The building sector and governments have made progress but are not doing enough to improve energy efficiency in the built environment -- and will not meet targets to address global climate change unless sweeping action is taken immediately to slash energy use, according to a new report by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

"The building sector must radically cut energy consumption -- starting now -- if countries are to achieve energy security and manage climate change," the report says.

The report, "Transforming the Market: Energy Efficiency in Buildings" was released Monday in Geneva, Washington, D.C., Beijing and Paris, where it was presented at the Alliance to Save Energy's EE Global Forum and Exposition.

The 69-page report is the product of a four-year, $15-million study by WBCSD. It is the first to inventory current building stock and projected future building stock -- and to provide an analysis based on that information and the modeled effects of consumer preferences and behaviors, design, technology and policy on energy consumption in six major markets: Brazil, China, Europe, India, Japan and the U.S. The markets represent almost two-thirds of the world's energy use.

The study is the broadest and most comprehensive of three recently issued research findings on different aspects of energy efficiency and buildings. The report is also the most emphatic in stating the need for urgent improvement.

"False optimism breeds complacency" and key players must avoid "sleepwalking into crises" as well as doing too little too late, the report says.

"Our analysis clearly shows the scale of the challenge and the impossibility of meeting it at current rates of progress," says the report. "Our conclusion: Under current financial and policy conditions, building decisionmakers will not spend sufficiently on energy efficiency, even on investments that pay off over a project lifetime. Financial timescales for owners of both residential and commercial buildings are generally too short to allow improvements that would save energy and pay off over the lifetime of the investments."

In addition to the warnings, the WBCSD report provides a roadmap on how to address the problem by achieving a worldwide average of a 55 percent reduction in building energy use by 2050.

The report says its recommendations would help shrink the world's energy related carbon footprint by 77 percent, or 48 gigatons, which would in turn help stabilize CO2 levels at the threshold called for by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The report notes, however, that some developed countries -- the U.S. among them -- will have to drive energy use in buildings down so that it is at least 80 percent below "business-as-usual" levels.

Potential barriers to progress include market and policy failures, inadequate knowledge and understanding among building professionals in the building industry and poor behavior of building users.

The report adds, however, that the situation can be turned around with the right financial mechanisms and relationships, holistic building design and a wholesale change in the behavior by building professionals and building occupants.

The study recommends the following actions with the first four measures to be taken by policymakers and government:

• Strengthen codes and labeling for increased transparency
• Provide incentives for energy efficient investments
• Encourage integrated design approaches and innovations
• Develop and use advanced technology to enable energy-saving
behaviors
• Develop workforce capacity for energy saving
• Mobilize for an energy aware culture
"We must start now to aggressively reduce energy use in new and existing buildings," the WBCSD report says.

Research on the Market for Commercial Retrofits

In the U.S., cleantech market intelligence firm Pike Research also released a report on building energy efficiency this week as a result of a study that looked at the market for retrofits in the public and private commercial building sector.

The findings released Tuesday project the total opportunity for major green renovations in the sector at "approximately $400 billion over the coming years." The report from Pike Research also forecasts that the annual revenue from comprehensive efficiency retrofits will more than triple and reach $6.6 billion by 2013.

"High-performance green building space experiences lower vacancy rates and commands a premium price, compared to conventional space," Pike Research Managing Director Clint Wheelock said in a statement. "Because of this, commercial building owners are adopting green retrofits as a market differentiator. The favorable retrofit business model will fuel steady momentum until most commercial building space has been retrofitted for energy efficiency."

Although green retrofits can produce significant energy savings, Pike Research's study indicates that "most major projects will not be driven by cost savings, but instead will be initiated to meet broader policy and business objectives such as lower carbon footprints, higher employee productivity and higher property values," the company said.

Financial Study on Ultra Green Living Buildings

Earlier this month, the Cascadia Region Green Building Council in Seattle, Washington, released a study concluding that when it comes to new construction, the smartest move is investment in an "ultra green living building," which generates its own power and cleans and reuses its water.

"A building that is only slightly green may end up costing more in 10 years than a building that is designed and built as high performance as is currently possible," the organization said in issuing its findings on April 14.

In conducting the study, researchers looked at nine structures that received a LEED Gold green building rating and are located in four U.S. cities.

Although initial costs for a living building are higher, the outlay has significant economic impact, with less than a 10 year payback in many instances, according to the study. A living building can cost as little 5 percent more to no more than 49 percent more, depending on the type of building and its location, the research found. Payback period for the range of investment was less than seven years to as many as 15 years, a timespan that usually is less than the period that companies and owners hold their real property as an asset.

Researchers noted that living buildings are not likely to be considered the best option for investors who want to put their money into spec buildings with an eye to flipping them on the market fairly quickly.

The study team for the green building council's research was led by SERA Architects with Skanska USA Building, Gerding Edlen Development, New Buildings Institute, and Interface Engineering.

Image by Olivier Bruchez.