Robert Habeck and his team managed to surprise: On Monday morning, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Protection announced that all support programs from the state KfW Bank for climate-friendly construction and energy-efficient renovation would be discontinued – with immediate effect and until further notice. The reason given was that the funds provided by the federal government for the subsidy had been exhausted, mainly because of the great rush to the new building program for the so-called Efficiency House 55. Applications for this could actually have been made by the end of this month.
Now this program will be terminated immediately and permanently. How to proceed with the funding for the much more demanding Efficiency House 40 should be decided quickly “against the background of the available funds in the energy and climate fund and the funding requirements of other programs in the federal government”, it was said. Funding for renovations has also been stopped for the time being, but should start again as soon as the necessary money has been made available from the budget.
The sudden halt to promotional loans is likely to catch many builders, large and small, off guard. Last year, the old federal government decided to end funding for the Efficiency House 55. However, KfW was supposed to accept applications for this until the end of January – and they came in large numbers, too many. There has been a “run” on the program, since November applications totaling more than 20 billion euros in funding have been received, according to the Ministry of Economic Affairs, of which around 14 billion alone for the Efficiency House 55.
That is why it is still unclear how the development loans for new buildings that have already been received but have not yet been approved will continue. The money provided is not enough for them either. It is possible that KfW could make offers for low-interest loans here, it said. “That’s being checked now.”
This means that those who have not yet received a commitment from KfW will have to wait – and in case of doubt they will get nothing. It is also still unclear how much money the state will provide for which measures in the future. The economics, construction and finance ministries are working “at high pressure” to reset the funding and restart it. However, it is not yet clear when that will be.
Too expensive, too little effect
And hurry is definitely required: “There is a considerable need for action in the building sector,” said Robert Habeck only recently in its “opening balance sheet” detected. For example, the energy consumption for heating and hot water in residential buildings has not fallen in recent years, but has risen. By 2030, however, so it has the coalition agreed, half of the heat is to be generated in a climate-neutral manner, including with heat pumps operated with green electricity. Here, too, the expansion is stagnating, just like with the renovation as a whole.
Nevertheless, the KfW funding is now being stopped for the time being – according to the ministry, it bought too little energy savings too expensively. For example, the annual CO₂ savings per euro of funding spent on energy-efficient refurbishment is up to ten times higher than on the Efficiency House 55. In recent years, however, there has been a failure to adjust the criteria and new building standards, said Secretary of State for Energy Patrick Graichen. “Instead, an outdated subsidy was continued that sets the wrong incentives.”
Most recently, the EU Commission had further increased the pressure. In mid-December, she submitted a legislative proposal strict specifications before. She demands that from 2030 onwards all new buildings should be climate-neutral, and by then 30 million particularly poorly insulated apartments and houses should be renovated – in every country. Because according to the will of Brussels, 15 percent of the worst houses in each country should be brought into shape. The EU Parliament and Council of Ministers still have to deal with the proposal, but the direction is already clear – after all, the continent should be climate-neutral by 2050. All EU countries have committed themselves to this.
Sharp criticism from all sides
The fact that the federal government is now taking time to think about the aid has caused fierce criticism from owners and construction companies. On the one hand, the pressure is constantly increasing, but at the same time the urgently needed funding is stopped – “that doesn’t go together,” said the President of the Haus & Grund owners’ association, Kai Warnecke. The decision was “a catastrophe”, it was also said by the central association of commercial landlords GdW. “What builders need above all is planning security. This step is exactly the opposite.”
Environmentalists and consumer advocates were hardly more positive. The decision was disastrous, said Barbara Metz from the German Environmental Aid. “You should have raised the standards first and then canceled the funding.” But the way things are now being built to poorer standards, the federal government is achieving less instead of more climate protection. Patrick Biegon from the Federal Association of Consumer Organizations (VZBV) referred above all to owners who would like to modernize their house. Funds are frozen for them too. “People who want to renovate are put on hold.” That is very unfortunate. It’s true, because construction prices have risen sharply almost every week over the past few months.
How the funding will continue is unclear for the time being. However, it seems possible that the federal government will fundamentally reorganize them – and overturn the entire system of efficiency houses. So far, funding has been based on two questions: How high is the total energy requirement of the property? And how good is the thermal insulation of the building envelope? Both values are set in relation to a so-called reference building, whose key data are specified in the Building Energy Act. The less energy a building consumes in comparison, the better. At 55 percent it is an efficiency house 55, at 40 percent an efficiency house 40. However, what is left out are the burdens caused by the production of the building materials, the construction itself and the disposal of the waste. If they were included in the calculation in the future, renovation could become even more attractive – and construction could lose its appeal.