Gabriel Moyer-Perez

February 8th

Professor Lin

ARCH 36501

Personal Responses to Climate as an Architect

As I’ve been bombarded, along with the rest of humanity, about news, proclamations and rebuttals
surrounding climate change I’ve come to understand the concept as one of the largest bets currently
going. Like the Super Bowl, elections, or any other intriguing proposition there are parties arguing on
both sides who are utterly convinced, or at least have a strong interest in appearing convinced, that
their side is the obvious choice. At this point it is obvious for most, peripheral extremists aside, that the
global climate has changed and will continue to do so, the larger discussion then moves to: what do we
do about it?

At risk of oversimplifying and even stating the obvious, the two largest camps fall into the following
categories. On one side we have the human exceptionalists, those that argue that through constant
innovation, development and technological control of the environment we might flourish into a bright
future in which we will be able to feed the hungry, house the unhoused, and find ever more efficient
and ecologically responsible ways of doing so. This path departs from the basic idea that humans are in
many ways a breed apart, capable of shepherding the world in ways that make it more comfortable for
us and, out of our self-interest or philosophical conviction, the other beings on this planet. In this view
our use of resources is roughly proportional to our possibility to effect beneficial terraforming and
satisfy our basic societal needs. On the other side of the discussion there are those who broadly believe
that, while safeguarding the health and shelter of all is critical, our route as a species must take a hard
turn towards understanding our integrated role within a larger ecosystem. This shift in perspective
provokes the questioning of the accepted markers of socio-economic development, the reevaluation of
cost of growth analysis, and the primacy of our responsibilities as cohabitatants with other species both
plant and animal.

As an architect within this much larger discussion, I’ve felt the responsibility to participate on both sides
of this grand debate. While my personal influence as an individual is negligible, I have had both the
desire and good fortune to lend my services in support of clients who are pursuing cutting edge scientific
research as well as those dedicated to ecological activism. My personal challenge within these projects,
and even those more domestic in nature, has been to create spaces that benefit the greatest number of
actors by pushing to find the opportunities beyond the obvious that each situation presented. These
additional parameters have reliably created a much deeper relationship throughout the design and
construction process between the client, me, and the end users. Whether designing terrariums and
external habitats for amphibians with the same care as the offices for the directors of an investigation
lab, finding ways of responding to modern typologies within indigenous design languages in the
Amazonian rainforest, or developing facade tests with recycled porcelain for a friend’s future home, at
my scale of action there are opportunities that lie beyond the debate of climate change and reside in the
realm of extra effort and ingenuity in the service of empathy.