James Fiske is Chief Executive of the Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) and Chair of the Built Environment Carbon Database Steering Group.
Since the consortium of practitioners who helped develop the Built Environment Carbon Database (BECD) first met almost three years ago, we have been very clear about what is needed to significantly reduce carbon emissions from the built environment.
We need a mandate to carry out lifetime carbon assessments on all construction projects, an agreed methodology for measuring and reporting emissions, calculators/software that comply with this methodology, easy access to consistent data and a suitably trained person and qualified staff to carry out assessments.
We already have the methodology, as set out in the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) Lifetime Carbon Assessment Standard, and now the BECD has been launched to provide a platform for industry to share and access the necessary data.
However, we still lack government mandate, we have a multitude of calculators and software that use different methodologies, and there are serious questions about the number of qualified and regulated appraisers.
I was encouraged by the response we got when we recently introduced the BECD to the industry. Not just because of the number of people from a wide range of disciplines across the built environment that we brought together, but because of their enthusiasm for reducing emissions.
In a survey of attendees, 84% said they did not support the government’s lack of push for the mandate, but more than three-quarters said it would not lead them or their organizations to reduce their own efforts, and the majority said We believe assessments should be mandated now, or within the next 12 months.
However, it is impossible to ignore the effect of the lack of a current mandate, which leaves carbon reporting in many areas to the individual priorities of developers. Only 27 percent of survey respondents said they always report embedded carbon, 42 percent said they do so occasionally if asked, and a quarter said they never do but i would like to do it
Furthermore, when we asked assessors whether they feel adequately trained and supported to calculate and report emissions, only 16% said they feel confident doing so. More than one and the other said they could use some help, or it was too confusing.
Limited experience
This seems symptomatic of the wider problems we have in the industry, where there is a drive to use more sustainable practices and technologies, but a limited workforce with the expertise to undertake the rapidly evolving roles required to support it.
A lot of effort has gone into the BECD by the Building Cost Information Service team and all the professionals who have so generously contributed their time and expertise in the steering and working groups. However, this is very much the first step, and we need the industry to step up and share their experiences through the BECD, good and bad, so that we learn and improve.
A central repository, free to use and easily accessible, will not only facilitate the import and export of data, although this is clearly a key part. Supported by industry, the BECD also has the potential to foster collaboration, stimulate debate and help inform future government policy.
A lack of consistent data has previously been cited as one reason why a mandate might not be appropriate. We’ve done our best to show that it doesn’t have to be that way. Now we need industry to embrace the BECD and show how sharing data, knowledge and experience can help reduce emissions.
Access the BECD a www.becd.co.uk
