Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that US utilities must move beyond a 'business-as-usual' mindset to meet increasingly aggressive energy efficiency targets. It proposes a 'turbocharging' strategy that combines 'broader' savings (acquiring more participants) with 'deeper' savings (increasing energy saved per participant). The authors identify systemic barriers, including utility complacency, lack of competitive experience, and rigid regulatory frameworks, and offer a framework of recommendations centered on improving marketing, sales execution, reducing transaction costs, and embracing collaboration with third-party partners and regulators.

The briefing argues that traditional utility rebate programs, which focus on single-technology upgrades, yield only 1 to 5 percent whole-building savings. In contrast, a 'deep retrofit' approach—optimizing the building as a whole—can achieve 30 to 50 percent savings. To scale this, the authors propose the 'Deep Energy Efficiency Pays' (DEEP) program, which provides an additional incentive for projects that meet a specific energy savings threshold (e.g., 30 percent). This incentive is designed to 'tip' the economics of projects that would otherwise be financially unviable for building owners. The document highlights the Empire State Building as a successful example of a deep retrofit and discusses existing programs in California and Connecticut as precursors to this model.

The report identifies significant barriers to deep energy efficiency retrofits in the U.S. commercial sector, primarily centered on financing, a lack of performance data, and split incentives. While 71% of surveyed stakeholders express high interest in deep retrofits, the private sector remains risk-averse, often requiring short payback periods of 2-4 years. The study concludes that providing targeted informational resources, such as case studies and improved energy modeling tools, is essential to reduce perceived risks and stimulate industry-wide activity.

The Empire State Building underwent a deep energy retrofit involving the remanufacturing of 6,514 windows into 'superwindows', chiller plant upgrades, and the implementation of direct digital controls. By coordinating energy upgrades with a larger $550 million remodel, the project achieved a projected 38 percent energy use reduction and annual cost savings of $4.4 million, with an incremental simple payback period of three years.

The report finds that Wales' 2003 ecological footprint was 5.16 global hectares (gha) per person, which is lower than Scotland, England, or any English region. However, the footprint grew by an average of 1.5% per year between 1990 and 2003, mirroring the growth in Gross Value Added (GVA). The analysis identifies housing, food, and personal travel as the three primary contributors, accounting for 63% of the total footprint. The report models scenarios to 2020, suggesting that while current policies may stabilise the footprint, a combined package of expanded retrofitting, food waste reduction, and sustainable travel initiatives could achieve a 6.6% overall reduction in the total footprint by 2020.

The Climate Bonds Building Criteria establish standards for certifying assets, entities, and debt instruments in the building sector to ensure they contribute to a zero-carbon future by 2050. Certification is based on a compliance process involving disclosure and GHG mitigation, with the latter achieved through either absolute performance (using trajectories or proxies) or relative performance (demonstrating significant emissions reductions during retrofitting). New buildings face stricter requirements, including a total ban on fossil fuels for heating, hot water, cooking, and on-site electricity, alongside mandates for electrification and electric mobility infrastructure.

The report details the use of the North American TIMES Energy Model (NATEM) to identify the most cost-effective technology combinations for decarbonizing Canada's building sector. It establishes a core 'Optimal NZ50' scenario targeting 440 Mt of emissions in 2030 and 10 Mt by 2050, while outlining seven sensitivity analyses covering heat pump costs, retrofit levels, and hydrogen integration. The modelling accounts for regional differences across 13 jurisdictions, incorporating detailed load curves, climate change temperature forecasts, and a comprehensive database of over 7,000 technologies.

The document outlines a framework for universities to transition to low-carbon campuses by focusing on three pillars: people, policy, and plan. It emphasizes assembling multidisciplinary teams, aligning investment policies with life cycle cost analysis, and adopting an iterative planning process. Key strategies include implementing portfolio-wide energy efficiency measures before building-specific deep retrofits, leveraging 'incremental costs' during planned maintenance, and reducing peak loads to downsize central plant equipment. The guide advocates for moving beyond 'business-as-usual' practices to maximize the economic and environmental impact of carbon-reduction initiatives.

The Carol Avenue Apartments in Boston are undergoing a deep energy retrofit scheduled for completion in late 2024. The project focuses on transitioning a 33-unit, 1910-era property from fossil fuel-based systems to a fully electric infrastructure. By combining interior wall insulation, roof upgrades, and the installation of a Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) system, the property is estimated to reduce energy use by 55 percent. The addition of 65.3 kW of rooftop solar PV is projected to further increase total energy reduction to 64 percent and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 41 percent.

The Hano Homes project in Boston aims to transform a multifamily residential building constructed in 1888 into a net-zero energy property through a deep energy retrofit planned for 2023–2024. The strategy involves wrapping the building in a superinsulated exterior shell, replacing gas boilers and water heaters with all-electric heat pump systems, and installing a 100–110 kW rooftop solar PV system. These measures are expected to reduce energy usage by 69% and eliminate operational greenhouse gas emissions, while the use of bio-based insulation is intended to store carbon and reduce embodied emissions.

The document advocates for a four-step life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) process—establishing a baseline, defining energy efficiency measures (EEMs), calculating financial metrics, and bundling measures—to avoid the sub-optimal design choices often resulting from simple payback analysis. It demonstrates through a fictional chiller replacement example and a real-world 20,000 square-foot retail store retrofit that LCCA can reveal positive net present value (NPV) and higher internal rates of return (IRR) by accounting for avoided business-as-usual costs and synergistic effects. The authors conclude that while LCCA requires more effort in data collection and modeling, the potential for significant energy cost savings and carbon emission reductions makes it worth the investment.

The GSA's National Deep Energy Retrofit (NDER) program demonstrated that deep energy retrofits can achieve significantly higher savings than typical federal projects, with 10 GSA ESPC projects averaging 38% savings compared to 21% in other agencies. A stakeholder workshop identified key barriers in project delivery, team dynamics, integrative design, operations and maintenance (O&M), and project economics. Recommended improvements include transitioning to whole-building performance contracts for O&M and combining energy efficiency contracts with appropriated renovation funds to incentivize deeper savings.

The document is a response by Amory and Judy Lovins to a Wall Street Journal article regarding their home's energy efficiency. The authors argue that their original 1982–84 house achieved 90% electricity savings and 99% heating energy savings with a minimal cost premium of $6,000, which was recovered in ten months. They distinguish this from a later 2007–09 renovation that was more costly because it focused on 'bleeding-edge' technology and aesthetics rather than basic efficiency. The authors promote 'integrative design'—where high insulation levels eliminate the need for expensive heating systems—as a method to reduce energy use by over 80% at comparable or lower capital costs. They cite examples such as 'passive houses' in Europe and specific projects in Bangkok and California to demonstrate that these economics apply across different climates and scales.

The report identifies a significant gap in energy efficiency within US affordable housing, noting that public housing is 38% more inefficient than private residential buildings. It categorizes barriers into programmatic (regulatory and information gaps), financial (funding backlogs and complex mixed-financing), technical (lack of integrative design and energy modeling), and operational (tenant incentives and lack of retro-commissioning). To address these, the report recommends streamlining HUD's Energy Performance Contract (EPC) processes, adopting life-cycle cost analysis, utilizing a 'whole-building' design approach, and implementing retro-commissioning, which can reduce energy consumption by a median of 16% with a fast payback period.

The report identifies nine key drivers—including energy cost savings, stakeholder demand, and smart building technology—that enable corporations to move beyond incremental sustainability gains toward higher energy performance and net-zero buildings.

The document argues that improving building efficiency is a cost-effective way to reduce global energy consumption and CO2 emissions while creating jobs and improving urban livability. It outlines eight specific actions for city leaders—ranging from implementing building codes and setting targets to engaging utilities and the private sector—and provides a strategic framework for developing integrated action plans to overcome market and institutional barriers.