 F E R R A R O C H O I A N D A S S O C I A T E S L T D
PUBLICATIONS
Sustainable Design Strategies
for the Modernization of the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station
by Joseph J. Ferraro, AIA and William D. Brooks, AIA
3. Construction History
Currently in the second of five construction phases, the modernization of Amundsen-Scott is scheduled to be complete and operational in 2006. The revitalized station combines proven strategies for extreme cold regions with new, sustainable design solutions that have evolved as specific responses to the climatic conditions of the polar plateau.
 First operational in 1956, the original Amundsen-Scott Station buildings were constructed of wood and canvas. The relentless annual snow deposition of 0.2 meters, bitter winter winds, soon led to improvements that consisted of corrugated steel arches that were placed over the living and working facilities. The arches provided needed protection from the elements, and were designed to withstand being buried beneath the ever rising snow plain and annual snowdrifts (See Figure 1).
The need to clear increasingly more snow each summer to regain access to the station, coupled with evidence of increasing structural fatigue resulting from supporting the weight of 18 seasons of accumulated snow, led to the original station being replaced in 1975. The replacement station’s design perpetuated the idea of placing buildings within steel arches that could withstand being buried, and also placed facilities within a dramatic 51 meter diameter geodesic dome. The landmark dome housed laboratories, offices, dining, and berthing space for a winter-over population of 28, while the adjacent arches enclosed a garage/shop, fuel storage, the power plant, and other support areas. The dome resisted being buried by snowdrifts better than the arches did, but over time, the unequal snow loading imposed on the dome’s base ring began to compromise its structural integrity. Compounding the problem, the station was struggling to accommodate a summer season population that had grown to 150, five times its design size. By the end of the 1980’s, it was evident that the station was again physically and programmatically near the end of its useful life, and would need to be replaced.
In early 1991 the National Science Foundation (NSF) orchestrated a high-level design retreat in Enfield, New Hampshire to develop concepts for the new station. In June 1991 NSF published the results in a document entitled the Enfield Concept Design. Notable in the concept design was the idea that the habitat portion of the new station could be above-grade in elevated, jackable structures.
 The concept that emerged from the Enfield retreat established a sustainable design direction that was a significant departure from the history of the conventional and inefficient below-surface facilities at Amundsen-Scott. It envisioned a state-of-the-art station that would have a minimum design life of 25 years, breaking the historical pattern of abandoning and rebuilding. It also envisioned a larger, modern, more energy efficient station that would accommodate an expanding science program and improve station living conditions.
In total, the program called for over 6,000 square meters of floor area to provide for berthing, dining, laboratories, a medical clinic, recreation, administration, storage, and services support spaces. The above-surface portion of the station would be designed to serve as a complete habitat for scientists and station operations personnel, accommodating a winter-over population of 50, and a summer population of up to 150. The elevated habitat would be interconnected with tunneling passageways to below-surface support spaces including a one-megawatt power plant, bulk storage facilities, fuel storage facilities, and a garage/shop (Figure 2).
Proceed to next section: 4. Sustainable Design Goals
Table of Contents
1. Abstract
2. Sustainable Design
3. Construction History at Amundsen-Scott Station
4. Sustainable Design Goals
5. Minimizing Impacts to the South Pole Research Environment
6. Ensuring a Station Useful Life of 25 Years or More
7. Energy Efficiency
8. Indoor Environmental Quality
9. Conclusion
10. References
Return to Publications
|
