UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
Defining Biomimicry:
Architectural Applications in
Systems and Products
Emily Royall
main picture of presentation
Fig. 01 Artwork by Dale Chihuly, photographed by Thomas Hawk
Introduction
Though the global menace of climate
and environmental change has intro-
duced a set of empirically complex
problems to the human race, the great-
est risk we run is to flounder in a sea
of our own potential ingenuity. Con-
temporary advancements in sustain-
able technology though great, remain
disconnected, unemployed or unde-
fined. This paper seeks to effectively
illustrate a marginalized though highly
promising mechanism of sustainable
development, Biomimicry. A concrete
theoretical and practical definition for
the term is developed with a focus on
its potential contributions to architec-
ture and design. In effort to clarify the
Biomimetics process and illuminate
its relationship to sustainability, the
Biomimicry “helix” will be introduced
as a continuous model illustrating two
integral products of the Biomimicry
process: organs and organisms. This
metaphorical approach to the defini-
tion embellishes the primary goal of
Biomimicry: to visualize man-made
systems and products as natural pro-
cesses. Thus the “organs” and “organ-
isms” of Biomimicry will be explored in
reference to photovoltaics and urban
planning, citing dye sensitized solar
cells and the sustainable city, Ham-
marby Sjöstad, as case studies.
What is Biomimicry?
Nature has solved many of the mechan-
ical, structural and energetic problems
humans have encountered without
generating residual, inactive waste.
Where biological processes are contin-
uously evolving to manipulate hydro-
gen, carbon and oxygen to accomplish
their objectives, humans have cheaply
contracted the unsustainable power of
oil. Biomimetics seeks to remedy such
error by designing efficient systems
and products using nature as a guide.
There are however, a few problems
with defining Biomimicry. It is dif-
ficult to segregate Biomimicry from
basic problem solving. The concept of
Biomimicry is often oversimplified into
1
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
Figure 02: Biomimicry Helix model by Emily Royall
a linear process in which one asks the
question, “How does nature solve my
problem?”, observes the solution in na-
ture, and creates a design that mimics
the observation. Biomimicry has been
severely criticized as a static problem
solving process. I suggest that what
separates Biomimicry from standard
problem solving is its continuous, spi-
ral-like nature, providing no definitive
solution, only products and systems
which can adapt to a changing envi-
ronment. Biomimetics is also typically
mistaken for biotechnology. Biomimet-
ics is not biotechnology as it does not
exploit “bio-assisted” processes (such
as using green algae to treat waste
water), but rather models them. Finally,
Biomimicry is also often attributed to
an inspirational role art and aesthetics.
Artists reproduce existing patterns in
nature for an aesthetic effect. This is not
Biomimicry, as the decorative nature
of the work does not yield an energy-
consuming product.
Because natural systems evolve con-
tinuously to meet dynamic challenges,
Biomimicry is considered to be a spiral-
2
ing, continuous process, taking nature
as inspiration to generate “organs” (indi-
vidual products) or “organisms” (sys-
tems and processes) for the purpose of
integration into a sustainable system.
For example, Biomimicry could produce
advanced photovoltaics (the organ)
inspired by photosynthesis, or a “smart
grid” system (the organism) modeled
after bee algorithms, for the purpose
of integration into a sustainable energy
system. The model below illustrates this
concept using a double helix.
The helix model of Biomimicry reflects
a number of nuances. Primarily, the
model is a spiral. This represents the
idea of Biomimicry as a continuously
evolving process, infinitely seeking a
closer fit to the fluctuating environ-
ment. The model’s spiral quality reflects
the continuous feedback and repeated
fine-tuning required to adapt “organs”
and “organisms” to the environment.
Additionally, “organs” and “organisms”
make up the two strands of the helix,
reflecting their entwined equality of
importance. Organs include singular
products such as photovoltaic cells or
fiber optics, and organisms are systems
such as smart grids or cities. Finally,
note the branches of the helix connect-
ing the organ and organism strand.
These are “sustainability” branches,
emphasizing the mutual dependence
of organs and organisms on each other
within the Biomimicry framework.
Sustainability integrates the organs and
organisms produced by Biomimcry into
a continuously evolving system. This in-
tegral relationship with sustainability is
also relatable by a basic biological rule:
nature seeks to minimize the amount
of energy consumed in a given period
of time (E/T).
To understand the broad applicability
of Biomimicry, it is helpful to con-
sider nature as a mentor, measure and
model.
As Mentor: We can view nature not as a
possession, but as a teacher.
As Measure: We can use nature as an
ecological standard to measure the fit-
ness of our own designs.
As Model: Biomimicry studies nature’s
models and emulates these forms or
processes.
The following sections explore and
expand upon the individual parts of the
model.
The Organism
The process of Biomimicry yields “or-
ganisms” in the sense that nature can
inspire the design of efficient systems.
As mentioned earlier, biological sys-
tems (and efficient man-made systems)
seek to minimize the amount of energy
consumed over time. Because this
basic concept is inherent to all sustain-
able systems, Biomimicry on this level
can have applications for many fields
including government and business
models. The context of this paper will

deal with a more architectural applica-
tion to the biomimetic production of
systems; urban planning.
In relating biology to urban planning
we can reflect on the principles illus-
trated by Richard Hopper in his article
published in the American Planning
Association magazine in the 1970s.
Hopper suggests that all man made
and natural systems have inherent car-
rying capacity that can be:
1. used as a limit for growth
2. ignored and exceeded with the con-
sequence of degrading the system
3. expanded through new technologies
and methods of design or planning
Essentially Hopper makes an argument
that is appropriate to Biomimicry. In de-
veloping a sustainable urban blueprint,
one must include basic biological rules
in mind. Hopper states that there is a
limit to the growth of a system before
it becomes unsustainable (or exceeds
energy over time), and if this energy
ceiling is ignored the system may be
degraded over time. Additionally, the
potential energy ceiling of a system can
be expanded through innovative tech-
nology. These basic principles illustrate
the natural relationship between cities
and nature providing some insight into
the sustainability of metropolitan areas.
Cities and Biology
What makes a city sustainable? Looking
to nature, we find several overlaps in
criteria, as many principles that make a
city sustainable are shared in biologi-
cal systems. Popular consensus reveals
three principles that define the sustain-
ability of the urban frontier: Density,
specialization and localized infrastruc-
ture.
Density: Dense metropolitan areas
show lower rates of vehicle ownership
Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
and usage. A nationwide analysis of ve-
hicle miles traveled in the U.S. revealed
that the top ten largest metropolitan
areas produce 23.5% of the total vehi-
cle miles traveled (VMT), while housing
26.3% of the national population, re-
inforcing the notion that metropolitan
residents drive less than the average
American. Additionally, although total
driving is concentrated in metropolitan
areas, the greatest driving per person
occurs in low-density Southwestern
and Southeastern regions known for
their vast spaces consumed by urban
sprawl. Fundamentally, a city’s com-
pactness directly affects the amount of
energy used for transportation within
it. Maximizing a city’s density while
taking special care to appropriate liv-
ing, work and recreational spaces is an
integral means by which to minimize
energy consumption via transporta-
tion.
Specialization: Diversity of a city includ-
ing the specialization of retail enter-
prises and civic centers is fundamental
for the incubation of new ideas and
enterprises so prized in major metro-
politan areas. The diversity of a city is
made up of a plethora of specialized
parts, contributing to the city’s flourish-
ing economy and society. Similarly, the
life of an ecosystem is stimulated by
the specialization of
a variety of interconnected partici-
pants. Specialization allows a system to
be self-sufficient, relying primarily on
the goods and services of the localized
system.
Localized Infrastructure: Less energy
is expended when individuals travel
shorter distances for the services they
need. The centralized infrastructure of
an urban area contributes to the reduc-
tion of carbon emissions and conve-
nience of city-dwellers. Many biological
systems such as plant or animal cells
operate on the same principle, often
minimizing the distance of resources in
effort to reduce E/T.
Seeking to minimize energy consump-
tion over time, natural systems appear
to use analogous mechanisms that
humans have artificially created to
solve similar efficiency problems. Such
is a credit to the concept of Biomimicry,
which evidently, is not entirely foreign.
Historically, humans have built cities
limited by the land (exhibiting Hopper’s
principles of energy ceilings). Cities
built before the Industrial Age were far
more modest in their energy demands,
responding to geographical restraints
by integrating nature and industry as
a working rural and urban landscape.
Ancient European cities had common
business areas, central squares and
localized infrastructure reducing the
need to travel long distances for re-
sources. These cities even operated on
a cyclic system, using the land to pro-
duce food and energy for settlement
activity whose waste was once again
reapplied to the soil. These archaic cit-
ies of the past were also fueled by solar
power, illuminated at daybreak and
ending activity at nightfall. Ironically
the contemporary sustainable move-
ment fashions itself as a novel trend,
though such ideas are ancient conse-
quences of our historical technological
restrictions.
Cities and Cells
Having established that urban and
natural systems share criteria for
sustainability, we can again examine
natural systems as inspiration for urban
design. Imagine a city modeled after a
cell. Although this design remains con-
ceptual, a number of realistic applica-
tions can be inferred. This hypothetical
city would possess as a cell does, three
major characteristics:
3
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
Figure 04: Map of Service Locations
Figure 03: Map of Hammarby Sjöstad
1. self-sufficiency
2. porosity
3. adaptability
Living cells are largely self sufficient as
reflected particularly by their organiza-
tion. A cell is contained; its contents
spread only to the plasma membrane
limits. This way, components of the cell
do not have to commute large distanc-
es to achieve their purpose. Resources
are localized and organized, without
4
Figure 05: Interior of Hammarby Sjöstad
Figure 06: Waterside view of Hammarby Sjöstad
favorably for urban environments,
avoiding typical demolition costs ($50/
ton or more) and reducing building
costs. Cities could also potentially
mimic cellular transport, where trans-
portation within the cell uses locally
produced energy. Yet despite their self-
sufficiency, both cells and cities must
adapt to their environment and retain
unnecessary repetition of infrastruc-
an element of porosity. Cells respond to
ture. In the city, carbon dioxide is also
internal and external changes in their
generated as waste, and could be trans-
environment and also depend crucially
formed into reusable products. Addi-
on effective communication systems
tionally, the old infrastructure of a cell
and signaling. Like a city, a cell’s “inter-
(worn out components) is broken down
regional” communication is equally as
by structures called lysosomes, and
important as its local communication,
recycled for further use. This recycling
establishing the organized functioning
process has long been investigated and
of a unified system.
advocated by architects interested in
sustainability and life cycle assessment.
Case Study: Hammarby Sjöstad
The deconstruction and reuse of mate-
In the outskirts of Stockholm lies
rials, as opposed to demolition works

Sweden’s hailed “sustainable city,” Ham-
marby Sjöstad. It functions (perhaps
unknowingly) in a similar manner to a
cell via its self-sufficiency, porosity and
adaptability. It is an example of how
designers are already applying Biomim-
icry without even knowing it.
Hammarby is currently home to some
25,000 residents in 11,000 apartments
located in a southeastern pocket of
Stockholm. The project is expected
to be completed in 2015, projecting
35,000 individuals to live and work in
the area. Historically, the port area was
a small-scale industrial “shantytown,”
dotted with temporary infrastructure
largely consisting of corrugated steel
shacks. In 1998 this area was demol-
ished to make room for a sustainable
city. Several features of Hammarby
Sjöstad make it an excellent example
of the potential of Biomimicry in urban
design.
Self Sufficiency
Construction: Hammarby focuses on
using localized resources and recycled
materials for building construction.
Similar to how lysosomes in a cell
recycle existing material and reuse
relevant resources, Hammarby Sjostad
has outlined procedures to draw mate-
rials from the demolition site. Pressure
treated timber may not be used for
construction, and Copper is not used as
ducting material.
Transportation: Unique and efficient
transportation options within the city
reduce the amount of energy con-
sumed and minimize CO2 byproduct.
Hammarby Sjöstad expects 80% of
residents’ and workers’ journeys to be
by public transport (via the light rail
“Tvärbanan”), on foot or by bicycle by
the year 2010. As of today, two thirds
of residents participate in alternative
Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
forms of transportation, whereas one
third of trips are car-borne. Taking
advantage of localized resources, one
of the major transportation options is
a free public ferry operating between
the northern to southern borders of
the city. One fourth of residents report
using the ferry regularly. Despite these
options, 66% of residents still own a car.
Hammarby has therefore encouraged
carpooling, and the city expects at least
15% of residents to participate by 2010.
Currently 8% (270 residents) participate
in the program.
Energy: For Hammarby, energy comes
from waste and sun. Hammarby’s
entire heating supply is based on waste
or rewnewable energy sources with
district heating and cooling centralized.
The combined heat and power plant
uses combustible waste as an energy
source (biofuels), producing electricity
and district heating. Additionally, the
Hammarby heat plant extracts waste
heat from treated wastewater in the
Henriksdal wastewater treatment plant.
District cooling is provided by the heat
pumps, where heat is exchanged into
water cooling. As a result, cooling is a
byproduct of district heating. Solar cells
and building integrated photovoltaics
have been installed for the collection
of energy. The energy from a 1m2 solar
cell module produces 100 kWh/year,
corresponding to the domestic elec-
tricity requirements of 3m2 residential
floor space.
Water: Water is a valuable, monitored
resource in both a cell and a city. The
installations of water-saving washing
machines, dishwashers, low flush toilets
and air mixer taps have reduced the
average water use of an individual by
25%. Hammarby’s goal is to reduce wa-
ter use by 50%, from 200 liters per per-
son per day to 100 liters within the next
few years (average water use figures
are based on the Stockholm average).
Using a new water treatment system,
95% percent of the phosphorous and
nitrogen extracted from wastewater is
recycled on agricultural land. Addition-
ally storm and drainage water from
urban runoff is treated and reused.
Waste: Hammarby operates on a cyclic
system reminiscent of efficient cities
of the past. Waste is reused for the
soil treatment and the production
of biofuels and biogas, used to run
transportation systems and appliances.
Hammarby implements a multilevel
waste management model. Com-
bustible waste is transported to the
Högdalenverket where it is incinerated
and recycled as heating and electricity.
Food waste is transported to Sofielund
where it is composted into soil with the
ultimate goal of being converted into
biogas and bio-fertilizers. Newspapers
and packaging are recycled into other
products, and electronic waste is disas-
sembled and reused, though unusable
excesses are deposited in landfills.
Hazardous waste is incinerated.
Porosity: The master plan of the city
was a collaborative effort, inviting the
participation of over 20 architects and
designers. Though it is self sufficient
and enclosed, the city is not culturally
or economically exclusive. The Master-
plan Team effectively aspired to create
a new inner city district, designing
extensive waterside units encourag-
ing retail. The high density develop-
ment creates an urban district that can
sustain a range of shops and services.
Planning policy and financial incen-
tives encouraged businesses to open
before the market had fully developed,
further emphasizing the importance
of porosity. Finally, Hammarby Sjöstad
has excellent public spaces, with a
permeable street pattern as well as an
extensive network of parks. Hammarby
5
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
Figure 07: veins in a leaf
has indicated that at least 15m2 of
courtyard space and a total of 25–30m2
of courtyard space and park area must
be within 300 meters of every apart-
ment. Additionally, at least 15% of the
courtyard space is sunlit for at least
4-5 hours during the spring and fall
equinoxes.
Adaptability: The city has emphasized
its role as a “laboratory” testing new
building techniques, water purification
systems and evaluating new technol-
ogy. GlashusEtt is the city’s education
center, where officials and residents
can meet to discuss the future of the
city while addressing current issues and
developments. The education center
reflects recognition of sustainability
as a continuous process, constantly
requiring open discussion and flexible
remodeling.
Evolution of Cities
Cities like any other organism can- not
remain stagnant in any climate whether
political, economical or environmental.
In this way, a city is continually evolv-
ing, and so too must its sustainable in-
frastructure. Contrary to the implication
of its title, the sustainable movement
is a dynamic process much like the
Biomimicry Spiral model introduced
earlier. Sustainable infrastructure must
therefore consistently seek a closer fit
to an ever-changing environment. The
addition of a bulky photovoltaic cell is
6
Figure 08: human lungs
not necessarily a sustainable technol-
ogy, as it does not provide facile altera-
tion or adaptation to its surroundings.
Nothing is sustainable forever.
Defining how flow systems change
over time, Constructal Theory high-
lights how a system must be architec-
turally designed to ensure survival.
Constructal theory operates on a basic
rule:
“For a system to survive it must evolve
to provide increasingly easy access to
the currents that flow through it.”
Although seemingly abstract and ir-
relevant, this rule elegantly illustrates
why some systems thrive and others
fail. For any of these systems to sustain
or survive, they must be architecturally
designed in such a way that the ele-
ments within that system increasingly
get to where they need to go. Figure 3
through 5 illustrate constructal theory.
Here, we see the physical evidence that
human lungs and a river basin have
both evolved to in the optimal way to
get their materials where they need
to go (oxygen in the case of the lungs
and water for the river basin). Over time
these two systems adapted to a chang-
ing atmosphere, finding the maximum
fit of their objectives to the environ-
ment; sustainability in a nutshell.
Another biological example of Con-
Figure 09: satellite image of a river basin
structal Theory can also be found in
native grass prairies whose flexibility
of dominating grasses between wet
and dry seasons allow the species to
“redraw” the system to accommodate
environmental changes. This simply
illustrates that to ensure any man made
system’s survival, we must maintain
the flexibility to recognize important
changes and reserve the freedom to “re-
draw” our designs. This directly applies
to urban planning and architecture in
the sense that designers and architects
should consider the elasticity of their
design. Can the design accommodate
change? Is the building material flex-
ible enough for alteration? To ensure
the survival of an urban development,
urban planners should consider the
potential for adaptation and evolution
of their design.
The Organs
Organs help organisms to function.
Without efficient organs, a system can-
not be considered sustainable. Biomim-
icry is capable of not only constructing
theoretical concepts and efficient
processes, but also tangible products.
Biomimicry is best known for the or-
gans it produces, which unfortunately
are often gadgets advertising idealistic
technology. The goal of this section is
to illustrate the practical applications of
the physical products Biomimicry can
generate.

Figure 10: Architectural applications of Biomimicry. Left: The Eastgate Centre in Harhare, Zimbabwe. Right: self-cleaning paint by Lotusan
Architectural Products: Biomimicry
can yield concept designs for general
urban planning as well as site-specific
infrastructure. One particularly innova-
tive example is the Eastgate Centre in
Harare, Zimbabwe designed by Mick
Pearce. The nation’s largest shopping
mall is modeled after a termite mound
indigenous to the area, using a passive
heating and cooling system that keeps
the mound at a precise temperature
despite severely fluctuating tempera-
tures of the environment. Mimicking
the termite system, the Eastgate Centre
warms or cools outside air coming in
contact with its concrete structure,
venting it through floors and offices,
where it ultimately escapes through
ceiling vents. Developers of the East-
gate Centre saved 3.5 million dollars by
not installing a standard air condition-
ing system. The savings have trickled
down to the tenants, whose rents are
20 percent lower than those of other
commercial buildings in the area.
Automation Systems: Biomimicry has
shown increasing promise for the
automation systems industry. Smart
Grids supply electricity to consumers
using digital technologies in effort
to reduce energy consumption and
Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
increase reliability. The Smart Switch
developed by REGEN Energy, manages
energy by mimicking the algorithms of
swarm bees used in colony organiza-
tion. Consequentially, the Smart Switch
avoids simultaneous energy demands
from appliances without sacrificing
individual performance. The product
attaches to the electric box of a home
and communicates with household ap-
pliances, turning off unused appliances
as needed without human interven-
tion. The device is simple to install
and testing reveals that it can reduce
energy consumption by 30% on com-
mercial and residential buildings.
Building Materials: Biomimicry is a
huge contributor to the field of green
building materials. One exciting devel-
opment is the self-cleaning paint Lotu-
san, which mimics the bumps on the
leaves of a Lotus plant used to collect
water and clean foliage. Tiny bumps
in the paint analogously collect dirt
off of the buildings when exposed to
rainwater, allowing a façade to essen-
tially clean itself. Additionally, the self
assembly of natural building materials
is another area of promising biomimet-
ics research. Researchers at Sandia Na-
tional Labs developed a way to create
a self-assembly coating process. Hard
building materials could be produced
via the “self assembly” or simply the
interlocking of molecules manipulated
by evaporation at room temperature.
The potential of this already existing
technology is related to Photovoltaics
as the user could effectively spray the
necessary precursors onto a desired
area and watch the materials self-
assemble naturally.
Case Study: Dye Sensitized Solar Cells
(DSSC)
The most important organ application
of Biomimicry is the use of Dye Sensi-
tized PV (Photovoltaic) systems. DSPV
mimics the process of plant photosyn-
thesis using Ruthenium based dyes
instead of Silicon to conduct electricity.
DSPV is superior to many Silicon based
PV for in manufacturing, cost and ap-
plication.
Manufacturing: There are three major
types of Silicon PV cells available on the
market today; single crystal, polycrys-
talline, and amorphous silicon. A great
deal of embodied energy is required in
the manufacture of a Silicon based PV
cell. The following chart illustrates the
embodied energy for the three types of
Silicon PV. DSPV requires less energy for
7
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture
manufacture than each of these silicon
options, though the energy conver-
sion efficiency is roughly 11%. DSPV
are manufactured at relatively low
cost on production equipment similar
to manufacturing processes used by
printing industries. Additionally, DSPV
is manufactured using readily available
materials that are relatively non-toxic.
Ruthenium dye is one of the primary
materials used in DSPV production. An
analysis of the availability of Ruthenium
reveals reserves that are projected to
last well over 150 years. Silicon however
is not found in nature so abundantly.
Manufactures instead harvest polysili-
con, splitting its molecules into Silicon
via the Czochralski process at high
temperatures.
Carbon emissions are a large concern
when considering silicon production.
Currently, fourteen tonnes of Silicon
are required to generate one mega
watt of electricity. For every1 tonne of
Silicon produced, 1.5 tonnes of CO2 is
emitted. Typically a Silicon based solar
cell will pay back this embodied energy
in 1-5 years. A life cycle assessment of
amorphous silicon PV systems showed
a total embodied energy of 42 g CO2/
kWh. Alternatively DSPV produces
Table 1. Comparison of Solar Cell Materials
Solar Cell mate- Crystalline Silicon
rial
Embodied Energy 553
(kW-hrs/m2)
Energy Conver- 15-22
sion
Efficiency (%)
8
between 19–47 g CO2/kWh, reflect-
ing a great potential for CO2 emission
reduction.
Currently nine producers manufacture
the bulk of silicon available on the mar-
ket, and collective in 2006 produced
35.5 ktons of Si, effectively emitting
53.55 kton of CO2 per annum (based
on the above conversion factor). These
figures can be related to Austin, Texas.
Given the current PV capacity of Austin,
3.4 MW, and assuming the majority of
PV installed to date is silicon based,
we can yield a rough estimate of 71.4
tonnes of CO2 already emitted by pro-
duction of these solar cell systems. Ad-
ditionally, Austin Energy projects a PV
capacity of 200MW within the next few
years. If all these installations are silicon
based PV, 4,200 tonnes of CO2 will have
been emitted in their production. Figure 11: Dyesol Panel
From an environmental perspective,
the main improvement DSPV has made
over the prevailing silicon technology is
by the increase in conversion efficiency
from solar radiation to electricity gen-
eration using lower embodied energy
in manufacture and organic materials.
DSPV is currently being tested against
national standards by two major manu-
facturers, Dyesol and Fujikura.
Figure12: DSSC as flexible thin film
Polycrystalline Amorphous
Silicon Silicon
Cost: The market price and demand
407 116 is on the rise for silicon as a result of
increasing demand from the computer
14-15 7-10 and semiconductor industries. Silicon
market prices are expected to rise
considerably as polysilicon reserves
(the empirical material used to produce
silicon) are in decline. When comparing
total production of silicon to its usage
over the last decade, we find that the

total production of silicon is increasing
while the total unused has completely
diminished. This has a negative impact
on the future of silicon prices, contrib-
uting to PV costs of 2$/watt or more.
Alternatively, DSPV projects costs 1$/
watt making it readily competitive with
the coal industry.
Application: The installation and ap-
plication of DSPV has a number of
advantages over Silicon PV. Compared
to silicon PV, performance of DSPV var-
ies less with temperature fluctuations.
The maximum power point voltage
(Vmpp) for DSPV varies by 20mV over
a temperature range of -10C to 70C
whereas that of crystalline silicon cells
significantly decreases with increasing
temperature. Furthermore the flexible,
film-like nature of DSPV makes it a per-
fect candidate for Building Integrated
Photovoltaics (BIPV). BIPV has a num-
ber of advantages and has been shown
to be more efficient than providing a
systems energy using a PV power plant.
DSPV can be easily applied to building
envelopes and facades, giving it much
architectural potential. DSPV can be
integrated into southern facades, used
for shadowing and even incorporated
into glazings. Additionally a flat roof is
not required for its installation, unlike
the bulky infrastructure of Silicon PV.
DSPV also out performs Silicon PV in
diffuse light conditions, when a panel
cannot be directed towards the sun-
light at an optimum angle. On an aes-
thetic level, DSPV can be customized
in its appearance and is available in a
variety of colors and shapes, catering to
broader architectural applications.
The Branches
Sustainability ultimately links organs
and organisms together, and can be
defined as the agent tying the Biomim-
icry “loop”. For a system to be sustain-
Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products
able, the organs and organisms must
be integrated together in a mutually
dependent relationship. Sophisticated
Biomimicry is the imitation of this rela-
tionship, effectively creating a unique,
sustainable system. For example an
organ produced by Biomimicry (the
smart switch) is not inherently sustain-
able, but becomes so when integrated
into the organism (a smart grid energy
distribution system). Or a city built
with sustainable urban planning is
not sustainable unless the individual
buildings within that system are also
energy efficient. This concept can oper-
ate on various micro and macro scales.
Furthermore it must be acknowledged
that sustainability is not simply an idea,
it is a reality of nature, easily identified
and imitated. Such is the goal of Bio-
mimicry, to ultimately produce the or-
gans and organisms for the purpose of
integration into a sustainable system,
infinitely seeking an increasingly close
fit to an ever changing environment.
Sources
Aizenberg, Joanna, and Gordon Hendler.
Designing efficient microlens arrays: les-
sons from Nature. Tech. Journal of Materials
Chemistry, 24 June 2004. Web. <www.rsc.org/
materials>.
Andrew. “Biomimetic and Sustainable Archi-
tecture: Learning from the Eastgate Building
in Harare, Zimbabwe.” Weblog post. Z+ Blog.
2004. Web. <http://www.zpluspartners.com/
zblog>.
“Ask Nature.” The Biomimicry Institute. Web.
Summer 2009. <http://www.asknature.org>.
Benyus, Janine M. Biomimicry: Innovation
Inspired by Nature. New York: Morrow, 1997.
Print.
CABE. Rep. Commission for Architecture and
the Built Environment. Web. <http://www.cabe.
org.uk/case-studies/hammarby-sjostad>.
Desilvestro, Hans, and Yanek Hebting. “Ru-
thenium-based dyes for Dye Solar Cells.” Ma-
terials Science. Sigma Aldrich. Web. <http://
www.sigmaaldrich.com/materials-science/
organic-electronics/dye-solar-cells.html>.
Desilvestro, Hans, Sylvia Tulloch, and Gavin
Tulloch. Volume Manufacture of Dye Solar Cells.
Rep. Dyesol, 2008. Web. <http://www.dyesol.
com/index.php?element=Volume+Manufacture+
of+Dye+Solar+Cells>.
Dorn, Jonathan G. “Solar Cell Production
Jumps 50 Percent in 2007.” The Economics
of PV. Earth Policy Institute, 27 Dec. 2007.
Web. <http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/
Solar/2007.htm>.
Ellin, Nan. Integral Urbanism. New York: Rout-
ledge, 2006. Print.
Hamilton, Tyler. “Managing Energy with Swarm
Logic.” Technology Review. MIT, 4 Feb. 2009. Web.
<http://www.dyesol.com/index.php?element=Vo
lume+Manufacture+of+Dye+Solar+Cells>.
Harvey, Austin Energy, Tim. “AE PV Estimate.”
Message to the author. 11 Aug. 2009. E-mail.
Hough, Michael. City Form and Natural
Process. New York: Van Nostrand Rienhold
Company, 1984. Print.
“How Do Solar Panels Work?” Great Lakes
Renewable Energy Association. Web. <http://
www.glrea.org/articles/index.html>.
Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great
American Cities. New York: Vintage Books,
1961. Print.
McGee, Tim. “Constructal Theory: Introduc-
tion to the Inverse of Biomimicry.” Treehug-
ger. Web. <http://www.treehugger.com/
files/2006/12/constructal_the.php>.
Murray, Paul, Andy Thein, Sylvia Tulloch, and
Hans Desilvestro. “Dye Solar Cells: The New
Kid on the Block.” Photovoltaics World. Web.
<www.pvworld.com>.
Passino, Kevin M. Biomimicry for Optimiza-
tion, Control and Automation. New York:
Springer, 2--4. Print.
Pierce, Joshua, and Andrew Lau. Net Energy
Analysis for Sustainable Energy Production
from Silicon Based Solar Cells. Tech. The
Pennsylvania State University, 2002. Web.
<http://jupiter.clarion.edu/~jpearce/Papers/
netenergy.pdf>.
Platt, Brenda. Resources up in Flames. Rep.
Waste to Wealth. Web. <http://www.ilsr.org/
9
UTSoA - Seminar in Sustainable Architecture

recycling/upinflames.pdf>.

“Urban Density.” Smart Growth America. Web.

<http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/>.

Van Brummelen et al. “Life Cycle Assessment

of Roof Integrated SolarCell Systems, (Report:
Department of Science, Technology and Soci-
ety, Utrecht University, The Netherlands, 1994.

Van Sark, W.G.H.J.M, G.W Brandsen, and M.

Fleuster. Analysis of the silicon market: Will
thin films profit? Tech. Elsevier Energy Policy,
30 Jan. 2007. Web. <http://igitur-archive.
library.uu.nl/chem/2008-0304-200907/NWS-
E-2007-326.pdf>.

Images
Hawk, Thomas. Chihuly_92. Digital image.
Flickr. Web. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/
thomashawk/2603598680/>.

Satellite image of tributaries. Digital image.

White Lake Data Management. CFO. Web.
<http://www.m2dxtx.com/>

Eastgate building. Digital image. Web. <http://

www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/ter-
mitehararezimbabwe.jpg>.

Dysol thin film and panel. Digital image. Geni-

tron Sviluppo. Web. <http://www.genitronsvi-
luppo.com/>

All Hammarbi Sjostad Images. Digital image.

Hammarby Sjostad. Web. <http://www.ham-
marbysjostad.se/>.

10
Defining Biomimicy: Architectural Applications in Systems and Products

11