A note on the solar architecture of the 1970s

/

My book The Solar House begins:

"The label ‘solar house’ typically conjures an image, I think, from the 1970s: an eccentrically-shaped structure with an oversized sloped glass wall and diagonal cedar siding.  Perhaps an earth berm.  A Volkswagen van nearby..."

The book then focuses on the period before 1973.  It includes a only broad overview of the solar architecture of the 1970s, with discussion of a few key examples.  I was not able to include every worthy house from that period, simply because so many appeared.

Yet I do think the solar architecture of the 1970s is a compelling subject, of course, and I'm especially interested in the aesthetic questions.  Because solar house design was strongly affiliated with the counterculture, it can be easy to dismiss with a laugh.

A stereotypical example (?)

A stereotypical example (?)

Or maybe it's beginning to look serious and attractive again now, as our tastes age.  And young people don't seem to find images like this to be ugly.  In any case, there are genuine, difficult issues to unpack when looking at the eccentric solar architecture of the 1970s and my book offers only a few small steps in that direction.  (Not only was there a lot of solar architecture after, say, 1973, there was a lot of discourse about aesthetics.)  I hope somebody else will continue to help us document and understand what happened and when that exists there should be a lot of new interpretations of 70s solar architecture.

I recently came upon a quotation from Susan C. Piedmont-Palladino which caused me to reflect again on some of these larger questions:

"...the trend towards integrated and more sophisticated technology may also allow environmentally responsible architecture of the future to avoid becoming ghettoized like the 'solar architecture' of the past.  The icons of the energy-conscious architecture of the 70s—the single-slope roof with attached solar collectors, the Trombe wall, etc.—became stigmas in the 80s as the reality of scarcity was obscured by the illusion of plenty."*

I generally agree with the premise, that the stereotypical 70s solar house created a 'stigma' which damaged the social movement.  Is the solar house, as a type, still stigmatized?  Probably.  I've spoken of an "Age of Aquarius hangover" on occasion.

Still, it would be a shame, I think, if anyone interpreted the historical lesson to mean that progressive social movements should avoid experimental architecture.   Of all the possible motives for architecture to explore new forms, surely free renewable energy is compelling enough...

What do you think?

*"Building Alternatives," Perspecta 29 (1998).

An Active Solar Primer

/

Just in time for next week's American Solar Energy Society (ASES) conference...

My colleague Jon Gardzelewski & I were asked to write an article on active solar energy systems for a magazine for rural homeowners.  Here's a link:

Is Solar Electric or Solar Thermal Best for You? (pdf)

An essential point is that consumers who may have priced solar electric systems a few years ago should not assume that those prices would hold true today.  Here's a slide which I've used from time to time.

The Solar House: Then and Now, on Youtube

/

A talk I gave in March---at the National Museum of Wildlife Art in Jackson, WY---was professionally recorded and posted to Youtube.  It gives an overview of some of the themes of the book.  The title was "The Solar House: Then and Now."

This was part of the University of Wyoming's "Saturday University," an excellent program.  Thanks to Paul Flesher and the other organizers and sponsors.

Unearthed: The Lo-Cal House

/

In The Solar House I briefly outlined a theme in the 1960s-80s, when some building scientists and other experimenters realized that good insulation and airtightness would be a more effective first energy-saving technique than passive solar heating.  I wrote:

"Solar vs. superinsulation" became a serious question for those interested in passive methods of reducing building energy use, and it remains so today (though the concepts are not mutually exclusive).  Light-and-tight vs. mass-and-glass is another was of expressing this philosophical debate.

One of the important early projects to explore the benefits of superinsulation and airtight construction was the Lo-Cal House, designed by the University of Illinois Small Homes Council.  The book includes a few paragraphs about the Lo-Cal House and an illustration.

A short film about the Lo-Cal House has just been unearthed.  Interestingly, its title is "Solar House Design," even though the main subject is envelope construction.  It's from 1976, and it features Wayne Shick and Seichi Konzo of the Small Homes Council:

My friend Jim Laukes found the video in the SHC archives, and he prepared it for the web.  The legendary Bill Rose also made it happen.  (Note: Bill will be a keynote speaker at the North American Passive House Conference this fall.)

Finally, I'll mention that Seichi "Bud" Konzo is a fascinating character.  I hope to write more about him in the future.  In the meantime, I'll mention his book The Quiet Indoor Revolution (1992), which in essence traced the changes in building science since the 1920s (and Konzo often played a key role in those changes).  It's outstanding, and should be much better-known.