Maryland Building Performance Standards - Fossil Fuel Use, Energy Conservation, and Electric- and Solar-Ready Standards (Better Buildings Act of 2025)
SB804 would amend Maryland’s Building Performance Standards to require the Department of Labor to adopt new building-code regulations aimed at reducing fossil-fuel use in buildings and improving energy performance. The bill directs the Department, by October 1, 2025, to require that new buildings and qualifying “significant improvements” meet laundry, water-heating, and space-heating demands without fossil fuels, subject to limited waivers for certain uses and emergency backup systems. It also requires electric-ready standards for buildings that receive a waiver and solar-ready standards for certain larger low- and mid-rise buildings.
In addition to the fossil-fuel provisions, the bill creates a new framework for energy conservation requirements for smaller “covered buildings” and sets phased-in energy-efficiency targets for new residential and other buildings beginning with permit applications received in 2027, 2030, and 2033. The bill also preserves local authority to adopt stricter standards, and it requires the Department to use Maryland-specific modeling and avoid fuel-type-based compliance rules that would let one fuel type achieve lower efficiency than another. The measure would be implemented through regulations under the Public Safety Article and would apply to building permits received on or after the effective dates in the bill.
SB804 would substantially revise § 12-503 of the Public Safety Article and add a new § 12-503.1 governing building performance standards. It would expand the Department’s regulatory authority to require all-electric operation for certain building end uses, establish electric-ready and solar-ready design requirements, and set statewide energy-conservation benchmarks for new construction. The bill would also affect local jurisdictions by allowing them to grant limited waivers, but preserving their ability to adopt stricter fossil-fuel bans or energy standards than the state minimums. Builders, developers, architects, and local code officials would be directly affected by the new design, permitting, and compliance requirements.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears to be policy-driven and reform-oriented rather than contested in the available record. The bill’s sponsors frame it as a “Better Buildings” measure focused on energy conservation, electrification, and solar readiness. Because no committee discussion or vote history is included, there is no documented support or opposition to characterize from the record provided.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s fossil-fuel restrictions, the scope of local waiver authority, and the cost and feasibility of compliance for builders and property owners. The bill limits waivers to situations where non-fossil-fuel use is not feasible and explicitly states that financial considerations alone are not enough, which could be controversial for commercial, institutional, and residential projects. Another likely issue is the phased energy-efficiency requirements and the prohibition on fuel-type-based compliance methods that could be seen as constraining design flexibility. Historic structures, emergency backup systems, hospitals, laundromats, laboratories, crematoriums, and commercial food establishments are specifically carved out or treated differently, indicating those sectors may be especially sensitive to implementation details.