On Sunday, I joined a team of ArchTam employees cycling from London to Glasgow for the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, also known as COP26. This awareness-raising ride began in central London, at the Palace of Westminster, the seat of both British Houses of Parliament and a historic building dear to many of us in the UK. It had been rebuilt after being devastated by the Great Fire of London in 1834 and has been subject to several renovation projects since. Shortly afterwards, we rode past Buckingham Palace. The official residence of the British Monarchy since 1837 has been extended, refaced and refurbished many times since and is currently undergoing a complete overhaul of key infrastructure.

This got me thinking about the challenge of making storied buildings like these energy efficient – and whether we need to rethink our approach given the magnitude of the climate crisis.

The UK has the oldest housing stock in Europe, according to The BRE Trust, a charity dedicated to improving the built environment, possibly the world. Heritage buildings are challenging to retrofit because of the need to preserve their heritage features. and due to their traditional construction, standard retrofitting approaches also aren’t sufficient.

The first challenge is often the energy rating measured by a U-value, which scores how easily heat can pass through materials, and by a g-value, which assesses how much solar heat is allowed through. Due to the heritage of the building, it isn’t always possible to put insulation on the outside, which is the ideal place, without affecting its distinct façade. Insulation can be installed on the inside, but this reduces the building’s footprint and can lead to issues with condensation.

Another challenge is how to reduce the air leakage of the heritage building, which requires significant renovation to reach  a standard similar to new ones. There are also issues with how the buildings are heated and cooled. Heritage buildings generally have limited floor to ceiling heights, so it can be difficult to fit the required equipment, such as heat pumps. There are also often limited locations for heat pumps to be located externally due to the need to preserve the building’s external appearance.

Power to the building also needs to be considered. New buildings are now installing photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof to provide renewable electricity to the building – but this is almost impossible without impacting the heritage look.

Now I’m a huge fan of heritage buildings, visiting many in my spare time. Going forward, however, we need to rethink our approach in favor of making them more energy efficient. Heritage glass in windows, for example, could be replaced with slim line double glazing so it still has the appearance of a single glazed window. High performing insulation can be used to minimize the reduction in building footprint. District heating systems could be used instead of heat pumps, and PV panels sourced that can be integrated into the roof to reduce the visual impact – such things do exist!

Of course, it’s often much more expensive to retrofit old buildings because of the need to preserve the traditional appearance, which involves significant costs to owners. Given that 20 percent of UK housing stock was built over 100 years ago, financial incentives may be required if we are to meet our net zero carbon goals. Heritage bodies should also reflect on their approach to allow a little more flexibility, preserving the integrity of these heritage buildings while making them also a part of the solution towards reaching net zero.

The post Rethinking retrofitting for historic buildings appeared first on Blog.

Schools that use prototypes, such as the DeKalb County School District’s John R. Lewis Elementary School (pictured here), can stretch school district dollars while advancing educational equity.

Equity — it’s a word that holds different meanings in different contexts. In education circles, equity is defined as establishing resources and environments that ensure each school community member is provided fair, just and individualized learning and growth. School buildings set the stage for the educational environment and as a result, are integral parts of the equity equation.

With 53 percent of school districts across the United States reporting the need to replace or update multiple systems* and school construction budgets largely constrained, districts are working to find measures that advance equity across all communities regardless of socio-economic position.

School building prototypes — schools built using designs meant to be repeated at several sites — are increasingly important solutions in the effort to build and maintain equity. Here, we will explore how well-designed and well-constructed prototypes can serve as models for schools of the future, advancing equity and academic achievement across all communities.

Why are school buildings so important? Understanding the importance of the school building requires that we examine the impact architecture has on academic achievement. A growing body of research indicates that poorly designed, poorly maintained school buildings — which students from low income or marginalized families are more likely to attend — can have profoundly negative impacts on student health, behavior, engagement, academic achievement and growth across the K-12 spectrum. The focus on creating equity is becoming more mainstream with the recognition that poorly maintained buildings also adversely impact teachers and administrators, increasing turnover and contributing to reduced academic achievement.

Enter the prototype. Prototypes are a practical consideration, arising from the recognition of facilities’ impact on academic achievement and the limitations of funding. Prototypes can cut millions from capital costs and reduce maintenance and upkeep of HVAC systems, electrical systems and technology through economies of scale all while providing cost, quality and schedule assurance during the design and construction phases. The resulting cost savings enables districts to advance equity by delivering new prototype school buildings across the socio-economic scale that predominantly exists in large school districts.

Developing impactful prototypes. While prototypes hold great potential to provide facility equity, they cannot be designed in a vacuum. Developing and constructing successful prototypes requires significant expertise in planning, design and construction. Pre-planning efforts include examining district equity goals and including stakeholders such as parents, school mentors and community advocates as part of the program team. This provides insight into a school’s culture, challenges and strengths so that the team may develop prototypes that address specialized curriculum needs, meet design criteria and capture the district’s and stakeholders’ vision for optimal school buildings that blend into neighborhoods and adapt to fit varied sites.

We used these principles when we collaborated with leaders from the DeKalb County School District in Georgia, to manage the design and construction of their elementary prototype school buildings. The district’s Comprehensive Master Plan prioritized facility equity, diversity and inclusion, and focused on providing sustainable innovations and learning principles to promote academic opportunity. These include creating permanent student online learning options, developing a customized approach to learning, and strengthening Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) and Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts and Mathematics (STEAM) programs.

Can prototypes meet specific community and student needs? Amid the positive aspects inherent in using prototypes, there are concerns that prototype school buildings might not reflect the communities in which they are situated. Program management expertise and experience can alleviate these issues. The prototype schools, which ArchTam developed with the DeKalb school district, offer customizable finishes, enabling the community to convey the neighborhood’s culture and priorities and, importantly, are adaptable to specific area sites and cater to each school’s specialized curriculums. And because they are new buildings, the prototypes offer upgraded facilities and future-proof technologies often unavailable in the schools they replace, ensuring that all community schools have the facilities needed to enable learning.

As school districts seek to provide educational equity, prototypes offer a means to provide academic opportunity across district communities. These buildings, when thoughtfully designed and constructed, offer numerous advantages that can help districts stretch their resources and reach their goals for equity and academic advancement across socio-economic scales for their schools, now and in the future.

John Wright is the Program Principal for the DeKalb County School District’s Educational-Special Purpose Local Options Sales Tax (E-SPLOST) Capital Improvement Program.

*According to the American Society for Civil Engineers 2021 Report Card on Schools

The post Prototypes: Delivering equity and academic opportunity appeared first on Blog.

The early adoption of the SAP10 carbon emission factors in the, newly published, GLA Energy Assessment Guidance has been the topic in the industry for the past few months. Spreadsheets are being reworked and carbon emission calculations are producing unexpected numbers!

But the reason this is such a hot topic goes beyond the mere calculations; this can have significant impacts on the selection of low and zero carbon technologies in buildings and can trigger a shift in the industry – as policy is meant to do. So let’s unpack it.

SAP10 was published in July 2018. The document noted that it is not currently to be used for any official purpose, and that SAP 2012 should continue to be used for Building Regulations. Its intention was to provide an indication of the expected future carbon emission factors that would inform, and potentially be adopted in, any future update to the Building Regulations.

A key implication from this update is that the proposed grid electricity emission factor is 0.233 kgCO₂ per kWh. This is less than half the figure of 0.519 kgCO₂ per kWh, currently used in Building Regulations, reflecting a rapid reduction in grid electricity emission factors since this was last updated.

The impact of this reduction is substantial on the reported carbon savings for technologies that gain their benefit from displacing grid electricity. For example, carbon savings from electricity generating technologies such as PV (photovoltaics) and district energy systems served by gas CHP (Combined Heat and Power), will be reduced. On the other hand, technologies such as heat pumps, that use electricity to generate heat, will see their carbon emissions decline.

The early adoption of SAP10 emission factors by the GLA intends to enable developers make appropriate, future-proofed, technology choices, accounting for the reduced grid electricity emission factors. For example, CHP will likely no longer be the technology that can deliver the highest emission savings in heat-led developments; and alternatives such as heat pumps and sources of secondary heat will need to be considered to help deliver the zero carbon target.

This shift is further supported by the policies set out in the draft New London Plan: the proposed ‘heat hierarchy’ lists the use of local secondary heat sources (in conjunction with heat pump, if required, and a lower temperature heating system) as the second option (after connection to an existing or planned heat network). Meanwhile, the implementation of CHP is moved further down in the hierarchy, and is supplemented by a note that attention should be paid to impacts on local air quality.

Finally, it is expected that the desire to reduce heating and hot water carbon emissions using the grid decarbonisation as a mechanism, will lead to increased electricity demands from the grid, at least in the short term and until demand side response measures realize their potential. Therefore, the possible impacts on the electricity infrastructure capacity required to serve the increased demand, should be further considered.

In the following months, developers, designers and energy consultants will be called to address these challenges; in addition to spreadsheet headaches, this will open up opportunities for innovative solutions that will be in the forefront of the global race in sustainable building design.

The post The impact of SAP10 carbon emissions on low and zero carbon technologies for buildings appeared first on Blog.