Dec 15

Last Friday, Finland and the European Union hosted a side event at the United Nations climate talks on the building sector.  Finnish Minister of Housing, Jan Vapaavuori was a featured speaker and he made the point that globally, 40% of all energy is used by buildings and that their greenhouse gas emissions account for 30% of total GHGs.  He made the important point that–for developed countries, at least–the crucial issue is dealing with old buildings.

Photo of Jan Vapaavuori: Megapolis 2024

Photo of Jan Vapaavuori: Megapolis 2024

Vapaavuori’s fellow panelist, Sylvie Lemmet of the United Nations Environment Programme, pointed out that 95% of the 2050 building stock is already built in developed countries.

This is significant for cities that are trying to reduce their emissions since developed countries are the ones that need to make the greatest emissions cuts by 2050.  While it is relatively simple to regulate building efficiency prior to construction through the deployment of strong building ordinances, reaching already-constructed structures is a bit more challenging.

The other important point made by Vapaavuori is that building operation is more important than building construction in terms of emissions.  This is essential to think about from the policy perspective as  most urban policies–in the form of building codes or development credit–once again target new construction instead of renovation.

Much of the discussion focused on trying to figure out ways to create incentives for low-emission building renovation.  The problem now is that there is a significant up-front cost for high-efficiency upgrades.  While the upgrades pay for themselves in the long-run, consumers may not have access to the initial capital to invest in the upgraded equipment.  Furthermore, in highly mobile countries like the United States, homeowners may only be thinking of living in a house for a short time, making investment unwise.

It would be relatively easy to leverage the savings generated over the life of a high-efficiency building enhancement to finance the requisite up-front investment.  Some municipalities in California do this sort of thing where they establish a bond district that residents can tap into if they want to make an upgrade.  The municipality fronts the money and then property owners pay back the city at a realtively low interest rate and monthly cost over several decades.  If they sell the house, the new owner assumes the outstanding debt obligation.  Cities are already using these sorts of financing schemes to raise money for things like alley pavement and sidewalk construction.

A federal program providing the capital in this way would be a perfect clean energy stimulus scheme.

Sep 11

Yesterday Todd Stern, the US State Department’s Special Envoy on Climate Change addressed the House select committee on climate change.  I didn’t get a chance to watch the hearing, but a couple of interesting things came out according to media reports.

First, he reiterated the importance of having Congress pass a climate bill by the time that the UN convenes climate negotiations in December, saying that having a climate law immanent would give the US “credibility and leverage” in negotiations.

Of course, he was speaking to the wrong audience.  The House passed its version of a climate and energy bill in June and is now waiting on the Senate.  The Senate has delayed consideration of climate legislation with the battle over health care reform taking center stage in Congressional deliberations.  This has make Senators from a wide variety of backgrounds less than optimistic about passage of legislation.  Some key Senators–namely Kerry and Boxer–are not giving up the fight and expect initial legislation to be introduced this month.

Stern also made mention of the difficulties ahead of Copenhagen with regard to aid to developing countries to shift to low carbon economic growth.  This is a major issue in negotiations with large emitters like China insistent that significaant financial flows from North to South be included in any agreement.  For countries poorer than China, guaranteed aid to deal with adaptation as well as mitigation is essential.

Before Stern’s remarks the European Commission released a plan that assumed developing countries would need $145 billion annually  by 2020 in climate-related aid.  Stern made no definitive response to the European proposal and a document released today by the US Treasury Department in advance of a meeting of G-20 finance ministers calls for increased money but doesn’t provide specific committments.

The European proposal has been seen as a way to jump-start negotiations, but the US silence suggests the move may not have been entirely successful.

Obama is scheduled to give a major speech on climate at the UN meeting in New York later this month.  Perhaps at that juncture he will be  bit more forthcoming with the US position.

preload preload preload