Government to commit to 2016 green target
The coalition government will commit to targets to make all new homes zero carbon from 2016, the housing minister has announced.
On Thursday Grant Shapps promised the government would publish a definition of zero carbon ‘within weeks’, and said he was committed to the 2016 target.
Industry figures had expressed concern that the coalition agreement, published two weeks ago, failed to mention zero carbon targets set by the previous government.
Speaking at the launch of Grand Designs presenter Kevin McCloud’s eco-housing development in Swindon, Mr Shapps said: ‘When we were in opposition I said that I endorsed the concept of building all new homes to a zero carbon standard and that remains my position.
‘I know how important it is to industry to have a clear definition as soon as possible – so that house builders can buy land with confidence and start to design the homes of the future, and so that the supply chain can gear up production of the technologies that will be needed.’
Paul King, chief executive of the UK Green Building Council, said: ‘The coalition government’s confirmation that from 2016 all new homes will be zero carbon is timely and right.
‘Over the last three years, this target has galvanised the construction sector and led to an unprecedented amount of innovation.’
Mr Shapps also told Inside Housing that he anticipated most existing homes would only cost £1,500 to retrofit and that the £6,500 offered by the government would cover all but the most difficult to treat properties. Industry figures estimate that it will cost at least £6,500 to cut 30 per cent from a property’s emissions.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (5)
Rick Campbell | 01/06/2010 11:00 am
So, in 6 years or so we're expected to be zero carbon. That is not going to be easy and may well force prices skywards and potentially put the purchase of a property out of the reach of many folk.
This, if my logic is anywhere near correct, will be a bit of a problem for us all - as some bright spark will no doubt point out. In Macclesfield, our landlord is presently building Level 4 housing which requires a 44% improvement in respect of 'greenness'. It is going to be very difficult to reach zero carbon as the definition stands presently.
It may well be that government(s) may have to underpin their desire for 'greenness' with a subsidy based on results or potential results.
Of course, in the private sector, they can always reduce the size of rooms to save costs - down from shoeboxes to matchboxes?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 01/06/2010 12:30 pm
Well developers have known about the zero carbon target for years now and yet the majority are still building at code level 0. We all know that developers are after 1 thing and that is profit, not quality or sustainable or units that we will be proud of in 100 years but Profit. They have been lobbying hard to try and get this zero carbon target removed and hopefully now the penny will drop that they have to change their ways! I am happy that the coalition has not yielded this to the private developers. Although I think the devil will be in the detail of the definition so watch this space!
it isn't rocket science and doesn't take much to build to code level 4 as i am doing regularly now and the jump to code six shouldn't be a problem over time as we have six years to find the technolgies, methodologies etc and reduce the costs.
The developers will as always argue about costs increasing astronomically but it can be done in an affordable manner. The developers just want to increase profits any which way they can. and before anybody asks I have worked for a contractor and for an RSL and produced zero carbon homes so it can be done.
More govt money? no chance they already want more for less money, just look at the current consultation on design standards by the HCA!
On top of all of this zero carbon is just good practice that is also good for tenants, the environment and will sustain our current lifestyles without drowning children in the third world!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dave Hollins | 01/06/2010 1:37 pm
By 2016 at the current rate they will be producing zero homes so zero carbon follows on naturally.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
| 02/06/2010 0:33 am
Quite. It all goes to show what utter hogwash all these anthropogenic global warming derived initiatives are. All new homes to be "zero carbon" by 2016. And we'll tell you in a few weeks just what "zero carbon" means. As if they haven't had enough time to invent a definition yet. Why not just concentrate on building spacious properties to at least Parker Morris standards, made of decent materials that won't fall apart in 20 years time and that people actually want to live in? Everyone in London wants to live in a Victorian street property which is why they are so much more expensive than modern rubbish. In urban areas why not build decent Victorian style terrace housing with high ceilings that people demonstrably want to live in. Address so-called "sustainability" issues with population control and limiting family sizes. Best thing for the planet is less people. Not thousands more matchbox sized flats, "zero carbon" or no...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12/12/2011 10:24 pm
you lost all credibility with your comment,, ''address so-called ''sustainability'' issues with population control and limiting family sizes. Best thing for the planet is less people'' ....wow ... thats ignorant
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment