Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   "World's first 'upcycled' skyscraper saves Australian tower from demolition"   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Skyscraper, Construction, Sydney's tallest building, outdated 1970s structure, tower's owners, high-rises, two-thirds of the old structure, Fred Holt  
•       •       •

2854 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Dec 2022 at 6:35 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



38 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-12-07 5:39:44 PM  
media.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 6:01:43 PM  
The lowest carbon footprint building is one that has already been built. This is really cool.
 
2022-12-07 6:36:47 PM  
Is this thing infested with drop bears or something?
 
2022-12-07 6:38:48 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 6:45:20 PM  

IgG4: The lowest carbon footprint building is one that has already been built. This is really cool.


This goes for a lot of things.  For example, keeping older nuclear power plants open (provided there's no safety issues with their age) is a good thing, ladies and germs.  Likewise, continuing to drive your car instead of buying a new one is also good.
 
2022-12-07 6:46:57 PM  
You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.
 
2022-12-07 6:51:35 PM  
They did that to the main campus library at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville.  The state legislature wouldn't approve funding for a new library, but they would for a "refurbishing" project on the existing library.  So they essentially built a whole new building around the old one.  They ripped out all the walls/doors/windows, leaving just them main concrete and steel skeleton of the original and build a new building encasing it.  The new building was about twice as big as the old one.
 
2022-12-07 6:53:08 PM  
What's upcycle?
 
2022-12-07 6:53:31 PM  
The Upcycled Skyscraper is a sex position worse than the Reverse Cowgirl but better than the Oral Hershiser
 
2022-12-07 6:53:40 PM  
pop-verse.comView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 6:59:45 PM  
Sounds like a renovation, with extra steps. Or the same amount of steps. Like when you gut a house down to the studs and rebuild everything.
 
2022-12-07 7:03:16 PM  

brap: [media.tenor.com image 640x486] [View Full Size image _x_]


Used as the opening line of "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf"
/for what it's worth
 
2022-12-07 7:04:15 PM  

morg: What's upcycle?


Not much, but don't call my cycle.
 
2022-12-07 7:05:35 PM  

studebaker hoch: The Upcycled Skyscraper is a sex position worse than the Reverse Cowgirl but better than the Oral Hershiser


we tried that but my wife got too dizzy.
 
2022-12-07 7:08:26 PM  
Up-cycling is such a good idea

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 7:11:31 PM  

morg: What's upcycle?


You grab your ankles in Two Wheeling Tim goes as fast as he can
 
2022-12-07 7:13:14 PM  

Geotpf: IgG4: The lowest carbon footprint building is one that has already been built. This is really cool.

This goes for a lot of things.  For example, keeping older nuclear power plants open (provided there's no safety issues with their age) is a good thing, ladies and germs.  Likewise, continuing to drive your car instead of buying a new one is also good.


Although eventually replacement is the best option. Automotive technology has advanced greatly in the 18 years since I bought my van.
 
2022-12-07 7:29:38 PM  

AppleOptionEsc: Sounds like a renovation, with extra steps. Or the same amount of steps. Like when you gut a house down to the studs and rebuild everything.


It's a renovation with extra PR.
 
2022-12-07 7:43:42 PM  
Great idea but if at any point the building was deemed unsuitable it would have been a huge extra cost for nothing. Making it a economic gamble and unlikely a consideration to something that can be quantified from the get go.

Seems like something the government should incentivise and cover the costs on. If the developer wins, they win, if the developer loses they break even, then EVERYONE would want to give it a go.
 
2022-12-07 7:52:09 PM  
Recently upcycled:

media1.orlandoweekly.comView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 7:53:44 PM  
What it used to look like:
media1.orlandoweekly.comView Full Size
 
2022-12-07 7:55:19 PM  

DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.


Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).
 
2022-12-07 8:13:59 PM  

indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).


I don't know that you could quite make it ready for IKEAification.

You're going to have different required live loads depending on location (especially wind loads).

You might be able to come up with some basic modules that have different strengths, and swap them around, but that also means that you're often overbuilding, so you have to figure out how the savings from standardization balances out with the overbuilding.

/not a civil engineer
//but I do have an undergraduate degree in it
 
2022-12-07 8:18:10 PM  

Oneiros: indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).

I don't know that you could quite make it ready for IKEAification.

You're going to have different required live loads depending on location (especially wind loads).

You might be able to come up with some basic modules that have different strengths, and swap them around, but that also means that you're often overbuilding, so you have to figure out how the savings from standardization balances out with the overbuilding.

/not a civil engineer
//but I do have an undergraduate degree in it


Agggh!  No, avert omen!  IKEAification would mean we'd get hired, head to work, and have to spend years putting it together with one tiny allen wrench and pictorial instructions

/and we'd still have extra beams left and one mysterious half floor that didn't seem to go anywhere
 
2022-12-07 8:30:21 PM  
And managed to make it as fugly as possible.
 
2022-12-07 8:31:39 PM  

indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).


That sounds like architecture schools putting themselves out of a job.
 
2022-12-07 8:44:11 PM  

indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.


Kind of... Really what they did is they stripped it to it's core, built another core beside it, waited a few months so the new core had time to settle and shrink while they started on the facade, then they grafted both cores together and finished facade. The new core was needed because they wanted to double the old building's capacity and the old core alone was not designed to support a structure of that size.
 
2022-12-07 8:45:17 PM  

morg: What's upcycle?


not much cycle, what's up with you?
 
2022-12-07 8:46:00 PM  

studebaker hoch: The Upcycled Skyscraper is a sex position worse than the Reverse Cowgirl but better than the Oral Hershiser


how is it compared to a Rusty Venture?
 
TWX
2022-12-07 9:39:31 PM  

LordOfThePings: Up-cycling is such a good idea

[Fark user image image 300x300]


Saw one of those at a pawn shop last week.  I hope they aren't expecting a quick sale.
 
TWX
2022-12-07 9:48:27 PM  

indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).


It can be difficult to predict things like telecom square footage though, along with it being s shared-space vs tenants needing their own private equipment rooms.  It's most efficient to stack those rooms next to a purpose-built riser, IF they're actually used to their extents.

Build with suitable square footage for every tenant on the floor to have their own locked deep-4post rack and find they don't use it, then it's a waste of space.  Omit it and suddenly on-premises network infrastructure becomes popular again and the building becomes more expensive to retrofit for data services and backup power.
 
2022-12-07 10:51:49 PM  

morg: What's upcycle?


This is a pretty recent term for using some existing thing for a different purpose. The presumption is that its useful life has been kicked up into a higher cycle after its old lifecycle has finished. In this case, the old building has met the end of its useful life, it has been repurposed (debatable) to fulfill some new role or purpose.

Reduce  This is foregoing consumption of something.

Reuse This is using the same item over again for a similar purpose.

Recycle  This is usually breaking an item down into its components for reconstruction into something new.

Upcycle is different from Recycle because you are refurbishing or augmenting or reinforcing the item for some new role, thereby avoiding new consumption, with its attendant waste, etc. You are extending the useful life of the item.
 
2022-12-07 11:10:12 PM  
This is generally a good idea. It is not always going to be a good idea. The general principle of land use planning is to have some area be devoted to its highest and best use. You want development, growth, increased service value, etc. That makes your city better, attracts people, etc. Simcity.

It MIGHT be a good idea to avoid wrecking something and starting all over again. The waste and foregone value of knocking down one building and putting up a new one might be so great that extending the life of the existing structure for some purpose makes everyone better off. But is it progress or just a kluge?

Humanity is going to have to come to terms about where we are, what we need, and where we are going. Is acquisition and reconstruction ruining us?

Probably, MOST buildings can be improved. The high costs of NIMBY, safety inspections, liability, new permits and all those greased palms are likely to drive developers to improvements more and more. This will continue to be a big deal.

And while I am at it, as a solar fan, I think it would be great to start putting panels on vertical spaces. If we are going to make huge glass and steel structures that blot out the sun, then make those glass panels into solar panels. You could even set up trombe walls and have the outer walls generate a chimney effect with powerful updrafts to generate wind power 24 7. The draft would cool the panels too. Haha. For a 30 story building, the winds would probably suck people off the street. You could do skydiving practice at ground level. but seriously, it would also ameliorate heat island effects for the whole area of the city.
 
2022-12-07 11:26:02 PM  

2fardownthread: This is generally a good idea. It is not always going to be a good idea. The general principle of land use planning is to have some area be devoted to its highest and best use. You want development, growth, increased service value, etc. That makes your city better, attracts people, etc. Simcity.

It MIGHT be a good idea to avoid wrecking something and starting all over again. The waste and foregone value of knocking down one building and putting up a new one might be so great that extending the life of the existing structure for some purpose makes everyone better off. But is it progress or just a kluge?

Humanity is going to have to come to terms about where we are, what we need, and where we are going. Is acquisition and reconstruction ruining us?

Probably, MOST buildings can be improved. The high costs of NIMBY, safety inspections, liability, new permits and all those greased palms are likely to drive developers to improvements more and more. This will continue to be a big deal.

And while I am at it, as a solar fan, I think it would be great to start putting panels on vertical spaces. If we are going to make huge glass and steel structures that blot out the sun, then make those glass panels into solar panels. You could even set up trombe walls and have the outer walls generate a chimney effect with powerful updrafts to generate wind power 24 7. The draft would cool the panels too. Haha. For a 30 story building, the winds would probably suck people off the street. You could do skydiving practice at ground level. but seriously, it would also ameliorate heat island effects for the whole area of the city.


Can't help but wonder what a bunch of those would do to the local climate in general though
 
2022-12-08 1:40:31 AM  

Geotpf: IgG4: The lowest carbon footprint building is one that has already been built. This is really cool.

This goes for a lot of things.  For example, keeping older nuclear power plants open (provided there's no safety issues with their age) is a good thing, ladies and germs.  Likewise, continuing to drive your car instead of buying a new one is also good.


Everyone forgets the the first two "R's":

Reduce, Re-use, recycle.
 
2022-12-08 2:18:09 AM  

LockeOak: indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).

That sounds like architecture schools putting themselves out of a job.


This will never happen for many reasons I won't go into here. We already do build prefab and modular construction, but even that's highly custom each time.

I'm an architect who works mainly with developers. If they could find a way to squeeze an extra penny out of a job, they will.

Lastly, this project is also known as a "renovation." My firm recently opened a 22 storey complete gut renovation of an abandoned social housing building. It never occurred to me to use some vaguely familiar greenwash terms to go with it.
 
2022-12-08 5:36:43 AM  

thespindrifter: What it used to look like:
[media1.orlandoweekly.com image 850x866]


Laugh all you want, but in 20,000 years that building will be all that's left for archaeologists to study they great Altamonte Springs civilization.
 
2022-12-08 8:13:23 AM  

indy_kid: DrEMHmrk2: You know, eventually building technology will reach a place where everything is sort of modular and 3d printable. At that stage this concept becomes really attractive because the core structure of building will in many cases be interchangeable with a number of facade options that could be swapped out as the building's mission changes over the decades.

Pretty much what they did with this building. Kept the core, new facade.

What might be needed now is for architecture schools to start teaching about reusable design. How do you design a core that could serve multiple purposes? If there's a standard core among 60-75% of the skyscrapers being built, you can have a team that does nothing but build the same core, over and over. The workers would get very skilled at it, saving time and materials.

So, among the world's largest cities, agree on an industry-standard core design. You could have one for 20, 40, 60, and 80 stories (differing locations and numbers of stairs/elevators, which floors are used for HVAC and other services, etc.).


I dunno if the efficiencies in having a standardized core would be that great. You'd need to have standardized floor layouts as well, then you'd need to have different standards based on expected occupancies - offices buildings are going to have different service needs than hotels, for example.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.