3D-Printed Buildings Catch On

3D printing was expected to transform architecture and construction, but uptake has been slow. Could that be changing, asks Thessa Lageman for CityLab?

Lageman writes:

3D printing is sometimes hailed as a revolution for architecture and construction. Enthusiasts say the technology is much faster and cheaper than conventional building, and that it has a smaller environmental footprint. But so far, machine-printed buildings have not materialized in significant numbers. Most examples are one-offs and are not fully habitable. The technology is hard to reconcile with building codes, and large-scale printers are scarce and expensive.

However, robotic architecture is still maturing. Recent examples include an office space in Copenhagen (2017) and a micro-home in Amsterdam (2016). Last March, an Austin startup named Icon debuted a tiny 3D-printed house, built in less than 48 hours, at South by Southwest. The company has partnered with the non-profit New Story on a plan to construct dozens of 3D-printed homes in El Salvador.

3D printing is often said to be more sustainable and less wasteful than conventional construction. Researchers at the Eindhoven University of Technology estimated that building the Meeting Factory will generate 40 percent less CO₂ compared to the usual methods. But the environmental implications of 3D printing are not yet fully known.