Uffelen

1.  Are Uffelen’s historical examples and attention to materials regarding environmentally friendly technology convincing?

First off, just as a writing style, his arguments are not convincing. In order to make an argument, merely providing a list of things is in no way convincing. I agree with his assessment that analyzing materials and ways of making sustainable buildings has infinite possibilities and is therefore very hard to categorize on broad level. However, he seems to focus most of his attention on high profile, high-tech architects who would not be considered sustainable by some at all.

2.  Is sustainability put as a priority above style or structural function in the United States?

Not at all. When you drive around the typical American suburb, track housing, strip mall, or parking lot, this is supremely evident. There have been a number of philosophical design shifts in the past century, and I hope that we are currently transitioning to a more sustainable outlook. But unfortunately, for the past few decades building has been about business, economy, and has been very short-sighted. With the housing-crash, I believe this way of building was brought low, and is on the decline. There is more focus now on sustainable technologies, but cultural awareness is still rather low.