Natural Humanists believe passionately in making the best and most efficient and responsible use possible of the limited land on Earth. They acknowledge that we, as a species, have no right at all to own any of the Earth’s land, as it belongs to every species, and is for our shared use.
They believe that, when it comes to workplaces, these should be shared, whenever possible and appropriate, to ensure that they make the best possible use of the planet’s land.
They believe that if a workplace or public building is not in use 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year, then, whenever possible, it should be made available to other potential users of that building, to permit more land-efficient and cost-efficient use of that land and property.
For example, a school kitchen might double as a catering kitchen for a food-manufacturing, or evening and weekend catering business, when not in use by the school, and school classrooms and shower rooms might double as a tourist hostel during school holidays, which is when most holidays take place anyway.
Natural Humanists believe that no building, road, path, or any other construction, should ever be built on the planet, unless it makes the most efficient and environmentally responsible use possible of both the land on which it’s constructed, and the raw materials and natural resources used in its construction and maintenance.
To Natural Humanists, very large multi-storey buildings, with ‘green’ living rooves and walls, providing residential accommodation and workplaces, or allowing land-efficient ‘vertical agriculture’ are essential to our future as a species, and to the future of our planet and its billions of other residents.
They believe that such land-efficient and energy-efficient buildings could be used for all essential offices and factories, and for all other commercial and industrial purposes, as well as for highly land and water efficient vertical aeroponic agriculture, which could grow, indoors, all of the foods needed for a tasty, balanced vegan diet, possibly run by Natural Humanists, and attached to their own communal, multi-storey Natural Humanist homes, to eliminate the time, effort, expense and environmental-damage, caused by commuting to and from work, and allowing a more family-friendly work-life, and more free-time.
Huge buildings already exist, including one which takes up 985,000 square metres of land[i] (equivalent to nearly 1km x 1km) and skyscrapers are currently being planned that are over 1km tall[ii] (so potentially 350-400 storeys high), but, according to some people, in theory, they could be over 8km tall (2800-3200 storeys), or possibly even 59kms tall[iii] (over 20,000 storeys), which would allow the entire population of the UK to live in just one building less than 500 metres by 500 metres in size, removing the need for most of the countries roads and transport, allowing everybody in the country to be in walking distance of each other and allowing efficient composting of all toilet waste and recycling of both wastewater and rubbish.
Although fitting the whole population of any country into one building is almost certainly not desirable, Natural Humanists believe that large, tall buildings most certainly are, and that these buildings could incorporate the eco-friendly building materials, designs and construction techniques used by the latest ‘green skyscrapers’ [iv], and could have rainwater harvesting systems, solar panels and wind turbines, as well as ‘green rooves’ and ‘vertical gardens’ on external walls, which maximise biodiversity and improve insulation and air quality[v].
They believe that, at the very least, the 2,000 million new homes that we’re believed to need before the end of this century[vi] should be these hugely land-efficient, large, multi-storey buildings, built to ‘True Net Zero Carbon Building’ standards[vii]. They also believe that every home that’s built to replace the world’s existing homes, at the end of their useable life, should also be replaced with these same green multi-storey buildings.
Given that the life expectancy of new homes is estimated at just 60 years, or 100-150 years in some cases, if they’re well maintained[viii], this would allow every one of the world’s homes to be permanently replaced by next century, freeing up millions of acres of land to become wilderness, for all species of our planet to share.
Space Efficiency
Natural Humanists believe that no building, room, corridor or any other space within any building, or within any road or any other type of construction, should ever be larger than is necessary, so that the total amount of land, and materials, used for that construction can be minimised.
They believe that all areas should be designed to maximise space-efficiency and, whenever possible, all spaces should serve as many functions as possible. For example, within homes, having a reception room that can, at different times of the day, be adapted for use as a dining room and, if appropriate, even as a bedroom or for food preparation, all utilising superbly-designed adaptable furniture, spaces and technology, to ensure that the room fully meets each of these needs without compromises.
Technology and design knowledge already exists, which could facilitate such ultra-space-efficient multi-functional homes and other constructions, but Natural Humanists believe that human beings should constantly attempt to increase knowledge, which should be freely shared, worldwide, to ensure that homes, workplaces and other constructions, can constantly become more and more space-efficient, comfortable, and environmentally responsible, while fully meeting human beings’ needs.
They believe that, if it’s more appropriate and is a more responsible use of space, and of potentially wild biodiverse land on the planet, for a room or facility within a building to be communal, then it should be. For example, a large high-rise residential building, could have a pleasant and stylish not-for-profit café-bar on-site, to provide all the meals, coffees, alcoholic drinks and snacks ever needed by all of the building’s occupants and visitors, mainly produced and served by technology, which could be eaten in the café, or a small ‘drone’ delivery vehicle could easily navigate around the corridors and lifts of a high-rise building, to deliver food and drink efficiently and effectively to all homes within that building, removing the need for any of the apartments in the building to have their own kitchen or dining room, or any of the furniture or equipment usually in such rooms.
Possibly each large building could also have a small, but very attractive and high-quality shared dining kitchen, for residents to use occasionally, which could be booked, even at the last minute, for private use, and which would always be cleaned to a high standard by an employee, or by users of the kitchen, or by all residents of the building on a rota.
Each apartment could also have an optional built-in and concealed air-frier, microwave oven, toaster, boiling water urn, and folding twin electric hob, or the new style of induction hob that looks exactly like a wooden table top, which wouldn’t be visible at all when not in use, all located in a corner of the living area which had ultra-efficient hidden ventilation, and all apartments could also have a multi-functional sitting and dining area.
Natural Humanists believe that if the people within such a large high-rise building have chosen to live together, and ideally share similar values, beliefs interests and life-goals, rather than having been ‘required’ to live together, as is the case with many residents of high-rise social housing of the past, the communal spaces and facilities within a residential building, could significantly improve the happiness and quality of life of residents, and eliminate the loneliness that’s endemic in today’s society.
They believe that as many as possible of the spaces and facilities within each apartment, should be multi-functional, to minimise the size of apartments that are needed, thereby increasing their environmental responsibility, and their affordability, while minimising the use of potentially wild, biodiverse land and unnecessary building materials.
The size and design of apartments should be the decision of each resident or community within any particular large high-rise building, but one option is for each apartment to have just one large room, with all parts of it designed to be multi-functional, for example, dining, socialising, working, studying and watching TV, all in one area.
Having certain areas of that one room separatable, to temporarily create separate private spaces within it, could even remove the need for private bedrooms for each resident of that apartment, particularly if each such temporarily separate space, or full-height ‘pod’, could be fully sound-insulated, with the aid of moveable highly-insulated doors or walls, blocking all sounds from going into and out of these private spaces.
Noise-cancelling technology could also be built into each pod, and into the apartment as a whole, and ‘ultrasound’ speakers could be used on all TVs, radios and digital speakers, as these can be heard by those facing the speakers, but can’t be heard at all by those facing in the opposite direction.
Each pod within a room could also incorporate one-way mirror glass, or the new type of glass which instantly becomes opaque at the touch of a button, to allow the user to still feel part of the main room whenever they want to, and to not feel ‘claustrophobic’, while still retaining complete privacy.
If there was one such, temporarily private space for each resident of each apartment, then each apartment could consist of just one large room, with each resident being able to ‘retreat’ for privacy into their own temporary full-height space at any time.
Each of these private ‘pods’ could have their own 6’ 6” long sofa, suitable for comfortably sitting or fully lying down on, which, unlike sub-standard sofa-beds, could easily, at the touch of a button, pivot through 180° to reveal a hidden, high-quality, comfortable permanent bed, already made-up and ready to use, for use at night or for an afternoon nap or siesta, or for intimacy with a partner or partners.
Each pod could have its own window, lighting, ventilation, heating, cooling, de-humidification, air-purification and noise-cancelling facility, as well as its own TV, radio, music system and computer screen with internet access. Users of each pod could have instant live audio and video contact with any other pod in that apartment, or in that building, or in any other Natural Humanist Community in the world and would also have individually adjustable access to ‘TV window’ images.
Environmentally Responsible Construction
Natural Humanists acknowledge that buildings are responsible for 24% of the world’s CO2 emissions and over 40% of the world’s primary energy consumption[ix],[x] so they believe that every future residential, agricultural, industrial, commercial and public building should have the minimum possible impact on the planet.
They believe that every new building should have a Life Cycle Assessment of its expected environmental, social and economic impact[xi], right from the extraction and processing of its raw materials, to the manufacturing of its building materials, and their distribution and use, to the anticipated repairs and maintenance of the building during its lifetime and, finally, to the eventual disposal or recycling of its materials, with this assessment taking into account things like the amount of resources and energy used, and how much it will contribute to global warming, air and water pollution and waste[xii].
They believe that every single new building in the world should be as ‘green’ as possible, and that its design should ensure that it requires as little ‘operational energy’ as possible, to power equipment in the building, and to provide things like heating, air conditioning and ventilation[xiii].
It should also have as little ‘embodied energy’ as possible, which is the energy needed to extract, process, transport and install the building materials used in their construction and maintenance, which can account for as much as 30% of a building’s overall energy consumption during its lifetime[xiv].
They recognise that buildings should also be designed to minimise air leakage, both to prevent heat loss during cold weather, and to prevent heat gain during hot weather, and that they should have highly insulating windows and extra insulation in their walls, ceilings, and floors[xv], and should incorporate sources of renewable energy into their design, like solar panels and wind turbines, to further reduce their environmental impact[xvi].
Natural Humanists believe that all new constructions should be built with the most responsible materials possible, ideally from local sources, to reduce transportation, and that the choice of materials should take into account the amount of energy and natural resources needed for their creation, and for their transportation, construction and maintenance, as well as the expected lifespan of the building if those materials are used, and the waste that will be caused when these materials are eventually disposed of, at the end of the building’s useful life.
This is important because, over a 250 year period, 5 times as many materials would be required to construct, demolish and then reconstruct, a building whose materials were only expected to last 50 years, than to construct only once a building whose materials were expected to last 250 years, plus, the longer-lasting building would also cause 5 times less waste over 250 years, because it wouldn’t need to be demolished every 50 years, and it would also cost over 5 times less in labour and demolition costs over the 250 year period.
A wooden building will require the use of potentially wild biodiverse land to grow the trees for its timber, which may be required numerous times over 500 years, whereas a stone building may produce a temporary ‘scar on the landscape’, because of the land needed to be quarried for this stone, which will only be of concern to sensitive humans, but, if all biodiverse soil excavated to reach this stone is carefully relocated to convert flat land elsewhere into mounds, which are planted with biodiversity-rich plants, then this could increase rather than decrease the total wild biodiverse land on Earth, as slopes have a greater surface area for plants and other wildlife than flat land.
To Natural Humanists, all living things and their natural habitats are hugely more important than lifeless rocks, and so, if human beings needs can be met by excavating and using such lifeless parts of our planet, rather than by destroying wildlife and natural habitats, then it’s perfectly acceptable to do so, as long as a careful plan has been made to minimise damage to nature during the excavation of these materials, and to ensure that the excavation site is put to beneficial use afterwards.
For example, a disused quarry could be used as the foundations for an essential high-rise green-rooved residential building, or indoor vertical agricultural facility, or could be converted into a nature-friendly lake, thereby hiding these eyesores permanently from our site, while at the same time allowing any building’s green roof to increase the biodiversity of the quarry’s land, bearing in mind also that the species-diverse soil removed to create the quarry site would also have continued to exist elsewhere, in its new location.
Natural Humanists acknowledge that building materials like responsibly-sourced timber, bamboo and straw, or natural stones and rocks, like granite, limestone, marble, sandstone or slate, or even recycled stone or metal may be suitable, and that numerous new ‘green’ building products may also be an option.
For example, a type of concrete is now available, which is made from hemp, mixed with lime or sand[xvii], which can be made into light building blocks, which seem to remove more CO2 from the environment, during the lifetime of both the hemp plants and the blocks themselves, than is ever created by the manufacturing of both this type of concrete, and the blocks that it’s made into[xviii].
Alternatively, ‘greener concrete’, made from waste materials[xix], or greener forms of steel and cement could be used, and industrial by-products and waste could also be used for the building’s foundations and construction[xx], or insulation could be used which is made from ‘greener cellulose’ [xxi], or from natural cork, which can be used as an external cladding, or as cavity wall insulation, and is totally recyclable, fire-resistant and able to increase soundproofing, and is also ‘carbon negative’, so, again, it reportedly reduces the overall total amount of CO2 in the environment[xxii].
Natural Humanists acknowledge the importance of ensuring that all new buildings can collect, use, purify, and reuse water on-site, including reusing shower water for flushing toilets, and that they use fittings like ultra-low flush toilets, and low-flow shower heads, as well as[xxiii] bidets, which eliminate the need to use toilet paper, and so allow land used for commercial forests to be rewilded.
They believe that, when any waste-water or toilet waste can safely be composted or reused, then the facility to very efficiently do so should be built into the design of every building. They acknowledge that the larger a building is, the easier and more cost-effective it is to recycle water, and even human waste, on-site, possibly to create natural liquid fertiliser, which provides soil with organic nutrients, and removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, without the high greenhouse gas emissions linked to the production and use of artificial fertiliser[xxiv].
They believe that all buildings should be as ultra-insulated as possible, ideally with no energy ever needed to heat or cool the building, and that they should have super-efficient land-source heat-pumps and communal ventilation and air-extraction, with any heat in this air captured and stored, as well as air cleansing and de-humidification, to constantly provide perfect comfort conditions, while also increasing the lifespan of the building.
They believe that all new buildings should meet ‘True Net Zero Carbon Buildings’ standards[xxv], meaning that they generate the same amount of energy, from renewable sources, as they use during the building’s entire lifespan, even taking into account the building’s embodied carbon, which is the carbon emitted during the creation and transportation of its building materials, and during its construction. This renewable energy may come from solar panels, wind turbines or heat pumps, which are part of the building or its land.
They recognise that this would ensure that, overall, no building contributes to global-warming, something which can also be achieved by using[xxvi] low-carbon building materials like straw, wood, linoleum, or cedar, or types of steel and concrete designed to have lower embodied carbon, and by using highly efficient insulation, lighting, heating, ventilation, air-conditioning and triple or quadruple-glazed windows, and possibly by storing excess energy generated, until its needed, or by returning it to the electricity grid[xxvii].
It’s been suggested that the best type of building for reducing greenhouse gases, is a 4-storey, multi-family building, created with low-carbon building materials,[xxviii] but Natural Humanists believe that minimising land use, and rewilding the planet are of equal, if not greater long-term importance, to reducing carbon levels and global warming, and that rewilding land can itself contribute significantly to reducing carbon levels in the long-term.
Therefore, it may be that buildings taller than 4-storeys are, in fact, the most responsible and appropriate option, with as many shared or communal facilities as possible, but only if this is proved to be the case, after carefully researching the environmental impact of such large land-efficient buildings, throughout their entire lifespan, and weighing this against the impact they’ll have on global ‘net zero’ targets, which we must address urgently.
All Under One Roof
Natural Humanists believe that bungalows and houses are always an irresponsible use of land, but they also acknowledge that the amount of heat lost through the roof of homes can be massively decreased by building multi-storey apartments, rather than bungalows or houses, so that all of the apartments in that high-rise building share just one roof, rather than having one roof each, which also greatly reduces the amount of materials and natural resources needed to build and to maintain these rooves.
They also recognise that pitched (sloping) rooves can be used to collect rainwater for use by residents of a multi-storey building, and that highly-efficient modern solar-panels, or solar-tiles or solar-glazing in rooves, and solar panels attached to all south-facing walls of such a high-rise building, all angled for maximum efficiency, have the capacity to capture huge amounts of free, green solar energy, for use in these low-energy-usage apartments. These solar panels reportedly produce more power on a south-facing roof at a 35-degree angle, but they can still work at any angle between 10 and 60 degrees, and on east or west facing rooves, or on south-facing walls, either vertically or at an angle[xxix].
Natural Humanists recognise that, if a ‘green’ roof is used, the entire roof could be planted with wildflowers, ideally on a pitch (slope) as this gives a greater surface area for these flowers than a flat roof would, and the whole roof could be angled towards the sun, i.e., it would only slope in one direction, not two. Such a roof would mean that even the land taken up by the footprint of this high-rise building wouldn’t be lost to wildlife. In fact, the building would increase the amount of biodiverse land on the planet, not reduce it, as a sloping surface provides a greater surface area for wild plants.
It’s Good to be Square
Natural Humanists recognise that square buildings are, by far, the most efficient use of building materials, and are therefore the most responsible and the cheapest option and, given that they have significantly less outside walls than rectangular buildings of the same total floor area, they cause significantly less heat loss as well.
For example, if a building needs to have 100 square metres of floor-space on each floor of the building, then it could, for example, be an ultra-efficient square building of 10 metres by 10 metres, which would require a total of only 40 metres of external walls, or it could be a 100 metre by 1 metre building, which would need a massive 202 metres of external walls (over 5 times as much). The external walls of this building would therefore require 5 times as much building materials, 5 times as much maintenance, would be responsible for 5 times as much heat-loss, would cost 5 times as much money to build, would take 5 times as much time to build, and would cause 5 times as much waste when the building was eventually demolished at the end of its life.
If this building had, say, 10 storeys, then this difference between 40 metres and 202 metres of external walls would be multiplied by 10, so that’s the difference between 400 metres and 2020 metres of 1-storey-high walls, allowing a huge reduction in materials, time, labour and cost.
Natural Humanists recognise that, similarly, square apartments and square rooms within such square buildings, minimise the number of internal walls needed as well, which therefore reduces building costs, decoration and maintenance costs, and the amount of heat and sound-insulation required between rooms and apartments, and, similarly, the idea of making each apartment just one large multi-functional, adaptable room, means that there is no need for any walls to separate individual rooms, again reducing cost, and the unnecessary waste of building materials.
Size Matters
Natural Humanists recognise that, regardless of whether a building is square or not, if its individual apartments are the same size, then the larger the overall building, the more efficiently it will make use of the building materials used for its construction.
For example, if 100 apartments, each with 10 metres by 10 metres of floorspace are required, then, ignoring any stairs or lift, the building could either be 10 metres by 10 metres and 100 storeys high, which would require a combined total of 40 metres of external walls per apartment, or it could be 50 metres by 50 metres and 4 storeys high, which would require a combined total of only 8 metres of external walls per apartment (8 times less).
Of course, an even better option would be to make this building 50 metres by 50 metres, and 10 storeys high, so that the same amount of potentially biodiverse land could provide 250 apartments, not just 100!
So, in summary, Natural Humanists believe that, whenever it’s a responsible use of materials and does not cause more environmental damage, buildings should always be as big as possible, as tall as possible, in terms of the number of stories, and should be as close in shape to a square as possible. They should also ideally have multi-functional one-room apartments with privacy ‘pods’, and should have green sloping rooves facing the sun, and external walls clad with super-efficient solar panels, angled to absorb the maximum amount of solar energy, or if solar panels are ineffective on a particular wall, due to the wall facing away from the sun, then there should be some form of ‘green living wall’, which is suited to shade and can increase biodiversity.
Green Living Walls
Green living walls are basically vertical green rooves,or ‘vertical gardens’,[xxx] with plants either growing in soil or hydroponically. They require little or no watering or maintenance, are lightweight, and contain plants with shallow roots and,as long as they’re planted with the right plants, they can be fitted to walls facing in any direction, even north-facing walls in narrow, shady passageways[xxxi]. They attract wildlife, increase biodiversity, absorb carbon from the atmosphere, improve air quality, help to insulate buildings (keeping them cooler in summer and warmer in winter), reduce energy bills, reduce the rainwater that enters drains and rivers (which reduces risk of flooding), increase our contact with nature and they also look really beautiful[xxxii].
Soil Biodiversity
Natural Humanists acknowledge that soil excavated for any type of building, road, or other type of construction is not just useless ‘mud’, but is home to a large proportion of the world’s biodiversity, contains a large variety of organisms[xxxiii], interacts closely with the wider environment, and is itself created by the activity of other species, for example rotting plant life and animal urine and faeces[xxxiv].
Important nutrients that exist within plants and animals above ground, either rot, or are consumed by animals and then defaecated, either way, they end up in soil, which then feeds new plants as they grow, which, themselves, then feed animals and birds, and so the eternal circle of life continues. Living organisms in soil break down this rotting organic matter, making its nutrients accessible for use by growing plants and other organisms, and earthworms help to aerate the soil and keep it healthy[xxxv].
Natural Humanists recognise that just 1 gram of soil can contain between 100 million and 3,000 million living bacteria, and up to 1 million fungi, like yeasts and moulds[xxxvi]. They recognise that soil is an important habitat for a wide range of species, including[xxxvii] megafauna (over 20mm), for example moles, rabbits, rodents and moles; macrofauna (2 to 20mm), for example ants, beetles, centipedes, earthworms, slugs, snails and woodlice; mesofauna (100 micrometres to 2 mm), for example mites, and microfauna and microflora (1 to 100 micrometres), for example bacteria, fungi, protozoa, rotifers, roundworms and yeasts[xxxviii].
They also recognise that animals like deer, mice and wild boar, feed on the fungi that grow in soil, causing it to spread via their faeces, and that some of these fungi produce a protein which helps to store both carbon and nitrogen, so it has a part to play in decarbonising the environment[xxxix].
Natural Humanists acknowledge that, however important it may be that all buildings are environmentally-responsible, every building must also meet the needs of its users, and they recognise that this will affect the size, shape and number of storeys of any building, and of any apartment or room. However, they believe that, with careful design, and the use of innovative materials and technology, the best and most responsible compromise possible can be achieved. They also recognise that, if these designs are shared freely worldwide, others can benefit from, and gradually further improve these designs, for the benefit of all human beings, all other wildlife and the planet.
They acknowledge that some people find high-rise buildings unsightly, but if located far enough apart, and if surrounded by dense, high, wild woodland, this is unlikely to cause a problem, and even if it does, arguably the needs of the planet and wildlife, are far more important than offending a minority of human beings’ delicate sensibilities.
Windows
With all buildings, but particularly with very large square buildings, one very important consideration is windows for natural light and ventilation. Indeed, a major reason why most residential buildings are rectangular rather than square, is to ensure that every room can have a window, but human innovation has, today, removed the need for any room to have a window at all.
Virtually silent forced-air ventilation, combined with automatic heat collection and storage, de-humidification, air-purification and de-ionisation, are arguably significantly better than an openable window, particularly in cold weather, and in the evening, when most windows will remain firmly shut.
Windows are also one of the main ways that heat, and energy, are lost from a building in cold weather, and that excessive heat enters a building during very hot weather, which is an increasing problem due to global warming. Also, a window is lovely if it reveals beautiful views of mountains, lakes, meadows, forests or the sea, or a view over a beautiful, bustling town square, but not so much if you’re looking out over the local gas works! The other problem, particularly in built-up urban areas, is that if you can see out of a window, then other people can see into your home as well, compromising your privacy.
Another problem with windows is that, every single year, millions of insects, and hundreds of millions of birds, are killed or injured when they fly into them [xl], usually on the lowest six storeys of buildings. In the USA alone, this kills between 365 million and 988 million birds each year, possibly reducing populations of some land-birds by as much as 2 to 9% each year, which could have a long-term effect on some species. This also kills 16 to 42 million birds in Canada each year,[xli] and inevitably kills billions more birds worldwide, every single year.
Artificial light coming from traditional windows, even when curtains are closed, causes light-pollution and can be harmful to some species of living things outside the building. Light pollution[xlii] is the presence of any unwanted, inappropriate, or excessive artificial lighting,[xliii],[xliv] which negatively affects human health and disrupts ecosystems, whether it comes from the interior and exterior lighting of homes, offices, shops or factories, or from streetlights, lighting in parks, car parks, bus and train stations, sporting venues and illuminated advertising hoardings, or from the headlights of cars and other vehicles.
Light pollution increased by at least 49% worldwide between 1992 and 2017[xlv] and it’s been estimated that 83% of all of the world’s population, including 99% of Europeans and Americans, now live under light-polluted skies, and that 23 percent of the world’s land area is affected by ‘skyglow’[xlvi],[xlvii], both of which are expected to increase.
If Natural Humanist’s windowless multi-storey residential buildings, and similar agricultural, commercial and public buildings, were built over existing roads, this would completely eliminate all light pollution, from both the buildings themselves and from street lighting and vehicle headlights.
TV Windows
Modern technology has the ability to eliminate all of the death, pollution and heat loss caused by windows, if very large, very energy-efficient ‘TV windows’ are installed, instead of traditional windows, in every room, in every new domestic property. These could be designed to look like windows rather than TVs, needn’t have a plastic casing, and could give a totally realistic ‘live’ view from cameras outside the building, 24 hours a day, or just during the hours of daylight, depending on the residents’ preferences. If apartments consisted of just one multi-functional room, then potentially just one such large TV window would be required per household.
TV windows would allow people to view live, high-definition standard or ‘night vision’ images of the outside world and, if the view in the direction that a particular TV window is facing are uninspiring, then that TV window could show the view in a completely different direction, all or just some of the time.
Residents could view the sun rising in the east every morning, and also the sun setting in the west every evening, all from the same TV window, in fact they could constantly choose and change what they can see through their TV windows!
They could also choose to see recorded ‘views’, perhaps of the view on a glorious summer’s day, or when the ground is fresh with snow, or if it’s dark when somebody gets home from work, they could switch to a recording of that day’s ‘live’ daytime view.
They could also choose to switch to the view from another property in that building, or from any other property or camera anywhere in the world, perhaps a live-streamed view of a favourite beach, lake, park, city square or from the top of their favourite mountain, or even a live or recorded view of the garden of their grandchildren or other family or friends, with their permission, of course, with the option of even talking (live) to the people in that garden, as if they’re outside their own open window, even if they’re thousands of miles away. The possibilities are endless.
Motion sensors could even automatically change the view from a TV window whenever it detects the movement of wildlife in the vicinity of the building, to increase residents’ awareness of, and contact with, other species of living things, even allowing the automatic creation of a ‘video’ show of all that day’s, or week’s, wildlife (or human) movements, to be viewed at any time.
TV windows would allow residents to hear all the sounds of nature, as if they were outside, a pleasure that’s denied to most people with double glazed windows, including the joy of birds’ morning and evening choruses, the sound of trees’ leaves rustling in the breeze and even the sound of wind, rain and thunder, significantly increasing all human being’s connection with nature, every single day.
Of course, traditional windows also provide rooms with daylight, which TV windows can’t, although this is, of course, only the case between dawn and dusk, which, during winter, can be as little as 10 hours a day in Britain and, on average is just 12 hours a day worldwide[xlviii], and for most of this time, many people are away at work. The rest of the time, artificial lighting is needed whether we have traditional windows or not and, even during daytime, many people need artificial light on rainy days and in north-facing rooms.
Natural Humanists acknowledge that all rooms can have all the light they need, always in the right place and at the right levels for the task being performed at the time, by using highly energy-efficient L.E.D. lighting, carefully fitted and distributed around each room, and totally controllable.
This lighting could either automatically gradually increase or reduce to reflect the actual light conditions outside the building at that particular time, throughout the day, or could be set at ideal levels 24 hours per day, or until switched off, or could be fully adjusted by residents, to give just the right level of lighting at any particular time.
L.E.D. TVs consume as little as 10 watts per hour (for example the Sceptre E18)[xlix] and provide light to a room, at the same time as displaying TV programmes, films, or displaying art or photographs. Usually, most of the time, this light is wasted, as it’s not necessary to illuminate the room, due to the presence of daylight or artificial room lighting.
If sensors could detect the light omitted by a TV window, and by any other TV, computer screen or smartphone in a room, at any particular time, and could then reduce the level of L.E.D. lighting in the room automatically, second by second, to ensure that there was always the same level of lighting, then most of the power used by a TV window would actually be providing room lighting. The fact that it would also be giving us a perfect ‘view’ of the outside world at the same time, would purely be an added bonus.
Any other lighting in rooms could be by the most efficient types of L.E.D. Bulbs, such as the Philips Ultra Efficient (2023)[l] bulb, which lasts 50,000 hours (over 8.5 years if used 16 hours per day, every day), or Philips L.E.D. Daylight Deluxe bulbs or Cree Connected’s Smart L.E.D. bulbs which are both similar to daylight[li], the latter of which is dimmable, to reduce energy usage and to allow only the ideal amount of light in a room at any one time, either controlled by A.I. or by the resident.
Unlike with traditional windows, TV windows would never cause the sun to shine, uncomfortably, straight into the eyes of residents, at certain times of day, and they would never cause the ‘solar heat gain’, which can make some rooms uncomfortably warm in summer, when the sun is shining straight into a room.
If windows’ ability to allow the sun to heat a room was considered beneficial, then any external walls of the building which face the sun could be completely covered with ultra-efficient solar panels instead, capable of powering electric heating within the building.
Not having traditional windows would have the advantage of making rooms 100% dark at night, making sleep easier, and lighting could be set to gradually come on at a set time, or at the same time that the day is dawning outside, to allow the body to gradually wake up in plenty of time for the day’s activities. This ‘wake up’ time could be set differently in each ‘pod’ or room of an apartment to suit each person’s personal preferences.
Sharing the Planet
Natural Humanists belief in the use of smaller, more space-efficient and multi-functional homes and other buildings, reflects the fact that they are non-materialists, so do not value wealth, property or possessions. They believe that ‘size is not what matters, it’s what you do with it that counts’, and that all human beings’ life-choices should not be selfish, so should also consider the needs and rights of all the other natural species which share our planet.
They believe that this carefully-planned and designed, land-efficient use of space in housing, and the use of solar-panels and green rooves, should also be applied to every other type of construction on the planet, including roads with ‘wildflower meadow rooves’ or, better still, with very large, square, high-rise homes, factories, schools, offices, shopping and leisure facilities constructed around and over all of these roads, which themselves have green-rooves, so that the same piece of land has multiple uses, as meadow, road and residential or commercial building, or, alternatively, with these roads running through underground tunnels, with permanent wild biodiverse land on top of these tunnels.
Natural Humanists believe that, whenever possible, the location of all buildings should be chosen to minimise the need for life-draining, time-consuming, stressful and polluting travel between them, and should ideally be on land with the lowest potential for use as highly-biodiverse permanently wild environments.
They believe that, as soon as all buildings are replaced with these green and land efficient constructions, every other bit of land in the world should be returned, permanently, to the natural, biodiverse wilderness that existed there for most of the planet’s history, before it was selfishly ‘stolen’ by humans to create their own ‘built environment’.
Click here to read the next Chapter!
References
[i] Peterson, Elizabeth. “What’s the Largest Building in the World?”. 30 July 2013. livescience.com. 27 May 2025. https://www.livescience.com/38437-largest-building-in-the-world.html
[ii] The Tower Info. “10 Tallest Buildings Under Development or Proposed in the World”. thetowerinfo.com. 3 June 2025. https://thetowerinfo.com/future-tallest-buildings/
[iii] Chou, Philip. “The Maximum Height a Skyscraper can be Built”. Updated 21 May 2023. thetowerinfo.com. 3 June 2025. https://thetowerinfo.com/skyscraper-extreme-height/
[iv] Beltran, Bryant “Green Skyscrapers: The Rise of Eco-Friendly High-Rises”. 5 Jan 2024. linkedin.com/pulse. 6 June 2025. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/green-skyscrapers-rise-eco-friendly-high-rises-bryant-beltran-b1d1c
[v] Beltran, Bryant “Green Skyscrapers: The Rise of Eco-Friendly High-Rises”. 5 Jan 2024. linkedin.com/pulse. 6 June 2025. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/green-skyscrapers-rise-eco-friendly-high-rises-bryant-beltran-b1d1c
[vi] Smith, Sean. “The world needs to build more than two billion new homes over the next 80 years”. 28 February 2018. https://theconversation.com/the-world-needs-to-build-more-than-two-billion-new-homes-over-the-next-80-years-91794
[vii] TreeHugger. “Landmark study shows how to change the building sector from a major carbon emitter to a major carbon sink”. 8 December 2019. treehugger.com. 6 June 2025. https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-how-to-change-building-sector-to-cut-carbon-4854259. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building#cite_note-:2-20
[viii] Property Registry Team. “How Long Will A New House Last?”. 2025. propertyregistry.co.uk. 3 June 2025. https://propertyregistry.co.uk/how-long-will-a-new-house-last/
[ix] iea.org. “Buildings – Analysis”. iea.org. https://www.iea.org/reports/buildings. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building#cite_note-13
[x] Goodhew, S. Sustainable Construction Processes. A Resource Text. John Wiley & Sons, 2016. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building#cite_note-14
[xi] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xii] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xiii] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xiv] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xv] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xvi] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xvii] Wikipedia contributors. “Hempcrete.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hempcrete
[xviii] Wikipedia contributors. “Hempcrete.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hempcrete
[xix] Palankar, Nitendra; Ravi Shankar, A. U.; Mithun, B. M. “Studies on eco-friendly concrete incorporating industrial waste as aggregates”. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment. 4 (2) (December 1 2015): 378–390. Bibcode:2015IJSBE…4..378P. doi:10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.05.002. ISSN 2212-6090. S2CID 135944819. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ijsbe.2015.05.002. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building#cite_note-41
[xx] Palankar, Nitendra; Ravi Shankar, A. U.; Mithun, B. M. “Studies on eco-friendly concrete incorporating industrial waste as aggregates”. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment. 4 (2) (December 1 2015): 378–390. Bibcode:2015IJSBE…4..378P. doi:10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.05.002. ISSN 2212-6090. S2CID 135944819. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ijsbe.2015.05.002. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building#cite_note-41
[xxi] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xxii]Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xxiii] Lockhart, Olga. “4 Main Health & Green Building Benefits For Homeowners”. February 2019. PATHWAY. https://pathwaydc.com/4-main-health-green-building-benefits-for-homeowners/. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building#cite_note-35
[xxiv] Wikipedia contributors. “Green building.” 29 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building
[xxv] TreeHugger. “Landmark study shows how to change the building sector from a major carbon emitter to a major carbon sink”. 8 December 2019. treehugger.com. 6 June 2025. https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-how-to-change-building-sector-to-cut-carbon-4854259. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building#cite_note-:2-20
[xxvi] TreeHugger. “Landmark study shows how to change the building sector from a major carbon emitter to a major carbon sink”. 8 December 2019. treehugger.com. 6 June 2025. https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-how-to-change-building-sector-to-cut-carbon-4854259. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building#cite_note-:2-20
[xxvii] TreeHugger. “Landmark study shows how to change the building sector from a major carbon emitter to a major carbon sink”. 8 December 2019. treehugger.com. 6 June 2025. https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-how-to-change-building-sector-to-cut-carbon-4854259. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building#cite_note-:2-20
[xxviii] TreeHugger. “Landmark study shows how to change the building sector from a major carbon emitter to a major carbon sink”. 8 December 2019. treehugger.com. 6 June 2025. https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-how-to-change-building-sector-to-cut-carbon-4854259. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building#cite_note-:2-20
[xxix] Lebreton, Tatiana. “The Complete Guide to Wall-Mounted Solar Panels”. Updated 2 August 2023. theecoexperts.co.uk. 6 June 2025. https://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/solar-panels/wall-mounted#link-can-solar-panels-be-mounted-on-a-wall
[xxx] The Constructor. “Green Roofs and Living Walls: An Overview of Benefits and Installation”. theconstructor.org. 3 June 2025. https://theconstructor.org/sustainability/green-roofs-and-living-walls-an-overview-of-benefits-and-installation/571495/
[xxxi] The Constructor. “Green Roofs and Living Walls: An Overview of Benefits and Installation”. theconstructor.org. 3 June 2025. https://theconstructor.org/sustainability/green-roofs-and-living-walls-an-overview-of-benefits-and-installation/571495/
[xxxii] The Constructor. “Green Roofs and Living Walls: An Overview of Benefits and Installation”. theconstructor.org. 3 June 2025. https://theconstructor.org/sustainability/green-roofs-and-living-walls-an-overview-of-benefits-and-installation/571495/
[xxxiii] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biodiversity.” 23 Feb. 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biodiversity
[xxxiv] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biodiversity.” 23 Feb. 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biodiversity
[xxxv] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biology.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biology#Table_of_soil_life (Table uses info from: (in French) Dominique Soltner [fr], Les Bases de la Production Végetal, tome I: Le Sol et son amélioration, Collection Sciences et Téchniques Agricoles 2003)
[xxxvi] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biology.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biology#Table_of_soil_life (Table uses info from: (in French) Dominique Soltner [fr], Les Bases de la Production Végetal, tome I: Le Sol et son amélioration, Collection Sciences et Téchniques Agricoles 2003)
[xxxvii] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biology.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biology#Table_of_soil_life (Table uses info from: (in French) Dominique Soltner [fr], Les Bases de la Production Végetal, tome I: Le Sol et son amélioration, Collection Sciences et Téchniques Agricoles 2003)
[xxxviii] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biology.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biology#Table_of_soil_life (Table uses info from: (in French) Dominique Soltner [fr], Les Bases de la Production Végetal, tome I: Le Sol et son amélioration, Collection Sciences et Téchniques Agricoles 2003)
[xxxix] Wikipedia contributors. “Soil biology.” 23 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jun. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_biology#Table_of_soil_life (Table uses info from: (in French) Dominique Soltner [fr], Les Bases de la Production Végetal, tome I: Le Sol et son amélioration, Collection Sciences et Téchniques Agricoles 2003)
[xl] Lewis, Aidan. “The invisible killer threatening millions of migrating birds”. 21 May 2014. BBC News. 3 June 2025. Washington. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27426866
[xli] Machtans, Craig S.; Wedeles, Christopher H. R.; Bayne, Erin M. “A First Estimate for Canada of the Number of Birds Killed by Colliding with Building Windows”. Avian Conservation and Ecology. 8 (2) (2013): art6. doi:10.5751/ace-00568-080206. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird%E2%80%93window_collisions#cite_note-3
[xlii] Wikipedia contributors. “Light pollution.” 22 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution
[xliii] International Dark-Sky Association. “Light Pollution”. darksky.org. Archived from the original. Retrieved 26 June 2021. https://www.darksky.org/light-pollution/. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#cite_note-1
[xliv] Smith, Keith T.; Lopez, Bianca; Vignieri, Sacha; Wible, Brad. “Losing the darkness”. Science. 380 (6650) (2023): 1116–1117. Bibcode:2023Sci…380.1116S. doi:10.1126/science.adi4552. PMID 37319220. https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.adi4552. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#cite_note-2
[xlv] Kaushik, Komal; Nair, Soumya; Ahamad, Arif. “Studying light pollution as an emerging environmental concern in India”. Journal of Urban Management. 11 (3) (September 2022): 392–405. doi:10.1016/j.jum.2022.05.012. hdl:10419/271475. ISSN 2226-5856. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2022.05.012. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#cite_note-8
[xlvi] Pain, Stephanie. “There goes the night”. Knowable Magazine. Annual Reviews. doi:10.1146/knowable-032218-043601. Archived from the original. March 23 2018. knowablemagazine.org. Retrieved March 26 2018. https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/living-world/2018/there-goes-night. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#cite_note-NWA-4
[xlvii] Kyba, Christopher C. M.; Kuester, Theres; Sánchez de Miguel, Alejandro; Baugh, Kimberly; Jechow, Andreas; Hölker, Franz; Bennie, Jonathan; Elvidge, Christopher D.; Gaston, Kevin J.; Guanter, Luis. “Artificially lit surface of Earth at night increasing in radiance and extent”. Science Advances. 3 (11) (November 2017): e1701528. Bibcode:2017SciA….3E1528K. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1701528. PMC 5699900. PMID 29181445. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5699900. Cited on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#cite_note-5
[xlviii] Wikipedia contributors. “Daytime.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 1 Nov. 2024. 29 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daytime
[xlix] James F. “TV Wattage – 2024’s Most Efficient TVs Revealed [With Data]”. Updated 11 February 2024. ecocostsavings.com. 29 May 2025. https://ecocostsavings.com/tv-wattage/
[l] Wikipedia contributors. “LED lamp.” 27 May 2025. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LED_lamp
[li] Color With Leo. “What light bulb is closest to natural light?”. 2025. colorwithleo.com. 3 June 2025.
https://www.colorwithleo.com/what-light-bulb-is-closest-to-natural-light