Building Biology

Introduction to Bau-biologie and Ecology

by Helmut Ziehe

As long as people have lived on this planet, they have built themselves shelter. Not only have they managed to do so, but in the process they have succeeded in creating outstanding buildings.

What went so wrong along the way that, today, we find that people living in modern buildings are becoming ill? Why are we unable to relate our physical discomforts and diseases to the hazardous conditions existing in our homes and work spaces, or to our use of improper food or clothing? And, once the causes of such problems have been recognized, why are people so apathetic about taking the measures necessary for improving their quality of life and yes, even ensuring their survival? We must take time to reflect deeply upon these questions. Some of them are addressed and answered in the Bau-biologie educations program.

What is “Bau-biologie & Ecology”?

The German term “Bau-biologie” means building biology or building for life.
The phrase “Bau-biologie and Ecology” specifically refers to the study of (1) the impact of the built environment on human health, and the application of this knowledge to the construction, or modification, of homes and workplaces, and (2) the holistic interaction between human life and other life forms with our environment.

Some Background Information
While the name Bau-biologie is now received favorably in many publications, as recently as twelve years ago it was not.

The principles of Bau-biologie have been applied in Germany and German speaking countries since the 1960s. They since have spread throughout Europe, to Asia and South America and now are well established in Italy, France, the Netherlands, the Scandinavian countries, Brazil, Colombia, Singapore, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.

Among the German pioneers in this field are Hubert Palm, a medical doctor; Professor Anton Schneider, wood technologist; and Wolfgang Maes, a journalist who has become an expert in electrobiology.

Pioneers can also be found in America: Dr. Theron G. Randolph, from the Human Ecology Research Foundation in Chicago; Richard L. Crowther, FAIA, an architect from Denver, who has been working in this field since 1930; Ken Kern, a practical man, probably best known for his book The Owner-Built Home. Along with these names we also find scientist Nikola Tesla, the electrical engineer and inventor, and Wilhelm Reich, the founder of the science of orgonomy.

While many of us recognize the achievements of these pioneers - in preventive medicine and ecological medicine, in holistic planning and building methods, in energy utilization and conservation - our own thinking patterns have not yet been critically impacted. It is my hope that the art and science of Bau-biologie, which applies the findings of these pioneers, will create that impact.

In Europe, Bau-biologie evolved from a general concern about the health effect of people’s surroundings. In the United States, however, building ecology got its start from specific problems with indoor air pollution. While its evolution may differ depending on local circumstance, Bau-biologie is a concept that now must be embraced wholeheartedly by all countries, especially in the developed world.

Bau-biologie in Practice

On the surface Bau-biologie appears to be just a study of such things as non-toxic building materials, indoor air quality, electric installations, electromagnetic radiation, and radon. While this is part of the picture, looked at holistically the study extends into many fields - such as ecology, biology, medicine, engineering, education, and economics. Bau-biologie is not a narrow, specialized subject. Interrelationship and synthesis are the unique characteristics of this living and vital subject. which often combines isolated fields of study as no other subject does.

Ideally, building culture, Bau-biologie and building technology have equal importance in the creation of the home or community. Professor Anton Schneider points out in several of his German publications that a clear imbalance exists in this area: today we find practically an exclusive focus on building technology, plus a fourth ingredient: economics.

One reason for this imbalance can be found by taking a look at our roots. Throughout the history of dwelling construction, people built their own houses, often with the support of the entire family and neighbors. Materials and methods of building were used that had proven effective and biologically healthy for centuries. Everyone was basically aware of how to build a house.

Today the theory and practice of building is totally detached from the users. And since the so-called experts have taken over (even though architects and builders don’t like it said), the results speak for themselves. As long as cost and technological advancement (both in materials and methods) is worshipped to the exclusion of our concerns about health and the environment, our chances of reaching the needed balance are very slim.

We need look no further than the housing development to see the results of this narrow vision. Properly used, technology should be subordinate to nature, life, and culture. A building development that disregards the basic needs of human life is schizophrenic and criminal. Even more tragic is the fact that building codes are put into place that require the use of harmful materials. The regulation of building and housing development activities today is heavily influenced by the almighty industrial giants, who are continually pressing for higher threshold values. If government health standards existed and were applied, many of the products of these industries would not be sold on the market. Who is benefiting from having the ban on asbestos lifted again? Who is benefiting from the promotion of PVC as a building material? Why do toxic building materials continue to be recommended for use? We desperately need to establish independent organizations to recommend building materials and systems that will benefit the majority of the people, and the environment, as an independent entity, and not just a select few.

With their abysmal success record, it is clear that not much help can be expected from government bodies and from industry - even tough their survival is also threatened, since we are all sitting on the same spaceship Earth. Thus the task of reversing these wrongs and improving the quality of our lives falls on us. A growing number of people, realizing the urgency of the situation are informing themselves. Hopefully, they will also help to do something about it!

Maybe no one has ever made the suggestion to developers and the manufacturers of building materials that they take a hard look at their ethics, that they consider switching their goals from a profit-and-performance orientation to a health orientation. Maybe they can be convinced that no more products should be developed that have even the slightest chance of becoming a health hazard. At the moment, this is not the case.

Let me illustrate this point with a common product in the construction field: dry wall. From a health standpoint, this product is acceptable providing the raw material is natural gypsum and it has a low radiation level. However, the radiation level is not being considered at all in the current manufacturing process of dry wall. The industrial grade gypsum is likely to have a high level of radioactivity and might contain all kinds of toxic materials, such as heavy metals. The result? An increased level of radiation in your home and workplace which, when added to radiation stemming from other sources such as radon and cement containing building materials, could very well have a negative impact on your health. Ethically speaking, any company manufacturing dry wall should have a policy requiring that its final product pass a radiation and toxicity check. At present, this is rarely being done.

Planning and Design Criteria

During the planning and design stages of building a biological home, the following additional criteria should be considered:

Include as part of the site selection process an analysis of the soil and geophysical conditions. The latter is to detect, for example. proximity to power lines, distorted underground energy fields, and water veins.
Consider climatic factors (prevailing winds, temperature, solar orientation), lifestyle, and orientation of rooms according to their respective functions.
Employ building materials, both structural and finishing, that enhance the ability of the structure to “breathe”. Natural building materials - such as untreated wood, clay bricks, cork, wool, sisal, coconut fibers - usually have the ability to exchange humidity, heat, and fresh air with the exterior and to maintain proper ion levels. They can also absorb a large number and variety of airborne toxins (diffusion).
Make careful decisions about energy, such as the use of solar energy, the methods of heat and energy conservation, and the use of thermal insulation. Insulation materials need to be efficient but must not release toxic gases or harmful particles into the air.
Select heating, ventilation, and air filtration systems that utilize radiant rather than convection heat distribution: a sauna-like heat storage facility could serve as a family health center; an efficient, artificial ventilation system could supplement natural ventilation, when necessary; ordinary air filters could be replaced by high-tech alternatives, such as non-ionizing electronic filters, or HEPA filters.
Take care to select the right illumination (light temperature, spectral range, intensity, etc.) for each room. This factor is as important for your well being as shielding unwanted noise from inside or outside the home.
Avoid electromagnetic fields, especially in areas of the house where people spend lots of time (bedroom and work area). This may be done by using shielded and grounded appliances and locating them away from sleeping and working areas, and by using demand switches (or cut-off switches) to shut off circuits when not in use.
When doing the interior design, use furniture that is in proper proportion to the residents, use materials that do not outgas and create static electricity.

By applying the twenty-five Bau-biologie Principles and eight Planning and Design Criteria, not only should the most obvious mistakes in modern building construction be avoided but a home with living qualities far superior to those of the average home today should result. Some architects and builders are knowledgeable in this field. But when they are not, the key to producing a bio-harmonic home can only rest in the hands of an informed prospective home owner. You!

The application of these guidelines and criteria has hardly produced uniform structures as some people feared it would. In fact, the variety is truly remarkable. A “standard” Bau-biologie home doesn’t really exist. Experimentation by architects and laymen in both Europe, the United States, Asia and South America have created a fine array of exciting, healthy and energy-efficient homes.

Conclusion

By looking at the behavior patterns of homo sapiens in the context of Bau-biologie, both in the recent past and present, we must acknowledge that we have caused the predicament ourselves. We have created and continue to create an environment that influences our well being adversely. One that, in fact, bears the threat of our extinction. Human life and the life of our environment interact continually according to natural laws; if we disregard such laws, destruction and confusion will take over.

Much has been said about our misconduct, and the effect of this misconduct on our personal lives and that of the entire planet. Most people have heard about the dangers of using asbestos, formaldehyde, pesticides, insecticides, preservatives. Yet not only do these pollutants continue to be used, laws are passed that protect polluters? What’s more, laws are even passed that force people to apply toxic chemicals to their home if they want a mortgage!

If the situation is so urgent, why is so little positive change occurring? You would expect people to mobilize within themselves forces they didn’t even know they had - similar to actions people take during floods or earthquakes. A few reasons for this lack of mobilization, and for the slow evolution of a grass roots movement, could be that:

Most people don’t realize the urgency. Those who do realize the urgency often lack the means and power to make the issue sufficiently known. Those who both realize the urgency and have the power to make it known often do not act because of the financial repercussions they or their friends may incur by doing so.
The issue has been made to appear complex; for the majority of people, it may not be easily grasped and comprehensible.
Toxins in the environment are the subject of much controversy. This is due to the presence of research data that contains erroneous or manipulated information, to vested interest groups, to ignorance, and also simply to evil intentions by certain industries.
People do not like to change their ways and habits. (Can you imagine persuading the average person to avoid most of the plastic in their household?)
In these times of stress, the complexities of life for many are often reduced to one single issue: SURVIVAL. People just want to survive. Although the consequences of our environmental action and inaction are as final as the explosion of an atom bomb, most people either do not see it, do not want to see it, or see it and are playing it down.
The effects of our hazardous ways on humans and the environment - such as using toxic building materials or applying the wrong technology - are often obscure. Many conditions have a long incubation period and some conditions may be the result of several factors, not just one toxic substance or system. When the effects occur in the form of illness, the source is very difficult to trace. It is generally accepted that our elderly tend to be feeble, arthritic, allergic; they have heart problems, use a cane or wheel chair, and need medical treatment until they die. This is not necessarily so! But the source of these problems is so elusive.

Suppose one day someone came along and announced that people could live healthier and more productive lives. One would expect that everyone would be eager to learn how to apply the proposed methods immediately to their lives. What if they understood that their life and health would improve, and they would reduce environmental deterioration if they would:

- Eat food that is beneficial to the body
- Exercise regularly
- Live in dwellings that are made of unadulterated materials and systems
- Work in quarters that are not polluted
- Wear clothing made of natural fibers
- Sleep and work in electromagnetically undisturbed areas.

But people do not act. They don’t change unhealthy habits, even if they are struck by cancer or a similar life threatening disease. How much survival potential do you think a society with this behavior has?

Perhaps we are dealing with a collective block at the mental and/or spiritual level. If this is the case, while we are addressing those two levels - which will take some time - we must accept the challenges that present themselves now on the physical level. We must begin to improve our environment, build healthy homes and workplaces, eat nutritious food, and exercise. Alert and aware people who are willing to improve their own health and that of their family, or even to extend their influence to local and federal levels of government, will find sufficient information around to do so.

The time to act is NOW.

Mr. Ziehe received his architectural degree from the Technical University in Berlin in 1964. He worked and lived in many countries in Europe, including Sweden, Denmark, Greece, Great Britain as well as in North Africa, and now resides in the United States. In 1984 he formed the International Institute for Bau-biologie and Ecology in England and relocated to the USA in 1986.

He is the President and Chairman of the Board of the International Institute for Bau-biologie and Ecology, Inc., in Clearwater, Florida, which is a non-profit organization.