“Every minute, a building in Europe is destroyed”
The EU wants millions of old buildings to be renovated. But frequently the opposite happens: existing houses are demolished and replaced by new builds. Exactly how many buildings are being torn down remains a blind spot. CORRECTIV wants to close this gap in the data.
Building demolitions cause a din and stir up clouds of dust – and yet, from a political standpoint, they remain largely invisible across Europe. “Currently there is no official data at EU-level on the number of buildings demolished,” the European Commission told CORRECTIV.Europe in response to an enquiry.
Yet demolitions and new constructions have serious consequences for the climate and nature, as well as for tenants. “The construction industry is driving the climate crisis, but it also plays a major role in the housing crisis that we have in Europe,” says Ciarán Cuffe, co-chair of the Green Party in the European Parliament, in response to an enquiry from CORRECTIV.Europe. “We are seeing too much needless demolition of buildings. These buildings could provide people with homes if we renovated them instead of demolishing them.”
Cuffe calls on the EU and its member states to provide better data in order “to get an overview of the extent of demolitions and also of the condition of our building stock in Europe. Only then will we be able to move away from demolitions and towards more renovations,” says Cuffe.
EU plans to renovate 35 million buildings by 2030
“The built environment”, according to a European Commission report, “is the single largest energy consumer in the EU. And one of the largest carbon dioxide emitters.” Overall, the EU’s building sector is responsible for 40 per cent of the bloc’s energy consumption and 36 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions, “which mainly stem from construction, usage, renovation and demolition.”
The construction industry releases huge amounts of greenhouse gases, particularly through the energy-intensive production of steel, concrete and other building materials. The German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) estimates that demolition and new construction alone emit 3.3 million tonnes of CO2 annually in Germany. Renovation could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a third. According to the DUH, there is a rule of thumb: “From an ecological point of view, it almost always makes sense to preserve an existing building and renovate it to make it more energy-efficient, rather than demolishing it to build a new, more energy-efficient building”.
When existing housing is demolished and rebuilt, it is often people with low incomes who lose their homes. At the same time, the cost of rent and heating rises. Research by CORRECTIV.Europe shows millions of people in Europe are freezing because they cannot afford to heat their homes.
Demolitions: the elephant in the room
The EU has identified renovations in the building sector as a central component of its sustainability strategy, anchored in the Green Deal. With its ‘renovation wave’, the EU aims to have 35 million buildings across Europe renovated for improved energy efficiency by 2030. Roofs and façades are to be insulated and old windows replaced with better insulated models. In addition, the supply of electricity and, above all, heating in the building sector is to be converted to renewable energy.
Time is ticking. Across Europe, nurseries, schools, hospitals and other parts of the public infrastructure are becoming increasingly dilapidated. Private homes and office buildings are also only getting older.
Renovation backlog jeopardising Europe’s climate targets
Surprisingly, however, one mass phenomenon is usually overlooked in the debate: demolition and new construction. According to the HouseEurope! campaign, instead of opting to renovate, hundreds of thousands of houses are demolished every year in Europe to be replaced by new buildings.
To date, three quarters of all buildings in Europe are “not energy efficient”, writes the EU Commission in its. “This means that a large part of the energy used goes to waste,” according to the Commission.
However, member states are lagging far behind the EU’s targets when it comes to building renovations. According to the European Commission, “on average, less than 1% of the national building stock is renovated each year.”However, the latest data on the renovation of European buildings, which allows a comparison between all EU countries, dates back to 2016. Estimates by the European Commission indicate that the figures in the member states currently vary between 0.4 and 1.2 percent.
Renovation rate needs to be tripled
According to the revised EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, “at the current pace, the decarbonisation of the building sector would require centuries.” To modernise the remaining 75 percent of European buildings in terms of energy efficiency by the middle of the century, the renovation rate would have to roughly triple from the current level of around one percent to three percent.
The industry association Efficient Buildings Europe has also been calling for such action since 2011. Under the slogan ‘Renovate Europe Campaign’, the lobby organisation brings together large corporations such as BASF and French building materials giant Saint-Gobain as well as window manufacturer Velux and the insulation division of the Knauf Group.
In a study, the industry association calculated how renovations affect the labour market. The study revealed that every million euros invested in improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings creates an average of 19 predominantly local jobs in the construction industry, thereby boosting “economic vibrancy in the EU”.
Renovation more sustainable than new construction
With the EU’s renovation targets still a long way off, extensive areas of existing housing continue to be demolished to make way for new buildings. However, the EU cannot say how many buildings are actually being demolished. “Registers of demolished structures are rare and non-harmonized,” revealed the EU Commission’s press office in response to an enquiry from CORRECTIV.Europe. “Only a few national statistical offices provide such data—and typically not publicly available in open datasets.”
CORRECTIV has therefore launched the Demolition Atlas Europe project together with media partners across the continent. Only when comprehensive data is available can the true extent and impact of demolition and new construction in Europe be quantified. In the Demolition Atlas Europe project, we work with citizens to collect information on demolished buildings or planned demolitions.
Demolition Atlas Europe: Where are buildings being demolished? Who are the winners and losers?
In most countries, demolition does not require a permit. According to estimates by the enivornmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), the number of unreported cases is therefore much higher than official figures suggest. In most other European countries, too, there is a lack of accurate and, above all, local figures on building demolition.
To close this gap, CORRECTIV is working with citizens to document the demolitions of building: initially focussed on Switzerland and Germany, the Demolition Atlas Europe project is designed to cover demolitions across the continent by collaborating with partner media, starting in Greece where CORRECTIV.Europe has partnered with investigative newsroom Solomon.
Using CORRECTIV’s CrowdNewsroom tool, citizens can send us information about demolished buildings or planned demolitions – simply by creating a new entry on our map.
The German version of Demolition Atlas is supported by a number of associations and institutions. These include environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe and the non-profit Architects for Future. Both have long been calling for a rethink: renovation instead of demolition.
The Architects for Future association is one of the initiators of the HouseEurope! campaign, which is also raising this demand at European level with a petition. This text features architect Olaf Grawert, one of the initiators of the HouseEurope! campaign.
In spring this year, the citizens’ initiative HouseEurope! took stock of the demolition frenzy. The result of their calculations: “Every minute, a building in Europe is destroyed”.
If this trend continues, two billion square metres of living space will be destroyed in Europe by the middle of the century, according to the campaign’s calculations. This corresponds to around half of the total living space available in Germany. “Instead, we will have built billions of square meters of new space as a replacement for what was already there,” warn the campaign’s initiators.
Campaign calls for less demolition and more renovation
While a select few people profit from this mass demolition, the general public pays the price – “with rising rents and rising temperatures,” according to the HouseEurope! campaign website. Architect Olaf Grawert is one of the initiators of the campaign. The 38-year-old Austrian native, who most recently taught at ETH Zurich, lives in Berlin. From his desk, he can see a row of prefabricated buildings in the Lichtenberg district, which is part of the former East Berlin. After reunification of the city, many buildings here stood empty and began to fall into disrepair. The architectural firm of which Olaf Grawert is a partner wanted to demonstrate that even such ruins could not only be saved, but also put to good use – “as long as profit is not the only consideration,” says Grawert.
Converting office buildings into living space
The choice fell on an old factory in Lichtenberg. “After the fall of the Berlin Wall, no one was interested in the site, and the factory fell into disrepair,” recalls Grawert. “Only the two concrete towers remained standing because demolition would have been too expensive and time-consuming”. Today, the former silo tower houses a workshop, an archive and workrooms where young designers and craftsmen experiment with new forms of construction and renovation.
“There are many other projects that are implementing what we have in mind,” emphasises Grawert. “For example, converting office buildings and warehouses into residential properties, but also converting detached houses that would otherwise have been demolished”.
“There is a big incentive for investors to demolish buildings”
Most people are still largely unaware of the consequences of demolition and new construction, says Grawert. “The fundamental problem is hidden – and it’s totally fascinating why no one talks about it,” he says. “People think we demolish buildings because they are old and in poor condition, but that’s not true at all. The reason they are demolished is often quite different: profit”.
Grawert cites the example of an almost empty residential building in Berlin’s Friedrichshain district: The owners, a real estate company from Luxembourg, are allowing the building to fall into disrepair. “They see the profit that awaits after demolition and new construction, and have no interest in renovating,” opines Grawert. “Not only are there no incentives, but there are also no consequences for not taking the responsibility and obligation that comes with ownership seriously”.
According to management consultancy firm McKinsey, almost half of global capital flows into real estate and building land. Residential buildings in particular are sought-after investment properties, according to real estate consultancy firm Savillis: around three-quarters of global investment in the real estate business is in residential buildings – corresponding to almost £250 trillion.
Grawert is critical of these figures, however, and believes they dramatically exceed the real value of the properties. Even if the developer had high investment costs, demolition and new construction would result in a lucrative increase in value, he explains. Often, the land alone is worth more than the building on it. When existing residential buildings are demolished to be replaced by new ones, significantly higher rents can be charged. “The increased profit expectations alone, due to the anticipated rise in rents, increase the value of the property on paper many times over,” says Grawert. “The fictitious building value allows investors to borrow even more money from banks. So there is a big incentive for investors to demolish buildings and erect new ones”.
Three specific proposals for more renovation and conversion instead of demolition
The non-profit initiative HouseEurope! has formulated three specific proposals to ensure more buildings in Europe are renovated and converted – and fewer demolished. To give weight to these demands, the initiative is collecting signatures from citizens across Europe. The initiators want to present these proposals to the European Parliament with an appeal to transform their demands into real legislation.
“We are calling for tax breaks on all materials and labour involved in renovations,” says Grawert. “We know that this works because some countries and local authorities are already doing it”. He cites Italy, France, Belgium and Luxembourg as examples. “If I renovate an apartment in France in a sustainable manner, for example, the labour and materials for the renovation cost 15 percent less than the work involved in a new build”. In addition, subsidies that currently go towards new construction should be redirected towards renovations of existing buildings.
Craftspeople prefer renovations to new construction
In general, money tends to flow into labour in the case of renovations and into materials in the case of new construction, according to Grawert. “Local businesses earn more from renovations and conversions than from new construction. It requires more thought and skill”. This is why craftsmen can charge higher fees, which in turn increases the value of their workers, Grawert emphasises. “Conversions don’t cost more or less than new builds – the money is simply spent differently”.
In fact, a survey of tradespeople in Germany found that almost 80 percent of respondents prefer renovation work to new builds. The results of the survey, published in the ‘Baukultur Report’ by the German Federal Foundation for Building Culture, provide further interesting insights: Most companies already generate the majority of their turnover – more than 70 percent – from conversions and renovations. Just 15 percent of respondents said they believed new construction would be particularly important for their company in the next ten years, whereas 85 percent saw their future in conversions and renovations of existing buildings.
“How do we choose which buildings to protect?“
The HouseEurope! initiative also calls for uniform standards across Europe for assessing existing buildings. “We must not view old buildings as ruins, but as potential assets,” says Grawert. With listed buildings, it is usually the other way around. For Grawert, this raises a pivotal question: “How do we choose which buildings to protect?“
Compared to financing for a new build, it is more difficult to obtain a bank loan for a renovation project, criticises Grawert. When granting loans, banks usually only see risks rather than the potential of the existing building stock. This is why financing for new construction is currently cheap, while renovations are comparatively expensive. “And yet, renovations are still being carried out because they pay off,” says Grawert. “But it would be even better if we also strengthened, equalised and promoted renovations and conversions by law.”
A price tag for grey energy
Thirdly, HouseEurope! is calling for a price tag for the energy lost and emissions released when a building is demolished. “Every building contains a lot of energy and CO2,” explains Grawert. The technical term for this is grey energy. “But so far, this energy tied up in existing buildings has no value,” Grawert laments. “Anyone who demolishes an existing building and wastes and discards the energy it contains should pay for it,” he argues. In many cases, this would make renovation cheaper than demolition and new construction.
Grawert and HouseEurope! are not alone in calling for greater consideration to be given to grey energy in existing buildings. Even one of Europe’s largest financial services providers, Deutsche Bank, in it’s 2023 report titled ‘Residential Real Estate – Leading to Net Zero’ stated: “We believe that in the future, investments may consider the amount of embodied emissions for construction of a building.”
Some EU countries are leading the way
According to a legal opinion (German original) conducted last year on behalf of the German Federal Agency for Energy Efficiency, “scientists and environmental organisations agree that manufacturing emissions must also be taken into account in building design”.
The report also lists several European countries that have already presented definitive plans or even introduced mandatory regulations for conducting comprehensive life cycle assessments in the building sector: in Denmark, France, the Netherlands and Sweden, corresponding obligations are already in force, and Finland plans to follow suit before the end of 2025.
Olaf Grawert anticipates binding CO2 pricing for existing buildings throughout Europe. “That is exactly what will happen soon,” he says, referring to the revised EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD). In fact, the Directive stipulates that from 2028 onwards, emissions from construction as well as those generated from the manfucaturing of the materials used in construction must be included in the climate balance sheet for new buildings. In addition, the EPBD calls on member states to also record the grey energy of their existing buildings in future.
German Ministry of Economics remains tight-lipped about renovation strategy
To ensure more renovations are carried out more quickly across Europe, all member states are required to transpose the guidelines laid out in Brussels by the EPBD into national law by the end of May 2026. In Germany, the Federal Ministry of Economics is responsible for this. However, when asked by CORRECTIV.Europe exactly how the federal government intends to implement the new guidelines from Brussels, the Ministry remained tight-lipped: “We ask for your understanding that we cannot provide any further details at this time due to ongoing work,” said a spokeswoman for the ministry. She emphasised that “the building sector makes an important contribution to achieving climate targets”. However, she added that “the coalition agreement calls for a more technology-neutral, flexible and simpler building energy law”. In Germany, at least, a genuine shift in construction policy – away from demolition and towards more renovation – does not seem to be on the cards.
Credits
Text & Investigation: Marius Münstermann
Editing: Elena Kolb
Data viualisation: Luc Martinon
Fact-checking: Elena Kolb
This investigation was supported by JournalismFund Europe.
