Maryland is trying to force its big buildings to go green, but the owners of these properties are fighting back.

Less than a month after Maryland put into place new regulations designed to reduce carbon emissions from large buildings, a coalition representing some of the state’s largest building owners is suing.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court against Maryland Environment Secretary Serena McIlwain, comes from a coalition of commercial real estate heavy hitters and condo associations.

Their effort could have big implications for Maryland’s plans to curb its role in climate change. The state is trying to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045 — an ambitious timeline that, along with scrubbing emissions from its transportation sector and power grid, would require significant retrofitting of office towers, hospitals and apartment blocks, among other buildings.

Fuel and electricity use in buildings drives roughly a third of all greenhouse gas emissions in Maryland, according to regulatory documents outlining the new energy standards. The smaller subset of large properties covered by the Building Energy Performance Standards made up roughly 7% of all Maryland greenhouse gas emissions in 2020.

But some of the state’s largest building owners see the requirements as needlessly draconian and an overreach by state regulators.

The Maryland chapters of the commercial real estate group NAIOP said in a statement that owners are committed to sustainable building practices, but called the Maryland standards “abrupt and aggressive.” A spokesperson pointed to an estimate by state regulators that the required retrofits will cost more than $14 billion.

“Without intervention, this regulation will put unsustainable, escalating financial pressure on the owners and occupants of Maryland commercial buildings, apartments and condominiums,” the group said.

NAIOP is joined in the lawsuit by Maryland Building Industry Association, the Maryland Multi-Housing Association, the Building Owners and Managers Association of Greater Baltimore, the utility Washington Gas Light Company, the Leisure World retirement community in Silver Spring and condo associations in Montgomery County.

Maryland Department of the Environment spokesman Jay Apperson said the agency is working to provide guidance and technical assistance to owners making the transition, which he said is crucial to meeting state climate goals. Many buildings in Maryland are already in compliance, Apperson added, and the steps required under the building standards “will save energy and save money.”

In the complaint, the building owners argue that the Maryland standards conflict with a 1970s federal law that already regulates fossil fuel energy use in their properties, a statue that states can preempt only in narrow exceptions.

At the same time, the building owners say, these requirements are bad for Marylanders because they restrict consumer choices while creating new demands on an already strained power grid and exacerbating the housing crisis by pushing up home and energy prices.

Clean building standards are facing similar blowback in Colorado, and the Maryland coalition points to a recent federal ruling invalidating a ban on gas pipes in Berkeley, California, to back up its case.

Climate advocates involved in sculpting the standards for big buildings, though, argued the regulations are crucial for meeting the state’s emissions goals.

Jamie DeMarco, representing the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said similar requirements are moving forward across the country, and Maryland shouldn’t be any different.

He said many people underrate the importance of eliminating emissions from buildings, which create far more outdoor air pollution in Maryland than the state’s power plants. Stripping out things such as gas furnaces and replacing them with heat pumps will take decades, DeMarco said, and it’s imperative that the process begin now.

“Building owners would rather keep polluting,” he said. “It’s not a surprise that they’re trying to get out of doing the right thing for the state and for their tenants.”

The new Maryland building emissions standards apply to buildings of at least 35,000 square feet. Under the rules, which took effect just before Christmas, such large buildings would need to achieve a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the next five years and reach what’s known as net-zero emissions by 2040. Net-zero means having no climate-changing emissions, either by reducing or absorbing such emissions.

Josh Tulkin, director of the Maryland chapter of the Sierra Club, said building owners should be focused on the more imminent 20% reduction goal, which he argued most buildings could meet without transitioning to electric systems, instead relying on resources like insulation and appliance tuneups.

Tulkin also argued that these building emissions create health problems, especially for Black Marylanders disproportionately affected by the pollution, and argued that the plaintiff Washington Gas has tried to undermine climate goals with similar lawsuits against building standards in Montgomery County and Washington, D.C.

“It’s no surprise then to see Washington Gas and special interests launch a baseless lawsuit against Maryland’s landmark Building Energy Performance Standards,” he said.

Building owners that don’t meet these requirements would have to pay penalties starting at $230 for every metric ton of carbon dioxide they emit over their limits. As an initial step, building owners will have to begin reporting emissions data to MDE this year.

A patchwork of other policies and proposals in Maryland are designed to transition smaller buildings and residences from fossil fuels to electric systems, too.

The lawsuit comes as Maryland legislators are expected to consider adjusting the building standards this session. DeMarco said those tweaks could include making the building regulations more flexible by instituting waivers that give owners a few years of leniency and capping how much they pay to get into compliance.