Reed, Richard and Wilkinson, Sara 2009 , RICS, …dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30034451/reed-movingtowards...build on the results of the first RICS Education Trust-funded study in 2006,

This is the published version: Reed,RichardandWilkinson,Sara2009,Movingtowardsalowcarboncity:AcasestudyofMelbourne,Australia,RICS,London,UK.

Available from Deakin Research Online: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30034451Reproducedwiththekindpermissionofthecopyrightowner.Copyright:2009,RICS

FiBRESERIESFINDINGS IN BUILT AND RURAL ENVIRONMENTS AUGUST 2009

Richard Reed and Sara Wilkinson, Deakin University, Australia

Moving towards a low carbon city: a case study of Melbourne, australia

03

MOVING TOWARDS LOW CARBON CITY: MELBOURNE

About the authors

Richard Reed

Richard is a chartered valuation surveyor and is a Member of the Royal Institution of Chartered

Surveyors (RICS). He has focussed his research directly on the links between sustainability and the

built environment, more specifically being the (property) business case for sustainability and lifecycle

costing. He is the visiting Environmental Professor at the IREBS university in Regensburg, Germany,

authored the ‘Business Case for Sustainability’ chapter for Your Building and is a member of both the

RICS Oceania and the International Valuation Sustainability Group committees. Richard is a Fellow of

the Australian Property Institute (API) and edited ‘The Valuation of Real Estate’ text as well as being

consulting editor for ‘The Australian and New Zealand Property Journal’. He is an editorial board

member of the Journal of Sustainable Real Estate and wrote ‘A Greener House’(an investor’s guide

to sustainability) and ’Property Development’(including a new chapter on sustainability), both with

Sara Wilkinson as co-author. In addition he is editor of International Journal of Housing Markets and

Analysis’ and has presented at many international conferences. He is Professor of Property and Real

Estate at Deakin University, Melbourne and co-ordinates a property course with a major

in sustainability.

Sara Wilkinson

Sara is a chartered building surveyor and a Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors

(RICS). An early advocate of sustainability, Sara completed her MPhil at the University of Salford in

1995, examining the conceptual understanding of green buildings. She has researched widely into

sustainability issues and published many refereed conference and journal papers. Sara co-edited

‘Best Value in Construction’, published by Wiley-Blackwell, and wrote ‘A Greener Home’ with Richard

Reed in 2008. She co-authored the 5th edition of Property Development, and authored a chapter on

feminist research within the built environment in ‘Advanced Research Methods’. Sara is a member

of the editorial boards of Structural Survey, the Journal of Corporate Real Estate and the International

Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis. Sara is Vice Chair of Commission 10, Construction

Management Construction Economics, of FIG (International Federation of Surveyors) and a member

of the RICS Oceania Sustainable Steering Group.

©RICS – August 2009ISBN: 978-1-84219-550-5

Published by: RICSParliament SquareLondon SW1P 3ADUnited Kingdom

The views expressed by the author(s) are not necessarily those of RICS nor any body connected with RICS. Neither the authors, nor RICS accept any liability arising from the use of this publication.

This work was funded by the RICS Education Trust, a registered charity established by RICS in 1955 to support research and education in the field of surveying.

Contents

What are the key findings? 05

Introduction 06

Background 08

How the research was undertaken 10

Modelling the scenarios 12

Findings 16

Implications 25

About the study 26

References 27

04


05

What are the key findings?

• Office space in Melbourne is by far the largest source

of carbon dioxide emissions, and is also the largest user

of space in the city centre, as measured by net lettable

area (NLA)

• If no steps are taken to control energy use in buildings in

Melbourne, then carbon dioxide emissions will continue

to increase, rising by 6% between 2005 and 2020

• Making minor changes, such as reducing electricity and

gas consumption by 10% and increasing slightly the use of

‘green’ power, has almost no impact over the longer term,

as increased levels of development outweigh any increases

in energy efficiency at the individual building level

• While the rapid introduction of major energy-saving measures

and the rapid take-up of ‘green’ power would deliver rapid

reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, it is unlikely that

there would be market acceptance for such measures

• A more realistic approach, of an initial phase of education

and awareness-raising, followed by the introduction of

significant energy-efficiency measures, is capable of

delivering meaningful cuts in carbon dioxide emissions,

in the order of 45% between 2005 and 2020, although

emissions do rise in the short term.

06

The latest climate change projections now show that

unless global greenhouse emissions are substantially

reduced, the mean temperature in Victoria, Australia

could increase by up to 5 degrees Celsius by 2070

(CSIRO, 2005). Similar climate change predictions exist for

other countries, although the extent of the impact varies

(IPCC, 2001). The issue is one that affects everyone on

the planet with recent widespread bushfires in Australia

highlighting the effect that high temperatures can have

on society and loss of life and property.

With funding from the RICS Education Trust, Richard Reed

and Sara Wilkinson of Deakin University, Australia, have been

exploring what this means for Melbourne, a city in Australia that

is typical of many cities around the world, and which is aiming

to be carbon neutral by 2020. This is the second stage of a

unique study by Richard Reed and Sara Wilkinson of Deakin

University, Australia, into the relationship between CO2

emissions and buildings in the city centre. In this stage of the

research, they surveyed all buildings in the central business

district (CBD) of Melbourne, to profile their energy consumption

and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions based on five year time

frames (2010, 2015 and 2020). Based on this, they then drew

up scenarios for energy reduction, to see what the impacts of

these would be on overall emissions. Four scenarios for energy

efficiency in CBD buildings were modelled based on (a) no

change, (b) minor change, (c) intermediate change, which

incorporated a transition period and included increasing

‘green power’ and reducing electricity and gas consumption,

or (d) major change.

Why did they do this? As Richard Reed explains, “Buildings

offer significant scope for contributing to overall emission

reduction targets through increased energy efficiency with

12% of all greenhouse gas emissions in Victoria coming from

commercial buildings”. They calculated levels of energy

consumption and C02 emissions for every building in the CBD

before examining variables such as size, visual appearance

and age. This research produced four key findings:

1. Office space is by far the largest CO2 emitter and is also the

largest user of space in the city centre, as measured by net

lettable area (NLA).

2. There is a varying correlation between NLA and CO2

emissions for different land uses (e.g. retail is high).

3. The ‘business as usual’ scenario is not a realistic option.

4. The ‘intermediate’ scenario seems to offer the best prospect

of both being capable of being implemented and able to

deliver meaningful emissions reductions.

Richard Reed and Sara Wilkinson concluded that the property

and construction professions must adopt a proactive stance

towards CBD buildings and energy efficiency. Embracing the

findings of this research and taking action will ensure that

meaningful action is taken to address this global problem.

Despite the continuing and on-going debate and promotion of

policies to encourage sustainability practices, now more than

ever they conclude that immediate action is needed.

Introduction


07

08

Like many other assets, property is subject to depreciation and

obsolescence, which reduces its value. Whilst this is unavoidable

in most instances, it can be slowed down, and the decrease in

the overall capital value reduced. What is now being promoted

is that improvements in energy efficiency can assist in this

process, as well having wider societal benefits of mitigating

climate change. While we will have to wait to find out if the

benefits in terms of reduced depreciation actually come to pass,

there’s no doubt that energy-efficient buildings can have a

positive impact in combating climate change.

There are, however, barriers to improvements in energy efficiency

in the commercial property market. This has partly been because

substantial stock is owned by institutional investors, who are in

many cases unconvinced by the need to improve their stock.

With Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Environmental

Management Systems (EMS, ISO 14000) becoming more widely

adopted, there should be a more receptive response to energy

efficiency. Whilst there were signs in 2007 and 2008 that

increasing number of building owners in Melbourne were

embracing sustainability, it remains that for most buildings and

building owners it is yet to be proven that capital values are

directly linked to energy efficiency; consequently most owners

have done little or nothing to improve the energy efficiency of

their property. There is a danger that with the 2008-9 global

financial crisis and reductions in oil prices the impetus for energy

efficiency may lose momentum. However there remains significant

potential for the global surveying profession to make a meaningful

contribution to mitigating climate change, through improving the

energy efficiency of the existing stock. This is the rationale for

this research.

Because all buildings contribute to climate change, this study

examines all types of commercial CBD buildings including retail,

wholesale, manufacturing, workshops/studio, hotels, car parks,

institutional buildings, hospitals/clinics and so on. The research

quantifies CO2 reductions resulting from measures that can be

made during in the operational phase of building lifecycles.

Why Melbourne? Firstly this project offered an opportunity to

build on the results of the first RICS Education Trust-funded

study in 2006, which examined the energy efficiency potential

of office buildings in the Melbourne CBD. The second reason

is related to greenhouse gas emissions levels with the 2008

Garnaut Review, which concluded that Australia had to

implement deep reductions in CO2 emissions, in the order of

90-95% per capita by 2050 (Garnaut, 2008). Victoria’s total net

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were 121.9 million tonnes CO2

equivalent (CO2e) in 2006 (DSE, 2009) which represented an

increase over 1990 levels of 12.7% (108.2 Mt CO2e) and 2000

levels of 1.6% (120.0 Mt CO2e). At 24 tonnes per capita

emissions for Victoria and 28 tonnes per capita emissions for

Australia as a whole, it is likely that per capita emissions in

Melbourne are higher than for any other developed country,

including the United States. Reductions in GHG emissions are

a priority and metropolitan Melbourne is the largest urban centre

in Victoria with a population exceeding 3.81 million, out of a

total population in Victoria of 5,205,200 as of June 2007 (ABS,

2009). Alongside this, Melbourne is ranked second in the

world’s most liveable cities (Economist, 2009) – if it is to

continue to enjoy such a status, it is likely that it will need to pay

much closer attention to its ‘green’ credentials, including cutting

its greenhouse gas emissions.

At the same time the City of Melbourne has set out plans to be

carbon neutral by 2020 (Melbourne, 2005) and has proposed a

series of measures to deliver this goal; one of these is to

target improvements in energy efficiency in existing buildings.

The 2005 City of Melbourne report (updated in 2008) specified

a reduction target of approximately 1000 kt CO2e, representing

a 24% reduction in current emissions in the commercial sector,

with the city helping to achieve these targets with a large scale

adaptation programme of about 1200 buildings over 8 years

(Arup 2008). These are ambitious targets and the city is leading

the way in terms of delivering sustainability in urban centres.

The methods and policies developed will be of interest and

relevance to many other city authorities globally.

The aim of this research is to see what pathways of emissions

reductions are most likely to succeed in achieving the reductions

that are envisaged by these targets.

Background

09

Darwin

Cairns

Hobart

Brisbane

Sydney

CanberraMelbourne

Adelaide

Perth


10

In order to do this, the first step for Richard Reed and Sara

Wilkinson was to allocate buildings in the Melbourne CBD to

one of 33 types (see box) and then to assemble them into a

database based on the following:

a. A visual inspection of the buildings;

b. An analysis of the relevant characteristics of each building

including age, net lettable area and gross floor area;

c. An examination of the physical location of buildings;

d. A calculation of the electricity and gas consumption for

each building.

*Note: this data relates to aggregated land uses. In some cases, a building will contain more than one land use (such as buildings with some common areas), In these cases, the predominant land use has been the one to which the building has been allocated.

Building Use Profiles

Richard Reed and Sara Wilkinson categorised buildings in the CBD of Melbourne into 33 different building land use categories as follows:

Different land usesProperty type identified in the analysis*

OfficeOffice premium 9Office A grade 42Office B grade 89Office C grade 140Office D grade 46

RetailRetail premium grade 10Retail high grade 77Retail standalone shop 226 Wholesale 3

Community and culturalEntertainment/recreation indoor 362Cultural and community use 36

Showroom 10Gallery/museum/public display area 4Conferences/meetings 15

AccommodationFlats/apartment/unit 175Hotel/motel 36Hostel/backpackers accommodation 6Private hotel/boarding house 2Institutional accommodation 1Serviced apartment 27Student accommodation 1Corporate supplied accommodation 3Student apartment 5

ParkingParking – private covered 92Parking – commercial covered 38

OtherManufacturing 7Workshop/studio 23Equipment installation/plant room 70Transport 5Storage 221Education/research 19Hospital/clinic 16Common area 653

TOTAL 2469

How the research was undertaken

11

The data was analysed over 5 and 10 year timeframes, which

allowed them to examine change over time. Importantly, this

also enabled them to develop alternative approaches to

increasing building energy efficiency, which resulted in varying

levels of reduced CO2 emissions. The data employed in this

research is founded upon reliable sources of information, being

based on all individual buildings rather than on just a sample

of the building stock.

They made use of a number of existing databases including

the City of Melbourne’s ‘Census of Land Use and Employment’

(CLUE). Data about energy consumption or energy efficiency

was supplied by the Property Council of Australia (PCA), being

the leading industry body regarding property data information

about CBD buildings. PCA collect and publish data relating to

energy consumption in the retail and office sector in the

‘Benchmarks’ series of publications which was used for the

calculation of energy use and CO2 emissions. This data is

collected directly from PCA members who are building owners

and is considered by industry to be a reliable source of data.

Following the assembly of the data set incorporating energy

consumption, the researchers used a greenhouse rating

diagnostic tool to convert energy consumption into carbon

emissions. This process was undertaken using information

and data from the following:

• ABARE, Australian Energy report 05.9;

Australian Building Greenhouse Rating

(www.abgr.com.au);

• AGO 2004, Stationary Sector GHG Emission Projections;

Vicpool Information Bulletin 3, 43;

Department of Infrastructure. 2005. Energy retail tariffs

for 2005;

• ESAA, Electricity Gas Australia 2005;

• OECD IEA 2005, Electricity Information (2003 data); and

• TXU - schedule of distribution use of system tariffs.

All land use types were classified into sectors such as hotel

and retail, some of which display a broad range of quality.

Hotels were classified as either luxury (premium) quality, high,

medium and low quality, and these classifications were based

around the quality star rating system adopted by the hotel

sector. The retail sector was classified under the classes of

premium quality, high class, and strip shop. The researchers

were able to allocate almost every land use into one of these

categories and there were relatively few properties excluded

from the analysis as they were not clearly aligned with a

designated land use catagory.

With regards to the uptake of ‘green’ power (that is power derived

from renewable sources such as wind or solar), the scenarios

assumed that owners would adopt varying amounts of ‘green’

power. As such the following rates were adopted for the baseline

data calculations, categorised according to how much of their

electricity requirements were met from green power:

• Premium (or highest) Grade - 5% green power

• Medium Grade - 2% green power

• Lower Grade - 1% green power

• Lowest Grade - 0% green power

Note that in the minor and major scenarios different rates of

green power uptake are applied to the stock.


12

The researchers developed three main scenarios and one intermediate

scenario for buildings in the Melbourne city centre, as follows:

1. no change;

2. minor change;

3. major change

The main scenarios are described in Table 1

Modelling the scenarios

Table 1: Main scenario variables

Variable Scenario 1 - no change Scenario 2 - minor change Scenario 3 - major change

Green power use by different grades of buildings (best, 5%, 2%, 1%, 0% 10%, 5%, 2%, 1% 50%, 25%, 10%, 5% medium, lower and lowest grade)

Electricity No reduction A reduction of 10% A reduction of 25% consumption (kWh)

Gas (MJ) No reduction A reduction of 10% A reduction of 25%

13


The rationale behind each of the main scenarios was to

model the impact of measures to make increasingly greater

improvements on the ‘business as usual’ approach. The minor

change scenario modelled measures that were considered

reasonable and within the means of the majority of building

owners and managers. For example, it is reasonable to

anticipate that building owners could achieve a reduction

in electricity consumption of 10% such as through the

replacement of worn-out services with modern equivalents.

The rationale for scenario three (the major change scenario)

was to model radical changes that would currently be beyond

the plans of most owners, in order to quantify the potential

reductions and provide evidence for policy makers to target

and base their policy making upon.

Based on these three main scenarios, Richard Reed and

Sara Wilkinson devised an ‘intermediate’ scenario, which

combines elements of the ‘minor’ and ‘major’ change. It is

based on the premise that short term radical change is unlikely

and that policy makers need to devise and implement policies

before a period of accelerated change is introduced.

The scenarios were then calculated for the entire building

stock of the Melbourne CBD. Three influencing variables were

examined to ascertain the impact on overall carbon emissions

of the stock. The first variable to change was the amount of

‘GreenPower’ used by the buildings. GreenPower use is very

likely to be implemented in the future (NSW Department of

Water & Energy, 2008). The participation rate for GreenPower

more than doubled between 2006 and 2007 and represents a

significant upswing in adoption. The City of Melbourne ‘2020

Zero Net Emissions Report’ makes reference to increasing the

amounts of GreenPower in CBD stock (City of Melbourne 2003).

The other two variables that they looked at were potential

reductions in electricity and gas consumption. Richard Reed

and Sara Wilkinson identified these after referring to literature on

contemporary energy conservation measures, which showed

that reductions of 5% across the whole stock was appropriate

for the minor change and 25% for the major change scenarios.

The application of the measures allowed the researchers to

assess the impact of changes across the whole stock. The

assumption made was that individual owners could determine

how best to meet the reduction targets in their particular property.

The rationale for the major change scenario was to set targets

considerably beyond existing levels to identify the impact that

a radical change would have on overall carbon emissions. Gas

and electricity figures were calibrated according to the quality

of the stock, the rationale being that owners of higher grade

buildings would be likely to spend more in order to ensure their

stock retained its status in the property market. Gas and

electricity data for the ‘no change’ scenario was derived from

completed surveys, and better quality building stock achieved

higher levels of reduction in consumption than lower grade

stock in the modelling.

14

The time periods for all four scenarios, including the intermediate scenario, are shown in in Figure 1.

Modelling the scenarios

Figure 1: The four scenarios

Major Major change

Intermediate change

Minor change

No change

Minor

Nil

2005 2010 2015 2020

Degr

ee o

f cha

nge

requ

ired

Time in years

Modelling for the first five year period was relatively

straightforward, as data for new stock under construction

is available. Predictions about changes to the stock in 2015

and 2020 models were based on market information, including

the cyclical behaviour of the market.

Scenario two, the minor change scenario, modelled slight

alterations to three key variables. Firstly green power use was

altered. Green power in best quality stock increased to 10%,

medium grade to 5%, lower grade to 2% and lowest grade to

1%. Finally, energy consumption of electricity and gas was

reduced by 10%, as the first research study indicated that it

was achievable for building owners to make efficiency gains

of 10% by regular and effective maintenance, and also by the

replacement of worn-out services with modern energy

efficient equipment.

Scenario three (major change), introduced more radical

amendments. Green power was increased to 50% for best

grade, to 25% for medium grade, to 10% for lower grade and

to 5% for the lowest grade properties. This level demands a

substantial change in the market and may need incentives to

building owners in the form of tax relief in order to generate

uptake. Within this scenario energy consumption of electricity

and gas was reduced by 25%, which would require the majority

of owners to invest in energy efficient equipment and undertake

regular and effective maintenance and replacement of worn-out

services with modern energy-efficient equipment.

15


For 2005 the following outputs were modelled for the land

uses listed above:

• totalactualemissions(kg/CO2/pa)

• totalenergyconsumption(MJ/m²).

For the years 2010, 2015 and 2020 the changes to the stock

were modelled against total actual emissions (kg/ CO2/pa).

The total CBD stock was modelled for the ‘no change’ scenario,

the ‘minor change’ and thirdly the ‘major change’ scenario to

quantify emissions and to ascertain the reduction in CO2

changes the stock would undergo.

Baseline data 2005

The first task was to establish the baseline emissions for

Melbourne for 2005, with reference to the following factors

relating to climate change: total actual emissions; and total

energy consumption. 2005 was chosen as the baseline year,

in order to provide comparability with the first stage of this

project, which looked at offices only.

Findings

16

Findings

Building space use in the Melbourne CBD

As expected office space, ranging from high quality office

space (premium) to low grade (D grade), accounts for over 45%

of space use. The median age of Melbourne CBD office is 31

years, though the stock ranges in age from the 1840s low rise

buildings, dating back to the early days of commercial

development in Melbourne, right up to multi-storey purpose-

built stock built in 2008. Beyond this there is a wide cross

section of space uses in Melbourne, with the dominant types

including public areas (e.g. libraries and museums) and covered

commercial parking. Retail space is separated into categories

including retail premium and retail standalone (shop), as well

as other types e.g. showroom.

Figure 2: Building space use in Melbourne CBD

Source: Author

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Office

Gallery/museum

/public display area

Showroom

Comm

on area

Parking - comm

ercial covered

Flat/apartment/unit

Entertainment/recreation (indoor)

Hotel/motel

Parking - private covered

Serviced apartment

Educational/research

Retail standalone

Storage

Conferences/meetings

Equipment istallation

Cultural and comm

unity use

Manufacturing

Retail premium

Student apartment

Retail high

Transport

Workshop/studio

Hostel/backpackers accomm

odation

Hospital/clinic

Wholesale

Private hotel/boarding house

Institutional accomm

odation

Student accomm

odation

Corporate supplied accomm

odation

Prop

ortio

n of

bui

ldin

g sp

ace

use

Building space use

17


Building space use in the Melbourne CBD (less office)

Figure 3 profiles the non-office building space use, and when

offices are removed from the analysis, there is no single

dominant use of building space. Retailers in Australian CBDs

are typically restricted to ground-floor locations only which is

reflected in the proportion of total retail space. In general

customers do not prefer multi-level retail in the city, which in

turn restricts the amount of CBD retail, although this is also

due to other factors such as limited parking.

So, based on this analysis of the land use composition of the

CBD of Melbourne, the next step was to model the resultant

CO2 emissions. Once this was done, it was possible to see

how the various land use types contributed to the overall CO2

emissions profile of Melbourne.

Figure 3: Building space use in Melbourne (less office)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Gallery/museum


Showroom

Comm

on area

Parking - comm

ercial covered

Flat/apartment/unit


Hotel/motel


Serviced apartment


Retail standalone

Storage

Prop

ortio

n of

bui

ldin

g sp

ace

use

Building space use



Cultural and comm

unity use

Manufacturing

Retail premium

Student apartment

Retail high

Transport

Workshop/studio


odation

Hospital/clinic

Wholesale



odation

Student accomm

odation


odation

18

Findings

Building space use emissions in the Melbourne CBD

Figure 4 confirms office use as the highest emitter of CO2 in the CBD. This is as expected given the large proportion of office space

in the Melbourne CBD and the findings in the preceding stage I report (Wilkinson and Reed, 2006) which identified the high level of

CO2 emissions from office space.

Figure 4: Building space use emissions in Melbourne CBD

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

Office

Gallery/museum


Showroom

Comm

on area

Flat/apartment/unit

Parking - comm

ercial covered

Hotel/motel


Serviced apartment



Retail standalone

Storage



Retail premium

Cultural and comm

unity use

Manufacturing

Retail high

Student apartment

Transport

Workshop/studio


odation

Hospital/clinic


odation


odation

Wholesale


Student accomm

odation

Prop

ortio

n of

bui

ldin

g sp

ace

use

Building space use

19


Building space use emissions in the Melbourne CBD (less office)

After removing office space and conducting further analysis, the building space uses with the largest amount of CO2 emissions

(figure 5) included showrooms and gallery/museum/display area. This may be linked to the cultural status of a city centre which has

a large number of galleries/museums and galleries. Flats/apartments/units and common areas in buildings are also relatively high

emitters of CO2 emissions. There has been a drive to increase residential property in the CBD to make the city centre more dynamic.

Having established the baseline position, the researchers were then in a position to model the scenarios, to produce future emissions

profiles for the whole of the Melbourne CBD. What did they find?

Figure 5: Building space use emissions in Melbourne CBD (less office)

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

Gallery/museum


Showroom

Comm

on area

Flat/apartment/unit

Parking - comm

ercial covered

Hotel/motel


Serviced apartment



Retail standalone

Storage



Retail premium

Cultural and comm

unity use

Manufacturing

Retail high

Student apartment

Transport

Workshop/studio


odation

Hospital/clinic


odation


odation

Wholesale


Student accomm

odation

Prop

ortio

n of

bui

ldin

g sp

ace

use

Building space use

20

Findings

Scenario evaluation - no change

Based on the ‘business as usual’ approach, there would be a

gradual but sustained upward trend in CO2 emissions (see figure

6). As Sara Wilkinson noted, “This is what we would expect and

highlights the combined effects over time of changing supply and

demand influences and associated emissions in a city centre.”

Figure 6: No Change Scenario - Total emissions from Melbourne CBD buildings 2005-2020 (all building space uses)

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1600000

1800000

2000000

2005 2010 2015 2020

Tonn

es C

O 2 p

er a

nnum

Year

21


Minor change scenario

If the measures outlined in the ‘minor change’ scenario were

implemented, the aggregate level of emissions from buildings

will decrease in the short term (figure 7). However, from a longer

term perspective this is a short-term correction only and unless

additional steps are taken, total CO2 emissions will revert again

to an upward trend. This is due the fact that, although there are

minor improvements in the energy efficiency of the stock, the

overall quantity of floor area and stock increases over time.

Figure 7 Minor Change Scenario - Total emissions from Melbourne CBD buildings 2005-2020 (all building space uses)

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1600000

1800000

2000000

2005 2010 2015 2020

Tonn

es C

O 2 p

er a

nnum

Year

22

Findings

Major change scenario

The changes that are proposed by the major change scenario

would have an immediate and significant decrease in CO2

emissions, which is followed by a gradual but relatively small

increase in emissions due to the increases in overall building

stock in the CBD. However, it is unlikely that this scenario is

achievable in practice, as it would require all building owners

to achieve very high levels of energy conservation measures

within a very short time frame.

Figure 8: Major Change Scenario - Total emissions from Melbourne CBD buildings 2005-2020 (all building space uses)

Tonn

es C

O 2 p

er a

nnum

Year

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1600000

1800000

2000000

2005 2010 2015 2020

Intermediate change scenario

What this has revealed is that, on the one hand, minor changes

are unlikely to deliver meaningful emissions reductions, while on

the other hand, the changes that would deliver major emissions

are unlikely to be implemented. What Richard Reed and Sara

Wilkinson explored is whether a phased implementation of

major cuts is feasible. It seems that, while this leads to an initial

small increase in emissions, it does over the longer run deliver

quite significant cuts in emissions (figure 9). What we do know is

that rapid behavioural change is extremely hard to achieve

– the first stage of the process needs to be an educational one,

during which emissions might still rise. However, it would lay

the basis for enabling deeper cuts to be made later on. In this

scenario, the initial increase occurs because of increases in

overall stock levels and no change in energy usage; thereafter

there is minor change and then a major change, which facilitates

a sustained downward trend in overall emissions from the

CBD to 2020.

Figure 9 Intermediate Change Scenario - Total emissions from Melbourne CBD buildings 2005-2020 (all building space uses)

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1600000

1800000

2000000

2005 2010 2015 2020

Tonn

es C

O 2 p

er a

nnum

Year

23

24

Findings

Table 3: Key findings and recommendations

Based on this analysis, Richard Reed and Sara Wilkinson make the following recommendations.

3. For different land uses there are varying correlations between net lettable area and CO2 emissions e.g. (retail is high)

• Energyefficiencyinformationleafletsshouldbepreparedforthedifferent building space uses and distributed to the respective building owners.

Key findings Recommendations

1. Office space use is the largest CO2 emitter and also largest net lettable area in a city centre

• Focuseffortsatcarbonreductionontheofficesectorinordertomaximise the amount of reduction in the short to medium term.

• RegularreviewoftheemissionsfromeachofthelandusesintheCBD to ensure that carbon reduction programs are targeted where needed most.

2. Different building space uses have varying levels of CO2 emissions

• Regularmonitoringandreviewofthetotalamountsofbuildingspace use and associated CO2 emissions.

4. Business as usual is not an option • Majorawarenessraisingcampaignamongstallbuildingownerswithin the city centre.

• Initiateaprogramofgrantsandincentivestoencouragebuildingowners to undertake energy savings measures within the short to medium term.

5. The intermediate scenario is the most realistic option

• Relevantauthoritiesestablishaneducationprogramcomprised of energy savings advisors or a list of approved energy consultants to provide an energy audit and list of priority measures to undertake in the short and medium term.

• Arangeofgrantsandincentiveprogramsshouldbeestablished to assist building owners to take up energy savings measures.

25


Implications

There is a wide range of members of the surveying profession

who are and who potentially could be involved in promoting

and increasing energy efficiency in buildings. These stakeholders

need to be convinced of the case for energy efficiency and the

scope of reductions that can be made to all building types.

This research illustrated the overall contribution of all building

types to total CBD/city centre emissions and highlighted where

reductions can have the most impact. More so than any other

land use, the office sector was confirmed as a good starting

point where the most gains in energy efficiency and greenhouse

gas reductions can be made. Having stated this, the researchers

believe energy efficiency measures should be broadened and

implemented where possible to all buildings regardless of

land use.

Melbourne is a global city containing a stock of CBD properties

similar to many of those in other international cities such as

Hong Kong and Boston. This type of CBD research is relevant

because most major westernised cities have a CBD (referred

to as ‘downtown’ in the US) with a diverse stock of ageing

buildings. There are other implications from CBDs with high

density development; many buildings have contributed to a

poorer environmental quality for city workers and residents

and improving the quality of the CBD stock is important for all.

The research is therefore directly applicable and transferable

to other global cities and can be seen as a blueprint for policy

formation with regard to city-wide carbon dioxide reductions.

As far as practitioners are concerned, this research highlighted

that changes to offices in city centres will lead to the greatest

initial reductions. Importantly, even minor improvements to

individual buildings collectively make a difference. With a more

ambitious effort as outlined in the major change scenario we

can make a substantial difference to this, at times, seemingly

overwhelming issue; we owe it to ourselves and to the

generations who will follow. In the final analysis ask yourself

this: can we afford not to act now?

26

About the study

The research work was carried out by Richard Reed and Sara

Wilkinson of Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia, with

financial support from the RICS Education Trust.

Contacts

Professor Richard Reed,

Deakin University

Burwood, Melbourne 3125.

Australia

e [email protected]

Sara J Wilkinson,

Deakin University

Burwood, Melbourne 3125.

Australia

e [email protected]

The full report of this study is available at:

www.rics.org/research

27


References

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2009) 6401.0 Consumer Price Index, Australia, Canberra.

Arup (2008). Zero Net Emissions by 2020. Update 2008. Consultation Draft. Melbourne: 43.

BRE, 1996. Potential carbon emission savings from energy efficiency in commercial buildings, by S.A.

Moss. Building Research Establishment IP3/96.

Callender, M. & Key, T, 1997. Value of the UK commercial property stock. Presented at the 6th

Investment Property Databank Investment Strategies Conference. Brighton, 27-28 November.

City of Melbourne. 2003. Zero net emissions by 2020. A roadmap to a climate neutral city. City of

Melbourne, February 2003. http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/rsrc/PDFs/EnvironmentalPrograms/

ZeroNetEmissionsFull.pdf

CSIRO, 2002. Energy & Transport Sector: Outlook to 2020. www.csiro.au (date accessed 10th May 2005)

Economist. 2009. Liveability ranking. Urban Idylls. http://www.economist.com/markets/rankings/

displaystory.cfm?story_id=11116839

Garnaut, R. 2008. The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Final Report. Cambridge University Press.

ISBN 978 0521 744 447.

Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Climate Change 2001: Working Group II:

Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/index.htm.

NSW Department of Water and Energy 2008. Greenpower Accredited Renewable Energy. National

GreenPower Accreditation Program. Annual Compliance Audit. 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2007.

ISBN 978 0 7347 5501 8.

Reed, R.G. and Robinson, J., 2002. ‘Property illiquidity: the effects of depreciation and obsolescence on

returns and values’ in Proceedings of the RICS Foundation Construction and Building Research

Conference, Nottingham Trent University, pp.259-272.

Wilkinson, S. & Reed, R. 2006. Delivering Sustainability: Improving energy efficiency of the CBD. RICS

Education Trust Golden Jubilee Project Final Report. RICS, London.

Wilkinson, S. & Reed, R. 2008. Property Development (5th edition), Routledge Publishing, London.

Advancing standards in land, property and construction.

RICS is the world’s leading qualification when it comes to professional standards in land, property and construction.

In a world where more and more people, governments, banks and commercial organisations demand greater certainty of professional standards and ethics, attaining RICS status is the recognised mark of property professionalism.

Over 100 000 property professionals working in the major established and emerging economies of the world have already recognised the importance of securing RICS status by becoming members.

RICS is an independent professional body originally established in the UK by Royal Charter. Since 1868, RICS has been committed to setting and upholding the highest standards of excellence and integrity – providing impartial, authoritative advice on key issues affecting businesses and society.

RICS is a regulator of both its individual members and firms enabling it to maintain the highest standards and providing the basis for unparalleled client confidence in the sector.

RICS has a worldwide network. For further information simply contact the relevant RICS office or our Contact Centre.

RICS HQ

Parliament Square London SW1P 3AD United Kingdom

Worldwide media enquiries:

E [email protected]

Contact Centre:

E [email protected] T +44 (0)870 333 1600 F +44 (0)20 7334 3811

Asia Room 1804 Hopewell Centre 183 Queen’s Road East Wanchai Hong Kong

T +852 2537 7117 F +852 2537 2756 [email protected]

Americas 60 East 42nd Street Suite 2918 New York, NY 10165 USA

T +1 212 847 7400 F +1 212 847 7401 [email protected]

Oceania Suite 2, Level 16 1 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia


Europe (excluding United Kingdom) Rue Ducale 67 1000 Brussels Belgium

T +32 2 733 10 19 F +32 2 742 97 48 [email protected]

Africa PO Box 3400 Witkoppen 2068 South Africa


Middle East Office F07, Block 11 Dubai Knowledge Village Dubai United Arab Emirates


India 48 & 49 Centrum Plaza Sector Road Sector 53, Gurgaon – 122002 India


United Kingdom Parliament Square London SW1P 3AD United Kingdom

T +44 (0)870 333 1600 F +44 (0)207 334 3811 [email protected]

AU

GU

ST

2009

/VP

/592

RS

rics.org/research

Documents

Reed, Richard and Wilkinson, Sara 2009 , RICS, …dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30034451/reed-movingtowards...build on the results of the first RICS Education Trust-funded study in 2006,