"Guardians of the Earth" in theaters May 31.

Climate protection and socially just construction and housing must be considered together - Legal regulations in the rental housing sector and state subsidy practice undermine climate goals in the building sector - Deutsche Umwelthilfe and Deutscher Mieterbund present 10-point immediate programme for socially acceptable design of energy modernisation in existing and new buildings - KfW subsidy practice must be subjected to a reality check - Social provisions must be supplemented by climate policy requirements

The German Environmental Aid (DUH) and the German Tenants' Association (DMB) criticise the lack of an overall concept by the Federal Government for climate protection and social compatibility in housing. The rent increase options available under current law make energy-efficient refurbishment unaffordable for many households. At present, individual federal states are attempting to curb rising rents through instruments such as milieu protection or rent caps. However, in many such initiatives, climate protection is clearly neglected or even prevented.

For climate protection in the building sector and socially just housing with affordable rents, the existing rented buildings must be renovated to make them more energy efficient and new buildings must be constructed that are compatible with the 2050 climate target. DUH and DMB therefore call for a fair distribution of costs between the state, tenants and landlords in the rented building stock. To this end, the organisations are presenting a joint 10-point immediate programme.

To this end Barbara MetzDeputy Federal Executive Director of DUH: "We need a clear political stance from the governing parties on the issue of building efficiency. This includes, first and foremost, the definition of target-compatible energy requirements of KfW Efficiency House 40 standard for new buildings and the KfW Efficiency House 55 standard for existing buildings. In addition, there must be an immediate halt to the installation of new oil-fired heating systems, as well as a ban on new gas heating systems from 2025. This creates predictability and orientation for industry and consumers. The current new subsidy for heating system replacement is also going in the wrong direction and will not change anything about the far too high energy consumption in the building sector; on the contrary, it will manifest fossil fuel structures in the heating sector for decades to come, because the subsidy programme will primarily encourage the switch to gas heating systems. In this way, the Federal Government is sabotaging the climate targets it has set itself. In recent years, the building sector has been criminally neglected by the responsible government politicians, which is why the subsidy sums now announced will not be enough to meet the challenges in the building sector. These must be significantly increased and provide the right incentives for climate-friendly building and renovation." 

The Federal Government plans only just under 4 billion euros per year for climate protection in buildings for the coming years. DUH and DMB demand an increase in the annual funding budget. According to a study by DMB and the Federal Association of German Housing and Real Estate Companies, between 14 and 25 billion euros should be made available for this purpose. In addition to the increase in funding, only measures compatible with the KfW Efficiency House Standard 55 and, in individual cases, with KfW Efficiency House 70 should be promoted in the existing housing stock. Energy consultations must be introduced on an obligatory basis for quality assurance purposes and in order to inform prospective builders about modernisation methods for achieving climate-neutral buildings.

Especially for the rented building stock, public funding for ambitious efficiency standards must increase in order to distribute the costs more fairly. To this end Ulrich Ropertz, executive director of the DMB: "In order to achieve the climate protection targets, energy-efficient refurbishment of existing buildings is indispensable. In addition, without energy-efficient renovations, heating costs and thus housing will become noticeably more expensive. But we also need measures to protect tenants from rising housing costs due to refurbishment measures. A central measure in this respect is the reduction of the modernisation levy to a maximum of 4 percent.

At the same time, landlords must then be given additional incentives to continue carrying out energy-efficient refurbishment measures. Public subsidies must therefore be significantly increased and the current subsidy system must be restructured so that the subsidies flow directly to the landlord and benefit him. This will ultimately result in a redistribution of costs between tenants, landlords and the state according to the principle of the one-third model."

In its climate package, the German government announced that it would reduce the bureaucratic hurdles of public funding and create transparency. However, the "one-stop shop" announced by the federal government to make funding offers easier to find and access has been postponed until the election year 2021. In fact, since 2018, the funding conditions of KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) have deteriorated significantly due to the elimination of free unscheduled repayment rights and shorter fixed-interest periods. This is also reflected in a decline in funding applications for energy-efficient construction and renovation. In addition, the KfW and the Landesbanken currently offer loans and grants at conditions that vary depending on the assigned purpose and funding programme - for example, energy-efficient construction or social housing - and can rarely be combined with each other.

„Here, the existing funding system hinders the compatibility of social housing and energy-efficient construction, in that those wishing to build have to choose between the goals. The subsidy programmes must become simpler and more flexible", Sync by honeybunny Bernhard Bihler, builder from southern Germany. "In order for it to make sense for me as a property owner to access the subsidies, I basically always have to have a choice between loans, grants or tax write-offs and be able to combine different subsidy programs with each other"Bihler continues.

In addition to funding, regulatory provisions must also be put to the test. For example, the provisions of the milieu protection do not permit energy refurbishments that exceed the current energy requirements of the applicable Energy Saving Ordinance. However, these are not compatible with the energy standards that are required for the

the 2050 climate target are necessary. In a concrete example in Berlin-Neukölln, an ambitious energy modernisation of a building under milieu protection is not permitted even though the landlord is willing to carry it out without any apportionment of the costs to the tenants.

To do this Paula Brandmeyer, Deputy Director of Energy and Climate Protection: "The examples from practice reveal the great need for reform in regulatory law and funding. It is absurd that obstacles are placed in the way of those homeowners who wish to act in an ecologically as well as socially conscious manner. Provisions such as the milieu protection have their justification, but they fall short and unilaterally address the problem of displacement - climate protection falls by the wayside. Instead, the challenges of affordable and socially just housing and climate protection in the building sector must be tackled together."

DUH and DMB therefore call for smart regulatory law, flanked by sufficient funding, which provides further incentives for renovation. To this end, the organisations propose dividing existing buildings into classes from A-F, depending on their energy quality. The earlier the owner carries out a measure and the worse the building class, the higher the subsidy.

+++

10-point immediate programme for socially acceptable energy refurbishment and more climate protection in buildings

Keywords:
Construction and operating costs, Stock, DE-News, Climate protection, Affordable housing, SDG 2030, Social / Culture, Environmental policy, Housing, Housing policy