By KATE WILLSON
Observer Staff
Oct. 18, 2007

Motion-sensor lighting, solar hot water heaters, walls made of water that trap the day’s heat.

“This isn’t Jetsons stuff anymore,” said Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Penn. “It’s here, it’s just not widely adopted yet. We know how to do it, so let’s start the process.”

Doyle is hoping a bill he introduced this session will spur the process, requiring all new construction to meet ‘green’ building standards. The House and Senate passed parallel energy bills, which are now in conference. Both sides will smooth the edges before sending a comprehensive Energy Bill 2007 to President Bush.

“The President has said there are parts of it he won’t sign,” Doyle said. “I just think it would be a huge mistake on his part to veto the bill. But I’m not sure that what I think means a whole bunch to him.”

Doyle said he began working on the bill after learning that buildings account for 40 percent of carbon emissions in the United States. Then he learned about green building standards that incorporated simple energy-efficient techniques like passive solar heating and radiant floor heating.

“It seemed to me there was this potential to save energy and reduce greenhouse gases if we could start adopting this technology,” he said. “So we should let the federal government set the example.

His bill and the Senate version would create an Office of High-Performance Green Buildings, establish an advisory committee, educate the public about green building and set standards for new construction and renovations.

“In the old days, energy was abundant and cheap,” he said. “It isn’t cheap anymore. It’s a finite resource.”

Doyle said the guidelines would be similar to those established in earthquake or hurricane-prone regions.

“What we want to see is the entire country adopt those standards,” he said. “If everybody builds by the code, we reduce greenhouse gas but the energy you save in the long run more than compensates. We think this is the future.”

Doyle isn’t advocating that everyone with a pre-existing home reinsulate their walls, install solar panels or rip up their floors to install radiant floor heating. Doyle himself hasn’t made those changes to his Pittsburg home, but he did buy a hybrid Ford Escape. And as his light bulbs go out, he replaces them with compact fluorescents.

“We’re not suggesting that if you live in an older home, you retrofit it,” he said. “But everyone can chip in. There are a lot of simple every-day things they can do to make their homes more energy-efficient that don’t cost a fortune.”

Doyle said the bill skated past the House with little dissent. He said that reflects a growing desire among representatives and their constituents for the United States to take a leading role in greenhouse gas reduction.

Doyle represents Pittsburgh, a city that is reinventing itself as eco-friendly. Without federal green building standards, the city passed its own codes and so have hundreds of cities across the country, including Seattle, Boston and Washington.

Earlier this year Washington passed the “Green Building Act of 2006” that requires new construction to meet LEED (green building) standards set by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) – the non-profit leader in environmentally-friendly building.

Ashley Katz, a spokeswoman for the USGBC said the organization prefers pushing incentives, not forcing changes.

“We actually prefer to rely on the power of incentivizing LEED as opposed to making it mandatory,” Katz said. “Offering tax credits and expedited permitting are ways that states have incentivized LEED certification. LEED initiatives including legislation, executive orders, resolutions, ordinances, policies and incentives are found in 55 cities, 11 counties, eight towns, 22 states, 33 schools and 11 federal agencies.”

Some contractors balk at the changes, fearing buyers can’t afford the increased cost of building green. But Katz said the cost difference is minimal. The upfront costs of building green are one to two percent more than in conventional construction, she said.

“But once your building is operational, you start saving money,” she said. “The average return on investment is 20 percent over the building’s lifetime.”

Trade magazines increasingly write about green building and the coming norm.

“Rest assured that green building, compliance with environmental regulations and environmental stewardship is where our industry is headed,” an author wrote for Southwest Contractor. “So you should be prepared, especially if you work on municipal or university or privately-funded projects.”

In Washington, 209 buildings are already LEED certified. They include community centers, schools, government buildings and company headquarters.

People shouldn’t confuse green building standards such as LEED with energy-programs such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star program.

“We look at energy-efficiency as the cornerstone of green building,” said Jon Passe, community coordinator for the EPA’s residential Energy Star program. “But Energy Star deals explicitly with energy efficiency issues. A lot more than that goes into green building.”

People are familiar with the EPA Energy Star approval of efficient appliances. Passe said they are less familiar with the programs that rate energy-efficient homes and businesses. In his estimate, 43 Energy Star homes have been build in Washington since 1999.

“Overall I’d still categorize that as fairly low,” he said. Contractors don’t get financial incentives to build energy-efficient homes and until now the housing market has been robust, which means builders don’t have to add the extras to compete for buyers.

Passe said it’s not cost effective to retrofit a pre-existing home simply to meet Energy Star requirements, but homeowners can do their best to insulate their homes and buy energy-efficient appliances when replacing old appliances.

In another EPA office, Richard King overseas solar research and development.

“We need to get to a place where every new home is integrated with solar,” he said. “I’ll contend that…we don’t know how to do that yet. It’s not cost effective. So, how do we get people to start buying them?”

Pepco charges about $.07 per kilowatt hour of electricity. Solar electricity is four times as expensive, King said. That’s too steep a difference to interest people in switching to solar today.

King said, the typical home owner pays $2,000 for utilities each year. Over 10 years, that’s $20,000.

“But that’s if the cost of fuel remains the same; but it won’t,” he said. “We do have to make that transition, and it’s going to be really hard. We need to change the way people think.”

The United States must address both its travel and home energy use, King said.

“You can’t bike, but own a McMansion. And you can build a big house and have it be efficient,” he said. “You’re lifestyle is your choice. You choose to buy a big car, or not. You choose to leave your lights on, or not.”

A solar hot water heater is one of the most cost-effective energy-cutting measures, said Celia Flye, a consultant for My Green Cottage.

“I can’t imagine why everyone doesn’t have one in their new home,” she said. The return on your investment is quicker and more substantial than that of installing solar panels to run the entire house.

My Green Cottage is a green building start-up that follows LEED standards. Flye said she’s seeing a swift and growing acceptance for green building techniques.

“The mainstream people are interested as well, for the sake of the planet but also for the sake of their pocket book,” she said. “People want to do the right thing, but not if it’s going to cost them money.”