The Energy Efficiency Law was adopted back in 2009, but many of its provisions still have not been enforced or have already gone out of date. What steps does the market expect fr om the government?
In the first place, the market is waiting for amendments to the energy efficiency regulations. It is no secret that due to the heat insulation design system used in Russia and absence of reference values for annual power consumption rates, our buildings today consume several times more energy than in the countries with comparable climate.
For more than five years, the industry has been involved in active discussions of the Rules for determining energy efficiency class of apartment blocks initially drafted by the Ministry for Regional Development of the Russian Federation and then by the Construction Ministry, expected to finally incorporate these reference values. The draft is supposed to approve separate energy efficiency requirements for apartment blocks, industrial facilities, buildings and structures.
Besides, in pursuance of Federal Law No. 261, the Construction Ministry and professional community have developed a road map to increase energy efficiency of buildings. This document is being finalised now and is intended to remove any technical, regulatory, information and other obstacles for design, construction, operation and overhaul of buildings and structures. Putting insulation back into the list of mandatory work items in case of building overhaul will also improve energy efficiency of the Russian industrial and housing facilities and will drive consumption of modern polymer materials. Eventually, these measures will mean lower utility bills and a better housing experience.
It was mentioned at the congress that the Housing Code needs to be amended to include façade and roof insulation into the list of mandatory overhaul requirements for apartment blocks. What problems will it solve?
Currently, home owners decide on insulation. And given the high costs involved, 99% of them decide not to have any. And there is no point talking about energy efficiency without having any façade and roof insulation. It is a waste of time. Energy efficiency is often understood to mean energy-saving lamps and door closers, which is obviously not enough.
Finding a solution is what our association and heat insulation manufacturers are tasked to do. I believe this is where GR forces of major market players should come into play because it is essential that the executive and legislative authorities are aware of the real state of things. The overhaul issue is especially important now as new construction projects are stalled.
Take for example Polish experience. They do not build a lot either but have the highest rate of façade insulation per capita in Europe. Why? Because all the buildings are insulated. But as long as it is not mandatory, no one is going to do anything here.
Increasing energy efficiency requires considerable financial resources. One of the solutions could include extending preferential loans for façade and roof insulation – this option was discussed at the congress. Is it a workable solution?
I believe that preferential loans should be given to tenants, rather than contractors, so that they themselves could estimate the effect of additional insulation and see how quickly it is going to pay off.
This is what they did in the former German Democratic Republic in the 1990s during the period of mass renovation of panel buildings. Housing cooperatives developed renovation projects with a cost-benefit analysis for each resident showing reduction in cost of heating, cooling, lightning, hot water consumption, etc.
After that banks issued cheaper loans to housing associations for renovation purposes under government guarantees. This meant that home owners themselves controlled the renovations and were the main beneficiaries of the extra insulation and other efforts to reduce their utility bills. Loans were issued for 20 to 25 years while the real savings kicked in immediately after the renovation. This model where home owners, a bank, government and contractor are closely interrelated and wh ere each of them is interested in the end result is the only way to make it happen.
Market participants believe that it is necessary to speed up the approval of energy efficiency requirements for buildings and structures making them as good or even better than foreign best practices. What would be the best way to solve the issue?
Thermal resistance requirements for insulation and load-bearing structures can be developed based on the expertise of market leaders such as SIBUR, Mosstroy 31, and others.
The best practice will include using the most advanced Russian technologies, such as expanded polystyrene with graphite additives. Having the same thickness as conventional polystyrene, it offers 15% higher heat shielding properties.
As for the mechanics, there is an action plan (roadmap) that the government is currently considering to boost energy efficiency. This document lists a set of rules and other regulations that need to be reviewed.
This includes thermal resistance requirements for the insulation and load-bearing structures and specific targets for higher thermal resistance to be reached by 2030.
In some cases, such as construction of low-rise residential buildings as part of projects seeking to relocate people from dilapidated housing or homes for children with disabilities and orphans, it would make sense to issue long-term interest-free loans to address energy efficiency issues. Who does this decision depend on and how likely is it to be made in the current economic climate?
The Ministry of Construction is currently in negotiations with Sberbank on its participation in the housing improvement programme. The two parties signed a cooperation agreement at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in mid-June this year. However, we have not heard about any developments so far.
Implementing housing improvement programmes is difficult in the current environment. According to the Housing Development Assistance Fund, RUB 297.5 bn was expected to be spent on these programmes in 2014–2017. The Fund itself planned to provide RUB 139.5 bn in the form of financial support to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Another RUB 158 bn were expected to be raised from regional and municipal budgets, as well as extra-budgetary sources.
At the moment, the budgets at all levels have virtually no funds available. Even priority projects, other than related to the 2018 FIFA World Cup and Crimea, have stalled. Considering that RUB 185 bn should have already been spent in 2014–2015, I believe that the programme is underfinanced by ca. RUB 60 bn.
Download PDF
Yuri Savkin
Director of the Association of Manufacturers and Suppliers of Expanded Polystyrene