Retrofitting provides the tools to make older buildings airtight, temperate, pleasant places. It also decreases emissions and helps halt the damaging impact on the climate. There’s no disguising the fact that we need to step up the pace. But is it really all about the environment? What are we missing in our retrofitting marketing and what can we do to get the message to hit home?
It’s time for some hard truths.
We are preoccupied. A failure to retrofit, we are told, is a betrayal to the environment. That’s the message we hear again and again, pushing us to act. And pulling us is this: energy-efficient makeovers save us money. An attractive combo. Still, the rate at which we renovate is practically glacial.
We spoke with Aneaka Kellay of Carbon Co-op, who made it apparent that there are facts we’re leaving by the wayside. Good and bad, we’re just not talking about them: the true financial burdens, the soft benefits, the ingrained inequity. Here we’re going to blow the lid off the little-discussed sides of retrofitting and explore how to better frame communications that lead to success.
Unrealistic Returns
Who doesn’t love a bargain! It’s true that retrofitting promises a sure-fire route to lower energy bills. Passive house standards, for example, maintain temperatures in a property year-round with very little need for artificial heating and cooling.
Aside from the benefits to the climate of decarbonising buildings, financial gains are the most cited advantage. This simply shouldn’t be. Aneaka pointed out:
“You wouldn’t expect payback from a new kitchen or a car. You don’t spend money to expect anything back.”
Like a car or a kitchen, we need to talk about retrofitting for what it is – a commodity. It serves a purpose, it’s not a profit-turning exercise. There are real, tangible gains for our everyday living: fresher air; no more damp; blocking out excess noise; bathing in natural light; water conservation. It’s good for our health (more on this coming up) and the health of our buildings, and even increases productivity in the workplace. But most of all, it provides us with bearable places to be when average temperatures soar; unless we change our habits, the average temperature will be a sweltering 5-8°C higher than today by 2100!
With work costing between $150 and $500 per square foot (30cm), retrofitting is a substantial investment. It can take 25 years before we recoup this through savings made on utilities – at least as long as the average mortgage in Europe! We could opt for a piecemeal approach or settle for the cheapest contracts in the first place, but this risks lower efficiency gains and poorer standards. It’s a false economy.
However, there is a time to rave about lower utility bills: namely, in discussions about how to finance a refurb. See it as a great consequence, but not a cause.
It’s Okay to be Shallow
Light-touch and incremental improvements are better than none at all. They’re cheaper, so accessible to more people. But the truth is, a whole-house approach packs more of a punch. The resultant efficiencies are greater. And instant. We need to praise both options carefully, as to not undermine one or the other or inadvertently encourage only minimum effort.
For those who are hell-bent on making their money back, deep retrofits should be labelled as a swift route to ROI. This is divisive, though: predominantly solely available to wealthier households, it antagonises the energy gap.
A Common Misunderstanding
It is estimated that 125 million people in the EU are hindered by fuel poverty. They are faced with a choice: heat or eat. If they can afford to, those on low incomes fill their bellies before cranking up the radiator.
These households struggle to pay for their own retrofits, but it’s no less important that it happens. As Aneaka told us, the ‘worst-first’ concept recognises the needs of the most vulnerable. But in terms of climate impact, it’s time to shatter an illusion: their carbon footprint will not change.
“There’s often a mistake in that people conflate dealing with fuel poverty with reducing carbon emissions.”
These households do – and should – continue to consume the same amount of energy. The difference being their standard of living increases. Same input, same costs, better output. Their drain on the power supply is low. They are not the big polluters. We must be careful not to demonise vulnerable people for failing to change their behaviour.
Policy and campaigns need to focus personal and corporate responsibility on those who can afford to make greater improvements, who consume more energy than is necessary. Target the wealthier, wasteful echelons of society, not the marginalised.
Dwelling in Discomfort
The truth is, we just don’t value our quality of life as we should. Marion Jammet from the Irish Green Building Council believes that “overestimating the potential time, hassle and cost” of the retrofitting process is a stronger hindrance than comfort performs as a motivation. These troubles are largely assumptions people develop because there is little information to deter them.
Based in the UK, Aneaka spoke of the millions of properties typically rife with draughts and damp. Some of the public, especially environmental ‘puritans’, as she called them somewhat tongue-in-cheek, are willing to live in a chill to curb energy use. But it doesn’t need to be like this. We don’t need to suffer for our planet.
It is possible to live in an efficient home, feel good, and be confident about minimising our carbon footprint. But how often do we hear this spoken aloud?
Aneaka has talked with many citizens who literally feel the benefits of energy efficiency improvements:
“What I like most about this is, I now live in a really comfortable, pleasant home.”
Typical response from a Carbon Co-op beneficiary.
Those even slightly interested in a refurbishment can be swayed by stepping into a building that’s undergone an energy makeover. They notice the difference and want a piece of the action.
In campaigns, it’s time we started talking more about the comfort individuals can gain by:
- promoting the sense of self-worth and dignity homely properties provide,
- using real testimonials from relatable people and community representatives to strike a chord,
- including messages from designers and constructors; those who create lived-in experiences provide strong, honest messages.
Overlooking Wellbeing
We are complacent, acting as though we can leave the problems we’re creating today to be dealt with in the future. Some believe the technology for a quick fix will appear in the nick of time, while others doubt it will manifest, and some oppose it on ecological grounds. Hence, we’re still mass-polluting the planet. Retrofitting at a snail’s pace isn’t helping.
At an event hosted by think tank IPPR, Aneaka had a ‘Eureka!’ moment. The panel spoke of shifting focus away from climate change. Instead, they advocated for a fresh approach: the direct positive influence of nature on health.
“I thought, ‘actually, that’s the way we talk about retrofit’. It’s not just about reducing carbon emissions. It’s about our wellbeing at home”, Aneaka reflected.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused a spike in anxiety and depression. It also led to many of us spending more time indoors – working from home, in lockdown, or quarantining. This indoors lifestyle shows no signs of abating. As mental wellbeing declines, shaping messages that inform the public of the health benefits of retrofitting is timely and really hits home.
Being Brutally Honest
Negative messaging lacks impact but sometimes the confronting truths are the most powerful. At the very least, they must be clear. As Aneaka told us, property owners should cover three themes: what they can do, how it can be achieved, and why it’s necessary.
In terms of conducting the retrofitting work itself, accepting the reality offers a chance to manage situations and expectations. At this stage, open dialogue between the property owner, occupant, and construction manager is essential. Here are topics that are rarely covered in literature and public discussion, but at the micro-level are vital to a succinct and frictionless experience:
- Be open about the extent of mess, noise, and time involved ahead of work commencing.
- Talk honestly about what is going to happen during and after the retrofit process to reduce conflict, confusion, and upset.
- Discuss whether occupants are expected to leave or if the work is to be done around them.
- Share even seemingly trivial aspects of the day-to-day, such as what time of day builders will arrive with their heavy boots and noisy drills.
- Hold regular briefings to share progress and report delays.
- Disseminate details about the tech that’s being installed, so that occupants are trained to enjoy optimal use and benefits.
- Remember to establish who will source any permits that might be required (e.g. for street parking or closures).
- Shine a light on the long-term benefits. Disruption is short-lived, but the impact will potentially last the building’s remaining lifetime.
We Are All Responsible
A study from the University of Warwick found certain “scepticism that co-ordinated action, for example to cut personal energy use, would make much difference”. Put another way, individuals don’t believe they can influence climate change.
The most important message we should be sharing is this: what you do matters. It is irrelevant how much funding is made available, what targets we set, how many campaigns and projects and innovations are created, or how much carbon budget is available; if we as citizens don’t feel empowered to make a difference, we won’t.
To go full circle, maybe we are doing the right thing by drumming in the message that retrofitting is better for the environment. It seems that this strategy of creating a sense of urgency is the most effective way to get us to change our habits. We just need to make sure the conversation isn’t so monotone.
Retrofitting Messages in a Nutshell
It’s true, retrofitting isn’t easy. No wonder the challenges are infrequently mentioned – talking about the expense, disruption, and even a lack of change to emission levels hardly seems the way to promote a practice we needed to be done yesterday.
Never underestimate the power of truth, though. If we take control of our messaging, if we appeal to the public’s environmental and social conscience, and if we make the facts known – however undesirable – we allow property owners and occupants the chance to make fully informed decisions. It is respect and responsibility, not secrecy and lies, that will encourage individuals to act.