Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy
 

Anderson Bell Christie issues a call to arms on embodied carbon

February 4 2025

Anderson Bell Christie issues a call to arms on embodied carbon

Anderson Bell Christie (ABC) has extended moves to reposition the practice as a campaigning voice on policy, beyond the supply of 'standard' architectural design services, with a call to action on embodied carbon.

The studio has published new research which shows that the Scottish Government's ambition to achieve net zero by 2045 is unachievable without an immediate course correction.

The practice boasts that emissions accruing from its current home designs stand at 541kgCO2e/m2, well under the RIBA 2030 target of 625kgCO2e/m2, when considering the full life cycle of construction. To put that in perspective a 100-home development built to that standard, with zero emissions from heating systems, would produce 4,399 tonnes of embodied carbon emissions - around 17 times higher than the equivalent figure of 258 tonnes of CO2e emitted by heating and powering the properties for 60 years.

ABC director, Jonathan McQuillan, said, “Given the scale of the problem, we need to move the dialogue on to embodied carbon. Policy plans for embodied carbon haven’t left the starting blocks. We need a route to reach net zero with embodied carbon by 2045. The construction industry needs to show leadership and help shape legislation with the Scottish Government.

“ABC are using their extensive research to develop a roadmap to a holistic net zero position by 2045 that will address embodied carbon. We look forward to presenting this to the Scottish Government in early 2025. We only have 20 years to tackle this problem from scratch, given the timescales involved with legislative change, we need to start now.”

The Scottish Government is working towards introducing updated minimum building standards for all new housing, but not before early 2028.

13 Comments

Lovely
#1 Posted by Lovely on 5 Feb 2025 at 07:57 AM
This is a very smart idea and a move in the right direction.

There has been a huge over focus on this fetish about ‘zero carbon’ during the use of a buildings. Rarely is there a proper accounting for the before during and after of the construction. This especially so when demolishing old buildings and building new carbon intensive short life buildings that will not last long.

Also the environmental and carbon cost of the machines that generate the electricity, store and distribute it would need to be taken into account as well if this was to ever be true calculation.

The resource depletion, unnecessary scarcity, consequent wars and very destructive pollution and land ruination from all this are probably at least as worrying as climate change itself.

All of these virtuous moves will mean exactly nothing unless we have the guts to examine and completely reform our debt based money system.

Such an ever expanding money system will always lead to greater consumption year by year. It’s just a case here of the style of consumption changing a little bit nothing more.

The core problem remains unsolved.







Neil C
#2 Posted by Neil C on 5 Feb 2025 at 11:16 AM
I'm sure Anderson Bell Christie support and are architects for the Wheatley housing association proposals to demolish the high flats in Wyndford, and therefor open to scrutiny and criticism for the embodied carbon such a proposal will release
Mark
#3 Posted by Mark on 5 Feb 2025 at 22:45 PM
#1 - There are limits to what architects can do; what you're effectively asking for is the overthrow of global capitalism. When that was attempted in 1917, it resulted in millions of deaths over the next few decades.

#2 - That's a valid point and a bit more on-topic! Perhaps UR can approach Anderson Bell Christie for comment?
Lovely
#4 Posted by Lovely on 6 Feb 2025 at 08:32 AM
Not at all.

Am suggesting all these manoeuvres and discussions are rather pointless as the planet will die soon anyway unless you reform the money system we live under.

Am not talking about the economic system and am certainly not advocating for a soviet communist economic system.

Read properly and do your own research before putting words in other people’s mouths and making unpleasant accusations like this.
Bill Cunningham
#5 Posted by Bill Cunningham on 6 Feb 2025 at 10:01 AM
An excellent point Neil. Anderson Bell Christie are in no position to lecture anyone on embodied carbon, jumping on the net zero bandwagon while supporting the needless demolition of the flats at Wyndford. It is the very personification of hypocricy.
UR
#6 Posted by UR on 6 Feb 2025 at 14:42 PM
@3 I have this from ABC:

"If there is demolition then we account for demolition embodied carbon.

"Wyndford is not however an ABC project, so I can not provide comment on that."
Mark
#7 Posted by Mark on 6 Feb 2025 at 22:48 PM
#4 - Without going off at too much of a tangent, you mentioned the "debt-based money system". As I understand it, a capitalist economy is fuelled by a combination of equity and debt financing, so you definitely are talking about our economic system.

#6 - Thanks for clarifying with ABC.
Bill Cunningham
#8 Posted by Bill Cunningham on 7 Feb 2025 at 08:21 AM
Long-awaited Wyndford regeneration plans finally revealed UR March 2024
"The Anderson Bell + Christie masterplan will be the subject of a full planning application later in the year, in tandem with site clearance, with construction expected to begin in 2025."
UR
#9 Posted by UR on 7 Feb 2025 at 09:09 AM
@8 ABC led the initial masterplan 'focus group'.
https://www.wheatleyhomes-glasgow.com/about-us/regeneration/wyndford
Bill Cunningham
#10 Posted by Bill Cunningham on 7 Feb 2025 at 09:29 AM
"in tandem with site clearance" I think that's AI speak for demolition
Lovely
#11 Posted by Lovely on 7 Feb 2025 at 13:15 PM
Capitalism (if you wish) can function easily without debt-based money.

The unavoidable money supply expansion it causes is at the very core of all sustainability issues. In fact it is the deliberately invisible elephant in the room. So shocking that it can't even be looked as we see here.

Respectfully, please research this before continuing your tangent as my original point concerned the article's sustainability focus, not capitalism vs. communism.
Mark
#12 Posted by Mark on 9 Feb 2025 at 09:43 AM
#11 - I think you’re projecting your own preoccupations onto a press release about something unrelated. Do you know how each of AB&C’s carbon budget projects will be funded? Could it be that some are paid for from general taxation (is that “good”?), some are paid for by bank lending or venture capital (“bad”?) and others by folk who have worked long and hard for our hegemonic capitalist masters in order to save up enough money to afford a wee house extension. Are they also worthy of your condemnation?
Lovely
#13 Posted by Lovely on 11 Feb 2025 at 09:10 AM
Unfortunately, it is very related.

I’m talking about money systems not economic or banking systems in terms of making things sustainable as per article topic.

If you spent five minutes looking up what I’ve said rather than conducting this student debate with yourself about capitalism vs communism etc you would start to maybe see the point.

It’s not to do with banks or economic systems it’s to do with how our money supply is created and the inextricable link between debt-based money and the never ending expanding consumerism that money system necessitates.

Everything else is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Post your comments

 

All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.

 

Back to February 2025

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.