BSEE
James MacGregor, Environmental Economist, Adam Pritchard, Consultant, Stepan Ruzicka, Director, Ramboll
unprecedented impact on global economies, businesses, governments, society, as well as our natural environment. It has exposed many flaws in our ways of living, including limitations in our economies, health systems, food security and supply chains, and has exposed inequalities of costs and opportunities across sectors, markets and societies. Not all impacts have been negative. Many businesses have embraced the Government’s contingency measures, enacting social distancing and remote working and finding new and possibly more efficient ways to operate. As our movement has been restricted, significantly reducing all modal trips except walking and cycling, many of us have realised that much of the time previously spent travelling can be put to better use, both at a professional and personal level. In many areas, the contingency measures have resulted in material improvements in air quality, as well as a reduction in environmental noise and overall GHG emissions. Reduced human activity has resulted in sightings of clean beaches and locally revitalised freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. On the other hand, there have also been negative aspects such increased uncontrolled waste handling and reduction in recycling providing further risk to secondary human health and environmental contamination. However, in light of the hopeful signs of a positive environmental impact, millions of citizens are urging their politicians to ‘listen to the birdsong’ and strive to build a different, more resilient and sustainable future. This is supported
T
he COVID-19 crisis is having an
by mayors of global cities pledging a ‘green recovery’ through the C40 initiative, and leading UK business and investors have called on the Prime Minister to deliver a green recovery plan from the coronavirus pandemic that builds a stronger and more inclusive economy. Despite these pledges, concerns remain that after the relaxation of lockdown, governments and organisations will seek a quick return to ‘business-as- usual’, trading environmental and social improvements in search of a strong economic rebound. Already, global Energy Monitor reports that data on the approval of coal-fired power plants in the first three weeks of March 2020 has exceeded total approvals for 2019. Compounding this is the exacerbated differential among renewable and fossil-fuel costs owing to historically low oil prices.
A ‘sustainable recovery’ that informs decisions over fiscal stimulus and public investment taken over the structure, timing and scale of the global transition from the COVID-19 pandemic is vital as we start to emerge from the worldwide lockdown, embedding long-term planning for an inclusive, sustainable and prosperous future.
Looking into three stages of the pandemic
We see three key stages set in motion around the world as governments and businesses tackle the pandemic:
At the time of writing, multiple governments are expressing their keenness to relax lockdown (Stage 1), and enter one of two potential Stage 2s, with the main triggers being a sustained fall in COVID-19 cases and deaths dropping the reproduction (R) rate significantly below 1.
INDUSTRY COMMENT
Engineering a Sustainable Recovery: how can the UK emerge from COVID19 greener?
Globally, some emerging evidence shows a Stage 2a, ‘business-as-usual' pathway is being pursued in the hope of rapid and stable financial and economic growth. Some examples include suspension of environmental law enforcement, bailouts announced for fossil fuel- based industries, and reductions in renewable energy bought by national grids.
Yet, alongside this, there are many instances of the pursuit of a deliberately sustainable pathway to Stage 2b – a ‘recalibrated recovery’. Notably, businesses around the world have collaborated on campaigns to ensure politicians choose a more sustainable recovery. This is undeniably having an impact. For instance, in recent days, the Air France bailout included several environmental conditions, including the slashing of domestic flights to encourage rail travel. Additionally, the European Parliament and Commission have proposed a recovery and reconstruction package that “should have at its core the Green Deal and the digital transformation in order to kick start the economy”.
Inevitably, all paths will result in Stage 3: stabilisation. However, how this ‘stable’ future will look is highly uncertain.
Innovating a sustainable recovery
Pre-pandemic, sustainability was notoriously difficult to retrofit, expensive to build, and crucially lacked mainstream will from businesses and governments. It requires leadership to overcome short-term political and investment cycles and communicate the long- term costs of inaction and the benefits of an early and more gradual transition.
There is strong evidence that the pandemic is generating fresh trends in sustainability – from more of a focus on localised needs, to a delivery culture, and more time spent outdoors – and consumers are reporting in surveys they intend to make longer-term behavioural changes, including taking fewer flights.
Moreover, the COVID19 pandemic has not only disrupted industries, but also stimulated rapid innovation, demonstrating our innate abilities to adapt. New products, services and opportunities have become market- facing in an unprecedented timeframe.
The challenge facing the buildings sector is how to leverage necessary and potential innovation alongside fresh consumer trends.
This attitude is reflected in a recent letter from the Climate Change Committee to the UK Government, stressing sustainability as a core outcome, with a renewed focus on “reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change”, which it outlined as “integral to any recovery package”. The letter also highlights six ‘resilience principles’, all relating to the above Stage 2b ‘recalibrated recovery’ phase, which highlight the potent risk that, despite the current uplift in environmental performance and recovery, the pandemic will overshadow environmental concerns in the longer term.
The CCC’s Six Principles 1 Use climate investments to support the economic recovery and jobs
2 Lead a shift towards positive long- term behaviours
3 Tackle the wider ‘resilience deficit’ on climate change
4 Embed fairness as a core principle 5 Ensure the recovery does not ‘lock- in’ greenhouse gas emissions or increased climate risk
6 Strengthen incentives to reduce emissions when considering fiscal changes
We have been presented with a valuable opportunity to engineer and plan towards objectives that are truly sustainable. A recent University of Oxford report concluded that clean physical infrastructure investment and building efficiency retrofits are two of the five investment items best placed to deliver effective and sustainable economic recovery, and, despite recent trends, the IEA’s ‘Global Energy Review 2020’ revealed that renewable energy production is the only source growing in demand. We can embed this resilience while ensuring inclusivity and liveability through strategic collaboration between stakeholder groups. The concern is that if we don’t, the recovery period will be longer, more polluting and less beneficial to our economies, society and natural environment. Unless we ensure our recovery from COVID-19 is truly sustainable, we risk locking our future into unsustainable models which are less resilient and more exposed to future shocks, be these economic, epidemiologic or environmental.
8 BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER AUGUST 2020 Read the latest at:
www.bsee.co.uk
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
