Some of London's tallest towers. Images: Wikimedia Commons

The UK government is cracking the whip on private rented buildings over 1000 square metres, confirming that from 2031, these buildings will need to reach a higher standard of energy efficiency. And the UKโ€™s Better Buildings Partnership is in full agreement.

Better Building Partnerships said on social media that this was a โ€œcritical piece of regulationโ€ that โ€œcouldnโ€™t be more welcomeโ€ and โ€œprovides much needed certainty for the marketโ€.

โ€œThrough engagement with our members, we know that MEES are already an important mechanism for driving investment in commercial buildings, and this will provide further confidence concerning the future trajectory for investors and owners.โ€

The announcement comes from the governmentโ€™s interim response to its 2019 to 2021 consultations with the industry on strengthening non-domestic MEES (minimum energy efficiency standard) in England and Wales. Buildings in this category will need to reach energy performance certificate (EPC) B, โ€œwhere cost effectiveโ€.

In the UK, EPC ratings are used to gauge the energy efficiency of a building, rated on a scale from A, most efficient, to G, least efficient. The rating generally takes into account heating systems, insulation, and windows, and it is legally required for properties being built, sold or rented.

The changes to raise MEES to EPC B for larger buildings will only take effect once the legislation passes through Parliament.

The government said it will help tenants in the largest rented buildings save energy and reduce their energy bills by ยฃ360 ($A688) million a year by 2031 and protect them from future energy shocks.

However, there are loopholes.

The government also confirmed that buildings below 1000 sq m will continue to be required to meet current minimum standards of EPC E. However, it will not move forward with its previously proposed interim EPC C milestone for 2027, saying it was โ€œgiving landlords and tenants more time to improve the efficiency of their buildings in a way that suits their buildings and lease agreementsโ€.

The government also confirmed that existing flexibility mechanisms, including the seven-year payback test and exemptions, will remain in place to ensure that โ€œonly improvements that are practical, affordable and cost-effective will be requiredโ€.

The seven-year payback test is a mechanism within MEES regulations, which states that landlords are entitled to exemptions from making energy efficiency improvements if the measure does not pay for itself through energy savings in seven years. This method isnโ€™t without criticisms.

UK energy surveyor and accreditors Elmhurst Energy said that while it was designed to protect landlords from โ€œdisproportionate costsโ€, this methodology was โ€œoverly complicated, time-consuming and unclear, especially for those with non-standard building types or limited budgetsโ€.

The government said further details on the proposal and implementation will come out with the full government response to the public consultation, which currently has no set date. It said it would introduce the legislation and updated guidance โ€œat the earliest opportunityโ€ and is โ€œworking with stakeholders to get the details rightโ€.

The BPP said: We look forward to the full response to the consultation and stand ready to support the government in getting the detail right to ensure that this ultimately delivers better, more energy efficient, buildings.โ€

Join the Conversation

1

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Is one to suppose maximum energy efficiency for ‘tall buildings’ after a 10 year (2021-2031) consultation to implementation period, is beyond attainment?

    Why settle for minimum energy efficiency with a ‘get out of jail’ card “where cost effective”?

    What of adopting effectiveness & rejecting efficiency, to maximise real endeavor?