Banks are in favour of receiving support from other agencies and organisations e.g., ESCOs. This can lead to a better evaluation of the investments for energy-saving projects in the residential buildings sector.
Banks consider that the investment process can be smoother if other actors are involved in activities such as preparing a credible dossier that will present a holistic approach on how investments in residential energy-saving projects would be best viable for all parties.
The One Stop Shop model could be useful for supporting the wider outreach of financial schemes like the ‘I am Saving – I am getting Autonomous”.
One Stop Shops can benefit building owners by understanding the benefits of energy upgrades since the main operation objective is to act as a source of information and guidance.
One Stop Shops are also useful tools for boosting private capital for energy renovation.
Tools such as the OSSs and the Building Renovation Passports can be leading examples of how the owners can be activated and mobilised and how the respective market can be strengthened with the use of private resources.
Step-by-step energy renovation, as proposed under the Building Renovation Passports scheme, can also support the increase of private capital, and mobilise the building owners to proceed with energy renovations.
Effort is needed for more effective and advanced communication actions to increase the owners’ knowledge regarding the benefits of energy savings. Such actions can increase the demand for energy renovation in the residential sector.
To achieve the maximum results of the communication actions, the cooperation of all market actors is needed.
The policy recommendation for the development and establishment of One Stop Shops in Greece, as part of the SMAFIN project activities, will benefit all market actors and can contribute positively to the achievement of the national energy reduction targets.
The energy consumption data validity is under question for the municipal buildings. According to data derived from various studies, the potential for energy savings is shown to be higher than the savings based on actual consumption.
To achieve a ‘cheaper’ in terms of interest rate financing, a guarantee mechanism for energy efficiency contracts is proposed.
For more ‘cheap’ bank financing for the ESCOs, a guarantee mechanism is needed to ensure that the ESCOs are paid on time as the guaranteed sizes of energy savings are achieved.
To increase the market confidence and to achieve better control, a mixed partnership contract involving various financing actors is suggested.
Grouping projects is considered difficult for municipal projects while the same difficulty is also applied to central government buildings.
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) should consider the multiple benefits of energy efficiency. In this case, the ratios are higher, which is also a market demand.
The taxonomy framework is considered complex and demanding in terms of technical compliance including all its provisions. More specialised technical support for all stakeholders is needed.
Taxonomy compliance is done with a simple attestation, and self-declaration, however, it is important that this compliance is monitored and confirmed by a process. It is easy to assess the available data, but it is difficult to verify compliance with the requirements of the Directive.
There is a need to define the process for monitoring and control of the obligations even if there are no sanctions yet. The process should consider also that the eligible economic activities and the final control criteria could be changed in the future.
There is a provision to extend the Taxonomy framework to also cover the social dimensions in later stages, and not only the environmental effect and impact of the investments.
Companies offering sustainability services face challenges during the implementation. There is a need to implement a common calculation framework, between the effects of power generation and energy efficiency interventions, to ensure both comparability of results and indicators.
Stakeholders need to understand the obligations and the limitations that derive from the framework of the EU Taxonomy classification system while stakeholders require clarifications for the unclear parts.
Many companies are not aware of the steps that need to be followed. Technical support is needed provided with a specific methodology. Technical support must be delivered to all parties involved concerning the needs, requirements, and expectations of the stakeholders.
The implementation of homogeneous procedures for the calculation of indicators is a prerequisite, the procedures of both calculation and data collection must be standardised.
The required data collection procedures needed for the calculation of indicators should be gradually built and developed so that in two years the stakeholders will be much more ready.
The experiences from the implementation of energy upgrading in two buildings, considering the technical requirements of the EU Taxonomy, conclude that there is a big issue mainly in all these actions related to the circular economy and the management of waste from demolition and there is no framework and from here the issue arises that compliance must be present in all steps of the investment and not only in the production and saving of energy.
Regarding the standardisation and certification to facilitate compliance with the Taxonomy requirements, a list should be built for the eligible equipment that meets all these technical criteria to facilitate the proper and compliant selection.
Greater emphasis should be placed in this context on the social dimension and the impact on human health.