Thermally Active Surfaces in Architecture Hardcover – April 1, 2010

For several years I have been studying and attempting to practice sustainable building.Perhaps most useful was Lechner's "Heating, Cooling, Lighting". All the time feeling something missing - until I happened on this book at ArchDaily.com. No-one else had made the distinction between radiant and convective energy transfer - both physiologically and in building, nor suggested that air is a most irrational material for energy transfer, water being 832 times denser. Add to that functional separation of fresh air supply from temperature control and we have a revolutionary new approach to architecture, from foundation to finish, as illustrated by outstanding examples. This is of particular relevance to building in our (Israel) semi-arid climate where in most parts the daily temperature differential is too small for effective night time cooling by accelerated air flow. This book is a must for every architect.

Bought this for my son-in-law and he was very happy with it

This is an important book. which opens a path for some major rethinking of energy and comfort in buildings, and for significant new architecture. And it does so with striking visual presentation and telling metaphors. The standard paradigm for thermal comfort in a building--heating, cooling and circulating air--has been largely unquestioned for two generations or more. Kiel Moe shows the potential for a strikingly different approach, thermally active surfaces, based on recent pathbreaking European engineering (but also on neglected practices from ancient Rome and Korea). The book does an excellent job of bringing forward finished European and North American buildings which embody this approach, together with imaginative comparative diagrams which show their departures from mid-Twentieth Century practices but also their alignment with good older industrial-era buildings. Building this way may allow major steps forward in saving energy and using sustainable materials. The book also does quite a reasonable job of translating engineering technicalities into lay terms. Some will resist its message, because it asks practitioners and rule-of-thumb people to take a great deal of new thinking on board. But Moe has brought together the technical aspects, the core metaphors, and the actually built examples of the new approach in a way that is inspiring. The substance is here, as well as the excitement, and the book deserves close attention.

Moe inspires architects to think laterally and not blindly follow current technological practices that drain buildings of energy and spatial richness. An excellent (and I think, required) read for architects and architecture students.

This is a first impression review:The idea of using water to cool/heat a house is the main reason I bought the book for because it is: a/ going against the common practice, and b/ making sense at a superficial level. I wanted to learn more, so I decided to buy the book.I just got it (literally less than 10 minutes ago) started reading through it, and felt that I can write two meaningful comments (this is not a review, but - this is the only way I can make the comments), so here they are:1 / Do you read " Achieve greater human comfort with low air temperature heating and high air temperature cooling" and feel the need for a double take? I did, and the went for a triple, and after reading it another two times I felt the need to write it down as:"Make your house comfortable heating it with cool air and cooling it with hot air." I do believe that the second phrase doesn't need a translation. I also believe that this is also a very poor translation, which completely misses the point that the author is trying to make.After reading a bit more from the book (that was when I realized my mistake), I came up with: "Make your house comfortable heating it with air that is heated just a little bit, and cooling it with air that is cooled just a little bit". This translation is closer to what the author tried to communicate, it also seems to have been written by a 5 years old...SO: i came up with the following paragraphs, which I hope capture the author's intended meaning, in an acceptable form:"Traditionally HVAC systems cool houses by taking hot OUTSIDE air and cooling it before pumping it into the house. This requires that a certain quantity of heat is extracted from the air - which needs to be cooler than the desired temperature.I propose a new system, where INSIDE air is cooled when it comes into contact with a (water) cooled surface in the house; and in turn helps cool the house. This approach requires a correspondingly smaller amount of heat to be extracted from the air, as the air used is already cooler than the exterior air, AND doesn't need to be cooled to a the same low temperature as the exterior air used in traditional HVAC systems in order to obtain the desired temperature."Not nearly as simple, or elegant as the author's phrase, but clear. If I'd have another 2 hours I might be able to come with something clear and concise, but for now, this will (have to) do.I worry that the author's message will be lost if all the book is written like this, mainly because most people will be put off by the unclear, pretentious text.2/ Then (on the next page), I looked at two drawings which try to capture the book's main idea: when it comes to heating / cooling a house, using water is better than using air. The trouble is that the charts are hard to read (the font employs a VERY FINE fine line, and seems to be no larger than 7); to add insult to the injury the font could easily have been 12 (there's plenty of white space inside each illustration). To make matters even worse the two pictures could have been much larger - they likely use less than half of the space available on the page. Once more, it looks like the editor chose style over clarity.Despite these (minor) gripes, the book's main idea is intuitively correct - and I will likely put up with its quirks to see how the author goes about defending it.