Heritage preservation *can* be climate action, but it too often is an obstacle. Want to replace leaky double hung windows with tight tilt/turns? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install exterior insulation to protect the structure and eliminate thermal bridges? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install an affordable heat pump with short refrigerant runs on the wall? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install solar panels on the roof? You guessed it, would affect historical character.
If we want preservation to be climate action, then we should scrap the idea of "historical character", stop focusing so much on aesthetics and start focusing on structure, function, and the people inside. After all, if our ancestor had to experience our challenges and had access to our technologies, they would make the above changes in a heartbeat. If it's okay for them to do so, why can't we? Are we somehow less "historical" people?
Heritage preservation *can* be climate action, but it too often is an obstacle. Want to replace leaky double hung windows with tight tilt/turns? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install exterior insulation to protect the structure and eliminate thermal bridges? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install an affordable heat pump with short refrigerant runs on the wall? Nope, it would affect historical character. Want to install solar panels on the roof? You guessed it, would affect historical character.
If we want preservation to be climate action, then we should scrap the idea of "historical character", stop focusing so much on aesthetics and start focusing on structure, function, and the people inside. After all, if our ancestor had to experience our challenges and had access to our technologies, they would make the above changes in a heartbeat. If it's okay for them to do so, why can't we? Are we somehow less "historical" people?
Thank you for highlighting this pervasive obstacle!