TO INSTALL SUN OR TO STREAMLINE? (THAT IS THE QUESTION?)

Here’s an issue likely to be a big part of the debate coming in with the Obama administration and its Green New Deal.

Energy Efficiency (EE) is the cheapest fastest way to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) – but funding it does nothing to build the New Energy (NE) infrastructure that will be urgently needed in a quarter century.

It’s a truly stark choice, worthy of a brooder like Hamlet. EE or NE – that is the question. Or is it?

Given the limitations of U.S. transmission and the sad state of U.S. buildings, many experts say big short-term cuts in GhGs – without which the longer-term fight against global climate change is likely lost – cannot be achieved without drastic improvements in efficiencies.

U.S. buildings lose as much as 2% of all energy they draw just through leaky ducts. Add in leaky doors and windows, ineffective insulation and antiquated appliances and the loses are big. It is possible the amount of NE permitted by a bloated regulatory system and delivered by inadequate transmission doesn’t even keep pace with the energy lost to inefficiencies.

Meanwhile, the emphasis remains on NE installations and most homeowners dedicated to going green think first of a solar system instead of a home energy audit.

In a home energy audit, experts walk through a house looking for evidence of EE flaws. They watch candle smoke circulate through ducts and drain out vents and, eventually conclude how airtight the building is and where it can be tightened.

The audit determines all needed retrofits and prioritizes them. The homeowner then must bear the expense of “reconstruction” for EE. Though a solar system installation is costly and has complications, it can be a simple, quick fix compared to the engineering of efficiency improvements.

Andrew McAllister, director, California Center for Sustainable Energy: “If we are ever going to meet our carbon goals … existing buildings have to be tackled somehow. And so integration of energy efficiency and [rooftop solar] has to happen…”

In California, EE makeover advocates pushed the Assembly for legislation requiring a home audit and EE retrofits in conjunction with home sales but the bill died in committee. A practical solution to a pressing problem, the idea did not appeal to California’s powerful real estate lobby because it would complicate and slow the home sale process.

Bill Pennington, manager of buildings and appliances, California Energy Commission (CEC): “It frankly would create a lot of green jobs as you have people moving into that sector, but the realtors … don’t like it because they think it gets in the way of the transaction…”

A fall-back plan: Add an EE rating in the real estate listings database. It would allow the free market to act on the home energy audit business, making a good EE rating like a car’s fuel-efficiency or safety rating.

Another possibility: Require a home energy audit with every solar system installation. The downside to this idea is that it adds complication and expense to an already tough sell. A possible compromise would be to allow the EE fixes to follow a year or more after the solar system is up and running.

Compromising EE away in favor of the solar system is, of course, exactly backwards.

Matt Golden, president, Sustainable Spaces: “Everybody strategically understands that energy efficiency is the most cost-effective place for us to spend our capital…We can’t afford just to take all these [super-inefficient] houses and put really big solar systems on them that require massive rebates and incentives from the government.”

It will be important to see how California, the most energy efficient state in the U.S., handles this debate between solar and EE. The state is looking for a way to emphasize EE without diminishing the excitement its “Million Solar Roofs” legislation has developed around rooftop solar systems.

California, though, may not resolve the question before the EE vs. NE debate comes to the national stage as part of the Obama administration’s Green New Deal.

Both NE installations and EE retrofits could represent a healthy part of the 5 million new “green collar” jobs the President-elect’s campaign promised. If healthy chunks of the expected economic stimulus package get aimed BOTH at solar and other small New Energy system installations AND at home energy audits/retrofits, it would resolve the dilemma and eliminate the question.

click for the Lovins/RMI presentation

Green homes: solar vs. energy efficiency; Solar gets more subsidies, but home energy efficiency may be more cost-effective.
Ben Arnoldy, November 26, 2008 (Christian Science Monitor)

WHO
Ted and Astrid Olsson, homeowners, San Francisco; Matt Golden, president, Sustainable Spaces; Molly Sterkel, California Solar Initiative; Bill Pennington, manager of buildings and appliances, California Energy Commission (CEC); Andrew McAllister, director, California Center for Sustainable Energy

WHAT
All serious calculations show home energy audits and implementation of Energy Efficiency (EE) practices is the most cost-effective way to cut emissions yet New Energy (NE), and especially rooftop solar, gets much more attention and investment.

click for the Lovins/RMI presentation

WHEN
- President-elect Obama’s frequently repeated goal is to get the U.S. on track to cut GhGs to 1990 levels by 2020 and by 80% by 2050.
- He also intends to have U.S. utilities obtaining 10% of their power from New Energy sources by 2012 and 25% by 2025.
- By 2020, California’s goal is cut home energy consumption 40%.

WHERE
- California is the most energy efficient of U.S. states.
- Homes, mostly older homes, consume 1/3 of California’s electricity and 1/3 of its natural-gas.
- Bad ducts: Waste 2% of a house’s energy consumption.

WHY
- Subsidies for solar installations, so important to the building of a rooftop solar capacity, undercut consumers’ interest in EE.
- EE lacks easily mandated or incentivized solutions.
- Advocates say EE and rooftop solar should be paired.
- Programs advocating EE or NE can and should adovocate for both.
- Proposals to couple EE with home sales are opposed by the real estate industry.
- Proposals to couple EE with solar system instatllations are opposed by solar installers.

click for the Lovins/RMI presentation

QUOTES
- Matt Golden, president, Sustainable Spaces: “We play in the same sandbox. When [policymakers] pull the lever, they are not only helping solar, they are hurting energy efficiency.”
- Molly Sterkel, California Solar Initiative” “[I]t’s a two-way street. Solar gets some people excited about energy consumption and drives them to do energy efficiency. And I think a lot of people get energy efficiency and they still want to do more, and so they go do solar…”
- Ted Olsson, homeowner, San Francisco: “Even with all the incentives offered [for solar], it pays me more to solve my problem by retrofitting the house…”
- Sue Kateley, head, California Solar Energy Industries Association: “It’s really good for the consumer to do [energy efficiency] first, but the timing is really difficult to overcome.”