Energy Star Slammed

The federal government years ago established several linked schemes to promote energy efficiency and renewable power, the two most important being Energy Star and Green Power Partners. I've been somewhat critical of Green Power Partners in the past, writing long letters to staffers complaining that the scheme provides a disproportionate amount of free federal government advertisement to the biggest buyers of green power in the market, at the expense of smaller buyers who may however purchase a larger percentage of their power from renewable sources.

Full disclosure: Unity College, a small purchaser, buys 700 MWH/year of renewable power, 100% of our total, and gets close to zero credit or PR from Green Power Partners, while other colleges may buy 20 or 30 or 40% and get beaucoup PR because they buy 30 or 40% of a bigger total. I suppose I'm partisan and over anxious for UC to get some credit for all our hard work. But then, it has been and continues to be a lot of hard work, on a tight budget, and we deserve credit. Other colleges can throw money at the problem. We can't. And this kind of bias makes it harder for us to attract donors and help that we need and deserve.

And after all, we were probably one of the first colleges in the country to buy 100% green power.

I had more than sour grapes in mind, though. I wanted the programs to send the right message to consumers. I wanted the goals to be set higher, and the playing field to be fairer. The whole thing just chipped away at my shoulder.

I got exactly nowhere with my protests, though, and eventually gave up. And recognition for our work began to flow from other, more solidly sensible sources, such as Rocky Mountain Institute, or the ACUPCC, settings where spin is less important and actual performance more so.

Now we hear that the other flagship energy program is also weak and possibly corrupt, based on the results of an energy audit "sting" operation.

No big surprise to me.

So will Obama and Congress clean up both of these programs and establish a more serious scheme of incentives and aid?

The answer might be found in what gets packaged in the climate bill. Apparently our own Senator Collins, who gave what I thought was a very sensible graduation address on climate change at Unity College last year, is reported to be deeply involved, promoting what I interpret as a form of Jim Hansen's idea of a "Cap and Dividend" carbon tax, along with a freshened up scheme of incentives and aid.

So maybe congressional bipartisanship is not quite dead. Go Susan!

And while you're at it, take a look at these programs.

They don't need to be thrown out, just made more reasonable and fairer.