{"id":47436,"date":"2026-07-21T16:27:47","date_gmt":"2026-07-21T15:27:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/?p=47436"},"modified":"2026-07-17T16:34:36","modified_gmt":"2026-07-17T15:34:36","slug":"ihbc-welcomes-new-heritage-counts-research-for-he-on-retrofitting-traditional-buildings-embodied-carbon-payback-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/?p=47436","title":{"rendered":"IHBC welcomes new Heritage Counts research for HE on \u2018Retrofitting Traditional Buildings: Embodied Carbon Payback Times\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

image: Mayville Community Centre, Justin Bere, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The IHBC has welcomed the new Heritage Counts research from Historic England (HE) on \u2018Retrofitting Traditional Buildings: Embodied Carbon Payback Times\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

IHBC Chair David McDonald said: \u2018Historic England’s research tackles the difficult topic of ’embodied carbon emissions’ and the effect of different retrofit approaches to a variety of domestic properties.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Its conclusion that the embodied carbon costs of retrofit are paid off through operational savings within a relatively short time is a useful, contribution to the climate change debate’.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

HE writes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research undertaken by Okana, commissioned by Historic England, looking into the different retrofit options for several types of traditional buildings (archetypical examples). The study found that the carbon used to make and install retrofit materials is paid back quickly through the carbon savings that they deliver.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent years, significant efforts have been made to understand and reduce operational carbon emissions from the built environment, which is the UK\u2019s second highest carbon emitting sector (CCC, 2025<\/a>). However, there are growing calls to address a previously overlooked but critical source of carbon emissions from the built environment \u2013 the so-called embodied carbon emissions\u2026. According to the UK Green Building Council (UKGBC 2021<\/a>), embodied emissions account for around 20% of all building-related emissions. These emissions must be addressed if the UK is to successfully decarbonise the built environment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026 Retrofitting\u2026 offers a means to significantly reduce operational emissions. Yet retrofit measures come with their own embodied carbon cost. This raises a critical question – Are embodied carbon costs outweighed by operational savings over a Reference Study Period (RSP)\u2026, once maintenance cycles, component replacement, and energy system decarbonisation are considered?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This study quantifies the embodied carbon associated with two types of retrofit options or packages \u2014 low impact and high impact \u2014 across five historic domestic building archetypes. These packages and archetypes were drawn from a 2020 Historic England\u2013commissioned study that modelled operational carbon savings<\/a> (UWE, 2020<\/a>). Even allowing for uncertainty and variability in embodied carbon assessments (see below for an overview of research caveats), all embodied carbon costs were paid off through operational savings within a reasonable timeframe\u2026.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Okana [said] \u2018For the types of buildings and interventions considered here, embodied carbon considerations should offer no significant impediment to the case for retrofit.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Embodied carbon by retrofit package, measure and lifecycle stage<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Okana research analysed the carbon footprints of retrofit packages across five traditional building archetypes, representing approximately 74% of England\u2019s pre-1919 housing stock:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Pre-Victorian Detached (pre-1850)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Georgian Terrace Large (pre-1850)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Victorian\/Edwardian Terrace Medium (1850-1918)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Victorian\/Edwardian Semi (1850-1918)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Victorian\/Edwardian Terrace Small (1850-1918)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Each archetype received a package of low-impact retrofit measures and a package of high-impact retrofit measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Key findings<\/p>\n\n\n\n