The National Association of Governors is the latest legislative group to support the American Institute of Architects' goal of zeroing out new and renovated buildings' greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

The NGA -- which is convening in Biloxi, Miss., for its annual meeting -- endorsed the AIA goal as part of a resolution on energy efficiency and conservation. The U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National Association of Counties have also endorsed the AIA goal by vowing to integrate provisions related to the built environment in their energy policies.

"Governors believe that the federal government should maintain its central role in promoting funding and developing a wide-ranging program of energy conservation and improved energy efficiency that considers all sectors of the economy," NGA's resolution noted. "Such a program should be cooperatively developed and implemented by the states and the federal government working together as full partners."

NGA's resolution opens the door for the AIA to promote in every state a "green" construction code that the International Code Council is developing. The code -- which will be compatible with the AIA's 2030 carbon-neutrality target -- will include water, energy, air-quality and safety benchmarks that states and cities may adopt starting in late 2011.

The House passed legislation last month that would force laggards to boost their energy efficiency.

H.R. 2454, sponsored by Democratic Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Edward Markey of Massachusetts, would require residential and commercial buildings to be 30 percent more efficient than the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code. The efficiency target would ramp up to 50 percent for residential and commercial buildings by 2014 and 2015, respectively, and would increase 5 percent every three years through 2030 (Greenwire, June 30).

Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said she plans to introduce legislation next month that integrates the House bill's provisions.

"The Waxman-Markey bill is the mark we're working off to write our bill," Boxer said. "I would say tweaks are more of what you're going to see than major changes."

Reprinted from Greenwire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. www.eenews.net, 202-628-6500

2 Comments

1. 1. Chisight 09:27 PM 7/21/09

   Laws like these that focus on the specifics of how to reduce carbon are doomed to failure, they'll generate a huge bureaucracy of rules and red tape that only further increases the cost of construction and decrease the number of more efficient buildings built. If governors want to decrease carbon output, they should tax carbon sources (aka oil) and let the market figure out what mix of fixing older homes/improving newer homes should be done. Pollution taxes also automatically decide how much of the changes should happen in buildings and how much should happen in transportation. If they need to address the regressiveness of this, then use specific laws to assist the poor in dealing with the cost of being more carbon efficient. (and not laws that assist the poor in continuing to be carbon inefficient)

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. jerryd 06:27 PM 7/25/09

   
   I don't understand why anyone would want a home that wasn't energy eff. It doesn't cost more if designed right and can even cost much less if one tries..
   
   I agree a tax on fossil fuels would be the best way as they are now subsidized big time. If you put that cost in them instead of our income taxes, health care costs, pollution then the market would sort itself out. But even then some basic standards should be set. And from that income get an income tax cut and help switching to more eff homes, transport
   .
   And no reason most homes, buildings can't make much if not all their own power. My next one will make much more power than needed for a check from the utility each month as part of my retirement income.
   
   Plus it will recharge my EV's I already have so my transport costs is close to Zero. Remember it's not how much you make, but how much you spend. Buy with an eye for the future and you'll be much better off.
   
   I do RE and you can buy a good, reliable 1kw wind generators now for $1k for home use. If handy one can make a good windgen for $300 in parts. Yahoo Axial Flux for info or join one of the many RE groups.
   
   As for solar a CSP unit not only make 25-35% eff power but makes heat, hot water too for a home making it much more eff than a solar farm.
   
   Now add homeowners pay 2x's as much for their power and payback is much faster, in /2 the time plus no transmission lines, land, labor which can cost as much as a solar/wind farm does.
   
   Personally I can build my own equipment for 1/10th going prices so my payback is in a yr or so. In fact make money getting a check each month from the utility.
   
   If connected to the grid no storage is needed and even if not storage is not that expensive. Nor is it a burden on the utility by being variable as they are already set up for that as loads are even more variable. And solar happen when most needed so is actually more valuable.
   
   In fact one can make money even charging batteries at night cheaply and selling it back in the day.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this