Brutalism is a significant historical architectural style known worldwide. However, many of these utilitarian structures struggle to meet today's sustainability expectations. Rather than demolish the massive blocks of concrete, architects are now integrating eco-friendliness into existing designs.

Brutalism's historical significance in architecture

Many believe Brutalist architecture originated from Swiss-French architect Le Corbusier, who designed the Unité d'Habitation in Marseilles, France, in 1952. The Unité d'Habitation was a housing unit for up to 1,600 working-class people and lacked ornate elements like some of the more classical structures.

Globally, Brutalism peaked in the 1970s before a significant shift occurred in architectural styles. However, its aesthetic lives on in city halls, libraries, schools, housing units, churches, and theatres today.

Perhaps surprisingly, Brutalism has little to do with its harsh and brutal facade. The word comes from "béton brut," which means "raw concrete" in French. The name didn't stick until 1955 when British architectural critic Reyner Banham wrote "The New Brutalism" for Architectural Review and attempted to define the style. Exposed concrete, steel, stone and other construction materials are a distinctive part of Brutalism. It can also be described as the following:

  • Geometric structure with clean lines.

  • Rough or raw exteriors.

  • Monochromatic colours.

  • Modular features.

How does brutalism contribute to sustainability?

Due to their robust materials, Brutalist structures are built to last. Part of this is because concrete reaches 99% of its strength after 28 days of curing and 100% within one to two years. Typically, these buildings require little maintenance. This reduces the need for additional materials, finishes, and energy outlays.

Additionally, concrete maintains excellent thermal conductivity for energy efficiency. The Southern Concrete Masonry Association says concrete delivers continuous R-value 14 and 20 insulation. This exceeds International Energy Conservation Code standards. Concrete walls can also result in 50% lower heating and cooling costs.

Although it's not perfect—for instance, an uninsulated basement accounts for 50% of total heat loss—the solid materials can add an extra layer of indoor temperature regulation. Likewise, its functional, adaptable design makes it easy for architects to renovate and make sustainable changes.

Can Brutalism and eco-friendliness coexist?

Critics of Brutalist architecture often highlight the carbon emissions produced by the concrete industry. While cement structures last a long time, material production contributes 8% of annual global emissions. Over 50% of concrete's emissions are derived from limestone calcination, while 40% are from fossil fuels to heat cement kilns.

Nevertheless, architects are finding ways to allow Brutalism and sustainability to coexist as eco-Brutalism. For example, green roofs are insulating and visually appealing against the rough, block-like design. Vegetation—trees, bushes, plants, flowers, and crops—also improves air quality and boosts biodiversity. These elements incorporate natural light, making the structures look brighter.

Likewise, today's Brutalist structures integrate passive cooling and heating, such as cross-ventilation and operable windows for natural airflow. This approach must consider the climate, building direction, and materials for optimal thermal comfort.

Worldwide examples of eco-Brutalist design

The University of Lethbridge in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, is a prime example of a Brutalist campus harmonising with natural surroundings. It blends seamlessly with nature and aims to avoid or postpone new construction with its space stewardship goals.

Boston City Hall is another example of Brutalism coexisting with sustainability. The city installed 150 modular pregrown gardens on the building's eighth- and ninth-floor terraces to divert stormwater runoff. Retrofitting has also included integrating energy efficiency and green spaces surrounding the structure.

The renowned Barbican Centre in London has also been upgraded to an eco-Brutalist structure. For instance, it prioritises reusing materials whenever possible to reduce waste. It’s committed to running on 100% renewable energy and replaces conventional lighting with low-energy alternatives. Its conservancy also contains 1,500 species of plants and trees, helping enhance biodiversity and habitat.

Other architects have blended Brutalist residences with eco-friendliness. For instance, the Mamnun Residence in Chittagong, Bangladesh, includes a projecting roof to shade the structure. Balconies also contain vegetation to keep it cool, while its shape allows it to benefit from winds.

Public perceptions of eco-friendly Brutalism

The general public feels little splendour toward Brutalism. In one interview about Washington, D.C.'s, Federal Bureau of Investigation building, one person called it ugly, while another said it reminded them of a prison with windows. They also said it looked like massive concrete just dropped in the middle of the city.

However, knocking the buildings down wouldn't be environmentally sound, especially since they could essentially stand the test of time. Demolition would cause ample air pollution. It’s also wasteful after emissions have already been released into the atmosphere during processing and curing.

Preservation and retrofitting are much sounder decisions. However, the buildings would need significant updates. For instance, plumbing and electrical must meet current standards. Accessibility is another feature most Brutalist buildings lack. Nevertheless, although an eyesore to some, Brutalism can meet today's sustainability needs.

Bridging Brutalism with eco-friendliness through sustainable synergy

Brutalist structures worldwide have the opportunity to enhance the environment through sustainable renovation and design. These buildings are going nowhere soon. The best option is to integrate the natural and built environments as a cohesive unit.