Colorado Green Building Post

May 21, 2010

Boulder City Council Hears Public Reaction to SmartRegs

Filed under: Energy Policy, Weatherizing and Retrofit — Tags: , — uswx @ 1:45 pm

By P.J. Nutting , New Era News

May 20, 2010 at 2:23PM  

Boulder City Council began its first reading of the much-discussed SmartRegs proposal at their meeting on May 18th. In witness of an over-capacity meeting hall, Mayor Susan Osborne said it was, “the most important issue we’ll tackle this year, and the most complex.” Landlords and renters passionately agreed.

If you haven’t heard of SmartRegs yet, you are surely a first-time visitor to the site. New Era Colorado has been a big player in supporting SmartRegs, which would update Boulder’s housing code to set energy efficiency standards for rental units. Landlords would have to maintain their properties to similar standards held for new properties — but to a lesser degree, according to the introductory presentation given by Yael Gichon, Residential Program Strategist for the Local Environmental Division.

Currently, there are no such regulations for rental units, and New Era found on its latest bus trip that many Boulder renters were relieved to hear they were due for an energy upgrade. As a renter in Boulder, and on a personal note, I have found it was hard enough to get my landlord to bolt my toilet into the floor so it didn’t swivel like an office chair. It took them months to fix a couple of bolts; I can’t imagine how long it would take to replace my ancient, drafty windows or lay down a little weather stripping.

City council is currently chasing after their sustainability goals outlined in their 2006 Climate Action Plan. In order to catch up to international carbon standards, they are eyeing the 19,600 rental units whose energy use is unregulated. I even heard Mayor Osborne refer to “when” it passes instead of “if” during preliminary discussion.

Surprisingly, the majority of the landlords in attendance, who would face the financial burden, thought it was a great idea. Jim Hartman, who has rented properties in Boulder and Denver, kicked off the public hearing by encouraging the council to work even faster to pass the new regulations. He said he has already updated many of his properties for energy efficiency and mentioned the retroactive incentives that SmartRegs might give to those already heading in that direction. Paul Sheldon, who rents out properties in Boulder and Durango and has worked on Aspen’s city planning board, said regulation would level the playing field for landlords who had already invested the money. He said it was “unfair” that other landlords were able to rent low-efficiency units with no consequence.

“The city won’t allow a property with gushing water, why would they allow gushing energy?” added Tom Volckhausen.

But even with all the support, it was clear that many landlords were afraid the details of the regulations were ill-advised. Sheila Horton, executive director of the Boulder Area Rental Housing Association, passed out bright-colored paper so landlords could show support without applause, and throughout the night there were talking points that raised a flutter of neon paper.

The proponents of the measure wore green ‘Renters With Benefits’ shirts for visual support. New Era Colorado also gathered 504 postcards of support from members of the community. Julia Harrington, a New Era organizing intern, delivered them to city council.

One of the biggest points of agreement among landlords in support and in opposition was the basis for the energy evaluations. There are two primary choices. One choice would involve an energy auditor, who would evaluate each property with specialized equipment at the expense of the property owner, which is the current method used for newly constructed housing; it would be comprehensive and reliable, but expensive. The other choice would use a point system, assigning a checklist of energy-saving upgrades to a point scale that would add up the the unit’s total energy grade; it would save time and allow flexibility, but some argued that the one-size-fits-all approach would favor certain properties.

For instance, several property owners complained that adding wall insulation to their old, brick properties would require expensive demolition and vacating tenants. Stanley Peterson, who owns two rental properties in Boulder, detailing his worst case scenario in terms of costs, said he supports the regulation in principle but took issue with the point system. The dollar value of additions didn’t seem to line up with the points - installing solar panels would cost him $13,000, he said, but would only give him 34 of the required 100 points. “The smart meters are more efficient and cheaper,” he pointed out, “but I would need 200 of them,” he said to laughs.

Horton advocated for more time and more research. She argued that the seven properties used as case studies by the city were not nearly comprehensive enough to create a model for the whole city. She also argued there was no third party verification to the study, and that even programs intended to help landlords with the transition (such as on-the-spot energy auditors Two Techs and a Truck) were unknowledgable about small details, such as the difference between single- and multi-family properties.

“A building is only as good as the tenants,” Horton added. “There is no magic bullet for the 100 points.”

Landlords heartily agreed with this point. Why should they add a new, expensive heating system if tenants would still leave their windows open, their lights on, and their heat at full blast? Renting as a two-way street became a hearty talking point. Kathryn Schweiger pointed out that smaller details, such as which lightbulbs were used, are the tenant’s decision anyway and out of the landlord’s control.

However, Boulder resident James Darden approached the council with his latest energy bill. He said he had been charged around $1,200 dollars in the last two months: “Rent, I can afford; utilities, I cannot,” he said, stating he was powerless to hold his landlord accountable for the amount of energy his unit consumed.

Whatever solution that seemed so certain to the council at the beginning of the session seemed to disappear by 10:30 p.m., when the public hearing closed. The council voted to hold futher discussion for their next meeting on June 1, and moved on to the next item on the agenda without so much as a closing remark. There is clearly a lot to wrap one’s head around on this issue, and though it was frustrating to not receive any kind of reaction from out city’s leaders, it was also reassuring that they recognized there were many details to work out.

http://neweranews.org/blog/part-1-smartregs-gets-its-legs-takes-some-heat

April 13, 2010

Climate Bill Update from National Save Energy Coalition

Filed under: Climate Change, Energy Policy — Tags: — uswx @ 2:44 pm

From Patrick Roche
The National SAVE Energy Coalition
www.nationalsaveenergycoalition.org

  1. Call to Action for Climate Bill
  2. Climate Webinar this Thursday
  3. House to Unveil Bipartisan Home Star Bill

 

*********

1.      Call to Action! The Kerry, Graham, Lieberman (KGL) climate bill is in its final stages, but decisions are still being made as to how the bill will allocate revenue from emissions allowances. Our partners in the efficiency industry expect that as currently written, KGL would NOT allow state Public Utility Commissions (PUCs) to use their utility allowance value for energy efficiency. One of the most effective ways to support energy efficiency programs, and the only way to allow PUCs to invest allowance revenue in efficiency, is to require that local distribution companies (LDCs) invest a minimum portion of their free allowances into consumer efficiency programs. Your help is needed today and tomorrow.

  • MA, CT, and SC businesses: please call and email Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman’s offices today and tell them to support 1/3 for EE in the gas & electric utility allocation to create jobs and save money.
  • All other states: please ask your Senators to call KGL and push for 1/3 or 1/4 for EE in the gas & electric utility allocation to ensure EE is not prohibited. KGL claim they haven’t heard from enough members on this
  • Contact info: at www.senate.gov and use drop down menu to find your state. Talking Points attached.

 

2.      Preparing for a Federal Climate Bill: Opportunities and Challenges

Major climate legislation is expected to be released on Earth Day, April 22nd, from Senators Kerry (D-MA), Graham (R-SC), and Lieberman (I-CT). Preliminary information about the structure of their legislation are available, and the system for carbon regulation looks drastically different from the climate bill introduced by Senators Kerry and Boxer (D-CA) in the fall of 2009. As a result, the bill would direct significantly less funding towards energy efficiency than either the House climate bill (American Clean Energy and Security Act) or the previous Kerry-Boxer bill. The clean energy industry has a limited window of time in which to improve this bill. Join us on the webinar as we discuss the upcoming proposal, two additional climate bills from Senators Cantwell and Collins and Senator Lugar, and how we can collectively impact the debate. Full invite w/ agenda and speakers list here.

 

3.      House to Unveil Home Star Bill: On Wednesday, April 14, Rep. Welch (D-VT) and Chairman Markey (D-MA) will introduce the House version of the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act, along with cosponsors Rep. Ehlers (R-MI) and Rep. Cardoza (D-CA). Home Star will now have bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, and the Home Star Coalition is actively working to recruit more Republican sponsors. The Reps will release the bill at a press conference at 1 PM eastern near the House Triangle, and they will also elaborate on the plan for House passage.

 

Resources for Action - Our most recent Home Star webinar is available on our home page, and we also have state-specific information on our Take Action page to help you get in touch with your Senator. These include pre-written emails, faxes, and phone call talking points. We also have recordings of our 4 climate and energy webinars and our first Home Star webinar on our Resources page.

 

Become a National SAVE Energy Coalition Member! - There is no cost. Just email Patrick.Roche@csgrp.com your organization name, whether the organization should be listed as national or local/regional, website, and your contact information (name, title, phone number, and e-mail address). We’ll put your company name a link to your website on our ‘Members‘ page and provide our logo for your website.

March 9, 2010

Energy Efficiency Proposals Could Create 333,000 Jobs in 2010

Washington, D.C. (March 9, 2010): Proposed federal energy efficiency jobs provisions would create about 333,000 jobs in 2010 and then 184,000 jobs in 2011 as funding begins to ramp down, according to a new analysis released today by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).The proposed programs include residential and commercial retrofit programs and an energy-efficient manufacturing grant program. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and a House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment will be holding hearings on these issues this week.

“The energy efficiency programs in these proposals would create jobs because energy efficiency improvements are labor intensive and net job creators.These programs would produce more construction and service-sector jobs than those energy sector jobs lost from reduced energy consumption,” said Steven Nadel, ACEEE Executive Director. “In addition, these programs would continue creating small numbers of jobs even after the stimulus period is over, because energy bill savings enable consumers and businesses to spend that money elsewhere in the economy.”

Most of the products used in buildings retrofits (such as insulation and windows) are manufactured in the United States. In addition, construction jobs involved in the projects cannot be outsourced and would provide vital local jobs in communities across the country. These provisions would represent good investments in three important sectors of the U.S. economy as they focus on improving productivity; creating jobs; and leveraging government, consumer, and business funds in the best way possible.

The “Home Star” program, also known as “Cash for Caulkers,” would provide rebates for energy efficiency improvements to homeowners. Like the popular “Cash for Clunkers” program, these rebates would be provided instantly at the retail store. Customers would receive rebates for up to 50% of the project (or $1,500 per retrofit), or could upgrade a whole home with 20 percent energy savings for a $3,000 credit. In addition to reducing energy use and saving consumers money on their energy bills, ACEEE estimates that this program would create about 126,000 jobs in 2010 and then 36,000 jobs in 2011, improving up to 3 million homes at a cost of $6 billion dollars.

Commercial retrofits, also with immense potential as job creators, include the “Building Star” program introduced in legislation last week by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Mark Pryor (D-AR). This program, estimated to create 130,000 jobs in 2010 and then 57,000 jobs in 2011, would offer businesses rebates for up to 30 percent of the cost of improvements to lighting, insulation, and energy management for commercial buildings.

The third proposal would provide $4 billion in grants to manufacturers for investments in energy efficiency and clean energy product manufacturing projects. This proposal would provide additional funding to a $156 million DOE grant program that was initiated by ARRA stimulus legislation. “DOE received applications requesting over $3.8 billion in the ARRA funds, more than 24 times the amount available,” said Neal Elliott, ACEEE Industrial Program Director. “The response demonstrates the pent-up demand for manufacturing efficiency investments. We have a large number of “shovel-ready” projects waiting at DOE for additional funding.” ACEEE estimates that the additional grant funding would create 77,000 jobs in 2010 and then 91,000 jobs in 2011 from funding the existing, unfunded applications and from a solicitation for a second round of proposals.

“These estimates of job creation are probably conservative,” concluded Nadel, “since we did not examine the impact of lower energy consumption on energy prices.When energy prices go down, money is freed up for spending in more labor-intensive parts of the economy.”

Details on ACEEE’s analyses of the proposed provisions can be found at: www.aceee.org/energy/national/potential_leg.htm.

March 1, 2010

Boulder County BuildSmart Public Hearing Tues March 2

Filed under: Building Technology, Energy Policy — Tags: , — uswx @ 8:39 pm

From the Boulder Green Building Guild

We are fortunate to have excellent support from Boulder county and our commisioners in terms of building regulations for new and remodeled homes. Collectively called “BuildSmart”, these programs are among the best in the nation.
The comissioners will be discussing adding a prescriptive path to the required HERS ratings for new homes and remodels with the intent of making the process easier for builders and architects, or at least in hopes of providing a choice.
The Daily Camera has just published an article on it or you can download a very basic summary or the proposed code revision.
It is important that we make a showing at this public hearing to support BuildSmart generally and to voice your opinion about these changes.
You can prepare to speak (limit of 3 minutes per person) or just show up in support of BuildSmart.

 Boulder County BuildSmart Revisions Meeting/Hearing Information

Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Regarding Boulder County BuildSmart Program Revisions Information
March 2, 2010
2:00 PM Third Floor Hearing Room
Courthouse Building
1325 Pearl Street
Boulder, Colorado 80302

February 15, 2010

How the Recession and a Targeted Energy Efficiency Marketing Program Can Create a Greener Economy and Benefit Energy Utilities

Filed under: Energy Policy, Weatherizing and Retrofit — Tags: , , — uswx @ 5:00 am

By Gina Woodall and Joe Bates

While the origins of the current recession are well known (i.e., the collapse of the housing bubble, the Wall Street financial crises, the abrupt downturn in consumer spending), it has not been clear how the energy sector can benefit from it.  Recent research by Rockbridge Associates reveals how consumers’ desires to save money and help the environment during the downturn are creating opportunities for energy providers to meet their own business goals.  Couple the weak economy with a smart targeted marketing strategy for energy efficiency programs, and energy utilities can reduce overall consumption.

Unlike consumers, most energy providers are doing well financially, despite the recession.  However, they continue to find themselves under increasing pressure to reduce power consumption.  The fact is, the nation’s energy utilities are faced with a problem not caused by the recession.  In many regions of the country, energy companies are producing at full capacity and have no room to expand without incurring huge expenses.  Even where expansion plans are underway, it will take many years for additional capacity to come on line.  And “green” energy sources, such as wind farms have limitations as well (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/business/27grid.html).

Thus, energy providers across the country need to figure out ways to reduce customers’ demand and extend the life of their current infrastructure.  Many energy efficiency programs are underway sponsored by cutting edge energy utilities, including demand response and rebate programs, but participation has been weak.  The weak economy and a targeted marketing strategy can increase the success of these programs.

How does the poor economy help energy utilities reduce demand?  If consumers are spending more time at home, due to spending less time out (i.e. not spending money in restaurants, malls, etc.), aren’t they using more energy?  A recent Rockbridge survey sheds light on this issue.

In order to save money, there are many ways consumers are retrenching; 43% are postponing the purchase of a high-end electronics product, 40% are delaying making home improvements, 33% are making their home more energy efficient to save on energy bills, and 32% are pushing back the purchase of a home appliance.  If you read the last sentence too fast, you might not have picked up on a startling fact.  Let’s reiterate the point.  One-third of households are actually spending money now on energy efficiency so they can save money later.  This finding has significant meaning for energy providers.

 

What energy investments are consumers making today?  Today, 81% of consumers use energy saving light bulbs.  This statistic alone is amazing due to the much higher cost of CFLs than incandescent bulbs at check out (typically 3 to 5 times more expensive).  More evidence of consumers spending now in order to save later is their purchases of energy efficient appliances, such as refrigerators (55%), water heaters (48%), and heating / cooling systems (41%).  It is clear consumers acknowledge a little pain in the wallet today will save money in the long run.

Is it all about the wallet or do people actually care about the environment?  Actually, it is both.  Two-thirds of these product owners say they purchased the products to save money AND to help the environment.  It is the best of both worlds making it easy to be green.

Can we expect this trend to continue?  Yes.  The above chart also illustrates this point.  Not only are consumers buying energy efficient products now, but more consumers are planning to make such purchases in the future.  This potential is greatest among the products least owned today, such as solar water heaters (39% either currently own or plan to buy in the future, mostly the latter), solar system for home heating (41%), and homes that are designed to be eco-friendly (43%).  Consumers will continue to act on their belief that what is good for the environment is also good for the wallet, and vice versa.

 

This sentiment is also evident among consumers when it comes to participating in energy efficiency programs, such as those initiated by local and state utilities.  For instance, 34% of consumers have replaced appliances through participating in a rebate program, 28% receive utility bills showing comparative energy use, and 27% receive their electricity from a provider using clean, renewable energy sources.  Similar to reasons for owning energy efficient products, consumers are participating in these programs to save money AND to help the environment.  This trend will also continue as the future potential participation rate for most of these programs is 50% or more of consumers, according to our research. 

What role can energy utilities play in spurring conservation behaviors?  A recent Rockbridge study shows the vast majority of energy use reduction will come from a small segment of customers.  Providers can maximize their energy reduction program results through a targeted marketing strategy.  We know from our research that consumers can be divided into six segments with different beliefs and behaviors in the green space (see below).

 

Based on this market segmentation, it is clear that a misguided energy conservation strategy will waste resources by reaching out to ALL consumers because many (a) respond to environmental issues by avoiding consumption and shunning technology, (b) are eking by a living and lack the time and resources for green services, or (c) are among the minority of the public that views the green movement as hype.  Thus, four types of consumers represent the greatest opportunity for a green strategy.

Green Tech Leaders - deeply committed consumers who also happen to be innovative.  They believe in technology, think green is “cool,” like doing business with green companies and believe that green products and services benefit their wallets.

The Opportunity: These consumers only represent 10% of the market, but tend to influence others, making them a prime target for expanding awareness and usage of your energy savings programs.  They are heavier than average users of social networking media, so it is important to give them informational resources to help your cause (e.g., an RSS Feed to a newsletter on energy programs).

Green Tech Followers - similar to the “leaders” in their commitment and innovative tendencies, the major difference being they do not readily influence others.  They think green is “fun.” 

The Opportunity: These consumers represent 18% of the market, and with the Leaders, are a logical target for green initiatives.

Tech-Savvy Green Sympathizers - not as zealous as the other two above, but they are environmentally aware, would like to do business with green companies and believe that green products and services will benefit their bottom-line. 

The Opportunity: These consumers make up 31% of the market.  They are technology geeks, and an ideal target for using energy efficient devices to go green.

Enviro-Friendly Skeptics - these consumers are a more cynical audience, at least in terms of receptivity to technology. This group does believe in adhering to a green lifestyle, but they are more negative about the potential impacts of technology.  In fact, they are the most likely to believe technology may worsen environmental problems.  As a result, they seek technologies with a proven track record.

The Opportunity: These consumers make up 12% of the market.  By focusing on the efficacy of the technology and programs you are using to implement your green strategies, you can gain the support of these customers.

Energy providers should take advantage of the recession to promote the green trends and reduce energy demand.  Energy utilities are perfectly positioned to lead the green movement.  Not only are they the focus of many environmental efforts, but they also have a huge impact on their surroundings.  They are tied hand-to-hand to the green movement.  The bottom line is that many consumers are waiting for their energy companies to lead the way in the green movement.  Through initiatives such as replacement programs, rebate programs and demand response programs, providers can meet their business needs of reducing energy consumption, save consumers money, AND help the environment.

February 9, 2010

Berkeley Energy Efficiency Standard for Home Sales

City of Berkeley, California, Population 104,000
Project Began 1987; ordinance revised in 1991
Annual CO2 Reductions of 5,098 tons
Annual Financial Savings $450, depending on household size
Initial Investment Subsidized: $1,000Without subsidy: $3,400
Project Status 600 dwellings transferred or remodeled annually

 SUMMARY

A city mandate/ordinance requiring that all households meet certain building standards when they are sold, transferred or renovated. This city-wide ordinance with various specific measures has reduced residential energy consumption by over 13 percent, annually reduced CO2 emissions by over 5,000 tons and allowed households to save up to $450 US dollars on their energy bills.

WHAT IS IT?

RECO, Residential Energy Conservation Ordinance, is a city law which mandates that all residences (homes, apartment build­ings or mixed use buildings) sold, transferred from one propri­etor to another, or renovated exceeding a total permit value of $50,000 must comply with certain energy and water efficiency requirements.

These requirements meet or exceed California’s Title 24 Energy Codes, which are also mandatory but are only in effect when properties are remodeled. RECO covers conditions of sale and transfer, and has an immediate effect on household energy consumption.

The intent of the ordinance is to assist residents in reducing their energy bills while achieving an overall reduction in energy consumption. There is evidence that this is working. The City of Berkeley has lower overall energy consumption per capita than other regions of California. California has the lowest energy consumption per capita in the United States.

 Read the Case Study at C40 Cities

February 4, 2010

Energy Conservation and Power Planning in the Northwest US

Filed under: Energy Policy — Tags: , , — uswx @ 5:00 am

It was salmon, not carbon that spurred energy conservation as a regional power planning tool in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana. The region’s “green” hydropower system was threatening salmon and native tribes on the Columbia River, so the Northwest Power and Conservation Council was established in 1980 to balance power development with fish and wildlife interests.

Hydropower development in the northwest was established when congress directed the Bonneville Power Administration, in the Bonneville Project Act of 1937, to build and operate transmission lines to deliver the power from dams, and to market electricity from federal generating projects on the Columbia river system at rates set only high enough to repay the federal investment over a reasonable period of time.

Today, the Federal Columbia River Power system includes 31 dams with 20,444 megawatts of capacity. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates 21 of the dams, and the Bureau of Reclamation operates 10.

In 1976, Bonneville’s power demand and supply projections showed that federal power supplies were running short for preference customers, and that Bonneville would no longer be able to guarantee preference customers that their load growth could be met beyond 1983. Bonneville issued a notice of insufficiency to the utilities in June of 1976. The following month, 88 public utilities signed contracts with WPPSS to build nuclear plants 4and 5. The WPPSS nuclear construction program proved to be a debacle, but it also prompted changes in regional energy policy. Mismanagement and cost overruns at the five WPPSS plants were at the root of the financial problems, but the WPPSS debacle also was a failure of electricity demand forecasting. The impetus for the nuclear construction effort lay in demand forecasts produced by the region’s utilities, through the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee, and Bonneville. The forecasts proved to be too high.

By creating a regional planning council consisting of two members from each of the four Northwest states to develop a regional plan, Congress provided a regional decision-making system. It emphasizes local control of resource development and power planning.

The states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington were authorized to form the Council (in the Act, Section 4.(a)(2)(A), it is called the Pacific Northwest Electric Power and Conservation Planning Council) with two representatives from each state, appointed by the governors. The Act directed the Council to draw up a plan for meeting the electrical needs of the region at the lowest possible cost. The plan must give highest priority to cost-effective conservation to meet future demand for electricity. Renewable sources of energy must be given next-highest priority in the region’s power planning, to the extent that they are cost-effective, ranking ahead of conventional thermal generating resources. Among thermal options, fuel-efficient methods of producing energy, such as cogeneration, must be given priority.

The current power plan comprises a resource development strategy to ensure the region’s future power supply is characterized by least-cost and least-risk resources. This plan recommends that the region increase and sustain its efforts to secure cost-effective conservation immediately. The Council’s analysis shows that improved energy efficiency is a resource that is lower cost than new generating options and provides a hedge against market, fuel, and environmental risks. Although conservation may result in small rate increases in the short-term, it can reduce both cost and risk in the long-term. The targets are ambitious but doable: 700 average megawatts between 2005 and 2009; and 2,500 average megawatts over the 20-year planning period.

Since the adoption of the Council’s first power plan in 1983 the region has made significant progress in acquiring conservation. The Council’s first power plan stated that the acquisition of cost-effective conservation should be used to reduce year 2002 loads by 5 to 17 percent depending upon the rate of economic growth experienced in the region. The plan called on Bonneville and region’s utilities to develop and implement a wide array of conservation programs. The plan also called on state and local governments to adopt more energy-efficient building codes. It called on the federal government to adopt national energy efficiency standards for appliances and to upgrade existing efficiency standards for new manufactured homes.

In response to the Council’s first power plan, the Bonneville Power Administration and the region’s utilities initiated conservation programs across all economic sectors. Between 1980 and 2002, it is estimated these programs acquired 1,425 average megawatts of electricity savings. Overall, the region’s conservation achievements have been impressive. Between 1980 and 2005, demand for power in the Northwest has been reduced by about 3,100 average megawatts through Bonneville programs, state energy codes, and federal standards. Converted to generation, that would be enough electricity for the entire state of Idaho plus western Montana.

Bonneville, the region’s utilities, and system benefits administrators have accelerated, or are accelerating, the pace of their conservation programs. Based on preliminary returns to the Regional Technical Forum’s (RTF) survey of regional conservation achievements in 2006, it appeared the Fifth Plan’s goal of 130 average megawatts for 2005 likely would be accomplished. From the survey returns received by the end of November 2006, the region acquired approximately 125 average megawatts of savings in 2005. The total Bonneville, utility, and system benefits charge administrator expenditures for conservation were just under $160 million, or about 1.7 percent of total retail revenues collected in 2005. The average utility cost of these savings was approximately $1.3 million per average megawatt.

This table summarizes the annual savings and expenditures for Bonneville, the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (Alliance),1 and the Energy Trust of Oregon2 and individual utilities that have responded to the RTF’s survey.

Table 1. Summary of Conservation Achievements (Preliminary)3 Program Administrator

2005

Projected 2006

Expenditures (million $)

Savings (MWa)

Expenditures (million $)

Savings (MWa)

Utility Conservation 96.2 72.4 112.5 61.8
Bonneville Conservation (ConAug) 15.2 13.1 15.0 15.6
Bonneville Conservation (C&RD) 20.7 9.4 12.0 6.9
Bonneville Low Income Weatherization 3.8 0.4 2.8 0.2
Utility Low-Income Weatherization 3.6 0.7 3.5 0.8
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance 19.7 28.9 20.6 24.5
Total (Expenditures and MWa) 159.2 124.9 166.4 109.8
                   

Savings reported by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance decreased from 29 average megawatts in 2005 to 25 average megawatts in 2006. This reduction was due largely to changes in federal standards for residential clothes washers that were a target of one of the Alliance’s initial market transformation programs. The Alliance now is targeting even higher-efficiency machines beyond the federal standards.

February 3, 2010

Conservation as a Power Resource in the Northwest

Filed under: Energy Policy, New — Tags: , — uswx @ 5:00 am

Power planning and energy conservation video from the Northwest Power and Conservaton Council by Tom Eckman, manager of conservation resources for the NPCC. 

He makes some interesting points about conservation in light of changing motives — carbon reduction — for conservation programs.

January 15, 2010

Dept. Of Energy Climate Enviros’ BFF on Retrofit

Filed under: Energy Policy — Tags: , , — uswx @ 3:00 pm

A generation ago, environments surrounded the Dept. of Energy bomb operation at Rocky Flats in silent protest. Now climate activists’ values are aligned with DOE energy efficiency goals.

JC Martel of the Center for ReSource Conservation team has a new blog post about her trip to Copenhagen for perspective on how Boulder energy efficiency efforts compare to others around the world. In November, JC was quoted by the Daily Camera about SmartRegs and Two Techs and a Truck, saying ”It’s very clear that there needs to be an energy efficiency program for renters, because unfortunately renters don’t have any power in terms of making their homes energy-efficient and being comfortable.”

Before I went to Copenhagen, I knew US emissions were high compared to the other countries. I look at Boulder County homeowners’ energy data every day. I see homes in this County that use up to 40 metric tons per year! And that’s not their whole carbon footprint; that’s just their home! The “low energy users” use as low as 2 metric tons. Below 2 seems quite difficult to achieve in a retrofit. What really hit me the hardest from Copenhagen was that 130 countries use only 1 metric ton per capita as their entire carbon footprint. We are nowhere close to being carbon competitive.

During the Copenhagen summit, US Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Steven Chu talked about several programs coming down from the federal level. One of them is what he called Retrofit Ramp Up; or what we in Boulder have been calling “Two Techs in a Truck.” It is encouraging to see that in our community, we continue to be leading the way, and are aligned with the goals of the US DOE as well.

Read JC Martel’s blog post. She will be part of a panel discussion next Monday, Jan. 18

December 7, 2009

Cash for Caulkers is Home Star

From Jared Asch at Efficiency First

Recognizing the urgent need to put millions of unemployed Americans back to work, the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB) voted on Dec. 4 to endorse a smart federal program that would leverage government incentives and private investment to stimulate a massive increase in home energy retrofits nationwide. This HOME STAR program - popularly known as “Cash for Caulkers” - has the potential to jump-start our industry from the current rate of about 250,000 home retrofits per year to 5.5 million retrofits in the next two years. Imagine the impact that would have on your business - and on the Home Performance industry as a whole.

Efficiency First has been deeply involved at the highest levels in developing this plan, which would rapidly create hundreds of thousands of local jobs in construction and related industries. At every step of the way, we have injected a boots-on-the-ground perspective based on real-life experience in the field to ensure that HOME STAR will be a highly productive use of public resources. The performance-based incentive structure we have promoted rewards measurable reductions in household energy waste, and delivers a practical and cost-effective strategy for creating good long-term jobs while reducing energy bills for American homeowners.

A memo published today on the White House Web site lays out the details of the HOME STAR plan, which will require decisive action from Congress and the White House. Efficiency First and our allies are working closely to build support for the plan on Capitol Hill, and we urge all of our members to contact their representatives in the Senate and the House help us get the message across. Additional information about HOME STAR is available on our Web site including the full report for PERAB at http://www.efficiencyfirst.org/home-star/

Your participation has been instrumental in making Efficiency First a powerful voice in Washington as new policies are written that will fundamentally reshape our future. Together we are blazing a new trail for the Home Performance industry, and laying the foundation for a prosperous 21st-century American economy.

What can I do to make HOME STAR a reality? Strengthen our voice, help us recruit three new members to Efficiency First. As a larger more unified voice we stand a greater chance at making HOME STAR a reality.

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress