Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9586

Bill Overview

Title: CLEANER Buildings Act

Description: This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a national model building performance standards initiative for specified purposes, including to assist state and local governments in the development and implementation of building performance standards. Not later than 2 years after the enactment of this bill, the EPA must develop national model building performance standards.

Sponsors: Rep. Levin, Andy [D-MI-9]

Target Audience

Population: People living in or owning residential or commercial properties

Estimated Size: 300000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Commercial Property Manager (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is well-intended and necessary for reducing emissions.
  • It may increase management costs, but energy savings could offset this.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Construction Worker (Houston, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • New standards will mean more work as buildings need to comply.
  • There may be a learning curve with new practices and materials.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Retired Teacher (Rural Iowa)

Age: 66 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about the cost of upgrading my home.
  • Hopefully, there's assistance for retirees like me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 7

Tenant (New York, NY)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope my landlord decides to upgrade so my energy bills drop.
  • I'm concerned about how costs might be passed to me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Environmental Scientist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy aligns with my values and benefits should manifest more widely.
  • I am excited to see changes on a larger scale.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 9

Small Business Owner (Detroit, MI)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Retrofitting my store will be a strain unless supported by subsidies.
  • Long-term, I expect it can lower my energy bills.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

City Planner (Miami, FL)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy provides necessary tools for cities to tackle emissions more effectively.
  • Implementation will need careful planning and resources.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Real Estate Developer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Building to new standards could initially increase costs.
  • However, certified standards might make properties more attractive.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 42 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm curious how my landlord will respond to these changes.
  • I hope for lower electricity bills but worry about increased rent.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 7

Tech Company Employee (Seattle, WA)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy feels like a positive step towards sustainability.
  • Condo fees might increase for upgrades, but energy savings will be worth it.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 2: $220000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $260000000)

Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $260000000)

Year 5: $230000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $270000000)

Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)

Key Considerations