An IntervIew wIth PAtrIck Bellew, AtelIer ten - BetterBricks

An IntervIew wIth
PAtrIck Bellew, AtelIer ten
Founding director of Atelier Ten, Patrick Bellew is a Chartered Building Services Engineer with more than twenty years’
experience in the design of high performance buildings and their systems. His success in integrating innovative technologies
with noteworthy architecture has been acknowledged by the Royal Institute of British Architects, who have made him an
Honorary Fellow, one of only three in his field. We had the privilege to catch up with Patrick before a presentation and
conduct the following interview.
BetterBricks: What and/or who has inspired you in both your career path and your commitment to sustainable design?
Bellew: The early part of my career was very much influenced by Professor Ted Happold, who
was the founder of Buro Happold and was a Professor at my University from 1977. I was also
influenced by Professor Derek Clements Croome, who ran the Environmental Design Module
at Bath University back in the late 70’s, early 80’s.
Ted was a structural engineer, but was a great believer in the application of a pragmatic
approach, and the qualities of reductive design for making great buildings. Derek was a very
different animal, inspired by philosophy as much as engineering and a firm believer in the
application of biomimicry to the development of architectural design.
I came out of Bath University in 1981, having spent four years exposed to these two amazing educators, and joined
Buro Happold, which was at that time a small office in Bath. Working with a very small group of structural engineers at
Buro Happold, I quickly realized that the difference between structural engineering and environmental engineering was
in the way that they applied their tools and attempted to minimize and be the most economical they could be. At that
time, in the field of mechanical design, there were no real guidelines for minimizing the size of plant or equipment; one
never got sued for putting in equipment that was too large. There was a very limited dialogue between architecture
and mechanical engineering at that time, but there was a very strong dialogue between the architect and structural
engineer. That has changed a great deal in the time that I have been practicing as an engineer.
The other major inspiration on my career has been my wife, Lois. She has been a committed environmentalist since I
met her, and her concerns for ecological matters have always been the key part of our conversations and discussions
throughout our life together.
It was really by combining the pragmatic influences that I learned at university with her belief in the importance of
minimizing building impacts, that allowed me to recognize the possible role of the mechanical designer in the production
of more sustainable buildings.
Two architects that I have worked with in the UK from the very early stages of my career included Peter Clegg and
Richard Feilden, of Feilden Clegg Bradley; in particular Peter was a major influence on my thinking about environmental
design from the outset. He is just one of many architects that I have been fortunate enough to work with, who have been
inspirational during collaboration and with whom I have enjoyed a fruitful and interesting career. I think there is no doubt
that the writings of people like Amory Lovins and George Monbiot, and to some extent William McDonough, have also
“It was really by combining the pragmatic
influences that I learned at university with my
wife’s belief in the importance of minimizing
building impacts, that allowed me to recognize
the possible role of the mechanical designer
in the production of more sustainable buildings.”
Patrick Bellew
been an inspiration as the environmental movement has
accelerated it’s pace and the application of these design
principals have become much more the norm.
BetterBricks: You’ve explored considerably the use
of environmental technologies in regard to heating
and cooling. How do you convince your clients to
adopt these strategies and coordinate with other team
members, e.g. engineers?

Bellew: We have explored and developed high performance building technologies over many years with greater and
lesser degrees of success with our clients. In every project, we attempt to bring in a degree of environmental thinking;
usually phrasing it in terms of ‘no-brainers’ that one ought to do as a matter
of course on the building. The next level are things that are slightly more of a
stretch to reach, and then on to the more complex things that require a major
shift in thinking about how buildings perform. We have been fortunate, however,
to work with many clients for whom a push towards more sustainable design
has been at the core of the selection process of their design team. In the early
days, this type of client tended to be either owner/occupiers of buildings, such
as universities and schools, or they would come from the government sector or
The Blue Bird Restaurant and Store in London
cultural buildings such as art museums, schools again or public buildings of any
kind. These were people who both owned and operated the buildings and, as
it’s now phrased, the triple bottom line applied to very well. This means that they were paying the fuel bills, and so the
benefits of investment in energy reduction were clearly demonstrable throughout the life of the building. It has been
far more difficult to persuade the developers of commercial buildings, who are not paying their own fuel bills, to come
to the party and build high performance, sustainable buildings.
This has changed somewhat in recent years, particularly the last two years in the UK, where the corporate
social responsibility demands of the potential building tenants have moved our commercial sector much more
towards the development of high performance buildings. I would say this has certainly been helped by the
emergence of benchmarking rating systems. In the UK this is BREEAM, and in the US this is LEED. The impact of
these benchmarking systems has been really significant in encouraging developers to achieve higher standards
for their buildings, and recognize that they have a better chance of leasing a building that’s deemed to be high
quality, than leasing a building that’s either not certified or of a lower quality. In a way this is exactly what the
benchmarking systems set out to achieve in the first place. They are frequently derided by the nay-sayers as being a
painful process, involving too much paper pushing, and many other negatives. However, I think they add extraordinary
value in providing a level playing field for comparison of designs and design qualities.
Our experiences in the US in recent years have very much paralleled this situation in the UK. Our earlier projects were
almost exclusively with universities and one or two enlightened developers, such as Liberty Property Trust out of
Philadelphia. The universities were beginning to recognize the benefits of reducing their energy consumption and their
infrastructure costs when developing new buildings, if they
built them to a higher standard. At the same time, or soon
after, the property development sector recognized that there
were some pretty big changes on the horizon and started to
respond. I wouldn’t say that they are all the way there yet,
but certainly a good start is being made in certain parts of
the country.
To respond to the second part of the question, about how
to coordinate with other team members; the truth is that
sometimes it’s very straight forward, and sometimes it’s
not. Despite the fact that it is widely recognized that the
architecture of the building is a key component of the way that
buildings perform, and despite the fact that all the architects
that we work with seek to incorporate environmental design
Despite it is widely recognized that
the architecture of the building is a key
component to a buildings performance,
and despite that all the architects that
we work with seek to incorporate
environmental design measures into
their buildings, there still remains a
reluctance on the part of many architects
to compromise architectural or aesthetic
considerations for a technical one, no
matter how carefully they are explained!
measures into their buildings, there still remains a reluctance on the part of many architects to compromise architectural
or aesthetic considerations for a technical one, no matter how carefully they are explained!
As the calculation tools have become more user friendly and particularly more graphical in the way that they represent
energy flows within buildings, we have found it increasingly viable to speak with the architects at a graphical level, get
Patrick Bellew
2

them to understand the consequences of their decisions, and start to move towards making better buildings. For the
most part however, the collaborative relationship within design teams, whether it be architects or structural engineers,
has been exciting and for the most part fruitful.
“In the earlier part of
my career, we used
to do what we called
“stealth” engineering...
The minute that you put
it up as an additional
item in the “green
column” of the analysis,
it is then a hostage to
fortune and to budget
cuts, whereas we would
rather see it as being
an intrinsic part of a
good building.”
Nonetheless, a realistic look back at many of our projects would suggest that
most clients prepare a little bit in their ambitions, but moving them to more
innovative environmental ideas still remains extremely difficult. I do think that
sometimes we over analyze the things that we are doing.
In the earlier part of my career, we used to do what we called “stealth” engineering
where we would simply install something, such as heat recovery, as standard on all
the ventilation systems in the building, having satisfied ourselves that the energy
efficiency gained was worth having. We wouldn’t necessarily do the detailed
life cycle cost analysis to show that the client would realize a benefit over the
long term, because we knew it would be so. The minute that you put it up as
an additional item in the “green column” of the analysis, it is then a hostage to
fortune and to budget cuts, whereas we would rather see it as being an intrinsic
part of a good building. So these days, we do a combination of things that we
just do as standard, and we then look for areas where we can “push the boat
out” to make for buildings that move the debate about green design forward.
BetterBricks: Are you familiar with the AIA’s 2030 Challenge? How would you characterize the best approach or strategies
to get to net-zero carbon buildings?
Bellew: I have some knowledge of the AIA’s 2030 Challenge documentation, and I think that it contains a very strong
message. In the UK, our government is looking to mandate a more ambitious timeline to carbon neutral buildings, aiming
for the domestic sector to be carbon neutral by 2016 and the commercial sector to be carbon neutral by 2019.
There is some debate about the meaning of carbon neutral, and a particular debate is developing about the fact that
the carbon neutrality of the project is intended to be established without the ability to import energy from green sources
offsite, or by using certified renewable energy credits. As you can imagine, this makes life rather challenging! There
is also some debate about the definition of zero carbon and the tax breaks that are being allocated to zero carbon
buildings; one supposes the treasury tries to make it difficult to achieve them in order to minimize the number of tax
concessions they have to give!
I wouldn’t take issue with any of the points raised in the 2030 Challenge headlines, except to highlight that one thing
we are very interested in looking into is how we can make the construction of new buildings somehow link to the energy
reduction in the existing building stock. To me it always seems crazy to spend a million dollars on a photovoltaic array
to take a building from a 60% carbon reduction to a 64% carbon reduction, when
the same amount of carbon could be saved by spending $250,000 on an adjoining
building or nearby housing estate. How do we put in place mechanisms to allow
the money to flow from one sector to another, and avoid wasting the green dollar
on uneconomic renewable energy systems, when there are much softer targets
nearby? I know this is a really difficult problem to solve, but it seems to me to be
one that our legislature needs to get its head around in order to allow it to become
part of the planning system.
In the UK, the town of Brighton has recently introduced a system that allows
developers to realize the best building performance possible by incorporating
economically feasible renewable sources into the design. Any short fall from the
required 10-20% renewable energy target, in effect any residual carbon emissions
can be paid off via a one-off development charge. This then goes into a community
Monsoon PLC in London
Patrick Bellew
3

fund and is used to provide zero cost installation for existing residential home owners. Installing solar panels, insulation,
double-glazing and the like to dramatically improve the energy performance. Personally, I think that this is one of the
biggest tools in the box beyond design for very high performance buildings.
It would be a very long interview if I were to try and deal with how you go about getting to zero carbon buildings!
I think the process of demand minimization and then the installation of very high performance building systems is
clearly the key, but how we deal with delivering electrical renewable energy in particular on these projects is still a
very challenging question.
BetterBricks: What have you learned from your experience incorporating biomimicry principles into buildings? Any advice
for architects? Or engineers?
Bellew: In my lecture I cover my favorite bit of biomimicry, which is the nest of the termite. I talk a little bit about
the magnetic termite and the barossa termite. These creatures have an amazing way of constructing their nests, and
in particular they use a thermal storage system contained in the ground and the earth tube that brings air into the
nest. They also use evaporation of water to provide cooling in these
same heat stores to produce an air conditioning effect without actually
running any chillers. We have used these principals many times on our
buildings to integrate subterranean thermal storage into air conditioning
pre-heat and pre-cooling systems to minimize the demands on the air
handling plant in the building, providing comfortable conditions with
very low energy consumption. So I believe very strongly in the principal
of biomimicry as a way of mirroring design techniques. However, I think
there is a limit to the extent to which it can be applied. Nonetheless, I
have found it extremely useful in getting across to clients the benefits of certain types of systems, and establishing a
clear understanding that it’s physical principles that we are working with and not smoke and mirrors!
BetterBricks: What do you see as future energy trends in the sustainable building market? What about future business
opportunities?
Bellew: I think there is no doubt that the renewable energy market will follow a broad range of applications in the years
to come. The question is, which one will give us the biggest benefit? I have always been a big fan of earth energy
systems, and how we have applied a wide range of earth energy techniques to buildings in recent years to minimize
demands and reduce or eliminate the need for air conditioning.
To me this seems to be one very logical place for us to start from. I would have to say that I am not a great believer in
the application of building based wind technologies. Recent trials underway in the UK suggest that the performance of
building integrated turbines are rarely as good as one would hope, largely because
of the very disturbed air surrounding the buildings. The move towards biomass
based heating and combined heat and power systems in the UK is gaining some
momentum, and I think in a balanced, green energy world, should such a thing exist,
we will be looking at a proportion of our building energy demands being met from
biomass equipment. The argument about the macro economic and social economic
implications of this continues to rage, and as an engineer I am not sure I have all the
answers regarding what the right solution is, but I do think in the right application,
biofuels have a role to play.
Ineos in Southampton, Hampshire
“I think there is no doubt that
the renewable energy market
will follow a broad range of
applications in the years to come.
The question is, which one will
give us the biggest benefit?”
We have installed many solar hot-water heating systems as an integral part of both
residential and office schemes, and it seems to me that this is one of the simpler
technologies that we should be using a lot more. PV is altogether a more difficult
Patrick Bellew
4

question, but there are an increasing number of examples of economies that have benefited greatly from setting
tariffs to generate a strong PV industry at the same time as offsetting a small proportion of building energy loads. I
would certainly say that they have a role to play in the future of high performance buildings. When it comes down
to it, however, the real gains that are to be made have to be in the way that architecture and engineering work
together to produce buildings that are just altogether leaner and greener, and have to rely a lot less on these new
technologies to meet their energy demands.
“When it comes down to it, however,
the real gains that are to be
made have to be in the way that
architecture and engineering work
together to produce buildings
that are just altogether leaner and
greener, and have to rely a lot
less on these new technologies to
meet their energy demands.”
One area of design that really doesn’t get enough attention in this
regard, I believe, is the importance of daylighting. The more one works
on projects, both in the commercial and retail sectors, the more one
realizes the amount of energy we actually waste on lighting buildings
when there is perfectly good daylight outside. Even in buildings that
have huge amounts of glass, and on days that are not very sunny, one
still sees massive amounts of lighting on. This is because lighting control
systems are not adequately developed or invested in to produce the
energy savings that go with good daylighting. It seems to me that there
are many areas here that we can get our house in order before we move to
a great and anxious debate over how big the solar panels should be.
On the positive side, there is no doubt that the future business opportunities in this area are considerable. As more and
more corporations and large businesses take up their corporate social responsibility statements and start to try to make
them real, they rapidly realize that it is their real estate they have to look to, to quickly promote the improvements that
they are claiming. They will also be looking to occupy new buildings that have better environmental credentials than the
buildings that they currently occupy. It seems to me that this is the key lever in the development of high performance
buildings in the future. The future trends in this building market are all about clients demanding more, and design teams
working in a more integrated way to deliver the solutions that they need.
A particular interest to us in the US market has been the emergence of the sustainable design consultant in the design
team. This is the space that Atelier Ten occupies in the US, although in the UK we also work as MEP (Mechanical,
Electrical and Plumbing) engineers. It seems to me that the US market is very open to the idea of a designer working
with the architect, helping to develop the best possible building envelope and response to orientation, massing and
form, but at the same time also working with the MEP engineers to integrate
high performance systems into these building envelopes. The influence
will spread right down the supply chain; I am talking now about designers,
but it also extends right through from material suppliers, contractors, water
engineers, water treatment engineers. Everyone who is involved in some
inflow or outflow from our buildings will have a part to play in building a
Plaza at PPL Center in Allentown, PA
more sustainable future for the construction industry.
Patrick Bellew
5