< prev

Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8

Page 7 of 8
next >

Majalah Ilmiah UNIKOM

Vol.7, No. 2

205

H a l a m a n

less worked if it is not supported by politi-

cal will or government commitment. Al-

though only economically established

country can be carrying out certification

process such as eco labeling ISO 14041–

14043 by way of sort of instrument such

as LCA. Nevertheless as part of global ar-

chitectural community, Indonesia should

be involving themselves by minimizing

environmental impacts as consequences

of the existences of architecture, if do not

want to be alienated.

Applying tropical architecture, energy con-

servation, using local material, awareness

of preservation, revitalization, and renova-

tion on designs besides create them as

manifestation of traditional wisdom, which

is expressing Indonesian architecture and

architects involvement, intrinsically has

been in sustainable spirit.

However, it should be better if the involve-

ment carried out systematically and holis-

tic by considering building–life–cycle from

raw materials extraction until end of life of

the building in every architectural design

process, in context building as product of

system of architecture.

CONCLUSIONS

By keep considering building–life–cycle

within an architectural process, it means

that we are constantly making up life qual-

ity into a better one under economic de-

pression that growing harder, as conse-

quences of the decreasing of environ-

mental quality and limitation natural re-

sources particularly non–renewable en-

ergy resources.

As a part of industrial construction, which

always relate with energy producing, archi-

tecture suppose to do something in regard

with this situation, and it has been proofed

by concerns from a number of architec-

tural theorists and practitioners about the

stated problems.

According to this discourse, there would be

uneasiness for some architects. Neverthe-

less, we no need to worry about the mat-

ters. Concerning about the building–life–

cycle within system of architecture means

analyzing energy, cost, and other environ-

mental impacts that would be spent and

occur along the building–life–cycle.

However, analysis by using a cradle–to–

grave based instrument such as LCA is not

a paradigm shifting of strategies or archi-

tectural design methods but it is more to

be parallel, side–by–side, and a comple-

mentary process.

Inherently, architectural planning and de-

signing still produce designs that are re-

lated to the creation of value or meaning

with the intention of arousing users‟ emo-

tion and sensitivity.

On the other hands, estimate life cycle of

the building along an architectural process

in context building as product of system of

architecture, offering designs that can

minimize environmental impacts as conse-

quences of building–life–cycle, or designs

that associated with quality and reliable

issues.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Abioso, Wanita Subadra (1999), Krite-

ria Rancangan Arsitektur Dalam Kon-

teks Pembangunan Berkelanjutan, Pro-

gram Magister Teknik Arsitektur, Pro-

gram Pasca Sarjana, Institut Teknologi

Bandung.

2. Amos, Jonathan, Energy crisis „will limit

births', BBC News Online science staff,

in Seattle,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/

sci/tech/3465745.stm

.

3. Frosch, Robert (1995), The Industrial

Ecology of The 21

st

Century, Scientific

American.

4.

H t t p : / / w w w . c f d . r m i t . e d u . a u /

Publications/papers/LCA-CR.html

5. Handler, A. Benjamin (1970), Systems

Approach to Architecture, New York:

American Elsevier Publishing Company,

Inc.

6. Holdway and Walker, (2004), Http://

w w w . w e e e m a n . o r g / h t m l / w h a t /

lifecycle.html

7. Steele, James (1997), Sustainable Ar-

chitecture, Principles, Paradigms, and