• Environment
  • Environment - Climate
  • How does ÐӰɴ«ý measure and minimise the environmental impact of its projects?

Building a road, a bridge or a building has an impact on the environment. Materials must be produced and transported, machinery is used on worksites, resources are consumed and work can sometimes affect natural habitats.

How do we know where to focus our efforts to minimise our impact on the environment?

You first have to understand and measure impact.

At ÐӰɴ«ý, these measurements inform very tangible choices, such as using lower volumes of raw materials, choosing greener materials, reusing materials wherever possible and protecting ecosystems. This approach is structured around three main priorities – acting for the climate, optimising resources thanks to the circular economy and preserving natural environments.

Measuring to become greener

Before you are able to reduce the volume of greenhouse gas emissions generated by a project, you have to know where they are coming from. On a project, such emissions may come from a number of sources, including the production of materials, transport, use of machinery and industrial facilities, construction work, as well as the operation and maintenance of the structure.

CO₂, a single unit to facilitate comparison

The different types of greenhouse gases have different heat-trapping potencies and therefore do not have the same impact in driving climate change. In order to calculate and compare them, emissions are all translated into a single unit – CO₂ equivalent. This data can be fed into CO₂ reviews and lifecycle assessments, which involve observing the impact of a structure, from material production to end of life. Lifecycle assessments highlight the stages that generate the most significant environmental impact, especially carbon emissions generated by the project, to determine where CO₂ reduction initiatives need to target.

Another indicator, carbon intensity, puts these emissions into perspective. It would make little sense to compare the total emissions of a 5,000 m² gymnasium with those of a family home. Assessing them with respect to the same unit makes the comparison more useful.

Materials, a powerful driver of decarbonisation

Once all the measurements have been made, action needs to be taken on the greatest GHG sources.
Materials represent a major focus. ÐӰɴ«ý takes a multi-pronged approach, for example by renovating rather than building wherever possible, using the right quantities of materials, choosing materials that best suit each purpose and developing lower carbon alternatives.
Concrete is one such example. To reduce the footprint of this material while maintaining its technical properties, ÐӰɴ«ý developed ®, a range of low-carbon, very low-carbon and ultra low-carbon concretes that cut CO₂ emissions by up to 70% compared with conventional concretes.

74%
of the concrete used by ÐӰɴ«ý to build buildings in France in 2025 came from Exegy® formulations.

However, reducing the impact of materials is not all about cutting the emissions generated to produce them. This means we need to avoid, wherever possible, extracting new resources.

Turning waste into resources

For a long time, our worksites and operations typically followed a linear model – extract raw materials, produce, use, throw away. The circular economy, however, seeks to conserve materials and resources in use for as long as possible.

In construction, the potential is particularly considerable, as renovation, demolition and earth works generate vast quantities of materials, a substantial proportion of which can be reused.

Indicators to measure circularity

Unlike carbon footprint, circularity cannot yet be measured by a single, stabilised indicator. It is assessed by considering a range of complementary data sources. For example, the recovery rate serves to measure the proportion of waste that is reused rather than disposed of. Excavated earth can be reused on other worksites. Certain concretes are crushed before being recycled as sublayers on roads.

The rate of reuse measures the volumes of material directly reused without being transformed. When a building is renovated or dismantled, certain materials can be recovered and reused on another project. A door removed from a building can be reused as is in another building. The rate of reuse therefore measures the proportion of materials saved and reused, thereby avoiding the need to produce new products or transform waste.

Other approaches now seek to measure the circularity of materials by considering their origin, their potential for reuse or recycling, and their useful life. These methodologies are still evolving.

Creating the conditions for upscaling

The ÐӰɴ«ý approach to the circular economy involves developing technical solutions and channels necessary to give materials a second lease of life.

With , ÐӰɴ«ý produces aggregates made from primary resources from quarries and secondary resources sourced from local deconstruction projects.

The process seeks to structure recovery channels, from collecting materials from worksites to reconditioning and putting them back into market.

ÐӰɴ«ý seeks to involve 80% of material producing sites in the circular economy and produce 20 million tonnes of recycled materials by 2030.

Biodiversity cannot be summed up by a stat

It is also essential to take account of the species present on and around a worksite, as well as the habitats, soil, water, and the relationship between these components. Wetlands, meadows and urban areas therefore cannot be assessed in the same way.
There is currently no universal indicator able to calculate alone the “biodiversity footprint” of a worksite. This makes on-the-ground observation and expert ecological assessments all the more critical.

Observation before action

Before starting any work, ecological diagnostics serve to identify the species and habitats presents and understand the make-up of the area. During the works phase, ecologists can work with the teams to adapt certain operations to the priorities identified.

ÐӰɴ«ý develops this expertise alongside scientific partners. Since 2012, its partnership with helps in particular to improve understanding of the importance of biodiversity on its sites and develop the specific tools to assess and monitor, which include the ecological quality indicator (IQE).

In urban environments, biodiversity can also be considered right from the design phase. The design office Urbalia works with project leads and developed Biodi(V)strict, a tool to assess the biodiversity potential of an urban project.

From preservation to restoration

The aim is clearly to reduce the impact of projects, but also where possible, to do what we can to restore certain ecosystems.

This is why ÐӰɴ«ý is developing skills in environmental engineering, for example to re-establish ecological continuity, restore wetlands, rehabilitate anthropised sites and regreen certain spaces. This leads to very tangible action, such as restoring waterways, creating ponds and hedgerows, developing ecological corridors and creating habitats that favour a variety of species.

In 2024, ÐӰɴ«ý opened , a demonstrator in the Paris region presenting different environmental engineering structures put in place on its worksites, including ponds, hedgerows, hibernacula, conservation grazing, orchards as well as wetlands and drylands.

Measuring, understanding, taking action

Measuring, however, is not an end in itself. The challenge is to transform the data into decisions that improve the design, building process and developments able to substantially reduce the impact of projects.

That is why ÐӰɴ«ý associates these measurement tools with its technical expertise so as to design differently, develop lower carbon materials, create reuse channels, optimise resources and restore ecosystems.

It is by leveraging this expertise that ÐӰɴ«ý seeks to reduce the footprint of its own operations, as well as support its clients as they undertake their environmental transition.

Sources :