CEnv Profile | Associate Sustainability Consultant, Ramboll UK Ltd | Tom Harley-Tuffs CEnv

What does an average day look like in your career?

No two days are the same, but there is a rhythm. I usually start by reviewing emails and recent project queries from clients. A lot of what I do is helping design teams interpret whole life carbon assessments and understand what the numbers actually mean for their building, so there is often a set of technical questions that need clear, practical answers.

I normally spend part of the morning with colleagues in the team. That might be briefing a graduate on a new project, reviewing their analysis or showing them how to approach a specific task within a life cycle assessment. Developing other people is an important part of the job, because we want sustainability thinking to become embedded in the everyday design process, not treated as a specialist bolt on.

The middle of the day is often focused work. That could be running an assessment of how different façade or structural options impact embodied carbon, or estimating what will happen to a building’s whole life impact if the client keeps existing heating systems rather than replacing them. I also carry out quality reviews of reports before they go out to clients, giving feedback and helping to strengthen the justification behind sustainability recommendations.

Later in the day I am often on the front line with project teams. That could be running a workshop with architects and engineers on how to reduce carbon and material use, or delivering a CPD session to bring everyone onto the same page before a project gets too far developed. In between, I try to make sure I go for a walk at lunchtime. Staying connected to the real world and not just the spreadsheets matters in a job that is ultimately about the physical impact of what we build.

How did you get to where you are now?

I trained and worked first as a structural engineer. Early in my career I spent a lot of time designing in timber and other biogenic materials. That was my way in to sustainability. Timber gave a route to lower carbon buildings, but it also forced you to think differently about resource use, reuse and the wider life of a structure.

I then worked in Singapore and across South East Asia, where engineering decisions are felt very directly by communities. That experience changed my perspective. You see very quickly that construction is not just technical, it is social, cultural and economic. You see the trade offs people make between safety, cost and environmental impact.

As the industry’s focus on climate accelerated, I moved into dedicated sustainability consultancy. For the last five years I have led and delivered work on life cycle assessment, circularity and whole life carbon for projects in the UK and internationally. I now lead on carbon and circularity within Ramboll’s Sustainable Solutions team. That includes both doing the work and helping other people across the business to do it well, so it becomes normal practice.

Along the way I have contributed to guidance and thought leadership in the industry. I have supported the Institution of Structural Engineers through its sustainability panel, helped shape best practice around carbon assessment and presented work on international drivers for embodied carbon reduction. All of this sits alongside project delivery. The two inform each other.

In what ways does your role consider and protect the environment?

My role is about helping clients and design teams make better informed decisions about the environmental impact of buildings. We do this by measuring and interpreting the effects that material choices and design decisions have over the full life of an asset. In practice that means assessing not just operational energy but also the embodied carbon of the structure, façade, building services and internal fit out, and increasingly the ecological impact of material sourcing.

Most projects want to do the right thing, but people need evidence to justify change. By producing whole life carbon assessments and explaining the results clearly, we make it possible for clients to choose options that use fewer raw materials, reuse more of what is already there and reduce overall impact. On some projects that might mean retaining existing services and systems rather than replacing them, if the performance can be improved through other means such as façade upgrades. On others it might mean showing that refurbishment is a viable alternative to demolition when viewed through the lens of carbon and programme risk.

A second part of the role is pushing the scope of what we measure. Carbon is essential, but it is not the whole story. On recent work in Dublin, for example, we have explored embodied ecological impact in the supply chain, working with ecologists and designers to define procurement requirements that minimise biodiversity loss. This kind of thinking is how we move from less harm towards genuinely regenerative outcomes.

How has your focus on environmental impacts changed over the course of your career?

When I started out, environmental performance tended to sit at the edge of the design conversation. The main question was usually How do we get this built within budget and programme. Carbon and resource use came later, if at all.

That has shifted, both for me and for the profession. I now see sustainability as central to what an engineer is for. Structural engineers in particular influence the biggest material and carbon decisions on a project, and we are starting to treat that responsibility with the same seriousness that we treat structural safety. That cultural change has been driven in part by the institutions, including the Institution of Structural Engineers, who have made climate and resource efficiency part of mainstream professional duty.

My own work has also widened in scope. It began with material efficiency and embodied carbon in structural frames. It has grown into whole life assessment of entire buildings, then supply chain impacts, then questions of circularity, resource use and ecological harm. I now also look at the systems around the project. Who benefits. Who is at risk. Whether the solution is not just lower impact, but fair and future proof.

In short it has moved from optimising individual components to shaping bigger decisions about what we build, how we build it and whether we should build it at all

What are the top three key knowledge areas that are crucial to your role?

1. Understanding the rules, drivers and levers
   You need to understand planning policy, client requirements, funding pressures, voluntary standards, future regulation and market expectations. These are often more powerful than pure technical arguments when you are trying to convince a client or contractor to change direction.
2. Technical credibility in construction
   You must be able to speak the language of structural engineers, services engineers, cost consultants and contractors, and understand what is actually buildable. Credibility matters. People take sustainability advice seriously when they trust that you understand their constraints.
3. Data and insight
   The work relies on handling large amounts of data from the design team and the supply chain, and turning it into something decision makers can act on. This is not just calculation. It is about clarity, benchmarking, and being honest about uncertainty. Increasingly, this also includes new digital methods such as automation and AI to scale good practice across many projects.

What part of your role do you find the most exciting?

The most exciting part is when a team is genuinely trying to do something that moves the industry forward, and I can help unlock that.

Sometimes that is a project that is aiming for very low whole life carbon and needs a robust evidence base so they can defend their decisions publicly. Sometimes it is a client who wants to set new procurement standards, for example by demanding lower ecological impact in the sourcing of major façade and structural materials. Sometimes it is about creating new internal tools and workflows that allow us to deliver good sustainability advice more quickly, more consistently and at larger scale.

There is also a real satisfaction in seeing mindset change. For example, when a contractor starts a meeting assuming that the specification is fixed and nothing can be improved, and leaves understanding that there is genuine flexibility and commercial value in getting ahead of net zero expectations. Those small shifts, repeated across dozens of projects, are how the sector actually changes.

What are your 3 top tips for those applying for CEnv?

1. Do not be put off by the process
   CEnv can sound intimidating, but it is actually a constructive process and far less painful than many other professional accreditations. It is a chance to pause and look at the work you have already done, rather than trying to reinvent yourself for the application.
2. Be honest about your direction
   Ask yourself whether becoming a Chartered Environmentalist reflects not just what you have done so far, but where you want to go. The designation is about leadership and accountability in environmental decision making. If that is the path you want to stay on, you are in the right place.
3. Use it as an opportunity for feedback
   Talk to peers, mentors and existing Chartered Environmentalists as you draft your submission. The discussion is often as valuable as the application itself. You will get perspective from experienced people who want you to succeed, and you will sharpen how you talk about your impact.

Why would you encourage others in your sector to aspire to become a CEnv?

Becoming a Chartered Environmentalist is a public statement that environmental responsibility is not an optional interest for you, it is part of your professional identity. In a sector as resource intensive and carbon intensive as the built environment, that matters.