Solving the built environment — What are the issues and the opportunities?

Thinking differently to decarbonise New Zealand — Part One

Buildings and the transport, energy and water systems that support them are an interconnected system which in combination is responsible for the vast majority of New Zealand’s carbon emissions. However, from the perspective of New Zealand’s emissions reduction tactics, the relationships between these sectors might as well not exist.

We currently focus on where and how emissions are produced and not why they are produced. This has led us to try to put plasters over the wounds rather than addressing the underlying drivers of emissions within our society. Understanding and resolving the sources of demand for our emissions intensive industries is likely to generate many of the solutions that will enable a transition to a zero-emissions economy.

Our built environments are one of the key sources of demand for emissions intensive industries. Where we place buildings dictates how much transport the eventual inhabitants will need. The efficiency of our buildings dictates how much water and electricity infrastructure they need and how much energy demand they will create. The materials we specify dictate the materials we manufacture. Decarbonising the built environment provides an opportunity to shift focus and to address the causes for emissions at their source.

New Zealand is in the midst of the most significant investment in homes and urban environments in generations and probably for generations. That investment could either put in place foundations that enable massive emission reductions, or lock in high emissions pathways for generations to come. We need to take a renewed focus on designing emissions out of our built environments. Getting that investment right is a critical piece of our decarbonisation puzzle.

How much carbon are we talking?

The design and performance of our buildings dictates the materials needed to build them, the infrastructure required to connect them and the energy needed to live in them. The manufacture and supply of this energy, water and building material in New Zealand is equivalent to ~12 million tonnes of emissions[1] or 33% of New Zealand’s gross annual carbon emissions. In particular these come from:

• products like steel, concrete and plastics (each of which is responsible for 8% of global emissions) used during construction and when maintaining buildings.
• water and energy used for heating, hot water, lighting and other appliances within the home.

The way that homes and buildings are laid out within an urban environment dictates the transport and amenity requirements of the people who live there. The transport related emissions consumed within our urban environments are equivalent to ~14 million tonnes of emissions[2] or 40% of our total annual carbon emissions. All sorts of things influence travel behaviour and result in these emissions:

• How far do I have to travel to get to the shop (is determined by where we locate buildings in relation to destinations and transport infrastructure)
• What choices do I have to get there, and which is most convenient? (this is where distance to transport infrastructure, street layout, intersection prioritisation and directness of route all come in to play).
• Is it safe? (this is where factors like protection from cars, lighting, passive surveillance and maintenance/ quality of the route)

This results in a combined impact of 26 million tonnes of gross carbon emissions compared to New Zealand’s net annual carbon emissions of ~12 million tonnes. We could achieve our 2050 net zero targets with a 46% reduction in emissions from the buildings, infrastructure and transport in our cities and towns.

There is a gap in the way we measure and make decisions about emissions

The way emissions are typically measured at a national level does not account for the interdependence between systems that come together in our built environment. Instead, emissions reporting is framed around which industry released these emissions and our focus for managing emissions lies squarely on avoiding emissions at the source.

The problem is that this framing means we are not asking some of the key questions (‘do we really need this thing in the first place?’) and will not result in the step change required to resolve climate change. Instead it focusses us on doing what we are already doing but a bit better.

We can all see how this plays out in society. At a policy level we point the finger at agriculture and energy companies while expecting industrial food supply and uninterrupted energy. At a personal level we sit at our computers and blame farmers, energy execs and ute drivers for producing emissions while eating meat, and using electricity.

The built environment is a critical tool currently absent in our decarbonisation toolkit

The built environment locks in emission pathways and demand from emission intensive sectors for a very long time. Planning decisions we make now and the transport needs they lock in will likely be with us for 100+ years. New buildings and the energy and maintenance requirements they lock in will be with us for 50–90 years.

Getting the design of our buildings and urban environments right presents a massive opportunity to enable other sectors to reduce their emissions. Reducing emissions in these sectors also almost by definition results in healthier homes, healthier communities and healthier New Zealanders. In addition, improving the efficiency of our buildings will enable more buildings to be served by existing infrastructure — which will help to overcome one of the major current barriers to new development.

Comparison programmes that aim at tackling emissions more directly are often just shifting the pain into other industries or other countries. Some examples are:

• Electrification of transport sounds great and looks great, but in reality it passes the baton on to the electricity sector. It also does nothing to amend deeper social issues attached to transport or the emissions that go into producing these vehicles.
• Shifting our national electricity grid from 85% to 100% renewable while needing it to double in size to meet all the demand from electrified transport, process heat and new buildings is a big ask. Doubling this capacity will be very expensive and vastly emissions intensive due to the quantities of steel, concrete, plastics and silica needed.

Decarbonising our urban environments may not be the ‘quick win’ that New Zealand’s Government is looking for. But, taking bold action now to plan towns and cities where people will consume less energy and less transport, live in healthier homes and live healthier lives, is a sure way to set us up for future success.

Keep an eye out for the next parts of our series

Among other opportunities we see that the critical moves to get this right being:

• We need to think differently about solving housing affordability (part 2)
• Build better buildings and start right yesterday (part 3)
• Design urban environments for the future not the past (part 4)

And special thanks for the help writing this story Andrea Duncan and Tom Kane.

NB

[1] Energy and materials used in buildings including generation and supply of electricity and manufacture and import of materials. Thinkstep — the carbon footprint of the built environment of New Zealand

[2] Domestic road transport emissions, road fuel production emissions and imported vehicles and fuel adjusted to reflect light fleet as 67% of total transport emissions. Thinkstep — the carbon footprint of the built environment of New Zealand