EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

The Energy Efficiency Directive will bring energy poverty to Sweden

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 06 April 2012

The proposed EU Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) will push rent prices up and cause energy poverty that has not been seen in Sweden since modern times, warn Barbro Engman, Kurt Eliasson and Reinhold Lennebo.

The following commentary was authored by Barbro Engman, president of the Swedish union of tenants, Kurt Eliasson, CEO of the Swedish association of public housing companies (SABO) and Reinhold Lennebo, CEO of the Swedish property federation.

"EU institutions have far evinced little knowledge of the special circumstances prevailing in Sweden, where water and heat are usually included in the rent. Three articles in the proposed directive are particularly problematic for Swedish tenants and landlords: Article 8 concerning metering; Article 4 concerning the exemplary role of public bodies; and Article 3 a proposed by the European Parliament concerning building renovation. We urge all actors in the trialogue negotiations to take this into consideration.

Metering, energy consumption and billing information

We must insist that apartments where heat is included in the rent should be excluded from the proposed obligatory metering and informative billing for heat. Furthermore, all metering and billing measures introduced should be technically feasible and cost efficient and the choice of technology should be made locally.

Heating is normally included in the rent in Sweden, which is not the case in many other Member States. Property owners have a strong incentive to curb heating costs. If the cost is charged directly to the tenant – for payment according to actual consumption – it would eliminate any incentive for the property owner to take general energy efficiency improvement measures, such as installing additional insulation and replacing windows. This could also cause the problem of energy poverty, non-existent in Sweden today, to emerge. Low-income tenants might choose to cut down on heating expenditures, which would impair living standards.

Climatic conditions combined with building structure in Sweden make it complicated to metre heat individually in a way that is fair. Moreover, heating costs are largely affected by factors over which the tenant has no control, such as heat transfers between apartments in a building. It will thus be difficult to engender confidence in such a system.

Installing a system for individual metering of heat and hot water would cost between €700 and €1 000 per apartment, in addition to a minimum annual operating and administrative cost of €50 per apartment. In Sweden, this equates to capital expenditures of at least €1.2 billion and annual costs of around €85 million for private and municipal property owners that provide rental housing. Despite these substantial costs, it is uncertain whether any energy would in fact be saved. Some tenants will choose to reduce their energy consumption to save money, while others will choose to increase it, which has been confirmed by various studies conducted in Sweden.  A system that offers residents freedom of choice must also be dimensioned to cope with all residents choosing the least energy-saving alternative.

The proposed directive mentions two techniques for individual metering and heating. It is not reasonable for the choice of technique to be decided at the EU level.

Renovation targets for public bodies could lead to significant rent increases

In respect of the exemplary role of buildings owned by public bodies, we suggest that Article 4 should apply only to buildings owned by central government, as suggested by the Council. This would exclude Swedish public municipal housing companies and thus not distort competition between public and private landlords, and would minimise the risk of unreasonable rent increases.

The Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) passed a new Public Municipal Housing Companies Act which entered into force on 1 January 2011. The law was enacted to ensure that Swedish legislation conforms to EU competition rules and that competition between public and private landlords is not distorted. Public municipal housing companies must therefore operate according to businesslike principles and must not be afforded any advantages by their owners (the municipalities) compared to private landlords. According to the proposal contained in EED Article 4, Member States shall ensure that three per cent of the total floor area of buildings owned by public bodies is renovated each year to meet the minimum energy performance requirements. This proposal would distort competition because terms and conditions would then not be equal for all landlords.

From a long-term perspective, it may be financially advantageous to make energy savings while carrying out regular renovation work. The Directive would require the current rate of renovation to increase dramatically, entailing further cost increases. A rough estimate of the cost of reasonable energy saving measures indicates that this could amount to almost €200 per m2.

Taken as a whole, these costs of renovation and energy saving would generate a need for significant rent increases in addition to the annual rent increases based on general cost trends. Many tenants will have difficulties paying the higher rents that would result.

Building renovation – 80% reduction between 2010 and 2050

We strongly believe it is not possible to reduce energy consumption of the existing building stock by 80% by 2050 without severe impact on living standards. The existing Swedish objective to decrease energy consumption by 50% between 1995 and 2050 is challenging enough.

Sweden has already set a very ambitious objective to decrease energy consumption in buildings by 50% between 1995 and 2050. A new base year will cause problems because our energy efficiency programmes began several years prior to the proposed base year. If property owners were to reduce energy use by 80% from the 2010 base year, it would entail permitted average energy consumption of approximately 30-40 kWh/m2, which is lower than for Passive Houses in Sweden. Energy consumption for hot water in existing homes is equivalent to approximately 40 kWh/m2.

A typical two-bedroom apartment of 70 square metres consumes an average of about 15 000 kWh per year in Sweden, including heating, hot water and electricity. Three quarters of the energy is used for heating and hot water, the remainder for electricity. A reduction in energy consumption by 80% would mean that this apartment must consume less than 3 000 kWh per year. If this were your apartment, what kind of living standard would you have if you were allowed to use only 3 000 kWh a year? You might be able to maintain a temperature of 14 degrees during the coldest period of the year–provided additional insulation is installed and windows are replaced– and have a few lamps switched on and shower every other week. You would also have to do without your washing machine, dishwasher and freezer. You would be able to use one ring on your electric cooker for a few minutes every day, and perhaps watch television for an hour.

Focusing on renewable energy and reducing energy consumption are two key components of a sustainable energy policy, but it is essential that targets are reasonable, realistic and cost efficient. The EED should provide for a more general approach that allows each Member State to design a regulatory framework that is suited to national conditions and focused on goals rather than specific actions."

COMMENTS

  • This article is complete nonsense. The authors affiliations should speak for themselves, since it is their industries that would be affected the most by the EED.

    If the heating for an apartment is included in rent there is no incentive for any of the primary actors to reduce energy consumption, unless there is a significant increase in the cost of energy (in the case of the landlords) in which case rent prices would go up anyway. If the tenants in an apartment block are aware of their own consumption, the logic goes that they will consume less, especially if they are paying for the energy out of pocket. They are also more likely to lobby their apartment owners to improve the situation. Is this something to really be worried about? Maybe for the CEO of the Swedish property federation.

    The renovation of apartment buildings may very well cost 200 EUR per square meter, this is not completely out of the question. What is completely absurd is to suggest that after the renovation the quality of life will decrease. A change in energy consumption being synonymous with thermostats set at 14ºC in the winter is pure nonsense. I am glad that the Passive House in Sweden is mentioned, but perhaps more needs to be said about what the passive house achieves and how it achieves this, namely with the thermostat set year round at a comfortable temperature, 20ºC. Check the facts and please don't distort.

    Mvh,

    Andrew Butcher

    By :
    Andrew Butcher
    - Posted on :
    08/04/2012
  • The 200 EUR per square meter referred to in the article regards renovations that can be made with reasonable energy saving measures (like window renovations, thermostat replacement, ventilation renewal, etc.). These measures will not come close to decreasing energy consumption in existing building stock with 80 % with today´s technologies. Such a reduction in energy consumption would be very expensive to achieve until 2050 and may need major renovations or even demolishment of the existing building to be replaced by a new. The cost of such measures will by far exceed 200 euro per square meter.

    Best regards

    Authors of the article

    By :
    Hans Dahlin
    - Posted on :
    11/04/2012
  • Subsidiarity is an important principle of the EU - so the EU should concentrate on aims and goals - and the national state should be free to implement these aims/goals in a way it fits into their system. There is never only one solution for a problem.
    Diversity is a quality we should support and that means not only culture or traditions but also sociopolitical concept as housing.
    As we all like our individuality there should be also possible to find individual solutions for energy saving methodes - The Commission is not the only place where people have good ideas. :-)

    best wishes
    Nadja Shah

    By :
    Nadja Shah
    - Posted on :
    12/04/2012
  • Reply to Andrew and some other points:

    Things are not so straightforward in Sweden. Because district heating is used to heat over 90% of apartment blocks, hot water used for space heating and hot water used for hygienic purposes are not separated in billing or statistics. And yes the landlord pays for this so tenants have unlimited use. While you state that if a landlord undertakes renovation that improves efficiency that they will pass the cost on to the tenant this is not the way things work in the rental sector. All rent increases are negotiated between landlords and the Swedish Union of Tenants (Hyresgästföreningen). Since about the 1930´s, the tenants union has a statutory role in agreeing rents with landlords. In their opinion a rent increase can only take place if there has been a noticeable improvement in living conditions as a result of the investment. Thus although a landlord may have spent quite a sum in undertaking energy efficient renovations, as this does not lead to any change in standard of living, the landlord cannot "jack up the rent" to compensate. The tenant’s union won´t agree to it. Macroeconomic or other co-benefits are to my knowledge not considered in the dialogue.

    The owners of Swedish rental apartment blocks are themselves mostly a number of large actors owning thousands of apartments. The petty bourgeoisie small time investor landlord is not involved in the sector making the negotiations more manageable. They are kept out by not being allowed to purchase individual units in apartment blocks. The only option available is to purchase the whole block. Thus seeing as the landlords are such large operators I would say that is always in their interest to invest in reducing their energy bills. This Swedish approach in fact seems to have solved the split incentives problem for space and water heating in the residential sector. Funnily a friend of mine recently had her shower head changed unilaterally by her landlord so as that the shower would spray less water. I seriously doubt as well if my friend will be getting a rent reduction as compensation for the lost comfort.

    It is also true that heat passes through the walls of the apartments into neighboring apartments so I don´t know if neighbors would end up after meters are installed trying to "free ride" on each other by not paying for heat themselves and hoping to avail of their neighbors transfer heat... It is not as easy to password protect heat as it is wireless networks...

    On some other points in the article, yes the installation of meters does seem to be expensive. In my home EU country the householders will be paying for their installation (albeit in this case for cold water), but look at the controversy the issue causes [1,2].

    It is also true that the Swedish Housing law [3] does mean that the public housing companies would be disadvantaged by being forced to renovate when the private sector is not. However in this case I do not agree with the writers as the multiple co benefits that Diana Ürge Vörsatz and co [4,5] have highlighted as accruing should be taken into consideration by the municipal housing companies.

    As for the 14 degrees indoor Celsius temperature argument, well, we all know that such a scenario would never be allowed to happen...

    1. http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0415/households-to-pay-cost-of-water-meters.html

    2. http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0416/opposition-parties-attack-water-meter-plans.html

    3. http://www.sabo.se/aktuellt/nyheter_s/2010/juni/Sidor/Riksdagen_nyalagen.aspx

    4. Bottom–up assessment of potentials and costs of CO2 emission mitigation in the buildings sector insights into the missing elements Energy Efficiency (2009) 2:293–316. Ürge-Vorsatz, D.-, Novikova, A., Boza-Kiss, B., Köppel, S.

    5. Co-benefits quantified: employment, energy security and fuel poverty implications of the large-scale, deep retrofitting of th Hungarian building stock. Tirado Herrero, S., Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Arena, D., Telegdy, A. Proceedings of ECEEE 2011 Summer Study, Belambra Presqu'île de Giens, France.

    By :
    Eoin Ó Broin
    - Posted on :
    16/04/2012

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Energy Efficiency News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Energy Efficiency Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising