While working on my posting about how we as a planet would deal with a major catastrophe like an asteroid impact, it occurred to me that some attention should be focused on preserving a portion of the ecosystem as well. After all, it would be short-sighted to only preserve human life, as Noah - or more accurately Jehovah - was fully aware.
A search for images of Noah's Ark revealed images of another ark. Developed by 51-year-old Russian architect Alexander Remizov of Remistudio, in co-operation with Russian and German scientific groups, the new Ark was designed as part of the International Union of Architects’ Architecture for Disaster Relief initiative.
Everything would seem to indicate that it's a brilliant design. It can be built as a floating structure as well as a land-based refuge, and is made up of a combination of wooden arches and cable supports that allow for a flexible response to earthquake stresses. The Ark is constructed to create a vortex that helps propel a wind powered generator located in the cupola that tops the building, and the outside of the building is designed to optimize solar panel usage and rain water collection. The rounded shape allows for easy circulation of air, greenhouse effect adds another source of energy to be collected and stored, and all wastes are recycled.
Remizov's Ark doesn't use glass - the outside surface is covered with a special transparent self-cleaning foil which is cheaper, lighter and more flexible. The transparent shell contributes to the existence of an interior microclimate, with plants and trees providing oxygen and possibly food.
Prefabricated building sections would allow construction of an Ark in three to four months, with each new Ark providing 150,000 square feet of living space.
It's an elegant and possibly even feasible solution to housing people in a disaster situation, but I'm sorry to say that after looking at the design, I found myself wondering how it would stand up to deliberate attempts at damage rather than aftershocks. Maybe I'm too cynical, or maybe I've read the wrong books, but it's far too easy to imagine desperate refugees trying to force their way into an already full structure, and the spacious green lawns packed with tents and sleeping bags.
But my real objection to the design is its theoretical nature, which is in no way the architect's fault. It is an elegant solution, one that probably deserves a real trial - well then let's try it. According to The New York Times, right now people in Haiti are moving back into damaged houses that may collapse on their heads at any moment, because they refuse to live in refugee tent cities any longer. Let's build some Arks in Haiti - because if we don't start actually doing some of these things, rather than making pretty 3-D digital renderings, we might as well be planning to move displaced and homeless people to Mars.
- Sid
