Clean Energy and Security Act brings auditors into your home

bite me

I think there will be a few folks that will problems with this, I will be one of them. Maybe I will take them lobstering for part of the day.

Tony Pacheco writes:

The bill states every home owner will receive an energy audit.

TITLE II, SUBTITLE A, SEC. 202. BUILDING RETROFIT PROGRAM of H.R. 2454, is the section that deals with home audits, retrofitting, etc. I read through the entire section, and did not find where it states that every homeowner will be forced to have an audit, will receive an audit, or even how a homeowner asks for one.

Perhaps you can point to it for me.

In answering a question from a student about how Pelosi was going to get Americans to cut back on their carbon emissions, the leading Democratic lawmaker said it was important to educate children on how to conserve energy and for citizens to build more environmentally friendly homes.

"We have so much room for improvement," she said. "Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory ... of how we are taking responsibility."

I wonder how many jet trips across the country her highness will forego in the name of reducing greenhouse gases and energy indepenence. I'll guess almost one, let's call it none.

Just like he of the size 50 carbon footprint Al Gore.

Cicero:

I didn't ask what Spkr. Pelosi said - I asked where in the bill it states that the Federal government is going to force every homeowner to have an energy audit performed on their house.

Please cite the section of the bill - I'm curious to see it.

(ii) EXISTING STRUCTURES.—For ex5
isting structures, a reduction in energy
6 consumption from the previous level of
7 consumption for the structure, as deter8
mined in accordance with energy audits
9 performed both before and after any reha10
bilitation or improvements undertaken to
11 reduce such consumption, that exceeds the
12 reduction necessary for compliance with
13 the energy efficiency standards under sub14
section (a) then in effect and applicable to
15 existing structures.
16 (B) NONRESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.—

(c) UNDERWRITING STANDARDS.—The Secretary
9 shall establish underwriting requirements for loans made
10 under the pilot program under this section, which shall—
11 (1) require the cost savings projected to be real12
ized from the capital improvements financed with
13 the loan, during the term of the loan, to exceed the
14 costs of repaying the loan;
15 (2) allow the designer or contractor involved in
16 designing capital improvements to be financed with
17 a loan under the program to carry out such capital
18 improvements; and
19 (3) include such energy, audit, property, finan20
cial, ownership, and approval requirements as the
21 Secretary considers appropriate.

No energy audit, no loan Clear enough??

(6) Under Article 4 of the United Nations
9 Framework Convention on Climate Change, devel10
oped country parties, including the United States,
11 committed to ‘‘take all practicable steps to promote,
12 facilitate, and finance, as appropriate, the transfer
13 of, or access to, environmentally sound technologies

’.
17 (7) Under the Bali Action Plan, developed
18 country parties to the United Nations Framework
19 Convention on Climate Change, including the United
20 States, committed to ‘‘enhanced action on the provi21
sion of financial resources and investment to support
22 action on mitigation and adaptation and technology
23 cooperation,’’ including, inter alia, consideration of
24 ‘‘improved access to adequate, predictable, and sus25
tainable financial resources and financial and tech1214
•HR 2454 EH
1 nical support, and the provision of new and addi2
tional resources, including official and concessional
3 funding for developing country parties’’

Once again the America haters look to a UN solution. I think they meant to say take as much money as possible from Americans, AKA rich, white people, to"promote, facilitate, and finance, as appropriate, the transfer of, or access to, environmentally sound technologies and know-how to other parties, particularly developing country parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention’.

As long as they show up with a warrant, fine. Till then they had better be sporting kevlar skivies.

Dunno if Congress has ever heard about this little ditty:

Makes sense. They control what we drive, now they control where and how we live. What did you expect?

Joe Redneck:

That's correct - if you WANT to receive Federal money to help pay for improving the energy efficiency of your building, then you MUST allow for an audit.

Again - where in the bill does it state that EVERYONE must take this money?

It doesn't, does it?

No.

But isn't it prudent of the Fed to make sure that work that is performed with your tax dollars meets a certain standard? What would you say if a year from now you learned that the Fed program simply through money at contractors, with no oversight, and that all that cash was wasted?

I thought so.

Cheers

So the state takes my tax money from me, and if I want it back to improve my home then I have to let them audit my home. Is that about right? They can also give my money to whomever they choose.

Wouldn;t it be better to just let me keep it and fix up my house myself. Oh that's right, some people may not manage their own money well enough to be able fix up their own home, so they need mine instead.

Just another reason why the smallest possible government is the best. The least possible amount of money taken from one citizen at the point of a gun and given to another, the better.

Gerald, from what I have read, it REQUIRES an energy inspection for home sellers, is this incorrect? This doesn't appear to be a voluntary program for rebate seekers.

A couple of things the bill does that would ruin new home sales and general real estate: (1) it creates a national building code for energy efficiency and specifically mandates that it takes precedence over State codes, and (2) it creates a federal inspection of all homes before they are sold or recorded to label the energy aspects of the home and make them a matter of public record.

Source

FXSTC:

H.R. 2454 amends the Energy Conservation and Production Act, and would created a new, national energy standard. It would require states to modify there existing code to meet this new Federal code, or simply adopt it. Maine currently has a statewide building code (IBC), but it has only been adopted in a few municipalities. Some towns have not adopted a building code of any kind.

I've read through Sec. 201 of Title II, and it appears that this new code would only apply to new construction. I did not see anything that said it would pertain to new additions. Adoption of new codes usually grandfathers existing structures. For example, with the ADA compliance isn't required until a certain amount of cost of renovation work is reached. Or, you would not be required to make the stair in your house compliant even though you were adding an additional bedroom on the 2nd floor.

I equivocate as I need to study it further, but my alarm bells have not gone off, and this new code affects me directly (I'm an architect).

I will add that this will place an extra burden on architects, builders, and especially code enforcement officers. The bill does establish a funding program for training.

If the Feds own the banks then ALL loans consist of federal monies. Even if they don't own the banks the Fed backs deposits which are used to make loans. They have two hands in our pockets.

I agree with the Kevlar skivvies comment.

Gerald, thanks for the response, it makes sense that existing structures would be grandfathered. Where are people coming up with the requirement for a home inspection upon transfer? Is it just nonsense?

FXSTC:

I think it does not apply to existing buildings. Additions may be a different matter - it's a grey area - it doesn't make sense for an addition that adds 10% plan and volume to a structure meet the new standard when the rest of the building is leaking like a sieve. But sometimes practical thinking doesn't apply to these things.

Where do people come up with these things? Follow the link the Cicero supplies. My first thought when I read such hyperbole (even ones I agree with) is to doubt it. Pacheo writes:

The bill states every home owner will receive an energy audit.

This bill is more complicated than most, but anyone can read it. I'll assume that Pacheo wants to rouse his readers, and so he leaves out the "if they accept Federal money" part. Not a small thing.

In the piece to which you link, Hoffacker writes:

it creates a federal inspection of all homes before they are sold...

Again, one must approach such claims with skepticism. All homes? A home inspection isn't currently mandated (by Maine, anyway) - why would the Fed impose this? If the house doesn't pass, what does that mean? Lead paint is a bigger threat - why aren't there Fed restrictions on this?

When you take a step back, away from the ideology, and think about it - you see that it might not be what some claim.

And I'll note that such hyperbole is not the sole province of right wing commenters. Lefties do it as well. I suppose centrists do, but I'm not sure about what. Salad dressing? Hemlines?

And again I want to note that I still haven't read everything I need to about this. It may be that such invasive demands are in the bill - I just find it hard to believe.

Remember these are the same people who promised that NAFTA would create jobs! jobs! jobs!

Cicero:

Not sure what your point is here. Air leakage is one of the main causes of heat/cooling loss in a building. The blower door test is accepted technology.

There were many opponents to NAFTA that predicted exactly what has happened - the flight of jobs from the U.S. Unless existing buildings are shipped offshore, not quite sure that this program will have the same effect. Perhaps you could explain the connection.

Boy are they in for a surprise when they land here!!!!!!!