By January 2030, all residential buildings in the EU must meet at least an E energy efficiency rating, and by January 2033, this will rise to a D rating or better. By 2040, all buildings must achieve an A or B rating.
I wouldn't say that an energy efficiency assessment hurts, but it's also limited in what it can do to improve the situation. An apartment built with 0 insulation and natural gas heating just isn't going to be environmentally friendly without completely bulldozing the complex.
Transparency is good, but I think most renters really just won't care.
The cost of retrofitting energy efficiency is massive compared to the cost of building an apartment with energy efficiency in mind in the first place. That's why striking on new builds is so important.
For vehicles, bad gas milage sucks and it should be regulated to keep it down. However, we are talking about products with somewhat short lifecycles destine to be melted down and turned into a new car in the next 20 years.
Where are you getting 22+?
Definitely an update to my mental model though.
[1] https://autorecyclingworld.com/what-is-the-lifespan-of-a-veh...
My experience is that apartment units tend to have low utility rates anyhow, particularly in larger buildings where only 1 or 2 of 6 surfaces (walls, floor, ceiling) will have any outside exposure.
If you're not too particular about temperature, it's often possible to "coast" based on the heating/cooling of your neighbours rather than heating or cooling your own space. Temperate climates such as California further reduce need for interior climate control, though construction is also correspondingly less well weather-proofed (insulated, wrapped, weather-stripped) than in colder, hotter, or more humid climates.
You could mandate buildings get an energy efficiency assessment. But I imagine that will go the way of carbon credits contracts and such - mostly lies.