-rise construction are passed on to others by the alderman and the developer. For example, the building’s large shadow falls outside its own lot, which amounts to stealing solar energy from others. High-rise buildings also cause traffic spikes, forcing the entire city to bear the costs through major investments in infrastructure.
Indirectly, the greater impact per square meter of built floor space accelerates global warming and exacerbates environmental problems because raw materials must be extracted elsewhere. In fact, every tower is a slap in the face to the climate and the environmental problem.
Finally, there’s the issue of safety. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to help residents in times of emergency. For example, residents are stranded during power outages, which are becoming more and more likely. To get help, they have to walk up and down 50 flights of stairs.
High-rise construction is nothing more than stacking people on top of each other to extract more financial profit from a square meter of privately owned land. And that should not be a reason to do it.
A rule of thumb: if you can’t do it without an elevator, don’t do it.
About the author of this column, “Post-Fossil Construction”
Ronald Rovers is a former professor, physical fundamentalist, futurist, and now an author, on a quest for the ultimate sustainable physical balance on Earth—without fossil fuels, of course. He calls Productive Land “our true capital, for food, energy, water, and materials. And that requires us to live ‘vegetarian’—and therefore also to build vegetarian. In that light, I explore the future of construction here.” More on this. You can read Rovers’ contributions here. Or visit his own website.
