Even Boulder Finds It Isn’t Easy Going Green

 BOULDER, Colo.—This spring, city contractors will fan out across this well-to-do college town to unscrew light bulbs in thousands of homes and replace them with more energy-efficient models, at taxpayer expense.

City officials never dreamed they’d have to play nanny when they set out in 2006 to make Boulder a role model in the fight against global warming. The cause seemed like a natural fit in a place where residents tend to be politically liberal and passionate about the great outdoors.

Instead, as Congress considers how to encourage Americans to conserve more energy, Boulder stands as a cautionary tale about the limits of good intentions.

"What we’ve found is that for the vast majority of people, it’s exceedingly difficult to get them to do much of anything," says Kevin Doran, a senior research fellow at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

President Barack Obama has set ambitious goals for cutting greenhouse-gas emissions, in part by improving energy efficiency. Last year’s stimulus bill set aside billions to weatherize buildings. The president has also called for a "cash for caulkers" rebate for Americans who weatherize their homes.

But Boulder has found that financial incentives and an intense publicity campaign aren’t enough to spur most homeowners to action, even in a city so environmentally conscious that the college football stadium won’t sell potato chips because the packaging isn’t recyclable.

Take George Karakehian. He considers himself quite green: He drives a hybrid, recycles, uses energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs. But he refuses to practice the most basic of conservation measures: Shutting the doors to his downtown art gallery when his heating or air conditioning is running.

Mr. Karakehian knows he’s wasting energy. He doesn’t care.

"I’m old-school," Mr. Karakehian says. "I’ve always been taught that an open door is the way to invite people in."

He’s not alone in ignoring the call to arms.

Since 2006, Boulder has subsidized about 750 home energy audits. Even after the subsidy, the audits cost each homeowner up to $200, so only the most committed signed up. Still, follow-up surveys found half didn’t implement even the simplest recommendations, despite incentives such as discounts on energy-efficient bulbs and rebates for attic insulation.

About 75 businesses got free audits; they made so few changes that they collectively saved just one-fifth of the energy auditors estimated they were wasting.

"We still have a long way to go," says Paul Sheldon, a consultant who advises the city on conservation. Residents "should be driving high-efficiency vehicles, and they’re not. They should be carpooling, and they’re not." And yes, he adds, they should be changing their own light bulbs—and they’re not.

The science behind climate change has taken hits of late. Authors of a landmark 2007 report on global warming have admitted to some errors in their work, though they stand by their conclusion that climate change is "unequivocal" and is "very likely" due to human activity, such as burning fossil fuels for energy. British climate scientists have also come under fire after their hacked email correspondence seemed to indicate they tried to squelch dissenting views.

Here in Boulder, some climate-change skeptics have become more vocal about their doubts in public and in online forums. For the most part, those working on the energy-efficiency plan say the public still backs it. The hitch is in getting residents to move from philosophical support to concrete action. As Mr. Sheldon put it, until his neighbors all decide, " ‘We’re doing this!’… the city will be pushing a rope uphill."

A city of 100,000, tucked up against the Rocky Mountains, Boulder has a proud history of environmentalism. It was one of the first to levy a tax to protect open space. Residents bike to work at 20 times the national average.

In 2006, Boulder voters approved the nation’s first "carbon tax," now $21 a year per household, to fund energy-conservation programs. The city took out print ads, bought radio time, sent email alerts and promoted the campaign in city newsletters.

But Boulder’s carbon emissions edged down less than 1% from 2006 through 2008, the most recent data available.

By the end of 2008, emissions here were 27% higher than 1990 levels. That’s a worse showing than the U.S. as a whole, where emissions rose 15% during that period, according to the Department of Energy.

"If a place like Boulder that regards itself as being in the environmental forefront has such a tough time, these types of efforts are not going to work as a core policy" for the nation, says Roger Pielke Jr., who studies the political response to climate change at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

One problem: People don’t want to give up gadgets. Recently, Prof. Pielke taught a seminar on energy demand. The university had installed motion-detector lights that shut off when the room is vacant to save energy. But when he asked his 17 students to lay all their iPods, cellphones and laptops on their desks, they had 42 electronic devices among them. Powering those up, he said, negated any conservation value from the fancy lights.

A local home-theater installer says most customers purchase a power strip, so they can turn off the outlet when they’re not watching. But during the Christmas holidays, 65-inch flat-screen TVs flew off the shelves of Boulder’s ListenUp Audio/Video. "People are definitely going for bigger screens," manager Bob Murphy says.

City officials are frustrated—and contemplating more forceful steps.

The City Council will soon consider mandating energy-efficiency upgrades to many apartments and businesses. The proposals under review would be among the most aggressive in the nation, requiring up to $4,000 a rental unit in new appliances, windows and other improvements. Owners of commercial property could face far larger tabs.

The goal: to spur $650 million in private investment in efficiencies over the next three years.

"Everyone needs to do something," says Councilman Matthew Appelbaum.

Unless the city does it for them. Recognizing that, as Mr. Appelbaum puts it, "it’s a real pain to do all that work," Boulder plans to spend about $1.5 million in city funds and $370,000 in federal stimulus money to hire contractors to do basic upgrades for residents.

In the program, dubbed "Two Techs in a Truck," as many as 15 energy-efficiency teams will go door-to-door. They’ll ask home and business owners for permission to caulk windows, change bulbs and install low-flow showerheads and programmable thermostats—all at taxpayer expense. The techs will set up clothes racks in laundry rooms as a reminder to use the dryer less often. They’ll even pop into the garage and inflate tires to the optimum pressure for fuel efficiency.

If they spot the need for bigger projects, such as insulation or a new furnace, the techs will help homeowners make appointments and apply for rebates.

Some grumble about Big Brother: "It’s like, ‘We’re going to find a way to make sure you do this the way we want you to,’ " says Robert Greenlee, a former mayor.

City officials say most residents want to make these changes; they just never seem to get around to it. In a test run in a lower-income Boulder neighborhood, nearly 70% of homeowners accepted the free upgrades. "We want to take away the financial barrier and the hassle barrier," said Kara Mertz, the city’s local environmental action manager. That may not be enough.

Kathie Joyner, an environmental planner, was one of the first to get a city-subsidized home-energy audit, back in 2006. She eagerly trailed the auditor through her modest bungalow, watching as he pointed out leaks and inefficiencies. He promised she could slash her utility bills by a third.

Ms. Joyner vowed to get to work. But tackling the whole list would have cost $4,000. She ended up spending less than $1,000, mostly on insulation and weather-stripping. The rest of the advice, she set aside. "It just kind of went out of my brain," she says.

Three years later, Ms. Joyner says she hasn’t noticed lower energy bills, in part because of rising rates and fluctuations in her electricity use depending on the weather. Frustrated, she says she isn’t sure her investment paid off, either for her pocketbook or the planet. That discouraged her from spending more on the project. "That’s the big disconnect for most of us," she says. "It’s all very squishy. We’re not really sure if it matters."

Among the most successful of Boulder’s green initiatives, as measured by participation, is a program under which residents pay the local utility a premium—up to about $25 a month—to support wind power. That requires no effort beyond opening a checkbook. About 5,500 households participate.

By comparison, just 45 businesses committed to cut their energy use by 10% within a year, a pledge requiring more active steps. The city estimates those businesses will cut greenhouse-gas emissions by a total of 17,000 metric tons of carbon-dioxide equivalent. That’s approximately the amount of carbon dioxide that 3,100 average U.S. cars emit in a year. Sending two techs in a truck to do the work for other, less-motivated businesses will reduce emissions far more—an estimated 88,000 tons—but at far greater taxpayer expense.

Relying on voluntary action is "slow to show significant results," the city concluded in a report last fall that called for stepped-up regulation.

James W.C. White, an environmental studies professor at the University of Colorado, says the city deserves credit for trying to push energy efficiencies. "It’s always hard being out in front," he says, "but somebody’s got to lead."

The city aims to overcome public inertia with a fresh advertising approach. Instead of talking about environmental benefits, new promotions will focus on financial benefits: Save energy, save money.

But there are signs Boulder’s efforts are starting to lose favor. Voters county-wide last fall rejected a measure that would have doubled a public fund set up to give homeowners low-interest loans for efficiency upgrades, such as a new furnace.

In the same November election, city voters elected to the council several newcomers eager to moderate Boulder’s aggressive environmentalism.

Among the newly elected: Mr. Karakehian, the gallery owner who insists on keeping his front door open. He is concerned about the city mandating conservation and says his constituents agree.

"My phone has been ringing off the hook," he says. "I’ve had a lot of people talk to me. Not happy people. Maybe we’ve bit off more than we can chew."

There are, of course, true believers in Boulder. Councilman Macon Cowles, who won re-election last fall, almost never drives, has stopped heating his pool and just re-insulated his home. The Shanahan neighborhood in Boulder offers "solar tours" of local photovoltaic panels. Two years ago, just a dozen homes there had solar. Now, nearly 50 do.

Jeff Hohensee, a sustainability consultant, invested $125,000 in home-energy upgrades—though with rebates, his cost was $35,000—so his home uses only as much energy as solar panels on his roof produce. To spur neighbors to follow suit, he suggests the city measure every home’s carbon footprint and publicize the results.

City officials aren’t willing to go that far. But they are hoping to leverage peer pressure. They plan to post congratulatory signs outside homes that have let the "two techs in a truck" change the light bulbs. They’ll offer prizes to churches and schools that get commitments from, say, 100 families to insulate their attics. They’ll host energy-efficiency block parties and plan to hire a consultant to create a conservation buzz on Facebook and Twitter.

Even if residents implement every possible efficiency, it will take Boulder only part of the way toward its goal of slashing emissions of the pollutants linked to global warming.

More than 1,000 U.S. cities have pledged to make such cuts, yet analysts say most are stymied—in part because it’s extremely difficult to reduce emissions without a wholesale switch to renewable energy sources. Boulder depends almost entirely for energy on a coal-powered plant.

Jonathan Koehn, the city’s regional sustainability coordinator, feels the pressure keenly.

"People say, ‘It’s Boulder! Kooky Boulder! Of course you can do it,’" he says, and sighs. "Not necessarily."

Will 2010 be the Year Home Efficiency Finally Takes Off?

 An article by Andy Mannle at New Leaf America

 It’s a perfect storm out there for residential energy-efficiency retrofits, and many of the pieces of this tricky puzzle are coming together. But there’s one big catch – us. Here’s why:

Efficiency is Cheaper, Safer, Faster and Smarter

Okay, so we’ve known this since efficiency guru Amory Lovins first coined the term ‘negawatt’ decades ago. But it makes even more sense now. You can get the same reductions in energy costs with $40 worth of CFL bulbs or $1000 worth of solar panels. In a down economy, it doesn’t take an economist to tell you which is the better deal. By switching bulbs, reducing power consumption, and tightening up leaky buildings, we can save 30% – 50% of the nearly $140 billion American homes spend each year on electricity. These are efforts that can take place simultaneously in every community across the country, putting tens of thousands of people back to work. As the tragic accident recently at a new power plant in Connecticut demonstrated yet again, power-production projects are long-term, capital-intensive, and dangerous.

This doesn’t mean we don’t need new sources of power. It just means that increasing energy productivity is safer, faster, and cheaper. For recovering from a recession in an era of waning fossil fuels, and increasing environmental imperatives that also makes it the hands-down smarter choice for immediate investment.

Technology is Making a Difference

The ability to change people’s behavior through simple awareness has attracted the attention of the software sector. Apple, Google and Microsoft are all getting into the Home Energy Monitoring business, and utility companies are actively rolling out SmartMeter programs that give utilities and customers much better information and control over when and how they use power. Companies like oPower are combining sophisticated software with simple psychology to let people know how their energy bill compares with their neighbors. Low-cost devices like the Kill-A-Watt or the Power Cost Monitor which demonstrate the power you’re using in real time, have also proven effective in reducing power usage. The cost of energy-efficient technologies from LED bulbs to solar panels continues to drop, even as their performance and versatility improve; and the same is true of less high-tech products ranging from better windows to more effective insulation.

The Carrots and Sticks Are Coming

Across the country, incentives for efficiency are already being offered by over a dozen states and many utility companies for high performance lighting, energy-saving appliances, better insulation, and weatherization. The success of programs like Energy Star and “Cash for Clunkers” have inspired a “Cash for Caulkers” program calledHome Star that is likely to be included in upcoming jobs legislation currently running through Congress. In February, the US EPA and the DOE announced the new State Energy Efficiency (SEE) Action Network to help states improve and expand their efficiency efforts. Meanwhile building codes are getting tougher. CA’s stringent new green building codescalls for higher standards on water, energy and waste; but also includes provisions that make it easier to get your home certified as a green building without the expense of third-party certification like LEED. Tighter national controls on energy use and carbon emissions are only a matter of time. And home energy use, which accounts for 21% of the nation’s carbon footprint (twice that of passenger cars!) is already in the cross-hairs.

The Big Players Are Getting On Board

Not only are states and the Feds getting involved in efficiency efforts, but utilities are coming under mandate to reduce energy consumption from laws like California’s AB32. The housing crisis has taken an enormous toll on sectors including construction, real-estate, and architecture. These hard-hit industries are quickly retooling to focus on energy efficiency. Major home-supply retailers including Home Depot, Lowe’s, Masco’s and others are creating home efficiency services. Even the Venture Capitalists, who’ve been drooling over solar for the last several years, are scaling back, and investing in efficiency. The Cleantech Group reports that in 2008 VC investment in solar dropped 64%, while money on efficiency rose 39%. The smart money is shifting because capital-intensive solar is hard to push in a down market, and the field is flooded. Speaking to the Mercury News in Silicon Valley, Kevin Surace of Serious Materials sums it up, saying:

“All the cleantech conferences are efficiency, efficiency, efficiency…When you really break it down, every dollar spent on energy efficiency pays back the investment four or five times. It saves people money and creates jobs. And it has bipartisan support.”

So where are the customers? Despite all these trends, demand for home efficiency retrofits is still weak. Companies that simply do energy audits without providing solutions often leave customers overwhelmed with options but confused about where to begin, and loath to spend money. High-end home-performance companies charging $10K – $15K for a whole home performance package, are understandably having trouble getting customers, and won’t be practical for millions of homeowners. New financing packages like the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)program extend retrofit loans to homeowners. These programs were originally designed to finance solar programs by removing the high-upfront costs. Now they’re being applied to retrofit projects – but often require a minimum loan of several thousand dollars or more, and of course many homeowners are underwater and don’t want to go further into debt. Even a progressive city like Boulder, CO, which has unsuccessfully tried incentives, ad campaigns and free audits is now launching “Two Techs in a Truck” to literally go to people’s houses and make simple efficiency changes – for free! The result? Complaints about Big Government.

To meet our energy and environmental goals, we need to retrofit millions of homes a year. But to spur customer demand, we need to offer easy, affordable measures that significantly reduce utility bills. Neither business nor government can do either of these alone. It can’t be done simply with audits, gadgets, advertising and financing. But it can’t be done without these things either. It may be too early to tell whether the movement will take off this year, but one thing is certain – these are our homes we’re talking about here. And unless we collectively take responsibility for improving their performance, the bright future of energy efficiency will remain just that.

Andy Mannle is a writer and consultant dedicated to exploring sustainable policy, innovations, and solutions. His clients include New Leaf America, West Coast Green, and the ETHOS fund among others.

N.C. ENERGY STAR APPLIANCE REPLACEMENT AND REBATE PROGRAM

Details of the Home Star program

The HomeStar program is shaping up.  This amazing piece of legislation is going to create 158,000 jobs, generate a huge amount of cashflow, and reduce energy consumption at an unprecedented rate.

Also going by the nickname "cash for caulkers", Homestar is close to becoming a reality.

This from the white house;

The White House

Fact Sheet: Homestar Energy Efficiency Retrofit Program

WASHINGTON–In his State of the Union address, the President called on Congress to pass a program of incentives for homeowners who make energy efficiency investments in their homes. Today, while touring a training facility at Savannah Technical College, the President outlined more details of a new “HOMESTAR” program that would help create jobs by encouraging American families to invest in energy saving home improvements. Consistent with the President’s call for a HOMESTAR program, the Senate Democratic leadership included a proposal of this kind as part of their Jobs Agenda released on February 4, 2010. The President looks forward to continuing to work with Members of Congress, business, environmental and labor leaders to enact a HOMESTAR program into law.

Background on the HOMESTAR program

With unemployment in the construction sector near 25% and with substantial underutilized capacity in our manufacturing sector, the HOMESTAR program has the potential to jumpstart our economic recovery by boosting demand for energy efficiency products and installation services. For middle-class families, this program will help them save hundreds of dollars a year in energy costs while improving the comfort and value of their most important investment – their homes. In addition, the program would help reduce our economy’s dependence on oil and support the development of an energy efficiency services sector in our economy. Key components of the HOMESTAR Program include:

• Rebates delivered directly to consumers: Like the Cash for Clunkers program, consumers would be eligible for direct HOMESTAR rebates at the point of sale for a variety of energy-saving investments in their homes. A broad array of vendors, from small independent building material dealers, large national home improvement chains, energy efficiency installation professionals and utility energy efficiency programs (including rural utilities) would market the rebates, provide them directly to consumers and then be reimbursed by the federal government.
• $1,000 – $1,500 Silver Star Rebates: Consumers looking to have simple upgrades performed in their homes would be eligible for 50% rebates up to $1,000 – $1,500 for doing any of a straightforward set of upgrades, including: insulation, duct sealing, water heaters, HVAC units, windows, roofing and doors. Under Silver Star, consumers can chose a combination of upgrades for rebates up to a maximum of $3,000 per home. Rebates would be limited to the most energy efficient categories of upgrades—focusing on products made primarily in the United States and installed by certified contractors.
• $3000 Gold Star Rebates: Consumers interested in more comprehensive energy retrofits would be eligible for a $3,000 rebate for a whole home energy audit and subsequent retrofit tailored to achieve a 20% energy savings in their homes. Consumers could receive additional rebate amounts for energy savings in excess of 20%. Gold Star would build on existing whole home retrofit programs, like EPA’s successful Home Performance with Energy Star program.
• Oversight to Ensure Quality Installations: The program would require that contractors be certified to perform efficiency installations. Independent quality assurance providers would conduct field audits after work is completed to ensure proper installation so consumers receive energy savings from their upgrades. States would oversee the implementation of quality assurance to ensure that the program was moving the industry toward more robust standards and comprehensive energy retrofit practices.
• Support for financing: The program would include support to State and local governments to provide financing options for consumers seeking to make efficiency investments in their homes. This will help ensure that consumers can afford to make these investments. 

The program will result in the creation of tens of thousands of jobs while achieving substantial reductions in energy use – the equivalent of the entire output of three coal-fired power plants each year. Consumers in the program are anticipated to save between $200 – $500 per year in energy costs, while improving the comfort and value of their homes.    

BACKGROUND ON PARTICIPANTS IN TODAY’S PRESIDENTIAL EVENT

• Business Leaders
  • Larry Laseter, President of Masco Home Services.  Masco is a Fortune 150 company specializing in products and services for the home building and home improvement business, including windows and doors, installation, and contracting. After being hit particularly hard by the recession (40% reduction in workforce over a several year period), Masco created Masco Home Services (MHS) a year ago with the intent to provide residential energy efficiency retrofits to American households. Laseter is a Georgia resident, and MHS will open a Home Performance branch in Atlanta in May.
  • Mike Lawrence, Vice President and General Manager for Insulation Systems, Johns Manville. Johns Manville is a leading manufacturer and marketer of insulation and roofing materials for commercial, industrial, and residential applications.  Johns Manville is based in Denver, CO and has manufacturing facilities in Georgia as well as California, Montana, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, Texas, and New Jersey.
  • Mark Andrews, CEO, North America, Knauf Insulation.  Knauf Mark was named to a newly created North American CEO position in January 2010.  Knauf’s US headquarters is in Shelbyville Indiana, and Knauf has manufacturing facilities in Indiana, Alabama, and California.
• Local Efficiency Contractors
  • Patrick Shay, Green Swap.  Patrick is an architect and co-founder of Green Sweep, an energy efficiency company that works with residential, commercial and industrial customers on cost saving clean energy and energy efficiency upgrades.  Pat is also a Chatham County Commissioner and chair of the Chatham Environmental Forum, which is addressing energy, climate and other sustainability issues in the Savannah Chatham area.
  • Howard Feldman, Costal Green Building Solutions.  Howard is a co-founder of Coastal Green Building Solutions.  He is a builder, renovator and a certified RESNET HERS rater, which means he evaluates homes and businesses for energy efficiency opportunities and upgrades.  Howard’s company works in both Georgia and South Carolina. In addition to Patrick Shay and Howard Feldman, several other Savannah-area contractors and small businesses who would create jobs if this program were passed are in attendance.