News Detail

Living and Working Underground

2/1/2000

My first teacher of reinforced concrete design was well-known to ACI members— Professor Phil M. Ferguson of the Civil Engineering Department, University of Texas. He was an inspiration, and deeply influenced my interest in structures, particularly concrete. I vividly recall his presentation of the performance of reinforced concrete structures in the massive 1950s earthquake in Mexico City. He showed photographs of the distortions caused by such forces, and although many were deformed, and capitals were cracked, not one spirally reinforced column had collapsed!

Years later, during graduate studies at Berkeley, I became fascinated with reinforced concrete earth-covered buildings. As an architect, I recognized the opportunity such construction offered to emphasize natural beauty. The energy crisis of the 1970s convinced me to pursue earth-covered buildings because of the extraordinary utility possible: low maintenance, insurance and operating costs, as well as exceptional durability, safety and longevity.* Some real-life examples:

My first house, built in Texas in 1977, has 2400 ft², is all-electric, and has energy costs of about $80 a month. Another of 1600 ft², also all-electric, but with a 200 ft water well, takes about $70. This latter house compares to conventional homes in the region at about $120 a month on an annual basis. Typically, a 65% reduction in energy costs for heating and cooling is achieved. Additonally, power outages or extreme weather take days to affect internal temperature.

Also, fire and storm insurance rates are the best given so long as a reinforced concrete structure with metal door and window frames is used.

So if earth-covered housing has so many advantages, why aren’t more being built? There are two major reasons: first, difficulty in gaining loans for these unconventional houses; and second, concerns about environmental quality; in this case, lighting and views to the outside, air quality, and water penetration.

Suffice it to say that properly designed and built earth-covered buildings, including houses, have abundant windows, natural ventilation, and absence of dampness. If one can build a waterproof boat, one can build a waterproof building, and today we can and do.

Today, earth-covered buildings are becoming more popular. Prominent examples include the Convention Center in earthquake-prone San Francisco; a multistory addition to the Smithsonian in Washington, D. C.; the very large three-story "City under a Park" in Paris, France; and the vast underground building for a high tech company being built in Surrey, England. Earth-covered single-family housing is also becoming accepted with superb examples in France, Germany, Mexico, Spain, Sweden, as well as in the United States. The future is bright for this type of construction, and I appreciate the opportunity to share my enthusiasm.

Frank L. Moreland
www.morelandassociates.com

* Those interested in learning more about performance may refer to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s book, "Earth-Covered Buildings: An Exploratory Analysis for Hazard and Energy Performance." It contains chapters written by experts in their fields on effects from violent weather, blast, earthquakes, fire and nuclear radiation, as well as chapters on environmental impact, energy consumption, and economy. Put simply, the performance of well-designed earth-covered buildings in each of these categories is superior, and in concert extraordinary.

Back to Past-Presidents' Memo List