in

Fight for the climate

There are still brakes on domestic climate protection. There is also a threat of a tug-of-war among the economic sectors: Who will be allowed to emit CO2 in the future? In any case, one solution has been established: the Co2-free building sector thanks to energy efficiency with passive houses & co, as well as renewable energy in the building sector.

fight for the climate

"For more than two decades, any compelling analysis of climate change and its causes has been deliberately challenged; Any attempt to develop ambitious measures that are appropriate to the needs will be accompanied by an unfamiliar alliance of extremely liberal economic attitudes (growth! growth! growth!) along with background noises (away from regulations!) and socio-politically argued client policy "for the so-called little man" ( We are not - the others are to blame!) Including targeted scare (foreigners! Social parasite!) Torpedoed and in good Austrian: shot down, before it was still discussed seriously, "said Robert Lechner of the Austrian Society for Sustainable Building ÖGNB" eaten ".

"Large parts of the construction industry are not interested in energy efficiency and climate protection."
Robert Lechner, ÖGNB

Only ten percent emit CO2

Let's face it: Climate change is taking place. The damage has long been done. Now it's about an existential damage limitation. And therefore, whether in the not so distant future still qualitative life on earth is possible. Absurd, if that is negated in year 2016.
One thing is certain: Only if we take the climate protection goals agreed upon in the Paris 2015 climate agreement seriously can the progressing global warming at + 1,5 or + 2 degrees Celsius be stopped and the worst consequential damage prevented. For Austria, this means that in the year 2050, we are only allowed to emit about ten percent of the CO2 emissions from the year 1990, about eight million tons of CO2 equivalent. That is not much. The current CO2 balance sheet, according to the Federal Environment Agency's forecast for the year 2015, is just under 78,8 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent, putting Austria at the same level as it did before 25 years.

Battle of the sectors

"The most important question is - from today's perspective - not: How do we do that? The most important question is: What will we do with our eight million tons of CO2 in the year 2050? ", Lechner sums it up. The tug-of-war of the lobbyists has long since begun, which probably explains why there is still no domestic climate strategy with regard to the Paris climate agreement. Which economic sector should CO2 "blow out" in the future? Where are our priorities?
The answers are actually obvious: We will continue to rely on food in the future, which would mean that agriculture and livestock would be largely out of the woods. And the factors labor and production are inevitable.
That's it with the CO2. This means: No more emissions in traffic, in waste management, ... - and especially not in the building sector.

Simplest lever building

What brings us to the next question: In which areas can realistically be avoided CO2 emissions? Of course, the industry still has to screw properly. However, emissions will probably never be avoided. Just as in agriculture, whose emissions are already through fermentation processes of natural origin. And clearly, switching to e-mobility will not be spared - and will be tedious enough. However, an area that has long since had the technological solutions is particularly suitable for the CO2 waiver: the building sector.
In terms of households, space heating represents the highest energy use, accounting for about two-thirds of domestic final energy consumption. Measures for energy efficiency and a swift turn towards - and this is what all Austrian experts agree with scientific background - are needed renewable energy sources for space heating.

Solutions Passive House & Co

The solutions have long since arrived: Passive House, Sonnenhaus and PlusEnergy House offer a building concept for every taste. Thermal insulation is provided by 20 materials - including renewable ones. And there are also numerous renewable alternatives to fossil fuels for heating. "Just by building new buildings between 2016-2020, the additional primary energy requirement according to the National Plan would be 5.483 GWh. This would correspond to 43 percent of the total heat production of all thermal power plants and district heating. This increase in energy demand could be reduced by 3.570 GWh in the passive house standard and energy costs reduced by 200 million euros per year. This would make it possible for future residents to sustainably afford sustainable housing for some 600.000, "explains Günter Lang of Passivhaus Austria.

Resistance of the conservative industry

But domestic climate policy continues to be characterized by stagnation and setbacks. Only this year, the funds of the so-called reorganization check were cut again - from 132,4 million euros in the year 2013 to 43,5 millions (2016). Despite proven economic impetus and at less than one percent stagnating reorganization rate. The latter means that it takes 70 to 100 years until the old building stock in Austria is thermally renovated.
The framework conditions for housing subsidies are also hard to criticize: the earmarking for housing equipment was already buried years ago; under the argument of affordable housing, the states are increasingly saying goodbye to ecological criteria.
The fact that the construction and real estate industry is flourishing as one of the few sectors and that the economic crisis somewhat cushions makes the discussion more difficult. Much more aggravating, however, is a conservative attitude toward sustainable technology and the passion for maximizing profit that is particularly attached to this industry. Lechner: "Let's stop fooling each other. Large parts of the construction industry are not interested in energy efficiency and climate protection. They find the resulting consequences annoying. And precisely this actor community has been pursuing a policy of misinformation, the softening of existing standards and the prevention of new climate protection initiatives for the construction industry for several years. "

"Given the results of this initial study, the thesis of" increasing energy efficiency as a natural enemy of cost-effective construction "does not seem to be sustainable."

Economic limits

Away from the actors of the construction industry, who refuse any progress in the field of ecology, one main argument is made again and again: Ecologically and energy-efficient construction would not be economical. The following: Of course, there is an economic limit to which such measures on a building pay off over the life cycle. In the meantime, however, many studies, studies and, of course, numerous construction projects have proven that even a passive house can be erected at the cost of a conventional building, or at least incur minor additional costs through ongoing savings in energy costs in the medium and long term. Much more crucial, however, is to find a master builder who builds on fair terms: alone, the construction cost differences in the federal states can be up to 50 percent.
A German study by the Ecofys Institute has also found that all the essential components for energy efficiency have become significantly cheaper in recent years. The study concludes: "In view of the results of this initial study, the thesis of" increasing energy efficiency as a natural enemy of cost-effective construction "does not seem to be sustainable."

Photo / Video: Shutterstock.

Written by Helmut Melzer

As a long-time journalist, I asked myself what would actually make sense from a journalistic point of view. You can see my answer here: Option. Showing alternatives in an idealistic way - for positive developments in our society.
www.option.news/about-option-faq/

1 comment

Leave a message
  1. Although the application is quite comprehensive, I was glad about the remediation. Once you have worked your way through the bureaucracy, it is a great incentive. I can only advise anyone to claim the benefits while they still exist.

Leave a Comment