Office Refurbishment vs Demolition: Measuring Carbon Footprints

Get updates on Commercial property for free

Carbon counter is a highly regarded series of Lex notes that assess the environmental impact of different lifestyle choices. Check out other articles here.

Concrete, steel, and plastic consume both money and carbon. Time is also a limiting factor. In the UK, as remote work reduces the demand for office space, landlords are looking to upgrade their property inventory. Renovation and refurbishment present greener and more cost-effective alternatives to demolition and reconstruction.

London’s 458 Oxford Street, owned by Marks and Spencer, is caught in a dilemma. Campaigners strongly oppose the plan to demolish and rebuild this mixed office and retail site. The significance of the Art Deco building and environmental concerns are at stake. A decision on whether the demolition can proceed will be made later this month.

According to Tom Scott of advisory Construction Carbon, the difference between rebuilding and refurbishment amounts to over 30,000 tonnes of CO₂. That is equivalent to 100,000 transatlantic flights. The calculation assumes that the carbon footprint of the refurbishment would be 9,000 tonnes, compared to the developer’s estimate of 40,000 tonnes of CO₂ for a new building, which includes demolition and removal.

Two dual-scale charts showing new build vs refurbishment of M&S building at 458 Oxford street. First charts shows construction cost (£mn) against carbon (tonnes of CO2) for a refit and a new build. Second chart shows asset valuation (£mn) and Rental yield (%) for refit and new build.

For building owners, the appeal of demolition lies in the opportunity to replace it with a more valuable structure. On the other hand, retrofitting may result in a smaller floor plan due to factors like additional ducting.

If Marks and Spencer’s rebuilding project proceeds, it plans to add multiple extra floors, including two in the basement. Scott believes that the finished building could be worth nearly £300mn more, excluding construction costs.

According to Simon Sturgis from consultancy Targeting Zero, environmentally sustainable features have become a top priority for smart developers. Tenant demand and new energy efficiency standards drive the inclusion of environmental criteria in prime spaces. This is evident in the over 90% occupancy rates at British Land and Land Securities. Landlords face the risk of being left with obsolete assets if they do not improve the environmental performance of their properties.

Decisions regarding old office blocks involve trade-offs. Starting from scratch makes it easier to achieve high energy efficiency standards. However, upgrading an existing building is generally significantly less carbon-intensive than rebuilding. This should shape the debate on how to best decarbonize building stock.

Reference

Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
DMCA compliant image

Leave a Comment