On the surface, it certainly seems illogical to raise upfront, out-of-pocket costs at a time when every penny counts.
But there are times when inflicting temporary pain in the pocketbook now leads to innumerable gains later. This is one of those times.
Late last week, the Boston City Council heard arguments in favor of further strengthening the city’s building rules to provide for a 20 percent increase in overall energy efficiency in new residential and commercial buildings.
The knee-jerk reaction from builders, developers and financiers was as predictable as it was short-sighted: This will unnecessarily and unfairly increase building costs and stifle design options at a time when we all can ill-afford it.
They’re right, of course. It is more expensive, on the surface, to implement today’s most energy-efficient systems, building methods and materials. Solar panels, low-energy light fixtures, green roofs and seemingly space-age HVAC machinery are all hugely expensive. Additionally, their very scarcity ensures their added expense, as only a select few professionals have the expertise and wherewithal to install and maintain said systems – and they charge a premium for it.
But carping about today’s costs ignores the wider view. Today’s state-of-the-art is tomorrow’s run-of-the-mill, and the evidence is all around us. In little more than a decade, we now have more computing power in our phones than we did in our very first wildly expensive, bulky laptops.
Of course, making that analogy inevitably triggers the “free market” response: That consumer demand and market forces dictated those advances, not heavy-handed mandates from on high. Generally, we find that argument to be correct, but it’s out of place in this context.
In this case, mandating stricter energy efficiency guidelines on all new construction merely hastens an already ongoing process. While it’s true that yes, some cutting-edge developers, designers, first adopters, large tenants and other innovators are already going as green as possible on their own, the vast majority of the commercial sector isn’t. This forces them to catch up.
Yes, costs will be high to begin with. But economies of scale dictate that as more demand for currently expensive technologies and materials crops up, prices will by necessity come down as more manufacturers join the competition for business.
Designers complaining that stricter efficiency requirements might take some tried-and-true design elements like glass lobbies off the table are also proving themselves out of touch. The “problems” inherent in designing around code have been around for decades, and have spawned a variety of innovative, creative solutions. We think Boston’s Zakim Bridge, for example, is as practical as it is innovative and beautiful.
Partnering with designers in the challenges imposed by efficiency mandates can, should and will be the region’s countless high-tech innovators. Emboldened by a sudden surge in demand for their knowledge, current laboratory technologies like automatically tinting glass and solar-powered ventilation can’t help but make their way from the lab to the job site. And this can only further help propel our region’s innovation economy, building on a leadership position we’re only tenuously clinging to at the moment.
Finally, we must applaud city leadership for being as practical as they are being far-sighted. Yes, solar panels and associated technologies are expensive – and so city bean-counters have created a series of tax breaks and permit fee reductions designed to help ease the burden. Is it unreasonable to assume that further creativity in financing will help make efficiencies more affordable?
In the end, we don’t think it unwise or unfair for our leaders to actually exhibit some form of leadership – particularly in areas where we’ve already exhibited some aptitude on our own. Boston ranks among the world leaders in green ideas and building. This is a logical extension of that position.
In this instance we can’t help but think the efficiency pros of tomorrow outweigh the expensive cons of today. By a wide margin.
