An independent survey of UK main contractors has found that although 68% said that managing energy use and carbon emissions was a big priority in 2015, two-fifths had no programme in place to monitor them.
The survey, carried out on behalf of pre-qualification and supply chain accreditation body Achilles, also found that 74% did not monitor the carbon emissions or energy use of their main suppliers – when these subcontractors would be involved in carbon-intensive activities such as concrete pours, freight transport and demolition.
The survey results reinforce the findings in the recent Green Construction Board report, which revealed that project-related carbon emissions actually increased in 2008-12, and suggested that several major Tier 1 contractors and UKCG members are failing to take the necessary steps to decrease their directly-controlled emissions.
The interview-based survey of 35 large Tier 1 contractors with more than 250 employees was commissioned by Achilles, which operates the BuildingConfidence pre-qualification and accreditation scheme.
“There are a handful of contractors who are very strong on sustainability and reducing carbon emissions. But for some others, it isn’t the highest on the agenda. And when you aren’t under direct client pressure to reduce emissions, an element of apathy can creep in.”
Lee Brunsden, Achilles
In the UK Achilles also runs CEMARS, the Certified Emissions Measurement And Reduction Scheme, which allows companies to measure their greenhouse gas emissions, and put in place reduction plans and gain independent certifications.
The interviews were conducted by independent research company IFF.
Lee Brunsden, account manager for the carbon reduction programme at Achilles, told CM that he was not surprised by the patchy results, saying that “some [contractors] have their house in order, and some don’t.”
“There are a handful of contractors who are very strong on sustainability and reducing carbon emissions – including Mace, who I used to work for. But for some others, it isn’t the highest on the agenda. And when you aren’t under direct client pressure to reduce emissions, an element of apathy can creep in.”
The findings show construction firms need to take action if they want to meet the Construction 2025 target to lower the industry’s carbon emissions by 50%. The same report also sets a target for the industry to become “dramatically more sustainable through its efficient approach to delivering low carbon assets more quickly and at a lower cost, underpinned by strong, integrated supply chains and productive long-term relationships”.
Brunsden added: “The industry has come out of some pretty tough times, a tough commercial environment where perhaps it hasn’t had the concentration it needs on the Construction 2025 targets. If we have a review [of progress towards the targets] in 2017 it’ll be interesting to see where we’re at and if we need to take any action.” He added that CEMARS is designed to reduce contractors’ emissions on a curve aligned with the Construction 2025 goals.
But Brunsden suggested that the government’s new mandatory ESOS scheme could help focus construction contractors’ attention on energy reduction. The Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme is the UK’s response to an EU agreement to cut emissions by 20% by 2020. The legislation, which came into effect at the beginning of the year, requires firms to audit energy use, identify a cost-effective energy savings scheme and notify the Environment Agency by 5 December.
However, the scheme forces companies to assess their energy performance – but doesn’t make mandate implementation of the resulting action plan.
“I certainly think ESOS is a good starting point, there’s nothing like the promise of being hit with a strict fine to get some traction,” said Brunsden. “But it would be better if the output of ESOS was mandated – some companies are choosing to go for the cheapest option just to tick a box. It would be better if we were to legislate around implementation of the recommendations.”
