In building construction and also in their operation, requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are increasingly being introduced.

In building construction and also during their operation, requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are increasingly coming into play, which may affect both the range of construction materials currently used and the technologies applied in construction.

These conclusions emerged during discussions at the Sustainable Construction Conference. It was noted that, in order to mitigate climate change, significant reforms are planned at the European Union level, which have already had an impact and in the coming years will increasingly affect not only companies, their production technologies, and the transport distance of manufactured products, but also residents. In construction, and thus in the production of building materials, there will increasingly be questions related to CO2 emissions—not only during the manufacturing phase of building materials and their transportation, but also emissions generated during the construction of a specific building, their calculation methods, accounting, and the CO2 emissions of the constructed facility throughout its entire life cycle. The changes are inevitable; the only questions are how quickly or slowly they will be implemented in Latvia, with which solutions, and at what cost.

The starting shot has already been fired

“Currently, only a kind of starting shot has been given for the beginning of changes, rooted in regulatory requirements, but their impact on both construction projects and building materials and construction technologies will only be felt after several years. However, this time should be used to identify possible changes and create an adaptation system,” summarized Armands Gūtmanis, Chairman of the Board of the Latvian Sustainability Cluster, describing the overall situation.

He explained that statistical data show a very significant impact of buildings on the surrounding environment. Specifically, buildings are responsible for approximately 40% of all consumed energy, they generate 36% of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions, 75% of all buildings in the EU are not energy-efficient, and at the same time, it is expected that by 2050, 85–95% of current buildings will still be in use. “The data speak for themselves, and it is no surprise that in a few years buildings will enter the emissions trading system and will be forced to buy CO2 quotas, which means that the management costs of these energy-inefficient buildings will only increase,” said A. Gūtmanis.

He also emphasized that the number of EU regulations requiring sustainability is steadily increasing — the Construction Products Regulation, the Recast of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, the Energy Efficiency Directive, the Renewable Energy Directive, the Taxonomy Regulation, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, waste directives, the Circular Economy Action Plan, and others. “At the EU level, it is now clear that we will have to specify how much CO2 (in tonnage equivalent) will be allowed per square meter of a new building,” added A. Gūtmanis.

He points out that such requirements also affect building material manufacturers. “This is well illustrated by foreign experience; for example, the Danish government agreed with the industry on a National Sustainable Construction Strategy and introduced limit values for new buildings, expressed in kilograms of CO2 per year for both buildings and the construction process, and committed to reducing them by approximately 15–20% over five years,” said A. Gūtmanis. He acknowledges that in Denmark, the industry approached the government to adjust these limits — specifying how much CO2/m² is allowed — which in turn requires builders to be meticulous about the CO2 generated during the production and transportation of building materials. “If all participants in the construction process cannot comply with the set limit for the building category, it is likely that the suppliers of the relevant building material will be changed, or the material itself will be replaced — for example, glued timber structures could replace reinforced concrete, and so on,” explained A. Gūtmanis.

He notes that Latvia has not yet reached the same level as Denmark in the context of sustainable construction. Interestingly, the northern neighbor — Estonia — is preparing to introduce sustainable construction parameters. In Latvia, the Ministry of Economics has currently drafted a construction strategy that addresses many aspects directly or indirectly related to sustainable construction.

All in one connection

Normunds Grīnbergs, President of the Latvian Builders Association and Head of the Latvian Construction College, rhetorically asked to what extent clients, architects, and builders are ready for sustainable construction. He points out that the competence level of all participants in the construction process in the context of sustainable construction is insufficient, which calls for a closer look at the education system — colleges and universities.

“There are good examples, but they are more isolated cases rather than everyday practice,” N. Grīnbergs described the situation. He reminds that there are already relatively old directives on this matter, and new ones are being planned.

According to N. Grīnbergs, the most important factor is competence, and it must be increased for everyone. At the same time, each participant in the construction process thinks they are the key player, but overall, the primary importance lies with the client’s competence, as well as their wishes (capabilities) and countries requirements (policy).

Experience has already been gained

“In the context of sustainable construction, the company has already ‘eaten a lot of salt,’ working in the UK, Denmark, and Sweden, which means that the experience gained in export markets allows us to work successfully in this field,” explains Kaspars Rožkalns, Chairman of the Board of UPB Nams Construction Ltd. He admits that there have been situations where architects and designers do not know exactly how much a construction solution with a specific CO2 emission measurement will cost.

Thus, a building materials manufacturer is brought into construction with a specific CO2 emission amount and corresponding price, and the CO2 emissions are also calculated across the entire lifecycle of the particular building. “The designer, when creating the project, cannot precisely say how much CO2 a specific construction will have, as it depends on the components and the loads they must withstand,” says K. Rožkalns.

He points out another approach, where a building is provided with seemingly good solutions to meet certain requirements, specifically from a ‘green’ perspective, but people do not actually use them. “We work in export markets, so CO2 emission calculations are not new or unknown, and therefore industry companies are ready to face these challenges in Latvia as well,” says Kristaps Ceplis, Executive Director of the Latvian Timber Construction Cluster.

In his opinion, the main problem is that we mostly follow the major European-set targets, while in Latvia, there is a lack of locally defined challenge goals. “In Latvia, we strive to implement targets set elsewhere but do not really look at what would be most beneficial for us here,” explains K. Ceplis.

In his view, in Latvia, the forestry sector has both the competencies and the appropriate wood resources when working in foreign markets, but these advantages are not fully utilized in the domestic market. “It might therefore be easier and more economically beneficial for Latvia to achieve the set European targets,” says K. Ceplis.

Meanwhile, Egija Smila, Head of Merko Ehitus Group companies in Latvia, pointed out that everyone is still learning, which is why various calculations are carried out to clarify how much CO2 emissions occur throughout each building’s lifecycle. Everyone needs to sit at the same table and understand what the emission limits are for a specific group of buildings, and then industry professionals will know how to implement them.

“Sustainable construction is not an end in itself, but a tool to achieve climate neutrality, reduce environmental impact both during the construction phase and throughout the building’s operational lifecycle, while at the same time ensuring quality construction, aesthetically pleasing buildings, and solutions that successfully meet the original objectives,” comments Jeļena Gavrilova, Board Member of the countries Real Estate Company (VAS Valsts Nekustamie Īpašumi).

The public procurement factor

Participants in the discussion concluded that the driving force for sustainable construction should first come from public procurement. Eduards Filippovs, representative of SIA Amber Cranes, emphasized that explaining a lower price is very simple, but it is an entirely different matter to explain what sustainable construction actually is.

“Municipal officials have even admitted that they try not to apply for or use EU structural fund co-financing, which requires compliance with many requirements, and the problem of the lowest price has not disappeared either,” concluded K. Ceplis. He reminded that from the perspective of the forestry and wood industry, sustainable construction is highly beneficial for the country as a whole, because it uses wood grown in Latvia, which is then processed into finished products locally, creating jobs and contributing related taxes to the countries budget.

“If such a principle could be defined and followed, everyone would benefit,” said K. Ceplis. He pointed to a precedent in which a Latvian wooden house manufacturer offering the lowest price won a public procurement in Norway but was ultimately rejected due to the significant delivery distance, which increases CO2 emissions specifically from transportation.

“Such approaches are lacking in Latvia,” emphasized K. Ceplis. N. Grīnbergs drew attention to the most important factor—competence, without which it is impossible to discuss any of the other issues in the context of sustainable construction.

“The regulatory framework exists, but the willingness is missing,” said Valdis Ligers, Chairman of SIA Baltic Sustainable Building Advisors. He emphasized that most people are willing to pay 10% more for a better future for their children. “Today, the first question often asked by tenants of office spaces is not how much the rent is, but how much CO2 a specific space in the building generates,” V. Ligers explained.

An objection was raised that public procurement by the country and municipalities could face questions from the Countrys Audit Office regarding the implementation of such sustainable construction practices. “A manager will think at least three times whether it is worth engaging in it,” said J. Gavrilova. N. Grīnbergs, however, shared his experience on how to defend and justify such decisions.

“If there is adequate funding, builders can rent equipment that ensures sustainable construction and hire competent specialists. But if there is no sufficient budget, it is difficult to achieve the desired goal, namely sustainable construction and a sustainable building,” noted Edijs Kupčs, head of the Latvian Builders Association.

36% – This is the share of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions generated by buildings

75% – This is the proportion of buildings that are not energy-efficient

85–95% – This is the expected share of current buildings that will still be in use in the EU by 2050

40% – This is the share of total energy consumption for which buildings are responsible