30
makes a significant impact on the carbon content of the building. However, as mentioned, there are many additional inputs which can contribute towards the environmental impact of the building and the materials used in it; the processes used in manufacturing, administration, storage and distribution. There seems little point in a building materials/systems manufacturer offering a reduced carbon product if the same manufacturer is not committed to reducing the carbon dioxide emissions of its own operations.
Steel and sustainability might not be a connection that everyone makes immediately, but its credentials make a compelling case
recovery rate of 85%, compared to just 13% for timber;
• reduction in a structure’s embodied carbon by using less steel;
• accurate design and manufacturing processes result in virtually zero waste;
• SFS is a lighter material, reducing the environmental impact of transportation.
There is no escaping the fact that steel manufacture is one of the largest global contributors to carbon dioxide emissions, but European steel manufacturers are making great strides to move away from fossil-fuelled processing by using less carbon-intensive electric arc furnaces which are powered by renewable energy to create a reduced carbon steel.
A few steel systems manufacturers now include this as an option for their product ranges; our own Metsec Decarb being one example. It is available on our SFS ranges, internal non-load bearing dry lining studs and purlins.
This steel is a true move towards a reduced carbon future for the construction industry. It does not rely on the smokescreens of greenwashing, mass balance, carbon offsetting or the allocation of green energy for its environmental credentials, but instead stands by its own impressive outputs; compared to blast furnace manufactured steel. Figures as of July 2024 show Metsec Decarb typically contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide per tonne for the same quality of steel.
Beyond material concerns The carbon within the material itself
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
Net zero carbon remains part of the government’s procurement policy. The previous adminstration’s Cabinet Office Action Note PPN06/21 stipulated how government departments need to take account of suppliers’ net zero carbon reduction plans when procuring major government contracts.
While governments at home and abroad have wavered on their commitment to achieving net carbon zero emissions by 2050, there can be little doubt that the objective will remain an integral part of UK policy in the future, even if the deadline is extended.
Manufacturers and suppliers will still need to look at ways in which they can reduce their carbon emissions; as part of voestalpine AG, Metsec remains committed to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2035.
A carbon guarantee As with most things in life, achieving a desired result, in this case a net zero carbon building, will rely on striking a balance between the ideal and the achievable. Faced with a design brief to minimise a building’s carbon footprint, steel might not be the first building material which comes to an architect’s mind. But, on closer inspection, steel, and reduced carbon steel in particular, offers a viable solution when all factors are considered, especially when used in the manufacture of efficient construction solutions.
Specifiers can take added assurance of product/system credentials from manufacturer statements and EPDs which can be included in the final project’s carbon assessments.
Andy Hackett is general manager & director at voestalpine Metsec Dry Lining Division
ADF OCTOBER 2024
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
