Energy cost should matter

I don’t really know enough about the energy auditing of buildings to know if they’re effective, but this is a weird statement:

The report also questioned whether Energy Star or similar ratings should be used for buildings.

Unlike appliances, to which Energy Star ratings are most frequently applied, buildings can have characteristics that make fair comparisons between them difficult. For example, Stavins said, a historic building might be limited in the renovations that can be undertaken, leading to a lower Energy Star ratings.

Low Energy Star ratings, in turn, could hurt property values, adding to the financial losses of building owners, the report said.

Energy Star “does not account for factors like the age, historic status, or location of a building, which are critical,” he said.

I really don’t understand this at all–is he saying that a report on energy and water usage should take into account all these other things? If I buy an appliance, its energy ratings will be one thing I take into consideration. If I buy a house or building, it would also be nice if I had this information available but it would not be my only consideration. And if a house or building uses a lot of energy to heat, then it should lower its value–if two houses could be exactly the same but one cost more to heat, I would probably not buy the one that cost more to heat. Is he implying I shouldn’t think about energy costs when I buy a house? Really, this is a confusing statement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: