Whose Carbon Is It Anyway: The Structural Engineer’s Role

Quick question for the structural engineers in the room: is tracking embodied carbon part of your job? If your answer was “only when the client asks,” we have some news, and it comes with a document attached.

PRACTICE ADVISORY: EMBODIED CARBON CONSIDERATIONS FOR STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS

On October 8, 2026, Engineers and Geoscientists BC (EGBC) published Version 2.0 of its practice advisory, Embodied Carbon Considerations for Structural Engineers, and we were one of a small group of engineering firms that helped shape the update. A week after the release, we presented on the advisory at the EGBC Annual Conference alongside representatives from EGBC, the City of Vancouver (CoV), and the Carbon Leadership Forum BC (CLF BC).

The short version: the advisory asks every structural engineer to engage with embodied carbon. The minimum is achievable, but for most firms it includes some new steps.

“Advisory” Doesn’t Mean “Optional”

The word “advisory” can sound like a polite suggestion, like a weather advisory you can ignore if you own a good umbrella. That is not the case here. EGBC expects registrants to stay informed , be knowledgeable about, and meet the intent of the guidance documents relevant to their practice. Practice advisories are part of that, not an optional extra.

The advisory also ties back to something every engineer in BC has already signed up for: the Code of Ethics duty to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, including the protection of the environment. As the advisory makes clear, that duty applies with or without project-specific carbon objectives.

Why single out structural engineers?

Under most current reporting scopes, structural materials often account for roughly two-thirds of a building’s embodied carbon.

When embodied carbon gets regulated, structure is where much of the conversation lands, and engineers are subject matter experts.

And it is being regulated, through the CoV Building By-law and major green building certification programs. Most of these work the same way: a whole-building life cycle assessment (wbLCA), which totals the embodied carbon of a building’s materials, is compared against either an absolute limit or a project-specific baseline. The wbLCA is usually prepared by a specialist on the project team rather than the structural engineer, but you do need to know the process exists and where your work feeds into it.

The Minimum Is Manageable (But Aim Higher)

Here is the part that should lower everyone’s blood pressure. On every project, whether there is a carbon target or not, the advisory asks structural engineers to:

• understand the embodied carbon impact of the materials they specify;
• consider opportunities to reduce embodied carbon while still meeting structural performance requirements; and
• keep their continuing education on embodied carbon up to date.

On projects with regulatory limits or certification goals, the role follows the familiar project phases:

• Schematic Design: confirm the project’s carbon goals and give the team input on structural options that help meet them.
• Design Development and Construction Documents: provide structural information to the project’s embodied carbon lead, and document material carbon requirements in the drawings or specifications. The embodied carbon lead is a specialist role on the project team; it may be held by someone at one of the major consultants or by a standalone practitioner. (We have written before about building carbon tracking right into our drawings.)
• Construction Administration: review submittals against those requirements and let the team know about substitutions or changes that could affect embodied carbon.

Just as important is what the advisory does not ask: the structural engineer of record is not expected to produce the wbLCA, and it is not our role to track exact material quantities during construction. At a minimum, we make our information available to the team and flag issues when we see them. For most firms, the new work is writing carbon requirements into the drawings and specifications and checking submittals against them.

That said, a minimum is a floor, not a target. We encourage structural engineers to go further and get involved early. Decisions like basement depth, building form, and transfer structures are usually locked in long before detailed design, and they have an outsized effect on embodied carbon (more on that in From Basements to Benchmarks). The earlier we are at the table, the more we can help.

A Reference You’ll Actually Use

The advisory is not just a list of responsibilities; it is also a practical reference. It covers wbLCA fundamentals in plain terms: the embodied carbon of a material is its quantity multiplied by its carbon intensity. That gives you two levers: use less material or use lower-carbon material. The advisory notes that using less is usually the more effective of the two, and it usually saves money as well. (It also points out that the most carbon-efficient structure is the one that never gets built. As structural engineers, we have chosen not to take that personally.)

From there, it lays out reduction strategies across building form, geotechnical criteria, loading, serviceability, and gravity and lateral systems, along with specific approaches for concrete, steel, and timber (see our take on decarbonizing construction materials). Small changes can add up: we have seen a single inch of slab thickness ripple through an entire building. The advisory also includes guidance on calculations and software tools, including a reminder to understand what is inside the “black box” before trusting its outputs. That is advice we took to heart when building our own in-house LCA tool.

Policy to Practice at the EGBC Annual Conference

Having helped draft the update, we joined the session Policy to Practice: Structural Engineers and Embodied Carbon at the EGBC Annual Conference on October 16, alongside Harshan Radhakrishnan, P Eng (EGBC), Stephanie Dalo, P Eng (CLF BC), and Forest Borch, P Eng (City of Vancouver). We covered how the advisory came together, the fundamentals of LCA, the City’s approach to permitting, and what it looks like for a practicing structural engineer.

We walked through 3 BC projects with different goals: meeting a regulatory limit, achieving an owner’s own reduction target, and demonstrating a new approach to the wider industry. In each, efficient structural design reduced carbon while saving cost or staying cost neutral.

What stuck with us the most was hearing the regulator, the municipality, and the LCA community describe the same picture from different angles: the policy, the guidance, and the tools are in place. The remaining step is for engineers to put them into practice.

Looking Ahead

Embodied carbon requirements are moving quickly, locally, through certification programs, and at the federal level, including through the National Model Codes development process. Version 2.0 will not be the last word, and having helped shape this version, we look forward to contributing to the next.

In the meantime, our advice is simple: read the advisory. It is 15 pages, written with practicing engineers in mind, and shorter than most specifications. You can find it on EGBC’s Guidelines & Advisories page.

If your team is working through how to document embodied carbon requirements or coordinate with an embodied carbon lead, contact us to discuss the project.

Written By Rory Roberts, P Eng
Director of Sustainability

Together, we can contribute to a more sustainable built environment. If you are interested in sustainability and would like to discuss any of the topics in this article, please get in touch with us at [email protected].

For more information on our sustainability initiatives and to stay updated on our latest projects, visit our website and follow our OnTrack blog series.