A promessa de uma utopia: as ideologias e contradições da Arquitetura Sustentável

Abstract

"Sustainability" is a very sensitive topic, which raises several comments that are sometimes quite contradictory due to the existing inconsistencies and the multiple definitions and meanings expressed about this single concept. So much saturation and diversity of uses, themes and arguments about "sustainability", that it trivialized and emptied the meaning of the concept, transforming it into a kind of chorus or background music for any issue. The attempt to combine economic development with environmental and social issues results in a "green" economy that uses the fear of the consequences of global warming, and the resulting natural phenomena, as a marketing strategy and, generically, as an absolute reason for legitimacy that, supposedly and wrongly, would make politics secondary. As a result, people are induced to invest in "sustainable" products such as renewable energies, which, however, are not as "clean" as is intended to be conveyed. Furthermore, the romantic fantasy of belonging to a world in total harmony with Nature, reinforces the revolt against Society and the intense consumerism that we witness in the capitalist system and, therefore, is lightly associated with the movement in favor of an utopic "sustainability". Besides, these fantasies and fetishes are often reinforces by the revision, often out of context, of naturalist authors and works, such as Henry Thoreau's "Walden" (1854), thus favoring the simplification of the multiplicity of natures and complexity of the interrelations between what is considered the "natural" and the "artificial". In short, the problem is that these simplifications of oversaturated and empty concepts such as "Nature", "Sustainability" or "Green", move away from a problem that needs political answers. In addition, this type of inconsistencies are also reflected in the fields of Sustainable Architecture. On the one hand, green buildings are becoming commonplace, which can range from conventional constructions with landscaped roofs, to houses with materials said to be more "environmentally friendly"; and, on the other hand, in urban discourses and policies, where "green" or ecological cities are generally found, there are usually several barriers and obstacles that make it difficult to try to achieve certain objectives or intended goals. Due to the temptation in architecture to want to finalize or close something, that is, in this specific case, a project; motivated by the urgency of seeking answers to the environmental crisis, various ways (usually very simplified) to solve the dilemma in question arise. However, as already verified by the amount of contradictions, and because this is an endless subject, it is not possible to reduce it to a simple resolution. For this reason, knowledge and debate are fundamental, as is the intersection of knowledge, the circumstances of each social or geographic context, or the difficult articulation between what is feasible, useful and sensible, at the local or global level. "Thinking globally, acting locally", as is repeated endlessly, proves to be a confusing formula, as if there were platforms for conciliation of decisions at a global level and the respective translation, articulation or regulation of actions developed on smaller scales; or as if the whole resulted simply from the sum of the parts. The system is much more complex, opaque and contradictory.