4 min read
Net Zero and Science Based Targets – Connecting the Dots
This blog is part of our Net Zero series for World Green Building Week 2017 – read more here.
I was recently asked how Science Based Targets are connected to Zero Carbon Buildings – hmmm, I thought, interesting question.
Let’s start with the definitions.
Science Based Targets
In response to mounting environmental, social and political pressure, organisations have recently begun setting science-based GHG emissions reduction targets (‘science based targets’ or SBTs). In doing this, companies are committing to bringing their operational activities and resultant emissions in line with the level of decarbonisation required to keep global temperature increases below 2oC compared to pre-industrial temperatures. Optional third-party approval of alignment to approved methodologies is managed by www.sciencebasedtargets.org, which is supported by the WWF, CDP, UNGC and the WRI.
The SBT approach is being adopted by companies across multiple sectors as the basis for setting long-term goals for GHG emissions reductions. Importantly, in the long-term the SBT approach may be adjusted to reflect advances of climate science and economic modelling (e.g. to target a 1.5oC increase in global mean temperatures).
Net Zero Buildings
Net zero buildings are highly energy-efficient buildings which uses on or off-site renewable energy sources – to achieve net zero carbon emissions. This definition encompasses all asset classes: homes, offices, shops, stadiums and theatres of the future.
WorldGBC support the ‘Advancing Net Zero’ project – its aims are to ensure that:
- All new buildings and major renovations should be net zero starting in 2030, meaning no buildings should be built below net zero standards beyond 2030. All buildings should be net zero by 2050
- 75,000 professionals are trained on net zero building design and operation by 2030, and 300,000 by 2050.
Laudable – and I can see the 2030 target working with a combination of innovation, creativity and targeted regulation (a carrot and stick approach). However, the aspiration to ensure that all buildings are net zero by 2050 if a big one. We are less than 33 years away from this deadline and buildings are designed with much longer life-spans. The speed of conversion and renovation must therefore increase significantly. In the UK, Minimum Energy Efficiency (MEES) legislation will ban the leasing of buildings with F and G ratings from 2018. However, net zero buildings have EPCs of A+ not D. So, in short, at least in the UK, there is a long way to go.
I believe in SBTs – they require that organisational carbon targets are set in line with the global context and can be all encompassing, covering operational, supply chain and even embodied carbon emissions. However, it should be noted that at least for commercial property, the SBT approach doesn’t actually require that all properties become zero carbon by 2050; rather, a minimal level of carbon emissions performance must be achieved (e.g. ~13kgCOe/m2 by 2050).
As such, a science based target is actually – relatively speaking – less stretching than a net zero building.
Furthermore, science based targets are set at the fund, portfolio or even company level, whereas the net zero buildings agenda is targeting all buildings. SBTS are therefore more flexible. SBTs can be met based on the average performance of a portfolio, with some inefficient and other efficient assets, which on balance are in line with a 2oC world.
In my opinion though, net zero buildings are a very worthy aspiration and will support any organisation in its aim to achieve performance in line with internationally agreed emissions targets. Certainly for new builds, I think we should be targeting net zero carbon. For existing assets, the challenge is substantial; however, one that we as an industry should be grabbing with both hands.
Net zero buildings are a very worthy aspiration and will support any organisation in its aim to achieve performance in line with internationally agreed emissions targets.
We need a joined-up approach, supported and incentivised by Government, as refurbishing all existing assets is a massive job and should be considered as a national infrastructure project. However, delivery will ultimately need to be managed by both Government and Business working in partnership.
- A strong approach from Government– balancing regulation with incentivisation
- Visionaries – organisations prepared to lead, to continue to progress the sustainability agenda
- Communication and voice – organisations like the WorldGBC, UK-GBC and the Better Buildings Partnership to promote and
Now, as they say, ‘that’s a big ask’.
However, so much [read everything] is at stake
Come on Property Industry – let’s take the lead!