Coliseum Place, Oakland, Calif.
Each Spring, as we have done since 2016, we pull together our predicted energy data to send to the AIA. As I have reflected before [2017, 2024], the AIA 2030 Commitment—a mandate for undersigned architects to take actions to draw down the carbon footprint of their building designs by 2030—is an opportunity for DBA to look at performance across our portfolio, rather than on a building-by-building basis. This is a powerful exercise, because it forces us out of the proud story-telling of individual projects into a place of curiosity about how well and how consistently we apply our principles and meet our goals.
With the year 2030 just one project-lifetime away—and political and economic uncertainty compounding multiple crises and taking an emotional toll—it’s easy to feel like we’re going through motions that are basically meaningless. But this reporting season, much to my surprise, I had the opposite feeling. Not because we are seeing that curve bend to zero, but because we had a growing cohort of engaged DBA architects participating in a way that hasn’t happened before, and as a firm we have new momentum around strengthening a robust project database and deepening our commitment to design excellence, as we have defined it together.
First, the stats:
This year DBA reported 32 active, new construction projects, all in the multifamily residential housing sector. This included 27 modeled projects and 30 all-electric projects. Nearly all—28 of 32—are in California, while three are located in the Southeast U.S. and one in Washington state. The average gross energy use intensity (EUI) across the group of modeled projects is 23 kbtu/sf-yr (range of 16-28), and the net EUI (including on-site PV generation) is 17 kbtu/sf-yr (range of 11-27).
As I have written before, while the 2030 Commitment tracks EUI reduction by percent, we are mostly focused on a gross EUI target—that is, designing buildings that are as low-impact as they can possibly be, exclusive of on-site energy generation. (We feel it’s important to put the goal of “zero” in context, with a regional and site-based approach to clean energy.) We are pleased that our portfolio is in a strong position by this measure, with predicted EUIs in our target range and steadily eking out those last degrees of available improvement.
Behind the reporting, the focus of our Action Plan is on identifying and tackling specific priorities that reduce life-cycle costs in multifamily and community-centered buildings, unlock opportunities for climate adaptation, and close the gap between predicted and measured performance. These priorities include central heat recovery ventilation—a low-payback system with multiple energy, comfort, and resilience benefits—as well as thermal enclosure inspection, hot water system design efficiency, and systems commissioning.
On the clean energy side, our goal in California is research and advocacy for tools and policies that actually help our clients to maximize their investments in PV (photovoltaics) and energy storage and to successfully take part in grid decarbonization. In the Southeast, our approach is about demystifying programs and incentives as a vehicle for climate resilience, meeting our clients where they are.
And of course, energy is only a piece of what we need to do. Our priority list also includes concrete optimization, eliminating toxic chemicals, and maximizing ecosystem services on all projects. All of our priorities are centered on benefits to our projects’ owners, inhabitants, and neighborhoods, and we are proud to have had increasing success advocating for these practices. Seeing these priorities shift from being pie-in-the-sky to becoming sensible best-practice keeps us energized. Moreover, in the last year we have grown the roster of clients who share our buildings’ utility data with us, and we are using these relationships and these critical stats to validate, discover, and address inefficiencies.
The key victories taking shape have to do with expanding the inclusivity of sustainable design initiatives at DBA. There is a new character and energy to these efforts, which are increasingly supported by many, not just by the individuals behind the Action Plan. Our firm mindset is expanding, strengthening in how we talk about design, how we align interests and share leadership, and how we engage with and advocate for what we think is right with our clients and design consultants. This kind of transformation in sustainable design culture and design culture alike, in our small-but-mighty firm, gives me hope more broadly as we roll irreversibly past 1.5C and toward 2030.
Katie Ackerly, AIA, CHPC, is a Principal and Sustainable Design Director at David Baker Architects. She is a member of AIA Committee on the Environment (COTE®) Leadership Team.