Team Germany wins Solar Decathlon 2009
16
Oct 2009
By David Basulto — Filed under: Awarded Competitions , Sustainability , Uncategorized , Solar Decathlon
After 9 days and 10 contests, Team Germany from the Technische Universität Darmstadt won the 2009 Solar Decathlon with their surPLUShome project.
© Jim Tetro, U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon.
The surPLUShome is based on a single room concept. The interior design is characterized by a multi functional body as its central element. This body contains primary functions like the kitchen, stairs and the bath and defines the possible use of close-by space. Besides it takes over functions of furniture and the building services.
But the most interesting aspect of this house is its shingle inspired ventilated skin, using photovoltaic modules.
You can learn more about the house at Team Germany’s official website.
Related articles:
Share:
16 comments »
This house expresses the most elegant sophistication I have ever seen in a house.
The ongoing success of the Darmstadt team is a testimate not only to the quality of design and technical ability set as an expectation in German archictecture, but also to all that is lacking in American “Architecture” schools. Seriously, with exception of one or two other house in the competition, the designs that were given two years to be produced were all too familiar and themed.
i think the ongoing success of the german team is due to it’s funding and does not represent any lack of quality in american architecture schools. i think the german house was the most expensive again… around 1000$/sq ft… like their previous winning project in 2007. the 2nd place team illinois cost less than 1/3 the cost of the german house, and the rice university house was less than 1/4th the cost. don’t get me wrong, i like the german house and it does represent many future innovations, but i am sure that if the american schools spent as much, they could achieve similar results. the failure of this competition is that it in some ways awards excess… most of these houses lack affordability, and therefore real marketability… mass-marketability is achieved through affordability.
i know that many of the top architecture schools in the u.s. do not participate in the solar decathlon because of this… example: university of virginia, one of the top winners in the 2002 competition and to me the most interesting design yet ( http://faculty.virginia.edu/solarhome/index.swf )does not participate anymore because of this very fact and has started its own award winning design/build sustainable and affordable initiative called eco-mod. the ultimate goal is marketability.
just because a school had gratuitous funding in a project does not make it superior… i challenge the german team to design an affordable house rather than blinging out with the latest and greatest technological advantages… plus, they only won because of their huge net metering score due to the insane, unrealistic amount of solar panels… i think the only other category they won was comfort zone, and that was just by a hair…
i hate to be so negative about this, and i do congratulate the german team, and the house is beautiful for sure, but the responsibility of architecture/sustainability is three fold: environmental, social, and economic…
This is the second time I’ve attended and I agree.
Riesen Glückwunsch!
two in a row. respect!
Mini Mecca
just because a school had gratuitous funding in a project does not make it superior… i challenge the german team to design an affordable house rather than blinging out with the latest and greatest technological advantages… actually, they only won because of their huge net metering score due to the insane, unrealistic amount of solar panels… i think the only other category they won was comfort zone, and that was just by a hair…
i do congratulate the german team, but the responsibility of architecture/sustainability is three fold: environmental, social, and economic… and at over 1000$/sqft (like in 2007 also)this house is over 3x the cost of the 2nd place team illinois and over 4x the cost of the rice house- the only truely affordable house in this whole project.
houses should be like this for everyone. designed and sustainable and good for people
If you take in account that after 10-15 years photovoltanics panels need to be exchange, because they loose normal productivity, so during the life time of panels you may save to replace elevation for the next time. What is so brilliant about that? I am sure it should not be call, affordable and sustainable.
Shape is totally boring, remained me Malvina Reynolds song …little boxes made with ticky tacky and all are the same…
That is sad!!!!!!!! where are creativity???????
Links to this article »