Building Energy Codes Prevent Climate Change

House Staff BriefingJune 22, 2009

Lowell UngarDirector of Policy

Alliance to Save Energy

Presentation Outline About the Alliance… Why building codes? How building codes are done now Advanced codes legislation

What is the Alliance? Mission: The Alliance to Save Energy promotes energy

efficiency worldwide to achieve a healthier economy, a cleaner environment, and greater energy security

Chaired by Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) and James Rogers (CEO, Duke Energy) with strong bipartisan congressional, corporate & public interest leadership.

Jim Rogers, CEO Duke Energy

Bi-partisan, bi-cameral Honorary Vice Chairs

What is the Alliance? NGO coalition of 150+ prominent business, government,

environmental and consumer leaders.

Conduct policy, education, research, technology deployment, market transformation and communication initiatives.

Headquartered in Washington, D.C. with operations in Eastern Europe, South Africa, Mexico, India and several states in the U.S.

Why Buildings? Buildings use 40% of energy in U.S.,

cause 40% of CO2 emissions Efficient buildings- Reduce stress on power grid and natural gas

supplies

- Improve air quality and public health

- Avoid global warming

- Save consumers money

Why Building Energy Codes?Key to making all new buildings more

efficient Makes homes more affordable- Monthly ownership cost lowered:

mortgage payment + utility bills Overcomes economic barriers- Split incentive: eg builders pay costs, buyers

pay energy bills Construction is cheapest and easiest time

to build in efficiency

Potential SavingsIf all states improved codes, by 2030 our

nation could save each year: 8% of total building energy use (4

quadrillion Btu) $28 billion in consumer energy bills greenhouse gas emissions of 46 million

autos (250 million tons of carbon dioxide)

How Codes are Set Independent professional organizations

develop national model building codes- DOE determines whether updates save

energy

- States adopt codes based on national models (sometimes with changes)States required to consider residential modelStates required to adopt commercial model

Local governments enforce codes

Codes Savings: inch by inch

Codes - Compliance A wide range of compliance rates:

Need more training and enforcement

AR – 55% MA – 46%

CA – 75% MT – 87%

IA – 53% OR – 100%

ID – 52% VT – 58%

LA – 65% WA – 94%

Codes Legislation: Goal Address national energy needs using

current process

Set national goals for energy savings Ensure development, adoption,

compliance

Codes Legislation: Status Sec. 201 in ACES- Similar provision in House-passed energy bills

last year Similar provision in Senate energy bill,

Lieberman-Warner climate bill last year

Proposal – Targets

National energy codes with aggressive energy savings targets:- 30% savings in 1 year- 50% savings in

2014 (homes), 2015 (comm.)

- 5% more savings every 3 years

New Building Goals American Institute of Architects,

U.S. Conference of Mayors, …- Reduce fossil fuel use for new and renovated

buildings by 60% in 2010, rising to 100% by 2030

ASHRAE (commercial building standards)- 2010 Standard 30% more stringent than 2004

IECC (residential)- 4 proposals for 30% savings in 2012

Tax incentives require 50% better than code- 50,000 new homes have met criteria

Proposal – Development ICC and ASHRAE get first chance, with

DOE help Backstop: DOE sets if they don’t

Proposal – Adoption Direct states to adopt national code or

equivalent within one year Backstop: If state and locality do not,

federal code is effective in that area

Proposal – Compliance Direct states to improve compliance- 90% of building space complies within 7 years

DOE help: 0.5% of all allowances to states, localities for code implementation

Stick: States lose increasing share of total allocation if fail to meet targets

Backstop: If states + localities still do not enforce, federal enforcement

Support for Codes Provision EEI APPA NRECA Duke National

Grid PNM PG&E SCE

NASEO AIA CFA NCLC ACEEE NEEP MEEA SWEEP SEEA

Sierra Club Audubon Environment

America NWF Greenpeace NRDC UCS

NAIMA PIMA NIA ICAA NFRC Johns

Manville Owens

Corning Honeywell

And many more (some based on last year’s language)

Thank You!Lowell Ungar

Alliance to Save Energy

Phone: (202) 857-0666

Email: lungar@ase.org

Website: www.ase.org

www.bcap-energy.org

Proposal – Model CodesICC/ASHRAE would still set models

Today Proposed

ICC and ASHRAE set models Same

DOE determines if models save energy

DOE determines if models meet targets

If they do not meet targets, DOE sets code that does

Proposal – AdoptionStates would still set building codes

Today Proposed

States set codes with DOE help Same

States directed to adopt commercial model, consider residential model

States directed to adopt both models or equivalent

If states and localities don't adopt, DOE does

Proposal – ComplianceLocalities, states would still enforce building codes

Today Proposed

Localities usually enforce codes, states assist

States directed to measure and improve compliance

0.5% of allowance value for codes implementation (states, localities split)

States lose allocation if don't meet targetsIf locals, state don’t, DOE enforces

Building Codes + Appliance Standards

Section 213(j) in ACES: In order to meet savings targets, codes

must address equipment as well as “envelope”- Often more efficient equipment makes sense

in new construction State codes preempted by federal

appliance standards, but need flexibility- Adopt requirements in national model- Provide alternative pathways, as long as at

least one pathway at base level