As some of you may know from my previous postings, one of my responsibilities in Government is the Building Regulations. So far, so dull, right? On the face of it, you might be forgiven for thinking so, but the building regulations offer a number of key tools and levers to tackle the carbon emissions produced from our buildings. Yesterday, I announced a Government Consultation on the latest proposals for upgrading the building regulations, and they contain a number of key proposals to significantly improve the sustainability of our built environment.
The upgrading of the building regulations happens once every three years. I signed off the most recent upgrade in October 2010, which required a 25% increase in energy efficiency standards for new build homes. We’re now consulting on the changes for the next upgrade, most of which are due to come into force in 2013.
So what are the key things you need to know? Well, it’s the last stop before Zero Carbon Homes become mandatory. For new buildings, the Government has committed to introduce zero carbon standards from 2016 in new homes and 2019 for new non-domestic buildings. The consultation proposes to tighten the carbon dioxide targets for new buildings and introduces a specific energy efficiency target for new homes. The preferred standards proposed by the consultation for new homes could be met with improvements to the building fabric (walls and windows etc), whilst more ambitious standards for non-domestic buildings are likely to require renewable energy generation technologies, like solar panels, integrated into the building itself.
Compliance is an issue I’ve raised before and keep coming back to. In my Conference Speech in October, I quoted a recent study by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, showing that not even an exemplar Zero Carbon Development in York was performing as it should, with the homes losing 54% more heat than designed to. The report concluded that many processes and cultures within the industry and supply chain needed to change if Zero Carbon Homes was to become more than just an empty slogan. I’m keen that doesn’t happen, so we are looking at how we might be able to regulate to increase the use of a new quality assurance standard, and I’m challenging different parts of the supply chain (home builders, product manufacturers etc) to come together to develop such a standard in readiness for 2013.
And there are also moves to cut carbon in existing homes and boost the Green Deal. We’re doing this through the introduction of “consequential improvements”, something Labour “bottled out” of introducing twice. Where homeowners or businesses are carrying out works to their building (an extension, a loft conversion or replacement windows) they would be asked to undertake additional work to improve the energy efficiency of the building at the same time. They will only be obliged to do so if they are eligible for the Green Deal, to ensure that they are not forced to bear the upfront cost, which would be paid for by the savings in their energy bills. This regulatory nudge, coming into force in October 2012, will help boost demand for the Green Deal, whilst also cutting carbon emissions and delivering cheaper energy bills for households.
There are a number of other important measures in there, including some key safety measures on structural design and radon protection. The total package of changes is positive not just for the green agenda, but also for businesses and delivering growth, providing a regulatory benefit of£63.1m.
The Consultation will run until April 27th. If we are to ensure that the Government delivers on its promise to be the greenest government ever, then I hope Liberal Democrats across the country will respond to the consultation positively, and ensure we can move further down the path to Zero Carbon Homes.
Andrew Stunell is the Liberal Democrat Communities Minister and MP for Hazel Grove
* Andrew Stunell is the Liberal Democrat MP for Hazel Grove, was a member of the all-party parliamentary inquiry into electoral conduct and is a former communities minister.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Thought for the Day: "We know that at night-time someone goes by amongst the trees, but we never speak of it"
Order of Service
Neil Alexander selected for Inverness and Nairn
Welcome immigrants (2)
Mark Valladares
David Evans
Luke Magalhaes
Zachary Adam Barker
Thelma Davies
6 Comments
I think the steps taken on building standards are laudable but the “consequential improvements” measure is likely to have a much more significant impact in cutting carbon emissions. That is because existing homes often have huge scope for additional energy saving measures achieving reductions at a lower cost than trying to squeeze down the last part from 20% to zero. On the basis of my local area, extensions and loft conversions must be keeping the economy afloat because people are very wary about moving so it should have a huge impact.
One thing I’d like to see finally get addressed is the size of the new build homes that get constructed in the UK. Most of our European neighbours have sensible regulations that specify minimum room sizes to ensure that there is a practical amount of space in each room. Meanwhile we are building the smallest homes in Europe, with ‘double bedrooms’ that barely leave any walking space once furnished with a double bed, ‘single bedrooms’ (which will commonly be used as a child’s bedroom) with no room for a desk for doing homework, etc.
RIBA has done some excellent work in this area and I urge you to give their submissions serious consideration.
i totally agree with Duncan. The Mayor of London has set the pace on this, with minimum size regulations in the latest London Plan. Would you commit to the same, Andrew?
I also agree with Duncan and LL. We should be providing decent housing and not alllowing developers to get away with rabbit hutches just because they can squeeze more units onto a plot and so increase their profit.
Generally beuiding regs are necessary to maintain standards but sometimes they get to be very jobsworth or simply innapropriate in a particular situation. Perhaps it would be possible to have a system whereby the planning system could grant an excemption – but only for good cause – to a particular regulation. This might apply for example if a building is shaded by protected trees or nearby buildings in which case consequential improvements requiring solar panels would be a total waste of money, green deal or not.
Also, please can yo do something – as in ABOLISH – the dreadful CDM regulations which add bureaucracy and cost but no benefit to building projects. Last I heard (admittedly about 5 years after their introduction) they had not demonstably prevented any accidents (their raison d’etre) but cost a bundle.
I think this is the correct URL for the consultation: http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/buildingregulations/buildingregulationschanges/
The consultation ends on 27 April 2012.
I agree with Duncan over specifying minimum room sizes – it isn’t difficult as the data is already available (and used) for council housing.
A further aspect that isn’t considered to any real extent in the current building regulations is maintenance. A building will require significant maintenance over it’s 60+ year design life, good construction can facilitate or hinder this. For example the typical loft conversion in a modern house with a ‘standard’ trussed roof will totally negate any materials and carbon saving the original builder made by using the cheap ‘standard’ frames instead of slightly more expensive frames that would of permitted a loft conversion without modification.
Finally, in addition to improving the energy efficiency of new build, I would like to see a strengthening of the NHBC scheme, so that the “10 year guarantee” actually means 10 years and is actually a guarantee (as per car warranties and white goods guarantees) and not as at present where it only covers “structural defects that HAVE caused major structural damage” after the builders 1 year guarantee. As many of the features that make a zero carbon home are not structural but if they fail or are incorrectly installed (as observed by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation) have a significant impact on the property, that is often both expensive and disruptive to rectify.
Andrew, the issue of compliance in low carbon homes is indeed a crucial one. A big issue is that building control inspectors often do not have the ability nor skills to judge compliance for novel technologies or construction methods. Even in older low-carbon technologies, like cavity wall insulation, it’s hard to tell whether the job has been done properly without employing expensive equipment, like thermal imagery.
A company I’ve come across has developed a new PassivHaus construction method specifically designed to be easy to inspect compliance with. The inspectors can literally check all they need to visually, at any time until the very final stages of construction.
The company is http://www.beattiepassive.com and I know them from when they received support from Carbon Trust (I used to run this Carbon Trust service).
Beattie Passive are currently building some Passiv Houses in Fife, but they also have a demonstration house (half-built, so you can see how building control would be able to inspect it) in Oxfordshire.
Would you, or one of your team, like to see it for yourself? I am happy to make the introduction.