Sustainable Homes: Myth or Reality?

What if everything that we have ever before told about building sustainable eco homes over the last two decades has been wasted? There is a growing doubt amongst people what if the eco homes are not able to achieve the number of reductions that are expected in terms of energy and water. Although a lot of interest has been aroused by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in people and organisations to create “sustainable eco-homes.” The problem is, there is no evidence to support this claim.

Everyone today knows that the significant reductions that are anticipated in terms of energy and water are possible. And every project that has been initiated kicks off with certain goals in these departments. However, still, there is no progress made when it comes to building sustainable, energy-efficient homes. What is the reason for that?

There has been a lot of thought put into the certification process when it comes to sustainable homes in most states of Australia. One of them is related to the lax thermal performance minimum standards in NSW, in particular. Lots of time, there have been records of inadequate site inspections, and the conflict of interest that comes up from the certifiers being paid by developers. The problem is, the pioneering BASIX certificate gets stuck in a decade long wrap, with minimum standards approximately 4 to 4.5 stars. 

There are certain designers and assessors that workaround on the weaknesses in software or documentation to protect the poor real design & performance outcomes. Apart from this, there can be other problems too. 

According to a research paper cited by Pitt & Sherry on the parlous state of the sustainability performance of Australian houses, here are the three main areas of concern:

• There are occurrences when compliance with the energy performance requirements in the National Construction Code can be less than ideal. There are certain reports and case studies that support this view.

• Certain aspects of the code can lead to a discrepancy between the actual performance of a finished building and the level of energy efficiency that the code is trying to achieve. In layman’s terms, it means that at times, the compliance with the code may not result in acceptable energy efficiency performance while developing the final building.

• The integrated systems of standards, requirements, and knowledge or skills development that underpin energy-efficient building is not functional in the same way as it should. The outcome is that the most efficient and economic opportunities to plan, design, construct, and fine-tune more energy-efficient buildings are never undertaken. 

Their point that the code itself might be effectively obstructing the realisation of its own goal is quite baffling! According to the report, there are comprehensive recommendations made for reforms, scrutinising the spread of issues recognised by stakeholders, the breadth of the building industry, and, last but not least, its regulatory systems. The authors are in support of the building industry by enhancing capacity and the perseverance of best practices in energy-efficient construction. 

According to this fact, there should be an increase in compliance with the energy performance requirements in the National Construction Code. Notably, in the case of NSW, with BASIX report - although that is a far-stretched thought until the NSW Government increases its minimum standards.

Final Thoughts

Nevertheless, through this report, Pitt & Sherry have empowered the building owners and made them comprehend how energy efficiency can be a rewarding affair. By expecting and demanding enhanced energy efficiency with its restricted-energy costs, the authors anticipate future phases of the project to create market demand for best practice energy-efficient construction practices.