Small business and property owners worry about the costs of new clean-energy standards

With tighter and faster clean energy deadlines, some business and property owners are torn between their progressive environmental views and what they see as financially realistic.

Cambridge adopted a building energy use disclosure ordinance in 2014 to track greenhouse gas emissions. The law, called Beudo, targets large commercial, institutional and multi-family buildings, which account for nearly half of the city’s emissions. Specifically, the law requires buildings larger than 25,000 square feet and residential properties with more than 50 units — roughly 1,100 buildings citywide — to report annual energy and water use.

The city’s Net Zero Action Plan recently added urgency to environmental efforts by moving it from 2050 to 2035, and Beudo’s changes were introduced as performance requirements after reports from 2018 showed no reduction in emissions. A New Deal for Cambridge Green” package.

If property owners fail to achieve the required emissions reductions, they can pay the city an alternative compliance fee.The ordinance puts the average cost of removing a ton of emissions from a building at $234, according to a city analysis. Boston Cambridge City Councilman Quinton Zondervan, leader of the local Bedouin effort, said. Cambridge Council is debating whether businesses should be allowed to use carbon credits as a way of offsetting carbon emissions.

In interviews in July, property owners said they want to prioritize eco-friendly energy use, but many can’t see how to quickly meet the city’s standards without hurting their businesses or penalizing tenants.

Mark Harrington, manager of Health Works, a small gym chain in Porter Square, was one of many business owners who supported the idea but said he was concerned about the implications. The difficulty of weatherproofing a space like an indoor gym, combined with demands like filtration and the more intense air circulation that came with the pandemic, has given the building one of the biggest carbon footprints in the city, he said.

He recently invested in green heating equipment and pumps designed to last 30 years, but says he fears that stricter standards on Beudo’s updates could put the investment at risk.

The law must be held accountable for the harm it causes to small businesses, such as Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the city’s many life science labs, when it passes laws that limit greenhouse gases. – and only those with deep enough pockets to avoid Beudo’s requirements. “I want to make sure that when you’re putting this together, you’re thinking of everybody, not just the guy in the 15-story lab in Kendall Square,” Harrington said. “We need to have an honest conversation about what it costs in the community.”

Another voice calling for the city to do more to fix the ordinance: Central Square attorney and property owner Patrick Barrett.

The city often cites laws similar to Beudo’s in Ithaca, New York, as an example of how it could work for Cambridge, but Barrett said the city has provided property owners with low or no-interest loans from a $100 million funded fund. Private equity to support the work needed to convert to new electrical systems. The Ithaca model also involves hiring consultants to review costs, Barrett said.

The 2035 goal is “a fun topic,” Barrett said, but the state is on the 2050 timeline, along with the rest of the country. Why is Little Cambridge Place on the Fast Track? What resources are available to do this? “

Barrett said he did a lot of research when he heard the city was failing, sending letters to 4,000 homes and 2,387 businesses he thought would be affected by the law to tell them what the law meant. Institutions like Harvard and MIT have entire sustainability teams that help meet the city’s goals, but most property owners don’t: “I’m the sustainability team,” Barrett said. Zero, you have to help people get there.

Charlie Marquardt, owner of Central Cambridge Cleaners, opposes Beudo in its current form. “I’m really saddened by the inequity in how it works,” he said, citing the law that would leave housing on Big Brittle Street “a lot more emissions” than apartment buildings like his. Requirements such as commercial property. Just compare 169 apartment homes and 169 single-family homes, he said.

Canceling Beudo’s hearings this summer is disrespectful to community members who are advocating for changes to the law because council members can’t get a quorum, Marquardt said. His fear is that the city will push the ordinance forward and deal with the consequences later, but he said, “It’s their responsibility to reach out to those affected by the laws they’ve passed.”

Zondervan cites widespread public support for the cause during the decade at Cambridge to fight climate change. Despite the pushback by building owners since the time limit was accelerated, most landlords are asking for more flexibility in the rule to comply. “At the end of the day, we have to go forward somehow and reduce emissions,” Zondervan said.

Penalties that hurt businesses and external costs passed on to customers and tenants can be an unavoidable problem for protecting the planet, Zondervan said – but it’s not fair to describe this as just a cost, as it’s also a reductionist approach that includes potential cost savings. And he says it’s not the small businesses that use the most energy and face the biggest compensation costs, but the big biolabs.

Zondervan said there are business concerns regardless of the regulation, as climate change will push buildings to improve their fuel needs. Through partners like the Community Development Department’s Energy Alliance, owners can get help upgrading energy systems, and some funding is also available through the Mass Save program.

This article was written in partnership with Cambridge Local First.