Bachelor Thesis "THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT - For a radical sustainable living"

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT [FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING] Feasibility & Applicability in the Danish Building Industry

Photography Credits: Mueller Felix

BA Dissertation by Elena Cucchi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT [For Radical Sustainable-Living] Feasibility & Applicability in the Danish Building Industry

Author: ELENA CUCCHI BA of Architectural Technology and Construction Management Advisor: MILLE WILKEN BENGTSSON Academic Professor & Communication Consultant in DK and internationally

9th October 2020 KEA – Copenhagen School of Design and Technology Campus PCG │ Prinsesse Charlottes Gade 38, 2200 Copenhagen N

|2 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

ABSTRACT This dissertation starts with the idea of investigating the technologies behind the Earthship concept; an offgrid construction methodology based on the use of recycled material, rainwater harvesting, renewable solar energy, wastewater treatment, food production, and thermal mass. With the research I seek for an answer to the question: “Why has the concept of the Earthship model not been adopted in Denmark – yet?

And what would it take to implement it, as an alternative model of the Earthship concept, to the existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?”. Using a qualitative method of analysis, the aim is to analyse the feasibility of the concept for the Danish building industry. To do so, factors such as building regulation, climate adaption, sustainable material use, off-grid adoption, scalability, and thermal performance, must be considered. After breaking down the six earthship principles, desk research and literature reviews is carried out to form the theory for the analysis and discussion. The findings give voice to three professionals from the construction industry, who were hand-picked for a very specific reason, as they are walking on different paths, yet striving for the same sustainable future for the humankind and the planet. The interviews with them explores their perspective on Drivers & Barriers and Possibilities & Challenges of the earthship concept in a Danish context. The data collected offers three argumentative perspectives on the topic and a case study in Denmark. After a thorough analysis, discussion, and crossreferencing the theory with the findings, the research shows that the concept is not yet adaptable to the different weather and socio-economic conditions of Denmark. However, some of the principle are feasible for the implementation into the current sustainable solutions in use. The final suggestions are summarized as follow:    

scrutiny of sun exposure, and geo location must be done before to start working with the concept analysis on user’s consumption it is also important when planning a self-sustaining living unit financials consideration must be considered a deep understanding of the building regulation and law is fundamental

Keywords: Earthships, Sustainability, Living Building, Natural Building, Construction Industry, Resources, Material Recycle, Legislation, Building Regulation, Scalability, Vernacular Architecture.

I, the undersigned Elena Cucchi, hereby confirm that I have carried out this dissertation report without any unrightfully help (referring to Order no.714 of 27 June 2012, chapter 5, § 18, section 6).

X

Elena Cucchi

X

Elena Cucchi

BATCM Student at Kea

KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

|3

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Being always very passionate about what I do, makes me a driven and motivated young persona with genuine values, love for life, curiosity, and true sensibility towards our planet and the creatures living on it.

I do believe there is chance for an apology to our Planet and as a future Architectural Technologist I feel the responsibility and necessity to work for the environment other than against it. Our profession has the power to make an impact if practiced in the correct way. My goal for today and tomorrow is to push minds to become one unit with the ecosystem using the knowledge I am gaining throughout my studies to build a better place where people come together in a community that is not divided in developed and underdeveloped but united under the same strive. Career is something most of us aim for; however, we must acknowledge the marks and footprints we leave when stepping on our path. We must be aware, every single decision we take in the present reflecting on the past, it will always have a result that will be felt from future generations. Now more than ever it is time to think twice and act accordingly to the real values which are slowing in extinction together with humanity. It is time to change starting from the habits and growing together again.

This is my statement to anyone who will come across this paper, an incitement to reflect on our behaviours and their repercussion on society and environment. Our personal development should always follow the thirst for knowledge and balance, every encounter has a purpose and gratitude plays a fundamental role.

Each stage of life will guide us a step further, broadening the perspectives and leading us to new horizons.

People we meet along the journey will always have an impact on us and it is in this matter that I would like to express my appreciation to some of those who have been walking this path with me contributing to the realization of this research.

I want to acknowledge my family in its fundamental role on this important step of my life and want to thank my parents for always standing by me with their energy and motivation. A special thanks goes to my professor, advisor, and counselor Mille Wilken Bengtsson. I want to thank her for believing in me and for giving me her precious support in all the lows and highs of my academic journey. Her professional and human skills have been the key to not lose trust in myself and my own work. The merit for the realization of this dissertation goes also to Mikkel Christensen, Yovko Antonov, and Martha Lewis who had share their thoughts and opinions with me in the interviews. This paper would not have been possible without their precious contribution.

“Don't be pushed around by the fears in your mind.

Be led by the dreams in your heart.” ― Roy T. Bennett

|4 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

ABOUT THE INSPIRATION Elena Cucchi I believe that to have a strong argument that supports my choices in life and academic environment, it is important to always scrutinize and analyse my journey, starting from the overview of the background. Mine began with the decision to enrol in the BA of Architectural Technology and Construction Management at KEA. With this course I found myself learning about construction technologies and materials proprieties which inspired me and mutated my interest from a very design-oriented approach to a more investigative way of thinking. Analysing the anatomy of the building allowed me to develop a more critical attitude in the choice of certain building systems and materials over others, constantly stimulating the thirst for research and knowledge gain. Parallel to the love for my studies I have always had an extreme sensitivity towards our planet and the humankind, which could be clearly sensed in my engagement with multiple volunteer projects of different natures from marine conservation to human rights and equality.

The understanding of the importance of my position as an Architectural Technologist, made me realize how big of an impact our actions and choices have on the society and the environment, as well as how important it is to engage with our habitat embracing the process of learning to cooperate with it implementing the science of new technologies and rediscovering the power of basic functional systems.

“We love the organic forms of earthen architecture and the idea of living freely and in concert with nature – growing our food, reducing our need for systems, rising and setting with the sun – these are noble, sustainable, and mindful ways to live”. (Prinz, 2015).

With this one quote that I love, I think Rachel Prinz is summarizing with very simple words the idea of rediscovering the simplicity of living. The evolution of the humankind and technologies has in my opinion distracted us from what our basic needs truly are. The same way we, as individuals, decide between a vacation or a travel, we can also choose if we want to live our lives as tourists or as travellers. I choose to embrace mine as a journey of absorption from the global community and contribution to the local one.

|5 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CONTENTS CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................. 6 CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Structure .......................................................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER 2 | METHOD................................................................................................................ 9 2.1 Methods of Data Collection – How I collected my data ................................................... 9 2.2 Methods of Analysis – How I analysed my data ............................................................. 11 2.3 Evaluation of Methodological Choices – My rationale .................................................. 12 CHAPTER 3 | THEORY ................................................................................................................14 3.1 The Earthship concept ................................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 The design principles ............................................................................................. 14 3.1.2 The same principles into different models ............................................................ 16 CHAPTER 4 | FINDINGS ..............................................................................................................18 4.1 The case study ............................................................................................................... 18 4.1.1 The story from the builder .................................................................................... 18 4.1.2 An Earthship-inspired building .............................................................................. 19 4.1.3 Working with and around Building Regulations .................................................... 20 4.2 The Industry Perspective................................................................................................ 21 4.2.1 The voice of the insiders: Yovko Antonov and Mikkel Christensen ....................... 21 4.2.2 The neutral ground: Martha Lewis ........................................................................ 22 CHAPTER 5 | ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION .......................................................................................26 5.1 Analysis: How to implement the earthships principles in Denmark .............................. 26 5.1.1 Policy and regulations ........................................................................................... 26 5.1.2 Waste material and resources .............................................................................. 27 5.1.3 Climate and scalability ........................................................................................... 27 5.2 Discussion: Possibilities for a hybrid earthship design ................................................... 28 CHAPTER 6 | CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................30 6.1 Overall conclusion .......................................................................................................... 30 6.2 Suggestions .................................................................................................................... 30 6.3 Future work.................................................................................................................... 31 BIBLIOGRAPHY...........................................................................................................................31 APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................................33 Appendix 1 Methodological Approach ................................................................................ 33 Appendix 2 Michael Reynolds .............................................................................................. 35 Appendix 3 Interview A ........................................................................................................ 36 Appendix 4 Interview B ........................................................................................................ 39 Appendix 5 Interview C ........................................................................................................ 41

|6 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background As a conclusion of my academic studies, I see the Bachelor Dissertation as an important stepping-stone for my future career with the purpose to dive into a specific topic within the construction field that particularly interests me. Moreover, writing this dissertation offered me a great opportunity to deeply research and understand a certain building model that I would like to explore in my future working environment.

The act of building with a purpose has faded away with time, revealing failure in protecting our Mother Nature. It was exactly this realization that weakened my mind pushing my thinking off-grid to meet the Earthship concept born in the 70s, and increasingly current, which goes far into and beyond a building model based on materials recycle and sustainable principles. Imagine a model of house built with recycled materials, totally self-sufficient, which heats itself, harvest rainwater, reuse its sewage water, and grows its own food. Well, I am not making a paradigm, it has existed already for the last fifty years and it is called Earthship. It is a type of off-grid house freed from the traditional water, electricity, and gas supply systems, which was designed and described for the first time by the architect Michael Reynolds in 1971, in the wake of the environmental movement. In 1988, the American architect created the first Earthship in New Mexico with beer cans, glass bottles, and tires, continuing to this day his research and the global spread of his ideals of sustainable life. The choice of this topic comes from my genuine and very deep interest on the future of our planet and the repercussion that the construction industry has already had and keeps having on the environment. Michael Reynolds, the so-called “Garbage Warrior” (GARBAGE WARRIOR, 2007), has shown us that is possible to have a positive impact when building our houses, reaching an energy-positive construction that not only does not leave a footprint when being built, but it also fully sustain itself throughout its life cycle.

The Earthship concept integrates and expands on some of the ideas behind bioclimatic design – used for ages in vernacular architecture, where environmental and climate conditions are taken into consideration to optimize the users’ comfort yet reducing building’s environmental footprint. However, my aim with this research was to define which aspects of the Earthship concept could and could not be effectively adopted in a Nordic country, still fulfilling the requirements imposed by the Building Regulation. This analytical approach came from my being quite of an ideologist, who supports forward-thinking initiatives like the Earthship one, but who also like to apply critical thinking, when investigating unconventional problemsolving. The lateral thinking at the base of Michael Reynolds’ doctrine is rather interesting, but still fairly lacking in detailed studies and research on its regional adoption. Reynolds has pioneered the concept and its first appearance in the harshness of the desert in New Mexico, then gradually translated it into some other global context such as Asia, Europe, and UK. However, what seemed to be lacking were technical information about this translation process, which made me then reflect on the feasibility of the concept.

These considerations led my research towards finding more critical analysis from professionals, who have wondered the same about earthships. Such a research required to analyse the issues and challenges from multiple viewpoints, evaluating the possibilities of the Earthship concept on a global model but for the local

|7 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

adaption. The aim was to understand if this US-based concept would be feasible for the Danish legislative, socio-economic, and climatic conditions and if not, then what could be implemented from the original model that works in the local building industry. To find such an answer, a case study in Denmark and people’s experience were important for the success of this dissertation.

1.2 Scope I believe the potential of this dissertation is to bring consciousness in the building industry and tackle some of the issues on the current agenda. Yet, my aim was also to produce a valuable piece of research to refer to when applying for jobs, and a very rich starting point for a potential future Master research.

The intent of this paper is to break down the six sustainable principles that the Earthship concept builds upon and analyse each of them to find the applicability on the Danish construction industry. This dissertation aims to assume an investigative tone, yet some more provocative arguments are purposely made when discussing barriers and challenges in terms of building regulation, resources (re)use, and ethics.

The main purpose of this research is to collect data and meaningful experiences to inform the reader about the potential, but also limitations of such concept depending on the context of its implementation. “There is a lot about sustainability, natural materials and local materials. Sustainability is a big animal” (Christensen, 2020), and this is the reason why with this dissertation I had to limited my field of research to the specific case of sustainability connected to the Earthship concept, focusing on the correlation with the Nordic environment. I imagined as a potential target for this paper anyone who is passionate about the sustainable change and is ready to embrace a mindset switch. Individuals that are driven by curiosity and thirst for new experimental knowledge. Nevertheless, I hope to also catch the attention of academics and professionals in the design, architecture, engineering, construction, and energy management field who have the interest in producing mindful products for our society and future generations. Finally, I wish this to be a pleasant and informative reading for anyone that is simply curios and looking for an inspiration and new perspective.

1.3 Structure Considering the span of the subject I defined some limitations to the research keeping my focus on investigating the potential implementation of the principles of an earthship in the Danish building industry.

To facilitate the collection of data I constructed the dissertation on two clusters of information which I then converged and analysed in a following third chapter. The first chapter is purely descriptive presenting the original concept, the founder, and the six sustainable principles both in the theory and the practice. This first section is very important to understand the concept in its simplicity which allows the reader then to follow the further analysis of its applicability in the Danish context. The second chapter investigates the Drivers & Barriers and the Challenges & Solutions in the implementation of the Earthship concept in Denmark by looking at a case study in the town of Horsens. Lastly, the third chapter assumes a critical tone by giving voice in the discussion to a third party. The theory, the case study and the perspective come together in the discussion and then conclusion answering my research question “Why has the concept of the Earthship model not been adopted in Denmark – yet? And what would it take to implement it, as an alternative model of the Earthship concept, to the existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?”.

|8 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 2 | METHOD 2.1 Methods of Data Collection – How I collected my data Once I designed my methodological approach to the research (see Appendix 1 for research design), I was aware of what kind of data was needed for my research, I had to decide when, where, and how to collect it which helped me to define my research method.

I want to stress the fact that, the collection method I chose was directly joint with the type of data I needed, and because the data I collected were of various typology, I also had a diversity in the method which was defined by the use of different tools. Due to the nature of my dissertation statement and research question, I chose a qualitative research for the overall approach which successfully applied to both primary and secondary data. This allowed me to investigate personal experiences and perspective of the participants, revealing their behaviour and perception on the discussed topic.

For the theory chapter, I started by collecting secondary data to locate my research in an existing body of work. This was done using several secondary sources such as books, reports, and websites. I used the Earthship Biotecture official website primarily to perceive the knowledge about the concept and its six principles; to get the raw truth about Michael Reynolds approach and ideas, including the specifics of how he plans each system to work. Together with the revision of some of his published literatures, few past interviews with Reynolds himself, and the latest news posted on blogs, this helped me to set the background for my statement; providing an explanation of the principles and creating a solid foundation for the first part of the chapter. As a sort of blueprint of the original concept, the theory is counterbalanced by some critical studies done on the earthship model followed by an evolution of the concept. The analytical content of the theory was retrieved from reviewing some publications, the first being a report entitled Analysis of the performance of earthship housing in various global climates (Kruis & Heun, 2007), that was published as a proceeding of Energy Sustainability 2007 in California. The study in the report was conducted from Nathanael J. Kruis and Matthew K. Heun, both engineering PhD at Calvin College in Michigan, by studying real values as well as values from simulations ran on industry-standard software. In this report, they also calculated the financial outcome of the same earthship construction, compared to a regular wood-framed insulated house with the same floor plan. What I found very interesting, and at the same time validating, was the fact that this report was also used, as a resource, in the publication by Rachel Prinz, that I analysed in this part of the theory. With the title HACKING the EARTHSHIP / In search of an earthshelter that works for everybody (Prinz, 2015), this book is the result of a coalition of architects, engineers, designers, and sustainability experts all sharing their knowledge to answer some of the “myths” behind the original Earthship concept. The author, Rachel Preston Prinz, is an American trained architect, preservationist, and documentary filmmaker, with 25 years of experience working with sustainability. With a Bachelor in Environmental Design, a Master’s of Architecture and Certificate in Preservation from Texas A&M University, and several awards and accreditations, Rachel has worked for 10 years in an architecture firm, to then start her own consulting agency Archinia. After joining the Architecture 2030 movement and

|9 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

the SEED campaign, she started a 5-year research project on “natural earth-centred” and sustainable design, in New Mexico and around the globe. It is in this context that the book HACKING the EARTHSHIP took shape, offering a critical approach to the concept based on academic and scientific research review, and a collection of experiences from people, who has built or owned an earthship. Following on the line of crossreferencing and source validation, the third literature I have used, Earthships in Europe (Hewitt & Telfer, 2012), is also mentioned in the publication from Rachel Prinz as a resource. This second edition of Earthships in Europe comes from the collaboration between the two authors Mischa Hewitt and Kevin Telfer. With a MSc Architecture: Advanced Energy & Environmental Studies from the Centre for Alternative Technology, and as Certified European PassivHaus Designer from the University of Glasgow, Mischa has been working as a energy consultant and project manager for more than 17 years, running his consulting company Earthwise. As trustee of the Sustainable Building Association (AECB), he was involved in the Earthship Brighton project, delivered by the Low Carbon Trust, where he met Kevin Telfer, author and journalist who had the opportunity to interview Michael Reynolds for The Architects’ Journal in 2003. In the book, the two authors objectively explore the stories from the pioneers of the “first generation of earthships built in Europe”. This is done through an analysis of what was successful and what did not work in the translation of the concept, concluding with critical suggestions of what can be done differently to adapt the concept to a European scenario.

Moving into the findings section, to compile meaningful information, I collected an abundant amount of primary data to build up my case study in Horsens, exploring the drivers and barriers from different perspective, and understanding what the participants believed and what their motivations were. In order to gain a better insight of the challenges and possibilities for the implementation of the Earthship concept in Denmark, semi-structured interviews were conducted with three participants who were purposely selected for their position and involvement in the building industry. The first was a face-to-face interview with Mikkel Christensen conducted at Christianias Byggekontor where he works as a Construction Technical Advisor. With a broad academic background in architecture, environmental design, architectural technology, and sustainable design – conducted in the United States and partially in Denmark, Mikkel was a treasure of argumentative information and reflections supported by his solid knowledge on the subject.

His rich professional background, together with his enthusiasm for the earthship concept, and his direct contribution to the project in Horsens as a trained carpenter, helped me to familiarize with the issues that were faced along the way and set a solid ground for further investigations. The second interview with Yovko Antonov was crucial for my research because gave me a detailed overview on the project in Horsens for my case study. Yovko Antonov is a young Civil Engineer from Bulgaria who moved to Denmark eleven years ago to pursue his academic carrier. He started his studies in 2009 with a Bachelor’s in civil engineering at VIA University College in Horsens, followed by an additional Master’s Degree in Indoor Environmental and Energy Engineering at Aalborg Universitet in Aalborg, Nordjylland. After being a Research Assistant at Aalborg Universitet, Yovko started a PhD Fellowship on Residential Retrofit Assessment for Near Zero Energy and CO2 emission. As co-founder of the organization Building Tomorrow, he was involved in the project in Horsens from the initial idea to the final construction which made him a valuable source for collecting data. Besides, he gave me an insider’s perspective of what the actual drivers and barriers were, during the project development. Lastly on the round of interviews, I had the honour to meet another important figure in the sustainable scene of Denmark’s building industry. Winner of the 2019 Sustainable

| 10 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Element Prize in Denmark, Martha Lewis is a brilliant acknowledge American Architect with an admirable academic background and a rich professional resume. With a Bachelor of Arts, History, magna cum laude from Vassar College in New York State, and a Master of Architecture, Architectural Design from Washington University in St. Louis, Martha was honoured with the Laura Adelina Ward Prize and later with the James Harrison Steedman Travel Fellowship in Architecture in 1988. Martha has been working as an architect for 30 years in New York, then in Berlin and now in Copenhagen, where she has been employed at Henning Larsen over the last 17 years becoming Head of Materials in 2018. Martha offered me a very different and interesting third perspective on the Earthship concept; as an architect and expert in materials and sustainability, she offered her reflections on a concept which was fairly new to her by the name, yet not by its form. Her connotative arguments were supported by a deep understanding of building materials and regulation due to her expertise in sustainability and building certifications such as, DGNB (German Sustainable Building Council, 2020) and LEED (U.S. Green Building Council, 2020), and an owner of a WELL AP accreditation (International WELL Building Institute, 2020).

The distribution of the interviews around the topic was strategic, resulting into three different levels of information and perspectives: insights from Yovko, the man involved in the construction of an earthshipinspired building in Denmark; oversights from Mikkel, the man who knows and appreciate the concept, but who also knows the reality of the industry; third eye perceptions from Martha, the woman looking at the concept from outside with a critical and analytical approach. Differently from the first one with Mikkel, both interviews with Martha and Yovko were conducted digitally through video calls, however all three of them lasted approximately between 45 to 90 minutes each and were audio-recorded with the interviewee consent. A quite large amount of data was generated by using interviews as a tool, yet the recordings had to be transcribed before I could start analysing them.

As part of my method, I believe that the project in Horsens was the driving force, moreover through the interview with Yovko, and the analysis of secondary sources such as articles, photographs, technical drawings and official records from the organisation Building Tomorrow, I gained a thorough understanding of the case study and its context diving into barriers, challenges, and possibilities connected to it.

For collecting more qualitative data in a shorter time span, I also planned to apply the survey method and run it in parallel with the interviews and the literature review. However, I realized along the way that this method was not much suitable in reflection to the statement of my dissertation and the subject of my research.

To clarify the findings in this dissertation were collected from primary and secondary sources, all listed in the References section. The accuracy of the secondary data is fully attributed to previous studies done by second parties, yet the results must not be used for any purpose other than further research/development.

2.2 Methods of Analysis – How I analysed my data The last step in my research was to decide on the method for analysing the collected data and to define what I wanted to achieve from the analysis. Same as it was for the previous considerations, I chose again to use a mixed method of analysis to better process the data following their nature and typology. The overall approach was qualitative since it partially relied on my professional judgement on the participants’ motivations and perceptions of the topic implying a careful reflection on my argumentative choices and

| 11 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

assumptions. In this qualitative analysis I primarily focused my attention on identifying and categorizing the information into two key themes that I defined as Drivers & Barriers and Challenges & Possibilities in relation to the six fundamental principles of the Earthship concept. This allowed me to look for patterns within the interviewees perspective, to interpretate them and place the results in the right cluster of information. The social context and professional background played a crucial role in understanding the origin of their viewpoint. To formally define the chosen investigating methods, I used thematic analysis on the transcribed interviews, though for the literature review I opted for content analysis to faster and better study the large amount of textual data selecting the relevant part for my contents. Further I cross-referenced the theory and the case study adding the third perspective on it to then elaborate the answer to my research question and draw the conclusion to the thesis statement.

2.3 Evaluation of Methodological Choices – My rationale As a conclusion of the research design, I took the time to reflect on the choices I made throughout the process questioning if they were the most suitable accordingly to the accomplished achievement. From an analytical point of view, I think there was no other method that would have worked as effectively as the one I chose for my research. With the topic being quite unrevealed – especially in the European context and even more in Denmark, it would have been almost impossible to perform a quantitative research on a sample-based method and with trends and statistics as data type. First, the scarcity of knowledge about the topic – in the Danish building sector, made it already really hard to find targets for the interviews, so considering for example a survey – where I would have needed a big amount of samples to get complete data, the result would have been not sufficient to generate a proper answer to the research question.

Second, my research question was very much focused on tackling a specific dilemma investigating technical, legal, and ethical aspects connected to it, meaning that to study in depth the barriers and challenges I had to understand people perspective and what their experience could tell me. Also, I must say that the concept itself goes somehow beyond the solo act of building, involving quite some elasticity in people mindset to be fully embraced and practiced. This made it of course harder to get more voices on the stage, but on the other hand made it quite interesting to see how small are the steps that we make in accordance with the ideas we follow. I believe the result I achieved with this dissertation by using this method can contribute to spread the new knowledge I produced, together with the awareness and understanding of what we must do to overcome the challenges and implement the principles of the Earthship concept in our Danish houses.

On the practical side I must admit it was not a completely smooth path the one I walked. The responsiveness and engagement of the participants for the interviews was excellent and quite on point, although I did encounter a small difficulty with one of them. While I was conducting the digital interview with Yovko, it happened that the recording of the session did not switch on without me realizing until the end of the interview. It was a moment of panic and sadness because of the amount of precious information that I had just lost. Technology has become more and more one thing with the human being, but I still like to think that it is not smart enough to fully rely on it. This being said, after analyzing the situation I started to write down everything that I could possibly remember into notes and then I sent the document to Yovko for checking and approval of its validity. This saved part of my research, teaching me that there is no problem that cannot be overcome, plus I had the advantage to have the full interview under my skin and in my head word after word, not to mention the value of the network that I have established. The interview with Mikkel

| 12 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

not only was unbelievably informative yet made me rediscover the idea of community and the concept of giving back to it. This research enlightened me in so many ways taking almost the shape of an inner journey within myself. I hope this will help to strengthen anyone that will want to give value to this dissertation even though I am aware that my conclusion does challenge the current assumptions and creates some bases for a further research and development.

| 13 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 3 | THEORY 3.1 The Earthship concept “I think that it is the birth right of any man, woman, and child on this planet to have access to autonomy and sustainable living for themselves and their family” (M. Reynolds, TEDx Talks Cabo Polonio, April 2016).

The Earthship concept was born on the flow of this vision, addressing the six fundamental “human needs for a harmonious life on Earth” which are: food, energy, clean water, shelter, garbage management, and sewage treatment. Introduced for the first time in the 70s by Michael Reynolds (see Appendix 2 for detailed biography), the original concept was proposing a model of housing with the core characteristics being: sustainability, autonomy, and feasibility. An earthship is meant to be sustainable from the materials choice to the energy conservation, Figure 1 The 6 human needs for a autonomous because designed to be off the grid, and financially harmonious life on Earth (earthshipglobal.com) feasible and constructable to anyone.

3.1.1 The design principles The Earthship concept is based on the idea of creating off-grid living units that are self-sustaining and built using materials that would otherwise be discarded in landfills, in conjunction with natural components such as soil, wood, and stones. The design of an earthship is developed around six principles (Figure 2) which are: “building with natural and repurposed materials, thermal/solar heating and cooling, solar and wind electricity, water harvesting, contained sewage treatment, and food production” (EARTSHIPBIOTECTURE, 2020).

Figure 2 Explanation of the building systems of an Earthship (earthshipbiotecture.com)

| 14 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

In the construction of an earthship, three of the exterior walls are built using tyres filled with rammed earth that, alongside the berm, create the thermal mass of the house. The interior plumbing walls have a wooden frame and the remaining inner walls are usually built with glass bottle or cans hold together with concrete. On the fourth side there is a slanted glazing for passive solar heating (Figure 3). The heat going through the façade is then stored in the thermal mass, which stabilizes the temperature inside and provides a comfortable indoor climate.

The addition of a glass wall behind the glazing façade, creates a hallway that function as a greenhouse for the cultivation of vegetables and plants. Photovoltaic panels or wind turbines are used to produce energy, that is then collected and stored with batteries; in the original design this system is enough to supply energy for the users’ consumption. To provide natural ventilation a geothermal vent is placed through the berm Figure 3 Earthship cross section: passive heating and cooling bringing in fresh air, that is then naturally system (urbannext.net) exhausted through the top part of the glass wall and façade. The metal panel roof is used for rainwater harvesting which is then collected into cisterns placed in the berms. Using a system called Water Organizing Module, the stored water is filtered and pressurized to provide running water for sinks, showers, baths, and solar thermal how water boilers. The greywater is filtered and aerated through interior botanical cells and collected in a well, before to be pumped in the toilet tank for flushing (Figure 4). The blackwater from

Figure 4 Wastewater treatment in an Earthship (earthshipbiotecture.com)

| 15 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

the toilet is discharged into a conventional septic tank that overflows into a sewage treatment planter, placed outside the unit.

3.1.2 The same principles into different models On the line of what suggested by Reynolds, “Earthships can be completely off-grid or partially offgrid. Earthships can be built in any part of the world, in any climate (with a permit) and still provide comfort, electricity, potable water, contained sewage treatment and sustainable food production” (EARTSHIPBIOTECTURE, 2020). According to the latest updates from Earthship Biotecture, the systems that are involved in the design principles of the earthship can be implemented in conventional buildings as a renovation project and can have conventional Figure 5 Simple Survival Earthship Model plan drawing (earthshipbiotecture.com) backups. In addition, the constant development made on the original concept, led to the creation of several models of earthships, which adapts to different circumstances and user needs.

The Simple Survival earthship model (Figure 5) was developed on the bases of the earthquake-relief demonstration project in Haiti and it has been used in disaster-relief circumstances around the world. In similar circumstances, the Circular Rooms Hut design (Figure 6) also evolved from a “hurricane-relief project in Honduras” and its peculiarity is the two circular modules that are connected by a greenhouse with a sloped façade.

Figure 6 Circular Rooms Earthship design floor plan The Encounter earthship model is designed to function the same way as the Global model, but it requires a smaller financial investment. The Global earthship design (Figure 7) includes all the previous described systems, with the addition of underground tubes for cooling that, together with convention skylights on the greenhouse, facilitate natural ventilation and air conditioning. According to the Earthship Biotecture website, this model of earthships have been built in Germany, France, Mexico, Canada, and United States.

(earthshipbiotecture.com)

On this remark there are some unclarities around the Figure 7 Global Earthship Design floor plan global adaption of the concept, even for the Global (earthshipbiotecture.com)

| 16 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Earthship model, as there is not enough information about its feasibility in all climate zones. What emerges from one of the studies done on the earthship performance is that the concept does not result as effective alternative to conventional building constructions (Kruis & Heun, 2007). In the same report is also explained that, accordingly to the development reached at the time of the study, the earthship concept could not provide a constant comfortable indoor climate only through passive heating, as Reynolds promoted. The same result was also found in regards of adequate water supply coming from rainwater harvesting and greywater reuse, and energy supply from photovoltaic panel, at a reasonable price. However, with the addition of auxiliary heating systems and back-up water supply, the concept can be used to improve sustainability in residential units compare to a regular grid-tied house. In regard of climate adaptability, the same study showed that earthships are not “financially feasible design alternative” for tropical wet or dry weathers. A very similar statement can be found in another publication Earthships in Europe (Hewitt & Telfer, 2012), where after a critical research and analysis of case studies in Europe, they confirmed that the data reporting earthships’ performance in temperate climates are very limited, with an absence of European residential examples that have been monitored on a regular base. In the book they suggested that “to successfully transfer the concept to Europe”, a deeper study of the thermal performance is needed; and this is because, the current examples of earthships built in a temperate European climate fails to achieve the thermal performance, expected from a building that is in principles considered sustainable, effective, and low-carbon. In the publication they conclude saying that, if the earthship concept wants to be implemented globally, it does absolutely need “significant design improvements”. And if that is not to happen, they predict earthships to remain “outlaw buildings on the fringes of architecture – or perhaps the refuges of the last survivors in a post-industrial, postapocalyptic future” (Hewitt & Telfer, 2012).

| 17 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 4 | FINDINGS 4.1 The case study According to the research found in Earthships in Europe (Hewitt & Telfer, 2012) yet confirmed by the official Earthship Biotecture website, and in an article from the Deputy Chairman of Earthship DK (Lütken & Bonde, 2012), there are several projects in Sweden, Scotland, England, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, which are at different project stages, or have been cut off for various reasons. What I found very interesting for my research was that they mentioned the presence of other projects that have been strongly influenced by the Earthship concept, although they have been built as a sort of hybrid designs. The reason for mentioning this is to introduce the case study that I have been researching in Denmark with the precious collaboration of Yovko Antonov and Mikkel Christensen.

4.1.1 The story from the builder In one of the interviews that I ran, I had the pleasure to meet Yovko Antonov. A like-minded young Civil Engineer who, after reading an article about Earthships written from his fellow student Darius, also found himself questioning the why this concept was not yet implemented in Denmark. Earthships are built upon thermal mass, water reuse, energy generation, and food production, so they asked themselves if and how well this model would have worked in a Nordic context. Their main doubts came after considering that the type of abundant materials in New Mexico is not the same as it is in Denmark plus, the regulations are tighter and there is not a predisposition to using natural materials due to a lack of documentation.

The casual conversation between Yovko and Darius about the article, together with the “Why don’t we build it here?” (Antonov, 2020), materialized in 2012 into a non-profit organization called Building Tomorrow. This brought together a multinational team with a background in the construction industry, marketing, and architecture, striving to promote the sustainable agenda within each other’s area of study.

Formed by a group of international students from VIA University College, the organization had the aim to design, build and research an Earthship inspired building on the Horsens’s campus. It is important to underline the fact that the building was planned as a pilot project with the purpose to study the method and test the different technologies applied. By placing a series of measuring units, one of the team’s objective was to keep track of the results over time and weather conditions, to find out if the Earthship concept works in Denmark. After an extended research and fundraising, the organization got the permission to build their revised version of an Earthship in the Horsens’s campus, using a plot of land which was made available for research studies and that already hosted two other prototype of housing solutions.

The concession of the building permit from the municipality was facilitated by the fact that this Earthship inspired building would not have been inhabited by anyone. Together with the support of some sponsors, the construction started in June 2012 and was completed in 2014 contrarily to what the prediction was.

The main causes for the delay were, among others, the insufficient planning, the continuous change of parts in the design and the fact that it was purely volunteers-based work so not fully reliable in terms of consistency on site and quality of the work.

| 18 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

4.1.2 An Earthship-inspired building The project in Horsens is better defined as Earthship-inspired for two specific reasons: the design does not include all the six principles promoted by the original concept, and its function is different from the residential one as most of the earthships are. According to Yovko, there are no solar panels installed and this is simply because, during Danish winters the sun light intake would not be enough to provide alone a sufficient amount of energy to fully sustain the house usage, unless some large batteries are installed.

They were granted the permission to add wind turbines however the project did not go that far, and time and money were scarce. Second, the treatment of wastewater is not considered because, the absence of toilet due to the non-residential function, does not require a sewage system. Last, differently from the Earthship concept, where the aim is to almost entirely use recycled materials together with bio materials, in the Horsens project most of the resources were purchased (this includes the tyres that have been used), or donated from sponsors as in the case of windows and skylights. However, three of the principles were successfully implemented in the construction.

This included a system for rainwater harvesting to reuse as clean water, a buffer zone to host a greenhouse for food production and indoor climate control, and the thermal mass of the back wall made of earth rammed tyres. In regards of rainwater harvesting-and-reuse in the building system, the Danish legislation is quite strict in regards of water contamination, treatment, and disposal, in fact they were requested to change the name on the drawings from sink to water tap to be approved (Figure Figure 8 Water System (Building Tomorrow) 8). For the buffer zone and green house, they used full height glazing windows with a 10°angle completed with 2-layer glass skylights on a timber structure (Figure 9). Using thermal mass to provide a good indoor climate was one of the most challenging of the three principles that they have accomplished in fact, to achieve a comfortable temperature they had the necessity to add mechanical ventilation and a floor heating system with pumps (Figure 10).

Figure 9 Cross Section, buffer-zone (Building Tomorrow)

| 19 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Another big challenge they faced was in connection with the pounded tyre wall where resources, structural stability and U-value calculation became a concern. As mentioned previously, collecting tyres from landfills as Michael Reynolds does was not a possibility in this case where instead, they had to buy the tyres to get all of them of the same size and height. It is also important to mention that to achieve the U-value requirements for the back wall, the earth pounded tyres were not enough yet they added a layer of insulation, a waterproof membrane, and reinforced cement Figure 10 Section ventilation system (Building Tomorrow) plaster on the exterior, completed by panels on timber frame in the interior side of the wall (Figure 11).

Finally, stability also became a complication for the project in Horsens, especially during the erection of the back wall although they did make approved and valid structural calculation.

To prevent the pounded tyres from moving when adding the next row, a geogrid on two levels had to be added in the back fill all around the house to relief some of the pressure caused from the soil to the wall. An additional consideration in terms of structural stability was in connection with the roof construction.

Differently from what the original Earthship concept uses for the roof, which is usually a Figure 11 Standard construction for rammed heart wall (Building Tomorrow) metal sheeting, in this project they chose to adopt a green roof instead. From a structural point of view, one advantage of using such system was the additional weight applied on the back wall which helped to keep it steady.

4.1.3 Working with and around Building Regulations The case of the project in Horsens was a unique one from a legislative point of view and it is important to remember what explained earlier about its function. The project was approved and categorized as a research pilot project with no residential purpose. The definition of building functions is a thin line for mediation in the Danish law, yet it was what allowed a green light for approval of the proposal from the Municipality. At the early stage of the project they considered applying for a dispensation but at the end they did not need one due to the status of the ground and the 60m2 building being non-residential. Another important fact was the site location and its delineation in the local plan. Referring to the legislation, obtaining a building permit could have been an issue. Having said that, it was in a way easier with the

| 20 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

project in Horsens because the plot assigned for the Earthship inspired construction was already own by VIA University College and, it was categorized as a playground where two other experimental houses had been previously built as research and development projects. If the same design concept was to be adopted for residential purposes, it would have been challenging to get the approval from the Commune, which can be translated as a barrier that prevents the concept implementation in Denmark.

Moving into the reality of facing the Danish Building Regulation (BR), Yovko started with a remark. Back in 2012 when the project was built the Building Regulation in effect at that time was the BR10, perhaps this could be argued by saying that some of the requirements that were met back then, would have to be revised accordingly to the BR18 currently in force in Denmark. Anyhow referring to the project in Horsens, the Building Regulation has surprisingly not been a barrier to the concept development. In the proposal all drawings were in place along with budget estimations and U-value calculations to the documentation provided. Only a minor thing requested a revision and it was in concern of the façade outlook. Lastly there was not scrutiny of the fire regulation needed at that point though accordingly to Yovko’s perception of it would have been challenging if today’s BR18 would have had to be applied.

4.2 The Industry Perspective 4.2.1 The voice of the insiders: Yovko Antonov and Mikkel Christensen As a completion for the technical information they provided about the project in Horsens, Yovko and Mikkel shared some of their consideration about barriers and challenges when implementing the earthship concept in Denmark. Also, they offered a point of reflection in regards of the potential of such concept.

In addition to what I have already explained with the case study, where Yovko gave me his perspective, one of the things he pointed out in regards of challenges is the scalability of the concept. As an engineer, he looked at the problem from a structural point of view, seeing a big challenge implementing the system as it is without apporting any modification. For example, the wall made of tyres and rammed earth would be very challenging if not impossible to implement for multistorey buildings. Because of this, and probably many more factors, we would run into some big limitations when implementing the concept in our cities.

Also, Mikkel made an important remark about the bream around the house, if we imagine this concept scaled for commercial or multilevel buildings, we should also consider the extension of land we need to build, because the bream would easily become a hill, if not a mountain.

In Mikkel’s opinion a big challenge is also in the ethic factor, underlining the need of a dynamic shift in people’s mindset. The consciousness of the users’ demand plays a huge role from his perspective, requiring us to define how much is that we are willing to leave behind, to adopt a sustainable lifestyle starting from the living arrangement. Together with this, he sees also the market as a barrier who slows the sustainable change in today’s transition, and in the construction industry this is reflected mainly in the choice of materials. There is not such law that request a specific material over another, but because the decision is market driven, we are automatically, almost unconsciously, delimitated in experimenting and implementing certain systems. The same principle applies to the building regulation, in fact the building law itself is quite vague and function specialized, which means it is based on the function. The code does

| 21 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

not say that we must build on a specific way, yet it tells us what to build to be able to achieve the requirements.

In these regards, Mikkel brought his Master thesis research as an example. In his study, he analysed the option of recycling glass bottles as double skin façade elements, studying the impact meaning how much less glass goes into the recycle stream. It was interesting to conclude that, if you recycle glass is good because it gets recycled, but it is even better to use it as a superstructure, as Stewart Brand has also described in his How Buildings Learn. With this reference, Mikkel pointed out what could be an adoption of the earthship concept, by creating a biodome in our constructions. Going back to idea of reusing recycled materials such as glass bottles, where he commented saying that what would be very interesting to find out is the how we use these materials; and if we should recycle them or we should use them as part of a bigger modular system, where it also can be taken down and taken apart to go back into the system again.

He concluded with saying that “we have not figure out the key yet, and most probability there is not just one magic key”. Especially in a reality like Denmark where the recycling system sees many parties involved, with the federal government at the top, which then send the trash to each commune to be handled, creating a sort of intricate flow hard to keep track of and with a mix-match of different corporate interests.

Looking from the earthship point of view this would just be a huge barrier to break through, but there is still the fact that, in his opinion, when talking about materials and building systems choice, it is all about “using the right tool, for the right place, for the right reason”.

One of the interesting thoughts Mikkel shared in regard of earthships, is about them having different generations that changes depending on the climate, confirming this idea of regional vernacular architecture, expressed also by architect Kenneth Frampton. He concluded saying that, in his opinion, it is amazing that the earthship concept has the six principles and that they can tweak and twist, so it somehow fits.

4.2.2 The neutral ground: Martha Lewis While conducting my research, one of the first things I have noticed, it is how easy it was to find successful stories about earthships from earthship passionate people. It was pleasant and inspiring, but it also started a reflection in me about the importance of having a different perspective on the topic, an impartial one from someone that is new to the concept. That is what drove me to meet Martha Lewis, sharing with her some of my reflections about earthships and inviting her to have a look at the concept, which resulted in a constructive critical reflection.

In 2011, Martha worked with the adaption of the German DGNB certification in Denmark; and I believe this made her the best candidate to answer my questions on adaptability of a concept in the local scenario. It was enlightening to hear her first impression of a concept that, she defined “in many ways a fairly romantic idea that is accessible for only a very few, and in an ironic way, that it is quite accessible for people who are actually fairly well-off”. Martha underlined of having just brushed the surface of the earthship concept, where she sees very positive initiatives and a reciprocal agreement that housing certainly should be much more sustainable than it is now. Despite how deep she investigated the concept, her knowledge and experience ensure her words are not pre-judgements but more of argumentative assumption. It was interesting to see, the historical context where she finds an analogy between the earthship community and many others back-to-nature and to live off-the-grid movements. There are hundreds of years of history

| 22 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

about trying to establish the perfect society and pull away from urban context, isolating yourselves with a group of people who abide by your same ideals. Looking at the earthship ideology recalls of that historical context of fitting into this group of initiatives that have been seen through the 20th century.

Materials: are tyres the right solution?

Looking at resources use, Martha acknowledged that Reynolds’ focus on materials is very interesting; and that his approach to using the bio-based materials is also very positive. It could make a great difference in terms of carbon for living units, however one thing she immediately pointed out is the use of the tyres. She underlined the presence of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH), used in the production of the rubber that is used in tyres, being mutagenic, reprotoxic, carcinogenic, and it would come through even plastering over it. Although she is not an expert on PAH, hazardous toxins, or leaching problems that occur, she is positive on the fact that enough studies have been done to not use tyres as material. From her point of view, it is very problematic that some of the basis of this approach is linked to re-use, which is good, but of material that might be harmful for the users. The reusing all circularity initiative must be done in a very careful manner, with investigating what the hazardous content is before starting to reuse the materials.

She agreed on the fact that there are a lot of tyres in our environment, and it would be amazing if they could be used in a constructive way. Yet the best way does not seem to be the one Reynold is doing.

Drivers and barriers: what is adaptable? And can be scalable?

When looking at the potential scalability of the concept, Marta made a very good point, based on the demographic shifts and the prognosis for the next fifty years. For the several last decades, people have been flocking to the city creating a massive population shift; this suggests that it is in the cities where the greatest crunch need to be solved in terms of sustainability. We need to make our cities more livable and the buildings in our cities more sustainable.

From her perspective, Reynolds had a very interesting approach which is good for living units; however, she does not see the single-family dwelling as especially applicable, in terms of being sustainable in the footprint of how many square meters each of the people, living in this house, will actually be using, even if they have built it very sustainably. It is the aerial area usage that is challenging the sustainable boundaries; in her opinion, we should be cautious and do measurement to ascertain, whether or not it is more reasonable to build apartment buildings, where more people live per square meter of ground, than to build one story houses that are off the grid but, taking up a lot of square meters of the earth. Scalability it is a challenge according to her considerations. On the other hand, if all these people are flocking to the cities, we do have a whole landmass left unused. For instance, in Denmark we have lots of small villages that are decaying, but Martha made a very good point mentioning, “is the solution that we necessarily need to build more, although it would be much more sustainable buildings, or perhaps the solution is to look at what is already been built and see how we could adapt it, in terms of land use of existing and existing resources?”.

And again, if we look at the non-urban challenges, the earthship concept could be a very interesting principle to adapt. Perhaps some of the principles used in earthships, for example rainwater collectors or reuse of greywater (which is discharged from the sink or the shower perhaps), could be implemented in an existing building to not increase the footprint by building more, yet by making what we have more sustainable.

| 23 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

In relation to what just said, Martha shared an interesting reflection, underlining the need for more “level of nuances” in the concept itself. She used as an example the DGNB adoption in the Danish building industry, which she facilitate in the technical translation. We would not think it would need an adaption from Germany to Denmark, considering they are neighbours; however, many things did not work for Denmark.

Even though with a similar climate, the point in development and the development in terms of energy uses, for example, were completely different. This is a great paradigm to stress the fact that, Michael Reynolds’ Global Earthship Model needs to be more regionally thought, taking into consideration questions like “where does this house works? Where do you have to have a different sun exposure? Where do you need an overhang? what do you do if you are in a really hot climate? What if you do If you are in really cold climate? What about no water? What about way too much water? How can you adapt it so that it could be like a hybrid?”. Martha felt that in a way he found the solution, but he must deliver much more content in terms of adaptability of the system to the local circumstances of each environment. Looking at their global map, they are spreading the concept almost as a discipline, creating a strong driving force based on passion for the environment. To solve the problem on the big scale, what she believes is missing is more knowledge following through, making the concept more resilient to criticism, which could ultimately be translated in a stronger product for the global community.

Challenges and possibilities: how can we facilitate the transition of the concept to the Danish standards?

Martha stressed the fact that, the building regulation should have the primary task of facilitating the sustainable transition, making sure that our buildings do live up to set standards. However, in many cases the legislation is challenging the development and implementation of certain concepts, which confirms that some of the earthship principles would be difficult to implement in a Danish context and in many others.

She pointed out that, for example, in many places in the United States the areas are pre-zoned, meaning that you cannot even do something as simple as have a compostable toilet because it is not legal. You must be connected to the sewage, which is due to all sorts of public health issues; and there are historically seen a lot of good reasons to implement this.

Despite what just said, there are also innovative developments and reasons why we should question the legislation, asking if this is the actual best way to dispose our waste. Anyhow, zoning and sewer system are big issues, particularly in the States. Looking at Denmark, the tightness test for the façade and the U-values are some of the biggest concern in terms of regulation check. Martha admitted to not have so much familiarity with single family houses, which is the regulations that an earthship concept would be under in the building code. So, she was not able to point out specifically where we would have a challenge. Overall, in her opinion, a good degree of these could be probably passed, but still the legislative problem does exist if wanted to go completely off-grid. It is quite a radical proposal to say that you are not going to connect to the electrical or to the sewer system or to a district heating system, especially in a reality like Denmark or the States, where you must connect to at least the sewage system. It would be perhaps more thought through to find potential reuse. A concept to work must accommodate more situations to solve complicated issues.

Then, if we look at rainwater harvesting, her experience in the field told me that, in large scale project they did implement rain collection tanks and they were able to use this water for toilet flush. The issue here is that the water demand is simply much higher than what even the rain in Denmark can provide. Of course,

| 24 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

her argument applies for commercial building and not living building where it could possibly work, depending on the water demand from the users. And this is even if you are a single family or a small living unit living in an area with enough rain. Again it does sound very easy when you have the principles but in her opinion these systems either they work or they fail based on how much backing knowledge there is and how adaptable it is to be translated from country to country. One of the reasons why she feels somehow provoked by the concept is the idea that, “it is easy if you are well-off, you are from the States, probably white, and you can afford a piece of property. But it is maybe not translatable to the solution for the world because it is simply too privileged, and it is also not thought through enough to have faith in it”.

Once again, with such critical perspective Martha emphasized that this one-solution approach does not work globally for all climates. Speaking that perhaps a large Southern exposure in a very warm country is not really what you need. You can have your solar cells on the front collecting but maybe it is more interesting to consider an overhang which prevents from overheating. And then “what if you are in an area that does not have much rainfall?” you need to also have other innovative systems in mind. Having said that Martha suggested that to make a concept feasible for the global reality, and this refers to the earthship concept as well, it needs to be fact oriented and again adaptable to all regional factors such as sun exposure, weather condition, and many other that has already been mentioned earlier.

| 25 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 5 | ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION 5.1 Analysis: How to implement the earthships principles in Denmark 5.1.1 Policy and regulations Hearing form the professional experience of sustainable experts like Martha Lewis, it is clear that, all the efforts put into the certification systems are not really providing the level of sustainability that we – as architects, engineers, architectural technologists, and anyone involved in the building industry, need to be addressing in each and every project. It is known that we have a climate crisis due to carbon emission and we have a threat to biodiversity. Of course, this is due to many different factors, but exactly in the role of the building industry is where we need a little more work and clarity about how we can make a positive contribution to biodiversity with our buildings, minimizing the negative impact on biodiversity. “We need to start working beyond certification systems because they are failing us” (Lewis, 2020). This being said, we do have to face the reality of building regulations and law, and it is proved by my research that here is where some of the biggest challenges are found when applying for permissions. To facilitate this process, it is important to carefully scrutinize the law and building codes, to have all the documentation in place when applying for a building permit for an earthship-inspired house, as well as for any other building. A remark needs to be made in regards of the building function, as there is no confirmed hypothesis that a building inspired by the earthship concept would be approved for residential purposes.

Disconnecting to the public services network is definitely one, if not the biggest challenge, due the fact that here in Denmark, as well as in many places in the States, most of the urban or rural planning requires a connection to electricity, water, and sewage systems. This means having to compromise on one of the six earthship principles, which is being fully off-grid, but it is also a way to adapt the concept to the local regulation. By managing the consumption, we would still have to run on a grid system, but it can be seen as a sort of back-up to the renewable energy production through solar cells, which would then require a smaller system meaning a smaller investment. Harvesting rainwater for drinking water in Denmark could also be a challenge, and this is mainly for two specific reasons. Denmark first and only water source is from underground water; there is a very tight regulation about using any other source for drinking water, due to the contamination and presence of bacteria which could be dangerous for people’s health. However, the collaboration between university researchers and the industry is leading to a new era of water management in Denmark. The other reason why it would not be possible to detach from the service is definitely market related. The waterwork implies an enormous investment from municipalities, which is why is just more convenient that as many people as possible are connected to it, so that the citizens are in a way sharing and contributing to the price of installation and maintenance. In relation to the sewer system it all depends if in the local regulation of the area there is or not a requirement to be connected to the public sewage system. Looking at the three components of going off-the-grid with the earthship concept, this is the most achievable one, as Michael Reynolds has developed a design that adopts to the westerns conditions, including a septic tank from which the water flows into the botanical cells.

| 26 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

5.1.2 Waste material and resources In regards of building materials used in the construction of an earthship-inspired house, another big challenge is faced with the use of tires, as in Denmark they are not approved as building material for living.

Earthship Biotecture published the results of the independent study conducted by the University of Wisconsin, where they show that off-gassing occurs only if the tires are exposed to weather conditions; however, there are plenty of other researches that proved the hazard of the material composition. For this matter, the earthship concept would require a remake on the choice of other material or systems, perhaps rammed earth or stamped soil would this be great solution in terms of using biomaterials. Again, the reason why these two systems are not often seen and used in construction in Denmark is probably connected to the market. Soil is not an industrial material, meaning “there is no money in it” (Lütken & Bonde, 2012), but despite that there is not written code that denies the use of it. Also has my case study and research has shown, the building technology in Denmark is advanced enough to offer countless other options to combine.

Of course, one of the six principle in the original concept is about recycled materials; however the reality is that in Denmark the recycling system of tyres is well established and functioning while in the USA – where most of the Earthships have been built, they are facing an extreme situation of waste abandoned in the desert creating landfills. Nevertheless this gives us another point of reflection about the recycling stream in Denmark, we could ask ourselves if it is actually more sustainable to deliver our tires, bottles, plastic, and others, to locations where they are recycled, other than just repurpose them as building material. A lot of energy is used in the process of breaking down the tire, a great amount of heat is then used to convert the material in other products, and last to mention the transportation of the product from location to location.

I believe what we should take from this one of the earthship principles is the curiosity to investigate in depth our recycling system. Also, it is a fact that the waste from the construction industry is in abundance and mismanaged, so we could investigate the potential of it as a resource for the earthship hybrid.

5.1.3 Climate and scalability Looking at the required climate adaption of the concept, the principle for thermal mass is more than any of the other connected to the local weather conditions. When building in deserts or very hot and dry areas, it would be probably enough to just have the thermal mass from the tyre wall with the finishes applied directly to it, but in a Scandinavian country it would be close to impossible to achieve long building life without applying the necessary barriers to prevent moisture from affecting the structure and the indoor climate. What found tells me that a professional and accurate study of the un orientation and geo localization is essential for the adaption and adoption of the concept. Moreover, to achieve a comfortable indoor climate it is not enough to use passive solar heating and natural ventilation, yet systems for ventilation and heating must be implemented in the design. The one-approach solution cannot be used in the construction industry and location-based solutions are that would facilitate the building performance.

This also applies to idea of scalability of the concept. Michael Reynolds has made a proposal for villages and even cities, but once again there is a lack of technical information to convince us that the idea would work.

For the amount of knowledge is offered so far, the earthship concept is restricted to small units and it is not feasible for the bigger scale, both from a technical and functional point of view. At the same time must be noticed that some of the principle behind the concept are already implemented in commercial and

| 27 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

multistorey buildings in Denmark; to name some water collection, collective food production, renewable energy, and waste water reuse are successfully used in several cases.

5.2 Discussion: Possibilities for a hybrid earthship design Looking at the case study, it is a proof that was not possible to follow the Earthship methodology by the book. Apart from the back wall with tyre which is also the base of in the original concept, the rest of the materials had to be adapted and chosen following local adjustments and resources availability. Things like glass bottles or metal sheets were substituted with the green roof, lightweight wooden constructions and energy efficient windows, bamboo floor finish with floor heating, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, and water cleaning system. Also, the addition of an insulating layer was a twist to the original concept, but that allowed the building element to achieve the required U-values. This could be defined as a compromise, having said this, if we look at it from a different perspective, it is also a fundamental change that needs to be apported, if we want to live up to the normative in relation to moist and indoor climate control in Danish buildings. Last but not least, some of the methods used in Michael Reynolds idea had to be improved for the local context, for example as already said there was a necessity to add a mechanical ventilation system and heating pumps to provide a sufficiently good indoor climate. The case that has been studied shows us that it is possible to build an earthship-inspired construction by using a hybrid design. Meaning that not all six principles from the original concept developed by Michael Reynold are feasible for the Danish construction industry, due to many factors such as building regulation, legislation on reuse of harvested rainwater, high energy standards, and difficulty to be completely off-grid.

Although for the past fifty years earthships have been built all over the world, the concept was originally designed as a response to a specific climate in New Mexico. There are currently very few data on how these buildings perform in different climates. It is confirmed, by my case study and the literatures review, that in high latitude areas, the earthship design does not perform well in winter, requiring backup heat and additional insulation on the perimeter of the structure, on the greenhouse, on the foundations, and under the floors. The research also confirms that, most of the tests ran in the last decade on earthships performance were carried out on small residential units, however looking at the data of population growth the sustainable emergency is very much concentrated in the development of our cities. In this regard, because of earthships being low-density buildings, which uses a material supply chain that is completely different from the well-established construction supply chain, it is unlikely that the earthship concept will be soon adopted for mass housing in cities. However, what is more likely to happen is an increase in the

Figure 12 Design for retrofit using the earthship principles – winter (earthshipbiotectuter.com)

Figure 13 Design for retrofit using the earthship principles – summer (earthshipbiotectuter.com)

| 28 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

number of hybrid developments, which will adopt the main earthships principles yet integrating them with conventional, modern, and professional building techniques “to create high-density, low-carbon, urban housing” (Hewitt & Telfer, 2012). Perhaps Reynolds has also presented his development for retrofitting an existing house by using the earthship principles. This appears has a great potential for a place like Denmark, where we are more and more investigating the renovation option as sometimes the more sustainable one.

This being said, the concept in its native form will most likely remain the “earthship dream” of passionate self-builders, believing in its powerful vision.

| 29 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

CHAPTER 6 | CONCLUSION 6.1 Overall conclusion We cannot think of earthships as an ultimate recipe kind of solution. To answer the first part of my research question “Why has the concept of the Earthship model not been adopted in Denmark – yet?”, it is mainly because there is a lack of location-based studies and information on the earthship concept itself. In order to be scalable and globally implemented, it needs to be flexible to the local context, weather conditions, environment, legislation, resources availability, and local community needs – as per say regional feasibility, meaning are we building in a rural area, a metropolitan zone, or perhaps on a ground that has been hit by a major natural catastrophe? Those considerations, among other economic, environmental, and social factors, must be kept in mind if striving for a sustainable building(s) or neighbourhoods and cities.

Michael Reynolds has put together key aspects of living, which could unlock the way towards a solution for many of today’s global issue. However, to make it a powerful tool for the construction industry in a country like Denmark, it is fundamental to break down the principles and adjust them to the different factors just mentioned. This, as well, gives an answer to the second part of my research question “[…] what would it take to implement it, as an alternative model of the Earthship concept, to the existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?”. It would take a deep scrutiny of the local building regulation to understand how we can adapt the systems used in the earthship concept, and perhaps implement them as refurbishment of what is already built. Also, it requires a mindset shift from the users and in regard of consumption and behaviours.

6.2 Suggestions According to what just said, we cannot take an earthship from Taos and place it anywhere in Denmark expecting to achieve the same result in terms of performance, cost, and building life span. Meaning that the concept on its own it is not yet scalable, but it opens an entire new field of research of what the possibilities are if working whit each single one of the six foundation principles. My suggestion is to take little steps, starting by finding out what are the environmental conditions meaning, “how much does it rain?

What is the sun intake and how it spreads along the year? What is the water consumption of an average family? Are you financially able to afford a potentially longer construction time?”. This, together with an analysis of the local plan and regulation, would determine the starting point for a vernacular study and hybrid development.

It is true, earthships are the utopian product of a very strong idealistic approach, but this should inspire us to look for a solution to make them feasible for today and the feature. Afterall, as Eleanor Roosevelt said, “The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.”

| 30 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

6.3 Future work  Investigate the Living Building Challenge and find out if there are similarity in their ambitions  Connect and explore parallel movements and communities such as Friland in Jutland  Research about user’s consumption to define applicability in terms of renewable energy use and water harvesting/reuse.  Look into “Livable cities”, building in nature-based climate adaption

BIBLIOGRAPHY Antonov, Y., 2020. Eartships in Denmark, why not? - The project in Horsens [Interview] (23 09 2020).

Christensen, M., 2020. The Earthship concept and its implementation in the Denish Industry [Interview] (18 09 2020).

EARTSHIPBIOTECTURE, 2020. Earthship BIOTECTURE. [Online] Available at: https://earthshipbiotecture.com/ [Accessed 15 September 2020].

GARBAGE WARRIOR. 2007. [Film] Directed by Oliver Hodge. New Mexico: Open Eye Media UK, ITVS International, Sundance Channel.

German Sustainable Building Council, 2020. DGNB Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen. [Online] Available at: https://www.dgnb.de/en/ [Accessed 29 09 2020].

Hewitt, M. & Telfer, K., 2012. Earthships in Europe. 2nd ed. Watford: IHS BRE Press.

International WELL Building Institute, 2020. WELL. [Online] Available at: https://www.wellcertified.com/well-ap/ [Accessed 29 09 2020].

Kruis, N. J. & Heun, M. K., 2007. Analysis of the Performance of Earthship Housing in Various Global Climates. Long Beach, ResearchGate.

Lewis, M., 2020. The erathship concept analyzed from the industry perspective [Interview] (23 09 2020).

Lütken, S. & Bonde, T., 2012. Earthship Denmark: Radical solutions to radical problems!. [Online] Available at: http://www.earthship.dk/hvordan-kan-jeg-bygge-et-earthship-i-danmark/ [Accessed 23 09 2020].

McCombes, S., 2019. Scribbr. [Online] Available at: https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-design/ [Accessed 28 09 2020].

| 31 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Prinz, R. P., 2015. Hacking the Earthship: In search of an Earth-Shelter that works for everybody.

Albuquerque, New Mexico: Archinia Press.

Reynolds, M., 2017. Earthship Biotecture: Self-sufficient and Sustainable Architecture for People and Planet [Interview] (November 2017).

U.S. Green Building Council, 2020. USGBC. [Online] Available at: https://www.usgbc.org/ [Accessed 29 09 2020].

| 32 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

APPENDIX Appendix 1 Methodological Approach – The type of research I did I would like to start by mentioning that the production of the Method chapter, was possible after a thorough study and research that I have made about academic writing where I used the online database called Knowledge Base (McCombes, 2019) to understand all the steps that it takes to realize a valid piece of research. It was amazing to understand the power of this tool and how important is to take the time to reflect on the research made.

When I started planning this dissertation project, the objective was very clear in my head together with the research question – “Why has the concept of the Earthship model not been adopted in Denmark – yet?

And what would it take to implement it, as an alternative model of the Earthship concept, to the existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?”. This was crucial and fundamental to develop the research design, yet the first step was to decide what type of investigation I wanted to do. The form my research design took was initially shaped by three factors: research aims, type of data, and sampling, timescale, and location.

Research Aims The first thing I had to consider was what kind of knowledge I was aiming to produce. In my case I was not aiming to expand a scientific understanding of the theory, yet I wanted to solve a practical problem by investigating existing building techniques and developing an adapting solution. Furthermore, from the initial investigation on the chosen topic I perceived that the amount of knowledge in regards was quite limited to specific geographical areas and body of ideas. The existing theory was enough for me to formulate hypothesis and it offered an opportunity to explore new aspects of this under-researched problem testing the theory. By collecting the data and analysing the result, it was then possible to find out if those were supporting or rejecting the initial hypothesis. To describe the aim of my research in few words, I defined it as applied, exploratory, and deductive.

Type of Data Once I defined the aim of my research, the next factor to be examined was the typology of data I wanted to collect which were directly associated with the chosen research methods described in the next section.

The choice of the data type was very much dictated also by the dissertation structure in a way that I needed different types of data to feed each section of the dissertation. The first chapter was fully supported by secondary data that already exist and has been collected into publications which I then analysed through a literature review. On the other hand, the second chapter was mostly based on primary data that I personally collected through one-to-one interview and then analysed. Those were also qualitative data with the aim to describe subjective experience, to interpretate meaning and perspectives, and to give a better understanding of the concept. Overall, the data I collected during my research were descriptive since based

| 33 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

on a specific theory, but they also assumed a more experimental look when variables were applied such as geographical context, climate conditions, and legislation.

Sampling, Timescale, and Location Finally, to fully describe the type of research that I chose, I asked myself three strictly connected questions such as how I selected the participants and subjects of the research, when and how often was the collection of data from them, and where the research took place. To answer these questions, it was enough to make a scrutiny of the type of data and research aims. With mine being a qualitative research I used a nonprobability sampling method in which I carefully selected the individuals that I wanted to incorporate in my research on a non-random criteria, the reason of this is to produce detailed knowledge in the specific contest of my case study. To better define a timescale for the investigation, I had to look again at my research question which tackles a problem in today’s building industry. Because my focus was on understanding the current situation, I chose to run a cross-sectional study to gather data from three different individuals at a single point of time which is the current one. Now, to answer to the last question it was quite evident that in my case I was not planning to conduct a laboratory research which also did not match with the field of my studies, but I simply opted for a regular field research on regular everyday setting.

The combination of these factors contributed to the definition of my research type and my approach to it.

| 34 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Appendix 2 Michael Reynolds – The man behind Earthship Biotecture Architect Michael Reynolds is known worldwide as the father of the earthship concept, as well as the founder of what today is an eco-construction company – and academy – called Earthship Biotecture. Michael Reynolds is what we would perhaps call an unconventional architect, or as he defines himself a “biotect”; an idealist with a utopian vision of a place where people live in harmony with nature. In his first book A Coming of Wizards – before he Figure 14 Michael Reynolds puts in the work on his sustainable school in Uruguay (inhabitat.com) published a whole series of books on earthships – Reynolds confesses: “This book centres around and was inspired by an experience with four wizards. From this experience I have developed a way of thinking and living that is vividly expressed in my architectural work.” This may sound like a far-out lateral thinking, and the point of mentioning it is not to ridicule him, but it helps to better understand the history behind how earthships came into place. After graduating from architecture school at the University of Cincinnati, Reynolds moved to Taos, New Mexico in 1969, remaining there ever since. Concerned about the problem of trash, the lack of affordable housing, and as way to respect the environment and counteract the climate change, Reynolds started to focus on developing selfsufficient housing using recycled materials. He began to experiment first making structures out of aluminium cans and cement, then with bottles and finally with tyres. The design constantly evolved, over the next decades, incorporating thermal mass, natural ventilation, and passive solar energy. As Reynolds writes in The Coming of Wizards, the first earthships were developed as “a prototype for a design to be used by the homeless”, looking at places hit by natural disasters. The implied message was that, in the extreme conditions of disaster zones, people are obliged to build with what is available to them, which often means rubbish. Reynolds’ experimental building structures were not always complying with the regulations, which translated into a life-long battle with the New Mexico State authorities. Opposing to the law brought him to be deprived of is architectural license to practice, which then was reinstated only long time afterwards. The conflict with bureaucracy thou, it never ended, mainly due to his conviction that as architects we are not doing enough to build in a less harmful approach to the planet; and he says in his book “Earthships can make it so more people can simply survive in an uncertain future, but if introduced in a large way soon enough, they can change that future.”

| 35 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Appendix 3 Interview A – Agenda_Mikkel Christensen Introduction Key Components: • • • • • •

•

Good afternoon Purpose of the interview (qualitative research for my BA dissertation) Consensus to be mentioned in the final dissertation Approximal duration and format of the interview (will be recorder, keynotes) Opportunity for questions during and at the end of the interview for further discussion and knowledge sharing So Mikkel, once again, I am super excited to be here with you today and so glad we could take the time to get together, I want to hear everything about your story and obviously the Earthship story and really get into some of the technology and how these “vessels” are built for people to coexist with Nature in one functional and sustainable unit.

I think I don’t need to introduce myself as we already did, but I would maybe love to give you a brief overview of my background to better understand where I am coming from and how my journey has been so you will feel more comfortable maybe to share your background as well. (academic, professional, volunteer, interests,) o When and how did you first bump into the Concept of Earthship? o What is that caught your interest and made you explore the subject more and more?

Questions (no more than 15 even less if reach in content): •

•

• •

So, when I had my first crush with Mike’s doctrine, I just thought “Wow how can it be possibly true that I haven’t seen one with my own eyes yet?” Then I started to read more and more discovering a model that I would have expected to see at any Building Green or Climate Summit. That is when I then asked myself “Why has this not been adopted in Denmark – yet? And what would it take to implement it as an alternative concept to the already existing “sustainable” solutions in the construction industry?”. Well now I am curious, have you at any point had these thoughts as well? And how did you work with them?

I think we can both agree on the fact that you will not see many Earthships around Copenhagen. That makes me think that there must be a missing piece or a lack of something, perhaps technologies, knowledge, regulations. How do you fell about this?

What do you think is stopping us from seeing this concept developing in our cities? What do they have more over in Indonesia or New Mexico that we cannot access or achieve?

Do you see the BR as a barrier? And if yes what are the challenges that we would most probably face when implementing such a model? What do you see it could be a solution?

Do you think the materials and construction methodology used in the original concept could be used the same way when building an Earthship here in DK? Otherwise how can we find a compromise to still live up to our straight U-value calculations? | 36

KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

•

• • •

• •

•

•

Also, the Earthship concept is based on the six sustainable principle of using wind and solar energy to provide electricity and light, collection and filter of rainwater to provide drinking water and running water, food production in its internal greenhouse, comfortably heating and cooling the living area by exploiting the thermal mass without affecting the environment and without economic costs, use of natural and recycled materials in the building process, and treatment of its own sewage and wastewater without contaminating the environment. This just sounds like the perfect recipe that will save us and the planet, but my wonder is, do you see all of them possibly implemented and used in a Danish Construction contest? Where do you see the challenges and what are the possibilities?

You mentioned you have followed a bit the Horsens project, how was that made possible?

And how much of the original Earthship concept had to be adapted to get to the project completion?

What are the biggest challenges you had to face throughout all the project stages? And what is the support that you got from the Municipality? Did you have to apply for any dispensation or was it a pilot project?

For example, the first thing that comes to my mind is the rainwater harvesting. Do you think would that be a challenge in Denmark? I mean we get rain for almost half of the year; how can we not consider reusing it? We are already doing it quite a bit with sun a wind to create energy, so what would it take to make the next step and bring the rainwater into our plumbing systems?

Also, the scalability of such a concept, do you think would that be possible, or we are limited to family houses?

That was a lot of diving into the technologies that this type of house uses. This make me think of the repercussion this would have on the economic situation for suppliers, contractors, services. Have you thought about this aspect? And could that be a sort of indirect block put from the outside to prevent us from making the move?

You know it also surprise me a lot when I go talk to people testing the ground by just mentioning the research that I am doing and they look at me with open eyes not sure of what I am talking about. And this happened with professional that claim themself as Sustainability Specialist or expert in Green Certification, as much as with friends, classmates, or the lady from the library. So now my question is, how can we not be aware of such a solution? Mike has started to build in the early 70s, but why is today society is not making a step towards adopting it? If the government does not make the effort to ease such a shift, why is the community then not pushing it raising the request for it?

It seems to me that building an Earthship goes way beyond the solo act of building, it is a change of lifestyle, of mindset and everyday philosophy. Would you like to share your opinion in regards?

Closing Key Components (additional comments, plans/future steps, thank you) •

Well, I think we are now ready to draw a line to sum up this super informative conversation we had, is there any thought or reflection you would like to leave me with? | 37

KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

• •

•

Or is there anything more you would like to add?

I believe the amount of information a could collect by talking to you it is extremely precious and valuable. I will take a day to “digest” and process everything before giving it a place in the dissertation but I will be more than happy to send you a copy of the theses after completion and it would be an honor and pleasure to receive your comment or feedback in regards.

Thank you for your precious time and for sharing your knowledge and opinions with me.

| 38 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Appendix 4 Interview B – Agenda_Yovko Antonov Introduction Key Components: • • • • • •

Good morning Purpose of the interview (qualitative research for my BA dissertation) Consensus to be mentioned in the final dissertation Approximal duration (1h) and format for resource reference (recording and notes validation) Greetings Short introduction and background overview – what was the approach to the Earthship concept and how the interest developed (first the interviewer followed by the interviewee)

Questions: •

•

•

• • •

When I found out about the Earthship houses I first thought “how is it possible that studying building construction I never heard about it in university?”. I would expect to hear about it much mor from the industry, so I asked myself “why has this not been adopted in Denmark – yet? And what would it take to implement it as an alternative concept to the already existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?”. Well now I am curious, have you at any point had the same thought? Do you perhaps think it is for a lack of technologies, knowledge, or regulations?

You had the wonderful possibility to experiment and put the Earthship Biotecture concept into practice here in Denmark with the Horsens Project. Would you call the one in Horsens an Earthship or more an Earthship inspired building? I would love to hear the story of how the project started, developed, and got to completion before to ask your more specific questions about it.

Now, the Earthship concept is based on the six sustainable principle that I presume are well known from the both of us. When listing them in sequence just sounds like the perfect recipe that will save us and the planet, but my wonder is, do you see all six of them possible to be implemented in a Danish building construction? Looking at the project in Horsens as an example where do you see the challenges and what are the possibilities? The fact that you called it an Earthship inspired project makes me think you had some struggle with following all the six principle.

In the Horsens project, where you able to apply the materials and construction methodology used in the original concept the same way? And if not, what were the compromises you had to apply to live up to the U-value calculations?

Remaining on this topic, do you see the Danish Building Regulation as a barrier? What were the challenges that you had to face and what were the solutions you found to work around these barriers?

As in any part of the World, states and regions are obligated to follow the law when applying for building permits and approval of proposals. What can you tell me about | 39

KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

•

legislation when it comes to building and Earthship inspired project in Denmark? What was the role of the Municipality throughout the project stages? And what was most challenging when applying for permission?

Now, so far you have provided me with a very detailed overview of the different aspects that are tighten with legislation, technologies, and design in relation to the Earthship Biotecture concept on a Danish framework. One last thing I would like to hear your opinion about is interrelated with the concept of scalability. We have been mostly referring to small residential units as Earthships, however looking at the data the sustainable emergency is also very much concentrated in the development of our cities. Do you see the Earthship model as a scalable concept which could be adopted for single family houses as well as for commercial or residential buildings?

Closing Key Components: • • •

Sharing of any extra supporting material such as technical drawings, structural analysis, or U-value calculations as an open source.

Possibility of reflection and ideas for a further development.

Greetings and establishing a connection for sharing the final dissertation.

| 40 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

Appendix 5 Interview C – Agenda_Martha Lewis Introduction Key Components: • • • • • •

Good afternoon Purpose of the interview (qualitative research for my BA dissertation) Consensus to be mentioned in the final dissertation Approximal duration and format of the interview (will be recorder, keynotes) Brief introduction of myself and my academic background including how I got to know about Earthship Biotecture and why I have developed an interest towards this concept (academic, professional, volunteer, interests,) Ask for her background and current position in the industry

Questions (no more than 15 even less if reach in content): •

•

•

•

As for someone that is quite new to the Earthship concept but very knowledgeable about sustainability, what is your first impression about this Radical Sustainable Living idea that Michael Reynolds has introduced in the late 70s and kept developing and improving for the past fifty years?

The aim of my dissertation is to research in depth about the concept looking at each single one of its six sustainable core principles breaking them down in reflection to the construction industry in Denmark and what I hope to achieve (with data collection, case study and interviews) is a detailed analysis of the challenges, barriers, drivers, and possibilities when looking at Earthship Biotecture in a Danish contest. But before moving into the details I would like to ask you the same question that has been keeping my mind busy for the last few months. In your opinion, why has the Earthship concept not been adopted in Denmark – yet? And what do you think it would take to implement it as an alternative concept to the already existing sustainable solutions in the construction industry?

Following on the previous question, what emerges from my findings when approaching the concept developed by Michael Reynold is a sort of grey aura of misplaced information on the expansion of the model on a global scale. Taking Denmark as an example, I think we can both agree on the fact that we are not seeing any Earthship built around. Now, this makes me believe that there is a missing piece or a lack of something in the concept to bridge the gap between the theory and the practice. Would you like to elaborate more on this, for example what do you think is stopping us from seeing the concept developing in our cities? Perhaps technologies, knowledge, regulations, law.

Looking at the technologies used in the Earthship model from a law perspective, do you see our building regulation as a barrier? And if yes what could the challenges be and where would they most probably arise? For example, looking at the materials that they use in the original concept, the solutions adopted for natural heating, cooling and energy production, water harvesting and so on. | 41

KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi

THE EARTHSHIP CONCEPT – FOR A RADICAL SUSTAINABLE LIVING

• • •

How can the law challenge the concept for example when looking at building permission?

Do you see the legislation as a barrier?

Do you see this as a scalable concept in our cities or you think it is mostly locked to the small residential function?

What do you see as a potential in Earthship Biotecture principles to be adopted into our building industry? Do you agree on the fact that taking the principles and adjusting them to meet the Danish building systems could be a possibility?

Closing Key Components: • • •

Good advice for further research Networking with the sharing of my final paper Greetings

| 42 KEA - Københavns Erhvervsakademi