Research Article: Do Urban Regeneration of Brownfields and New Emission Efficiency Needs Conflict? An Economic Perspective

Abstract

The redevelopment of brownfield sites poses costs due to prior land uses and obsolete structural features, not just real or perceived contamination. Regeneration may require public subsidy, and the process may be further “threatened” by higher standards for building energy efficiency likely to arise with new climate change policies. New structural standards might undermine private reuse of old buildings on cost grounds. This article examines the potential conflict in terms of benefit trade-offs and the distribution of costs and benefits across current and future populations, examining impact assumptions and the approaches taken to risk of failure in emissions reduction, especially with regard to irreversible impacts. Two examples of pursuit of both objectives are considered: land-use planning and densification, including contaminated-land reuse; and new building standards and financing for retrofitting older structures for energy efficiency. It concludes that the conflicts are overstated and that complementarities are stronger, especially when viewed from a public sector perspective.

Notes

Notes

1. Transportation and buildings energy savings represent the bulk of the possible efficiency contribution to reducing total emissions. Transportation and residential uses accounted for 28% and 21%, respectively, of total US consumption in 2008, according to the Energy Information Agency, with commercial use, mostly building operations, adding another 21%. (Data downloaded July 20, 2009, from the Energy Information Agency's Annual Energy Review 2008.)

2. For more on ESCOs, visit the Web site of the National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO) at http://ww.naesco.org.

3. For more on pursuit of energy efficiency in existing buildings, see the library and resources at Climate Change Economics, http://ClimateChangeEcon.net.