Cooler Planet

Though the State of Washington did not make Home Power magazine’s top ten list, we at Cooler Planet believe our home state deserves an honorable mention.  Washington has a history of adopting innovative legislation.  While Washington laws are not perfect, many of its mandates have inspired other states to adapt and customize similar types of laws for themselves.
 
For example, in 2005, Washington was the first state in the nation to pass a green building mandate.  The legislation requires all major renovation projects and new construction funded with state monies to meet the US Green Building Council’s LEED Silver rating system or higher.  That same year, Washington State passed two laws to advance solar electric use and nurture the solar industry’s development throughout the state.

The State’s two renewable energy bills specifically try to bolster solar photovoltaic manufacturing and wide spread use of solar electric systems.   One law provides tax breaks to the manufacturers of solar photovoltaic modules and components that locate in economically depressed and low population counties within the state. 

The other law, based on a successful program in Germany, provides a tax credit to residents and businesses that have renewable energy systems (which includes solar photovoltaic, wind, and anaerobic digesters).  However, unlike other states that set aside funds to pay property owners an upfront rebate for installing a renewable energy system, Washington law rewards property owners for their system’s production of electricity.

The Washington legislation establishes a $0.15 per kilowatt hour minimum credit for all the energy generated from a resident’s or business’s renewable, on-site power system (with a cap of $2,000 annually for households).  If the solar electric system components (modules, inverters, rack, etc.) come from Washington State manufacturers, then the property owner is awarded additional funds per kilowatt hour (which can amount to roughly $0.54 per kilowatt hour).  The property owner can also take advantage of the state’s net metering laws, thus make additional cents from its system.

Yet because these two solar bills provide complementary approaches to help jump start the nascent solar photovoltaic industry in Washington State, the $0.54 credit is not yet a reality.  Several companies do manufacture inverters in Washington, but no module photovoltaic manufactures currently exist. 

Perhaps the most innovative part of the Washington solar legislation is how the state structured its funding.  All utilities – regardless of this legislation – must pay a “utility use tax.”  The solar legislation enacted in 2005 promises the utilities an equal dollar match for every dollar the utility pays its customers for their own electricity production via renewable energy.  In essence, the tax becomes a closed-loop system:  the state does not set aside additional funds for the program instead it returns potential revenues to the utilities.  The utilities, in turn, get “a wash,” the portion of the utility use tax used for renewable energy is handed back to them.  The utility does incur the adminstration cost to track the funding; the state tried to minimize that cost by requiring utilities to report only once per year.  

Unfortunately, it’s still too early to determine what state’s approach and funding strategy works best to advance renewable energy.  

Washington State continues to move forward and enact legislation aimed at tackling climate change, and to a lesser extent renewable energy.  In March 2008, Washington made headline news again when Governor Christine Gregoire signed a measure that requires both State government and private industries to reduce their carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and meet further reductions by 2035 and 2050. 

Home Power magazine named ten top solar states.  We’ve talked about nine of them.  The final state that won the magazine’s admiration is Oregon (which happens to be the home state of the magazine). 

Oregon rightly deserves the accolade.  The State has long supported solar energy and has offered renewable energy tax credits since President Jimmy Carter famously (or infamously) encouraged energy conservation at a national scale in 1979.

Oregon offers attractive tax credits to residents and businesses for both solar electric and solar hot water systems.  For homeowners, once a qualifying PV system is installed, residents can receive $3.00 per watt for systems that are at least 200 watts or more.  The State caps its credit at $6,000, and only $1,500 can be claimed each year.  Qualifying solar hot water systems can earn property owners $0.60 per kilowatt-hour saved, up to $1,500, or 50 percent of the total system cost, whichever is greater. 

Net metering laws apply as well, allowing residents to recoup credit for any net excess energy they generate.  At the end of the annual period, unused credits are either credited to the customer or can be granted to low-income assistance programs.

Not only does Oregon offer its residents incentives for solar electric and hot water, but also offers tax credits for other types of solar heating systems.  Homeowners who install solar pool hot water systems can obtain $0.15 per kilowatt-hour saved (up to $1,500) and up to 50 percent of the system’s total cost.  Additionally, the State recognizes the value of taking advantage of passive or active solar technologies for space heating and offers similar types of tax credits.

Oregon’s commitment to renewable energy does not stop there.  Similarly generous incentives are available to businesses who install solar systems and to manufacturers to encourage growth of the renewable energy industry.  In February 2008, for example, the Oregon House unanimously approved a measure that would increase its tax credits for manufacturers of renewable energy equipment from the current $10 million to nearly $100 million by 2013.

The Oregon Legislature has consistently passed bills to advance renewable energy.  Like other “super solar states,” in 2007 Oregon passed a law that requires its largest utilities to acquire 25 percent of its energy come from renewable energy sources by 2025; smaller utilities must get 5 – 10 percent of the energy from renewable sources by that year as well.  Another state law mandates that any new state-funded public building must earmark 1.5 percent of the budget and use it to install solar technology in the building.

Oregon law does not stop there.  State property tax law dictates that any added value from a solar or other qualifying renewable energy system cannot be included in the assessment of the property’s value for property tax purposes.  And, like Minnesota, Oregon law allows municipalities to create solar access laws so that solar access to south-facing sides is protected from potential obstructions.

The State’s attractive incentives are working.  Solar World, a manufacturer of solar photovoltaic systems is moving one of its manufacturing facilities from Vancouver, Washington to Hillsboro, Oregon where its expected output will reach 500 megawatts by 2009. 

Large businesses within the state are investing in solar.  A Pepsi-Cola bottling plant in Eugene, Oregon opened its recently remodeled site in Eugene, Oregon earlier this year.  The facility includes a one-plus acre solar PV rooftop array that should generate 10 million kilowatt-hours of electricity over its expected lifetime of 35-years – enough to power approximately 21 Eugene homes during that same time period.  Pepsi-Cola also upgraded its lighting system and installed skylights, the company plans to save roughly 200,000 kilowatt hours of electricity each year from its renovations.  

In addition to the State of Oregon incentives, the government sanctioned, non-profit Energy Trust of Oregon provides residents throughout most of the Oregon with additional monetary incentives aimed at solar photovoltaic and solar hot water systems.  For information about the incentives Energy Trust provides, follow this link:  http://www.energytrust.org/solar/residential/provide.html.

Oregon has become a hotbed for green building and solar energy initiatives.  No wonder Home Power magazine recognized the state for its efforts.  Oregon’s plethora of integrated incentives makes it one of the nation’s leading states for advancing viable and effective solar energy policies and strategies today.

Moving away from New England toward the Midwest, Home Power magazine gives accolades to Minnesota, another state on its “Solar Super States” list.  Minnesota is a state known for its progressive “green policies;” no wonder the state has embraced solar energy initiatives as well.  In fact, Minnesota was the first state to adopt net metering rules.  Since 1981, residents who install solar electricity systems receive a check at the end of each month for any excess energy they generate.

Minnesota demonstrates that latitude does not stand as a detriment to harnessing the sun’s energy.  At a statewide average of 4.5 daily peak sun hours, Minnesota’s average is not much different from other Home Power super states like Maryland and Massachusetts.  On Minnesota’s Energy Info Center website, the state boasts that it has potential to receive more annual solar energy than Houston, Texas and nearly as much as Miami, Florida.

Minnesota has several state laws to encourage solar photovoltaic installations.  Its Solar Rebate Program, established in 2002, offers $2.00 per watt for solar electric systems up to 10 kilowatts in size, essentially reducing a system’s cost by 20 percent.  In addition, the state exempts solar equipment from sales tax.

In Minnesota the sun trumps shade.  State law gives local zoning boards the authority to create solar access easements to protect a property owner’s solar array from shading.

In 2006, Minnesota, like other fellow top solar states, set a goal requiring that energy companies must source 25 percent of their power from renewable energy sources by 2025.

Minnesota is the only Midwestern state to make Home Power magazine’s Top Ten Solar States list.  This state has “solar chutzpah” further dispelling the myth that solar energy is only viable in hot and arid regions.

Health House is the American Lung Association’s green building certification guidelines to build a healthy home – free of indoor pollutants.  According to the EPA, Americans spend 90 percent of their time indoors!  If ventilation systems that flush indoor air out and bring outdoor air in do not work properly, occupants can find themselves in buildings susceptible to levels of pollutants that are 2 – 5 times higher than surrounding outside.   High temperatures and humidity levels can also contribute to poor indoor air quality in a home.

The American Lung Association’s interest in keeping our homes free and clear of pollutants – in part to protect children from another one of our nation’s growing health concerns, asthma – led the American Lung Association to create Health House.  Their certification system focuses on the construction of a building, the materials, and heating and cooling systems to maximize a healthy and clean indoor environment.  The guidelines include protocol for maximizing air filtration and ventilation systems within a home and avoiding building and finishing materials that off-gas (such as urea-formaldehyde laced products like some laminated wood or furniture products, or oil-based paints and floor finishes).  For more information about Health House, you can visit www.healthhouse.org and download a copy of their Health House Builder Guidelines.

The EPA’s ENERGY STAR label not only encompasses over 50 different types of energy-consuming products such as computers and appliances, but also has created a green building protocol for homes.  ENERGY STAR Homes is a nationwide voluntary program, implemented at the regional level throughout the United States.  The certification targets new homes and requires third-party certification.

ENERGY STAR Homes focuses on the inter-related systems that impact energy use in your home.  Some are obvious:  the ways you heat and cool your home, the types of lamp fixtures and appliances you choose, and the number of televisions, computers, and other electronic equipment you operate.  Others are less obvious:  the way you water your yard, the insulation installed in your walls, and the types of windows and doors in your home.  The products you (or your builder) choose and the way the systems are installed affect the dwelling’s overall energy performance.

According to the EPA its standards often lead to homes that are 20-30 percent more energy efficient than their conventionally built counterparts.  You can find the names of participating ENERGY STAR builders by visiting http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=new_homes_partners.showHomesSearch. 

These days, there are seemingly endless amounts of “green labels” out there.  What do they all mean?   

In the world of green building there are a variety of green building rating systems.  Some take a holistic approach and evaluate all the various systems inside and outside your home; others examine a narrower band of categories such as indoor air quality or energy efficiency.  Complicating matters further, different – yet similar – names are used within different regions (or even smaller jurisdictions) throughout the country.  Take, for example, this dizzying sampling of names:  Built Green, Build Green, Earth Advantage, Earth Craft Home, Green Home Choice, I-Built, EcoBUILD. 

Generally, to achieve certification in any of these green building rating systems designers produce designs and specifications that incorporate the required goals and then builders incorporate requirements into their construction practices.   What generates confusion for home owners and buyers is trying to understand the myriad of different goals and check-list requirements applied to each prospective home.  Green labels wouldn’t do much good if consumers did not understand them and what they are trying to achieve. 

Understanding and appreciating the design, engineering and finishing choices builders include can help prospective home buyers differentiate between homes beyond an aesthetic appeal.  Builders often tout a home’s “green features.”  However, until a single building standard is adopted what is called “built green” may differ between programs.

So how do you distinguish between green building certifications?  Let’s start at the national level.  Both the National Home Builders Association (NAHB) and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) have developed rating systems for residential construction.  The NAHB calls it guidelines, the Green Home Building Program; the USGBC who created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification system, calls its system:  LEED for Homes.  Both of these rating systems include a wide-range of protocol for how to build a green home. 

At first glance, both the NAHB Green Home Building Program and the USGBC LEED for Homes look similar.  They are.  Both organizations have published lengthy checklists and guidelines that define categories such as Energy Efficiency, Water Conservation, and Indoor Environmental Quality.  Both describe criteria and objectives to meet in order to obtain points toward a rating.  And each rating system has different levels – the Green Home Building Program has 3-levels:  Bronze, Silver, and Gold; LEED for Homes has 4-levels:  Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum.  The higher the level, the more green features a home has incorporated.  Both rating systems aspire to design and build homes that are energy efficient, use water wisely, are well placed on a site, and incorporate building materials and best construction management practices that tread lightly on the earth.

The differences between the programs are subtle.  Many of the variances relate to how the homes are rated, how the programs are executed, and plain old competition for brand name recognition and dominance.   The USGBC rating system relies on third-party certification to determine how many points to award each house.  The NAHB allows local builders and jurisdictions to establish their own certification process.  For example, the local home builders’ chapter in King and Snohomish counties, two counties in Washington State, has established a rigorous green building rating system that requires third-party certification to achieve its highest green building levels whereas the lower-point levels are based on the builder’s self-verification. 

In future posts I’ll explain the actual differences between other types of green building certifications, labels, and standards.