If the standard requires to throw away good material, then they are certainly fucked up.
Discussion
But an energy standard doesn't require throwing away good material, quite the opposite tbh
That's how you see it. An me also. But maybe not the bureaucrats
But blaming the energy standard instead of the bureaucrats basically promotes denialism while we're in danger of wiping out all known life via pollution
Life will still be on this planet when the Sun swells up and swallows it, anything humanity does to it will be totally irrelevant in the fullness of time. Humanity is so close to spreading life across the universe but those bureaucrats are destroying any future humanity and life have.
What life do you know of that can survive the planet being inside the sun? Do you hear yourself?
It is unlikely that any life will survive on Earth after been swallowed by the Sun, but humanity will be taking life to the Stars long before that UNLESS we are stopped by the Net Zero idiots that want to stop any progress for humanity. Make no mistake, whilst the green lobby does things that tug the heartstrings of the easily lead astray, its overall objectives are anti-life over the long term. I have no objections to new buildings being built to the highest standards but destroying beauty and history just for some bureaucrats tick sheets is evil and pointless.
You're making no sense.
My point is if we make ourselves extinct with pollution, we also might make everything extinct because we might be the only species that can do space travel.
You're saying "no, the people trying to stop us from going extinct with pollution are wrong, we avoid extinction by dying and traveling space in our freed souls instead of our actual bodies"
*Sigh* I realise that you might be a little bit hard of thinking so I will try and keep this simple enough for you to understand it. Humanity is not going to make itself extinct through pollution. Whilst it is a good idea to reduce our impact on the planet, those who are really pushing the green agenda do not want us getting off planet or doing anything that raises the possibility of life getting spread beyond this planet. The whole deindustrialisation of the west and the imposition of Carbon Taxes and related control regimes is designed to keep power in the hands of a very small number of people whilst the rest of us get depopulated down to a more controllable number. These people have weaponised humanity's desire to be good people in a very destructive and self-harming direction by turning us against any form of progress and development - you just have to see how often they try and get the narrative about expansion into space turned around by taking about "the hungry and homeless" as if the money spent on space travel somehow doesn't stay on Earth getting cycled around again and again!
Humanity will make great strides in cleaning up this planet by getting heavy industry off of it! Most of humanities problems have been caused by people needing more breathing space and resources, once we are off this rock, the possibilities are endless! Net Zero and the rest of the Climate Change narrative is a dead end that the human race needs to avoid in order to get to a much better future for both us and the planet!
My point stands that it's not an "ecological regulation" making you waste good material
If you can give me some reason stucco is worse for the environment than the replacement, and prove you're doing something safer with the stucco than just leaving it up, then sure, call that environmentalism
But I don't see any evidence for that stuff
Idek if I understood you right