Will renewal obligations be eased soon? “This could mean you no longer need to isolate.”

If it is up to the Flemish negotiators, the renovation obligation will soon be eased. Since last year, this renovation obligation has been linked to the energy performance certificate or EPC score, which determines how energy efficient a home is. Anyone who currently buys a home with an E or F energy label must renovate it to at least a D rating within five years. After that, the requirements will gradually become stricter. By 2050, all homes must have an A rating. The renovation obligation is intended to support the Flemish government’s climate goals.

But negotiators in the new Flemish government now want to ease the renewal obligations. The memorandum will provide an exception for those who heat without using fossil fuels. For these owners, the C label will suffice.

“This is a complete relaxation,” says energy specialist Ruben Baetens, who heads the Institute for Energy and Society at the University of Leuven. “A house with an EPC E label can only get the C label by installing solar panels and a heat pump. In practice, this relaxation could mean that you suddenly no longer need insulation, which is absurd. Until recently, it was always recommended to insulate first and then deal with the installation. This seems to have been completely reversed now.”

Who will this relaxation mainly affect?

Robin Batens: Especially for people who want to sell their homes. The value of the home depends on the renovation obligation. Homes with renovation obligations are relatively less valuable, because they still require significant costs for the buyer. If the reduced renovation obligation is met, sellers will consider whether they should quickly install solar panels or a heat pump in order to get a C. They can then list their property for sale with the promise of no renovation obligation. But if that home is not insulated, you are in a very undesirable position. The investment may be cheaper, but heating the home is still expensive because it is not insulated. In my opinion, this is the big risk: there will be a lot of uninsulated homes that are relatively energy efficient on paper.

Do you really think that the EPC result is not really suitable for promoting sustainable construction efficiently?

Paytenz: We gradually discovered that the way the EPC score is calculated is a problem in this sector. A single number is calculated that defines the overall performance of a house, which makes it difficult to promote sustainable construction efficiently. Using just one number, everything is lumped together: whether you insulate well, whether you heat sustainably, whether you have solar panels – when in fact these three things have nothing to do with each other. Ideally, we could make them different indicators, as we already do in new build and major renovation tools. The EPC score has never been a tool that should serve as a target.

How do we ensure that everyone can participate in achieving climate goals, also through the Environmental Protection Agreement?

Paytenz: This is difficult, because it is a purely financial issue. The necessary climate change adaptations require expensive investments, often unprofitable under current energy taxes. Ideally, poor housing would become somewhat cheaper, so that subsequent renovation costs would be affordable. But this will only work if we dramatically increase the supply of housing and thus build more.

Moreover, heat pumps use electricity, and electricity is currently subject to a particularly heavy burden. If we want to achieve this transformation, energy tariffs must also be considered in coalition agreements.

Do you have a message for the negotiators?

Paytenz: Government negotiations do not seem to me to be the ideal context in which to define a new final objective – and I mean the EPC designation. In this way we keep receiving new objectives and new messages, to which citizens no longer find their way. A one-year process in which experts and the sector also participate seems to me more useful.