Thinking Long-term: the Alliance's FY 2010 Funding Recommendations
Add a comment
The recent avalanche of funding for energy efficiency in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) has made the need for regular appropriations more urgent, not less. This in mind, the Alliance-led Energy Efficiency Coalition issued its FY 2010 budget recommendations in a letter addressed jointly to the Chairman and the Ranking Member of the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Energy and Water.
Why the concern over budgetary appropriations after the infusion of stimulus funds? Because energy efficiency – while certain to benefit from the temporary infusion of funding from ARRA – is a necessity to achieving long-term energy sustainability, and therefore requires continuous investment from regular appropriations. After September 30, 2010 (when the last stimulus funds must be obligated), energy efficiency programs will revert to their reliance on annual budgetary appropriations. If program funding has been zeroed out or greatly diminished in the meantime due to the temporary availability of stimulus funds, advocates will face an up-hill battle in getting energy efficiency programs back into the budget.
FY 2010 Budget Recommendations Issued by the Energy Efficiency Codes Coalition
Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) We recommend the Committee fund WAP at no less than $300 million. This program helps low-income families, the elderly and the disabled to improve the comfort and affordability of their homes. In doing so, it is reducing our nation’s energy demands by the equivalent of 18 million barrels of oil each year.
State Energy Program (SEP) We recommend the Committee fund SEP at no less than $75 million. SEP improves the energy efficiency of schools, hospitals, small businesses, farms, homes and industries, providing enormous savings in energy costs. According to Oak Ridge National Laboratories, for every dollar invested in this program, $7.22 is saved in total energy costs (based on 2002 data, when energy prices were lower). SEP also leverages $10.71 in non-federal funding for every federal dollar spent and provides hundreds of millions of dollars in direct energy cost savings annually.
Energy Information Administration (EIA) We recommend the Committee fund the Energy Information Administration at no less than $145 million. EIA performs invaluable data gathering and analysis on energy issues ranging from consumption to prices and supply. Among its important publications are the Energy Consumption Surveys, the Annual Energy Outlook and the Winter Fuels Outlook, all of which provide unique and invaluable data to policy makers, industry and researchers. In order for our federal and state leaders to make informed decisions, they must be provided with the tools necessary to prepare and respond to national emergencies and have timely energy data available.
Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) We recommend the Committee fund the ITP program at no less than $150 million, which is an increase of $60 million over FY 2009 funding. The program includes best practices, industrial assessment centers, Industries of the Future (specific) Initiatives, and Distributed Generation. During the economic downturn, it is essential that we provide the tools necessary to secure the U.S. manufacturing base. The U.S. industrial sector currently accounts for about 30 percent of U.S. energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. ITP plays a critical role in the research, development, deployment and support of technologies and management practices that can address industry’s pressing energy challenges without compromising productivity and growth.
Building Technologies Program We recommend the Committee fund the Building Technologies Program at no less than $175 million. This request is an increase of $35 million over the FY 2009 appropriated level and would provide adequate funding for programs including the ENERGY STAR Program, residential energy efficiency programs and Building America. Of the total funding, we request that $25 million be allocated for the Building Energy Codes Training and Assistance Program and $40 million be directed to the Commercial Buildings Initiative. This funding is necessary to provide the resources to improve the efficiency of all aspects of buildings and building equipment across our economy. Buildings currently account for about 40 percent of U.S. energy use and carbon emissions, so investing in building technology is a necessary step to secure our economic and environmental future. In addition, while states are working to upgrade building energy codes, funding is needed to train local building inspectors, codes officials, contractors, builders, utility personnel and architects to accomplish required upgrades.
Equipment Standards and Analysis We recommend the Committee fund this program at no less than $35 million. This additional funding is needed outside of appropriations allocated to the Building Technologies Program in order for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to fully implement new standards and analysis for appliances. Appliance standards for energy efficiency have already reduced U.S. electricity use by an estimated 2.5 percent and reduced peak power demand by the output of 70 power plants. These programs are deployed at minimal cost to the federal government while saving consumers billions of dollars on energy bills. Despite the demonstrated energy savings from energy efficiency standards, DOE has lacked the funding or support to fully capitalize on energy efficiency opportunities for more than 20 products.
Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) We recommend the Committee fund FEMP at no less than $30 million. From 1985-2001, FEMP helped to decrease federal building energy use by 24 percent, a reduction that now saves federal taxpayers roughly $1 billion each year in reduced energy costs. In order for federal agencies to meet the demands and requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), Executive Order 13243, and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), FEMP will need to be given the maximum resources available to help federal agencies fully meet its energy savings goals.
Public Information Initiative We recommend the Committee fund this program at no less than $45 million. Consumer education is the most effective means of reducing energy demand. EPAct authorizes $90 million per year for this program to provide consumers with the information they need to reduce their energy use. DOE has contributed small amounts of funding toward effective education campaigns, but much more must be done to help American families find and learn ways to reduce their monthly energy bills, especially in the current economic climate.
Energy Sustainability and Efficiency Grants and Loans for Institutions (EISA Sec. 471) We recommend the Committee fund this program, authorized in Section 471 of EISA, at no less than $250 million for grants and $500 million in loans for FY 2010. This program received strong support from both the House and Senate and has yet to be funded at the authorized level. It will support investment in clean energy infrastructure for institutional entities, including institutions of higher education, local governments, municipal utilities and public school districts by providing cost-shared funding for sustainable energy projects, such as district energy systems, renewable energy, combined heat and power, waste heat recycling and natural sources of thermal energy such as deep water cooling.
Industrial Energy Efficiency (EISA Sec. 451 & 453) We recommend these programs be funded at no less than $200 million for grants and $1 million for the registry. As part of EISA, Congress authorized programs that would encourage energy efficiency through the recycling of waste heat and provide a survey and quantification of the opportunities that waste heat recovery could provide. These programs would provide $10 per MWH of recovered energy. Funding of these programs would enable the recycling of waste heat that would otherwise be lost.
