Fully decarbonising the electricity system by 2035 is central to delivering Net Zero in the UK.[1] With buildings responsible for over 60% of the UK’s national electricity demand[2], the built environment industry has a critical role to play in achieving this target, and the way electricity is procured for our buildings can accelerate our transition to a reliable, resilient, and zero carbon grid.

Launched today, new guidance from UKGBC on Renewable Energy Procurement seeks to empower stakeholders tasked with procuring energy in the built environment to do so in a way that enables them to realise their climate ambition, while supporting the continued decarbonisation of the electricity supply sector. Across a suite of guidance documents, UKGBC’s new series of reports gives industry the tools to make more informed procurement decisions. Key aspects within the guidance include:

• Three principles for good quality renewable electricity procurement – Renewable, Additionality and Time-matched – along with actions to meet these principles. The best electricity procurement approaches will seek to maximise the extent to which they respond to these three principles.
• A toolkit to better engage with your energy supplier and source the information needed to compare the procurement routes available to you in the market.
• A rating system for assessing the performance of a building or organisation’s overall electricity strategy, including electricity procured from off site, as well as any onsite generation, demand management, and storage.
• A summary of procurement routes available in the market, with more detailed information on many of the Power Purchase Agreement variants, as well as some of the factors that may affect an organisation’s ability to engage with certain procurement options.

The guidance highlights the urgent need for greater collaboration between customers and their energy suppliers, as well as for more transparency and better-quality information from suppliers about their products, to enable customers to make informed decisions about how and where they source their electricity. UKGBC also outlines why market evolution is needed to incentivise building owners to operate their assets with greater flexibility, to minimise operational emissions whilst supporting a grid increasingly powered by intermittent wind and solar.

Ultimately, the guidance provides the tools stakeholders need to effectively navigate the electricity procurement landscape and ensure the way they buy their power meaningfully supports the essential decarbonisation needed from our energy supply sector.

UKGBC’s Head of Climate Action, Yetunde Abdul said:

Decarbonising the electricity system is a top priority for achieving Net Zero. Critical to enabling this, is understanding the active role our buildings and the way we procure energy must play. However, distinguishing the high-quality products that are supporting the energy system’s transition from the other ‘green’ offerings in the market is currently challenging.

Our guidance provides industry with the much-needed tools to better understand their procurement options, benchmark the performance of their building’s electricity strategy, and effectively engage with energy suppliers to make more informed decisions. We strongly believe the collective voice of built environment stakeholders demanding more from their energy suppliers will be a powerful mechanism for driving change in the energy procurement sector and improve the product offering for the entire industry.

CBRE’s Associate Director – Renewable Energy, Rebekah Needham said:

This fantastic new guidance brings long-needed clarity and transparency to the electricity market and CBRE is pleased to have supported this important work. Moving towards a decarbonised electricity system and the procurement of renewable energy is a collective responsibility, since the procurement decisions made by one party – such as a landlord or occupier – can directly impact the decarbonisation progress made by the other. All those within real estate must be aligned and working towards the same net zero goal if we are to guarantee a successful transition.”

This guidance is primarily intended to support those procuring energy on behalf of businesses or commercial buildings, rather than domestic customers (i.e., corporate procurement). It can also be applicable to anyone involved in the design, delivery, or operation of a building and will be useful for energy systems designers, renewable energy generators, and energy brokers/suppliers.

This project forms part of UKGBC’s Advancing Net Zero Programme, which has been made possible this year thanks to the generous support of our Programme Partners: BAM Construct UK, Berkeley Group, Buro Happold, CBRE, Grosvenor Property UK, Hoare Lea, ISG, JLL, Lloyds Bank, ROCKWOOL UK, Turner & Townsend, and Project Partners: Ampersand, Landsec, Low Carbon Alliance, Macfarlanes and Stanhope.

[1] Climate Change Committee (2023), Delivering a reliable decarbonised power system. Available here: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/delivering-a-reliable-decarbonised-power-system/

[2] National Grid ESO’s Future Energy Scenarios 2022

The post Energy procurement is a critical factor in achieving Net Zero in the UK appeared first on UKGBC.

Circular economy design principles have been largely developed but still we find these concepts difficult to implement. For the designer to implement circular economy concepts there may be a need to change in how we structure our projects, how we procure the materials and how process and classify reclaimed materials. Rather than looking at this enabler in isolation, we need to take more of a systems approach, taking into account other enablers for circularity as well.  

As a forum, we identified three key barriers that need to be overcome so that the circular design principles can be embraced across the industry. Currently, there is a lack of communication and early engagement which hinders the implementation of circular concepts. It has been frequently stated that the earlier we implement these concepts, the more we get out of these processes. Leading on from that, time and logistics usually force circularity out of our projects, with the impression that circularity increases programme. By understanding the concepts further and allowing for these processes to be baked into the programme will ensure an appropriate amount of time is allowed to ensure materials are retained and reused. The final area that we have addressed is the lack of storage and information of reclaimed materials, which has been underdeveloped and allows for little understanding of appropriate materials available at early design concepts. By looking at the constraints of these concepts we hope to outline the issues and possible solutions to ensure design concepts are implemented and circularity is increased in projects.

Lack of Collaboration / Early engagement

An early collaborative approach must be considered to communicate and explore the opportunities to implement circular principles by sharing designs, experiences and circumstances that encourage a circular approach.

Lack of collaboration or early engagement can lead to missed opportunities to incorporate circular economy principles, resulting in a linear approach to building design and construction. There are several stakeholders, such as contractors, that may not be involved in the early design stages that restrains the implementation of circular economy principles in the design of a project. This is because there is usually a knowledge gap between the designers and contractors. 

Solution: Therefore, an early collaborative approach must be considered to communicate and explore the opportunities to implement circular principles by sharing designs, experiences and circumstances that encourage a circular approach, highlighting the need for education across the industry. 

Learn more about Collaboration and Early Engagement here.

Timing and Logistics

Additionally, logistics and program timing can pose several challenges when implementing circular economy strategies, as they require changes in early design stages, supply chain management, delivery and production methods. This includes reverse logistics for collecting and processing waste and recycling processes, demolition is considered cheaper and faster than taking a construction apart piece by piece. 

Solution: Multiple stakeholders can take multiple actions to improve the logistics and reduce the timing of projects. For example, the design team can identify areas where a standardised modular design approach could improve efficiency in construction to potentially reduce the programme time; contractors can propose modern construction solutions and produce an early forecast on construction programs once they have collaboration and early engagement in the design to reduce waste and improve the circularity of the project. As a result, manufacturers can identify early in the process any factor that may impact the logistics of the project, as the lead times for the production of material that contain secondary content.

Aligning a multi disciplinary team on a project at the start gives the opportunity to identify potential for optimisation, effectiveness and embed circular practices deeper into the design – Designing buildings and infrastructure that are adaptable, flexible and durable, allowing them to be easily repurposed, disassembled or reused in the future. Multidisciplinary teams can maximise the benefits of Design for Manufacture and Assembly (DfMA) by bringing manufacturing, assembly and logistics knowledge upstream in the project to assess criteria such as buildability, standardisation and modularity. This will help to ensure that the construction and production phase of the project are well planned and executed efficiently. 

Lack of storage and information of reclaimed materials

To overcome the shortage of storage of secondary materials, with the efforts of developers, national governments, and local authorities, ‘reuse hubs’ can be an affordable solution to deconstructed materials to be stored and remanufactured to perform as a secondary materials market.

Although there is growing aspirational trend for the use of reclaimed material from demolition waste in the built environment, it comes with challenges such as storage of these materials and associated costs; attaining guarantees or warranties on such materials due to lack of standardisation and difficulties in verifying their quality; and limited understanding of reclaimed materials such as the materials’ origin, lifecycle, and technical properties, etc. which can pose as a risk to other stakeholders such as contractors and clients.

Solution: Several solutions can be adopted to mitigate these barriers to implementing circular economy principles. To overcome the shortage of storage of secondary materials, with the efforts of developers, national governments, and local authorities, ‘reuse hubs’ can be an affordable solution to deconstructed materials to be stored and remanufactured to perform as a secondary materials market.

Using digital solutions, such as material passports, to act as a tool by accumulating building materials’ information to provide more credibility on existing materials for future procurement on the secondary materials market. Moreover, digital solutions can also connect multiple stakeholders to indicate the availability of these recovered materials on the secondary market.

At a macro level, the industry would benefit with a legislative body that mandates and governs manufacturers to enhance the level of detail of their data sheets. These documents may include details like recycled content, carbon impact, end-of-life scenarios, etc. which will assist design teams to make better-informed decisions to facilitate the principles of circular economy.

Additionally, by establishing standardised warranty and certification programs for recovered materials with the help of other stakeholders in the industry, circular economy principles can be met to prolong the value of materials by ensuring businesses to incorporate the use of secondary material in their projects.

Associated costs do play a crucial role, however, there needs to be a different way of thinking, and investment mechanisms and green financing to enable scale for teams and specifiers. The implementation of circular economy design principles has a massive potential of tackling climate crises if implemented on a mass scale, however, the current challenge is to implement it on a project-to-project basis.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while Circular Economy Design principles are pivotal for sustainable resource management, it is crucial to recognize that their successful implementation cannot occur in isolation. The UKGBC’s report on “Systems Enablers for Circular Economy” highlights in more detail the intricate web of interconnected factors that shape successful circularity. 

By recognising the mutually beneficial relationship between Circular Economy Design principles and other critical enablers, designers and architects are invited to take on this challenge. Professionals can find tailored actions for stakeholders at every level by diving deeper into the insights provided in the UKGBC’s Systems Enablers report. This collective effort will drive collaborative progress, advancing Circular Economy in the Built Environment and forging a more sustainable future.

This blog was written by members of UKGBC’s Circular Economy Forum. Would you be interested in joining the forum? It’s open to any UKGBC member with expertise in circular economy.

If you want to learn more about the enablers for a circular economy, you can join our new learning webinar on 5th September that will explore the findings of the System Enablers report.

Circular Economy

The built environment needs to move away from the linear economy and embrace circularity. This will reduce waste, carbon emissions and our impact on the natural world.

View more

Circular Economy Forum Partners

The Circular Economy Forum is generously support by our 3 partners who make this industry leading work possible,

The post Embracing Circular Economy Design principles and interconnected enablers for Sustainability appeared first on UKGBC.

Simon brings cross-sector leadership experience to the Hub’s goals of creating retrofit infrastructure and developing the UK’s marketplace while representing UKGBC at the heart of our shared mission to upgrade homes across the UK.  

Reflecting on his appointment, Simon said: 

“UKGBC’s members and partners know that retrofitting our homes at scale and speed is absolutely critical to delivering on our net zero future while permanently slashing bills and stimulating the UK’s green economy. The National Retrofit Hub will fill a longstanding missing piece of the puzzle of solving our national housing retrofit crisis. 

“From the heart of this crucial national endeavour, I’m looking forward to championing what UKGBC members want and need from the Hub and helping to unlock the full-speed action on retrofit that is so urgently needed across the UK.”

Lynne Sullivan, Chair of the National Retrofit Hub Board, shared her thoughts on this development:  

Simon’s active engagement across the industry mirrors the collaborative ethos that defines our mission at the Hub.  This appointment comes at an instrumental time as we are rapidly building progress at the Hub; our working group activity is in full swing with our first outputs due in the Autumn, a new website and branding will soon to be unveiled, and we have a growing group of partners and sponsors. We are actively seeking to consolidate expertise across all retrofit sectors within our board, to ensure we cover all areas that require focus.  

Drawing from Simon’s experience within groups like the Scottish Government’s Green Heat Finance Task Force, the West Midlands Combined Authority’s Future Homes Taskforce and the UK government’s Energy Efficiency Task Force will help us to ensure that we consider the conditions needed to scale retrofit from the many different local contexts that exist throughout the length and breadth of the UK. This appointment will also help us make stronger connections with the work of the UKGBC, where Simon plays a leading role. We look forward to sharing where we have got to so far with Simon and gaining his advice and guidance on the routes forward.” 

More information about the National Retrofit Hub is available here.  

Home Retrofit

With time running out to keep global temperatures to 1.5 degrees, upgrading the nation’s homes is one of the biggest opportunities the UK has to reduce carbon emissions whilst tackling the cost-of-living crisis, energy security and levelling up.

View more

The post Simon McWhirter joins National Retrofit Hub as Board member  appeared first on UKGBC.

What is a carbon handprint and how does it differ from a carbon footprint?

Simply put, a carbon handprint measures the positive impact of a product on the environment, while a carbon footprint measures the negative impact (absolute greenhouse gas emissions) of a product on the environment.

Simply put, a carbon handprint measures the positive impact of a product on the environment, while a carbon footprint measures the negative impact (absolute greenhouse gas emissions) of a product on the environment.

You might think that a carbon handprint is just “the opposite” of a carbon footprint, but their distinction is a bit more complex. One of the core differences is that a carbon footprint focuses on the absolute emissions associated with an organisation’s product or activity, whereas a carbon handprint refers to the positive impact (emission reductions) that said organisation’s product has on the carbon footprint of others.

VTT, the Technical Research Centre of Finland, defines both handprint and carbon handprint separately:

“A handprint refers to the beneficial environmental impacts that organisations can achieve and communicate by offering products and services that reduce the footprints of others.”

“A carbon handprint is the reduction of the carbon footprint of others.”

It’s also important to note that a carbon handprint is not an absolute value and cannot be directly evaluated against a carbon footprint. A carbon handprint is a relative value measured by comparing the impact of the baseline product to that of a new alternative, i.e. the emissions resulting from the current product or system compared to a different one. Such a comparison tells us how much better one product or service can be for the climate over another.

Why focus on carbon handprint?

Understanding your carbon handprint offers you a different perspective on the environmental impact of your company. For example, while it’s true that electronics manufacturers rely on a complex, resource-intensive supply chain to create their products, it’s also true that many of these companies are creating truly impactful solutions that contribute to sustainable development.

In the case of some industries, understanding the carbon handprint of an offering can provide the company with an additional focus area in its sustainability strategy. Ultimately, measuring carbon handprint can help to answer the question of “How is my company helping society to meet climate targets?”.

The most practical way to improve your carbon handprint is to invest in solutions that improve (energy) efficiency or reduce reliance on unsustainable practices, or, in other words, solutions that can help your end customer to reduce their carbon footprint.

Companies can also consider engaging in educational campaigns to boost the awareness and adoption of such solutions among their stakeholders, which could impact the carbon handprint of said company as well as the overall industry.

Raising awareness of the concept of a carbon handprint in general could also be highly beneficial in reaching wider climate goals. With a keener understanding of the concept, companies could better compare and assign resources to maximise their positive impact. Collaboration with other organisations, NGOs, and local communities, for example, could be a great avenue for sharing the message.

What does carbon handprint mean for Helvar?

Helvar are a UKGBC member who provide intelligent lighting solutions for customers around the world. In the smart building industry, lighting solutions can have a strong carbon handprint by improving the overall energy efficiency of a building. In fact, by combining ultra-efficient lighting components, intelligent controls and a digital services platform into an interconnected ‘end-to-end’ solution, Helvar is in a unique position to impact on the sustainability of buildings around the world.

As an example of the impact of lighting controls, we can look to Helvar’s solution for the Allander Leisure Centre in Bearsden, Scotland. Helvar’s intelligent lighting management system provided control over all lighting within the facility, ensuring efficient operation and significant energy conservation. Because the system can now adjust the lighting based on real-time occupancy and available natural light, massive savings are achieved compared to a traditional “on-off” lighting system which operates at a fixed output level. “Helvar’s solutions perfectly aligned with the project’s requirements for creating adaptable lighting environments while maximising energy efficiency” explained Raymund McGrath, Regional Manager, Helvar. 

For the end user, intelligent lighting controls vastly reduce the amount of energy that is wasted and thus their Scope 2 emissions. In other words, by implementing intelligent solutions and reducing their customers’ energy consumption and resulting carbon footprint, Helvar positively impacts the environment through a growing carbon handprint. As such, Helvar’s carbon handprint is truly a core part of the company!

Calculating carbon handprint

In practice, there is no standardised way to calculate a carbon handprint. In Helvar’s case, to evaluate their carbon handprint in the form of saved electricity, they analysed the annual sales of their dimmable drivers and sensors and the corresponding yearly energy savings at the locations where they are utilised.

It’s good to note that the main energy production methods can vary between specific countries or even regions, which can impact both foot- and handprint calculations.

In the case of the United Kingdom, where nearly 40% of energy is generated from fossil fuels, the carbon handprint of any one solution may be higher than say in Finland, where a considerable portion of the energy comes from renewable or nuclear sources. As an example, a study in Finland found that a luminaire’s carbon handprint in the use stage is 5 times greater than its footprint from the manufacturing stage, when it is equipped with a dimmable driver and uses proper lighting controls. Using these calculations it can be concluded that in the UK, because of a different energy mix, the same solution would provide a handprint that is 8 times greater than its footprint.

Conclusion

Although novel and lacking standardisation when it comes to its measurement, the concept of a carbon handprint can be a critically important factor for prioritisation in R&D and solution portfolios, helping companies to focus on opportunities where they can create the biggest positive impact on the planet (while continuing to improve their own operations).

Helvar are a UKGBC member who create intelligent and energy-saving lighting solutions. Learn more about what it means to be a UKGBC member here.

Climate Commitments

Our UKGBC members are on a journey to achieving net zero, reducing their greenhouse emissions in the face of the climate crisis. Our members have made a climate commitment, what is yours?

View more

The post What’s a carbon handprint? Understanding your organisation’s positive impact appeared first on UKGBC.

The transition to clean energy is urgently needed and inevitable. At consecutive COP meetings, we are yet to see the necessary leap forwards that will keep global temperature rises within the science-based 1.5°C target. At COP27, the conference concluded with talk of phasing down rather than phasing out coal, and little mention of oil and gas.

The transition to green energy and a green economy can be accelerated through action in our towns and cities. The time has come to focus on solutions and action rather than problems and potential. Energy efficiency has clear and tangible benefits and there is one area in which the built environment can take quick action to reduce both emissions and costs – lighting. Whether it be lighting up the homes, city streets, offices, factories or other commercial and municipal buildings, lighting has potential to lower a city’s carbon footprint – quickly.

Why the path to energy efficiency starts with lighting and what can be done

Europe and the UK lag behind much of Asia in the switch to greener lighting.  This demonstrates huge potential for energy savings to be delivered in the immediate future.

Smart LED lighting has the highest relative cost saving of any replacement technology, which is made possible both quickly and unobtrusively because it doesn’t require the altering of existing infrastructure to any great degree.

Subsidies can be very effective but only when rolled out in the right way.

Signify data* suggests that in Europe, this would amount to a saving of 65 billion euros, depending on energy rates, if all traditional lights were replaced with low energy alternatives. This also brings the potential to reduce CO2 emissions by 51 million tonnes. Meanwhile, switching all light points in the UK alone could reduce CO2 emissions by 3.9 million tonnes, the amount of emissions that 175 million trees could sequester in a year. Making the switch would also generate electricity savings of 16.1 TWh, which is equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of more than 4.3 million households. In both cases, those savings bring the potential to bolster capacity in energy networks for other purposes including EV charging, capacity for heat pumps etc., and the benefits can be seen in monetary terms. Signify’s data suggests that for an average British household, switching to LED lighting can help save up to £250 per year (i.e., £15-£18 per light bulb).

In terms of encouraging the switch more broadly in the built environment, subsidies can be very effective but only when rolled out in the right way. For example, the UK government recently rolled out subsidies in response to the current energy crisis by subsidising energy bills for consumers and businesses continuously – for a limited period. These measures are little more than a sticking plaster and, as a business model, are completely unsustainable for the long term. For example, households in the UK received a subsidy of £400 for a period of 6 months. For business too, the government introduced the Energy Bill Relief Scheme which supported businesses and organisations with support in the winter. Now, the Energy Bills Discount Scheme is running for 12 months. While these may have lessened the worst impacts of energy bill increases, it will have done little to reduce energy consumption or carbon emissions and also doesn’t bring about energy savings long-term. At some point, subsidies will need to be paid back and the lighting will need to be replaced so municipalities, building owners and families effectively must deal with the problem twice. Instead, what if the subsidy were switched out for a retrofitting measure, like LED lamps. It provides immediate energy- and cost-savings and means you only must deal with the problem once.

The window for action to avert a climate catastrophe will close before our eyes if we don’t treat this with the seriousness it deserves.

The bigger picture

The transition to a sufficiently energy efficient built environment takes an integrated approach at all levels of government and society, and cannot be achieved without a clear, cohesive, and long-term plan. National governments must agree targets on carbon reduction and energy saving, but the action and the work to achieve those targets ultimately takes place in cities, towns and even homes. We are still in the early stages of a transition that truly accounts for renewables energy together, and the potential demonstrates the value it can offer in improving not just the environment, but the economy and our society.

Recent weather events have brought the impact of climate change to the doorstep of cities around the world. The window for action to avert a climate catastrophe will close before our eyes if we don’t treat this with the seriousness it deserves. It is a complex challenge but making the switch to greener, energy efficient lighting represents one of the most immediate, achievable, and cost-efficient actions that can be taken. And whether it be to provide more education, awareness, or practical demonstrations of what is possible, the lighting industry stands ready to support cities and organisations around the world.

To find out more about how Signify’s technology can help make the switch to a more energy-efficient and greener future, go to Flipping the Green Switch* for Europe and UK.

Signify are UKGBC Members and you can learn more about UKGBC’s work on energy efficiency in cities in our Climate Change Mitigation Programme.

The post How energy efficiency is creating environmental and economic value in cities appeared first on UKGBC.

Strengthening the UK’s climate resilience requires a collaborative approach between numerous actors in the built environment that is underpinned, crucially, by government support. The UK Climate Resilience Programme sought to boost the UK’s climate resilience, working to bring together fragmented climate research and expertise to support UK government decision making.

Now that the Programme has come to an end and its projects continue to bear fruit, what solutions and learnings can we takeaway to ensure our built environment is fit for the future?

The UK Climate Resilience Programme

Running 2019 – 2023, the UK Climate Resilience Programme (UKCRP) was an interdisciplinary research programme led jointly by University of Leeds and The Met Office and funded by the Strategic Priorities Fund of UKRI. The programme sought to quantify the UK’s climate risk and build its resilience, producing outputs that inform and support UK government’s decision making on this topic. Themes included understanding the risks to the UK, how to communicate and manage the risks, and how to work with organisations to develop suitable climate services.  

While the UKCRP explored a variety of sectors, there were notable learnings for the built environment industry specifically. Below details a handful of relevant projects, but the full list can be found here.  

Key learnings

Next steps

UKCRP identified a number of research gaps that need to be explored going forward:

1. The need for increased collaboration between sectors and society for challenge-focused research.
2. Further developing the resilience community’s boundary spanning skills to ensure useful and usable outputs as good adaptation research often requires skills that go beyond a single discipline.
3. Expanding and applying techniques and approaches developed in the programme to additional locations, situations and risks.
4. Generating a better understanding of how risks can be reduced through resilience building and adaptation.  

To date, there hasn’t been any suggestion that there will be further funding for UKCRP part 2, but the legacy of the programme will continue through the funded projects’ successes. The UK Climate Change Committee has already started planning for the next climate change risk assessment, and it is hoped that much of the learning from the programme can inform this process. Also, it is hoped that tools, data and knowledge from the programme will be used to help support the recently published National Adaptation Programme.

UKGBC recognizes the crucial role of academic research in increasing thorough understanding, and providing pioneering solutions to gaps and challenges across different sustainability topics. UKGBC’s Academic Research Forum convenes academic members across our network to share insights on research, gaps and future opportunities. UKGBC members are able to access exclusive content on the insights from these forums, please get in touch to gain access. The next Forum will be On Tuesday 14^th November exploring research projects on the topic of hard to recycle materials. Sign up here. 

The UK built environment sector currently lacks the definitions and targets needed to become climate resilient by 2050. To address this, UKGBC is launching a Resilience Roadmap project aiming to scope and propose an industry wide collaborative project to set new climate resilience and adaptation targets for the sector. Applications to be involved in this project are now open. 

The post What learnings can we take from the UK Climate Resilience Programme? appeared first on UKGBC.

The infographics examine the intrinsic value of nature while demonstrating the impact of the built environment as an industry on the UK’s biodiversity. They also map the links between biodiversity and other socio-economic priorities to tell a broader story about how we should view nature as a foundational element of our economy and society.

The infographics also explain the differences between BNG, which focuses primarily on habitats, and other key concepts like Environmental Net Gain (ENG), which focuses on systems and outcomes, and the Environmental Impact Assessments.

Understanding these concepts and their relative importance for different areas of design and construction in the built environment will enable and encourage businesses to – independently of Government action or legislation – implement solutions that enrich the natural world in early design and strategy stages.

Our infographics are designed to remind people that while 10% Biodiversity Net Gain is an important legal requirement from November, we should view this as the minimum contribution in one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world.

“There are so many ways that businesses can adopt and thrive by implementing BNG, but also push beyond it with creative investments that unlock new potential for themselves, their communities, and society as a whole.”

Kerri McCarton, Project Coordinator for Resilience & Nature at UKGBC

Biodiversity/ Environmental Net Gain

Embracing and adding to biodiversity on site is vital as we work to reverse the biodiversity crisis.

View more

The post UKGBC infographics explain why Biodiversity Net Gain matters for the built environment appeared first on UKGBC.

Our research and guidance pull together the frontiers of the sector’s intellect and creativity. Our learning and leadership work blends purpose with deep impact. Our policy and advocacy initiatives coalesce your voices and your insights into calls for a better future. On top of this we gather insights, craft and amplify messages, and facilitate collaborations, all while looking after each other through what is genuinely a wonderfully warm and nurturing team culture.

it’s through vehicles like UKGBC that we can bring about desperately needed systems change, through collective action.

This is all extremely impressive and core to why I took this job, but here’s what’s really exciting: it’s through vehicles like UKGBC that we can bring about desperately needed systems change, through collective action.

Maybe those words make you want to punch the air like a Lioness netting a winning goal. Or maybe they feel as arbitrary as a VAR decision. Let me rephrase.

From energy sources to energy carriers

It’s not news that the heart of humanity’s big sustainability project is a shift away from our reliance on fossil fuels. For over a century, we’ve been able to do all the stuff we do in large part thanks to the juicy chemical energy of zillions of dead creatures from a long, long time ago. Weening ourselves off this system is proving understandably challenging. But here’s the thing, this isn’t just a shift in technology: it’s a shift to powering our society from energy sources instead of energy carriers. When we discovered fossil fuels, it was like we discovered an enormous pile of fully charged batteries lying around. Not appreciating that these fossil-batteries would take millennia to recharge, and that using them up in a fraction of the time that it took to charge them in the first place would lead to environmental disaster, we built our world around things that needed these fossil-batteries.

Our golden opportunity

Humans do live and have lived in many, many different ways and we can adapt to different ways of living now.

Our task now is to build the physical infrastructure, cultural networks, and neural pathways of a different society, one in sync with a source of energy: the sun (wind energy also being technically solar powered). As anyone who’s owned an electric car or a four-year-old smart phone knows, having to organise life around keeping our own batteries charged means a pretty massive change to the basis of our civilisation. Not only do we need to adapt our technologies for making stuff, growing stuff, moving stuff, and generating electricity, we also need to learn how to be unprecedentedly flexible and cooperative in our energy and resource management.

It’s daunting, but I don’t think we should shy away from the magnitude of the change needed. I also don’t think we need to let that magnitude get us down. Humans do live and have lived in many, many different ways and we can adapt to different ways of living now.

Together for transformative impact

This is where organisations like UKGBC come in. Organisations like ours help us to do things differently together. We can do this by collating deep understanding of the visions for change, the challenges frustrating change, and the trends and innovations enabling change; then by reflecting that understanding back, we can build consensus, and deliver that ask to those with decision-making power.

Sustainability isn’t about trying to preserve our current ways of living, but rather about adapting to new ways of living; ways of living that we can fairly and genuinely sustain.

More bluntly, because we’re an industry-wide network we’re not so locked-in to the system. And because we’re empowered by our members, we can credibly ask national and sub-national governments for the regulation and infrastructure needed.

It’s extremely difficult to work differently from the industry around us. I know, I’ve tried! No matter how enlightened an individual engineer or insurer or building-owner is, there’s a limit to what we can do on our own. This can be dispiriting, especially when it feels like nobody else is reacting proportionately to the existentially terrifying threats we’re facing. A breakthrough for me was realizing that sustainability isn’t about trying to preserve our current ways of living, but rather about adapting to new ways of living; ways of living that we can fairly and genuinely sustain. When I think about this, my shoulders drop and my jaw unclenches.

Let’s create a new version of the future, together

It’s time to stop fighting over how to create a decarbonised version of the late 20^th century. It’s time to work together to cultivate a 21^st century society that will last us into the 22^nd century.

I believe that we can do this safely and fairly by pooling our resources, sharing our knowledge, coordinating our action and uniting our voices. We at UKGBC can help, but together, in greater numbers and through broader representation from across the value chain, we’re stronger.

It’s time to stop fighting over how to create a decarbonised version of the late 20^th century. It’s time to work together to cultivate a 21^st century society that will last us into the 22^nd century.

So to all present members, thank you for your continued support, your insights, contributions to guidance and intellectual generosity in building consensus. Now, I invite you to think even more profoundly about what you’re doing and why. I ask you to share your progress and challenges even more honestly, to collaborate even more deeply and allow your personal purpose to flourish even more authentically.

To all past members, thank you for your support in getting us to where we are, and I’d personally like to welcome you back to be part of this next exciting chapter for our network.  Today, there are so many ways you can engage with us – from joining our Systems Change working groups, to partnering with us in a variety of capacities on our groundbreaking Resilience and Nature Roadmap. This is in addition to a whole host of member benefits, created to support your organisation to have greater sustainability impact.

To all potential members, I invite you to join us and become part of this transformational network; committed to overcoming the barriers that hold back progress and co-creating the solutions that can drive each one of you, and our industry forwards.  We all stand a better chance of emerging safe and healthy into our different future if we act together.

To everyone, I’m punch-the-air excited to be here, on the pitch with you all! With this phenomenal team and the strength of our broad membership we will work to bring about desperately needed systems change through collective action, leaving no one behind.

Learn more about Smith Mordak and their arrival at UKGBC. Our network is now over 700 members strong, to learn more about what it means to be a member and how you can join us on this critical journey, click here.

The post Smith Mordak, Chief Executive: “Let’s create our new vision of the future, together.” appeared first on UKGBC.

Climate risk assessments identify the climate risks, determine the potential impact of these risks, and develop strategies to mitigate and adapt to them. However, conducting an effective climate risk assessment requires a well-defined methodology that takes into account the unique challenges posed by climate change.

The Framework

Acknowledging this gap, the UK Green Building Council launched ‘A Framework for Measuring and Reporting of Climate-related Physical Risks to Built Assets’ in February 2022. The framework seeks to assist asset owners and organisations in preparing for and responding to the impacts of climate change and is an essential first step towards addressing physical risks from climate change within the industry.

The launch of the framework was paired with the ‘Physical Risk Labs’ to discuss and monitor early projects that were utilising it. This was to test stress and highlight any difficulties when using it in practice. Hydrock were a contributor to the ‘Physical Risk Labs’ as project partners with the University of Nottingham (UoN). UoN appointed Hydrock to undertake a climate risk assessment and provide adaptation recommendations for the university’s assets at Jubilee Campus, which included 30 buildings and 14 infrastructure assets.

The framework methodology follows a five-step process and recommends a number of tools and datasets that could be used within risk assessments such as the UK Climate Projections 2018 (UKCP18) dataset, the UK Climate Risk Indicators map and Environmental Agency flood mapping. The primary data used within our assessment was the UKCP18 data.

Observed Limitations

The assessment process highlighted a number of limitations that could lead to challenges and potential inconsistencies between climate risk assessments conducted across the industry when assessing the future risk from physical hazards. The most fundamental limitations identified were:

• A lack of industry-wide defined thresholds for level of risk for each physical climate hazard.
• Insufficient easily accessible datasets that are appropriate for detailed asset level climate risk assessments.

Out of the 9 physical hazards assessed at Jubilee Campus at least 4 were difficult to quantify and provide an accurate level of risk.

Out of the 9 physical hazards assessed at Jubilee Campus at least 4 were difficult to quantify and provide an accurate level of risk.

Take wildfire for example. The UKGBC rightly details it as in its infancy for assessments, with the framework recommending the use of the Met Office’s UK Fire Severity Index (FSI). This index assesses how severe a fire could become if one were to start, but not the risk of it occurring. The FSI is also limited to a five-day forecast, which is unsuitable for long-term climate risk assessments. There are other wildfire risk indicators available through the UK Climate Risk Indicators tool, however, similar difficulties arise when using them to quantify wildfire risk at asset level.

When looking at the other physical hazards the same ambiguity was observed. The data required for wind and storm events for instance was caveated in UKCP18 probabilistic data due to it not passing the Met Office’s credibility checks. Until an alternative data set or methodology is made available, assessing the worst case risk of future wind and storm events on assets is frankly inaccurate at best.

The most prevalent physical hazard in the industry is heat stress, for which there is ample guidance available. The framework suggests the use of CIBSE TM52/59 terminology or degree days to evaluate the possibility of heat stress. However, the framework stops short of prescribing specific thresholds for assessing the outputs of the analysis and determining the level of risk. For instance, if a building is halfway towards failing CIBSE TM52/59, does it pose a medium risk? Similarly, it is unclear how many cooling-degree days correspond to a low, medium, or high-risk level.

Limitations were also seen when using the UKCP18 data for the assessment (the preferred source for future climate data in the UK). Although an extremely in-depth and useful data set, acquiring data with a granularity relevant to an asset-level climate risk assessment proved more onerous than one would hope.

Via the UKCP18 dashboard daily data is only available for a single representative concentration pathway (RCP^*) instead of all 4 included within the framework. The remaining data must therefore be found elsewhere. In our case, we utilised the Centre for Environmental Data Analysis (CEDA) archive to find data suitable for the assessment.

Call to Action

We need the relevant industry stakeholders to come together now to agree on a standardised methodology for determining the thresholds of physical hazards and what specific datasets are to be used.

Climate adaptation is critical. Action must be taken to ensure climate risk assessments can be conducted effectively. We need the relevant industry stakeholders to come together now to agree on a standardised methodology for determining the thresholds of physical hazards and what specific datasets are to be used. This requires a collaborative effort between industry bodies, engineers, academics, and experts in climate science and risk management.

The thresholds should be based on latest research and available data, taking into account industry practices already in place where applicable, to construct well-founded thresholds that can be utilised across the UK. The data selection process must also be refined. As mentioned, there are several derived data sets available in the CEDA archive that offer greater granularity and cover all RCP scenarios than more accessible UKCP18 data. However, if these are to be used, an industry-wide consensus is needed to specify which data sets should be utilised.

The above will help remove the ambiguity, creating a consistent approach for the industry to continue conducting climate risk assessments.

Regardless of the issues discussed, the framework is a comprehensive tool designed to help the built environment industry improve both its resilience and sustainability. With the framework, UKGBC is pushing the industry in the direction required to close the adaptation gap and make up for the previous decade of lost time. The physical labs and other consultations will help further refine the framework to continue being the industry standard for assessing climate-related physical risk to built assets.

*RCP – a future scenario of greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere, leading to different levels of climate change projected across 4 variables.

Hydrock are a UKGBC member and Resilience and Nature Programme Partner. Learn more about what it means to be a member and the opportunities it provides you here.

Interested in learning how to apply the Physical Risk Framework and Reporting Tool to your built assets? UKGBC’s new practical learning programme supports participants to create a physical risk assessment for their chosen asset, and the knowledge and skills to assess the risks to other assets in their portfolio. Find out more and register to join at this page.

Learn more in our Physical Risk Labs Compendium of Experience

To discover more about our partner’s journeys for reaching net zero, read our report summarising the experiences from our Physical Risk Labs.

Learn more

Climate Change Adaptation

As the climate crisis intensifies and extreme weather events become more common, the UK’s buildings, cities and critical infrastructure, and the communities that use and occupy these, are in increasing danger. It’s vital to address how our buildings and infrastructure can be adapted to remain fit for the future.

View more

The post What is it like to measure the physical risk of built assets? appeared first on UKGBC.

Responding to the comments, UKGBC Deputy Chief Executive Simon McWhirter said: 

Rolling back plans to improve the energy efficiency of rented homes is environmentally reckless and economically damaging. The last time the Government went down the path of slashing green measures it added billions to people’s energy bills.  

“Upgrading the energy efficiency of homes is essential if we are to meet our climate targets. Doing so would add value to landlords’ properties and improve the lives of millions of tenants who live in cold, damp, mouldy and unsafe homes. This is the moment to be strengthening energy efficiency measures not watering them down.”  

Home Retrofit

With time running out to keep global temperatures to 1.5 degrees, upgrading the nation’s homes is one of the biggest opportunities the UK has to reduce carbon emissions whilst tackling the cost-of-living crisis, energy security and levelling up.

View more

The post Delaying energy efficiency standards for renters is environmentally reckless and economically damaging  appeared first on UKGBC.