3.2 Project duration
The machinery and methods currently used to reduce emissions on construction sites may prolong the construction time and, therefore, cost more. Limited availability and longer delivery times for both emission-free construction machinery and heavy-duty vehicles are often noted as some of the top barriers to emissions-free construction. Longer lead times when ordering electric vehicles and equipment can significantly delay projects. For example, it could take up to 18 months to fulfil an order for an electric vehicle or piece of equipment compared to 6 months to fulfil an order for the same type of vehicle or piece of equipment with a diesel engine. The limited supply of biofuels and delivery logistics may also lead to delays. Electrical equipment and vehicles do not have enough power to last all day, which has been cited as a significant barrier by construction professionals, and one which can lead to the use of fossil fuels to complete projects. Technical malfunctions with new equipment can also cause delays. There may be a learning curve for workers when using new equipment and following new workflows, which can also prolong a project. The infrastructure necessary to support the electrification of both transport and machinery will take time to develop and depends on interactions between the sector and many different stakeholders. Constraints in the charging grid can increase charging times, again prolonging the duration of projects. A limited choice of local suppliers can increase the need to import materials, which extends a project’s timeline and increases cost and risk.
3.3. Reducing waste
Although reducing waste on the construction site can decrease overall costs for construction projects, there may be some upfront expenses associated with waste management techniques. Beginning at the design stage, there may be higher fees for designing a project to have less waste. Using prefabricated or modular components has been shown to reduce waste compared to conventional building techniques. For example, there is less potential for mistakes such as cutting materials to the wrong dimensions, which reduces both waste and material costs. However, there can be higher costs associated with purchasing these units and more cost and complexity related to the transport of these units. Workers also need to be skilled in this type of construction, but although an initial investment in training may be necessary, this type of construction is often quicker which can save on labour costs in the long run. The availability of modular and prefabricated units may also be a barrier since manufacturing plants that produce these units require higher initial capital investment, and regional suppliers may be unable to fulfil orders for large projects, which could lead to delays or hybrid construction techniques. Clients and financial institutions may be less familiar with modular and prefabricated components and, therefore, less willing to purchase or finance these projects.
On the worksite, other upfront costs associated with proper waste management techniques include providing an adequate sorting area, training staff to sort waste, and having proper storage facilities for materials to reduce loss. Although both EU and national legislation and targets seek to reduce construction waste, many of the Nordic countries have yet to meet these targets when it comes to the rates of reuse, recovery, or recycling of construction and demolition waste. Cost can be a major driving force when it comes to recycling or reusing materials on the construction site as landfilling, backfilling, or energy recovery can work out cheaper than recycling. Moreover, the availability of inexpensive raw materials hinders reuse since it is often cheaper to buy new materials over recycled ones, and the market for recycled materials is not yet well-developed. The cost of selective demolition and preparing materials for reuse can be higher than that of conventional methods, and there can be additional costs for storing materials. However, it has to be noted that there are projects in the Nordic countries proving the contrary. Some consider separating waste to be time-consuming and are reluctant to separate materials with low economic value. Transportation costs for waste management can be high in areas where recycling plants are located far from construction sites and where landfill costs are low.
3.4 Finance
Access to finance and financial support is a key factor on the path to implementing emission-free construction sites. Incentives and requirements to reduce emissions on construction sites are necessary to ensure that stakeholders act on this goal. Financiers need to prioritise environmental performance over financial gains and provide access to financing for low-emissions projects and equipment. Difficulties in accessing finance are a major barrier to emission-free construction. Financiers provide loans and investments directly to construction projects and indirectly through loans and investments in the supply chain, so there is great potential to support emission-free construction projects. Although financial institutions can set lending criteria requiring low-carbon construction practices, the financial sector mainly prioritises short-term monetary gains over the environmental performance of projects. The lack of collaboration between the financial sector and the construction sector results in a lack of data, standardisation in reporting, and standard value appraisal for sustainable buildings, which makes it difficult for financiers to assess a project’s environmental performance.