Will Worcester try to ban fossil fuels in new construction? City Hall won't say

WORCESTER — In the same week that Boston Mayor Michelle Wu said she wants her city to ban fossil fuels in new construction and major rehabilitation projects, Worcester City Hall has been publicly silent on the issue.

It’s too early for city officials to comment, said a City Hall spokesman.

Gov. Charlie Baker signed a sweeping climate energy bill into law last week.

One of the bill’s provisions allows up to 10 Massachusetts communities to petition state lawmakers by way of home-rule petition to be part of a pilot program banning fossil fuels in new construction and major renovation projects.

The ban would not apply to life science and health care buildings.

To be eligible, at least 10% of a community's total housing stock must be classified as affordable.

As of 2020, 13.5% of Worcester’s housing stock qualified as affordable, according to the state Department of Housing and Community Development’s Subsidized Housing Inventory.

Besides Boston, 10 communities have reportedly entered the ring to potentially become one of the locations to ban fossil fuels: Cambridge, Newton, Brookline, Lexington, Arlington, Concord, Lincoln, Acton, Aquinnah and West Tisbury.

'Good thing for us'

“Absolutely, this would be a good thing for us,” said Worcester District 5 City Councilor Etel Haxhiaj.

It all starts with the city’s climate activists, said Haxhiaj. They must demand the City Council vote to support a home-rule petition.

Haxhiaj is confident they will, because, she said, activists supported a ban on fossil fuels before Baker signed the bill into law.

As Haxhiaj sees it, electrification of buildings is cheaper and healthier, compared to systems that run on fossil fuels.

To strengthen her point about the need for lower-cost solutions, Haxhiaj pointed to a National Low Income Housing Coalition report that said Worcester rents are too expensive for many residents.

The market-rate rent for a two-bedroom apartment is $1,491 monthly. To make this payment without spending more than 30% of income on rent, a renter needs to earn $28.67 hourly.

However, the average wage of renters in Worcester and surrounding areas is $14.25 per hour. To afford a two-bedroom apartment in the city at that hourly wage, a renter would need to work 80 hours weekly, all 52 weeks in a year.

Worcester is 'a little timid'

That is the perspective of Gaylen Moore, coordinator of the Worcester chapter of Mothers out Front, a nonprofit that advocates for climate, racial and social justice.

“Worcester is often a little timid when it comes to progressive policy like this,” said Moore. “I think it’s a shame. This is a huge opportunity, and we could get out front and take advantage.”

When asked when – and if – activists will come before the City Council to push for the city to be one of the 10 pilot communities, Moore said, “We certainly will."

“There are already conversations about it," Moore continued. "We’re thinking about strategy together, and will raise the issue at the next opportunity and continue to as long as the opportunity is out there.”

Moore raised a warning that Worcester must act quickly because the 10 slots will fill up fast.

Developer's perspective

Some developers believe it’s too expensive to go the route of installing renewable systems.

Worcester developer Michael Ermani of Premier Investment Properties LLC doesn’t see it that way. At least the way the market is right now.

Fully electric systems were a problem about 18 months ago, said Ermani, because of the high cost of renewable energy.

However, prices have come down, making both options – fossil fuels and renewables – equally attractive for developers.

Ermani has no problem with City Hall pursuing a ban on fossil fuels. He owns about 300 units that range across 40 properties, and is considering going fully electric for three of his new developments.

“I don’t really see a big deal. I don’t see it as a bad thing. It’s not going to hurt anybody” is Ermani's take on whether Worcester should make an effort to be part of the pilot program.

Ermani pointed out that as long as new construction and major renovations are properly insulated, then it shouldn’t be a problem to go fully electric.

Bad idea

That’s how Brian Allen sees it.

Allen is founder and owner of WorcesterMulti, a buyer and seller of owner-occupied and investment properties since 1999.

His major concern about Worcester joining the pilot program is that a policy telling developers what to do could potentially kill projects that benefit the local economy.

“Worcester is still looking for developers and outside money. Anything that chases that away becomes a problem,” Allen said.

Besides, the city’s antiquated energy grid can’t handle the amount of green energy that must be run through it to power buildings, said Allen.

Instead of forcing developers to go the route of full electrification, Allen thinks it wiser for the city and state to invest in other areas, like public and school transportation fleets that run exclusively on renewables. That step will get more cars off the roads and drastically cut down on harmful emissions.

Plus, Worcester should lower its commercial tax rate to encourage increased development. If that happens, Allen believes there will be more jobs in the city, resulting in fewer residents having to drive to employers outside of Worcester. That will reduce emissions, while boosting the city’s economic engine.

Additionally, renewable sources like heat pumps are more costly to maintain, versus gas-powered systems, Allen said.

Consider it

Kelly Friend doesn't want to tell Worcester what it should do. but she encourages any city looking to reduce carbon emissions to consider the pilot.

Friend is vice president of policy and regulatory affairs at Nexamp, a Boston company that develops solar projects. The company has residential and commercial customers in Central Massachusetts.

"I would encourage Worcester to take a close look [at the pilot]," said Friend, because such a step could help reduce carbon emissions and improve public health.

Another factor to consider, Friend said, is that being part of the pilot sends a strong signal about a community's seriousness to cut carbon emissions. That is a plus when taking advantage of environmental incentives in the $750 billion federal Inflation Reduction Act signed into law Tuesday by President Joe Biden.

The bill includes more than $300 billion in climate and energy policies, and Friend said incentives like electric appliances, heat pumps and geothermal systems could help homeowners and businesses figure out how to transition away from gas and other fossil fuels.

"There are clean ways to power life, and now is the time to think about it," she said.

Different opinions

Bottom line for Allen, a fossil-fuel ban is a mandate, and that’s not good for business.

“If you take away options, it’s harder to justify people coming to Worcester with their money.”

Haxhiaj sees it differently.

“I’m hoping climate activists will petition the City Council to start the process. There is no better time to aggressively go after reducing emissions.”

Contact Henry Schwan at henry.schwan@telegram.com. Follow him on Twitter @henrytelegram

This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Climate change fossil fuels Worcester Boston Michelle Wu real estate