A waste of energy

Our energy use in the construction and running of buildings is one of the major sources for carbon emissions: clearly the time has come for us to actually do something about it.

The government’s answer to the problem comes in the form of the European Union’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, which must be enshrined in UK legislation by January 2006. On the face of it, the proposed provision of energy certificates for buildings – which would provide them with an energy efficiency rating between grades A and G – is a good idea and entirely plausible. But it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the government will be able to successfully introduce them by the beginning of 2006 without some significant reconsideration.

The update of Part L of the Building Regulations means that the new Part L will be written to ensure compliance with the directive. However, this is likely to further complicate this already difficult to understand, largely ignored area of the regulations.

In fact, there is a very real possibility that the property owning world will not take any notice of this directive at all as it offers neither carrots nor sticks. There are no financial advantages to having a more energy efficient building and no punishment if the directive is completely ignored.

The papers in circulation talk of the “energy profession” and this is where another of the problems lies: there is none as far as I am aware, or certainly not one large enough to cope with the possible implications of the EPBD. If a certificate is required for every building to be sold or let, then the RICS conservatively estimates that there would need to be at least 500,000 certificates produced in the first year. Assuming that a surveyor working full time could produce, say, 200 certificates in a year, this requires 2500 fully trained and qualified surveyors to be available by January 2006. And here’s another scenario: if all those interested spent a quarter of their time on energy certification, we would need 10,000 trained surveyors by 2006.

On top of this, for a surveyor to assess a building in the manner required by the directive, they will need a knowledge not only of the building structure and fabric but also of its M&E systems. I believe that in complex structures it will be very rare to find someone with enough knowledge in each area. In these circumstances, production of a certificate will require a trained engineer and surveyor working hand in hand. As the directive is to be implemented by January 2006, comprehensive training packages would have needed to be available by, say, March this year to get all these surveyors and engineers up to speed.

There is a very real possibility that the property owning world will not take any notice of this directive at all

At this stage – with the deadline for the implementation of the directive less than a year away – there is no legislation, no idea of what is required in a certificate, no trainers, no training courses and no trainees. Little thought has been given to how property is owned, managed and traded, or the fact that most owners have no concept of energy performance. And what about the fact that, in many cases, it will not be possible to introduce improvements to buildings because of existing lease structures? Or the fact that Part L is not yet agreed?

There are a couple of solutions to these problems. First, instead of trying to cover all property immediately, implementation of the directive should be staged. Second, the government must make provision for adequate training schemes – and this also means encouraging training at university level to ensure that there is a “hearts and minds” shift in attitude.

I have to say, however, that despite the best efforts of many, we might just as well throw in the towel now. If this legislation was about fridges, I would be predicting another mountain.

Roger Watts is a spokesman for the RICS’ building surveying faculty