Cool and all but did they really need to build it? I think every big city should have one really tall building you can go up and look down but other than that skyscrapers are a huge waste of money, manpower, resources, etc.
How so? I’ve always just assumed that kind of extremely dense urban construction was better environmentally. One big system to manage HVAC, economies of scale when building it, tiny actual footprint relative to usable space, etc.
The gain from building higher isnt linear. You have to use more space for elevators, re-enforcements, safety(fire for example), etc. The cost of the apartments go up drastically so most people who buy them dont live there, they just invest. Midrises are much better in all of these aspects. Also the materials needed for skyscrapers harder to mamufacture so with all of these they are just plain worse for the environment. Göterborg is a pretty good example of how midrises are better in almost every case.
One big system to manage hvac, which needs to constantly work overtime because you built an insanely gigantic Greenhouse. To be fair that can be solved by simply not making the entire goddamn outer surface glass windows but that’s a different conversation
Oh, most certainly not. I completely agree with your statement. It is a really unnecessary monument of capitalism where the owner of the building company owns the top floor as his own apartment or something like that.
![[OC] Karlatornet](https://feddit.nu/pictrs/image/f9f669fc-3c0b-477a-befc-53f793e0c932.jpeg){kind=link}
Cool and all but did they really need to build it? I think every big city should have one really tall building you can go up and look down but other than that skyscrapers are a huge waste of money, manpower, resources, etc.
How so? I’ve always just assumed that kind of extremely dense urban construction was better environmentally. One big system to manage HVAC, economies of scale when building it, tiny actual footprint relative to usable space, etc.
The gain from building higher isnt linear. You have to use more space for elevators, re-enforcements, safety(fire for example), etc. The cost of the apartments go up drastically so most people who buy them dont live there, they just invest. Midrises are much better in all of these aspects. Also the materials needed for skyscrapers harder to mamufacture so with all of these they are just plain worse for the environment. Göterborg is a pretty good example of how midrises are better in almost every case.
Interesting, thanks! I think I’m starting to dislike skyscrapers…
One big system to manage hvac, which needs to constantly work overtime because you built an insanely gigantic Greenhouse. To be fair that can be solved by simply not making the entire goddamn outer surface glass windows but that’s a different conversation
Oh, most certainly not. I completely agree with your statement. It is a really unnecessary monument of capitalism where the owner of the building company owns the top floor as his own apartment or something like that.
But it looks cool 🙂
I don’t think you need capitalism for humans to construct large buildings. Let’s be happy even capitalists value aesthetics
Also, it apparently surpassed this building as the highest one in Sweden
The building you just linked was built by a cooperative association as well, many of whom now live in that building.