ENERGY EFFICIENCY RATINGS

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (15:56): I seek leave to make an explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question about six star green ratings.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In May 2006, the minister announced an increase from four star to five star energy efficiency requirements. I will paraphrase the information contained in his media release, because I think there is a grammatical error in it. He stated that increased energy efficiency would help meet the target in the South Australian Strategic Plan (target 3.10) to increase energy efficiency of dwellings by 10 per cent within 10 years.

In May 2008, in a further media release from the minister and the Premier, it was stated that every property in the Blakeview development would have a five star energy rating, with a solar boosted hot water service in every house. More recently, honourable members may recall that last month the minister announced that, as of 1 September 2010, all new homes and home extensions must meet six star energy efficiency requirements. My questions are:

1. What contribution did the 2006 requirement make to the government's State Strategic Plan target?

2. Why are the new targets for increased efficiency not going to be a requirement for existing homes?

3. What percentage of South Australia's emissions come from existing residential dwellings?

4. What are the new requirements for electric gas-boosted solar hot water systems under the new six star requirements?

5. Given that the six star rating may add up to $5,000 to the cost of each home, will there be any offset for housing affordability, particularly for first home buyers?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:59): There are a number of questions there. I will take on notice some of the historical aspects of the questions and see what information can be gathered for the honourable member.

There are basically two ways the six star rating can be achieved. One is through meeting design parameters and the other is through achieving specific objectives that are set out in the building codes. Although those codes come under the Development Act and therefore are under my responsibility, they are developed by the relevant agencies that have responsibility for those matters.

I think the honourable member asked about the requirement for existing homes and why it is not retrospective. Obviously that would impose a significant burden on existing homeowners. The average life of a residential dwelling is something of the order of 40 years, and that is why it is important that we strive to ensure that all homes are energy efficient when they are built because they do have a long life. Of course, in relation to retrofitting, that would add significantly to the cost. That brings me to the last part of the honourable member's question which was about cost. In fact, the government believes—and it is the advice that we have had—that requiring a six star rating for residential dwellings should not add undue cost to new homes.

Our advice is that many of the homes that are built by the largest builders in this city are close to (if not above) a six star rating. The main way in which the six star rating can be achieved over the current five star rating is often just the orientation of the building and good design. I think the honourable member used a figure of $5,000; that should not be the case. In fact, for most builders, we believe that the cost would be much less than that. Of course, that needs to be set off against the savings that will be made. In the press release the honourable member was referring to, I provided a figure—I think it was up to about $320 per year or something of that order—that householders could save through having a more energy efficient building because of the better design of that home and the greater ability not to lose energy in winter or require extra cooling in summer.

So, there are significant savings which should apply to all new housing that is compliant with the six star rating relative to other housing. They will be significant savings, and we believe that the benefits of those savings should significantly offset any costs. As I said, the advice I had was that very few of the major builders in this city would not now be producing something fairly close to a six star rating. What is important is the orientation of housing on blocks to ensure that energy efficiency is achieved. There are some other questions the honourable member raised that were of a more historical nature, and I will take those on notice.