22
ROUND TABLE REVIEW: SOLUTIONS FOR WATER & ENERGY SAVING IN COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTS
products such as showers were also key. She cited an innovative shower developed by Southampton University to provide 4.5 litres per minute, without performance compromise due to a cleverly formed head. Sadler asserted that while many 15 litre-plus shower heads were sold, “I don’t think you should be able to sell them.” Tom Reynolds confi rmed that manufacturers are currently working on an “appropriate” test of required shower effi ciency which will become a standard. He added that when it comes to reducing fl ow rates, manufacturers were on board – “you’d be surprised at the positive response from the biggest brands.”
Bringing water into carbon calculations One of the key pointers from our round table was the need to look at ways to better integrate water effi ciency considerations into sustainability frameworks like BREEAM. Naomi Sadler gave just one example of how this was already being done, with BREEAM rewarding project designs which included showers, but also advocated using a system like EPCs to drive energy saving alongside water saving in commercial properties. A ‘carrot’ of an aspirational label like an EPC was required, with water was playing second fi ddle to energy savings, she said. Unless there is such a driver, commercial clients were not going to invest “if there’s nothing they’re saying to them, oh, you should be considering your water usage as well as your PV panels.” Christine Pout of BREEAM agreed: “Putting it all under the umbrella of carbon is probably the key. If you start telling people how much carbon is coming from their water usage, and you have the carbon impacts on the bill, that’s the thing that people are focusing on.” She confi rmed that water use has been included in the Net Zero Carbon Building Standard, which she has been involved in developing.
A long way to go For the commercial sector, there is a long way to go to develop both the ‘sticks’ and ‘carrots’ end of the Government’s strategy if it is serious about making the water savings that it wants to happen a reality. With the discussion still largely revolving around carbon savings, and schemes like BREEAM and LETI which focus on carbon and not water saving, there is a mountain to climb to ensure that water is given a higher priority. Andrew Tucker believed that seeing the improvements needed in terms of strategy meant a more bottom-up approach that would “embed water effi ciency and performance for building facility managers or building owners, so that it’s core business.” He added: “Sometimes they don’t even think about water. How do you get them to embed in their targets, in their hierarchy, their SLAs, their KPIs, how does water become business as usual like carbon or energy effi ciency already is.” Beth Robinson of Turner and Townsend pointed to potential improvements in the status quo, saying that changing water use was “all about people’s behaviour; the human element is the big change. What is great to see is the collaboration between water companies to bring products to the market.” While Andrew Tucker pushed back against questions of whether the water companies should or are doing this, he said that the “policy and regulatory landscape has put all the responsibility and fi nancial accountability onto us.” Edward Barnes added however that given the negative perception of water companies that had built up over the last few years, driven by media coverage over the past few yeas, asking “are we comfortable that water companies are the right companies to be
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
fronting this – it’s unlikely they are going to suddenly become the trusted voice. The challenge is who is going to lead.” This round table aired key problems around engaging commercial clients in driving water effi ciency; such as clients will only make such investments if there is either a mandatory requirement, or a business benefi t, and the former at least is sorely lacking. Showing them the fi nancial benefi ts of bringing in better products is key to success, and the delegates clearly outlined the untapped potential. As Richard from co-sponsor Cistermiser said, manufacturers and waiting to respond when a more robust set of requirements does appear. “If there’s a mandate that we know clients or M&Es consultants have to adhere to, manufacturers will innovate.” In the absence of solid regulation, we await to fi nd out what the Cunliffe Review of the water sector has to say on mandating more water effi cient products, and the rumoured mandatory water label. As several attendees reiterated, there is still the perception that only when water prices rise steeply are we likely to see signifi cant change. Thank you to our sponsors Delabie, Cistermiser and eco-cistem for supporting the event.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY & GOVERNMENT
• Tom Reynolds: The sandbox idea for tech overlaps with the Government’s ‘growth triangle,’ and is something we should really push for collectively.
• Edward Barnes: Tax levers are a simple thing you can do immediately; paying VAT on all of these things is crazy. Could there be an intervention to offset against corporation tax?
• Christine Pout: Companies need to report their water use and the carbon impacts; it will point to this as something to keep an eye on and do something about.
• Naomi Sadler: I would like it simply to be reported; basically anything that regularly monitors water use so it’s brought to the forefront of people’s minds, similar to how EPC has become the mechanism on which people now lend money.
• George Warren: Mandate the use of rainwater – just make the most of it; it lands on your building, it is free. If you mandate it, suddenly the issue of cost and space is removed quite quickly.
• Beth Robinson: Incentivise people to not see potable water as their own resource, whatever you use it for. Source and use have to be matched.
• Chris Brooks: Someone in government needs to take ownership and drive it from the top down. Reporting water consumption annually is really good; once clients see what’s going on, and measure it, they start to do the interventions, it becomes a virtuous circle.
• Andrew Tucker: A mandatory label – take behaviours out of the equation, and mandate the 9% reduction into the levers and documents that the commercial sector will pick up, and get it built into their sustainability targets. And we need to engineer the leaky urinals problem out of existence.
ADF MAY 2025
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
