A myopic focus on energy performance may blind European policymakers to the fire safety risks

As Europe recovers from one of the hottest summers on record, national governments across the European Union are preparing to transform the buildings in which millions of people live and work. Renovating this ageing building stock is essential to meeting Europe’s climate goals, but this drive for energy efficiency must not come at the expense of fire safety.

The programme is being driven by the EU’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), the bloc’s central piece of legislation for improving the energy performance of the continent’s buildings. The policy is moving from Brussels legislation to national policies as 16 European countries submitted national renovation plans in July 2026.

The plans show the scale of the transformation ahead. Many countries are targeting renewables to provide 40% to 90% of buildings’ energy by 2030, while the plans envisage primary energy consumption falling by 24% to 73% by 2050.

Eighty-five per cent of buildings in the EU were constructed before 2000, meaning much of the transition will involve retrofitting buildings that were designed for a very different energy system — and, in many cases, a very different climate.

Many of these older buildings, while inefficient and expensive to keep warm, were built with solid non-combustible materials such as brick, stone and concrete. As they are renovated with new insulation, cladding, PV panels and EV charging stations, they must keep the same level of fire performance rather than erode it. This needs to be a design requirement, not an afterthought.

0% The percentage of homes in France that were built before 1945 – which makes the challenge of renovating to meet the EU’s standards different to somewhere such as Cyprus, where just 2% predate 1945

A coalition of liberal politicians in the European Parliament is arguing that the EPBD does not adequately account for the different building standards across member states. In France, for example, where 33% of homes were built before 1945, the challenge of renovating to meet the EU’s standards is different to somewhere such as Cyprus, where just 2% predate 1945.

The varying ages of European buildings creates a patchwork of different risk environments. Studies suggest that older buildings built with stone and concrete are better at containing fire than modern ones built with combustible materials, such as untreated wood and plastics.

The broader environment differs too. Buildings in southern Europe face greater exposure to wildfires and extreme heat than those in Europe’s cooler northern countries. An approach that performs well in one context will not necessarily be the right choice in another.

The EPBD states that energy-efficiency measures should not affect other building requirements, including fire safety

The rules already provide a certain level of flexibility, explains EU spokesperson, Ricardo Cardoso. “The subsidiarity principle approach continues even further from national level to regional and even local levels as this is where the best knowledge and understanding of local context, needs and requirements reside,” says Cardoso.

Nor, does the EPBD simply tell countries to improve energy performance and leave fire safety behind, he adds. The directive explicitly states that energy-efficiency measures should not affect other building requirements, including fire safety.

In practice however, fire safety can often find itself competing for resources. A review of EU-funded building renovation in Romania found “that at least 90% from the total allocation shall be used for energy efficiency works and not more than 10% of the allocation shall be used for seismic consolidation and other complementary works (such as fire safety, accessibility etc).”

But the scale of the renovation programme also presents an opportunity. If millions of European buildings are going to be opened up, insulated, rewired and fitted with new energy systems, this is a chance to address fire-safety deficiencies at the same time. That includes choosing non-combustible insulation and facade materials wherever fire risk is elevated such as in high-rise or high-risk buildings.

The alternative is to retrofit buildings for a new energy system and leave the underlying fire-safety risks untouched, or, worse, introduce new ones. Some of the materials commonly used to hit energy targets are combustible. Rolling them out across millions of buildings without regard for fire performance would multiply that risk as a moment where Europe should be reducing it.

Fire safety should therefore not be treated as a competing objective to energy efficiency, but as part of the same transformation. Europe’s renovation race is making its buildings more energy efficient. With the right approach, it could also make them safer – in short, creating a new generation of energy efficient and fire safe buildings.