Skip to content

That NT retrofit the buildings report


. For instance,
retrofitting 50% of pre-1919 residential buildings over a 10-
year period could lead to carbon savings of 39.6 million tCO2e
and an estimated monetary saving of £3.4 billion worth of
CO2 reductions by 2050.


Our evidence shows scaling up the
construction sector with the skills necessary
to retrofit the UK’s historic buildings would
lead to an additional £35 billion of output
annually, supporting around 290,000 jobs.

The £35 billion is the cost, as are the 290k jobs. The benefit is that CO2 saving (which is indeed about right by theStern value of CO2-e). So we spend (or, more accurate, don’t gain other goods and services worth perhaps the same amount) £35 billion and get £3.4 billion back.

A bargain, I’ll take 2.

5 thoughts on “That NT retrofit the buildings report”

  1. “Our analysis estimates that nearly a quarter of all UK homes, 6.2m properties, are historic buildings (built prior to 1919).”

    The report is conflating “historic” with plain “old”. In other parts of the world those buildings would have been knocked down and rebuilt to higher standards long ago; and rightly so.

  2. Andrew M
    And on top of these tottering fabrications they will allow you to put an extra storey.
    Never buy anything listed, in a conservation area, with bay windows, on a hill, in a terrace, and so on. Unless you like having the builders in and spending a fortune. The days of having a free pension from owning a house are over.

  3. In other parts of the world those buildings would have been knocked down and rebuilt to higher standards long ago

    The chances of a British builder rebuilding anything other than a tin shack to a higher standard seems unlikely. In any case knocking down and rebuilding is verboten these days. Embodied carbon you see…

    The study might have merit if it looked at the cost savings the upgrades might bring.

  4. If you wish to get rid of CO2, iron fertilisation of the ocean, or just grinding up peridotite and dumping it on the ocean surface instead, is probably the simplest and cheapest approach. It could’ve been done a century or so ago with my favourite 19th century technology.

    But I don’t take the CO2 panic seriously. This rubbish about meddling with people’s housing is just another example of the irresistible urge to bugger people around that the climate fuss represents.

  5. MC @ 2.44, there are a number iof Youtubers who highlight just how crap some new builds really are.

    I recall seeing an article recently discussing an EU proposal to classify each property according to their energy efficiency (like the UK’s Energy Performance Certificate I guess).
    Those with a poor performance will be prevented from resale (and rental too I think) or obtaining insurance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *