The Climate Change conundrum – how much change are we prepared to take?
May 4, 2021
It’s been an extraordinary year for many reasons, not least the pandemic that has changed so many aspects of all our daily lives and continues to be a rollercoaster journey of ups, downs, and imponderables.
Seeking to be optimistic, the virus, at least in the UK, appears to be abating.
Global warming and associated climate change, however, are not.
The Government recently announced radical new climate change commitments that will set the UK on course to cut carbon emissions by 78 per cent by 2035.
This potentially world-leading position will require change, adaptation and flexibility and means the next decade will be decisive in terms of what we can achieve as a nation and, indeed, global community.
More electric cars, better insulated homes, renewable electricity, tree planting and simple lifestyle changes, such as walking and cycling more, will all have a role to play.
Some councils and sectors are already well on the way to significantly slashing their carbon footprint, promising to go over and above the Government targets.
What is abundantly clear is the planning system will have a key role to play in this next decade and much is, of course, being made of the green recovery.
Quite rightly, one of the positives to come from the pandemic has been greater appreciation of the fragility of our biosphere and how nature and people can work symbiotically.
The big question is how far are we prepared to adjust and change?
How much are we prepared to shift our decisions and behaviour, being aware of the real costs of the lifestyles and economies we choose, and their impact on nature?
While it’s great that Boris Johnson has signed the UN Leaders’ Pledge for Nature to prioritise a green recovery and deliver biodiversity targets, this is going to take a mind shift for many of us as we factor in short-term costs, while perhaps not getting immediate return.
Buildings are a key challenge in our quest to become carbon net zero (meaning that any unavoidable emissions are offset).
According to the UK Green Council, about 45 per cent of the UK emissions come from the built environment, with about 10 per cent directly associated with construction.
The planning system’s ability to effect change on existing building performance is, at best, limited. However, we can make significant change going forward when planning our places, spaces and communities, ensuring the highest quality built form is required and then delivered.
We may have to challenge ourselves regarding materials. Design is about far more than materials, but they are an important component in terms of climate adaptation. While many materials can be ‘dressed up’ to look very similar to those around, is that always right?
In a National Park where 23 per cent of the land is covered by woodland, I believe we should be making use of timber. It locks in carbon into its very structure and can be used in a myriad of ways.
Cross-laminated timber, in particular, is supremely strong and can support many buildings. In fact, up to 84m, as I learned recently, in the commanding timber skyscraper that is Brumunddal, Norway. Closer to home, the aptly-titled Forest Green Rovers, based in Gloucestershire, are having their new stadium “Eco Park” built entirely from timber.
There are, of course, plenty other ‘green’ materials for building, including straw, hemp and rammed earth.
We must also not forget the use of greenery and used water re-harvesting – whether to create pleasant and oxygen-providing spaces or actually on buildings themselves. While the Bosco Verticale in Milan may be a bit beyond us, greening buildings should be used at every opportunity.
All this is particularly important given the Government pledge to have 30 per cent of the nation’s land “protected” by 2030. Given that existing protected landscapes need to adapt and develop, so will any new designations.
It’s imperative that in these areas we accept that new development will occur. Coming back to my original train of thought, it’s clear that the need for housing and other land uses will not abate.
But, in this decisive decade for climate change mitigation, building construction should tread as lightly as possible upon the land and its resources. The over-riding goal? That net environmental impact is positive.
Are we, and the planning system, able to recognise the value of the building material and its contribution to net zero growth and potentially make allowances in other directions?
A compelling arena of debate and one I’ll be following closely.
Tim Slaney,
Director of Planning, South Downs National Park Authority
