YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Reducing upfront carbon: A roadmap for Australia’s built environment - webinar with ASBEC

Reducing upfront carbon: A roadmap for Australia’s built environment - webinar with ASBEC — Transcript

by thinkstep-anz · 5,956 words · 916 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:01[music]
0:14Welcome everyone to the next webinar in
0:17our think set webinar series. So today
0:19we'll be hearing from Allison who's CEO
0:22at ASBEC. So the Australian sustainable
0:24built environment council which is a
0:26national forum of peak bodies all
0:29seeking to decarbonize the sector. We've
0:32done a bit of work with looking at the
0:34embodied carbon of the Australian built
0:36environment and through that produced an
0:38issues paper and a policy roadmap. Um so
0:41Nicole from thinkep our impact director
0:44will also be going through our
0:45involvement in those projects today. So
0:48I'll hand over now to our first speaker,
0:50Nicole, who's our impact director at
0:51ThinkStep AZ, um, to walk through a bit
0:54about how the project went and ThinkPE's
0:56involvement. So Nicole, I'll pass over
0:59to you.
0:59>> Thank you very much. Absolute pleasure
1:01to bring this to you today and really
1:04excited by the fact that there's so many
1:05people who actually haven't seen this
1:06work and it's a a really good message to
1:09be able to share. You might know uh from
1:12other webinars that we've done and
1:13things like that that at think step az
1:15we've worked with quite a lot of
1:17organizations on embodied carbon so
1:20aspect but also organizations like
1:22neighbors infrastructure Australia GBCA
1:25NZGBC and on the acronyms go the reason
1:28that we work with these organizations is
1:30we like to work on really sticky
1:32problems with organizations ones that
1:34don't have a really easy answer or
1:37necessarily a linear process to go
1:39through them. And so we work with those
1:42organizations to work and understand
1:45their stakeholder needs, where things
1:47are at globally and then formulate
1:49solutions that are practical and
1:51pragmatic and something that can really
1:53make a difference. That process starts
1:56with of course defining the problem. We
1:57need to understand what we're trying to
1:59address. In this particular one, we're
2:02talking about embodied carbon within a
2:04project. So we're looking at the built
2:07environment specifically and there is a
2:09whole life cycle of a building or
2:12infrastructure. So any kind of asset in
2:14the built environment. But what ASB and
2:17others are doing at the moment is really
2:19focusing on upfront embodied carbon.
2:21That first part where we're focused on
2:24the things that we can impact now. So
2:26the decisions that we make in
2:28construction today impact and lock in
2:31the emissions that happen at the start
2:32of the life cycle. we have the power to
2:35make a difference and to make different
2:37choices and also it has a big impact. So
2:40this is from a report that we did with
2:41the GBCA Green Building Council of
2:43Australia back in 2021 and in that
2:47report we looked at what would happen if
2:51building materials didn't decarbonize
2:53and all that happened was the grid
2:55transitioned to being 100% renewable.
2:58And what we found that embodied carbon,
3:01the sort of lime green bit, would go
3:03from 16% of built environment emissions
3:06up to 85% of built environment emissions
3:10by 2050 if building materials don't
3:13decarbonize. And what that looks like in
3:16terms of the trajectory is you can see
3:18the darker color descends like a
3:20slippery dip. Um because the we modeled
3:23the grid as decarbonizing
3:26but the bottom bit that lime green bit
3:28is actually slowly creeping up as the
3:30line shows that the area constructed is
3:33increasing. So, we need to make sure
3:36that we're focusing on embodied carbon
3:39because even by 2035 on that graph, you
3:42can see that they were projected in that
3:44report to be roughly 50/50. So, what's
3:47so hard about this? What are the
3:49challenges that we're facing? Well, what
3:51we did is we went through all the
3:53consultations that we've been involved
3:54in over the past few years and discussed
3:58that with a group of stakeholders and
4:00particularly aspect steering committee
4:02and pulled together an issues paper that
4:04was released in June last year. In that
4:07issues paper, we laid out research that
4:10we had done and we laid out a set of
4:14challenges that we felt the built
4:16environment needed to tackle based on
4:18that feedback we'd received before.
4:20Those challenges we called our seven
4:21decarbonization dilemmas because there's
4:24nothing like a bit of alliteration to
4:25make you smile. So the first one of
4:27those was direction. So about getting
4:28direction from a regulatory perspective
4:31or from companies in tenders and
4:33contracts to make sure that we
4:36understand how it is required to bring
4:38lower carbon construction to the
4:40mainstream. On that mainstream bit,
4:43that's incredibly important. When we're
4:45talking about decarbonization, we're
4:46talking about the whole built
4:48environment. This isn't just green
4:50building. This is all of the built
4:52environment as it stands today.
4:54Secondly, to develop industry capacity
4:56to decarbonize the knowledge and the
4:59skills that industry needs to be able to
5:01keep moving forward. The third is
5:04disclosure. How do we continue to reduce
5:08if we don't know what our benchmark is?
5:10If we don't know how to measure
5:11consistently so that we can compare what
5:13we're doing now to what we did before.
5:15So it was about developing standard
5:18methods as well as the data and
5:21reporting associated with that. The
5:23fourth was demand. So manufacturers of
5:26building products are crying out for
5:28clarity, consistency, and confidence in
5:31demand. It's all very well to say we
5:33want lower carbon building materials,
5:35but unless there is a consistent demand
5:38that they can build business cases for,
5:40it just doesn't work. design came up as
5:42a really important issue and that was
5:44number five. Making sure that we're
5:46making the best decisions to lower
5:48embodied carbon all the way from concept
5:51of a project all the way to completion,
5:54not just when we get to procurement and
5:55value engineering. The detail is about
5:57making sure that we can choose the best
6:00product options, supporting that with
6:02appropriate standards and templates to
6:06make sure that we can achieve the best
6:08that we can. And the fifth of uh the
6:10seventh rather is of course to deliver
6:13delivering lower carbon assets because
6:14we can put all of the rest of this in
6:16place but if we're not going to actually
6:19deliver on the things that we're talking
6:20about in the end it's quite meaningless.
6:23We did research after the issues paper
6:25was developed to see how quickly does
6:28this built environment need to
6:30decarbonize to meet our commitments
6:32according to the Paris agreement. And
6:34this graph is frightening. If you have a
6:37look at that middle line there at 2035
6:40compared to 2020 on the left, we need to
6:43have decarbonized the whole built
6:45environment by 60 to 75%. Now, that's
6:48particularly frightening cuz we know
6:50this is really hard for green buildings.
6:53When there are things like green star
6:54that are going through, it's really hard
6:56to achieve more than 40%. For example,
6:59we need 60 to 75% by 2035. And this is
7:03for the whole built environment. Every
7:05house, apartment block, shopping center,
7:07office tower, road, railway, bridge,
7:11airport, you name it. All of the
7:14infrastructure and buildings need to
7:16meet this target in order for us to have
7:18a chance of meeting the Paris agreement.
7:21What's even scary, you can see there's
7:22like this broad green line there. It's
7:24not just that little blue one in the
7:26middle. That broad green line is
7:28actually trying to represent that when
7:32we build something, the day we design it
7:35isn't the day that we use the materials
7:37and build it. So if we want to achieve
7:4060% by 2035, actually if you take follow
7:45that green back band back to the left
7:46and about 2032, we need to be designing
7:49for a 60% reduction. Uh so this is
7:52coming on us really quickly. That's only
7:54seven years away. Some building cycles
7:57can take longer than that, but we can't
7:59rely on materials to get us there. It's
8:01all very well to jump up and down and
8:02say we need materials to decarbonize and
8:04give us lower carbon options, but
8:06honestly, it's just not possible at the
8:09quantity, intensity, and scale that this
8:13needs to be delivered in that time
8:15frame. The technology and infrastructure
8:17that we have to generate buildings just
8:20does not allow that. Yes, there are some
8:22lower carbon offerings and we need to
8:24take them up where we can but across the
8:27whole built environment there is that
8:29gap that is being shown there and we
8:31need to have other ways to address it.
8:34Now the question is what's the solution?
8:36Well, we looked we did a lot of research
8:40around the globe to see what regulatory
8:43and programs were in place to see what
8:47other countries were doing. What are
8:48other jurisdictions doing to drive down
8:51embodied carbon? All of this
8:52information, by the way, is in the
8:54issues paper and in the annex to the
8:56issues paper. From the research that we
8:59did, we did an overview of leading
9:01countries and what they were doing to
9:02drive down carbon in the built
9:04environment. Uh, and there's a lot of
9:06countries doing good things, but they're
9:08all different. They have different
9:10rules. They have different standards.
9:12They have different focus areas. They
9:15have different methodologies and they
9:16don't align. And so the easy answer for
9:19us would have been pick a winner and
9:21follow it. But there really wasn't a
9:23winner to follow. So we had to look
9:26harder. So what is the solution? Well,
9:28we knew that global alignment just
9:29doesn't exist. And there is no perfect
9:32answer. There's no silver bullet that
9:34would solve everything. The other thing
9:37that we heard in consultation is that
9:39different approaches across Australia
9:40are slowing progress. So just like
9:42there's this incredible diversity
9:44internationally in Australia by states
9:47or even even local governments let alone
9:50private enterprise they've all got
9:52different asks different requirements
9:54and different timings and that's really
9:56slowing progress in terms of
9:57manufacturing knowing how to respond.
9:59One thing that we did notice is that
10:01stakeholders are clear on what they
10:02need. So we published a consultation
10:04report that explains what the
10:07stakeholders required.
10:09We took all of that consultation
10:10feedback and we compiled it into a
10:13stakeholder consultation report. It's
10:15available on the ASB website and also on
10:17our website. Here are just some of the
10:20comments from within that report. There
10:23are many many more things that
10:24stakeholders are asking for are things
10:27like bold policy measures, talking to
10:30industry, focusing on EPDS in terms of
10:34reliable measurement alignment and
10:36harmonization. This consistency thing
10:38comes up time after time. Clarity and
10:41consistency around policy, clear and
10:44concise education, making sure what's
10:47specified is installed. We heard many
10:49times that companies are specifying a
10:54certain product, but then it actually
10:56gets substituted out. And what was a
10:58lowcarbon intention isn't necessarily
11:01low carbon delivery. We also heard that
11:03design and reducing embodied carbon
11:05through design is incredibly important.
11:07Uh that actually there are many options
11:10that can help to reduce embodied carbon
11:12right back at the start of the project
11:14from concept and many of those options
11:16are missed if they're not taken up at
11:18the beginning. We're also told we should
11:20be looking to try to build less and to
11:23use alternate options where we can to
11:25make sure that we're using renewables,
11:27using materials to their highest
11:29purpose, doing the best we can, using
11:31more recycled and waste materials and
11:33incentivizing the supply chain to
11:35change. And that was only a snippet.
11:38It's there's much much more which is in
11:40that consultation report. We then worked
11:42with ASBEC to take all of this and to
11:45support them to create solutions or
11:48proposed solutions that can really help
11:51to advance the position for the built
11:53environment in Australia. And ASB then
11:56took that and consulted with their many
11:58stakeholders to make sure that there is
12:01an industry agreed unified approach that
12:04is now presented as a policy road map.
12:07And now I'm going to hand over to
12:08Allison who's going to explain the key
12:10recommendations in that policy road map
12:12and how it actually is possible to make
12:15a really big difference uh in a short
12:18period of time by following the
12:20recommendations of ASPEC. Over to you
12:22Allison.
12:23>> Well, thank you Nicole. Now you should
12:26hopefully see my presentation up there
12:28on the screen. So fabulous. Really
12:31excited to to work with the ThinkStep
12:33team on this really important project.
12:36But lovely to hear as part of the poll.
12:39Many of you in this webinar may not be
12:41as familiar with ASBECK. So the
12:43Australian Sustainable Built Environment
12:45Council, we are a member organization,
12:48but our members are not people or
12:50companies. Our members peak bodies, peak
12:53bodies in the built environment sector.
12:55We also enjoy a really collaborative
12:58relationship with uh government and
13:00academic observer members. But our role
13:03is to bring together a very very diverse
13:06range of interests together with the
13:09common goal of sustainability and really
13:12nutted out have really robust
13:14discussions about what a common approach
13:17should be across the sector. So very
13:20very important especially when we're
13:22talking about a subject like embodied
13:24carbon. So Nicole started with a bit of
13:28a a why around embodied carbon in in her
13:31presentation and gave you a few
13:33statistics. I'll bring up a few more to
13:36talk about the why before I launch into
13:40the results of our cons uh our
13:42comprehensive policy framework. So one
13:45of the reports that think collaborated
13:48with infrastructure Australia on was a a
13:51bit of a baseline. So like Nicole said,
13:54from an Australian point of view, we
13:57need to know at the very basic level
14:00what our carbon intensity is now in
14:03relation to upfront embody carbon across
14:06the sector. And it's one of those things
14:08that we found out as we were going into
14:11this project process. You know, we
14:13originally had a focus on buildings. You
14:16know, it was uh driven by the work of
14:18neighbors and their work in commercial
14:20buildings. But we found that from an
14:22embodied carbon perspective, this is a
14:25sectorwide thing. Whether you're talking
14:27about buildings, whether you're talking
14:28about infrastructure, we all tap into
14:31our same supply chain. So the mechanisms
14:34that we need to look at need to be able
14:37to talk to all sectors of of the
14:40economy. And there's a bit of a
14:42breakdown of of what we're looking at in
14:43terms of embodied carbon. We also
14:46recognize that you know embodied carbon
14:49occurs throughout an asset life cycle
14:51and or reife but we recognize that
14:55upfront embodied carbon is a good you
14:58know 70 odd% of the asset life cycle and
15:01so it's got the most immediate
15:03opportunity to reduce and and and look
15:06at mechanisms to reduce the emissions in
15:10the extraction and manufacturing
15:13processes the transport and construction
15:15process processes. So the the A1 to A5
15:18as as Nicole had in one of her earlier
15:20diagrams.
15:22So again as as Nicole mentioned, we went
15:25through a comprehensive process where we
15:28were standing on the shoulders of
15:30giants. So we took all of the existing
15:33research and analysis that was out there
15:35prior to ASB taking this on and we we
15:39used this to inform the issues paper
15:41that was released at the neighbors
15:43conference back in gosh 2023 now. So
15:48this the issues paper was really
15:50important because it helped start that
15:52conversation about what needs to happen
15:55across the value chain and we received a
15:58lot of really interesting insights from
16:01our conversations with stakeholders and
16:03it helped us understand and evolve our
16:06our perception of what this challenge
16:09was like. We also during the
16:11consultation there was some amazing
16:14advances in policy policy in
16:17infrastructure. So at the time uh
16:20infrastructure New South Wales had
16:22released its decarbonizing
16:24infrastructure delivery policy. So there
16:26was a really great opportunity for ASBK
16:29to align with what was happening in the
16:32infrastructure space and ensure that
16:34what we were talking about in relation
16:36to buildings matched and aligned with
16:38what was happening in infrastructure. So
16:40a really great opportunity and that
16:42resulted in our comprehensive policy
16:45framework where we do look at all of the
16:48different types of elements of the built
16:50environment. So again, that's how a
16:54comprehensive policy framework was born.
16:57And harking back to a slide that Nicole
17:00had earlier, we we outlined that, you
17:04know, using a very sort of simple
17:06trajectory in reductions and noticing
17:09the the design versus construction lag.
17:12We did put out to industry that we
17:15really need to be aiming for a 60 to 75%
17:19reduction in embody carbon by 2035. So
17:22we're thinking about all our NDC's, but
17:25we were very very aware and throughout
17:28many of our conversations with our
17:30manufacturing interests, every single
17:33manufacturing sector, every single
17:35material sector is on their own
17:36decarbonization journey and trajectory
17:39out to 2050. That's they need to be
17:42supported and they need to happen and
17:45but we did recognize that if you take
17:48some of the big m um you know the the
17:51voluous materials used in our sector
17:53it's going to take them a little bit
17:55longer to decarbonize because they're
17:57still working out the right solutions.
18:00So by 2035 we cannot rely on material
18:04substitution alone to meet our targets.
18:07We know that the infrastructure
18:08Australia work looked at you know direct
18:11materials substitution with available
18:13materials that would get us maybe just
18:16over 20% reduction. We need to aim more.
18:20So how do we do this and what can we
18:22implement right now? We developed a
18:25range of levers. These levers solutions
18:29that we can employ to reduce embodied
18:32carbon. So on there on the screen like
18:36we say back in the issues paper around
18:39the the design aspect from concept the
18:42concept to completion. Concept is where
18:45we're looking at planning and
18:47procurement. There's at the very very
18:49design stages as at the very early
18:51concept stages um they are the most
18:54tremendous opportunities to reduce
18:57embodied carbon or upfront embody
18:59carbon. So being a lot more un cognizant
19:02of the problem you are trying to solve
19:05the the options you have in front of you
19:08to plan better design better these are
19:11really important levers to reduce embody
19:14carbon. We also recognize that building
19:18design and and material effici
19:21efficiency, even something as as
19:23straightforward as housing size, the
19:26smaller we're building, do you need that
19:28extra rumpus room when when you're
19:29building a new house, these are really
19:32important decisions around whether or
19:34not you you have the ability to to
19:36reduce your embodied carbon. So, you
19:39know, a lot of opportunities there to
19:40reduce. the the blue uh lever relates to
19:45our materials supply chain. So
19:47absolutely supporting them on their own
19:50decarbonization trajectories to ensure
19:52that we have and and reward these
19:55lowcarbon materials or or zerocarbon
19:58materials and and have a market for
20:00these materials. So that needs to happen
20:02at the same time just as much. And the
20:05the whole A4 to A5 processes in the
20:09building life cycle or or asset life
20:11cycle, fossil fuelfree transport and
20:14construction. Again, that needs to
20:16happen and there are some really clear
20:18wins. The important point about the
20:21levers is that the composition of these
20:24solutions and the extent to which they
20:26influence our embodied carbon reductions
20:29they will change over time. So you know
20:32we need to go hard in the early years to
20:35reduce emissions through better building
20:37design through material efficiency and
20:39planning mechanisms uh but set and also
20:43set in motion incentives that will help
20:45our supply chain decarbonize. But as we
20:48sort of move past 2035, we are hoping
20:51that the decarbonization of our
20:53construction products and materials and
20:56their supply chains supply chains will
20:58you know generate more you know
21:00substantial emissions reduction
21:02opportunities for the sector. But again,
21:04I think out of every policy that we've
21:07seen in the last couple of years around
21:10reducing emissions in, you know, the
21:12built environment scope 3, it's the it's
21:16the earlier you looking at carbon in a
21:20concept or a project, um, the bigger the
21:23opportunity, the bigger the potential
21:24for carbon reductions. So this is really
21:28important when we're looking at skills
21:30and capability building to target those
21:33professions that do have the um ability
21:37to make decisions that can dramatically
21:39lower carbon right at the outset. So I
21:42will spend a bit of time on this
21:44particular slide. So ASB you know we got
21:48all the amazing work brought to us from
21:50thinkstep with the preliminary
21:52recommendations based on the
21:54consultation. We had a lot of sessions
21:56with our industry and government
21:58partners across buildings across
22:01infrastructure to come up with eight
22:03priorities for government at all levels
22:07and industry to start right now you know
22:10working together and and continuing the
22:12momentum over the next decade. So these
22:14eight priorities priorities that we are
22:18right away you know this can we can have
22:21these discussions right now. We know
22:23that there is an update to the
22:25trajectory for low energy buildings.
22:27Hopefully this week it the energy and
22:29climate change ministerial council
22:31looking at that trajectory. This
22:34trajectory helps understand helps set a
22:37tone for the built environment or for
22:39buildings and and potentially look at
22:41the levers that need to happen to to
22:43reduce embodied carbon. We know that the
22:46infrastructure sector also needs a
22:48common policy across the country, a
22:51common policy ambition around the
22:53reduction in carbon and a consistent
22:56policy approach across the sector. So
22:59that needs to happen whether or not
23:00you're looking at buildings or
23:02infrastructure. It needs to be
23:03nationally aligned and we need to be,
23:05you know, singing from the same song
23:07sheet. In tandem, we also need to be
23:10continuing investment in our tools. So
23:13we have the neighbors tool and and
23:14common approach. There is the approach
23:17and measurement methodology agreed
23:19throughout ITM. So the infrastructure
23:21transport ministers meeting. We need to
23:24ensure that the tools and databases and
23:27common frameworks invested in and
23:29maintained so that all of our built
23:32environment sector can continue to use
23:34the same thing with the same outcomes.
23:37as a a very very big no-brainer is the
23:41support for Australian manufacturers. We
23:43need to ensure that they given the right
23:46drivers to reduce embodied carbon.
23:49That's you know a positive you know in
23:51the terms of investment for their own
23:54decarbonization processes but also um
23:57the ability for them to understand the
23:59carbon impact of their processes. So,
24:01you know, processes like environmental
24:03product declarations, third-party
24:06verified carbon assessments, that's what
24:08you're looking at because unless you
24:10understand your impact, you can't, you
24:12know, make change, make positive change.
24:15So, it it's just about our, you know, as
24:17if we own a building or if we own a
24:20infrastructure asset, you know, our
24:22scope three is the manufacturing sector
24:25scope one and two. So, everyone working
24:27together to reduce these emissions. Uh
24:30we also recognize that what we can do
24:32right now is prioritize that reuse or
24:36retrofit first processes in our planning
24:38mechanisms and decisions. And that
24:41really embodies the elements of
24:42circularity. You know, keeping assets at
24:45their highest level um assets and
24:47materials at their highest level of use
24:50for longer really needing to adopt these
24:54behaviors and processes at the outset.
24:56We also recognize that minimum standards
25:00need to be set. We need to have
25:02government lead in their procurement
25:04processes and really drive and create
25:07those markets for lowcarbon behaviors.
25:09Um whether it's lowcarbon materials or
25:12lowcarbon and fossil fuel-f free
25:14transport and construction processes.
25:17Another no-brainer capaci skills
25:20capacity and awareness. all of these
25:22elements. If you think about the built
25:24environment value chain, we really need
25:26to focus on upskilling all of our
25:29professions, it's not just the
25:30sustainability team that needs to think
25:33about this. It's procurers, it's it's
25:35decision makers, it's it's everyone
25:38along the life cycle and relife or even
25:41the value chain. Everyone needs to be
25:43aware of the consequences of the carbon
25:46consequences of their decisions. Then we
25:49had a few industry or segment specific
25:52recommendations around the national
25:54construction code and the need for
25:57signaling and understanding about the
25:59mechanisms and and giving industry time
26:01to adjust whether it's the commercial
26:03sector or the residential sector. Um and
26:06then the the last recommendation is is
26:09around that level playing field for
26:11manufacturers. So it's a level level
26:14playing field to ensure that we don't
26:16have carbon leakage but it's also a
26:18level playing field in terms of
26:20understanding life cycle assessments. So
26:23we want to be able to understand you
26:25know compare like for like in terms of
26:28delivery like EPDS or other third party
26:32verified assessments. Um we we need to
26:34ensure that they're they're saying the
26:36same thing. So each of these
26:38recommendations we go into the paper,
26:41they each have the ability to pull
26:44different levers. So the levers are
26:46colorcoded throughout the document. So
26:49the levers related to the
26:51recommendations in their way of being
26:54able to take the opportunities and and
26:57get the change that we need in in each
26:59space. So I recommend you read if you're
27:02interested in any of the
27:03recommendations. I also recommend you
27:06read at the same time as Beck also
27:09released via our infrastructure net zero
27:11initiative report around understanding
27:15what net zero means in terms of
27:17infrastructure.
27:19This unpacks, you know, we're talking
27:21about scope 1, 2, and three. What does
27:23that mean? How does the scope one two
27:26three reporting relate to what we're
27:28talking about in relation to PA 2080 and
27:30the managing of carbon reductions at
27:34every life cycle stage of an asset. So I
27:37I recommend that if you're interested in
27:40the infrastructure space you also have a
27:42look at this report because it helps to
27:44unpack how the scopes and the greenhouse
27:48gas reporting aligns with carbon
27:50reduction opportunities at the different
27:52life cycle stages. So that's another
27:55really great report that I encourage you
27:57all to read. And that's it from me in
28:00terms of a summary of the report. Very
28:02happy and looking forward to answering
28:05the questions that you have. And here's
28:07some QR codes up on the screen just in
28:09case you haven't seen all the amazing
28:11links that Emily's been sharing with you
28:13all.
28:14>> Awesome. Thank you so much Allison and
28:16Nicole for taking us through all things
28:18ASB. I was involved in the project a
28:21little bit, but even that was a lot of
28:22new information for me. So, I'm sure all
28:24our audience did learn a lot from that
28:26as well, which is fantastic. We have a
28:28few questions now. So, we've got this
28:30first one here from Eva who asks, "Can
28:33we expect the projected embodied
28:35emissions to be similar in transport
28:38infrastructure?" Nicole, did you want to
28:40answer that question?
28:41>> I will. And Em, if you can pop a link in
28:44the chat that I just sent you, please.
28:46In the infrastructure Australia report
28:48that they released, I think it was yeah
28:51August 2024, they actually reported on
28:54embodied carbon emissions across the
28:56whole built environment or upfront
28:57embodied carbon emissions particularly
29:00as the focus. So out of our whole
29:02national footprint, 10% of our national
29:05footprint are embodied carbon emissions
29:07with almost 7% out of the national
29:10footprint being upfront carbon in the
29:12built environment. Out of that 7% of
29:14upfront carbon which represents the
29:16whole built environment, 27% of that is
29:20represented by transport infrastructure
29:23alone. So when we're talking about
29:25building roads and bridges, this is
29:27where we're at. And 27% of transport
29:31infrastructure also includes rail is the
29:34built environment upfront carbon in
29:36Australia. So it is very significant for
29:38transport. the other numbers there, 59%
29:41is buildings and 15% is just in
29:45utilities. So, you know, we're talking
29:46like power lines and things like that.
29:4815% so also quite significant. So, yeah,
29:51very very similar for transport.
29:53>> Great. Thanks, Nicole. And yes, I've
29:55just popped a link in the chat in case
29:56anyone wants to see that Infrastructure
29:58Australia report. So the next question,
30:00will the recent ISSB/ IFRSS2
30:04draft amendments that propose easing for
30:06finance emissions in scope 3 impact us
30:09here in Australia? I assume this doesn't
30:11impact built environment. It was
30:12discussed a lot at the recent AICD
30:14climate governance forum and would love
30:16to know your thoughts. So Allison or
30:18Nicole, one of you feel free to take
30:19that one away.
30:20>> This is a standoff with both people not
30:22wanting to answer the question.
30:23>> You're talking now, Nicole. So
30:25>> yeah, I'm I'm talking so I guess I'll
30:26continue. Look, I I don't know this in
30:29detail. So the the standards for
30:31reporting are governed by the ASB, the
30:33Australian Accounting Standards Board in
30:36Australia. Let's just assume that scope
30:383 reporting for financed emissions was
30:40taken off the table. Financed emissions
30:43is about how much you're what you're
30:45investing into. But actually calculating
30:48the emissions of buildings still has to
30:51get reported in a different scope 3
30:54category. So category one, the purchase
30:57goods and services would still get that
30:59not for say the bank or the investor but
31:01rather for the builder. So it would
31:03still come up but not necessarily in
31:06finance depending on where the rules
31:08land in Australia and I'm not aware
31:09where that's going to land yet. Sorry
31:11Dominique, I don't have a better answer
31:13for you than that at this stage. And
31:15thanks and and Dominique, I think what I
31:18would say probably is I I think you know
31:21how we said you know everyone's scopes
31:24you know scope one and two could be
31:26someone else's scope three potentially
31:29the companies that producing materials
31:32in Australia that are manufacturing they
31:36will start to need to look at you know
31:38reducing scope one and two. I think from
31:41our perspective, we just wanted to
31:43ensure that the built environment could
31:46reward and incentivize that looking at
31:49reducing scope one and two of our um
31:51value chain, our supply chain and what
31:54are those what are some really good
31:56levers that can you know result in the
31:58win-win. So, you know, having people
32:01demand the lowcarbon materials so that
32:03they can be invested in. So, not
32:06particularly around the financing, but
32:08at least just looking at the levers to
32:10drive behaviors.
32:12>> And that's actually going to be really
32:13important because a lot of our building
32:16products that we use in Australia are
32:18actually imported and may or may not
32:20come under the same regulation that the
32:22ones do here for reporting. So,
32:23important that we're actually drawing
32:25that data in regardless of where they're
32:26coming from.
32:27>> Yeah, absolutely.
32:29>> Awesome. We've just got one more
32:31question which I'll I'll throw out and
32:32then we'll wrap up. So just wondering if
32:35we can go back to the roots. Is there
32:36any particular standard or policy or
32:39intervention for measuring embodied
32:41carbon right from the start to the end
32:42of a project as this is the stage where
32:45most emissions lie considering the
32:47transportation and processing of
32:48materials. This seems to be mostly
32:51ignored when it comes to practical
32:52incorporation um in regards to on-site
32:55consideration. Is there any studies or
32:57case studies particularly measuring that
33:00construction stage embodied carbon? So,
33:03yeah, I'll leave that as a free-for-all
33:04question. I feel like either of you
33:05could answer that one. So, yeah. Do you
33:07want to go first?
33:09Happy to.
33:10>> Thanks. Um, all I can say is yes, there
33:13are standards out there. I know, you
33:16know, when I talked about the the gap
33:19between the ASB policy paper and
33:23comprehensive policy framework, so much
33:26policy from government was released. And
33:30from an infrastructure perspective, they
33:32pointed to PAZ 2080. So a publicly
33:36available specification produced in the
33:38UK that is can't remember the name, but
33:41it's it's something like carbon
33:43management across buildings and
33:45infrastructure. And that looks at all of
33:48the opportunities you can do to reduce
33:52carbon at every single stage of an asset
33:55life cycle. So there are standards out
33:58there that is a carbon management
34:00standard. So that helps you make the
34:02right decisions at the right time. There
34:04are also other standards and Nicole is
34:06very wellversed with this and you can
34:09probably talk into it around the life
34:11cycle analysis. So I might pass to you
34:13Nicole.
34:14>> Yeah absolutely. So the one of the
34:17biggest moves that's happened in the
34:18Australian built environment for
34:19embodied carbon is that neighbors now
34:21has published a rating tool for the
34:23upfront carbon of buildings. So again,
34:26we're talking about modules A1 to A5 in
34:28the standards speak. Um, so talking
34:30about from raw materials, transport,
34:33manufacture, transport to a construction
34:36site, and construction emissions, all of
34:38that together. So all the way up to
34:40practical completion. Neighbors now has
34:43a rating tool for that. It is out. The
34:45rules are public. They're freely
34:47available to everyone. And and so is
34:50their calculator. And we're really
34:52encouraging people, you know, at least
34:54use that methodology even if you don't
34:56get a neighbors rating, use that
34:57methodology. The infrastructure bodies
35:00are also using basically the same
35:02methodology. So Australia's falling into
35:05alignment behind that methodology and
35:07the reason for that is it was really
35:09heavily consulted and we got you know
35:12massive stakeholder agreement to the
35:13methodology. So that's why everyone's
35:15falling in behind it. I'm just going to
35:17jump to the next question. MPD is being
35:19used by ASB as a means of identifying A1
35:21to A5 carbon and certification.
35:23Absolutely. The ASB paper that Allison
35:26just referred to pointed out EPDS and
35:29verified carbon footprints. So, we want
35:32to make sure that it is trustworthy uh
35:34that it's aligned with the standards.
35:36So, that A1 to A5 is critical. Um but
35:39yeah, EPDS are the gold standard for how
35:41to develop and publish that kind of
35:44info.
35:45>> Perfect. Awesome. And we just have I
35:47know I said this before but we do have
35:48one last question now I think if either
35:50of you happy to answer. It's more of a
35:52sentiment really I suppose but it's yeah
35:54to achieve big cuts quickly. It seems
35:56like the focus should be on forum policy
35:58level one maybe not that two and three
36:01>> and policy level one I gather.
36:03>> Yes I believe so. So this is the design.
36:06Yeah the the design and planning stage.
36:08Absolutely right David. the
36:10opportunities there immense and not only
36:13that very very much aligned with
36:16circularity principles. So it's about
36:20understanding you know what do I need to
36:22do to build sufficiently or you know I'm
36:25trying to house x many people how do I
36:28do that in a way that considers the use
36:31of resources in in a much better way or
36:34the reuse or or the you know sweating
36:37the assets. So very much good on you for
36:41embracing circularity because th that
36:43recommendation is very much around
36:45circularity thinking.
36:46>> Awesome. Well, that brings us to the end
36:48of the webinar. I just want to take
36:50another minute to thank Allison and
36:51Nicole for coming on today and talking
36:53about all things ASB and the embodied
36:55carbon work that has been done. Have a
36:58wonderful rest of your afternoon and see
36:59you next time.
37:03We have many more webinar replays on a
37:05whole host of sustainability topics. You
37:08can check them out on our website and
37:10our YouTube channel.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Reducing upfront carbon: A roadmap for Australia’s built environment - webinar with ASBEC by thinkstep-anz, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 5,956 words across 916 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.