Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The life cycle impact of refurbishment packages on residential buildings with different initial thermal conditions

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Existing buildings constitute a large portion of the UK’s housing stock. Refurbishment of existing buildings can, therefore, have an important role in achieving the UK government’s CO2 reduction targets. While building regulations and rating frameworks mainly focus on the improvements of the operational performance of buildings, Life Cycle Analysis is considered to be a more appropriate framework to account for long–term CO2 savings. This study evaluates a range of retrofit approaches (simple, medium, and deep), in terms of Life Cycle Carbon Footprint applied on a terraced house—one of the most common housing archetypes in London. The initial state of the original building has also been examined assuming three initial states (never refurbished, refurbished in compliance with the 1976 and with the 2000 building regulations). Results showed that for all initial state scenarios, deep retrofit achieved the lowest life cycle carbon emissions, in absolute figures, compared to the simple and medium retrofits. Simple retrofit packages, on the other hand, achieved quick and significant improvements, especially in buildings with poor initial thermal conditions. The study also indicated that retrofit packages applied on highly efficient building fabrics result in longer carbon payback time periods. The study recommends establishing a ‘staggered’ retrofitting approach, which pushes for ‘older building first’ and ‘simple retrofit packages first’, as these gain quick CO2 savings. Deep retrofit packages and treatment of relatively new buildings should be implemented at a later stage, to push buildings further to Zero–Carbon target.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: BS EN 15978:2011

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Oikonomou et al. (2012)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Source: Prestia (2010)

Fig. 6

Source: Prestia (2010)

Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Authors A, B and C conceived of the presented idea and developed the theoretical framework. Author A, took the lead in writing the manuscript, performed the thermal simulations and analysed the data. Authors A and B contributed to the interpretation of the results. Authors B and C supervised the findings of this work. All authors provided critical feedback and helped shape the research, analysis and manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonia Vavanou.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Initial state scenarios

See Tables

Table 9 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE, 1900–1918 Never Refurbished (Initial State)

9,

Table 10 System inputs, IESVE, 1900–1918 Never Refurbished (Initial State)

10,

Table 11 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE, 1976 Refurbishment (Initial State)

11,

Table 12 System inputs, IESVE,1976 Refurbishment (Initial State)

12,

Table 13 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE, 2000 Refurbishment (Initial State)

13,

Table 14 System inputs, IESVE, 2000 Refurbishment (Initial State)

14

Appendix 2: Retrofit scenarios

See Tables

Table 15 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE,1900–1918 Never Refurbished (Retrofit)

15,

Table 16 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE, 1976 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

16,

Table 17 Construction fabric inputs, IESVE, 2000 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

17,

Table 18 System inputs, IESVE

18,

Table 19 Air permeability inputs, IESVE, 1900–1918 Never Refurbished and 1976 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

19,

Table 20 Air permeability inputs, IESVE, 2000 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

20

Appendix 3: Embodied carbon

See Tables

Table 21 Breakdown of Initial Embodied Carbon

21,

Table 22 Breakdown of Recurring Embodied Carbon (60 years life span)

22,

Table 23 Embodied Carbon Breakdown_Building Materials, 1900–1918 Never Refurbished (Retrofit)

23,

Table 24 Embodied Carbon Breakdown_Building Materials, 1976 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

24,

Table 25 Embodied Carbon Breakdown_Building Materials, 2000 Refurbishment (Retrofit)

25,

Table 26 Embodied Carbon Breakdown for Building Components and Systems

26

Appendix 4: Thermal zones and schedules

See Table

Table 27 NCM Project Profile IESVE inputs for different thermal zones

27

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vavanou, A., Schwartz, Y. & Mumovic, D. The life cycle impact of refurbishment packages on residential buildings with different initial thermal conditions. J Hous and the Built Environ 37, 951–1000 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-021-09871-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-021-09871-8

Keywords

Navigation