This Government remains committed to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 80% by 2050 compared with a 1990 baseline, but perhaps not on its watch. The 2008 Climate Change Act made this a legal requirement of course, as well as an interim target of a 26% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020. More recently the Government’s 2050 Pathway Analysis has identified the need for massive investment in a combination of demand reduction and decarbonisation of the grid in order to meet carbon targets. The way forward for the construction sector has been eloquently signposted by the Low Carbon Construction Innovation and Growth Team (IGT) report, summarised in a previous posting.
New Homes
Recent policy developments from the Coalition have seriously undermined the likelihood of the 2050 carbon targets being met. Although there may be some good things in the 2011 Budget, it's not so good on the sustainable development front. Despite commitments in the recently published Carbon Plan and recommendations in the final report from the Zero Carbon Hub the Budget has removed the commitment to zero carbon homes being a requirement of Building Regulations from 2016. The requirement has been watered down to cover only those parts of the energy demand that depend on the design of the dwelling, and exclude the so-called 'unregulated emissions', such as white goods, TVs etc, which make up some 33% of carbon emissions. Combined with the recent row-back on the feed in tariff this is disastrous for an industry that has been gearing up for zero carbon for the last 4 years or so! Needless to say this will also impact on the proposals for zero carbon non-residential buildings, scheduled for 2019.
The reasons for this dramatic reversal in policy are clear. The Government is worried that the cost of achieving zero carbon will make homes unaffordable and hence inhibit growth. Unfortunately this results in a vicious circle since the demand for the materials and products required for zero carbon homes will be insufficient to bring the costs down to affordable levels. It also means that many of the manufacturers who have been gearing up for zero carbon will be left high and dry.
One side effect of the redefinition of zero carbon is that developers are less likely to be required to contribute to off-site community energy schemes, unless these are leveraged by Local Authorities through the Community Infrastructure Levy.
Only a few days before the Budget DECC came up with its unscheduled revisions to the feed in tariff (FIT). This dramatically reduces the FIT for PV installations of between 50 and 150 kW to 19p, between 150 and 250 kW to 15p and between 250 kW and 5 MW to 8.5p/kWh. These have been reduced from 32.9p for 10 to 100 kW installations and 30.7p for 100 kW to 5MW. The lowest rate also applies to any stand-alone installations, such as solar power stations. Ostensibly the reason for this is because there has been an excessive demand for FIT for large installations, although it could be argued that this is exactly what should be encouraged (see Germany), and the problem is one of under-funding. It will be interesting to see whether the Renewable Heat Incentive and the Green Deal suffer from the same under-funding problems. This seems highly likely for the latter since it will receive no funding from the Green Investment Bank and will rely instead on an extension of the existing Energy Company Obligation.
Last month the Zero Carbon Hub delivered its latest and final report on the path to zero carbon, which, in summary, recommends Carbon Compliance limits for built performance of various dwelling types. For example the maximum annual CO2 emissions, confirmed once constructed, were recommended to be 14 kg per square metre for a low rise apartment and 10 kg for a detached house. To get down to zero carbon an ‘Allowable Solution’ would have been required to offset the remaining carbon emissions. The aim was for Carbon Compliance to be achieved through some combination of building energy efficiency and on-site low or zero carbon energy generation. Allowable solutions include on-site energy and/or connection to zero carbon community energy. It seems likely that the Zero Carbon Hub will now have to revisit their recommendations since the requirement for 2016 will be, in simple terms, based on offsetting heat loss, hot water and lighting energy with zero carbon technologies.
Refurbishment/retrofit
It is clear from the IGT final report that the existing building stock represents the biggest challenge for the construction, property management and infrastructure sectors in meeting the 2050 carbon target. The majority of the 26 million existing homes and 2 million other buildings that need enhancing between now and 2050 will depend on a combination of a Green Deal type pay as you save arrangement to improve insulation and FIT/Renewable Heat Incentives or their successors to reduce connected demand. If these are not properly funded or the take-up is not adequate then they will remain ineffective.
Energy Infrastructure
Nobody can plan for the long term without an understanding of how the electricity supply is to be decarbonised over the next 40 years. The Government has recently responded to the evidence provided for its 2050 Pathway Analysis. The original report postulated a number of alternative pathways for achieving the 80% carbon reduction, including decarbonisation strategies based on some combination of renewable, nuclear power and fossil fuel with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Post-Japan it is interesting to examine the scenario in which no new nuclear plant is built. By 2050 all existing plants would be decommissioned and it is predicted that in excess of 500 TWh/year of electricity would be required from renewable sources and 220 from fossil fuels with CCS. The funding for this will be hundreds of billions of pounds, and presumably mostly have to be leveraged from the activities of the Green Investment Bank.
However if we are successful in decarbonising the grid there will be a corresponding drop in the carbon emissions associated with buildings, with a greater reduction in those buildings that rely primarily on electricity to meet their energy demands. This is the opposite of the current situation, which is why it is vital for those planning construction projects to be able to predict the carbon intensity of the electricity supply during the lifetime of their proposed buildings.
Planning
Continuing its measures to kick start the construction sector “(Government will make) radical changes to the planning system to support job creation by introducing a powerful presumption in favour of sustainable development; opening up more land for development, while retaining existing controls on greenbelt land; introducing new land auctions starting with public sector land; consulting on the liberalisation of use classes; and ensuring all planning applications and appeals will be processed in 12 months and major infrastructure projects will be fast-tracked.” (See page 24 of supplementary document: Plan for Growth, BIS).
There appears to be no mention of the recommendations from the IGT that Environmental Impact Assessments should include carbon targets and that all large projects should be scrutinised by a Major Projects Review Group.
