Building retrofits towards net zero energy
Building retrofits are designed to reduce the energy needs and environmental impacts of buildings. Building retrofits typically include active and passive elements. Passive elements improve building envelopes by installing insulation, double-pane window glazing, energy-efficient doors, and more. Passive elements also use natural shade, sunlight, and ventilation solutions that increase heating and cooling efficiency. Active elements address energy efficiency for building systems, such as air conditioning, heating, hot water, or lighting, implement automated controls, and use renewable energy sources such as solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, geothermal energy, wind turbines, or linking to off-site renewables1, 2. Building retrofits can be implemented in all types of buildings, including residential, commercial, institutional, educational, industrial, and mixed-use buildings1, 2, 3. Comprehensive building retrofits with renewable energy sources for existing buildings can achieve net zero energy and net zero greenhouse gas emissions for building operations4.
Net zero or zero energy buildings produce as much energy as they use (and sometimes more) with low or no greenhouse gas emissions, by combining energy efficiency measures that reduce energy needs with renewable energy generation4, 5. Net zero buildings combine multiple strategies to reduce and meet energy needs, including insulation and energy efficient systems, green and cool roofs, high performance glass, LED lighting, automated building systems, energy efficient building materials, renewable energy sources, renewable energy storage, and more5. Initiatives to support net zero buildings can use incentives, legislation, policies, and community organizing to adopt energy efficient building practices and operation systems and replace conventional building and energy consumption practices5.
Typically, the operational phase of a building’s life cycle is the most energy intensive, especially for buildings with long lifespans. The operational phase can account for over 80% of a building’s total energy consumption6. Energy use breakdowns differ by building type, use, and location; however, buildings use most of their energy on heating, cooling, and ventilation; for lighting; for major appliances; and on miscellaneous needs, including electronics or specialized equipment7. In 2020, buildings produced more than 40% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 50% of carbon dioxide emissions8.
What could this strategy improve?
Expected Benefits
Our evidence rating is based on the likelihood of achieving these outcomes:
Increased energy efficiency
Reduced energy use
Reduced emissions
Improved indoor environmental quality
Potential Benefits
Our evidence rating is not based on these outcomes, but these benefits may also be possible:
Reduced energy expenditures
Improved health outcomes
Improved well-being
Reduced absences
What does the research say about effectiveness?
There is strong evidence that building retrofits increase energy efficiency, reduce energy use, reduce greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions, and improve the quality of indoor environments1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. The effectiveness of different retrofit combinations varies by region, location, and microclimate, building type and use, and with future climate change considerations1, 4, 6, 8, 11. Building retrofits are most effective when location and building specific contexts inform retrofit choices1, 8.
Retrofits of older buildings that comprehensively improve energy performance, including improving efficiency, energy systems, and renewable energy use, have the greatest potential to reduce building energy use and costs12, 13. Residential buildings have the lowest energy consumption across climate types compared to other buildings, including commercial, educational, and institutional buildings3. Experts suggest retrofits for non-residential buildings and multi-building projects are needed to maximize emission reductions9. Multi-building retrofitting projects are more complicated technically and socially but also provide greater opportunities for energy generation and energy sharing9.
Estimated reductions. Estimates for energy and emissions reductions vary by retrofit choices and locations. On average, building retrofits cut energy consumption by more than half9 and can reduce residential building energy use 75-80%8, 15. Building retrofits can reduce carbon emissions by over half6. Project Drawdown estimates net zero buildings could reduce emissions by 5 to 32 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent, depending on the adoption rate5. Project Drawdown also has estimates of emissions reductions for several individual components of building retrofits; for example, building insulation retrofits could reduce emissions by 15 to 18.5 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent16.
Other expected beneficial outcomes. Building retrofits can improve residents’ health and well-being4. Housing improvements can increase warmth in wintertime, address insulation, and improve temperature regulation, and so improve residents’ overall physical and mental health, respiratory outcomes, and well-being17, 18. Housing improvements have also been shown to reduce children’s absences from school, adult absences from work, doctor’s visits, and hospitalizations17, 18. Building retrofits using insulation, LED lighting, energy efficiency, and net zero building can reduce energy bills2, 5, 16. One analysis suggests that widespread adoption of building retrofits could directly or indirectly create over 3.3 million jobs in the U.S.19.
Advantages and limitations of specific retrofits. Retrofits with active elements that improve building systems substantially reduce energy use, especially for commercial buildings, and improve thermal comfort1. Some system retrofits such as lighting or smart meters have low installation and maintenance costs, while heating and cooling system retrofits have higher costs for installation, maintenance, and disposal or recycling of old equipment1. Installing renewable energy sources can reduce or eliminate a building’s greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption from non-renewable sources; however, initial costs are high, the energy supply can be unstable, and renewable energy sources vary depending on local weather conditions1. Retrofits with passive elements that improve building insulation reduce energy consumption for heating and cooling, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and have low installation and maintenance costs1. Using natural lighting and natural ventilation reduces energy use, but the amount of energy saved depends on weather and elements outside of the building1.
Best practices. Critical success factors for building retrofit projects include active stakeholder engagement, tenant shareholding, project management and tailored design, strong regulatory and policy support, and economic feasibility with financial incentives to alleviate initial costs6, 10, 20. Project planning that establishes technology and materials feasibility, life cycle analysis, energy monitoring, waste management improvements, clear contract agreements, and collaborative interdisciplinary project teams and multi-system retrofit solution development also supports successful building retrofits6, 10, 20, especially for commercial and institutional buildings20. Building retrofits that consider the life cycle of materials used, including supply chain and sustainability, maximize a project’s potential energy and emissions reductions21. Incorporating future climate change projections with building energy simulations informs decisions about the best retrofit solutions to combine and implement based on building location8. Multi-family building retrofits will be more successful if residents are engaged and supportive of efforts to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions4. Commercial building retrofits are uncommon despite demonstrated advantages; experts suggest stronger regulations and policies, strategic partnerships, and improved information-sharing between governments, utilities, real estate investors, employers and employees to help increase retrofitting in commercial buildings20, 22. Government policies that support building retrofits for public sector buildings have been shown to increase implementation in both the public and private sector, with spillover effects also increasing implementation in neighboring cities23.
Challenges. Challenges for building retrofit projects include environmental uncertainties; economic constraints with high upfront costs and long payback periods, especially without incentive programs; social limitations in awareness or user support; lack of understanding and communication between stakeholders; irrationality in building codes; and technical constraints based on the conditions of existing buildings1, 8, 10. Building retrofit projects often encounter labor shortages, rising costs, lack of knowledge among building owners4, conflicting guidance, and administrative burdens for both owners and service providers24. Selecting the best building retrofit combinations is complex and location-specific8. Building retrofits are needed for communities, regions, and countries to reach climate and energy goals24, 25. Most buildings in the U.S. that will stand in 2050 already exist and operate using fossil fuels24; the challenge is how to retrofit as many of those buildings as possible, quickly and comprehensively, to substantially reduce energy consumption24, 25. In many cases, locating large renewable energy sources on site is also challenging, which is why building efficiency measures are essential to make meeting energy generation needs more feasible15.
Climate change impacts. Climate change impacts building system performance, retrofit effectiveness, energy consumption, and decisions about optimal building retrofits. Uncertainty about future climate conditions changes potential risk, vulnerability, and energy demand8. Areas with more frequent extreme weather events will see corresponding impacts on building durability, risk, moisture damage potential, peak energy demand limits, thermal discomfort, and health effects for building residents8. In many areas demand for cooling will increase more than demand for heating will reduce. Urban heat island effects also increase energy needs for cooling8.
Costs. Building retrofits are cost-effective. Project Drawdown estimates the costs and savings for different large-scale adoption scenarios of insulation retrofits, with cost ranges from $710 to $790 billion yielding savings ranges from $19.5 to nearly $23 trillion16. Building insulation and programmable thermostats are among the most effective retrofits when evaluating for both energy and cost savings13. Passive retrofits are more cost-effective in cold climates; in mild climates the payback period for passive retrofits alone can be long9. Net zero buildings can encourage design and investment innovations for energy conservation and on-site energy generation5. New retrofit technologies are usually developed to improve installation ease, scalability, reduce costs, or reduce life cycle energy use11.
Life cycle perspectives. Stakeholders changing perspective from considering retrofits based on a basic cost difference between the retrofit and business-as-usual – to the perspective which evaluates the full life cycle value of a retrofit, and its benefits for the life of the building and occupants, could increase the speed and comprehensiveness of retrofit implementation24. Building retrofits can be evaluated as part of a comprehensive system with standardized assessments and calculations, which could enable efficiencies in project management, support scalable solutions, and support retrofits for households with low and middle incomes24.
How could this strategy advance health equity? This strategy is rated potential to decrease disparities: suggested by expert opinion.
Experts suggest building retrofit programs that subsidize and support affordable housing retrofits have the potential to reduce disparities in energy burdens between households of color with low incomes and white households with high incomes13, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46.
People with low incomes are the most likely to be living in inefficient homes and disproportionately burdened by high energy costs13, 41, 43, 44. Affordable housing options are more likely to be older, have been built under less strict building codes, have poor insulation, inefficient appliances and systems, and high energy burdens for residents, both in single family and multi-family homes41, 42, 43. Building retrofit programs that serve households with low incomes, especially those with fuel-heating instead of electric heating, report significant cost savings and reduced energy use13. A Lisbon, Portugal-based study shows how retrofits can be used as a tool to reduce fuel poverty and improve public health outcomes in neighborhoods with low incomes47.
People of color, Indigenous communities, immigrants, people with limited English language skills, people with disabilities, renters, and older adults have all experienced disproportionate energy burdens nationally, regionally, and within metro areas41. Black households experience the most severe energy insecurity, which experts suggest may be a product of residential segregation and housing discrimination45, 46.
Multi-family residential building retrofits represent an opportunity to scale changes and substantially reduce energy demand among energy-burdened populations48. Retrofits of buildings with multiple residents are more effective when owners and managers engage with residents and stakeholders during the planning and implementation process, address potential disruptions for occupants during retrofitting, and provide information about energy efficiency, energy consumption behaviors, the goals of retrofits, as well as the health and safety benefits20.
Building codes that require energy efficiency measures for new homes have been shown to reduce energy use when building codes are strictly enforced49. Codes that limit building energy use may be less regressive than explicit taxes on energy consumption; however, state level building codes must be designed carefully to achieve energy use reductions through building envelope improvements and energy efficient systems. Otherwise, strict building energy codes can have unintended negative consequences for the affordable housing market, by incentivizing builders to achieve energy savings through reductions in home square footage or the number of bedrooms, which reduces home values and increases the energy burden per square foot for households with the lowest incomes50.
Adjusting federal codes for manufactured housing could significantly expand the U.S. supply of energy efficient and climate resilient affordable housing, which would reduce energy use, reduce energy costs, and improve health outcomes for households with low incomes and high energy burdens36. Industry stakeholders resist changes to federal codes through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (U.S. HUD) and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), since it is more profitable to continue making manufactured housing under the conventional standards36.
Building retrofits are needed as part of a broader climate resilience strategy for local communities, since most people in the U.S. live in housing that has already been built under weaker building energy codes and updated building codes primarily target new construction43, 44. Local and state policies determine zoning and building codes, land use plans, and funding for most capital, maintenance, and operations projects, especially for transportation and water systems. Although the housing market is largely private, local governments can support housing markets, share information about local climate risks, incentivize and subsidize retrofits, and develop partnerships to achieve energy efficient changes in local housing supply43. Neighborhoods with lower incomes at high risk of extreme weather events, including floods, drought, heat, and wildfires have experienced faster population growth than lower risk areas. This may be partially due to local regulations in lower risk areas that prevent or limit the growth of sustainable infill housing development43. Building developments in high-risk areas also carry significant financial risks, including rising insurance premiums, physical property damage, and declines in property values44.
What is the relevant historical background?
The U.S. has a long history of discriminatory housing, lending, and exclusionary zoning policies that have entrenched residential segregation and denied people of color access to government-insured mortgages and to funds for mortgage payment assistance, housing rehabilitation, and home maintenance51, 52, 53. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 was passed to reduce housing discrimination, but it has not stopped housing discrimination against people of color or helped rebuild the historically marginalized neighborhoods created by residential segregation54, 55. Historically, the building and construction industry has not prioritized energy efficiency or shown concern for the energy required to operate buildings. States began using residential building codes to improve energy efficiency after the oil embargo of 197349.
In the present day, formerly redlined neighborhoods remain more likely to include older homes in poorer condition, meaning homes that have energy inefficient systems; repair needs; challenges with heating and cooling; lead paint, soil, or pipes; mold and other allergens; and more56. Local, state, and federal support can provide funding to homeowners in these neighborhoods to repair and retrofit their houses, supporting health and safety at home. This helps families to remain in their communities and offers the potential to build wealth over time53, 57.
At the federal level, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 provided $4.5 billion for green buildings, $250 million to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (U.S. HUD) for retrofits of multi-family buildings, and $600 million for supporting energy efficient, green communities34. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 authorized U.S. HUD to administer the Green and Resilient Retrofit Program (GRRP) to increase energy efficiency and climate resilience retrofits in U.S. HUD-funded properties. These subsidized properties serve some of the nation’s most economically vulnerable families26, 43. GRRP-funded projects aimed to improve energy or water efficiency, enhance indoor air quality, implement renewable energy generation and storage, use low-emission building materials, or address local climate resilience needs26. On July 3, 2025, Congress eliminated any funding remaining for GRRP in the budget reconciliation bill26.
Equity Considerations
- How well are current building retrofit programs working? What partnerships, collaborations, or community engagement efforts could increase equitable investment in, speed of adoption, and comprehensiveness of building retrofits in your community? Especially among multi-family, commercial, educational, or institutional buildings in your community?
- Who decides how to prioritize and fund retrofit projects in your community? How are residents of multi-family buildings represented and engaged about projects that will affect them?
- How can building retrofit program administrators raise awareness about retrofit program goals and benefits?
- How many households in your community have the resources and knowledge to support retrofit decisions? How many owners of commercial, institutional, and other types of property have financial resources and knowledge to support retrofit investments? What additional sources of funding can help building owners with building retrofit investments?
Implementation Examples
The Green and Resilient Retrofit Program (GRRP) awarded federal funds to increase energy efficiency and climate resilience retrofits in U.S. HUD-funded properties, before the program funding was eliminated in the 2025 budget reconciliation bill26. Examples of funded projects include retrofits for the National Church Residences of Clinton, North Carolina, a program for rental assistance living for seniors with low incomes; a zero energy retrofit plan for Pageland Place Apartments in Pageland, South Carolina; and green retrofits of the Pineridge Apartments in Seneca, South Carolina26.
Many school districts have retrofitted buildings to reduce energy use and improve indoor air quality and student health. For example, Colorado Springs District 11 used a retrofitting plan to achieve significant air quality improvements and over $928,000 a year in energy cost savings27. Zero energy schools are being implemented through new construction and building retrofits. Zero energy schools use 65–80% less energy on average than traditionally constructed schools, which can save school districts tens of thousands of dollars annually28. In Arlington, Virginia, a new school was needed to accommodate a growing public school student population. The cost to build Discovery Elementary as a zero energy school was less than anticipated and the school is more efficient than projected; it now saves the school district $100,000 a year in utility costs28. Net zero schools have also been built in Irving, Texas; Woods Cross, Utah; Warren County, Kentucky; and on Mackworth Island in Falmouth, Maine28.
Communities across the country are developing net zero building plans for multiple buildings using retrofits, new construction, and a combination of those efforts. For example, in Huntington Beach, California, existing buildings, including multi-family homes, a community center, and industrial, educational, and commercial buildings, are being retrofitted to reach net zero energy across the district and reduce energy costs for residents29. In Lackawanna, New York, the site of a former Bethlehem Steel plant is being redeveloped into a zero energy manufacturing facility, which the community hopes will attract more zero energy development29. St. Paul, Minnesota has proposed a zero energy mixed-use district as a redevelopment project for a former Ford Motor factory29. In Denver, Colorado, the city plans to redevelop public housing for 1,500 residents and create a net zero energy district in the Sun Valley neighborhood, the city’s lowest-income neighborhood29. More net zero multi-building plans are being implemented in other areas of Denver, Arvada, and Fort Collins, Colorado; and Fresno, California29. In Boston, Massachusetts, the Allston Brighton Community Development Corporation is a non-profit organization that is working to implement comprehensive energy retrofits to cut energy consumption in over 100 affordable housing units30.
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) headquarters is the first net zero energy building in Washington, D.C. that was retrofitted to reduce energy demand, reclaim water, use heat exchange, and generate renewable energy31. Many office buildings have been designed and built as zero energy buildings, including the Bullitt Center in Seattle, Washington; Boulder Commons in Colorado; and District 3 Police Headquarters in Cincinnati, Ohio32. DPR Construction purchased and retrofitted existing office buildings to set up their zero energy regional offices in several locations, including San Diego, California; Phoenix, Arizona; San Francisco, California; and Reston, Virginia32.
Many cities and regions have large scale implementation and support for Passive House principles and standards, for example, in New York City, New York; the San Francisco Bay Area, California; Vancouver, Canada; Heidelberg, Germany; and Tyrol, Austria15. The Passive House Standard outlines building system efficiency improvements for both new construction and retrofits to reduce heating and cooling needs. The Passive House Standard is often viewed as the basis for net zero energy buildings and has been used to successfully reduce energy use and improve efficiency for single family houses, apartment buildings, schools, offices, supermarkets, laboratories, and more15.
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards developed by the U.S. Green Building Council are the most widely used standards and recognized certifications for energy efficient, cost-effective, sustainable buildings33. LEED building practices are being used for many model building codes and standards, which have been incorporated into many enforceable city and state building codes34. The Department of Health and Human Services opened a net zero energy National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) warehouse in 2018 that was designed to meet LEED Platinum level certification35.
Clayton Homes is one company making manufactured homes that meet the U.S. Department of Energy’s Zero Energy Ready Home standard with energy efficient technologies and building envelope improvements that reduce residents’ energy costs by more than half compared to similarly sized manufactured homes36.
Building retrofits are included in many energy justice efforts; for example, the Center for Progressive Reform has a Campaign for Energy Justice in North Carolina and features Energy Funds for All to fund building retrofits37. Emerald Cities Collaborative is a national non-profit organization working to advance racial, economic, and climate justice in communities, which includes building retrofit and energy efficiency investments in cities, states, and regions across the country38. Many universities and research institutes highlight the need for equitable building retrofits and access to affordable, renewable energy for all communities, including the Texas Energy Poverty Research Institute39, the University of Michigan’s Energy Equity Project40, and the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy41.
Implementation Resources
‡ Resources with a focus on equity.
ACEEE-Smarter House - American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). Smarter House: Reduce your impact and home energy breakdown.
ACEEE-Energy equity - American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). (n.d.). Energy Equity. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
US DOE-Zero energy buildings - U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (n.d.). Zero Energy Buildings Resource Hub. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
ACEEE-Mooney 2023 - Mooney, P. (2023). Financial and systemic barriers and solutions to scaling energy retrofits in commercial buildings. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).
US DOE-Guides - U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (n.d.). Guides and Case Studies for Hot-Dry and Mixed-Dry Climates. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
US EPA-School retrofit - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). (2025, March 28). Protecting IAQ during school energy efficiency retrofit projects with energy savings plus health guidelines [Data and Tools].
US GBC-LEED Resources - U.S. Green Building Council. (n.d.). Resources. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
NAACP-Retrofitting‡ - NAACP, Environmental and Climate Justice Program. (2025). Just energy policies and practices action toolkit: Module 6 starting a community energy efficiency, retrofitting, & weatherization project. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
Gonzalez-Caceres 2019 - Gonzalez-Caceres, A., Rabani, M., & Wegertseder Martínez, P. A. (2019). A systematic review of retrofitting tools for residential buildings. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 294(1), 012035.
Lee 2015a - Lee, S. H., Hong, T., Piette, M. A., & Taylor-Lange, S. C. (2015). Energy retrofit analysis toolkits for commercial buildings: A review. Energy, 89, 1087–1100.
Footnotes
* Journal subscription may be required for access.
1 Citadini de Oliveira 2024 - Citadini de Oliveira, C., Catão Martins Vaz, I., & Ghisi, E. (2024). Retrofit strategies to improve energy efficiency in buildings: An integrative review. Energy and Buildings, 321, 114624.
2 Project Drawdown-BR - Project Drawdown. (n.d.). Building retrofitting. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
3 Ibrahim 2024 - Ibrahim, M., Harkouss, F., Biwole, P., Fardoun, F., & Ouldboukhitine, S. (2024). Building retrofitting towards net zero energy: A review. Energy and Buildings, 322, 114707.
4 Weerasinghe 2024 - Weerasinghe, L. N. K., Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Blay, K. B., & Edwards, D. J. (2024). Measures, benefits, and challenges to retrofitting existing buildings to net zero carbon: A comprehensive review. Journal of Building Engineering, 94, 109998.
5 Project Drawdown-NZB - Project Drawdown. (n.d.). Net zero buildings. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
6 Adegoke 2024 - Adegoke, A. S., Abidoye, R. B., & Sunindijo, R. Y. (2024). A bibliometric analysis and scoping review of the critical success factors for residential building energy retrofitting. Buildings, 14(12), Article 12.
7 US DOE-QTR 2015 - Quadrennial Technology Review (QTR), U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (September 2015). An assessment of energy technologies and research opportunities. Chapter 5: Increasing efficiency of building systems and technologies. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
8 Shen 2025 - Shen, P., Li, Y., Gao, X., Zheng, Y., Huang, P., Lu, A., Gu, W., & Chen, S. (2025). Recent progress in building energy retrofit analysis under changing future climate: A review. Applied Energy, 383, 125441.
9 Bjelland 2024 - Bjelland, D., Brozovsky, J., & Hrynyszyn, B. D. (2024). Systematic review: Upscaling energy retrofitting to the multi-building level. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 198, 114402.
10 Xiaoxiang 2024 - Xiaoxiang, Q., Junjia, Y., Haron, N. A., Alias, A. H., Law, T. H., & Abu Bakar, N. (2024). Status, challenges and future directions in the evaluation of net-zero energy building retrofits: A bibliometrics-based systematic review. Energies, 17(15), Article 15.
11 Kamel 2022 - Kamel, E., & Memari, A. M. (2022). Residential building envelope energy retrofit methods, simulation tools, and example projects: A review of the literature. Buildings, 12(7), Article 7.
12 Madushika 2023 - Madushika, U. G. D., Ramachandra, T., Karunasena, G., & Udakara, P. a. D. S. (2023). Energy retrofitting technologies of buildings: A review-based assessment. Energies, 16(13), Article 13.
13 Giandomenico 2022 - Giandomenico, L., Papineau, M., & Rivers, N. (2022). A systematic review of energy efficiency home retrofit evaluation studies. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 14(Volume 14, 2022), 689–708.
14 Krajcik 2023 - Krajčík, M., Arıcı, M., & Ma, Z. (2023). Trends in research of heating, ventilation and air conditioning and hot water systems in building retrofits: Integration of review studies. Journal of Building Engineering, 76, 107426.
15 LCP-James 2015 - James, M., Everhart, T., & Maxwell, L. (2015). Net zero energy buildings: Passive house + renewables. Low Carbon Productions.
16 Project Drawdown-Insulation - Project Drawdown. (n.d.). Insulation. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
17 Thomson 2015 - Thomson H, Thomas S. Developing empirically supported theories of change for housing investment and health. Social Science & Medicine. 2015;124:205-214.
18 Howden-Chapman 2007 - Howden-Chapman P, Matheson A, Crane J, et al. Effect of insulating existing houses on health inequality: Cluster randomized study in the community. BMJ. 2007;334(7591):460.
19 Mukhtar 2021 - Mukhtar, M., Ameyaw, B., Yimen, N., Zhang, Q., Bamisile, O., Adun, H., & Dagbasi, M. (2021). Building retrofit and energy conservation/efficiency review: A techno-environ-economic assessment of heat pump system retrofit in housing stock. Sustainability, 13(2), Article 2.
20 Kim 2024a - Kim, A. A., & Medal, L. (2024). Factors influencing energy-efficiency retrofits in commercial and institutional buildings: A systematic literature review. Journal of Facility Management Education and Research, 7(1), 42–63.
21 Piccardo 2020 - Piccardo, C., Dodoo, A., Gustavsson, L., & Tettey, U. (2020). Retrofitting with different building materials: Life-cycle primary energy implications. Energy, 192, 116648.
22 ACEEE-Mooney 2023 - Mooney, P. (2023). Financial and systemic barriers and solutions to scaling energy retrofits in commercial buildings. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).
23 NBER-Simcoe 2012 - Simcoe, T., & Toffel, M. W. (2012). Public procurement and the private supply of green buildings [Working Paper No. 18385]. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).
24 RMI-Rosenbloom 2024 - Rosenbloom, E., Mure, E., & Toffoli, L. (2024). A marketplace for equitable building retrofits. RMI.
25 Hondeborg 2023 - Hondeborg, D., Probst, B., Petkov, I., & Knoeri, C. (2023). The effectiveness of building retrofits under a subsidy scheme: Empirical evidence from Switzerland. Energy Policy, 180, 113680.
26 EFFA-GRRP - Energy Funds for All (EFFA). (n.d.). Green and Resilient Retrofit Program (GRRP). Retrieved July 22, 2025.
27 US EPA-School retrofit - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). (2025, March 28). Protecting IAQ during school energy efficiency retrofit projects with energy savings plus health guidelines [Data and Tools].
28 US DOE-Schools - U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (n.d.). Zero energy building project profiles: Offices. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
29 US DOE-Multibuilding - U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (n.d.). Zero energy building project profiles: Districts & communities. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
30 RMI-Mure 2023 - Mure, E., Rosenbloom, E., & Weir, M. (2023, November 2). A blueprint to decarbonize affordable housing. RMI.
31 AGU-NZE - AGU - American Geophysical Union. (n.d.). Learn about the building. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
32 US DOE-Offices - U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE). (n.d.). Zero energy building project profiles: Districts & communities. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
33 US GBC-LEED - U.S. Green Building Council. (n.d.). LEED rating system. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
34 CRS-Clark 2021 - Clark, C. E. (2021). Green Building Overview and Issues (Legislation No. R46719).
35 Yewell 2018 - Yewell, J. (2018, January 26). NIEHS Opens Net-Zero Energy Warehouse. NIH Record, LXX(2), 9.
36 Urban-Rumbach 2025 - Rumbach, A., Sullivan, E., Curran-Groome, W., Rosenow, A., & Cohen, O. (2025). Building a climate-resilient manufactured housing stock. Urban Institute.
37 CPR-Energy justice - Center for Progressive Reform (CPR). (n.d.). Campaign for energy justice in North Carolina: Energy funds for all. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
38 ECC-Justice - Emerald Cities Collaborative (ECC). (n.d.). Economic inclusion, energy democracy, and justice 40+. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
39 TEPRI-Equitable energy - Texas Energy Poverty Research Institute (TEPRI). (n.d.). Our work: Our vision is to create a brighter and more equitable energy future for Texas. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
40 EEP-Resources - Energy Equity Project. (n.d.). Resources: Energy equity project materials, foundational resources, mapping tools, and our go-to energy equity dashboards, tools, and resource compilations. University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability. Retrieved July 23, 2025.
41 ACEEE-Energy equity - American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). (n.d.). Energy Equity. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
42 ACEEE-Multifamily - American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). (n.d.). Homes and Multifamily Buildings. Retrieved July 22, 2025.
43 Brookings-Vajjhala 2023 - Vajjhala, S., Martin, A., Kane, J. W., Tomer, A., Schuetz, J., Donoghoe, M., Maxim, R., & Briggs, X. de S. (2023, October 6). Around the halls: Brookings scholars discuss the White House’s new National Climate Resilience Framework. Brookings.
44 Brookings-Schuetz 2024 - Schuetz, J., & Devens, E. (2024). Homes and commercial buildings need substantial investments to become more resilient and sustainable. Who pays for these investments has important equity implications. Brookings.
45 Hernandez 2019 - Hernández D, Siegel E. Energy insecurity and its ill health effects: A community perspective on the energy-health nexus in New York City. Energy Research and Social Science. 2019;47:78-83.
46 Lewis 2019 - Lewis J, Hernández D, Geronimus AT. Energy efficiency as energy justice: Addressing racial inequities through investments in people and places. Energy Efficiency. 2019;13(3):419-432.
47 Avanzini 2022 - Avanzini, M., Pinheiro, M. D., Gomes, R., & Rolim, C. (2022). Energy retrofit as an answer to public health costs of fuel poverty in Lisbon social housing. Energy Policy, 160, 112658.
48 Brookings-Bamberg 2010 - Bamberger, L. (2010). Scaling the nationwide energy retrofit of affordable multifamily housing: Innovations and policy recommendations. Brookings.
49 NBER-Jacobsen 2010 - Jacobsen, G. D., & Kotchen, M. J. (2010). Are building codes effective at saving energy? Evidence from residential billing data in Florida [Working Paper No. 16194]. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).
50 NBER-Bruegge 2018 - Bruegge, C. D., Deryugina, T., & Myers, E. (2018). The distributional effects of building energy codes [Working Paper No. 24211]. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).
51 Kaplan 2007 - Kaplan J, Valls A. Housing discrimination as a basis for Black reparations. Public Affairs Quarterly. 2007;21(3):255-273.
52 Home Owners’ Loan Act - Thompson L. Home Owners' Loan Act (1933). The Living New Deal. 2016.
53 USDA-Section 504 HRP - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development Programs & Services. Section 504 Home repair program (HRP): Single family housing repair loans & grants, program 101.
54 Urban-Reynolds 2021 - Reynolds K, Lo L, Boshart A, Galvez MM. Federal reforms to strengthen housing stability, affordability, and choice. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute; 2021.
55 AIC-HTF - All-In Cities, an Initiative of PolicyLink. All-In Cities Policy Toolkit: Housing trust funds (HTF).
56 Braveman 2022 - Braveman PA, Arkin E, Proctor D, Kauh T, Holm N. Systemic and structural racism: Definitions, examples, health damages, and approaches to dismantling. Health Affairs. 2022;41(2):171-178.
57 CDC-Home improvement - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy. Home improvement loans and grants.
Related What Works for Health Strategies
To see all strategies:
countyhealthrankings.org/whatworks