Tag Archives: builders

Industry welcomes long-awaited government plans on Allowable Solutions for zero carbon homes By Jessica Shankleman 07 Aug 2013 Builders could be allowed to buy carbon offsets from third parties to help meet a government target for all homes to be “zero carbon” by 2016. The Department for Communities and Local Government yesterday unveiled a consultation on so called “allowable solutions” – the offsite measures house builders can use to curb the emissions from new housing stock in England. Under the government’s Zero Carbon Homes plan, house builders will be required to meet strict standards on energy efficiency by 2016 that could also include the use of renewable energy. However, the government has said it will no longer require house builders to meet the entire target “onsite” through the installation of energy efficiency or generation measures, instead allowing them to deliver some of the required emission reductions through offsite renewable energy or carbon offsetting measures. The new consultation provides further details on these proposed “allowable solutions, arguing that the government should set a national plan to determine how carbon emissions can be offset by builders, rather than allowing local authorities to each set their own frameworks. It suggests four offsetting measures that could be used by a developer once they have calculated the level of emissions that will need to be cut. They include carrying out the carbon abatement work locally, such as connecting the property to a heat network; or the “do-it-yourself” option, which could see a builder improving other existing buildings, or building homes to exceed the current energy efficiency standards . The government would also allow builders to contract out carbon abatement measures to a third party, including local councils, or pay into a nationally managed scheme, based on the Green Investment Bank model, which would then invest in carbon abatement measures. The launch of the 10-week consultation has been eagerly anticipated by the industry, after the government launched the initial call for evidence in early 2011. Allowable Solutions will work alongside the Part L building code to help to deliver the zero carbon homes standard from 2016. Last week, the government confirmed it would tighten energy efficiency standards in Part L from 2014 , confirming a six per cent carbon reduction target for new build homes and a nine per cent cut for non-domestic buildings, compared to 2010 levels. A spokesman for DCLG told BusinessGreen the full regultions and impact assessment for changes to Part L are due to be annouced later this week. Yesterday’s consultation was welcomed by the UK Green Building Council, which believes the resulting decisions will be crucial in defining the government’s zero carbon homes ambition. “The proposals for how builders can meet the zero carbon 2016 target seem sensible, and build on the recommendations made by a UK-GBC Task Group back in 2008, and extensive work since carried out by the industry through the Zero Carbon Hub,” said Paul King, chief executive of the UK GBC. “As our report said in 2008, we believe the price of Allowable Solutions should be set to encourage community level solutions first. We also welcome the proposal that Allowable Solutions should also be available for non-domestic buildings – something we’ve consistently called for. “We look forward to considering the proposals in more detail and working with members to formally respond.” David Bownass, sustainability director for consultancy WSP, said the cost per tonne of carbon for allowable solutions would be critical to which option developers choose to implement. “If the cost is set at the PV equivalent level £90 per tonne then the House Builder DIY route will be widely used as this will be significantly cheaper than any of the other routes,” he said. “However, assuming there is agreement that allowable solutions is the right way forward, the question we should be asking is which of the proposed routes to implementation is the optimum method for reducing carbon emissions in the built environment? The decision on cost should then be made accordingly to promote this option.” Continue reading →