Thursday, December 13, 2007

Builders Account for Global Warming ? Is it Time?

City Council wants builders to account for global warming
By JENNIFER LANGSTONP-I REPORTER

Seattle is poised to become one of the first cities to require large construction projects -- whether condos or freeways -- to account for their greenhouse gas emissions.
But legislation passed Monday doesn't resolve a thornier question: how local governments want builders to curb gases that contribute to global warming.

Those choices could include requiring buildings to be more energy-efficient, charging fees for projects with large carbon footprints or possibly even rejecting permits.

The City Council, in a unanimous vote Monday, took a first step toward regulation. In March, city departments will start evaluating greenhouse gas emissions -- from the energy used to make concrete to pollution from cars that a building's residents drive -- when reviewing proposed projects.

"It's useful because departments aren't currently doing this," environmental attorney David Bricklin told the council last week. "But you're only scratching the surface with this, and you can't go home and think 'We've dealt with the issue now.' "

Seattle's vote follows a string of court rulings -- including one by the U.S. Supreme Court -- that classify greenhouse gases as pollutants that can be regulated.

King County, the first county to pick up on that idea, started a greenhouse-gas monitoring program in October. In both cases, the requirements apply to public and private projects large enough to undergo state environmental review.

"It is perhaps a small step, but an important one," said outgoing City Councilman Peter Steinbrueck, who sponsored the legislation. "We need to start down this path."

It's unclear what, if any, impact the legislation would have on public transportation projects, such as the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement. But decision makers ought to have better information about how different options would contribute to global warming, said Dennis McLarren, executive director of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.

He also urged the council to quickly identify how they'd like private developers to respond to climate change, and add those steps to city codes dealing with energy efficiency, transportation or land use. "Unless the city gets pretty specific about what it wants ... there will be a tremendous amount of uncertainty," McLarren said.

In Portland, for instance, the city is considering levying a fee on developers who only do the bare minimum to meet energy efficiency codes, Bricklin said.

Garrett Huffman, a lobbyist for the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish County, said that organization already has green building checklists that the city could borrow from. Those specify how everything from insulation to window glazing to the choice of thermostat can reduce a building's energy consumption.

"There's no need to reinvent the wheel -- put those things in an incentive basis where they make it worth our effort to do it," he said.

The Seattle Department of Planning and Development is working with King County, which has developed a simple spreadsheet to calculate emissions, and the state to develop a consistent approach.

Just trying to measure emissions from a new condo building raises complicated questions, such as whether developers in downtown Seattle should get credit for taking cars off the road that might have otherwise been commuting from Issaquah.

Trying to account for every last molecule of carbon dioxide associated with a building isn't necessarily the point. The main benefit, some argue, may be in showing builders how their choices -- where material comes from, architectural designs -- can affect global warming.
"We do know the first step is gathering the information," Department of Planning and Development spokesman Alan Justad said.

"I think everyone feels like it's time to start, and we'll learn as we go."

P-I reporter Jennifer Langston can be reached at 206-448-8130 or jenniferlangston@seattlepi.com.

No comments: