9 Embodied Carbon
Comment
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan Document - Regulation 19
Representation ID: 72171
Received: 08/05/2022
Respondent: BLAST (Bringing Leamington Allotment Societies Together)
Ideally there would be natural resources available such as hemp farms for hempcrete in Warwickshire itself. Would the council support such projects?
Ideally there would be natural resources available such as hemp farms for hempcrete in Warwickshire itself. Would the council support such projects?
Comment
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan Document - Regulation 19
Representation ID: 72198
Received: 08/06/2022
Respondent: Warwick District Labour Party
Why is whole life calculation limited to larger developments and buildings?
9.3 Be specific on tests used - not 'such as' while leaving it to LPA to bring in improved standards and methods
Explicit preference for refurbishment and repurposing or buildings to minimise adding to embodied carbon to be clear requirement.
Consider sliding scale carbon offset charge for all demolitions linked to how far new design achieves zero carbon.
Why is a whole-life calculation required only for 50+ dwellings and 5000sqm+ other buildings and not for all developments.
9.3 Be more specific on which test or tests should be applied - not 'such as'; but leave it open to the LPA to change the list of acceptable tests as technology and experience require (Same comment as on 5.9 above).
WDC preference for refurbishment and repurposing of buildings to minimise adding to embodied carbon should be made explicit and apply to most developments of all sizes.
Could a carbon offset charge be made on the additional embodied carbon required for every demolition/newbuild project on a sliding scale related to how closely the new building(s) are designed to achieving zero carbon?