> In 20 years they would be money ahead by tearing down most buildings on campus and rebuilding to modern standards - assuming energy costs don't go up which seems unlikely) But they consider all those old buildings historic and so won't.
It has nothing to do with considering those building historic.
The problem is unless someone wants to donate a $50-100M, new buildings don't happen. And big donors want to donate to massive causes "Build a new building to cure cancer!" not "This building is kind of crappy, let's replace it with a better one".
It doesn't matter that over 50 years something could be cheaper if there's no money to fix it now.
It has nothing to do with considering those building historic.
The problem is unless someone wants to donate a $50-100M, new buildings don't happen. And big donors want to donate to massive causes "Build a new building to cure cancer!" not "This building is kind of crappy, let's replace it with a better one".
It doesn't matter that over 50 years something could be cheaper if there's no money to fix it now.