Gov Update: Energy Efficiency Reductions in HB675

On page 3 line 26 of this bill, new language is included that would add a cost-benefit analysis of all proposed changes to the NC Energy Code based on a five-year payback period and impacts on the energy efficiency of the entire structure.NCBPA believes this language is yet another legislative attempt to prevent moderate improvements to energy efficiency and roll-back the mediocre standards we already have. Last session, energy efficiency requirements for attached residential garages were written out entirely with no financial justification at all in HB573 (page 4 section 2.(a)).

The vagueness of this language will make energy efficiency and clean energy improvements difficult to make for many years to come. And worse off, the financial analysis is to be performed by the Council itself, a body that - by statute - lacks an Energy professional in its ranks. How would the Council prove financial justification for a verification method like blower door testing in homes or the installation of EV charging stations in commercial buildings?

In addition, it will be incredibly challenging to tie the impacts of proposed energy code changes to the energy efficiency of the entire structure. Residential energy code changes already have to pass a substantial economic impact for any cost increase over $80 per housing unit. How will this new justification be applied?

(Taken from the NCBPA, the North Carolina Building Performance Association)