And in the architects bubble is there a concern about the climate crisis? He asked me about the agro-ecological.

If the construction sector is responsible for the high percentage of CO2 emissions, the question makes sense. Naomi Klein says in his book, "This changes everything, how an aircraft can't take off because of the temperature of the heat of the airport runway, that passengers switched planes and embarked on a higher-powered aircraft, and the relationship with our crisis comes from the anecdote that instead of asking about the need for flight, we're making moves to make their own way, and this attitude doesn't accept the crisis and it's looking the other way. In the construction practice there are many theories to build with climatic phenomena and to introduce naturalization pathways in buildings and streets. The changes are clear because of the need to enforce energy saving techniques and technologies in technical regulations, or because the “adaptation” of buildings and streets to the crisis has become a source of work. But the “construction flight” remains the same. If the building is based on shelves to make them cheap and fast, we're looking the other way.

There are more and more groups of architects working within the ethical manifests, aligned in strategies that are little built, rebuilt, not built or unbuilt, more than an alignment with architecture, convinced that it is a good meeting point for architecture and crisis. Important construction tasks are being carried out in biomaterials and in the recovery of construction residues, so that the management of resources gathers the characteristics of the context.

More radical approaches are also heard: if we did not make more new buildings in five years? Or if we stopped using concrete, what architecture would we do? Perhaps in this way some flight passengers would be thinking about the need for travel and other forms of travel.