EPA lauds 25 U.S. cities with most Energy Star Buildings

Make This Your Home Page

Help Log In

EPA lauds 25 U.S. cities with most Energy Star Buildings

E-mail This Story

March 5th, 2009 · No Comments

By Harriet Blake
Green Right Now

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recognized 25 U.S. cities for having the most Energy Star buildings in 2008.

The top 10 are Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, Washington, D.C., Dallas-Fort Worth, Chicago, Denver, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Atlanta and Seattle.

Los Angeles ranked first with 262 buildings earning the Energy Star rating, which can be applied to rehabbed and new properties. San Francisco had 194 buildings; Houston, 145; Washington D.C., 136 and Dallas, 126.

Energy Star, the EPA’s label for high efficiency, sets standards for everthing from light bulbs and appliances to buildings.

“An Energy Star building,” says Energy Star spokesperson Maura Beard, “uses 35 percent less energy and emits 35 percent less greenhouse gases than average buildings.”

Looking at the list, it might surprise some to see cities such as Los Angeles, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston — known more for their air quality challenges than for green building — at the top of the rankings.

Ms. Beard explains that the list reflects improvements in buildings, which will be reflected in air quality gains later on.

“In terms of this list, we looked specifically at [a building’s] reductions in greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. This is a big concern in states like California and Texas where there is a lot of demand on their infrastructure,” she says.

There were some standout buildings in each of these three cities, she says. She praised a retrofit of a JC Penney store that was built in 1969 in Downey Calif., in Los Angeles County. “They did a beautiful job improving the building’s energy efficiency, starting with its operating characteristics,” says Beard. (Also this week, JC Penney, an early adopter of the Energy Star program with 52 stores that have earned the label, won the first Energy Star Award for Sustained Excellence in Energy Management.)

In Houston, the Green Valley Elementary School involved the student body in its transformation. “Here the kids formed patrol teams making sure lights weren’t left on in the cafeteria and elsewhere when not in use,” says Beard. And in Dallas, the Hines real estate firm, won the Energy Star rating for its Galleria North Tower office building.

The Galleria office building is attached to a spacious, upscale, air-conditioned mall, which raises the question: What about the energy efficiency of malls in general?

“Shopping malls are difficult [structures] to measure efficiency in,” says Beard. “For Energy Star, we collect data from the Department of Energy, then build a model. There are 12 different types of buildings included in the Energy Star ratings. For example, you can’t compare a hospital to a small store. Your have to compare peers, apples to apples.

“For now, we can just measure the efficiency of the anchor stores at a mall. It’s difficult to measure each of the many small stores. We are working with the Simon group, who manages many of the country’s malls, to improve this.”

The EPA reports that in 2008, more than 3,300 commercial buildings and manufacturing plants earned the Energy Star rating. This translates into a savings of more than $1 billion in utility bills and more than 7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. The structures range from schools and hospitals to office buildings and assembly plants.

More than 6,200 U.S. buildings have qualified for the Energy Star rating in total, says EPA spokesperson Enesta Jones. This represents an annual savings in greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to taking 2 million cars off the road.

Depending on the climate and location, buildings, homes and offices and workplaces, are estimated to be responsible for about 40 percent of the world’s GHG gases.

The Energy Star rating system for buildings is similar to the green certification system devised by the U.S. Green Building Council known as LEED or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Efficiency and Design. But Energy Star is more focused on onsite power savings, while LEED looks at how building materials are sourced and considers broader environmental issues like how close a building is to mass transit opportunities.

“LEED certification tends to be more for new buildings and includes everything, green roofs, supplies and materials, recycling, even the commute,” says Beard. “Energy Star is purely about energy efficiency.”

“It works best if the two [certification systems] are used hand in hand,” she says. “Energy Star is more rigorous in terms of energy efficiency. With LEED, you can get a bunch of points for many different attributes. If a building doesn’t score highly on energy efficiency, it could still earn LEED certification because it might score well on other levels.” (Though LEED standards are currently being tightened and it would be difficult for a building to earn the highest level ratings without being energy efficient.)

EPA’s new chief Lisa P. Jackson is pleased with the results of the Energy Star cities. In a statement released yesterday, she said, “EPA commends all of these cities…[that] are now using more energy efficient appliances and dwellings. They are saving energy, saving money and protecting our environment.”

Related stories: