Plymouth’s Climate Emergency Statement and EPDs
If your products land in projects across Plymouth, South Hams, or West Devon, the Climate Emergency Planning Statement quietly changes the sales math. It nudges design teams toward low‑carbon choices backed by real data. Manufacturers with ready, third‑party verified EPDs become easier to select and harder to swap out at the last minute.
What this policy is and why it matters
The Plymouth and South West Devon Climate Emergency Planning Statement is an interim planning policy that guides every new planning application in the area from 1 December 2022 (Plymouth City Council, 2022). It does not replace the Local Plan. It tells applicants what to submit so carbon is reduced in design, construction, and operation.
For manufacturers, this is a demand signal. The statement asks project teams to evidence material impacts with credible documentation. EPDs are the cleanest hand‑off for that proof.
Where EPDs show up in the requirements
Under “Resilient and low carbon building materials,” the statement points applicants toward products with Environmental Product Declarations where possible. That means specifiers will reach first for materials with transparent, third‑party verified impact numbers. If an EPD is missing, teams must dig up provenance and other proofs which slows them down.
If your competitors offer EPDs and you do not, the friction is on you. That friction often costs a slot in the spec.
Numbers that change design choices
The statement expects regulated emissions 20 percent below Part L through on‑site measures, supported by the area’s guidance that accompanies DEV32 in the SPD (Plymouth CEPS, 2022). It also sets EV charging power minimums that affect building electrical design. Class E uses 22 kW points while other non‑domestic uses need 11 kW points (Plymouth CEPS, 2022). Those are real capacity allowances that flow into plant rooms, cable trays, and budgets.
Demolition and rebuild is treated carefully. If demolition proceeds, the net embodied carbon of the new structure needs to be offset by operational savings within 25 years using a whole life carbon approach consistent with RICS methodology (Plymouth CEPS, 2022). That calculation is only credible when material inputs are robust, which is exactly where product‑specific EPDs earn their keep.
What project teams must file, and how EPDs help
Applicants complete a Climate Emergency Compliance Form that maps each requirement to the submission pack. EPD PDFs and machine‑readable datasets simplify that mapping. Designers can drop A1 to A3 numbers into their material schedules. WLC assessors can pull upstream transport and end‑of‑life scenarios without guesswork.
We see faster design iterations when manufacturers supply both the declaration and a short data sheet translating the EPD to common modeling assumptions. That saves everyone time.
How to prioritise your EPD roadmap for this region
Start with the SKUs most likely to appear in local housing, education, healthcare, and mixed‑use shells. Focus on the heavy hitters in the bill of quantities where carbon and cost concentrate. Typical candidates include cladding, insulation, flooring systems, structural elements, roofing, and hardscape stone.
If you supply slate or stone into these markets, provenance and durability are scrutinised. Pair the EPD with warranty documentation and origin evidence to reduce review cycles.
Picking PCRs and program operators without drama
Choose the PCR your closest competitors use to ease comparability. For UK and EU projects, EN 15804‑based EPDs reviewed by a reputable operator are standard practice. Many teams publish in IBU in Germany or with UK‑recognised operators, then cross‑reference in project documentation. The operator is less important than a clean, verifiable dataset that maps to the WLC assessment.
If your product straddles categories or PCRs are in flux, document the assumptions clearly so assessors can reconcile models across design options. That clarity prevents scope creep late in tender.
Avoid the three classic snags
First, relying on generic databases when a product‑specific EPD exists. That often triggers a conservative penalty. Second, sending EPDs that omit transport or packaging assumptions used in practice. Third, letting renewals lapse near bid dates. A near‑expiry EPD invites avoidable queries.
There is no prize for being almost compliant. Get the details right.
What to prepare this quarter
- Prioritise two or three product lines for immediate EPD development where sales volume meets likely local demand.
- Build a one‑page EPD summary for each SKU that translates results to WLC inputs and typical submittals.
- Publish product data in formats designers actually use, not only a PDF.
- Train the sales team to point planners to the compliance form and where your EPD slots in.
These moves pay back quickly once your products become the low‑friction choice on submittals. It’s definately noticeable in repeat specs.
The takeaway for manufacturers
Plymouth’s statement shifts the default toward low‑carbon, well‑documented materials. EPDs remove excuses to pick a rival with better paperwork. Aim for product‑specific, EN 15804‑compliant declarations, keep renewals current, and package the data so planners and assessors can plug it straight into their WLC models. That is how you win the spec and keep it.
(Policy dates and validation scope: applies to all planning applications submitted from 1 December 2022) (Plymouth City Council, 2022).
(Key numeric requirements cited from the adopted statement: 20 percent below Part L, EV charger power minima, 25‑year demolition offset test) (Plymouth CEPS, 2022).
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the statement mandate EPDs for every product used on a project?
It directs applicants to use products with EPDs where possible and to evidence material impacts. In practice, EPDs are the easiest way to satisfy reviewers, especially for high‑volume materials (Plymouth CEPS, 2022).
Are there numeric thresholds we should know about that influence product selection?
Yes. Regulated emissions are guided to 20% below Part L, EV charging power minima are 22 kW for Class E and 11 kW otherwise, and demolition cases must show operational savings offset embodied carbon within 25 years (Plymouth CEPS, 2022).
Which EPD program operator should we use for UK projects affected by this policy?
Any reputable operator publishing EN 15804‑compliant, third‑party verified EPDs works. Teams often use IBU in the EU or UK‑recognised operators. The priority is data quality, clarity, and easy reuse in WLC assessments.
About the Author
Eric works at the intersection of sustainability, regulation, and business strategy, helping manufacturers navigate the evolving landscape of EPDs and LCAs. Having spoken with hundreds of teams across North America, brings a deep understanding of what drives ROI, what regulators are asking for, and how companies can stay ahead with smart, scalable approaches to environmental reporting.
