A 2030 Challenge for Building Product Manufacturers
Reducing carbon emissions rapidly within the next 20 years is critical to averting disastrous climate change. Because carbon impacts of building products are disproportionately high over the first 20 years of a building's life (they become less significant compared to operational carbon over 100 years or more), a focus on products could help "front-load" carbon reductions in the building sector.
The 2030 plan
With more than 100 different product categories to be addressed, the 2030 Challenge for Products has a lot of details to sort out. Architecture 2030 plans to spend the next two years finalizing product category rules (PCRs), including product-specific carbon benchmarks based on current life-cycle averages, a process the organization hopes will lead to “a harmonization of standards.” As with the 2030 Challenge for buildings, the 2030 Challenge for Products has started by setting broad guidelines and interim targets. These goals, says Architecture 2030, apply to all new developments, new buildings, and renovations:- The carbon footprint of covered products should be reduced 30% by 2014; 35% by 2015; 40% by 2020; 45% by 2025; and 50% by 2030.
- Manufacturers wishing to participate will commission a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of at least one product, calculating the carbon footprint; LCA results will be submitted to moderators developing the PCRs for each category, so current industry averages can be established for benchmarking starting in 2014.
- LCAs will be cradle-to-grave profiles and use measurements from actual local energy sources.
- Once benchmarks are established, manufacturers will commission Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), which standardize data across product categories, in order to track their progress toward embodied carbon goals.
- Carbon footprint data for individual products will be available to designers, planners, specifiers, and builders through a variety of channels, including BuildingGreen’s GreenSpec database of products and the Pharos online screening tool.
- Architecture 2030 will not certify products; participation requires manufacturers’ own reporting based on commissioned EPDs.
High stakes
The process may be long and difficult, given the number of product categories under review, but the stakes are high, according to Architecture 2030’s founder Ed Mazria, FAIA. PCRs and the related LCAs are not currently standardized, and this effort could go a long way toward establishing comprehensive, industry-wide norms for a variety of product categories. “Architects and designers have an opportunity to promote low-carbon building products for the projects they design and the hundreds of thousands of products they specify,” Mazria said. “By requiring that building products undergo a rigorous, scientific analysis of their carbon-equivalent footprints, designers can catalyze a movement towards dramatically reducing the embodied greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) of the product sector.”For more information
Architecture 2030
www.architecture2030.org
February 14, 2011
Reader-contributed comments related to A 2030 Challenge for Building Product Manufacturers - BuildingGreen.com. Comments are listed with newest at the top.
| Log in to add comments - Help with comments |
[ top of page ]
|
EBN: Feature - May 2013
|
BuildingGreen.com: What's Happening - January 2012
|
||
|
EBN: Newsbrief - July 2011
|
EBN: What's Happening - September 2009
|
||
|
EBN: Newsbrief - August 2007
|
EBN: Newsbrief - March 2007
|
Showing 6 of 7 [ show all ]
[ top of page ]
LEED Credits
ID Credit 1
GREEN TOPICS
[ top of page ]
IMAGE CREDITS:
1. Source: Adapted by Larry Strain, FAIA, from “Heat,” by George Monbiot
2. Image: Architecture 2030
DISCUSSIONS
Michael Brown
Apr 21, 2011 RELATED ARTICLES
Whole-Building Life-Cycle Assessment: Taking the Measure of a Green Building
EBN: Feature - May 2013 RELATED LEED CREDITS
ID Credit 1
RELATED GREEN DESIGN
|
||||||||||||||||


More comments
More related articles
A bit of caution
Posted by Michael Brown on Apr 21, 2011, 09:18 PMIt's good to focus some attention on the life cycle of building materials and their impacts on climate. But I’m worried that such a single minded focus may result in institutionalizing products and technologies that achieve carbon reductions at the cost of increasing other environmental impacts. We’ve already seen that with the increase in use of CFLs and the resulting mercury exposure issues (trading coal-related emissions for localized emissions due to product breakage and disposal) and are starting to see it with LEDs and the potential need for disposing of them as hazardous waste. Sometimes the trade-offs are well known and can be weighed and considered. Other times we have gone forward blindly using products and technologies with little understanding of their overall effects on human health and the environment. While LCA is a somewhat useful tool for extending that understanding, it tells a partial story—LCAs demonstrate the energy and GHG emissions of LEDs, but don’t do a very good job of identifying regulatory issues. I would hope that both the 2030 Challenge and EBN recognize the need for caution in pushing products with reduced GHG emissions quickly into the marketplace when we do not really understand the trade-offs in impacts.