►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
good
evening,
everyone
we're
just
waiting
for
participants
to
arrive
so
welcome
along
to
you
all
we're
hosting
a
live
webinar
tonight
on
great
cambridge
local
plan,
our
first
proposals.
This
is
our
fourth
webinar
session.
We've
already
done
three
others
and
you
can
see
them
on
our
website.
A
We'll
give
you
details
of
how
to
access
them
later
on,
and
today's
session
is
all
about
climate
change
and
water,
so
very
apt,
subject
at
the
moment,
just
from
the
cop
26,
but
also
from
our
own
perspective,
of
bringing
some
of
the
climate
change
stuff
into
our
own
local
plan.
A
And
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
we'll
go
around
the
screen.
I've
got
a
really
really
good
panel
for
here
tonight,
we've
got:
we've
got
some
of
our
consultants.
Who've
been
helping
work
up
some
of
the
policies
in
the
plan.
We've
got
some
of
the
team
here,
so
hopefully
it'll
be
really
interesting,
an
enjoyable
session
and
we'll
give
you
a
chance
to
really
get
involved
and
ask
some
questions
put
in
the
right
direction
of
where
we're
going
to
be
able
to
feed
into
the
plan.
A
So
I'll
make
a
start
now
and
I'm
just
going
to
remove
my
screen
share
and
hopefully
you
should
be
able
to
see
us
all
so
welcome
to
you
all.
Unfortunately,
we
can't
see
you
we're
doing
the
webinar
is
an
hour
long
and
we're
going
to
try
and
make
it
as
interactive
as
possible.
So
you
can
ask
questions
all
the
way
through
and
it
is
being
recorded.
A
So
what
we
can
do
is
we
can
have
that
up
on
our
website
afterwards,
so
you
will
be
able
to
re-watch
it,
and
we
will
pick
up
other
questions
that
we
haven't
been
able
to
answer
during
session
and
we'll
put
them
on
our
faqs
on
the
website,
where
you
can
find
them
there
and
I'm
going
to
introduce
the
panel
now
and
I'll
go
around
to
them
individually
and
they
can
introduce
themselves.
In
fact,
so
I'm
going
to
go
around
by
my
screen
anna.
B
Oh
hello,
everyone,
my
name,
is
anna
mckenzie.
I
work
with
etude
and
I
worked
on
formulating
some
of
the
buildings
policies
that
we've
recommended
within
our
evidence,
base
to
support
the
local
plan.
B
D
Hi
there,
I'm
marina
goodyear,
I'm
a
senior
project
officer
at
bioregional.
I've
been
working
with
anna
and
emma
to
put
together
the
evidence
base
for
net
zero
carbon.
How
that
might
be
defined
and
I'll
be
talking
about
that
more
in
a
moment.
A
E
Hello,
john
dixon
planning
policy
manager
for
the
greater
cambridge
planning
service
and
I
helped
pull
the
plan
together
and
use
this
information
that
they
helped
repair.
F
G
A
Thanks
ellian,
thank
you
for
joining
us
again
tonight
and
behind
the
scenes
we've
got,
we've
got
will
smeaton.
Without
will.
We
won't
be
doing
this
at
all
because
he's
running
all
of
the
technology
tonight
and
for
us
so
hopefully
fingers
crossed
we
can
we
can
stay
and
stay
online
live
with
you.
My
name's
paul
from
those
of
you
don't
know
me.
I'm
assistant
director
for
strategy
and
economy
across
both
councils,
so
you're
part
of
the
plan
making
team
and
been
running
these
webinars
as
well.
So.
G
A
Further
ado,
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen.
It's
going
to
give
you
a
quick
overview
of
what
the
session
is
going
to
look
like,
and
then
I'm
going
to
hand
over
to
colleagues,
so
this
session
we're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
role
of
planning
and
responding
to
climate
change
and
then
get
some
get
into
some
detail
around
net
zero
and
carbon
and
plan
making.
We
are
going
to
do
a
little
interactive
session
in
the
middle.
We
have
run
a
couple
of
these
already.
A
D
A
With
water
and
then
we'll
have
about
15
minutes
for
an
actual
panel
q
a
later
on
as
well,
please
do,
as
I
said,
put
your
questions
in
the
chat
and
some
of
the
team
will
answer
them
as
we're
going
along
as
well,
and
so
I'm
going
to
hand
over
to
emma
now
he's
going
to
start
the
presentation
emma.
C
Okay,
thanks
paul,
so
I
thought
I
would
just
start
off
this
evening
by
giving
you
a
bit
of
an
overview
of
the
role
of
planning
and
responding
to
climate
change
and
what
we've
tried
to
cover
in
the
first
proposals
document.
C
So
we
wanted
to
really
make
sure
that
the
local
plan
included
a
kind
of
wide
range
of
policies
that
recognized
the
role
that
the
planning
and
place
making
has
to
play
in
responding
to
climate
change.
So
thinking
about
reducing
carbon
emissions,
but
also
thinking
about
kind
of
climate
resilience
and
adapting
to
the
changing
climate
that
we
know
is
going
to
happen
over
the
next
few
years.
C
So,
within
the
first
proposals
document
we've
got
a
section
on
climate
change
and
also
water,
and
that
covers
a
wide
range
of
policy
areas
which
we've
tried
to
kind
of
illustrate
on
this
slide.
So
we've
got
policies
that
are
there
to
support
renewable
energy
generation.
So
that's
going
to
be
a
really
important
aspect
of
getting,
I
suppose,
greater
cambridge
as
a
whole,
so
cambridge
and
south
cambridgeshire
to
net
zero
carbon.
C
So
we
wanted
to
have
quite
a
supportive
policy
approach
within
the
document
around
that
we've
also
got
within
here
kind
of
a
new
area
for
us
which
we
haven't
really
touched
on
before
in
in
planning
policy.
But
we've
got
some
policies
around
looking
at
using
materials
that
have
low
embodied
carbon,
which
is
another
really
important
element
of
net
zero
carbon.
It's
not
just
about
energy
used
in
buildings,
but
it's
about
how
you
construct
those
buildings
and
the
materials
that
you
use
to
construct
those
buildings.
C
We've
also
we're
looking
to
kind
of
develop
a
policy
on
circular
economy,
which
is
again
another
area
which
we've
not
really
touched
on
before
within
planning,
but
certainly
an
area
that
we
think
is
worthy
of
inclusion
in
the
local
plan
and
developing
something
around.
You
know
how
the
built
environment
can
become
more
circular,
what
I
would
say
on
embodied
carbon,
that
is
quite
a
new
and
an
emerging
area
kind
of
nationally
as
well
as
locally.
C
So
I
would
say
what
we've
got
at
the
moment
is
a
kind
of
placeholder
about
reporting
on
embodied
carbon,
but
recognizing
that
that's
a
kind
of
rapidly
moving
area.
So
it
may
be
as
we're
developing
the
plan
things
like
targets
around
in
body
carbon
might
become
clearer,
so
that
might
be
an
area
that
we
can
develop
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
as
we
go
through
the
plan
making
process.
C
So
you've
probably
already
heard
in
some
of
previous
webinars
around
the
spatial
strategy
that
we've
developed
in
terms
of
where
we're
looking
to
locate
growth
and
how
the
carbon
associated
with
transport
has
been
a
really
integral
part
of
informing
that
spatial
strategy.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
focus
development
on
locations
that
are
already
well
served
by
sustainable
mode
of
transport
and
also
kind
of
encourage
people
to
to
get
out
of
their
car
more
and
use
other
modes
of
transport,
particularly
things
like
cycling.
C
We're
then
looking
at
setting
some
very
stringent
standards
in
the
plan
around
water
efficiency
and
we've
got
nancy
and
john
who
we're
going
to
cover
that
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
a
little
further
along
in
this
presentation
and
then
the
final
kind
of
area
that
we
look
at.
It's
a
really
important
one
not
to
overlook.
I
think,
when
you
start
talking
about
net
zero
carbon,
it's
very
easy
to
forget
that
our
climate
is
going
to
change
because
of
the
emissions
that
we've
already
released
into
the
atmosphere.
C
So
another
really
important
policy
area
for
us
is
around
climate
change
adaptation
and
making
sure
that
our
communities
can
adapt
to
the
changing
climate
that
we
are
already
starting
to
see.
To
be
perfectly
honest,
so
we've
got
policies
within
the
the
plan
or
emerging
policies
around
the
role
of
green
infrastructure,
the
role
of
sustainable
drainage
and
also
a
fairly
new
area.
D
Thanks
very
much
emma
that
was
a
great
intro
and
definitely
sets
us
up
well
for
what
we're
going
to
go
into.
So
just
to
recap,
we
are
the
consultants
who
produced
the
the
policy
approach
and
based
on
a
specific
approach
to
defining
what
net
zero
carbon
canon
should
mean
for
the
local
plan,
so
just
to
introduce
ourselves
bioregionals
and
environmental
charity
with
experience
in
all
around
sustainability,
sustainable
construction
and
policy,
making
all
the
way
up
to
local
to
international
level.
D
We
also
were
joined
by
two
other
organizations
in
this
work
who
were
of
immense
help,
and
those
are
carrion
brown
who
are
quantity,
surveyors
and
cost
consultants
with
experience
advising
central
and
local
government
on
the
cost
implications
of
the
transition
below
carbon
or
zero
carbon,
and
also
mode
who
are
transport
planners
right.
So
our
task
was
essentially
to
try
to
give
greater
cambridge
shared
planning
service,
the
information
it
needs
about
carbon
to
make
decisions
about
where
to
allow
that
new
growth
to
happen.
D
So
what
are
the
implications
in
terms
of
building
size
and
transport
carbon
and
also
thinking
a
little
bit
about
about
landscape
as
well?
And
secondly,
what
kind
of
local
plant
policies
within
existing
planning
powers
would
enable
that
transition
to
a
zero
carbon,
greater
cambridge,
which
is
the
the
overall
goal
and
that
zero
carbon
graded
cambridge
is
going
to
have
to
fit
within
a
zero
carbon
or
a
net
zero
carbon
uk
as
a
whole.
D
So
next
slide,
please
I
wanted
to
before
we
dive
into
the
specifics
to
just
give
everyone
an
overview
of
the
full
suite
of
tasks
that
we
went
through
and
in
the
diagram.
The
ones
marked
in
orange
are
the
ones
that
we
will
or
can
cover
parts
about
today
and
but
I'll
just
run
through
these.
So,
firstly,
we
wanted
to
define
what
does
net
zero
carbon
mean
both
for
the
the
whole
area
and
for
individual
buildings?
Why
do
we
need
it?
D
Secondly,
exploring
the
different
levels
of
carbon
emissions
that
will
occur
or
that
we
can
expect
to
occur
depending
on
where
the
local
plan
allows
the
new
growth
to
happen.
Thirdly,
what
kind
of
carbon
reduction
targets
should
we
be
aiming
for
for
greater
cambridge
and
what
kind
of
standards
new
buildings
and
energy
would
enable
this,
and
that
and
I
let
that
work?
D
Fourthly,
the
technical
feasibility
of
building
zero
carbon
new
buildings
now,
as
in
there's
lots
of
people
calling
for
this
and
a
lot
of
developers
that
are
kind
of
terrified
and
thinking
that
it's
not
possible.
So
we
wanted
to
test
that,
and
next
we
wanted
to
look
at
the
cost
implications
of
building
to
those
standards
which
we
identified.
D
Task
f
was
then
exploring
whether
there's
any
credibility
or
use
in
in
the
offsetting
concept,
whether
that
could
form
a
planning
lever
to
get
us
towards
that
net,
zero,
carbon
and
greater
cambridge
as
a
whole,
and
then
finally,
we
did
do
some
stakeholder
engagement
as
well
with
some
small
groups
about
coming
up
to
a
year
ago.
D
Now,
I
think
from
all
of
that
we
developed
a
sort
of
suite
of
policy
suggestions
which
emma
and
john
and
the
others
have
been
honing
and
working
with
and
working
out
what
they
can
use
and
implement,
and
there
is
also
a
non-technical
summary
of
all
this
work
available
online
as
well,
if
anyone's
wanting
to
dig
in
a
bit
more
into
it
after
this
webinar.
D
So
that's
that
that
was
our
work.
That's
our
full
set
of
tasks
and
next
slide.
Please
thanks
very
much
so.
Firstly,
why
do
we
need
to
achieve
net
zero
carbon
in
the
uk
and
greater
cambridge
and
at
individual
developments?
D
Firstly,
as
emma
has
already
touched
upon,
we've
already
been
putting
a
lot
of
carbon
in
the
atmosphere.
Climate
change
is
already
happening.
There
has
been
a
one
degree
celsius
rise
in
average,
temperatures
today
compared
to
the
pre-industrial
period,
and
there
is-
and
anna
will
cover
this
a
little
bit
more
detail
later.
There
is
a
limited
amount
of
carbon
that
we
can
emit
between
now
and
a
certain
date
before
we
will
tip
the
planet
over
a
really
dangerous
level
of
climate
change.
D
Responding
to
that
danger,
the
international
paris
agreement
in
2015
was
by
the
united
nations
framework
convention
on
climate
change.
D
The
uk
is
a
signatory
to
that
that
commitment
commits
the
uk
and
all
other
signatories
to
limit
climate
change
to
well
below
two
degrees
celsius
of
global
average
temperature
increases
and,
as
I've
mentioned
on,
one
degree
of
that
is
already
gone,
and
to
try
to
attempt
a
limit
of
1.5
and
the
second
really
interesting
part
about
the
paris
agreement
is
that
it
contains
the
equity
principle,
and
this
means
that
countries
like
the
uk,
which
are
richer
and
have
more
technological
ability,
have
a
greater
responsibility
to
pursue
deeper
and
quicker
cuts
to
our
carbon
emissions,
specifically
of
carbon
emissions
per
person.
D
Within
the
uk,
we've
had
legislation
about
carbon
reduction
since
about
2008
with
the
climate
change
act
which
committed
the
uk
to
reduce
its
carbon
emissions
by
80
between
1990
to
2050,
and
that
was
updated
in
2019
to
be
net
zero
carbon.
So
that's
this
target.
Everyone
is
chasing
and
that's
where
all
of
this
stems
from
really
at
a
more
local
level.
D
The
both
local
authorities
of
greater
cambridge
have
declared
climate
emergency,
and
south
cambridgeshire,
in
particular,
has
has,
as
part
of
that,
made
a
pledge
that
all
strategic
decisions,
including
planning
decisions,
will
be
in
line
with
that
shift
to
zero
carbon.
So
those
are
the
drivers
and
if
we
could
have
the
next
slide,
please
great.
So
then
what
does
net
zero
carbon
mean?
So,
firstly,
carbon
gets
is
used
as
a
sort
of
capsule
term
for
a
few
different
gases.
D
There
are
a
range
of
greenhouse
gases,
they
are
emitted
in
different
amounts
and
they
have
different
climate
impacts,
carbon
dioxide
being
the
main
one,
as
you
can
see
in
the
sort
of
pie
chart
in
the
top
right
there
and
the
other
other
greenhouse
gases
are
emitted
in
smaller
amounts
and
but
can
sometimes
have
bigger
effects
per
kilogram
emitted.
D
So,
at
a
global
level,
essentially
net
zero
carbon
means
greenhouse
gases
in
equals
greenhouse
gases
out
so
that
human
caused
emissions
of
greenhouse
gases
are
balanced
by
an
equal
amount
of
removals
and
those
removals
could
be
by
green
infrastructure
or
it
could
be
in
the
future.
Maybe
there
might
be
technologies
for
that
as
well,
but
they
don't
exist
yet
in
a
scalable
way
at
a
smaller
scale.
D
So
if
you
want
to
have
a
net
zero
carbon
place,
building
organization
or
person,
then
that
place
building
organization
or
person
needs
to
prevent
or
remove
an
equal
amount
of
greenhouse
gas
as
it
emits
and
to
understand
that
we
need
a
carbon
accounting
methodology.
So
it's
basically
whose
carbon
is
it
anyway,
who's
responsible
for
what
and
and
how
do
we
keep
track
of
that
so
to
explore
this
topic,
we
reviewed
a
number
of
methodologies.
D
There
are
methodologies
for
organizational
carbon
accounting
and
there
are
a
number
of
methodologies
for
the
carbon
accounts
of
a
whole
area
like
greater
cambridge,
like
like
cambridge
city
like
south
cambridge,
and
you
can
see
a
list
of
the
ones
that
we
reviewed
there
and
there
are
also
methodologies
and
guides
to
to
try
to
account
for
the
carbon
emissions
of
an
individual
building
as
well
and
again,
you've
got
a
list
of
them
there
and
they
are
sort
of
more
or
less
effective
on
on
different
topics,
and
we
weren't
reviewing
these
to
try
to
say
you
should
use
this
method
or
you
should
use
that
method,
but
more
to
look
at
the
consensus
of
what
should
or
shouldn't
be
included,
no
local
areas,
carbon
emissions
or
a
building's
carbon
emissions.
D
If
we're
trying
to
get
that
to
net
zero
and
be
able
to
track
that
so
yeah,
we
looked
at
all
of
these
together
and
I'll.
Just
explain
the
diagram
on
the
bottom
right.
That
diagram
is
from
the
ghg
protocol
for
cities,
which
is
possibly
the
the
best
recognized
local
area,
carbon
accounting
method,
and
it
divides
these
into
three
scopes.
So
scope.
One
is
the
emissions
coming
from
directly
within
your
area
and
that
can
come
from
a
variety
of
sources.
So
that's
burning
fuel,
but
either
for
transport
or
for
for
buildings.
D
It
can
come
from
agriculture,
waste
waste,
water.
It
could
come
from
industrial
processes,
scope.
2
is
your
good
supplied
energy,
which
probably
comes
partly
from
generation
inside
your
area
and
partly
from
outside
it
and
scope.
3
is
stuff
that
your
activities
will
influence
but
which
you
didn't
emit
directly,
and
so
essentially
those
three
scopes
are
reflecting
how
responsible
you
are
for
each
set
of
carbon
emissions.
So
that's
the
scopes
and
methodologies.
If
we
have
the
next
slide,
please
great
so
long
story
short,
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
the
detail
of
each
of
those
methodologies.
D
They
do
differ
in
terms
of
which
gases
and
which
sources
they
include,
but
our
consensus,
and
also
relating
back
to
what
the
local
plan
can
do
about
it,
was
that
the
definition
of
a
net
zero
carbon
growth
in
cambridge
should
include
all
greenhouse
gases
and
their
sources
in
scope,
one
and
scope
2..
D
We
should
monitor
and
seek
to
reduce
scope
3,
but
we
shouldn't
really
expect
to
reduce
this
to
0
with
certainty
and
that's
because
there's
just
so
much
estimation
involved
in
working
out
what
your
scope
3
emissions
will
be.
It's
tracking
the
data
is
just
it's
close
to
impossible
to
do
it
with
real
robustness
in
a
way
that
you
could
hold
developers
to
account
for
it
put
it
that
way.
Secondly,
this
definition
of
a
net
zero
carbon
greater
cambridge
should
be
principally
based
on
real
reductions.
D
We
shouldn't
just
be
throwing
money
outside
the
county
to
to
make
it
someone
else's
problem
and
say:
oh
they're,
going
to
reduce
or
remove
emissions
on
our
behalf.
It
should
be
based
on
real
reductions
just
because
there
isn't
the
scope
to
actually
achieve
enough
as
many
offsets
as
we
would
need
those
offsets.
If
we
do
use
any,
they
should
never
be
from
outside
the
uk,
because
that
wouldn't
count
towards
the
uk's
net
zero
carbon
status
really
and
and
to
achieve
that,
essentially,
we
need
new
buildings
to
be
net
zero
carbon
in
their
energy
use.
D
Now
we
need
them
not
to
use
fossil
fuel
on
site.
We
need
them
to
be
located
to
minimize
the
transport
emissions
and
to
enable
low
carbon
or
zero
carbon
vehicles
for
basically
any
car
use
that
you
can
expect
there
to
be
and
they
need
to
be.
This
is
a
kind
of
tangential
point,
but
they
need
to
probably
be
located
to
try
not
to
damage
the
the
major
carbon
sinks
that
greater
cambridge
already
has.
D
So,
if
there's
peatland
or
if
there's
a
forest
that
could
be
continually
removing
carbon,
we
should
avoid
building
on
those
and
then
finally
keep
track
of
and
take
steps
to
reduce
the
embodied
carbon
and
that's
the
the
carbon
that
was
involved
in
producing
transporting
and
constructing
the
materials
to
make
those
buildings
right,
because
that
mostly
falls
within
scope.
3..
D
There
are
a
lot
of
other
steps
that
will
need
to
be
taken
not
directly
relating
to
to
new
buildings
and
those
are
kind
of
listed
at
the
bottom
in
terms
of
massively
upscaling
renewables,
large-scale
renewables
making
that
happen
within
greater
cambridge
to
a
reasonable
extent,
investing
in
transport
infrastructure
and
restoring
green
infrastructure
as
well
but
part
covering
buildings
is,
is
in
the
bullet
points.
So
next
slide.
D
Please
great
and
I'll
try
to
be
fairly
quick
on
this
one,
so
there
are
a
number
of
duties
and
powers
that
apply
to
what,
where
the
local
plan
is
meant
to
achieve
really,
and
there
are
powers,
but
also
limits
those
powers
in
terms
of
what
it's
allowed
to
do
in
terms
of
reducing
carbon
emissions.
So
number
one
planning
compulsory
purchase
act
requires
that
we
have
policies
that
as
a
whole,
secure
that
the
development
and
use
of
land
contribute
to
the
mitigation
of
an
adaptation
to
climate
change.
D
D
D
Energy
efficiency
standards
is
well
the
devil's
in
the
detail.
Really
it
is
defined
in
that
act
as
standards
endorsed
by
the
secretary
of
state.
Currently,
only
the
building
regulations
calculations
count
towards
that.
So
we
can
require
improvements
on
those,
but
it's
a
bit
of
a
grey
area,
whether
we
can
require
other
methods
to
account
for
the
energy
use
and
carbon
in
the
building.
D
The
extent
of
what
is
reasonable
hasn't
really
been
tested,
so
I
mean
from
my
point
of
view
as
an
environmental
consultant.
My
instinct
would
be
the
reasonable
thing
is
net
zero,
but
it
hasn't
been
legally
tested
and
then
beyond
that
spatial
distribution
of
growth,
as
we've
discussed,
is,
is
a
key
planning
power
and
we
can
require
developer
payments
towards
new
infrastructure
and
mitigation
of
development
and
perhaps
through
the
community
infrastructure
levy
or
section
106
agreements.
D
However,
all
of
the
above
have
to
be
justified,
with
robust
evidence
of
need
and
and
being
able
to
be
implemented.
So
I
think
that
is
the
end
of
my
section
I
may
be
handing
to
anna.
In
just
a
moment.
We
have
the
next
one.
Please
there
we
go
I'll
hand
over
to
anna
to
talk
about
problem
budgets,
reductions
and
building
specs.
B
Thank
you,
marina
and
hello,
everyone.
B
So
I'm
going
to
try
and
explain
briefly
in
about
five
minutes
how
we
have
ended
up
recommending
and
why
we've
recommended
the
the
targets
within
the
net
zero
carbon
buildings
policies
that
we
have
and
to
do
that,
I
just
wanted
to
sort
of
take
you
back
to
what
marina
was
saying
and
let's
look
at
what
are
we
really
trying
to
achieve
and
so,
as
marina
said,
we're
trying
to
achieve
and,
as
you
all
probably
know,
we're
trying
to
limit
global
temperature
rises
to
within
one
and
a
half
and
two
degrees
celsius
above
pre-industrial
levels
and
simultaneous
to
that.
B
So
next
next
slide,
please
so
the
ipcc
and
climate
scientists
have
shown
that
there
is
a
real
direct
proportion.
There's
a
there's,
a
direct
proportion
between
the
cumulative
carbon
in
the
atmosphere
and
the
temperatures
surface,
temperatures
they're,
seeing
so
that's
really
useful,
because
essentially
we
can
get.
We
can
understand
if
we
want
to
limit
to
one
and
a
half
or
two
degrees
how
much
carbon
in
the
future
in
the
atmosphere
to
get
to
that
point.
B
So
next
slide
please.
So
the
ipcc
has
worked
out.
We
have
a
global
carbon
budget
of
900
000
megatons
for
a
50
50
chance
of
reaching
1.7
degrees,
it's
a
little
bit
of
uncertainty,
and
so
they
give
various
sort
of
statistics
for
different
temperatures
and
different
amounts.
But
so,
as
you
can
see,
50
50
chance
of
1.7
is
not
exactly
ambitious.
It's
a
bit
give
or
take
it's
kind
of
fingers
crossed,
and
the
tyndall
center
has
done.
Some
really
amazing
work
on
apportioning
the
uk
and
every
local
authority
within
it.
B
Its
share
of
that
global
carbon
budget
next
slide.
Please.
B
So
here
we
have
a
graph
which
shows
the
annual
emissions
so
from
between
2020
and
2050.
So
this
is
just
a
a
graphic:
it's
it's
it's
it's
not
indicative
of
anyone's
particular
pathway
or,
but
what
it
shows
is
that
essentially,
you've
got
if
we
carry
on
emitting.
So
we've
got
this
horizontal
line,
we're
carrying
on
emitting
at
the
same
pace
we
are
now
and
then
we
have
a
sort
of
fairly
steep
drop
off
in
the
mid-2030s.
B
The
area
underneath
the
graph
that
represents
the
amount
of
carbon
we've
emitted.
The
blue
shading
is
the
amount,
the
global,
the
carbon
budget
of
greater
cambridge.
All
the
orange
isn't
a
carbon
overspend,
so
greater
cambridge,
for
example.
It
has
11
megatons
of
co2
in
its
carbon
budget.
That's
that's
the
amount
you
can
emit
between
now
and
any
point
in
the
future
before
you're
contributing
effectively
more
than
1.7
degrees.
B
So
at
your
annual
emissions
rate,
now
that
only
annual
emissions
rate
was
pre-2020
and
these
figures
are
from
2020
and
you'd
admit,
you'd
end
up
using
it
by
2026
2027.
If
you
don't
reduce
your
carbon
now,
so
that's
I
really
wanted
to
make
that
clear.
Next
slide,
please!
B
So
what
sort
of
trajectories
should
we
be
looking
at?
Well,
if
you
were
just
looking
at
an
annual
reduction,
you'd
probably
be
looking
at
something
like
13
and
a
half
percent
per
year
or
50
every
five
years,
and
that
would
give
you
a
trajectory
that
you
can
see
on
the
left,
but
it's
in
practice
quite
unlikely
that
that's
going
to
happen.
B
So
that's
just
the
point
I
wanted
to
make,
because
clearly
we
can't
just
sort
of
wait
and
say:
well,
we
don't
need
to
be
zero
carbon
by
2050.
We
don't
need
to
implement
these
zero
policies
until
the
next
local
plan,
or
maybe
we
could
have
step
steps
approach
between
now
and
then
to
be
kind
to
developers.
B
If
we
want
to
be
paris
compliant,
we
have
to
be
ambitious
with
zero
carbon
policies.
Now
next
slide,
please!
So
what
do
we
need
to
do?
What
buildings
need
to
do?
Well,
they
have
to
stop
burning
gas.
That's
really
important!
We
need
to
stop
putting
that
carbon
into
the
atmosphere,
so
the
alternatives
are
direct
electrics
at
the
moment.
The
alternatives
available
right
now
and
that
that's
also
important.
B
Of
course,
there
is
electricity
within
the
grid,
and
but
this
is
the
grid.
National
grid
is
decarbonizing
quite
rapidly
and
we
have
some
really
good
predictions
from
the
national
grid
to
show
that,
hopefully,
in
future
years,
maybe
in
the
even
in
the
2030s
we're
going
to
get
to
net
zero
carbon
electricity.
B
There's
an
exclamation
mark
against
zorax
electric
heating,
because
that's
just
to
show
that
it
does
use
a
lot
more
electricity
than
an
s
or
c
pump
would
and
therefore
it
puts
more
strain
on
the
grid.
So
some
caution
needs
to
be
viewed
around.
G
B
So
the
metrics
that
we're
essentially
we've
essentially
recommended
go
into
the
policy,
are
a
space
heating
demand
of
15
to
20
kilowatt
hours
per
meter
squared
per
year.
So
essentially,
that
just
means
very
efficient
building
fabric
means
ultra
efficient
building
fabric
of
approximately
passive
house
levels.
It's
been
recommended
by
the
committee
on
climate
change,
it's
also
recommended
within
the
letty
letties
definition
of
net
zero
carbon
and
one
of
the
practical
and
technical
benefits
of
this
it,
your
building
kind
of
acts
like
a
bit
like
a
storage
heater.
B
You
can
be
really
flexible
about
when
you
heat
it
and
that's
really
important,
because,
as
we
move
towards
an
electrified
economy,
we
are
going
to
be
putting
a
lot
more
strain
on
the
grid.
The
grid
isn't
currently
at
where
it
needs
to
be
so
it's
going
to
have
to
improve
and
ramp
up,
and
if
we,
if
we
can
even
out
those
peak
heat
demands
by
different
people's
heating.
B
Turning
on
at
different
times,
we
just
enable
that
transition,
much
more
than
if
we
had
less
energy
efficient
buildings
are
all
requiring
more
heat
in
those
peak
winter
demands
and
those
coldest
times.
B
The
second
metric
we're
looking
at
is
the
total
energy
use
of
buildings.
So
that's
the
amount
of
energy
that's
needed
for
everything.
So
you
know
your
your
appliances,
your
cooking,
your
lighting,
your
hot
water
and
your
heating.
So
it's
everything.
We've
selected,
35
kilowatt
hours
per
meter
square
per
year.
B
That's
in
line
with
the
letty
net,
zero
definition
and
the
way
they
calculated.
That
was,
they
really
looked
at
the
national
at
the
national
level.
How
much
electricity
can
the
national
grid
provide
and
they
sort
of
worked
out?
What
share
each
home
should
be
targeting
so
there's
a
sort
of
science-based
reason
to
that
figure
and
again
it's
low
because
it
helps
the
grid.
B
It
reduces
those
peak
demands
on
the
grid
and,
finally,
the
third
sort
of
key
aspect
of
this
in
terms
of
operational
carbon
is
achieving
an
energy
balance
and
simply
that
just
means
that
the
home
or
the
building
should
generate
as
much
energy
renewable
energy
in
a
year
as
it
consumes
and
the
benefits
of
that
are
yeah.
Thank
you
very
much
this.
This
just
shows
that.
B
So
all
those
energy
uses
that
you
use
in
a
building
are
balanced
by
the
amount
of
renewable
energy
and
the
benefits
of
that
are
we're
contributing
to
renewable
energy
and
the
national
grid,
which
we
need
to
do,
but
there's
also
some
real
benefits
for
homeowners
as
well,
so
they
get
to
benefit.
They
can
use
that
electricity
directly
if
they
want
to
most
people
are
probably
going
to
end
up
moving
over
to
electric
cars.
You
can
use
them
to
charge.
B
B
We
used
that,
because
it's
been
shown
to
be
really
sort
of
quite
reliably
predict
how
much
the
build
a
building
will
use
in
real
life,
as
opposed
to
the
compliance-based
modeling
that
you
need
for
building
regulations
which
tend
not
to
have
much
correlation
to
how
much
building
reads
is
in
real
life,
so
we
tested
those
metrics
across
four
different
buildings
and
all
these
these
plans
and
these
buildings
were
taken
from
planning
applications
that
had
been
made
within
greater
cambridge
and
we
just
literally
took
them
exactly
as
they
were,
didn't
make
any
amendments
to
them.
B
We
did
we
tested
two
different
heat
sources,
heat
pump
and
direct
electric,
and
you
can
see
this
is
showing
for
the
heat
pump
for
all
those
metrics.
We
were
able
to
achieve
the
target
set
with
varying
levels
of
fabric
efficiency,
there's
an
exclamation
mark
against
the
terrace
house,
because
that
was
a
a
little
bit
more
challenging
to
achieve
things
like
normal
windows.
B
Do
actually
increase
the
heat
loss
quite
a
lot,
and
what
we
did
find
was
that
through
optimizing
certain
design
elements,
then
you
can
it's
easier
to
meet
the
targets.
It's
also
cheaper
to
meet
the
targets,
and
that's
really
that's
something.
That's
quite
interesting
really
that
we
found
next
slide
please
so
this
is.
These
are
what's
the
results
using
a
direct
electric
heating
system.
B
So
again
we
were
able
to
achieve
obviously
the
fabric,
didn't
change,
so
we're
able
to
achieve
that
space
heating
demand
target
on
the
top.
B
It
was
not
possible
to
meet
the
overall
energies
intensity
target
using
direct
electric
heating,
and
that's
because
it
uses
three
times
as
much
electricity
to
heat
the
home
than
slc
pumps
do
so
that
overall
energy
use
grew
quite
substantially
as
a
result,
it's
also
harder
to
achieve
that
net,
zero
balance.
B
So,
if
you're
using
more
energy,
you
need
to
generate
more
energy
to
get
that
net
zero
balance
and
for
this
terraced
house,
for
example,
because
of
that
dormer
and
the
orange
the
particular
oriented
orientation
of
this
home,
we
weren't
able
to
achieve
that
net.
Zero
balance
on
the
site
for
that
that
type,
but
I
think
one
of
the
I
think
what
we
found
was
if
we're
targeting
35,
it
really
does
kind
of
rule
out
indirectly
direct
electric
heating.
B
So
people
would
almost
certainly
need
to
be
installing
s
or
seat
pumps
to
get
there
and
yeah,
and
and
that's
it
we
did
do
the
cost
modeling
too,
and
we
found
we
had
some
uplifts
of
between
7
and
13.
B
We've
also
modeled
this
on
other
projects
too
and
they've
come
in
lower
than
that,
but
I
think
one
thing
that
was
really
really
clear
was
it's
it
changing
the
design
and
optimizing.
The
design
of
the
building
form
really
has
an
impact
on
how
much
that
uplift
is,
and
so
designers
right
from
the
beginning
can
minimize
those
costs
with
the
uplift
required
to
meet
those
targets,
just
by
paying
some
attention
to
how
the
building's
designed
and
the
details
within
it-
and
that's
that's
the
end
of
my
part.
Thank
you
very
much
for
listening.
A
Anna
marina,
that
was
incredibly
interesting
and
and
really
detailed,
and
I
know
we
run
over
a
little
bit,
but
I
think
that
it's
really
important
to
give
that
time.
I
know
there's
quite
a
lot
of
detail
in
there,
but
you
know
this
is
all
fairly
new
stuff,
I'd,
say
very
new
stuff,
but
it's
something
that
we've
really
got
to
get
a
grip
with,
and
it's
it's.
You
know
this
is
the
kind
of
the
foundational
work
really.
We've
heard
a
lot
of
conversation,
I
suppose
over
cop
26,
but
this
is
the
real
work.
A
That's
happening
at
a
bottom
up
level
that
really
needs
to
start
taking
place
and
things
that
local
government
can
actually
do
and
put
in
place
to
start
dealing
with
these
issues.
So
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
We
will
have
got
a
little
bit
of
an
interactive
session,
I'm
happy
to
run
over
a
little
bit
as
well.
If
people
are
happy
to
stay
a
congrats
to
questions,
there's
not
a
huge
amount
of
questions
coming
through
there's
quite
a
few.
A
Only
a
few
of
you
tonight
and
maybe
it's
the
timing,
so
we'll
try
and
get
through
all
of
them.
I
would
think
at
the
moment
unless
a
big
influx
comes
through.
It's
got
a
little
bit
of
an
interactive
session
for
you
now,
as
I
said
before.
If
you
scan
that
qr
code
or
I
think
that
on
the
next
screen,
there's
a
details
for
men
to
meet.
A
A
It
may
be
things
that
go
out
with
outside
of
it,
but
from
your
own
perspectives,
and
you
know
listening
to
some
of
the
conversation
about
the
planning,
but
also
the
fact,
the
kind
of
quite
dark
facts
that
we've
got
to
get
to
net
zero
and
how
we
might
get
there
and
why
not
get
there?
What
do
you
think
are
the
most
important
things
that
we
can
do
to
address
climate
change
now.
A
I
think,
if
you
put
some
of
your
thoughts
into
the
men
to
meet
that
they
will
start
popping
up
on
my
screen
and
we
can
just
have
a
little
discussion
around
them.
I
mean,
as
I
said,
we've
run
a
couple
of
these
over
the
last
three
or
four
sessions,
but
we
have
had
a
lot
of
a
bigger
group
really
so
there's
not
too
much
coming
through
our
move
straight
on,
but
there
was
only
thoughts
that,
from
a
high
level
perspective
panel,
any
things
that
are
coming
out.
A
Yeah
we've
got
you
coming
through
so
net
zero
homes
and
we've
talked
about
that
a
little
bit.
The
reduction
in
car
use-
and
I
think
both-
and
I
think
emma
touched
upon
this
in
terms
of
how
strategy
is
designed
around
you-
know,
thinking
about
transport
and
thinking
about
the
best
places.
To
put
you
know,
development
to
put
growth
for
houses
near
jobs,
so
people
are
reduction,
reducing
those
those
you
know
those
car
journeys
any
thoughts
on
any
of
those
from
the
panel.
We.
E
Were
actually
discussing
the
act
now
point
before
we
started
and
I
think
the
short
answer
is
we
we
are
but
plan
making
does
take
a
long
time
in
order
to
bring
in
standards
like
this
which
go
beyond
the
national
standards
set
out
in
your
national
guidance.
E
C
C
There
are
already
some
developers
out
there
that
are
referring
to
some
of
the
standards
that
we've
talked
about
as
well,
so
we're
seeing
people
starting
to
use
the
letty
standards
we're
getting
a
lot
more
passive
house
developments
coming
forwards
now
as
well.
I
think
that's
driven
quite
a
lot
by
colleges
and
university
of
cambridge,
but
we're
starting
to
see
some
of
those
standards
we're
starting
to
see
embodied
carbon
being
reported
on,
and
you
know
people
are
using
there's
the
river
climate
challenge
as
well,
which
sets
some
targets.
So
we
are
making
progress.
C
I
would
love
to
go
further
faster,
but,
as
john
says,
you
know
we
do
have
to
work
within
the
plan
making
process.
I
think
as
well.
If
I
could
also
pick
up
on
the
retrofit
and
I've
seen
that
there
is
a
question
in
the
q,
a
about
the
local
plan
and
retrofitting
what
we
found
with
the
existing
local
plan
for
cambridge,
where
we
have
a
retrofit
policy,
we're
finding
it
really
hard
to
actually
implement
through
planning,
because
planning
isn't
really
set
up
to
deal
with
retrofit.
C
C
But
what
I
would
say
is:
I
know
that
cambridge
city
council,
working
actually
with
bioregional,
are
currently
developing
a
retrofit
guide
to
net
zero
carbon.
So
they're
going
to
be
publishing
early
part
of
next
year,
a
handbook
for
for
homeowners.
That
will
take
you
through
how
you
can
retrofit
towards
net
zero
carbon
for
some
of
the
common
house
types
and
archetypes
that
we
see
in
cambridge.
A
Yeah,
it's
really
interesting,
also
to
see
I
mean
you
know,
and
you
make
the
distinction
there
with
retrofitting
and
the
power
planning
policy,
because
this
is
an
area
that
we
do
know.
It
transcends
a
number
of
different
places
that
need
to
be
involved
in
this,
and
I
think
you
know
retrofit
is
one
of
those
areas,
but
there's
a
big.
You
know
big
point
around
behavior
change
here,
which
is
obviously
not
a
planning
issue,
but
again
it
needs
to
be
something
that's
considered
in
the
round,
because
you
know
the
way
that
we
think
about.
A
A
You
know
it's
a
collaborative
piece
and
we're
not
going
to
solve
these
problems
on
our
range
I'm
going
to
move
on
because
we're
quite
we're
quite
far
into
time.
Now
I
mean
there's
not
huge
amount
of
questions
coming
through,
so
we
will
pick
those
up
we're
going
to
move
into
water
because
it
is
a
really
critical
issue
in
this
area
and
wouldn't
have
been
usually
an
entire
session
on
it.
But
I
think
that
we
really
do
want
to
touch
on
it
in
detail.
A
E
So
this
is
a
slide
that
we've
used
in
a
number
of
the
webinars
so
far,
because
it's
such
an
important
issue
for
the
plan,
we've
been
quite
clear
that
the
plan
and
the
level
of
growth
that's
been
identified
in
the
proposals
for
consultation
is
dependent
on
there
being
a
water
supply
available
without
causing
further
harm
to
the
environment.
E
We've
almost
been
quite
clear,
that's
contingent
and
that
we
haven't
yet
got
the
evidence
to
understand
that
fully
and
I'll
go
into
that
in
a
second.
So
it's
almost
a
the
word
is
a
caveat
on
the
plan
that
we
we
still
need
to
understand
the
role
water
plays.
E
The
biggest
issue
really
is
that
the
greater
cambridge
area
gets
largely
most
of
its
water
from
the
chalk
quack
for
south
of
cambridge
and
that
aquifer
is
under
pressure
and
doesn't
have
capacity
to
provide
water
to
supply
further
growth.
Indeed,
the
abstraction
rates
need
to
be
reduced.
E
It's
not
as
straightforward
as
thinking
well
don't
develop,
because
we've
also
got
responsibilities
to
respond
to
economic,
social,
environmental
issues.
When
planning,
we
need
to
respond
and
understand
our
objectives
as
needs,
and
if
we
can
do
so
without
causing
you
know,
unacceptable
environmental
harm,
we
need
to
plan
for
them.
So
we
have
got
to
balance
all
of
these
issues,
so
the
slide
really
ends
up
saying:
what
are
the
consequences
if
we
were
to
reduce
that
growth,
so
the
first
point
would
be.
E
We
would
have
to
ask
our
neighbors
to
meet
that
growth
for
us
and
that
in
itself
has
sustainability
consequences.
Clearly,
they're
not
meeting
needs
where
they're
generated
could
mean
further
issues
of
commuting,
for
example,
and
then
it
could
be
that
if
they
can't
make
the
need,
you
don't
meet
that
development
at
all,
which
has
other
consequences
so
not
helping
and
providing
enough
housing.
For
example,
there
are
consequences
to
all
of
these
issues.
E
And
the
next
slides
really
go
on
to
what
what
is
happening.
So
it's
not
something
that
the
councils
can
deal
with
directly
and
we
need
very
much
to
work
with
partners,
the
water
industry,
the
government,
to
look
into
how
these
issues
are
being
resolved
and
we
commissioned
an
integrated
water
strategy
to
inform
the
plan
and
that
study
continues
to
be
developed
and
one
of
the
issues
that
particularly
looks
at
is
water
supply,
and
I
think
we
skipped
the
slide
there.
Paul
that's
the
one.
E
So
at
the
regional
level,
water
resources
are
working
with
the
water
companies
to
develop
a
regional
water
plan
for
the
area
as
looking
at
how
they
meet
the
needs
of
users,
economic
development,
so
on,
whilst
protecting
the
national
environment
and
they're,
exploring
all
the
options
that
could
be
applied
into
how
they
can
can
address
the
water
supply
needs
issues
for
the
long
term.
I
think
the
plan
will
go
up
to
2050..
E
It's
got
a
longer
time
of
it's
being
prepared
at
slightly
later
timeline
than
our
plan.
So,
as
you
can
see
there,
they
tend
to
carry
some
consultation
next
year,
but
that
final
plan
won't
be
available
until
2023,
so
to
some
extent
we're
still
awaiting
the
outcome
of
that
process
and
the
individual
water
companies
will
also
be
preparing
their
water
resource
management
plans,
which
is
their
statutory
process
for
identifying
water
and
where
it's
going
to
come
from,
as
can
be
managed
over
the
period,
so
we're
expecting
those
to
be
updated
as
well.
E
Now
the
water
companies
and
water
sources
east
actually
did
submit
a
paper
to
us
which
you
can
find
in
our
integrated
water
management
strategy
on
our
document
library
and
it
started
to
show
some
of
the
measures
which
they're
exploring
as
to
how
they
might
be
able
to
address
supply
issues.
Next
slide,
please
paul.
E
Some
of
the
options
they're
exploring
are
particularly
bringing
forward
new
reservoirs
in
the
east
of
england,
potentially
a
fen
reservoir
at
the
very
early
stages
of
planning,
and
that
could
significantly
increase
supplies
to
our
area
and
they're,
also
exploring
whether,
in
simple
terms,
cambridge
could
be
becca
better
connected
up
to
the
surrounding
area.
So
are
there
other
water
resources
in
surrounding
areas
that
could
be
brought
in
to
help
meet
the
needs
of
cambridge
and
take
the
pressure
off
the
aquifer,
and
there
are
other
measures
also
being
looked
at.
E
So
how
can
use
water
resources
more
efficiently,
reduce
leakage
all
those
things?
So
really,
we
need
to
understand
the
outcome
of
that
water
planning
process
to
understand
whether
the
level
of
need
we've
identified
can
be
met
sustainably
and
also
when
that
can
happen.
So
it
might
also
affect
the
timing
of
delivery.
Do
we
need
to
wait,
for
example,
for
the
reservoirs
to
be
available?
Are
there
shorter
term
measures
that
could
come
in
and
meet
that
demand
in
the
shorter
term?
So
there's.
F
Thank
you
yeah,
so
john's
run
through
sort
of
additional
sources
of
water
supply,
which
obviously
are
outside
the
remit
that
we
can
do
as
a
local
planning
authority.
But
within
the
first
proposals
we
do
talk
about
policy
sort
of
policy
areas.
F
One
of
them
is
having
a
very
high
water
efficiency
requirement
in
new
development,
and
this
slide
shows
that
at
the
moment,
sort
of
typical
water
use
in
cambridge
water
area
is
143
liters
per
person
per
day,
which
is
sort
of
quite
high,
even
in
comparison
to
the
125
liters,
which
is
the
standard
building
regulations
requirement
for
new
housing.
F
Within
our
current
2018
local
plans.
We
already
have
a
policy,
that's
at
a
sort
of
more
efficient
level
than
that,
and
you
know,
within
this
area
it's
been
identified
as
an
area
of
serious
water
stress,
so
we
could
use
that
level,
which
is
an
optional
national
building
standard,
but
within
the
policy
area
we
actually
want
to
go
even
further
than
that.
So
we're
proposing
80
liters
per
person
per
day
within
the
integrated
water
management
study.
F
That's
shown
that
that
is
possible
with
water,
efficient
fittings
and
fixtures,
but
you
would
also
have
to
use
some
sort
of
rainwater
harvesting
and
potentially
grey
water
within
developments,
but
it
doesn't
add
that
much
more
to
the
cost
of
the
development
and,
in
particular
those
sort
of
reuse
of
water
schemes
particularly
work
best,
where
it's
a
sort
of
larger
development,
rather
than
kind
of
individual
householder
level.
F
Particularly,
we
we're
sort
of
focusing
on
having
that
in
that
water
should
be
looked
at
in
an
integrated
way
within
all
new
developments,
and
this
sort
of
diagram
here
shows
that
how
everything
can
kind
of
connect
and
that's
the
way
that
developers
should
be
looking
forward
as
to
all
those
interactions
between
them
next
slide.
Please
and
our
evidence,
as
we've
already
spoken
about
in
elliot's
here
today,
is
the
integrated
water
management
study.
F
So
we
already
have
the
outlying
water
cycle
study,
which
has
an
update
at
the
end
of
that
sort
of
moving
more
towards
the
detailed
water
cycle
study
and
there's
the
strategic
flood
risk
assessment,
as
I've
said,
and
those
are
all
within
the
document
library,
on
the
website.
A
Very
much
nancy
and
I
think
that
we're
at
the
end
of
the
slides
now
and
I'll
just
put
this
slide
up,
because
this
is
where
we're
currently
at.
In
terms
of
our
webinars,
I
mean,
if
you
go
to
the
website,
you
will
see
a
number
of
the
different
in
real
life
and
other
zoom
sessions
that
we've
got
on.
All
of
these
sessions
will
be
recorded
and
they'll
be
up
online,
so
the
details
plus
the
slideshows,
will
always
be
there.
So
we
have
still
got
some
questions
in
the
q
a
and
we'll
pick
them
off.
A
Now,
I'm
happy
to
go
over
if
we
do,
if
we
do
run
into
any
more,
there
are
a
lot
of
questions
around
growth
and
growth
numbers
in
the
chat,
and
we
understand
this
is
a
really
sensitive
issue
for
residents
and
communities
around
here
as
well
and-
and
we
have
dealt
with
a
lot
of
those
conversations
and
a
lot
of
the
detail
behind
that
in
some
of
the
previous
sessions
and
the
q
and
a's
that
can
be
found
essentially
on
online,
and
I
just
will
deal
with
it
once
here
as
well.
A
Just
for
those
who
haven't
heard
them
have
that
detail.
If
you
do
want
to
find
further
detail,
you
can
see
on
the
faqs.
Essentially,
the
issue
around
growth
in
the
standard
methodology
government
level
is
that
it
is
incumbent
on
us
to
identify
the
number
of
homes
that
we
think
are
relevant
to
this
particular
area.
Yes,
there
is
a
standard
method
of
government.
It's
a
standard
methodology
for
the
across
the
uk.
Cambridge
is
quite
unique
and
jobs.
Growth
here
has
been
significant
in
previous
history
and
it's
forecasted
to
be
significant.
A
There
was
quite
a
detailed
piece
of
evidence.
Work
undertaken
by
a
combined
authority
called
the
independent
and
cambridge
and
peterborough
independent
economic
review,
which
you
know
pushes
even
higher
jobs
numbers
which
they
feel
is
likely
in
the
next
few
years.
We
have
taken
our
own
evidence
on
this
because
of
that
fact,
and
we
do
have
to
provide
enough
homes
for
their
jobs.
It's
incumbent
on
us
to
do
so,
because
you
know
planning
policy
in
a
local
plan
in
particular,
is
one
of
the
most
scrutinized
statutory
documents.
A
So
we
do
have
to
plan
for
that,
and
I
think
it's
important
to
understand,
and
if
you
want
to
look
in
detail
of
that,
but
obviously
you
know
the
impacts
of
not
planning
for
enough
development.
You
know
development
will
happen.
Jobs
growth
will
happen,
irrespective
the
impact
will
be
the
you
know,
longer
distance
commuting
commuting,
worsening,
affordability,
insufficient
or
uncoordinated
infrastructure
and
the
inabilities
for
us
to
be
able
to
pay
for
the
things
that
we
need
to
pay
from
that
development
obligation.
A
Through
section
106
or
sil,
or
whatever
the
new
methodology
for
infrastructure
levy
might
be,
and
so
it's
really
important
to
have
a
sound
plan
that
sets
out
the
framework
to
deliver
a
sustainable
development
framework
for
the
future,
and
you
know,
I
think
that
that's
that's.
We've
done
a
a
very,
very
thorough
job
on
that
and-
and
I
think
you
know
there-
I
know
we
understand
all
of
the
issues
with
it
and
we
are
planning,
for
you
know,
support,
2041
and
that
growth
that
might
happen
in
there.
A
E
Now
we
haven't
necessarily
identified
sites
for
every
specific
type
of
employment,
but
I
think
what
we've
demonstrated.
We
have
got
a
strong
and
flexible
supply
of
employment,
so
clean
tech
firms
could
locate
and
do
locate
in
a
number
of
locations
where
there
is
capacity
for
for
further
growth
employment.
So
I
hope
that
the
plan
will
continue
to
support
those
sectors
going
forward.
A
Thanks
john
I'm
going
to
to
going
to
come
down
here.
There's
this
one
here,
a
marina
goodyear
slide,
one
of
your
slides,
marina
and
defining
net
zero
carbon
for
local
plant
purposes,
talking
about
carbon
offsetting,
and
I
don't
think
we
got
to
carbon
off
setting
and
I
think
we've
got
a
few
slides
that
we
had
in
the
bag
and
we'll
add
them
to
the
the
slide
pack
at
the
end
as
well.
D
Oh
yeah
sure
thing
so
actually
I
already
started
typing,
but
I'm
happy
to
go
live
instead,
that's
fine,
and
so
essentially,
ideally,
we
would
want
those
offsets
to
be
delivered
according
to
the
following
hierarchy.
Firstly,
avoid
having
to
offset
in
the
first
place,
deliver
your
carbon
reductions
on
site
for
the
greatest
possible
extent.
D
I
suppose
it
could
also
be
within
a
wider
cambridge
context
if,
if
desired,
if
it
couldn't
be
done
within
greater
cambridge-
and
I
know
that
there
are
some
people
in
there-
the
county
council
who
are
doing
some
interesting
work
on
working
out-
possibly
a
county-wide
offsetting
scheme
and
what
that
could
be
spent
on-
and
I
know
that
they've
they've
already
had
some
experience-
delivering,
for
example,
using
some
money
to
transition
the
entire
small
village
from
oil
heating
to
a
village-wide
district
heat
network.
D
I
believe
so
they
could
be
used
within
the
wider
county,
but
ideally
within
greater
cambridge
and
never
outside
the
uk.
There
will
be
our
two
sort
of
parameters
for
that.
I
hope
that
helps.
A
Thanks
mourinho,
I'm
sure
that
was
very
helpful.
We
have
got
another
couple
of
questions
left
about
one
minute
leslie.
So
if
you
have
got
questions,
people
are
still
here,
please
please
do
put
them
in
the
chat,
we're
happy
to
answer
them,
and
so
you
just
want
to
again
on
the
growth
issues
you
know,
and
so,
if
jobs
growth
will
happen,
why
propose
more
employment
land
to
the
south
of
our
heart
homes
are
planned
for
the
north.
A
Just
to
answer
to
that
one,
we
ran
a
whole
strategy
session
I
think
last
week,
and
that
goes
into
some
detail
around.
You
know
the
the
kind
of
rationale
for
the
sites
that
we're
proposing
and
the
way
that
they
relate
between
the
relationship
between
those
homes
and
jobs.
But
if
anything
further,
you
wanted
to
add
to
that
john.
I
can
put
the
link
up
at
the
end
of
the.
So
we've
got
the
link
to
where
you
can
find
that
information
in
further
detail.
E
No,
I
would
end
up
repeating
the
strategy
section,
which
is
very
much
resort
to
focus
growth
where
jobs,
homes
and
transport
worked
worked
together
through
a
a
clearly
set
out
strategy.
So
I
won't
seek
to
repeat
that
session
again.
A
Thanks
john
another
quick
question
here
on
water
neutrality
and
potential
option:
emma:
do
you
happy
to
pick
this
one
up?
Does.
A
G
Hello
and
thanks
for
your
question
kiera
I
was
just
starting
to
I-
can
talk
to
you.
Live
it's
a
tricky.
One.
Neutrality
in
the
strictest
terms
means
you
compensate
for
new
people
by
asking
the
people
that
live
there
already
to
use
less,
and
our
problem
is
the
levers
we
have
to
encourage
the
existing
population
to
use
less.
There
are
very
few
and
it's
all
down
to
personal
behavior
and
motivation.
G
So
I
would,
you
know,
suggest
an
alternative
interpretation
of
this
word.
Water
neutrality
is
that
we
try
and
replace,
or
we
introduce
new
drinking
water
into
the
area
from
outside,
so
that
we
can
water
more
people
without
causing
any
additional
judgment
without
recovering
the
current
detriment
to
the
new
population,
then
to
the
river.
E
I
guess
the
other
issue
is
that
part
of
part
of
using
water
efficiently.
The
standard
nancy
showed
previously
is
also
about
using
grey
water
for
tasks
that
you
know.
We
don't
need
to
use
that
very,
very
highly
processed
drink,
precious
drinking
water.
For
so,
I
think
that's
where
we've
focused
our
money,
dare
I
say
our
requirements
in
the
plan
on
making
sure
we
get
our
dwellings
as
efficiently
as
possible.
That's
the
most
effective
way
we
can
do
through
the
plan.
We
think.
G
Yeah
and
whilst
providing
new
water
efficient
buildings
is
not
more
costly
than
normal.
Buildings
might
be
retrofitting
that
technology
into
the
existing
housing
bases
is
much
more
challenging.
A
Thank
you
elliot,
thank
you,
john,
as
well,
and
so
just
two
questions
left
and
then
we'll
we'll
finish
up
so
I'll.
Just
pick
up
that
last
growth
question
around
the
leveling
up,
I
mean
you
know
for
not
really
being
in
a
place
to
be
able
to
comment
on
government's
plans
for
leveling
up.
I
mean,
I
think
the
key
point
for
us
is.
You
know
we
are
two
districts
with
districts
in
the
city.
We
are
local
planning
authorities.
A
We
have
to
provide
a
local
plan
for
this
area
and
you
know
we
can
have
a
conversation
about
the
role
of
strategic
planning
and
we
may
see
some.
You
know
some
some
news
on
that
coming
out
of
government
over
the
next
few
weeks
and
months
in
response
to
the
white
paper.
But
you
know
the
strategic
planning
issues
could
potentially
have
a
have
a
role
in
helping
you
know
disperse
some
of
that
in
a
more
effective
way
over
a
longer
period.
A
But
the
current
position
for
us
is
that
we
are
preparing
a
local
plan
for
greater
cambridge
and
it's
incumbent
on
us
to
prepare
that
for
the
needs
of
this
area.
Currently
so
so
you
know,
I
think
that
we
can
discuss
those
other
things
in
the
round
as
they
appear
and
I'm
just
going
to
come
to
I'm
going
to
open
this
up
to
the
whole
panel,
because
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
it.
A
E
E
Some
of
the
research
that
we
looked
at,
I
think
working
with
elliot
on
the
the
study
was
that
there's
very
few
examples
of
making
it
work
successfully
so
that
the
best
approaches
are
to
try
and
minimize
the
water
you
actually
use
in
the
first
place
and
that's
really
what
we're
focused
on
at
the
moment.
But
it's
a
really
interesting
point,
but
a
difficult
one.
D
Yeah,
I'm
just
going
to
stick
my
nose
in
on
the
topic:
that's
not
really
mine,
as
I'm
carbon
team
rather
than
water
team,
but
just
a
small
thought
on
that
topic.
I
can't
say
I
can't
speak
for
this
specific
water
supply
area,
but
I
have
worked
on
developments
in
other
areas
so,
for
example,
the
thames
water
supply
area
and
the
affinity
water
supply
area,
and
I
just
want
to
note
that
there's
really
shocking
leakage
rates
on
a
lot
of
those
places.
D
And
again
I
don't
know
if
that
applies
in
the
same
way,
the
greater
cambridge
area
but,
for
example,
in
the
thames
water
area.
Last
time
I
checked
their
water
reports.
I
think
about
25
percent
of
what
they
put
in
the
pipes
is
just
lost
to
leaks
before
it
gets
to
anyone's
tap.
So
I
wonder
if
that
could
be
something
I
mean.
Theoretically,
the
water
company
themselves
should
be
fixing
that
and
they
are
all
making
huge
efforts
to
fix
it.
D
But
I
wonder
if
that's
a
way
to
sort
of
do
the
offsetting
without
having
to
fiddle
around
with
anyone's
bathroom
fittings
in
their
own
homes
and
so
on.
E
I'm
gonna
speaking
for
the
water
industry,
but
I
know
that
is
part
of
their
thinking,
so
I'm
I'm
pretty
sure
the
regional
water
planning
and
the
individual
strategies
of
the
water
companies
will
very
much
look
to
address
that
so
in
their
current
water
management
plans
they
already
put
in
steps
where
they
were
reducing
down
their
level
leakage.
I
have
no
doubt
they'll
be
looking
again
at
those
issues
and
it
may
very
well
form
a
significant
element
of
their
going
forward.
So
we
really
have
to
watch
this
space.
F
G
Leakage
reduction
used
to
be
conditional
on
some
economic
tests,
an
economic
level
of
leakage,
that's
largely
been
rejected
as
a
concept.
Now
all
leakage
is
bad,
leakage
must
be
minimized,
so
far
is
technically
feasible.
So
that's
definitely
a
big
drive
on
leakage,
but
by
just
addressing
leakage,
does
not
compensate
for
the
number
of
new
homes
planned
on
cambridge
or
different
scales.
A
Right
well,
thank
you,
everybody,
and
that
was
a
really
enjoyable
session.
I
mean
I've
learned
a
lot
myself
in
that
session
from
marina
and
elliot
and
anna.
So
thank
you
for
coming
and
attending.
Thank
you
to
the
team
for
being
here
as
well.
As
you
can
see.
If
you
can,
if
you've
got
comments,
and
we
really
really
encourage
you
to
get
involved
and
participate
and
think
about
you
know
what
you
can
contribute
to
the
consultation.
A
You
can
find
the
consultation
on
the
on
the
website,
which
is
showing
up
there
and
there's
a
lot
of
chat
going
on
the
social
media
as
well.
So
if
your
hashtag
localpan
or
gain
the
qr
code,
you'll
take
us
straight
to
the
website
and
then
you
can
either
get
involved
in
a
short
survey
or
you
can
get
more
detailed
comments
in
there
and,
as
I
say,
we're
running
until
the
sort
of
early
early
early
december.
So
please
stay
tuned
for
further
sessions
that
will
be
running.
A
I
wish
you
all
have
a
lovely
evening
thanks
for
those
of
you
did
attend
and
I'll
see
you
hopefully
soon
and
thank
you
again.
I
really
thank
my
panel.
You've
been
great,
so
thank
you
have
a
lovely
evening.