The following is a section from a note prepared by Shropshire Council as the Applicant for the Shrewsbury North West Relief Road (NWRR) in order to clearly demonstrate the benefits of the Scheme, the section is on Carbon emissions.
In 2023 Wales boldly cancelled new road projects, Shropshire Council's attitude to climate change is a bit woolier. 😂😂😂. Sir Humphrey would be very proud:
During the development of the NWRR Project, Shropshire Council declared a ‘climate emergency’. This has focused attention onto reducing carbon emissions from the construction of the Project. The carbon management assessment of the NWRR Project aims to demonstrate any savings of carbon emissions will be delivered for the project wherever possible within the design. To achieve this, the design will continue to seek to reduce the carbon associated with the Project in accordance with PAS 2080 Carbon management in infrastructure verification.
The NWRR has also undertaken a comprehensive Carbon Assessment as part of its impact assessment, covering both the build phase and future use impacts. This has been validated and endorsed by independent peer review at Birmingham University. Within the future costings model for the NWRR there is now a quantified Carbon reduction valuation, which offers the potential to place the NWRR at carbon neutrality within its operational lifetime.
Options are currently being explored by Shropshire Council to use the NWRR as a catalyst for the commencement of active carbon management processes (local biochar production). The opportunity now exists to use the NWRR quantified carbon costs of £1.4m (budget allocations for the management of this have now been made within the overall project costs), in order to seed and develop this initiative to initially manage down the carbon legacy of the road, potentially to neutrality in due course, and also to leave an established local processing capability that can assist with the mitigation of wider Council carbon impacts.
In a wider context, the current development of the Local Transport Plan 4 by the Council will be fully aligned with the Carbon Mandate and modelling requirements within DfT guidance to be published shortly. As such, this will put carbon assessment and management at the heart of future transport, infrastructure and project delivery. The LTP4 is due to be published within the next 12 months, pending the publication of the relevant national guidance.
What we need is this:
The NWRR is expected to emit more than 70,000 kg of CO2 during construction, and all their defence amounts to blithering insubstantial waffle like:
What does ChatGPT make of that?
Overall, the section on carbon emissions in the note demonstrates a commitment to addressing environmental concerns and considering carbon emissions throughout the lifecycle of the Shrewsbury North West Relief Road (NWRR) Project. However, there are some areas that could benefit from further clarification and expansion for a more comprehensive assessment. Here's a critique:
Specifics on Carbon Reduction Measures: While the note mentions that efforts will be made to reduce carbon emissions associated with the project's construction and operational phases, it could be strengthened by including specific examples of the strategies or technologies that will be employed to achieve these reductions. This could provide a clearer understanding of the practical steps being taken.
Quantitative Data: The note discusses a "quantified Carbon reduction valuation" and a budget allocation of £1.4 million for carbon management. It would be beneficial to provide more context and details on how this quantification was arrived at, what specific carbon reduction targets are being pursued, and how these financial resources will be allocated to achieve the stated goals.
Validation of Carbon Assessment: The fact that the Carbon Assessment has been validated and endorsed by an independent peer review at Birmingham University is a positive point. However, it would be helpful to elaborate on the methodology used in this assessment, the criteria for validation, and any findings or recommendations from the review.
Biochar Production and Carbon Management: The note briefly mentions the exploration of using the NWRR as a catalyst for active carbon management processes, specifically local biochar production. This is an interesting initiative, but it would be useful to expand on what biochar production entails, its potential impact on carbon reduction, and how it aligns with the broader goals of the NWRR Project.
Long-Term Carbon Neutrality: The note suggests the potential for the NWRR to achieve carbon neutrality within its operational lifetime. While this is an ambitious goal, it would be valuable to provide more insight into how this will be achieved, considering factors such as ongoing monitoring, adaptation of practices, and potential challenges that might arise.
Integration with Local Transport Plan (LTP4): The mention of the alignment of the Local Transport Plan 4 with carbon assessment and management is important. However, it could be strengthened by discussing how this alignment will practically influence decision-making, project prioritization, and the broader transport and infrastructure development strategies of the Council.
Timelines and Deadlines: While the note mentions that the LTP4 is due to be published within the next 12 months, it might be helpful to provide a bit more context on the anticipated timeline and any milestones that will be achieved in the interim regarding carbon reduction efforts for the NWRR.
In summary, while the note demonstrates a strong intent to address carbon emissions and environmental concerns, it could benefit from providing more specific details, quantifiable data, and a deeper explanation of the strategies being employed to achieve carbon reduction goals. Additionally, considering the broader implications of carbon management within the transportation and infrastructure sector could enhance the note's overall comprehensiveness.
How about some counter arguments?
1. Climate Crisis and Emission Reduction Imperative: Building the NWRR goes against the urgent need to address the global climate crisis. The world is striving to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions to prevent catastrophic climate change. Constructing new road infrastructure will inevitably lead to increased carbon emissions due to construction materials, machinery, and ongoing maintenance. Given the dire state of our environment, it is a moral imperative to prioritize emission reductions over new developments.
2. Locked-in Carbon and Stranded Assets: Once built, the NWRR will lock in carbon emissions for decades. This contradicts the necessary transition to low-carbon and sustainable transportation options. As the world accelerates its shift toward electric vehicles, renewable energy, and alternative modes of transport, investing in a new road risks creating stranded assets that are not aligned with the future of transportation.
3. Disincentivizing Sustainable Alternatives: The construction of the NWRR may inadvertently promote car-centric infrastructure, which discourages the use of more sustainable alternatives such as public transport, cycling, and walking. By pouring resources into road expansion, we divert attention and funding away from projects that would promote greener transportation solutions and contribute to emission reductions.
4. Missed Opportunity for Prioritizing Transit and Active Mobility: Rather than building new roads, the focus should be on enhancing existing transportation infrastructure, investing in public transit systems, and creating safer environments for pedestrians and cyclists. Such investments encourage people to shift away from private vehicles, reducing emissions and congestion while promoting healthier modes of transport.
5. Environmental Degradation and Ecosystem Impact: Constructing the NWRR could lead to habitat destruction, deforestation, and disruption of local ecosystems. Such impacts not only contribute to biodiversity loss but can also result in the release of stored carbon from ecosystems, further exacerbating climate change.
6. Financial Resources Misallocation: The financial resources allocated to the NWRR project could be better invested in renewable energy initiatives, public transport, and sustainable urban planning. Focusing on road expansion perpetuates a car-centric culture that undermines efforts to transition to cleaner energy sources and more efficient transportation systems.
7. Inconsistent with Climate Commitments: Many governments and local authorities have committed to climate goals and emission reduction targets. Building the NWRR contradicts these commitments and sends a message that short-term development interests outweigh the long-term wellbeing of the planet and its inhabitants.
8. Precedent for Unsustainable Development: Approving the NWRR sets a precedent for further unsustainable infrastructure projects. It reinforces the belief that prioritizing economic growth over environmental stewardship is acceptable, undermining the broader efforts to shift toward a sustainable and responsible approach to development.
In conclusion, the construction of the Shrewsbury North West Relief Road would be a step in the wrong direction at a time when the world is working tirelessly to mitigate the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions. It disregards the urgency of the situation, risks stranded assets, and undermines efforts to transition to a sustainable and greener transportation future. It's imperative to prioritize emission reductions, sustainable alternatives, and responsible infrastructure development for the sake of our planet and future generations.