ZEMCH 2015 - International Conference Proceedings | Page 488

Figure 9 - End of life scenarios (steelconstruction.info)

Conclusions
As a matter of fact there are plenty to carry out the theme, not only the architectural one, in
summary there is a container of the theme (the pavilion) and content (everything in the pavilion).
Even if the guidelines encouraged the nations to develop the theme through architecture and
engineering, it’s a choice to focus the majority part of the attention on the container.
As already discussed the analysis made on the architecture of the pavilions showed that the most
used structure type is the steel frame, but the main cladding material is wood. Many of the pavilions made out with a steel frame that is a structure composed of a material produced with a lot
of embodied energy, even if it’s recycled steel. The request of the guidelines was to use the knowhow to reduce as much as possible the environmental impact of the construction site. Surely a
huge cantilever (e.g. Russian pavilion) requires steel beams to bear loads, but probably not all the
structures needed the adoption of steel or concrete. It must be considered also the high specific
weight of steel that made the transport very expensive.
An example of great work has been made by China and Japan. The former made a big coverage
using a wood frame reinforced with just the strictly necessary amount of steel (joinery and reinforcing beams) and the latter inserted freestanding wood wall to reduce the necessity of beam
frames.
Make a green roof, a big field or a factory on the façade is not enough to ensure the reduction of
environmental impact of a building, because the biggest part of energy used in building is used
during the construction phase. The use of green energy and the attention to architectural details
that made the building more efficient are surely praiseworthy and represent a key to success
in the zero emission goal, but the primary focus of the designers must be put on the emissions
produced on the construction sites and during the production of the materials. In this event, for
example, a light material permits to drastically reduce the emissions in the material transport that
must be made twice (in the mounting phase and after the dismantling).
The realized buildings give a strong perception of green construction and sustainability, evocating these concepts, but “perceived architecture” and “real architecture” are deeply different. The
realization of a perceived architecture that communicates the importance of eco-sustainability is
surely important, but it doesn’t guarantee the achievement of guidelines’ goals.

486

ZEMCH 2015 | International Conference | Bari - Lecce, Italy