As one of the major housebuilders on the Isle of Wight, Captiva Homes is pledging to hit carbon net zero in 2 years.
Having built more than 400 homes in 13 projects since the Island company was founded — and with plans to build more — Captiva has unveiled ‘clear and definitive actions’ to be more environmentally responsible in the way it develops.
Iain Delaney, Captiva’s chief executive, said they want to set a new benchmark for sustainable house building on the Island — supporting the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, biosphere goals and rewilding — while accelerating housing delivery. He said:
“The Island’s housing need means some green fields will have to be built on so how can we do the best to offset that and mitigate as best as possible?”
One key promise, he said, was to make every one of the homes they build the most energy efficient possible, certified at an ‘A’ rating – which will also lead to a reduction in energy bills for tenants. Another is the desire to rewild or regreen more land than it builds.
Mr Delaney said it is a goal they are reaching towards achieving — having secured 57 hectares of land to regreen against 34 hectares of development land across 3 sites.
Its third goal, while not there yet, is the aspiration to be carbon neutral, fully offsetting its admissions on the Island. Mr Delaney said they have used the Solent Local Enterprise Partnership’s sustainable business programme to verify their carbon footprint, which they are now in the process of offsetting.
Building a 3-bed detached house using Captiva’s timber-framed construction, produces 60 tonnes of carbon, so 360 trees would need to be planted.
Captiva produced 2,180 tonnes of carbon last year and a predicted 3,680 tonnes this year, so the company would need to plant more than 35,000 trees.
Mr Delaney said:
“We don’t have the land to do that but we have started the process to facilitate the planting to become net zero.
“We would like to be net zero in two years time. We are not there yet but that is our goal.”
Tree planting started earlier this year and up to 3,500 trees will be planted around its latest development, Highwood Grove in Rookley.
Other environmental features have been added to its newest scheme including bat boxes built into the houses and hedgehog highways installed through the gardens.
Net zero?
In building, just possibly.
But their homes all have gas fired heating and no solar panels. So not so green once occupied.
Far better and more cost effective to install things like heat pumps and solar panels at the time of building.
This is the second less-than-truthfull press release ( published unchallenged and not fact checked by either the CP or IE )
They are building homes, mostly for 2nd homers and incoming retirees on greenfield sites that are not even close to carbon neutral when occupied.
These people are in it for the profit, and the profit alone. Don’t fall for the sugar coated PR misdirection.
they could achieve net zero now on the Island ,Just get them to leave, do not let them back on the ferries.
And the three bears.
Iain Delaney, Captiva’s chief executive says…The Island’s housing need means some green fields will have to be built on.
and there you have it – the selfish,money grabbing, environment wrecker openly admits it.
We need nature, not more benefit hutches for asylum seekers and other benefit spongers.
if he wants to be net zero – don’t build a single house anywhere – job done.
for the record – The cement industry contributes to around 7% of global carbon emissions. Particulate matter (PM) emissions from cement plants are very high, and cement is understood to be the most polluting industry in the world.
captiva are full of it.
I heard somewhere a ton of cement ‘costs’ a ton of carbon. No such thing as green, electric cars are another big scam whose environmental damage is massive, 500,000 lbs of deposits to make a single 1000 lb battery. Mining all that is not green or sustainable.
The Island population growth is mostly due to well-off elderly retirees moving here. Not benefit claimants and asylum seekers.
We need affordable homes for young Islander families, preferably built on brownfield sites, instead we get large homes and retirement bungalows built on farmland.
Please stop the lies about “benefit hutches for asylum seekers” as it just deflects from the real problem. The number of people on the island in the age ranges associated with asylum seekers and benefit claimants has actually fallen in the last 10 years while the number of pensioners has increased massively.
“The number of people on the island in the age ranges associated with asylum seekers and benefit claimants has actually fallen in the last 10 years while the number of pensioners has increased massively”.
Can you back all elements of that up with figures from a non left wing source?
It’s in the 2011 and 2022 censuses. Comparing the two shows that all of the increase in the Island population (around 2100) has been in those aged over 65.
In fact, because the number of people aged under 65 has actually decreased, the increase in over 65s is around 3000.
Facts. Black and white facts.
Now, can you and your geriatric chums come up with non far-right sources for all of your gibberish about immigrants and benefits scroungers being the ones pushing up the IW population.
You can’t, because it isn’t true no matter how often you push those lies.
Bottom line. The house building on the island is almost exclusively driven by people moving here to retire.
There is no such thing as carbon neutral, and reading this rubbish from an industry which blights the countryside with its unwanted hovels is more than a bad joke.
“Some green fields will have to be built on”. Planning permission assumed already? Didn’t we Islanders have a say in the matter?
Trees are more important than rabbit hutches…
Stop building and we will have green space, the future generations won’t know what Greenfield s are …..
The concrete jungle jigsaw is on it’s way!!!!
We need better services, eg Doctors , Dentists, and nurses social care , a cottage hospital so as to stop bed blocking at our 1 Hospital….
We don’t need more housing using our greenfields…..
Captiva must think we are mugs, they are driven by profit only. The greenest scenario is not to build any more houses on green field sites. They would be far more eco friendly if they refurbished and repurposed existing empty properties. Their public credibility would benefit massively by adopting this approach to housing.
There is still time to change direction.
If building companies really gave a toss about the environment they would operate ‘not for profit’ and explore all options to use brownfield and build using space as efficiently as possible before even contemplating greenfield. With profit as the incentive they have different building priorities. In the 21st century profit-making from greenfield developments should not be allowed to protect for future generations. Simple as that.
Remember that the land that people ‘re-wild’ is often productive food producing farmland that they buy up and then remove the farming element, backed up and often funded by the eco-loons in Defra using taxpayer money – several mainland councils have already bought farms over here and stopped production so they can ‘re-wild’ to offset carbon emissions from massive developments they are building to accommodate our burgeoning population (1.2 million visas dished out by Whitehall last year alone) – so it’s concrete for new arrivals and reduction in food production for the rest of us , what a wonderful contribution to ‘saving the planet’
By ” trees”, do you mean young trees, or twigs of hawthorn etc for the rabbits to chew. With all these new trees promised and planted on green land, there will soon be no space left to build carbon creating houses.Now that would be carbon neutral.