Description

This research addressed the question of whether it is preferable to refurbish in an extensive way or to choose a retrofit strategy with lower capital cost, embodied energy and CO2, tackling issues of cost-effectiveness, embodied and operational energy throughout the lifecycle of an existing Victorian house in London. The indicator Cost per Ton carbon Saved was used, which resulted in higher values for the EnerPHit retrofit model, rendering it a less viable alternative. It was also concluded that retrofitting, in general and especially the application of EnerPHit, is an appealing option only with rising gas prices, low discount rates and long lifespans. Those results were even more amplified when climate change was taken into account, a conclusion very important for the application of future legislation and the possible transfer of this study to other climates. It was deduced that a house's remaining lifetime is a very significant factor to be taken into account, as investments of higher capital cost give higher benefit in long term.