{"id":17595,"date":"2023-05-28T11:25:00","date_gmt":"2023-05-28T18:25:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/essential.construction\/news\/industry-has-a-complete-void-of-basic-knowledge-on-carbon-footprints\/"},"modified":"2023-05-28T11:25:04","modified_gmt":"2023-05-28T18:25:04","slug":"industry-has-a-complete-void-of-basic-knowledge-on-carbon-footprints","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/essential.construction\/news\/industry-has-a-complete-void-of-basic-knowledge-on-carbon-footprints\/","title":{"rendered":"Industry has a \u2018complete void of basic knowledge\u2019 on carbon footprints"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"-\"<\/a>
\n<\/p>\n

\n

Owners, contractors and subs are eager to take meaningful steps to decarbonize the construction industry and supply chain.<\/p>\n

However, many still lack knowledge about the issue and how to move the needle.<\/p>\n

That was one of the findings that came to light during a recent roundtable of panellists and leaders from various sectors of the industry who gathered to focus on tactical ways to eliminate carbon emissions.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you\u2019re a general contractor \u2013 or if you\u2019re a subcontractor in Canada \u2013 90 per cent of your footprint is the embodied carbon of the materials that you put in place on jobsites,\u201d explained Tim Coldwell, president of Chandos Construction, who moderated the discussion. \u201cMost subcontractors, and frankly most general contractors, don\u2019t even understand the concept of embodied carbon.<\/p>\n

\u201cI rub shoulders with the CEOs of the largest construction companies in Canada. These are really smart guys and gals, and I would bet that only half of them would be able to explain the difference between embodied carbon and operational carbon. So, underneath all of it, there is a complete void of basic knowledge in terms of like what your footprint might actually be as an organization.\u201d<\/p>\n

Coldwell noted understanding embodied carbon, which is all the carbon emitted to produce and put-in-place materials and processes required to build a building, is critical if the industry is to tackle the problem.<\/p>\n

During the roundtable, aptly called Decarbonizing the Construction Industry Supply Chain, panellists and industry leaders discussed how to eliminate carbon emissions related to the selection of building materials, the supply of the construction elements, the movement of personnel and management of waste from an energy and carbon use perspective.<\/p>\n

As raw materials are extracted, cooked, carved up, altered, turned into building products, transported to and constructed onsite, carbon is produced and emitted.<\/p>\n

While there\u2019s a feeling that strides are being made, Coldwell believes there\u2019s a need for more action by the industry.<\/p>\n

\u201cI hate going to events where there\u2019s the same 50 people who drank the Kool-Aid 40 years ago talking about the same crap they were talking about 40 years ago and preaching to the choir. You\u2019ve got to get different people engaged in this and more people drinking the Kool-Aid.\u201d<\/p>\n

Coldwell said there is a need for many owners, generals and subcontractors to do a deeper dive and track the components of carbon emissions embedded in every building decision.<\/p>\n

\u201cDetails really matter. You can\u2019t just skip across the surface. Once you kind of brush up on that, people in construction are thinking, \u2018Well, it\u2019s going to be the carbon I burn on utilities,\u2019 and \u2018I\u2019ve got diesel equipment, I\u2019ve got transportation, I\u2019ve got this, that and the other thing.\u2019 Those are scope one and two. But 90 per cent of our industry is rolled up in scope three, so down the supply chain.\u201d<\/p>\n

To reduce the embodied carbon on a project, industry personnel must acquire more knowledge about the supply chain.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo, we need to know where to buy low-carbon engineered floor for the same price as the other engineered floor,\u201d said Coldwell.<\/p>\n

Owners, generals and subs have an opportunity to lead on reducing the carbon footprint of a project. For example, Coldwell noted if owners set a goal to reduce the embodied carbon on a project by 30 per cent, generals will take notice and, when selecting subs, will expect them to follow suit. He figures generals can influence carbon reduction because they\u2019re in a unique position.<\/p>\n

\u201cGenerals should turn around, because we\u2019re in the middle of the supply chain, and do the same with our subcontractors. We should say, \u2018When we\u2019re picking the electrical guy, what are we doing about embodied carbon?\u2019 You just push it all the way down the supply chain and make it part of selection criteria.\u201d<\/p>\n

The design community also has a big part to play because architects can inform contractors about lower carbon materials that could be used, said Coldwell.<\/p>\n

To fairly assess products and processes from a carbon perspective, identifiers like an Environmental Product Declaration attempt to introduce transparency to the construction supply chain by using a standardized approach to calculating embodied carbon.<\/p>\n

However, Coldwell raises the spectre that there is inconsistency in methodologies used by the various industries.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a lot of nonsense that goes on in quantifying embodied carbon and materials right now. It\u2019s a little bit like the Wild West.\u201d<\/p>\n

For example, the wood industry often claims negative embodied carbon because it is stored in the timber. However, Coldwell maintains that\u2019s nonsense because eventually when a structure is demolished and the wood is sent to landfills or is burned, the carbon that was stored gets released.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s like a friendly arms race around decarbonization that\u2019s happening among the three big material guys,\u201d he said. \u201cRight now, mass timber wins the day just by a nose on a mid-rise office building.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n