Debate  |  Low carbon fuels

Fuelling change

Radical changes are needed if the construction sector is to be decarbonised. Fuel transition is one opportunity to cut down emissions. Sotiris Kanaris reports.

In recent years construction industry players have intensified efforts to cut carbon emissions as they strive to hit the 2050 net zero carbon target. More attention is being paid to the amount and types of materials used in construction, with the aim of slashing embodied carbon.

But to hit the 2050 target, the sector must also switch away from using fossil fuels.

NCE recently teamed up with World Kinect subsidiary Watson Fuels to discuss the decarbonisation solutions the industry is looking at and to examine the opportunities and challenges associated with the transition to lower carbon fuels.

“Setting [carbon] targets is easy, the problem is being able to deliver them from a financial perspective, as well as from a supply chain perspective,” says World Kinect director of UK and Ireland energy management Martin Hamilton.

Hamilton adds that industry players must establish a clear process for meeting targets.

When it comes to hitting those targets, there are two options. One is to reduce carbon emissions; the other is to offset them.

HS2 Ltd head of environmental sciences Andrea Davidson says the industry should evaluate design and construction methods and look for ways to reduce carbon emissions as much as possible, before looking at offsets as a solution.

Arcadis senior director Chris Mattock says offsetting, while useful for many companies as a first step towards reducing their carbon footprint, is not driving the industry forward as it does not accelerate change.

“Last resort is the word we would use for offsetting at Lower Thames Crossing,” he says. Mattock was lowest carbon programme leader on that project until August 2023.

“We wanted to get as close to zero [carbon] as possible using solutions that would not only help the project, but leave a legacy.

“When you have some carbon at the end, offsetting is better than not offsetting,” Mattock adds.

Finding ways to reduce carbon can be more challenging than offsetting. “Some people are just going to choose the easy option, as from a public perception point of view, net zero is net zero,” says Mattock.

Cost is also a factor for some decisions to choose carbon offsetting.

John Sisk & Son head of carbon engineering Ian O’Connor says “offsets are not so expensive, so they don’t have much [financial] impact”.

The high cost of some carbon cutting solutions is making offsetting more popular in the current challenging economic environment, according to Watson Fuels commercial director for UK and Ireland Jim Williams.

“There is still resistance to electric plant even by fairly large contractors because of cost“The first line of defence would be solutions that do not emit carbon, so ideally you would electrify everything you can,” says Mattock.

He points that the high upfront cost of electrical equipment makes this unpopular. But the significantly lower operating costs of electric machinery compared to diesel plant, mean that investing in electric plant would pay for itself over time.

Map Plant managing director Darren Carter agrees. “We’ve been trying to push a new division, starting off with electric tools and electric plant, then moving on hopefully to hydrogen. There is still resistance to electric plant even by fairly large contractors because of cost.”

Carter says another challenge for the uptake of electric plant is the limited range of products. O’Connor adds that to achieve net zero carbon with electric plant, companies would also have to rely on the power grid to decarbonise. “Is that [decarbonisation of the grid] happening at a pace that needs to happen? I am not sure,” he adds.

FUEL TRANSITION

With electric plant use facing challenges, the construction industry has been focusing on using lower carbon plant fuel as a way to cut carbon emissions.