By Edward Mazria

I was wondering when it would happen, a Building Sector disinformation campaign launched by vested interests. Well, it’s happened.

The campaign hit The New York Times on Saturday, and it comes from NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association. It appears just as the country has come to grips with the fact that buildings are responsible for over 50% (50.1% to be exact*) of all the energy consumed in the US. It comes at a time when Americans are trying to reshape their energy policy and wean themselves from dependence on foreign oil, dwindling natural gas reserves and dirty conventional coal. This disinformation campaign is obviously meant to stall, confuse and distort. The first salvo, a spurious study and press release, was issued two days before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on improving building energy code standards.

It is clear from a simple analysis of the study that NAIOP commissioned a building energy efficiency analysis to support predetermined results. They contracted with ConSol, an energy-modeling firm, and asked them to analyze five (yes, only five) efficiency measures for an imaginary, square-shaped, four-story office building with completely sealed windows and an equal amount of un-shaded glass on all four sides of the building. In other words, analyze an energy Hog.

They conducted the analysis for different cities and climates – Newport Beach, Chicago and Baltimore – without changing the design to respond to these very different climates. They did not study changing the shape of the building, its orientation or form, or redistributing windows or using different windows to take advantage of natural light for daylighting or sunlight for heating (office buildings are day-use facilities). They did not study shading the glass in summertime to reduce the need for air-conditioning, using operable windows for ventilation (not even in Newport Beach with its beautiful year-round climate), using landscaping to reduce micro-climatic impacts, employing cost-effective solar hot water heating systems, employing an energy management control system or even study the impact of using inexpensive energy-saving occupancy sensors in rooms to turn off lights.

In other words, NAIOP intentionally kept out of the analysis all the readily available low-cost, no-cost and cost-saving options to reduce a building’s energy consumption. This deliberate omission is glaringly apparent in their press release and in the NY Times article. In fact, they take so many inexpensive, energy-saving options off the table that it is impossible for the imaginary building to reach commonly achievable energy-consumption-reduction targets. They then add an inflammatory headline to their press release, “Results show efficiencies unable to reach 30 percent mandates”, and state that, “The study provides an unbiased insight into the energy targets practical to commercial development today.”

Using this analysis as their baseline, NAIOP goes on to report, without any objective basis, that “reaching a 30 percent reduction above the ASHRAE standard (a commercial building energy code standard) is not feasible using common design approaches and would exceed a 10-year payback.” They conclude, “achieving a 50 percent reduction above the standard is not currently reachable.” Clearly, this study is meant to confuse the public and stall meaningful legislation, insuring that America remains dependent on foreign oil, natural gas and dirty conventional coal. The U.S. peaked in oil production in 1970 and natural gas in 1973. Our reserves are in steep decline and 70% of the remaining world oil and gas reserves are located in the Middle East, an area stretching from Saudi Arabia and Iran to the Islamic republics of the former Soviet Union.

This type of activity by NAIOP not only hurts our country, it is also a disservice to their membership and all those in the Building Sector who work hard to deliver a high-quality, energy-efficient building product. NAIOP touts itself as advancing responsible commercial real estate development and advocating for effective public policy. This study and misleading campaign accomplishes none of these goals. The American public deserves better. · · ·

*To create a U.S. Building Sector, the Residential buildings (operations) sector, Commercial buildings (operations) sector, Industrial sector-building operations estimate, and the Industrial sector-annual building construction and materials embodied energy estimate were combined.

To most effectively use remaining TARP funds and directly address the mortgage crisis, Architecture 2030 is urging the White House and Congress to support the The Two-Year, Nine-Million-Jobs Investment Plan (an update to the 2030 Challenge Stimulus Plan). With an investment of $192.47 billion ($96.235 billion each year for two years), this Plan creates, in just two years:

• over 9 million new jobs,
• $1 trillion in direct, non-federal investment and spending, and
• a new $236 billion renovation market that could grow to $2.6 trillion by 2030 and over $5.47 trillion by 2069.

Also critically important:

• the Plan pays for itself annually through the new tax base created,
• this new tax base also provides the needed funding for public infrastructure
  and building projects, and
• the Plan can be implemented quickly through existing federal programs.

What can you do?
Architecture 2030 wants you to add your voice to the cause. Please urge your representatives to support the Two-Year, Nine-Million Jobs Investment Plan. A sample letter is available at the Architecture 2030 website, here.

Hope Resides in the Private Building Sector

The Two-Year, Nine-Million-Jobs Investment Plan is so effective because it invests funds directly in the sector that is dragging down the entire economy, i.e. the private building sector. The private building sector represents 93% of total U.S. building stock and affects virtually every industry and sector in the U.S. It also generates substantial private investment and spending, which makes the 9 million jobs possible. Although important, the public building sector accounts for only 7% of total U.S. building stock and, compared to private building, generates very little private investment and spending, resulting in far fewer jobs.

Addressing the foreclosure crisis and the collapse of the private building sector is critical to stabilizing the U.S. economy. The Two-Year, Nine-Million-Jobs Investment Plan addresses both, as well as many other challenges facing the country, including energy independence and climate change. With a single investment, the U.S. can create millions of jobs, strengthen the U.S. economy, reduce CO2 emissions and energy consumption, and save consumers billions of dollars. Investing in the private building sector is the only investment that can accomplish all of these objectives simultaneously.

Additional information is available at the Architecture 2030 website.
To read the updated Plan, click here.