In the final days of 2010, the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) released the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020.
This 130-plus page report was issued in accordance with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008. The act requires the EEA to reduce 1990 greenhouse gas emission levels statewide between 10 percent and 25 percent by 2020.
The EEA opted for the most aggressive target — a 25 percent reduction by 2020.
To accomplish this across-the-board reduction in the upcoming decade, the EEA looked at five different categories for reduction efforts: buildings, electricity supply, transportation, non-energy emissions and cross-cutting policies.
The category facing the largest reduction is the building sector. Specifically, the EEA is targeting the building sector to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a total of 9.8 percent – roughly 40 percent of the overall targeted 25 percent reduction.
To achieve its goal within the next decade, the EEA has proposed a plethora of new and expanded measures to reduce building greenhouse gas emissions.
Stretch Code Controversy
One of the proposals entails expanding the EEA’s building energy code policy. Under existing policy, the commonwealth has already committed to adopting the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code. Likewise, the Board of Building Regulations and Standards has approved a local option “stretch” energy code that has been adopted by approximately 60 communities in Massachusetts.
The local-option “stretch code” – unlike traditional building codes that prescribe the installation of specific energy measures – is a performance-based code. It mandates a percentage reduction in total building energy use, allowing developers to make their own design choices on how to achieve that reduction.
The stretch code, as it currently exists, is somewhat controversial. The Home Builders Association of Massachusetts has objected to the stretch code, which it contends would return the commonwealth to a fragmented building code process, without uniformity on a statewide basis, increasing costs to homebuilders and homeowners alike.
The proposed expanded policy would transition the existing code entirely to a performance-based code by the end of the decade for all communities. The EEA acknowledges that upfront design and construction costs are likely to increase under the expanded energy code policy, but contends that the developer can realize a return on the investment, by marketing the construction as high-performance buildings.
But the mortgage market is still tight. And recent housing market reports are not yet showing a rising demand for new construction.
The EEA is also looking for “deep” energy efficiency improvements in existing buildings. This involves retrofitting buildings with additional insulation and performance windows, and upgrading leak prevention efforts. The improvements exceed the standards of existing energy efficiency retrofit programs. The effort is being launched as a pilot project with utility companies, offering rebates to homeowners, as well as training and technical support.
While programs, policies and incentives to increase energy efficiency in existing construction are a necessary element of greenhouse gas emission reduction, many homeowners can’t afford the significant upfront costs of a “deep energy” retrofit – especially in the current economy.
The 2020 Clean Energy/Climate Plan is a forward-thinking approach to tackling the mandated reduction in greenhouse gases on many levels. To be effective in our current economy, however, the state has to be mindful of the struggling development community and homeowners in Massachusetts.
Attorney Stephanie A. Kiefer is of counsel at Smolak & Vaughan, North Andover. Her practice focuses on land use law and environmental permitting, as well as administrative and judicial appeal of permitting matters. She can be reaced at SKiefer@smolakvaughan.com.
