Agenda item

To recommend to Council that the audit report be agreed as having established the Council’s current position and carbon baseline and that the action plan be noted with agreement given for the detailed work and feasibility studies to commence.  

That it be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that:

1.           the audit report be AGREED as having established the Council’s current position and carbon baseline; and

2.           the action plan be NOTED, and agreement given for detailed work and feasibility studies to commence in relation to the carbon reduction options set out in the action plan.

16.1          The report of the Deputy Chief Executive, circulated at Pages No. 8-93, provided Members with detail on the climate change and carbon reduction audit and action plan as required by the Motion which was approved by the Council in 2019. The Committee was asked to recommend the audit report to Council as having established the current position and carbon baseline; and to note the action plan and agree that detailed work and feasibility studies commence in relation to the carbon reduction options set out within it.

16.2          The Deputy Chief Executive explained that the Council had declared a climate emergency in October 2019 which included a commitment to doing all in its power to make Tewkesbury Borough Council Offices carbon neutral by 2030 as well as undertaking an audit of the Council’s current position, together with the creation of an action plan that would set out how that aim could be achieved. The audit report set out the relevant government guidance and the detailed analysis that was undertaken in order to establish the current carbon footprint and the action plan set out the short, medium and long-term opportunities that could be explored further as part of detailed feasibility testing as ways the Council could seek to meet the ambition of carbon neutrality by 2030 in relation to its buildings. Members were advised that the Council’s Climate Change and Flood Risk Management Group had been created to consider all aspects of climate change and was initially tasked with working with Officers to oversee the delivery of the audit and action plan. The discussion and key observations from the group were included at Paragraph 2.2 of the report, along with the key questions from Members and the responses received from the consultant.

16.3          In terms of next steps, the Deputy Chief Executive confirmed that the report and action plan provided an excellent base on which to build - this met the first part of the climate emergency motion and was also reflected in the sustainable environment priority within the Council Plan. It was intended to use the Council’s existing governance arrangements to monitor and manage the carbon reduction work which would be helpful given the competing priorities and additional impacts currently being felt as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The recommendations from the current meeting would go to Council on 28 July but be preceded by an all Member Seminar to be held on 23 July at 6pm.

16.4          The consultant was invited to make his detailed presentation on the report which set the context and covered the salient points as follows:

·        The remit - production of a baseline from 2019/20 and the creation of an action plan based on a set of principles including demand reduction and renewable energy information. The report covered the Council’s own buildings and transport except those buildings owned for commercial investment purposes. The approach had followed nationally recognised greenhouse protocol standards – scope 1, 2 and 3 – and used government advanced conversion factor data sets.

·        Scope 1 – all gas consumption in buildings in scope and also owned transport – including Ubico.

·        Scope 2 – electricity consumed.

·        Scope 3 – everything else – extraction, refinement and transportation of 1 and 2, water, business travel in owned vehicles and public vehicles and waste disposal.

·        Specifically, the base line data incorporated Council Offices (less the areas occupied by tenants), Tewkesbury Leisure Centre, Roses Theatre, Tewkesbury Cemetery, Cold Pool Lane sports pavilion, the five homeless properties, the waste fleet and the grey fleet. As a result of data being unavailable, office waste and business travel via public transport was not included at this stage but would be when possible.

·        Significantly greater reductions in the electricity network than the gas network. It was highly likely improvements would be realised by 2050 with it being expected that electricity would have made significant inroads into decarbonisation by 2030 – the speed of progress was slow.

·        Some of the internal factors included the age of equipment, control systems, observation of user engagement with energy. Around five times better energy performance was possible going forward which was a strong part of reassessing diversion away from gas powered systems to heat source pump options.

·        The action plan was designed on the basis of five priorities: energy consumption controlled and managed; energy efficiency maximisation through ‘low cost’ and ‘no cost’ measures; replacement of end of life equipment with most appropriate low carbon technologies; offset through increasing the extent of renewable energy generation and therefore avoiding the need to import from the national grid; and the potential for a small amount of generated energy to be procured from green energy.

·        As described in the action plan, the first series related to lowering the energy needed.

·        Using gas was a combustion process that lost efficiency; the current gas system was at 60% efficiency whereas using a heat pump source would be at 300% to 400% efficiency which was a stark illustration of the potential opportunity. Everything was being reviewed as the intention was that enough energy would be generated to meet demand and therefore avoid importing it. The Council had already started purchasing for its own sites with possible 50% savings across the electric vehicles.

·        The need for implementation of a waste management system was understood and was something the Council was eager to do with the prospect of realising carbon neutrality being high. The actions needed for this were outlined in the report. There was a bit more work needed on the systems/processes to ensure the data was as robust as possible so the business case stacked up and the measures were implemented in appropriate priority order.

16.5          A Member thanked the consultant for his very thorough report. He questioned whether his understanding of the figures was correct that £160,000 savings per year could be realised from the changes with £22,000 revenue included. He also questioned whether the work could be done in a shorter timescale, i.e. five years, and whether the consultant had any idea as to the rough cost to making the savings. In response, the Member was advised that his understanding of the figures was correct. In terms of implementation of the action plan, this would see a reduction of around £55,000 plus further income generation e.g. bonuses from provision of electricity to the national grid and renewable heat incentives through air source heat pumps. In terms of the length of the plan, the consultant felt five years would be a difficult aspiration to realise given the Council’s financial situation. It would be more prudent to demonstrate the revenue and get a ‘green pot’ to fund the more expensive measures e.g. solar costs would likely be around £950,000 for a system the size required. A full feasibility study was not in scope at this stage but in due course there would have to be structural surveys on buildings to check they could support the Panels etc. needed. In terms of approximate costs, the consultant was unable to provide this from the work to date as he had not undertaken full feasibility studies. The main unknown factor was the cost of retrofitting the refuse collection vehicles - early indications were that fitting end of life vehicles with batteries to make them last longer could be a cost effective option.

16.6          A Member noted the Council’s difficult financial forecast for the next two years and felt it would make good sense to focus on easy quick returns in the first instance. Other Members agreed with that view and expressed their concern about the financial implications to the Council of both the climate change crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. It was generally felt the right approach was to implement the less costly options in the first instance. The consultant advised that the crises were not exclusive, and it should be possible to combine some good wins from both, the Council could then take stock and plan for the longer-term accordingly. In respect of the action plan, most of the short and medium-term actions could be implemented within seven years. Another Member was in agreement with the points made and felt the Council had given itself ten years to implement measures – it may be possible to do that ahead of schedule but it needed to ensure it had realistic timescales - and to reduce that to five years would not make sense at this stage. In response to a query regarding costs, the consultant explained that £193,000 was the annual cost and that would reduce to £55,000 after implementation of the actions which would be saving of £138,000. Within the action plan appendices there was a plan that provided more detail and showed a breakdown of each action point, along with the cost saving, so Members could see the scale of the opportunity e.g. if the Council looked at putting in place all energy efficient measures, time control and replacement of gas with air source heat pumps, savings of £603,000 could be realised. This was a carbon study so looked at zero carbon rather than zero cost, but he understood cost was a major influencing factor. In terms of costs, the Head of Finance and Asset Management confirmed that there were some early wins for which costs were already budgeted e.g. replacement of boilers and changes to the server room were both contained in the asset plan meaning funding was already in place. The Chancellor had just announced money for green energy in public buildings so there may be some other funding sources available as well. In addition, the consultant noted that the Severn Wye Energy Agency was also running a scheme that the Council may be able to tap into depending on timescales. He further noted that, in terms of equipment replacement, there was a lot that was nearing end of life/obsolete, so needed to be replaced; it was a case of understanding the requirements and the cost saving equipment that could be used instead. A Member questioned whether it would make sense to borrow money to make the changes required, and therefore realise savings, rather than to invest in property in the current climate. In response, the Head of Finance and Asset Management indicated that there were competing priorities for borrowing and this needed to be considered carefully as, in some cases, the cost of expenditure before realising a return and income could be an issue and this was definitely a balancing act in ensuring it was affordable in the short/medium-term. The benefit from commercial property investment was the immediate payback but there was a risk in the loss of tenants. The climate and carbon reduction action plan had both different risks and income recovery, but he would be exploring the options to understand what worked best for Tewkesbury Borough Council.

16.7          Referring to Page No. 12 of the report, a Member noted that a countywide Climate Change Strategic Coordinator post was being established and he questioned whether this would be required by Tewkesbury Borough Council and how much it would cost. In response, the Deputy Chief Executive explained that there would be a big advantage to the Council in being part of the countywide initiative. This was a proposal that had been considered by Leadership Gloucestershire and it had been made clear that it would be better to work as a county to collaborate on climate change and carbon reduction. Money would be contributed to a funding pot and each district would get a share of the strategic coordinating role – that role would apply to government with proposals for the county to get grant funding etc. It would not dilute the local work but offered good economy of scale and it was anticipated the government would look more favourably on countywide bids rather than individuals – the post would be hosted by Gloucester City Council. The County Council would contribute around 35-40% of the overall total with the districts making up the rest. This was still under discussion, but it was hoped it would come forward soon as it would be helpful moving forward. The post was likely to be evaluated as a £65,000 a year position.

16.8          In response to a query about the timescales for other Councils in Gloucestershire, the consultant advised that, currently, over 400 Councils had declared a climate emergency and largely the timescales focused on 2030 even though the government target was 2050. The trend was gathering momentum and Tewkesbury Borough Council had joined it early. The Deputy Chief Executive confirmed that there was a variation across Gloucestershire in terms of the approaches taken e.g. Stroud District Council had resolved to be carbon neutral by 2030 for district wide emissions whereas Gloucester City and Cheltenham Borough Councils were looking at their own estates to be carbon neutral by 2030. He felt it was encouraging that so many Councils nationally were looking at a quicker timescale than 2050 and undertook to circulate a list to Members of what each District Council was doing along with the County Council’s ambitions.

16.9          A Member expressed concerns about the timescale for delivery despite the good report and action plan, he was of the view that the timescale of ten years failed to recognise the importance of the impact of climate change even though the effects on the world could be equally as profound as the COVID-19 pandemic – the trend had to be turned around and this would not be easily achieved. He was of the view that, if the Council had to borrow to make savings and implement changes within five years instead of ten, that was what it should do. The Deputy Chief Executive felt that the action plan gave the Council the foundation to look at the quick wins and to determine whether borrowing to generate income or savings would work. Ultimately, if there was a good business case, there was no reason that actions could not be taken sooner.

16.10        Accordingly, it was proposed, seconded and