CMF Document - Full

FIDIC Carbon Management Framework

Beta Version

Summary note Summary note to stakeholders using this “beta” version of the FIDIC Carbon Management Framework (CMF)

This document is the current “beta” version of the CMF to be used by project teams.

§ The CMF articulates what carbon management is, in the context of infrastructure project delivery by project teams. It defines a foundation of carbon awareness upon which seven components are built: leadership & accountability, carbon assessment, baselines and targets, carbon reductions, collaboration, procurement, and continual improvement.

§ The components of carbon management are described at different levels of maturity in a project. A project team can use the maturity assessment tool to complete a self-assessment and identify opportunities for improvement.

§ The audience of the CMF is project teams delivering infrastructure projects. Project teams consist of asset owners and designers as a minimum and then constructors/product material suppliers and other stakeholders as required.

§ The CMF emphasises that there are windows of opportunity to reduce whole life carbon emissions throughout the delivery stages of a project and regardless of support or involvement from asset owners or clients.

§ The CMF provides guidance in the form of FAQs for helping project teams implement whole life carbon management in infrastructure projects, covering all delivery stages. As the CMF is reviewed and refined, the intention is to build on the FAQs and provide a way to navigate through these based on project stage and ambition.

Vision of the Carbon Management Framework

The completed CMF is proposed to have the following outputs:

a. Description of the carbon management components and what they mean for each maturity level

b. A maturity assessment tool for project teams to self-asses and identify opportunities to improve application of carbon management in the project

c. An interactive portal to navigate FAQs with questions to address each carbon management component and signposting to existing guidance, resources, and case studies. This includes mapping of the FAQs to different project delivery stages.

The current “beta” version of the CMF in this document has the following limitations:

§ The current FAQs are in draft form and do not have complete coverage of signposted guidance/resources/worked examples. Efforts have been focused on the expected most pertinent FAQs to ensure pilot project teams can test the format. FIDIC would welcome feedback on which of the resources provided are useful and what further resources would support teams.

§ The FAQs are not mapped to different delivery stages or levels of maturity.

1. Purpose of the Carbon Management Framework

1. Purpose of the Carbon Management Framework

To provide infrastructure project teams with a framework to enable action and reduce whole-life carbon emissions.

1.1 Overview

The FIDIC Carbon Management Framework (CMF) provides a structured approach to reduce whole-life carbon emissions from infrastructure projects.

This voluntary framework supports project teams at various stages in their journey of carbon reduction, guiding them through how to embed carbon management in project conception, design, construction, and operation. It introduces a four-level maturity pathway, supported by seven core components, to help teams progressively evaluate and reduce carbon on their projects. A basic level of carbon awareness is proposed as the foundation on which the seven components build.

By embedding carbon management into project decisions, teams can reduce resource consumption, avoid waste, and optimise designs. These actions frequently reduce carbon emissions, project costs and achieve wider project benefits in quality, social, and environmental outcomes.

1.2 Scope and Applicability

The CMF aims to be globally relevant and apply to infrastructure projects of any type, scale, or geography in highly regulated markets or in regions with emerging carbon policies. The framework applies across all infrastructure sectors including energy, transport, water, and utilities.

The intention is to enable any project team to identify and implement opportunities, reducing carbon impacts of infrastructure whilst often also reducing whole life costs, and not compromising on quality or programme.

Project teams: The framework is project team-focused, encouraging collaboration across owners, designers, contractors, suppliers, and operators. It applies to everyone working on the project with any control and influence on project outcomes.

Complimenting existing guidance: The CMF does not replace standards or regulations but complements them by translating principles into practical actions and signposting existing guidance and resources.

The PAS 2080 standard ‘Carbon Management in Buildings and Infrastructure’ is generally considered as good practice in many parts of the world. The CMF builds on the principles of PAS 2080, offering a practical and accessible framework to help project teams begin and/or mature in their approach to whole life carbon reduction.

Global Application: The CMF aims to support project teams to apply the principles in their own regional and industry contexts, learning from what has been done elsewhere. However, it’s recognised that more work needs to be done to signpost and develop resources beyond the current guidance to ensure true geographical global reach.

1.3 Key Objectives and Benefits

The CMF’s objective is to accelerate global decarbonisation whilst supporting positive economic and social outcomes of infrastructure through the following aims:

§ Promote carbon awareness: Build awareness of whole-life carbon impacts across the full project team, equipping them with the knowledge to assess carbon emissions at every project phase and to reduce impacts.

§ Facilitate improved decision-making: Guide teams to evaluate project options with carbon impact in mind alongside technical constraints and financial costs.

§ Standardise practice: Provide a common language and methodology for managing whole-life carbon within project lifecycles, allowing better benchmarking of both carbon and costs.

§ Deliver sustainable outcomes: Demonstrate how reducing whole-life carbon supports climate goals whilst delivering cost-effective and resilient projects.

2. Carbon Awareness

2. Carbon Awareness

This section provides information on what is proposed as basic carbon awareness that project teams will need to have before they reach Maturity Level 1. This is the foundation for the CMF’s seven components of carbon management.

2.1 Understanding why

Project teams need to understand what ‘carbon’ is and why it is important in infrastructure projects, helping to build motivation to take meaningful action. Carbon awareness covers:

§ Terminology – including the components of whole-life carbon

§ Relevance of whole-life carbon in infrastructure projects

§ Relationship between cost and carbon including efficiency, circularity and quality

§ How carbon assessment supports carbon reduction

§ How carbon relates to wider sustainability impacts and benefits

§ Overview of policy and regulations

For detailed guidance about these aspects, refer to the chapter in the FAQs about ‘Carbon Awareness’. This provides an overview of the terminology and key concepts that are essential to start using the CMF.

2.2 Understanding whole life carbon

A whole life approach evaluates carbon and costs across construction, operation and use of infrastructure assets ensuring consideration is given over the full lifecycle of infrastructure. This encourages a holistic approach and better decision making. It avoids potential false economies that can occur when a lifecycle stage is looked at in isolation, where a low-cost or carbon solution may be more expensive or carbon intensive over its lifespan due to long-term considerations such as more frequent replacement cycles, higher operational costs or higher energy consumption. For example:

§ A higher-cost durable material may have higher upfront embodied carbon but extend asset life, reducing overall emissions and lifecycle costs.

§ In optioneering solutions, lower cost construction may mean lower capital carbon such as a pumped water solution, but lifetime energy use increases costs and emissions, compared to a gravity-fed system with higher construction cost and carbon emissions but has low operational energy and cost.

Expanding this thinking to a systems level of wider global decarbonisation, whole life carbon thinking allows a project team to evaluate benefits when planning investment in infrastructure assets. For example:

§ Projects to increase active travel and use of public transport enable a modal transition from highly carbon intensive transport modes but should be considered with construction carbon impacts of these projects from materials and activities.

§ Renewable energy infrastructure supports a low-carbon transition with low operational carbon during energy generation, however, construction materials and their maintenance and replacement can be highly carbon intensive.

Understanding how to evaluate impacts and trade-offs over the lifecycle of the asset is addressed in the FAQs on ‘Carbon Awareness’.

3. Carbon Management Framework Components

3. Carbon Management Framework Components

Effective carbon management requires an integrated project approach to measurement, monitoring and reduction in the wider project decision making processes. Each component can be applied in isolation, but a project will be the most effective in achieving decarbonisation when all components are effectively and consistently applied. The seven components are illustrated in Figure 1 and described in more detail below.

CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT

PROCUREMENT

COLLABORATION

CARBON AWARENESS

LEADERSHIP & ACCOUNTABILITY

WHOLE LIFE CARBON ASSESSMENT

BASELINE & TARGETS

DRIVING CARBON REDUCTIONS

3.1 Leadership and Accountability

Clear leadership and accountability improve infrastructure project outcomes. When carbon management is made a core part of leadership with clearly defined roles and responsibilities from the executives through to the project team, this ensures that carbon reduction is driven by a strong vision and supported with the necessary resources.

Benefit when realised: Aligns carbon reduction with projects performance including cost, quality and time allowing carbon impacts to be given appropriate project attention and ensuring effective strategic and cost-effective delivery.

3.2 Whole Life Carbon Assessment

Assessment quantifies the whole life carbon (upfront, operational and user) to identify carbon hotspots and prioritise reduction efforts on aspects that will have the most impact, ensuring alignment with project objectives on cost, quality, and time. By aligning whole life carbon assessment with cost assessments, joint hotspots for both carbon and cost can be identified and action taken to reduce impacts.

Benefit when realised: Identifies hotspots allowing teams to focus efforts for maximum impact in a data-driven approach. This highlights opportunities for solutions that reduce both whole life cost and carbon such as energy efficient technologies, design optimization or material substitution.

3.3 Baseline and targets

Project carbon baselines and targets for reduction enable the delivery of carbon reduction at the required pace and scale. They allow a level of ambition to be determined and a baseline to track progress. This can be aligned with top-down targets at a national or sectoral level as well as internal or external benchmarking on project performance.

Benefit when realised: Promotes a shared commitment to reducing carbon in the project team alongside other cost, time and quality performance indicators.

FIGURE 1: FIDIC CARBON MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK COMPONENTS

3. Carbon Management Framework Components

3.4 Driving carbon reductions

The objective of carbon management is to reduce carbon emissions of a project. To achieve these reductions, discussions about carbon should be integrated into project decision-making to evaluate solutions and decisions alongside project criteria such as cost, time, and other social and environmental factors. The best solutions will be realised when project objective synergies and trade-offs are made visible.

Benefit when realised: Enables carbon reduction decisions to be visible and prioritised as part of decision making. This unlocks innovation and value across the infrastructure lifecycle, often with lower whole life costs.

3.5 Collaboration

Collaboration allows project teams to recognise carbon and cost reduction opportunities across the full value chain and see the impact of solutions across the project lifecycle. It allows alignment of perspectives and priorities towards a common goal to support unlocking deeper carbon reductions and holistic decision making.

Benefit when realised: Allows for more effective practices to benefit the full project team and supply chain, and best-value solutions by pooling expertise and aligning incentives.

3.6 Procurement

The procurement process is a critical lever in achieving project ambitions. Carbon reduction can be woven into the evaluation procedures with contractual requirements specified for project delivery. Procurement mechanisms can incentivise low-carbon behaviours, financially rewarding suppliers delivering optimum low cost and carbon solutions and promoting innovation.

Benefit when realised: Alignment of supply chain procurement incentivises carbon reduction outcomes.

3.7 Continual improvement

Drawing on successes and lessons learnt to improve delivery of current and future projects, ensures that low cost and carbon solutions are repeated and scaled across future projects. Standardised data collection and whole life carbon evaluation builds the evidence and business case for low-carbon solutions.

Benefit when realised: Efficiency in the application of carbon management practices and project delivery, ensuring minimal impacts to project costs while accelerating sector-wide decarbonisation.

4. CMF levels of maturity

4. CMF levels of maturity

Recognising that different projects using the CMF will be at different levels of maturity, the CMF defines four maturity levels, which represent progressively greater integration and application of carbon management:

§ Level 1 – Acknowledging: Teams begin developing a carbon reduction mindset, with appreciation of wider project benefits.

§ Level 2 – Intervening: Teams actively identify and consider better project solutions but these may not be fully implemented.

§ Level 3 – Achieving: Teams embed and consistently implement carbon management into standard processes, alongside cost and other project criteria.

§ Level 4 – Pioneering: Projects influence wider systems, beyond the project boundary – this level is targeted at influence on policy-makers, financers and other key stakeholders.

The table below in chapter 4.1 provides a detailed description of what it looks like to be applying each of the seven components at the four levels of maturity.

4.1 Progressing component maturity

The four maturity levels have been designed to enable project teams to take action to progress their maturity and reduce carbon on their projects. Honest self-assessment against each component should support identification of actions for improvement. Note that it is likely that a project will be at different levels in the different components and the tools is most effective when completed honestly.

The table below provides a detailed description of each component at each level and can be used for self-assessment. Alternatively, the maturity assessment tool can be used to evaluate level of maturity in each component, with a visual presentation of the results to support communication.

FIGURE 2: SUMMARY OF INCREASING MATURITY ACROSS THE CMF COMPONENTS

4. CMF levels of maturity

Leadership & Accountability Project team has a basic understanding of carbon but responsibility is with sustainability manager/team and not the engineering teams. No clear accountability.

Engineering teams understand carbon management and actively consider low carbon solutions. Project Execitive (can be asset owner delegating to design or contractor) is accountable for carbon impact of the project and prioritise implementation of low carbon/ low cost solutions, challenging the scope and intended outcomes of the project for greater carbon reduction.

Project Executive (Asset Owner) is accountable for implementing decarbonisation and meeting or exceeding the carbon targets. Each value chain member involved in the project proactively reduces whole life carbon in their control and influence, challenging the scope and intended outcomes for delivering whole life low carbon reduction.

Carbon assessment Basic carbon assessment for capital and/or operational emissions. Assessment may not cover all project activities/assets and is limited to information that is available. Sustainability expert supports project team in understanding the basic carbon hotspots of the project.

Project teams (engineering teams and sustainability managers) have access to carbon data to be able to assess capital, and operational and/or whole life emissions and/or carbon removals. Carbon assessment in this Level is typically done in one delivery stage only.

Carbon assessment done using generic industry data (emissions factors). Carbon assessment data used to understand where carbon hotspots and reduction opportunities are.

Carbon assessment for whole life emissions and removals done early on in every project stage to inform reductions. Carbon assessment is dynamic and where appropriate more specific emissions factors (from supply chain, geography, etc.) are used.

Project Representative / Sponsor in Government has ownership of target setting and delivering it, with clear and significant penalties if the system target is missed. This person has to have appreciation of national/sectoral/regional carbon budgets and targets

Granular carbon assessment using the most appropriate emissions factors is done for the emissions within the project boundary. Team makes effort to assess emissions beyond the project boundary as a result of a project (e.g. user emissions) affecting the wider system

Carbon assessment is dynamic and relevant to each delivery project stage

Baseline & Targets No target or baseline set for the project.

Carbon targets set (can be capital, operational or whole life), but not necessarily formal targets dictated by the Client / Asset Owner. The project team has set “shadow” targets that may be based on other projects. The “shadow” targets are communicated to the project team and can act as a benchmark of good practice.

Baseline is estimated based on general data that reflect a standard technical solution of the project; no project-specific adjustments are done for carbon data to be used.

Target and baseline clearly set by the Client/ Asset Owner.

The target aligns with specific standards and policies (e.g., PAS2080).

Target is linked to relevant project components/ packages at different stages of the delivery process, if relevant.

The project baseline has transparent assumptions and has a clear change mechanism. Granular baseline calculated with project-specific data, reviewed with key stakeholders.

A carbon budget/target is set at the system level –beyond the project’s boundary.

A baseline reflects the current operational and user carbon emitted on the system in question.

The whole life carbon target for the asset is demonstrably related to effective decarbonisation of the system of which it is part - e.g. capital carbon investment on a railway asset that enables system-wide reduction of user carbon for the transport system through mode shift.

Target should be set by Government/ Asset Owner in consideration of the system decarbonisation needs and investment available

4. CMF levels of maturity

Driving Carbon reductions The project team is starting to understand where the carbon hotspots in the project are and discussing potential carbon reduction opportunities. Low carbon opportunities not always translated into carbon emissions (can be linked to resource efficiency). These are not necessarily prioritised or implemented in reality.

Clear communication of carbon hotspots and reduction opportunities in project teams and client (value chain). Integrated in project risks & opportunities register. Some but limited implementation of low carbon opportunities, prioritising low carbon, low cost opportunities. The project team understands the blockers in the project environment for not implementing low carbon solutions (can be asset standards, high cost, programme pressures, client not engaging, etc)

Project team considers whole life carbon in wider decision-making process alongside other criteria. Low carbon solutions are prioritised based on total value. Project is systematically considering carbon in all design/delivery challenge sessions in the project

Not meeting the national/regional carbon target is a project-stopper – no decision is taken forward if project’s whole life carbon impact is not meeting the absolute whole life carbon target of the system

Collaboration Carbon is included as a topic in design team and/or client discussions and meetings.

Sharing of carbon hotspots in project team meetings with client but project team not supported to implement reductions.

Procurement No contractual requirements for decarbonisation in the project

Contract may only include corporate SBTi or similar organisational level ESG targets but not relevant to reducing carbon in the project.

Client promotes collaboration in the project team among designers, contractors, product/material suppliers, supporting identification of low-carbon solutions

Designers / consultants/ contractors proactively challenge others in value chain and the engineering solution

Carbon reduction requirements are included in the procurement process for the project (by the asset owner) but they are fairly general without specifics on what carbon reduction target a project should use, what carbon assessment method or data to be used etc.

Project teams engaging with other suppliers (e.g. subconsultants, product/material suppliers) ask for specific low carbon innovations and/or supplier specific data to help make decisions on implementing low carbon solutions

Client proactively engages stakeholders outside the project environment to investigate carbon reduction opportunities and is willing to test innovative solutions.

Collaboration has a clear focus in the project/industry environment – innovation, R&D (e.g. low carbon concrete)

Project team proactively shares data and lessons with wider industry

Procurement is a clear enabler of all carbon management framework components and is clearly articulated throughout the project’s procurement process. There is a clear carbon management strategy for the project in the procurement strategy including ambitious targets, clarity on tools/ assessment requirements, systematic approach to decision-making addressing conflicting priorities and co-benefits

The procurement process focuses on long-term supplier partnerships that enable the project team meeting the common carbon reduction goals

Collaboration across planning and delivery

Cross-sector collaboration to maximise carbon-reducing innovation, accelerate implementation and manage risk in delivery

Continual improvement Building the basis for future projects – start creating carbon benchmarks, low carbon solutions, etc. Doesn’t have to be project specific. But act as a basis for use in future projects

Capture any lessons to be used in future projects

Project specific lessons captured (inc. carbon data, refine carbon benchmarks, low carbon solutions register/practices).

Using data from the industry and applying it in project while also generating own information

Focus is primarily on own organisation and projects; not routinely engaging with wider industry.

Continual improvement central to project’s delivery (can include data, better carbon benchmarks, ambitious low carbon practices, procurement models, etc.)

Lessons learned shared with wider industry not only internally with project teams (e.g. sharing of benchmarks with wider industry)

Sector-wide coordination for common data and reduction opportunities, with established feedback loops that are curated for continual improvement. Owned and managed at sector-level, by a group of asset owners and integrated in all projects delivered across the sector / system.

TBC

4. CMF levels of maturity

4.2 Maturity assessment tool

The maturity assessment tool allows project teams to complete self-assessment and understand which components of carbon management they could be focusing on to improve their ability to maximise carbon reductions. The tool proposes a question for each of the seven CMF components; answers reflect the project team’s maturity level as described in the table, visually presenting results. Figure 3 below provides an illustrative example of the output of CMF maturity assessment tool.

4.3 When to apply the CMF

The earlier in the project the CMF is applied the greater the potential of the benefits to be realised, right from the project conception or outset. However, regardless of the project’s stage or a project team’s carbon management maturity, project teams can take action to embed carbon management and reduce the projects carbon impact.

Figure 4 below illustrates how a project team can act in all stages of project delivery for the various CMF components. The boxes highlighted in blue indicate the stage during which action in each component has the most impact.

4.4 Implementing the CMF

To support the implementation of the CMF, a structured step-by-step guide has been developed to make it as practical and accessible as possible for those project teams that are new to or at the early stages of considering carbon reductions. The guide is targeted at Levels 1 and 2, providing a logical process for teams to follow from carbon awareness through to systematic reduction strategies (Level 2 and beyond). It also helps align expectations across stakeholders, making it easier to benchmark progress and track outcomes consistently. See Appendix 1 for the Step-by-Step guide.

FIGURE 3: EXAMPLE OUTPUT OF CMF MATURITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

FIGURE 4: APPLICATION OF CMF COMPONENTS AT DIFFERENT STAGES IN THE PROJECT LIFE CYCLE

5. FAQs

5. FAQs

The Frequently Asked Questions provide simple guidance about how your project can approach carbon management using the components of the CMF. As the focus of the CMF is on projects, the questions are framed to be as generally applicable as possible across project team members. Each question provides a concise answer and, where relevant, some resources for project teams to access further information.

Note that there is naturally some overlap in questions across the different components and cross references are noted where applicable. The questions are not categorised according to different project delivery stages, although some components of the CMF will tend to more applicable in certain phases of the project than others.

5.1 Gateway questions about the CMF

NUMBER QUESTION ANSWER

1 What is the purpose of the CMF? The Carbon Management Framework (CMF) is a structured approach aimed at decarbonising the infrastructure sector by addressing emissions at different stages of project development and operations. It describes four levels of maturity, guiding project teams in understanding and reducing carbon emissions through various stages of design, construction, and operation. The CMF is adaptable, able to be applied by project teams at various levels of carbon management maturity, at different project stages for projects globally. It aims to integrate whole-life carbon reduction into the design, decision-making, and operational processes of infrastructure projects. The CMF is not designed to replace existing standards but rather complements them, providing flexibility for different stakeholder maturities and geographic contexts.

2 How should I use this framework?

The CMF is intended to guide users towards key principles and best practice of carbon management on infrastructure projects. This is applicable to different levels of maturity, starting with introductory questions and topics for those just starting out on carbon management, and building up to challenge those at the leading edge about further steps to take. Note that the focus is on carbon from the perspective of projects, not organisations. This does not replace existing standards and initiatives, but instead acts as a gateway to guide you on the journey to reducing carbon on your projects.

3 Who is the CMF for? The CMF can be used by any project team member, focusing on asset owners, consultants, contractors, and product/ material suppliers. As maturity increases, the stakeholders involved will broaden out to include planners, investors, regulators and so forth.

4 What is a project? The PAS 2080 definition of a project is used: “a unique process, consisting of a set of coordinated activities and controlled resources undertaken to achieve certain objectives that can take place at the asset, network or system level” At higher levels of maturity, a project may not necessarily comprise a built asset. For example, an intervention may be not to build an asset and find alternative ways of meeting a performance outcome in infrastructure systems.

5 Does it apply to all size projects? Yes. The focus is on infrastructure projects. The intention is that it can be used by any party involved on the project at any point during the project’s lifecycle. The principles of carbon management can be used on any size project.

6 Is this a certification scheme? No, the CMF is not a rating scheme or certification scheme for carbon management. The levels in the CMF are indicative of increasing maturity in understanding and applying the principles of carbon management and reduction on projects, but this is for self-evaluation and reflection only and is not externally validated.

7 Is this a database? No, the CMF is not a database for carbon information for projects or source of information for benchmarking. Suggestions of resources and guidance for carbon factor information, calculation tools and software, databases and benchmarking are provided.

8 How does the CMF help me understand carbon and reduce it on my projects? The framework emphasises systematically challenging carbon impact throughout a project’s lifecycle and provides guidance for stakeholders to integrate carbon management into their practices. It can be overwhelming to know where to begin when first looking into carbon reduction. The CMF illustrates the main components to decarbonise infrastructure projects, showing how these are applied at increasing levels of maturity. The FAQs start off with basic questions that provide answers to get you started on your journey. These also signpost to some initial resources that may be helpful.

9 How is the CMF structured? The CMF starts with carbon awareness, explaining the basic carbon awareness that project teams will need to have before looking further into the CMF. Next, the CMF explains seven core components for effective whole life carbon reduction on infrastructure projects. For each component, four levels of maturity are defined to indicate the level of decarbonisation maturity of the project. Note that a project could be at different levels for different components. The FAQs provide guidance about how projects can implement carbon management using the components of the CMF.

1 What do you mean by carbon? ‘Carbon’ is a shorthand way of referring to greenhouse gas emissions, which are usually measured in kgs carbon dioxide equivalent (kg CO2e). It is important to understand how our activities contribute to emissions of these gases and actions that we can take to reduce them.

For more information about the definition of carbon, see resources such as ‘IstructE - Climate jargon buster’ and ‘Carbon Definitions for the Built Environment’.

2 What is ‘whole life carbon’?

Greenhouse gases are gases in the atmosphere, including carbon, methane and water vapour that absorb radiation and trap heat. There are six gasses that have been identified as having Global Warming Potential and are therefore the main focus of attention to address climate change: these are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC’s), perfluorocarbons (PFC’s), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6). Their Global Warming Potential is measured in ‘carbon dioxide equivalent’ (CO2e).

In the context of an infrastructure project, whole life carbon refers to the carbon emissions expected over the full lifecycle of an asset, from the materials and construction activities, to carbon from operation such as energy and water as well as refurbishment, repair and replacement, and finally end-of-life. These are usually grouped into embodied carbon (also known as capital carbon or embedded carbon), operational carbon, and end-of-life carbon. Infrastructure assets should also consider user carbon.

3 What is 'net zero'? Net zero is when the sum of emissions of carbon and removals (such as offsets) are balanced out to equal zero emissions. This is different to ‘Absolute zero’ or ‘zero carbon’, which is when there are no emissions of carbon.

4 Why is managing carbon in infrastructure important?

Infrastructure projects are important in both climate change mitigation, that is reducing emissions to limit climate change, as well as climate change adaptation, that is adapting to the changes and likely impacts of future climate scenarios.

For infrastructure projects, it is important to understand where emissions are generated over the lifecycle of the project, including user carbon associated with the use of the asset, for example cars on a road, and then to take action to reduce the emissions. The biggest opportunities for reducing carbon are at the earliest stages when decisions are being made about whether infrastructure is needed at all. As project scope and details are decided, there is a degree of carbon ‘lock-in’, limiting the scope of reductions that are possible.

5 What are the benefits of reducing carbon on my project? There are a variety of drivers, for example:

• Client ambition – demonstrating leadership in commitment to sustainability and reducing carbon

• Regulatory requirements – reducing carbon can help meet the requirements of current and future regulations (for example, UK legally required to achieve net zero by 2050)

• Cost savings – Reducing carbon is often linked to more efficient use of resources, less waste and more energy efficient designs, all of which can lead to cost savings on a project over its lifecycle.

• Funding – investors may be looking for projects that demonstrate commitment to reducing carbon as part of their ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) strategy

The ‘Climate Jargon Buster’ website provides clear, plain English descriptions of words often used when talking about climate action and carbon in general (not specific to infrastructure).

For more information about whole life carbon, see resources such as ‘IstructE - Climate jargon buster’ and ‘Carbon Definitions for the Built Environment’. LETI and UKGBC both have infographics explaining the principles of whole-life carbon as well as UKGBC’s ‘Explainer Guide to Operational & Embodied Carbon.’

For more detail about the different carbon targets definitions, see resources such as ‘Climate Jargon Buster’ and ‘Carbon Definitions for the Built Environment’.

For further information about decarbonisation principles and the carbon reduction hierarchy, see ‘PAS 2080: 2023’, particularly clause 4.

For more information about why reducing carbon in infrastructure is important, read FIDIC’s ‘Decarbonisation of the infrastructure sector’. To understand how carbon reduction fits in with broader sustainability goals, read the United Nation’s short and informative guides on the Sustainable Development Goals, especially Goal 13 ‘Climate Change’.

6 When should I consider carbon reduction on my project?

7 So much I see about carbon management is in the context of buildings, but my projects are infrastructure. Are these relevant?

Whilst the project activities before construction works begin, such as feasibility, optioneering and design, don’t generate emissions in themselves, this is where the biggest influence is for reducing carbon on a project. This is because decisions made in the earliest stages of a project, right from whether to build anything at all the way through concept design, optioneering and detailed design significantly impact the carbon that will be emitted in the construction, operation, use and ultimately end-of-life of the asset.

Buildings and infrastructure are part of a connected built environment system, with growing recognition of addressing them together. For example, the PAS 2080: 2023 update expanded the scope to include all of the built environment (buildings and infrastructure), where previously it was for infrastructure only.

Whilst there are some differences in the way carbon management is addressed in buildings, the underlying principles of carbon management are the same. There can be valuable information and insights in reports, documents or case studies of buildings that are transferable to infrastructure.

Some key differences to note:

• Functional unit: To allow for comparison and benchmarking, embodied, operational or whole life carbon for buildings is usually reported per m2, using the gross internal floor area as the functional unit. For infrastructure projects, the functional unit will depend on the asset type and function, for example km of road or pipeline or m2 of bridge deck.

• In the assessment of whole-life carbon for infrastructure, there are two major additional aspects to consider: land-use change (the carbon emissions or removals associated with changing the state of the land) and user carbon (carbon emissions from end-users’ use of the asset).

Refer to PAS 2080:2023 Carbon reduction hierarchy (Figure 5)

8 What is lifecycle assessment (LCA)?

Lifecycle assessment is a methodology for quantifying carbon emissions across the full lifecycle of an asset. This process can also be used for quantifying other environmental impacts (such as water use and acidification potential).

There are standards that detail the requirements for LCA in the built environment and a variety of software and tools (free and paid) to assist in creating a robust LCA.

To standardise assessments, impacts are reported in defined groups called modules that relate to a specific stage of the project’s lifecycle:

• Module A: Upfront – materials and construction processes

• Module B: In-use stage – this includes maintenance, repair, replacement and refurbishment as well as operational energy and water. Importantly for infrastructure, this also includes user carbon.

• Module C: End of life stage

• Module D: Benefits and loads beyond the lifecycle

For more detail about LCAs, see OneClick LCA’s report ‘Life Cycle Assessment for Buildings: Why it matters and how to use it’. Although it is written with a buildings-focus, the principles are applicable to infrastructure projects too.

Carbon assessment

9 How does this framework fit in with other ways that carbon is talked about, e.g. 'Scopes' of emissions? It is important to distinguish between carbon emissions from the perspective of an organisation or business, and carbon emissions of an infrastructure asset or project. There is naturally overlap in these, however, the CMF focuses on projects.

From an organisational perspective, carbon emissions are usually described by their scope, i.e. Scope 1, which is direct emissions from controlled or owned sources, Scope 2, which is indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heating, cooling and steam., and Scope 3, which is indirect emissions from activities that are both upstream and downstream of the organisation. The definitions of these scopes come from GHG Protocol.

From a construction organisation’s perspective, scope 3 emissions would include the materials used in projects undertaken and construction activities. This is where the overlap occurs in these spheres of understanding carbon.

See UKGBC’s ‘Scope 1, 2 & 3 Explainer Guide’ for more info.

There are many initiatives and reporting requirements that address organisations and businesses. Examples include Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Task-Force for Climate Disclosures (TCFD) and other ESG requirements, such as ISSB and the EU’s CSRD. These are not in the scope of the CMF, but more information is available online.

10 Why should I reduce carbon if the client is not asking for it?

There are several benefits that can be achieved when evaluating and reducing carbon on projects, even when not specifically requested in a client’s ambition or procurement requirements. These include cost savings (for example materials reductions) and process improvements (for example construction logistics).

Some companies have implemented policies that require all projects above a certain threshold to have at least a baseline calculation of embodied carbon conducted on the design, regardless of client’s requirements. This has provided incredible insights into carbon hotspots and opportunities for intervention and allows for internal benchmarking of projects to determine realistic targets for carbon reduction. Proactive engagement with carbon reduction means that you will be able to respond appropriately, with a mature approach for future clients and projects where there may be a priority on addressing carbon.

11 am a contractor so I tend to only get involved late in the process. What does low carbon construction mean to me?

Although the major opportunities for reducing carbon happen early in the project stages, there are always actions that can be taken at each stage of the project. As a contractor, you biggest influence is likely around materials and construction processes. Even if the client or others in the project team are not specifically requesting carbon reductions, there are lots of ideas and opportunities for contractors. It is also important for contractors to know how to respond to low carbon requirements in tenders/bids.

Some brief examples include:

• Investigate local sources of materials, which minimises emissions from transportation

• Recommend low-carbon alternatives for materials in the project, demonstrating how these meet the performance specifications and other project requirements.

• Eliminate waste on site (encourage high-value reuse or recycling, not over-ordering materials etc.)

• Think about how to maximise opportunities for using grid or renewable electricity as early as possible to minimise the use of fossil fuel generators

• Improve efficiency of construction plant and machinery and reduce idling time

For more information and ideas for contractors see resources such as ‘Low Carbon & Resource Efficient Construction Procurement’

Leadership and Accountability

Driving Carbon reductions

12 Why focus on reducing carbon in infrastructure. Can’t just offset through carbon credits or other mechanisms? Carbon offsets are a mechanism for compensating for emissions made through purchasing or trading reductions/ removals achieved elsewhere. These should be a last resort after all efforts have been made to reduce emissions as much as possible.

There is debate about the effectiveness of offsetting schemes in achieving long-term reductions that truly compensate for emissions.

13 My client has many different targets: carbon, resilience, cost, biodiversity. How can I really balance all these and prioritise?

Whilst there are many targets and requirements, these are often interconnected challenges with opportunities for addressing multiple requirements through interventions on a project. It is helpful to build an understanding of the principles for each of the competing aspects and investigate opportunities for accomplishing multiple goals simultaneously. In relation to decarbonisation, ‘co-benefits’ are where there are added benefits to decarbonisation beyond just reducing carbon.

For example – nature based solutions for infrastructure provide an opportunity to boost biodiversity whilst reducing use of carbon intensive materials such as concrete and steel; furthermore, they may improve the resilience of asset in withstanding changing climatic conditions and also improve air quality.

See ‘Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting’ or UKGBC’s ‘Carbon offset and pricing report’ for more information. Another resource for the UK context is the report by the Environment Agency ‘Achieving Net Zero carbon emissions: a review of the evidence behind carbon offsetting’, which reviews the evidence for a range of offsetting approaches.

In the updates from the previous version, PAS 2080: 2023 included addressing the interdependence between decarbonisation and other aspects such as “climate resilience, environmental regeneration and biodiversity”

14 How does circular economy link with decarbonisation of infrastructure?

Circular economy refers to a system of production and consumption that emphasises sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing, and recycling existing materials and products for as long as possible. This approach aims to extend the lifecycle of products, reduce waste, and minimise the consumption of finite resources. Circular economy in construction aims to reduce the environmental impact of construction activities. Some key aspects of implementing a circular economy in the construction industry:

• Design for Deconstruction: assets are designed to be easily disassembled, allowing materials to be reused or recycled at the end of their life. This includes using modular components and standardizing materials.

• Material Reuse and Recycling: Emphasizing the use of recycled materials and ensuring that new materials can be recycled in the future. This reduces the demand for virgin resources and minimises waste.

• Innovative Construction Techniques: Employing new methods such as 3D printing and prefabrication to reduce material waste and improve efficiency. These techniques can also facilitate the use of recycled materials.

• Collaboration and Partnerships: Engaging multiple stakeholders, including governments, private companies, and communities, to promote circular practices and share resources and knowledge.

15 What about biodiversity? How does this fit in with reducing carbon?

Biodiversity and environmental enhancement are significant components of managing carbon in and around infrastructure assets and networks.

In simple terms, biodiversity refers to the variety of all life forms on Earth, encompassing plants, animals, bacteria, and fungi. This includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems. It is crucial for maintaining the balance of ecosystems, providing essential services like food, clean water, medicine, and shelter.

In relation to carbon emissions:

• Conserving natural ecosystems avoids the disruption of the natural carbon cycle and hence the release of carbon in the atmosphere.

• Enhancing degraded ecosystems re-instates the natural carbon cycle, removing carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in the green canopy and soil.

In infrastructure, nature-based contributions to decarbonisation include the use of natural or modified ecosystems to provide infrastructure services (PAS 2080:2023 definition). Nature-based solutions contribute to decarbonisation by:

1. Providing a service that removes the need for hard/grey infrastructure (therefore reduced embodied and operational carbon), such as flood protection or urban cooling

2. Removing carbon from the atmosphere through sequestration in the vegetation and soil.

(taken from PAS 2080)

16 What about the social dimension? Isn't that important in infrastructure?

Sustainability traditionally addresses the three aspects of environment, society and economics. The social dimension is crucial in relation to infrastructure projects because infrastructure is ultimately a mechanism for delivering on outcomes for society. For example, in the Global Infrastructure Hub’s (GIH) analysis ‘Transition pathways for sustainable infrastructure’, there are three pathways that specially address the positive social impact of infrastructure; these are increasing universal access, increasing affordability of services and improving the standard of operation.

Measuring the social value of a project is a way to tangibly evaluate metrics relating to the social aspect on infrastructure projects.

For further information on nature-based solutions and co-benefits to be considered in managing carbon in infrastructure, see PAS 2080:2023 (e.g. Clause 4.1 (c) )

A case study of the link between carbon and biodiversity is illustrated in Arup’s project for the Environment Agency which quantified the opportunities for carbon sequestration on the EA’s land in Yorkshire and North East England. See https:// www.arup.com/projects/yorkshire-and-north-eastcarbon-absorption/

Another case study is the ‘Knepp Wildland Carbon Project’, which demonstrates the carbon sequestration potential of rewilding projects in low-land Britain. https://www.arup.com/insights/ knepp-wildland-carbon-project/

Assessment

NUMBER QUESTION LEVEL ANSWER

1 Where do we start with assessing carbon on the project?

1 Ensure you have good understanding of the basics of whole life carbon, especially what’s included in the different lifecycle stages such as embodied and operational carbon.

Methodologies

Follow a methodology for conducting the assessment. Basic carbon calculations can be performed using existing project data such as quantities of materials extracted from a BIM model or Bill of Quantities or expected energy consumption predictions.

Embodied (upfront) carbon

Initially, it may be simplest to begin by calculating upfront embodied carbon. Very simply, embodied carbon can be calculated by multiplying the mass or volume of each material by the carbon factor for that material, and then summing it up for the whole project.

SIGNPOSTING CROSS-REFERENCE

Methodologies

For an introduction into measuring carbon impacts for infrastructure, see ICE’s Meaningful measurement for whole-life carbon in infrastructure. For a more detailed description, see RICS ‘Whole life carbon assessment for the built environment (2nd edition)’. The ICMS report ‘Global Consistency in Presenting Construction Life Cycle Costs and Carbon Emissions’ has detailed tables that provide guidance on what to include for different types of buildings and infrastructure projects. This enables consistency in scope and measurement across projects.

2 What do we need to calculate whole life carbon?

1 The guidance documents provide detailed information about what is needed to calculate whole life carbon. These depend on the lifecycle stage and level of detail needed.

Examples of key data required include:

• General information about the project such as what is being delivered and the estimated design life.

• Quantities and types of materials.

• Appropriate Carbon factors for materials.

• Construction processes – e.g. temporary works, access routes, transportation distances, energy usage on site.

• Expected replacement cycles of all products and materials, throughout maintenance, use, repair, replacement and refurbishment.

• Expected disposal routes of materials at end-of-life of asset including demolition, reuse, recycling and landfill.

• The energy use of the project across its lifetime and the source of energy

• Water use of the project, where this is significant.

3 don’t know how to do a detailed carbon assessment and need a quick way to understand opportunities for carbon reduction. What can I do?

4 Where can we find data on carbon factors and how do we know what to look for?

1 A good proxy for understanding the carbon emissions of your project is to ask the question ‘How much does your project weigh?’ – i.e. what is the weight of materials used. Whilst this is not a robust or accurate assessment, a large portion of the capital carbon emissions come from the quantity of materials used. If there is a way to reduce materials, this is likely to be linked to reducing carbon, provided that it is not being swapped for a material with a higher carbon intensity (i.e. more carbon per kg). This should only be the first step towards a whole life carbon assessment that evaluates the impacts of design and decisions across the lifecycle of the asset.

1 Carbon factors are applied to activities and material quantities to calculate the carbon impact of those activities and materials. These can be found in a range of sources including EPDs and databases.

Where available, actual carbon data that is specific to the project should be used. Where this is not available, generic or average carbon factors for similar materials and products should be used.

Rank of factors to use:

1. Product-specific information: Some products have Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs). Where available, use factors for the materials or products specified on the project

2. Carbon Factor Databases: Use freely available carbon databases to find average or generic carbon factors for many materials.

a. Regional databases: where available use factors from the region of your project.

b. Global databases

As you mature in your understanding of and approach to carbon measurement, refine the data sources and expand the scope of assessment to include whole life carbon

EPDs:

What is an EPD? Read the guide | One Click LCA

Global EPD databases such as ‘ECO Platform’ and ‘2050 Materials’ are repositories for information ranging from generic materials to manufacturer specific.

Databases:

In the UK, a freely available source of information of embodied carbon factors for materials is the ‘ICE Database’.

Embodied Carbon Footprint DatabaseCircular Ecology

Climatiq Data Explorer - Search Global Carbon Emission Factors

Built Environment Carbon Database

5 We don’t have the resources to quantify the carbon impacts of the whole project, what should we prioritise?

6 Which tool should used to assess project carbon?

1/2

Focus on the areas of the projects where the project team has the most control, this will help make assessment more meaningful for reduction.

Make the best use of existing project information, for example design information including quantities of materials, or estimates, to identify the carbon hotpots and where the biggest opportunities for impact are.

1 For basic carbon assessments you may not need a complex industry tool. The project team can develop their own simple spreadsheets to complete calculations with carbon factors.

If needed, there are tools available with built-in carbon factors, where you can follow instructions to generate carbon impacts and see the impacts of project changes.

Some clients and industries may have specific tools available for calculating whole life carbon of their projects.

Various websites provide an overview of the available LCA software, for example https:// lca-software.org/

Examples of specific tools that can be used include professional institutions such as the IStructE embodied carbon tool.

7 How do we know how accurate our assessment is?

2

8 How do I use whole life carbon assessments to inform decision making?

The accuracy of the assessment is not as important as how the assessment supports decision-making for carbon reductions. Do not be too fixated on getting to what the ‘correct’ answer is. As long as the information and boundaries are consistent between the project team over the project duration, the assessment should serve its purpose. As with cost, there is always room to increase accuracy as the project progresses and more detail is available.

Accuracy of the carbon becomes more important when validating and comparing against external benchmarks. As the project matures through carbon management levels, assessments should seek to consider wider systems boundaries and measure more of the project impacts.

Note that the carbon footprint might increase with the level of accuracy, this is because more information is included in later project stages.

It’s as important to communicate the scope of the assessment as well as the final figures as varying scopes can have a significant impact on the outcome of the assessment.

The granularity of the carbon assessment should be enough to demonstrate where the biggest carbon impacts are in the project or ‘hotspots’. These hotspots should then be the focus of actions that will reduce carbon, these actions will be taken through decision making.

The process of calculating the whole life carbon and analysing the results should be prompting reflection and investigation into opportunities for reducing carbon on the project. These could be significant challenges to the project brief and requirements, drastically changing the project’s scope, or in the later stages might be changes to the material type or process to replace with low-carbon alternatives, reduce energy consumption or eliminate waste.

The carbon assessment of a project should be recognised in the context of the system of which the asset is part. This should acknowledge any construction as a capital carbon investment that must achieve a greater carbon reduction across the system.

9 The project is at early stages, before detailed design, so we don’t have material quantities. What should we use to assess carbon?

2 Carbon Assessments don’t have to be quantitative. In the early stages of a project there is limited information but the biggest opportunity for reduction meaning an assessment is important.

Use the principles of whole life carbon (embodied and operational) to ‘eyeball’ where the carbon in the project might be. Engaging with carbon professionals can help you do this.

This is particularly important when comparing options, take the differences in materials, construction techniques and energy and water usage of any options to consider carbon impacts.

Driving carbon reductions

10 When should I complete a carbon assessment?

1 Quantification of carbon on a project should be seen as a continual process, aiming to improve the accuracy and reliability of the calculation as the project progresses and data change from generic assumptions to as-built information.

Initially, calculations may rely on estimates in material quantities and specifications as well as generic carbon factors. As the project progresses, update the model to re-evaluate assumptions made and check progress against targets set.

Upon completion of the construction phase, aim to have a carbon model that reflects the upfront embodied carbon of the as-built asset using actual project data. Establish procedures for collecting the data required such as material quantities, EPDs, transportation, etc. so that this information is available when needed to update the carbon model.

11 What competency does the project team need to do a carbon assessment on the project?

12 How can a project team share carbon data and expertise to support future improvements across the wider community?

13 Is carbon assessment regulated in any geographies?

A baseline understanding of carbon should be promoted across the project team. This equips all stakeholders to be able to engage in and support carbon reductions in the project.

To conduct carbon assessments for the project, appropriate competency should be sought and budgeted for as early as possible. If carbon consultants are not available for engagement due to a project’s circumstances, simple open access tools can be used to do a simple carbon assessment to understand hotspots.

3 Where carbon assessments are completed these should be submitted to industry databases where available. This supports the industry in generating more accurate benchmarks which can be used for future projects and decision making at the asset level.

In addition, share insights in usual continual improvement circles in the industry, for example through professional institutions. The more carbon awareness and knowledge is integrated into infrastructure sectors thinking for engineers and other value chain members, the easier it is for the sector to take action to reduce carbon.

Not at the moment. It is therefore important to ensure that the project team has the necessary awareness and competencies to conduct carbon assessments and use the results to support decision-making.

Built Environment Carbon Database (UK)

Continual Improvement

5.4 Baseline and Targets

1 What is a baseline?

2 When should a baseline be drawn and how frequently should it be updated?

3 - How can I draw a baseline when there is not adequate design information?

4 - Where should the boundary of baseline be drawn?

5 What are realistic and impactful carbon targets?

How do I know what good looks like?

6 Is a carbon target aiming to reduce absolute carbon or reduce the carbon increase from a project?

A baseline is a whole life carbon assessment that is used as a reference point against which the carbon impact of a project is measured. This defines the ‘starting point’ or current status of the project and the expected emissions if no interventions or improvements are made. A baseline allows you to compare alternative designs, materials, or operational strategies to see how much carbon can be reduced.

For example, a baseline for a project might be a conventional design using standard materials. If you then switch to low-carbon concrete or energy-efficient systems, the reduction is measured relative to that baseline.

Right at the start of the project definition, so that it can inform optioneering and strategic decision-making. Ideally, it should be drawn once and keep updates to a minimum and only when major changes in the scope are included

Using existing benchmarks and industry averages.

Try and do a basic carbon assessment using volumes of materials and other activities

Use typical cost/carbon intensities from industry peers if available

The boundary of a baseline should include as a minimum the project boundary activities. (see guidance references on carbon assessment)

For higher levels of maturity project teams, emissions (carbon impact) should also be looked at beyond the project boundary

Starting out it could be a good idea for the project team to work on the basis of either a % reduction of whole life carbon from a baseline or set a tCO2e absolute emissions target to meet.

Different sectors may have guidance on targets for infrastructure assets. For example, this IStructE paper ‘Carbon targets for bridges: a proposed SCORS-style rating scheme’ describes the application of an embodied carbon rating scheme, similar to that used for rating energy efficiency of electrical appliances, to bridges

7 Who sets the targets and why?

8 How do we know that the decarbonisation targets are meaningful?

9 What are good and bad examples of decarbonisation targets for infrastructure projects?

10 What happens if we don’t meet the targets?

Can targets be changed if the design or program changes?

Often will come from client but if not, no reason why a stakeholder can’t set their own targets for the aspects of the projects that they are involved in/have influence over/are in their control. As maturity in carbon management increases, these targets will be based on clear understanding of carbon budget, and will be set from the earliest stages of the project.

Initially, carbon reduction or intensity targets may only relate to certain aspects, e.g. Only embodied or only operational.

As maturity in managing carbon increases, investigate benchmarking projects in line with national and international guidelines.

Strong leadership should create accountability across the project team for delivering carbon reductions with appropriate actions for when targets are not met. There are contractual mechanisms that can be used to ensure delivery of carbon targets.

12 What are carbon budgets and how does this relate to infrastructure? 4 Quantifying carbon emissions for infrastructure projects is a bottom-up approach for evaluating emissions. Without robust benchmarking or targets, it is difficult to know what the ‘right’ amount of carbon is that can be invested in creating infrastructure.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) talks about a global carbon budget, which is the maximum amount of carbon that can be emitted to limit global warming to either 1.5°C or 2°C. ‘MCC Carbon Clock’ provides a tangible representation of how much time is left before we run out of this global carbon budget.

Whilst there is no correct way to match top-down carbon budgets with bottom-up carbon quantification at individual project or even sectoral levels, this does not diminish the importance of doing as much as possible to reduce the carbon emissions from infrastructure along robust justification of how this infrastructure is essential for delivering society’s needs.

For a detailed look at the UK’s built environment carbon budget and trajectory to net zero by 2050, read the UKGBC’s report ‘Net Zero Whole Life Carbon Roadmap’, which sets out a clear pathway and key actions across each sector.

13 am a consultant working with my client who is about to progress with planning a project involving a new development. How do I make sure my project is aligned to the regional decarbonisation targets?

4 In developing/planning any infrastructure project, asset Owners (and their consultants) should make sure they bring carbon management in the wider planning agenda. This is to ensure that any project being delivered to meet specific outcomes is aligned with the wider carbon reduction targets – at regional and national level.

The project team will have to ensure they engage with key regional/local authorities at the start of the project to establish the role the new development could play towards the region’s decarbonisation trajectory. They should also engage with other asset owners/developers who manage other assets in the region to identify potential opportunities for collaboration to maximise decarbonisation at the project as well as regional level. This early engagement will help them outline some strategic objectives for the project, embedding decarbonisation in the scope from the outset and help reinforce the strategic business case for the project with ambitious and specific added value from climate mitigation. This conversation will have to start early. To inform such conversations, the whole life carbon impact of a proposed project (including land use change, climate resilience, user carbon etc) will have to be assessed at a high level to inform scope and decision-making. For example, the planning of a transport project in a region (at the time of the business case) must demonstrate that alternative mode transport options have been considered, and the whole life carbon changes from such options, including modal shift are understood.

When a new development is proposed (e.g. housing/retail, etc) the project team will demonstrate that all emissions within and beyond the project boundary have been considered (e.g. additional demand on the transport, energy, water etc systems relevant to the development. This, together with other project criteria (nature, climate resilience, economic benefit) will help show the wider value or impact in the region. Engagement with other stakeholders in the system (e.g. planners, local authorities, other developers, users of project, investors, etc) will be key

Guidance Document for PAS2080 – “PAS City Example »

5.5 Driving carbon reductions

1 How do I reduce carbon?

All Quantifying carbon is only one part of carbon management. The most important thing is to use this process to investigate opportunities for reducing carbon on the project.

Evaluate the scope of the project and the baseline (if available) to identify hotspots and opportunities across the project lifecycle. Work with other disciplines in the project team and other stakeholders to answer questions like:

• What can you do to avoid this carbon?

• Can I switch to a different design solution that reduces the carbon?

• When all other options are exhausted, can I improve the carbon intensity of the materials used?

• Can I reduce energy consumption or eliminate waste?

2 Who is responsible for reducing carbon on my project and who should be involved in the process?

All Responsibilities for evaluating and implementing carbon reduction depends on where in the project lifecycle the project is. Engaging a diverse group across the project team ensures balanced decisions that integrate technical, economic, and operational perspectives. Key stakeholders include project managers, designers, sustainability consultants, clients, contractors, and suppliers.

Various documents can support understanding of who has responsibility and support carbon reduction as the project progresses. These include a Carbon Management Plan and a Carbon Responsibility Matrix.

Examples of documents to support carbon reduction include:

• Carbon responsibility matrix: “Establish a carbon responsibilities matrix to identify key roles across the project value chain, assign actions to them and identify necessary reporting protocols.”

(Minoro.org Action 0-03)

• Carbon management plan: This is a standalone document that clearly describes the expectations for managing and reducing whole life carbon and documents decisions made as the project progresses. (Minoro.org Action 0-07)

Leadership and Accountability Collaboration

3 Do you have some examples of questions to help the project teams identify low carbon alternatives when designing or planning a project?

All Project teams can start using some simple questions in different stages of the project to prompt the right conversations and actions for considering low carbon alternatives. Example questions include:

• Is the project need (and its rootcause) well understood? Can alternative approaches be taken without building the asset or part of it? Can an operational solution be taken?

• How can the team make use of existing assets (including nature) within and beyond the project boundary to be part of the solution and avoiding building new assets?

• How can the design be further optimised to use less resources (both in construction and operational phases)?

• Can you consider alternative materials that will lead to a lower whole life carbon performance of the project?

• Can alternative construction methods be used that result in lower fuels consumption, less excavation or faster construction and with less waste?

• Is there scope to consider alternative and lower carbon sources of energy in the project?

Carbon Assessment

PAS 2080:2023 – carbon reduction hierarchy

4 Does it even matter if we optimise my design to reduce capital carbon?

Absolutely! Capital carbon can account for a significant portion of a project's whole life emissions, particularly in infrastructure projects with large quantities of carbon-intensive materials such as concrete and steel and less operational energy. By optimizing your design, you can:

1. Reduce upfront emissions: Embodied carbon is locked into a project at the construction phase, meaning these reductions have an immediate impact.

2. Set the tone for long-term sustainability: By focusing on embodied carbon, you contribute to achieving broader decarbonisation targets, such as those set by global agreements like the Paris Accord or national regulations.

3. Lead by example: Optimizing your design shows that low-carbon solutions are feasible, encouraging others in the industry to follow suit.

4. Future-proof your project: Regulatory frameworks are increasingly demanding lower carbon footprints, and optimizing now avoids costly retrofits or penalties later.

Every reduction you achieve today helps build a more sustainable tomorrow, demonstrating leadership.

5 How should we prioritise carbon reduction actions in a project?

The carbon assessment can be used to identify carbon hotspots – areas or processes with the highest emissions – and pinpoint opportunities for reduction. Focus on actions with the highest potential impact and explore strategies such as material substitution, energy-efficient technologies, or design optimizations. Demonstrate how actions to reduce carbon align with project goals and stakeholder expectations.

Carbon Assessment

6 How do I identify low carbon solutions early in the delivery process if I don’t have a lot of information for my project?

All Accurate carbon quantification of the project is not essential to be able to identify low carbon solutions and reduce carbon. This is particularly relevant in the early stages of a project where details and material quantities are not yet known. The project team can draw on previous project experience or industry case studies to identify possible opportunities for reducing carbon.

In the early stages, the project team should explore alternative low carbon design options, including radical challenges to the project brief such as no or low-build. If there are other similar previous projects already, designers can create high level carbon benchmarks to be able to identify and compare low carbon alternatives. There are many low carbon alternatives relevant to different infrastructure sectors that designers can get inspiration from.

Examples of low carbon opportunities:

Materials – Concrete: This article provides an overview of what to consider for low carbon concrete and signposts guidance for specifying sustainable concrete

https://www.concretecentre.com/Resources/Concrete-Compass/ Low-Carbon-Concrete.aspx

Water / wastewater infrastructure:

• In this report The Roadmap to a Low-Carbon Urban Water Utility’, Table 4 on page 35 presents a summary of opportunities for reducing carbon emissions in the water sector https:// iwa-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018_ WaCCliM_Roadmap_EN_SCREEN.pdf

• This net zero summary by Anglian Water provides an overview of their decarbonisation strategy https://www.anglianwater. co.uk/SysSiteAssets/household/environment/net-zero-routemap-summary-2021.pdf

• https://waterprojectsonline.com/wp-content/uploads/case_ studies/2012/Covenham-to-Boston-Pipeline-2012.pdf

Transport –

https://www.stantec.com/au/ideas/content/blog/2024/decarbonising-road-transport-designing-low-carbon-green-transport-corridors

Tunnels –https://www.mottmac.com/en-gb/insights/new-guidelines-for-lowcarbon-tunnelling/

7 What factors influence decision-making for carbon reduction strategies?

8 How do we balance carbon reduction with cost and time constraints, ensuring alignment with project budget and programme?

Key factors include the project’s carbon baseline, budget constraints, client priorities, available technology, and regulatory requirements. Decisions should also consider long-term benefits, lifecycle costs, and alignment with corporate sustainability commitments.

Focus on high-impact, low-cost measures first, such as optimizing material use and improving energy efficiency. Plan carbon reductions early in the project lifecycle to integrate them without significant cost or schedule impacts.

Use evaluations such as lifecycle cost analysis (LCCA) to demonstrate long-term savings from investments in low-carbon solutions.

Investigate opportunities to leverage any government incentives or financial support accessed by aligning to particular standards or green certifications.

Carbon Assessment

9 How do we address stakeholder concerns about increased costs for carbon reductions?

10 What happens if carbon reduction conflicts with other project goals?

11 How do we ensure carbon reduction decisions deliver long-term benefits?

12 We have started to propose lower carbon solutions to my team / client but they are not convinced. How can I give them confidence to support carbon reduction efforts?

Present a compelling business case, highlighting long-term savings, regulatory compliance, and market advantages.

Provide clear data on the return on investment (ROI) for sustainable measures.

Use a decision framework to evaluate trade-offs. Engage stakeholders to identify compromise solutions, such as phased implementation of carbon reduction measures.

It is vital to ensure that a whole-life perspective is taken to avoid potential unintended consequences of decisions made with a short-term view. For example, a particular material may be low embodied carbon but may need to be replaced more frequently over the asset’s lifetime, leading to higher whole-life emissions than an alternative with higher upfront emissions but longer lifespan.

Regularly monitor and report on performance to ensure reductions are sustained over the asset’s lifecycle.

2, 3, 4 To build their confidence, consider the following strategies:

1. Provide industry examples: Share case studies or benchmarks from similar projects where carbon reduction measures were successfully implemented, highlighting tangible benefits like cost savings, improved performance, or stakeholder approval.

2. Cite leading organizations: Point to initiatives by respected companies or institutions actively reducing carbon.

3. Highlight regulatory trends: Explain how governments and industries are embedding carbon reduction into planning and procurement, making it a mainstream consideration. For instance, demonstrate how these decisions align with emerging policies and certifications.

4. Quantify benefits: Use tools like Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to show measurable impacts of lower-carbon solutions, emphasizing that low-carbon solutions often result in lifecycle cost savings.

5. Focus on co-benefits: Emphasise that carbon reduction efforts often lead to additional advantages, such as enhanced efficiency, market differentiation, or positive brand perception.

Commitment schemes or initiatives e.g.:

• Science-Based Targets

• World Green Building Council's Net Zero Carbon Buildings initiative

Leadership and accountability

13 Are low carbon solutions just technologies to retrofit to my project? All Low carbon solutions should not only be thought of as technologies that can mean a lower carbon outcome such as renewable energy and heat pumps. Effective solutions that reduce carbon should evaluate aspects such as:

• Challenging the brief about the scope of the project (e.g. .void building new assets and focusing on upgrade or adaptation solutions);

• Reuse of existing assets or structural elements, e.g. reusing existing assets like old foundations, pipelines;

• Making a design more resource efficient by optimising the size of assets, the amount of energy or other materials they consume, etc.

• Replacement of materials, consumables or other activities with lower carbon alternatives. Examples include cement alternatives in concrete, alternative fuels replacing diesel, alternative chemicals.

It is important when considering a low carbon solution on a project to take a whole life view of carbon emissions. For example if a pipeline diameter is reduced in a water pumping main, the headloss and hence energy consumed is higher.

The best low carbon solutions are to not build new assets! There may be a different project technical solution that is applicable that refurbishes an existing asset instead of replacing it with a new one. Or a design standard by an asset owner may have very conservative design parameters for the intended use of the asset (e.g. thicker road surfacing).

14 Am I reducing absolute carbon emitted in the atmosphere or minimising the carbon increase from the construction and operation of my project?

15 How do we address the carbon reduction of new infrastructure in a just way and global scale?

4 It depends on where you have set the boundaries for your carbon reduction: if you are only focusing on the carbon that you may have direct control of in the construction and / or operation of your asset, then it is likely that you are still increasing absolute carbon overall, although by a lesser amount than a business-as-usual delivery. However, if you are also targeting the whole life carbon that you influence across the infrastructure system of which the asset it is part, this gives you the lens through which to see if you are reducing overall carbon emissions of the system.

3, 4

Because of the unique context of each nation’s political systems, economic drivers, and societal development needs, it may not be possible to directly extract solutions for carbon reduction from one country and apply them in another country. However, the principles of carbon management can be investigated and applied in local contexts.

The GIH analysis of infrastructure investment plans across 25 of the G20 economies highlights trends in how countries are addressing climate change and the Sustainable Development Goals. This is an interesting overview of the various strategies that can be adopted at a national level, including decarbonisation and resilience.

5.6 Leadership & Accountability

1 am a project manager in a designer organisation. My client hasn’t expressed interest in carbon management. How do I get the project team to start considering carbon?

1 When starting out a project, even if clients do not ask for low carbon solutions, it will be important to start engaging the sustainability/environmental manager of the project to consider carbon reduction in project delivery. This can be done for any size of project in any geography. It is helpful to illustrate the business case for decarbonisation as actions to reduce whole life carbon often lead to reduced lifecycle cost too.

In this entry-level 1, it is accepted that engineering teams delivering the project may not be familiar with carbon management. The sustainability manager can introduce basic carbon awareness resources to explain the importance of carbon management to the project teams and give examples of low carbon alternatives for activities in an infrastructure project. Ideas include highlighting how much carbon is in emitted in key project activities, for example, 1 ton of concrete or steel, in 1MWh of electricity, or in 1000 litres of diesel used for operating construction equipment or in asset during operation.

The sustainability manager can attend some design meetings to support with quantification of carbon for key activities/materials in the project and introduce low carbon alternatives. At this level, low carbon alternatives can be strongly linked to resource efficiencies and cost savings e.g. thinner walls in a tank, less energy consumption. Whilst these activities may normally be done by designers as part of their design efficiency processes, introducing the carbon impact and including these in communication with the client (e.g. as part of a sustainability section in a design report) will reinforce the message to the client that there are additional benefits (in this case low carbon) when focusing on resource efficiency in the project.

2 I am an asset owner responsible for delivering an infrastructure project. My project budget and programme are very challenging and I don’t have the time or the knowledge to guide suppliers on how to implement carbon management. Where do I start?

2 When starting out, it will be important to ask the project team (from the project exec or delegate to an appropriate advisor) to set a carbon reduction target for the project and manage the carbon as part of the project development to achieve the target in the delivery of the project. The target will need to be When starting out, it will be important to ask the project team (from the project exec or delegate to an appropriate advisor) to set a carbon reduction target for the project and manage the carbon as part of the project development to achieve the target in the delivery of the project. The target will need to be clear and measurable and link to a carbon baseline. (see targets section). If not possible, the asset owner can ask the designer who has carbon management capability to set a target based on good practice in similar projects.

The asset owner should also include a contract requirement for designers/contractors to identify the whole life carbon hotspots of the project are and to consider low carbon alternatives in any solutions they are proposing. Furthermore, the asset owner should clearly delineate the level of decarbonisation ambition and provide the necessary scope and incentives to meet the carbon requirements.

The asset owner should ask the project team to assess the project carbon throughout the project development, using a consistent approach to carbon assessment. They should ensure that carbon emissions and progress against the agreed baseline are an item in the agenda and that low carbon alternatives that are low cost or cost neutral are being presented in design meetings.

Meeting the carbon target and ensuring implementation of carbon reduction opportunities will be owned by the Project Executive.

The asset owner should be familiar with basic concepts of carbon management and be able to review and approve recommended actions for decarbonisation. To do this, the asset owner/manager can ask one of their advisors to provide training on carbon management as an awareness.

The Project Exec should be informed to ensure they ask in each project milestone how low carbon alternatives have been considered and how they are comparing the project’s performance against the set target.

The asset owner should understand the budget required to support their teams and their supply chain to do the above.

Anglian Water, @ one alliance example on systematically considering carbon in all projects

Baseline and targets

Carbon Awareness

3 am an asset owner responsible for delivering an infrastructure project. know it is important to manage whole life carbon and have set targets and relevant contract requirements. How do I mainstream carbon management and direct the project team to deliver?

3 It will be important for the project team to receive training on carbon management – from project exec to designers/planners/ environmental practitioners. The Asset Owner will be leading the decarbonisation ambition, providing the direction to the project team in delivering a design that will meet the client target. The Project Executive with the support of the sustainability / carbon team will work with the Asset Owner to clearly define the specifics of It will be important for the project team to receive training on carbon management – from project exec to designers/planners/environmental practitioners. The Asset Owner will be leading the decarbonisation ambition, providing the direction to the project team in delivering a design that will meet the client target. The Project Executive with the support of the sustainability / carbon team will work with the Asset Owner to clearly define the specifics of the decarbonised project outcome, working with the project’s carbon reduction target and baseline and using appropriate carbon quantification tools that provide the granularity to identify the project’s carbon hotspots. These requirements, direction, carbon hotspots and intended outcomes will have to be clearly communicated to the design teams.

The designers should actively engage with the supply chain and other relevant stakeholders for proactively considering lower carbon design options and materials/products (see collaboration section). The Carbon team will manage and regularly present to the client sufficient carbon management information (alongside cost and other metrics such as resilience, nature, etc) to support decision-making processes during key project milestones.

Key design meetings with the Asset Owner and key decision-makers will have specific agenda items on decarbonisation progress and lower carbon alternatives they have considered (see driving carbon reduction section).

The project’s design principles should include carbon management as a core activity, integrated with design and project management, including a direct report and steer from the Asset Owner on the progress against the targets.

The project’s governance, delivery plan and roles and responsibilities must be such that carbon management is systematically considered in all project delivery and there is a clear line to the project and Asset Owner executive where low carbon implementation can be escalated to.

4 I don't have the time or the expertise to look into carbon on my project. Who can I pay to do this?

There are many environmental or sustainability consultants who are specialised in evaluating carbon on infrastructure projects. This ranges from conducting comprehensive life cycle assessments to working with project teams to explore opportunities to reduce carbon, suggesting alternative materials, methods or approaches that could be considered. Consider what your needs are, and you could either upskill someone in your own organisation or hire an external consultant to assist.

5.7 Procurement

1 Why is procurement critical to achieving carbon reduction in infrastructure projects? All Procurement influences the entire supply chain, from the selection of materials to construction practices and operational performance. By embedding carbon management into procurement processes, organizations can drive significant carbon reductions, promote innovation, and align with sustainability goals.

2 How can a project team or an asset owner/operator make sure that the supply chain proposes low carbon technologies and solutions in a project?

3 What are the benefits of including carbon metrics in tender evaluations?

4 What data could a project team ask suppliers to provide to support carbon reductions in a project?

Early contractor involvement and collaboration should be promoted to allow the supply chain to support carbon reduction on projects.

Clearly specify contractors’/supply chain partners’ responsibilities in reducing carbon on the project and include this in the contractual requirements. This can relate to supplying accurate, reliable data (e.g. on materials, construction processes and waste) material specifications etc. Include expectations around investigating and sourcing low carbon materials and technologies and how to ensure that products and materials meet the project’s carbon performance targets.

Including carbon metrics ensures that sustainability is a key consideration in decision-making. This practice incentivises suppliers to innovate, use sustainable materials, and adopt low-carbon practices, resulting in reduced project emissions and alignment with long-term sustainability goals.

Project teams could consider asking suppliers through the procurement process for:

• Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) for materials.

• Carbon footprint data covering lifecycle stages (A1-A5 initially, expanding to A-D at advanced levels).

• Plans for reducing emissions, including recycling and end-of-life strategies.

Contractual agreements should specify expected data and reporting requirements for evaluating carbon reductions.

5 How do carbon reduction targets in procurement contracts work? Contracts can include specific carbon reduction targets aligned with project goals. For example:

• Mandating the use of materials with lower embodied carbon.

• Requiring renewable energy use during production or transportation.

• Including penalties or incentives based on carbon performance during delivery.

6 What are the challenges of implementing carbon-focused procurement? Challenges include:

• Limited availability of low-carbon alternatives.

• Lack of standardised carbon data and benchmarks.

• Resistance to change from suppliers or project stakeholders.

• Balancing cost, time, and carbon reduction goals.

Carbon Assessment

7 What examples are there for embedding carbon reduction clauses into contracts?

Carbon management in procurement has been a challenging area. However there have been increasing efforts to embed carbon management considerations in the procurement process through various ways – carbon KPIs for suppliers, carbon performance metrics in contract forms as well as more general guidance. These efforts target the shift in behaviours when delivering projects and aim to drive more collaborative behaviours for managing whole life carbon.

Some examples of procurement carbon clauses already exist in contracts worldwide. FIDIC developed a holistic approach to provide guidance for carbon management in procurement and contracting in the upcoming FIDIC Carbon Management Guide (FIDIC CM Guide), which is due for publication by the end of 2025.

As part of FIDIC CM Guide, FIDIC has introduced new carbon management guidance for consultancy agreements and each FIDIC works contract, providing specific contractual mechanisms. The guidance introduces a solution through a new Clause and a Schedule of Carbon Emissions to be incorporated with FIDIC works Contracts.  The FIDIC CM Guide is aiming to help projects using the FIDIC suite of contracts manage carbon emissions by encouraging a fair and balanced allocation of risk and reward between the project participants and ensuring that all major stakeholders are part of the decarbonisation effort, for example by introducing a Carbon Balance Sheet to be managed by the Employer, evaluation criteria for procurement to include Carbon Emissions Budget (CE Budget) proposed by the contractors at tender stage and incentives and damages for contractors in case actual carbon emissions deviate from the proposed CE Budget. The new carbon guidance is designed to be adaptable, ensuring project-specific criteria can be accommodated and reflect the requirements of employers, financing institutions, authorities, and the applicable law.

8 What are some limitations seen in the procurement processes of projects that may limit carbon reduction achievements?

There are various challenges that could mean that procurement may not incentivise low carbon solutions or drive carbon reductions:

• No project specific carbon requirements specified in procurement.

• Procurement process asks for low carbon but not linked to specific targets.

• Procurement only focuses on organisational ESG/corporate goals.

• carbon reduction delegated to supply chain

• Procurement model doesn’t inhibit the implementation of low carbon solutions. E.g. capex only contracts asking for whole life carbon reductions elsewhere

FIDIC Carbon Management Guide and Carbon Emissions Management Guidance will be published at fidic.org

1 am a designer. What is the best way to start a conversation with my project team and/or client on carbon when working on a project to start agreeing that carbon management is considered?

2 How do I start engaging my supply chain to embed low carbon solutions in the project I am responsible for delivering as a client? I have a very tight budget though and many other priorities to manage as part of my project

3 How do we ensure stakeholder alignment on carbon reduction goals?

How do we ensure all stakeholders are on board with carbon reduction measures?

4 I have several low carbon alternatives in my project that we, the project team, including my client’s PM, all want to implement. However, we know that some of these alternatives conflict with the current project scope or planning timescales or client asset standards. How do I progress?

1,2 Start by “disclosing” in your project team conversations and client meetings the carbon hotspots in your project – eyeball capital and operational carbon. Bring in the project engineering teams and sustainability manager of the project team in the conversation.

Target audience: project designers, sustainability manager

2 Ask the supply chain to present during project meetings/decision-making points about low carbon alternatives that are also lower cost and see whether any of those solutions conflict with other decision-making priorities or schedule.

Target audience: asset owner

All Clearly communicate the project's decarbonisation objectives and benefits. Use workshops, collaborative sessions, and transparent reporting to build consensus and address concerns early in the process. Use collaborative workshops to align goals and expectations. Communicate the benefits of carbon reduction in terms that resonate with each stakeholder group (e.g., cost for finance teams, reputation for marketing, etc.). Address concerns transparently and provide options to mitigate perceived risks. Driving carbon reductions

2, 3 Many times, low carbon innovations identified in a project cannot be implemented on time in the particular project (such as alternative binders in concrete, or hydrogen fuels for construction, or renewable energy generation at large scale or nature base solutions at large scale handling stormwater quality). Main blockers include lack of time, lack of technical maturity and understanding of the risk profile of an alternative solution when compared to the client’s asset standards, planning/project timescales, lack of buy-in from client, supply chain stakeholders etc. When low-carbon opportunities are identified, the key to unlocking barriers to implementation is to engage early in the project with a broad range of stakeholders including clients, standards teams, planners etc.

Consider how to leverage economies of scale when trialling low-carbon solutions. Engage across other asset owners/ constructors/ construction projects that could benefit from the same innovation. Collaborate to accelerate technological maturity and proof of concept. Combine resources to scale up and mainstream in time for the project implementation.

5 If we are engaging early, what are the sort of things we need to engage/collaborate for? What does good practice look like?

3 Asset owner: will need to engage early with other asset owners/planners/government to understand how the project fits in the wider regional/national system and better understand whether there are any relevant carbon reduction targets that need to be considered. The asset owner will also need to engage early designers and contractors as well as product/material suppliers to understand what innovations could be considered in the planning of the project and through procurement before a design is delivered

Designer: designers can start engaging with contractors and product material suppliers to understand relevant low carbon alternatives that are appropriate to their project.

Contractors and supply chain: Be proactive in low carbon practices irrespective of client brief. Enable supply chains to scale up innovation and provide the incentives for making it happen. Collaborating and sharing with the wider industry low carbon construction and materials expertise is a commercial advantage compared to traditional high carbon practice.

5.9 Continual improvement

1 What can I compare to if I don’t have a baseline?

0 If you don’t have a formal baseline, you can still make useful comparisons. Start by improving on your own first version of the plan or design. Use a hotspot analysis to see where the biggest carbon impacts are, then review options to reduce them. Each iteration becomes a new reference point, showing progress even without an external baseline. Where available, you can also use published benchmarks or sector averages to give additional context for your progress.

2 Each project is different. How can I meaningfully compare my project against other projects?

3 How do new materials and technologies fit into this?

4 How do I know if I am improving carbon reduction on my projects?

Whilst each project is unique, meaningful comparisons are still possible by focusing on elements that are similar and using normalisation. For example, while tunnel geology may differ, overground stations, bridge structures, or pavement layers can be compared on a per-m² or per-km basis, allowing benchmarking and learning across projects.

2 New materials and technologies are valid mechanisms for driving carbon reductions and achieving continual improvement.

You know you’re improving when each iteration of your project shows lower carbon than the last. This means setting a reference point (baseline or first design), tracking reductions against it, and focusing on hotspots where the biggest impacts occur. Comparing results to benchmarks or sector averages can also show whether your project is outperforming typical practice.

It is important to ensure that carbon reductions are not only theoretical, and to confirm that the construction and delivery processes used on the project actually follow through on the design intention to reduce carbon.

For example, the ACORN compression shell shows how novel approaches can open up new pathways to lower-carbon delivery.

Baseline & Targets

APPENDIX:

Step-by-Step guide for conducting carbon assessments according to Carbon Management Framework Levels 1 and 2

This guide provides a structured process for conducting carbon calculations as per the Carbon Management Framework component ‘Carbon assessment’ for Level 1 and Level 2. It highlights the need for identifying appropriate lifecycle assessment (LCA) tools and carbon databases, both at the local market level and, if unavailable, at the regional or global scale.

Level 1: Acknowledging – Creating a Carbon Reduction Mindset

Level 1 establishes foundational carbon awareness and sets the stage for future reductions.

Step 1: Define Project Scope

Objective: Identify major sources of carbon emissions.

§ Engage experts to estimate material types and quantities.

§ Focus on high-emission materials such as concrete, steel, and asphalt.

§ Establish an initial estimation framework for future refinement.

§ Determine the availability of LCA tools and carbon databases specific to the project's local market. If unavailable, identify regional or global alternatives.

Step 2: Data Collection

Objective: Gather necessary data for carbon calculations.

§ Collect data on material usage, energy consumption, transportation, and water usage.

§ Ensure data is as detailed and comprehensive as possible, covering both direct and indirect sources.

§ Assess the quality and completeness of available carbon emission factors.

Step 3: Identify Lifecycle Phases

Objective: Define key lifecycle phases (A1-A5) relevant to carbon emissions.

§ Include material procurement, construction, and durability considerations.

§ Prioritise embodied carbon assessments in early project stages.

§ Ensure that data collection aligns with the phases defined in the selected LCA tool.

Step 4: Calculate Carbon Footprint

Objective: Use lifecycle assessment (LCA) tools to quantify emissions.

§ Apply LCA methodologies to assess direct and indirect emissions.

§ Identify carbon hotspots and major sources of emissions.

§ Select an LCA tool that is widely recognised in the local market, such as One Click LCA, GaBi, or SimaPro. If local references do not exist, consider regional or global sources such as EC3 (Embodied Carbon in Construction Calculator), ICE Database (UK’s Inventory of Carbon & Energy), or Ecoinvent.

Step 5: Report Findings and Share Reduction Ideas

Objective: Communicate initial findings and potential reduction strategies.

§ Prepare a preliminary carbon report for stakeholders.

§ Propose early-stage carbon reduction opportunities.

§ Ensure that calculations and reduction ideas align with available CO2e databases and relevant industry benchmarks.

Level 2: Intervening – Systematic Carbon Reduction

Level 2 involves more advanced strategies to integrate carbon reduction into project design and execution.

Step 6: Engage Stakeholders

Objective: Ensure all key stakeholders are involved.

§ Collaborate with clients, contractors, and sustainability experts.

§ Establish clear roles and responsibilities for carbon management.

§ Align stakeholders on the selection and use of an LCA tool and CO2e databases.

Step 7: Develop Lifecycle Inventory

Objective: Create a comprehensive inventory of emissions sources.

§ Document all emissions sources, material inputs, and outputs.

§ Use detailed inventory data as a baseline for reduction strategies.

§ Ensure lifecycle inventory data aligns with industry-standard databases.

Step 8: Analyze Data

Objective: Identify key carbon impact areas.

§ Quantify total project emissions across phases A and B.

§ Pinpoint opportunities for carbon savings.

§ Compare emissions data with regional or global benchmarks.

Step 9: Develop Reduction Strategies

Objective: Create actionable plans for emission reductions.

§ Optimise designs to reduce material use and energy consumption.

§ Implement material substitutions with lower carbon footprints.

§ Integrate energy-efficient technologies.

§ Utilise data from selected LCA tools to validate reduction strategies.

Step 10: Implement and Monitor

Objective: Put carbon reduction strategies into practice.

§ Execute the proposed reduction measures.

§ Monitor emissions over time to assess effectiveness.

§ Utilise real-time monitoring tools to refine reduction strategies.

Step 11: Report and Document

Objective: Provide a structured report on carbon management efforts.

§ Include carbon calculations, reduction strategies, and monitoring results.

§ Maintain transparency for project stakeholders.

§ Ensure reporting aligns with internationally recognised databases such as Ecoinvent, ICE Database, or GaBi.

Acknowledgements

The Carbon Management Framework is part of the Carbon Collaboration Initiative which was established by FIDIC’s Global Leadership Form in 2024. The founding organisations have been joined by additional supporting organisations since the launch and are shown below.

This document has been written by people from the following organisations (alphabetically):

§ Arcadis

§ ARUP

§ Mott MacDonald

§ Ramboll

§ University of Cambridge (Laing O’Rourke Centre for Construction Engineering and Technology)

§ WSP

Thank you to all additional organisations and project teams who have supported this work through guiding, challenging, and reviewing as well as conducting pilot testing. This has been invaluable in shaping this work.

About FIDIC

FIDIC, the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, is the global representative body for national associations of consulting engineers and represents over one million engineering professionals and 40,000 firms in around 100 countries worldwide.

Founded in 1913, FIDIC is charged with promoting and implementing the consulting engineering industry’s strategic goals on behalf of its member associations and to disseminate information and resources of interest to its members.

FIDIC member associations operate in around 100 countries with a combined population in excess of 6.5 billion people and a combined GDP in excess of $30tn. The global industry, including construction, is estimated to be worth over $22tn. This means that FIDIC member associations across the various countries are worth over $8.5tn.

This document was produced by FIDIC and is provided for informative purposes only. The contents of this document are general in nature and therefore should not be applied to the specific circumstances of individuals. Whilst we undertake every effort to ensure that the information within this document is complete and up to date, it should not be relied upon as the basis for investment, commercial, professional, or legal decisions.

FIDIC accepts no liability in respect to any direct, implied, statutory and/or consequential loss arising from the use of this document or its contents. No part of this report may be copied either in whole or in part without the express permission of FIDIC in writing.

Copyright FIDIC © 2025

Published by

International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC)

World Trade Center II P.O. Box 311 1215 Geneva 15, Switzerland

Phone: +41 22 568 0500

E-mail: fidic@fidic.org

Web: www.fidic.org