Page 1


London Terrace in New York is one of the cities largest mixed-use residential buildings. It encompasses an entire city block and has over 1,700 apartment units; Lucarelli 2012

ENERGY BENCHMARKING AND DISCLOSURE  Compulsory (?) energy disclosure

 Identifies buildings in need of retrofits  Large multi-family/commercial properties  Buildings assessed annually  Indirectly can lead to fewer GHG emission  Can this work in Richmond?

BUILDING ENERGY ASSESSMENT  Best Practices  Austin, Texas

 Support (win)  Marketing tool

 Opposition (overcame)

 Law?


Clean and Affordable Energy Act of 2008 

Requirements: Beginning April 2013: 

Compulsory Program

Commercial / Multi-Family: 50,000 Sq. Ft. >

Government Buildings: 10,000 Sq. Ft >

Energy totals (electric/gas and water) for 2010-2012

$100/day penalty for late submissions

 Data Software: Energy Star  Information kept as public record; Provided annually

 Cost: Software is FREE!

75% of GHG emitted from buildings in our Nations Capital!

National Mall; Lucarelli 2010


Local Law 84 (LL84) of 2009:  Requirements:

Beginning May 2011:  Compulsory program  All city-owned buildings larger than

10,000 sq. ft.  Private buildings larger than 50,000 sq.

ft.  Clustered buildings larger than 100,000

sq. ft.  Data software: Energy Star

 Information kept as public record; Provided

annually  Cost: Software is FREE!

Light Pollution in Times Square, New York; Lucarelli 2010


Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure ordinance of 2011  Requirements  Compulsory  Multi-family properties with five or

more units  Receives electricity from Austin Energy  Building Types

 Commercial and Residential  Data Software: Energy Star  Statements kept as public record; Provided

annually  Estimated ≈$200 - $300 | Single-family

residence[≤1,800 Sq. Ft.] | Single A/C system

6th Street in Austin, Texas; Wikipedia via Moore

ENERGY TRANSPARENCY Does energy transparency influence renter decisions? •Yes and no

•Preliminary research shows that benchmarking and disclosure programs have a greater impact on property owner behavior, rather than a renter’s decision to lease an apartment. •Property interviews also indicated owners have a greater incentive than renters to retrofit on the large scale (i.e. new windows, upgrade insulation, LED lighting, green roofs, HVAC upgrades, etc.) •Renters more likely to invest in small scale improvements like CFL’s

Methodology  Three Case Studies  Austin, TX  Washington, D.C.  New York City

 Four Property Interviews  Open and Closed Ended


 Housing Data from RREA

INTERVIEWS WITH MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY OWNERS  Conclusions:  Majority of multi-family units are 

   

individually metered Average Age of Building: 48 years Preferred voluntary program (Less government) Few complaints about energy bills Many owners recognize the benefits of energy retrofits Renters less concerned with energy bills

RICHMOND HOUSING STOCK MF Units by Building Size 12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0

# Multifamily Properties LIHTC Properties

2 units 3 units 4 units

5-24 units

25-49 units

50-99 100-199 200-299 300-499 >500 units units units units units

Total Building Count: 4542 Total Dwelling Units: 48,830 TOTAL LIHTC BUILDINGS: 96 TOTAL LIHTC UNITS: 5261


Distribution of Housing Stock by Unit Count

Distribution of Housing Stock by Age

ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND GHGs  Inventory of Richmond Multi-Family housing  Methodology

 Analysis of potential energy and GHG savings  Retrofit Scenarios  Recommendations

CALCULATING PER UNIT ENERGY USE  The methodology for determining baseline multifamily housing per unit

average annual energy consumption was adapted from Pitt (2012)

 Data was gathered from the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA)

2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS)

 RECS Data measures per unit averages for Heating, Cooling, Water, Fridge,

and other Appliances /Lighting.

 Micro-data for MF housing from South Atlantic Region adjusted to account

for Richmond climate conditions (heating and cooling degree days)

Pitt, D., 2012. Evaluating the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of compact housing development. Journal of environmental planning and management.


PER UNIT ENERGY AVERAGES (CONT.) Baseline Energy Consumption Totals by Age 2,500,000

Million BTU


1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000

0 1800s - 1940 Units in 2-4 Unit Buildings

1941 - 1980

1981 - present

Units in 5+ Unit Buildings

CALCULATING GHG EMISSIONS FROM ENERGY CONSUMPTION  Methodology was adapted from Pitt (2012)  According to most recent census, Richmond MF Housing is comprised

of nearly 70% Gas and 30% Electric as main heating source.  Greenhouse Gas coefficients for Natural Gas and Electricity were used

to convert from energy use (million Btu) to GHG emissions (Metric Tonnes of CO2 equivalent)

POTENTIAL ENERGY AND GHG SAVINGS GHG's by Unit Age (Year Built) 12% 8%

80% 1800s - 1940

1941 - 1980

1981 - 2013

RETROFIT ASSUMPTIONS  The following retrofit scenarios are generalizable and

assume that retrofits are evenly distributed across all building unit types as well as all heat source types (70% Nat. gas and 30% electric)  Three scenarios: retrofits to 10%; 30%; 50% of MF housing

 Scenarios can be customized to apply to certain building

types, age, and heat type to yield more specific results.

RETROFIT SCENARIOS Energy Consumption Totals by All Age and Unit Types 3,000,000

Million BTU


2% savings

4% savings

6% savings

S-1 10%

S-2 30%

S-3 50%

2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000

500,000 0 Baseline

Energy Consumption

Like putting a 4 KW solar PV system on 8,258 houses in RVA

Recommendations Voluntary benchmarking and disclosure Use Energy Star Portfolio Manager

Develop certification system Energy Star certification? Independent RREA certification?

Target pre-1980 buildings with electric heat Still need tax credits or grants / rebates or

financing program to cover up-front costs

Works Cited Hardesty, L. (2013) DC Finalizes Regulations for Benchmarking Energy Use in Large Buildings Brown, Alex. (2013) “A Bid to ‘Shame’ Building Owners Into Energy Efficiency.” Edes, A. (2013) “Study Questions Usefulness of Mayor’s Energy Proposal” Hardesty, L. (2013) “87% of Seattle’s Large Buildings Report Energy Usage” District Department of the Environment, Energy Bench Marking Case Studies Stein, E. (2011) New York City’s Split Incentive “Trifecta”. Environmental Defense Fund. Retrieved from website:’s-splitincentive-“trifecta”/ City of New York, Mayor's Office. (2013). About planyc page. Retrieved from website: City of New York, Mayor's Office. (2011). Energy-Aligned Lease Language: Solving the split Incentive Problem. Retrieved from website: . (2010). The perfect marriage of content and technology: Is social media the new CRM? [Press release]. City of New York, Mayor's Office. (2013). New York City Local Law 84 Benchmarking Report. Retrieved from website:

Energy Bench Marking and Disclosure Feasibility Study.  

All Rights Reserved ® 2013

Energy Bench Marking and Disclosure Feasibility Study.  

All Rights Reserved ® 2013