Australian Property Giants Continue Aggressive Emissions Cuts Ahead of 2020 Target Announcement
Tuesday, 02 December 2008 20:02
In December 2007, amidst the fanfare of the Bali Climate Change Summit, five of the nation’s property giants (Macquarie Office Trust, GPT Group, the Australian Prime Property Fund, Local Government Superannuation Scheme, and Becton Property Group) came together to commit to combating climate change by upgrading the emissions performance of their Australian office portfolios.
Almost one year on, as the global climate negotiations reach their crucial midpoint in Poznan, Brookfield Multiplex has joined the ‘first five’ of the Existing Buildings Project and committed to upgrade its entire domestic office portfolio to 4.5 NABERS Energy by 2012. This represents a 40% decrease in emissions below the market average.
"Optimising the performance our properties through efficient management is key to our service delivery strategy, regardless of the property's age, technical limitations or scheduled capital upgrades." said James Vesper, Sustainability Manager for Brookfield Multiplex Services
"Brookfield Multiplex Services recently launched their Sustainable FM training program aimed at providing existing building managers with the knowledge and expertise required to meet increasing sustainability demands, with a particular emphasis on energy efficiency. This initiative will assist in ensuring we achieve the 4.5 Star average rating target." He added
Becton Property Group also announced that it would commit the existing buildings it acquired in its 2007 Lachlan Property Group purchase to the upgrade. This adds a further 16 buildings to Becton’s portfolio of projects already committed to climate change goals.
“These new commitments bring the number of buildings in the Existing Buildings Project to almost 100 throughout Australia’s major CBDs. These buildings account for over 10% of Australian investment grade office floor space and include many of Australia’s landmark buildings.” said Cameron Eren of the Total Environment Centre
“This is the largest wholesale movement on existing buildings anywhere in the world. The leadership of these groups should be welcomed at this critical point for climate policy- as Australia prepares to announce its 2020 emissions reduction target and international climate negotiations enter their final turn in Poznan.’ Mr Eren continued
“Meeting these targets would reduce annual emissions by over 70,000 tonnes of CO2e from base buildings alone. This is the emissions equivalent of permanently removing over 15,500 cars from Australia’s roads.”
“If all office buildings were upgraded to 4.5 NABERS Energy, it would be the emissions equivalent of permanently retiring Australia’s entire heavy trucking fleet.” Mr Eren explained.
Total Environment Centre believes that existing building upgrades are the first ‘cab off the rank’ in a national emissions reduction strategy. While much has been made of new ‘green’ buildings, only existing building upgrades will offer true emissions reductions. This simply reflects the fact that the use of emissions intensive steel, glass, and concrete in the construction of new buildings generates significant greenhouse gas emissions in and of itself.
By one estimate, the emissions benefit of building a new 5 Star NABERS Energy building, instead of upgrading an existing building to 4.5 NABERS Energy, would not be realised for 290 years.[1]
According to a recent report from the Total Environment Centre (Commercial Property & Climate Change: Exposures & Opportunities) the upgrading of existing buildings is not only an environmental priority, but is also a key commercial priority for Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).
The upgrading of existing buildings will not only safeguard existing margins against rising energy costs, but will also ensure that individual buildings remain attractive to large corporate and government tenants who are increasingly tying leases to the achievement of specific emissions intensities, and demanding that landlords do not simply pass on the costs of their own inefficiency.
