POLICY ZERO CARBON HOMES
The Zero Carbon Hub’s adjusted slides illustrating the revised post budget definition of zero carbon homes.
www.zerocarbonhub.org
Code Level 3
25% reduction 44% reduction
Code Level 4
CO2
emissions from
regulated energy use: space and water heating fans, pumps and lighting
Code Level 5 100% reduction CO2 emissions from
unregulated energy use: cooking and appliances
Carbon
From 2006 CO2
emissions
from a home built to 2006 Building
Regulations Part L1A
From 2010 CO2
emissions
from regulated energy use to be reduced by 25%
From 2013 CO2
emissions
from regulated energy use to be reduced by 44%
From 2016 CO2
emissions
from regulated energy use to be net zero
Zero
to think they are buying a ‘zero carbon’ new home with very low or no energy bills when they are getting, in reality, a low carbon home and are, in effect, having to fund off-site renewables in their local area, which may be of no direct benefit to them. I believe the new definition of ‘zero
carbon’ could also sap the overall ambition of the industry to invest time and money in developing innovative and cost-effective solutions to make significant emissions reductions. The industry has moved ahead in leaps and bounds on the back of the zero carbon homes ambition. A lot of work has been done to trial Level 6 homes to see how they can be built well and cost effectively, so that these lessons can be taken on board for all the homes to be developed in the future. Just as it has become viable to take on the
SSE’s Greenwatt Way, a ‘true’ zero carbon home development built by Keepmoat
additional cost of delivering genuine zero carbon homes – thanks to feed-in tariffs and the Renewable Heat Incentive – most
developers will not be looking to build higher-performing homes. The high levels of innovation that have recently put Britain at the forefront of research and development in this area in Europe will diminish. In response to the moving of the goal
posts on zero carbon homes, the official line from the Hub was pragmatic and diplomatic. But the way this decision was taken without any consultation has certainly upset the apple cart, with WWF immediately resigning from the compliance task group. The whole idea of bringing the industry together to produce a recommended level of carbon compliance, and then government coming out with a different view without any consultation, was a great surprise to the Hub. The Hub must now move forward and
confirm the final piece of the ‘zero carbon’ definition as soon as possible. There will still need to be a lot of discussion around the issue of allowable solutions, even though the amount of carbon to be offset on site is considerably lower. How this approach to allowable solutions is going to be made to work in practice is something that will need a great deal of work by the Hub new task group and those across the industry represented on it. That is our task for the coming months. CIBSE provided financial support for the work of the Hub’s Carbon Compliance Task Group.
l nigel banks works for housing developer and community regeneration company Keepmoat, which is to complete the construction of its 100th Code 6 zero carbon home this summer.
www.keepmoatgreensolutions.com
40
CIBSE Journal July 2011
www.cibsejournal.com
Keepmoat
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68