NAHB Opposes Portman-Shaheen Energy Bill

Filed in Capitol Hill, Codes and Regulations by on July 17, 2019 3 Comments

thumbs downSens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) today introduced the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, legislation opposed by NAHB because it would mandate overly costly and aggressive energy efficiency requirements in model building energy codes, which harms housing affordability.

Moreover, the Senate bill would discourage states from amending codes to meet their specific needs and could encourage the Department of Energy (DOE) to move beyond its current role as a “technical advisor” and push overly prescriptive and costly energy targets.

At the same time, NAHB is supporting bipartisan legislation introduced in the House by Reps. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.) and Bill Flores (R-Texas) that offers a more cost-effective way to encourage energy efficiency. The Energy Savings and Building Efficiency Act would accelerate cost-savings for home owners by requiring that any code or proposal supported by the Department of Energy has a payback of 10 years or less.

The House bill also stipulates that regarding the development of energy codes, DOE would be prohibited from advocating for certain technologies, building materials or construction practices.

NAHB continues to work with Congress to advance cost-effective ways for the federal government to incentivize home owners to upgrade their homes to be more energy efficient.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail

Tags:

Comments (3)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. TP says:

    “DOE would be prohibited from advocating for certain technologies, building materials or construction practices” needs to be removed from the legislation.
    It is research from different areas such as DOE that brings new technology to the masses. I would want the DOE, in this circumstance to go through the trial and error to bring the new technology and materials to light.

  2. Armando Cobo says:

    So if NAHB is supporting a bill that requires ANY CODE change that has a payback of 10 years or less, the NAHB should the leading force behind DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Home Program that has cost increases between 1-3% with paybacks much lower than 10 years. NO EXCUSES!
    See: https://rmi.org/insight/economics-of-zero-energy-homes

  3. The affordability problem is caused because builders and designers are not using cost vs energy optimization in the specification of materials and construction assemblies. Using optimization, one can identify bundles of standard building components that cost 3% less and reduce energy consumption by 40% for most homes. The opposition to the costs of increased performance is driven by poor decision making rather than actual cost constraints. @cove_tool

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *