Jonathan Leake and Brendan Montague
Win luxury hampers plus Waitrose vouchers & guidebooks
Green Central: click here to read Times Online's environment blog
Gordon Brown's pledge to create a string of carbon-neutral “eco-towns” will prove unachievable unless the government buys carbon offsets, the designers of the scheme have warned.
The offsets, potentially costing millions of pounds a year, will be needed because eco-towns will be net generators of greenhouse gases, even though ministers have promised they will be zero-carbon. The warning comes from the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA), the government’s main adviser on the project.
David Lock, chairman of the association, said: “There has never been a true zero-carbon settlement and the eco-towns will not achieve it either. They will generate much less greenhouse gas than normal but to call it zero-carbon is slack language.”
Lock, a strong supporter of the eco-town concept who is advising developers on four of the proposed settlements, said the zero-carbon claim was raising expectations too far. “These phrases are like slogans on a T-shirt but if you ask civil servants and ministers what they mean, they cannot define it,” he said.
The warning comes as the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) prepares to announce the sites of the first settlements, possibly as early as this week.
The eco-towns plan was announced by Brown after he became prime minister last summer. He asked developers to submit proposals for new settlements of up to 20,000 homes.
It was part of an attempt to regain control of the environmental agenda from David Cameron and achieve the government target of 3m new homes by 2020.
Yvette Cooper, then housing minister, told last September’s Labour conference that her aim was to develop “eco-towns with zero-carbon offices, zero-carbon schools and zero-carbon pubs”.
About 70 applications have been received, with Caroline Flint, the current housing minister, set to announce soon a short-list of 15, with 10 eventually being built. “Climate change is perhaps the most pressing issue facing not only this country but the entire world,” Flint said. “By 2016 all new houses will have to be zero carbon while all new nondomestic buildings will be zero carbon from 2019.”
Bill Dunster, an architect renowned for leading the way on green building design said he did not accept zero-carbon developments were impossible. Dunster's own BedZed development on a disused sewage works in Beddington, south London, is seen as an exemplar of the kind of projects needed if ecotowns are to become viable. He said: "The Code for Sustainable Homes sets out just how new housing can be made carbon neutral. It is technically very feasible. The real obstacle is the construction companies who are very conservative and resist anything they fear might reduce their profits."
The confusion over whether the towns can be zero carbon is the latest row to hit the plan. It has already provoked widespread opposition from residents near the sites of the proposed developments.
Felix Dennis, the multi-millionaire publisher, is fighting plans for an eco-town near his home in Warwickshire. Tim Henman, the former world No 4 tennis player and his parents are opposing a project in their home village in Oxfordshire.
The DCLG is understood to be holding urgent consultations over what zero carbon should mean and the role of offsetting. Opponents are angry that the building of supposedly environmentally friendly housing estates will concrete over countryside, some of it rich in wildlife, which they previously believed inviolable.
Among the protesters is Tessa Robertson, 48, whose 500-acre farm near Micheldever, Hampshire, faces destruction. Robertson has worked for Greenpeace and the WWF but said the new towns were “greenwash for developers”. “It cannot be green to destroy prime farmland and ruin our wonderful hills,” she added.
Douglas Paterson, 46, a neighbouring farmer, said the 350 acres he would lose to the development produced enough wheat for 1m loaves of bread plus feed for 200 dairy cows each year. “The world is short of food and this is prime farmland they want to build on,” he added.
Kate Gordon, a senior campaigner on planning at the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, said that the ecotown concept was a good one but would only remain credible if the principle of sustainability were rigorously applied. She said: "Offsetting is not the way forward since if fails to actually address the problem - our dependency on fossil fuels. This is a hugely disappointing admission on the part of the TCPA."
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles

The perfect summer companion


Overseas contacts and local business information
2007
£47,995
2008
£42,945
06/2006
£40,850
Great car insurance deals online
£33,000
Macmillan Cancer Support
Central/South West
£50k
NHS
Nationwide
£
£30k OTE
Meltwater News
Nationwide
circa £70k
Central Office of Information
London
5% below developer pre-launch price!
Luxury Appts, beautiful gardens w/ Thames views
Great Homes Available on a shared Ownership Basis
Great Investment, River Views
Visit the ‘entertainment capital of the world’
at great sale prices!
Christmas Cruises
From only £995pp
APTs East Coast now from only
£2425pp.
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
NIMBY; NIMBY; NIMBY - of course this plan will fail if enough people want it to fail and there are probably, currently, enough NIMBYs in the UK the ensure it fails... at least long enough for them to "safely" live out their own selfish little lives. Thank God the Georgians and the Victorians where a little more imaginitive and innovative than we sorry Elizabethans or we'd probably all still be happy living in our cosy thatched round houses, using Oxen for transport, wearing sack-cloth smocks and knee deep in human exciment and farm waste.... but hey, that'd be traditionally British - wouldn't it??? THOUGH NOT EXACTLY A CHOCOLATE BOX IMAGE.
Kevan, Nottingham, England
To build on green field sites is a criminal act that should be dealt with accordingley. The proposed site near me is prime farm land [arrable]. We are being told that climate change is reducing potential and necessary food creation, where is the "common sence" to distroy this vital part of our existance.The Labour party is systematically ruining our once "Great Britain", they were never welcome, it is time they were evicted for the trouble and financial debt they have created for all of us who work! The UK. is full of vacant properties and brown field sites, get these developed for the legal immigrants, this seems to be the main reason for the extra housing needed, the illeagle types and asylum seekers should be deported sooner rather than later, give us our space back!
M.S.Hall, Eggborough, England, Nth. Humberside.
Stop the influx of immigration now return all failed asylum seekers back to their homeland that will reduce the population considerably and therefore reducing the need to build further homes! How can any new build be eco friendly when it is proposed to rip up huge swathes of trees and countryside.If there is to be any building done at all why not convert many of the buildings that stand empty? No need for building massive estates just make the old buildings eco friendly.
There is more to this than meets the eye and its all being done in the name of global warming.Its just plain wrong!
Kevan, Birmingham,
Tessa Robertson and Douglas Patterson should take a careful look at the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 2, which was incorporated into British law in the Human Rights Act in essence it means that the Compulsory Purchase Act is incompatible with the ECHR.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
Of course they'll use more carbon than they save. And what about all the equipment used to build these places, will they run on fresh air? The workers who build the places, will they get to their places of work as if by magic? And all the materials that are used, will they be produced using eco-friendly methods. Another badly thought out policy by Nu Lab, to make it look as though they care when in reality they don't give a tinker's cuss.
Paul Downes, Milton Keynes, Bucks