Introduction
The advent of technology and the industrial revolution have significantly affected global climate. Specifically, the 21st century has been marked by increased carbon emissions, negatively influencing climatic patterns and conditions. More precisely, the high emissions have resulted in global warming, loss of biodiversity, extreme weather conditions, and health hazards. The article “Whole Life Carbon Assessments” provides a comprehensive understanding of the effects of the built environment on carbon emissions (RICS 11). Specifically, the publication highlights that roughly 40 per cent of the carbon emission is attributed to built assets (RICS 9). As such, there is a dire need to assess carbon during the life cycle of different projects. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) provided an instrumental technique for assessment known as Whole Life Carbon Assessments (WLCAs).
Analysis
Reducing carbon emissions that emanate from the built environment is a complex issue. The problem is multifaceted because there is no standardized method to precisely measure and compare the carbon emissions of various built assets. Secondly, existing traditional methods of measuring carbon footprints focus solely on identifying operational emissions of the asset during its lifespan. However, the conventional approaches neglect measuring carbon emissions from material production, transportation, construction, and end-of-life processes. Therefore, the lack of standardized methodology hinders efforts to address the climate crisis. A compressive framework will aid in mitigating carbon emissions and enhance sustainability in the built environment.
Alternatives
Several solutions were proposed to address the problem of measuring the carbon footprint of built assets and carbon emissions. The first approach entailed the development of standard measurement frameworks for assessing carbon emissions (RICS 11). These frameworks will ensure a consistent method to measure carbon emissions across various projects, facilitating comparisons among multiple projects to establish areas for improvement. Besides, promoting the use of sustainable materials and construction practices could help with the issue. This approach involves encouraging the use of environmentally friendly materials, which helps lower the carbon footprint (RICS 45). Third, promoting construction methods that adopt energy-efficient methods will help minimize carbon emissions.
Another proposed solution entails the implementation of regulations and certification programs that consider environmental sustainability in the built environment (RICS 77). These programs will require individuals involved in building projects to meet specific requirements. Lastly, stakeholders should be equipped with the relevant knowledge necessary to drive positive change regarding a more environmentally friendly built environment. Specifically, the awareness will increase their advocacy on the advantages of sustainability and understanding of the adverse environmental effects of the built environment.
Recommendations
There is a need to address the problem of measuring carbon footprints; the Whole Life Carbon Assessment (WLCA) technique was chosen as the best alternative. Thus, implementing WLCA helps ensure a standardized method to establish the sources of carbon emissions. The methodology is recommended because it has a comprehensive framework that quantifies operational emissions and other emissions from material production, transportation, construction, and end-of-life processes. Also, the approach utilizes the circular economy and reuse. More specifically, it promotes net zero carbon emission by encouraging recycling and reusing post-end-of-life systems and materials. Besides, the RICS methodology offers a standardized technique for conducting WLCA, which ensures consistency and comparability across different projects (RICS 17). Stakeholders are encouraged to ensure the assessors are competent and accurate in collecting data and that WLCA evaluations are facilitated for successful project implementation. Lastly, the methodology is also recommended because its idea describes how evaluating a developed asset across its whole life cycle is necessary to determine how it will affect the environment. When calculating carbon emissions, this practical method makes sure that operational emissions as well as combined emissions for material goods and end-of-life processes are included.
Conclusion
The concept of WLCA stood out the most as it provided a holistic, comprehensive framework that different stakeholders could implement to reduce and monitor carbon emissions. This practical approach ensures that operational and combined emissions for material products and end-of-life processes are counted when quantifying carbon emissions. With such knowledge, one can determine the most suitable and efficient products and raw materials that can be used in a project’s life cycle. The case study also emphasizes the need for certification schemes that support environmental sustainability in the built environment.
The information provided in the case study applies to different sectors. The sporting industry is a significant contributor to carbon emissions and climate change. When starting a sports facility-related project, it is essential to integrate the WLCs framework from the onset. More specifically, it should be applied sequentially from the pre-approval design, technical designing, post-completion, and construction phases (RICS 9). Since the approach effectively covers all the removals and carbon emissions that occur during the early design phase of the project to the post-completion period it is easy to monitor the carbon emission levels against the set baseline and consider more efficient material to use in the project.
The emissions can be attributed to the participants’ training, sporting tournaments, facilities maintenance and use, and construction processes. The emissions can be reduced by enhancing the operational control and management systems of the facilities, optimizing transportation, and managing waste. From the WLCAs framework, it is encouraged to use sustainably sourced materials, which are also durable and locally sourced during the construction phase (RICS 105). The approach will reduce emissions resulting from maintenance, repair, and transportation. Similarly, during this phase, there is a need to optimize the materials used to deal with emissions from waste. According to the framework, selecting materials that can be reused or recycled during the post-completion stage is important. The fields could also be constructed and designed in ways that can sequester carbon. Lastly, the management team of the facilities should undergo certification programs to indicate their commitment to the climate issue.
Even though the case study focuses on built assets, the WLCA’s recommendations can be utilized in other sectors. For example, it can be applied in manufacturing, transportation, and agriculture to help measure carbon emissions, which will help stakeholders in these sectors make informed decisions regarding environmental sustainability (Li 56). For instance, in the transportation industry, carbon footprinting methodologies are used to assess the emissions associated with different modes of transportation and fuel types. In addition, various initiatives similar to the case recommendation have already been considered to help address climate change issues. For example, building certification programs like LEED and BREEAM have assessments that are equal to or similar to WLCA. These programs provide environmental assessments of certain levels of carbon emissions from various companies across the industry.
Overall, implementing the WLCA methodology has made significant progress in helping to address carbon emissions in the built environment. The climate crisis is a global phenomenon that should be addressed; stakeholders have a standardized framework for evaluating and comparing carbon footprints from different projects. This helps in creating mitigating measures that can change and promote sustainability. Overall, the major discussion points from the case include the significance of the standardized carbon evaluation framework, the importance of comprehensive carbon assessment, and the role of stakeholders in driving change to ensure environmental sustainability.
Works Cited
Li, Jie, et al. “Identifying uncertainties in the whole life carbon assessment of buildings: Sources, types, and potential actions.” Building and Environment (2023): 110779
RICS. “Whole Life Carbon Assessment (WLCA) for the Built Environment.” Rics.org, 2023, www.rics.org/profession-standards/rics-standards-and-guidance/sector-standards/construction-standards/whole-life-carbon-assessment.
write