Strategies to Promote Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Advanced State Codes

Following my previous post on Laggards, this post intends to detail the status of advanced state codes, the middle of the curve. There are now a growing number of states that develop and maintain their own building code. Some states, like Massachusetts and California, have policy goals to reach zero-energy buildings in the future. Read my previous post on defining zero-net energy for more information on that. And now forgive me for focusing on California, as it is the state I know best. 

California's building code is called Title 24. Part 6 of Title 24 governs energy efficiency in all occupancies in the state. The first Title 24 was established in the mid-seventies by the Warren-Alquist Act. This act created the California Energy Commission (CEC) with the mandate to reduce "wasteful, inefficient, unnecessary, or uneconomic uses of energy." The Act has been revised many times and now directs the CEC to develop mandatory energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances that are cost-effective and in the public interest. With such a broad mandate the CEC has been an aggressive force in bringing efficiency into the mainstream. In fact, their current policy is to reach zero-net energy homes by 2020 and commercial buildings by 2030. In addition they have a mandate to develop water efficiency standards which impact energy quite a lot in California. 

To date the energy efficiency building and appliance standards in California have avoided the construction of nearly six 500MW power plants since 1975, dubbed the "Rosenfeld effect." California is not the only success story. Much of the pacific northwest has been implementing strong building codes for a while. From a recently released study by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, the region has saved approximately 1,800 aMW since 1978 through building and appliance standards. That's almost 4 mid-sized power plants.

States like California, Massachusetts, the Pacific Northwest, New York and Florida have all discovered on their own that mandatory building codes and appliance standards make a lot of sense. They are the fastest and cheapest resource available to deploy energy efficiency throughout the state. Unfortunately, there is still much opposition within these states to enhancing the building code. Despite the fact that these programs can cost as little as 1-2 cents/kwhr, outcompeting coal generation, home builders and the construction industry frequently oppose increased efficiency in the code. Industry complains that mandatory standards undermine creativity and flexibility, which they need to compete. In fact, mandatory standards can increase competition by creating a more transparent and fair market. In addition, we have many examples of an industry unwilling to explore efficiency because of the lack of recognition or simply laziness. Think about car companies here. We simply cannot afford to not regulate these folks.

No one likes to be regulated, but we need to realize that carefully developed regulations can be a great thing. Those six power plants we didn't build in California is money in our pockets and greenhouse gases never emitted. If we build more efficiently, always pushing the limit with mandatory regulations, we will build a strong, independent country. If we believe in the misinformation campaigns industries like to put together, we will build more power plants.