Why Don't We Build Skyscrapers Anymore?

Published 2024-08-10
Skyscrapers: Thanks DeleteMe for sponsoring this video! Protect your online Info Today! joindeleteme.com/TwoBitDavinci

For 100 Years, the tallest buildings int he world were all in the United States. But as the world caught up, the U.S. stopped setting records. So I got to thinking, are we losing our dreams of reaching for the sky? So let's look into skyscraper data world wide and see what the future of cities may look like. Let's figure this out together!


》》》SUPPORT THE SHOW!《《《
Join our Giveaway! twobit.link/Giveaway
Join our Newsletter! twobit.link/Newsletter
Join our Discord! twobit.link/Discord
Become a Patron! twobit.link/Patreon
Buying a Tesla? twobit.link/Tesla

》》》GOING SOLAR?《《《
Energy Sage for Solar ⟫ twobit.link/EnergySage

》》》COMPANY OUTREACH 《《《
Sponsor A Video! [email protected]

》》》CONNECT WITH US 《《《
Twitter 》 twitter.com/TwoBitDaVinci
Facebook 》 www.facebook.com/twobitdavinci
Instagram 》www.instagram.com/twobitdavinci/



Chapters
0:00 - Introduction
2:00 - Looking Back
6:30 - Why?
8:00 - Economic Changes
10:00 - Funding



















what we'll cover
two bit da vinci,Why Don't We Build Skyscrapers Anymore?,why we don't build skyscrapers,skyscrapers,why we don't build skyscrapers anymore,why buildings aren't as tall,future of tall buildings,did we stop building skyscrapers,future of cities,when did we stop building skyscrapers,are buildings shorter now,why the us doesn't build more skyscrapers,city planning trends,future of skyscrapers

All Comments (21)
  • @grkuntzmd
    Many years ago, I had a friend/coworker who had worked in one of the top floors of the World Trade Center (before 9/11, obviously). He said that in high wind conditions, the top of the build would rock more than 1 meter in each direction and people would get nauseous.
  • @chriswheeler8143
    I remember standing at the top of the Sears tower and seeing how many flat car parks I could see within a few blocks. It clearly wasn’t built because land was expensive.
  • @deezynar
    You missed one factor that made a big impact on people who might be tempted to build a record breaking skyscraper. That factor is the spire, or antenna, being counted as part of the building. Sears Tower lost its title for tallest to a shorter building. They built a shorter building and put a taller spire on it. When cheating gets rewarded, competitors back out of the game.
  • @jonjohns8145
    - 10:49 - That's Not Sheikh Khalifa .. You are looking for Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al-Nahayan. No idea who this is. - Sheikh Khalifa did not pay for the building, it was financed with a loan from the Government of Abu Dhabi to the Government of Dubai (Both are Emirates in the UAE Federation). - The Spike in Sky Scraper building at the Turn of the 20th Century was mostly due to the Improvement in Quality and reduction in Cost of producing Steel.
  • @reiteration6273
    It's always amazing to me, as a Brit, whenever I'm reminded of how far back my ancestors (and other Europeans) had in-depth record-keeping. To think that we have almost a millenium of building height records is just mind-blowing.
  • @paul1979uk2000
    I always had a sense that Skyscrapers was and is still a power status symbol, with countries doing it to announce, hey look guys, we are a power like others are. Europe is one of the odd one out that doesn't really build them, part of that reason is that Europe didn't really have much to prove, it's already got a long history and is already a power, but another reason is culturally, Europeans don't find Skyscrapers appealing on the landscape and they are right, a lot of people around the world don't really like living near Skyscrapers. As we see, Asian is on the rise as a power and they are doing what is expected as a rising power, building lots of Skyscrapers, just like the US did to announce their rise as a power and to be different from Europe. Today, thought, Skyscrapers are not appealing and most of us don't want them or don't want to live near them, in Europe, we do build them but we have designated areas for them that are well away from landmarks and residential areas, usually they are in business areas that you travel to work in but not usually live in, and also, today, Skyscrapers doesn't have that power status symbol it used to have and honestly, I think Europe has the right approach when it comes to Skyscrapers and the well-being of its citizens. In any case, I think the real problem with Skyscrapers, the higher they go, the less appealing they become to want to work, live in them or to want to live anywhere near them as they block out a lot of the natural scenery and the more expensive they are to build and maintain, and I think some that build these buildings forget the quality of life impact it can have on the citizens in those areas. In fact, if I recall, in Europe, there was a boom of Skyscrapers in Europe, but a lot of people turned against them because of the harm they were doing to the natural landscape, so some regulations came into force, I think first starting in Belgium and then spreading across Europe on what kind of building can be built, how high and where they can be built, without those regulations, Europe might have ended up like many other cities around the world with lots of Skyscrapers around.
  • Recently spoken to a guy in this business - he said, in Europe not only the cost increases dramatically with more stories, but sustainability decreases as well significantly - which is a no-go for many developers and in an increasing number of cities. In Europe, cost for high rise buildings (9 stories and more) make condo prices less market compatible, costing at least +25% - and, therefore, often have troubles finding buyers if resold.
  • @user-ft3ed5wv7w
    You didn talk about the law-thing, that owners of buildings can sell their air-space above to others, so that they can build much taller. And that there is a restriction in height from city to city to make need of that.
  • @snake10566
    In my city, the buildings are not allowed to be taller than the capital.
  • @ccatarinajm7114
    Funny to see Brussels there at 9'40" - I hardly ever go to Brussels, hate it, to be honest because it's supposed to be our capital but hardly anybody speaks Dutch, while 60% of the country does. But it doesn't take much to recognize the "grand marketplace" (Grote Markt) and just by pausing it, you can tell by the double street name that it is indeed Brussels and no other Belgian city. It's filmed from the Hoedenmakerstraat, don't ask me what that's called in French.
  • @ccatarinajm7114
    When I was a teen there was this semi-scientific magazine that had a whole futuristic city built in a kind of cone or pyramidal form, with the housing all around but just say 5 or 10 stories high. The ceiling/ground for the next level was more than double that, so that light would shine to the central plaza. There were trees and plants and such on that plaza. The structure was held up by large structures around and I imagine in the center too. I could see such a structure actually being built in some oil-rich country or somewhere "between" the Sahel and the Sahara.
  • I'm still annoyed that the names of famous things can change so easily. It took me a moment to connect Willis Tower to what I thought I knew as the Sears Tower. I might not have made the leap at all if I hadn't gotten used to sporting arenas changing every so often.
  • @Lord.Kiltridge
    I used to joke that the floors between two and 40 are too high to jump without a parachute and too low to jump with one.
  • @tbananas1
    In the coming decades, the architecture of cities will fundamentally alter to reflect changes in population, online shopping, work from home, AI replacing humans in certain roles, safety and environmental concerns. Office and retail spaces may play a less important role. Malls are already failing, office and retail spaces stay empty. Combine that with the extra expense of building taller, they won't be economically viable. I think project's focus will change to providing lower level building complexes with open space and maybe plenty of planting. These areas will still have office and retail spaces, but will be out numbered by homes. Given moves to reduce car use, public trams, subways etc need major overhauls. Outside these zones, the picture will be a very different picture. All the problems of today, with old dilapidated building, high crime and poverty. It will take time to rebuild cities to meet the changes in society. Not everywhere will be rebuilt. The younger generations aren't having as many children, more adults are choosing to stay single. Over the next several decades, as the boomers and gen x age, there will the problems of an aging population and less people paying taxes. That is going to impact cities far more than most realise given many are still convinced by over population narratives.
  • @georgeoriold8798
    Hi Ricky, Thanks for dealing with the subject of skyscrapers. It makes more sense to build more livable, useable spaces than the ego driven reach for the sly. However, there is no reason to give up on the aesthetics of buildings. People function better when they have their feet connected to the ground. We are not meant to live in sky like birds. It is not like there is a shortage of land anywhere to build on.
  • @se777en73120
    I’m surprised that there was no mention of the Legends Tower in Oklahoma City that will become the tallest building in the United States at 1907ft (compared to One World Tower at 1776ft). 100% of the financing for it has been secured. It will be mostly residential and hotel space.
  • @grkuntzmd
    When the Empire State Building was built, they didn't have OSHA, but they did have "Oh Shit!".
  • @NickCombs
    2:45 The 19th century. 18th century would be the 1700s.