Cute huh?
Well... yes, but:


Is this not actually a more accurate ideology of what we have come to think of as 'green architecture' than one might think? What I'm saying is that the more research I do, the more I look into this new trend that is going green I cant help but wonder is it really a practical, feasable and above all economically viable way forward? Like the image above the whole going green phase, at least in my opinion, is more of a cutesy stereotype that opens itself to dreamy visions of a paradise-like future than it is a realistic look at the characteristics and restrictions imposed on us by modern day architecture.


Its fine and well to be perched in your mothers basement day and night dreaming up skyscrapers emerging from the oceans clad in lush green lawns and roofed with the recycled exrement of domestic kitty cats. But venture upstairs at some point and spend some time in the real world and you will actually develop an understanding of how the grass isn't always greener on the other side of a vertical wall. Actually within a few months it's usually dead.


The question I'm asking is really can we acheive even an inkling of our proposed sustainable goal while still residing within the realm of plausable, recognized construction AND will the the client pay for it? I think in essence at the end of the day GREEN is like physical exercise. As long as it plays a role in our life - within the fabric of our way of thinking, we are able to improve the way we live in this world and the means with which we interact with it. If this is true on even a minor scale then all our efforts certainly count for something, or at least thats what we can tell ourselves.