Kyle Rodriguez University of Florida Senior Capstone Sustainability and the Built Environment

2

Table of Contents

I. Abstract..3 II. Introduction....4 III. Research Question..5 IV. Literature Review...7 V. Methodology and Results: Sustainability and the Built Environment.16 VI. Discussion35 VII. Conclusion and Recommendations.38 VIII. Works Cited.41 IX. Appendix A: IRB Request...43 X. Appendix B: Informed Consent Document..47 XI. Appendix C: Focus Group Protocol.....49 XII. Appendix D: Focus Group Questionnaire ...53

3

ABSTRACT A minimum energy performance standard (MEPS) is a requirement designed to measure the performance of devices that use energy and puts a limit on the maximum amount of energy that a device can use. Progressive cities throughout the nation have begun to implement Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances for residential properties to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions while reducing the economic burden high utility rates can have on renters. Cities located near large universities have found that not only do rental properties have a large burden on low-income families, but also on college students. The purpose of this research is to determine the effect of implementing Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinance on residential properties, to identify possible barriers, and to develop recommendations for Gainesville, Fl.

4

INTRODUCTION A minimum energy performance standard (MEPS), as discussed above, is a maximum energy usage mandate developed to reduce the amount of energy a certain device uses (Energyrating.gov, 2014). In more recent years, MEPS has been expanded to establish minimum building standards, also known as minimum property standards (MPS) (Julian Castro, 2015). MPS and MEPS have been used by local governments to create ordinances and regulations that establish cost effective energy standards that promote public health, safety and welfare. The idea behind minimum energy performance standards came to America in 1974 with the creation of the California Energy Commission (CEC) after shortages in energy throughout California due to widespread population growth (California Energy Commission, 1974). The regulations created by the CEC were eventually adopted for use throughout the whole United States to reduce the large amount of non-renewable resources that were being used within the household. Progressive cities throughout the nation have begun to create their own residential energy conservation ordinances that go well above the standards set by the United States Government. Cities such as Boulder, Colo., San

5

Francisco, Cal., Burlington, Verm., and Ann Arbor, Mich. have created strict ordinances that require rental properties to meet certain energy efficient standards. The reason so many cities have focused on rental properties is due to the usually poor living conditions that renters live in compared to the rest of society (Philbrick, Scheu, Evens, 2014). Many landlords see no need to upgrade existing energy producing devices or water structures due to the high cost of funding such a project and because they do not pay the utility bill directly. Renters do not make upgrades to their rental properties because their living situation is merely temporary, with no long-term gain from making improvements. Because of this issue, rental properties tend to be very inefficient and have high utility costs (Philbrick, Scheu, Evens, 2014). This capstone project will look at the advantages and disadvantages that cities have to implement residential energy conservation ordinances. By determining possible barriers, identifying challenges, and developing recommendations, cities can have an easier time adopting such ordinances. RESEARCH QUESTION What are the barriers for a city to implement a Minimum Energy Efficiency Ordinance?

6

LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction to Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances The social, environmental, and economical issues that utilities have on the population is rather outstanding. As populations continue to grow and the gap between upper and lower classes widens even further, issues surrounding living costs have become an even bigger issue. To help ensure that living conditions remain healthy for the population as a whole and to help promote economic growth, many cities throughout the nation have began to create Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances for rental properties to help lower the amount of carbon dioxide that communities are emitting and to help lower the utility prices of those using rental properties. The need to promote a healthier, more sustainable lifestyle has become a top priority for many local governments, and city politicians have started to look at Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances as a starting point. By creating a more sustainable living environment, the population can start to learn about the need to adopt better living lifestyles. Many cities throughout the United States have begun to create ordinances that require rental properties to meet minimum energy standards. Cities such as San Diego, Boulder, and San Francisco have all implemented such policies. In 1974, the

7

state of California established minimum energy standards due to energy shortages. The creation of this law worked so well, that later on the United States adopted the policy for the entire country (California Energy Commission, 1974). Some other states have also created their own state-wide policies. The state of Wisconsin created a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances for properties. The ordinance states that whenever a property is being sold that an energy inspection must occur and the house must meet pre-determined minimum energy standards for the house to be successfully sold (Madison, WI, 1985). There are numerous different types of Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinances; this literature will look over those used throughout the United States, creating a strong background as to why one should be implemented in Gainesville. Who is involved in a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinance? When developing any sort of city policy, it is important to take into account those who will be affected. By doing this, a city can better plan for possible issues that may arise while trying to pass the ordinance and any issues that may occur after implementation. Some of the more obvious people involved in a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard Ordinance are the tenants, the landlords, the utility company, the city, and tax payers overall. For the

8

ordinance to be successful, each one of these players has to be willing to cooperate to the new policy. The people who would be affected most by such an ordinance would be those renting out a property. In most cases, the people that rent out homes and apartments are low-income families, young professionals, or college students (Philbrick, Scheu, Evens, 2014). All the groups listed above have one thing in common; most of them dont have enough money to buy their own home or apartment, so they decide to rent one. Because of this, issues with energy efficient housing has been an issue for many years now throughout the United States. Renters see no long-term value in putting money into a rental property because the property is just a short-term living space. Due to this, many renters pay high utility bills, wasting a huge amount of income that could be used elsewhere (Philbrick, Scheu, Evens, 2014). A recent study showed that households with an income of $46,000 or less could pay over 30% of their income to utilities during the winter months (Harak, McLaughlin, Nedwick, York, 2013). Another study showed that during regular months, low-income families pay on average 20% of their income to utilities (Philbrick, Scheu, Evens, 2014). The money that is wasted on utilities by low-income families could be used towards other needed goods, such as higher

9

quality food, healthcare, transportation, and education, reducing the burden that low-income families have on the government. Landlords would also be affected by the implementation of an energy standards ordinance. When first discussed, it may come across that such an ordinance would be harmful to many landlords; the opposite of this is the truth. Although landlords may have to put in the money upfront, or even take out a loan, the long-term affects of improving their properties are much more beneficial than not doing so. To begin with, many of the improvements made to the house that help make it energy efficient in fact help prolong the lifespan of the propertys infrastructure. By expanding the lifetime of the rental property, landlords are increasing the amount of years that they can rent out the property, maximizing total income. At the same time, many tenants are willing to pay an increase in rent to offset the lower utility bills due to the improvements (Harak, McLaughlin, Nedwick, York, 2013). By increasing the rent due to lower utility bills, landlords are given the possibility to actually make more money if the increased rent price pays for the improvements beyond the time needed for further improvements to be made. Local utility companies play a crucial role in making sure that a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance is successful. The biggest possible issue with passing a piece of legislature such as this is if the utility

10

company opposes such an implementation. Many utility companies, however, are more than willing to help implement such programs. Over the last several years, many utility companies have reached maximum production capacities. Due to this, they have been forced to buy energy and other utilities form other companies, which is more expensive than producing their own (Williams, 2014). If they are able to reduce this high demand, less stress would be put on management, workers, and the facilitys operations. Many utility companies are also locally or state regulated, making it easier for local governments to create a policy that is enforced and encouraged by the utility companies. Other ways utility companies can be incorporated with a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance is by working with local governments to give landlords incentives to follow the new policy (Williams, 2013). Cities that have worked to establish such an ordinance have found different incentives to offer, which will be talked about in greater detail later in this paper. For any piece of legislation to be successful, it must be supported by local government. It is the job of all city governments to oversee the safety, welfare and wellbeing of its citizens. With climate change occurring throughout the world, it is important for local governments to help reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that a citys inhabitants are producing. One way that progressive cities are fulfilling this is by implementing Minimum Energy

11

Efficiency Standards Ordinances. The biggest roles a city government plays is enforcing the ordinance, teaching the public why it is being implemented and educating the public on how to properly use energy efficient appliances and home improvements. Not only is enforcing extremely important, but so isnt helping landlords reach the needed standards. One way that many cities and towns have achieved such standards is by offering landlords low-interest loans to be used towards meeting the minimum home efficiency standards (Arena, Vijayakumar, 2012). Although these low-interest loans takes away money from other government sectors, the need to improve rental properties is high, helping to bring the quality of living for low-income families and college students up drastically. The last major group to be involved in a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance are taxpayers. Taxpayers are crucial to any functioning government for obvious reasons, but, as talked about above, are necessary to keep an ordinance funded and implemented. The community as a whole, which is made-up of tax payers, must come together to make sure that program runs efficiently. An ordinance that helps reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released into the environment benefits every person within a community. Long-term health must also be considered when trying to implement any policy regarding sustainability. Society as a whole benefits

12

when environmental issues and health hazards are addressed by governments. What does a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance entail? A Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance requires landlords to meet a certain level of energy efficiency for rental properties. The requirements that must be met are created by the city that enacts such an ordinance. Many different changes can be made within a property to help improve the overall efficiency. The changes that can be made are improvements to lighting, exterior walls, open attics/ceilings/roofs, insulation, electric water heaters, heating and cooling ducts and hot water piping, windows and doors, solar panels, air leakage, and heating and hot water appliances and equipment (CPSEnergy, 2015). Each improvement that can be made has a different price and level of impact on the reduction of carbon dioxide produced. Due to the difference in pricing and impact, each improvement counts as a certain level of improvement, with the most impactful changes being worth the most. Why have a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance? The main reason for having a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance is to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide being produced by households, while reducing the utility bills of those renting properties. Billing

13

codes have been improved greatly over the last several decades, but many properties still lack basic energy efficient qualities due to them being outdated and the owner seeing no need to improve the property. Many citizens who rent properties are usually low-income families or college students, especially in the Gainesville area. This is because buying a house can be expensive, usually requires a down payment, and mortgage prices can be unaffordable, all factors that can hinder someone from buying a property. Due to these factors, many people are forced to rent properties, creating issues with house responsibilities and upkeep. One issue with rental properties are home improvements and housing equipment that are unsustainable. When one considers home improvements, it is mainly thought that landlords should be responsible for them. Although this may be true, what benefit does a landlord gain if all the current appliances and structures are working properly? Because of this, many landlords see no reason to upgrade parts of the house that are properly working. At the same time, no tenant is realistically going to spend a large portion of money on upgrading the property because it is just a temporary lease. With no one taking the initiative over housing upgrades, many appliances and parts of the housing structure are outdated, causing the property to have high utility bills and to produce higher levels of carbon dioxide.

14

By implementing a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance, the property owner is required to make basic upgrades to the property so that utility bills are lowered and less carbon dioxide is produced. Small upgrades can have a huge effect on the amount of carbon dioxide produced by a household. On average, a household produces 12.4 tons of carbon dioxide a year (Arena, Vijayakumar, 2012). By just changing the type of lightbulbs used, the amount of carbon dioxide can be reduced significantly. On average, if a whole household uses incandescent lightbulbs, the lights alone produce 4500 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. This can be compared to a household that uses LED lights, where only 451 pounds of carbon dioxide are produced. By just changing the type of lightbulb used, a household can reduce its carbon footprint by 4,049 pounds per year (Arena, Vijayakumar, 2012). What defines a successful Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance? A successful Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance can only be determined by understanding the citys goals for the program. Many cities, such as Boulder, Colorado, established an ordinance to help reach their plan of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 2025 (Arena, Vijayakumar, 2012). The main purpose for implementing such a policy was to help reach this goal while improving housing infrastructure and reducing the utility bills of the lower-class, which helps society out as a whole due to more money being able to be

15

used towards basic needs, such as food and clothes. Ultimately, the goal of any program should be to better society as a whole and to create an ordinance that is supported and followed by all citizens.

16

METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS: SUSTAINABILITY AND

THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Sustainability and the Built Environment has become an important aspect in todays society. By having a very broad definition, sustainability can incorporate a wide array of topics and aspects. Sustainability can be categorized into three main pillars: social, environmental, and economic. The following three sections will go over a background of that sector of sustainability and the built environment, the type of methodology that was used in this capstone and will be followed by the results found. These three categories incorporate all sectors that sustainability touches on and will help to promote the goals stated above. Social Sustainability Social Sustainability can be defined as, The general definition of social sustainability is the ability of a social system, such as a country, to function at a defined level of social wellbeing indefinitely.5 By being responsible for upholding peace and wellbeing, it is important for a society to benefit all members to an extent. By establishing a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance, the city is helping to benefit both classes of society, especially the lower class, which may feel excluded and ignored at times.

17

Throughout the United States poverty rates have increased, there has been a higher demand for food stamps, and there has been a decrease in living conditions for the lower class, all factors that can work to diminish social sustainability. Several cities have used the phrase social fairness to help pass a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance. Social fairness explains that improving rental properties is part of doing business. Rental properties are generally seen as a long-term investment. A landlord buys a property with a down payment and must pay the mortgage each month. A tenant pays the landlord a monthly rent fee which helps pay for the mortgage and the down payment. The landlord will not immediately start to make money, but will when the mortgage is paid off or when the landlord goes to sell the property. Because of the long-term payout, it is expected for landlords to continue to improve the property, because over time they have a chance to create more of a profit off the property. By adding social fairness into the understanding of why a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance would be implemented by a city helps to justify why such an ordinance would be implemented. Methodology To collect data relating to social aspects that utilities have on tenants in Gainesville, a focus group was performed. A focus group is a small group of

18

six to ten people led through an open discussion by a skilled moderator. The group needs to be large enough to generate rich discussion but not so large that some participants are left out (Eliot & Associates, 2005). Before a focus group could be conducted, the questions that will be asked needed to be created. After receiving suggestions and edits on the questions, a final set of questions were established for the interview on top of a questionnaire that everyone who would participate in the focus group would complete at the very beginning of the session. Asking questions and conducting such a focus group can establish the social barriers that exist between students and utilities. By gaining this information, local governments can better understand the positives and negatives that citizens have about implementing a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance. There were a total of eight participants with each focus group consisting of four participants and was facilitated in a neutral environment. Each participant volunteered to participate in this study and no compensation was given. Each participant was encouraged to participate, but any participant could withdraw from the focus group at any time and were not required to answer questions they did not feel comfortable answering. All focus groups were recorded.

19

All discussion groups occurred in the month of April with eight participants participating in two focus groups. 6 males and 2 females participated and their ages ranged from 19-22, being freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors. The questionnaire that each participant was asked to fill out at the beginning of the focus group sought to identify basic utility usage, such as how much they paid in utilities each month, what utilities their house used, and if they believed their house was energy efficient. The answers to these questions were a guideline for further discussion that would occur at a later time. These answered would be analyzed to create an idea of a participants thoughts about utilities before the definition of a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance was discussed. The whole focus group was recorded so that further analysis of the discussion could occur at a later time. After the focus group, the conversation was viewed so that the discussions that were taken place between the participants could be reviewed along with the questionnaire that was collected at the end of the focus group.

20

Results The first part looked at when determining the results of the focus group was the questionnaire that was passed out at the very beginning of the focus group. The purpose for this questionnaire was to understand the participants background with utilities. All participants knew about utilities, but all participants had difficulty filling out at least one question asked. Some participants werent fully sure of what utilities there house had (mainly relating to gas), if their property was energy efficient, or if any of their appliances/ building structures were energy efficient. A very interesting result was that only one person thought that their rental property was energy efficient. The participant that did respond saying that they live in an energy efficiency house brought up later in the group discussion that his house had just gone through major renovations over the last year to help make the house more energy efficient, along with upgrading the living conditions. 87.50%

12.50% Do you believe that your rental property is energy

efIicient?

No Yes

21

The amount that each participant spent on utilities also varied greatly. 37.5% of participants did not directly pay for their utilities, meaning that their landlord or apartment complex paid for them. Without having a direct relationship to utility costs, it can be determined that utility usage is not a huge issue for these participants. This was made clear in the discussion part of the focus group where all of the participants who did not pay for their utilities agreed that if they did pay for their own utilities, they would be much more cautious with reducing the amount of utilities on a daily basis. The amount that the other participants spent monthly on utilities varied greatly. 25% of the individuals paid over $100 a month, 12.5% said they paid between $80 and $90 a month, 12.5% said they paid between $60 and $90, and 12.5% said they paid between $40 and $59 a month. Participants that did not pay for their 0 0 12.50%

12.50% 12.50%

25%

37.50%

How much does an individual in oyur household pay in utilities each month?

$0-$19 $20-$39 $40-$59 $60-$79 $80-$99 $100+ I do not pay

22

own utilities had almost no concern about how much water, electricity, and gas they used monthly. When asked if their daily lives are limited at all due to utilities, one participant said his utilities dont have a cap on it at all and I dont get charged extra for it, so no I am not limited at all. When asked later if they thought they would watch how much utilities they used if they did have to pay for their utilities, the same participant said, Oh yeah, everything would be off all the time. After having been told what a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance was, participants were asked direct questions about how such an ordinance would effect themselves along with the community. When asked if they thought the ordinance would have a huge cost, one participant responded with, No, especially not over the time it pays off as an investment. This showed that students understand that by having access to energy efficient appliances, a tradeoff in price can be accomplished. After this question, participants were asked if they were willing to pay higher rent knowing that their utility prices would be lower due to energy efficient appliances. All participants answered yes to this question with one saying, I would say yes, assuming I was able to see the benefits at least over the semester or however long I lived there.

23

Environmental Sustainability The environmental benefits that come from implementing a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance have been discussed throughout this paper. Environmental sustainability is defined as the maintenance of the factors and practices that contribute to the quality of environment on a long-term basis.5 The biggest issue revolving the environment and housing is the amount of carbon dioxide that inefficient properties produce. On top of this, by improving rental properties, the lifespan of the properties can be prolonged. The lifespan of a property is also very important when considering environmental factors. It is more environmentally sustainable to maintain a property than having to tear it down to just use new non-renewable resources to build a new property. By preserving current buildings and by promoting the reduction of carbon dioxide, a more healthy society can be established. Economic Sustainability Economic sustainability is one of the key concepts to passing a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance. By incorporating the economic benefits into the reasons why such an ordinance should be passed helps to show the overall benefits that can occur thanks to such a program. Economic sustainability can be defined as the ability of an economy to support a defined level of economic production indefinitely.5 Many energy efficiency

24

programs help to prosper growth, especially for local businesses and communities. With the implementation of the ordinance, many local governments offer landlords low-interest loans that help cover the costs of improvements needed to meet the basic requirements and allows them to repay the loan over an extended period of time so that the costs are not a direct burden on the landlord. A large amount of those who rent properties have low-incomes, and because of this, have trouble paying for their most basic needs, looking to the government for help. This puts a burden on the government and society as a whole. Low-income families spend, on average, 20% of their income on utility bills and can spend up to 30% of their income on utilities during the winter months. Including utilities, such families can spend up to 94% of their income on housing and food related costs, neglecting other basic needs that they may have including healthcare, clothing, and education. By helping to reduce the amount of money low-income residents spend on utilities, a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance can help reduce some of the burden that these residents have on the government. By reducing the amount of money the government has to spend on programs such as food stamps and healthcare, the money can be spent elsewhere to help improve overall infrastructure, education and economic opportunities.

25

An idea that is closely associated with energy efficiency ordinances is offering low-interest loans to landlords. As discussed above, low-interest loans offer landlords to pay off the cost of improvements over a longer period of time. Many critics have brought up the fact that if a city adopted a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance then rental prices would increase. In many cases, this has not been the case, but there is a tradeoff incase rental prices do increase. If landlords increase rental prices to help pay for the changes made to the property, lower utility bills will offset the price change. In many cases, the amount paid overall for rent and utilities combined will still be less than before the increase in rent. Methodology To help prove this point, a home energy calculator was used in houses and apartments throughout Gainesville. The calculator took into account local weather patterns, energy rates, and utility patterns throughout the year to produce estimated utility costs and determine improvements that can be made to reduce utility costs. In total, 8 different rental properties were looked at and factors such as design style, year built, home size, insulation, windows/glass, heating and cooling systems, water heating, refrigerators/ freezers, appliances/lighting, and kitchen/laundry appliances were considered (CPSEnergy, 2015).

26

Results

Apartment #1 The first rental property to be looked at is located on the corner of SW 4th Ave and SW 10th street, 2 blocks away from campus. The house was built in 1935, and has gone through basic home improvements since this time, including new insulation in the attic, newer kitchen appliances, a new roof, and a new energy efficient central air conditioning unit. Many of the original features are still present throughout the house, including the windows and the flooring. After inputting all the factors, the calculator produced the chart shown below.

27

These graphs represent the expected utility bills for this rental property and at what percent each utility is used. The estimated costs were pretty accurate when compared to the actual amount paid, with certain months being a little under or over. Over the eight month period utility data that was available for this property, the actual amount of money spent on utilities was $1,560, while the calculator projected that the property would only spend

28

$1,375, proving that house may actually be less efficient than officially reported. The calculator also gave improvement suggestions based on the factors inputted and how much money could be saved a year by making these changes. Two of the factors that would save the most amount of money if upgraded were windows and weatherization.

The next step that was taken was to compare how much it would cost to upgrade both the windows and weatherization and then to compare this amount to the amount of money that would be saved if the upgrades did occur. The price for an energy efficient window was taken and then was multiplied by the amount of windows needed. This price was then added to the local estimated cost to would take to install the windows. The total estimated cost came to $3,090. If the landlord of this property took out a low-interest or no-interest 10-year loan, the cost of the new energy efficient windows would equal $309 a year. The estimated yearly savings by upgrading the windows is $439, or a total savings per year of $130 (the math for this

29

equation is performed below).

Similarly to the windows, weatherization can decrease utility costs by reducing the amount of air conditioning and heat that is able to escape. Weatherization by a professional costs between $78 and $187 in the Gainesville area. In the first year alone, the improvements would pay for itself, and both the landlord and renter would both save money at this point while reducing the amount of utilities used by the property. By improving both the windows and by having the weatherization redone by a professional, a renter can save $255 a year while paying for the improvements through increased rent. These improvements are not only beneficial to the renter, but the landlord has the opportunity to continue to keep the increased rent price the same even after the loan is paid off assuming

30

that no improvements to these projects need to be made and that the increase rent is still a tradeoff for lower utilities. House #1

The first house looked at is on the corner of SW 23rd Street and SW 2nd Avenue. The house was built in 1956 and still has some of the same appliances, the same doors, floors, and windows. Both the air condition and heating unit are over 15 years old and very inefficient. The house is 3,074 sqft. And sleeps 5 people. After running the same calculations as talked about in the first apartment, the following graphs were created:

31

Similar to above, the actual cost of utilities was compared to the estimate cost given by the calculator to determine if there was an actual relationship between the calculator and the utility costs. For this house, actual utility costs were actually double the amount of the estimated due to the information that was put-in. This concludes that the math performed below is not equivalent to the money that will be able to be saved, but the amount of money saved due to

32

high efficiency utilities will be much greater. The estimated cost for utilities over 7 months was $1,800, while the actual amount of money spent was $3,962The calculations suggested that new windows be installed in the home

and that a new cooling system be put in. New windows would save up to $1,129 per year and a new cooling system would save up to $807 a year in utility bills. The same mathematic calculations were used as above to determine how much money would be saved a year if these changes were made.

33

The combined total savings of installing new windows and a new air conditioning unit would be $320.56 a year. Although the air conditioning unit did not save as much money per year as compared to the energy efficient windows, it is important to realize that the environmental benefits of installing an energy efficient air conditioning unit are vast. By implementing a city ordinance the forces landlords to improve inefficient housing factors, utility bills can be greatly reduced, renters can have more money in their pocket, and the air quality can be drastically improved. Apartment #2

34

The last rental property that will be brought up in this paper is a new apartment that finished construction in November 2014. Three people live in this apartment, with all the appliances being brand new and many of them being energy efficient, and all the windows were new with new weatherization.

When compared to the other houses, the utility bill is much lower and the prices are even throughout the utility categories. This apartment is extremely efficient with low utility costs due to its energy efficient utilities and design.

35

DISCUSSION The first barrier discovered in the focus group was students lack of awareness of what utilities they used on a daily basis. This was first discovered when many to the participants had a difficult time filling out this question on the questionnaire. The biggest issue that students had with this issue is what products used gas. Before conducting this study, I assumed that most students would be aware of what utilities their rental property used because when having your utilities turned on by Gainesville Regional Utilities, you must sign a document saying that you understand these utilities will be used. This shows an issue not primarily related to a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance, but it shows there is a bigger issue surrounding the knowledge of utilities. Not one participant from the focus group had ever heard of a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance before. Although the term is rather new, it is still important for younger generations to know about energy efficiency programs that are being started throughout the United States. With rising climate temperatures and high levels of deforestation, the need to reduce pollution is becoming more crucial, especially for younger generations. My assumption was that at least several students would be able to guess what

36

a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance was just by hearing the name, but this was not the case. This lack of awareness, I believe, can be directly attributed by the lack of education that is being done about pollution issues by the government, there are many different global health and environmental problems that are going on throughout the world, and all point to the high increase in carbon dioxide admissions. Although the participants had little knowledge of such programs, I also must admit that I knew little to nothing about such ordinances before I started this project. After explaining what a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance was, students became more engaged because it was an issue that directly impacted many of their everyday lives. Students, low-income, middle-income, and high-income citizens all must pay for utilities, so a utility bill is something that everyone within a society can relate to. By understanding the affects that a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance can have on the community, all participants agreed that such an ordinance would not just be beneficial to themselves, but would also benefit the community as a whole due to the environmental benefits that it offers, the higher level of living standards that it promotes, and the economic benefit that it has to all renters. As discussed above, there are great economic benefits when a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance is implemented. One of the greatest

37

barriers that was found when looking at literature reviews and when the midterm presentation was presented was that there seemed to be a lack of desire for landlords to be willing to take out loans or spend their own money to upgrade their rental properties. By incorporating research that was based from an economic standpoint, it was shown that there is an economic benefit for landlords to introduce energy efficient products into their rental properties. The math above shows that when utility prices were reduced and rent prices increased to help pay-off the loan that the landlord took out, that both the renter and landlord were better off. The only barrier that existed with this was if students were willing to agree to the tradeoff of paying more for rent and less for utilities. Every single participant in the focus group did agree that they would be willing to pay more for rent if it was proven that their utilities would go down. Not only were they concerned about the price, but they also seemed happy that the standard of living for the rental property would also increase due to improved housing infrastructure and utilities.

38

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The main reason for this research was to determine if there were any barriers when trying to pass a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance. There were several different barriers that were recognized, including economic issues, community support, and implementation. Through the research that was conducted in the research, information was gathered so that any possible barriers can be avoided by implementing proper tactics in regards to the ordinance. The first suggestion is that the local government needs to work with the local or regional utility company to help offer rebates and incentives to landlords for improving rental properties. As talked about earlier in this paper, one of the most influential benefits that can be given is a low-interest loan. This type of loan allows landlords to borrow money from the government at a low rate, and gives them the opportunity to repay the loan over an extended amount of time. Another incentive that they can offer is reducing utility costs for energy efficient properties. This would allow the landlords to increase rent even more to help pay for energy efficient loans due to the utility/rent pricing trade-off talked about in this paper.

39

Another suggestion is to work on public education of utilities and energy efficient appliances. One way this can be done it by working with local extension offices that are available in all Counties through IFAS. By educating both landlords and renters through educational programs, there is a possibility that utility usage can be reduced without even needing to implement such an ordinance just by improving how people work with utilities. In the focus group, students said that they would be willing to pay more rent if it could be proven that a rental property would have reduced utility costs. One way that renters can be shown that the house is energy efficient is by having an energy assessment performed on it. Local governments can work with IFAS offices to offer landlords a reduced energy assessment. This would give the landlords physical evidence showing renters that although they may be paying more for a property, that they would be saving money in the long run by spending less one on utilities. The last issue that this capstone addresses is how to enforce such a program. Cities through America use different implementation tactics. Some use a point system where all rental properties must have a certain amount of energy efficient points to be rented while others must be classified as energy efficient at the point of sale. Although both of these may be beneficial to the cities that they are implemented in, neither would work in Gainesville due to

40

the high number of college students that move into new rental properties yearly. A better way to enforce an ordinance would be by looking at properties that have high usage utilities and see if these rental properties meet the regulations. This would allow the city to start implementing the ordinance for the worst rental properties that are releasing the most amount of carbon dioxide and having their renters pay the most in utilities. Warnings can be sent to landlords in the mail, and if proof of the house not being energy efficient is not shown to the city in a certain amount of time, a housing inspector would go and inspect the property. The local government can also setup a call line where renters can report rental properties that are not energy efficient. This would be most beneficial if wide-scale educational programs were used so that the public can be aware that their landlord must now offer a certain level of energy efficiency .

41

Works Cited United States of America. National Housing Trust. American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. Partnering for Success: An Action Guide for Advancing Utility Energy Efficiency Funding for Multifamily Rental Housing. By Charlie Harak, Jillian McLaughlin, Todd Nedwick, and Dan York. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. United States of America. Department of Energy. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Evaluation of Boulder, CO, SmartRegs Ordinance and Better Buildings Program. By G. Vijayakumar and L. Arena. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. "Home Energy Calculator." Home Energy Calculator. CSE Energy, n.d. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. . Williams, Geoff. "Why Your Energy Company Wants You to Use Less Energy - US News." US News RSS. US News, 02 Apr. 2013. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. . "Minimum Property Standards - HUD." Minimum Property Standards - HUD. US Department of Housing and Urban Develpoment, n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. . "Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS)." Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS). N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. . State of Wisconsin. IMPORTANT INFORMATION for BUYERS and SELLERS of RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTIES. Madison: State of Wisconsin, 1985.Http://dsps.wi.gov/sb/docs/sb-RentalWeatherizationBrochure7366.pdf. Web. . Williams, Justin. "Buying Energy in Deregulated Markets." Buying Energy in Deregulated Markets. Energy and Capital, 15 May 2014. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. . "About the California Energy Commission." About the California Energy Commission. State of California, n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. . "Search Results." Thwink.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2015. .

42

Eliot, And Associates. Guidelines for Conducting a Focus Group (n.d.): n. pag.Duke University. Duke University, 2005. Web. . United States of America. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Elevate Energy.Preserving Affordable Multifamily Housing through Energy Efficiency. By Deborah Philbrick, Rachel Scheu, and Anne Evens. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

43

UFIRB 02 Social & Behavioral Research Protocol Submission Form

THIS FORM MUST BE TYPED. DO NOT STAPLE. Send this form and the supporting documents to IRB02, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611. Should you have questions about completing this form, call 352-392-0433.

Title of Protocol: Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance Capstone

Principal Investigator: Latimer Stanley UFID #:

8956-8750

(Last Name) (First Name)

Degree / Title:

Associate Professor Mailing Address: (If on campus provide PO Box address): P.O. Box 115701

Gainesville, FL

32611

Email: latimer@ufl.edu

Department: Design, Construction and Planning

Telephone #: (352) 294-1493

Co-Investigator(s): Coordinator: Research Asst.:

Rodriguez

Kyle UFID#: 6940-4915

(Last Name) (First Name)

Degree/Title Sustainability and the Built Environment Mailing Address: (If on campus provide PO Box address): 1016 SW 4th Ave, Gainesville, Fl 32601

Email:

Kyle.rodriguez@ufl.edu

Department: Design, Construction, and Planning

Telephone #:

813-298-6975

Supervisor (If PI is student):

UFID#

(Last Name) (First Name)

Degree / Title:

Mailing Address: (If on campus provide PO Box address):

Email :

Department:

Telephone #:

Dates of Proposed Research:

March 30. 2015-June 30, 2014

Source of Funding (A copy of the grant proposal must be submitted with this protocol if funding is involved):

44

Describe the Scientific Purpose of the Study: This research is one component of a capstone project that will be done for completion of the PIs degree in Sustainability and the Built Environment. The purpose of the research is to better understand the barriers for students regarding the use of Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinances (MEESO). An MEESO is a form of legislation that has been established by the local government to help reduce the amount of energy utility companies must supply due to inefficient housing standards. This focus group is of potential use for students, professionals, and politicians to help understand what challenges might be faced when trying to pass an MEESO through local governments. Other components of the capstone project will include a literature review and recommendations for passing an MEESO based off students data collected. Describe the Research Methodology in Non-Technical Language: (Explain what will be done with or to the research participant.) The study to be conducted will discuss the barriers that may prevent a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance from being implemented. Participants will be recruited to participate in a focus group. There will be no more than ten focus groups consisting of approximalty six students each. Students will be asked questions regarding their knowledge and awareness of MEESOs. The focus group will be held as an open discussion, fostering communication and honesty. The moderator, Kyle Rodriguez, will keep the conversation flow constant. The final product of the discussion will be an open forum suggesting recommendations to the local politicians that are considering creating an ordinance revolving MEESOs. The PI will analyze the focus group data to determine the barriers identified. Student participants will be contacted and asked to complete a 5-10 minute survey ranking the barriers identified during the discussion in priority order. The focus group will last between 45-60 minutes. The Co-Investigator Kyle Rodriguez will moderate the discussion. At least one, potentially two, student assistants will participate in the focus group as observers.

Describe the Data You Will Collect: (what are you collecting, where will it be stored, how will it be stored) The discussion will be digitally recorded. Recordings will be stored digitally for no more than 1 year in Stanley Latimers office and protected by passwords. The only people who will have access to the information are the project researchers Mr. Kyle Rodriguez and Mr. Stanley Latimer.

Please List all Locations Where the Research Will Take Place: (if doing an on-line survey then just state on-line survey)

University of Florida College of Design, Construction and Planning 331 ARCH P.O. Box 115701 Gainesville, Florida 32611-5701 331 Dean's Conference Room

Describe Potential Benefits:

There are no direct benefits to the students in this group study. However, if student recruitment is low, we will offer participants a $5 Wards Supermarket gift card in exchange for their participation.

45

Describe Potential Risks: (If risk of physical, psychological or economic harm may be involved, describe the steps taken to protect participant.)

The potential risk to the participants is no more than that encountered in routine discussions with other students or professionals.

Describe How Participant(s) Will Be Recruited: (flyers, email solicitation, social media websites, etc.)

Participants will be recruited through public advertisements. Faculty will be contacted and asked to distribute research information requesting student participation. We will not recruit from Stanley Latimers courses. Flyers will also be posted on departmental announcement boards and around dormitory common areas. We will also contact the Division of Student Affairs and ask them to include an announcement in their email list serve to students living-off campus. We will also advertise the research study through student organization social media pages. Initially students will be asked to volunteer basis with no compensation. Should the PI have difficulty recruiting an adequate number of students for the focus group, all participants will receive a $5 gift card to Wards supermarket in exchange for their participation. Maximum Number of Participants (to be approached with consent)

200 Age Range of Participants:

18 or older Amount of Compensation/ course credit:

$0; $5 Gift Card (potential)

Describe the Informed Consent Process. (How will informed consent be obtained? Attach a copy of the Informed Consent Document)

We will inform participants about the nature of our research and what we want them to do as part of this research study prior to participation. Participants will have the opportunity to provide informed consent at the beginning of the focus group process. The participants will give a signed copy of the informed consent to the individual(s) facilitating the process at the chosen location, all of which will be returned to Stanley Latimer and stored in her office. The participants will retain a copy for his/her records. We will ask participants to maintain confidentiality of the comments made during the focus group discussions, but we have no way to ensure that confidentiality is maintained.

(SIGNATURE SECTION)

Principal Investigator(s) Signature:

Stanley Latimer Date:

Co-Investigator(s) Signature(s): Kyle Rodriguez Date:

Supervisors Signature: Date:

46

Department Chair Signature: Date:

47

Appendix B: Informed Consent Form Informed Consent Document

Informed Consent

Protocol Title: Barriers Limiting Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinances

Please read this consent document carefully

before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: My name is Kyle Rodriguez. I am currently a senior pursuing my undergraduate bachelors degree in Sustainability and the Built Environment at the University of Florida. The purpose of the research is to better understand the barriers for students regarding the implementation of Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinances (MEESO). An MEESO is a form of legislature that is passed by local governments. MEESOs have begun to be implemented throughout the United States due to climate change and increased amounts of carbon dioxide emissions, hurting the environment. MEESOs also help improve the infrastructure of buildings, allowing the building to fulfill its function for a longer period of time. What you will be asked to do in the study: We are asking you to participate in a focus group discussion about your knowledge and awareness of MEESOs, energy efficiency, consumer behavior and perceived barriers. You will meet in small groups of 6 students to discuss your actions and provide us with recommendations for MEESO program improvements. You will be contacted within 5 days after the focus group and asked to complete a 5-10 minute survey reviewing the results of the focus group. Time required: 45-60 minutes Confidentiality: We will keep the information you provide confidential to the extent provided by law. We will record the meeting digitally. The recording will be kept for no more than one year, stored in Stanley Latimers office and protected by passwords. The only people who will have access to the information are the 2 project researchers, Kyle Rodriguez and Stanley Latimer, and a research assistant who will take notes during your discussion and help the project moderators process the information later. We may use the information you provide in reports and journal publications, but we will NOT identify you as the source of the information. Risks and benefits: There are no direct benefits to you for participating in the study. The potential risk to you is no more than that which you would encounter participating in normal everyday activities. Compensation: There is no direct compensation for participation in this study.

48

Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from this study at any time with no penalty. You are NOT required to answer any question. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Kyle Rodriguez, Student, College of Design, Construction and Planning. P.O. Box 115706, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611; Phone (813) 298-6975; Email: kyle.rodriguez@ufl.edu Stanley Latimer, Lecturer/Undergraduate Coordinator, College of Design, Construction and Planning, P.O. Box 115706, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611; Phone (352) 294-1493; E-mail latimer@geoplan.ufl.edu Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl 32611-2250; Phone: (352)392-0433; Email: IRB2@ufl.edu Agreement: I have read the procedures described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in this research evaluation and I have received a copy of this description. Participant ________________________________ Date _________________ Principal Investigator ________________________ Date __________________

49

Appendix C: Focus Group Protocol Focus Group Protocol

Protocol Title:

Barriers Limiting Participation in Community Supported Agriculture Programs Focus Group Start Time ___________ End Time ______________ Focus Group conducted by Kyle Rodriguez I. Introduction (5 Minutes)

a. Thank you for coming today b. Introduce Facilitator c. The Purpose of Todays discussion is to better understand the barriers for students regarding the use of Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance (MEESO). An MEESO is a form of legislature that is passed by local governments.

II. Informed Consent a. Key Points:

i. The data we collect will remain confidential- only research team members ii. You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time. You can choose to leave or not answer any questions asked should you feel uncomfortable at any time during our discussion of your experiences.

III. Pause: Are there any questions about the informed consent document? IV. Collect: If there are no more questions about the informed consent document, please sign. Ensure participants retain a copy. V. Confirm permission to record the session

a. Only researcher team members will access audio-recordings. Transcripts only available to research team members.

VI. Ground Rules: a. Everyone is encouraged to participate b. All ideas are equally valid c. There are no right or wrong answers- We are very interested in your experiences d. Everyones views should be heard and respected e. It is important that you respect the privacy of other participants. Please remember that what is said inside this room today must stay here.

VII. Introduction Questions about the participants a. (Before the focus group begins, ask the note takers to mark down the age group and gender of the participants)

i. What role do you play at the University? ii. Where do you live?

We have planned this focus group to last no longer than one hour. During this time, we have several questions that we would like to cover. If time begins to run short, it may be necessary to interrupt you in order to push ahead and complete this line of questioning. VIII. Any questions?

50

Topic 1 (10 Minutes): Awareness on MEESOs (Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance). Objective: Understand how much or how little the participants know about MEESO programs. If there is a general knowledge about MEESO programs I would like to better gage their involvement within the program. I. Question: How many of you are familiar with MEESOs (Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance) Potential Probes:

a. Could you please describe any MEESO you are aware of? b. Who are the key members in MEESO programs? c. How much do you believe MEESOs cost? d. Who do you think are affected by MEESOs? e. Are you aware of the different types of MEESO models that exist? f. Do you know how many MEESO programs exist in the United States?

* Regardless of groups previous knowledge, I will show them a premade poster, outlining the key aspects of an MEESO. The poster will be shows after the initial questions are asked. The poster will allow the participants to visually understand the workings of an MEESO and offer an opportunity to refresh their memory during the discussion. Topic 2 (20 Minutes): Utility usage and habits Objective: To provide the participants with a Survey, asking them to outline their typical utility usage and habits, in order to better understand their usages and actions. The goal is to identify actions of the participants and attempt to gain a consensus on their utility costs/habits. Directions: Please take 5 minutes to fill out this survey. Choose the answer choice that best suits your own preference or habits. Once you have completed the survey, please hold on to it for further discussion. Survey Questions (5 minutes):

1. What year are you in school? a. Freshman b. Sophomore c. Junior d. Senior

2. What zip code do you live in? a. I live on campus b. 32601, 32609, 32641 c. 32603, 32605, 32606, 32653 d. 32607 e. 32608

51

f. None of the above 3. What utilities does your rental property have?

a. Electricity b. Water c. Gas

4. How much does in individual in your household pay in utilities each month (average bill amount per month/number of people living in the household)?

a. I do not pay for my utilities b. $0-$19 c. $20-$39 d. $40-$59 e. $60-$79 f. $80-99 g. $100+

5. Do you think this price is: a. Too much b. Just right c. Too little

6. Who pays for your utilities? a. I do b. My parents do c. My apartment complex does d. Other

7. Does your rental property have any energy efficient appliances? If so, what are they?

a. b.

8. What year was you rental property built? a. 1900-1929 b. 1930-1959 c. 1960-1989 d. 1990-2009 e. 2010-2015

9. Are your daily activities limited because of your utilities bill? a. Yes b. No c. Not Sure

10. Do you believe that your rental property is energy efficient? a. Yes b. No c. Not sure

Trying to gain a consensus: Re-ask some of the survey questions to better gage the participants answers and gain a collective opinion

52

II. Question: How many of you are more energy efficient while at home? Potential Probes

a. How convenient is it for you to turn off high energy-consuming products? b. Would you be willing to spend more money if your apartment was energy efficient? c. How easy is it for you to access energy efficient supplies?

Topic 3 (20 minutes): Consumer behavior and perceived barriers **After the survey is a completed and you have discussed for a few minutes, show them a sample MEESO so that participants gain an understanding for a typical MEESO and how they may benefit if an MEESO was implemented in Gainesville. The example will be at least one city in the United States that has already established an MEESO (ex. Boulder, Colorado or San Francisco, California). Objective: Understand the barriers to implementation of MEESO programs into the students daily lives. Also, to identify the changes that need to be made in order to successfully implement an MEESO program. III. Question: What are the barriers to implementation of CSA programs into your food week?

Potential Probes: a. What would you need to change about your utility habits to make use of an MEESO

i. Do you think you would have to change the amount of time you would have to spend using utilities? ii. Would you say money is one of the major barriers? iii. Do you think that the preparation and implementation of an MEESO is a big issue?

b. Would you be interested in helping pass an MEESO in Gainesville? i. Do you think an MEESO would be beneficial for Gainesville considering the population? ii. How do you support MEESO towns that have already established a program? iii. Do you think an MEESO would benefit yourself?

Wrap-up (5 minutes) - Brief Recap- In this portion summarize the information that I have heard over the last hour and try and get the group to form a consensus. - Ask if there is anything else related to the topic that we have not yet covered but would feel is important to discuss. - Thank you so much for coming today. Your contributions today will help us determine the potential barriers for students and the improvements that can be made within MEESO programs to better suite the needs of students. What was said during the last hour should remain confidential - Ensure documentation of attendees

53

Appendix D: Focus Group Questionnaire

Focus Group Questionnaire

1. What year are you in school? a. Freshman b. Sophomore c. Junior d. Senior

2. What zip code do you live in? a. I live on campus b. 32601, 32609, 32641 c. 32603, 32605, 32606, 32653 d. 32607 e. 32608 f. None of the above

3. What utilities does your rental property have? a. Electricity b. Water c. Gas

4. How much does in individual in your household pay in utilities each month (average bill amount per month/number of people living in the household)?

a. I do not pay for my utilities b. $0-$19 c. $20-$39 d. $40-$59 e. $60-$79 f. $80-99 g. $100+

5. Do you think this price is: a. Too much b. Just right c. Too little

6. Who pays for your utilities? a. I do b. My parents do c. My apartment complex does d. Other

7. Does your rental property have any energy efficient appliances? If so, what are they?

54

a. a. b. b.

8. What year was you rental property built? a. 1900-1929 b. 1930-1959 c. 1960-1989 d. 1990-2009 e. 2010-2015

9. Are your daily activities limited because of your utilities bill? a. Yes b. No c. Not Sure

10. Do you believe that your rental property is energy efficient? a. Yes b. No c. Not sure