As climate change drives more frequent heatwaves and cold snaps, scientists and architects are warning that the buildings people rely on for safety are no longer fit for purpose. A new book argues that surviving the extreme temperatures of the climate crisis will require nothing short of a revolution in how homes and workplaces are designed.
In Adaptive Thermal Comfort: At the Extremes published by Taylor & Francis, authors Susan Roaf, Fergus Nicol and Michael Humphreys contend that modern building design particularly in Western countries has created thermally fragile spaces that depend excessively on energy-intensive mechanical systems. As global temperatures rise and weather becomes more volatile, they say, this model is increasingly unsustainable and socially unequal.
People spend around 90 percent of their lives indoors. Buildings function as a protective “third skin,” shielding occupants from external conditions. Yet many contemporary homes and offices, particularly lightweight, glass-heavy, air-conditioned structures with sealed windows, are ill-equipped to cope with extreme heat or cold. During heatwaves, they can overheat rapidly. During power outages, some become uninhabitable within hours.
The authors argue that the twentieth century saw a narrow definition of “thermal comfort” exported globally, favouring standardized, climate-sealed architecture reliant on air conditioning. While such buildings may maintain steady indoor temperatures under normal conditions, they consume vast amounts of energy and contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. As electricity demand surges during extreme weather events, the financial burden of maintaining safe temperatures is becoming unaffordable for many households even in developed economies.
Single-sided flats with limited ventilation, dense urban buildings that trap heat overnight, and large open-plan homes with expansive glass walls are highlighted as particular risks. These designs allow heat to enter or escape too easily, undermining both comfort and safety. According to the authors, the current approach to measuring and engineering indoor climate control is leading to a generation of buildings that are thermally dangerous and increasingly accessible only to the wealthiest occupants.
Instead, they call for a shift toward climate-responsive architecture capable of maintaining safe temperatures with minimal reliance on the electricity grid. Future buildings, they argue, must be designed to operate for much of the year using local, renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and ground heat. Natural ventilation, seasonal solar gain in winter and passive cooling techniques in summer should form the backbone of design strategies.
Susan Roaf, Emeritus Professor of Architectural Engineering at Heriot-Watt University, describes the moment as a crossroads for the built environment. One path continues the reliance on efficient machines to seal off indoor climates from outdoor realities. The other reconnects buildings to their natural surroundings, enabling occupants to use local resources to stay comfortable while drastically reducing energy consumption and emissions.
The book draws lessons from traditional architecture across diverse climates, from Mongolian yurts to Māori philosophies of well-being, arguing that societies have historically adapted successfully to environmental extremes through locally evolved building practices. The authors suggest that Western architects should now look to designers in Southeast Asia and other warmer regions, where climate-adaptive buildings that prioritize shading, airflow and natural materials are increasingly sophisticated.
The discussion also broadens beyond engineering to social resilience. Studies cited in the book show that during urban heatwaves in the United States, some residents avoid opening windows due to fears of crime, increasing their health risks. In Sweden, older adults gathering in community halls reported greater physiological and psychological comfort at lower temperatures than when isolated at home. The authors emphasize that thermal comfort is not merely about temperature it is intertwined with social connection, safety and mental well-being.
As global and local climates grow more extreme, the question of how to keep populations thermally safe and affordable indoors is becoming a pressing political issue. The authors argue that hybrid or mixed-mode buildings designed to function primarily on natural energy and supplemented by mechanical systems only when necessary must become the new standard.
With rising emissions and intensifying weather patterns, they conclude that rethinking building design is no longer an architectural preference but a public health imperative.