National AEB Code, MEPS, or both?

Development of the AEB began several years ago, and in that time an increasing number of sub-national governments have recognized the urgency of our climate emergency and the need to take bold action. Municipalities, in particular, are seeking regulatory tools that can help them quickly cut energy waste and emissions from the built environment. This means that, alongside an AEB code based on the voluntary action of the building owner and triggered by major equipment changes, change of occupancy type, or by the adding or reconfiguration of building spaces, these jurisdictions can look to MEPS to reach deeper energy and emissions reductions, in a broader swath of buildings in less time.

MEPS can also help governments pursue their policy priorities in ways the AEB is not structured to. For example, as seen in early iterations of MEPS introduced in the United States, MEPS can be part of a strategy to improve carbon performance, or as in the UK, MEPS can be used to improve specific segments of the buildings sector that contribute to the health and well-being of building occupants while reducing energy poverty.

MEPS are one of the select regulatory tools that set a clear path towards reducing energy use and emissions in buildings, and in a way that conventional building codes cannot. By signalling the desired end-state of the existing building stock, MEPS provide the certainty needed to encourage deeper energy retrofits while providing policymakers with the flexibility to target specific segments, building archetypes, and/or specific municipal objectives.