Retro-fitting – a Rubbish Solution, literally…

IS RETRO-FITTING VIABLE..?

In the wake of the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster – London’s own towering inferno – it was reported that the building (containing 120 flats) was “retro-fitted” in 2016 at a cost of £10 million, which amounts to almost £80,000 per flat. Yet, when asked how much it costs to retrofit a typical flat, a building contractor said “about £2000”. Phooey – you can hardly replace your front door for that price..!

See the source image

Retro-fitting old buildings to make them more energy-efficient is one of the “solutions” the UK government has proposed in order to meet its ambitious (and unlikely to achieve) target to reduce CE by 80% by 2050.

Under its so-called “Green Deal” the govt is offering to subsidise home-owners doing this “remedial work” to the tune of at least £500 million

Dr David Strong (expert in energy efficient sustainable building design and refurbishment)
“if the government is to meet its carbon targets virtually all the UK’s 24 million existing homes would need ‘some attention’. To do that job over the next 40 years would mean refurbishing a city the size of Cambridge every month. Approx 23,000 TEAMS working on each building for a 2 week period, and keeping that rate going for 40 years.”

The mind just boggles at all this – think of all the new materials used, and all the old ones dumped – think of the clouds of GGE created by the manufacture of the materials and the “refurbishment” itself. And, unless all the work is done by volunteers or specially-imported Bangladeshi labourers paid Bangladeshi wages, who is going to pay for it all? And, in the EXTREME unlikelihood that this programme is ever completed , we are still left with the original bull elephant in the room – SPRAWL..!!!

“Retro-fitting” may reduce carbon emissions from old buildings, BUT… 

You would still have cars, you would still have commuting, you would still have the outmoded ObeCity model with all its grotesquely wasteful infrastructure, and you would still have 24 million conventional homes which would still consume more energy and emit for more CE than necessary, and which would still require ongoing maintenance.  And then, assuming all this expensive remedial work is ever completed, what would then be the average remaining life-span of these buildings? Based on historical experience perhaps another 75 years. And, as everyone who has ever done major home renovations should know, re-construction is always more expensive than new construction.

“Retro-fitting” is a rubbish solution that will create huge clouds of dust and air pollution and great mountains of building rubbish..!

BOILING BRITISH FROGS
If the Nimby Nation opposes the idea of compact Oasis Cities, virgin land on our city perimeters and in the so-called “green-belts” (which, despite what their name implies, are not safe from development) will continue to be gobbled-up by stealth.  Because this “development” is scattered and piecemeal, most people don’t notice it unless its in their own back-yards or, as in the “boiling frog” syndrome, only object when its too late.