Todd Gloria's climate action plan will take a heavy toll on people trying to sell homes and small businesses. Page 1 of 2 | UTSanDiego.com
The plan itself notes the residential mandates come at a high cost to you, the consumer. Elderly people on fixed incomes, low- to moderate-income homeowners, and small businesses are especially vulnerable.
Under these mandates, you could be required to install new windows, lighting, water heaters and other costly items, before selling your home or small business.
As an example, a dozen new energy efficient windows installed in a modest two-bedroom, one-bath home could run a family over $4,000.
The mandates in the climate action plan would require you to pay these out-of-pocket expenses before a sale can occur, meaning the mandates could lock you into your home until you are able to save thousands of dollars to make the required improvements.
DRAFT Climate Action Plan Document - February 2014
 |
| Action 1.2 is the 2nd action of first phase, to be implemented in 2015 |
|
The plan residential energy consumption reduction of 27,429 MT/CO2 is to be forced by implementation of a phased point of sale Residential Water and Energy Conservation Ordnance by 2015. This is based on the analysis presented in the appendix.
Residential
Water and Energy Conservation Ordinance
To estimate the GHG reductions associated with this local action,
we assume that homeowners are required to increase energy efficiency at the time
of receiving a permit for an addition or remodels and when they sell their residential
unit. The number of residential units affected was estimated by using the rate of
remodels and additions and sales of residential units.
According to the City of
San Diego Department of Development Services, approximately 0.5% of the existing
stock of residential units in the City conducts a remodel or addition in an average
year. According to the San Diego Association of Realtors, about 3% of the existing
stock of residential units was sold in 2012 -‐ 13 in the County of San Diego. We
assumed that the rate was the same for residential units in the City of San Diego.
To account for the fact that rented units would likely not be captured by this policy,
we assumed that 48% of residential units – applied equally to multi -‐ and single
-‐ family units – were owner occupied, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
To
eliminate to possibility of double counting, we reduced the total quantity of owner
-‐ occupied units by the amount that already were affected by the policy . As a
result, approximately 20% of single -‐ family and multi -‐ family owner -‐ occupied
homes would be affected by this local action in 2020 and approximately 50 % of single
-‐ family owner -‐ occupied homes in 2035.
To determine the total energy and emission
s reduction associated with this policy, we assumed that each participating unit
reduced energy use by 15 % below the average residential energy consumption value.
Table 11 summarizes key assumptions and result
 |
| Table 11 |
In the only cost analysis in the plan, shown in Figure 2.6, these are the least cost effective measures other than mass transit that could be taken at a net cost of $500/MT for solar water heating and $1250/MT for residential efficiency. By 2020, after 5 years of implementation, this will have cost 52,699 single family home owners who remodel or sell a total of $1250*27,429 = $34 million. Note that the sellers will pay a higher price than this, since they will pay for the improvements, while the new owners will reap the benefits of lower gas and electric use, hence there is a net transfer of benefits. It may also be noted that the additional cost to remodel or sell may result in significant reduction of such activities, resulting in failure to achieve the emission goals, reduced construction and unimproved housing, and owners renting instead of selling to avoid the costs. Furthermore, cost of administration and enforcement are not considered. Savings from reduced gas and electric usage are likely to be ephemeral, as SDG&E raises its rates to counter a 15% drop in consumption.
No comments:
Post a Comment