Category: Science and Technology

Synthetic Landscapes should be read 1 through to 4.

Canopy is not a synthetic landscape, it is the natural three dimensional immersive responsive environment in which we are both actuators and reciprocals of its system. It is the landscape that we have forgotten as it has been removed from nearly all of the developed world. We continue to see nature as pastureland, viewed from the comfort of our car, a continuous surface of green rolling hills. Today’s pastureland was once forest, ancient, wild and untamed, a dense impenetrable mass of moss, lichen and fern, dark, damp and full of life. We wiped these systems away to graze our cows and grow our corn. There is a need to reintroduce the tropical and temperate forest so that it can again become an integrated part of the sustainable world.

The rain forest is a complex system of interrelated species. The rain forests are a dense layered mass of vegetation with each layer having a specific role and housing its own eco system and yet together they work as a symbiotic system. The rain forests are typically wet and tropical and are home to the majority of all species on earth, they re-oxygenate the air and consume carbon dioxide. The forest floor is a rich but shallow new earth and the symbiosis within this ecosystem’s layers continues below ground. Rain forests are dynamic living environments and as such the stratification is not always clear with many overlaps throughout the forests development. The rain forests water cycle is an efficient circular system. Plants roots take up moisture and nutrients into the canopy, falling rain is often caught by the canopy. During the day as the forest heats up water evaporates forming clouds that in turn become the next days rain. The process feeds the forest and purifies the water, the nutrient cycle is self-feeding. Rain forests have constant climate and constant rainfall allowing the trees to be deciduous yet evergreen, continuously growing and shedding leaves. Rain forest soils are often infertile, shallow acidic and stained red due to high concentrations of iron oxide. The soil needs the forest as much as the forest needs the soil.

Layer Stratification

The emergent, the tallest of the trees are those able to withstand strong winds and excessive heat, these may rise fifty meters above the ground (seventeen stories), some are able to reach heights of eighty meters. Their role is to break new ground to form the shelter under which new forests may grow.

Below this is the canopy layer a continuous coverage of foliage 30-40m above ground. The canopy is one of the richest unexplored habitats on earth with over a quarter of the world insects and half the worlds plant species. Many species never leave the canopy either to venture up to the emergent layer or down to the forest floor. Epiphytic plants grow within the canopy range, they attach themselves to trunks or branches and obtain all of the water and nutrients they need from falling rain and debris.

The understory or under canopy sits below the canopy, only 5% of the light that hits the emergent layer falls to reach it. Leaves become huge waxy plates that try to absorb as much light as possible. The understory is home to larger mammals.

The forest floor, the lowest level with only 2% of light reaching its surface where plants adapted to low light can survive. The forest floor is relatively clear with less diversity and speciality species that can grow with such low light levels. The floor is made of decaying plant and animal matter that decomposes quickly due to the humidity and heat. Fungi feed on the decaying organic mass that is rich in nutrients but poor in humus. Buttress roots are common in the shallow soil as there are few nutrients or minerals at depth. The buttresses are structural and the roots spread to a wide supportive base. Where the roots break the surface ridges help to channel water and fresh nutrients into the root system. Collectively interlocking root systems stabilise the soil and protect the weak soil from erosion. On average rain forests receives 2m of rain per year and this amount of water leaches soluble nutrients from the ground. Large mammals are able to roam the forest floor as it is has sparse vegetation.

Below the forest floor are the decomposers and these are vital to a nutrient dependent forest. Decomposition rates are high due to temperature and humidity levels as well as armies of microorganisms, bacteria and fungi each with a decomposition role. Nutrient recycling is essential as the below ground resources support the above ground biomass and all of its inhabitants. In breaking down leaf litter microbial organisms turn organic compounds into inorganic forms of carbon that can be used by plants. The microbial community respire taking up oxygen and releasing carbon dioxide.

Ecosystems benefit mankind in numerous indirect ways primarily through cleaning, air and water, and decomposing and recycling wastes. Ecosystem services have recently been given economic values and categories such as; supporting, provisioning, cultivating and cultural. The purpose of this is to try to add a comprehensible value to systems that work in the background supporting other economic or social criteria. The problem with this is that the values and assessments are still homocentric and not planet focused. Of the four criteria:

Supporting – services that are necessary to support all other ecosystems.

Provisioning – includes the provision of food, medicines, mining, water, minerals.

Regulating – carbon detoxification, waste decomposition, water purification, prevention of soil erosion. Cultural – would include scientific, educational, recreational, spiritual.

In summation the natural landscape, that of the forests, are three-dimensional immersive environments with complex integrated systems supporting a multitude of diverse species.

What is the difference between our concepts of landscape and wilderness? Landscape is allowed to be farmed as farming is conceived of as part of landscape. Wilderness is the unknown, undiscovered wild. It is conceived as the primitive romantic allocated to pockets of other worldliness kept somehow in isolation and suspension. The ecological and environmental as opposed to spiritual concept of wilderness is historically relatively new. The vital influence of independent beings outside of mans homocentric notions and rules is difficult for us to comprehend. The idea of coexistence, that we are part of a much greater whole alienates. The domestic landscape in any form is not a true wilderness, species diversity and proliferation need to remain untouched by humans. So in this over populated world how can the concept of natural exist?

Modern landscape is determined by policies, government directives, subsidies, global markets, where land only has a value measured by its economic return and the bias of that return is manipulated according to policies. This problem is compounded as all land is now owned, split into networks of estates and small holdings each with their own agenda. The concept of ecological coexistence is meaningless in such an environment. Short sighted political competition strives to support short-termism to appease the demographic popular mass. Global policies are powerless and perhaps only patronage can collect, save and set aside natural landscape. The constant depletion of resources through monoculture is unsustainable and their replacement with variations of polyculture at present unrealistic. We live in an ever-increasing synthetic world supported by synthetic systems and a reduction in human population is the only way to attain a balance.

So what can be learnt from these short essays on synthetic landscapes? Firstly we view things incorrectly, we are too close or too far away. The heart zooms in close and the intellect seeks overview but both of these approaches misses the point as they reduce landscape to surface, the landscape as the rolling plane or the flower as a smooth petal. We read landscape in the abstract, in books, from IT, from above high, in our towers or from the cliffs, or we walk on lawns and admire two dimensional compositions of arranged fauna. We flatten to overview, to control and understand and in so doing we have forgotten that nature is not like this and that we are part of it and not above it. In the essay Synthetic Landscape 4, The canopy landscape is truly three dimensional and we are engulfed by it, it consumes us and orders us, to inhabit it we have to live within its rules.

Secondly after surface we desire objects, totems, souvenirs, monuments, effigies. Our elementary three-dimensional understanding loves products. Architects are living proof as they have for centuries built objects to be viewed from above, studied first as drawings then as models but always viewed on the desktop. Even when built high in the city buildings are visualised in the mind as a totality, as a clearly defined object with an enclosing perimeter. Natural landscape is a dynamic, ever adjusting variable, an emerging responsive nebular conclusion of interrelations. 

In conclusion, system diversity is essential to efficiency.

The Surrogate Twin

Synthetic Landscapes should be read 1 through to 4.

Landscapes in extreme environments are heavily nursed. Central pivot irrigation provides the most common form and these create surreal circular patterns that are seen clearly from above. The simple technology, invented by Frank Zybach in the 1940’s, consisted of a boom sprinkler system fed from a central point. The interlocked booms can be 500m in length, these rotate about the central point so a 500m length would create a 1km diameter circle but an 800m diameter circle (400m boom) is the common norm. The sprinkler booms are supported by trusses, these in turn are supported by wheeled towers driven by electric motors. The outer edge of the boom, the perimeter of the circle makes a full rotation every three days. Water is evenly spread and the outer edge of the boom travels at a faster pace than the inner parts and therefor covers a greater area. Holes that distribute the water from the boom are correspondingly larger towards the ends of the radii. Central pivot irrigation best suits large areas of flat land and are often located over subterranean aquifers. The more efficient systems employ hoses that deposit the water directly onto the ground next to the plants and cutting evaporative losses that are high. Central pivot irrigation systems can use hundreds of gallons of water per minute but are still considered to be more water efficient than traditional farmland in specific locations. However by allowing farming to exist in areas where climatic conditions would not normally support farming, pivot irrigation quickly depletes underground water supply. It makes no long-term ecological sense to continue using central pivot irrigation in arid regions without controlling evaporative loss and better sustainable management amongst farmers. The aesthetics however are seductive; lush green circles carpet the desert sands creating extravagant geometries that can be viewed from space.

Vertical landscapes, Green Walls or Living Walls are indoor or outdoor vertical gardens. The vegetation grows on substrates of either loose dirt in trays, felts, woven mats or polyurethane sheet media. The media used is dependent upon wall height, scale and location but all consist of a grid system that has a feed of water and substrate panels. The walls are high maintenance, earth needs to be replaced at least yearly and matting panels every three years, replacement requires disrupting both the established aesthetics and planting. Vertical Landscapes using structural media have become increasingly popular as a means of covering large vertical surfaces and fifteen year life spans have been achieved. As the benefits of the vertical planting become better understood and with increased use further efficiencies will incur, including assisted natural ventilation of buildings.

Vertical Landscapes are of interest at the larger scales and could function and offer positive for both the built and the urban environment. Cities are heat sinks, acres of concrete paving, roads and walls all of which absorb solar radiation and re-radiate the absorbed heat allowing a heat build up in cities. Vertical Landscapes can help negate the affects of the heat sinks associated with building materials. Urban areas lack adequate green space, green walls can humidify, add oxygen, remove carbon dioxide and lower ambient temperatures. On a building they could help recycle grey water, shade and humidify, assist and filter ventilation, encourage biodiversity and increase habitats. Green walls offer an addition to the architectural vocabulary of the façade, increasing its depth and its texture.

Hydroponics has a history of over 300 years and is a method of growing plants in water without soil. The plants are drip-fed mineral nutrient solutions that can be from organic waste products such as food waste, fish waste and manures. One advantage of hydroponics is the efficiency with which the plants roots can have constant access to both oxygen, water and nutrients, taking as much or as little as required. Excess water can be drained, aerated to eliminate anoxic toxins, supplemented with minerals and recycled back to the plants. Although hydroponics may use a static solution culture a continuous flow nutrient film is preferred it is easier to manage and can obtain higher crop yields. It is possible to grow plants using aeroponics where the roots are fed with nutrients via an atomizing mist. A wide range of plants can be grown together in this way as each plants microclimate can be finely controlled and pathogen spread can be greatly reduced. Aeroponics uses 65% less water than hydroponics and produces a greater biomass. There are available a wide range of substrates and nutrient feeds but the method of feeding is consistent. The hydroponic mechanised landscape offers an unusual aesthetic potential.

These mechanised, highly serviced, landscapes may have a much greater role in a post-industrial urban environment. Automation, robotics, micro drones may soon be cost effective gardeners fussing over rooftops and facades. Responsive systems moving in and out of the sun, opening and closing, moving to allow light through or clustering to prevent hard rains reaching ground. Systems that capture sunlight, wind and rain and hold and release these when required, turning rain into humidity, turning solar into coolant, modulating its own microclimate. In this system architecture is not a pre-determined form but instead a conclusion to a series of responses set around a desired environment.

In conclusion, a landscape of choreographic intensity.

The Surrogate Twin

Synthetic Landscapes should be read 1 through to 4.

There is something incredibly seductive about order and pattern. Partly as organised regimentation signals stability, control and efficiency all desirables built into the human psyche and partly the appeal of manmade geometric aesthetics. Humans crave simplicity from chaos, structured geometry over natural disorder; endless fields of blocked colour in rectilinear patchwork tapestries are easy on the eye and easy to comprehend. The tamed landscape concurs that we are in control and that we can make nature do as we please. Of course nature isn’t chaotic. It has hierarchy and order but it is not an order that most humans understand. We feel vulnerable in its presence, we order to organise and dominate, control is calming, it is safe and secure. In pleasing the eye the abstract patterns of monoculture, the chequered fields of blocks of colour, neat rows of subservient trees that line up to assist man and make his life easier and more pleasant hide a broken order.

Man has been farming for at least ten thousand years, he learnt to save seed and plant so that food would appear on his doorstep, he no longer had to live a nomadic life as a hunter-gatherer. Steady and reliable food quickly increased population and as population grew more farmland was cleared. Natural landscapes, indigenous species and habitats have all been wiped away. Historically every time a farmer cleared a small land holding habitats are swept aside but since the 1950’s this has been done on such a colossal global scale with thousands of square miles cleared to plant a single crop. Farmland is protected, sheltered and nurtured but the more we parent our crops the more they are dependent on us for their survival. Todays crops are genetically so far removed from their wild ancestors that they are unable to exist without their daily fix of fossil fuel derived pesticides and fertilisers. In our quest of forever increasing yields we leached the soil and bred out the crops inner defence systems. Annuals replaced perennials and with each season the plough weakened the soil losing the topsoil that will take a thousand years to replace. Below ground the microfauna and microflora that adheres and regenerates the soil are broken apart. Hard compact surfaces become windswept dust plains or washed away in heavy rains as water cannot penetrate to the depths required. Topsoil ultimately gets washed into rivers or drains and eventually ends in the sea. Some parts of the Mid West US lose 30mm of topsoil every two years. The soil is no longer a rich black fecund of life and death, the ongoing circle of perpetuity but instead a chemically enhanced anaemic rock like mass. In our never-ending search for increased production we have turned farmland into a synthetically supported factory system. Even our extensive manicured lawns are a form of monoculture.

The industrialisation of farming methods that have developed over the past two centuries favours monoculture, farming of one crop or one breed continuously. There are short-term efficiencies in this system as a single species has the same requirements and runs one timetable. Planting, maintenance, harvesting, marketing and logistics can be standardised. Sadly there are long-term inefficiencies such as soil degradation, low biodiversity and high risk of disease through pathogen spreads. The negatives can be offset with pesticides and fertilisers, usually made from petrochemicals and delivered with diesel miles. The efficiencies of monoculture increase yields that in turn increase with scale, so monoculture farms benefit as they grow and in so doing consume neighbouring farms and land. Eventually thousands of acres may fall under a single ownership and are harvested by subcontractors that move from farm to farm following the seasons. The Corn Belt of the Mid-Western United States, olive groves of Southern Spain or cut flowers from the Netherlands would be typical examples. Concentrated production of cash crops from within a confined area feeding a world through global distribution systems are particularly vulnerable to disruption including political, logistical and environmental. The long term negatives of monoculture have long been known and efforts to obtain equivalent yields from polycultures are being tested. The transition to polycultures will not be easy as increased labour, tooling and logistics costs are off set by longevity and less dependency on fertilisers.

The world’s natural state is forested but forests now cover less than 30% of the planets surface. The depletion of the Amazon rain forest is a sad atrocity but that depletion has occurred in every developed nation. In the US there was once 440 million acres of forest now there is only 25 million acres a 95% depletion. Tropical rain forests are depleting at a rate of 35 million acres a year. The consequences of de-forestation are well known first soil erosion followed by polluted water tables. Every nation should be re-forested and not micro managed agrarian forest but natural forest left to assume its own natural balance and eco system. This would not only help the biosphere to the benefit of all the planet but would also start to put a slow squeeze on land available for development or agriculture which in turn would begin to put pressure on a reducing population. Managed forests have little diversity, trees are planted at one time and harvested, clear cut, at another putting strains on habitats. Natural forests have a mixture of trees of various types, ages and scales. In the mix dead trees have an important role housing all types of wildlife that are essential to a thriving living forest system. We have become so use to associating farmland with nature that we now accept farmland as nature. We have no concept for the wilderness without human intervention.

In conclusion, regimented order does not guarantee the most efficient system.

The Surrogate Twin

Synthetic Landscapes should be read 1 through to 4. 

The purpose of the Synthetic Landscapes essays 1-4 are the beginnings of an investigation into the planets primary problem of over population, that taboo subject all politicians and environmentalists avoid. Synthetic Landscapes will draw upon the extremes that man has reached to maintain the present rate of population growth. But the essays also look at man’s peculiar relationship with nature, the us and them as if the two are completely separate and alien. Man rarely sees himself as part of a larger system but somehow outside of it, as either an observer or master. There is much to learn from the natural ecosystems especially with regard to future infrastructure and city healing. Lessons from natures circular systems in which there is no such term as waste need to be introduced into every aspect of our lives rather than our linear systems that push the problems elsewhere either in time or space.

Without a global policy for population reduction, one that is desperately needed, a new short term solution of inhabiting even more extreme landscapes, or repairing existing eroded landscapes, will be required to continue to support life on earth. Areas of ‘terraformed’ landscapes will be needed to try to reclaim spent and eroded soils and rejuvenate the semi arid regions of the world that were once lush fertile plains and this will form the research base for extra terrestrial terraforming.

Synthetic Landscapes 1

Inspired by Chinese gardens both the Japanese Rock Garden and the Japanese Garden were built to capture the intimate essence of nature in miniature. The gardens date back to the 8^th century and have strong links to Zen Buddhism. The gardens were small and walled, often laid out to be experienced from one seated viewpoint whilst in solitary meditation. In these greatly simplified abstracted or stylised compositions, elements within the garden are representations of natural phenomena, raked gravel represents rivers or streams, rocks may represent mountains or islands. Miniature trees and shrubs, (Bonsai) are used to make the garden seem perceptually larger.

The development of the Japanese garden runs parallel to the development of Japanese and Chinese ink landscape paintings. Where a restricted pallete, an asymmetrical composition and large areas of white are all part of the composition. Occidental gardens were optimised for visual appeal whilst Chinese and Japanese gardens were modelled on spiritual and philosophical ideas. The Japanese garden can be seen as a three-dimensional text telling a story. Nothing in a Japanese garden is natural or left to chance, every plant is chosen for its aesthetic as part of an overall composition. Trees may be trimmed and shaped to make them look as mature trees and their autumn colours are of particular importance. Mosses are used to make the gardens seem ancient and flowers are chosen for their religious symbolism.

In conclusion, the gardens are transcendental, solitary, meditative and spiritual.

The 16^th century Italian Renaissance garden was an extension of the architecture. It was ordered by symmetry, geometry and perspective. The gardens like the architecture symbolised mans control over nature. The gardens were usually walled and separate from the house, to be enjoyed as outside rooms with a rich tapestry topiary carpet.

The 17^th century French formal gardens expanded upon these principles both in scale and complexity of plan. The garden was integrated with the house setting up vistas deep into the surrounding landscape. The perspectives were visually lengthened with pathways narrowing and trees and topiary shortened towards the ends of vistas. The affect was to extend the gardens to infinity increasing the power represented by mans control. Geometry and mathematics lay the foundation plan, there were few ornamental flowerbeds and evergreen topiary was the principle medium. The gardens were used for entertaining, for gossip and politics, or to be to walked with surprises and discoveries such as fountains, statues and ponds en route. Technically the gardens required moving considerable amounts of earth to provide the level plain on which this horizontal tapestry could be laid. Bringing adequate water to the gardens both for plants, ponds and fountains was another engineering challenge often with water diverted from great distances. The planting was extreme and continuously labour intensive. The gardens are best described as horizontal paintings, tapestries or carpets and often best viewed in totality from the upper floors of the adjoining house or palace. The gardens of Versailles and the work of Andre Le Nôtre would be characteristic examples.

In conclusion, the gardens were social/political and very much part of Court life, symbolically they were about mans control over nature, and they were best viewed in two dimensions from above.

The English landscape gardens of the 18^th century were first inspired by the romance captured in landscape paintings, typically those of Claude Lorrain and Nicolas Poussin. The paintings captured an idyllic wilderness where man and nature were at one. Domesticated animals and overgrown classical ruins recaptured by nature were recurring themes. The soft asymmetrical composition of Chinese gardens was also influential in breaking with the geometry and symmetry of the French Garden.

The English landscape gardens built these paintings as physical realities. One could ride the grounds and discover a ‘painting’ as a three dimensional reality, ride further and turn to discover another. Antiquity was represented in miniature, the temple, the obelisk, the rotunda, the Palladian bridge. Often these would be built as ruins, along with caves, grottos and sculpture all in the process of being retaken by nature. The garden architectures had limited practical use other than complementing the aesthetic composition of the gardens. The architectures act as focal points and places of destination where once one has arrived one turns only to discover another ‘painting’ across the landscape. In this way one is lead through a series of three-dimensional picturesque romantic sets and as such the landscapes are experienced sequentially.

The English landscape gardens undulated with rolling hills, indigenous woodlands, artificial lakes, rivers and streams. Deer, sheep, rare breeds of cattle, ducks, swans and fish all cohabit this picturesque idyll. Manufacturing this idyll was a massive undertaking of landscape manipulation, digging down to make lakes, moving the soil to make hills, pumping the water to maintain the streams that forever circled between the lakes. The gardens extended far into the horizon to eventually blend with the natural landscape or the farmland beyond. For the landed gentry, where wealth is measured by the acreage of their vast estates, an uninterrupted ‘as far as the eye can see’ was the objective. The gardens of Stowe, Blenheim and Stourhead, or gardens by William Kent and Capability Brown would be examples of the genre.

In conclusion, the gardens were sequential stage sets to be experienced at a leisurely pace. Politically they were about confidence, power and stability through ownership.

We are constantly presented with new terminologies, smart materials, disruptives, robots, drones, virtual reality and wearable tech, we need first to remember that design is evolutionary (See text Environs 2). Todays amazing realisations have their roots in the conceptual projects of the past. These projects have been evolving incrementally in the research labs of architectural and design schools for many decades. Over time each isolated experiment has been collected and collated by the next generation into ever more comprehensive products and environs.

The 1960’s were one of the richest periods of liberal free thinking, many conceptual ideas that were crudely sketched or montaged then have since formed the roots for endless projects, some realised, some academic. Examples include The Mowbot, derivatives of which can now be bought in the high street, The Electric Tomato now comes in the form of an iPhone. The intangible sensory environments of the past are fast becoming reality with the growth of virtual reality, holographic projections and automated environments. The Internet of Things will soon spread from the home to the city. The potential of free solar power and wireless energy would mean that information and animated responsive environs are only a few years of development away. We are moving away from mono specific tools towards multi specific tools. Just as the computer, the phone, the watch were once mono specific tools they have now evolved into tools of multiple application. Other products will follow suit, the car will become the library, the energy storage centre, the entertainment centre, the bedroom, the office. As tools move from mono to multiple applications an overlap between products will make many objects redundant. Preexisting semantic forms will no longer have relevance. The move from micro to Nano will continue the pursuit of the ephemeral as objects slowly disappear. Everywhere access to a global cloud will enable the place less international nomad not so dissimilar to the ideals proposed by Superstudio. Micro climates of information and energy stitched invisibly into landscapes and ecologies are now a very feasible possibility.

So as a point of reflection here are some favourite projects.

1967 – Suitaloon and Cushicle, Mike Webb. 

If it wasn’t for my Suitaloon I would have to buy a house. The Suitaloon is a wearable environment. Each suit has a plug. You can plug into a friend and two suits become one, or onto any envelope. The plug serves as a means of connecting envelopes together to form larger spaces.

1968 – Pneumatic Space for Two, Hans Rucker. 

The all encompassing sensory environmental capsule for friends.

1969 – The White Suit, Coop Himmilblau. 

The White Suit has sounds, projections and a pneumatic vest for tactile transference. 

1969 – The Electric Tomato, Ron Herron, Warren Chalk, David Greene. 

The Electric Tomato or Manzak is your own cyber friend, all the sensory equipment you need for environmental information. 

1969 – Logplug and Rockplug, David Greene.

A system of distributed nodes for energy, communication and services. 

1970 – The Mowbot, David Greene.

An automated work pet. 

And some favourite permeable environments.

1967 – The Continuous Walk. Superstudio.

The world is imagined as a network of energy creating new artificial panoramas between man and the environment. This continuous permeable surface encircles the planet with its thermally controlled and modulated microclimate, it is without borders or enclosure. 

1968 – All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace, Richard Brautgan. (extract)

I like to think

(it has to be)

of a cybernetic ecology

where we are free of our labours

and joined back to nature

returning to our mammal

brothers and sisters

and all watched over

by machines of loving grace

The Surrogate Twin