No Need to Say Goodbye: Retrofitting Historical Sites

Carlsbad is a beautiful coastal city nestled between farmland and the Pacific Ocean, which I am so privileged to call home. When driving along our shoreline, there is nothing but dazzling ocean views for miles and then, suddenly, a power plant comes into view.

This seemingly out of place 400 foot smoke stack and power plant rise far above any other buildings for miles and are an odd addition to our classic beach town. While visitors may see the Encina plant as an eyesore that ruins our ocean views, residents of North County look to it as a welcome sign. Whether driving up the 5 freeway, flying into McClellan Palomar Airport, or sailing along the coast, a glance at the power plant reassures residents that home is near. Understandably, many people outside of North County fail to understand why the people of Carlsbad feel so attached to an ugly power plant sitting a mere 20 feet away from the shore. Carlsbad’s Assistant City Manager, Gary Barberio, explains it best in his address to Coast News when he says “It is definitely iconic, the building and tower. The power plant’s been there for pretty much the city’s entire life” and as such was one of Carlsbad’s treasured landmarks (Puterski).

So it was with great shock to many residents over the past weeks when we noticed our beloved plant got slightly shorter, and then even shorter still. It turned out plans between the city council and the owners of the plant, Natural Resources Group (NRG), to demolish the structure finally began. Admittedly, we all knew an arrangement to remove the plant existed for many years, however I, and many others never thought it would come to fruition. But what if demolition was not the only option? Green retrofitting, defined as repurposing or “upgrad[ing] … an existing building [or site]… to improve energy and environmental performance” by the United States Green Building Council is an excellent alternative to destruction which allows for the preservation of historical sites like the Encina power plant and helps to counter the progress of the global climate crisis (Jagarajan et al.). Rather than simply modernizing a structure as seen in normal retrofitting, green retrofitting mitigates the negative effects of climate change brought on by the building process itself. This is achieved by skipping demolition and reconstruction and implementing green solutions in the structure. In this paper, I will explain the benefits of green retrofitting historical sites and why this process should be implemented worldwide.

In 2018, NRG officially retired the Encina plant after the construction of their new, more environmentally conscious, ‘Carlsbad Energy Center’ was finished in a nearby location (Diehl). In the interim, the Carlsbad city council finalized their Encina demolition negotiations almost eight years in the making. The Encina plant, which powered the North County energy grid by burning oil and cooling with ocean water, would be deconstructed from the top down by the second quarter of 2021, just in time for summer (Diehl). Meanwhile, the new Carlsbad Energy Center would take over the energy needs of North County (Diehl). As of April 2021, the city and NRG remain in a state of negotiation over the future purpose of the Encina power plant’s plot of land.

NRG claims their part in the removal and subsequent construction of the ‘Carlsbad Energy Center’ marks their company’s move towards more environmentally friendly energy production as their new energy center “offer[s] a myriad of environmental benefits — like improved air quality and reduced [ocean] water consumption — in addition to ensuring grid reliability” (NRG.com). By cutting down on seawater intake, the ‘Carlsbad Energy Center’ protects small marine creatures from getting sucked up into the plant’s inner workings and prevents harmful waste products, such as toxic metals, from exiting back out into the ocean. Furthermore, this new system turns on much quicker than the Encina plant (just ten short minutes compared to eighteen hours) and runs only when the grid needs extreme amounts of power (NRG.com). Of course, I wholeheartedly support making our city and region green and helping to ensure a beautiful Carlsbad for future generations however, I am terribly sad to see a landmark present for my entire life disappear forever. To me, losing the power plant feels like my city is being irrevocably changed into something I no longer recognize, and I fear the Encina power plant is but the first in a long series of changes.

Unfortunately, none of the plans created by the Carlsbad city council, NRG, or even community members who lobbied to keep the Encina plant considered green retrofitting as a way to retain this historic structure. Even if such a plan was proposed at this point it would be too late to implement, as significant parts of the demolition are already completed. However, had the Encina plant undergone sustainable repurposing I believe the most successful identity change would have been to a hotel. But why a hotel and not a green power plant instead? Sadly, turning the Encina plant into an environmentally conscious energy producer is not an option due to the systems already in place inside. For example, the Encina plant currently cools with ocean water, and to change this to a more green solution such as air cooling would be nearly impossible due to the complex pathways which would need to be rerouted inside the structure. So the next best thing to benefit the city in my mind is turning the plant into a hotel. According to Carlsbad’s 2015 Tourism Industry Study, “June, July, and August consistently produce hotel occupancies over 80%” so a historic hotel a mere 20 feet from the beach (our main summer attraction) would indeed be a successful venture (Carlsbadlifeinaction.com). Furthermore, revenue from this hotel could have helped Carlsbad’s economy recover from the pandemic recession by increasing the appeal to vacation and stay in the city. As “the areas hardest hit [by the pandemic] are hospitality, tourism, and food and beverage” adding a new opportunity to create jobs and revenue in that sector would have helped Carlsbad progress back to its pre-pandemic economic state (carlsbadca.gov). Now I am not saying that this green retrofitting process would be without obstacles, removing the inner workings of the plant alone would take significant time and energy, however, it is a much better alternative to losing our historical landmark forever.

Like Carlsbad, many cities worldwide struggle when attempting to preserve their historical structures. These landmarks face widespread criticism for their outdated emissions, waste processing, and power solutions which often negatively impact their surrounding environments. As new green legislation mandates structures and their internal systems to reduce their carbon footprint, many companies choose to demolish historical sites rather than face the constant updating required for them to function in times of such environmental awareness. This is not to say that all historical sites face removal or an eventual fall into disrepair, but that people fail to see the importance of maintaining them when they will likely need recurrent modernization to keep up with new policies. While I understand the need to turn a profit, what companies often overlook is how these historical buildings hold significance for their communities who would do anything to see them remain for future generations.

But is green retrofitting really an option for all historical buildings? In taking a global perspective, we can see some countries where this is not an option. One such nation is Italy, known for its thousands of years of cultural history still seen around the country today. In fact, “about 30% of the Italian building stock (12.5 million buildings) [were] constructed before 1945” meaning that at least 30% of all buildings in Italy qualify as historical structures (Filippi). Yet only 1.8% of these historic buildings receive protection by the Cultural Heritage and Landscape Code, leaving the rest vulnerable to destruction in the face of an ever-increasing need for housing and industry spaces (Filipi). For this reason, many environmentalists, historians, and community members alike increased their public support for green retrofitting of historical structures, but their encouragement failed to increase the frequency of this process. Why? A significant portion of Italy’s historical buildings are more than a century old, meaning they lack even the basic foundation of modern technology. Therefore, the process of green retrofitting such historical buildings costs more than building an entirely new one in its place because along with repurposing, architects must devise a way to include modern amenities without disrupting the original design too much. Using Italy as a case study, it can be concluded that green retrofitting is preferable for more industrialized historical sites and to a lesser extent industrialized nations. That is not to say other types of historic buildings can not be greenly retrofitted, just that the process may require more work if the site lacks certain modern aspects. Fortunately for the United States, nearly all of our buildings are under 300 years old meaning that sites such as the Encina power plant can easily be green retrofitted and preserved for future generations.

But what makes green retrofitting in particular so important? Doesn’t any retrofitting in general accomplish the same goals? To answer that simply, green retrofitting not only gives structures a new purpose, as simple retrofitting does through modernizing, but creates a system that enables historical sites to be sustainable for the rest of their existence. This is important because as the world’s resources grow scarcer, the need for sustainable solutions will rise, and what better way to ensure the survival of our beloved historical sites than to make them sustainable structures with a multitude of purposes. While some may claim retrofitting historical structures 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 mitigate the effects of climate change by repurposing an older space, but to also save our communities’ beloved historical sites. With such a goal in mind, architects nearly always include core features of the original in their finished designs.

An example of the green retrofitting process is currently in action in Tompkins and Niagara counties of New York where Beowulf Energy LLC plans to green retrofit two coal run power plants (Cayuga and Somerset) into data processing centers (Coffman-Smith). After operating for nearly seven decades, these historical plants shut down in early 2020 to meet the new New York state environmental laws regulating carbon dioxide emissions in an effort to make the state independent of coal power by the end of the year. Once operational, these new data centers will use the existing power plants altered to fit their new purposes, and create “a viable new business and jobs in their place, using renewable energy” (Coffman-Smith). To ensure the survival of the historic structures in an ever changing world, architects of the new data processing centers invested in a 15 MegaWatt solar energy array and a 2447 MegaWatt transfer of power from the hydroelectric Robert Moses Niagara plant on the Canadian border to provide energy (Coffman-Smith). Once completed, the retrofitting of Somerset and Cayuga will allow for the data processing centers to be fully sustainable while maintaining their original look and feel for their surrounding communities. Furthermore, green retrofitting will save nearly 30,000 tons of carbon dioxide from releasing into the atmosphere and significant levels of toxic chemicals from getting released into Cayuga Lake by skipping the demolition process (Coffman-Smith).

Though many proponents support green retrofitting to make 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 (Corcione). Some claim that green retrofitting is a way for owners of the original structure to rebrand as environmentally conscious and therefore gain a larger customer base without changing much about the structure (Bechtold et al.). These claims are unfounded as the green retrofitting process saves companies money by skipping demolition and rebuilding, so there is plenty to invest in environmentally friendly solutions. Furthermore, the companies who take on green retrofitting projects are often environmentally motivated and therefore, make their projects environmentally conscious.

Although the American government outwardly supports the idea of green retrofitting, there is little legislation to back up these attitudes. The Obama administration’s “Recovery Through Retrofit” plan focused on retrofitting newer structures solely as a means to to boost the economy and solve the housing crisis during the 2008 recession, claiming the environmental benefits as an added bonus (obamawhitehouse.archives.gov). Even with its minimal emphasis on global warming, former President Trump pushed this system to the wayside due to his climate change denying policies which still maintain a strong hold on our country. In an attempt to fix this, current President Biden introduced a two trillion dollar infrastructure proposal which includes plans to retrofit commercial and residential buildings nationwide on March 31st (Budryk and Beitsch). However, it remains to be seen whether these plans will be fulfilled as the constant battle between political parties over the climate crisis leaves retrofitting underfunded and under-promoted as a viable solution to reduce the harmful effects of human involvement in nature. This is not to say there is no government recognition of green retrofitting, the Department of Energy’s website provides resources on how to accomplish this, yet these are not significant enough as they merely address the bare necessities for residential and commercial retrofitting. What our government should be focusing on is investing in green retrofitting efforts, and more specifically protecting our historical sites with this process to help mitigate climate change and retain our country’s history for future generations.

If we look globally, we can see a model the US should emulate in the country of Australia. Similar to the United States, Australia witnessed a steady increase in temperatures since 1910 which led to extreme consequences such as rising sea levels (csiro.com). Now Australia’s National Science Agency estimates the country experiences a 20% reduction in rainfall per year and is at risk for increased frequency of extreme weather events such as the 2019–2020 mega wildfires which burned 46,050,750 acres (csiro.com). So how did two seemingly very similar first world countries come to possess such different success with green retrofitting? The quick answer is simply politics.

In both Australia and the United States, the concept of climate change is widely debated by politicians and hence turned into a sensitive subject. In fact, a study done by Fielding et al. found that, like American politicians, “political ideology (left–right) emerged as the most important predictor of politicians’ climate change beliefs” while studying perspectives on the climate crisis in Australia. Thus any policy created in an effort to address global warming in either country is subject to great scrutiny and is likely to be removed by future politicians.

To avoid this cycle, Australian lawmakers in both federal and state governments provide grants, subsidies, rebates, and advisory services instead of taking a heavily involved approach, allowing residents to decide what to do when green retrofitting historical sites. Local governments around the country mostly follow the funding procedures set by the federal government, with the difference being that local governments participate in much more community outreach and education on the topic of green retrofitting (Dowling et al.). The local government of Sydney specifically teaches its communities about green retrofitting by supporting the repurposing of local historical sites that hold community significance like the Sydney Crago Flour Mill that began operating in 1897 (Dowling et al.). By seeing the process of green retrofitting happening in their local communities, Australian citizens are more likely to support similar efforts in the future at which point the state and federal resources can help them along.

The United States would benefit greatly from implementing a model of Australia’s “hands off” attitude towards green retrofitting policy of historical buildings. This is because it protects against the current unstable political climate and against alienating companies and citizens who either do not agree with the practice of green retrofitting or are currently unable to practice it in their lives. Furthermore, by building a framework of substitutes, grants, and rebates rather than new strict policy, the United States can use existing government programs involved in historical preservation instead of needing to reallocate resources. I am not claiming that green retrofitting should solely be a secondary tool to tackle climate change, but that the process of moving green retrofitting to the forefront will take time and that trying to do so all at once will likely trigger adverse reactions in the government’s opposing parties. Had Carlsbad used the Australian green retrofitting model to retrofit the Encina power plant, it could have started an education and outreach cascade to our surrounding communities, inspiring them to consider green retrofitting their landmarks as well. To ensure the survival and popularization of green retrofitting historical sites in America the best solution is to take a passive approach by following the Australian model.

At this point, we must consider the global implications of green retrofitting historical structures. Buildings are currently responsible for nearly 40% of the world’s energy consumption, and roughly half of all buildings standing today will last until at least 2050 (e360.yale.edu). Such structures, historical sites included, could “improve energy efficiency by at least 20 percent through simple fixes like better insulation,” so broad, environmentally conscious changes to entire buildings as seen in green retrofitting will undoubtedly impact the global climate crisis significantly (e360.yale.edu). Furthermore, the benefits of greenly retrofitted historical sites, such as improved energy consumption and waste processing solutions, begin immediately whereas new structures, even if they are environmentally conscious, take 10–80 years to compensate for the harmful emissions given off during the demolition and construction processes (architectmagazine.com). Therefore, it is clear that one of the most viable solutions for combating the negative effects of climate change is adopting green retrofitting. Specifically, green retrofitting of historical sites is a perfect example of a more sustainable practice that can help with curtailing the human impact on global warming while preserving some of our most beloved structures.

As you can see, green retrofitting provides many environmental benefits. However, if we return to my home city of Carlsbad, it is plain to see that further benefits include the preservation of culture and memories. As mentioned above, policies of first world countries typically possess the most effective green retrofitting programs, but it is important to clarify that this process can be accomplished in all economic situations if there is motivation. Furthermore, I believe this is a necessary step to preserve diverse history and not just that of dominant cultures as was often the case in the past. Our respective cultures, exemplified through our beloved historical sites, establish a sense of identity, place, and belonging inside of each of us which is embodied in our community historical structures. This is the case with Carlsbad’s historical Encina power plant which provides a sense of identity and belonging to the city and its residents. While differences between cultures are often used to divide citizens of the world, green retrofitting of all cultures’ historical landmarks allows for an exploration of a “common human past — what makes us the same” according to UNESCO Chair in Cultural Property Protection and Peace Peter Stone.

So whether you are mourning the loss of a landmark, or the devastation the globe faces due to rapid climate change, I urge you to consider green retrofitting as a solution.

Works Cited

“Australia’s Changing Climate.” CSIRO, CSIRO Publisher , 2020, www.csiro.au/en/research/environmental-impacts/climate-change/State-of-the-Climate/Australias-Changing-Climate.

Bechtold, David, et al. “It Isn’t Easy Being Green: Operationalizing Environmental Sustainability.” Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability , vol. 18, no. 8, 2020, pp. 9–18., doi:https://search-proquest-com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/2492324789?accountid=14749&pq-origsite=primo.

Biello , David. “Building Retrofits: Tapping The Energy-Saving Potential.” Yale Environment 360, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies , 7 Nov. 2011, e360.yale.edu/features/green_architecture_building_retrofits_tap_energy_saving_potential.

Budrynk, Zack, and Rebecca Beitsch . “Biden Infrastructure Plan Includes Billions for Electric Vehicles, Building Retrofitting.” TheHill, News Communications Inc , 31 Mar. 2021, thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/545732-biden-infrastructure-plan-includes-billions-for-electric-vehicles.

California State Parks, State of California. “California Historical Landmarks By County.” CA State Parks, 2021, ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21387#:~:text=California%20Historical%20Landmarks%20(CHLs)%20are,of%20the%20criteria%20listed%20below%3A&text=Associated%20with%20an%20individual%20or,on%20the%20history%20of%20California.

Chadwick, Scott. “City Council Staff Report .” City of Carlsbad , 21 Apr. 2020.

Coffman-Smith, Andrew. “Plan Unveiled to Repurpose New York’s 2 Coal Plant Sites for Data Centers.” S&P Global Marketing Intelligence , S&P Global Inc , 21 May 2019, www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/trending/6U9JJYtiN_G7Zo3-a3uYTQ2.

Corcione, Adryan. “What Is Greenwashing?” Business News Daily, Broadcast Media , 17 Jan. 2020, www.businessnewsdaily.com/10946-greenwashing.html.

Diehl, Phil. “Landmark Carlsbad Smokestack Coming Down .” Los Angeles Times , 30 Oct. 2020, www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-30/landmark-carlsbad-smokestack-coming-down.

Dowling, Robyn, et al. “Retrofitting Cities: Local Governance in Sydney, Australia.” Cities, vol. 38, 2014, pp. 18–24., doi:10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.004.

Fielding, Kelly S., et al. “Australian Politicians’ Beliefs about Climate Change: Political Partisanship and Political Ideology.” Environmental Politics, vol. 21, no. 5, 14 Sept. 2012, pp. 712–733., doi:10.1080/09644016.2012.698887.

Filippi, Marco. “Remarks on the Green Retrofitting of Historic Buildings in Italy.” Energy and Buildings, vol. 95, 2015, pp. 15–22., doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.11.001.

Hoyt, Alex. “Report Shows Environmental Benefits of Retrofits.” Architect Magazine , The Journal of American Institute of Architects , 2 Feb. 2012, www.architectmagazine.com/technology/report-shows-environmental-benefits-of-retrofits_o.

Jagarajan, Rehmaashini, et al. “Green Retrofitting — A Review of Current Status, Implementations and Challenges.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 67, Jan. 2017, pp. 1360–1368., doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.091.

NRG Energy, Inc. “Carlsbad.” NRG Energy, NRG Inc , 2021, www.nrg.com/case-studies/carlsbad.html.

Puterski, Steve. “Webpage Footer for The Coast News Group.” The Coast News Group, 13 Dec. 2018, thecoastnews.com/after-64-years-encina-power-plant-goes-dark/.

“Recovery Through Retrofit: Saving Homeowners Money and Creating Jobs.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives and Records Administration, 2016, obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/retrofit#:~:text=It%20is%20currently%20being%20used,colleges%2C%20universities%20and%20international%20organizations.

Stone, Peter. “Destroying Cultural Heritage Is an Attack on Humanity’s Past and Present — It Must Be Prevented.” The Conversation, The Conversation , 23 Oct. 2020, theconversation.com/destroying-cultural-heritage-is-an-attack-on-humanitys-past-and-present-it-must-be-prevented-129412#:~:text=Those%20risks%20are%3A%20lack%20of,sites%2C%20enforced%20neglect%20and%20development.

Strategic Advisory Group. “Tourism Industry Study Prepared for the City of Carlsbad.” Carlsbad Tourism Business Improvement District , Jan. 2015.