Sustainable Bristol

Can Bristol Score a Green Goal?

Posted on 04 January 2011

Taiwan built the world's first solar powered football stadium in 2009. The 8,844 solar panels power the building’s 3,300 lights and two giant television screens, selling the excess 1.14 million KWh per year generated into the grid.

New Year is a time for reconciliation and thinking afresh, and one area where views in the city have got entrenched is around the new Bristol City football stadium. On one side are those who argue that the club deserves 21st-century facilities. On the other side are those who want to protect precious green belt from sprawl. But could an innovative stadium that make a positive environmental contribution provide a way forward asks Peter Madden the CEO of Forum for the Future in his New Year column for the Bristol Evening Post.

Progress on the stadium is blocked because the land in question has been designated as a village green. There is also valid opposition on wider environmental grounds. So, here is my question: if the new stadium could fulfil the major functions of a village green and be built in a way that enhances overall environmental quality, should it then be given support?

What characterises a village green? The dictionary definition says they are “used for grazing and sometimes for community events. Some may also have a pond, originally for watering stock. The green is traditionally at a central location and provides an open-air meeting place for the people of a village.”

So, what of this could a new stadium incorporate? Open green space – if not for grazing livestock, then at least for walking dogs, running and playing, or free events.

Could the stadium make a positive environmental contribution? Could it be carbon neutral, through generating its own clean energy? Could it enhance biodiversity, through areas protected for wildlife and a ‘green roof’ with plants growing on it? Could traffic problems be lessened by making tickets cheaper if people walk or use the park and ride?

There are educational possibilities, too. If it was a state-of-the-art environmental stadium, facilities could be used to engage City supporters and other Bristolians – as well as visiting fans – on green issues, further multiplying the positive impacts.

Other clubs are doing this. Ipswich Town went carbon neutral. And lowly Dartford FC built the UK’s first sustainable stadium from renewable timber with a grass roof and sunk two metres below ground level to reduce noise and light pollution.

So, why shouldn’t Bristol have the greenest major football stadium in the country, a beautiful building that shows what can be done, is useful to the local community as well as the fans, which provides the benefits of a village green and has a zero environmental footprint?

The purse-holders might worry about extra costs. Yet evidence shows that investments in energy efficiency and minimising waste have good paybacks. And long planning wrangles may prove even more costly.

Are the club up for meeting such ambitious environmental goals? If so, this might be one way forward.