No Need to Say Goodbye: Retrofitting Historical Sites
It is well known that global climate change is causing many serious problems worldwide. This is important to acknowledge and consider because where we get almost 84% of our energy, the burning of fossil fuels, is the largest contributing factor to global climate change (Forbes). In an effort to fix this problem some propose massive reforestation efforts, however even if all possible land was replanted this process would only solve about 25% of the issue (Basten et al., 2019). So the answer most experts have turned to is using green, renewable energy in the place of fossil fuels to maximize energy production without increasing the world’s carbon footprint. Yet this seemingly cure-all solution has not been widely adopted. The reason? Green energy is often difficult and expensive to implement (UCSUSA).
This isn’t to say that green energy is not a viable way to combat global warming, but I believe there must be other more accessible solutions as well. One such alternative we should be focusing on is the repurposing of old fossil fuel consuming sites into usable locations. Such projects not only protect historical buildings for future generations to enjoy, but also limit fossil fuel emissions.
An example of this process can be seen in action currently in Tompkins and Niagara counties of New York where two coal run power plants (Cayuga and Somerset) are being retrofitted into data processing centers. After operating for nearly seven decades, the plants are being shut down to meet the new New York state environmental laws regulating carbon dioxide emissions in an effort to make the state more environmentally conscious. The new data centers will use existing structures altered to fit their new purposes, and create “a viable new business and jobs in their place, using renewable energy”. While some may claim retrofitting historical structures, such as the Cayuga and Somerset power plants, removes all historical significance to make them environmentally friendly, this could not be further from the truth. The point of these projects is not only to create a usable space out of an old one to lower fossil fuel emissions, but to also save communities beloved historical sites. With such a goal in mind, architects nearly always include core features of the original in their finished designs.
Though there are many proponents for retrofitting as a means of making environmentally conscious progress, some critics claim that this is a wide scale form of greenwashing. Greenwashing, as defined by Business News Daily, is when a company spends more time marketing their practices and products as environmentally friendly than actually minimizing their carbon footprint. Some claim that retrofitting is a way for owners of the original structure to rebrand as “green” and therefore gain a larger customer base without changing much about the structure’s carbon emissions (Bechtold et al,. 2020). These claims are unfounded as the retrofitting process saves the company doing the work so much money from skipping demolition and rebuilding that they have plenty to invest in green solutions for the structure. Furthermore, the companies who take on repurposing projects are normally environmentally motivated and therefore put effort into making their projects environmentally conscious.
While there are many viable alternatives that could help in curbing harmful emissions, repurposing fossil fuel consumers seems to be the most efficient way to create positive change. By being an easy and environmentally conscious solution, this process allows for greater progress towards reaching our goal of reversing the negative impacts of climate change.
