「英中对照」CIBSE净零负责人评析征求意见中的伦敦规划草案建筑节能低碳政策

Julie Godefroy

The draft London Plan is open for consultation until 15 October. Some of its proposals for sustainability policies (GHR1 to GHR11) are based on measurable outcomes, which is a very welcome shift and one for which CIBSE has long argued. 伦敦规划草案 公开征求意见至10月15日。其可持续发展政策（GHR1至GHR11）的部分提案基于可衡量的成果，这是非常可喜的转变，也是CIBSE长期以来所倡导的。

The approach to energy and operational carbon changes from a relative reduction beyond Building Regulations to absolute energy use intensity (EUI) and space-heating demand targets, complemented by onsite renewables and a minimum five years of post-occupancy reporting. 在能源和运行碳方面，相关方法从超出《建筑法规》要求的相对减排，转变为绝对能源使用强度（EUI）和空间供暖需求目标，并辅以 现场可再生能源和至少五年的用后报告。

This is really positive: targets expressed as improvement on Building Regulations make it difficult to compare performance with targets and to track progress over time; an absolute metric (for example, kWh^.m^-2 per year) gives a stable and comparable benchmark. 这确实具有积极意义：以相对于《建筑法规》的改进来表述目标，会使实际性能难以与目标相比较，也难以随时间跟踪进展；而绝对指标（例如，每年 kWh^.m^-2）可提供稳定且可比较的基准。

The proposals include ‘baseline’ and ‘aspirational’ limits. The latter are aligned with the UK Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard (NZCBS) limits for 2040 onwards, except for offices – where the London Plan is more ambitious – and industrial buildings. Here, the NZCBS differentiates between logistics and distribution sectors, and data centres. 提案包含“基准”限值和“进取”限值。后者与英国净零碳建筑标准（NZCBS）2040年起的限值一致，但办公楼和工业建筑除外；伦敦规划对办公楼的目标更为宏远。在工业建筑方面，NZCBS对物流配送行业和数据中心作了区分。

However, the wording on refurbishments is ambiguous, seemingly without EUI limits. This must be addressed, as long argued by CIBSE, particularly now that the NZCBS offers an approach and possible EUI limits. 然而，关于改造的措辞含糊不清，似乎没有EUI限值。必须解决这一问题，CIBSE长期以来一直如此主张，尤其是眼下NZCBS已提供一种方法和可能的EUI限值。

It is proposed to drop carbon offsetting, which has been used unevenly. The GLA Carbon Offset Funds monitoring report shows that around half of the £170m collected since 2016 has been spent, with some boroughs spending more than 80% of their funds and others less than 15%.提案拟取消实施情况一直不均衡的碳抵消机制。GLA 碳抵消基金监测报告显示，自2016年以来收取的£170m中约有一半已经支出，一些自治市支出了其资金的80%以上，而另一些则不足15%。

An absolute metric gives a stable and comparable benchmark 绝对指标可提供稳定且可比较的基准

The largest category of funded projects is, however, a genuine positive – energy efficiency projects in council estates, schools and social housing, as well as projects such as heat networks decarbonisation. If offsetting goes, other funding streams will be needed.然而，获资助项目中最大的类别是一个真正的积极进展 ——市政住宅区、学校和社会住房的能效项目，以及热力网络脱碳等项目。如果取消碳抵消，就需要其他资金渠道。

GHR2 requires a low carbon heat appraisal on all major schemes, with heat-source selection based on upfront and whole life costs and carbon. This is a positive response to CIBSE’s repeated concern that heat networks are too often encouraged for their potential to deliver carbon savings, without actual delivery. However, the draft policy relies heavily on the national heat network zoning regime, under which connection can become mandatory in designated zones, with concerns about carbon content of heat limits and how they will be calculated (potentially continuing to favour gas-fed CHP). This is a real limitation to delivering low carbon heat, and ambition could be raised in the Plan. GHR2要求所有重大项目开展低碳供热评估，热源选择基于前期成本、全生命周期成本和碳排放。这积极回应了CIBSE一再提出的担忧：热力网络往往因具备碳减排潜力而受到过多鼓励，却未实际兑现减排。然而，政策草案严重依赖国家热力网络分区制度；在该制度下，指定区域内可能强制连接热力网络，同时存在对热力碳含量限值及其计算方式的担忧（这可能继续有利于燃气热电联产（CHP））。这是推动低碳供热的一个实际局限，该规划本可提高目标雄心。 

GHR3 introduces upfront embodied carbon targets for new build. This is very welcome, building on how much industry has moved on in recent years, with whole life carbon assessments in the current London Plan, more widespread skills and data, and the NZCBS. GHR3为新建建筑引入前期隐含碳目标。这非常受欢迎，它依托近年来行业的长足发展，以及现行伦敦规划中的全生命周期碳评估、更为普及的技能与数据和NZCBS。

The limits for residential schemes below 11m and for Class E buildings are broadly aligned with the NZCBS. An important distinction is residential schemes above 11m, for which limits are much higher than in the NZCBS. 11m以下住宅项目和E类建筑的限值与NZCBS大体一致。一个重要区别是11m以上的住宅项目， 其限值比NZCBS中的限值高得多。

The policy also requires a pre-redevelopment audit, assessing retention before demolition. This is a step forward, but it only asks for assessing and reporting, not meeting a fixed test. A more robust approach could be taken – for example, following Westminster’s Retrofit First policy – and retrofit projects could be subject to limits; for example, following the NZCBS. 该政策还要求进行重新开发前审计，在拆除前评估保留事宜。这是向前迈出的一步，但它仅要求评估和报告，而非满足固定标准。可以采取更有力的方法——例如遵循威斯敏斯特的 Retrofit First 政策——并且改造项目可受到限值约束；例如遵循 NZCBS。 

Other policies, and what’s missing其他政策，以及尚缺的内容

GHR4 strengthens the overheating mitigation hierarchy and expects shading on windows receiving direct sunlight. However, it sits oddly alongside a reduced 2.4m floor-to-ceiling standard and softened encouragement for dual-aspect dwellings (HN8).GHR4 强化了过热缓解层级，并要求受阳光直射的窗户采取遮阳措施。然而，它与下调至2.4米的地板至天花板高度标准、以及对双朝向住宅（HN8）鼓励力度的弱化放在一起，显得不甚协调。

Finally, for a number of years CIBSE has argued for more consistent and extensive monitoring of outcomes, both at scheme level and in aggregate, to track progress and inform future policy. 最后，多年来 CIBSE 一直主张在方案层面和总体层面对成效进行更一致、更广泛的监测，以跟踪进展并为未来政策提供依据。

The GLA’s energy monitoring reports have improved significantly from past headline averages: recent ones publish EUI and space-heating demand by typology (though often based on Part L rather than performance assessments), and whole life carbon against benchmark by module. GLA 的能源监测报告较过去笼统的总体平均值已有显著改进：近期报告按建筑类型公布 EUI 和空间供暖需求（尽管通常基于 Part L 而非性能评估），并按模块公布对照基准的全生命周期碳排放。

What remains missing is the ‘be seen’ in-use layer: the most recent report shows only a handful of as-built submissions and in-use reporting yet to follow. This is largely to be expected, as a development approved now will not generate its first in-use data for some time. Looking forward to what the data will reveal when it does get published! 仍然缺失的是“可见”的在用层面：最新报告显示仅有少量竣工状态提交，使用中报告仍有待跟进。这在很大程度上在意料之中，因为当前获批的开发项目在一段时间内不会产生首批使用中数据。期待这些数据真正发布时能够揭示什么！

About the author
Julie Godefroy is CIBSE head of net zero关于作者
Julie Godefroy 是 CIBSE 净 零主管

The post Is London measuring up? appeared first on CIBSE Journal.文章 伦敦是否达标？ 最早发表于 CIBSE Journal。