Level(s) is a standard created by the European Union, which aims to make construction and large-scale renovation projects as responsible as possible. Level(s) contains six objectives and within them 16 indicators to measure the achievement of the objectives. The most familiar is certainly the first objective, to reduce the carbon footprint of buildings throughout their life cycle. Other targets include reducing water use, buildings that are comfortable and have good indoor air quality, reducing whole-life material costs, building structures that are more resilient to changing climate, and choosing materials that are recyclable and as sustainable as possible.
Finland Level(s) will be affected by construction market in 2025, at the latest, low-carbon building targets will be rolled into building regulations and all new buildings will be required to have a carbon footprint report, for example for the entire life cycle of the building. In the past, buildings have focused more on energy efficiency, but now the aim is to focus on the whole life cycle of the building. The building sector is again facing new changes, as a conflict can be found between today's building practices and the requirements of the Level(s) standard. Examples:
- External design of house packages
House designers have to sit on the school bench and study the Level(s) objectives, as many of today's house designs blatantly violate parts of the Level(s) objectives. The fifth Level(s) objective is to take account of the increasing weather phenomena caused by climate change in the appearance and design of houses. New house designs often have very narrow eaves, which expose the exterior to increasingly heavy rains. This is also identified as one of the problems in new and old houses. Also, dark exteriors, almost black, will become a problem as the climate warms and houses become like shingles.
2. The rise of CLT construction
The main building material is still of little importance, except in terms of price and preferences; people choose the building material that suits them best within their budget. But the reality is that wood (despite the fact that it sequesters carbon) is inferior to CLT (which is recyclable, cross-laminated solid wood) and stone houses or concrete is the worst in terms of climate impact especially when considering the whole life cycle. When looking at the whole life cycle of a building, materials should be as recyclable and low-carbon as possible, and their use should have as little environmental impact as possible. At present, however, CLT is a minimal building material compared to the most common building material in the world, concrete.
3. Concrete is not going away for a while, if ever
Concrete is still one of the most cost-effective, accessible and durable building materials and there is still a long way to go before substitutes for concrete can take over the number one spot. Concrete is still one of the worst environmental pollutants in terms of CO2 emissions, as the production of its constituent cement produces a large amount of carbon dioxide. It is worth noting that when you Google the environmental impact of concrete, those selling and lobbying for the material come up high in the search results. However, it is still worth looking a little deeper into the net for accurate and objective information.
4. Inflationary spiral - raising construction costs and forgetting green values
With construction costs having officially risen by almost 10% in a year, it's clear that cost savings will be sought where they are found; by both sellers and buyers. In many cases, environmentally friendly solutions are still more expensive than alternatives that rely on fossil fuels or pollute the environment. Not everything can be influenced, but the question arises as to why geothermal heating and solar panels are not subject to the same subsidies or forms of subsidy as electric cars, since self-sufficiency in houses with virtually emission-free energy solutions would make Finland a pioneering country.
Minna
