Building for sustainability | Dispelling the myths
Building for sustainability extends beyond reducing carbon emissions or specifying materials with lower environmental impact. It requires a whole-life approach that considers the relationship between building fabric, energy demand, material selection, occupant wellbeing and future adaptability. Decisions made during the early design stages can have a lasting influence on operational performance, durability and overall environmental impact.
Despite growing recognition of the need for a more sustainable built environment, misconceptions remain around cost, architectural design and the potential to upgrade existing buildings.
In this article, some of the Henriksen Studio team take the time to examine several common myths - while explaining how an integrated, performance-led approach can deliver better outcomes for both people and the environment.
Myth 1: Sustainable buildings are expensive and compromise on design
Improved environmental performance does not have to come at the expense of architectural quality or affordability. Integrating sustainability requirements from the outset allows project teams to evaluate design options, understand their implications and identify opportunities to optimise performance and cost.
Viola Allen, Senior Passivhaus Designer at Henriksen Studio, explains:
“Sustainability isn’t only about the environment. It’s about the wellbeing and future of humanity. There are still many misconceptions around it: that sustainability is too expensive, reserved only for large corporations, or that it means compromising on quality or convenience. In reality, true sustainability is about smarter design, long-term value, and creating buildings that enhance both human comfort and environmental performance.”
Evaluating sustainability across a building’s lifecycle, rather than focusing solely on initial capital expenditure, provides a more complete understanding of value. Measures that reduce heat loss and energy demand can lower operational consumption and running costs, while attention to thermal comfort and indoor environmental conditions supports occupant wellbeing.
For Warren Stanley, Associate Passivhaus Designer at Henriksen Studio, sustainability can also drive better architectural design.
“A common misconception is that sustainability automatically means an aesthetic compromise. In reality, good design - when considered from the outset - can be both cost-effective and architecturally refined. Sustainability is a constraint that sharpens design, not dulls it.”
Environmental performance influences building form, facade configuration, glazing ratios, solar control and material specification. These elements are interdependent: glazing, for example, affects daylight, heat loss, solar gains and overheating risk. Assessing them together enables designers to balance architectural intent with measurable performance objectives.
For Adam Pollonais, Associate Facade Project Lead at Henriksen Studio, it is the interfaces, which play a significant role in a project's overall success, which often get overlooked:
"We naturally spend a lot of time designing the individual elements of a building, but many of the most difficult problems occur in the spaces between them, where one facade system meets another, or where the envelope meets the structure, roof, waterproofing or fire strategy.
"I think the same is true beyond the physical detail. There are interfaces between disciplines, responsibilities, information and different stages of a project. Often the individual parts have all been designed perfectly well; the problem is that nobody has fully considered what happens between them.
"That is why coordination shouldn’t just be something that happens after design. The dialogue between disciplines is part of the design."
Sustainability should therefore inform design development from the beginning, rather than being treated as an additional requirement late in the process. It is also important to ensure that all of the different elements work together from the beginning – from both a construction and a design perspective.
Myth 2: Sustainable performance is only achievable in new-build projects
Although new-build projects offer opportunities to integrate performance requirements from the outset, existing buildings also have significant potential for improvement. Retrofitting can reduce operational energy demand, improve comfort and extend a building’s useful life, while retaining materials and potentially avoiding the embodied carbon associated with demolition and replacement.
Jocelyne Hilal, Junior Facade Designer at Henriksen Studio, advocates a retrofit-first approach.
“A common misconception is that sustainable building performance is strictly a new-build luxury. However, we can make a massive impact simply by optimising existing envelopes. We can meet modern-day standards without wiping away historic character.”
Replacing an existing building can involve substantial material extraction, manufacturing, transport and construction works. Retention and refurbishment should therefore be assessed as part of a whole-life carbon strategy, taking account of the building’s condition, intended use, heritage significance and constraints.
The facade is often a key focus of retrofit investigations. Improvements may include upgrading insulation and glazing, reducing uncontrolled air leakage and addressing thermal bridges. However, interventions must be assessed in the context of the existing construction, as changes to insulation and airtightness can affect moisture movement, condensation risk and ventilation requirements.
A robust retrofit strategy requires an understanding of how the building envelope performs, where energy losses occur and how proposed measures will interact. For heritage buildings, this must also be balanced with preserving architectural character and significant fabric.
A retrofit-first mindset encourages clients and designers to explore appropriate opportunities for retention and adaptation, before committing to demolition and replacement.
Myth 3: Recycling alone is enough to make a building sustainable
Recycling supports responsible resource management, but circularity requires a broader approach to how buildings and their components are designed, maintained, adapted and eventually dismantled. Reducing material demand, extending service life and designing for disassembly and reuse can help retain material value and reduce reliance on resources.
For facade systems, designing components to be accessible, maintainable, demountable and suitable for future reuse can reduce replacement requirements and preserve material value. This involves considering connection methods, material compatibility, access for maintenance and whether components can be recovered without damage.
The importance of adaptability is emphasized by Warren Stanley:
“Buildings that can evolve with minimal intervention, through demountable systems, generous floor-to-ceiling heights, or service voids, will outlast more rigid, resource-intensive structures and reduce the need for carbon-heavy retrofits.”
Adaptability must be considered from the earliest design stages. Buildings that accommodate changing uses, occupancy patterns and technologies are better positioned to remain functional over time. At facade level, this may mean enabling individual components to be replaced or upgraded without extensive intervention across the wider system.
According to Lama El Ayache, Senior Facade Engineer at Henriksen Studio, for a project to be truly successful, all the main pillars of sustainability must be successfully balanced.
"The main pillars of environmental, social and economic sustainability must be balanced. In construction, this means reducing carbon and waste as well as creating healthy and safe spaces for people, and making sure the design is durable and financially practical."
Building for sustainability therefore means considering the full lifecycle of materials and components, designing out unnecessary waste and supporting longer service lives, rather than relying on recycling alone.
Myth 4: Sustainability is achieved through technology alone
Renewable energy generation, efficient building services and lower-impact materials can all improve building performance. However, their effectiveness depends on the wider design strategy. Technology should complement a building fabric that minimises unnecessary energy demand, rather than compensate for avoidable deficiencies in the envelope.
Insulation, airtightness and thermal bridge management help reduce heat loss and maintain stable internal temperatures. Glazing specification, orientation and solar control must also balance daylight and useful solar gains against overheating risk.
Viola Allen reinforces the importance of the building envelope.
“Optimising the building’s thermal envelope through high-quality insulation and airtightness provides the foundation for true energy efficiency, maximising the impact of all other sustainable measures.”
Demand reduction should therefore be central to sustainable building design. Building physics analysis can help project teams evaluate how building form, orientation, insulation, glazing, shading and ventilation influence energy requirements before determining the specification of building services and renewable energy systems.
However, design alone does not determine performance. Installation quality, commissioning, maintenance and occupant behaviour all influence how effectively a building operates.
Clear operational guidance, intuitive controls and responsible approaches to water use and waste can complement design measures. Where appropriate, monitoring and verification can identify differences between predicted and actual performance, informing future improvements.
Making sustainability part of every design decision
Building for sustainability is not defined by a single intervention, material or specification. It depends on interconnected decisions that influence environmental impact, energy use, occupant comfort, durability and adaptability throughout a building’s lifecycle.
Maria Cipriani, Facade Consultant at Henriksen Studio, emphasises the importance of early consideration.
“I would encourage designers and architects to prioritise sustainable practices from the very beginning of a project. This could involve selecting low-impact materials, designing for energy efficiency, or considering the building’s full life cycle. Even small decisions made at the outset can have a significant impact on long-term sustainability.”
Early collaboration allows environmental and performance requirements to shape the wider design strategy before key decisions become difficult or costly to change.
Considering material selection, facade configuration, thermal performance and future adaptability together helps teams understand the implications of individual choices.
For building envelope design, this means ensuring that details support the intended performance of the overall system. Junctions, interfaces and penetrations require particular attention, as deficiencies can undermine airtightness, thermal continuity, moisture control and durability.
Robust detailing, appropriate material selection and a clear understanding of how components interact are essential. Design calculations and modelling can inform specifications, while inspection and testing help establish whether the completed building achieves the required outcomes.
Ultimately, building for sustainability requires an integrated, evidence-led approach that moves beyond assumptions and considers performance throughout the building lifecycle.
How Henriksen Studio supports sustainable building performance
At Henriksen Studio, we take a performance-led approach to facade engineering, building physics and Passivhaus design. We help project teams understand how the building envelope influences energy demand, thermal comfort, moisture risk, indoor environmental conditions and long-term durability.
For new-build projects, we integrate performance requirements into design development, considering how the building fabric interacts with ventilation, heating and cooling systems. For existing buildings, we assess envelope condition and performance to identify opportunities for improvement, taking account of technical constraints and architectural objectives.
By bringing technical analysis and architectural intent together, we help project teams evaluate design options, address performance risks and make informed decisions about a building’s wider lifecycle. Our aim is to support buildings that are designed to perform well and are capable of maintaining that performance in practice.
At Henriksen Studio, it is our belief that sustainable buildings are not defined by a single technology or material. They result from integrated design, careful detailing, appropriate verification and a commitment to performance that extends beyond practical completion.
Find out more about Henriksen Studio and our approach to facade engineering, building physics and Passivhaus consultancy.
