header-logo header-logo

08 February 2007 / Stuart Pemble
Issue: 7259 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Just hot air?

Do the government’s plans for carbon-neutral homes stack up? asks Stuart Pemble

In his Pre-Budget Report, Investing in Britain’s Potential: Building Our Long-Term Future (Cm 6984), on 6 December 2006, the Chancellor Gordon Brown announced a brave new green world: all new homes are to be carbon neutral by 2010. However, by the time Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, launched the government’s consultation on the process—Building a Greener Future: Towards Zero Carbon Development—a week later, the timetable had already slipped to 2016. Everyone appears to agree on the need for change: in 2004, energy use in UK homes was responsible for a quarter of all of our carbon emissions. But what can be done in practice?

Regulation, regulation…

The most obvious change is that the Building Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/2531) (the regulations), the regime of statutory instruments which underpin the Building Act 1984, need to be changed. Once the government has decided on what constitutes a carbon-neutral home, any home constructed will have to comply with the regulations. Failure to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll