Energy Efficiency and residential building - How changes to regulation will impact on certifying authorities and the ethics of assessment.

State and Federal Government is committed to a course of increasing the energy efficiency of residential dwellings in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimise energy use in the home.

This policy is part of Government programs and plans that require the thermal performance of new dwellings and renovations to be assessed, and is part of the documentation required by a certifying authority for building rules consent. The Building Code of Australia outlines measures in Vol 2, Section 2.6 which are implemented in various ways by different State planning and building regulation bodies.

The change in the ‘star rating’ required for new dwellings (from 5 to 6 stars), already implemented in South Australia and Queensland in 2010, and fast approaching for Victoria in May 2011, is an example of this.

For the builder or developer, implementing energy efficiency measures early in the design and development of a project life-cycle can be extremely cost effective, providing homeowners with dwellings that are more comfortable and thermally efficient, dwellings that maintain a more stable temperature range without the need for supplementary heating and cooling. However, leaving energy efficiency till late in a project (or as an after-thought) or viewing it as another regulatory hurdle placed in the way of builder profits, is fraught with danger. This approach often introduces nasty surprises for the homeowner, with ‘improvements’ usually to insulation and glazing required to meet the regulations. Sometimes these improvements can be in the order of thousands of dollars, and for the first home buyer on a budget, this could mean the difference between owning a home or not. Often an energy assessor will be the bearer of bad news, requiring modification to the building design or fixtures, usually once final decisions have been made and emotional attachment formed by the client.

For a highly competitive building industry, engaging with energy efficiency regulation and compliance on these terms can be a problematic issue. Measures become cast as ones that effect profit and ‘housing affordability’, and become measures to be lobbied against (as some of the big players in the housing industry have done). While the implementation of policy is sometimes far from perfect, the knowledge required to meet, understand and work with energy efficiency regulations is easily accessible and straight-forward. What will be required for some builders, is a greater emphasis on the design and development phase of a project, and especially understanding what housing types are appropriate for certain lot configurations, orientations and climate zones.

So what does all this mean for the certifying authority? Should the certifier be concerned with building thermal performance in much the same way that he or she is concerned that the building is properly documented, with the right certificates from independent experts that clearly state the building conforms with the various codes and regulations?

This raises a questions of ethics and liability, and issues with energy efficiency reporting that certifiers should be aware of. Ideally, like with any professional documentation, the energy efficiency reporting should be undertaken by a qualified independent technical expert. Reports should be prepared in a consistent way by assessors who have a standardised level of training and professional development, working with a recognised code of conduct. Auditing and cross checking of reports and assessors should be undertaken by a third party to ensure not only accurate compliance, but that buildings are being constructed as stated in the assessment.

In many ways the above scenario is not currently the case. The energy efficiency assessment industry is primarily one that is self-regulated with assessors subscribing to various codes- of-conduct and loose sets of regulations. It is also one that lacks consistency between State jurisdictions due to local regulations and exemptions.

Many involved in energy efficiency, including raters, builders and certification authorities, are crying out for an industry wide framework which is better regulated, audited and focused on the professional development, training and operational standards for those conducting assessments. Any subsequent industry changes resulting from this will most likely come from both a ‘top- down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approach. Government policy, a ‘top down’ approach, will dictate change, driving the adoption of tighter standards in building construction and post construction audits. In addition, as a relatively new industry, given to interpreting building codes and the application of Government policy, there necessarily needs to be a ‘bottom up’ approach from within the industry. This approach would seek to cement a national code-of-conduct seeking to further evolve and mature the industry as a whole.

But it is not all bad news! While currently not a perfect regulation framework, an energy assessment company that subscribes to a code-of-conduct, with regulation focused on accuracy and independence, will take on the limited liability for an assessment. This is because they are recognised as an ‘independent technical expert’, meaning the certifying authority should not be concerned with exposure to a potential conflict of interest. It may indeed be more efficient and indeed less risky to hand over all energy efficiency work to a qualified independent expert capable of delivering the assessment and taking on the liability for this at the same time.

So what does all this mean for the future? Government policy and regulation is going to play an important role in facilitating change in the industry and tightening up on current practices. There will most probably be a corresponding change in auditing both assessments and post construction to certify what is built corresponds with the plans and assessment detail. This will no doubt become all the more important with the introduction of schemes such as mandatory disclosure in the near future.

During this period of transition many certifying authorities are likely to question what they need to know and the validity of the information that they are being given and expected to assess. While in this article we have discussed the potential conflicts and need for improvement, it should be noted that the vast majority of energy assessors are trained professionals with a keen interest in improving the efficiency of the built form in Australia. If, however, when looking at a proposal there is a degree of concern over the assessment, there is nothing wrong with seeking a second opinion from a third party. It is only via this error checking that the accuracy of reports can be further verified and the industry as a whole improved.

 

More fact sheets and information…