I've been trawling through the Government's response to the consultation on Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) scheme. This will mean that firms that pay more than about £500,000 for energy a year will have to purchase allowances to a set Government cap and have to buy allowances beyond that. The idea is that 'polluting' companies will have to buy credits off 'clean' companies.
Certain things which we cannot do without have become uncool - carrier bags, cheap flights, fruit from far afield. We must use them but vocalise our distaste. Surely there is something we can all agree to get rid of? Something that we can consign to the past? Coal seems a likely candidate. Coal is bad because those naughty Chinese are building two new power stations a week. It's far more polluting than gas. It involves digging up the ground. We don't produce it in this country any more. Activists want us to wear blue for World Earth Day on April 20th and call Congress and say, 'no new coal power stations!'
George Monbiot certainly seems to think so.
Trust an engineer to perform a close reading of a House of Commons committee hearing. Iain Fraser, environmental engineer, from Chapman Bathurst has responded to my recent report that only 9% of Government buildings meet eco-standards saying that the thinks it most unlikely that the BRE will consent to a BREEAM-lite since it is so well-established and "as they see it fit for purpose." It was the suggestion of the committee head, Edward Leigh MP who had noted that smaller projects were more likely to lack BREEAM rating.
Continue reading "Post occupation evaluation, the defence" »
Interesting online seminar held by Property Week yesterday on energy performance certificates (you can still download it on their site after a brief registration). here's some highlights:
So it seems that the quietly released new timetable for commercial EPCs seems to be following the implementation of the housing certificates - big first, then rolled out to smaller properties. I'm not sure this is a response to market concerns, but more that the department is not ready yet for the implementation. And similarly to the housing side are there enough assessors to check commercial and public buildings?
Yesterday saw the publication of a Draft Strategy for Sustainable Construction issued by the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. There are no less than 35 targets set for procuring and assessing the performance of buildings as well as for waste recycling and a commitment to whole life value. I'm wondering whether there should be a deadline set in the next year after which all public sector bodies and companies must pledge not to issue any new targets. Or perhaps this is just a fact of life for the next few decades.
The New York Law Journal recently published an insightful article entitled "What does 'Green' Mean?" Its dual authors, Peter S. Britell and Smita G. Korrapati, state their terms in the opening paragraph: "Green is good. Yet there has been little focus on what green means in commercial agreements - and what happens if a contracting party defaults in being green."
Continue reading "How do you rate green buildings? An American look - but an international issue" »
Here's a list of useful information/websites/events I've spotted in the last week or so:
New research released by the RICS today claims there is no clear relationship between the proximity of wind farms and nearby property prices. The study, carried out by the RICS with Oxford Brookes University, claims that houses only within a mile of massive turbines are affected. The research examined three locations in Cornwall and found that most wind farm developers are avoiding such problems by locating their developments in remote locations. Brian Berry from the RICS said that apparent changes in property values "disappear when examined closely". "Objections raised are often found to be less about local concerns and more about wider ideological issues," he said.
It's quite understandable that reporting on climate change can get a bit gloomy. Here's my attempt to lighten the mood a bit with some more cheery news:
Here's a round-up the most significant sustainability news I've picked up in the last week:
An exciting landmark for me. Two new comments in response to my Westminster Watch posting last week. They're both in response to how industry environmental standard BREEAM is aimed at particular markets. I'm off to the BRE, who run the certification scheme, later this week so will be much clearer on developments there. Watch this space.
The construction supply chain has a long way to to get to grips with the buying and subsequent disposal of materials. Two reports out this week underline the point powerfully. One from the WWF finds that the UK is the third largest importer of illegal timber in the work, around £712m a year. It reckons 65% of this, a cool £462m, is in construction.
And new figures from website Netregs, which gives advice to firms on waste regulations, claims that two thirds of contractor don't have a site waste management plan and 60% do not realise not having one is illegal.
Recent Comments