From the 1980s to today
Roberto Sacchi: Fausto, you founded your studio in 1988 Architecture & Environmentusing a direct and recognizable title that referred to the values of that architecture that would later be recognized with the name of bioarchitecture, coined by the late Ugo Sasso. If you were to draw a connecting thread between the enthusiasm of your early days and today’s result, regarding the expectations you had, do you think you have been rewarded by the results obtained?
Furthermore, you have been disseminating ecological thinking in architecture for more than thirty years, starting with your association The Ecological Housefollowed by seminars, meetings, interviews, and finally with the many videos on YouTube. What was the fuse that pushed you to commit your time to disseminating knowledge?
Fausto Redondo: What you have introduced flatters me and gives me a lot of satisfaction: it’s nice to know that you have left something on which others have been able to build and develop their own path. Your first question is very profound. I can tell you that I have always strongly believed in the concept of bio-architecture, that is, in the possibility of connecting construction, health and respect for the environment.
Already in the 1980s I had explored with great interest the themes of the ecology of building and living, extending this vision also to healthy eating and the relationship with nature: for me it was all part of a single system. This awareness represented my real “fuse”, which fueled curiosity, the desire to do and spread. At the time, however, these issues were far from widespread: there was no talk of energy saving or environmental sustainability. Between the end of the 80s and throughout the 90s I carried out an intense dissemination activity also through the association The Ecological Housewith conferences, articles, interviews and courses, but there were few truly sensitive people.
In the early 2000s I also published a book, The Healthy and Ecological Homewhich collected and summarized these contents. However, in a period of strong economic development, talking about energy saving and conscious use of resources could even be counterproductive: there was the risk of being labeled as “stingy” or, even worse, as “ecologists” in an ideological sense. It’s the price you pay when you’re a pioneer… Despite this, the enthusiasm and belief in the principles of bio-architecture have allowed me to continue. Over time I have met sensitive clients, both private and public, with whom I have been able to design and carry out interventions – renovations, buildings and furnishings – which still today, decades later, demonstrate characteristics of sustainability and low environmental impact. This is a great satisfaction for me!
Environmental sensitivity, market and building culture
Roberto Sacchi: Green building and green architecture are fundamentally ways of approaching construction with materials that respect the ecosystem, in the first case, and putting the inhabitant at the centre, in the second case. For many, even today, these ways of working are seen as a fashion for the few. After the experiences you have had in the freelance profession in comparison with colleagues and clients, do you think there is still a certain technical and cultural obstructionism on the part of the construction world to accept this way of working as a given? Furthermore, do you think that nowadays there is more sensitivity towards environmental issues in construction on the part of the customer? What level of awareness does the customer who approaches your technical office have?
Fausto Redondo: I fully agree with the definition you gave of green building and green architecture. Today the times are certainly more mature: legislation has imposed greater attention to respect for the environment and energy efficiency, and people have immediate access to information and insights. However, there was a period, between the end of the 90s and the early 2000s, in which green building was interpreted – in my opinion incorrectly – as a simple trend. This contributed to creating confusion and, perhaps, influencing its diffusion. Even today, people who are truly sensitive to the issues of eco-sustainability and the healthiness of domestic environments represent a narrow market niche. They are the ones who turn to specialized technical firms. An important limit remains the initial cost: a healthy and eco-sustainable approach is often more expensive than the conventional construction system. This leads, in most cases, to doing “the bare minimum”, favoring what is imposed by legislation and economic availability, followed by aesthetic choices and only ultimately by aspects of healthiness and eco-sustainability, when there is awareness.
The “Doctor of the House”: diagnosis, healthiness and living well-being
Roberto Sacchi: Today you are known as the “Doctor of the house”, a definition that distinguishes your work in diagnosing problems in the home, identifying the causes that generate discomfort for the inhabitant and/or malfunctioning of building parts and treatment path. In your role you deal, among other things, with research on Radon gas, electromagnetic influences, harmful volatile substances in the home, etc., disciplines that were once identified as “geobiology”, a term that has almost disappeared, but which brings me back to the themes you faced when I met you. Do you believe that your specialist work today is the logical consequence of your theoretical dissemination path carried over into the practice of your profession?
Fausto Redondo: My current activity is the natural evolution of the path that began with dissemination. Over time I felt the need to deal more and more with diagnostics in construction, where there are real housing problems and their impact on health. It is in this context that my clients have shaped me as the “Doctor of the house”: a professional who does not limit himself to designing or building, but analyses, identifies the causes of construction differences and housing discomfort and defines a “treatment” path, that is, the solution to the problems encountered. An important reference in the initial phase was that of “geobiology”, which already then studied the relationship between the environment and human well-being. Over time, the term has been partly set aside or fragmented into more specific and scientifically structured fields, but the basic principles have remained valid: understanding how the environment in which we live can influence our health.
Today this approach has evolved in a more technical and measurable way, through diagnostic tools and scientific analyses. Among the most important areas of this diagnostic activity is the study of Radon gas, a natural radioactive pollutant, colorless and odorless, which can accumulate in closed environments and represent a serious health risk. Radon gas is particularly insidious and requires a rigorous diagnostic approach. Alongside this, I also deal with indoor air quality, VOC harmful substances and electromagnetic fields, i.e. some of the conditions that can generate discomfort or pathologies in the inhabitants. This activity is also the basis of the informative content that I have developed in recent years, in particular through the videos of my YouTube channel, where I have tried to inform and make complex and often underestimated topics accessible. In these contributions I explain how to recognize the signs of a “sick house” and what tools to adopt to improve its healthiness. Ultimately, “Doctor of the house” is the concrete expression of a path that began many years ago: combining technical knowledge, environmental sensitivity and attention to people’s health, to restore to living its deepest meaning of well-being and quality of life.
Roberto Sacchi: Fausto, I thank you for this discussion and I hope that you can continue in your profession with the same spirit and enthusiasm with which you began your journey.
