Schwarzenegger's green building collapse?

Last year, when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed three bills that would have set stringent state standards for green buildings, his rationale dovetailed with that of the powerful California Building Industry Assn. Rather than set rules by legislation, the governor argued, a new State Green Building Code, under development by the California Building Standards Commission, would deal with the issue.

On Thursday, the commission is slated to meet in Sacramento to adopt the new code. But far from setting tough rules to save energy, water and use promote eco-friendly materials, the proposed code would actually undermine green building standards set by 75 California cities and counties, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, according to green building advocates.

No surprise there, since the commission's advisory committee is chaired by Robert Raymer, technical director of the California Building Industry Assn.

According to draft testimony prepared by John Walser of the Northern California chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council, a national non-profit industry group, the proposed state code "would represent a lower environmental threshold than the basic levels of qualification for the most commonly used green building rating systems, including the one the state adopted for its own buildings: the LEED rating system." (LEED, a national benchmark for green buildings, stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design).

If the proposed state rules are adopted, he asserts, "local governments may face legal challenges when attempting to adopt a more stringent code." Among its other deficiencies, he notes, the new code fails to include adequate standards on recycling, renewable energy and the use of wood (allowing dubious industry-certified wood instead of mandating wood vetted as sustainably harvested by the national Forest Stewardship Council).

A July 14 memo prepared by the Natural Resources Defense Council, a national group with 250,000 California members, calls the draft "severely flawed ... potentially preempting already adopted local green building standards." The new code "would serve a disheartening blow to these communities which sought to reduce greenhouse gas emissions..." it charges.

A spokesman for the building industry association, John Frith, said the advisory committees "do not write code. That is the job of the various state agencies." And Raymer added that the state code serves as a "minimum threshold" and would not interfere with local standards.

But environmentalists are mobilizing this week to persuade the Governor's staff that it would embarrass him to adopt a weak new code only weeks after the state issued a draft plan to cut back its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% in the next 12 years. Schwarzenegger touts the battle against global warming as one of his signature issues.

Residential and commercial structures that waste energy through heating, air conditioning, and poor choice of materials, are major emitters of planet-heating gases. Overall, buildings represent 39% of US primary energy use and account for 40 % of carbon dioxide emissions nationwide.

--Margot Roosevelt

Comments

[sheila]

i have been trying to tell people that Arnold is the LEAST green governor in the country, and using his steadfast refusal to adopt strict building codes as a perfect example, for the past few years. when i confronted his aide, who had the audactity to go on a little junket to boast about Our Great Governor at GREEN BUILDING TRADESHOWS, of all places, he chucked, agreed and said that Schwarzenegger prefers a "voluntary approach."

Ugh.

his press team is just overwhelming to anyone trying to get the truth heard, though, and our overworked media basically cuts and pastes from his press releases and, voila! a total fiction is born - that of a "Green Governor."

oh, and Villaraigosa is at least as bad. those "building codes" were embarrassing and will not impact ANY greenhouse gases, will not steer ANY one towards passive solar or conservation or energy efficiency, and are merely another greenwash by another faker.

it's so depressing.

[Kali Recher]

Sounds like the US Green Building Council hired a PR firm - in one breath the codes are too strict for local govt’s - then they are not strict enough for enviros?

As the sate codes are drafted they are the floor and the state encourages builders to hit the ceiling.

What happened to journalism? Maybe call the state for their side instead of re-printing what a PR firm gives you.

Very disappointing LAT.

-Kali

[Matthew]

Green buildings are good, but this article shows an example of some of the more unproductive and extreme political viewpoints from the movement. The state can't simply adopt as law some codes from a private company as that is unconstitutional. The Governor was right to veto those bills and to start the process by which will give our state the first set of green codes in the nation.

If you don't know, LEED is a private company. We wouldn't take kindly to executives or mid-level managers from Cheveron pushing the state to only buy fuel from that company, so I am not sure why we are OK with people trying to force the state to only use one certification program. LEED is also designed to apply to the most "elite" buildings. Suggesting you should apply the highest of private standards to every building built in the state also doesn't make sense.

This writer also fails to acknowledge that the state already has the toughest building code in the nation. A new building built in California is 50% more energy efficienty and emits half the greenhouse gasses of the national average. Now, the state is about to adopt the first set of green building codes in the nation on top of that. But because it isn't the program the writer is affiliated with, it isn't good enough. Reasonable people might disagree on some of the specifics of the new code, but generally acknowledge the fact the state is leading the nation in this area.

Additionally, it is obvious that the state building code is a "minimum" standard. It is the floor. Always has been, always will. This new code raises that floor. Local governments that want to go above and beyond this floor have the legal ability to do so. They simply need to fill out a one page form and adopt the program. Suggesting that the new code somehow distrupts this process is simply not true.

To state the governor isn't "green" is uniformed and/or hyperbole that is not part of the productive discussion that has put California on the leading edge of energy efficiency, green buildings, and greenhouse gas reduction.

The Governor and all the state agencies working on this should be applauded.

[sheila]

what a bizarre defense of Schwarzenegger, who, since the vetoes, has worked ONLY WITH THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, and not with environmentalists, to develop half-hearted, COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY "green" (ahem) building codes that encourage deforestation of CA (all CA wood, no matter how harvested is now "green!") over that icky foreign bamboo, and do literally nothing to move the ball forward in any way.

by cheerleading the outdated building codes which were enacted before he came into office as some sort of a triumph for Arnold, we get another bait and switch defense of his total failure to do anything now that the urgency has become much more apparent, and now that the costs have reached parity with the crap buildings CA is famous for.

Where are our feed in tariffs for solar? 40 nations are out ahead of the Green Governor on this, and more come online every day (Switzerland just did a retroactive tariff, paying 73 c/watt for residential PV). We get "net metering?" what a crock. these are just a few of his complete failures as a leader.

sorry, but he is a TOTAL GREENWASHER SELLOUT, and not only does nothing to encourage cost-effective, healthy, sustainable construction methodology, but by dominating the field, also prevents the legislature from enacting the WILL OF THE PEOPLE. he is a disgrace to this state - a Big Business puppet who does not care about the people of CA or the environment. the sooner people recognize that this particular Emperor has no clothes, the better.

[L]

You talk the talk but will you walk the walk? How many dissenters here have actually retro-fitted PV on their own homes? How many of you have moved to drought tolerant landscape? How many have footed the bill to retrofit themselves? It's always easier to complain about what someone else should do or be doing. How many Green homes have you built? Do you live in a Green home? I'll bet a Building Industry Association member built the home you live in. If Green is the right way, and it is, then vote with your dollars.

[No One]

Matthew - "The state can't simply adopt as law some codes from a private company as that is unconstitutional."

Not true. Building codes are drafted by private industry organizations and adopted by various state and local agencies. Lawmakers certainly don't have the knowledge to draft building codes. So the fact that an industry leader is involved doesn't necessarily make the results suspect.

That doesn't mean I agree with the results in this case, only that you can't dispute the results simply because they were drafted by industry.

[Kelly Hamm]

I am adamantly opposed to more government regulations. Let the market decide what people want. Let the builders build the type of house they want to build. If the buyers don't like it or it's not green enough, it won't sell. If you want to address global warming, focus on a simple carbon tax or cap and trade system. These little silly laws that force people to buy low flow toilets, or showerheads, etc. are more beaurocracy. Let people decide through a market what they feel is right for their lives. It's silly how we force low flow toilets on the general public, but we don't limit the size of a house that people can build. So I am stuck with a toilet or showerhead that barely works, but someone can build a 10,000sf mega mansion. How much water was wasted building that structure? Therefore, create a water market, charge people for what they use. During drought years, the price will rise and people will automatically cut back. Same with insulating a house. When natural gas prices rise, people will automatically seal drafts, add insulation, and close the silly window. Stop government from micromanaging our lives. Free country the last time I looked.

Kelly

[sheila]

L, you have a point, but here's the catch: Schwarzenegger goes all over the world bragging about how GREEN he is - he has recently been posturing to be Obama's "environment and energy czar!"

If HE wants to talk the talk, then HE has to walk the walk. I don't care if he's green or not, but he sure as hell doesn't get to take credit for being SuperGreenGov while shooting down every bill and every agency which would actually BE green. I'm not waving my green flag in Obama's face, and doing endless press conferences congratulating my enormous environmental accomplishments, I'm simply holding an elected representative accountable for his promises.

And I can promise you this - I will install a massive, oversized PV system within 60 days of a fair feed-in tariff being passed for this state/country. Give me 70 cents a watt in lieu of the massive subsidies given to Big Energy, and it's on. Right now, all this state's policy is gamed AGAINST us installing systems, and FOR Big Energy monopolies to scoop up all the "renewable" goodies. there is no possible way with a $35 electricity bill that conservationists like myself can "net meter" $40,000 in our natural lifetimes.

And Kelly, the beauty of LEED, which is, of course, imperfect, is that you DO get to choose. It's a point system and you get severely docked for 10,000 square feet, so you would have to basically build a perfect home in all other ways to get certified if you wanted to size to that scale. YOU control the tradeoffs... Even some modifications to LEED to make it easier for the first 5 years would have been a vast improvement over the NOTHING we got. The environment is about more than straight commodity prices and "going green" is about being thoughtful when you make choices with your hard-earned money.

[stephanie Pincetl]

The reason why California uses less energy per capita than any other state in the country is because the state passed strict building codes in the 1970s. Today, if you pay for gas and electricity -- and most of us do -- we are thankful that your buildings are more efficient, it reduces our costs. More strict requirements yet are entirely realistic (LEED or other energy standards no longer add costs to building, the technologies have become so common place). What institutionalizing stricter codes does is ensure that all of us can save money on our bills, and at the same time, conserve resources. It seems like a real no-brainer. But is it commonplace for industry to cry wolf and to try to water standards down, change is always resisted. Better energy efficiency, at this point, serves everyone.

[Jared]

I am not connected to the building industry lobby or the environmental lobby. However, I admittedly lean left with respect to environmental issues. I consider myself to be farily educated on environmental topics, including the green building standards and, based on what I've read, I don't think the author does a very good job of painting the whole picture. The proposed CA green building standards, even as a minimum threshold, are far more stringent than those of any other state. This is a well-established fact. Also, the notion that local governments can't adopt stricter regulations is untrue. There are a few local governments (e.g., LA & SF) that plan to adopt stricter standards and it's my understanding that they haven't received any pushback. I applaud them for doing so, but their standards would never get approved through the legislative process. What the new standards do is raise the minimum bar and allow local governments to exceed it.

I'm not sure what the author's agenda is, but if it is to kill the new green building standards, I think that is very irresponsible. The time to act is NOW. We can't afford to let politics get in the way of progress. If we try for the all or nothing approach, we will end up with nothing. These standards are very progressive and will represent a major step in the right direction. We need to get green building standards in place now so we can continue to be the leader in the fight against man-made climate change. The more political the process becomes, the more we lose out.

It's very sad. I hope we don't end up with nothing because of the Margot Roosevelts of the world. I'm sure she thinks she's doing the right thing, but it is really to our detriment. It's the equivalent of a lobbyist who wants to raise minimum wage from $8 to $20 balking at an offer of $19 per hour and saying "No thanks, we'd rather have $8 per hour than settle for $19." It just doesn't make sense... and it's not fair to the rest of us who want $19.

[Marshall]

I think that it is important to expose the fact that it is the very "for Proffit" and politicaly motivated groups that, demanded the State Green Codes to not "interfere" in their arena,and that are now the biggest criticis of the new code. This double standard self intrest politics serves only to hurt the citizens of California.

The establishment of a minimum State requierment(floor) is the smartest thing to come out of the Capital in a long time.