A geographic solution to an environmental challenge
By Nick Jones, business strategist, Esri UK
Under mounting government, financial and moral pressure, organisations are starting to implement a wide range of carbon reduction strategies. Esri UK business strategist Nick Jones explains why a deeper understanding of geography, and the ability to harness geographic information systems (GIS) technology, is crucial to the success of these initiatives.
Not that long ago, companies that launched ‘green initiatives’ did so for positive publicity. Today the picture is very different. Organisations across the public and private sectors are increasingly having to implement strategies to reduce their carbon emissions – or face penalties if they don’t. Central government has committed the UK to reducing carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, and it is introducing legislation to ensure that this target is met.
In the public sector, the government has introduced Local Carbon Frameworks, which compel local authorities to set quantifiable aims relating to carbon emissions. The pilot scheme, involving nine local councils in the UK, was introduced before the election of the Coalition Government and before the term ‘localisation’ took on the significance that has today. But it is essentially about passing responsibility for achieving the carbon reduction target from central government departments to local authorities.
Private sector organisations too have been challenged with helping the government to achieve its 80% carbon reduction target. The UK’s top 5,000 energy consumers are now required to report on their energy consumption under the Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme. These organisations have to pay a levy based on the amount of carbon that they emit. The money raised from this levy is then paid back to those organisations that achieve the greatest carbon reductions. It’s a big carrot, big stick approach.
No organisation can afford the financial penalties that come with inaction. Equally, however, no organisation can afford the financial losses that might accrue from |160| ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRY MAGAZINE
a carbon reduction initiative that fails, due to poor planning or ineffective execution. All business executives therefore have to think more strategically and more carefully to make sure that their carbon reduction strategies are a success.
The environmental challenge As with all business initiatives, the best way to reduce the risk of a new low carbon investment is to conduct careful planning and to gain a thorough understanding of the issues. If we want to transform our environment, we have to really comprehend it. In order to gain this deep understanding of our environment, complex questions have to be answered about everything from where an initiative should be sited and who it will benefit, to how it will impact upon other buildings and communities. All these questions rely on geography.
Take local authorities and energy providers, for example. These organisations will need to ask a cascading series of questions like: Do we have a south facing series of roofs, suitable for solar energy? Are those roofs free from shade or obstruction? Are they big enough to accommodate a solar panel? Or do we have the density of buildings in a given location to make it economically viable to introduce a combined heat and power station? Is there land nearby to produce crops for that power station? And are the meteorological conditions right for those crops?
Retailers, banks and other organisations with large numbers of sites will have to ask: Which of our locations have the available space to accommodate combined heat and power generation? Which of our buildings receive high amounts of sunlight or wind each year? Is there perhaps social housing in the area or other businesses that might want to tap into our greener power source and purchase heat in a cleaner way? And which communities might be affected by the proposed development or noise pollution?
To answer these questions – and hundreds of others like them – organisations need to be able to perform detailed,
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180