Fawcett, T (2014) Exploring the time dimension of low carbon retrofit: Owner-occupied housing. Building Research & Information, 42(4), pp. 477-488. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Low carbon housing retrofit is often understood as a one-off, whole-house activity. However, an alternative model of low carbon retrofit is presented whereby improvements happen step by step over several years. This staged approach is described and contrasted with the one-off approach, and empirical evidence on both models is presented. Three key questions are considered: whether an over-time low carbon retrofit could be attractive for owner-occupiers; whether it could deliver sufficient carbon and energy savings; and what policy support would be needed. The benefits of over-time low carbon retrofit are explored through householder survey and qualitative data, as well as the time scales that apply to housing, renovation and homeowners. Technical issues around energy savings are explored, and the risks of lock out investigated. Policy support measures specifically for over-time low carbon retrofit are suggested, with reference to existing policy approaches in the United Kingdom and European Union. Over-time low carbon retrofit could be attractive to (some) householders - at least 60% carbon savings could be achieved - and policy could be designed to recognize and support this form of low carbon retrofit. This approach provides an additional route to the uptake of energy-efficiency and renewable-energy measures.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | energy; housing; low carbon; public policy; refurbishment; renovation; retrofit; time |
| Index terms: | housing, public policy, dimension, evidence, renovation, energy-saving, savings, survey, low carbon, European Union, homeowner, United Kingdom, owner, efficiency |
| Subjects: | sociology, performance management, renovation and retrofit, sustainability assessment, physical geography and landforms, Geography, public policy, economic analysis, health monitoring assessment and metrics, energy systems, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Governance, Construction Technology, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here