Roundtable on Energy Guides for Homes – Where are We Going? Who’s Doing What?

Framework Residential Energy Labeling (FREL) White Paper & D.C. Energy Summit Summary

Sean Penrith, Executive Director, Earth Advantage Institute Raleigh, NC Wednesday, 24th February 2010

Context ► Oregon pilot ► HUD’s call ► DOE/EPA MOU ► FREL White Paper ► January D.C. Energy Summit

Energy Trust of Oregon Energy Performance Score Pilot & Findings

► Pilot on 300 existing homes ► Purpose was to explore the potential for a home performance label ► Not a single respondent said “not very useful” ► 100% of all homeowners felt label would have use when buying ► Realtors: 65% of their homebuyers would be “very interested” ► 89% of Realtors said that the label would be a competitive marketing advantage ► 79% of Realtors would like to see it on the RMLS

Energy Trust of Oregon Energy Performance Score Pilot & Findings

► 64% of homeowners want a customized list of EE steps with $ ► 90% of builders said the label offers a competitive marketing advantage ► 41% of builders thought the label should be mandatory. ► The label must clear, objective and from a trustworthy source ► CO2 emissions are familiar and very important to public ► Audit yielding a label would ideally be $100 and tops out at around $200 ► Third-party scoring needed to eliminate conflict of interest and increases trust and consistency.

HUD calls for ‘MPG’ for homes

“The Obama administration's top housing official -- Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development -- thinks consumers deserve more information on the energy efficiency of the houses they buy, both resale and newly built. And he thinks mortgages should come with lower rates or better terms to encourage purchases and retrofits that save energy. "When you buy a car," he said, "you know very clearly what the energy efficiency of that is because there's a number on the window. It says: Here's the gas mileage. We don't know that for housing.“ NATION'S HOUSING, April 12, 2009

DOE-EPA MOU

– Sept 30, ‘09

MOU on Improving the Energy Efficiency of Products and Buildings Between The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and The U.S. Department of Energy National Building Rating Program NBRP will be enhanced in the following ways: 1) A comprehensive whole building scale-based rating tool will be developed and promoted that reflects both the physical characteristics of a building (asset rating) and a way to compare the actual energy use of existing buildings with similar buildings. 2) A labeling scheme will be developed to easily convey the energy use information from the whole building scale-based rating tool.

DOE-EPA MOU A. Rating system will address the building’s (residential & commercial) physical characteristics (the “asset measurement”) and past energy performance (the “operational measurement”) as well as its performance relative to other similar buildings (“benchmarking”) B. The program will provide information on specific, actionable and cost-effective energy retrofit measures for residential and commercial buildings C. Free, online software tools (web applications) will be made available

Office of EE and RE Programs Update – Feb 10, 2010 Kathleen Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency

Recovery thru retrofits: highlights

Consumer need for quality data Source: Hogan webinar 12/17/09

Purpose of FREL White Paper ► Industry stakeholders prepared the paper to reach consensus and thus inform DOE/EPA/HUD

► Approach to: ► Energy modeling ► Rating ► And, labeling of residential buildings ► Presented & discussed at Energy Labeling Summit, Washington DC,

January

12th of 2010

► Contributions to FREL paper

by Steve Baden (RESNET), Michael Blasnik,

Richard Faesy (VEIC), Philip Fairey (FSEC), Diane Ferington (ETO), Asa Foss (USGBC), Rick Gerardi (MASCOHS), Matt Golden (ReCurve), Bruce Harley (CSG), David Heslam (EAI), Greg Thomas (PSD), Iain Walker (LBNL), Larry Zarker (BPI)

FREL Approach

► Energy labels can be generated by: ► Simple audits ► More in-depth retrofit audits that provide finer resolution of energy modeling that provides estimates for:

► Financing ► Incentives ► Upgrade decision making ► Though these two types of energy analysis serve different but related purposes

► Must be harmonized in delivery and methodology. ► Both need consistent set of standards. ► FREL paper recommends actions for energy labeling standards that ensures synergy of these audits in the marketplace.

FREL Consensus ► An energy label should be an asset value. ► An energy retrofit audit should produce savings estimates that are guided (informed) in part on operational values ₣ ► Home energy should be expressed in terms of three metrics: ► Site energy by fuel type ₣ ► Site energy costs ₣ ► Associated carbon emissions ₣ ► Two levels of granularity are recommended for the metrics. ₣ ► 10 MBtu resolution for a building energy label. ► 1 MBtu resolution for energy audits. ₣ - Not 100% consensus

FREL Consensus ► A minimum set of required data fields to be collected for labeling and energy audits should be defined by DOE in consultation with stakeholders ₣ ► DOE should provide funding for ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140 development after protocols have been improved and in use. ► DOE should adopt minimum standards for training and certification of auditors in consultation with industry, but should default to industry standards ► A signed utility bill release form by building owners should be a prerequisite to acceptance of federal energy efficiency incentive funds.

D.C. Energy Summit - Outcome ► Usage scenarios need to be defined (rater, auditor, home inspector, finance, Realtor, builder, consumer) Further refinement:

►When consumers are choosing a house ►When there are financing incentives/institutions setting the rules ►When a consumer wants to improve performance of a house ► Stakeholder testing of parameters of label is needed ► Comprehension ► Action it causes (wrt upgrades) ► DOE to define minimum requirements and allow regional customization(e.g. goal reference points, CO2 etc.)

D.C. Energy Summit - Outcome ► Asset and Operational rating should use the same metrics to offer comprehensible value to consumer

►Agree on key assumptions ($/KWh, thermostat setting, etc.) ► Resolve how to incorporate estimated operating cost in meaningful way on the label.

► Link label format to appropriate usage scenario ► Investigate how different ways of calculating CO2 impacts the carbon portion of the label pre-and post, & over time

► Distribute straw-man labeling proposals for discussion purposes ► Use RESNET and ACI conferences to advance dialog & FREL paper

Resources ► Earth Advantage Institute EECBG Micro site:

http://www.earthadvantage.org/eps/eecbg.html

►ETO 2008 Pilot Findings & Recommendations report ►Legislative bills on the energy performance label passed in Oregon & Washington

►Links to white papers, media on benchmarking, & labeling ► Stakeholder survey results

Thank you! Sean Penrith Executive Director Earth Advantage Institute [email protected] 503-968-7160 x 13