Maryland, Here's to a Bright Future!
by Michael T. Richard, Director, Maryland Energy Administration
Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. knows Marylanders care about their environment and when given good information, they will make choices that are in the best interest of energy efficiency and environmental stewardship. Rather than creating heavy-handed government prohibitions and product mandates, the Governor advocates educating citizens on what they can voluntarily do to become more energy-efficient.
For this reason, Governor Ehrlich has joined President George W. Bush in championing the highly successful Energy Star ® program which is an excellent example of a voluntary program that has had great impact on the consumer. In January 2004, the State of Maryland launched the Maryland Energy Star Program with Governor Ehrlich as the spokesperson. By increasing awareness of the importance of energy efficiency throughout the state, Governor Ehrlich believes the citizens of Maryland will make the right choice of buying energy-efficient goods and services.
The success of the program is linked to its three-pronged approach focusing on targeted advertising, sales training and partners' initiative.
Advertising
The program runs radio, television and newspaper ads, and point-of-purchase promotions, throughout the State in 2004 to educate Marylanders about the money saving and environmental benefits of purchasing Energy Star labeled products. The Governor's involvement has elevated the profile of the campaign and has focused the attention of Marylanders on the Energy Star message.
Training
In addition to targeting consumers through this campaign, the Energy Star Program focuses attention on contractors and the state's business community. The program has offered a variety of training courses ranging from those designed to teach heating and cooling contractors how to properly size and install heating and air conditioning equipment, to advanced sales training for lighting and windows retailers to enable them to more effectively convey the benefits of Energy Star products to consumers. Other related activities include training home energy auditors and developing a builders training guide.
Partners Initiative
Throughout this campaign, the Maryland Energy Star Program is seeking to create new partnerships throughout the business community in an effort to further Maryland 's Energy Star Partners Initiative. Through this initiative, key Energy Star partners will create a cooperative advertising strategy to leverage shared resources to promote the Energy Star brand as well as their market sector's Energy Star labeled products. A cooperative advertising campaign will begin this September with home builders in the Baltimore area to promote Energy Star New Homes through 72 television ads.
In addition to the residential Energy Star Program, MEA works on a full range of voluntary efforts to encourage energy efficiency in industry, business, and state and local governments. Maryland industries have taken advantage of DOE's Industries of the Future Program by choosing to conduct industrial energy audits to re-engineer production systems in their companies. In partnership with the University of Maryland , MEA has conducted 10 audits and plans more audits in the next year. On the alternative fuel front, MEA is working through its Clean Cities partnerships with 40 business and governmental partners to promote alternative fuels and advanced technology vehicles. For over a decade, MEA has promoted the voluntary use of Energy Performance Contracts with other state agencies. To date, Maryland state agencies have saved over $10 million in energy bills on more than 22 multi-building projects.
The future of energy efficiency in Maryland is bright, and we look forward to a wide range of partnerships with the many public and private interests in Maryland . We are pleased to be a new Partner with the Alliance to Save Energy and look forward to connecting with other Alliance members. For more information on the Maryland Energy Star Program click here.
Back to the Top |
Climate Change Policy and State Leadership
By Kara Saul Rinaldi and Anna Carmichael
The concern about global warming and its impact on the world's wildlife, economy, and future security continues to be discussed and debated in the U.S. and around the globe. Most scientists agree that climate change is occurring, and the increase in global greenhouse gas emissions is the likely cause. The U.S. produces about a quarter of global carbon dioxide emissions (the leading greenhouse gas) from fossil fuels. 1
Changing the way America uses energy is vital to reducing our carbon contribution to the atmosphere, since we now meet 85 percent of our energy needs through burning fossil fuels.2 Federal lawmakers tried to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel through energy legislation like the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) which set reduction goals for motor fuels (through production of sufficient replacement fuels to substitute, on an energy equivalent basis) of 10 percent of consumption by 2000, and 30 percent reduction by 2010. The target goals have not been met.
Since 1992, the federal government has continued to formulate innovative legislation calling for fuel switching; investments in or mandatory standards for efficiency and renewable technologies; or caps on carbon emissions. Unfortunately these measures have largely stalled. In the absence of federal action, the states are playing a growing role in addressing the problem of climate change by seeking new policy solutions to help address this growing global environmental and economic issue.
Around the country, states and regions have begun adopting legislation aimed at reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. In 2001, a regional agreement known as the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers Climate Change Action Plan established greenhouse emission goals for the New England states and Eastern Canadian provinces. Many of the policies that grew out of this agreement depend heavily on energy efficiency measures to secure the reduction of GHG emissions. Connecticut 's recent climate change bill, SB 595 , signed into law on June 14 th 2004 , sets forth a reduction goal in greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by 2010 and a ten percent reduction in 1990 levels by 2020. SB 595 received enormous bipartisan support in the Connecticut legislature, passing the Senate in a 36-0 vote, and the House in a 133-14 vote. Similar legislation was passed in Maine last summer ( LD 845 ).
Other states involved in the Climate Action Plan agreement also have adopted measures; Massachusetts has pledged to reduce carbon dioxide from the state ' s dirtiest power plants by approximately 10 percent by about 2008, and Vermont has taken executive action to curtail its emissions.
In the Midwest, legislation pending in Minnesota ( HB 2656 and SB 2580 ) would require the development of a state plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from electric generation facilities and other sources.
The West Coast has been a leader in seeking to address climate change through policy. In September 2003, the governors of California , Oregon , and Washington announced a commitment to pursue greenhouse gas emissions reductions. In June 2004, The Western Governors Association followed up that pledge with a “Clean and Diversified Energy initiative for the West” sponsored by New Mexico Governor Richardson (D) and California Governor Schwarzenegger (R). This resolution seeks to identify ways to increase the contribution of renewable energy, energy efficiency, and clean energy technologies to meeting energy demand in the West .3
In Washington state, legislation ( S.3141 ) that requires power plants with a generating capacity of 25 megawatts or more to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent over the next 30 years was signed by the governor on March 31, 2004 . Across the border in Oregon, new power plants with a generating capacity of 25 megawatts or more are required to meet a performance standard of .675 pounds of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour to qualify for a building permit (Note: half of the power plants in Oregon currently meet this performance standard).
California intends to tackle GHG emissions from the transportation sector. The “Pavley bill” ( AB 1493 ) introduced by Representative Fran Pavley would have a profound impact on carbon pollution from automobiles in California should it be enforced. Signed by Governor Gray Davis in July 2002, the Pavley bill directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to “develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles” that would cover model year 2009 vehicles and later. (To learn about the current status of the Pavley Bill click here )
Not all states are unanimous in their efforts to fight climate change. In fact, some states have chosen to specifically prohibit adoption of policies to reduce or control GHG emissions. Alabama (HB 465 passed in 1998), Virginia (SJR 58 passed in 1998), and South Carolina ( HB 4761 passed in 1998) prohibit the promulgation of state regulations intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions prior to ratification of Kyoto Protocol, or have called on Congress to reject the Kyoto protocol . 4
While this article only touches on some of the state and regional efforts to address climate change, it did not discuss the impacts states already are noticing from altered weather patterns, nor did it note the challenges some states are finding in passing meaningful legislation that is not preempted by federal authority. One thing is clear, however, concerns about climate change will not fade away. In 2002, the U.S. government projected that U.S. GHG emissions would rise 42 percent from year 2000 levels by 2020. 5As the federal government continues to find difficulty passing legislation to change our energy use and help mitigate climate change impacts, the states have demonstrated that they will lead if Congress does not.
For more information contact the Alliance Policy Team at policyinfo@ase.org
1.http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html
2.Ibid
3. WGA Policy Resolution 04-13, June 22, 2004 , Santa Fe , New Mexico
4.This treaty was not been submitted to Senate for ratification by Presidents Clinton or Bush
5. Robert Nordhaus, Kyle Danish, “Designing a mandatory greenhouse as reduction program for the U.S. ”, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, May 2003, p.5
Back to the Top |
