While there are a countless interest groups using their political capital to derail comprehensive climate change legislation, one might assume that establishing simple efficiency codes for American homes would not be politically controversial. After all, climate scientists and architects agree that updating building standards -- which does not require "glittering technology" -- is the policy change most likely to to save energy and reduce the nation's carbon emissions over the long run. Hal Harvey, chief executive of ClimateWorks, told the New York Times over the weekend that the U.S. could cut its carbon output by about 11 percent in the next 20 years if  "today’s best building practices were applied in new buildings" throughout the nation. That figure does not even include updates to existing structures.

But elected officials in many state capitols have done virtually nothing to promote these reforms. The Times' Clifford Krauss explains:

Since the energy crises of the 1970s, the United States has known it has an energy problem. Yet today, the energy requirements in building codes remain weak across half the country, and at least seven states have virtually no rules. That means that in many places, particularly the nation’s heartland, almost every new home, store and factory that goes up locks the country into unnecessary energy use for years to come.

Currently, Illinois is one of those seven states without any requirement. That can partly be attributed to elected officials drumming up fear about the cost of efficiency measures. For instance, GOP Rep. Peter Roskam recently warned on WLS Radio about a provision in the cap-and-trade bill that would require 30 percent improvements in building efficiency by 2010. Listen (full audio here):

Internal mp3

ROSKAM: Well what they’ll do if this bill were to become law, Jim, is they would create a national standard and the national standard would have certain criterion that your house would have to meet in terms of efficiency. If you don’t get your house up to that standard, then you’re not going to be able to sell your house. [...]

You can imagine some bureaucrat out there with a pocket protector and half glasses clicking on various sorts of things and saying, “Nope, this isn’t complete. We won’t let you transfer title to your house until this is complete.”

As he often does, Roskam painted a scary picture, but omitted a few important details. Most importantly, buildings sta exist today will not be required to meet the new federal standards. That will only apply to new construction projects. The bill also mandates that households could receive $3,000 in financial support to upgrade the efficiency of their residences by at least 20 percent. Even the builders’ lobbies agree that adding upgrades to satisfy most building codes only cost $2,000 per home. That means the expenses required to upgrade would be all but mitigated anyway.

Roskam also fails to mention that consumers end up saving lots of money in the long-run once their homes start using less energy. According to the Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, energy efficient building codes could save (PDF) the average Illinois homeowner between $287-$667 on annual energy costs.

Lastly, Roskam seems unaware that the General Assembly finally did approve its own building energy code measure before leaving Springfield this year. Rep. Julie Hamos' Energy Efficient Commercial Building Act (HB3987), which is waiting for the governor's signature, requires the state's Capital Development Board to adopt the most recent version of the International Energy Conservation Code within nine months. And thanks to the hard work of environmentalists, the code will apply to all new residential and commercial buildings.

In other words, Roskam is on the wrong side of history.