UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
Emily Royall

main picture of presentation

Fig. 01 Artwork by Dale Chihuly, photographed by Thomas Hawk

Introduction Though the global menace of climate and environmental change has introduced a set of empirically complex problems to the human race, the greatest risk we run is to flounder in a sea of our own potential ingenuity. Contemporary advancements in sustainable technology though great, remain disconnected, unemployed or undefined. This paper seeks to effectively illustrate a marginalized though highly promising mechanism of sustainable development, Biomimicry. A concrete theoretical and practical definition for the term is developed with a focus on its potential contributions to architecture and design. In effort to clarify the Biomimetics process and illuminate its relationship to sustainability, the Biomimicry “helix” will be introduced as a continuous model illustrating two integral products of the Biomimicry process: organs and organisms. This metaphorical approach to the definition embellishes the primary goal of Biomimicry: to visualize man-made

systems and products as natural processes. Thus the “organs” and “organisms” of Biomimicry will be explored in reference to photovoltaics and urban planning, citing dye sensitized solar cells and the sustainable city, Hammarby Sjöstad, as case studies. What is Biomimicry? Nature has solved many of the mechanical, structural and energetic problems humans have encountered without generating residual, inactive waste. Where biological processes are continuously evolving to manipulate hydrogen, carbon and oxygen to accomplish their objectives, humans have cheaply contracted the unsustainable power of oil. Biomimetics seeks to remedy such error by designing efficient systems and products using nature as a guide. There are however, a few problems with defining Biomimicry. It is difficult to segregate Biomimicry from basic problem solving. The concept of Biomimicry is often oversimplified into


UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

fiber optics, and organisms are systems such as smart grids or cities. Finally, note the branches of the helix connecting the organ and organism strand. These are “sustainability” branches, emphasizing the mutual dependence of organs and organisms on each other within the Biomimicry framework. Sustainability integrates the organs and organisms produced by Biomimcry into a continuously evolving system. This integral relationship with sustainability is also relatable by a basic biological rule: nature seeks to minimize the amount of energy consumed in a given period of time (E/T). To understand the broad applicability of Biomimicry, it is helpful to consider nature as a mentor, measure and model. As Mentor: We can view nature not as a possession, but as a teacher. As Measure: We can use nature as an ecological standard to measure the fitness of our own designs. As Model: Biomimicry studies nature’s models and emulates these forms or processes. The following sections explore and expand upon the individual parts of the model. The Organism The process of Biomimicry yields “organisms” in the sense that nature can inspire the design of efficient systems. As mentioned earlier, biological systems (and efficient man-made systems) seek to minimize the amount of energy consumed over time. Because this basic concept is inherent to all sustainable systems, Biomimicry on this level can have applications for many fields including government and business models. The context of this paper will

Figure 02: Biomimicry Helix model by Emily Royall

a linear process in which one asks the question, “How does nature solve my problem?”, observes the solution in nature, and creates a design that mimics the observation. Biomimicry has been severely criticized as a static problem solving process. I suggest that what separates Biomimicry from standard problem solving is its continuous, spiral-like nature, providing no definitive solution, only products and systems which can adapt to a changing environment. Biomimetics is also typically mistaken for biotechnology. Biomimetics is not biotechnology as it does not exploit “bio-assisted” processes (such as using green algae to treat waste water), but rather models them. Finally, Biomimicry is also often attributed to an inspirational role art and aesthetics. Artists reproduce existing patterns in nature for an aesthetic effect. This is not Biomimicry, as the decorative nature of the work does not yield an energyconsuming product. Because natural systems evolve continuously to meet dynamic challenges, Biomimicry is considered to be a spiral-

ing, continuous process, taking nature as inspiration to generate “organs” (individual products) or “organisms” (systems and processes) for the purpose of integration into a sustainable system. For example, Biomimicry could produce advanced photovoltaics (the organ) inspired by photosynthesis, or a “smart grid” system (the organism) modeled after bee algorithms, for the purpose of integration into a sustainable energy system. The model below illustrates this concept using a double helix. The helix model of Biomimicry reflects a number of nuances. Primarily, the model is a spiral. This represents the idea of Biomimicry as a continuously evolving process, infinitely seeking a closer fit to the fluctuating environment. The model’s spiral quality reflects the continuous feedback and repeated fine-tuning required to adapt “organs” and “organisms” to the environment. Additionally, “organs” and “organisms” make up the two strands of the helix, reflecting their entwined equality of importance. Organs include singular products such as photovoltaic cells or


Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

deal with a more architectural application to the biomimetic production of systems; urban planning. In relating biology to urban planning we can reflect on the principles illustrated by Richard Hopper in his article published in the American Planning Association magazine in the 1970s. Hopper suggests that all man made and natural systems have inherent carrying capacity that can be: 1. used as a limit for growth 2. ignored and exceeded with the consequence of degrading the system 3. expanded through new technologies and methods of design or planning Essentially Hopper makes an argument that is appropriate to Biomimicry. In developing a sustainable urban blueprint, one must include basic biological rules in mind. Hopper states that there is a limit to the growth of a system before it becomes unsustainable (or exceeds energy over time), and if this energy ceiling is ignored the system may be degraded over time. Additionally, the potential energy ceiling of a system can be expanded through innovative technology. These basic principles illustrate the natural relationship between cities and nature providing some insight into the sustainability of metropolitan areas. Cities and Biology What makes a city sustainable? Looking to nature, we find several overlaps in criteria, as many principles that make a city sustainable are shared in biological systems. Popular consensus reveals three principles that define the sustainability of the urban frontier: Density, specialization and localized infrastructure. Density: Dense metropolitan areas show lower rates of vehicle ownership

and usage. A nationwide analysis of vehicle miles traveled in the U.S. revealed that the top ten largest metropolitan areas produce 23.5% of the total vehicle miles traveled (VMT), while housing 26.3% of the national population, reinforcing the notion that metropolitan residents drive less than the average American. Additionally, although total driving is concentrated in metropolitan areas, the greatest driving per person occurs in low-density Southwestern and Southeastern regions known for their vast spaces consumed by urban sprawl. Fundamentally, a city’s compactness directly affects the amount of energy used for transportation within it. Maximizing a city’s density while taking special care to appropriate living, work and recreational spaces is an integral means by which to minimize energy consumption via transportation. Specialization: Diversity of a city including the specialization of retail enterprises and civic centers is fundamental for the incubation of new ideas and enterprises so prized in major metropolitan areas. The diversity of a city is made up of a plethora of specialized parts, contributing to the city’s flourishing economy and society. Similarly, the life of an ecosystem is stimulated by the specialization of a variety of interconnected participants. Specialization allows a system to be self-sufficient, relying primarily on the goods and services of the localized system. Localized Infrastructure: Less energy is expended when individuals travel shorter distances for the services they need. The centralized infrastructure of an urban area contributes to the reduction of carbon emissions and convenience of city-dwellers. Many biological systems such as plant or animal cells

operate on the same principle, often minimizing the distance of resources in effort to reduce E/T. Seeking to minimize energy consumption over time, natural systems appear to use analogous mechanisms that humans have artificially created to solve similar efficiency problems. Such is a credit to the concept of Biomimicry, which evidently, is not entirely foreign. Historically, humans have built cities limited by the land (exhibiting Hopper’s principles of energy ceilings). Cities built before the Industrial Age were far more modest in their energy demands, responding to geographical restraints by integrating nature and industry as a working rural and urban landscape. Ancient European cities had common business areas, central squares and localized infrastructure reducing the need to travel long distances for resources. These cities even operated on a cyclic system, using the land to produce food and energy for settlement activity whose waste was once again reapplied to the soil. These archaic cities of the past were also fueled by solar power, illuminated at daybreak and ending activity at nightfall. Ironically the contemporary sustainable movement fashions itself as a novel trend, though such ideas are ancient consequences of our historical technological restrictions. Cities and Cells Having established that urban and natural systems share criteria for sustainability, we can again examine natural systems as inspiration for urban design. Imagine a city modeled after a cell. Although this design remains conceptual, a number of realistic applications can be inferred. This hypothetical city would possess as a cell does, three major characteristics:


UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

Figure 05: Interior of Hammarby Sjöstad

Figure 04: Map of Service Locations

Figure 06: Waterside view of Hammarby Sjöstad

Figure 03: Map of Hammarby Sjöstad

1. self-sufficiency 2. porosity 3. adaptability Living cells are largely self sufficient as reflected particularly by their organization. A cell is contained; its contents spread only to the plasma membrane limits. This way, components of the cell do not have to commute large distances to achieve their purpose. Resources are localized and organized, without

unnecessary repetition of infrastructure. In the city, carbon dioxide is also generated as waste, and could be transformed into reusable products. Additionally, the old infrastructure of a cell (worn out components) is broken down by structures called lysosomes, and recycled for further use. This recycling process has long been investigated and advocated by architects interested in sustainability and life cycle assessment. The deconstruction and reuse of materials, as opposed to demolition works

favorably for urban environments, avoiding typical demolition costs ($50/ ton or more) and reducing building costs. Cities could also potentially mimic cellular transport, where transportation within the cell uses locally produced energy. Yet despite their selfsufficiency, both cells and cities must adapt to their environment and retain an element of porosity. Cells respond to internal and external changes in their environment and also depend crucially on effective communication systems and signaling. Like a city, a cell’s “interregional” communication is equally as important as its local communication, establishing the organized functioning of a unified system. Case Study: Hammarby Sjöstad In the outskirts of Stockholm lies


Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

Sweden’s hailed “sustainable city,” Hammarby Sjöstad. It functions (perhaps unknowingly) in a similar manner to a cell via its self-sufficiency, porosity and adaptability. It is an example of how designers are already applying Biomimicry without even knowing it. Hammarby is currently home to some 25,000 residents in 11,000 apartments located in a southeastern pocket of Stockholm. The project is expected to be completed in 2015, projecting 35,000 individuals to live and work in the area. Historically, the port area was a small-scale industrial “shantytown,” dotted with temporary infrastructure largely consisting of corrugated steel shacks. In 1998 this area was demolished to make room for a sustainable city. Several features of Hammarby Sjöstad make it an excellent example of the potential of Biomimicry in urban design. Self Sufficiency Construction: Hammarby focuses on using localized resources and recycled materials for building construction. Similar to how lysosomes in a cell recycle existing material and reuse relevant resources, Hammarby Sjostad has outlined procedures to draw materials from the demolition site. Pressure treated timber may not be used for construction, and Copper is not used as ducting material. Transportation: Unique and efficient transportation options within the city reduce the amount of energy consumed and minimize CO2 byproduct. Hammarby Sjöstad expects 80% of residents’ and workers’ journeys to be by public transport (via the light rail “Tvärbanan”), on foot or by bicycle by the year 2010. As of today, two thirds of residents participate in alternative

forms of transportation, whereas one third of trips are car-borne. Taking advantage of localized resources, one of the major transportation options is a free public ferry operating between the northern to southern borders of the city. One fourth of residents report using the ferry regularly. Despite these options, 66% of residents still own a car. Hammarby has therefore encouraged carpooling, and the city expects at least 15% of residents to participate by 2010. Currently 8% (270 residents) participate in the program. Energy: For Hammarby, energy comes from waste and sun. Hammarby’s entire heating supply is based on waste or rewnewable energy sources with district heating and cooling centralized. The combined heat and power plant uses combustible waste as an energy source (biofuels), producing electricity and district heating. Additionally, the Hammarby heat plant extracts waste heat from treated wastewater in the Henriksdal wastewater treatment plant. District cooling is provided by the heat pumps, where heat is exchanged into water cooling. As a result, cooling is a byproduct of district heating. Solar cells and building integrated photovoltaics have been installed for the collection of energy. The energy from a 1m2 solar cell module produces 100 kWh/year, corresponding to the domestic electricity requirements of 3m2 residential floor space. Water: Water is a valuable, monitored resource in both a cell and a city. The installations of water-saving washing machines, dishwashers, low flush toilets and air mixer taps have reduced the average water use of an individual by 25%. Hammarby’s goal is to reduce water use by 50%, from 200 liters per person per day to 100 liters within the next few years (average water use figures

are based on the Stockholm average). Using a new water treatment system, 95% percent of the phosphorous and nitrogen extracted from wastewater is recycled on agricultural land. Additionally storm and drainage water from urban runoff is treated and reused. Waste: Hammarby operates on a cyclic system reminiscent of efficient cities of the past. Waste is reused for the soil treatment and the production of biofuels and biogas, used to run transportation systems and appliances. Hammarby implements a multilevel waste management model. Combustible waste is transported to the Högdalenverket where it is incinerated and recycled as heating and electricity. Food waste is transported to Sofielund where it is composted into soil with the ultimate goal of being converted into biogas and bio-fertilizers. Newspapers and packaging are recycled into other products, and electronic waste is disassembled and reused, though unusable excesses are deposited in landfills. Hazardous waste is incinerated. Porosity: The master plan of the city was a collaborative effort, inviting the participation of over 20 architects and designers. Though it is self sufficient and enclosed, the city is not culturally or economically exclusive. The Masterplan Team effectively aspired to create a new inner city district, designing extensive waterside units encouraging retail. The high density development creates an urban district that can sustain a range of shops and services. Planning policy and financial incentives encouraged businesses to open before the market had fully developed, further emphasizing the importance of porosity. Finally, Hammarby Sjöstad has excellent public spaces, with a permeable street pattern as well as an extensive network of parks. Hammarby


UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

Figure 08: human lungs Figure 07: veins in a leaf Figure 09: satellite image of a river basin

has indicated that at least 15m2 of courtyard space and a total of 25–30m2 of courtyard space and park area must be within 300 meters of every apartment. Additionally, at least 15% of the courtyard space is sunlit for at least 4-5 hours during the spring and fall equinoxes. Adaptability: The city has emphasized its role as a “laboratory” testing new building techniques, water purification systems and evaluating new technology. GlashusEtt is the city’s education center, where officials and residents can meet to discuss the future of the city while addressing current issues and developments. The education center reflects recognition of sustainability as a continuous process, constantly requiring open discussion and flexible remodeling. Evolution of Cities Cities like any other organism can- not remain stagnant in any climate whether political, economical or environmental. In this way, a city is continually evolving, and so too must its sustainable infrastructure. Contrary to the implication of its title, the sustainable movement is a dynamic process much like the Biomimicry Spiral model introduced earlier. Sustainable infrastructure must therefore consistently seek a closer fit to an ever-changing environment. The addition of a bulky photovoltaic cell is

not necessarily a sustainable technology, as it does not provide facile alteration or adaptation to its surroundings. Nothing is sustainable forever. Defining how flow systems change over time, Constructal Theory highlights how a system must be architecturally designed to ensure survival. Constructal theory operates on a basic rule: “For a system to survive it must evolve to provide increasingly easy access to the currents that flow through it.” Although seemingly abstract and irrelevant, this rule elegantly illustrates why some systems thrive and others fail. For any of these systems to sustain or survive, they must be architecturally designed in such a way that the elements within that system increasingly get to where they need to go. Figure 3 through 5 illustrate constructal theory. Here, we see the physical evidence that human lungs and a river basin have both evolved to in the optimal way to get their materials where they need to go (oxygen in the case of the lungs and water for the river basin). Over time these two systems adapted to a changing atmosphere, finding the maximum fit of their objectives to the environment; sustainability in a nutshell. Another biological example of Con-

structal Theory can also be found in native grass prairies whose flexibility of dominating grasses between wet and dry seasons allow the species to “redraw” the system to accommodate environmental changes. This simply illustrates that to ensure any man made system’s survival, we must maintain the flexibility to recognize important changes and reserve the freedom to “redraw” our designs. This directly applies to urban planning and architecture in the sense that designers and architects should consider the elasticity of their design. Can the design accommodate change? Is the building material flexible enough for alteration? To ensure the survival of an urban development, urban planners should consider the potential for adaptation and evolution of their design. The Organs Organs help organisms to function. Without efficient organs, a system cannot be considered sustainable. Biomimicry is capable of not only constructing theoretical concepts and efficient processes, but also tangible products. Biomimicry is best known for the organs it produces, which unfortunately are often gadgets advertising idealistic technology. The goal of this section is to illustrate the practical applications of the physical products Biomimicry can generate.


Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

Figure 10: Architectural applications of Biomimicry. Left: The Eastgate Centre in Harhare, Zimbabwe. Right: self-cleaning paint by Lotusan

Architectural Products: Biomimicry can yield concept designs for general urban planning as well as site-specific infrastructure. One particularly innovative example is the Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe designed by Mick Pearce. The nation’s largest shopping mall is modeled after a termite mound indigenous to the area, using a passive heating and cooling system that keeps the mound at a precise temperature despite severely fluctuating temperatures of the environment. Mimicking the termite system, the Eastgate Centre warms or cools outside air coming in contact with its concrete structure, venting it through floors and offices, where it ultimately escapes through ceiling vents. Developers of the Eastgate Centre saved 3.5 million dollars by not installing a standard air conditioning system. The savings have trickled down to the tenants, whose rents are 20 percent lower than those of other commercial buildings in the area. Automation Systems: Biomimicry has shown increasing promise for the automation systems industry. Smart Grids supply electricity to consumers using digital technologies in effort to reduce energy consumption and

increase reliability. The Smart Switch developed by REGEN Energy, manages energy by mimicking the algorithms of swarm bees used in colony organization. Consequentially, the Smart Switch avoids simultaneous energy demands from appliances without sacrificing individual performance. The product attaches to the electric box of a home and communicates with household appliances, turning off unused appliances as needed without human intervention. The device is simple to install and testing reveals that it can reduce energy consumption by 30% on commercial and residential buildings. Building Materials: Biomimicry is a huge contributor to the field of green building materials. One exciting development is the self-cleaning paint Lotusan, which mimics the bumps on the leaves of a Lotus plant used to collect water and clean foliage. Tiny bumps in the paint analogously collect dirt off of the buildings when exposed to rainwater, allowing a façade to essentially clean itself. Additionally, the self assembly of natural building materials is another area of promising biomimetics research. Researchers at Sandia National Labs developed a way to create a self-assembly coating process. Hard

building materials could be produced via the “self assembly” or simply the interlocking of molecules manipulated by evaporation at room temperature. The potential of this already existing technology is related to Photovoltaics as the user could effectively spray the necessary precursors onto a desired area and watch the materials selfassemble naturally. Case Study: Dye Sensitized Solar Cells (DSSC) The most important organ application of Biomimicry is the use of Dye Sensitized PV (Photovoltaic) systems. DSPV mimics the process of plant photosynthesis using Ruthenium based dyes instead of Silicon to conduct electricity. DSPV is superior to many Silicon based PV for in manufacturing, cost and application. Manufacturing: There are three major types of Silicon PV cells available on the market today; single crystal, polycrystalline, and amorphous silicon. A great deal of embodied energy is required in the manufacture of a Silicon based PV cell. The following chart illustrates the embodied energy for the three types of Silicon PV. DSPV requires less energy for


UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

manufacture than each of these silicon options, though the energy conversion efficiency is roughly 11%. DSPV are manufactured at relatively low cost on production equipment similar to manufacturing processes used by printing industries. Additionally, DSPV is manufactured using readily available materials that are relatively non-toxic. Ruthenium dye is one of the primary materials used in DSPV production. An analysis of the availability of Ruthenium reveals reserves that are projected to last well over 150 years. Silicon however is not found in nature so abundantly. Manufactures instead harvest polysilicon, splitting its molecules into Silicon via the Czochralski process at high temperatures. Carbon emissions are a large concern when considering silicon production. Currently, fourteen tonnes of Silicon are required to generate one mega watt of electricity. For every1 tonne of Silicon produced, 1.5 tonnes of CO2 is emitted. Typically a Silicon based solar cell will pay back this embodied energy in 1-5 years. A life cycle assessment of amorphous silicon PV systems showed a total embodied energy of 42 g CO2/ kWh. Alternatively DSPV produces

between 19–47 g CO2/kWh, reflecting a great potential for CO2 emission reduction. Currently nine producers manufacture the bulk of silicon available on the market, and collective in 2006 produced 35.5 ktons of Si, effectively emitting 53.55 kton of CO2 per annum (based on the above conversion factor). These figures can be related to Austin, Texas. Given the current PV capacity of Austin, 3.4 MW, and assuming the majority of PV installed to date is silicon based, we can yield a rough estimate of 71.4 tonnes of CO2 already emitted by production of these solar cell systems. Additionally, Austin Energy projects a PV capacity of 200MW within the next few years. If all these installations are silicon based PV, 4,200 tonnes of CO2 will have been emitted in their production. From an environmental perspective, the main improvement DSPV has made over the prevailing silicon technology is by the increase in conversion efficiency from solar radiation to electricity generation using lower embodied energy in manufacture and organic materials. DSPV is currently being tested against national standards by two major manufacturers, Dyesol and Fujikura.

Figure 11: Dyesol Panel

Table 1. Comparison of Solar Cell Materials
Figure12: DSSC as flexible thin film

Solar Cell material Embodied Energy (kW-hrs/m2) Energy Conversion Efficiency (%)

Crystalline Silicon 553 15-22

Polycrystalline Silicon 407 14-15

Amorphous Silicon 116 7-10

Cost: The market price and demand is on the rise for silicon as a result of increasing demand from the computer and semiconductor industries. Silicon market prices are expected to rise considerably as polysilicon reserves (the empirical material used to produce silicon) are in decline. When comparing total production of silicon to its usage over the last decade, we find that the


Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

total production of silicon is increasing while the total unused has completely diminished. This has a negative impact on the future of silicon prices, contributing to PV costs of 2$/watt or more. Alternatively, DSPV projects costs 1$/ watt making it readily competitive with the coal industry. Application: The installation and application of DSPV has a number of advantages over Silicon PV. Compared to silicon PV, performance of DSPV varies less with temperature fluctuations. The maximum power point voltage (Vmpp) for DSPV varies by 20mV over a temperature range of -10C to 70C whereas that of crystalline silicon cells significantly decreases with increasing temperature. Furthermore the flexible, film-like nature of DSPV makes it a perfect candidate for Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV). BIPV has a number of advantages and has been shown to be more efficient than providing a systems energy using a PV power plant. DSPV can be easily applied to building envelopes and facades, giving it much architectural potential. DSPV can be integrated into southern facades, used for shadowing and even incorporated into glazings. Additionally a flat roof is not required for its installation, unlike the bulky infrastructure of Silicon PV. DSPV also out performs Silicon PV in diffuse light conditions, when a panel cannot be directed towards the sunlight at an optimum angle. On an aesthetic level, DSPV can be customized in its appearance and is available in a variety of colors and shapes, catering to broader architectural applications. The Branches Sustainability ultimately links organs and organisms together, and can be defined as the agent tying the Biomimicry “loop”. For a system to be sustain-

able, the organs and organisms must be integrated together in a mutually dependent relationship. Sophisticated Biomimicry is the imitation of this relationship, effectively creating a unique, sustainable system. For example an organ produced by Biomimicry (the smart switch) is not inherently sustainable, but becomes so when integrated into the organism (a smart grid energy distribution system). Or a city built with sustainable urban planning is not sustainable unless the individual buildings within that system are also energy efficient. This concept can operate on various micro and macro scales. Furthermore it must be acknowledged that sustainability is not simply an idea, it is a reality of nature, easily identified and imitated. Such is the goal of Biomimicry, to ultimately produce the organs and organisms for the purpose of integration into a sustainable system, infinitely seeking an increasingly close fit to an ever changing environment. Sources
Aizenberg, Joanna, and Gordon Hendler. Designing efficient microlens arrays: lessons from Nature. Tech. Journal of Materials Chemistry, 24 June 2004. Web. <www.rsc.org/ materials>. Andrew. “Biomimetic and Sustainable Architecture: Learning from the Eastgate Building in Harare, Zimbabwe.” Weblog post. Z+ Blog. 2004. Web. <http://www.zpluspartners.com/ zblog>. “Ask Nature.” The Biomimicry Institute. Web. Summer 2009. <http://www.asknature.org>. Benyus, Janine M. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Morrow, 1997. Print. CABE. Rep. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment. Web. <http://www.cabe. org.uk/case-studies/hammarby-sjostad>. Desilvestro, Hans, and Yanek Hebting. “Ruthenium-based dyes for Dye Solar Cells.” Materials Science. Sigma Aldrich. Web. <http://

www.sigmaaldrich.com/materials-science/ organic-electronics/dye-solar-cells.html>. Desilvestro, Hans, Sylvia Tulloch, and Gavin Tulloch. Volume Manufacture of Dye Solar Cells. Rep. Dyesol, 2008. Web. <http://www.dyesol. com/index.php?element=Volume+Manufacture+ of+Dye+Solar+Cells>. Dorn, Jonathan G. “Solar Cell Production Jumps 50 Percent in 2007.” The Economics of PV. Earth Policy Institute, 27 Dec. 2007. Web. <http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/ Solar/2007.htm>. Ellin, Nan. Integral Urbanism. New York: Routledge, 2006. Print. Hamilton, Tyler. “Managing Energy with Swarm Logic.” Technology Review. MIT, 4 Feb. 2009. Web. <http://www.dyesol.com/index.php?element=Vo lume+Manufacture+of+Dye+Solar+Cells>. Harvey, Austin Energy, Tim. “AE PV Estimate.” Message to the author. 11 Aug. 2009. E-mail. Hough, Michael. City Form and Natural Process. New York: Van Nostrand Rienhold Company, 1984. Print. “How Do Solar Panels Work?” Great Lakes Renewable Energy Association. Web. <http:// www.glrea.org/articles/index.html>. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books, 1961. Print. McGee, Tim. “Constructal Theory: Introduction to the Inverse of Biomimicry.” Treehugger. Web. <http://www.treehugger.com/ files/2006/12/constructal_the.php>. Murray, Paul, Andy Thein, Sylvia Tulloch, and Hans Desilvestro. “Dye Solar Cells: The New Kid on the Block.” Photovoltaics World. Web. <www.pvworld.com>. Passino, Kevin M. Biomimicry for Optimization, Control and Automation. New York: Springer, 2--4. Print. Pierce, Joshua, and Andrew Lau. Net Energy Analysis for Sustainable Energy Production from Silicon Based Solar Cells. Tech. The Pennsylvania State University, 2002. Web. <http://jupiter.clarion.edu/~jpearce/Papers/ netenergy.pdf>. Platt, Brenda. Resources up in Flames. Rep. Waste to Wealth. Web. <http://www.ilsr.org/


UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

recycling/upinflames.pdf>. “Urban Density.” Smart Growth America. Web. <http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/>. Van Brummelen et al. “Life Cycle Assessment of Roof Integrated SolarCell Systems, (Report: Department of Science, Technology and Society, Utrecht University, The Netherlands, 1994. Van Sark, W.G.H.J.M, G.W Brandsen, and M. Fleuster. Analysis of the silicon market: Will thin films profit? Tech. Elsevier Energy Policy, 30 Jan. 2007. Web. <http://igitur-archive. library.uu.nl/chem/2008-0304-200907/NWSE-2007-326.pdf>.

Hawk, Thomas. Chihuly_92. Digital image. Flickr. Web. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ thomashawk/2603598680/>. Satellite image of tributaries. Digital image. White Lake Data Management. CFO. Web. <http://www.m2dxtx.com/> Eastgate building. Digital image. Web. <http:// www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/termitehararezimbabwe.jpg>. Dysol thin film and panel. Digital image. Genitron Sviluppo. Web. <http://www.genitronsviluppo.com/> All Hammarbi Sjostad Images. Digital image. Hammarby Sjostad. Web. <http://www.hammarbysjostad.se/>.


Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products


Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.