194
C. F. Albrecht et al.
• They live in less expensive regions… typically a greater distance from employment
opportunities, which results in increased transportation costs [and needs].
• They live in housing that is substandard or in poor physical condition.
Throughout the United States, more than 30% of homeowners and half of all
renters struggle with housing cost burden, many of these families are severely burdened—paying more than 50% of their incomes for housing (Harvard University
2017). Monthly gross housing expenses include “carrying costs,” such as utilities, in
addition to direct expenses (mortgage, rent) associated with monthly/annual housing
expenses. The law and economic consulting firm Fisher et al. (2016) established
a method for assessing “carrying costs” of housing, specifically factoring energy
expenses into the equation. Their calculations take into consideration energy-related
end uses including space heating; space cooling; domestic hot water; and electrical
appliances including lighting and refrigeration. They conclude that no more than
6% of housing related expenses (2% for heating) should be dedicated to paying for
energy. Their findings have shown that “home energy is a crippling financial burden
for low-income households (…) home energy un-affordability, however, is not only
the province of the very poor.” Even higher income households often pay more than
affordable amounts for expenses associated with home energy (Fisher et al. 2016). It
is no wonder, therefore, that people need to make difficult, sometimes life-threatening
choices, about where to spend. Poor energy-efficiency results in a number of social
problems, including fuel poverty and ill health, as well as excess energy consumption which leads to high levels of energy-related environmental emissions; the policy
context for these air pollutants is now well established” (Healy 2003). The building
sector accounts for 40% of the overall U.S. energy consumption and contributes significantly to greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions associated with global climate change.
“The largest source of GhG emissions from human activities in the United States is
from burning fossil fuels for electricity, heat, and transportation” (EPA 2017). “In
2012, the residential sector accounted for 21% of total primary energy consumption
and about 20% of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States (computed from EIA
2013)” (EIA 2015). Production of energy is associated with poor air quality and significantly contributes to GhG emissions associated with Climate Change. Therefore,
energy-efficiency measures, associated with sustainable housing must be addressed
in building and retrofitting affordable housing.
Although not a primary consideration, energy has been an implicit or explicit
consideration since the inception of U.S. affordable housing policy and has gained
momentum since the 2003 International Energy Conservation Code. In 2010, the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) introduced their Better Building Initiative and
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the federal agency
responsible for affordable housing policy, revised its mission to include sustainability: “create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable
homes for all.” Related concepts of resilience also rose in priority starting in 2013,
with significant CDBG (Community Development Block Grant, one of HUDs the
longest-running programs) dedicated to disaster recovery (Iulo and O’Brien 2015).
C. F. Albrecht et al.
• They live in less expensive regions… typically a greater distance from employment
opportunities, which results in increased transportation costs [and needs].
• They live in housing that is substandard or in poor physical condition.
Throughout the United States, more than 30% of homeowners and half of all
renters struggle with housing cost burden, many of these families are severely burdened—paying more than 50% of their incomes for housing (Harvard University
2017). Monthly gross housing expenses include “carrying costs,” such as utilities, in
addition to direct expenses (mortgage, rent) associated with monthly/annual housing
expenses. The law and economic consulting firm Fisher et al. (2016) established
a method for assessing “carrying costs” of housing, specifically factoring energy
expenses into the equation. Their calculations take into consideration energy-related
end uses including space heating; space cooling; domestic hot water; and electrical
appliances including lighting and refrigeration. They conclude that no more than
6% of housing related expenses (2% for heating) should be dedicated to paying for
energy. Their findings have shown that “home energy is a crippling financial burden
for low-income households (…) home energy un-affordability, however, is not only
the province of the very poor.” Even higher income households often pay more than
affordable amounts for expenses associated with home energy (Fisher et al. 2016). It
is no wonder, therefore, that people need to make difficult, sometimes life-threatening
choices, about where to spend. Poor energy-efficiency results in a number of social
problems, including fuel poverty and ill health, as well as excess energy consumption which leads to high levels of energy-related environmental emissions; the policy
context for these air pollutants is now well established” (Healy 2003). The building
sector accounts for 40% of the overall U.S. energy consumption and contributes significantly to greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions associated with global climate change.
“The largest source of GhG emissions from human activities in the United States is
from burning fossil fuels for electricity, heat, and transportation” (EPA 2017). “In
2012, the residential sector accounted for 21% of total primary energy consumption
and about 20% of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States (computed from EIA
2013)” (EIA 2015). Production of energy is associated with poor air quality and significantly contributes to GhG emissions associated with Climate Change. Therefore,
energy-efficiency measures, associated with sustainable housing must be addressed
in building and retrofitting affordable housing.
Although not a primary consideration, energy has been an implicit or explicit
consideration since the inception of U.S. affordable housing policy and has gained
momentum since the 2003 International Energy Conservation Code. In 2010, the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) introduced their Better Building Initiative and
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the federal agency
responsible for affordable housing policy, revised its mission to include sustainability: “create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable
homes for all.” Related concepts of resilience also rose in priority starting in 2013,
with significant CDBG (Community Development Block Grant, one of HUDs the
longest-running programs) dedicated to disaster recovery (Iulo and O’Brien 2015).