The UK development industry needs to change its ‘default’ setting to retrofit rather than rebuild and begin to call embodied carbon ‘construction carbon’ in a bid to get the public to better understand the issue. But the ‘colossal’ challenge represented by the UK’s need to retrofit millions of homes may also be a chance to transform the industry, even if Grenfell has damaged the sector and the government is still putting off a vital move to remove VAT from refurbs.
Those were some of the main points raised in a fascinating APPG webinar session on retrofit from the NLA and London Society kicked off by Duncan Baker MP, who is launching a Carbon Emissions bill this Wednesday. ‘The task is absolutely colossal’, he said of the fact that 80% of the buildings currently standing will be here in 2050, so will require energy retrofitting. ‘I think we are way behind the curve’.
Preston Benson, founder of Really Local Group, showed the impact of retrofit projects in Reading and at Catford Mews, where the group built on good public consultation to turn a Poundland store into a cinema and café. ‘Our vision is straightforward’, said Benson. ‘The future is local. And, post-COVID, really the present is local’.
But Will Hurst of The Architects Journal - someone who has done much to push the issue with the magazine’s Retro First campaign - suggested that while architects and engineers have long understood their role in bringing down operational carbon, they have been much slower in recognising the importance of reducing embodied. And some developers have provided useful snippets on the scale of the problem of dwindling resources, he added. ‘LendLease recently told me they use 62 Eiffel Towers’ worth of steel every year’.
One of the suggestions to government has long been vocalised – to cut VAT on retrofit projects and remove the inequity with new build. ‘In the past, Treasury has been steadfast in its refusal to contemplate reform in this area’, Hurst went on. ‘But we must make the case; we’ve never had such a compelling reason to adjust the rates.’
Retraining is another key issue, said Marion Baeli of PDP Architects. ‘All the architects in my industry, in my sector, for example, need to learn a new way of designing buildings and retrofitting buildings’. Certainly, said Baker, there should be some kind of re-education process for the public too. ‘You say “embodied carbon” to people and I don’t think many really understand what it is’. Perhaps we should start to call it ‘construction carbon’ instead, suggested Hurst. There has also been what Brian Berry of the Federation of Master Builders called ‘a market failure to create the retrofit market’. But what was really needed was clear 20-year strategy from a government that also needs to take whole life carbon assessment seriously, according to Baker. Berry again: ‘It’s absolutely imperative that there’s a long-term strategy for tackling what is a major infrastructure project – 28 million homes across the country need to be improved.’
Other points raised in the session included the need to offer regulation and licencing for retrofit in a bid to cut out the cowboys and ‘botch jobs’ from the builder market; that Grenfell had the ‘unintended consequence’ of damaging the image of retrofitting towers and has also had a ‘knock-on’ effect on the timber market for tall buildings.
But one of the key points offered a neat summary of the situation. ‘I think at the moment I would say we have a default approach in favour of a sort of disposable built environment’, said Hurst. ‘We need to change it to a default to retrofit and reuse. That’s where we need to be’.