The Chicago suburb of Naperville already has an extensive system of building codes and inspections, so when it began to consider adding another layer earlier this year, area homebuilders were alarmed.

Adopting a “stretch” energy code that goes beyond existing conservation requirements would add thousands of dollars to the cost of a new home, potentially tens of thousands, while saving only a negligible amount of energy each year, the builders reportedly told the City Council.

Just a few weeks after that, the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, sending the price of oil and liquefied natural gas on a roller-coaster ride and creating widespread shortages around the world. Meantime, electricity costs are surging across the country, in part because of the growth of data centers that consume huge amounts of power.

With energy prices on the rise, could stricter building codes pay for themselves after all? Yes, but there’s more to consider.

Indeed, a battle has been brewing over, of all things, the basic rules that govern residential and commercial construction. And the disputes about these nitty-gritty details are philosophical as much as pragmatic.

Red states have branded climate-friendly policies as government overreach, in some cases nullifying energy-efficiency measures in their more liberal cities. Yet some of those same states are being forced to beef up building requirements as severe storms, floods and wildfires make property too costly to insure without stricter codes.

Deep-blue Massachusetts pioneered the voluntary stretch codes, which reduce carbon emissions and energy use beyond base-code requirements. Illinois followed and progressive-minded north suburban Evanston last year became the state’s first municipality to stretch its codes.

Small changes in code multiplied over many buildings can indeed save large amounts of energy in the long run with thicker insulation, tighter building envelopes and better HVAC systems. While climate-change activists cheer, however, the stricter rules complicate the market for affordable housing, another top item on the progressive agenda.

For years, this debate between stricter codes and affordable housing festered behind the scenes, including at the obscure International Code Council, which brings together government officials, contractors, appliance makers and others to lay the groundwork for model codes. Early in its history, it mostly made incremental changes.

But in 2019, the group started to tighten the energy efficiency standard in gulps. That meant higher upfront costs for builders, electrification rules that upset natural gas providers and other special interests being disadvantaged.

Illinois was among the leaders in upgrading its model codes to address higher standards and encourage the use of stretch codes. The new regulations arrived as housing affordability was being recognized as a national crisis. Rents today are especially crushing for low-income families, and the American Dream of owning a home is far out of reach for many debt-strapped young Americans.

This page long has taken a pragmatic approach to regulations. While there’s no doubt stricter codes can save energy, we question the benefits versus the costs.

We believe the best way to improve housing affordability is to increase supply. We’ve given Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson credit for his sensible efforts to jump-start development of three flats and so-called “granny flats” added on to existing properties.

How many homes and commercial properties won’t get built if onerous new stretch codes catch on? When even optimistic analyses indicate that it takes a decade or more for these rules to pay for themselves through lower utility bills, is it worth it?

In Naperville, the builders pointed out to the City Council that today’s homes already are far more efficient than typical older homes. They’re onto something.

Rather than discourage new construction by piling on regulations, put the focus on existing buildings. Most are badly inefficient compared with their newer counterparts, and surprisingly cheap to retrofit.

Just sealing gaps around windows and doors can sharply lower heating and cooling bills. Smart thermostats, easy to install and in some cases costing under a hundred bucks, can pay for themselves in a matter of months by automatically managing temperatures. Many but not all residents have learned to change furnace filters regularly, switch out incandescent lighting for LEDs and unplug unused electronics that otherwise sap power.

Some upgrades involve bigger investments: When old furnaces and AC units conk out, replacing them with high-efficiency models can save more in a year than the estimated financial benefits from stretch codes. Simply adding insulation works wonders for many older buildings, and installing solar panels can cut electric bills to a trickle.

Let’s adapt building codes and promote tax credits and other programs to further encourage those straightforward conservation measures. The result will be cost savings and greater efficiency without pricing more households out of a costly market for homes.

___

©2026 Chicago Tribune. Visit at chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.