Backlash to Climate Legislation Success
Climate advocates had great success in the last few legislative sessions in Olympia. Since 2020 there have been numerous legislative proposals to reduce Washington’s contribution to climate change and the efforts have been wide ranging. They include transportation, new and existing buildings, clean energy jobs, and more. Not all have been successful, but persistence has paid off. These successes are now being challenged in court and on the ballot.
The 2024 session was Governor Inslee’s last, and he wants his legacy to include strong action against climate change. Samantha Morrow, Government Affairs Director for AIA Washington Council. summarized the most recent accomplishments in an email to members:
Passage of HB 1282, the Buy Clean and Buy Fair legislation, promoting sustainable and ethical construction practices. This bill mandates transparency and accountability for building materials used in major state-funded projects by requiring firms to report Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), Health Product Declarations, working conditions, and other data. It also directs the Department of Commerce to develop a public database for this information and establishes the "Buy Clean Buy Fair" workgroup.
AIAWA secured an important budget proviso in the Operating Budget allocating $250,000 to the State Building Code Council to study embodied carbon language in other jurisdictions' building codes and provide recommendations for potential adoption by December 1, 2024.
AIAWA's partners at Shift Zero secured $3.5 million in the Operating Budget to facilitate access to energy assistance programs, including incentives, audits, and rebates for retrofitting homes and small businesses.
Shift Zero, along with their partners, advocated for a $50M proviso in the capital budget for multifamily building efficiency grants. In the end, the budget included $55M, as well as approximately $45M for school district indoor air quality and energy efficiency.
The initiative is being marketed with “Stop the gas ban”. This is a deceptive tactic since ESHB 1589 does not include a gas ban!
These successes, however, have brought a backlash from opponents.
The Climate Commitment Act (CCA), passed in 2021, is facing a campaign to repeal the law (Initiative Measure No. 2117), which established a comprehensive program to reduce carbon pollution and cap greenhouse gas emissions. The initiative would repeal the CCA and prohibit state agencies from establishing any type of program that involves trading carbon tax credits.
There is also a campaign to prohibit the state/local government from restricting natural gas access. Several proposed initiatives are attempting to repeal ESHB 1589 that prohibits expansion of natural gas service and supports the state’s largest natural gas utility (PSE) in its efforts to decarbonize. Most of these bills likely won’t make it to the ballot, but I-2066 may collect enough signatures. The initiative is being marketed as “Stop the gas ban”. This is a deceptive tactic since ESHB 1589 does not include a gas ban.
At the local level, Seattle’s proposed amendments to the 2021 Washington State Energy Code have been under extreme pressure from the development community. So much so that in May, Mayor Harrell put forward a proposal to strike many of the Seattle amendments and have the code align more closely to the Washington State Energy Commercial Energy Code. Rising interest rates and construction cost increases due to market forces are causing development costs to skyrocket in Seattle, but many in the industry also blame the energy codes.
Of special concern is the cost of housing that falls under the commercial provisions of the code (generally residential buildings four stories or more). The high cost of development has all but stalled these types of projects in Seattle—and at a time when demand for housing and rents are high. It is often said that Seattle is in a housing crisis, and that the high cost of housing is contributing to homelessness in the city. How can we justify adding further cost to housing in the form of energy efficiency when new construction is already very efficient? Advocates say that the efficiency measures benefit the tenants, but opponents say that the benefit is minor compared to the increase in rent. Advocates also say that we shouldn’t have to choose—that housing can be affordable and efficient.
Because we know that legislation plays a big part in the transformation of the market, we advocate for common sense policies that further the adoption of sustainability in the building sector.
This is the kind of issue that reasonable people can easily disagree about. If the priority is to encourage housing, perhaps we can loosen the energy code rules for housing and keep the stronger requirements for other project types.
Because we know that legislation plays a big part in the transformation of the market, we advocate for common sense policies that further the adoption of sustainability in the building sector. We participate in several organizations that advocate for climate policies in Washington. We’re members of Shift Zero, an alliance of over 55 green building, energy efficiency, and climate action businesses and organizations working together to catalyze a just transition to zero carbon buildings for all in Washington State. We‘re also AIA members where we participate in the AIA Washington Climate Committee, and AIA Seattle’s Committee on the Environment (COTE).
Seattle’s Construction Codes Advisory Board has debated the issues at two recent meetings. On June 20th they voted on the proposed changes which can be found on SDCI’s website Proposed changes to 2021 Energy Code. The board’s recommendation includes several compromises, and will now be forwarded to City Council for consideration.
With a few exceptions, we do not believe that the 2021 amendments pose significant cost increases for housing. We did, however, see significant cost increase with the adoption of the 2018 Seattle Energy Code. This code added requirements for energy recovery ventilation in dwelling units, and strictly limited the use of electric resistance heat, while disallowing fossil fuels for heating or hot water. The result was a change to heat pumps for space conditioning. This is significant for comfort and safety. As our summers have gotten warmer, cooling has become more necessary. And when the hot summers are coupled with smoke from forest fires, the benefit is even more significant. The market is still adjusting to these requirements, and given the numerous strains on housing development, a temporary reprieve for multifamily projects may be in order. However, we do not agree that the Washington State Energy Code is strict enough and that we can abandon our role as leaders in the state.