States, Localities Push Code Case for Energy Efficiency

MBA (5/7/2008 ) Murray, Michael
Local and federal policies requiring property owners to improve energy efficiency in buildings are increasing 15 percent to 50 percent above existing building code requirements, but a new report questions whether one standard should apply to all property types.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors passed a resolution last year at the state and local level pledging to work toward standards that would require all new buildings to reduce fossil fuel, greenhouse gas (GHG)-emitting energy usage by 60 percent in 2010, 70 percent in 2015, 80 percent in 2020, 90 percent in 2025 and to be carbon neutral by 2030. The city of Dallas recently started requirements for new buildings to improve their energy performance by 15 percent above current energy standards.

The National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency—under the Environmental Protection Agency—said energy codes typically specify requirements for “thermal resistance” in a building’s shell and windows and they provide standards for minimum air leakage and minimum efficiency for heating and cooling equipment.

Most commercial building energy codes are based on ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers). The energy code that applies to most residential buildings is the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), which supersedes the Model Energy Code (MEC).

“These measures can help eliminate inefficient construction practices and technologies with only modest increases in up-front project costs,” the EPA group said. “New construction and major renovation represent cost-effective times to incorporate energy-efficiency measures into buildings because these improvements save energy throughout the life of those buildings and can be expensive to adopt later. Building energy codes are typically developed at the national level, adopted at the state level and implemented and enforced by local governments.”

A recent study conducted by Newport Partners LLC, Davidsonville, Md., Strategies and Costs to Exceed ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Requirements in a Multifamily Apartment Building, commissioned by the National Multi Housing Council, said a codes-based approach to energy conservation puts extreme pressure on developers and owners to upgrade specific building characteristics, leaving the vast majority of building energy use, including appliances, unaffected.

A 30 percent or 50 percent increase above the standard ASHRAE 90.1 code would include “practical and financial barriers,” and a 50 percent increase would not be possible for most buildings to achieve with today’s technology, the Newport Partners report said.

“A 30 percent or 50 percent increase in code requirements will not result in an equivalent decrease in whole-building energy consumption. For instance, these codes do not regulate residential appliances, like refrigerators, washing machines, lighting and home entertainment equipment, which account for more than 65 percent of energy use in residential buildings,” the report said.

The study examined energy modeling in three different climate zones—Atlanta, Houston and Chicago—to determine product and practice requirements to exceed existing code requirements by 15 percent, 30 percent and 50 percent as well as costs of the investments.

Newport Partners found that advanced window technology, solar shading and stepped-up R-value insulation would increase building performance by 1 percent or less in many cases. However, water heating improvements, advanced in-unit lighting units and onsite-renewable power generation would not count for “better than code” efficiency mandates because the ASHRAE baseline does not consider the changes under its current energy standards.

As of January, Georgia could show energy-efficiency compliance in residential and commercial properties through ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or IECC 2006.

In Texas, the IECC 2003 was adopted statewide for state funded residential buildings in September 2005 as well as the ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-2004 for state funded commercial buildings, but other residential and commercial properties use the 2001 IECC for commercial and residential properties.

The IECC 2006 applies to commercial properties in Illinois with no state building code standard for residential properties.

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) estimated upgrading residential building codes could save a state—on average—nearly $650 million in homeowner energy bills during a 30-year time frame.

“With energy consumption expected to rise 20 percent in the residential sector and 19 percent in the commercial sector by 2020, the potential energy savings from further building code improvements can be significant,” ACEEE said.

In March, a Wisconsin Task Force on Global Warming examining Residential & Commercial Energy Efficient and Green Building Codes said reducing green house gas emissions would improve energy efficiency by 30 percent more than prior codes in commercial buildings while residential/multifamily codes would improve efficiency by 15 percent above prior codes by 2020.

The task force said updating the state commercial building code to reflect the IECC 2006 model could receive opposition because of uncertainty in future content and local impact as well as the ability to enforce commercial building codes.

Despite these issues, the task force estimated total reduction of 1.7 million metric tons by 2020 from an improved commercial building code and 0.3 million metric tons by 2020 from improved residential/multifamily codes. Commercial codes would improve efficiency by 30 percent above prior codes while residential/multifamily codes would improve efficiency by 15 percent from prior codes by the year 2020.

The National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency reported that in all 50 states, the savings potential for IECC adoption is 6.6 quadrillion BTUs in more than 20 years, and it would reduce more than 100 million metric tons of carbon equivalent emissions.

“States and municipalities benefit from greater investment in energy-efficient capital equipment and new jobs installing equipment and monitoring building compliance,” the EPA group said. “While spending on energy services typically sends money out of state, dollars saved from efficiency tend to be re-spent locally. Codes become even more cost-effective during periods of high heating and cooling fuel prices.”