Parliamentary inquiry launched into sustainable construction

  • Email
  • Comments (1)
  • Save

Architects asked to submit evidence on challenges to green agenda

MPs have launched a parliamentary inquiry into sustainable construction and the Green Deal and have called on architects to submit evidence.

Architects and other construction sector organisations have been asked to provide examples of best practice, challenges and barriers to sustainable construction.

Tony Baldry

Committee chairman Tony Baldry

Among the questions being asked by the All Party Parliamentary Committee for Excellence in the Built Environment is whether sustainability has suffered in the recession.

The cross-party group of MPs has also questioned whether the Green Deal is the right solution to rolling out sustainable technology.

A report to be published in the summer of 2013 will set out which measures have successfully been used to date to clarify how the construction sector can contribute to reducing carbon emissions.

Committee chairman Tony Baldry said: “The contribution of the built environment to climate change is immense and if the UK is to meet its challenging targets for reducing carbon emissions then much has to be done to take carbon out of the construction and use of our buildings and facilities.

“So we are looking for the best ideas in green construction – including how we get the best out of the Green Deal – and invite evidence from clients and the industry to demonstrate the innovations that are already taking place or planned.”

The report will be the second to be produced by the committee and follows “A better deal for public housing” which set out measures to improve construction procurement.

To submit evidence to the inquiry contact APPGInquiry@cic.org.


Readers' comments (1)

  • james francis

    Sustainable construction? A solution? Start with procurement and as the very first steps introduce legal penalties for suicide bidding and move away from the attitude of spending budgets just because they are there.

    When projects get value engineered to the bone because a contractor cannot deliver the contract even such processes as BREEAM can become stretched to the point of being meaningless. Holes in specification get taken advantage of and risk shortening the life span of the building (just think fixings here as a prime example). Even if the building still performs on completion if things have to be replaced then that carries a huge carbon cost (even when paid for by someone’s insurance).

    A really great carbon saving will be to build building we need not just those there are budgets for (that have to be spent within certain timescales) and those we build we must give time to design fully for the intended use, and lets define that use rather than opting for the soft option of getting out of developing a real brief by saying the building is flexible/adaptable etc.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register
  • Email
  • Comments (1)
  • Save