P r e – E x i s t e n c e s a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l S u s t a i n a b i l i t y
565
The results clearly shows that, although a debate about “sustainable recovery” is still
complex, time is ripe to consciously address the building heritage, revising a range of
artefacts that have been abandoned, looking at them as unexploited resources. In fact a
recovery intervention consent to calibrate the thermal resistance of vertical and
horizontal enclosures introducing new functional layer, the aim of intervention is to
integrate the preexistence with compatible material and also preserve the architectural
morphology.
This simple observation gains in renewed value when contextualized in territories such
as Sicilian, which more than others is now paying the price of ambiguous economic
policies with its artefacts and abandoned areas, which extend along a broad spatial and
temporal front. This building heritage assumes the characteristic of a potential resource
to be preserved - thinking about materials and energies employed in its realization, as a
potential way for saving natural resources - if its use is considered instead of further
processes of urbanization and construction; and finally as a potential instrument for
production and optimization of natural resources - if the distribution of artefacts in the
territory is taken into account, especially in the Sicilian inland.
References
MALIGHETTI L. E., 2004, Recupero edilizio e sostenibilità, Il contributo delle tecnologie
bioclimatiche alla riqualificazione funzionale degli edifici residenziali collettivi,Il sole 24
ore, Milano.
Roof - After intervention
Thickness
[ ]
m
Thermal conductivity λ
mK
W
R
W
Km
2
Tavella
0.080
0.360
0.222
Light concrete
0.075
0.050
1.500
Insulating panel
0.080
0.040
2.000
Plaster
0.020
0.750
0.027
Rse - External thermal
resistivity
0.040
Rsi - Internal thermal
resistivity
0.100
R - Global thermal
resistivity
3.889
U
adm
0.300
U
0.257
Table 4: Roof transmittance - U<U
adm
