Need some info on the "cap & trade" bill to refute a RWers

[NewJeffCT]

Was listening to Chris Murphy (D-CT) on the radio this morning and Murphy had gotten grilled on cap & trade by the RW radio host. Murphy had said that he had read the entire bill and that there was NOT a provision in there about retrofitting old houses when you sell them to make them more energy efficient. The host has been going crazy over this provision, saying that whenever anybody sells a house, they'll need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to retrofit their house before they can sell it. He was calmed down a bit by Murphy's words when Murphy said it would only apply to new houses or something (didn't catch the whole thing), then 5-10 minutes after Murphy was off the air, the host started ranting again saying that Murphy had either lied about not reading the whole bill, or lied about the provision calling for retrofitting on all houses. he then linked to the provision in the bill.

I'm sure there is some sort of catch on this - an earlier paragraph that says, "this applies to only X, Y and Z situations, but not A, B and C"

However, I want backup to refute a RWer I'm debating with on this.

Thanks

[babylonsister]

1. Wow. I googled cap and trade retrofitting homes, and what do you

know, a bevy of r/w sites came up spouting their nonsense. This was the first hit I got that made sense. Hope it helps.

http://www.housingwire.com/2009/06/30/home-energy-audits-optional-in-cap-and-trade-bill/


Home Energy Audits Optional in Cap-and-Trade Bill
By JON PRIOR
June 30, 2009 8:56 PM CST
Advertisements

A section in HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which narrowly passed a US House of Representatives vote Friday, falls short of mandating an energy audit on homes, according to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Section 204 of the cap-and-trade bill establishes a building energy performance labeling program for homes and commercial property. The section would provide potential buyers and investors in those properties a label explaining that property’s energy efficiency.

Much like a nutrition label on the back of a candy bar, the performance labeling program is a consumer right-to-know provision in the cap-and-trade bill, but it is not required, according to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Section 202 of the bill develops the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program. If the owner of the building — residential or commercial — seeks financial assistance from REEP, the property must pass the energy audit.

Energy savings for residential properties are determined by the Home Energy Ratings System (HERS) Index, and the final score is selected by an objective third party, according to the bill.

After the audit is conducted, state and local REEP programs may grant funds to owners for retrofit improvements on energy efficiency.

[NewJeffCT]

2. thanks - that was very helpful

So, only if you seek financial assistance do you go through the audit. I knew their was a catch to it.

[alc]

3. I read the bill when someone asked this a few days ago

(I searched and read parts of the bill so could have missed something).
There is nothing I can find that required retrofitting. But new houses are required to be more efficient. So if you have an almost new house now that you want to sell in 5-10 years, you will be competing with something around the same age but more efficient. So you will need to sell for less than them become more efficient. There are also some provisions that allow for better loans on more efficient houses (I didn't read the loan parts very carefully). So you may have fewer potential buyers than a more efficient house.

[MercutioATC]

4. The way I read it, it's like an "Energy Star" label.

Homeowners would have the OPTION to have their home evaluated and rated.

There would also be a mechanism by which homeowners had the OPTION to ask for financial assistance to improve their home's energy efficiency. If they exercised that OPTION, certain efficiency standards would have to be met.


I don't see anything in the bill that mandates any of this.

[zbdent]

5. I read the bill and it didn't have anything about outlawing having sex with beets!

Those damn Democrats!

[MercutioATC]

6. Oh, so "racial purity" isn't enough for you?

You dirty "kingdom purists" are so insidious...

:)

[NewJeffCT]

7. Well, that guy from Fox wants us to be more like the Swedes...

How about we start with the Swedish health care system?