A Green Breakfast That Truly Satisfied Our Appetite for Green News!

By Cherie Ching, Advocacy Fellow

July 31, 2015

The Green Breakfast Forum: What's Cooking With Current Advocacy Efforts?

Our Advocacy Committee hosted a successful Green Breakfast Forum yesterday to highlight the recent Advocacy efforts made in our Chapter. With six Advocacy Priorities and six enthusiastic presenters, our forum turned out to be an exciting touchstone in our Chapter's momentum supporting many hot bills at the State House, and for continuing awareness and education on these issues. Starting with a brief introduction and history of USGBC Massachusetts Chapter, Cherie Ching kicked off the forum and encouraged questions and open discussion throughout the event.


Net Metering Improvements– David Bliss continued the Green Breakfast with the complicated and pressing issue of net metering. Giving a brief background on the origins of energy regulation of Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) enacted in 1978, David explained how net metering has become such an essential element for energy generation and renewable energy nationwide! The recent Bills S.1770 and S.1973, with Senator Downing's amendment, to lift the limits to net metering known as solar caps, triggered interesting comments and dialogue throughout David's presentation. The feedback that we received truly confirmed the complexities of net metering and that continuing this conversation with those of various fields from supporting and opposing sides is the most important. We also look forward to working in collaboration with Acadia Center and allied organizations.

 

Net Zero Energy Building (NZEB) Codes– Kate Bubriski kept the advocacy energies flowing by diving into Net Zero Energy Building codes and how Massachusetts, although maintaining decent progress, still has a long way to go to reach NZEB goals. Bill S.1771 would act as a dragnet for residential and commercial buildings to achieve net zero energy performance by 2020 and 2030 respectively. This bill also designates the Board of Building Regulations and Standards (BBRS) to establish definitions of zero net-energy for residential and commercial buildings. Kate emphasized the interconn
ectedness of supporting NZEB and the movement of the other Chapter Priorities, such as net metering and PACE. Although there are success stories already in the Commonwealth, such as with the Cambridge Net Zero Task Force, there was discussion about organizations in opposition to NZEB, such as NAIOP. We will continue to look towards NZEB as our priority by collaborating and learning from the steps taken by allied organizations. 

Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing– With John DiModica, PACE Issue Captain on the conference line and unable to present, Kate also spearheaded the PACE financing priority by explaining the role of PACE for property owners and project developers. Bill S.1774 would expand the current PACE legislation by allowing 100% project funding as a voluntary property tax assessment, not a loan. The assessment remains part of the property regardless if the property is sold or there is a change of ownership. Giving MassDevelopment state-wide bonding authority, this bill would encourage more energy efficiency and resiliency projects and renovations to commence. The presentation led to interesting discussion on the role of municipalities, which properties and buildings would be included in the bill, and the difference (and complications) of Residential PACE (which is not part of S.1774 and a significantly different policy issue). The MA PACE Coalition continues to work on a more aggressive advocacy approach to pushing PACE to the top of the priority list in the legislature.

Home Energy Assessment– Craig Foley took center stage in addressing many issues on Home Energy Assessments with much enthusiasm as he played devil's advocate on the pros and cons of Bill S.1761, An Act relative to home energy efficiency.” His presentation triggered many questions and concerns about the energy rating systems and requirements, how realtors would be affected, the benefits homeowners would receive, and the inherent energy characteristics v. occupancy energy consumption. Although net metering is taking away much attention from this important priority, we can voice our support for this bill to the legislature to push action. 

Energy Efficiency Education– Celis Brisbin highlighted the importance of Energy Efficiency Education for our Chapter, as well as for our State, in order to create more awareness and regularity of the green building certification process. Celis pointed out the many educational programs our Chapter offers such as LEED Credential Maintenance; LEED Green Associate Exam Prep Workshops; GPRO for Operations & Management; Construction Management, and other modules; Green Building tours; and Outreach & Education to the general public to support our advocacy agenda. Through Bill H.2857, USGBC MA can create more of a presence in the standardizing of green education in MA with the educational programs we already provide to our members!


Green Tax Incentives– Jerome Garciano finished off the Green Breakfast with a brief description of his research on green tax incentives through his Green Tax Incentive Compendium of July 2015. While Jerome further explained about the benefits and availability of these Federal and State tax incentives for renewable energy and energy efficiency, he passed around an impressive 131-pg. booklet detailing the tax incentives by jurisdiction, statute, technology, and amount. The discussion was directed to what Massachusetts would have to do to address expiring or expired tax incentives and what LEED-specific tax benefits would be available for our State. Jerome went further to describe New Mexico and Connecticut as being success stories for green building tax credit. The Advocacy Committee looks forward to continuing the dialogue on green tax incentive opportunities for our State in order to incentivize more property owners to choose the green building path!

Our Green Breakfast Forum came to a close a little later than expected, but surely our participants were going leaving with full stomachs and satisfied minds! Our loyal green participants took advantage of this opportunity to stick around, make connections, ask questions, as well as plan for the beach party, SOAK UP THE SUN rally to the State House happening right up the street in the next hour. Thank you for your participation, contribution, and interest in our Green Breakfast- Advocacy Forum.  We look forward to continuing our advocay movement and hope to see you at the next Green Breakfast on Thursday, August 20 on Architecture + Human Subconscious Responses to the Built-Environment!


We are currently editing our recorded-audio version of the Green Breakfast and it will be up on the GBCI website soon!

Please check out our slideshow presentation.

 

Making Energy Efficiency Visible in the Real Estate Market (Webinar)

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager


Making Energy Efficiency Visible in the Real Estate Market

To register for the webinar click here. 

Wednesday June 24, 2015

10am – 11am EST



As the brutal cold of winter 2015 fades to a memory, the question for an increasing number of potential home buyers is how to find a comfortable house that won't break the bank with high energy bills. 

Join NEEP on Wednesday June 24 from 10:00 to 11:00 EST for a webinar which will focus on the value of energy efficiency in the real estate market and provide a snapshot ofthe growing high-performance housing market.

RE/MAX's Chief of Energy Solutions, Craig Foley, will outline the importance of being able to recognize the energy efficient characteristics of homes. His presentation will provide resources that real estate professionals can use to stay up to date on the rapidly changing technologies that contribute to a comfortable, healthy, and affordable living environment. 

 

Global Warming Solutions Project Briefing

By Grey Lee

On Tuesday, May 19th, the Global Warming Solutions Project hosted a policy briefing on legislation that addresses climate change. Much of the conversation around climate change involves state energy policy and much of that affects buildings. The USGBC MA is party to these discussions as they relate to our priority advocacy issues and also our broader concerns. In the legislative arena, things can move fast and something that has been on a back burner can suddenly arrive to the fore. Our advocacy volunteers and staff are dedicated to tracking issues and enabling our members and other stakeholders to participate in a more informed manner.

 


The morning's presentations were led by Josh Craft, Program Director of the Environmental League of Massachussetts. ELM summarized the event recently (thank you ELM!):

ELM hosted an energy policy briefing for legislators and their aides Tuesday, focusing on opportunities for the state to save customers money and curb greenhouse gas emissions by reducing energy waste. Rep. Ehrlich (D-Marblehead), a major leader on energy and environmental issues, and members of ELM's Global Warming Solutions Project (GWSP) shared their views on policies that will build upon Massachusetts' success in improving energy efficiency.


– Rep. Ehrlich provided an overview of her efforts to fix natural gas leaks, which cost Massachusetts gas customers almost $40 million each year. Her legislation, HB 2870 (Protecting Consumers from Leaked or Unaccounted for Natural Gas), would require the gas utilities to account for leaked natural gas from its pipelines and discount the value of those leaks from customers' energy bills.

 


* Jim O'Reilly, of Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP), discussed the value of energy efficiency as an energy resource, meeting customers' energy needs without costly new power plants or transmission lines. He then focused on the benefits of SB 1761 (Relative to Home Energy Efficiency), sponsored by Senate Energy Chairman Downing (D-Pittsfield). SB 1761 is a top legislative priority for ELM this session. It would create a “first in the nation” home energy label so that home buyers can understand the energy costs of a home they may buy as part of their purchasing decision.

* Mark LeBel, of the Acadia Center, shared their vision for solar and locally owned energy resources as central to our energy generating system, finding that solar photovotaics offer significant economic and societal benefits to Massachusetts customers. LeBel encouraged lawmakers to preserve the current net metering policy while making smart changes to our solar incentive programs. Such changes will reduce program costs while allowing all customers to participate in these vital programs.

You can read more of the materials from the event here. (This is a real treasure trove about energy policy in Massachusetts!)

One topic that came up was the labeling of homes and buildings in order to help market participants better evaluate the value of an assett. We are actively tracking this legislative initiative.

 


And this is a good one, justifying support for local renewable generation – each dollar spent on carbon-intensive fossil fuels and distant transmitted hydro power means money leaving the economy of the Commonwealth. We can make better investments in local, renewable power for numerous economic advantages.

 


It was good to see some USGBC MA members in the audience and we will continue to work and collaborate with our colleagues in the intersection of climate justice, economic growth, energy, and buildings.

SemaConnect & the 2015 Building Tech Forum

By Ryan Duffy, Communications Fellow


SemaConnect is a Leadership Sponsor at the first-ever Building Tech Forum. SemaConnect is an EV car amenities distributor and their commitment to clean-powered cars and renewable energy makes them an awesome partner to support this exciting event!

SemaConnect is the leading provider of electric vehicle amenities to the North American commercial and residential property market. Electric vehicle charging stations are the newest and most visible green building amenity, capable of continuously enhancing your property and communicating participation in a global building movement.  Choosing SemaConnect is a visible commitment to quality, allowing you to make the most of their highly visible and interactive nature by extending a truly modern property experience beyond your lobby and into your parking lot.


Check out these videos showing more about SemaConnect and visit their website!

 

Re-Post: The All-Glass Building – Is Energy Efficiency Possible

By Andrea Love, Chapter Board Member

One of our wonderful volunteers wrote extensively about glass facade buildings and the challenge these present to proponents of energy efficiency. Take a look at her recent blog entry at NESEA. Thanks for explaining this for us, Andrea!

 

Glazed towers dominate the skylines of our cities. However, most have been designed with little thought as to the climate in which they are located or the environmental impact they might have. According to the Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) in 2003, 70 percent of energy use in commercial buildings is from the lighting and HVAC systems. The performance of both of these systems is directly related to the design and performance of the building envelope. Sealed, glazed façades, now so ubiquitous, lead to higher heating and cooling loads as well as glare and thermal comfort challenges.

Despite these challenges, many design teams pursuing sustainability continue to use all-glass façades because of their ability to connect interior and exterior environments. The market continues to demand, and architects to deliver, high glazing percentages for the daylight, views, and marketing potential they provide in green buildings. Such designs are difficult to make energy efficient, but many argue that fully glazed buildings, when designed correctly don't increase a building's energy usage.  

The question remains: is an all-glass building a sustainable building?

Daylight

The principal benefit of glass façades is their ability to allow natural light into living and working spaces. Daylight provides high-quality illumination with less radiation than most artificial light sources, including fluorescents. When coupled with a high-performance glazing system, natural daylighting can reduce the heat load that comes from artificial light fixtures. A lighting control system that responds to changes in daylight can yield a dramatic reduction in the building's lighting energy use.

In addition to the energy benefits from daylighting, studies have found numerous psychological benefits. A 1999 study by the Heschong Mahone Group found that students in classrooms with more natural light scored up to 25 percent higher on standardized tests than other students in the same school district. Studies looking at the effect of natural light on productivity date back to the 1920s, when they were conducted on silk weavers; even then, daylight was shown to increase productivity. Numerous subsequent studies have shown improved performance and increased attention and alertness in occupants of daylit buildings.

Exposure to daylight has also been shown increase sales in retail establishments such as Walmart and Whole Foods. Walmart installed a daylighting system in one of its Kansas stores in the 1990s and had store employees rotate goods for sale under the natural light source; items sold better when under daylight.

Daylight has many benefits, but few studies have investigated how much glazing is needed to achieve good quality natural lighting. Most buildings do not need to be completely glazed to benefit from daylighting. For example, the glazed area below a work surface in an all-glass building has minimal impact on the daylight in a space.

Daylight has many benefits, but few studies have investigated how much glazing is needed to achieve good quality natural lighting. Most buildings do not need to be completely glazed to benefit from daylighting.

The rule of thumb in the industry (recommended by organizations such as Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) is that only 30 percent glazing is needed for optimum daylighting performance. Our findings atPayette corroborate this figure. Our computer simulations on the impact of the amount of glazing on daylighting have found in multiple projects that the Useful Daylight Illuminance (UDI) does not increase at all beyond 50 percent glazing. UDI looks at how much light a space receives above a specified target but below the threshold of lighting levels that will cause glare and discomfort. For example, a recent investigation for an east-facing office concluded that 40 percent glazing provided no any more useful daylight than 25 percent.

Energy

A well-designed daylighting strategy can decrease a building's light energy use and associated cooling load. However, as lighting power densities decrease with more efficient lighting technologies like LEDs, lighting represents an ever smaller portion of a building's total energy use. Glazing's biggest impact on building energy consumption comes from its impact on a space's heating and cooling loads. The solar heat gain from the sun increases proportionally with the amount of glass on a façade, which in turn increases the energy needed to cool the building.

A number of strategies exist to mitigate solar radiation, from external sun shading to frits and coatings on the glass. A well-designed shading system can significantly decrease but not block all heat gain, particularly on east- and west- facing façades, where low sun angles are particularly challenging. 

In a cold climate like New England, the increase in heat loss in the winter as a result of high glazing percentages can significantly impact energy use. The current code requirement for maximum U-values for glazing is seven times higher than that of an opaque wall. Even with code-compliant glazing to high-performance triple glazing, the U-value is still three to four times greater than the maximum allowable for an opaque wall assembly. As a result, fully glazed buildings always have a much higher heating load than more moderately glazed buildings.

Double-skin façades have grown in popularity in recent years as a way to improve the energy performance of all-glass buildings. They work by capturing heat between the two glass walls to reduce winter heat loss and ventilating the same cavity in the summer to minimize heat gain. An integrated sun shading system between the two glass walls can further improve performance in the summer. While the double-skin façade can typically decrease a building's energy consumption in relation to a conventional, fully glazed façade, it still does not perform as well as an opaque wall with glazed openings.

Because lighting energy loads are decreasing and HVAC energy loads are increasing as the amount of glazing increases, an energy model is often the best method to determine the optimal amount of glazing.

While there is some variability based on the building type and climate, we have consistently observed buildings with a moderate amount (around 20 to 30 percent) of glazing use less energy than a fully glazed façade or one having little to no glass. 

Comfort

Creating comfortable environments for building occupants in all-glass buildings can be a challenge. Direct solar radiation, particularly in the summer, can create localized hot spots in the building. If the thermostat is not in the sun and is therefore not experiencing the raised temperatures, it will not adjust the HVAC system to make the space comfortable for those in the sun. If the control is in the sun, the HVAC system can overcool occupants that are not directly in the sun, especially in open office spaces. A well-designed solar control strategy, using interior blinds or exterior sun shades, can mitigate this discomfort.

Winter conditions can also pose thermal comfort challenges in all-glass buildings. Because glass does not insulate well, it has a lower interior surface temperature than an opaque wall assembly. This increases the radiant heat transfer that happens between an occupant and the façade, and can make occupants feel cold even at a comfortable air temperature. The colder surface can also create a downdraft along tall vertical pieces of glass. Downdrafts occur as warm interior air hits the cold surface of the glass and falls, creating cold convective currents with temperatures and air speeds that can cause discomfort. 

To combat this discomfort in fully glazed buildings, perimeter radiant heating is often added. Using a high-performance assembly, such as triple glazing, will raise the interior surface temperature, decreasing the radiant heat transfer and reducing the downdraft which can often create a thermally comfortable environment without the need for perimeter radiant heating. However, because comfort is determined by both glazing area and the U-value of the assembly, there is a limit to how low the U-value can be without needing mechanical means to create a comfortable environment. For the Boston climate, we have found that full-height glazing (60 to 70 percent glazed or higher) to be the comfort limit with a good triple-glazed window.

Visual discomfort can also be a challenge to control in fully glazed buildings. While increased glazing increases the amount of daylight in a space, you can have too much of a good thing, resulting in overlit spaces at the perimeter that create glare problems. A well-designed exterior shading system or fritted glass can help mitigate glare, but low sun angles in the morning and evening can still pose a challenge. Interior blinds are the most common glare-control strategy. Unless they are automated, however, they frequently are lowered during a brief period of glare and are not raised again. While this controls glare, it erases all of the benefits of daylighting and exterior views that you can get from glass.

Views

Visual connection to the exterior environment and nature is one of the biggest benefits of all-glass buildings. Views to the external environment have been shown to benefit the health and productivity of occupants because of the biophilic connection between humans and other living systems. The most famous of these is the seminal study by Roger Ulrich in 1981 that found that medical center rooms with views improved patient recovery rates by eight percent. As with the daylight studies, the percentage of glazing needed to achieve quality views is unclear. Some argue that punched windows common in buildings with limited glazing act much like a picture frame, allowing access to views while maintaining the thermal integrity of the building envelope.

Aesthetics

Because large panes of glass weren't commonly available until the mid-twentieth century, fully glazed buildings are associated with modernism. Both designers and building owners demand highly glazed buildings to give the image of transparency and modernity. But in an age where we must think about the environmental impact of the built environment, many argue that it is time to end our collective passion for all-glass buildings. Fully glazed buildings have become so ubiquitous that we as designers should embrace the challenge of creating a new image for what it means to be modern in this age. Design is about embracing constraints to create a new and beautiful building, and working with materials other than glass should be embraced as part of our design challenge. 

Reducing Power Plant Emissions

By Grey Lee

EPA Rule 111: Clean Power Plan

In 2013, the EPA proposed a new carbon pollution standards for power plants under section 111 of the Clean Air Act.  The program is designed to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions for new power plants under federal guidance and to address the emissions of existing power plants through a state-based program.  These proposals are designed to cut emissions from the power sector by as much as 30% by 2030, which will help to protect our health and the health of the environment for future generations.  For a comprehensive list of benefits, see the EPA's fact sheet on the Clean Power Plan. This diagram helps to explain the different kinds of greenhouse gas pollution and which sectors are major contributors.
 
 
This map shows the location of the 54 fossil fuel fired power plants in Massachusetts. The data points and background map come from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA); their online mapping system allows users to explore the various sources of energy production and distribution across the United States.
 

In December of 2014, the USGBC submitted recommendations to the EPA supporting their Clean Power Plan, proposing that States be given flexibility in developing their individual compliance strategies.  The USGBC also suggested that existing knowledge around evaluation, measurement and verification used in the LEED system be applied to tracking the reduction in emissions of power plants.

The EPA Clean Power Plan proposes 4 building blocks for states to achieve reduced power plant emissions, 1) power plant efficiency improvements 2) dispatching to cleaner natural gas combined cycle plants 3) renewable energy and 4) energy efficiency.  The fourth building block presents an opportunity for Massachusetts professionals to leverage their leadership and expertise in green building practices to help the Commonwealth achieve these important goals.

 

Super Bowl XLIX, Green Building & Energy Efficiency

By Grey Lee

Congratulations to the New England Patriots on their victory over the Seattle Seahawks in the Super Bowl on Sunday!
 
 
(Image Credit: Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

 

With all the excitement around Super Bowl XLIX, we thought it would be fun to see how the home states of each team stack up in terms of Green Buildings and Energy Consumption (Yes we know that it’s the New England Patriots, but for the purposes of this study we are only including data from states that actually house the stadiums!).  For good measures, we are also including the sunny state of Arizona where the big game was played.  The following bar graphs compare data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) on average monthly electricity consumption from 2012.

 

 
 
 
 
 
Arizona, Massachusetts and Washington are all very different places with a range of climatic, transmission and generation factors that influence how and when electricity is used.  In the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) 2014 rankings, Arizona placed 15th, Washington placed 8th, and Massachusetts placed 1st overall.  One component of the ACEEE ranking system is on Building Energy Codes, in which any state can earn up to 7 points.  Arizona earned 3 points in this category, with the majority of its municipalities using the 2009 IECC for residential construction.  Washington earned 6 points for building energy code stringency and adopting the 2012 IECC for both residential and commercial construction.  Massachusetts earned 5.5 points after adopting the 2012 IECC in 2014 with state-specific amendments.  Also, Massachusetts completed a baseline compliance study, which involves utilities in code compliance support efforts (ACEEE, 2014).
 
In addition to energy efficiency, these three states are also pursuing renewable energy solutions.  The Arizona Office of Energy Policy provides statistics on the state’s current renewable portfolio (8% total energy) and also a 10 year outlook on solar, wind, biomass, geothermal and hydroelectric for the state.  Massachusetts office of Energy and Environmental Affairs provides information on different types of renewable energy, funding programs and incentives, as well as installation assistance.  Also, Massachusetts obtained 9.3% of its total energy from renewable sources in 2013.  The Washington State Energy Office provides energy policy support as well as analysis for the legislature and commerce and manages the State Energy Program.  Washington is the nation’s leader in hydroelectric generation, accounting for 29% of total hydro capacity in the United States.
 
How are these states doing when it comes to Green Building? Looking at data from the USGBC from 2013, we can see Washington State has an edge over both Massachusetts and Arizona with an impressive 1,474 registered LEED projects!
 
 
 
 
A lot of energy goes into putting on a Super Bowl.  What are stadium operators and teams doing to address this?  The University of Phoenix Stadium is a member of the USGBC and as part of their Green Mission, prioritizes recycling and Green Products, water-efficiency and high efficiency LED lighting.  Find out more about their Green Mission here: University of Phoenix Stadium
 

 

(Image Credit: Arizona Cardinals)

 

 
 
 

Harvard Takes Giant Leaps to Create a Greener Community

By Grey Lee

December 5, 2014

Photo credit: Harvard University Housing

Actions speak louder than words and Harvard is definitely taking some noticeable action in the green building community!  The Harvard Green Building Standards reflect Harvard University's commitment to sustainability and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from building design to operations within their new capital projects and major renovations over $100,000. They were “built” upon the Harvard Green Building Guidelines from 2007 and the Harvard Green Building Standards from 2009 (led by the Office for Sustainability and Green Building Services), then they were updated this year to include healthy material requirements and assessment to determine toxic substance exposure.  Consistent with the mission and priorities of USGBC MA, Harvard also analyzes how Net Zero Energy Buildings, LEED certification and energy efficiency systems can improve their campus buildings and spaces through implementation.

The Harvard Green Building Standards require:

Integrated design goal-setting charrettes with all key stakeholders
Multiple iterations of energy models
Life cycle cost analysis
Prescriptive requirements such as aggressive energy and water reduction targets

Through these standards, Harvard sets a prime example that greening a community takes commitment and teamwork.  Because of the hundreds of participants across the University's Schools and departments working in a collaborative process, Harvard continues to develop and expand their knowledge and resources in order to stay on top of their green game!

Harvard’s green efforts also go beyond buildings into energy conversion in their Nocera Lab, a research group of Daniel G. Nocera, which studies the basic mechanisms of energy conversion in biology and chemistry.  Nocera is the Patterson Rockwood Professor of Energy at Harvard University and has been an organizer to and primary author of four DOE Basic Research Need workshops: Hydrogen, Solar Energy, Energy Storage and Catalysis.  He was also a primary author of the Grand Challenges report (Directing Matter and Energy: Five Challenges for Science and the Imagination) to the DOE.  His group pioneered studies of the basic mechanisms of energy conversion in biology and chemistry with primary focus in recent years on the generation of solar fuels.

Earning a LEED Gold Certification earlier this year, Harvard hits another homerun with their 33,000 sq. ft. renovation at the Cronkhite Graduate Center.  The renovations included a new core bathroom installation, new lounge/kitchenettes, new high efficiency lighting and heating system upgrades on 150 dorm rooms.  Scoring perfectly in water efficiency, innovation and regional priority credits, Harvard will be able to provide their students with a healthier and energy efficient living space into the future!

We hope that many more institutions will follow their “LEED” and take on the challenge of greening their communities for the invaluable results that are sure to come.

 

Massachusetts Ranked as the Most Energy Efficient State!

By Grey Lee

On October 21st, 2014, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released their annual State Energy Efficiency Scorecard and ranked Massachusetts #1 for the 4th year in a row.

Way to go Massachusetts! Be sure to check out the press release and report.
 

Methodology
“The State Energy Efficiency Scorecard benchmarks states across six policy areas – utility policies and programs, transportation initiatives, building energy codes, combined heat and power development, state government-led initiatives, and state-level appliance standards. In total, states are scored on more than 30 individual metrics. Data is collected from publicly available sources and vetted by state energy offices and public utility commissions.”

 

IECC 2012 is Now the State Energy Code

By Carrie Havey

 
 
On July 9th, the Massachusetts Board of Building 

Photo credit: www.mass.gov

Regulations & Standards (BBRS) voted to adopt the most current version of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC 2012). This makes Massachusetts one of the first states in the nation to adopt the new code and represents a 20% increase in energy efficiency over the current statewide energy code. The results of this change – the state base code is now equal to the energy efficiency requirements of the Massachusetts Stretch Energy Code. 

 
The Stretch Energy Code was added to the state building code in 2009 and provides an option for cities or towns to adopt an energy code that requires greater energy efficiency in buildings than the base code that is otherwise mandatory for municipalities across the state. Currently, the Stretch Code has been adopted by 131 municipalities in Massachusetts. 
 
So for a short while, the Stretch Code and the MA state code will be one and the same, until the State determines what the change in the Stretch Code will be. Our Advocacy Interest Group is following the issue and meeting with partners next week to outline a strategy to make sure we get an ambitious next Stretch Code. Contact Norm Lamonde if you are interested in knowing more.