Net zero needs unified carbon measurement standards

To overcome this, we need to start paying more attention to embodied carbon - the emissions associated with materials and construction processes throughout the whole lifecycle of a building project. While progress is being made in this space by adopting industry standards such as the UK Net Zero Carbon Building Standard, embodied carbon remains broadly overlooked.

Significant progress has been made in reducing operational carbon emissions generated from the energy used for heating, cooling, and powering buildings through improving the energy efficiency of buildings. However, embodied carbon is not seeing the same progress - increasingly accounting for a larger percentage of total carbon. Canada, Sweden and Norway are already seeing a near 50/50 split between total embodied and operational carbon as they move toward renewable energy sources. The prominence of embodied carbon is only set to become more noticeable as operational carbon is systematically addressed. 

Addressing embodied carbon remains a complex challenge as a lack of clear standards and inconsistent reporting practices continues to hinder progress. In the UK, members of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) must adhere to its professional statement. However, sourcing materials globally complicates consistent data collection, a challenge further compounded by the variety of carbon reporting requirements worldwide.  For example, the UK’s Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting (SECR) policy mandates that organisations disclose their energy use and carbon emissions in annual reports. Meanwhile, in the European Union, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requires companies to report on sustainability metrics, but this is contingent on company size, leaving smaller entities outside its scope.  

These fragmented approaches create a patchwork of standards which complicate efforts to track and reduce carbon emissions. To accelerate progress toward net zero, a more consistent and universally applied framework for carbon reporting across geographies is essential. 

This is where industry can play a pivotal role in bringing international taxonomies together. As Head of BREEAM Development at the Building Research Establishment (BRE), I have overseen the development of BREEAM V7, the latest evolution of the world’s original sustainability assessment methodology for the built environment.  

This update is not merely incremental; for the first time, it mandates the inclusion of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems into embodied carbon calculations. These elements, including ducts, pipes, cables, and equipment, can account for between 25-50% of a building’s total embodied carbon, yet they have often been overlooked.  

While BRE has worked hard to align BREEAM’s lifecycle assessment and embodied carbon measurement with industry standards, such as the UK Net Zero Buildings Standard, and reporting requirements to enable better tracking of a building’s pathway to net zero, there is still work to be done to get the built environment on the same trajectory.  

Sustainable finance has a critical role to play in driving this transition. Investors are increasingly looking to direct capital toward green projects, contingent on the ability to accurately measure and verify carbon performance. A clear, consistent approach to carbon measurement and reporting in the built environment provides investors with the confidence they need to fund truly sustainable developments.  

BRE launched an international alliance with the Green Building Council of Australia, the US Green Building Council, the Singapore Green Building Council, and Alliance HQE-GBC France to drive consistency in sustainable finance practices. 

Global taxonomies such as the EU Taxonomy or ASEAN Taxonomy have varying criteria for what qualifies as sustainable and can tend to skew their focus towards new high-performance buildings.  This can neglect the potential for retrofitting and refurbishing existing stock, often a more sustainable option due to reduced material usage and embodied carbon. 

Some taxonomies also disregard established building certification such as BREEAM, LEED, Green Star and Green Mark, creating confusion and leading to high compliance costs. As part of our global alliance, we are collaborating with other certifications to achieve greater alignment in measurement, providing clarity for investors, developers and other stakeholders. 

The aim is not to introduce complexity without purpose, but to establish standards that governments, financial institutions, and industry stakeholders can adopt with confidence. Achieving net zero is a collective goal, but it requires a shared understanding of carbon measurement. A consistent, rigorous and global approach is the only foundation on which all other sustainability efforts can be built. 

This article first appeared in BusinessGreen.