Listen to the episode:

Check out the shownotes through this link.

---

Are you interested in embodied energy and greenhouse gas emissions of buildings?

---

Our summary today works with the article titled A review of existing policy for reducing embodied energy and greenhouse gas emissions of buildings from 2022 by Katie Skillington, Robert H. Crawford, Georgia Warren-Myers, and Kathryn Davidson, published in Energy Policy journal.

This is a great preparation to our next interview with Katie Skillington in episode 232 talking about the built environment’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.

Since we are investigating the future of cities, I thought it would be interesting to see embodied energy and greenhouse gas emissions in the building sector. This article presents the policy landscape which is dominated by voluntary instruments and confined to inconsistent applications across lower levels of governance, but also signals of change for emission reduction.

[intro music]

---

Welcome to today’s What is The Future For Cities podcast and its Research episode; my name is Fanni, and today I will introduce a research paper by summarising it. The episode really is just a short summary of the original paper, and, in case it is interesting enough, I would encourage everyone to check out the whole paper. Stay tuned until because I will give you the 3 most important things and some questions which would be interesting to discuss.

---

[music]

Buildings account for about a third of the world’s energy consumption and a significant portion of CO2 emissions. While there have been improvements in reducing the energy used during building operations, less attention has been given to the emissions involved in constructing and maintaining buildings, known as “embodied” emissions. As buildings become more efficient, these embodied emissions become a larger part of the problem. With global construction expected to increase significantly, addressing these emissions is crucial for combating climate change. There is a gap in research regarding policies to reduce these emissions and analyse policies to find effective strategies. This analysis aims to help shape better policies that can reduce the impact of building construction on the environment globally.

Both operational and embodied impacts in building assessments are important to consider. “Embodied energy” (EE) and “embodied greenhouse gas emissions” (EGHG) account for the energy and emissions from all stages of a building’s life, not just its use. As buildings become more energy-efficient, the impact of materials and construction processes becomes more significant. There is a need for policies that address both operational energy and the environmental costs of construction to truly reduce a building’s overall environmental impact. This study analyses policies aimed at reducing embodied energy (EE) and greenhouse gas emissions (EGHG) in the building sectors of Australia, Canada, the USA, and the UK. It categorizes policies into regulatory measures, voluntary instruments, and economic incentives, and evaluates them based on their number and strictness. The study collects data through a two-stage search but does not assess the actual effectiveness of these policies.

In Australia, Canada, the U.S., and the UK, policies governing embodied energy (EE) and greenhouse gas (EGHG) emissions in buildings are mostly voluntary and lack enforceability. In Australia, while national codes do not mandate EE/EGHG targets, industry groups like the Green Building Council have introduced standards to reduce carbon emissions, but these are not compulsory. Similarly, in Canada, although there are initiatives like the Greening Government Strategy aiming for a 30% reduction in new projects, most local efforts like those in Vancouver are also voluntary. The U.S. lacks national mandatory regulations, relying instead on state-level initiatives and voluntary programs which have limited adoption. The UK uses voluntary measures like BREEAM that integrate into some government projects but lack stringent emissions reduction requirements. Overall, these countries show a trend of relying on voluntary standards without substantial regulatory enforcement, leading to moderate policy intensity and slow progress in EE and EGHG reductions. Post-Brexit, the UK’s potential to follow EU sustainability standards has diminished, further impacting the rigor of its environmental policies.

The analysis of EE and EGHG emissions policies in the USA, Australia, the UK, and Canada shows increasing awareness of the building sector’s impact on global GHG emissions, with a trend towards voluntary measures over strict regulatory enforcement. The USA has the most policies, but all countries predominantly lack quantitative, enforceable targets, relying more on qualitative or voluntary standards. Since 2017, there’s a noticeable shift toward setting more ambitious goals, particularly in developing robust evidence bases for future policies, especially in Canada, the UK, and the USA. Despite these efforts, the effectiveness of these policies is limited due to their voluntary nature and the lack of stringent enforcement mechanisms. The private sector plays a crucial role, with certification systems like LEED, Green Star, and BREEAM integrating EE/EGHG considerations, though the absence of mandatory targets limits the overall impact of these initiatives.

Addressing EE and EGHG emissions in the building sector faces key challenges:

1. Terminology Clarity: Unclear definitions for terms like ’embodied’ create policy inconsistencies. Clear, standardized definitions are needed.
2. Methodological Consistency: Variability in life cycle assessment methodologies and databases leads to unreliable emissions assessments. Standardizing these methods is crucial.
3. Benchmarking: Effective benchmarking is hindered by diverse methodologies and data. Harmonized benchmarks are necessary for broader applicability.
4. Financial Incentives: The lack of financial incentives deters engagement in emissions reductions. Implementing incentives like tax reliefs or grants could encourage more active participation.

Addressing these issues with clear standards, consistent methodologies, and compelling incentives is essential for effective EE and EGHG governance.

The study on EE and EGHG emissions governance across four major economies reveals a growing focus on addressing these emissions in the building sector, though challenges persist due to unclear terminology, inconsistent methodologies, and a lack of financial incentives. To effectively reduce emissions, both immediate and long-term actions are needed. In the short term, implementing caps on emissions for specific building elements and mandating reductions and life cycle assessment (LCA) reporting in building regulations are recommended. For a sustainable long-term approach, standardizing methods for calculating and reporting emissions and establishing comprehensive targets for entire buildings across varied governance levels are needed. Moreover, practical solutions and a systemic approach integrating policies from connected sectors, such as manufacturing are required. Robust policy efforts should include ambitious targets and a diversity of mechanisms to move toward zero emissions buildings and contribute meaningfully to global climate action. This holistic and coordinated approach is essential for making significant progress in both operational energy and EE/EGHG emissions governance.

[music]

---

What was the most interesting part for you? What questions did arise for you? Do you have any follow up question? Let me know on Twitter at WTF4Cities or on the wtf4cities.com website where the transcripts and show notes are available! Additionally, I will highly appreciate if you consider subscribing to the podcast or on the website. I hope this was an interesting paper for you as well, and thanks for tuning in!

---

[music]

Finally, as the most important things, I would like to highlight 3 aspects:

1. Embodied energy (EE) and greenhouse gas emissions (EGHG) in buildings are becoming more significant as buildings become operationally more efficient, but current policies addressing them are mostly voluntary and lack stringent targets.
2. Key challenges in effective EE/EGHG governance include unclear terminology, inconsistent methodologies, lack of harmonized benchmarks, and absence of financial incentives.
3. A holistic, multi-sector policy approach with ambitious targets, standardized methods, and diverse mechanisms is needed to achieve zero emission buildings and contribute to global climate action.

Additionally, it would be great to talk about the following questions:

1. What role should the private sector play in driving the adoption of low-carbon building practices, and how can we incentivize their participation?
2. As we move towards a future of zero-emission buildings, what are the potential unintended consequences we should be aware of, and how can we mitigate them?
3. How can we encourage more governments to adopt mandatory policies and strict targets for reducing embodied energy and emissions in buildings?

[outro music]

---