Green Homes Directive: the possible consequences of the new EU regulations in Italy

There is increasing debate on the new European directive on so-called 'green homes', which will lead to the renovation of thousands of buildings across Europe to bring them up to the most efficient energy classes. In Italy, the number of homes to be renovated is close to two million, which, according to Unioncasa (the National Association of Property Owners in Italy), calls for more in-depth reflection, if possible, than in other European countries on the appropriateness of introducing this standard with the timing and in the manner envisaged. These are the possible consequences of the new EU regulations in Italy according to the position of the President of Unioncasa, Flavio Sanvito.

What is the EU Green Buildings Directive?

The EU has detailed new regulations, known as the EU Green Buildings or Green Homes Directive that aims to make public and residential buildings more climate friendly by improving insulation and energy efficiency. The goal is to double renovation rates by 2030.

The effects of the Green Homes Directive in Italy

With 1.8 million buildings in Italy that, according to the new EU Green Homes Directive, should be subject to energy retrofitting, a comparison must necessarily be made, according to Unioncasa. A standard of this magnitude cannot be imposed indiscriminately and in such a short timeframe, i.e. by 2030/2033 barring some unclear exceptions. As far as Italy is concerned, particular consideration must be given to the effects that such a rule may have on a real estate heritage made up of historic buildings, on a climate quite different from that of northern European countries, and on a particular real estate economy, especially if we consider the various small municipalities that make up Italy.

Green Homes Directive: the particularities of Italian real estate heritage

According to Unioncasa, the variables to be taken into account when applying the green homes directive include countries such as Italy, where the real estate stock is largely made up of buildings, including those of historical and architectural value, which are often subject to constraints, unlike, for example, the Nordic countries, which also have different climatic conditions.

The environmental impact of the green homes directive in Italy

The environmental impact of heating/cooling Italian buildings, when compared both with that of countries with a harsher climate, and above all with the well-known countries with a high pollution rate (China, India, Russia, and the USA, which alone pollute more than 65%) makes it clear that such interventions do not represent a priority due to their very low contribution to pollution.

Economic impact of the Green Homes Directive in Italy

Still, according to Unioncasa, the economic impact on households must be considered. An adjustment would entail an average expenditure of between 30,000 and 65,000 euros per flat, for a total expenditure that could easily exceed 100 billion. Add to this the uneconomicity for certain dwellings located in areas where property values are minimal and for which the investment would be inadvisable, in fact exceeding the value of the property.

The scaremongering generated by a lack of information and even more so by a poorly designed regulation is already creating negative effects on the real estate market, generating mistrust and detachment from the purchase of energy-efficient properties, and the consequent and sometimes unjustified loss of value of a real estate asset that would be sold off by the owner in case of need.

Green Homes Directive: the attitude of Italian banks

Last but not least, not to be overlooked is the attitude that banks are taking, reluctant to finance the purchase of high-class properties that, from their point of view, would represent sterile guarantees. Unioncasa, in the words of its President Flavio Sanvito, affirms 'that for the obvious reasons described above, this rule cannot find logic and consensus among the parties involved, and therefore hopes that it can be revised and significantly modified. We all agree on the usefulness of energy-efficient buildings, but by applying concrete distinctions, giving congruous intervention times and with involvement and rationality, not imposition'. "The effects of the 110% superbonus, should serve as a lesson that improvised and unplanned interventions can only lead to indiscriminate increases in materials and renovation costs, on which, moreover, in this case, not even an intervention by the State is envisaged," concludes the Unioncasa president.