A skim through the full report makes for an interesting read. Whilst replace vs. refurb is discussed in a general sense it would have been good to see the report to tackle Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute head on i.e. to undertake a detailed study of embodied energy incurred by the act of demolition and replacement, instead it falls short and simply looks at new build vs. refurb (and concludes that both solutions are environmentally viable, if you included a study for replacement then refurb would probably take the lead.)
That the Cumulative Carbon Emission (for EE and in-use) roughly balances between the two approaches is somewhat reassuring though it is a shame that the energy performance is based upon calculated energy performance models rather than real life data (I understand that Stamford Brook, featured in the report, actually failed to achieve its performance target by ~30%.)
Discussion of the energy performance measures in the refurb houses would have been useful. Sadly there are no useful details on the performance measures in the refurb case studies. The study seems to relate to thermal performance only, therefore it can been seen that all of the projects fail to achieve the AECB Silver. From what I understand, in Germany, they are refurbishing to Low Energy (AECB Silver-ish performance), and PassivHaus standards. To this end these refurb projects still have some way to go before they reach the current limits of performance.
Full report available for download here.
http://www.emptyhomes.com/resources/papers_publications/ehapublications.html#newtricks Mark
Author