Environmental Factors affecting the Sustainable Renovation of Listed Buildings

My final essay and major research project/dissertation looked into the Sustainable Renovation of Listed Buildings.

It has been a topic that has fascinated me for years since moving into a listed building when I was 7 and realising quite how cold they can be! Fascinated by the way they were built and consequently how they work, I wanted to know how these cold, drafty, energy-sucking buildings could become more sustainable. I went on to research the three pillars of Sustainability broken down roughly into Social, Environmental, and Economical considerations. These three aspects need to be taken into account when considering anything to do with sustainability whether that be judging if a build is sustainable, or implementing sustainable aspects into a design - these factors will affect and affect all decisions.

This article will explain the environmental impacts listed buildings have on the surrounding area and offers a debate into how listed buildings struggle and how they could do better.

When considering the environmental aspects of sustainability, it is important to understand the fundamentals of heat energy. Heat constantly seeks to dissipate, hence the greater introduction of insulation and glazing solutions into the UK (Morgan, 2018, p17). The more heat energy that is able to escape into the wider atmosphere, the more heat has to be generated in order to maintain a comfortable indoor air temperature, which requires greater use of energy resulting in the unnecessary burning of fossil fuels contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and a higher carbon footprint. Listed building restrictions mean buildings are required to maintain their original windows and solid walls which makes it difficult to implement any structural heat-saving measures at all, often resulting in a higher (poorer) U-value (Morgan, 2018, p17-19).

Renovating a listed building can have big benefits when considering the ecological impacts affecting sustainability. According to Moxon (2012, p19), existing buildings hold the greatest potential for reducing carbon emissions, and with appropriate measures can reduce their energy consumption by 80%, stating that renovating an existing building is preferable to tearing it down and rebuilding it. Backing this up, they continue to say that even the most energy-efficient green new construction will take 20 years to offset the embodied energy used in its construction. Moxon (2012, p24). This suggests that sustainable renovation of existing buildings is key to cutting down our carbon emissions and achieving the government’s pledge to meet net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. This is supported by policy officers in Historic England who have stated that the UK cannot reach 2050 carbon goals if carbon emissions within the existing building stock are not reduced (Historic England, 2019, p4). Not only is restoration better in terms of embodied energy expended in the construction of a building, but it is also sticking to the key principles of sustainability.

By renovating buildings, a form of sustainability is being achieved based on The Four R’s system long advocated for by environmentalists such as David Attenborough and Lumi Youm (Abbot, 2019, Youm, 2021). The principles Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Recover can be brought together in a systemic package to demonstrate the function of a good sustainable design. Part of this lies in the reuse of already existing buildings which is preferred by sustainability assessment tools such as BREEAM (Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method), LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), and DGNB (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen – German Sustainable Building Council) over demolition (Edwards, 2014, p7).

According to Godwin (2011, pp12-21) a building that is converted or adapted, takes advantage of the energy embodied within the fabric of that building. The amount of energy used to manufacture materials and transport them during the construction of a new building is equal to the amount of energy required to meet the energy requirements of that building for up to ten years. Therefore, by recycling existing buildings, greenhouse gas emissions and the energy required for demolition can be minimized. Embodied energy in a building, refers to the energy required to produce every single aspect of the property; from the bricks to the timber and even metal hinges on doors. Each aspect of the build will have taken an amount of energy to be made, delivered, and implemented into the design which is then embodied into the total energy and CO2 consumption of the building (Godwin, 2011, pp12-21). Older buildings will have less embodied energy due to the use of traditional building materials and methods of construction. However, their uses tend to be outdated and no longer serve the modern-day user resulting in obsolete, high energy-consuming, cold and draughty buildings that fall behind in terms of new and more sustainable technological advances. The answer is to renovate historic buildings with both new sustainable technological advances such as renewable energy resources and old techniques such as passive design and natural, locally sourced materials to reduce the building's energy consumption and embodied energy.

Mahmud et al. (2021, pp23-29) states the materials we use in a building not only include the amount of embodied energy but can also retain by-products called Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that can be toxic, contribute towards indoor air pollution, and have significant ecological impacts on the wider environment whilst also being detrimental to human health.

As Kim notes:

“Exposure (through different exposure pathways, i.e., inhalation, dermal absorption, ingestion, etc.) to those hazardous pollutants can damage the immune, neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, and respiratory systems of humans and animals.”

(Kim, 2017, pp1-3)

They are found in everyday items that we possess within the interior of our homes such as chemicals used in finishes, timber products, carpets, furniture, fabrics, paints, and varnishes (Moxon, 2012, pp100-105). Therefore, it is increasingly important to seek formaldehyde-free low-VOC products whilst also choosing natural materials or organic options that have not been in contact with pesticides or other harsh chemicals in the production of the product (Moxon, 2012, pp100-105). This is important when considering the materials included in historic buildings as they may not meet the modern-day requirements and any buildings insulated or renovated before the year 2000 or built before 1970 may contain toxic substances like asbestos which can cause harmful cancers if disturbed (Health Essentials, 2020). VOCs within the interior environment can be damaging to the health of the occupant and due to humans spending 90% of their time indoors (Opinium, 2018), has a larger impact on health than first thought with long term air pollution exposure estimated to cause 28,000–36,000 premature deaths a year (Ferguson et al. 2021, pp425-448). There are also significant impacts on the wider environment in terms of acid rain but are also toxic when many of the interior elements from a home are discarded into landfills and left to degrade which can also contaminate local ecosystems, water supplies and poison local wildlife (Moxon, 2012, pp100-105). Products that are organic or made from bamboo and hemp may be low in VOC’s but they tend to be imported from other countries (which emits carbon into the atmosphere) and can disturb other habitats. They may also be more expensive to import and drive the cost of the build higher which can make them unattractive options for designers.

References

Abbot, K. (2019) 'Just don't waste': David Attenborough's heartfelt message to next generation Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/oct/19/just-dont-waste-david-attenborough-advice-bbc-seven-worlds-one-planet (Accessed: 15/01/22)

Edwards, B. (2014) Rough guide to sustainability: a design primer. 4th edn. London: RIBA Publishing.

Ferguson, L. et al. (2021) 'Systematic inequalities in indoor air pollution exposure in London, UK', Buildings & cities, 2(1), pp425-448. doi: 10.5334/bc.100

Godwin, P. J. (2011) “Building Conservation and Sustainability in the United Kingdom,” Procedia Engineering, 20, pp. 12–21. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.135.

Health Essentials (2020) Asbestos Still Lurks in Older Buildings: Are Your Lungs at Risk? Available at: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/asbestos-still-lurks-older-buildings-lungs-risk/#:~:text=Any%20building%20built%20before%20the,area%20is%20in%20good%20condition. (Accessed: 14/01/22)

Historic England (2019) There’s No Place Like Old Homes. Re-Use and Recycle to Reduce Carbon. Available at: https://historicengland.org.uk/content/heritage-counts/pub/2019/hc2019-re-use-recycle-to-reduce-carbon/ (Accessed: 12/12/21)

Kim, K.-H. (2017) ‘Volatile organic compoun

ds in environment’, Environments, 1, pp. 1-3. doi: org/10.3390/books978-3-03842-513-7

Opinium. (2018) Brits spend 90% of their time indoors. Available at: https://www.opinium.com/brits-spend-90-of-their-time-indoors/#:~:text=The%20average%20Brit%20spends%2022,fifth%20of%20Brits%20(22%25). (Accessed: 23/01/22)

Morgan, C. (2018) Sustainable Renovation Imp

roving Homes for Energy, Health and Environment. Available at: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3.spanglefish.com/s/31974/documents/[digitalv3]-guide-to-domestic-retrofit-compressed.pdf (Accessed: 04/01/22)

Moxon, S. (2012) Sustainability in interior design. London: Laurence King Publishers (Portfolio skills. Interior design)

Youm, L. (2021) I’m an Asian American Environmentalist. My story is a familiar one. Available at: https://www.edf.org/blog/2021/05/26/im-asian-american-environmentalist-my-story-familiar-one (Accessed: 13/01/22)

Yead Mahmud et al. (2021) ‘Assessment of the Carbon Footprint and Vocs Emissions Caused by the Manufacturing Process of the Footwear Industry in Bangladesh’, Textile and Leather Review, pp. 23–29. doi: 10.31881/TLR.2020.19.