WORKING PAPER

ACCELERATING BUILDING DECARBONIZATION:

EIGHT ATTAINABLE POLICY PATHWAYS TO NET ZERO
CARBON BUILDINGS FOR ALL
RENILDE BECQUÉ, DEBBIE WEYL, EMMA STEWART, ERIC MACKRES, LUTING JIN, AND XUFEI SHEN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Highlights CONTENTS
▪▪ Cities will lead the shift to net zero carbon buildings
(ZCBs) and will therefore play a major role in
Executive Summary........................................1
Abbreviations.............................................. 6
achieving the goal of a decarbonized world. 1. Introduction...............................................7
▪▪ ZCBs are more achievable when the definition is
expanded beyond the boundary of the individual
2. Getting to Zero Carbon: A Structured Approach..... 11
3. A Menu of ZCB Pathways............................. 16
building to allow the use of off-site clean energy
or consideration across a portfolio of district or
4. ZCB Pathways and the Different
municipal buildings. Roles of Government................................... 23

▪▪ This working paper lays out a menu of pathways to

achieve ZCBs, with a focus on operational carbon
5. Comparing the Feasibility of ZCB Pathways........ 27
6. Conclusions and Next Steps.......................... 37
emissions. Each pathway is a combination of up to Appendices................................................38
five components: basic energy efficiency, advanced Endnotes.................................................. 78
energy efficiency,1 on-site carbon-free renewable
energy, off-site carbon-free renewable energy, and
References................................................80
carbon offsets only in cases where efficiency measures Acknowledgments........................................84
and renewables cannot meet 100 percent of energy About the Authors........................................84
demand.

▪▪ Policies shape a city’s ability to achieve ZCB pathways.

This working paper draws on reviews of current policy Working Papers contain preliminary research, analysis,
findings, and recommendations. They are circulated to
frameworks and consultations with stakeholders in
stimulate timely discussion and critical feedback, and to
four countries—India, China, Mexico, and Kenya—
influence ongoing debate on emerging issues. Working
to determine how policies at the national and
papers may eventually be published in another form and
subnational level enable or disable the different ZCB
their content may be revised.
components and pathways.

▪▪ Even within these different policy contexts, we find

ZCB pathways that are feasible today, making a
Suggested Citation: Becqué, R., D. Weyl, E. Stewart, E.
Mackres, L. Jin, and X. Shen. 2019. “Accelerating Building
decarbonized building stock a target increasingly Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero
Carbon Buildings for All.” Working Paper. Washington, DC:
within reach for urban policymakers.
World Resources Institute. Available online at https://www.wri.
org/publication/accelerating-building-decarbonization.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 1

Box ES-1 |A Note to Readers: Definitions and Scope Purpose of This Paper
of the Paper This paper responds to the global discourse around the
need to decarbonize the world’s building stock by 2050 in
order to meet global climate goals. It aims to provide clear,
This paper uses the term net zero carbon building (ZCB) to define feasible policy pathways by which developing countries
an energy efficient building, regardless of whether the building uses can achieve net ZCBs in their cities. We hope the paper
on-site renewables, off-site renewables, and/or credible offsets to will provide a starting point for urban decision-makers
achieve a (net) balance between energy demand and renewable who are interested in understanding the wide range of
energy supply or between the carbon emissions associated with
annual energy demand and energy provision. The balance between policy options available to them. We do not consider the
building energy demand and the provision of carbon-free renew- full spectrum of opportunities and barriers that affect
able energy can be achieved at the level of the individual building or planning for ZCBs, and this document alone does not
at the district or municipal portfolio scale. provide a sufficient basis for policy actions.

This definition of ZCBs was chosen to align closely with the thinking
presented in the Zero Code standard by Architecture 2030, which
An Introduction to ZCBs in Cities
itself consulted with key institutions like the World Green Building To achieve the Paris Agreement’s vision of
Council and the International Finance Corporation’s EDGE program. a decarbonized world and the Sustainable
The standard was published in spring 2018 as “a national and inter- Development Goals’ vision of equitable climate
national building energy standard for new commercial, institutional,
and mid- to high-rise residential buildings.”a
action, reducing the carbon footprint of buildings
will be at the center of actions to mitigate the
In line with the thinking of the World Green Building Council impacts of climate change. The building sector today
and several of its member councils around the world, as well as is responsible for a staggering one-third of global energy
Architecture 2030, we allow the use of carbon offsets as a last- consumption and energy-related carbon emissions.2 Zero
resort option. Offsets may be purchased to close the gap in cases
carbon buildings can create significant equity benefits by
where on- or off-site carbon-free renewable energy cannot provide
for 100 percent of energy demand. Such offsets are bound by a reducing energy poverty, strengthening energy resilience,
number of criteria, including additionality and their being used to and improving energy access for all.
invest in energy efficiency or renewable energy projects.
Cities must be lead actors in shifting the world
Commonly used terms today include net zero energy, nearly zero toward a decarbonized building sector. With a
energy, net zero carbon, zero net carbon, or zero carbon buildings. higher percentage of the world’s population now living in
These different concepts all refer to buildings that achieve or nearly urban areas than ever before, cities largely determine the
achieve a balance between energy demand and renewable energy
supply or the carbon emissions associated with energy demand
future of their countries. Urban decision-makers will have
and provision. We focus this working paper on buildings that to lead on fostering and accelerating ambition on ZCBs.
achieve net zero carbon emissions at either the individual building Actors at different government levels and in the public and
or district/municipal portfolio level. Readers interested in a more in- private sectors will need to come together to overcome
depth consideration of effective building energy efficiency policies barriers and make net ZCBs a feasible and desirable goal.
can consult the World Resources Institute’s Accelerating Building
Efficiency: Eight Actions for Urban Leaders report.b Certain key national and subnational policies
have direct enabling or disabling effects on
The paper presents a menu of ZCB policy pathways and analyzes
policy frameworks in four countries to test the hypothesis that no the feasibility of achieving ZCBs. Mandatory
matter the current policy framework, a ZCB pathway is achievable requirements such as building codes and appliance
today. We emphasize that the paper limits its consideration of path- standards, various incentives for voluntary action, and
way feasibility mainly to policies currently in place—their enabling action plans influence whether and how much building
or disabling effect—and policies that are lacking. The paper does owners will choose to incorporate EE or clean energy
not consider local markets or technical capabilities. However,
financial and technical factors will play a major role in which ZCB
elements in their new building construction or existing
pathways can be pursued by policymakers and by actors on the building renovation plans. Although some policies
ground, particularly building developers and building owners and are enacted mainly at the national level, regional and
managers. municipal authorities also have influence.

Sources: a. Zero Code, n.d.; b. Becqué et al. 2016.

2|
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

ZCBs are more achievable and accessible when carbon emissions associated mainly with a building’s
they are broadly defined. Our definition of ZCBs construction can also be added as a component to these
allows cities to produce or procure clean renewable energy ZCB pathways. Illustrative examples of how the pathways
beyond the boundaries of the individual building site can be constructed from constituent energy efficiency and
and achieve net zero carbon emissions across a group of renewable energy components are shown in Table ES-1.
buildings as well as at the level of the individual building.
Not all pathways to ZCBs are equally desirable.
Pathways to ZCBs We develop a set of principles to guide the choice
of components. Energy efficiency comes first because
To accelerate policy ambition among urban
using no more energy than necessary often results in
decision-makers, this paper introduces a menu
the least expensive pathways, along with significant
of eight pathways to decarbonize the building
additional benefits including health and comfort. Next
stock. We recognize that there are multiple ways to
in the hierarchy of preference is use of on-site RE, which
arrive at 100 percent reduction of a building’s operational
adds to a city’s total installed capacity of clean energy.
carbon emissions. Each pathway consists of a “package”
Off-site RE is the next choice and may be especially
of measures—some combination of basic energy efficiency
suitable for portfolios of buildings seeking to achieve
(basic EE), exemplary energy performance (advanced
net zero carbon emissions across their combined energy
EE),3 on- or off-site carbon-free renewable energy (on-site
use. Lastly, carbon offsets may be chosen to compensate
RE and off-site RE), and—only in cases where efficiency
for remaining carbon emissions that cannot be avoided
measures and renewables cannot meet 100 percent of
through efficiency measures and carbon-free renewable
energy demand—the use of carbon offsets.4 Embodied
energy supply.

Table ES-1 |Cities Can Achieve Zero Carbon Buildings via Different Combinations of Energy Efficiency (EE) Measures,
Use of Renewable Energy (RE), and—as a Last Resort—Carbon Offsets

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EEa ADVANCED EEb ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETSc
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8

Notes:
a
The minimum required level of energy efficiency achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewables cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 3

Applying these principles allows us to develop a Key Findings: ZCB Pathways and Enabling
decision tree that can help urban decision-makers
map out the best ZCB pathway, given their local
Policies
policy framework. The decision tree (Figure ES-1) The research suggests that even within different
lays out the ZCB components in a recommended order policy frameworks, there is likely to be a ZCB
of consideration. Some ZCB pathways will be easier pathway that is achievable today. In each of four
to pursue than others, depending on the policies and countries that are influential in their regions—India,
programs currently in place and market readiness—that is, China, Mexico, and Kenya—examples of nearly ZCBs
sectoral experience and the availability, quality, and cost already exist or are under development.
of products, materials, designs, and labor.

Figure ES-1 |Decision Tree to Help Identify Suitable ZCB Policy Pathways, Combining Energy Efficiency (EE),
Renewable Energy (RE), and/or Carbon Offsets as a Last Resort

ZER O C ARBON BUI L D IN G S — P OL I C Y SC O PE

Life cycle Operational

emissions emissions

Reduce embodied Reduce energy

carbon demand Does our policy framework enable EE?
YES NO

Offset remaining
embodied carbon Basic + Advanced EE Basic EE

Clean energy supply

Does our policy YES On-site RE Does our policy YES Off-site RE Does our policy
framework enable framework enable generation framework enable
On-site RE? NO Off-site RE generation? NO Off-site RE purchase?
YES NO

Off-site RE purchase

YES Have you

reached
ZER O C ARBON
YES Have you reached Offset remaining NO zero carbon?
zero carbon? operational carbon
BUILD ING NO

Source: WRI.

4|
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Policy and economic considerations reinforce the renewables, or buildings powered by 100 percent
hierarchy of desirable ZCB pathways. For example, renewable energy from the local grid. Because there are
it is often cheaper to meet energy demands through so few recognized ZCBs, they are seen as one-off pilot
energy efficiency measures than through the provision of projects rather than a scalable approach to buildings.
alternative, greener energy supplies. Creating on-site RE
where feasible is preferable to off-site RE sources because ZCBs are currently seen as the preserve of only
it directly expands the total carbon-free renewable the wealthiest economies. Buildings recognized as
generation capacity and helps strengthen energy security. ZCBs today are clustered largely in the European Union
It should therefore be considered before purchasing and North America. The barriers to achieving ZCBs at
off-site renewables where possible, though financial or scale in developing economies in the short term are
site constraints may rule out this option. Generating or therefore often seen as insurmountable—because it has
purchasing carbon-free renewable energy is preferable not been done, it is often assumed that it cannot be done.
to purchasing carbon offsets, which can be hard to verify Rather than perceiving ZCBs as one-off projects
and, ultimately, cannot support a full transition to a to be scaled in the future in wealthy economies,
decarbonized building stock. our research asserts that ZCBs are possible in
Municipal governments can lead the achievement all economies, and we must start pursuing them
of ZCB pathways through several roles. On the today. Knowledge of a menu of pathways toward ZCBs
policy side, municipal governments may be able to act can change urban decision-makers’ perceptions of carbon-
as regulator, convener, and facilitator as well as act as neutral buildings. Rather than far-off aspirations, they
complementary or strategic partner to state or national can be seen as targets within reach. The pathways can
governments for policy design and implementation. In be applied at the individual building level or to a group
addition, municipal governments can lead by example as of buildings, such as a municipal building portfolio or
an owner/investor of a substantial portfolio of buildings. a city district. This should increase the feasibility and
affordability of some of the pathways while simultaneously
Leadership from state- and national-level generating a variety of community-scale benefits.
government is also critical to enable the success
of local initiatives to achieve ZCB pathways. State Putting Theory into Practice: Next Steps
and national governments often design essential policy This paper limits its analysis to assessing the
components, such as building energy efficiency codes and policy feasibility of the eight ZCB pathways by
standards, and renewable energy regulations that govern considering the enabling or disabling effects of
which options are available to energy consumers. These policy frameworks in four countries. The paper does
policymakers can also work in partnership with local not consider technical, market, or economic conditions,
governments to strengthen policy effectiveness. although these factors will also influence which ZCB
pathways are most feasible.
The Need to Accelerate Ambition
Although all buildings must be net zero carbon Additional research is needed into the technical,
by 2050 to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, market, and economic conditions for ZCBs. In
not even 1 percent of buildings are considered addition to the enabling or disabling influence of national
net zero carbon today. Estimates from 2017 noted and local policy pathways on ZCBs, success relies on
2,500 net zero energy buildings existed worldwide—500 critical factors that include technology availability, the
commercial buildings and 2,000 housing units. This first cost and overall cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency
number refers only to buildings that are officially and renewable energy measures, and the availability of
recognized to be net zero energy, for instance, through financing structures in the local context.
a green building certification or by having adhered to an
Further research is also needed into the
official standard. It leaves out the many buildings that
implications of decarbonizing the building stock,
have reached net zero energy but are not recognized as
rather than individual buildings, by addressing
such. Examples include noncertified buildings that use
ZCBs at the district or portfolio scale. This may
local passive design principles and on-site renewable
involve different (communal) drivers than an individual
energy to achieve net zero carbon, buildings in off-grid
building approach—such as benefits from resilience and
areas that are energy self-sufficient through on-site

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 5

 ABBREVIATIONS
AC air conditioner IPP independent power producer
ASHRAE A merican Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- KGBS Kenya Green Building Society
Conditioning Engineers LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
BEA Building Efficiency Accelerator MAITREE Market Integration and Transformation for Energy
CCER China Certified Emission Reduction Efficiency
CDM Clean Development Mechanism MEPS minimum energy performance standards
CEL certificado de energia limpia (clean energy certificate) MOF Ministry of Finance
ECBC Energy Conservation Building Code MOHURD Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development
EDGE Excellence in Design for Greater Efficiency NOM-ENER  ormas Oficiales Mexicanas de Energia (Mexican
N
EE energy efficiency Official Standards of Energy)
ESCO energy service company PPA power purchase agreement
FAR floor area ratio PROCALSOL Promoción de Calentadores Solares de Agua en
México (Promotion of Solar Water Heaters in Mexico)
FIT feed-in tariff
PV photovoltaic
GBC green building council
RE renewable energy
GEC Green Electricity Certificates
REC renewable energy certificates
GRIHA Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment
REDD Reduced Emissions from Deforestation
HVAC heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning
and Forest Degradation
IECC International Energy Conservation Code
RPO renewable purchase obligation
IFC International Finance Corporation
USGBC U.S. Green Building Council
IGBC Indian Green Building Council
WorldGBC World Green Building Council
INFONAVIT Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para
WRI World Resources Institute
los Trabajadores (National Workers’ Housing Fund
Institute) ZCB zero carbon building

6|
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

improved air quality—and also incorporates a broader The Case for ZCBs
set of interventions that impact the carbon intensity of
With a higher percentage of the world’s population now
buildings, such as decarbonizing centralized electric grids.
living in urban areas than ever before, cities will lead
The World Resources Institute (WRI) aims to much of the effort to shift to a low-carbon economy. Cities
raise ambition among cities on the depth and will largely determine the future of their countries, and
scale at which ZCBs are being rolled out across actors in both the public and private sector will need to
urban areas. This menu of ZCB pathways and analysis collaborate to overcome policy and market barriers and
on policy impacts on pathway feasibility form the first make ZCBs a feasible and desirable goal.
step toward such a transition. This analysis shows that a
To help foster and accelerate policy ambition on ZCBs
decarbonized building stock is attainable through policy
among urban decision-makers whose policies and
pathways and is politically feasible, even in jurisdictions
leadership are impacting the development and prosperity
that so far have gained less experience in or have had
of cities, this paper lays out a menu of pathways to
less of a focus on greening building energy demand and
effectively decarbonize the urban building stock. Each
supply.
ZCB pathway consists of a combination of basic or
As a next step, WRI and partners are launching advanced energy efficiency, on-site and/or off-site
“Zero Carbon Buildings for All,” a national- carbon-free renewable energy, and—only in cases where
subnational and private sector consortium to renewables cannot fully provide for 100 percent of
support governments in taking the first steps remaining energy demand—the use of carbon offsets5 to
toward ZCBs or enhancing their existing efforts reduce or compensate for all of a building’s operational
and mobilizing the financing to convert policy into carbon emissions. Stakeholders who wish to expand their
shovel-ready projects. definition of net zero carbon to include the embodied
carbon emissions associated mainly with a building’s
INTRODUCTION construction can add this component to their set of ZCB
pathways.
The goal of the Paris Agreement on climate change is to
keep average global temperature increase to well below 1.1.1. Pathways to ZCBs
2°C, and preferably below 1.5°C. It requires the peaking of
It is our hope that the availability of a menu of ZCB
global emissions as soon as possible, followed by a rapid
pathways will help transform the aspiration of carbon-
reduction, bringing greenhouse gas emissions effectively
neutral city buildings into a practical target increasingly
to zero in the second half of this century. The current
within reach. Building decarbonization can be pursued
climate targets of many countries and cities are largely
both at the individual building level or across a group
inconsistent with this long-term vision.
of buildings, for example, a portfolio of buildings under
Although action is becoming increasingly widespread in the same local ownership or management or within a
both the power and mobility sectors, progress toward city district. Such an approach is expected to increase
zero carbon buildings (ZCBs) has been relatively slow, the feasibility and affordability of some ZCB pathways
even though building decarbonization can greatly support and generate a variety of community-scale benefits.
national and subnational low carbon development goals. Our research suggests that, even within different policy
Technically the solutions, though not perfect, already frameworks, one or more ZCB pathways are achievable
exist. The costs of renewable energy generation are today.
falling rapidly, making them increasingly competitive
with conventional grid electricity while creating jobs
and reducing pollution. The principal barriers faced are
political, financial, and normative.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 7

Not every pathway is considered equally desirable. It of ZCB pathways thinking to accelerate the pace and scale
is generally good practice to consider opportunities of building decarbonization. Interested cities are welcome
for energy efficiency before greener energy supplies. to get in touch.
Following contemporary thinking in the net zero
buildings community, we introduce a set of core The following sources, among many available, are
principles that allows us to differentiate between the recommended as further reading.
ZCB pathways, creating a hierarchy of pathways from
Building efficiency:
more to less desirable. We also discuss the roles and
degree of influence of municipal, national, and/or state
governments in achieving these pathways.
▪▪ WRI’s Accelerating Building Efficiency: Eight Actions
for Urban Leaders report, https://www.wri.org/
publication/accelerating-building-efficiency-actions-
1.1.2. Four country case studies city-leaders
We assess the policy frameworks relevant to ZCBs in
four countries: India, China, Mexico, and Kenya. All ▪▪ The Building Efficiency Accelerator, http://
buildingefficiencyaccelerator.org/resources/

▪▪
are powerhouses in their own regions, but their diverse
geographies and institutional structures present ideal case The Building Efficiency Initiative, https://
buildingefficiencyinitiative.org/

▪▪
studies of how ZCB pathways may be pursued in different
ways. We aim to identify not only pathway feasibility The Global Buildings Performance Network, http://
but also help pinpoint policy strengths and weaknesses www.gbpn.org/
relevant to building decarbonization. The methodology (Net) ZCBs:
applied for the country analysis is provided in Appendix
A, while each country’s policy framework is presented in
more detail in Appendix B. We include a set of suggested
▪▪ Architecture 2030’s Zero Code, https://
architecture2030.org/zero-code/
priority policy actions for each country that can help close
the gap between existing and enhanced policy and bring ▪▪ The World Green Building Council, http://www.
worldgbc.org/thecommitment

▪▪
preferable ZCB pathways within reach. The research
demonstrates that ZCBs can become an attainable goal The International Finance Corporation’s global target
within each of these countries and their wider regions. of net zero carbon via EDGE tool: https://ifcextapps.
Even local jurisdictions that currently have less experience ifc.org/ifcext%5Cpressroom%5Cifcpressroom.nsf%5C
with greening building energy demand and supply can 0%5C7B96214C03769DBE8525817700524A9C
aspire to this goal. Aggregated renewable energy purchasing:

This paper can help interested urban decision-makers

broaden their thinking around the options available to
▪▪ The Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance, http://
rebuyers.org/
them for decarbonizing their local building stock. It does
not, however, consider the full spectrum of opportunities ▪▪ The Rocky Mountain Institute’s Business Renewables
Center, https://www.rmi.org/our-work/electricity/
and barriers that come into play when pursuing ZCB goals
brc-business-renewables-center/
and does not provide a sufficient basis for policy actions.
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol for Project Accounting:

▪▪
As a next step, the World Resources Institute (WRI)
aims to recruit a select number of Building Efficiency Project Protocol, https://ghgprotocol.org/standards/
Accelerator (BEA) cities to take first or further steps in project-protocol
accelerating ZCBs. We will support them in the application

8|
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table 1 |Overview of Commonly Applied Zero Building Concepts and What They Entail

Nearly zero An energy efficient building that supplies most (but not all) of its annual energy use through on-
energy building or near-site renewable energy sources.
NEARLY
ZERO

An energy efficient building that produces enough on-site or nearby renewable energy to meet building
Net zero energy operations’ energy consumption annually on a net basis (the building delivers at least the same amount
building of renewable energy to the grid than is used from the grid over the course of a year).

Note: Not all renewable energy is considered to be carbon-free in its generation.

ZERO

An energy efficient building that produces on-site, or procures, enough carbon-free renewable energy to
meet building operations’ energy consumption annually.
(Net) zero carbon
building (ZCB) Note: Zero carbon is often used interchangeably with net zero carbon, whether or not the building uses
potentially fossil fuel–derived grid electricity to make up for temporary gaps in on-site renewable energy
ZERO generation to meet demand or uses carbon offsets. If it does, it is usually called a “net” zero building.

An energy efficient building that produces on-site, or procures, enough carbon-free renewable energy
to meet building operations’ energy consumption annually and also over its life cycle, compensating for
(Net) zero the carbon embodied in the building’s construction.
carbon building,
including Note: An emerging goal is to also include embodied carbon arising from the materials, machinery,
INCLUDING
embodied carbon and equipment used in building construction, maintenance, and repair into the net zero definition.
EMBODIED Preferably, these embodied emissions are reduced during the design and construction phase rather
CARBON
than compensated during the operational building phase.

A group of energy efficient buildings sharing a similar characteristic and usually under the same
(Net) zero carbon
ownership or management, with carbon-free renewable energy demands mainly provided for within the
building portfolio
boundaries of the portfolio rather than at the level of individual buildings.
ZERO

A group of energy efficient buildings within a geographically defined urban area, with carbon-free
(Net) zero carbon
renewable energy mainly supplied through nearby off-site sources, generating clean energy at the
district
district level.

ZERO
ZERO

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 9

A Short Primer on Zero Building Concepts new renewable energy capacity. However, the nearly
and net zero energy definitions represent a narrower
Various concepts are commonly used in the literature and
path, focusing on on-site or near-site renewable energy
discussions of building decarbonization. They all concern
production. This limits their application to mostly low-
buildings that achieve a net zero or nearly zero balance
density, low-rise, suburban, or rural building applications
between energy demand and renewable energy supply
(Architecture 2030 et al. 2016).
or between the carbon emissions associated with energy
demand and energy provision. To clarify the relationship The focus of this paper is mostly on net zero carbon
between these concepts, we provide concise definitions buildings. For simplicity, we refer to these throughout
and boundaries for those most commonly used (Table 1).6 this paper as ZCBs. We provide additional explanation of
The concepts can be seen as nested, each one slightly more the various concepts for achieving building energy and/or
ambitious or all-encompassing than the last (Figure 1). carbon neutrality, as well as concise definitions for a few
commonly used terms, in Appendix C.
All these concepts offset carbon-based energy
consumption with improved energy efficiency and

Figure 1 |ZCB Concepts Can Be Seen as Nested, from Less to More Encompassing, in Terms of Their Ability to Achieve
Carbon Neutrality

NET ZERO CARBON BUILDING INCLUDING EMBODIED CARBON

NET ZERO CARBON BUILDING

NET ZERO ENERGY BUILDING

NEARLY ZERO ENERGY BUILDING

INCLUDING
NEARLY
ZERO
ZERO ZERO EMBODIED
CARBON

10 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

GETTING TO ZERO CARBON: are described in more detail in Appendix D. The section
also introduces a set of principles that help guide the
A STRUCTURED APPROACH choice and prioritization of components to achieve
Framing ZCBs ZCBs. The section concludes with some examples of ZCB
certification tracks that recently have been developed by
Recent years have seen rapidly growing interest in ZCBs. national green building councils (GBCs) around the world.
This has resulted in at least 2,500 verified net zero energy
buildings around the world today, ranging from single- Key Components of ZCBs
and multifamily housing to schools and commercial office
Buildings are major end users of energy, mainly for space
buildings.
heating and cooling, lighting, and running equipment.
Zero carbon buildings can be thought of in terms of The most common energy source is usually electricity,
measures taken within a building or group of buildings, and electricity generated from fossil fuel sources releases
measures taken outside the building(s), and measures carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere. In many
appropriate to specific characteristics of the building(s). buildings, natural gas also plays an important role for
There are generally trade-offs to be made between the energy provision, and in some countries unreliable grids
costs, desirability, and practicality of all these measures. have resulted in considerable use of diesel-powered
backup generators. The carbon emissions associated with
For a ZCB, energy efficiency is generally considered a a building’s energy use are called operational carbon
first priority before meeting the building’s (remaining) emissions because they are caused by the building’s
energy needs with carbon-free renewables. In practice, operation.
however, the cost and effort of ensuring deep energy
savings against business as usual,7 in particular for The construction of buildings is also associated with
existing building stock, may not always weigh up against carbon emissions, resulting from both the construction
spending these same resources on other decarbonization materials (their extraction, manufacture, and transport
efforts, such as greening the electricity grid or promoting to site) and the machinery and equipment used on- and
on-site renewable power generation. And, depending on near-site (fuel). These emissions are known as embodied
the building type and local conditions, renewable energy carbon emissions.
can sometimes be more (cost-) effectively developed at
On average, embodied carbon emissions represent about
the system level, such as at the scale of districts, cities,
one-quarter of a building’s total life cycle emissions. The
or entire regions, rather than at the level of individual
global average is based on a relatively inefficient building
buildings. An example is a high-rise building with small
stock supplied by electricity from a heavily fossil fuel–
floor plates in a high-density city.
based grid. However, in the case of low-energy buildings
Trade-offs may also exist between building vintages— or buildings supplied by a low-carbon-intensity grid,
such as whether to focus more on new buildings by embodied emissions can represent as much as 40–60
implementing and enforcing strong codes and standards percent of the life cycle carbon emissions (Karimpour et
or on existing building stock through retrofits—and al. 2014). In Kenya, one of our four case study countries,
between segments of the market, such as commercial, 70 percent of grid electricity is derived from renewable
residential, or municipal buildings (e.g., schools, hospitals, energy sources, giving greater weight to embodied carbon
etc.). The optimal combination of measures to arrive at in a building’s total carbon footprint. Many developing
ZCBs, as well as the optimum scale (individual buildings countries are rapidly adding new buildings to their
versus a district, municipal, or portfolio approach), is building stock, and the aggregated carbon emissions
likely to differ by region and is equally dependent on associated with materials such as steel and cement can be
market conditions and the policy framework in place. considerable.
Identifying the best approach will be a critical first step
Despite the importance of embodied carbon, current
for urban decision-makers aiming to develop a ZCB policy
ZCB approaches most commonly target operational
road map.
carbon emissions. Three main components, related to
This section discusses the main components of ZCBs: energy demand and energy supply (Table 2), can reduce a
basic and advanced energy efficiency, on- and off-site building’s (or a group of buildings’) operational emissions
renewable energy, and carbon offsets. These components to zero:

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 11

▪▪ Energy efficiency (EE): A building’s energy
consumption may be reduced in many ways,
▪▪ Carbon offsets: Sometimes a combination of energy
efficiency and generating or purchasing renewable
starting with passive design measures. What we call energy does not eliminate 100 percent of a building’s
basic EE involves pursuing the minimum required operational carbon emissions. This leads to a nearly
level of energy efficiency by ensuring that the (net) zero carbon building. For existing buildings
building complies with local codes and standards. using fossil fuels such as gas for cooking or hot water
In many countries, such codes and standards still heating, it may not always be feasible to fully eliminate
have considerable untapped potential for higher carbon emissions. In such a case, carbon offsets may
performance. Advanced EE involves more ambitious be used to compensate for the balance of emissions.
energy performance that goes beyond minimum Such offsets should preferably be able to prove
regulatory requirements. additionality8 and should be used to invest in energy

▪▪ Renewable energy (RE): Further reductions

in building emissions can be achieved by using
efficiency or carbon-free renewable energy projects
elsewhere, although preferably within the boundaries
carbon-free renewable energy sources. The options of the city. The emissions reduction benefits must be
include on-site RE generation, off-site RE purchase, claimed through a credible mechanism such as carbon
or off-site RE generation. The cost of renewable credits or a local carbon credit fund.9
energy technologies for generation and storage have
fallen considerably in recent years, and renewables
are increasingly able to compete economically with
conventional grid energy, making renewable energy a
more attractive option.

Table 2 |Emissions-Reduction Components of Zero Carbon Buildings (ZCBs)

ZCB COMPONENTS EXAMPLES OF MEASURES PREFERRED HIERARCHY

Basic EE: minimum energy efficiency (EE) in line ▪▪ Building EE codes/standards
EE with local codes & standards ▪▪ Appliance MEPS a (Baseline)

+
Advanced EE: exemplary EE performance ▪▪ Incentives
performance
that encourage beyond-code/standard
Energy efficiency first

+ On-site renewable energy (RE) ▪▪ On-site RE generation through solar panels or solar hot
water systems
On-site RE generation first

▪▪ Green retail tariffs

▪▪ Power
RE
+ Off-site RE (purchase) purchase agreement (PPA) b

+/or
▪▪ Renewable energy credit (REC) c Remainder that cannot be provided by
EE or on-site RE
+ Off-site RE (generation) ▪▪ Direct ownership of off-site RE assets
Only if on- or off-site RE are not viable
CO2 + Carbon offsets ▪▪ Carbon credits purchased through investment in EE or
RE reduction projects elsewhere
options
or if embodied carbon is included in
ZCB scope

Notes:
a
MEPS refers to “minimum energy performance standards” for appliances.
b
PPAs represent a contract signed directly between a buyer and a nonutility RE provider to let the buyer purchase RE from a project at a long-term fixed price.
c
RECs show proof that renewable energy has been generated. The energy is fed into the grid, and the carbon emission reduction benefits are traded through a certificate. See Appendix D for more
information.
Source: WRI.

12 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Stakeholders may decide to expand their definition of

ZCB to include embodied carbon. To the extent that
▪▪ Efficiency first. The aim is always to use no more
energy than necessary. Energy-efficient building
these embedded emissions cannot be reduced or avoided, design and energy-efficient building equipment and
credible carbon offsets may be used to compensate for appliances should be implemented before meeting
them. remaining energy demand with renewable sources
of energy. This does not mean pursuing energy
These components can be combined in various ways to efficiency at any cost: the optimal combination of
achieve a full 100 percent (net) reduction of a building’s energy efficiency and renewable energy is likely to
operational carbon emissions. differ by region, depending on local policy and market
conditions. Nonetheless, it is preferable that energy
All combinations start with basic energy efficiency
efficient design measures are used to achieve energy
measures (basic EE) and other components are added
efficiency that exceeds local codes and standards,
in different proportions to achieve full carbon emissions
which often do not tap into the full energy reduction
reduction. In all cases, credible carbon offsets are applied
potential of a building.
only when all other options have been fully utilized—or
are not available. We define any effective combination of
components as a ZCB pathway. Section 3 of this paper
explores pathways in more detail. EE before RE

Principles to Guide Choice of Components

Not every combination of measures is considered
▪▪ On-site energy generation first. Having achieved
energy savings through efficiency measures, the aim
equally desirable. Financial costs and broader social and is to use carbon-free renewable energy.10 On-site
environmental factors dictate a hierarchy of preference generation is preferable to off-site options because on-
among different components. For example, the avoidance site generation increases the total installed capacity
of energy use in the first place (efficiency) is preferable to of clean renewable energy within a city or district.
constant energy use supplied even from clean renewable In addition, on-site generations help enhance the
resources. Some technologies will be more cost-effective building’s energy security and energy resilience in case
than others for large-scale building decarbonization of disruptions to the grid. Where on-site generation
and/or will provide greater carbon reduction and other for individual buildings is not a viable option due to
environmental or social benefits. However, the choice technical, financial, and/or legislative barriers, off-site
of specific ZCB pathways will be based on the judgment energy options can be explored.
of building developers, owners, and managers and will
depend heavily on local circumstances. As an example,
in jurisdictions with high energy subsidies, the cost of
▪▪ It may already be possible to purchase renewable
energy locally. If not, interested stakeholders can
explore the option of generating renewable energy at
renewable energy may outcompete the savings achievable
the district scale to serve a group of buildings within
from additional energy efficiency measures.
that area. Distributed generation models of this kind
The following core principles can help decision-makers help enhance local energy security and resilience in
identify the most or more preferable approaches to case of grid power outages. High-density urban areas,
achieving ZCBs, and they align with accepted thinking in however, may not have sufficient suitable space for
the building community. For ZCBs to reduce their fossil on-site or local off-site generation, and may have to
fuel–generated energy consumption, they first apply rely on clean energy generated well beyond the district
building design strategies and energy efficiency measures or even city boundaries.
to reduce consumption, then incorporate (carbon-free)
on-site renewable energy systems, then use off-site
(carbon-free) renewable energy to meet the balance of its ON-SITE before OFF-SITE RE
energy needs, and lastly use credibly carbon offsets in case
a gap remains in net carbon balance (Architecture 2030 et
al. 2016).

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 13

▪▪ Renewable energy generation/purchase before
carbon offsets. Any ZCB approach should first
Applying these four principles allows us to compile a
decision tree (Figure 2), laying out the ZCB components
exploit the options for on- and/or off-site renewable in a recommended order of consideration. Together, they
energy provision. This encourages building owners/ help users create a road map for different segments of a
managers to first tap into opportunities where they city’s building stock by “navigating” the decision tree and
can exert a greater degree of direct influence and determining suitable combinations of ZCB components.
that reduce emissions close to the source. If neither These combinations constitute the pathways toward ZCBs.
on-site nor off-site generation or purchase are viable
options—due to technical, financial, and/or legislative Each component in the decision tree must be considered
barriers—then carbon offset options can be explored within the enabling policy framework currently in
next. They should be used only to compensate for the place, the availability of suitable technologies and
carbon generated by remaining consumption of non- skilled labor, and the cost-effectiveness of pursuing
carbon-free energy. various options. This paper considers only the policy
framework in determining the feasibility of different
ZCB pathways. However, urban decision-makers are
RE before CARBON OFFSET advised to incorporate not only policy but also additional
market and other considerations to help inform the local

▪▪
appropriateness of different building decarbonization
Embodied carbon reduction before carbon pathways. In addition, although a jurisdiction may
offsets to achieve life cycle carbon neutrality. have supportive policies in place, it is not unlikely that
The entire life cycle of a building involves practitioners on the ground run into conflicting existing
construction, maintenance and repair, renovation policies that can pose a hurdle and may need active
and retrofit, and eventually demolition, and all stages involvement from policymakers to help clear them.
produce carbon emissions from materials, machinery,
and fuel. These emissions are known as embodied ZCB Certification Tracks
carbon.

▪▪
ZCBs are not simply an idea. Multiple independent
Increasingly, governments are likely to encourage certification initiatives have sprung up to help building
the inclusion of embodied carbon in ZCB approaches owners and managers gain recognition in the market for
to account for all carbon emissions across the their efforts. The International Living Future Institute
building’s full life cycle. The reduction of embodied in the United States was one of the first organizations
carbon should be considered before compensating to develop stringent certification for net zero energy
for remaining emissions with carbon offset solutions, buildings, which must exemplify deep energy efficiency
such as carbon credits. For example, building and meet all energy demands through on-site renewables
managers can choose low-carbon materials and only. Recently, it has also launched a net zero carbon
cleaner fuels. certification track,11 which allows the use of on- and off-
site renewables (Liljequist 2018).
CARBON before CARBON OFFSET In 2016 the World Green Building Council (WorldGBC),
REDUCTION the overarching organization for national GBCs, has
been working with a group of member councils through
its Advancing Net Zero project. The aim is to accelerate
uptake of ZCBs to 100 percent by 2050 through the
introduction of tools, resources, and programs such as
certification schemes. Participating in this project are
the GBCs of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Croatia,
Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Jordan,
New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Spain,
South Africa, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, the
United Kingdom, and the United States (WorldGBC, n.d.).

14 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Figure 2 |Decision Tree to Help Identify Suitable ZCB Policy Pathways, Combining Energy Efficiency (EE),
Renewable Energy (RE), and/or Carbon Offsets as a Last Resort

ZER O C AR BO N BUI L DI N G S — P OL I C Y S C OPE

Life cycle Operational

emissions emissions

Reduce embodied Reduce energy

carbon demand Does our policy framework enable EE?
YES NO

Offset remaining
embodied carbon Basic + Advanced EE Basic EE

Clean energy supply

Does our policy YES On-site RE Does our policy YES Off-site RE Does our policy
framework enable framework enable generation framework enable
On-site RE? NO Off-site RE generation? NO Off-site RE purchase?
YES NO

Off-site RE purchase

YES Have you

reached
ZER O C AR BO N
YES Have you reached Offset remaining NO zero carbon?
zero carbon? operational carbon
BUI LDIN G NO

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 15

Certification tracks are usually not initiated by
government policy but instead are developed by
A MENU OF ZCB PATHWAYS
independent nonprofit organizations and are voluntarily Overview of ZCB Pathways
pursued by building developers, owners, and managers In Section 2 we showed how ZCB components—energy
who desire third-party verification in order to market efficiency, a noncarbon renewable energy supply,
their sustainability credentials, including enhanced energy and carbon offsets—can be assembled in different
efficiency performance. combinations to form ZCB pathways. In total, we identify
eight ZCB pathways that can be pursued to fully reduce
Table 3 provides a snapshot of eligible ZCB certification
a building’s operational carbon emissions. The preferred
tracks and their requirements developed by GBCs in
hierarchy of components is that energy efficiency and
four countries. These voluntary ZCB certification tracks
renewable energy should be implemented before carbon
demonstrate the diversity of approaches to building
offsets, which should only be used when other options are
decarbonization. Collectively, the member GBCs have
fully utilized, impractical, or unavailable. Thus, pathway
certified over 400 buildings as net zero carbon since 2017,
1 is preferable to pathway 2 and so on. However, each of
based on verified performance data (WorldGBC 2018).
the ZCB pathways leads to the equivalent of 100 percent

Table 3 |Zero Carbon Building Certification Schemes in Four Countries, as of 2017

GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL

REQUIREMENTS
AUSTRALIA BRAZIL CANADA SOUTH AFRICA
Zero carbon operational
Overall performance Annual verified consumption Annual verified net zero energy Annual verified zero carbon
emissions balance;
requirements data balance operational emissions balance
recertification every 3 years
If using on-site renewable
Basic energy
energy (RE): no additional EE
efficiency (EE)
EE requirements
+ Min. 80% demand reduction
If using off-site RE: EE Heating EE targets set for each
Advanced EE 30% more EE than usual over code by using EE and/or
requirements beyond ASHRAEa climate zone
on-site RE
At least 5% of energy demand
+ On-site RE Allowed Allowed -
met by on-site RE
RE
+ Commercial buildings can use Allowed if procured via RECs or Off-site RE only allowed
+ Off-site RE Allowed RECs for max. 10% of energy bundled green power (green if demand reduction
demand retail tariff + associated RECs) requirements met
Any remaining, nonelectricity Report on embodied CO2 of
CO2 offsets allowed if demand
CO2 + Carbon offsets operational CO2 emissions to be - structural & envelope building
reduction requirements met
offset annually materials

Notes: For more information, see the World Green Building Council’s advancing net zero snapshots for these four countries, available at https://worldgbc.org/news-media/worldgbc-snapshots-
detail-net-zero-carbon-standards-developed-green-building-councils.
a
ASHRAE = American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. ASHRAE issues a building energy efficiency standard, ASHRAE 90.1, which is updated every few years. The
original standard, ASHRAE 90, was published in 1975.
Source: WRI.

16 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

carbon reduction, meaning that all operational carbon As a working example, we will use pathway 6 to illustrate
emissions have been reduced or compensated for in a how, by applying the principles, we can proceed step-
building. Any pathway that is feasible within a given by-step to avoid 100 percent of the carbon emissions
jurisdiction could be pursued. associated with the operational energy use of a building
(Figure 3). With the principle of “efficiency first” in mind,
Table 4 presents the menu of eight ZCB pathways. The we first aim for building energy performance in line with
first four involve “exemplary energy performance,” local energy efficiency codes and standards (basic EE).
meaning energy efficiency measures that go beyond what Compliance with existing codes and standards cannot
is required by local codes and standards. The second be assumed because, in many countries, such codes and
four involve only “minimum energy efficiency,” meaning standards are either voluntary, mandatory but poorly
energy efficiency measures that meet required standards enforced, or waiting to become mandatory through a
but no more. cumbersome process that transfers responsibility from the
national to the local level.
Although we include a ninth pathway that illustrates how
to achieve 100 percent decarbonization by including a Next, we consider the options for meeting remaining
building’s embodied carbon emissions, this paper focuses energy demand through a combination of on- and off-
mainly on the first eight pathways, which are designed to site renewables. We begin with on-site RE generation. If
fully reduce operational carbon emissions.

Table 4 |Zero Carbon Building Pathways and Their Component Parts

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EE a
ADVANCED EE b
ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETSc
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8
Embodied carbon
9
emissions

Notes:
a
The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 17

it turns out that we can meet only part of the building’s that the “state of play” changes constantly as policies and
energy demand through on-site options, we subsequently markets develop. For example, a city might provide high
add an off-site RE supply, if locally available. If this still electricity subsidies and lack a net metering policy, which
does not achieve 100 percent reduction of the building’s would make the installation of on-site solar photovoltaic
operational carbon emissions, we may decide to use (PV) panels an unattractive proposition. A building
carbon offsetting as a last resort to make up for the gap developer could, in such a case, begin by pursuing a
between nearly and net zero carbon. pathway that uses off-site RE while ensuring the building
is “on-site RE ready” and able to switch to an on-site RE
Although a jurisdiction’s current policy framework and pathway once policy and market factors make on-site solar
market conditions will influence the feasibility of different panels sufficiently attractive.
pathways, building owners and managers should be aware

Figure 3 |How to Achieve Zero Carbon Emissions by Following Pathway 6

ZER O C ARBON BUI L D IN G S — P OL I C Y SC O PE

Life cycle Operational

emissions emissions

Reduce embodied Reduce energy

carbon demand Does our policy framework enable EE?
YES NO

Offset remaining
embodied carbon Basic + Advanced EE Basic EE

Clean energy supply

Does our policy YES On-site RE Does our policy YES Off-site RE Does our policy
framework enable framework enable generation framework enable
On-site RE? NO Off-site RE generation? NO Off-site RE purchase?
YES NO

Off-site RE purchase

YES Have you

reached
ZER O C ARBON
YES Have you reached Offset remaining NO zero carbon?
zero carbon? operational carbon
BUILD ING NO

Source: WRI.

18 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Real-World Buildings Illustrate the building carbon neutrality. The important takeaway
message from these examples is that even in jurisdictions
ZCB Pathways with less well-developed or less ambitious policy
From the 2,500 ZCBs in the world, we have selected a frameworks and perhaps limited local experience with
few examples to illustrate how their approaches fit within ZCB, energy efficiency, or renewable energy concepts, a
our ZCB pathways (Table 5.) These buildings show that feasible ZCB pathway is still likely to be available.
despite a wide range of climates and different governance
systems, they were all able to achieve decarbonized Note that we did not analyze the broader market and
status. Each uses its own unique mix of energy efficiency, technological conditions prevailing in the cities where
renewable energy, and/or carbon offsets to arrive at these buildings are located.

Table 5 |Illustrative Examples of Zero Carbon Buildings for Each Pathway Option

PATHWAY COMPONENT
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON
OFFSETS
1 Indira Paryavaran Bhawan Compliant with Natural light, Photovoltaic — —
New Delhi, Delhi, India local codes shading, (PV) panels
and standards landscaping; EE
Building type: Public office & education active building
Climate type: Hot and humid / temperate climate systems: 70%
More information: Net Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB) platform, http:// less energy than
www.nzeb.in/case-studies/detailed-case-studies-2/ipb-case-study/ conventional
Passive energy apartments (18 floors) Compliant with Passive design; — — —
Qinhuangdao, Hebei, China local codes super insulating
and standards homes; heat
Building type: Residential building recovery: >90%
Climate type: Cold climate less energy than
More information: E&E News, https://www.eenews.net/ conventional
stories/1060012314
EcoCasa Max homes Compliant with Passive house PV panels — —
Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico local codes features: 87%
and standards energy reduction
Building type: Residential building
Climate type: Hot and dry climate
More information: EcoCasa,
https://www.gob.mx/shf/documentos/ecocasa
PATHWAY BASIC + ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE + OFF-SITE RE CARBON
(PURCHASE OR GENERATION) OFFSETS
2 Pearl River Tower (71 floors) Radiant heating and cooling; double- PV panels; solar collectors; wind —
Guangzhou, Guangdong, China skin façade; underfloor ventilation; turbines—nearly zero energy
daylight harvesting; building building (ZEB): local power
Building type: Commercial office orientation to optimize breeze/solar company does not allow selling
Climate type: Warm and humid climate potential back excess RE to grid
More information: “Pearl River Tower,”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_River_Tower
PCNTDA building Natural ventilation; daylighting; LED PV panels—nearly ZEB —
Pune, Maharashtra, India lighting; 95% non-air-conditioned
(AC)
Building type: Public office
Climate type: Warm and humid climate
More information: BigEE, “PCNTDA,” http://www.bigee.net/en/buildings/
guide/services/examples/building/30/#energy-consumption

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 19

Table 5 |Illustrative Examples of Zero Carbon Buildings for Each Pathway Option (Cont’d)

PATHWAY BASIC + ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE + OFF-SITE RE CARBON

(PURCHASE OR GENERATION) OFFSETS
2 Infosys campuses (portfolio) LEED Platinuma buildings PV panels; RE grid electricity; —
Various locations, India off-site RE plant

Building type: Commercial offices

Climate type: Variety of climates—all rather warm
More information: CleanTechnica, https://cleantechnica.
com/2015/12/07/how-indian-it-giant-infosys-is-going-carbon-neutral/
Olas Verdes hotel Almost 50% more energy efficient PV panels; solar hot water; —
Playa Guiones, Nossara, Costa Rica than conventional almost 100% RE grid electricity

Building type: Hotel

Climate type: Warm and humid climate
More information: USGBC, https://www.usgbc.org/projects/
olas-verdes-hotel?view=overview
PATHWAY BASIC + ADVANCED EE OFF-SITE RE (PURCHASE OR CARBON
GENERATION) OFFSETS

3 TZED homes (80 apartments; 15 homes) LED lighting; light sensors; green District cooling for refrigeration Project earns
Bangalore, Karnataka, India roofs; natural ventilation; daylighting and AC carbon credits

Building type: Residential building

Climate type: Warm and dry climate
More information: Architecture & Developpement,
http://www.archidev.org/spip.php?article1151
PATHWAY BASIC + ADVANCED EE — CARBON
OFFSETS
4 Tampines Concourse Building envelope; natural — Construction and
Singapore daylighting; noncompressor air operational carbon
cooling is offset
Building type: Commercial office
Climate type: Hot and humid climate
More information: City Developments Limited,
http://cdlcommercial.com.sg/property/11-tampines-concourse
PATHWAY BASIC EE ONLY ON-SITE RE CARBON
OFFSETS
5 Malankara Tea Plantation — PV panels provides 100% of —
Kottayam, Kerala, India energy needs

Building type: Office and packaging plant

Climate type: Warm and humid climate
More information: OutBack Power,
http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/case_studies/pdf/
malankara.pdf
URBN Hotel Efficient lighting; double pane PV panels Remaining CO2
Shanghai, China windows emissions from
energy offset
Building type: Hotel
Climate type: Warm/temperate and humid climate
More information: TemptingPlaces, https://www.temptingplaces.com/en/

20 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table 5 |Illustrative Examples of Zero Carbon Buildings for Each Pathway Option (Cont’d)

PATHWAY BASIC EE ONLY ON-SITE RE + OFF-SITE RE CARBON

(PURCHASE OR GENERATION) OFFSETS
6 Essent headquarters Compliant with local code PV panels; biogas for heating; —
Den Bosch, Noord Brabant, The Netherlands 100% wind energy for grid
electricity
Building type: Commercial office
Climate type: Temperate climate
More information: Essent, https://www.essent.nl/content/overessent/
actueel/
index.html/zonnepanelen-op-dak-van-kantoor-essent/
PATHWAY BASIC EE ONLY OFF-SITE RE (PURCHASE OR CARBON
GENERATION) OFFSETS
7 Bombay House (TATA headquarters) Range of EE measures to bring Renewable energy credits —
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India existing building up to current purchased for 75% of energy use
standards
Building type: Commercial office
Climate type: Warm and humid climate
More information: Construction World, https://www.constructionworld.
in/articles/special-project/Green-House-/12418
Adobe office — Solar PPA to cover 100% of —
Bangalore, Karnataka, India energy demand

Building type: Commercial office

Climate type: Warm and dry climate
More information: Adobe Blog, https://theblog.adobe.com/adobes-
bangalore-office-among-first-in-india-to-be-powered-100-by-
renewable-energy/
PATHWAY BASIC EE ONLY — CARBON
OFFSETS
8 Barclays Bank (portfolio) Compliant with local code; sometimes — Buys voluntary
UK, Europe, and beyond with strong Africa presence beyond carbon offsets in
Kenya (avoided
Building type: Commercial offices deforestation),
Climate type: Variety of climates India, and China
More information: Environmental Finance, https://www.environmental- (RE)
finance.com/content/market-insight/carbon-offsetters-look-beyond-
climate-change.html
PATHWAY BASIC + ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE AND/OR OFF- CARBON OFFSETS
SITE RE (PURCHASE OR FOR EMBODIED
GENERATION) CARBON
9 Pixel Building Building envelope; natural daylighting PV panels and micro wind Construction
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia and shading; LED light; superefficient turbines provide 100% of energy emissions fully
heating, ventilating, and air- needs offset
Building type: Commercial office conditioning; “Perfect” score under
Climate type: Temperate climate local green building certification
More information: Inhabitat, https://inhabitat.com/
pixel-building-australias-first-carbon-neutral-building-is-now-complete/

Notes: EE = energy efficiency; RE = renewable energy.

a
LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a green building rating and certification scheme from the U.S. Green Building Council with different certification levels, of which
“Platinum” represents the highest level.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 21

Technologies to Support the ZCB Pathways measures like installation of high-efficiency heating,
ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems, LED
Many technologies necessary to support ZCB pathways are
lighting, and efficient appliances.
already available in the global market and increasingly in
most local markets. These technologies cater to different Common renewable energy technologies include on-site
climates, budgets, and existing levels of expertise (Figure 4). PV panels and solar water heaters and off-site renewable
energy systems such as solar power plants, wind turbines,
Energy efficiency options range from the use of passive
and hydropower plants.
measures—such as smart use of natural daylight, natural
ventilation, insulation, and evaporative cooling—to active

Figure 4 |Widely Available Energy Efficiency (EE) and Renewable Energy (RE) Technologies That Support
Zero Carbon Buildings

Wall and ceiling Double/triple Window size Natural Evaporative Radiative Natural
insulation window pane and position lighting cooling cooling ventilation

EE

Efficient Window Efficient water Efficient Efficient Efficient

HVAC system shading heating system lighting system power system appliances

OTHERS: Building form and layout to reduce cooling load, passive cooling through wall, window, and roof massing/materials.

Solar
Solar water Electric Geothermal Solar power
photovoltaic Windmills Hydro Geothermal
heating storage cooling plants
panel
RE

OTHERS: Parabolic solar collectors, solar cooling, clean biomass for cookstoves, “thermal batteries.”

Source: WRI.

22 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

ZCB PATHWAYS AND THE DIFFERENT City-level policymaking and implementation

ROLES OF GOVERNMENT Depending on a country’s urban and wider governance
system, each government level has a different capacity to
Decisions affecting the feasibility of ZCB pathways are
take on specific roles in the development, implementation,
governed by a mix of public and private actors. Around
and enforcement of policy. In spite of these differences,
the world, the degree of influence over buildings held by
local governments typically play the following roles
the public sector versus the private sector varies widely, as
(Becqué et al. 2016):
does the relative level of authority vested in each sphere of
government. The specific authority and capacity for action Regulator: Local government is responsible for
held by local (including city or municipal), regional, and the design, implementation, and/or enforcement of
national levels of government (or by the private sector) regulations related to a policy or program. Often these
is known as capacity to act. Capacity to act must be an take the shape of mandates or incentives.
important consideration for ZCB stakeholders as they
prioritize their actions (Hammer 2009). Convener and facilitator: Local government can help
enable voluntary private action by convening actors,
The Role of City Governments in Enabling ZCB launching or facilitating public-private partnerships, or
Pathways creating programs that address barriers to action.

Local governments generally hold the authority to adopt Owner/investor: Local governments are often owners
and/or implement a range of policies influencing building of and/or investors in a city’s public buildings, such as
efficiency. However, their approach is heavily influenced public offices, schools, museums, and hospitals. City
by guidance or requirements from provincial, state, or governments can lead by example, thereby helping to
national governments. Building energy efficiency codes prove the case for ZCBs and create market demand.
and standards, for instance, are usually designed and
issued at the national level. Complementary or strategic partner: Local
governments may undertake complementary or strategic
Policies that affect the availability and attractiveness actions that contribute to the introduction, uptake, or
of off-site RE options, in particular, are often designed success of a policy or program led by higher levels of
and implemented at higher levels of government. The government, such as state or national government.
regulation of energy utilities is also usually handled by
national or regional government, although some larger Table 6 summarizes the most common roles played
cities and city states have the capacity to act in this by local governments in developing or implementing
area. In some urban areas, governments take little role policies or programs that support the components of ZCB
in shaping building efficiency and renewable energy pathways.
development, leaving action primarily to the private
sector.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 23

Table 6 | “Capacity to Act” and the Different Roles Played by Local Governments

CITY GOVERNMENT ROLE

ZCB PATHWAY COMPONENTS
REGULATOR CONVENER/ FACILITATOR OWNER/INVESTOR PARTNER

▪▪ (Adapt), incorporate, and ▪▪ Engage/educate

enforce code building stakeholders
▪▪ Ensure code compliance ▪▪ Inform central
for public buildings government code

▪▪ Enforce ▪▪ Train/inform market

Basic energy design
efficiency (EE) mandatory
energy performance
standards

▪▪ Set local EE targets ▪▪ Support central ▪▪ Lead by example for ▪▪ Work with utilities to

▪▪ Design/implement
government EE targets public buildings implement EE programs
EE
EE incentives ▪▪ Engage /educate ▪▪ Mandate green

▪▪ Design/implement
stakeholders certification of public
+ EE
▪▪ Support
buildings
challenge programs green building
▪▪ Facilitate
Advanced EE

▪▪ Design/implement
certification EE
performance
EE audits and information
benchmarking
▪▪ Facilitate
solutions
EE finance

▪▪ Set local RE targets ▪▪ Support central ▪▪ Lead by example for ▪▪ Inform central

▪▪ Design/implement
government RE targets public buildings government

▪▪ Engage/educate ▪▪ Facilitate
photovoltaic policy
+ On-site rooftop RE incentives rooftop RE design
▪▪ Design/implement
building stakeholders finance solutions
▪▪ Work
renewable
▪▪ Inform/train market
energy (RE) with utilities to
rooftop RE support implement rooftop RE
RE
programs programs
+

+ Off-site RE
▪▪ Support aggregating
private sector demand
▪▪ Lead by example by
aggregating RE demand
▪▪ Work with utilities to
reduce nonutility RE
for off-site RE purchase from public buildings purchase resistance

▪▪ Educate stakeholders
on voluntary market
▪▪ Lead by example by
offsetting public sector’s
CO2 + Carbon offsets
to create demand and carbon footprint
awareness

Source: WRI.

24 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Local government influence on enabling policies Using Policy to Facilitate a ZCB District or
Given the wide choice of available policies, local Portfolio Approach
governments should seek to prioritize those policy actions The menu of ZCB pathways gives cities the opportunity
over which they have more direct influence and which to pursue or encourage ZCB approaches not only for
provide greater environmental and social benefits. Local individual buildings but also across a district or portfolio
governments will want to consider the contribution of a of buildings. By district we mean a defined area within
proposed policy or program to achieving citywide goals, a city, such as a neighborhood; portfolio refers to a set
such as reducing the city’s carbon footprint; addressing of buildings within the boundaries of the city that share
energy poverty, energy access, or energy security; or at least one characteristic and are often under the same
curbing air pollution. ownership or management. Examples might be a portfolio
of city-owned public buildings, a portfolio of commercial
In general, local governments tend to have the highest
offices all located within the city, or a portfolio of
level of control over energy efficiency measures (Figure
affordable housing stock.
5). Although local governments are not usually the
actual designers of building energy efficiency codes and Defining ZCBs in this way allows for more flexible
standards, they are often crucial for their incorporation approaches that achieve 100 percent reduction of
in local bylaws and subsequent enforcement. In addition, operational (or embodied) emissions across a group of
local governments can encourage stakeholders to buildings rather than striving for full decarbonization
pursue energy efficiency through incentives and support of each building.12 Some buildings, particularly existing
programs. ones, are unlikely ever to become fully decarbonized at
the individual building level because of poor initial design
Local governments still have some influence over policies
that makes energy efficiency measures challenging and
that affect the attractiveness and feasibility of on-site RE,
costly, insufficient roof space for on-site renewables, or
such as by providing incentives. They often rely heavily
insufficient energy demand to engage on their own in
on state and/or national government action to facilitate
off-site renewable purchase options. However, under a
off-site RE purchasing. Nonetheless, once such policies
portfolio approach, even such buildings can contribute
are in place, local governments may be able to use their
carbon reductions and are thus encouraged to be included
convening and buying power, for example, to aggregate
in taking actions that might otherwise have been ignored.
demand for renewable energy purchasing via power
purchasing agreements (PPAs) or pressure their local
utility to introduce more renewables into the energy mix.

Figure 5 |Relative Level of Local Government Influence on Policies Affecting Energy Efficiency, On- and Off-Site
Renewable Energy (RE)

ENERGY EFFICIENCY ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE

Modest/high Relative level of municipal influence Low

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 25

Examples of policy approaches that target a district or The Role of National and State Governments in
(municipal) portfolio approach include the following:
Enabling ZCB Pathways
▪▪ Local governments issue citywide energy efficiency
or on-site RE challenges. These schemes challenge
National and state government are critical actors when it
comes to designing and implementing policies that affect
building owners—for example, in the commercial the uptake of energy efficiency and renewable energy
office segment—to voluntarily reduce their energy options by building owners and managers. Although
use or install on-site renewables to meet a predefined cities are the centers of focus and action when it comes to
target. decarbonizing the building stock, local governments often

▪▪ Local governments help to aggregate energy demand

from a group of public and/or private buildings
rely heavily on higher levels of government to provide
them with a suitable enabling policy environment.
in order to engage in a PPA for off-site RE. This
approach is becoming increasingly popular because
The different roles of national/state governments in
it allows building owners with smaller energy loads policymaking and implementation
to benefit from PPA options and generally lowers the Higher government levels typically design critical policy
cost of energy provision for the participants. pieces (regulator role), such as building energy efficiency

▪▪ Local governments engage with their utility to request

a proposal for renewable energy delivery. When a
codes and standards and renewable energy regulations
that govern which options are available to energy
large city sets ambitious renewable energy goals and consumers. Examples of the latter are net metering,
asks its utility for cleaner energy, the utility may be feed-in tariffs (FITs), and the ability to engage in PPAs,
interested in collaborating rather than getting cut out purchase green energy tariffs, or buy renewable energy
of the deal by third-party renewable energy suppliers. credits (RECs). Most of these options are associated with

▪▪
expanding consumers’ choices on how they access energy,
Local governments facilitate district-level renewable including nonutility purchase or self-generation. Policies
energy solutions, such as distributed energy formulated by national and state governments can also
generation.13 Besides grid-connected rooftop solar impede effective action at the local level. For example, a
systems, communal examples are a district heating city incentivizing rooftop PV panels or energy efficiency
and/or cooling plant or a local smart grid network. may have difficulty convincing building owners/managers
▪▪ Local governments incentivize buildings with rooftop
space—such as warehouses, factories, and parking
to invest in these technologies if electricity rates are
heavily subsidized.
garages—to install rooftop renewables and become
net energy producers. By feeding the excess generated National and/or state governments can also be key
energy into the grid, they can provide for part of the to implementation (regulator role), especially if local
renewable energy demand of nearby buildings with governments require their active involvement before
limited on-site generation opportunities. they themselves can act. In many jurisdictions, building

▪▪
codes and standards are issued by national government,
Local governments establish local cap and trade and they may even need to be adopted (and, where
systems, under which they set a cap on total carbon relevant, adapted) by every state before local governments
emissions and encourage eligible parties to trade incorporate them in their regulations and subsequently
emissions among themselves. Parties are allocated enforce them. State governments can also help prioritize
an emissions allowance; facilities with high energy cities— with higher capacity or with higher expected
consumption need to purchase emissions allowances growth in their building energy demand—to demonstrate
from highly efficient or net positive buildings14 in the potential success and benefits of various policies,
order to stay within their allowance. helping encourage smaller cities to follow.

26 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

National and state governments can also work in

partnership (facilitator/strategic partner roles) with local
COMPARING THE FEASIBILITY OF
governments. Higher government levels can provide ZCB PATHWAYS
guidance and support to local governments on how to We tested the practical value of the ZCB pathways by
effectively implement or enforce policies coming from the analyzing the current policy framework in four coun-
national or state level. Local governments can support tries—India, China, Mexico, and Kenya—and assessing the
national or state targets on energy efficiency or renewable degree to which they enable progress toward decarbon-
energy and lead by example through the public building izing their building stock. Our analysis shows that, regard-
stock under their direct control. Local governments can less of policy differences, one or more ZCB pathways
also act as a strategic partner to higher government levels is likely already within reach today in each country.
in designing, trialing, and tracking policy approaches However, although the policy environment is maturing
(Broekhoff et al. 2015). in many jurisdictions, the local market may still need to
catch up to provide a suitable enabling environment for
The influence of national and state governments on ZCBs. Our country research focused mainly on current
enabling policies policies and programs. It did not consider the state of local
Although national and state governments have relatively market factors, such as the cost and availability of specific
firm control over energy efficiency measures such as energy efficiency– or renewable energy–related products
the introduction of codes and standards, they often and services, financing options, and the skilled labor to
rely heavily—particularly in decentralized governance install and maintain them. Technical, market, and/or
systems—on local governments to implement and enforce financial barriers are likely to further influence which ZCB
them. For example, national or state governments may pathways building owners/managers can most feasibly
decide to open up the electricity market and provide pursue.
consumers with a wider range of renewable energy
options. They typically set tariffs and decide the level of
consumer subsidies for grid electricity. Local governments
play a secondary but important role through local
incentives, market and consumer facilitation, and leading
by example through their public building stock (Figure 6).

Figure 6 | Relative Level of National and State Influence on Policies Affecting Energy Efficiency, On- and Off-Site
Renewable Energy (RE)

ENERGY EFFICIENC Y ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE

Modest Relative level of national/state influence High

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 27

Pathways at a Glance assessments of feasibility were derived, together with
recommended actions for governments at city, state,
Tables 7 and 8 provide an overview of the feasibility of
and national level, is provided in the country analyses in
each of the eight ZCB pathways in the four countries
Appendix B.
under consideration. A detailed explanation of how these

Table 7 | Feasibility of Each Zero Carbon Building Pathway under Current Policies and Programs in Study Countries

COMPONENT COUNTRY
PATHWAY ADVANCED ON-SITE OFF-SITE CARBON
BASIC EE A INDIA CHINA MEXICO KENYA
EEB RE RE OFFSETSC
1 (if needed)

2 (if needed)
Exemplary energy
performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)

6 (if needed)
Minimum energy
efficiency
7 (if needed)

= pathway is not sufficiently supported = the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
by the current policy framework. the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.
Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

Table 8 | Feasibility of Each Zero Carbon Building Component under Current Policies and Programs in Study Countries

CARBON OFFSETS c
COUNTRY BASIC EE a ADVANCED EE b ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE
AS A LAST RESORT

India

China

Mexico

Kenya

= pathway is not sufficiently supported = the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
by the current policy framework. the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.

Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

28 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Pathway feasibility under the current policy and Pathways are considered most feasible for commercial
program framework buildings for a variety of reasons. Off-site RE purchasing
may require a high minimum energy demand (e.g., one
When we examine ZCB pathway feasibility by building megawatt, or MW). Likewise, incentives and support
segment, it becomes clear that commercial buildings are programs tend to focus on larger commercial building
best catered for under current policies and programs owners, and residential building owners may even be
(Table 9). Only a few of the pathways across the ineligible for certain policy benefits.
four countries are considered feasible for residential
buildings, although large residential complexes under In addition, pathways that emphasize energy efficiency first
one owner may fare better than individual households. are often not well supported by current policy. And, in some
Smaller commercial buildings appear limited in their of the study countries, the presence of “perverse incentives,”
opportunities as well. Nonetheless, the overview provides such as high electricity subsidies or the lack of critical policy
a generic indication of pathway feasibility. It should not pieces, make on- or off-site RE a challenging proposition.
be viewed as a predictor of pathway feasibility for specific In spite of these obstacles, Table 5 indicates that ZCB
categories of buildings. pathways can be considered a politically feasible
goal in all four study countries.

Table 9 | Feasibility of Zero Carbon Building Pathways under Current Policy Framework

COUNTRY
PATHWAY
INDIA CHINA MEXICO KENYA
Exemplary energy performance (basic & advanced EE) plus…
1 On-site RE Commercial Commercial
Commercial (>1 MW energy Commercial
2 On-site and off-site RE Commercial and residential Commercial
demand) (>1 MW energy demand)
Commercial (1 MW energy Commercial
3 Off-site RE Commercial
demand) (1 MW energy demand)
Carbon offsets in place
4 Commercial Commercial and residential Commercial & residential Commercial
of RE
Minimum energy efficiency (basic EE) plus…
5 On-site RE Commercial Commercial Off-grid (residential)
Commercial (>1 MW energy Commercial
6 On-site and off-site RE Commercial and residential Commercial and residential
demand) (>1 MW energy demand)
Commercial (1 MW energy Commercial
7 Off-site RE Commercial
demand) (1 MW energy demand)
Carbon offsets in place
8 Commercial Commercial and residential Commercial and residential Commercial
of RE

Notes: EE = energy efficiency; RE = renewable energy. Red shading color indicates that the pathway is not sufficiently supported by the current policy framework. Light green shading indicates that
the pathway is reasonably feasible under current policy, but either only for specific segments of the building market and/or critical policy elements are not well enough developed to make this very
attractive. Bright green shading indicates that the pathway is sufficiently facilitated through current policy.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 29

Pathway feasibility under an enhanced policy and Key Enabling and Disabling or Lacking Policies
program framework In each of the four study countries, we were able to
Targeted policy actions can enhance the feasibility of identify current key policies that appear to either enable
pathways and expand the number of pathways that can be or disable (impede) ZCBs or policies that, while known
considered attainable. Policymakers can gradually shift to be effective elsewhere, are lacking in one or more of
over time from targeting mainly “low-hanging fruit” to the study countries. This section provides an overview of
more challenging goals that can bring more preferable key policies relating to four core components of the ZCB
pathways within reach. pathways: basic and advanced EE and on- and off-site
RE. We hope that highlighting specific policies in this way
Table 10 provides an indicative overview of which ZCB will allow urban decision-makers to better understand the
pathways could become more feasible if the priority ingredients of a successful policy package to accelerate
actions that we recommend for the four study countries building decarbonization. More detailed analyses for each
(detailed in Appendix B) were to be implemented. country are provided in Appendix B.
Although local and national governments may not be
capable of or interested in pursuing all of the policy This section is structured as follows. First, a schematic
recommendations, it becomes clear that almost all of the table shows which ZCB pathways incorporate the core
eight ZCB pathways can be brought within reach through component in question. A table then summarizes key
targeted enhancements of policies and programs currently enabling, disabling, or lacking policies with specific
in place in the four study countries. examples from the four study countries. The table also
indicates the nature of the role played by central or local

Table 10 | Feasibility of Each Zero Carbon Building Pathway under Enhanced Policies and Programs in Study Countries

COMPONENT COUNTRY
PATHWAY ADVANCED OFF-SITE CARBON
BASIC EEA ON-SITE RE INDIA CHINA MEXICO KENYA
EEB RE OFFSETSC

1 (if needed)

Exemplary 2 (if needed)

energy
performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)
Minimum 6 (if needed)
energy
efficiency 7 (if needed)

= the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.
Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

30 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

government in developing and/or implementing that Minimum energy efficiency (basic EE)
policy. We refer to central government meaning national,
All eight ZCB pathways incorporate minimum energy
federal, state, and/or provincial government levels, and
efficiency (basic EE), which means ensuring that a
local government refers to municipal- or county-level
building performs in line with local energy efficiency
governments. The lists of policies are not meant to be
codes and standards. Basic EE is therefore the baseline
exhaustive. Other countries may have policies in place
requirement for a ZCB (Table 11).
that are not included here but that are equally enabling or
disabling. Our analysis of current policies and programs in India,
China, Mexico, and Kenya indicates that the presence of
These policy findings can help inform readers’ thinking,
mandatory energy efficiency building codes and standards,
but they do not suffice on their own as a basis for
which are reasonably simple to implement and enforce, is
policymaking. Urban decision-makers should preferably
critical for ZCBs.
strengthen their policy framework in line with the four
principles set out in Section 2.3 of this paper.

Table 11 | Basic Energy Efficiency Is a Baseline Requirement for All Zero Carbon Building Pathways

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8

Note: Basic EE is the minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 31

Table 12 | Enabling, Disabling, and Lacking Policies for Basic Energy Efficiency

KEY ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ Mandatory
standards are regularly updated, implementable, ▪▪
building energy efficiency codes or
Central ▪▪ Regulator
and well enforced ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
▪▪ Local jurisdictions amend the code to require
better performance than the average; in China, ▪▪ Central
Beijing’s building code is more stringent than the ▪▪ Local
▪▪ Regulator
central code
▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Government provides technical guidance docu-
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
ments, such as in China and Mexico, on code
implementation and enforcement ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Minimum energy performance standards (MEPS)
for appliances with high energy comsumption,
such as air conditioners and fridges, that are ▪▪ Central
enforced and regularly updated as more efficient ▪▪ Local
▪▪ Regulator
appliances become widely available in the
▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
market

KEY DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ Mandatory building codes or standards that are

not updated to increase their stringency; Kenya ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
introduced a building code in 1968 that was not
updated until 2016a
▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Voluntary building energy efficiency codes
or standards, such as in India, are unlikely to
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
see much uptake unless tied, for instance, to
building approvals or combined with extensive ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
support and incentive schemes

▪▪ Mandatory building energy efficiency codes or

standards that are cumbersome to implement; in
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
Mexico, states first need to adopt and adapt the
code before each municipality can incorporate it ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator
in local regulations

▪▪ Nomandatory
penalties in place for noncompliance with ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
codes and standards ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator
Note:
a
Kenya’s 2016 and 2017 building code updates are still awaiting parliamentary assent.
Source: WRI.

32 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Exemplary energy performance (advanced EE) convener and/or facilitator of, for example, incentives,
rating and certification schemes, knowledge sharing,
In addition to basic EE, ZCB pathways 1–4 incorporate
and energy challenges. Governments are also important
exemplary energy efficiency (advanced EE)—that is,
in their role as building owners/investors who can lead
energy efficiency performance that exceeds what is
by example. On the other hand, high energy subsidies
required by local codes and standards (Table 13).
resulting in energy tariffs that do not reflect the real cost
Our analysis identified a number of enabling and disabling of generating energy are a major impediment to pursuing
or lacking policies relevant to exemplary energy efficiency greater energy efficiency.
in India, China, Mexico, and Kenya (Table 10). They
highlight the positive effects of government in its role as

Table 13 | Advanced Energy Efficiency Is a Component of Zero Carbon Building Pathways 1–4

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8

Note: Advanced energy efficiency (EE) involves more ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 33

Table 14 | Enabling, Disabling, and Lacking Policies for Advanced Energy Efficiency

KEY ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ Nonfinancial incentives to promote energy efficient/green buildings, such as allowing developers an

▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
increase in floor area ratio (FAR); in India, many states give developers extra FAR if they can prove a
certain performance level ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Financial incentives to promote energy efficient or green buildings; India and China provide subsidies, ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
such as for certified green buildings, ultra-low-energy buildings, and building retrofits ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Energy audit and benchmarking schemes for public or certain private buildings, as in China and Kenya, ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
that help identify improvement opportunities while also collecting valuable data on energy performance ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Programs that support, facilitate, and challenge public and/or private building owners to improve energy
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
efficiency; Mexico City challenges building owners to achieve at least a certain percentage reduction in
energy use ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ Development of or support for green building rating and certification schemes, such as China’s Three ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
Star or India’s Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA) and Indian Green Building Council ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Government leading by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits to comply with a
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Owner/ investor
suitable (green building) rating and certification system, such as the minimum level of China’s Three Star
or India’s GRIHA ▪▪ Local ▪▪ investor
Owner/

▪▪ Programs that address both affordable housing and energy efficiency, like Mexico’s green mortgage
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
program by INFONAVIT and the EcoCasa program, supporting developers to build more efficient, afford-
▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
a

able homes

KEY DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ High grid electricity subsidies for households, such as in India and Mexico, which reduce the economic
case for energy efficiency measures
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Lack of awareness in many jurisdictions as a result of limited communication and outreach about the ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
benefits of energy efficiency as well as potential incentives available ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Relative absence of incentives and energy performance information for building buyers that could ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
encourage them to opt for a more energy efficient building ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Relative absence in many jurisdictions of facilitating programs that educate and inform building stake- ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
holders and support them in pursuing energy efficiency measures ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator

▪▪ Few or no programs in many jurisdictions that show governments leading by example on energy ef- ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Owner/ investor
ficiency in their public building stock ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Owner/ investor
▪▪ Barriers to the growth of the energy service company (ESCO) industry. In China, ESCOs rely heavily on ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
subsidies and find it difficult to obtain working capital ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
Note:
a
INFONAVIT stands for the Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para los Trabajadores (National Workers’ Housing Fund Institute).
Source: WRI.

34 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

On-site RE the importance of an attractive and stable net-metering

scheme and financial incentives to overcome the up-front
ZCB pathways 1 ,2, 5, and 6 incorporate on-site RE as
capital cost of installation. High energy subsidies, on the
either the sole means of supplying the building with clean
other hand, disincentivize the use of on-site renewables
energy (pathways 1 and 5) or in combination with off-
because they greatly increase the length of payback times
site renewables (2 and 6) (Table 15). Our assessment of
(Table 10).
policy frameworks in the four study countries points to

Table 15 | On-Site Renewable Energy (RE) Is a Component of Zero Carbon Building Pathways 1, 2, 5, and 6

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8

Source: WRI.

Table 16 | Enabling, Disabling, and Lacking Policies for On-Site Renewable Energy (RE)

KEY ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ Renewable energy targets, including rooftop photovoltaic (PV) panels, such as those set by India’s ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator/ faciltator
national government ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
▪▪ Introduction of net metering, as in Mexico and India, that provides consumers with like-for-like credits or ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
an attractive and stable feed-in tariff for supplying on-site RE to the grid ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Incentives that promote on-site RE, like tax depreciation on the cost of on-site RE systems in Mexico and ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
India; Mexico City offers a reduction in property taxes for buildings that install solar hot water systems ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
KEY DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ High grid electricity subsidies for households, such as in India and Mexico, that reduce the economic
case for on-site PV systems ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Incentives that frequently change, such as subsidies or feed-in tariffs that are reduced after a relatively ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
short period of time, creating an unstable investment climate ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Lack of awareness in many jurisdictions, as a result of limited communication and outreach about the ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
benefits and possibilities for on-site RE as well as available incentives. ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Limited programs that show government leading by example by requiring new public buildings and ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Owner/ investor
major retrofits to install rooftop renewables where feasible ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 35

Off-site RE them to engage in PPAs directly and/or offer RECs to
consumers is an important policy move to enable off-site
ZCB pathways 2, 3, 6, and 7 incorporate off-site RE as
renewables. On the other hand, uptake of off-site RE
either the sole means of supplying the building with clean
is inhibited by minimum eligibility conditions, such as
energy (pathways 3 and 7) or in combination with off-site
requiring prospective buyers to have at least 1 MW of
renewables (2 and 6) (Table 17). Our analysis indicates
energy demand, or renewable energy options that come at
that, in addition to greening the grid and introducing
a high cost premium without being paired with incentives
green tariffs at an attractive price point, opening up
to soften the price hurdle (Table 18).
electricity markets to nonutility actors and allowing

Table 17 | Off-Site Renewable Energy (RE) Is a Component of Zero Carbon Building Pathways 2, 3, 6, and 7

COMPONENT
PATHWAY
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)
4
5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)
8

Source: WRI.

Table 18 | Enabling, Disabling, and Lacking Policies for Off-Site Renewable Energy

KEY ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ Opening up the electricity market to nonutility actors, allowing users to engage directly in power purchase
agreements (PPAs) as well as to purchase renewable energy credits (RECs); both Mexico and India have ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
opened their markets to provide consumers with more choices

▪▪ Government promotion of development of RE to supply energy to the grid; in Kenya, the grid is 70% powered ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
by renewables ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Introduction of green tariffs, as in Mexico, at an attractive price point that enables customers to buy renew-
able energy (RE) from the grid
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator/
facilitator

▪▪ Government aggregation of energy demand from public buildings in order to engage in off-site RE purchase ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Owner/ investor
(PPA or RECs) ▪▪ Local ▪▪ investor
Owner/

36 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table 18 | Enabling, Disabling, and Lacking Policies for Off-Site Renewable Energy (Cont’d)

KEY DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL ROLE

▪▪ High minimum energy demand requirements on consumers interested in participating in a PPA or buy-
ing RECs; in India and Mexico, parties need at least 1 MW energy demand to be able to use PPAs or RECs
as an off-site RE solution
▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Utilities, such as in India, take an uncooperative stance in allowing consumers to purchase nonutility RE ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
via PPAs ▪▪ Local ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Green tariffs, such as in Karnataka, India, that come with a high cost premium, making them unattract-
ive to consumers ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Facilitator
▪▪ Governments fail to actively enforce renewable purchase obligations (RPOs), as in India; RPOs help
increase demand and thus develop the market for RECs ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Certain off-site RE options, such as green energy tariffs, are only available to qualified registered users,
as in Mexico, thereby excluding most households ▪▪ Central ▪▪ Regulator
Source: WRI.

CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS Using four countries as study cases, our research shows
that, regardless of the current policy framework, at least
Buildings are major energy users, responsible for roughly one ZCB pathway—and usually more—is feasible today.
one-third of global energy consumption. To achieve global This implies that the target of a decarbonized building
and national climate and energy goals, the building sector stock is coming within reach. This is the case even in
needs to decarbonize by 2050. jurisdictions with less experience of ZCBs and that have
focused less on greening building energy demand and
Cities, where most buildings are located, will have to
supply.
be at the forefront of the movement to decarbonize the
building sector. Actors at different governance levels Our policy analysis also highlights key enabling and
need to come together to overcome barriers and make disabling policies that play an important role in
ZCBs a feasible and desirable goal on which to set their determining the feasibility of the different pathways.
sights. With a maturing policy environment and rapidly Critical enabling policies include mandatory energy
falling technology costs, policies that support ZCBs can efficiency codes and standards that are easy to implement
also greatly support national and subnational low-carbon and enforce by the responsible government levels;
development goals while creating a range of economic and governments acting as conveners and/or facilitators
environmental benefits. through their use of incentives, rating and certification
schemes, knowledge sharing, and challenges; and
To accelerate the speed and scale of uptake, we have laid
governments leading by example in their roles as owners
out a menu of eight pathways to arrive at net zero carbon
of or investors in public buildings. Attractive and stable
buildings. Each pathway consists of a combination of
net-metering schemes for on-site renewables and, where
basic or advanced EE, on- and/or off-site RE, and—when
needed, financial incentives to overcome up-front capital
renewables cannot provide for 100 percent of remaining
costs of installation are important supports for clean
energy demand—carbon offsets to compensate for the
energy buildings. Some deregulation of electricity markets
balance of carbon emissions. Not every ZCB pathway can
to allow nonutility actors to engage in PPAs directly and/
be considered equally desirable in terms of the costs and
or offer RECs to consumers looking to purchase off-site
benefits, even when broader environmental and social
RE can also increase the feasibility of the ZCB pathways.
benefits are taken into account. For this reason, we use
a set of four core principles to determine a hierarchy On the other hand, disabling policies—such as high energy
of action, which ranks pathways from more to less subsidies that result in energy tariffs that do not reflect the
recommended. real cost of generating energy—are a major impediment
to pursuing both greater energy efficiency and the uptake

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 37

of renewables. Restrictive conditions, such as minimum
energy demand thresholds that prevent prospective
APPENDIX A. METHODOLOGY
buyers from entering the off-site RE market, are a major A.1. Introduction
disincentive. High-cost renewable energy options that are In this paper we present a menu of ZCB pathways, inspired by the thinking
not paired with incentives to reduce the price hurdle also presented in the Zero Code standard of Architecture 2030 and by other
decrease the feasibility and attractiveness of many ZCB parties exploring pathways to zero carbon, such as the ZCB certification
pathways. tracks developed under the WorldGBC’s Advancing Net Zero project. The
Zero Code standard by Architecture 2030 was published in spring 2018 as
With this knowledge, urban decision-makers can map out “a national and international building energy standard for new commercial,
potentially feasible ZCB pathways that are appropriate institutional, and mid- to high-rise residential buildings” (Zero Code n.d.).
for segments of their cities’ building stock, whether at the The novelty of this paper lies in structuring this thinking into a framework
individual building or district/portfolio level, working with of distinct pathways that policymakers can use to determine suitable ZCB
the policies currently in place. We hope this paper will policy approaches for core segments of their building stock.
help them better understand how their policy framework
Because ZCBs are more achievable and affordable when broadly defined,
impacts their goals to reduce building carbon and identify
we also use this menu of pathways approach to adopt a scope that allows
the gaps and obstacles that may need addressing. This
buildings to produce or procure clean renewable energy beyond the building
can empower them to increase their ambition on building site’s boundaries, and/or achieve net zero carbon emissions either at the
decarbonization and transform ZCBs into a politically level of individual buildings or across a group of buildings within a district or
attainable goal. municipal portfolio. Finally, we test these approaches by using four countries
in three different continents as case studies.
In coming months and years, WRI aims to raise ambition
amongst the BEA network and other cities regarding the This section lays out our methodology for analyzing how pathways are being
depth and scale at which ZCBs are being rolled out in enabled or disabled by local policy so that others interested in performing
urban areas. This paper serves as the first step toward this same analysis for their jurisdiction can follow the same approach.
such a transition. In the next phase, WRI is looking to
recruit a select number of cities that are committed to A.2. Country Selection
take the first or further steps in accelerating ZCBs. WRI We selected four countries, each of which is a major economic powerhouse
anticipates providing them with technical support to apply in its region. China and India are expected to see the largest absolute
ZCB pathways thinking to accelerate both the pace and volume of new buildings being built in the coming decades. Mexico has
scale of building decarbonization. a track record of developing green, affordable housing and a particularly
vibrant renewable energy market. Kenya has made great strides in providing
a suitable enabling framework for solar energy access.

A.3. Policy Framework

We analyzed current policies and programs at the national and subnational
levels in each of the four countries to test this paper’s hypothesis that
there can be an achievable ZCB pathway within any existing policy
framework. After reviewing and analyzing the body of literature for each
ZCB component—basic and advanced EE, on- and off-site RE, and carbon
offsets—we developed a framework of 56 policy types grouped into 16
categories that, taken together, can enable or impede the uptake of ZCBs.
The policies we considered are listed in Table A1.

38 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table A1 | Policies Considered to Determine the Feasibility of a Zero Carbon Building Pathway in Four Countries

ENERGY PLANNING

1 Legislation or action plan, aiming to increase building energy efficiency (EE)

2 Legislation or action plan, aiming to develop or increase renewable energy (RE) generation

ZCB POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

3 Policy to mandate uptake of zero carbon buildings (ZCBs)

4 Policy to incentivize uptake of ZCBs

5 ZCB trainings, workshops, other knowledge/communications activities, pilots

6 ZCB design specifications or standards for key building types/climate zones

7 ZCB research and development, demonstration buildings

8 Incorporation of ZC/green/EE/RE measures in (affordable) housing programs

ZCB CERTIFICATION

9 ZCB certification schemes

BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY CODES AND STANDARDS

10 Building EE code or standard

EXISTING BUILDING STANDARDS

11 Performance requirements for existing buildings to get up to code when undertaking major renovations

12 Retro-commissioning

13 Mandatory lighting upgrades

DATA COLLECTION—BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION

14 Energy audit policy or program

15 Energy benchmarking policy or program

16 Energy “challenge,” encouraging participants to reduce energy and track it

APPLIANCE STANDARDS AND INCENTIVES—AIR CONDITIONERS

17 Minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for air conditioners (ACs)

18 Energy performance label for ACs

19 Incentive programs to encourage greater uptake of efficient ACs, including replacement programs

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 39

Table A1 | Policies Considered to Determine the Feasibility of a Zero Carbon Building Pathway in Four Countries (Cont’d)

ENERGY EFFICIENCY INCENTIVES—FINANCIAL

20 Tax credits/reductions

21 Rebates

22 On-bill financing for residents

23 Tax-lien financing/property assessed clean energy financing for residents

24 Credit lines or partial risk guarantees for developers

25 Green mortgage program for residents

26 Energy service company/Energy Performance Contracting programs

ENERGY EFFICIENCY INCENTIVES—NONFINANCIAL

27 Fast-track permitting

28 Density bonus for developers

29 Gross floor area concessions for developers

ENERGY EFFICIENCY INCENTIVES—FACILITATING PRIVATE SECTOR ACTION

30 Local public-private partnerships; knowledge/exchange platforms, training

31 Green leases

32 Better access to finance

33 Certification schemes—voluntary or mandatory

UTILITY/GRID ELECTRICITY

34 Government regulating and governing grid electricity provision and demand management

35 Individual metering of building properties

36 Consumer electricity charging

37 Grid electricity subsidies for certain customer groups

38 Utilities (mandated to) carry out EE activities to help customers reduce energy usage

39 Utility customers receiving overview of individual energy usage through their bill

40 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table A1 | Policies Considered to Determine the Feasibility of a Zero Carbon Building Pathway in Four Countries (Cont’d)

ENABLING ON-SITE RENEWABLE ENERGY—GRID CONNECTED

40 Incentives to purchase on-site RE (rebates, tax breaks, subsidies)

41 Mandatory installation of photovoltaic (PV) panels on new homes, or requiring homes to be “PV ready”

42 Net metering

43 Feed-in tariffs

44 Charging of on-site RE producers for their connection to the grid

45 Policies prohibiting/impeding on-site RE

ENABLING ON-SITE RENEWABLE ENERGY—OFF-GRID ENERGY ACCESS

46 Energy access programs/initiatives providing off-grid solar to households with no or poor grid connections

47 Low-income housing improvement programs

ENABLING OFF-SITE RENEWABLE ENERGY PURCHASING

48 Green energy tariffs

49 RE purchasing from third party/nonutility (e.g., physical or virtual power purchase agreements)

50 Trading of renewable energy certificates

51 Policies prohibiting/impeding off-site RE purchasing

ENABLING OFF-SITE RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION

52 Incentives for nonutility RE generation

53 Policies prohibiting/impeding off-site RE generation

CARBON OFFSETS

54 Building carbon offset standard

55 Access to (voluntary) local markets for purchasing carbon credits

56 Labels to ensure the quality of offsets

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 41

A.4. Policy Impact on ZCB Components With the advice of local experts (WRI offices in China, India, and Mexico, and
the Kenya Green Building Society), we then systematically considered the
We mapped how these policies would impact the implementation of each availability and applicability of these policies in each country, taking into
ZCB component (basic and advanced EE, on- and off-site RE, and carbon off- account key attributes and considerations impacting their likely influence on
sets). We considered which policies have the greatest positive and negative ZCBs. This analysis yielded a map of which ZCB components were feasible
impact on implementing each ZCB component (Table A2). in each country given the current policy framework.

Table A2 | Key Policies Considered to Enable or Impede Zero Carbon Building Components

KEY POLICIES ENABLING ZERO CARBON BUILDINGS KEY POLICIES IMPEDING ZERO CARBON BUILDINGS
Basic EE

▪▪ Mandatory building energy efficiency (EE) codes or standards that are regularly
updated, implementable, and well enforced
▪▪ Mandatory building energy efficiency codes or standards without updates to
increase their stringency

▪▪ Local adaptation of national code or standard that is more stringent ▪▪ Mandatory

implement
building energy efficiency codes or standards that are cumbersome to

▪▪ National government technical guidance on code or standard implementation and

enforcement ▪▪ Mandatory codes or standards without penalties for noncompliance
▪▪ Minimum energy performance standards for appliances with high energy
consumption that are regularly updated and well enforced
▪▪ Voluntary building energy efficiency codes or standards lacking measure to
incentivize uptake
Advanced EE

▪▪ Nonfinancial incentives to promote energy efficient/green buildings ▪▪ High grid electricity subsidies for households
▪▪ Financial incentives to promote energy efficient/green buildings ▪▪ Lack of awareness about energy efficiency benefits and available incentives
▪▪ Energy audit and benchmarking schemes for public or private buildings ▪▪ Absence
buyers
of energy performance information and efficiency incentives for building

▪▪ Programs that support, facilitate, and challenge building owners to improve

energy efficiency
▪▪ Absence
measures
of information supporting building owners to pursue energy efficiency

▪▪ Development of or support for green building rating and certification schemes ▪▪ Absence of government leadership by example on building energy efficiency
▪▪ Government
targets
leadership by example through requirements, certifications, or
▪▪ Barriers to the growth of the energy service companies industry
▪▪ Programs that address both affordable housing and energy efficiency
On-site RE

▪▪ Renewable energy (RE) targets ▪▪ High grid electricity subsidies for households
▪▪ Net metering or a stable feed-in tariff ▪▪ Incentives that frequently change
▪▪ Incentives promoting on-site RE ▪▪ Lack of awareness about on-site RE benefits and available incentives
▪▪ Lack of government leadership by example
Off-site RE

▪▪ Opening electricity markets to nonutility actors to partake in power purchase

agreements (PPAs) or purchase renewable energy credits (RECs) ▪▪ High minimum energy demand requirements to partake in PPAs or buying RECs
▪▪ Promoting the development of RE for the provision of grid energy ▪▪ Utility barriers to consumers purchasing nonutility RE via PPAs
▪▪ Cost-competitive green tariffs ▪▪ Green tariffs with a very high markup
▪▪ Aggregating
or RECs)
energy demand from public buildings for off-site RE purchase (PPA ▪▪ Lack of government enforcement of renewable purchase obligations to support
the market for RECs

▪▪ Limiting availability of off-site RE options to qualified registered users

Source: WRI.

42 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

A.5. Pathway Feasibility Based on ZCB Components Although India has developed building energy efficiency policies for more
than 15 years, it has yet to implement mandatory requirements. Its national
To subsequently determine the feasibility of complete pathways in each Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) still has a mostly voluntary
country, we examined the feasibility of its component parts. If one or more character and relies on the willingness of states and municipalities to adopt
components of the pathway is poorly enabled in a country, then that path- and incorporate the code. The cumbersome process has resulted in only 10
way would be considered somewhat feasible or unfeasible from a current states taking the effort to adopt the ECBC between 2007 and 2018.
policy perspective. A broad comparative overview of pathway feasibility in
the four countries is included in Section 5 of this paper, and further details The absence of mandatory energy efficiency policies results not only in low
can be found in the subsequent Appendix B. uptake of building energy efficiency, but it also stunts the market for such
products and services. It also slows down the pace at which economies of
Having distilled the core enabling and disabling policies that were identified scale can be reached, which would lead to more capital being allocated to
as having the most influence on pathway feasibility, this information was and more competitive pricing emerging for this segment of the market.
used to inform a number of country-specific recommendations for enhanc-
ing the local policy framework for energy efficiency and renewable energy At the same time, India has shown leadership in the green building market,
at the national and subnational levels to bring more ZCB pathways within with multiple successful rating and certification schemes on offer that jointly
reach. have certified several thousands of buildings, including about a dozen build-
ings than can be considered (net) zero or nearly (net) zero carbon.
In addition, we considered the different roles and levels of influence of city,
national, and state governments. We also focus on a number of policy op- India’s electricity market reform in 2003 has also opened up more options for
tions that allow cities to facilitate a district or municipal portfolio approach to renewable energy generation and purchasing. Nonetheless, limited incen-
building decarbonization. tives for rooftop PV panels; highly subsidized electricity rates for certain
customer groups, such as households; caps on net-metering capacity; and
APPENDIX B. CURRENT POLICIES AND no stable long-term price signal for FITs hamper the growth of on-site RE
generation.
PROGRAMS ENABLING ZCBS
Current regulations for off-site RE purchasing cater to large energy consum-
Four countries were selected for a deeper analysis of their current policies
ers, requiring a minimum of 1 MW of energy demand to purchase from non-
and programs to illustrate how countries and cities can help enable or even
utility actors. Coupled with utilities resisting the loss of their customers, the
inadvertently disable ZCB pathways through their framework of policies and
market for renewable energy purchasing has yet to reach its full potential.
programs. The four case studies show that even in the absence of compre-
At the same time, India is a major global force when it comes to generat-
hensive sets of policies, and despite a very diverse set of contexts, there
ing local carbon credits, and the relatively low-cost supply of credits in the
are almost always one or more ZCB pathways already within reach. Targeted
voluntary market provides options for offsetting operational building energy
priority actions can help further increase the relative ease and desirability of
emissions in case on- and/or off-site RE does not provide feasible options
achieving these pathways.
(CDP 2017; Sengupta 2017).
Nonetheless, the actual feasibility and attractiveness of a pathway for a
Altogether, India’s current policy framework already puts multiple ZCB
building owner/manager depends on a variety of factors, including market
pathways within reach of Indian building owners/managers, although
readiness, awareness of the benefits, and the availability of capital finance,
this is mainly true for commercial buildings and in particular those that have
of which this analysis has mainly considered the policy and program state
a considerable energy demand. In addition, although the Indian national and
of play.
state policy environment is increasingly favorable to ZCBs, the local market
may still need to catch up to enable nonpolicy elements of various ZCB
B.1. India pathways.
B.1.1. Overview
B.1.2. Pathways at a glance
In India, buildings account for over a third of total electricity consumption,
with consumption still increasing due to rapid urbanization. The country ZCB PATHWAYS ENABLED THROUGH THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK OF
also regularly faces acute electricity shortages, amounting to about 10 POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
percent annually, which can increase to more than 15 percent during peak India’s policy and program framework for basic and advanced EE, on- and
demand periods (NRDC and ASCI 2012). A move to energy efficient, ZCBs has off-site RE, and carbon offsetting makes a number of ZCB pathways already
enormous potential to provide India with clean, secure, and reliable energy within reach today. The feasibility of each available ZCB pathway that
for all well into the future. government may encourage building owners/managers to pursue is shown
in Table B1.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 43

Table B1 | Indicative Overview of the Feasibility of Each Pathway in India under the Current Policy and Program Framework

COMPONENT
PATHWAY INDIA
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS

1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)

= pathway is not sufficiently supported = the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
by the current policy framework. the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.

Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

For India, many ZCB pathways are increasingly within reach. Nonetheless, Table B2 provides a concise overview of the enabling or disabling policies for
those pathways considered to be somewhat or very feasible15 under the cur- each ZCB component. It indicates the most likely building types that would
rent policy state of play are mostly or only attainable for owners/managers be considered feasible as well as potential caveats for pursuing the compo-
of commercial buildings or public buildings, for which government can lead nent. Those pathway components that are relatively easy to achieve—mean-
by example. ing they are the most feasible under the current framework of policies and
programs—are not necessarily the most preferable ones, keeping in mind
For owners/managers of residential buildings, most pathways are consid-
ered either too challenging or are not even viable due to a lack of enabling the core principles and hierarchy of pathways (Section 2.3).
policies. Thus, low uptake can be expected unless dedicated policies also
help faciliate this part of the market.

44 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table B2 | Overview of Most Feasible/Likely ZCB Components to Pursue in India under the Current Policy and Program
Framework

COMPONENT FEASIBILITY DETAILS

Dependent on the national building energy code having been adopted

Basic EE
by the local state
Most suitable for (large) commercial buildings, which are the main
▪▪ Building energy efficiency (EE) code: Energy Conservation Building
Code (ECBC) for commercial and residential (coming), voluntary
subject of the voluntary building energy code; a code for residential
buildings is only just emerging
▪▪ Minimum energy performance standards for air conditioners
▪▪ Exemplary building EE code performance: ECBC+ and ECBC++
▪▪ Star-rating
index
program: 1–5 star rating based on energy performance

Advanced EE
Most suitable for commercial buildings, which can afford to pursue
green building certification to which many incentives are tied; ▪▪ LEED,
Green building certification schemes: IGBC, GRIHA, SVAGRIHA,
d
EDGE e
a b c

however, limited EE experience in the market will mainly see front-

▪▪ Financial incentives for GRIHA- or IGBC-rated buildings
runners take this path.
▪▪ Nonfinancial incentives for IGBC-rated buildings
▪▪ (“MAITREE”) program:andpublic
Market Integration Transformation for Energy Efficiency
building EE retrofits

Policies do not sufficiently facilitate this component

▪▪ High electricity subsidies for residential discourage photovoltaic
(PV) panels
On-site RE
Most suitable for commercial buildings, which face higher electricity
rates, making on-site renewable energy (RE) more attractive
▪▪ PV: residential—national/state subsidies, majority expired;
commercial—40% depreciation in first year
▪▪ Net metering: widespread at state level, often like-for-like credits,
energy bill adjusted, or (low) feed-in tariff

Off-site RE
Dependent on the local state providing RE open access
▪▪ PPA: for users with minimum of 1 MW; emerging market
(purchase or
Most suitable for commercial buildings, which may have enough
▪▪ RECs: sold
Green tariff: none or limited
generation)
remaining energy demand (minimum 1 MW) to engage in a power
purchase agreements (PPAs) or buy renewable energy credits (RECS) ▪▪ once/month, representing 1 MW each

Only if EE and RE cannot reach 100 percent

Carbon offsets
Most suitable for commercial buildings since there is a dearth of local
programs that target individual consumers to offset their carbon
▪▪ Voluntary carbon credit market present, selling carbon credits from
local accredited projects
footprint, making this a less attractive option for residential buildings

Notes:
a
India Green Building Council Rating Systems.
b
Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment.
c
Simple Versatile Affordable Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment.
d
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.
e
Excellence in Design for Greater Efficiency.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 45

B.1.3. The impact of policies on pathway feasibility Key current policies and programs that help enable the feasibility of ZCB
pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the relevant
From the analysis, it has become clear that a select number of policies/ government levels (national, state, and/or municipal) that are currently
programs—or their absence—are responsible for enabling or disabling local responsible for aspects of the policy as well as the type of responsibility they
players to pursue energy efficiency and renewable energy solutions, which take on. In general, the listed actions all relate to the government’s role as
together can be used to arrive at a (net) zero or nearly (net) zero carbon regulator.
building.16

Energy Efficiency

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ The ECBC includes exemplary performance levels, known as ECBC+ and ECBC++ ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
(minimum of 35 percent and 50 percent energy efficiency, respectively, versus ▪▪ State ▪▪ Implementadapt)
Adopt (&
conventional). ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ & enforce

▪▪ Multiple ▪▪ National ▪▪ Incentivize

successful green building rating and certification schemes are actively
▪▪ State ▪▪ Incentivize
being promoted and provide education and training support to interested parties.
▪▪ Private sector ▪▪ Implement
▪▪ A(such
range of national or state incentives that, through financial or nonfinancial rewards
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & implement
as increased floor area ratio), encourage green design, although the majority
are tied to obtaining green building certification. ▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & implement
Renewable Energy

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Renewable energy targets set by the national government, which include rooftop PV ▪▪ National ▪▪ Issue & implement
panels
▪▪ State ▪▪ Implement

▪▪ The widespread availability across Indian states of net-metering schemes ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & implement
▪▪ The opening up of the electricity market, allowing users to engage in nonutility PPAs ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
as well as to purchase RECs ▪▪ State ▪▪ Implement

Key policies and programs—or the lack thereof—that (in part) disable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the
relevant government levels (national, state, and/or municipal) currently responsible for aspects of the policy and their specific responsibilities. In general, the
listed actions all relate to a government’s role as regulator, except where it concerns supporting the market (convener/facilitator role) and leading by example
(owner/investor role).

46 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Energy Efficiency

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ The voluntary nature of the ECBC and the cumbersome process for states and ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
municipalities to adopt and incorporate it in their local regulations, which results in ▪▪ State ▪▪ Adopt (& adapt)
many local jurisdictions having no energy efficiency regulations to follow ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ Implement & enforce
▪▪ The ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
absence (until recently) of an ECBC for residential buildings, which is now
▪▪ State ▪▪ Adopt (& adapt)
gradually being introduced in phases and is still as a voluntary code
▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ Implement & enforce
▪▪ High grid electricity subsidies for households, which reduce the economic case for
both energy efficiency measures and on-site PV systems ▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & implement
▪▪ Many financial and nonfinancial incentives being tied to being green building
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & implement
certified (GRIHA or IGBC), which may put them out of reach for smaller building
developers lacking the means to pursue such certification ▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & implement
▪▪ The ▪▪ National
relative absence of facilitating programs that educate and inform building
▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & implement
stakeholders and support them in pursuing energy efficiency measures
▪▪ Municipal
▪▪ The ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & implement
relatively limited number of programs that show government leading by example
▪▪ State
on energy efficiency for their public building stock
▪▪ Municipal
Renewable Energy

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ The expiration of most national or state subsidies for households to install PV ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design
panels as well as the halving of the percentage depreciation allowed for commercial ▪▪ State & implement
▪▪ & implement
buildings installing PV systems ▪▪ Design

▪▪ The requirement to have at least 1 MW in energy demand to engage in a PPA for off- ▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & issue
site RE or buy RECs ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement
▪▪ The lack of green energy tariffs; the state of Karnataka is an exception because such ▪▪ State ▪▪ Design & issue
electricity comes with a 50 percent markup, which reduces its attractiveness ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement

▪▪ RECs only being sold once/month at India’s national exchange, providing interested
parties with limited opportunities for their purchase ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
▪▪ The uncooperative stance of many utilities to allow their customers open access to ▪▪ State ▪▪ Oversight
renewable energy per the 2003 Electricity Act ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 47

B.1.4. Priority actions for better enabling the ZCB pathways
With enhanced policy, several of the ZCB pathways that are currently considered to be insufficiently or only somewhat facilitated by the current policy frame-
work in India will become increasingly attainable and desirable, putting India firmly on the track toward building decarbonization.

A short list of priority policy actions is provided for city governments,17 followed by a similar list for national and state governments, that can facilitate progress
in cities. The recommended actions acknowledge that decisive action at higher government levels is often a prerequisite to enable urban stakeholders to most
effectively act on policies that can help enable the ZCB pathways.

Energy Efficiency—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Large and major cities to incorporate the ECBC into their local regulations and tie it to building approval forms and processes (for
example, Hyderabad), effectively making the ECBC mandatory for new buildings ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Cities to introduce (nonfinancial) incentives for buildings that can prove compliance with ECBC+ and ECBC++, which are voluntary
exemplary performance levels of the ECBC ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Cities
ECBC
to develop communication and outreach materials that help educate the market on how to achieve compliance with the
▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ Cities to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to comply with at least the
minimum level of a suitable green building rating and certification system, such as IGBC or GRIHA ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Renewable Energy—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Large and major cities to introduce or alternatively lobby their states to introduce/reinstate incentives for rooftop renewables (PV,
solar hot water) ▪▪ Regulator/ partner
▪▪ Cities to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to install rooftop renewables
where feasible ▪▪ Owner/ investor
▪▪ Cities to aggregate energy demand from (existing) public buildings to engage in off-site RE purchase (PPA or RECs) ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Energy Efficiency—National/State Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National government to develop a process to turn the ECBC into a mandatory code, for instance, by tying it to building approvals;
the current introduction of the ECBC for residential buildings provides such an opportunity ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ States to rapidly adopt (and, if necessary, adapt) the ECBC, if they have not done so yet ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to more proactively phase out electricity subsidies for specific groups to increase the attractiveness of energy
efficiency (or on-site RE) measures, ensuring that the increase in energy bills can be mitigated by a drop in energy consumption
through affordable and readily available energy efficiency measures
▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National/state government to reconsider if incentives would be best tied to green building certification and/or also to the ECBC to
put them in reach of more building developers ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ State governments to develop communication and outreach materials that help educate the market on how to achieve compliance
with the ECBC ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ National and state government to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to
comply with at least the minimum level of a suitable green building rating and certification system, such as IGBC or GRIHA ▪▪ Owner/ investor

48 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Renewable Energy—National/State Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National/state government to introduce or reinstate attractive incentives for rooftop renewables (PV, solar hot water) ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ States to introduce green energy tariffs with a limited markup to increase their attractiveness ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ States to work with their local utilities to develop alternative business models that help cushion the loss in revenue from customers
seeking nonutility renewable energy options, thereby reducing the stumbling blocks for off-site RE purchasing put in place by
utilities
▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ States to enforce RPOs to increase the demand for and thus help develop the market for RECs ▪▪ Regulator
These actions will help better facilitate pathways 3 and 7, which are currently In 2017 an ECBC for residential buildings was being introduced. This new
only somewhat feasible, while also supporting the enhanced feasibility of ECBC will launch in stages, having first released Part 1 for the building enve-
other pathways. lope, to gradually familiarize the market. Similar to the ECBC for commercial
buildings, its implementation depends largely on states and municipalities
Section 5 of this paper provides a comparative overview of all four coun- adopting and incentivizing the code because the national government can-
tries considered in this analysis. It shows the feasibility of each pathway not mandate states to implement the ECBC (BEEP 2018).
under the current policies as well as under an enhanced policy framework
if the priority actions were to be implemented. Importantly, it points to how For existing buildings, a star-rating program (one to five stars) was
targeted policy enhancement can put every ZCB pathway well within India’s introduced in 2009 by the national government. The ratings are based on
reach. an energy performance index (kilowatt-hour per square meter, kWh/m2)
determined for three climate zones and involving energy audits. By late 2014,
B.1.5. Current policies for facilitating ZCB pathways around 125 buildings had taken part in the program, pointing toward low
ENERGY EFFICIENCY uptake.
In 2002 India enacted the Energy Conservation Act, marking the start of The incremental costs and payback time for EE projects (in the absence of
building EE policies. In 2007 an important next step was taken by launching binding regulations) deter many in the private sector building community.
the ECBC, which so far has mainly applied to large commercial buildings. Although anecdotal evidence points toward a drop in the cost premium for
Data suggest that ECBC-compliant buildings may be 25–60 percent more ef- an energy efficient building of 16–17 percent in 2000 to only 4 percent in 2013,
ficient than standard buildings in India (NRDC and ASCI 2014), with the ECBC high interest rates at banks can still double the payback time due to the cost
providing additional exemplary performance levels known as ECBC+ and of (extended) interest payments for energy efficient equipment (EIU 2013).
ECBC++. The ECBC is mostly a voluntary code, however; as such, it generally
bears no penalties for noncompliance. In the residential market, price sensitivity is high among homes bought by
lower-middle-class families, which represent up to 90 percent of the housing
To be applicable, the ECBC also has to be adopted by states first, then market. Combined with relatively low electricity fees, subsidized for residen-
implemented by Urban Local Bodies, and finally embedded in the bylaws tial consumers by commercial and industrial energy users, the economic
of municipalities, which has proven to be a very slow and cumbersome argument is currently not in favor of energy efficiency (Khosla 2016).
process. This is further impeded by the shortage of building professionals
with sufficient knowledge of EE and the rather complex permit application Several green building rating and certification schemes have been
process (IPEEC 2015). As a result, it was estimated that in 2013 no more than introduced into the Indian market that have been quite successful so far in
10 percent of applicable new buildings complied with the ECBC, with only 7 garnering the industry’s interest. In addition to Leadership in Energy and En-
states having adopted the ECBC at that time, up to 10 states in 2017. States vironmental Design (LEED), a scheme originally from the United States, that
can make modifications to the ECBC to make the code better suit local has more than 2,300 buildings certified in India, the Indian Green Building
circumstances. Council (IGBC) has introduced its IGBC green building certification scheme.
A success story of implementation is the Greater Hyderabad Municipal The IGBC has about 1,000 buildings certified and more than 4,000 registered.
Corporation. Not only has it incorporated the ECBC into its local regulations, Eleven of these certified buildings can be considered to be nearly zero
but it has also made it mandatory through integration with building approval energy. The IGBC is also working on a “net zero” certification scheme as part
forms and processes and has been actively enforcing the code (NRDC 2016). of the WorldGBC’s Advancing Net Zero project, which helps GBCs to offer a
certification track for ZCBs (WorldGBC 2018).

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 49

Another popular scheme is the Green Rating for Integrated Habitat As- For on-site producers of renewable energy, a number of states offer FITs. Al-
sessment (GRIHA), introduced in 2005 by the national government. GRIHA though rates were initially quite attractive, they have dropped multiple times
has standards for all Indian climate zones and can result in 40–60 percent since. The lower FITs thereby hamper the longer-term investment decisions
energy savings compared to conventional. A three-star GRIHA rating has for rooftop solar systems. In some states, utilities only provide customers
now become mandatory for new public buildings owned by the national who are most expensive to serve the option to feed energy into the grid and
government (NRDC and ASCI 2012). be compensated for as an incentive to generate their own on-site energy.
Many states also cap their net-metering options to a maximum aggregated
Incentives for building developers are mostly linked to obtaining certifica- annual amount of megawatts across the state on a first-come, first-served
tion under GRIHA or the IGBC. Many states and municipal corporations have basis and to a maximum percentage of local transformer capacity to protect
financial incentives in place, providing partial rebates on property taxes, their fragile grids (Climatescope 2018).
permit fees, or the registration fees for the actual green building rating
schemes. Other incentives give developers rights to a greater built-up area Role of cities: Cities can extend incentives or lobby their states to introduce or
than those currently sanctioned, known as the floor area ratio (FAR). Several reinstate incentives for rooftop PV panels as well as lobby or collaborate with
states provide FAR incentives, which do not cost the government anything their state government to develop attractive long-term (price) signals toward
but are being perceived as valuable by developers.18 Smaller building the market for net metering and FITs.
developers who lack the means to pursue green building certification do not
benefit from incentives for energy efficiency (NRDC and ASCI 2014). OFF-SITE RE PURCHASE
The option to purchase off-site RE from nonutility actors is available to
For the most part, the government does not appear to tap into the potential those who have at least 1 MW in energy demand. Several state governments
to lead by example. For instance, a 2016 announcement by the state of have considered lowering the 1 MW limit; however, they face challenges
Maharashtra that required an IGBC rating for all new/renovated government from the utilities about losing customers and thus revenue. As an example,
buildings appears to have had no follow-up. the state of Tamil Nadu dropped the minimum requirement to 500 kW and
subsequently to 50 kW. It then raised the limit to 1 MW again due to utility
Role of cities: Cities19 can extend incentives or lobby their states to introduce concerns. In some states, customers also require permission from the local
or reinstate incentives for rooftop PV panels as well as lobby or collaborate utility if interested in purchasing nonutility renewable energy, with the utility
with their state government to develop attractive long-term (price) signals maintaining the right to refuse the request.
toward the market for net metering and FITs.
Although the PPA market is very new in India, it is reasonably vibrant despite
ON-SITE RE GENERATION many awaiting the outcomes of the courts, with some large customers
Utilities in India are generally regulated by the states, which leaves very having challenged the utilities for their stance. Green energy tariffs, however,
little room for cities to influence electricity access, pricing, and subsidies for are mostly still nonexistent, with the state of Karnataka providing the option
certain consumer groups in light of their impact on the economic attractive- with a roughly 50 percent markup on the regular price of grid electricity; as
ness of both basic and advanced EE measures and on-site RE systems. a result, the policy has not seen much uptake yet. For small private sector
Nonetheless, since the reform of India’s electricity market in 2003, which and residential consumers, purchasing green energy is currently not a viable
created open access for renewable energy, producers, buyers, and sellers of option because of the absence of green tariffs, the low cost premium, and
renewable energy have been provided with more opportunities, even though the high bar set for purchasing nonutility renewable energy.
awareness is still relatively low. In addition, central government targets for
renewable energy (175 gigawatts, or GW, by 2022) include a target for rooftop Since 2010, India has offered solar and nonsolar RECs, each representing
PV panels equivalent to 40 GW, and most states have introduced net-meter- 1 MW. The RECs are sold in India’s national exchange on the last Wednes-
ing or similar regulations (Climatescope 2018). day of every month. Although the RECs are verified, buyers do not know
which project generated them. The REC price is low due to limited demand
At the same time, many incentives to facilitate rooftop PV panels have compared with the generation of RECs, resulting in RECs trading at the floor
expired or have been reduced. The central government, for instance, used price. Although utilities are bound by RPOs, which should fuel demand in the
to offer a 30 percent subsidy on the capital cost of PV panels or even solar REC market, not all have fulfilled their obligations. The resulting low price
lanterns for households, with some states adding an extra percentage or a provides opportunities for building owners/managers with at least 1 MW in
certain cash amount. For commercial rooftop PV panels, a tax incentive is energy demand to purchase RECs at an attractive price (Shrimali 2013).
available, initially allowing 80 percent tax depreciation in the first year; in
April 2017 it was capped at 40 percent, and it is only available if the project is Role of cities: Cities can work with their local utilities to develop alterna-
commissioned in the first six months of a financial year. tive business models that help cushion the loss in revenue from customers
seeking nonutility renewable energy options, thereby reducing the stumbling
blocks for off-site RE purchasing fueled by utilities.

50 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

CARBON OFFSETTING To support a move to a more sustainable building market, China has also
Since 2005, India became one of the largest producers of carbon credits un- introduced a wide range of incentive policies and has developed green
der the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), at some point claiming almost building rating systems and labels, the most well-known being China’s
a third of the market (CDP 2017). Since 2012, however, new carbon reduction Three Star rating, along with financial incentives for certified projects. For
projects are no longer eligible to register under the CDM. One challenge its 13th Five-Year Plan (2016–20), the national government has set a goal of
faced by Indian carbon credits generated under the CDM was the question 50 percent of new construction being certified (MOHURD 2017b). In addition,
of additionality, with many arguing that a considerable part of the credits did passive house and ultra-low-energy passive building concepts have been
not fulfill this criterion. 20 With CDM no longer an option, India has become an introduced to the Chinese market through a range of pilots, and the Passive
important source for carbon credits in the voluntary market, leading many Ultra-low Energy Building Standard Guideline for Residential Buildings
developers to sell to voluntary buyers instead. was issued in 2015. The national government is currently taking this a step
further through pilots and draft guidelines for nearly and net zero energy
A considerable crash in the price of carbon credits has made registering for buildings, which also incorporate renewable energy provision.
and generating carbon credits less attractive for Indian developers, many
of whom now operate in the renewable energy industry. For the time being, To facilitate the uptake of alternative energy sources, the national govern-
however, this provides buyers with a relatively low-cost supply of credits ment has been financially supporting the building of integrated PV panels,
for locally offsetting their emissions (Sengupta 2017). These carbon credits shallow geothermal energy, sewage waste heat recovery, wind energy, and
should be vetted to ensure they are of high quality and meet additionality biomass since 2006. In addition, the recently introduced Renewable Portfolio
criteria. Standards require each Chinese province to achieve a certain percentage
of renewable electricity generation as part of its overall energy portfolio,
Role of cities: Cities can educate stakeholders on the options for offsetting with noncompliance being subject to penalties (NEA 2018). Ongoing power
their carbon footprint through the voluntary carbon offset market, thereby fuel- market reform also aims to deregulate the power system and reduce China’s
ing greater demand and awareness, although ensuring that they first consider wind and solar curtailment.
energy efficiency and renewable energy options and that they thoroughly
consider the quality of these credits in their analysis of suitable options. For on-site renewables, China’s national government has (previously) been
offering subsidies for building-integrated PV systems, and many provinces
B.2. China and municipalities have done so for household solar PV systems (NEA 2017).
China is the world’s largest market for solar hot water systems, with the
B.2.1. Overview national government previously providing consumers with rebates. The
China has the largest construction market in the world. In 2010 it surpassed country has also adopted FITs in 2013 for both large-scale and distributed
the size of the U.S. construction market (EU MSE Centre 2015). In the five generation (Fuller and Guo 2016).
years from 2011 to 2016, the building and construction industry grew at an
To provide consumers with more options to purchase renewable electricity,
average rate of 8.5 percent annually as a result of rapid urbanization (IBIS-
the Green Electricity Certificates (GECs) initiative was released in July 2017
World 2017). This strong urbanization trend, combined with an increasing de-
(NEA 2017). It provides a platform for all, including building owners/manag-
mand for better indoor thermal comfort, is expected to lead to a significant
ers and households, to directly purchase RECs from renewable energy
increase in building energy use if no mitigating measures are being taken.
suppliers. Uptake so far has been low, with a shrinking public subsidy fund
Building energy efficiency has been on the government agenda since 1986, for renewable energy dependent on fee collections from customers (Miao et
although the first two decades saw limited interest from both the private and al. 2017).
the public sector. In 2005, according to official inspection data, the compli-
Even though some of China’s policies are still in their infancy, the country’s
ance rate with local mandatory energy efficiency codes and standards stood
policy framework is increasingly paving the way for (net) ZCBs to be imple-
at 53 percent for the design stage and at 21 percent for the construction
mented at scale. This means that all ZCB pathways are already some-
stage. As implementation and enforcement have significantly improved,
what or well within reach of Chinese building owners/managers.
compliance rates in urban areas reached nearly 100 percent in 2010. Rural
Although the Chinese policy environment is increasingly favorable to ZCBs,
areas, however, are not subject to compliance inspection (Bin and Nadel
the local market may still need to catch up to enable the nonpolicy elements
2012).
of various ZCB pathways.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 51

B.2.2. Pathways at a glance yet being well established, not all pathways are equally within reach. In ad-
dition, several of the ZCB pathways are considered mostly or only attainable
ZCB PATHWAYS ENABLED THROUGH THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK OF for owners/managers of commercial buildings and of public buildings, for
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS which the government can lead by example.
China’s policy and program framework for basic and advanced EE, on- and
off-site RE, and carbon offsetting makes all the ZCB pathways somewhat or Table B4 provides a concise overview of the enabling or disabling policies
fully within reach today. The feasibility of each available ZCB pathway that for each ZCB component, indicates the most likely building types for which
the government may encourage building owners/managers to pursue is the component is considered feasible, and potential caveats for pursuing the
shown in Table B3. component. Those pathway components that are relatively easy to achieve—
meaning they are the most feasible under the current framework of policies
In theory, all of the ZCB pathways can be achieved in China today, 21 with a and programs—are not necessarily the most preferable ones, keeping in
range of supporting policies in place for each of the ZCB pathways. Nonethe- mind the core principles and hierarchy of pathways (Section 2.3).
less, as a result of gaps in the policy framework as well as some policies not

Table B3 | Indicative Overview of the Feasibility of Each Pathway in China under the Current Policy and Program Framework

COMPONENT
PATHWAY CHINA
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)

= the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.

Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

52 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table B4 | Overview of Most Feasible Zero Carbon Building Components to Pursue in China under the Current Policy and
Program Framework

COMPONENT FEASIBILITY DETAILS

▪▪ High penetration of energy efficiency (EE) techniques

▪▪ Building energy codes and standards have been improving over
▪▪ More strict building energy codes
Basic EE time to reflect technology progress according to different types of
buildings and climate zones. ▪ ▪ Ambitious national targets of energy efficient buildings

▪▪ High penetration of EE techniques

▪▪ are provided
Most suitable for commercial/public buildings: Financial incentives
▪▪ National, subnational, and local government incentives
Advanced EE
for above-code practices (i.e., green building label,
▪▪ International collaboration
Green building rating and certification schemes
passive house certificate, demonstration projects), with many
targeting commercial buildings and/or more likely to be within ▪▪
reach of larger building developers or owners/managers.

▪▪ On-site photovoltaic (PV) systems are very popular.

▪▪ Most suitable for commercial/public buildings: While building-
integrated renewable energy (RE) and distributed energy have ▪▪ Building code: solar water heating, integrated PV panels, PV
On-site RE lighting system;
been promoted by national and subnational governments, rooftop
PV panels for residential buildings in urban areas are often ▪▪ Feed-in tariffs (FITs) provided and net metering allowed
challenging due to limited rooftop space.

▪▪ Ongoing power market reform—possible to buy RE

▪▪ No green power
Green tariffs available for RE providers

▪▪ Green tariffs are available for renewable power, but RE purchase is ▪▪ market is deregulated
purchase, but possible in the future (if the power
Off-site RE difficult in a regulated market.
▪▪ Most ▪▪ Renewable energy credits (RECs) are weakly enforced
(purchase or
generation)
suitable for commercial/public buildings: Off-site renewables
can be purchased directly from solar/wind power producers, but ▪▪ market is rather inactive
RECs are available through a national trading platform, but the
because of the following:
this option is limited to only a few eligible buyers. □□ The cost for buyers comes in addition to their electricity bills
□□ Price is similar to that of FITs, which the RE supplier has to
forgo to create RECs

▪▪ Only if EE and RE cannot reach 100 percent

▪▪ Most suitable
Available option but not practiced in building sector yet ▪▪ Voluntary carbon credits are available for trading through the
Carbon offsets
▪▪ commercial sector
for commercial/public buildings: Mainly the
is familiar with the voluntary market.
China Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) system

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 53

B.2.3. The impact of policies on pathway feasibility
An analysis of China’s policy framework points to a number of core policies/programs responsible for enabling and disabling local players to pursue energy ef-
ficiency and renewable energy solutions, which together can lead one to a (net) zero or nearly (net) zero carbon building. 22

Key current policies and programs that help enable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the relevant government
levels (national, state, and/or municipal) that are currently responsible for aspects of the policy as well as the type of responsibility they take on. In general, the
listed actions relate to the government’s role as regulator or as convener/facilitator in the market.

Energy Efficiency

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

National mandatory building energy efficiency codes or standards set minimum requirements for different
building types and climate zones and are well enforced in medium to large cities. ▪▪ Province/
municipal
▪▪ enforce &
Implement

▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

The Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD) provides technical guidelines on building
▪▪ Province ▪▪ Implement &
Implement
energy efficiency code implementation and compliance and technical codes or standards for certain energy
efficient technologies. ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ enforce
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
A variety of standards, benchmarking, and certificate systems have been put in place, such as China’s Three
▪▪ Province/ implement
Star, Green Building Material Certificate, China Energy Label for energy efficient appliances and equipment, and
MEPS for air conditioners. ▪▪ municipal ▪▪ Implement
Financial and some nonfinancial incentives are available for those pursuing above-code practices. These
include subsidies for certified green buildings, ultra-low-energy passive buildings, pilot and demonstration
▪▪ National/
province/ ▪▪ Design &
implement
projects, and retrofits as well as some provinces and cities offering tax credits, or extra FAR. municipal
Banks are required by government to provide low-interest loans for energy efficiency improvements, thereby
overcoming hurdles around (the high cost of) access to capital. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
implement
MOHURD has established a voluntary energy auditing program for public buildings requiring provincial
National Design & issue
governments and major cities to submit annual energy audit reports. Some cities, such as Beijing and
Province/ municipal Implement
Shanghai, are taking the lead, going beyond what is required at the national level.
MOHURD has issued a technical guideline for ultra-low-energy buildings (similar to passive houses) and is ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design
working on a similar guideline for nearly zero energy buildings. It has also issued a five-year target for uptake
of such buildings, with several local governments issuing additional policies.
▪▪ Province/
municipal ▪▪
& issue
Implement

Renewable Energy

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

China’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (currently under consultation) set renewable energy quotas for each ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
province. ▪▪ Province implement
▪▪ Implement
Financial incentives for building-integrated renewables and distributed renewable energy generation are ▪▪ National/
province/ ▪▪ Design &
provided, including FITs and some subsidies. implement
municipal
A GEC trading platform was established in 2017, allowing consumers to buy RECs from renewable energy
suppliers. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
implement

54 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Key policies and programs—or the lack thereof—that (in part) disable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the
relevant government levels (national, state, and/or municipal) currently responsible for aspects of the policy and their specific responsibilities. In general, the
listed actions relate to a government’s role as regulator, except where it concerns supporting the market (convener/facilitator role).

Energy Efficiency

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

China’s building codes/standards are currently not being reviewed or evaluated at regular, predictable
▪▪ Province ▪▪ Implement
intervals, and many of them have not been updated since 2010, which may hinder the further uptake of energy
efficiency in buildings. ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ Implement
enforce
&

Many of China’s market facilitation efforts to increase energy efficiency depend strongly on public funding and
mandates/targets, with only certain building owners being affected and progress made being at risk if strong
▪▪ National/
province/ ▪▪ Design &
implement
government intervention were to be discontinued. municipal

▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &

Voluntary building energy efficiency audit programs are unlikely to lead to considerable uptake in the market. ▪▪ Province/ implement
municipal ▪▪ Implement
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
Overall, there are few incentives for building buyers to purchase more energy efficient houses and apartments;
▪▪ Province/ implement
currently, incentives are mainly available for developers and investors.
municipal ▪▪ Implement
Renewable Energy

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

Frequent changes, limited durations, insufficient funds (“oversubscribed”), and/or accelerated phaseouts for ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
subsidy schemes for FITs for distributed renewable energy do not support the creation of a stable, predictable
investment climate.
▪▪ Province/
municipal
implement
▪▪ Implement
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
No green energy tariffs and no PPA options are available as off-site RE purchase options to building owners/
managers. ▪▪ Province/
municipal
implement
▪▪ Implement
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
As RECs sold via the pilot GEC trading platform present a cost premium to buyers, with no incentives provided
▪▪ Province/ implement
to offset the extra cost, the market currently remains mostly inactive. .
municipal ▪▪ Implement

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 55

B.2.4. Priority actions for better enabling the ZCB pathways
With enhanced policy, several of the ZCB pathways that are currently considered to be only somewhat facilitated by the current policy framework in China will
become increasingly attainable and desirable, allowing China to become a global leader in building decarbonization.

A short list of priority policy actions is provided for city governments, followed by a similar list for national and provincial governments, that can facilitate prog-
ress in cities. The recommended actions acknowledge that decisive action at higher government levels is often a prerequisite to enable urban stakeholders to
most effectively act on policies that can help enable the ZCB pathways.

Energy Efficiency—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

With mandatory national codes or standards usually setting the baseline for energy performance, provincial and municipal
governments should actively use the options when/where available to them to set more ambitious requirements based on their
development needs, local resources, and climate zones.
▪▪ Regulator
Local government can proactively take the lead by incentivizing above-code practices; currently, only a select number of Tier 1 cities
do so. ▪▪ Regulator
Interdepartmental collaboration should be enhanced and incorporate energy efficiency improvement goals with other environmental
goals, such as air quality improvement, renewable energy purchase goals, and carbon emission reduction. ▪▪ Regulator
Local governments should make use of the option to run pilot and demonstration projects for retrofitting, energy management
systems, and building-integrated renewables. ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Renewable Energy—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

Facilitate the power market reform at the local level; coordinate the negotiation among stakeholders (state grid enterprises, dealers,
renewable investors) so that renewable energy can be sold to building owners directly through PPAs ▪▪ Regulator/ facilitator
Set a mandatory target for energy sourced from renewables for public buildings and large-scale industrial and commercial buildings,
which can be fulfilled by buying RECs, PPAs, or investing in on-site renewables ▪▪ Regulator
Establish a stable, predictable subsidy/tariff regime for net metering with FITs and for the encouragement of building-integrated
renewables to encourage the uptake of on-site RE ▪▪ Regulator
Energy Efficiency—National/Provincial Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

Review and update the mandatory building energy codes/standards regularly to enable the uptake of new energy efficiency
technologies by introducing a five-year code review cycle ▪▪ Regulator
Develop national building challenge and training programs for different stakeholder groups, such as building developers, architects,
and architecture students to increase awareness and uptake of building energy efficiency ▪▪ Facilitator
Decouple savings on energy bills from energy improvements of public buildings and municipal budget allocations, as this leads to
perverse incentives to keep energy bills high;23 instead, properly incentivize reductions in energy bills for public buildings ▪▪ Regulator
Local governments to proactively design communication and outreach programs to encourage learning and knowledge exchange
among key stakeholder groups ▪▪ Regulator

56 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Renewable Energy—National/Provincial Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

Work closely with stakeholders in the power market to design an implementable regulation that allows non-utility PPAs; current
policy allows renewable energy providers only to sell electricity directly to consumers if given the approval of the local provincial grid
company
▪▪ Regulator
Incentivize building owners/managers to purchase RECs, with the market currently remaining fairly inactive due to the cost premium ▪▪ Regulator
These actions will help enable pathways 1 and 5, which are not considered requires a minimum 20 percent energy efficiency improvement after renova-
feasible under the current policy framework, and better facilitate pathways 2, tion (Bin and Jun 2012).
3, and 7, which are currently only somewhat feasible.
Over time, both national and local governments have issued a number of
Section 5 of this paper provides a comparative overview of all four countries mainly financial incentives to facilitate policy uptake. In 2012, for instance,
considered in this analysis. It shows the feasibility of each pathway under the MOHURD and the Ministry of Finance (MOF) allocated subsidies based on
current policies as well as under an enhanced policy framework if the priority floor area and region for retrofitting existing residential buildings in the
actions were to be implemented. Importantly, it points to how targeted policy hot summer/cold winter climate zone (MOHURD 2012a). In the same year,
enhancement can put every ZCB pathway well within China’s reach. a subsidy was provided for any 2- or 3-star certified building under the
China Green Building Label based on the total floor space and the energy
B.2.5. Current policies for facilitating ZCB pathways efficient technologies applied (MOHURD 2012b). Many cities now require
new construction to meet at least the 1-star requirements, and some cities
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
also provide rebates for the application fees of the Three Star green building
The first building energy efficiency code introduced in China was the Design
scheme. Besides national subsidies established by MOHURD and MOF, many
Standard for Energy Efficiency of Residential Buildings, adopted in 1986
provincial and local governments provide additional subsidies to encourage
(JGJ 26-1986) and updated in 1995 (JGJ 26-1995). It initially only covered the
more ambitious action, such as Guangdong Province providing subsidies for
“severe cold” and “cold” climate zones of northern China, where heating
the China Green Building Label (Guangdong PDHURD 2016).
demand is very high. This code was again updated in 2010 and was renamed
the Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Residential Buildings in Severe Since 2007, MOHURD, in collaboration with the German government, has or-
Cold and Cold Zones (JGJ 26-2010). It sets specifications for building enve- ganized technical workshops and trainings to introduce the German passive
lope thermal performance (such as window/wall ratio, heat transfer coeffi- house (passivhaus) concept, referring to ultra-low-energy buildings. After
cients, shading coefficient, airtight level, etc.) and HVAC system performance establishing passive house pilot projects in various provinces, especially in
(boiler efficiency for central heating, heating pump electricity/heat ratio, China’s colder northern regions, and the issuance of the Passive Ultra-low
and coefficient of performance for heaters, etc.). The 1986 version required Energy Building Technical Guideline for Residential Buildings in 2015 (MO-
a 30 percent reduction of heating energy consumption versus a baseline HURD 2015), the 13th Five-Year-Plan introduced a goal to add 10 million m2 of
building, the 1995 version required a 50 percent reduction in heating energy ultra-low-energy buildings during the 2016–20 period (MOHURD 2017b).
consumption, and the 2010 version required a 65 percent reduction of heat-
ing energy consumption (Feng et al. 2017). The 2015 technical guideline set the highest energy efficiency benchmark
in the market, requiring a 90 percent improvement in energy efficiency
In 2001, MOHURD issued the Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of compared to current building energy codes and an 85 percent improvement
Residential Buildings in Hot Summer and Cold Winter Zone (JGJ 134-2001) for heating. It does not, however, specify the use of on-site renewables or
and the Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Residential Buildings in the purchase of off-site renewables. Built on the passive house technical
Hot Summer and Warm Winter Zone in 2003 (JGJ 75-2003). Both codes were guideline, MOHURD has released the Technical Standard for Nearly Zero
updated, in 2010 and 2012, respectively. The current version for the hot sum- Energy Building (draft), which will redefine the required energy performance
mer/cold winter climate zone (JGJ 134-2010) requires a 50 percent reduction for ultra-low-energy buildings (passive house standard), nearly zero energy
in heating and cooling energy consumption relative to a baseline building. and zero energy buildings, and will include renewable energy provision
For the hot summer/warm winter climate zone (JGJ 75-2012), a 50 percent requirements.
energy efficiency improvement of the building envelope and HVAC system is
required versus the baseline. Many local governments are supporting the national goal to promote ultra-
low-energy and nearly zero energy buildings by issuing additional policies.
Building energy efficiency specifications for major building renovations Beijing, for example, issued the Action Plan for Promoting Ultra-Low Energy
have followed a similar path. The first technical specification (JGJ 29-2000) Building (2016–20), which committed financial incentives for 300,000 m2 of
focused primarily on the energy efficiency for heating (i.e., boilers for central certified ultra-low-energy buildings until 2018 (Beijing MHURDC 2016). Hebei
heating and indoor heating system) and building envelop energy perfor- Province, on the other hand, has committed to build 1 million m2 of ultra-low-
mance. The updated version (JGJ 29-2010) covers other climate zones and energy buildings by 2020 (Mo 2016).

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 57

ON-SITE RE GENERATION China has been developing the Renewable Portfolio Standards, which re-
The national Golden Sun Projects policy, initiated in 2009 to promote solar quire each province to achieve a certain percentage of renewables in its grid
power generation, provided 50 percent of the up-front capital costs for regu- electricity generation mix (NEA 2018). Noncompliance is subject to penalties.
lar PV projects and 70 percent for remote/off-grid PV projects (IEA/IRENA If implemented, this may also help alleviate the frequent occurrence of wind
2016). This generous subsidy stimulated the uptake of PV panels, although and solar curtailment.
many applicants used loopholes to make unfair use of the policy (Urban and
Geall 2014). Noticing the loophole, the policy was replaced by FITs in 2013 (Li- More of interest for building owners/managers is the GEC pilot program,
ang 2014). The net-metering subsidy and FITs are set at fixed prices, differing which allows them to buy RECs directly from independent wind and solar
by regions, and are reevaluated annually according to the actual capital cost energy providers (Miao et al. 2017). So far, the market is quite inactive, with
of PV systems. This has resulted in gradually lower rates per kWh being set the transaction volume representing less than 1 percent of total certificates
for renewable electricity fed into the grid through FITs, although the reduced available in the market since its commencement in July 2017 (CNREC n.d.). A
rates only apply to new generation capacity. key reason is likely that RECs present an additional cost for consumers; they
continue to pay their normal electricity bills, but there are no mandates or
FITs are available at different rates for large-scale wind and solar projects; financial incentives in place that encourage energy users to purchase RECs.
on-site PV systems, which upload all of their generated energy to the grid; The suppliers, on the other hand, no longer qualify for FITs once they sell
and on-site PV systems up to 6 MW capacity that feed a maximum of 50 their RE as credits, and they want to receive a price per kWh at least equal to
percent of their generated energy onto the grid. In addition, subsidies are or higher than the FIT.
available from the national government and some local governments for
every kWh of generated on-site RE, including energy used on-site (Hall 2019). Building owners/managers in China are currently unable to engage directly
in a PPA or select a green energy tariff because China’s state grid solely
China is the world’s largest market for solar water heater systems, produc- controls the power market. Discussions are taking place in China to reform
ing about 1 million systems annually (Urban et al. 2016), although rebates the power market, charging transmission fees to RE suppliers who opt to
have now been phased out in most regions. Many of the rebates were driven feed their energy into the grid for sale to consumers via virtual PPAs (An et
by subnational governments where the RE industry provides important al. 2015).
local economic benefits. For example, 99 percent of households in the city
of Rizhao in Shandong Province have purchased solar hot water systems CARBON OFFSETTING
through a combination of local mandatory and incentive policies (C40 2011). In 2017 China launched a national carbon emission trading scheme after
Uptake of solar hot water systems has been higher in rural areas, where having piloted seven subnational trading systems since 2011, making it the
households often have more rooftop space available. world’s largest carbon emission trading scheme (EDF and ERI 2017). 24 The
first phase of China’s scheme has seen 1,700 energy-producing enterprises
Furthermore, a special fund for building-integrated renewables was created participating, covering a total of 3 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Even though
in 2006 that covers solar energy, shallow geothermal energy, heat recovery only the power sector is included under the scheme, it is expecting to cover
technology, wind energy, and biomass (MOF 2006). Many provincial and the petrochemical industry, building material manufacturing industry, chemi-
municipal governments have been providing matching subsidies to achieve cal industry, paper industry, and other energy-intensive industries in the
their five-year plan goals. A program was also put in place in 2015 to sup- future (UNFCCC 2017). With the anticipated expansion of the scheme, parties
port solar systems in poor regions, attracting investors through long-term covered under it are provided with direct access to a carbon credit market,
public-private partnerships and putting in place 20-year net-metering or and their coverage in the scheme will help push them in the direction of zero
FIT agreements, with the revenue from selling electricity to the grid shared carbon.
between the households and investors (CPAD 2016).
The CCER program enables voluntary carbon emission reduction projects to
OFF-SITE RE PURCHASE sell their offsets. The CCER Trading Platform subsequently issues a Carbon
Off-site renewables have been encouraged in a variety of ways, including Credits Exchange Certificate for any carbon credit transactions (CCER n.d.).
the use of FITs for large-scale wind farms and solar power plants. Recently, Projects are validated by third parties to ensure accuracy, quality, and
additionality (Qing 2018). Consumers can purchase these credits to offset
emissions.

58 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

B.3. Mexico With the Mexican Energy Reform introduced in 2013, the electricity market
has opened up to welcome a whole suite of new on- and off-site RE genera-
B.3.1. Overview tion and purchase opportunities. These include a menu of net-metering
In Mexico, (net) ZCBs are part of a nascent market. The country’s first net options for on-site RE producers as well as the possibility to engage in PPAs,
zero energy building is under development in the city of Monterrey (Gerencia buy RECs, and purchase green grid electricity. At the same time, the require-
de Edificios 2015), and through the EcoCasa program for sustainable, afford- ment to become a qualified registered user to partake in some of these op-
able housing, a number of passive homes (EcoCasa Max) with ultra-low- tions and/or to have at least 1 MW of aggregated energy demand exclude the
energy use have been built in recent years. At the same time, green building participation of households and other small energy consumers (SENER 2018).
is rapidly gaining ground. LEED, the green building rating and certification Nonetheless, the positive policy developments in Mexico in recent years on
scheme, has over 200 certified and 500 registered projects in Mexico both the energy efficiency and renewable energy fronts, combined with a
(USGBC 2016). large domestic market for the generation of carbon credits, puts all eight
Building energy efficiency is slowly gaining ground with the introduction ZCB pathways already more or less within reach of Mexican building
of a national building code in 2014, the International Energy Conservation owners/managers. At the same time, the majority of the pathways under
Code–Mexico (IECC-Mexico), which, however, only becomes mandatory the current policy framework are mostly or only suitable for commercial
once adopted by and incorporated into local legislation by states and their and public buildings rather than residential ones. In addition, although the
municipalities. A variety of energy efficiency support programs and incen- Mexican policy environment is increasingly favorable to ZCBs, the local
tives targeting new or existing buildings have also been introduced by the market may still need to catch up to enable nonpolicy elements of various
national and subnational governments, some more successful than others. ZCB pathways.
A good example is the green mortgage program of the National Workers’
Housing Fund Institute (Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para
B.3.2. Pathways at a glance
los Trabajadores; INFONAVIT), which, as of 2012, accounts for 70 percent of ZCB PATHWAYS ENABLED THROUGH THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK OF
all new mortgages and provides prospective homeowners with additional POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
credit to implement water- and energy-saving measures (INFONAVIT 2012). Mexico’s policy and program framework for basic and advanced EE, on- and
Nonetheless, high electricity subsidies, particularly for residential consum- off-site RE, and carbon offsetting makes a number of ZCB pathways already
ers, reduce the economic case for both energy efficiency and the installation within reach today. The feasibility of each available ZCB pathway that the
of on-site RE. government may encourage building owners/managers to pursue is shown
in Table B5.

Table B5 | Indicative Overview of the Feasibility of Each Pathway in Mexico under the Current Policy and
Program Framework

COMPONENT
PATHWAY MEXICO
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)

= the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.

Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 59

For Mexico, all of the identified ZCB pathways are already within reach. 25 At Table B6 provides a concise overview of the enabling or disabling policies for
the same time, the slow adoption of energy efficiency makes pathways pur- each ZCB component and indicates the most likely building types for which
suing exemplary energy performance less likely to see major uptake, and the the component is considered feasible and the potential caveats for pursuing
current policies favor commercial buildings and public buildings, for which the component. Those pathway elements that are easiest to achieve under
the government holds the reins. the current framework of policies and programs are not necessarily the most
preferable ones, although Mexico is in a good position to gradually increase
For owners/managers of residential buildings, the majority of pathways will the feasibility of the more preferable pathways.
remain beyond reach unless dedicated policies—of which Mexico already
has multiple good examples—are further tailored and refined to help faciliate
this part of the market.

Table B6 | Overview of Most Feasible/Likely Zero Carbon Building Components to Pursue in Mexico under the Current Policy
and Program Framework

COMPONENT FEASIBILITY DETAILS

▪▪ Energy efficiency (EE) standards: NOM-ENER for nonresidential

a

Basic EE
Dependent on national building energy code being adopted by local
state and municipality
▪▪ fewer thanEEthree
Building code: IECC-Mexico for commercial and residential with
floors
b

Most suitable for commercial buildings ▪▪ Mexico City, Merida, Veracruz: local EE regulations
▪▪ MEPS for air conditioners
c

Pursuing exemplary EE performance still not common

▪▪ Mexico City: energy audits for select public buildings; Sustainable
Buildings Certification Program; Building Challenge Program (EE
Mainly suitable for commercial buildings: Advanced EE programs retrofit)
primarily focus on public and commercial buildings. Financial ▪▪ Energy performance rating system: public and commercial
Advanced EE
incentives are available in residential market for self-build affordable ▪▪ Green mortgage program
housing, but this pathway is not attractive for residential buildings
due to high electricity subsidies.
▪▪ EcoCasa program: financial incentives for EE in residential
affordable housing
▪▪ Lighting and appliance replacement programs

▪▪ High electricity subsidies for residential discourage photovoltaic

(PV) systems

Mainly suitable for commercial buildings: Tax depreciation and net

▪▪ Solar hot water: in Mexico City for hospitals and large commercial
(30% of demand); PROCALSOL, Nationally Appropriate Mitigation
d

metering facilitate on-site renewable energy (RE) for businesses, but Actions
On-site RE
there are limited or no on-site RE incentives for residential buildings. ▪▪ Merida: land tax reduction for households installing PV
▪▪ Net meteringcananddepreciate
Companies 100% of cost of PV
▪▪ producers net billing for residential and commercial small

▪▪ No feed-in tariffs
Suitable for commercial buildings, which may have enough remaining
▪▪ PPAs for qualified users with minimum 1 MW demand
Off-site RE
(purchase or
energy demand (minimum 1 MW) to qualify for power purchase
agreements (PPAs), green tariffs, and renewable energy credits ▪▪ demandtariffs
Green for qualified users with no (public) or minimum 1 MW
(commercial)
generation) (RECs).
Residential homeowners cannot purchase off-site RE. ▪▪ RECs for clean energy certificates that each represent 1 MW of RE
Carbon offsets
Commercial and residential building owners have options for
purchasing locally generated carbon credits.
▪▪ Voluntary carbon credit market present, selling carbon credits from
local accredited projects

Notes:
a
Mexican Official Standards (Normas Oficiales Mexicanas de Energia).
b
International Energy Conservation Code–Mexico.
c
Minimum energy performance standards.
d
Promotion of Solar Water Heaters in Mexico (Promoción de Calentadores Solares de Agua en México).
Source: WRI.

60 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

B.3.3. The impact of policies on pathway feasibility

An analysis of Mexico’s policy framework points to a number of core policies/programs responsible for enabling and disabling local players to pursue energy
efficiency and renewable energy solutions, which together can lead one to a (net) zero or nearly (net) zero carbon building. 26

Key current policies and programs that help enable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the relevant government
levels (national, state, and/or municipal) that are currently responsible for aspects of the policy as well as the type of responsibility they take on. In general, the
listed actions relate to the government’s role as regulator or as convener/facilitator in the market.

Energy Efficiency

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

▪▪ In 2014 Mexico introduced a building energy efficiency code, the IECC-Mexico, which sets requirements for
▪▪ State ▪▪ Implementadapt)
Adopt (&
commercial buildings and residential buildings with fewer than three floors.
▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ enforce &
▪▪ Design &
▪▪ ACity,rangefocusing
of programs to support or facilitate energy efficiency have been introduced, in particular in Mexico ▪▪ National implement
foremost on the public and commercial sectors. ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ Mexico has had success with several programs tackling both affordable housing and energy efficiency,
including INFONAVIT’s green mortgage program and the EcoCasa program. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
implement

Renewable Energy

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Mexico’s energy market reform in 2013 has opened up the market for nonutility RE options, including on-site
PV systems with net metering, PPAs, green energy tariffs, and RECs. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
▪▪ Mexico ▪▪ Design &
City, in particular, is promoting or mandating (for part of demand) solar hot water systems for various
building types, using incentives such as a reduction in property duties. ▪▪ Municipal implement/
enforce

▪▪ Net metering and multiple variations of it, such as net billing, are widely available for both residential and ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
commercial building owners. ▪▪ State implement
▪▪ Facilitate
▪▪ Companies are provided a 100 percent tax depreciation on the cost of installing on-site PV systems and
other renewable energy equipment. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 61

Key policies and programs—or the lack thereof—that (in part) disable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the
relevant government levels (national, state, and/or municipal) currently responsible for aspects of the policy and their specific responsibilities. In general, the
listed actions relate to the government’s role as regulator or as convener/facilitator in the market.

Energy Efficiency

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ The ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

national IECC-Mexico building code only becomes mandatory once it has been incorporated in local
▪▪ State ▪▪ Adopt (& adapt)
legislation. In most local jurisdictions the code does not yet apply due to limited capacity and limited
experience with energy efficiency. ▪▪ Municipal ▪▪ Implement
enforce
&

▪▪ Many of Mexico’s market facilitation efforts to increase energy efficiency depend almost entirely on public
and/or international funding, meaning progress made is at risk once funding runs out.
▪▪ National/
municipal
state/ ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ Some of these efforts have only been able to impact a very small portion of the market, an example being
the Sustainable Buildings Certification Program, which saw 65 buildings or tenanted portions becoming ▪▪ National/ state/ ▪▪ Design &
municipal implement
certified between 2009 and late 2016.

▪▪ High ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

subsidies for household electricity fees reduce the economic case for both energy efficiency and on-
site RE. ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement

Renewable Energy

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ High ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

electricity subsidies for households make on-site PV systems only attractive for high-consuming, high-
income households or for business, both of which pay higher electricity fees. ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design
▪▪ There is a lack of incentives for households to install on-site PV systems. ▪▪ State &

▪▪ Municipal implement

▪▪ Commercial buildings are required to have at least 1 MW in energy demand (within the same economic group ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
of interest) to engage in a PPA, register for a green energy tariff, or buy RECs. ▪▪ State ▪▪ Facilitate
▪▪ Incommercial ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
addition, PPAs and green energy tariffs are only available to qualified users, which can be public or
parties. Households cannot register for green energy tariffs. ▪▪ State ▪▪ example & lead by
Facilitate

62 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

B.3.4. Priority actions for better enabling the ZCB pathways

With enhanced policy, several of the ZCB pathways that are currently considered to be only somewhat facilitated by the current policy framework in Mexico will
become increasingly attainable and desirable, putting Mexico in a good place to become a leader in Latin America on ZCBs.

A short list of priority policy actions is provided for city governments, followed by a similar list for national and state governments, that can facilitate progress
in cities. The recommended actions acknowledge that decisive action at higher government levels is often a prerequisite to enable urban stakeholders to most
effectively act on policies that can help enable the ZCB pathways.

Energy Efficiency—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Large and major cities to incorporate the IECC-Mexico into their local regulations, thereby making the code mandatory for new buildings ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Cities to introduce (nonfinancial) incentives, an example being to give developers extra FAR for buildings that can prove exemplary
energy performance in excess of IECC-Mexico ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Cities to develop communication and outreach materials that help educate the market on how to achieve compliance with IECC-
Mexico in light of low compliance rates as exemplified by a 2016 sample from Mexico City ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ Cities to introduce challenge programs (for example, Mexico City) that encourage building owners/managers to meet or exceed an
energy reduction goal ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ Cities to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to comply with at least the IECC-
Mexico, if not yet mandatory locally, and preferably beyond ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Renewable Energy—City Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Large and major cities to introduce incentives for households to install rooftop renewables (PV, solar hot water) ▪▪ Regulator/ partner
▪▪ Cities to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to install rooftop renewables
where feasible ▪▪ Owner/ investor
▪▪ Cities to aggregate energy demand from (existing) public buildings in order to engage in off-site RE purchase (PPA or RECs) ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Energy Efficiency—National/State Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National and state governments to further advance their (already existing) support to cities for incorporating IECC-Mexico into local
regulations and how to subsequently enforce it ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ States to rapidly adopt (and, if necessary, adapt) the IECC-Mexico, if they have not done so yet ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to reconsider electricity subsidies for specific groups to increase the attractiveness of energy efficiency (or

readily available energy efficiency measures and/or accompanying this with measures that protect the affordability of electricity for ▪▪
on-site RE) measures, ensuring that the increase in energy bills can be mitigated by a drop in energy use through affordable and
Regulator
low-income households

▪▪ National government to increase the energy efficiency requirements under successful programs, such as INFONAVIT’s green mortgage ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National and state governments to further build on existing or expired efforts (for example, EcoCasa) to help educate and support
the market on energy efficiency ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ National and state government to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings
to comply with a suitable (green building) rating and certification system, such as LEED or the recently introduced E4 Energy
Performance Rating System
▪▪ Owner/ investor

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 63

Renewable Energy—National/State Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National/subnational government to introduce incentives for households to install rooftop renewables (PV panels, solar hot water) ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to consider introducing a green energy tariff for households, with a minimal markup to increase its
attractiveness ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to consider relaxing the rules around qualified users, allowing a group of buildings (in a district) with at least 1
MW in energy demand to register and thus be able to jointly engage in a PPA ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator

These actions will help enable pathways 1, 2, 3, and 4, considered only some- programs, including energy audits for selected public buildings, mainly
what feasible under the current policies. hospitals; the Sustainable Buildings Certification Program, which has seen
limited uptake; and the soon-to-be launched Building Challenge program,
Section 5 of this paper provides a comparative overview of all four countries which encourages public/private building owners or managers of existing
considered in this analysis. It shows the feasibility of each pathway under the buildings to commit to retrofitting projects that will save at least 10 percent
current policies as well as under an enhanced policy framework if the priority in energy demand (C40 2017).
actions were to be implemented. Importantly, it points to how targeted policy
enhancement can put every ZCB pathway well within Mexico’s reach. An energy performance rating system, E4, is also being created by the
national government for public and commercial buildings (AES 2017). The
B.3.5. Current policies for facilitating ZCB pathways high level of dependence on public funding, the low awareness of energy
efficiency, and the limited energy service company (ESCO) market capacity, 27
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
however, hinder growth in the existing building segment of the market
The federal government of Mexico has established a range of voluntary and
(Sustainia 2018).
mandatory energy efficiency standards for buildings and their components.
In 1995 it introduced the Mexican Official Standards (Normas Oficiales Limited financial incentives are available to stimulate interest in the new
Mexicanas de Energia, or NOM-ENER), intended to be updated every five building market beyond residential buildings. Since 2007, Mexico has pio-
years and applicable to nonresidential, new buildings, and major renova- neered two innovative affordable housing programs. Of these, INFONAVIT’s
tions. Before the introduction of a national building code in 2014, it acted as green mortgage program, Hipoteca Verde, is well-known. It now accounts
the country’s only official standards on building energy efficiency and was for 70 percent of all mortgages in the country. It gives families an additional
mandatory only if included in local state and municipal regulations, which credit on top of the actual mortgage to cover the cost of several green mea-
only a few states and municipalities did (IPEEC 2015). sures, which is paid back through the savings on their bills (INFONAVIT 2012).
In 2014, however, Mexico launched the IECC-Mexico. The building energy In addition, the EcoCasa program launched in 2013 in collaboration with
efficiency code applies to new commercial buildings as well as residential international partners. It provides housing developers with attractive loans if
buildings with fewer than three floors, and it acts as a model for local au- they offer affordable homes with a design that results in at least 20 percent
thorities. The code allows for the use of prescriptive and performance-based or 40 percent carbon emission reductions (EcoCasa 1 and 2, respectively)
approaches, identifying six climate zones and introducing requirements in compared to a determined baseline while trialing passive homes28 (EcoCasa
line with NOM-ENER (ICC 2016). Max) as well (Rebolledo 2015).
Limited resources and capabilities mean that, similar to the NOM-ENER, Nonetheless, as a result of high subsidies for household grid electricity
only a limited number of local governments, including Mexico City, have fees—with residential rates covering only 43 percent of actual cost in 2011—
so far adopted the IECC-Mexico, thereby making the code mandatory and energy efficiency does not always make economic sense. For instance, a
the governments responsible for its enforcement. The national government recent energy efficiency pilot for new affordable housing units in León, a hot
aims for a mandatory code for all buildings by 2030, with the transition from and dry area, led to 26 percent lower energy consumption. However, due to
voluntary to mandatory pending its adoption by state and local legislations. the subsidized electricity rates, the cost savings on a household’s energy
In general, however, enforcement of building codes and regulations is very bill were too low to compensate for the very modest additional cost of the
weak. Of a 2016 sample of buildings in Mexico City, for instance, 71 percent measures (Davis et al. 2018). Mexico is considering phasing out residential
failed to meet compliance thresholds. electricity subsidies by 2035.
Nonetheless, several cities, including Mexico City, Merida, and Veracruz, are Role of cities: Cities can adopt the national building code to make its require-
actively introducing (stricter) building energy efficiency requirements. Also, ments locally mandatory, enforce the code, and offer incentives and support
the energy consumption of existing buildings receives attention through to the public and private market for incorporating energy efficiency measures
various lighting replacement programs and others run by the federal govern- in existing and new buildings.
ment. In Mexico City, existing buildings have been the target of multiple

64 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

ON-SITE RE GENERATION Only qualified users can purchase green power, which puts this option out
of reach of households. Green energy contracts are entered into through bi-
With private sector commercial and industrial building owners paying higher lateral negotiation with a qualified supplier, which can be a utility or another
electricity rates than residential ones, they have a greater incentive to look provider with energy generation contracts within an area.
for alternatives to grid electricity, such as by installing on-site RE capacity.
Companies can depreciate in a single year 100 percent of the cost of PV In 2013 clean energy certificates (certificados de energia limpia; CELs) were
panels and other RE equipment that will operate for at least five years from introduced as well. CELs act like RECs and represent 1 megawatt-hour (MWh)
their tax return, resulting in about a 30 percent reduction on the capital cost of renewable energy. The CEL price fluctuates pending supply and demand,
(Climatescope 2017c). with certain high-energy consumers obligated to purchase a certain
percentage of CELs. Mandatory or voluntary CEL buyers are not provided
For residential customers, the city of Merida offers a financial incentive for with financial incentives such as tax breaks to soften the cost premium. The
installing PV panels through a reduction in the land right tax. The incen- bidding price of CELs has dropped more than 50 percent, however, since
tive, however, has not seen much uptake due to the heavily subsidized grid their introduction. To purchase CELs voluntarily, a party first has to register
electricity fees, in combination with the way the incentive was designed, a as a “voluntary entity.” Furthermore, it is not possible to buy a part of a CEL,
general lack of awareness, and an inability to finance the panels with bank or less than 1 MWh (CRE 2016).
interest rates as high as 16 percent for a loan (Schierenbeck 2014). More
support is available for those interested in installing solar hot water heaters. Role of cities: Cities can educate public and private sector actors on the op-
In particular, Mexico City supports or requires solar hot water systems for a portunities for off-site RE purchase and generation.
range of new and existing buildings.
OFF-SITE RE GENERATION
In 2013 Mexico also introduced net metering at the time of its Mexican Mexico’s self-supply scheme has been allowing parties to either purchase
energy market reform. Net metering is available for residential users with or commission the generation of off-site RE by using the electricity grid. The
systems less than 10 kW capacity and for commercial users with systems purchaser of the RE has to hold a share in the generation assets. The cost for
less than 30 kW capacity, with credits accruing in the following month’s using the grid is subsidized for self-supply, with the transmission charge be-
bill. Any surplus energy fed into the grid, beyond what the user needs on an ing independent of the actual distance between generation and consump-
annual basis, is paid out after one year at a price equal to the variable cost tion assets. Due to lower generation costs, the supply scheme is dominated
of generating energy, which, in most parts of Mexico, is not very attractive by wind power plants (Schierenbeck 2014). After 2019, however, the scheme
cost wise. will be discontinued and is currently limited to the amount of permits issued
before the energy reform.
Several additional options were introduced in 2013, including a net billing
system under which all energy purchased from the grid is charged at the Role of cities: Not applicable.
regular price. A third option concerns the total sale of on-site RE genera-
tion, whereby all energy generated is sold to the grid at a price reflecting CARBON OFFSETTING
the local marginal cost of generation. The fourth option of isolated supply Mexico is an active participant in the CDM for generating carbon credits and
and local generation allows for local RE generation and distribution within hosts hundreds of CDM projects. A number of carbon offset projects have
a private local “grid,” without being connected to the public grid. As a result, also been implemented under voluntary carbon offset schemes. 29 Organiza-
the producer does not have to pay transmission and distribution charges tions such as Plan Vivo, the Verified Carbon Standard, the Gold Standard, and
(SENER 2018). the Climate Action Reserve all have registered and issued voluntary carbon
offsets to projects in Mexico implemented under each program’s respective
Role of cities: Cities can provide incentives, regulations, and support to standards (Climate Action Reserve 2015).
facilitate or mandate the uptake of on-site RE for certain building types, both
for rooftop PV panels and solar hot water systems. In addition, local programs exist for consumers and companies to offset
their carbon footprint. A major one is the Neutralizate program by ProNatura,
OFF-SITE RE PURCHASE which was created in 2008. It supports Mexican indigenous communities to
As a result of the Mexican Energy Reform introduced in 2013, the options develop forestry projects that sell certified offsets in the voluntary carbon
for off-site RE generation and purchase have greatly increased. With the market (Climate Action Reserve 2017).
introduction of the remote generation option, for instance, qualified regis-
tered users can now engage in PPAs for the supply of remotely generated Role of cities: Cities can educate stakeholders on the options for offsetting
RE. There are no minimum requirements for public sector users to become their carbon footprint through the voluntary carbon offset market, thereby fuel-
qualified. Private sector users, however, must have a minimum of 1 MW ing greater demand and awareness, although ensuring that they first consider
aggregated energy demand within the same economic group of interest as energy efficiency and renewable energy options and that they thoroughly
a threshold. It is allowed to have multiple registries of at least 1 MW each. consider the quality of these credits in their analysis of suitable options.
Households cannot become qualified users (SENER 2018).

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 65

B.4. Kenya holds become less poor over time. For grid-connected buildings, particularly
commercial ones, the combination of energy efficiency and the installation
B.4.1. Overview of solar hot water systems with an increasingly green grid puts a number of
In Kenya, green buildings are a nascent segment of the market, although zero carbon building pathways within close reach. At the same time,
organizations such as the Kenya Green Building Society (KGBS) are actively although the Kenyan policy environment is increasingly favorable to ZCBs,
trying to accelerate their uptake. No dedicated (net) ZCBs have been built to the local market may still need to catch up to enable nonpolicy elements of
date, but multiple green building certification schemes have been intro- various ZCB pathways.
duced. Several advanced buildings throughout the nation, including in the
capital city, Nairobi, now incorporate a range of green features. Examples
B.4.2. Pathways at a glance
include the regional United Nations Environment Programme and UN head- ZCB PATHWAYS ENABLED THROUGH CURRENT FRAMEWORK OF
quarters, the regional Coca-Cola headquarters, Strathmore University, and POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
the Learning Resource Center of the Catholic University of East Africa. 30 Kenya’s policy and program framework for basic and advanced EE, on- and
off-site RE, and carbon offsetting makes a number of ZCB pathways already
Building energy efficiency is an emerging topic, supported by Kenya’s
within reach today. The feasibility of each available ZCB pathway that the
revised building code for new buildings (2016)31 as well its Energy Manage-
government may encourage building owners/managers to pursue is shown
ment Regulations for high-consuming existing buildings. At the same time,
in Table B7.
70 percent of Kenya’s installed electricity capacity is already supplied by
renewable energy sources, mainly hydro- and geothermal power and, to a For Kenya, several of the identified ZCB pathways are already within reach. 32
lesser extent, solar and wind power. Additional regulations (Energy Regula- At the same time, the very limited experience with energy efficiency will
tory Commission 2012) also require many (new and existing) buildings to only see limited uptake of those pathways pursuing exemplary energy
install solar water heating systems, although the noncompliance penalty performance. In addition, the current absence of net metering—although a
for existing buildings was annulled in summer 2018, likely undermining its net-metering scheme has been proposed—makes installing on-site RE to
effectiveness. Furthermore, the country focuses on rapid expansion of grid meet 100 percent of demand most attractive for off-grid buildings.
connectivity for those already living near existing grid infrastructure (World
Bank 2015a). Together with the lack of options for purchasing off-site RE, the feasibility of
multiple pathways is hampered by the limited policy framework that enables
Nonetheless, many households are not yet connected to the grid, with Kenya grid-connected consumers to tap into RE options. Although Kenya’s grid is
witnessing major growth in recent years in the off-grid solar market, facili- already majority powered by RE, building owners/managers may require car-
tated by pay-as-you-go payment models and financial transfer systems like bon offsetting to make up for the shortfall in reducing operational emissions
mobile phone-based M-Pesa (Power Africa 2016). There is also quite a push by 100 percent.
for cleaner cookstoves, with close to 70 percent of the population relying on
biomass or fossil fuels such as kerosene for their cooking needs (Hivos 2012). The result of this is reflected in Table B8, which shows that only a few
pathway components are relatively easy to pursue. It provides a concise
Together, this could mean that a large number of Kenya’s poorer households overview of the enabling or disabling policies for each ZCB component and
currently can be considered to live in zero or nearly zero carbon homes indicates the most likely building types for which the component is consid-
through on-site solar or green grid electricity—albeit not always reliable ered feasible as well as potential caveats for pursuing the component.
or available around the clock—in combination with clean cookstoves. This
household energy consumption may increase in the future as poorer house-

66 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table B7 | Indicative Overview of the Feasibility of Each Pathway in Kenya under the Current Policy and Program Framework

COMPONENT
PATHWAY KENYA
BASIC EE ADVANCED EE ON-SITE RE OFF-SITE RE CARBON OFFSETS
1 (if needed)

Exemplary energy 2 (if needed)

performance 3 (if needed)

5 (if needed)

Minimum energy 6 (if needed)

efficiency 7 (if needed)

= pathway is not sufficiently supported = the pathway is feasible under current policy but with limited application—either for specific segments of = the pathway is sufficiently
by the current policy framework. the building market and/or critical policy elements are insufficiently developed to make the pathway attractive. facilitated through current policy.

Notes: a The minimum required level of energy efficiency (EE) achieved by complying with local codes and standards.
b
More ambitious energy performance that goes beyond minimum regulatory requirements.
c
Recommended only in cases where efficiency measures and renewable energy (RE) sources cannot meet 100 percent of energy demand.
Source: WRI.

Table B8 | Overview of Most Feasible/Likely Zero Carbon Building Components to Pursue in Kenya under the Current Policy
and Program Framework

COMPONENT FEASIBILITY DETAILS

▪▪ Building EE code: new buildings

Basic EE Basic energy efficiency (EE) is feasible if enforced. ▪▪ annually
Energy Management Regulations: existing buildings with more than 180,000 kWh

▪▪ MEPS for air conditioners (emerging)

a

▪▪ NoGreengovernment incentives
Only front-runners are likely to use advanced EE due
▪▪ KGBS building rating and certification schemes
Advanced EE to limited market experience with EE and a lack of EE
▪▪ EE finance
b
training and support
incentives.
▪▪
▪▪ Building code: solar hot water for residential; all to consider photovoltaic/wind power
100% on-site renewable energy (RE) is most attractive for
▪▪ Solar water heating regulations for existing buildings with more than 100 L/day
On-site RE
off-grid buildings due to current lack of net-metering policy
▪▪ Net metering coming (62% credit for every 1 MWh)
(though it is in the pipeline).
▪▪ Clean cookstove
Off-grid pay-as-you-go solar market
New residential buildings require on-site solar hot water.
▪▪ tax breaks

Policies do not sufficiently facilitate this component. ▪▪ NoNo green energy tariffs, but grid electricity 70% RE
Off-site RE
The exception is that in some regions, 100% of local grid RE ▪▪ No renewable
power purchase agreement option
(purchase or
is already supplied through RE, though this may be difficult ▪▪ Off-site generation
energy credits
generation)
to verify. ▪▪ maybe possible

Carbon offsets
Building owners have options for purchasing locally
generated carbon credits.
▪▪ Voluntary
projects
carbon credit market present, selling carbon credits from local accredited

Notes:
a
Minimum energy performance standards.
b
Kenya Green Building Society.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 67

B.4.3. The impact of policies on pathway feasibility
Kenya’s policy framework points to a number of core policies responsible for enabling and disabling local players to pursue energy efficiency and renewable
energy solutions, which together can lead one to a (net) zero or nearly (net) zero carbon building. 33

Key current policies and programs that help enable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the relevant government
levels (national, state, and/or municipal) that are currently responsible for aspects of the policy as well as the type of responsibility they take on. In general, the
listed actions relate to the government’s role as regulator as well as market facilitator. In Kenya, we even see the opposite situation, whereby a private sector
initiative helps educate and train the public sector.

Energy Efficiency

ENABLING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Aenergy ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

new building code was adopted in 2016, replacing the previous 1968 code and incorporating various
efficiency measures or considerations.34
▪▪ Counties ▪▪ enforce &
Implement

▪▪ The KGBS actively promotes the principles and benefits of green buildings to both private and public sector
actors. ▪▪ Private sector ▪▪ Implement
Renewable Energy

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Kenya’s grid is already over 70 percent supplied by renewable energy sources, and the government is intent ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
on further increasing the volume of renewable energy generation. ▪▪ Counties implement
▪▪ Implement
▪▪ Anneeds.
active enabling environment is allowing many off-grid households to use solar systems for their energy
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ Government is actively expanding access to grid electricity for those living near existing grid infrastructure. ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ The new building code of 2016 and the solar water heating regulations of 2012 require certain (new)
buildings to install solar hot water systems.
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & enforce
Key policies and programs—or the lack thereof—that (in part) disable the feasibility of ZCB pathways include the following. They are accompanied by the
relevant government levels (national, state, and/or municipal) currently responsible for aspects of the policy and their specific responsibilities. In general, the
listed actions relate to a government’s role as regulator, as market convener/facilitator, and as owner/investor of public building stock.

68 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Energy Efficiency

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Kenya’s ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue

47 counties are responsible for building code enforcement. Considering their limited exposure to
energy efficiency, this may prove challenging. ▪▪ Counties ▪▪ Implement
enforce
&

▪▪ Design &

▪▪ No incentives or facilitating policies are in place to support building energy efficiency. ▪▪ National implement
▪▪ Counties ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ Design &
▪▪ There is an absence of programs that show government leading by example on energy efficiency for their ▪▪ National implement
public building stock. ▪▪ Counties ▪▪ Design &
implement

Renewable Energy

DISABLING/LACKING POLICIES GOVERNMENT LEVEL & RESPONSIBILITY

▪▪ Design &

▪▪ Limited incentives or facilitating policies are in place to support on-site RE beyond the off-grid market. ▪▪ National implement
▪▪ Counties ▪▪ Design &
implement

▪▪ Nopercent
net-metering policy is currently in place. A proposed policy would see on-site RE producers receive a 62 ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
credit for every 1 MWh exported to the grid. ▪▪ Utilities ▪▪ Implement
▪▪ Nomakes
green energy tariffs, limited PPA options, and no RECs are available as off-site RE purchase options. This
meeting a building’s energy demand by 100 percent off-site RE only possible in regions where 100
percent of local grid electricity is already supplied through renewable energy; the latter may be difficult to ▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & issue
verify.

▪▪ The penalty for noncompliance with the solar water heating regulations of 2012 was publicly annulled in
summer 2018 for existing buildings, after providing them with a five-year grace period for installation, making
high uptake among existing buildings quite unlikely.
▪▪ National ▪▪ Design & enforce

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 69

B.4.4. Priority actions for better enabling the ZCB pathways
With enhanced policy, Kenya can become an emerging leader not only in the off-grid solar market but also in the grid-connected building energy market in
Africa. This is due to the country’s strong position in both the off-grid solar energy market and the off-site RE market. Although some of the ZCB pathways are
currently already somewhat in reach as a result of the current policy framework, implementing the priority actions will make these pathways increasingly attain-
able and desirable.

A short list of priority policy actions is provided for city governments, followed by a similar list for national and state governments, that can facilitate progress
in cities. The recommended actions acknowledge that decisive action at higher government levels is often a prerequisite to enable urban stakeholders to most
effectively act on policies that can help enable the ZCB pathways.

Energy Efficiency—County Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Urban counties to tie compliance with the new code to building approval forms and processes, thereby facilitating its mandatory
character ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Urban counties to introduce (nonfinancial) incentives, an example being to give developers extra FAR for buildings that can prove
exemplary energy performance in excess of the new building code ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Urban counties to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to comply with at least
the minimum level of a suitable green building rating and certification system, such as KGBS’s ratified Green Star, the Green Africa
Building Standards and Certification, LEED by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), or the Excellence in Design for Greater ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Efficiency (EDGE) by the International Finance Corporation (IFC)

Renewable Energy—County Governments

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ Urban counties to introduce incentives for rooftop renewables (PV panels, solar hot water systems), building on the successful
examples of the off-grid solar market ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ Urban counties to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to install rooftop
renewables where feasible ▪▪ Owner/ investor
Energy Efficiency—National Government

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National government to provide support and training to counties (for instance, in collaboration with the KGBS) on energy efficiency
and how to implement and help enforce the new building code ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ National governments to develop communication and outreach materials (potentially in collaboration with the KGBS) that counties
can use to educate the market on energy efficiency and how to achieve compliance with the new building code ▪▪ Convener/ facilitator
▪▪ National government to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to comply with at
least the minimum level of a suitable green building rating and certification system, such as KGBS’s Green Star or the Green Africa
Building Standards and Certification
▪▪ Owner/ investor

70 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Renewable Energy—National Government

POLICY PRIORITY ACTIONS ROLE

▪▪ National government to reconsider the proposed net-metering policy to ensure that the proposed net-metering credit is aligned
with its goals ▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to consider opening up the current PPA route between independent power producers (IPP) and the national
grid to nongrid energy purchasers interested in purchasing directly from IPPs, such as building owners/managers with a large
energy demand
▪▪ Regulator
▪▪ National government to lead by example by requiring new public buildings and major retrofits of public buildings to install rooftop
renewables where feasible ▪▪ Owner/ investor
These actions will support the feasibility of pathways 1, 3, and 7, which are rating tool, EDGE; and also offers USGBC’s LEED scheme. Besides support-
not considered feasible under the current policy framework. It will also ing and educating professionals in the private sector, the KGBS also trains
help better facilitate pathways 5 and 6, which are currently only somewhat government officials from a number of Kenyan counties, including Nairobi
feasible. City County, and works alongside several development finance institutions
and the Kenya Green Bond program to unlock foreign and local currency
Section 5 of this paper provides a comparative overview of all four countries green finance for buildings targeting green certification. 37
considered in this analysis. It shows the feasibility of each pathway under
the current policies as well as under an enhanced policy framework if the In 2016 another green building certification scheme, the Green Africa Build-
priority actions were to be implemented. Importantly, it points to how tar- ing Standards and Certification, was introduced in Kenya by the Green Africa
geted policy enhancements can put many ZCB pathways well within Kenya’s Foundation (Wahinya 2016). Across all of these schemes, including LEED, 38
reach. around 24 green buildings have been registered in Kenya so far, although not
all have pursued actual certification (IFC 2017).
B.4.5. Current policies for facilitating ZCB pathways
Together, these measures provide a good start to make Kenya’s building
ENERGY EFFICIENCY stock more energy efficient, although capacity building at private and public
In 2009 Kenya started a review of its building code, which was still based on level, proper enforcement by local counties, and a sufficiently attractive
British standards introduced in 1968. The new 2016 mandatory building code, enabling environment that facilitates and encourages action will help deter-
based in part on the Eurocode, 35 incorporates energy efficiency through a mine to what extent Kenya will see real uptake of building energy efficiency
number of passive and active design measures or considerations (NPBA in the near future.
2009). The new building code also introduces penalties for noncompliance;
however, policy enforcement is seen as a challenge and is regularly lacking Role of cities: Cities can encourage local counties to enforce existing EE
at both national and local government levels (Were et al. 2015). Kenya has 47 regulations; support local green building schemes, for instance, by setting
counties that have to adopt, adapt, and enforce the code, but many of them an example through publicly owned building stock and/or by incentivizing
have had limited exposure to green building and building energy efficiency, certification under these schemes; and introduce (nonfinancial) incentives for
and they may grapple with limited capacity. developers to incorporate energy efficiency.

Preceding the adoption of the new code, the Energy Management Regula- ON-SITE RE GENERATION
tions were introduced in 2012, requiring certain commercial, industrial, and The new building code, introduced in 2016, requires new housing develop-
institutional buildings with high energy consumption to develop an energy ments to have solar hot water for bathroom use and promotes the use
management plan. These facilities have to undertake an energy audit at of on-site PV systems and wind power. Solar water heating regulations
least every three years, prepare an energy investment plan, submit annual introduced in 2012 make it mandatory also for existing buildings with hot
implementation papers, and prove that at least 50 percent of the identified water requirements exceeding 100 liters per day to install and use solar
and recommended savings are being realized. These regulations are also water heaters. Nonetheless, in summer 2018 the penalty for noncompliance
expected to provide government with valuable data on energy consumption was publicly annulled because it was considered to threaten the affordability
for benchmarking purposes (Climatescope 2017a). However, enforcement of of low-income housing, making enforcement officers powerless to ensure
the regulations thus far has been limited. implementation of the regulations (Karume 2018).
At the same time, no financial or nonfinancial incentives are in place to Net metering is currently being considered for on-site RE systems of 1 MW
encourage more energy efficient buildings. Building owner/manager action or less, although owners of such systems would only receive a 62 percent
beyond the current regulations, if enforced, is mainly fueled by the efforts of credit for every 1 MWh exported to the local grid (Climatescope 2018). FITs, on
nonprofit or private organizations and initiatives, such as by the KGBS. The the other hand, are already in place for utility-, commercial-, and industrial-
KGBS has been licensed to use the (originally Australian) Green Star building scale generation of renewable energy, with rates set for a 20-year period for
certification scheme;36 supports the IFC in promoting its green building

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 71

producers. For systems with a capacity over 10 MW, this may be replaced Currently, Kenya has about 10 licensed IPPs, which have PPAs in place
with an auction system. A backlog of FIT applications, however, results in to supply energy to Kenya’s grid. With consumers not having a choice of
few projects actually moving forward. In addition, most building owners third-party suppliers via PPAs, the current situation does little to encourage
are unlikely to generate renewable energy at a sufficient scale to qualify renewable energy choice for building owners.
(Climatescope 2017b).
Nonetheless, in 2015 already 70 percent of grid electricity was being
For off-grid areas, 15–20 percent of Kenyan households already use solar supplied by renewable energy sources, with this amount still expected to
systems, and other energy-access solutions are taking off, including green increase; this was due to an increase in geothermal energy, followed by
minigrids, biodigesters, and microhydropower systems. This leads to hydropower (currently the dominant source) and wind power. This means
reduced consumption and expenditure on kerosene and diesel for many that even without active options for renewable energy purchases, such as by
off-grid households. One of the success factors has been privatization of the choosing a green energy tariff or by engaging in a PPA with an independent
energy market, attracting investment into decentralized renewables and producer, grid-connected building owners may already have most of their
fueling both innovation and competition. The government has also exempted energy being supplied by renewable energy.
several of these off-grid products from taxes and tariffs, while having no
kerosene or diesel subsidies that can negatively impact the financial attrac- With a low official electrification rate of around 36 percent in 2014, Kenya is
tiveness of cleaner alternatives (SEforAll 2017). also actively expanding access to safe and legal grid electricity through its
Last Mile Connectivity Project. This initiative particularly targets “under grid”
Besides a lack of grid electricity, 70 percent of Kenyan households lack clean connections for households that already live “under the grid” or basically
fuel options for cooking. Kenya now has one of the highest availabilities near existing grid infrastructure (World Bank 2015a).
of improved cookstoves in the region, with local production and a healthy
market in both urban and peri-urban areas (Hivos 2012). In 2016 the national Role of cities: Cities can support local expansion of renewable energy genera-
government removed a 16 percent value-added tax on liquefied petroleum tion and Last Mile Connectivity efforts.
gas, which hindered the uptake of cleaner cooking fuels and stoves, while it
simultaneously announced an increase in the cost of kerosene. It also low- CARBON OFFSETTING
Kenya has a variety of carbon reduction projects available through the CDM
ered import duties on energy efficient cookstoves, although the latter does
not benefit the affordability of the many clean cookstoves being manufac- and the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
tured locally (Clean Cooking Alliance 2016). (REDD) scheme, and companies can buy carbon credits through official
channels. 39 Kenya Airways, for instance, has a voluntary carbon offsetting
Role of cities: Cities can enforce solar hot water regulations, facilitate local scheme for travelers that has been investing in a REDD project protecting
expansion of on-site RE generation, and facilitate and incentivize off-grid dryland forests in southeastern Kenya (Wildlife Works 2013).
clean energy solutions.
Carbon offsetting of operational energy or embodied (construction-related)
OFF-SITE RE PURCHASE carbon emissions is therefore a viable option, particularly for commercial or
Kenya’s energy generation and distribution planning is undertaken on the public sector building owners, and it can be used to support projects and
basis of a 20-year rolling Least Cost Power Development Plan. The new reduce emissions within Kenya.
Energy Bill, written in 2017 and signed into law in March 2019, aims to liberal-
Role of cities: Cities can facilitate and support local carbon reduction projects
ize both power distribution and retail; therefore, it is expected to provide
that generate carbon credits and lead by example by offsetting public sector
enhanced opportunities for renewable energy producers.
emissions, although ensuring that they first consider energy efficiency and
renewable energy options and thoroughly consider the quality of these credits
in their analysis of suitable options.

72 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

APPENDIX C. DEFINITIONS AND CONCEPTS

In this appendix, Table C1 provides short definitions40 of a number of commonly used terms throughout the paper. It is followed by Table C2, which presents
a concise overview of a number of different energy and carbon-neutral building concepts that readers may come across in literature or in discussions of the
topic. It provides definitions (similar to those provided in Section 1.2) complemented by a short summary of the key principles of each concept as well as their
boundaries and delineations.

Table C1 | Relevant Definitions

Energy consumed at the building site as measured at the site boundary.

Building Note: At a minimum, this includes heating, cooling, ventilation, domestic hot water, indoor and outdoor lighting,
energy use plug loads, process energy, elevators and conveying systems, and intrabuilding transportation systems.
Contributions from on- or off-site renewable energy systems are not included in building energy use.

Energy generated from a source that is not depleted when used.

Renewable
energy Note: The most common forms of renewable energy are photovoltaic systems, solar thermal power plants, (off-
site) wind turbines, hydroelectric plants, geothermal power plants, and geothermal heat pumps.

On-site
renewable Renewable energy generated by systems within the site boundaries of the building.
energy

Off-site
renewable Renewable energy generated by systems not located within the building site boundaries.
energy

Additional energy efficiency savings or renewable energy generating capacity are generated as a result of and in
Additionality
proportion to the energy demand of the zero carbon building.a

Net A system through which excess on-site generated renewable energy can be transferred to the electricity grid and
metering the producer is compensated for it, often by the amount provided being credited against the retail price.
$

A system through which (excess) on-site generated renewable energy is transferred to the electricity grid,
Feed-in tariff
receiving payment for every unit delivered.
$
Market price

Carbon A reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases that would not otherwise have occurred, made in order to
offset compensate for or to offset greenhouse gas emissions occurring elsewhere.
+CO2 -CO2

Note:
a
Definition inspired by Architecture 2030’s Zero Code.
Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 73

Table C2 | Zero Carbon and Energy-Related Terms, Defined

DEFINITION
CONCEPT
KEY PRINCIPLES CONSIDERATIONS/LIMITATIONS

NET ZERO ENERGY

An energy efficient building that produces enough on-site or nearby renewable energy (RE) to meet building operations’ energy
consumption annually on a net basis (meaning the building delivers at least the same amount of renewable energy to the grid as
the grid uses over the course of a year).
Note: Not all RE is considered to be carbon-free in its generation.

▪▪ Efficiency considered first before meeting its (remaining) ▪▪ Not all buildings have sufficient (roof) space for installing
on-site renewables, particularly in the case of mid- to high-
energy demands with RE
▪▪ Generates
ZERO rise buildings
annual basis
as much RE on-site or nearby as it uses on an
▪▪ Daily on-site generation and demand profiles may not

▪▪ For new buildings, does not use on-site combustion (fossil

fuels)
match one-on-one, requiring grid electricity—often from
power plants that burn fossil fuels—to meet demand during

▪▪ For existing buildings, may use on-site combustion from

existing sources, such as gas for cooking
those times
▪▪ May use renewable but potentially carbon-intensive energy
sources, such as biomass

NEARLY NET ZERO ENERGY

An energy efficient building that supplies most (but not all) of its annual energy use through on- or near-site RE sources.

▪▪ Deep efficiency considered first before meeting part of its

remaining energy demands through RE ▪▪ Not all buildings have sufficient (roof) space for installing
▪▪ Generates
nearby
some but not all of its RE demand on-site or on-site renewables, particularly in the case of mid- to high-
rise buildings
▪▪ May become net zero energy if adding (more) on-site or
nearby RE or purchasing off-site RE
▪▪ Installing on-site RE may not always be cost-effective, and
purchasing RE may not be an option
▪▪ For ▪▪
NEARLY
ZERO new buildings, does not use on-site combustion (fossil May use renewable but potentially carbon-intensive energy
fuels) sources, such as biomass
▪▪ For existing buildings, may use on-site combustion from
existing sources, such as gas for cooking
Net zero energy ready ▪▪ Similar
generated
to net zero energy except that no on-site RE is being ▪▪ Without the actual installation of PV panels, this simply
represents an energy efficient building
▪▪ Instead, buildings have the provisions in place to install
photovoltaic (PV) panels in the future
▪▪ Only suitable for buildings that have sufficient space to
become net zero energy by installing PV panels
NET ZERO CARBON
An energy efficient building that produces on-site, or procures, enough carbon-free RE to meet building operations’ energy
consumption annually.
Note: Zero carbon is often used interchangeably with net zero carbon, whether or not the building uses potentially fossil fuel–
derived grid electricity to make up for temporary gaps in on-site RE generation to meet demand or uses carbon offsets. If it does,
it is usually called a “net” zero building.

▪▪ Efficiency considered first before meeting (remaining)

energy demands with carbon-free RE
▪▪ Daily on-site generation and demand profiles may not
match one-on-one, requiring the use of grid electricity—
ZERO
▪▪ Generates on-site or nearby or procures as much carbon-
free RE—or carbon offsets—as it uses on an annual basis
often from power plants that burn fossil fuels—to meet
demand during those times
▪▪ For existing buildings, may use on-site combustion from ▪ ▪ Does not usually include embodied carbon
existing sources, such as gas for cooking, offset by the
purchase or generation of carbon-free RE or RE credits
▪ ▪ Does not use renewable but potentially carbon-intensive
energy sources, such as biomass

74 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

Table C2 | Zero Carbon and Energy-Related Terms, Defined (Cont’d)

DEFINITION
CONCEPT
KEY PRINCIPLES CONSIDERATIONS/LIMITATIONS

(NET) ZERO CARBON, INCL. EMBODIED CARBON

An energy efficient building that produces on-site, or procures, enough carbon-free RE to meet building operations’ energy
consumption annually and also over its life cycle, compensating for the carbon embodied in the building’s construction; an
emerging goal is to also include embodied carbon arising from the materials, machinery, and equipment used in building
construction, maintenance, and repair, into the net zero definition.

▪▪ Same ▪▪ Asgridsbuildings
INCLUDING
EMBODIED as (net) zero carbon, plus become more energy efficient and electricity
▪▪ reduced orcarbon
CARBON
embodied emissions (e.g., from construction) are greener, embodied carbon will represent a larger
offset share of a building’s footprint

(NET) ZERO CARBON PORTFOLIO

Refers to a group of energy efficient buildings, sharing a similar characteristic and usually under the same ownership or
management, with carbon-free RE demands mainly provided for within the boundaries of the portfolio rather than at the level of
individual buildings.

▪▪ Same as (net) zero carbon, but ▪▪ Mid- to high-rise buildings may not have much space for
ZERO
▪▪ boundaries ofREtheis generated
carbon-free and exchanged within the
building portfolio
on-site renewables; instead, total RE demand is provided
for within the portfolio of buildings

(NET) ZERO CARBON DISTRICT

Refers to a group of energy efficient buildings within a geographically defined urban area, with carbon-free RE mainly supplied
through nearby off-site sources, generating clean energy at the district level.

▪▪ Same as (net) zero carbon, but ▪▪ Mid- to high-rise buildings may not have much space for
ZERO
ZERO
▪▪ carbon-free RE is mainly supplied through nearby off-site
sources, generating clean energy at the district level
on-site renewables; instead, their RE demand is provided
for at the district level

Source: WRI.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 75

APPENDIX D. ZCB COMPONENTS (CLASP 2017). At the same time, many studies have shown that efficiency is
often (one of) the cheapest energy resources a country has available when
Section 2.2 of this paper discusses the different components available to us accounting for all costs of energy generation and provision.
for reducing a building’s operational carbon emissions to zero. These compo-
nents, being basic and advanced EE, on- and off-site RE, and carbon offsets, The “efficiency first” principle thus means first considering the potential for
are explained further in this appendix. energy efficiency before converting conventional building or appliance en-
ergy supplies to renewable energy sources and prioritizing those efficiency
D.1. Energy Efficiency improvements when they are more cost-effective than energy genera-
tion. Increasingly, governments are starting to recognize the importance
D.1.1. Minimum energy efficiency (basic EE) of encouraging building owners/managers to go beyond local codes and
The simplest way for a government to accelerate the uptake of (net) ZCB standards in terms of their energy efficiency efforts.
would be to require buildings to demonstrate compliance or alignment with
An example is the city of Beijing, China, which not only has a local building
locally applicable energy efficiency codes and standards in combination
code more stringent than the national one but also requires new develop-
with on- or off-site RE for meeting remaining energy demand or even the
ments to conform with the minimum level (one star) of China’s Three-Star
use of carbon offsets. Minimum energy efficiency is therefore the baseline or
green building rating program and hands out subsidies per square meter
prerequisite for any (net) zero carbon building.
of floor area for those pursuing higher (i.e., two- or three-star performance
Nonetheless, making sure that a building adheres to local regulatory policies levels) (Yu et al. 2014).
on energy efficiency is not a given. In many countries, codes and standards
are voluntary, mandatory but poorly or not enforced, or waiting to become D.2. Renewable Energy
mandatory through a cumbersome process that transfers responsibility from D.2.1. On-site RE and storage
the national to the local level.
Depending on the building type and the locally available solar energy
Building efficiency codes and standards. The minimum energy ef- potential, buildings can meet all or part of their demand with on-site gener-
ficiency level required for a building is usually laid down in a mandatory or ated renewables. Usually, these involve rooftop PV panels or solar hot water
voluntary code, sometimes also called a standard.41 Building energy codes systems. In many countries, subsidies or tax credits are available for the
are most commonly focused on new buildings, but they can also be applied purchase of PV panels to overcome high up-front capital costs, although
to existing buildings, usually during renovations. There is no single energy the cost of PV panels has rapidly come down in recent years. Net metering
code or set of requirements that will suit all types of buildings, economies, and FITs also help to further boost uptake. This has allowed Germany, for
and climates. instance, to now generate around 7 percent of the country’s total energy
demand from rooftop PV panels.
Typically, building energy codes set different energy performance and
compliance requirements for residential and nonresidential buildings while Although on-site RE generation is preferable as a ZCB pathway over sourcing
tailoring them to existing best practices for the area’s climate as well as lo- off-site renewables, certain building types, such as mid- to high-rise build-
cally available resources and technologies. Codes are usually tightened over ings, may have limited opportunities for on-site generation under currently
time—for example, through three yearly code upgrade cycles. Two-thirds of available technologies. In addition, the solar energy potential varies depend-
countries, however, still do not have mandatory energy codes in place for all ing on climate, with sunnier climates generally having greater potential.
relevant building segments (GBPN 2015).
D.2.2. Off-site RE purchase
Appliance standards. MEPS specify the performance requirements for an
energy-using device, effectively limiting the maximum amount of energy that A variety of options may be available, pending local circumstances, for
may be consumed by that product in performing a specified task. Examples the purchase of off-grid RE, either for all of a ZCB’s energy needs or for the
are MEPS for air conditioners (ACs), which are commonly applied in buildings portion that cannot be supplied through on-site RE. Ideally, a building can
to cool internal spaces. Despite the rapid worldwide growth in AC use, in prove that it has a long-term commitment in place for purchasing renewable
many countries MEPS are still nonexistent, outdated, under development, or energy. In addition, it would be preferable if the purchased energy meets the
have significant room for improvement based on the best AC models already additionality criterion, thus ensuring that a building’s purchase of renewable
available in the global market (CLASP 2011). In India, for instance, the average energy contributes to the generation of new, “additional” renewable energy,
AC sold in 2016 had an energy performance equivalent to a three-star rating, thereby expanding the total pool of renewable energy supply (Architecture
on a scale of one to five stars as introduced by the Indian government for 2030 2018).
rating ACs (Emerson Climate Technologies 2012).
Green energy tariffs. Some energy retailers, such as local utilities, offer
their customers the option to purchase 100 percent renewable energy from
D.1.2. Exemplary energy performance (advanced EE)
the grid for all or part of their energy needs. Often this green energy comes
Many countries do not have mandatory building efficiency codes and/or at a cost premium versus “gray” energy. Currently, green energy tariffs are
MEPS for building appliances in place, and where they do exist, there is often mostly confined to North America, the European Union, Australia, and New
considerable untapped scope for greater energy efficiency performance Zealand.

76 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

In 2015, for example, 58 percent of households in the Netherlands had a D.2.3. Off-site RE generation
green power contract with their utility, generally at a very low cost premium.
One reason for this high uptake has been the introduction of an “ecotax” Instead of purchasing renewable energy, building developers/owners may
in 1996, which increased energy prices for all consumers except those also generate their own renewable energy at an off-site location. They can
purchasing green electricity (MacDonald 2016). do so by purchasing or leasing a separate parcel of land and constructing a
renewable energy system on it. While the actual building continues to draw
Power purchase agreements. Beyond the grid, there is an increasing power from the grid, the off-site renewable energy system delivers power to
range of options to purchase renewable energy directly from solar or the grid, such as through a FIT (Architecture 2030 2018). Increasingly, large
wind energy projects. For example, buyers may unite in a syndicate or corporations, including Apple, Google, and Facebook, are investing in off-site
collaborative to aggregate their energy demand and strike an attractive RE facilities to cover part or all of the energy needs of their facilities.
deal with a renewable energy project developer. Developers may also offer
small chunks of renewable energy from their off-site RE project for sale to D.3. Carbon Offsets
individual buyers. A more uncommon means of getting to a ZCB would be to use carbon offset
For the actual PPA signed between a buyer and the renewable energy solutions, equivalent to the carbon footprint generated by using nonrenew-
project developer, we can distinguish between physical and virtual able energy for part or all of the building’s energy needs. This gap could be
PPAs. Physical PPAs on-sell excess power from a purchasing party’s own referring to only grid-purchased energy, however in some countries power
renewable energy investments (e.g., a large company invests in a wind farm cuts are so common that buildings commonly have diesel backup genera-
and on-sells the excess it does not need), which is only possible in markets tors, which can also generate considerable emissions.
that are not tightly regulated, such as competitive access or direct retail To compensate for these carbon emissions, a similar amount of carbon
markets that allow “retail electricity choice,” giving energy consumers the offsets would be purchased or generated. The types of carbon offsets range
ability to buy power competitively from an entity other than the local utility. from planting trees to those resulting from investments in clean energy or
Virtual PPAs, which make up the majority of PPAs, let a party buy clean energy efficiency projects elsewhere to generate carbon savings. The result-
energy from a project at a long-term fixed price without technically being ing emission reductions are often sold as so-called carbon credits. A variety
the owner of the purchased power—for instance, a company continues of quality standards are available for carbon credits to ensure aspects such
powering its operations with grid electricity but strikes a long-term cost deal as additionality and lasting carbon reductions (World Bank 2015b).
on renewable energy with a project developer who feeds its energy into the
grid (BRC 2016). In jurisdictions where on-site RE may come with an unfavorable policy
framework leading to long payback times and off-site RE or REC purchases
An example of renewable energy buyers uniting is provided by India’s Green are limited or not available to segments of the market (such as residential)
Power Market Development Group, which brings together local governments, due to local legislative frameworks, carbon offsets may be considered as
utilities, regulators, companies, and energy developers in various Indian a permissible pathway toward achieving ZCB. However, for the purpose
states, including Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, to bulk purchase renewable of the ZCB pathways set out in this paper, only carbon offsets that can
energy through virtual PPAs with renewable energy project developers (WRI prove additionality, and are used to invest in energy efficiency or
2017). renewable energy projects off-site, are considered eligible to offset
Renewable energy certificates. RECs are known under a variety of names emissions from operational energy use.
in different countries. They show proof that energy has been generated from A good example of such an approach is the city of London. Its zero carbon
renewable sources, with each REC representing the environmental benefits homes policy requires new residential buildings to achieve at least a 35
of a certain unit (such as 1 MWh) of renewable energy generation. The gener- percent reduction in carbon emissions on-site through energy efficiency
ated energy is fed into the grid, and the environmental benefits are traded and renewable energy. Any remaining on-site emissions have to be offset
through a certificate that can be sold and bought. This allows a building through a cash-in-lieu contribution to the relevant borough. The resulting
developer/owner to purchase RECs equivalent to the amount of energy used carbon offset funds provide a source of funds for carbon reduction projects
by the building. across London and, in particular, play a role in funding emission reduction
Mexico, for instance, allows certain renewable energy projects to issue measures for existing buildings where achieving carbon savings can be
“clean energy certificates” that can be bought by others looking to fulfill their more challenging and expensive.42
renewable energy commitments (Sustainability Roundtable 2012). RECs often In addition, stakeholders are increasingly interested in the embodied carbon
get confused with carbon offsets. Purchasers of the RECs, however, buy the footprint of buildings. To compensate for these embodied emissions, the use
legal right to the renewable attributes they represent, somewhat similar to of carbon offsets could be encouraged to the extent that they cannot be first
what happens with a virtual PPA. In both cases the generated clean energy reduced or avoided.
is fed into the grid, where it is indistinguishable from nonrenewable energy,
but the mechanisms put in place ensure that buyers can claim the benefits.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 77

ENDNOTES 10. Not all renewable energy is considered carbon free. Certain types of
biomass, for instance, may come with a high carbon footprint as well
1. Basic EE involves pursuing the minimum required level of energy as other adverse environmental and/or social impacts.
efficiency by ensuring that the building complies with local codes
and standards. In most countries, such codes and standards still have 11. For more information about net zero carbon certification, see the
considerable untapped potential for higher performance. Advanced International Living Future Institute at https://living-future.org/zero-
EE involves more ambitious energy performance that goes beyond carbon-certification/.
minimum regulatory requirements.
12. The approach is analogous to a car manufacturer achieving a required
2. For more information, please see the United Nations Environment level of fuel efficiency by averaging the efficiencies of all vehicles in the
Programme’s Global Status Report 2016: Towards Zero-Emission fleet.
Efficient and Resilient Buildings, available at https://wedocs.unep.
org/handle/20.500.11822/10618, and Global Status Report 2017: Towards 13. Distributed generation refers to electrical generation and storage per-
a Zero-Emission, Efficient, and Resilient Buildings and Construction formed by a variety of small, grid-connected devices at or near where
Sector, available on the World Green Building Council website, https:// the energy will be used.
www.worldgbc.org/sites/default/files/UNEP%20188_GABC_en%20 14. Net positive refers to a building, facility, or operation that reduces more
%28web%29.pdf. (operational) carbon than it generates, in essence becoming “net posi-
3. Basic EE involves pursuing the minimum required level of energy tive.” An example could be a highly energy-efficient building producing
efficiency by ensuring that the building complies with local codes more on-site RE than it needs to fulfill remaining energy demands.
and standards. In most countries, such codes and standards still have 15. The analysis has not considered the state of the market, including the
considerable untapped potential for higher performance. Advanced (local) cost and availability of specific energy efficiency– or renewable
EE involves more ambitious energy performance that goes beyond energy–related products and services and the skilled labor to install
minimum regulatory requirements. and maintain them.
4. Carbon offsets should be able to prove additionality and should be pri- 16. Carbon offsets would typically be used to make up for the gap between
marily used to invest in energy efficiency or renewable energy projects nearly and 100 percent ZCB.
elsewhere.
17. In India, the city government may consist of a municipal corporation
5. Carbon offsets should be able to prove additionality and should be pri- (for areas with more than 1 million inhabitants) or a municipality (for
marily used to invest in energy efficiency or renewable energy projects smaller urban areas).
elsewhere.
18. There is some evidence that points to FAR limits regularly being flouted
6. Definitions provided in this section are based on a synthesis of credible by developers in some states, which would undermine the effective-
definitions available in recent literature, together with expert judgment ness of a FAR-based incentive.
by the WRI team.
19. For instance, municipal corporations.
7. The “business as usual” situation, in this case a typical building without
energy efficiency measures. 20. Carbon offsets used as part of ZCB pathways should be able to prove
additionality and should be used primarily to invest in energy efficiency
8. Additionality requires proof that a mitigation measure would not have or renewable energy projects elsewhere.
occurred without payment of the mitigation credit (i.e., would not have
been economically feasible or customary). In this case, additional 21. The analysis has not considered the state of the market, including the
energy efficiency savings or renewable energy generating capacity are (local) cost and availability of specific energy efficiency– or renewable
generated as a result of and in proportion to the energy demand of the energy–related products and services, and the skilled labor to install
ZCB. and maintain them.
9. Carbon credit is a generic term for any tradable certificate or permit 22. Carbon offsets would typically be used to make up for the gap between
representing a reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide emissions nearly and 100 percent ZCB.
or the equivalent of another greenhouse gas.

78 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

23. If a municipality reduces its energy bill as a result of energy efficiency 36. Known as Greenstar Africa.
improvement measures, it risks receiving less budget in the next fiscal
year from state or national governments, a perverse outcome. 37. Based on conversation between the authors and Madhur Ramrakha,
Board Treasurer and Chair of Finance Committee for the KGBS, March
24. Carbon offsets used as part of ZCB pathways should be able to prove 2019.
additionality and should be used primarily to invest in energy efficiency
or renewable energy projects elsewhere. 38. LEED is a green building rating and certification scheme from the
United States and the most widely used scheme worldwide. LEED
25. The analysis has not considered the state of the market, including the buildings can be found in dozens of countries.
(local) cost and availability of specific energy efficiency– or renewable
energy–related products and services, and the skilled labor to install 39. Carbon offsets used as part of ZCB pathways should be able to prove
and maintain them. additionality and should be used primarily to invest in energy ef-
ficiency– or renewable energy–related projects elsewhere.
26. Carbon offsets would typically be used to make up for the gap between
nearly and 100 percent ZCB. 40. Definitions provided in this section are based on a synthesis of credible
definitions available in recent literature, together with expert judgment
27. ESCOs enable the procurement of energy efficiency technologies or by the WRI team.
services by taking on the first costs and often the risk of these invest-
ments, then being paid back by a building owner through the energy 41. Building energy efficiency codes, which are termed standards in some
savings via an energy performance contract or similar mechanism. countries, lay down mandatory or (sometimes) voluntary energy per-
formance requirements for a building. Building certification programs
28. Passive house standards result in extremely energy-efficient homes; in provide (verified) recognition for a building’s energy performance and
general, they use at least 80 percent less energy than a conventional potentially other green building features, are usually voluntary, and are
home. often driven by the private sector.

29. Carbon offsets used as part of ZCB pathways should be able to prove 42. For more information, see the Mayor of London’s report entitled Carbon
additionality and should be used primarily to invest in energy efficiency Offset Funds: Greater London Authority Guidance for London’s Local
or renewable energy projects elsewhere. Planning Authorities on Establishing Carbon Offset Funds, available at
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/carbon_offsett_funds_
30. Not all of the mentioned examples have obtained green building certifi- guidance_2018.pdf.
cations.

31. Since 2010, Kenya’s implementation of the building code has devolved
to the counties; however, many of the country’s 47 counties lack suf-
ficient capacity and knowledge to implement it.

32. The analysis has not considered the state of the market, including the
(local) cost and availability of specific energy efficiency– or renewable
energy–related products and services, and the skilled labor to install
and maintain them.

33. Carbon offsets would typically be used to make up for the gap between
nearly and 100 percent ZCB.

34. Although Kenya’s 2016 and 2017 building code updates are still awaiting
parliamentary assent, implementation has devolved to Kenya’s 47
counties.

35. Eurocode refers to European standards specifying how structural

design should be conducted within the European Union.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 79

REFERENCES Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute; New York: Bloomberg
Philanthropies. https://mediamanager.sei.org/documents/Publications/
AES (Adviesbureau voor Energiestrategie). 2017. “Energy Labelling of Non- Climate/SEI-Bloomberg-brief-2015-What-cities-do-best.pdf.
residential Buildings in Mexico.” https://www.energy-strategies.nl/projects/
energy-labelling-of-non-residential-buildings-in-mexico/. CCER (China Certified Emission Reduction). n.d. “Platform Introduction.”
http://www.ccer.com.cn/article/tzh/. Accessed July 30, 2019.
An, B., W. Lin, A. Zhou, and W. Zhou. 2015. “China’s Market-Oriented
Reforms in the Energy and Environmental Sectors.” Working Paper. Beijing: CDP. 2017. Putting a Price on Carbon: A Handbook for Indian Companies.
Pacific Energy Summit. http://nbr.org/downloads/pdfs/ETA/PES_2015_ London: CDP.
workingpaper_AnBo_et_al.pdf.
C40. 2011. “Case Study: An Extensive Solar Programme in China.” https://
Architecture 2030. 2018. “Technical Support Document: Off-Site Procurement www.c40.org/case_studies/an-extensive-solar-program-in-china.
of Renewable Energy.” Santa Fe, NM: Architecture 2030.
C40. 2017. Case 4: Mexico City—Sustainable Buildings Certification
Architecture 2030, NBI (New Buildings Institute), and RMI (Rocky Mountain Programme. London: C40. http://www.kankyo.metro.tokyo.jp/en/int/c40/
Institute). 2016. “Zero Net Carbon (ZNC) Building.” Santa Fe, NM: Architecture c40_pse_r.files/UEII_Chapter3.4_MexicoCity.pdf.
2030. https://architecture2030.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ZNC_
Building_Definition.pdf. CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy). 2011. Cooling Benchmarking Study
Paper. Washington, DC: CLASP.
Becqué, R., E. Mackres, J. Layke, N. Aden, S. Liu, K. Managan, C. Nesler,
S. Mazur-Stommen, K. Petrichenko, and P. Graham. 2016. Accelerating CLASP. 2017. Cooling MEPS. Washington, DC: CLASP.
Building Efficiency: Eight Actions for Urban Leaders. Washington, DC: World Clean Cooking Alliance. 2016. “Kenya Drops Trade, Tax Barriers to Aid
Resources Institute. https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/16_REP_ Adoption of Cleaner Cooking Technologies.” June 22. https://www.
Accelerating_Building_Efficiency_0.pdf. cleancookingalliance.org/about/news/06-22-2016-kenya-drops-trade-tax-
BEEP (Indo-Swiss Building Energy Efficiency Project). 2018. Energy barriers-to-aid-adoption-of-cleaner-cooking-technologies.html.
Conservation Building Code—Residential (Part I: Building Envelope). New Climate Action Reserve. 2015. “Introduction to Carbon Markets in Mexico.” Los
Delhi: BEEP. http://www.beepindia.org/content/energy-conservation- Angeles: Climate Action Reserve. http://www.climateactionreserve.org/wp-
building-code-%E2%80%93-residential-part-i-building-envelope. content/uploads/2015/12/Climate-Action-Reserve_Mexico-Carbon-Markets-
Beijing MHURDC (Municipal Housing and Urban-Rural Development Memo-ENGLISH.pdf.
Committee). 2016. Notice on Printing and Distributing the “People’s Building Climate Action Reserve. 2017. “The Growing Potential for Carbon Offsets in
Energy Conservation Development Plan during the 13th Five-Year Plan Period Mexico: NACW Pre-conference Day.” Presentation. Los Angeles: Climate
in Beijing.” Beijing: Beijing MHURDC. http://www.bjjs.gov.cn/bjjs/gcjs/ Action Reserve. https://www.climateactionreserve.org/wp-content/
jzjnyjcjg/jzjnyqcgx/zcfgjxgwj/407109/index.shtml. uploads/2017/08/Growing-Potential-for-Carbon-Offsets-in-Mexico-
Bin, S., and L. Jun. 2012. Building Energy Efficiency Policies in China. presentation.pdf.
Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; Paris: Climatescope. 2017a. “Kenya Energy Management Regulations.”
Green Buildings Performance Network. http://www.gbpn.org/sites/default/ http://global-climatescope.org/en/policies/#/policy/4011.
files/08.%20China%20Report_0.pdf.
Climatescope. 2017b. “Kenya Feed-In Tariffs.” http://global-climatescope.org/
Bin, S., and S. Nadel. 2012. “How Does China Achieve a 95% Compliance Rate en/policies/#/policy/3426.
for Building Energy Codes? A Discussion about China’s Inspection System
and Compliance Rates.” Paper prepared for the American Council for an Climatescope. 2017c. “Mexico.” http://2017.global-climatescope.org/en/
Energy-Efficient Economy Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, country/mexico/#/enabling-framework.
“Fueling Our Future with Efficiency,” Pacific Grove, CA, August 12–17. https://
aceee.org/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193-000261.pdf. Climatescope. 2018. Emerging Markets Outlook 2018: Energy Transition in
the World’s Fastest Growing Economies. New York: Bloomberg New Energy
BRC (Business Renewables Center). 2016. An introduction to Renewable Finance. http://global-climatescope.org/assets/data/reports/climatescope-
Energy PPAs. Boulder, CO: BRC. https://businessrenewables.org/primers- 2018-report-en.pdf.
and-guides/.
CNREC (China National Renewable Energy Centre). n.d. “Trading Platform.”
Broekhoff, D., P. Erickson, and C.M. Lee. 2015. “What Cities Do Best: How http://www.greenenergy.org.cn/shop/index.html. Accessed July 30, 2019.
to Maximize the Role of Cities in a Low-Carbon Future.” Briefing note.

80 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

CPAD (China Poverty Alleviation and Development). 2016. “Opinions of Hammer, S.A. 2009. “Capacity to Act: The Critical Determinant of Local
the National Development and Reform Commission, the State Council Energy Planning and Program Implementation.” Paper prepared for the
Poverty Alleviation Office, the National Energy Administration, the National World Bank’s Fifth Urban Research Symposium, “Cities and Climate
Development Bank, and the China Agricultural Development Bank on Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda,” Marseille, France, June
Implementing Poverty Alleviation Work for Photovoltaic Power Generation.” 28–30. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/
Beijing: CPAD. http://www.cpad.gov.cn/art/2016/3/23/art_1744_86.html. Resources/336387-1256566800920/6505269-1268260567624/Hammer.pdf

CRE (Comisión Reguladora de Energía). 2016. “Frequently Asked Questions Hivos. 2012. Kenya: Energy Profile. The Hague: Hivos. https://www.hivos.org/
about Clean Energy Certificates.” Mexico City : CRE, Government of Mexico. sites/default/files/kenya_profile.pdf.
https://www.gob.mx/cre/articulos/preguntas-frecuentes-sobre-los-
certificados-de-energias-limpias. IBISWorld. 2017. Building Construction—China Market Research Paper. New
York: IBISWorld. https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-trends/international/
Davis, L., S. Martinez, and B. Taboada. 2018. “How Effective Is Energy-Efficient china-market-research-papers/construction/building-construction.html.
Housing? Evidence from a Field Experiment in Mexico.” Working Paper.
Berkeley, CA: E2e. https://e2e.haas.berkeley.edu/pdf/workingpapers/WP034. ICC (International Code Council). 2016. Código de Conservación de Energía
pdf. para las Edificaciones de México (Mexico Conservation Code for Buildings).
Washington, DC: ICC. https://codes.iccsafe.org/public/public/chapter/
EDF (Environmental Defense Fund) and ERI (Energy Research Institute). 2017. content/5128/.
The Progress of China’s Carbon Market. New York: EDF. https://www.edf.org/
sites/default/files/documents/The_Progress_of_Chinas_Carbon_Market_ IEA (International Energy Agency)/IRENA (International Renewable
Development_English_Version.pdf. Energy Agency). 2016. “Golden Sun Programme,” IEA/IRENA Global
Renewable Energy Policies and Measures Database. https://www.iea.org/
EIU (Economist Intelligence Unit). 2013. Achieving Scale in Energy-Efficient policiesandmeasures/pams/china/name-24845-en.php?s=dHlwZT1yZSZzd
Buildings in India: A View from the Construction and Real Estate Sectors. GF0dXM9T2s,&return=PG5hdiBpZD0iYnJlYWRjcnVtYiI-PGEgaHJlZj0iLyI-SG
London: EIU. 9tZTwvYT4gJnJhcXVvOyA8YSBocmVmPSIvcG9saWNpZXNhbmRtZWFzdXJ
lcy8iPlBvbGljaWVzIGFuZCBNZWFzdXJlczwvYT4gJnJhcXVv.
Emerson Climate Technologies. 2012. “Energy Performance Standards for
Air Conditioners Comprehensively Upgraded in India.” May 2. https://www. IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2017. Green Buildings Market
slideshare.net/icpci/press-release-bee-20120430. Intelligence: Kenya Country Profile. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
https://www.edgebuildings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Kenya-
Feng, W., X. Li, C. Szum, N. Zhou, M. Bendewald, Z. Meng, and Y. Zeng. 2017. Green-Building-Market-Intelligence-EXPORT.pdf.
“From Prescriptive to Outcome-Based: The Evolution of Building Energy
Codes and Standards in China.” Paper prepared for the European Council for INFONAVIT (Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para los
an Energy Efficient Economy Summer Study, Hyères, France, May 29–June 3. Trabajadores). 2012. Green Mortgage Program. Mexico City: INFONAVIT. http://
https://china.lbl.gov/publications/prescriptive-outcome-based-evolution. www.ecpamericas.org/data/files/Initiatives/energy_efficiency_working_
group/eewg_mexico_workshop/infonavit.pdf.
Fuller, J., and Y. Guo. 2017. “Comparison between China and the United States
in Solar Energy Development.” Studies in Engineering and Technology 4 (1): IPEEC (International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation). 2015.
131–39. India Building Code Implementation: Country Summary. Paris: IPEEC.

Gerencia de Edificios. 2015. “First Zero-Energy Building in Latin America to Be Karimpour, M., M. Belusko, K. Xing, and F. Bruno. 2014. “Minimising the Life
in Mexico,” September 5. https://en.gerenciadeedificios.com/201709055776/ Cycle Energy of Buildings: Review and Analysis.” Building and Environment 73
noticias/empresas/primer-edificio-de-energia-cero-de-america-latina- (March): 106–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.11.019.
estara-en-mexico.html.
Karume, N. 2018. “Kenyan Parliament Annuls Punitive Fine on Solar Water
Guangdong PDHURD (Provincial Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Heating Systems.” Pumps Africa, August 7. https://www.pumps-africa.com/
Development). 2016. 广东省住房和城乡建设厅关于申报2017 kenyan-parliament-annuls-punitive-fine-on-solar-water-heating-systems/.
年度省级节能降耗专项资金（建筑节能）入库项目的通知.
Guangzhou, China: Guangdong Construction Information Center. http://www. Khosla, R. 2016. “Closing the Policy Gap: Building Energy Code Lessons from
gdcic.gov.cn/ZWGK/WJTZ/20160805_article_142544. Andhra Pradesh.” Economic and Political Weekly 51 (2): 66–73.

Hall, M. 2019. “China Confirms FIT Level Payments—but They Will Be Liang, X. 2014. Last in Transmission: Distributed Solar Generation in China.
‘Subject to Competition.’” PV Magazine, May 1. https://www.pv-magazine. Washington, DC: Wilson Center China Environment Forum. https://
com/2019/05/01/china-confirms-fit-level-payments-but-they-will-be-subject- www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Lost%20in%20Transmission_
to-competition/. Distributed%20Solar%20Generation%20in%20China_Xiupei%20Liang_2.
pdf.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 81

Liljequist, B. 2018. “Introducing ILFI’s New Zero Carbon Certification,” April 11. NEA (National Energy Administration). 2017. “National Development and
https://trimtab.living-future.org/blog/introducing-the-ilfis-new-zero-carbon- Reform Commission, Ministry of Finance, National Energy Administration,
certification/. Notice on Trial Implementation of Renewable Energy Green Power Certificate
Issuance and Voluntary Subscription System.” Beijing: NEA, People’s
MacDonald, S. 2016. “The Global Status of Green Electricity Tariffs.” Working Republic of China. http://www.nea.gov.cn/2017-02/06/c_136035626.htm.
paper. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308803287_The_Global_
Status_of_Green_Electricity_Tariffs. NEA. 2018. “Letter from the General Department of the National Energy
Administration on the Opinions on Soliciting the Renewable Energy
Miao, H., A. Perera, and M. Yuan. 2017. “New Clean Energy Buying Option in Power Quota and Assessment Measures (Draft for Comment).” Beijing:
China: Green Electricity Certificates.” Insights (blog), October 24. https:// NEA, People’s Republic of China. http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/auto87/201803/
www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/new-clean-energy-buying-option-china-green- t20180323_3131.htm.
electricity-certificates.
NPBA (National Planning and Building Authority). 2009. Planning and
Mo, K. 2016. Financing Energy-Efficient Buildings in Chinese Cities. Building Regulations, 2009. Nairobi: NPBA, Republic of Kenya.
Chicago: Paulson Institute. http://www.paulsoninstitute.org/wp-content/
uploads/2017/06/2017_Green-Finance-for-Low-Carbon-Cities_R2_EN.pdf. NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). 2016. Building a Better Future:
Implementing the Energy-Saving Building Code in Hyderabad. New York:
MOF (Ministry of Finance). 2006. “Notice of the Ministry of Finance Ministry NRDC. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/better-future-energy-saving-
of Construction on Printing and Distributing the Interim Measures for building-code-hyderabad.pdf.
the Administration of Special Funds for Renewable Energy Building
Applications.” Beijing: MOF, People’s Republic of China. http://www. NRDC and ASCI (Administrative Staff College of India). 2012. Constructing
mof.gov.cn/zhengwuxinxi/caizhengwengao/caizhengbuwengao2006/ Change: Accelerating Energy Efficiency in India’s Buildings Market. New York:
caizhengbuwengao200610/200805/t20080519_24660.html. NRDC. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/india-constructing-change-
report.pdf.
MOHURD (Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development). 2012a. “Notice
on Printing and Distributing the Interim Measures for the Administration NRDC and ASCI. 2014. Greener Construction Saves Money: Incentives for
of Energy-saving Reconstruction Grant Funds for Existing Residential Energy Efficient Buildings across India. New York: NRDC. https://www.nrdc.
Buildings in Hot Summer and Cold Winter Zones.” Beijing: MOHURD, People’s org/sites/default/files/energy-efficient-construction-incentives-IB.pdf.
Republic of China. http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/fgjs/xgbwgz/201205/
t20120503_209706.html. Power Africa. 2016. Development of Kenya’s Power Sector, 2015–2020.
Washington, DC: U.S. Agency for International Development AID.
MOHURD. 2012b. “Implementation Opinions on Accelerating the Development
of Green Buildings in China.” Beijing: MOHURD, People’s Republic of China. Qing, T. 2018. “Introduction on China Certified Emission Reductions.”
http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/fgjs/xgbwgz/201205/t20120510_209831.html. Presented at the International Civil Aviation Organization Seminar on
Carbon Markets, Montreal, February 7–9. https://www.icao.int/Meetings/
MOHURD. 2015. “Notice of the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural carbonmarkets/Documents/01_Session2_Qing_CCER.pdf
Development on Printing and Distributing Passive Ultra-low Energy Green
Building Technical Guidelines (Trial) (Residential Buildings).” Beijing: Rebolledo, O. 2015. “EcoCasa and Mexico’s Green for All Housing Recovery.”
MOHURD, People’s Republic of China. http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/ Capacity4dev, September 4. https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/public-
wjfb/201511/t20151113_225589.html. environment-climate/blog/ecocasa-and-mexico%E2%80%99s-green-all-
housing-recovery.
MOHURD. 2017a. “Notice of the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
Development on Printing and Distributing the 13th Five-Year Plan for Building Schierenbeck, S. 2014. “Mexico—Building a Renewable Energy Market
Energy Efficiency and Green Building Development.” Beijing: MOHURD, Without Conventional Feed-in-Tariffs.” Apricum, February 27. https://www.
People’s Republic of China. http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201703/ apricum-group.com/mexico-building-renewable-energy-market-without-
t20170314_230978.html. conventional-feed-tariffs/.

MOHURD. 2017b. 13th Five-Year Plan of Building Energy Efficiency and Green SEforALL (Sustainable Energy for All). 2017. Taking the Pulse: Understanding
Building Development. Beijing: MOHURD, People’s Republic of China. http:// Energy Access Market Needs in Five High-Impact Countries. Washington, DC:
www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201703/W020170314100832.pdf. SEforAll. https://www.seforall.org/sites/default/files/gather-content/2017_
SEforALL_FR3-F_0.pdf.

82 |
 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

SENER (Secretaría de Energía). 2018. Modalidades de compras de Wildlife Works. 2013. “Kenya Airways and Wildlife Works Allow You to Travel
energías renovable para el sector commercial e industrial mexicano. the World While Protecting the Environment.” Wildlife Works Blog, July 1.
Eschborn, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale http://blog.wildlifeworks.com/2013/07/01/kenya-airways-and-wildlife-works-
Zusammenarbeit. https://energypedia.info/images/7/7d/Modalidades_ allow-you-to-travel-the-world-while-protecting-the-environment/.
Compras_ER_GIZ_2018.pdf.
World Bank. 2015a. “Bringing Electricity to Kenya’s Slums: Hard Lessons
Sengupta, D. 2017. “Budget 2017: Tax Cut on Gains from Carbon Credit Sales Lead to Great Gains,” August 20. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/
Won’t Benefit Much.” Economic Times, February 3. https://economictimes. feature/2015/08/17/bringing-electricity-to-kenyas-slums-hard-lessons-lead-
indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/budget-2017-tax-cut-on-gains- to-great-gains.
from-carbon-credit-sales-wont-benefit-much/articleshow/56944005.
cms?from=mdr. World Bank. 2015b. “Overview of Carbon Offset Programs: Similarities and
Differences.” Technical Note 6. Washington, DC: Partnership for Market
Shrimali, G. 2013. “In India, Renewable Energy Certificates Are Missing Readiness, World Bank. https://www.thepmr.org/system/files/documents/
the Target.” Climate Policy Initiative. https://climatepolicyinitiative. PMR%20Technical%20Note%206_Offsets_0.pdf.
org/2013/02/11/in-india-renewable-energy-certificates-are-missing-the-
target/. WorldGBC (Green Building Council). 2018. Building a Better Future: Annual
Report 2017/18. London: WorldGBC. https://www.worldgbc.org/news-media/
Sustainability Roundtable. 2012. International Markets for Renewable worldgbc-annual-report-201718.
Energy Certificates (RECs). Cambridge, MA: Sustainability Roundtable.
Shttp://sustainround.com/library/sites/default/files/SRER_Member%20 WorldGBC. n.d. “Advancing Net Zero.” http://www.worldgbc.org/advancing-
Briefing_International%20Markets%20for%20Renewable%20Energy%20 net-zero. Accessed July 30, 2019.
Certificates_2012-07-16.pdf.
Yu, J., M. Evans, and Q. Shi. 2014. Analysis of the Chinese Market for Building
Sustainia. 2018. “Mexico City: Hospitals Lead the Way in Energy Transition.” Energy Efficiency. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. https://doi.
Global Opportunity Explorer, June 18. https://goexplorer.org/mexico-city- org/10.2172/1126340.
hospitals-lead-the-way-in-energy-transition/.
Zero Code. n.d. “About the Zero Code.” https://zero-code.org/about/.
UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). 2017. Accessed July 30, 2019.
“China to Launch World’s Largest Emissions Trading System,” December 19.
https://unfccc.int/news/china-to-launch-world-s-largest-emissions-trading-
system.

Urban, F., S. Geall, and Y. Wang. 2016. “Solar PV and Solar Water Heaters
in China: Different Pathways to Low Carbon Energy.” Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Review 64 (October): 531–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2016.06.023.

USGBC (U.S. Green Building Council). 2016. LEED in Motion: Mexico.

Washington, DC: USGBC. https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-motion-
mexico.

Wahinya, H. 2016. “Green Building Certification Takes Root.” Mediamax,

September 9. http://www.mediamaxnetwork.co.ke/features/green-building-
certification-takes-root-251348/.

Were, S.W., S.O. Diang’a, and A.K. Mutai. 2015. “Challenges Faced by
Practitioners in the Adoption of Green Building Concepts: A Case of Nairobi
City County.” International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology
4 (2): 1157–62. https://www.ijert.org/research/challenges-faced-by-
practitioners-in-the-adoption-of-green-building-concepts-a-case-of-nairobi-
city-county-IJERTV4IS020550.pdf.

WORKING PAPER | September 2019 | 83

 Accelerating Building Decarbonization: Eight Attainable Policy Pathways to Net Zero Carbon Buildings for All

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABOUT WRI

The authors would like to thank the following people for their peer review World Resources Institute is a global research organization that turns big
and helpful insights and comments during the development of this paper: ideas into action at the nexus of environment, economic opportunity, and
Murefu Barasa (EED Advisory Limited), Christie Baumel (USDN), Victoria human well-being.
Burrows (World Green Building Council), Paul Cartwright (C40), Elizabeth
Chege (Kenya Green Building Society), Joelle Chen (formerly World Green Our Challenge
Building Council), Wei Feng (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), Bianca Natural resources are at the foundation of economic opportunity and human
Gichangi (EED Advisory Limited), Andreas Gruner (GIZ), Deepak Krishnan well-being. But today, we are depleting Earth’s resources at rates that are
(WRI India), Jonathan Laski (formerly World Green Building Council), Andrew not sustainable, endangering economies and people’s lives. People depend
Lee (formerly Architecture 2030), Mark Lyles (New Buildings Institute), Anne on clean water, fertile land, healthy forests, and a stable climate. Livable
Maassen (WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities), Sumedha Malaviya (WRI cities and clean energy are essential for a sustainable planet. We must
India), Vincent Martinez (Architecture 2030), Edward Mazria (Architecture address these urgent, global challenges this decade.
2030), Hong Miao (WRI China), Octavio Molina (WRI Mexico), Clay Nesler
(Johnson Controls), Alex Perera (WRI), Madhur Ramrakha (Kenya Green Our Vision
Building Society), Heidi Bishop Ratz (WRI), David Rich (WRI), Inder Rivera We envision an equitable and prosperous planet driven by the wise
(WRI Mexico), Carolyn Szum (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), Laura management of natural resources. We aspire to create a world where the
Malaguzzi Valeri (WRI), Marco Villalobos (formerly WRI Mexico), Yaki Wo actions of government, business, and communities combine to eliminate
(Architecture 2030), Min Yuan (WRI China), and Mofan Zhang (WRI China). poverty and sustain the natural environment for all people.

Thanks also to Laura Malaguzzi Valeri, Emilia Suarez, Emily Matthews, Our Approach
Romain Warnault, Billie Kanfer, Lauri Scherer and Carni Klirs for their COUNT IT
assistance with editing and producing this paper. We start with data. We conduct independent research and draw on the
latest technology to develop new insights and recommendations. Our
rigorous analysis identifies risks, unveils opportunities, and informs smart
ABOUT THE AUTHORS strategies. We focus our efforts on influential and emerging economies
where the future of sustainability will be determined.
Renilde Becqué is an independent international consultant on
sustainability and energy. CHANGE IT
Contact: [email protected] We use our research to influence government policies, business strategies,
and civil society action. We test projects with communities, companies,
Debbie Weyl, Manager, Buildings Initiative, WRI Ross Center For
and government agencies to build a strong evidence base. Then, we work
Sustainable Cities with partners to deliver change on the ground that alleviates poverty and
Contact: [email protected] strengthens society. We hold ourselves accountable to ensure our outcomes
will be bold and enduring.
Emma Stewart, PhD, Director, Urban Efficiency & Climate and Director,
Urban Finance, WRI Ross Center For Sustainable Cities SCALE IT
Contact: [email protected] We don’t think small. Once tested, we work with partners to adopt and
expand our efforts regionally and globally. We engage with decision-makers
Eric Mackres, Manager, Data and Tools, Urban Efficiency & Climate, WRI
to carry out our ideas and elevate our impact. We measure success through
Ross Center For Sustainable Cities government and business actions that improve people’s lives and sustain a
Contact: [email protected] healthy environment.
Luting Jin, former intern, WRI Ross Center For Sustainable Cities

Xufei Shen, former intern, WRI Ross Center For Sustainable Cities

Copyright 2019 World Resources Institute. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
To view a copy of the license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

10 G Street, NE | Washington, DC 20002 | www.WRI.org