The EU's recast EPBD is “internationally regarded as the leading regulatory framework to improve energy efficiency in buildings.”147 It demonstrates the EU’s ambitious efforts to address the interrelated and connected challenges of climate change and energy emanating from the EU’s building stocks by making new and existing buildings more efficient. The 2010 recast is considered the EU's “main legislation covering the reduction of energy consumption”148 in buildings and providing “a crucial leverage point both for reducing power plants emissions and for avoiding new power plant construction.”149 The directive promotes the reduction of energy requirements through the development of new building designs that reduces energy consumption and ultimately reduce CO₂ emissions and afterwards, promote energy production from renewable resources.150 The primary focus of the EPBD is therefore to reduce energy usage demand and CO₂ emissions from the building stocks with the central objective of promoting “cost-effective improvement of the overall energy performance of buildings, while taking into account climatic and local conditions as well as indoor climate environment” (EPBD Recital 8).151 In 2014 it accounted for 48.9Mtoe
145 COM (2016)761. p.2.
146 Rosenow 26 Energy Research & Social Science 2017. p.74.
147 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p. 266-281.
148 ec.europa.eu/energy/en Section Buildings.
149 Sachs Vanderbilt Law Review 2012, p.1640.
150 Paleari The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, p.1670.
151 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.260.
26
final energy savings based on the 2007 baseline.152 The directive is supplemented by the Delegated Regulation (EU) NO 244/2012 also discussed below.
The EU had to tighten Directive 2002/91/EC153 on the energy performance of buildings to realize the emission reduction potential for the building sector and to maximize its impact since it underperformed.154 Directive 2002/91/EC’s real potential in terms of energy reduction in the building sector and mitigating climate change155was untapped156 due to a number of flaws and shortages such as, market failures and inefficiencies in the building sector, the lack of convergence, synergies and coordination between Directives 2002/91, 2001/77 and 2006/32.157 There was also low level of ambition and political will from Member States 158 and as such, the recast Directive was strengthened to include “more ambitious and in some extent more binding measures” for Member States.159 The recast EPBD therefore focuses on enhanced quality assurance improvements to ensure the reliability and robustness of energy efficiency that lacked in the 2002 EPBD.160 A recast EPBD retained most of the framework of Directive 2002/91/EC and introduced a number of new requirements that will be discussed in this thesis.
The recast EPBD is a framework made up of two key regulatory tools which have an important interrelationship of promoting building standards and enhancing energy performance of existing and new building stocks. The two key regulatory tools of the EPBD are Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) and Building Standards which will be discussed below.
152COM/2016/0765 final, p.5.
153 Directive 2002/91/EC.
154 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.261.
155 Mlecnik Energy Policy 2010, p. 4592.
156 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.261.
157 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.261.
158 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.261.
159 Maxoulis Advances in Building Energy Research 2012, p.261.
160 Burman Energy 2014, p.154.
27
3.3.1 Nearly zero-energy buildings
The Directive introduced the ‘nearly zero-energy buildings’ (NZEB) requirement. The EU ensures that new buildings are NZEB by 31 December 2020 while new buildings occupied and owned by public authorities have a stipulated deadline for 31 December 2018 (Article 9.1(b).161 The transition to NZEB is meant for Member States to realize the potential for energy savings in their building stocks.162 The EPBD defines the concept of NZEB as a “building that has very high energy performance”, and that “the nearly zero or very low amount of energy required should be covered to a very significant extent by energy from renewable sources produced on-site or nearby”.163 Energy demands should be reduced as far as possible before the remaining energy needs are supplied by renewables.164 NZEB “combines high efficiency technologies with renewable” energy production and represents a new holistic approach to energy efficiency in EU building stocks.165 The energy performance of a building is the energy demand associated with the
“typical use of the building, which includes energy used for heating, cooling, hot-water”
production, mechanical ventilation and lighting.166 The EPBD does not give a numerical definition of nearly zero-energy building or desirable levels of energy consumption. It rather focuses the attention from minimizing the energy needs of buildings to harnessing renewable energy sources as a way of reducing GHG emissions. This creates a conflict between reducing energy needs and upscale renewable energy usage. A critical study by Paleari shows that the EU regulations do not give specifications on energy balance calculation and as a consequence, “many designers take care to install a large number of devices for energy production and for consumption control, rather than to reduce the energy requirements.”167 In this regard the net zero balance of the buildings is promoted by installing more renewable energy sources rather than promoting the efficiency of buildings. In this case, “the balance between the two actions is closely dependent on the economic
161 Directive 2010/31/EU, Article 9.1 (a)
162 Annunziata et al.. Energy 2013, p.126.
163 Directive 2010/31/EU, Article 2.2.
164eceee.org Section EPBD must focus on reducing energy needs and avoid double counting of renewables.
165 D’Agostino Energies 2017, p.120.
166 Paleari The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, p.1670.
167 Paleari The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, p.1670
28
issue, sometimes considered in a life cycle perspective, rather than on the environmental matter.”168
3.3.2 Energy Performance Certificates
Energy Performance Certificates169 (EPCs) are regarded as the cornerstone of the effort to reach the EU’s emissions reduction target of the building sector.170In comparison to “building standards, EPCs are of broader reach”, applied to businesses, governments and individuals.171 EPCs provide useful information to the public which is essential in promoting energy efficiency. The recommendation reports provide useful details of current and potential to “lower energy bills, the costs and paybacks of energy efficiency improvements, and common practices to lowering energy consumption.”172 Most significantly they “provide enhanced information to a broader network of building owners and occupiers about how to reduce emissions through energy efficiency.”173
Evidence from the UK174 indicates that the results of actual energy performance have been significantly higher than the standardized and theoretical performance determined under Article 3 since “actual operating conditions often differ from standardized conditions.”175 There is always an energy efficiency or performance gap due to the discrepancy of the “actual energy performance of a building with its theoretical performance.”176 In some Member States the discrepancy derived from using the EPBD compliant software is up to 30%.177 The “lack of a requirement to verify energy performance in-use” is an EPBD structural barrier that affects the practical achievements
168 Paleari The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, p.1669.
169ec.europa.eu/energy/en Section Certificates and Inspections.
170 Ries Rand Corporation 2009, p.22.
171 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.276.
172 James Landlord & Tenant Review 2008, p.1.
173 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.280.
174 Burman Energy 2014, p.155.
175 Burman Energy 2014, p.153.
176 Burman Energy 2014, p.153.
177 Burman Energy 2014, p.153.
29
of the Member States’ energy targets.178 Bridging the gap between predicted and measured performance is crucial for building NZEB and climate change mitigation.179 The “current energy assessment framework prescribed by the EPBD is overwhelmingly based on theoretical performance”180 and its criticized for not accelerating energy savings in buildings.181
3.3.3 Technical building systems and renovations
Among major requirements of the directive, the Member States are obliged to promote the implementation of intelligent energy consumption metering systems in new buildings or existing renovated building stocks (Article 8.2). This requirement ensures that building stocks achieve the set cost-optimal levels. The directive ensures that the energy performance of new or existing buildings is calculated.
The EPBD shows the EU’s increased attention on buildings renovation quality, rate and efficiency.
The “existing EU building stock is old and inefficient” and renovation is done at a slow pace.182 Member States are encouraged to adopt actions and measures to harness energy savings opportunities in the building sector through deep,183 major184 and NZEB renovations.185 Most of the EU building stocks averages 55 years186 with about 35 % over 50 years old.187 The Union has demonstrated high ambition to tackling the high energy consumption of these old existing buildings as outlined in Article 5 and 7. The rate of renovations has been low ranging from 0.5%
178 Burman Energy 2014, p.153.
179 De Wilde Automation in Construction 2014, p.40.
180 Burman Energy 2014, p.155.
181Lechtenböhmer Energy Efficiency 2011, p.257.
182 D’Agostino Energies 2017, p.13.
183 Directive 2012/27/EU, Recital 16
184 Directive 2010/31/EU Article 2 (10)
185 This renovation focuses on combining high efficiency technologies with renewable production, See, Zacà et al.
Energy Build. 2015, p.250.
186 D’Agostino Energies 2017, p.13.
187europarl.europa.eu/legislative Section Energy Performance of Buildings Directive review.
30
to 2.5 % per year across Member States.188 The Fraunhofer Institute research conducted on behalf of the European Commission indicated variations across EU regions, with “rates of 1.2%, 0.9%
and 0.5% per year were found for North-Western Europe, Southern Europe and new Member States respectively.”189
3.3.4 EPBD challenges and opportunities
Dawes is of the view that, “there is a risk that building standards and EPCs will be insufficient to adequately curb energy consumption levels.”190 This argument is based on the premise that “a building that incorporates greater energy efficiency and certification to this effect does not automatically reduce emissions of CO₂.”191 Dawes argues that an “EPC rating may create a ‘false impression’ to the recipient that they are contributing to reducing emissions.”192 New and renovated buildings mostly have good EPC rating, and this does not necessarily mean that the building generates low emissions. The most significant argument is that “EPCs asset ratings are based on assumptions about standardized usage of a building,” this is a major challenge to energy efficiency considering that “studies have found actual energy consumption variations even in homogenous buildings.”193
Energy efficiency standards are criticized for imposing “unwarranted technical constraints on product design, performance, or function and force firms to divert research and development resources into regulatory compliance, a diversion that carries significant opportunity costs” for industries.194 It is difficult to assess whether product efficiency standards associated with energy efficiency of buildings promote or hinder innovation. This however can be further examined in a
188BPIE Europe’s Buildings under the Microscope A Country by Country Review of the EPBD 2011.
189Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.267.
190 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.267.
191 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.267.
192 Ries Rand Corporation 2009, p.22.
193 Dawes Environmental Law Review 2010, p.267.
194Stewart, R. B. (1981). Regulation, innovation, and administrative law: A conceptual framework. California Law Review, 69(5), 1256-1377. p.1280.
31
broader debate over “whether environmental regulation can promote technological innovation or whether it inevitably hinders it.”195 However, the efficiency standards promoted by the EU has a positive impact on the building sector although there are barriers to be overcome. One barrier identified by Sachs affecting the “clear cause-and-effect relationships is that ‘innovation’ is notoriously difficult to quantify.”196
The EPBD does not take into account energy inefficiency or “any verification about the environmental impacts generated by building construction, maintenance and disposal.”197 This has resulted in considerable energy efficiency during the buildings’ operational phase while undermining the environmental impacts and energy inefficiencies of buildings that result from the buildings construction, maintenance and disposal.
The directive faces enforcement and infringement challenges. In 2010, eight infringement proceedings for EPCs, boiler and air-conditioning system inspections were opened.198 Enforcement is systematic in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands, but considered a failure in Spain as discussed above (3.2.3).199 Burman et al. are of the view that “there are shortcomings in complying with the EPBD requirements, enforcement of the regulations, and the existing quality controls schemes in all EU Member States.”200 This is further substantiated in the following section that discusses the EPBD proposed future update. Furthermore, these shortcomings however, indicate that “there is a scope for simplifying and streamlining outdated requirements”201 and for “enhancing compliance through fine tuning of existing provisions and better linking them with proposed financial support.”202
195 Sachs Vanderbilt Law Review 2012, p.1663.
196 Sachs Vanderbilt Law Review 2012, p.1663.
197 Paleari The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, p.1669.
198 Levine, M. (2014). Building Energy-Efficiency Best Practice Policies and Policy Packages.p.57
199 Levine, M. (2014). Building Energy-Efficiency Best Practice Policies and Policy Packages.p.58.
200 Burman Energy 2014, p.153.
201 Examples include the proposed deleting of Article 6 (1) which is necessitated by the obligation for all new buildings to be NZEB and the deleting of alternative measures and streamlining of Article 14 and 15 since they have proven not to be effective. See, COM (2016)765. p .6.
202 COM/2016/0765 final, p.6.
32