We’ve all seen the private development sector hit the skids over the past nine months. At the moment, the only residential projects that seem to be going ahead are those with a large RSL component (and so grant-funded by the HCA). This has a serious implication from a regs point of view because from spring 2011 all publicly funded housing will have to meet Code 4 (pdf). That effectively means that the residential development sector, such as it is, has to meet its regulatory targets two years early.
Here’s a map (ok, I know Code 6 won’t look quite like that once the consultation finished, but it will still be a hell of a drop):
Bob Cervi, the editor at the CIBSE Journal, writes this month that on the road to zero carbon “it’s going to be a quick six years.”
It’s going to be an even quicker 5.
carbon limited 
Hi Casey,
Good looking graph.
I am not sure that the 2016 timeline for private and RSLs is going to go ahead. DCLG seem to be dragging their feet and it is unlikely to become mandatory.
Also, the Building Regs update means that the percentage improvements that are 44% are effectively doing a 58% improvement over today’s regs. Likewise 25% is a 43% improvement.
JP
Thanks for the comment, JP.
I take your point, but I think it’s going to be very hard for the CLG to step away from the 2016 timeline. I suspect we’ll see a watering down of the zero carbon definition but the 2016 milepost won’t get moved.
You say
Can you expand on this?
Sure, SAP 2010 will be 25% more onerous than 2005. The Code for sustainable homes works on a percentage improvement over Building Regulations.
Once SAP 2010 is in place, to meet a Level 3 there is effectively a double requirement. You will need need to do a 25% improvement for a level 3 and a 25% improvement compared to SAP 2005.
This shifting of the baseline results in a building built under SAP 2010 meeting a Code LEvel 3 will have less carbon emissions that one pre sap 2010 meeting level 3.
This is all to do with the relative improvments as opposed to aboslute carbon emissions figures.
Hope this is clear!
My understanding is different. In the Code guidance it says:
In line with this, the 25% and 44% drops are always relative to 2006.
I agree, Code carbon requirements are set against current SAP. The graph / timeline still holds.
So I guess that the SAP assessor would issue two sets of calculations, one on the old 2005 model and the other on the 2010 new model. Thats a lot of calculation sheets on top of the Standard Case SAP required for renewables!
Thanks for clarification,
JP