Defining Biomimicry:

Architectural Applications in
Systems and Products
Emily Royall

Instructor

Werner Lang

csd
Center for Sustainable Development
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

2

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
Biomimetics or Biomimicry is a
fashionable term whose ultimate
definition continues to evade us. The
purpose of this paper is to outline
a concrete theoretical and practical
definition for Biomimicry and high-
light its architectural applications.
In effort to clarify the Biomimetics
process and illuminate its relation-
ship to sustainability, the Biomimicry
“helix” will be introduced as a con-
tinuous model illustrating two integral
products of the Biomimicry process:
organs and organisms. The “organs”
and “organisms” of Biomimicry will
be explored in reference to photovol-
taics and urban planning, citing dye
sensitized solar cells and the sus-
tainable city, Hammarby Sjöstad, as
case studies.
What is Biomimicry?
Nature has already solved many
of the mechanical and structural
problems humans face today without
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
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 unsus-
tainable power of oil. Biomimetics
seeks to remedy such error design-
ing efficient systems and products.
Biomimicry is a spiraling, continuous
process, taking nature as inspira-
tion to generate “organs” (individual
products) or “organisms” (systems
and processes) for the purpose of
integration into a sustainable sys-
tem. For example, Biomimicry could
produce advanced photovoltaics (the
organ) inspired by photosynthesis, or
a “smart house” system (the organ-
ism) modeled after bee algorithms,
for the purpose of integration into
a sustainable energy system. The
model below illustrates this concept
using a double helix.
3
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

lem solving. The typical conception

of Biomimicry is often oversimplified
BIOMIMICRY

into a linear process. First one asks

the initial question, “How does nature
or solve my problem?” then observes
ga the solution in nature, creating a de-
sign that mimics the observation. For

n
this misconception, Biomimicry has

is
been severely criticized. I suggest

m
that what separates Biomimicry from
standard problem solving is its con-
susta
gan

inab tinuous, spiral-like nature, providing

ility no definitive solution, only products
and systems which can adapt to a
or changing environment. Additionally,
Biomimetics is typically mistaken for
biotechnology. Biomimetics is not
biotechnology because it does not
implement “bio-assisted” processes
Figure 02: The Biomimicry Helix Model by (such as using green algae to treat
Emily Royall waste water). Finally, Biomimicry
ity, integrates the organs and organ- is also often confused with art and
The helix model of Biomimicry aesthetics. Artists reproduce existing
isms produced by Biomimcry into a
reflects a number of nuances. Pri- patterns in nature for an aesthetic
continuously evolving system. This
marily, the model is a spiral. This effect. This is not Biomimicry as the
integral relationship with sustainabil-
represents the idea of Biomimicry organ created is not integrated with
ity is also relatable by a basic biologi-
as a continuously evolving process, an organism in a sustainable system.
cal rule: nature seeks to minimize
infinitely seeking a closer fit to the The organism product of Biomimicry
the amount of energy consumed in a
ever-changing environment. The spi- is the subject of the next section.
given period of time (E/T).
ral reflects the continuous feed back
and repeated fine tuning required to The Organism
To understand the broad applicability
adapt “organs” and “organisms” to
of Biomimicry, it is helpful to consider
the environment. Notably, the spiral The process of Biomimicry yields
nature as a mentor, measure and
motif is an important structural build- “organisms” in the sense that nature
model.
ing block in nature and is encoded can inspire the design of efficient
into ourselves and environment. systems. As mentioned earlier, bio-
As Mentor: We can view nature not
Secondly, “organs” and “organisms” logical systems (and efficient man-
as a possession, but as a teacher.
make up the two strands of the helix, made systems) seek to minimize the
reflecting their entwined equality. amount of energy consumed over
As Measure: We can use nature as
Organs include singular products time. Because this basic concept is
an ecological standard to measure
such as photovoltaic cells or fiber inherent to all sustainable systems,
the fitness of our own designs.
optics, and organisms are systems Biomimicry on this level can have
such as smart grids or cities. Bio- applications for many fields including
As Model: Biomimicry studies na-
mimicry is equally capable of yielding government and business mod-
ture’s models and emulates these
both kinds of items. Finally, note the els. Business models can fashion
forms or processes.
branches of the helix connecting the themselves after natural processes
organ and organism strand. These which are “waste-free, cyclical, and
There are however, a few problems
are “sustainability” branches, em- very efficient, running on sunlight,
with Biomimicry. It is difficult to seg-
phasizing the mutual dependence of use only what it needs, and focus-
regate Biomimicry from basic prob-
organs and organisms. Sustainabil-

4

ing on resource productivity.” The
context of this paper will deal with a
more architectural application to the
biomimetic production of systems;
urban planning.
In relating biology to urban plan-
ning we can reflect on the principles
illustrated by Richard Hopper in his
1970s article published in the Ameri-
can Planning Association magazine.
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 conse-
quence of degrading the system
3. expanded through new technologies and
methods of design or planning
Essentially Hopper makes an argu-
ment that is appropriate to Biomimic-
ry. In developing a sustainable urban
blueprint, one must include basic bio-
logical rules in mind. Hopper states
that there is a limit to the growth of
a system before it becomes unsus-
tainable (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 ex-
panded through innovative technol-
ogy. These basic principles illustrate
the natural relationship between
cities and nature and providing some
insight into the sustainability of met-
ropolitan areas.
Cities and Biology
What makes cities sustainable?
There appears to be popular consen-
sus that three principles define the
sustainability of the urban frontier:
Density, specialization and localized
infrastructure.
Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
Density:Dense metropolitan areas
show lower rates of vehicle own-
ership 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 trav-
eled (VMT), while housing 26.3% of
the national population, reinforcing
the notion that metropolitan resi-
dents drive less than the average
American. Additionally, although total
driving is concentrated in metropoli-
tan areas, the greatest driving per
person occurs in low density South-
western and Southeastern regions.
The spread of urban sprawl notably
requires more energy usage per
capita and does not minimize E/T.
Austin, Texas is no exception. An
Austin resident will drive an average
of 31.1 miles per day. The percent-
age of commuters walking to work
is only 2.2%, and the percentage of
commuters using Transit is a dismal
2.8%. Ironically, Austin ranks above
average when measuring the extent
of urban sprawl compared to other
major metropolitan areas.
Specialization:This is an area vital to
city life. 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 metro-
politan areas. The diversity of a city
is made up of a plethora of special-
ized 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 partici-
pants. 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 infrastruc-
ture 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.
In essence, metropolitan cities are
sustainable for much of the same
reasons that biological systems are
sustainable. Seeking to minimize en-
ergy consumption over time, natural
systems appear to use analogous
mechanisms that humans have
created, (or have naturally evolved)
to solve similar efficiency problems.
Such is a credit to the concept of
Biomimicry which evidently, is not
entirely foreign. Naturally and histori-
cally, humans have built cities limited
by the land, exhibiting Hopper’s
principles of energy ceilings as well
the biological principles of sustain-
ability. Cities built before the indus-
trial age of the 19th century were far
more modest in their energy de-
mands. They were built into the land,
integrating nature and industry as a
working rural and urban landscape.
Ancient European cities had com-
mon business areas, central squares
and localized infrastructure reducing
the need to travel long distances for
resources. These cities even oper-
ated on a cyclic system, using the
land to produce food and energy for
settlement activity which naturally
incurred waste that was once again
reapplied to the soil. Such cities of
the past were fueled by solar power,
illuminated at day break and end-
ing activity at night fall. Ironically the
contemporary sustainable movement
fashions itself as a novel trend, while
5
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
Figure 03: veins in a leaf
the basic principles of sustainability
appear to be “going back to nature.”
Cities and Cells
Biomimicry shows great potential for
urban planning. Imagine a city mod-
eled 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 charac-
teristics:
1. self-sufficiency
2. porosity
3. adaptability
Consider the potential architectural
applications of the following con-
cepts. ronment and also depend crucially
Cells are largely self sufficient as re-
flected particularly by their organiza-
tion. 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 orga-
nized, without unnecessary repetition
of infrastructure. As in a city, carbon
6
Figure 04: human lungs
dioxide is generated as waste, but is
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. The deconstruction and reuse of
materials, as opposed to demolition
has worked favorably for urban envi-
ronments, avoiding typical demolition
costs ($50/ton or more) and reducing
building costs. Cities could
also potentially mimic cellular trans-
port, where transportation within the
cell uses locally produced energy.
Yet despite their self-sufficiency, both
cells and cities must adapt to their
environment and retain an element
of porosity. Cells respond to internal
and external changes in their envi-
on effective communication systems
and signaling. Like a city, a cell’s “in-
ternational” communication is equally
as important as its local communica-
tion, allowing for the organized func-
tion of a unified system.
Evolution of Cities
Cities like any other organism can-
not remain stagnant in any climate
Figure 05: satellite image of a river basin
whether political, economical or
environmental. In this way, a city is
continually evolving, and so too must
its sustainable infrastructure. Con-
trary to the implication of its title, the
sustainable movement is a perma-
nent process much like the Biomim-
icry 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 ir-
relevant, this rule elegantly illustrates
why some systems thrive and others

fail. For any of these systems to
sustain or survive, they must be ar-
chitecturally 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 adapt-
ed 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 plan-
ning and architecture in the sense
that designers and architects should
consider the elasticity of their de-
sign. 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.
Case Study: Hammarby Sjöstad
In the outskirts of Stockholm lies
Sweden’s hailed “sustainable city,”
Hammarby Sjöstad. It functions
Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
(perhaps unknowingly) in a similar
manner to a cell via its self-suffi-
ciency, 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 fea-
tures 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 con-
struction. 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 con-
sumed 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 transporta-
tion, 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 encour-
aged carpooling, and the city expects
at least 15% of residents to par-
ticipate by 2010. Currently 8% (270
residents) participate in the program.
Energy: Energy will come from the
waste and the sun. Hammarby’s
entire heating supply is based on
waste or rewnewable energy sourc-
es. Hammarby’s district heating and
cooling is centralized. The combined
heat and power plant uses com-
bustible 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 Hammarby heat plant heat
pumps, where heat is exchanged
into water cooling. In this way, cool-
ing 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 produc-
es 100 kWh/year, corresponding to
the domestic electricity requirements
of 3m² residential floor space.
Water: Water is a valuable, moni-
tored resource in both a cell and a
city. The installation 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%,
7
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

from 200 litres per person per day to

100 litres 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 waste water
is recycled on agricultural land. Ad-
ditionally 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 appli-

Figure 06: Map of Hammarby Sjöstad

Figure 08: Waterside view of Hammarby Sjöstad

Figure 07: Map of Service Locations

Figure 09: Interior of Hammarby Sjöstad

8

Figure 10: Architectural applications of Biomimicry. Left: The Eastgate Centre in Harhare, Zimbabwe. Right: self-cleaning paint by Lotusan
ances. Hammarby implements a
multilevel waste management model.
Combustible waste is transported to
the Högdalenverket where it is incin-
erated and recycled as heating and
electricity. Food waste is transported
to Sofielund where it is composted
into soil with the ultimate goal of be-
ing converted
into biogas and bio-fertilizers. News-
papers and packaging are recycled
into other products, and electronic
waste is disassembled and reused,
though unusable excesses are de-
posited in landfills. Hazardous waste
is incinerated.
Porosity
The master plan of the city was a
collaborative effort, inviting the par-
ticipation of over 20 architects and
designers. Though it is self sufficient
and enclosed, the city is not cultur-
ally or economically exclusive. The
Masterplan team effectively aspired
to create a new inner city district,
designing extensive waterside units
with floor to ceiling heights encour-
aging retail. The high density de-
velopment creates an urban district
that can sustain a range of shops
and services. Planning policy and
Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
financial incentives encouraged busi-
nesses to open before the market
had fully developed, an impressive
initiative. Finally, Hammarby Sjöstad
has excellent public spaces, with a
permeable street pattern as well as
an extensive network of parks. Ham-
marby has indicated that
at least 15m² of courtyard space
and a total of 25–30m² of courtyard
space and park area must be within
300m of every apartment. Addition-
ally, 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 sys-
tems and evaluating new technology.
GlashusEtt is the city’s education
center. Here officials and residents
can meet to discuss the future of the
city while addressing current issues
and developments. The education
center reflects recognition of sus-
tainability as a continuous process,
constantly requiring open discussion
and flexible remodeling.
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.
Architectural Products: Biomimicry
can yield concept designs for general
urban planning as well as site-spe-
cific infrastructure. One particularly
innovative example is the Eastgate
Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe de-
signed by architect Mick Pearce.
The nation’s largest shopping mall is
modeled after a termite mound indig-
enous to the area, using a passive
heating and cooling system. Termites
build large mounds that must be kept
at precisely 87 degrees F despite
exterior temperatures ranging from
35 to 104 degrees. The termites
achieve this by constantly opening
and closing a series of heating and
9
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
cooling vents throughout the mound
over the course of a day. The system
is carefully adjusted to convection
currents, sucking up air in the lower
part of the mound down into marginal
enclosures and back up through a
channel to the peak of the termite
bound where heat is released. The
Eastgate Centre, primarily made of
concrete, operates in a similar way
where outside air is either warmed
or cooled by the concrete, vented
through floors and offices, and ulti-
mately escapes in ceiling vents. De-
velopers of the Eastgate Centre have
saved 3.5 million dollars from not
installing an air conditioning system
alone. These savings have trickled
down to the tenants, whose rents are
20 percent lower than those of other
commercial buildings.
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. Fiber Optics is
frequently required for the efficient
display and transportation of informa-
tion within these systems. The Venus
Flower Basket Sponge make their
Table 1. Comparison of Solar Cell Materials
Solar Cell mate- Crystalline Silicon
rial
Embodied Energy 553
(kW-hrs/m2)
Energy Conver- 15-22
sion
Efficiency (%)
10
own fiber optics and are better ca-
pable of transmitting light than indus-
trial fiber optic cables. Additionally,
Venus Sponge fibers are produced
at low temperatures using natural
materials and are more flexible than
the man-made variety. A study of the
way this species generates its own
fiber optics could reveal how humans
could make stronger, more efficient
fiber optics at ambient temperatures.
Another example of Biomimicry’s
contribution to automation systems is
the Smart Switch developed by RE-
GEN Energy, which manages energy
mimicking the swarm bee logic of
self organization. The goal is to avoid
simultaneous energy demands from
appliances without sacrificing indi-
vidual performance. The product at-
taches to the electric box of a home
and communicates with household Figure 11: Dyesol Panel
appliances, turning off unused ap-
pliances as needed without human
intervention. The device is simple to
install and tests have revealed 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 de-
Figure12: DSSC as flexible thin film
Polycrystalline Amorphous
velopment is the self-cleaning paint
Silicon Silicon
Lotusan, which mimics the bumps on
407 116 a lotus leaf used to collect water and
clean foliage. Tiny bumps in the paint
14-15 7-10 analogously collect dirt off of the
buildings when exposed to rainwater,
allowing a façade to essentially clean
itself. The self assembly of natural
building materials is another promis-
ing area of biomimetics research.
Sandia National Labs has found a

way to create a self-assembly coat-
ing process. Hard building materials
can be produced via the “self assem-
bly” or simply the interlocking of mol-
ecules manipulated by evaporation
at room temperature. The potential
of this already existing technology
is related to Photovoltaics. Imagine
spraying the necessary precursors
onto a desired area and watching the
materials self assemble naturally.
Case Study: Dye Sensitized Solar
Cells (DSSC)
The most important organ application
of Biomimicry is the use of Dye Sen-
sitized PV systems. DSSC is supe-
rior to many Silicon based PV for in
manufacturing, cost and application.
Manufacturing: There are three
major types of Silicon PV cells avail-
able on the market today; they are
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.
DSSC requires less energy for
manufacture than each of these
silicon options, though the energy
conversion efficiency is roughly 11%.
DSSC are manufactured at relatively
low cost on production equipment
similar to manufacturing processes
used by printing industries. Addition-
ally, DSSC is manufactured using
readily available materials that are
relatively non-toxic. Ruthenium dye
is one of the primary materials used
in DSSC 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.
Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
Manufactures instead harvest poly-
silicon, splitting its molecules into
Silicon via the Czochralski process at
high temperatures.
Carbon emissions are a large con-
cern when considering silicon pro-
duction. Currently, fourteen tonnes of
Silicon are required to generate one
mega watt of electricity. For every
1 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 DSSC produces be-
tween 19–47 g CO2/kWh, reflecting
a great potential for CO2 emission
reduction.
Currently nine producers manufac-
ture 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 an-
num (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. Addition-
ally, 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 DSSC has
made over the prevailing silicon tech-
nology is by the increase in conver-
sion efficiency from solar radiation to
electricity generation using lower em-
bodied energy in manufacture and
organic materials. DSSC is currently
being tested against national stan-
dards by two major manufacturers,
Dyesol and Fujikura.
Cost: The market price and demand
is on the rise for silicon as a result of
increasing demand from the com-
puter 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 total produc-
tion of silicon is increasing while the
total unused has completely dimin-
ished. This has a negative impact on
the future of silicon prices, contribut-
ing to PV costs of 2$/watt or more.
Alternatively, DSSC projects costs
1$/watt making it readily competitive
with the coal industry.
Application: The installation and ap-
plication of DSSC has a number of
advantages over Silicon PV. Com-
pared to silicon PV, performance of
DSSC varies less with temperature
fluctuations. The maximum power
point voltage (Vmpp) for DSSC
varies by 20mV over a temperature
range of -10ºC to 70ºC whereas that
of crystalline silicon cells significantly
decreases with increasing tempera-
ture (Murray). Furthermore the flex-
ible, film-like nature of DSSC makes
it a perfect candidate for Building In-
tegrated 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. DSSC can be easily
applied to building envelopes and
facades, giving it much architectural
potential. DSSC can be integrated
11
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
into southern facades, used for
shadowing and even incorporated
into glazings. Additionally a flat roof
is not required for its installation, un-
like the bulky infrastructure of Silicon
PV. DSSC 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, DSSC can be
customized in its appearance and is
available in a variety of colors and
shapes, catering to broader architec-
tural applications.
The Branches
Sustainability ultimately links or-
gans and organisms together, and
can be defined as the agent tying
the Biomimicry “loop”. For a sys-
tem to be sustainable, the organs
and organisms must be integrated
together in a mutually dependent re-
lationship. Sophisticated Biomimicry
is the imitation of this relationship,
effectively creating a unique, sustain-
able 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 integra-
tion into a sustainable system, infi-
nitely seeking an increasingly close
fit to an ever-changing environment.
12
Sources
Aizenberg, Joanna, and Gordon Hendler.
Designing efficient microlens arrays: les-
sons from Nature. Tech. Journal of Materials
Chemistry, 24 June 2004. Web. <www.rsc.org/
materials>.
Andrew. “Biomimetic and Sustainable Archi-
tecture: 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. “Ru-
thenium-based dyes for Dye Solar Cells.” Ma-
terials 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+Man
ufacture+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: Rout-
ledge, 2006. Print.
Hamilton, Tyler. “Managing Energy with
Swarm Logic.” Technology Review. MIT, 4
Feb. 2009. Web. <http://www.dyesol.com/
index.php?element=Volume+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: Introduc-
tion to the Inverse of Biomimicry.” Treehug-
ger. 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 Optimiza-
tion, 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/
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 Soci-
ety, 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/NWS-
E-2007-326.pdf>.
Images
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/ter-
mitehararezimbabwe.jpg>.
Dysol thin film and panel. Digital image. Geni-
 Defining Biomimicry: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

tron Sviluppo. Web. <http://www.genitronsvi-

luppo.com/>

All Hammarbi Sjostad Images. Digital image.

Hammarby Sjostad. Web. <http://www.ham-
marbysjostad.se/>.

13