Back to Industry Leadership Insights
Buildings & StructuresBuilding StructuresEnvironmental Consulting and Compliance
In Tonkin's Q&A series, our technical experts discuss the opportunities and challenges that are front of mind for industry and our clients.
In this Quick Q&A, Tonkin’s Saad Haque – Environment and Sustainability Lead and Ricky Worn – Structures Lead in Queensland discuss how the building sector in Australia is tackling embodied carbon.
Saad:
Ricky, when it comes to embodied carbon, can you share your thoughts around what you're seeing in the industry in recent years.
Ricky, when it comes to embodied carbon, can you share your thoughts around what you're seeing in the industry in recent years.
Ricky:
One of the biggest shifts is that larger companies are now setting emissions targets on their infrastructure projects. With mandatory climate reporting starting to be rolled out in Australia, many organisations are required to produce annual sustainability reports alongside their traditional financial reporting. That’s one of the more significant things that has changed recently.
In New South Wales, for example, there are now mandatory reporting requirements for residential buildings. More broadly, the industry is moving toward like-for-like comparisons of building types so we can benchmark embodied carbon and then set targets to reduce it year on year.
There's been a lot of work in Australia to define the boundaries of what we're measuring, and to improve the accuracy of environmental product declarations. These help ensure the carbon factors we use are credible. Organisations like the Materials Embodied Carbon Leadership Alliance have been facilitating these conversations between industry and academia.
One of the biggest shifts is that larger companies are now setting emissions targets on their infrastructure projects. With mandatory climate reporting starting to be rolled out in Australia, many organisations are required to produce annual sustainability reports alongside their traditional financial reporting. That’s one of the more significant things that has changed recently.
In New South Wales, for example, there are now mandatory reporting requirements for residential buildings. More broadly, the industry is moving toward like-for-like comparisons of building types so we can benchmark embodied carbon and then set targets to reduce it year on year.
There's been a lot of work in Australia to define the boundaries of what we're measuring, and to improve the accuracy of environmental product declarations. These help ensure the carbon factors we use are credible. Organisations like the Materials Embodied Carbon Leadership Alliance have been facilitating these conversations between industry and academia.
Saad:
Until recently, I feel there’s been far more focus on energy efficiency and operational emissions than on embodied carbon. It seems like the next frontier is embodied carbon – what gets locked into an infrastructure asset before it even switches on. What are your thoughts?
Until recently, I feel there’s been far more focus on energy efficiency and operational emissions than on embodied carbon. It seems like the next frontier is embodied carbon – what gets locked into an infrastructure asset before it even switches on. What are your thoughts?
Ricky:
Historically, operational carbon has received most of the attention, particularly in buildings. Over a building’s lifecycle, something like 50% of emissions can come from operational energy, heating, cooling, and lighting. Engineers have been working on this for decades, and there’s been a strong financial incentive to reduce those costs, so that part of the problem has progressed relatively quickly.
Historically, operational carbon has received most of the attention, particularly in buildings. Over a building’s lifecycle, something like 50% of emissions can come from operational energy, heating, cooling, and lighting. Engineers have been working on this for decades, and there’s been a strong financial incentive to reduce those costs, so that part of the problem has progressed relatively quickly.
Embodied carbon is different. It’s tied to how we design and build in the first place, and that means challenging long-standing business as usual practices. Construction productivity, particularly in housing, hasn’t had very dramatic improvements over the last 50 years. We still rely heavily on pouring concrete into temporary formwork that gets thrown away.
Saad:
That lack of productivity gain is interesting, especially now that circular economy principles are being considered for integration into built-environment design guidance for states like NSW and Victoria. Do you think cost is becoming a driver for change, given how much material prices have increased in recent years?
That lack of productivity gain is interesting, especially now that circular economy principles are being considered for integration into built-environment design guidance for states like NSW and Victoria. Do you think cost is becoming a driver for change, given how much material prices have increased in recent years?
Ricky:
It should be a driver, but I think historically construction time and labour costs have often mattered more than material costs. We’re starting to see more modular construction elements and cross-laminated timber in buildings.
It should be a driver, but I think historically construction time and labour costs have often mattered more than material costs. We’re starting to see more modular construction elements and cross-laminated timber in buildings.
These are manufactured in factories and assembled on site, which makes construction much faster and significantly reduces material waste. So, you start to see productivity improvements alongside carbon benefits.
Saad:
Modular construction is often discussed alongside the circular economy. Do you think offsite, factory-based construction also makes it easier to incorporate recycled or low-carbon materials?
Modular construction is often discussed alongside the circular economy. Do you think offsite, factory-based construction also makes it easier to incorporate recycled or low-carbon materials?
Ricky:
It can, particularly because of the controlled environment. Where the circular economy really has strong potential is in reuse rather than recycling. Steel is a good example. We’re already good at recycling steel, but that still involves demolishing, transporting, melting, and remanufacturing—an energy-intensive process. A far better outcome is to directly reuse steel elements.
It can, particularly because of the controlled environment. Where the circular economy really has strong potential is in reuse rather than recycling. Steel is a good example. We’re already good at recycling steel, but that still involves demolishing, transporting, melting, and remanufacturing—an energy-intensive process. A far better outcome is to directly reuse steel elements.
Saad:
Are you seeing real-world examples of steel being reused rather than recycled?
Are you seeing real-world examples of steel being reused rather than recycled?
Ricky:
In Europe there’s an secondary steel market, buildings are surveyed before they're demolished to identify steel section sizes and lengths for potential reuse. That information is catalogued so the steel can be reused in other projects. When embodied carbon targets are introduced, it's can be a big driver for material reuse options to be explored.
In Europe there’s an secondary steel market, buildings are surveyed before they're demolished to identify steel section sizes and lengths for potential reuse. That information is catalogued so the steel can be reused in other projects. When embodied carbon targets are introduced, it's can be a big driver for material reuse options to be explored.