Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Buildings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislators debate statewide push for electric-ready building rules and fossil-fuel limits
Summary
Multiple bills in the Environment & Transportation hearing sought to accelerate electrification and electric-ready standards for new construction and major renovations; supporters said the measures cut emissions and long-term costs, while utilities, builders and industry groups warned of grid readiness, costs and potential federal preemption.
Delegates presented multiple measures during the Environment and Transportation Committee hearing that would tighten building energy performance standards, require “electric-ready” new construction, and in some versions prohibit on-site fossil fuel use in new buildings.
Delegate Gabriel Acevedo introduced HB 212, describing it as building on Maryland’s Climate Solutions Now Act by “requiring that new constructed buildings with some exceptions meet energy demands without the use of fossil fuels” while directing the Department of Labor to adopt modifications to the International Building Code and International Energy Conservation Code. He said the bill includes guardrails to avoid diminishing affordable housing availability.
Delegate Adrian Bofa (HB 973, “Better Buildings Act”) said at-scale electrification of new buildings would accelerate emission reductions and reduce long-term energy costs; he cited prior PSC and MDE analyses and welcomed phased compliance timelines tied to updates of model codes.
Supporters — including the American Institute of Architects, Sierra Club, RMI and housing advocates — argued that new construction is the lowest-cost moment to avoid future retrofits, would reduce health-harming combustion emissions indoors, and would accelerate the state toward net-zero and climate targets. Mariah Schreiner of the Sierra Club, and Aaron Sherman of RMI both emphasized consumer health and long-term cost savings if buildings are “built right the first time.”
Opposition testimony came from energy companies, the building industry, commercial real-estate representatives, the Maryland Chamber of Commerce, municipal and county associations, and utilities. Key concerns included:
• Grid readiness and generation capacity: BGE and Columbia Gas representatives warned that existing generation and grid upgrades (including major transmission and substations projects) may not be sufficient to absorb large, near-term load growth from electrification. BGE noted plans to build transmission and substations to mitigate generation retirements and said timing must be coordinated with infrastructure upgrades.
• Cost and housing supply: Building Industry Association and NAIOP representatives warned about construction cost increases and possible negative impacts on housing affordability and supply. They urged phasing, additional analysis of costs to consumers and businesses, and coordination with code cycles and PSC/utility planning.
• Federal preemption and compliance: Columbia Gas argued that certain product bans may be preempted by federal law (Energy Policy and Conservation Act) and urged caution on measures that could be construed as banning federally regulated appliances.
Numerous lawmakers and advocates debated the timeline and scope. Delegate Adrian Bofa and supporters noted phased timelines, exemptions, and waiver provisions in drafts. Several sponsors and witnesses emphasized the bills’ focus on new construction and significant renovations rather than forcing immediate mass retrofits of existing buildings. Local governments asked for clearer waiver criteria and funding for implementation.
No final action was taken in committee; sponsors and opponents indicated willingness to negotiate amendments to address grid planning, exempt small jurisdictions or provide waivers, and align timelines with the building code update cycle.
(Reporting note: quotes and speaker attributions above come from the hearing transcript; several bills on related building code and BEPS topics were presented and debated.)
