Advocacy & Outreach related to Energy Efficiency, Building Science, and Climate Change
Efficiency For All has been working hard to represent the importance of growing energy efficiency to our state energy plan.
Join us Jan 12 to learn more about how we can support energy efficiency and good energy policy in Connecticut. Click here to learn more.
Energy efficiency has the advantage of reducing all types of power plant-related emissions simultaneously by avoiding the need to generate electricity in the first place. Therefore, energy efficiency programs can improve air quality by reducing emissions. Whenever households and businesses reduce electricity consumption, somewhere on the grid one or more generators reduce their electric output (all else being equal). Typically, the avoided generation is from higher marginal-cost, fossil fuel-fired power plants, which, depending on the region, can be higher emitting power plants. Thus, avoiding generation from these units is desirable to reduce air pollutant emissions. – Pathways/Energy.gov 2017 Report
Energy Efficiency, while not new or exciting, is simply very efficient. According to the 2017 DOE National report, These programs help reduce electricity market prices, reduce disconnections, reduce the number of customers in arrears, improve system reliability and electricity price stability, support local job growth and provide a host of benefits to participants, including non-energy benefits such as increased property values or positive health impacts. Energy efficiency is playing a significant role in helping meet the energy needs of energy customers throughout the country, with many states incorporating annual energy savings of ≧ 1 percent or more into their energy plans and delivery strategies, along with additional policies and programs at the state and local levels.
Energy efficiency is a good investment. Energy efficiency is a well-established industry in the U.S. with billions of dollars invested annually through administered energy efficiency services programs, energy savings performance contracting, and other efforts.
APPEAL: Ratepayers, Energy Businesses, and Environmental Advocates Ask Court to Review Decision on Ratepayer Fund Raids
U.S. District Court ruled against ratepayers, energy efficiency and clean energy businesses, environmental orgs, and consumer groups; allies come back with appeal
Hartford, Conn. – Attorneys for ratepayers, efficiency businesses and environmental organizations filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York today, asking the appellate court to reverse an October 25 U.S. District Court decision that denied plaintiffs a remedy in their lawsuit to force the State of Connecticut to restore $145 million in ratepayer dollars intended to save families money on energy bills and reduce climate pollution.
Ratepayer representatives, energy efficiency businesses, clean energy businesses, and environmental nonprofits filed the federal lawsuit on May 15 seeking to stop the state legislature’s 2017 sweep of Connecticut’s energy efficiency and clean energy funds, and to prevent future diversions of ratepayer funds. The original complaint argued that diverting ratepayer funding to plug a budget deficit instead of using the dedicated funds for its intended purpose violates the Contract Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution and functions as an illegal tax on tax-exempt organizations like churches and nonprofits.
“Connecticut’s leaders broke the trust of their constituents when they turned electric ratepayer dollars into an illegal tax,” said lead plaintiff Leticia Colon de Mejias, chair of Efficiency For All (EFA) and founder. “Even in these difficult times, it is obvious that stealing ratepayer funds intended to help Connecticut residents and businesses reduce energy waste, save money on energy bills, and access clean resources is a bad choice. Legislators don’t have to wait for a court decision. Our leaders must take action to restore these funds which protect our energy stability, health, local jobs, and our economy. Efficiency and renewable resources are the future. We won’t stop fighting for fairness, for families, and for efficiency as a clean energy resource.”
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs and Defendants presented their cases in oral arguments before Judge Janet C. Hall at the U.S. District Court in New Haven on September 13. In a 27-page decision issued October 25, Judge Hall found that the state’s 2017 budget that swept ratepayer funds did not impair contracts between ratepayers and their electric distribution companies because neither utility tariffs nor state law ever promised ratepayers that their dollars would not be transferred to the General Fund for unrelated purposes.
Plaintiffs are Leticia Colon de Mejias; Connecticut Fund for the Environment; New Haven-based Fight the Hike; Energy Efficiencies Solutions, LLC; Best Home Performance of CT, LLC; Connecticut Citizen Action Group; New England Smart Energy Group, LLC; CT Weatherproof Insulation, LLC; Steven C. Osuch of East Windsor; Jonathan Casiano of Windsor; and Bright Solutions, LLC. The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from the firms of Holland & Knight in New York City and Hartford-based Feiner Wolfson. Defendants are the Governor, Treasurer, and Comptroller of the State of Connecticut.
“It’s hard to stop the state from diverting millions of dollars dedicated for a specific purpose like energy efficiency and clean energy investments to general fund purposes on a legislative whim—even when, as happened here, the state treasury had a $1.7 billion surplus to call on,” said Stephen J. Humes, a partner at Holland & Knight and co-counsel on the case. “Already more than 3,000 jobs have been lost and a number of energy efficiency projects across the state have been halted as a result of the state’s action. We are confident in our legal arguments that a contractual relationship existed between the state and the ratepayer who paid into the energy programs, and that the sweep of the funding was an unconstitutional and illegal tax that has harmed the plaintiffs and other ratepayers. We look forward to reviewing these important and precedential legal issues with the Second Circuit.”
This case raises an important legal issue that is relevant beyond Connecticut in that it is the first time ratepayers argued in court that when they pay their utility bills with surcharges dedicated for specific programs or services—such as energy efficiency and renewable energy—enforceable contracts arise that cannot be invaded by any state. The practical effect of Judge Hall’s October decision, however, was to deny judicial relief and send the problem back to the Connecticut General Assembly.
“We are pursuing the case to fix the damage the raids have done to Connecticut families and businesses,” said Roger Reynolds, chief legal director at Connecticut Fund for the Environment. “Residents trusted that their ratepayer dollars would go where their electric bills said they would—towards energy efficiency and clean energy programs that save money and cut climate pollution. Instead those hard-earned dollars were used to plug a hole in the state budget. We believe the appellate court will see that the state’s action violated federal contract and tax law, and ask them to correct that mistake to put Connecticut back on the path to a healthier energy future and a stronger economy.”
###
What Connecticut’s clean energy, efficiency, environment, and consumer advocacy communities are saying:
“We are now seeing the real life fall-out of this misguided, irresponsible decision by the state to take funds that weren’t theirs to take. Not only are we losing valuable, skilled technicians, but we are losing entire companies. If these funds aren’t restored in the very near future and future raids prevented, we will see a once-thriving and growing Connecticut industry—an industry that actually helped all the residents of Connecticut save money on their energy bills—disappear forever.”
– Stephanie Weiner, plaintiff, CEO and founder of New England Smart Energy Group, LLC
“It breaks my heart when we receive a call from a client whose house is drafty and leaky, and the efficiency charge money they have been contributing on a monthly basis is no longer there to help them get the new windows or insulation they need.”
– Vivian Perez, co-owner of HE-Energy Solutions, LLC
“Raiding these funds is extremely bad public policy. Shifting funds away from energy efficiency and clean energy projects had an immediate, detrimental impact on public health, the economy—with loss of highly skilled jobs and our environment. The raids disproportionately impacted communities of color and low income. This is unacceptable and must not happen again.”
– Anne Hulick, RN, MS, JD, Connecticut director, Clean Water Action/Clean Water Fund
“This case is not only about promoting energy efficiency and jobs. At its core, this case is about trust in government. Arbitrary diversion of funds clearly designated for one purpose has a corrosive effect on our trust that our elected leaders will keep their word about anything.”
– Mark Scully, president, People’s Action for Clean Energy
“Working families rely on energy efficiency and clean energy funds to pay their bills and protect their health. When the legislature raided those funds, they robbed the most vulnerable among us of their ability to pay for their basic needs. Many of these families live in low-income communities that already face significant challenges and disproportionate environmental impacts. After all, while climate change and pollution affect us all, they do not affect us all equally. We must restore these funds to protect all of our ratepayers and families in Connecticut.”
– Alexander Rodriguez, Chispa community organizer, CT League of Conservation Voters
“Connecticut’s budget woes partially reflect a broader economic crisis that continues to hit working families the hardest, as the state suffers from a deficit in good jobs. At the same time, we face a looming climate crisis that has already brought more severe storms and major flooding to coastal communities. Fortunately, these two crises have the same solution: we need to put people to work protecting the climate. Our energy efficiency programs do exactly that: they help struggling communities by creating new local jobs, they grow our state’s economy and tax base, and they move us toward a clean energy future that protects the climate for our grandchildren.”
– John Humphries, Organizer for the CT Roundtable on Climate and Jobs; and a member of the Governor’s Council on Climate Change
“Energy efficiency programs are a key part of the battle against climate change. Connecticut residents have paid for programs that will reduce harmful emissions and create good local jobs in our communities. Lawmakers should not be able to get away with robbing these essential programs of the funds they need to work.”
– Jen Siskind, Local Coordinator, Food & Water Watch
“The Energy Efficiency and RGGI Funds are an investment in economic development (jobs and businesses), tax revenue, and addressing the growing threat of climate change. It has been a great resource for Connecticut municipalities and residents to save money, and should be restored as soon as possible.”
– Kenny Foscue, member of the North Haven Clean Energy Task Force
Background:
Photo: Connecticut Energy Efficiency Workers at the State Capital speaking on the positive impacts of energy efficiency on low income, middle class households, and health outcomes in our state. Jan. 2018
Photo: Leticia Colon de Mejias, Chair, Efficiency For All, Advocating for clean energy law in Washington, DC
Contacts:
U.S. District Court rules against ratepayers, energy efficiency and clean energy businesses, environmental orgs, and consumer groups; groups urge legislative remedy
New Haven, Conn. – Efficiency businesses and environmental organizations are pushing legislators to act after a federal judge ruled against the groups’ lawsuit to force the State of Connecticut to restore $145 million in ratepayer dollars intended to save families money on energy bills and reduce climate pollution.
Energy efficiency businesses, clean energy businesses, environmental nonprofits, and utility ratepayer organizations filed the federal lawsuit on May 15 seeking to stop the state legislature’s 2017 sweep of Connecticut’s energy efficiency and clean energy funds, and to prevent future diversions of ratepayer funds. The original complaint argued that using ratepayer funding for other than its intended purpose violates the Contract Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution and functions as an illegal tax on tax-exempt organizations like churches and nonprofits.
Plaintiffs are Leticia Colon de Mejias; Connecticut Fund for the Environment; New Haven-based Fight the Hike; Energy Efficiencies Solutions, LLC; Best Home Performance of CT, LLC; Connecticut Citizen Action Group; New England Smart Energy Group, LLC; CT Weatherproof Insulation, LLC; Steven C. Osuch of East Windsor; Jonathan Casiano of Windsor; and Bright Solutions, LLC. The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from the firms of Holland & Knight in New York City and Hartford-based Feiner Wolfson. Defendants are the Governor, Treasurer, and Comptroller of the State of Connecticut.
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs and Defendants presented their cases in oral arguments before Judge Janet C. Hall at the U.S. District Court in New Haven on September 13. In a 27-page decision issued late Thursday, Judge Hall found that the state’s 2017 budget that swept ratepayer funds did not impair contracts between ratepayers and their electric distribution companies because neither utility tariffs nor state law ever promised ratepayers that their dollars would not be transferred to the General Fund for unrelated purposes.
“This case shows how incredibly difficult it is to stop the state from converting millions of dollars dedicated for a specific purposes—in this case, energy efficiency, renewables, and investments in clean energy—and converting the money into general fund purposes on a legislative whim even when the state treasury had already collected an unanticipated surplus of $1.7 billion dollars,” said Stephen J. Humes, a partner at Holland & Knight and co-counsel on the case. “While voters can hold their legislators accountable in 11 days, the sad reality is that more than 3,000 jobs have been lost and a number of energy efficiency projects across the state have been halted as a result. We disagree with the Court’s decision and are considering our right to appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.”
“We won’t stop fighting for fairness, for families, and for clean air,” said Leticia Colon de Mejias, chair of Efficiency For All (EFA) and founder/owner of Energy Efficiencies Solutions. “Even in these difficult times, it is obvious that stealing ratepayer funds intended to help Connecticut residents and businesses reduce energy waste and use cleaner resources is a bad choice. No matter your political party, efficiency is efficient. While we decide next steps, legislators don’t have to wait for anyone else’s decision—they can take action themselves. This is the message to send your legislators and those hoping to be elected in just a couple weeks. Let them know that Connecticut cares about our health, our local jobs, and our economy. Efficiency and renewable resources are the future. It’s now up to us to tell our leaders to stop stealing the funds that support our path forward to a clean, efficient, stable energy plan!”
“Our goal remains to remedy the injury the raids have done to Connecticut families and businesses,” said Roger Reynolds, chief legal director at Connecticut Fund for the Environment. “Residents paid the charge on their electric bills, trusting that their ratepayer dollars would go towards energy efficiency and clean energy programs that save money and reduce climate pollution—not be used to plug an unrelated budget hole. We are considering our next move in this case; in the meantime, legislative leaders must return the swiped ratepayer dollars promised for efficiency and clean energy programs to prevent further damage to Connecticut’s healthy energy.”
###
Background:
More information can be found at www.efficiencyforall.org and www.ctenvironment.org.
To speak with contractors who are experiencing direct harm or staff who were let go, please contact Leticia Colon de Mejias at 860-580-9076.
Written in collaboration with Annika Brink of the National Housing Trust.
Michigan can expect lower energy bills, less energy consumption, and less pollution as a result of plans to significantly expand utility energy efficiency programs. NRDC, the National Housing Trust (NHT), the Michigan Public Service Commission staff, and other interested parties recently reached agreement with Consumers Energy and DTE Energy to achieve more yearly energy savings than ever before by doubling down on energy efficiency programs.
Since the passage of 2008’s energy legislation, Michigan’s big electric utilities like DTE and Consumers have had to submit plans describing how they will meet the required level of energy efficiency savings. The initial 2009 target for energy savings was equal to only 0.3 percent of total annual electricity sales and the utilities invested a combined $49 million dollars resulting in $233 million in benefits, for net electric bill savings of $184 million. That means for every dollar spent, we all got nearly five dollars back in benefits. Between then and now, the yearly investment and savings have only grown, with the cumulative effect of the efficiency programs run between 2009 and 2016 being a net electric bill savings of $3.3 billion!
Now, thanks to a new component in the 2016 energy laws, we can expect even more savings. Through the new law, the annual savings target is up to 1 percent with additional financial incentives available to the utilities who achieve even greater levels of savings. As a result, both utilities submitted and have been approved to increase their electric savings goals by 50 percent, to a record 1.5 percent of utilities’ total electricity sales each year—with DTE submitting a two-year plan and Consumers submitting a four-year plan.
The newly approved plans will invest a combined $222 million per year, resulting in over $1 billion per year in electricity cost reductions, for net bill savings of over $800 million annually. In other words, for every dollar spent on energy efficiency, customers are continuing to save around five times as much in avoided investment in extra energy consumption and on new power plants that would have been needed to meet that demand. All told, assuming DTE continues at the same proposed level for all four years, these expanded plans will produce over $3 billion dollars in additional electric bill savings for families across Michigan by 2021. And this is just on the electric side.
For context, the utilities’ programs will now be producing enough new savings each year to meet the entire electricity needs of about 150,000 Michigan homes. And that’s the effect of just one year of efficiency programs. Since the savings from most efficiency measures last a decade or more, the cumulative effects of the programs will grow dramatically over time, enough to match the electricity consumption of more than half a million homes in the next four years.
Last January, NRDC and NHT entered the Consumers case to review and provide feedback on the company’s plan. From January to December we worked alongside Commission staff and the utility to come to an approved settlement agreement. At the end of June, we began a similar process with DTE that resulted in the settlement agreement approved in April. In addition to significantly increasing the total amount of energy savings they will both achieve, the plans increase their commitment to providing efficiency benefits to its low-income customers, include a state-of-the art approach to capturing savings from affordable multi-family buildings, commit to exploring how to use efficiency programs to reduce the cost of capital investment in the “poles and wires” that bring power to homes and businesses, and structure its key performance metrics to promote savings that last longer and provide for low-income customers.
Low-income customers and those customers in affordable multifamily housing have garnered increasing attention in recent years, as stakeholders across the spectrum of utility, housing, energy, state agencies, and local governments have realized how underserved these communities have been. NHT, NRDC, DTE, Consumers, and other local stakeholders, have been grappling with this topic formally in Michigan since 2015 as part of the Energy Efficiency for All initiative. Collaboratively, stakeholders discussed many topics, including how to best structure utility offerings, streamline the customer experience, provide easy-to-access whole-building data, and better reach owners preparing for periodic financing events. The results have been tremendous.
From 2009 to 2016, combined Consumers and DTE investment in low-income programs rose from a yearly $4 million dollars per year to $11 million dollars per year. Looking forward, DTE and Consumers are planning to spend more than $17 million per year from 2018 through 2021!
Digging into the program design a bit, both Consumers’ and DTE’s plans agreed to major program design improvements, including increases in measure incentives and a one-stop-shop/whole-building approach that will offer customers many free measures and experiment with different rebate levels for the other measures it offers. DTE will also be dedicating new funding over two years to deliver energy efficiency to low-income customers who are behind on their bills. This marks a creative new approach for using bill payment status as a way to target customers at risk of shut-off and pair bill assistance with energy efficiency upgrades in an attempt to break the cycle of high utility bills.
Michigan has been benefitting from energy efficiency programs for years, and with the new legislation’s incentives for increased investment in efficiency plans and efficiency emphasis in the integrated resource plans, we can look forward to reaping more rewards than ever before. To make sure you’re taking advantage of all the great energy efficiency offerings, visit your utility’s website (DTE, Consumers Energy) to see what program works for you and what upgrades can help you start saving money today!
In Michigan, investing in energy efficiency is paying off for the climate and the wallet.
To meet state requirements for reducing wasted energy, Michigan utilities have implemented a range of energy efficiency programs. For example, some offer customers free energy audits and rebates for efficient appliances.
The energy efficiency programs are funded by a surcharge on customer utility bills. But for every dollar they’re charged, customers have saved, on average, more than four.
Gonzalez: “The cumulative effect of the efficiency programs between 2009 and 2016 was a net bill savings of three point three billion dollars.”
That’s Ariana Gonzalez with the Natural Resources Defense Council. She says now the state is working to ensure that energy efficiency programs reach low-income homeowners and renters.
She says lower energy bills can free up a little extra money for other necessities, such as groceries or rent.
Gonzalez: “We see energy efficiency as having a huge impact on people’s everyday lives. Annually the savings may be around a couple hundred bucks for a homeowner or renter, and thousands of dollars for a building owner. Each month’s savings can really add up to make a difference.”
Reporting credit: Sarah Kennedy/ChavoBart Digital Media.
For full article click here.
The multiplying power of size makes it easy to save big money on little changes.
Imagine saving millions of dollars just by changing light bulbs and floor wax. It’s exactly what Walmart is doing.
“We are in the process of a multiyear rollout of replacing all fluorescent fixtures with LEDs in our stores, clubs and parking lots,” Chief Financial Officer Brett Biggs told analysts Tuesday at the retailer’s investor day at its headquarters, in Bentonville, Arkansas. “Not only is it good for the environment, these changes could reduce our annual energy costs by $200 million over time.”
In the U.S. alone, Walmart buys tens of billions of dollars’ worth of goods and services used for the business that aren’t sold in its stores, a category called “goods not for resale.” These are goods like travel services or maintenance supplies.
One of those items, is floor wax for stores, which the world’s largest retailer recently changed.
“Not only is the new wax cheaper, it’s also sturdier. It doesn’t need to be buffed as often, resulting in less spent on the actual buffing, as well as fuel for the machines,” Biggs said. “That one change in floor wax will save us over $20 million a year.”
It’s savings on a major scale.
Walmart’s founding principle is “everyday low price,4” which can only be achieved by everyday low cost. The more Walmart saves on the cost side, the more shoppers save at checkout.
Read full article at https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/10/16/walmart-saves-200-million-by-changing-its-light-bulbs.html
EFA is a local nonprofit which works with communities, leaders, and the EE workforce to raise awareness on the value and importance of energy efficiency to our economy, workforce, health, energy stability, environment, and rising energy costs in Connecticut.
Last week, two EFA members were awarded for their efforts to protect the ratepayer funds and the local energy efficiency programs & services.
Stephanie Weiner, Leticia Colon de Mejias and Vivian Perez (not pictured) were key plaintiffs in the legal filing against the latest state of Connecticut raid on the energy efficiency funds and renewable energy funds.
Their efforts along with key support from E4 the Future were critical to the legal action taken to protect the ratepayers and our clean energy future.
Efficiency remains the least expensive and most efficient clean energy resource we can deploy.
Learn more about the legal case and positive outcomes EE provides Connecticut’s. Join EFA in our effort to increase energy efficiency and to educate the public about the value and importance of energy efficiency to a stable energy future.
Efficiency is the least expensive clean energy resource that we can deploy. Efficiency is the fastest way to reach both our economic and environmental goals. Simply put, “Efficiency is Efficient.”
We all need energy and there is a strong growing movement to convert our nation to 100 percent clean energy. It is not possible to meet the 100 % clean energy goals without implementing energy efficiency (EE) broadly across our state and our nation!
Climate change is real, yet our leaders seem paralyzed. We don’t have to throw the baby out with the bathwater, or give up hope on our work to lower our dependence on fossil fuel.
Yes, even if your friends and family have gone to the dark side and no longer believe in Facts; you can have a safe conversation about energy efficiency. Unlike energy or climate modeling, efficiency has been proven to have amazing positive impacts on everything from our economy to our environment. Efficiency is one of the things that we can all agree upon and support.
Here are some facts when discussing energy policy in a non confrontational, nonpartisan way:
EE increases local jobs, and generates local & federal taxes.
EE lowers energy costs and energy waste.
Lowering our energy waste also lowers the impacts of burning fossil fuel, as well as protect our health and the environment.
EE lowers pollution caused by burning fossil fuel as it strengthens our energy grid.
EE avoids the need to build new energy plants which cost us money, providing even deeper savings for our residents and state.
In fact, if we implement enough efficiency, in time we can actually reach our 100% percent clean energy goals, all while relying on EE’s proven ability to reduce energy waste and the negative effects of burning fossil fuels.
I’m all for clean cars and community solar. However, they are expensive and some people don’t even own cars. Buying an electric car won’t reduce carbon pollution unless you power it with clean energy.
There is much more pollution created by heating and cooling our homes and buildings than there is from transportation. We can immediately reduce this energy generated pollution through proven simple low cost technologies such as cellulose insulation, air sealing those leaky old homes, installing efficiency lighting & timers, efficiency-based heating and cooling systems, better windows, and power strips.
For example, my team worked on a project where we installed LED lights, insulation and windows in 13 New England homes. We then tracked the energy bills for three years. We reduced the energy waste by approximately 30 percent in each home. Yes, 30 percent annual savings on heat and cooling electric use. That’s 30 percent less pollution from each home. They also are more comfortable homes, safer, and are realizing the financial benefits of not wasting energy.
It is important to look at the facts on Efficiency Efficiency and building science. I am all for aiming for the stars, but we must also pick the low hanging fruit and be sustainable while we aim higher for the 100 percent clean energy goals.
No matter our political party, we can all get behind EE.
Full article: https://www.npr.org/2018/09/19/649633468/31-percent-of-u-s-households-have-trouble-paying-energy-bills
Nearly a third of households in the United States have struggled to pay their energy bills, the Energy Information Administration said in a report released Wednesday. The differences were minor in terms of geography, but Hispanics and racial minorities were hit hardest.
About one in five households had to reduce or forgo food, medicine and other necessities to pay an energy bill, according to the report. “Of the 25 million households that reported forgoing food and medicine to pay energy bills, 7 million faced that decision nearly every month,” the report stated.
More than 10 percent of households kept their homes at unhealthy or unsafe temperatures.
The data come from the federal agency’s most recent energy consumption survey in 2015. That year, expenditures for energy were at their lowest in more than decade, according to the agency.
“We only conduct the Residential Energy Consumption Survey every 4-5 years,” survey manager Chip Berry told NPR by email. “This is the first time in the history of the study (goes back to late ’70s) that we have [measured] energy insecurity across all households, so there’s not much in the way of historical comparison.”
The study found that about half of households experiencing trouble reported income of less than $20,000. More than 40 percent had at least one child.
And people of color were disproportionately affected: about half of respondents who reported challenges paying their energy bills identified as black. More than 40 percent identified as Latino.
“It’s not shocking, because the communities of color disproportionately face all the highest burdens, whether it’s housing, lack of jobs or education,” Tracey Capers, executive vice president of the Bedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation, a community development initiative in New York, told The Associated Press.
Click here to view the entire article…
