A new report, published by the Supply Chain Sustainability School, reveals that 9 significant opportunities exist for offsite manufacturers to help their clients in their drive for low carbon construction projects, both new build and in the retrofitting of existing buildings.  The built environment industry needs to rapidly decarbonise existing and new buildings, as well as reduce embodied carbon produced in production of building materials and elements, construction, and maintenance of assets. The ability of offsite construction processes to reduce whole life carbon is often expressed, but evidence of this has been patchy.  Drawing on the experience of more than 40 organisations working across homes, commercial, public and infrastructure, the new report, ‘Whole Life Carbon Guidance for Offsite Construction’ highlights opportunities and challenges for carbon management and reduction for the offsite sector.  This includes common benefits around the material and resource efficiency of premanufacture, reduced fuel and energy use in logistics and on site, as well as greater confidence in operational energy performance with standardised designs.   Some of the strongest evidence for carbon reductions exist in energy and fuel use for transport and construction processes, with studies finding savings of 30-40%, even when factory energy use is included. However, most of the embodied carbon within construction projects comes from materials and manufacturing: the product stage.   The report proposes that there is a big opportunity for Design for Manufacture and Assembly to drive emissions savings in this stage, sharing evidence for this across homes, schools, and commercial projects. It recommends early collaboration between manufacturers and design teams in order to fully realise low carbon design options. This collaboration will also aid robust whole life carbon estimates, which are likely to become mandatory in the coming years. The report also encourages manufacturers and contractors to embed processes for the collection and communication of activity data.  Andrew Shepherd, Managing Director at TopHat Communities, said “We all know carbon is a problem, but without knowing how much of a problem, it is very difficult for us to start addressing some of the key problem areas. This report provides guidance on how to start assessing whole life carbon and understanding the impact each stage of the development cycle has on the environment about us.”  Naomi Pratt, lead author of the report and Consultant at Action Sustainability, said: “It’s been really encouraging to see projects cutting embodied carbon through offsite techniques. What these have in common is a design approach driven by material and carbon efficiency. What we need to see now is more organisations adopting this focus and sharing data.”  Ian Heptonstall, Director of Supply Chain Sustainability School, said: “The good news from this report is that yes, Offsite and MMC (Modern Methods of Construction) can help us tackle the climate emergency. However, as the evidence suggests, we are currently missing many opportunities and it’s clear as an industry we need to think and act differently.  My challenge to those not at the forefront of tackling carbon is: will you act now and make a difference, or be left behind whilst your customers transition to a low carbon economy?”  The examples of best practice highlighted in the report are crucial for whole life carbon reduction and the journey to net zero. The authors encourage organisations working within the sector to show leadership, take advantage of the opportunities, and share data and experiences.   Download the report from the Supply Chain Sustainability School website here.  Building, Design & Construction Magazine | The Choice of Industry Professionals 

David Johnson, UK Pre-construction Director at Volumetric Building Companies, shares his thoughts on the future of offsite construction in the UK and the urgent need for change. The UK Government has made no secret of the need for faster, higher quality, and more predictable construction solutions in every sector – from schools and hospitals to housing. And there is a considerable drive for a unified platform design and a greater level of standardisation across the modular industry. In recent years, there have been multiple attempts to drive standards in offsite construction with the use of specialist MMC procurement frameworks developed by the Department for Education, Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Justice.  Whilst these client-led attempts to introduce standardisation have been very welcome, they just haven’t gone far enough. Too many requirements have been left open to interpretation, leading to the introduction of a host of similar but different types of building solutions.  To exacerbate the problem, as each scheme percolates through the various stages of procurement, the sustained tinkering by building designers, cost consultants and local authority planners and building control, combine to completely erode the strategic ambition for an increased level of standardisation to improve the efficiency and quality of project delivery. Traditional in-situ methods of construction have to adhere to standardisation through compliance with Building Regulations. This gives clients the vital confidence that the contractor will deliver the project to the required standard – and if not, that it will be rectified. The offsite sector absolutely MUST come together to agree a truly universal standard against which compliance can be measured and assured.  Many modular manufacturers are simply selling their own ‘platform solutions’ in an attempt to ‘capture the zeitgeist’, when in fact they are promoting their own system completely independently and calling it a platform. A genuine platform solution has to embrace and represent the whole MMC sector. How to Foster Greater Confidence in Modular Technology With the unfortunate demise of some big industry names in recent months, the time for pride and individual business trailblazing has passed. We need to come together as an industry and provide a unified solution that will foster a much great level of confidence in modular technology and in the built solutions. And if we don’t achieve this? The UK Government will lose faith and volumetric MMC as a viable building solution will be set back 20 years. Let’s be honest, what we do is not rocket science. We do not use space age materials or really cutting-edge technology. What we do is apply well-managed processes and robust control systems to the historically chaotic and continually bespoke world of construction. Eroding Strategic Ambition There are many other intrinsic benefits of modular solutions that provide really persuasive arguments for its use over traditional in-situ building methods – from reduced material waste, improved safety on site, consistent delivery on time and budget, shorter build programmes to less disruption and enhanced thermal performance. However none of these advantages are dependent on the need to protect new or innovative technology. Beyond the box, it really doesn’t matter what happens inside.  Does the colour of the seat fabric or the quality of an in-car entertainment system affect the legal compliance or reliability of a new car? Is it really worth the effort of protecting a particular modular solution that is only a slight variation on a theme? Our industry has to pool its expertise and collaboratively develop a regulatory compliant genuine ‘white box’ standard that we can all support, promote and take to Government as a truly game changing platform design solution. Without that, we risk remaining a niche specialism rather than a universally adopted construction standard. www.vbc.co/uk   Building, Design & Construction Magazine | The Choice of Industry Professionals