Passivehouse and Energiesprong

A few nights ago, I watched “A Life on Our Planet", David Attenborough’s witness statement of a 70-year long career. It provided a fascinating narrative of the history of the planet, its current state as well as two alternatives for the future. One that fits among the “doom and gloom" scenarios we are accustomed to, and one that is more positive, but that requires initiative. The director of Greenpeace, John Sauven, published an opinion piece in the Guardian, reinforcing the idea that 2021 is the year to change. A year where we don’t and can’t go back to “business as usual”. Let’s not let the lessons of 2020 fall through our fingers.

Luckily, throughout the city there has been some small but very visible steps to facilitate the transition to cleaner buildings. Walking through the city, you can now see letter grades in front of buildings. According to an article by the Gothamist, most buildings are getting D and F grades (although buildings get an F grade due to a failure to submit the necessary documentation). Currently there is no financial penalty for poor performance other than whatever psychological effect a poor letter grade must have to the tenants of the building and the consequent effect to lease prices. Hopefully this gives more reason for owners to want a better building.

Making improvements and retrofits to existing buildings will be necessary if New York wants to make a difference against climate change. We understand how challenging this can be. Now in Bushwick, Casa Pasiva is pioneering a new way to retrofit with minimal interference to the building. The idea for this solution came from the Netherlands, from a program called Energiesprong, which attaches a prefabricated exterior envelope to the building. That element includes additional insulation, provides airtightness, piping for heating and cooling and ventilation. According to Energiesprong, there are another 46 projects in New York State that are attempting a retrofit using this method in addition to Casa Pasiva.

And certainly, as reported in Forbes, Passivehouse can be an answer to the pandemic and climate change. The greatly reduced energy consumption in tandem with the vastly improved indoor air quality are just two of the benefits of building using the guidelines of the standard. I would add that Passivehouse on its own is not enough as while by using the standard, we build better and healthier buildings, but we should also investigate the embodied carbon of the materials used to build a project. Architects, developers, and builders alike have a lot of work to do, and fighting climate change needs collaboration and a holistic approach.

What I’m reading:

The Guardian
Amid 2020’s gloom, there are reasons to be hopeful about the climate in 2021

Rocky Mountain Institute
The Top 11 Clean Energy Developments of 2020

Forbes
Is Passive House The Answer To A Pandemic And Climate Change? These Brooklyn Developers Think So

Building Energy Exchange
Better Ventilation: Solutions for Multifamily Buildings (Report)

The New York Times
New York’s Real Climate Challenge: Fixing Its Aging Buildings

Gothamist
NYC Now Requires Energy Efficiency Grades For Big Buildings, And Most Are Getting D’s and F’s