Share

Green houses: green light from the European Parliament to the EU directive on energy efficiency

The "Energy Performance of Building Directive" for the energy efficiency of buildings throughout Europe has been approved in the Plenary. Italy, which voted no, is against it. Picket: "We will defend ourselves"

Green houses: green light from the European Parliament to the EU directive on energy efficiency

step forward for theenergy efficiency of buildings across Europe.

Il European Parliament approved the directive on green houses called "Energy Performance of Building Directive" (Epbd). The green light in the Plenary came with 343 votes in favor, 216 votes against and 78 abstentions.

La directive is part of the project EU Fit for 55 and was presented by the Green MEP, Ciaran Cuffe. The document aims to substantially reduce the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and energy consumption in the EU building sector by 2030 to make it climate-neutral by 2050. The text provides that new buildings they will have to be zero-emissions starting from 2028. while the residential buildings will have to achieve energy performance class E and D by 2030 by 2033.

Text now to the test of the negotiations

On 9 February, the first go-ahead was given by the Industry, Research and Energy Commission of the Eurochamber. Today the approval by the Eurochamber is just another step before the measure is approved by the commission.

Il text, amended by the European Parliament in several parts, will now be the subject of the trilogue, Or the negotiation with the Council and the European Commission before returning to the Plenary. Just once completed this process will arrive at definitive version of the new directive, which, once in force, will have to be ratified by the Member States.

“We have seen that the restructuring of buildings wins strongly. Now I am sending the text back to the Commission for institutional negotiations", the promoter of the text declared in the Chamber, Ciaran Cuffe.

Italy votes no, Picket: "Unsatisfactory for our country, we will defend ourselves"

THEItaly opposes the directive and in the Plenary the representatives of our country voted against the approval. I criticize the Minister of the Environment and Energy Security Gilbert Pichetto, which believes “The directive on Green Houses approved in the European Parliament unsatisfactory for Italy. Even in the Trilogue, as we have done up to now, we will continue to fight in defense of the national interest. “Let's not question – adds Picchetto – the environmental objectives of decarbonisation and redevelopment of the building heritage, which remain fundamental. However, this text lacks a serious insight consideration of the Italian context, different from that of other European countries due to historical reasons, geographical conformation, as well as a deep-rooted vision of the house as a safe haven for Italian families. The time targets, especially for existing residential buildings, are currently unreachable for our country". Italy – concludes the minister “does not ask for any favorable treatment, but only the awareness of reality; we will act for a negotiating result that recognizes the Italian reasons”.

Criticisms also from Confedilizia

”The European Parliament has approved the proposal for a directive which provides for the obligation to carry out energy efficiency measures on all European buildings. The exponents of the Italian political majority voted against and we thank them for this. However, the story does not end here. In fact, a negotiation phase begins today which will also see the governments of the countries of the Union as protagonists” he declared Giorgio Spaziani Head, President of Confidentiality who had already shown doubts about the proposal in recent days. According to Spaziani, to make a house less expensive, it would take an average of ten thousand euros per housing unit (underestimated given the rate of inflation and rising costs). "There directive is harmful for the entire Italian real estate sector, even for those subjects who think they can derive some advantage from it. It is a fundamentally wrong provision at the very moment in which it obliges, rather than incentivizes, the implementation of certain types of interventions”, Spaziani's opinion.

comments