Architecture does not “have to be” sustainable or bioclimatic. Nor does it formally “have to be” like nature or imitate it. Architecture, to be good, implies being sustainable. Architecture has always been closely linked to nature. It is nothing new to reflect on the symbiotic relationship between nature and architecture. After all, this dependence—and correspondence—has been present since the beginning of the second. Perhaps the most basic relationship, but no less important, and sometimes very complex, occurs in the way in which the building is affirmed or positioned on the ground. This relationship with the zero plane (the ground) does not only have to do with the surface that delimits the territory where spatial objects are deposited; It is an endless topic that architecture will continue to solve throughout history in different ways.
It is, neither more nor less, a form of domestication of nature, or the territory, through architecture. Another variant of this symbiotic relationship occurs when nature provides the materials for BVB Directory architecture, a dependence that is reflected in buildings that deliberately show in their structure or façade what they are made of. We can talk about adobe or brick as examples in some regions: they are materials thanks to which we can see how architecture is literally born from nature, since, when exposed, they are an intrinsic part of a constructive logic and an expressive presence. On the other hand, the determining presence of the environment and climate, as well as sunlight, are natural conditions that generate unique architectures, which in other parts would be unthinkable.
Due to the above, it is an indivisible relationship; Hence it seems like a fad when we talk about labels such as “sustainable architecture”, “bioclimatic architecture”, “green architecture” and so many other concepts that have been invented, when in reality it is nothing new. Architecture does not “have to be” sustainable or bioclimatic. Nor does it formally “have to be” like nature or imitate it. Architecture, to be good, implies being sustainable. “A building in which people die from the heat inside, no matter how elegant it may be, will be a failure. Concern for sustainability betrays mediocrity. You cannot applaud a building because it is sustainable. It would be like applauding because he remains standing,” said Eduardo Souto de Moura. Architecture and nature.