Drafty homes drive up energy bills. Maine volunteers are using a simple technique to insulate some of them
Inside an old church basement in Norway, Sharon Harrison stretches a wide, thin sheet of polymer over a rectangular wooden frame. She’s one of a few dozen volunteers inside the church — building the frames and covering them in shrink wrap and foam.
The end result: window inserts that will eventually fit snugly into the drafty windows in her house in Waterford, built back in 1798. She already added some inserts a few years ago.
“And I do not want to replace the windows. I love the old, gravy glass,” Harrison said. “So this was a good alternative to keeping our house from being drafty. It really has made a difference.”
A big difference. It’s warmer inside, and Harrison said her fuel bill has fallen by a third.
“The first year we moved in the house, without these, we were just going through so much fuel. It was ridiculous,” Harrison said. “And there’s been a couple occasions when I’ve taken one out of a window, and you cannot believe the cold difference behind that. It really stopped the drafts.”
Harrison is building these inserts through a program called WindowDressers, through which residents from communities across Northern New England come together in churches and town halls to tape and wrap the frames together. The Norway event was organized by a local group, the Center for an Ecology-Based Economy. By using volunteers, prices stay relatively cheap — around $40 per insert. And they’re free for low-income households.
But while advocates tout this low-cost solution as a way to both reduce bills and cut carbon as part of the state’s plans to move away from fossil fuels, they say tackling Maine’s old, drafty housing stock will require a lot more investment in the years ahead.
“We’ve seen that about 96% of units in Maine, were built before the state even adopted a statewide building energy code, in 2008,” said Jeff Marks, a senior policy advocate and Maine Director for the Acadia Center, a climate advocacy organization.
Marks said that while weatherizing those hundreds of thousands of older homes is a huge challenge, it can make a substantial difference — particularly for low-income residents, who spend nearly a fifth of their income on energy alone.
A 2019 report from the Maine Office of the Public Advocate shows the average home energy burden for low income households compared to all households in the state.
“And really, the electrification of homes, with energy efficient heat pumps, are really the next steps. And are the types of investments that Maine really needs to increase over the coming years,” he said.
Some view Maine as a pioneer, as some of the first weatherization programs were created here in the 1970s.
In the decades since, MaineHousing has used funding from the federal Weatherization Assistance Program to seal cracks, close drafts and insulate hundreds of homes a year for low-income residents eligible for heating assistance. More recently, Efficiency Maine has also offered weatherization rebates: up to $3,500 for any resident, and up to $9,600 for those with low-to-moderate incomes.
“That’s anywhere from a third, to maybe as much as 90% of a typical project cost,” said Efficiency Maine Executive Director Michael Stoddard. “It makes a huge difference. And I think that’s a big — that financial incentive really helps people take that action.”
Altogether, the two agencies’ efforts combined weatherized about 2,000 Maine homes this year.
But in order for the state to reach its climate goal of weatherizing 35,000 homes by 2030, that rate will need to nearly double.
State officials say two recent investments have them feeling optimistic they can get there. Earlier this year, the Mills Administration allocated $25 million in federal stimulus money to Efficiency Maine, which the agency estimates will weatherize about 3,500 homes.
And the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed last month contained $3.5 billion for home weatherization nationally — about ten times the program’s annual funding level.
“But we have to remember, these are one-time influxes of cash into the state,” said the Acadia Center’s Jeff Marks. He notes that while the increased attention and funding on weatherization are good steps from state officials, he’d like to see more sustainable funding sources over the long term, such as a fee on heating fuels.
“So the money coming in from the federal government, as well as state money, and Efficiency Maine programs, are good. They’re solid,” Marks said. “But it’s not nearly enough to do everything that we need to do to reach our energy goals.”
And some advocates said that even with funding, doubling the rate of weatherization will also require bolstering the state’s workforce in a tight labor market, which could be a challenge, even with new job training programs.
Back in the church basement in Norway, Jim Gibson of Fryeburg sticks long strips of foam on to the sides of a wooden window insert — it’s one small step that Gibson says he can take to reduce carbon emissions.
“And it doesn’t seem that our politicians are moving too fast in that realm,” Gibson said. “So as I say, I feel as though, one window at a time, I’m trying to make a difference.”
Read the full article at Maine Public here.
Groups urge bigger targets, more equity as RGGI states consider changes
As the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, known as RGGI, undergoes a thorough review by participating states, environmental advocates are demanding more ambitious emission reduction targets and a mandate for equitable distribution of the revenues.
This is the third time since RGGI’s kickoff in 2009 that the states have reviewed the cap-and-invest program. With climate change predictions looking more dire than ever, advocates say it’s time to seriously ramp up the program’s carbon emission reduction targets.
“In both of the previous program reviews, the states lowered the emissions cap and improved the program,” said Jordan Stutt, carbon program director at the Acadia Center. “But neither of those reviews delivered sufficient levels of improvement. We would like to see it decrease more rapidly, and ultimately get us to zero emissions.”
Under RGGI, the participating states set a regional limit on the amount of carbon pollution that power plants are allowed to emit, and sell emission “allowances” up to that limit at quarterly auctions. The cap declines over time, gradually bringing down emissions.
The proceeds from the auctions are shared by the states. So far, the program has raised more than $4.7 billion, most of which has been invested in energy efficiency and clean energy projects.
The participating states are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia. Pennsylvania is in the process of formulating rules that will allow it to join.
Power plant emissions across those states are down by more than half, although there is disagreement as to how much of that reduction was driven by sharp declines in the price of natural gas and renewable energy rather than RGGI.
“So far, RGGI has had pretty low auction prices,” said Kenneth Gillingham, an economics professor specializing in environmental and energy issues at Yale University. “It’s a nudge. It has reduced emissions, but I don’t think it’s a dramatic effect.”
The 2021 cap under RGGI is 119.8 million short tons. It declines by 3.655 million tons every year through 2030 and is currently supposed to hold steady after that at approximately 86.9 million tons.
But environmental advocates say that schedule is too meager, especially given the aggressive greenhouse gas reduction and renewable energy goals set by many of the participating states.
“The RGGI states should evaluate cap levels that are, at a minimum, consistent with these state goals to maintain their position as national leaders in decarbonizing electricity generation,” said Drew Stilson, a senior policy analyst at the Environmental Defense Fund, in written comments submitted during a program review stakeholder meeting last month.
Acadia is also calling for the elimination or redesign of RGGI’s so-called “cost containment reserve.” Under that mechanism, if auction prices reach a certain level, additional carbon allowances beyond the cap are released from the reserve.
Stutt says it is “unacceptable” to allow for that additional polluting. He noted that at the last RGGI auction, held earlier this month, the allowances sold for $13 each, a record high and a stronger incentive for the market to generate electricity from clean sources. But because that sum also matched the trigger price for the cost containment reserve, an additional 3.9 million allowances were released.
“We contend that if the cost containment reserve is maintained, the price triggers must be significantly higher than they are,” Stutt said. “Carbon prices are still very low compared to other programs across the globe.”
Gillingham said the reserve is intended to act as a backstop to prevent the RGGI program from becoming too expensive for ratepayers — “if it raises rates too much, it might not last.” But he agreed that a trigger price of $13 is too low “if the goal of the policy is really to ensure that it’s reducing emissions in a substantial way.”
Advocates are also hoping the states will take a serious look at whether the program is adequately benefiting the communities that are most impacted by air pollution. RGGI has so far deferred to individual states as to how to spend their share of the auction proceeds. But advocates are seeking a requirement that states allocate a minimum of perhaps 40% of proceeds to environmental justice communities.
“It’s frustrating that we haven’t seen progress on this yet,” Stutt said. “I think it would be inexcusable for the states to forego this opportunity to build equity into the program.”
The Northeast Regional members of the Climate Justice Alliance are urging the states to collect data identifying where emissions reductions are happening, and whether the program is improving or worsening air quality in environmental justice communities.
States are “certainly paying more lip service” to equity issues this time around, said Basav Sen, a climate policy expert at the Institute for Policy Studies, which is a member of the alliance. “But the primary problem with the way they approach equity is that they view it as something to address after the emissions have occurred. And those emissions happen in an inequitable way.”
In addition to tightening the emissions cap and boosting the trigger price for the reserve, Sen said the program should also stop allowing emitters to store allowances for future use.
“It makes the cap completely meaningless,” he said. “They should just expire. It’s supposedly a way to allow polluters to reduce emissions in the most cost-efficient way possible. But honestly, we are way past the point of worrying about costs for polluters. We are too far into the climate crisis for that.” The review process will continue throughout next year, with a draft of the updated model rule expected next fall.
Read the full article at Energy News Network here.
Maine Must Fundamentally Reform Energy Planning to Gain Public Trust
On November 2, motivated by opposition to the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC) transmission project, Maine voters overwhelmingly approved Question 1, the citizen’s initiative to amend state law regarding construction of electric transmission lines, including banning certain projects and requiring legislative approval for those that cross public lands. The line proposed by Central Maine Power in conjunction with Hydro-Quebec would have connected the Maine power grid with Quebec as part of a Massachusetts plan to export hydropower and displace fossil fuel generation.
The controversy over the NECEC project has crystalized critical issues that Maine must grapple with, including how to transition to a modern energy system that benefits communities, protects critical lands and habitat, and serves all consumers equitably while rapidly shifting away from fossil fuels towards reliance on cleaner, safer electric options needed to meet the state’s climate targets by 2030.
Maine is already witnessing the damaging impacts of climate change. From increased storm damage and flooding, to alarming threats to lobster habitat, Maine’s economic future and quality of life is tied to its climate future. Maine must shift from fossil fuels like heating oil and natural gas to clean energy options. Over the next decade, Maine can do this by expanding electric building heating and electric transportation choices; increasing clean energy generation, storage, and delivery of renewable energy; and modernizing its electricity grid. This transition will require a clean and equitable transmission and utility distribution system and a shared vision to build it.
To ensure good decisions that earn public support, Maine must fundamentally reform its outdated approach to energy planning and decision-making. Simply put, the current energy planning and utility business model is no longer compatible with the transformations necessary to address climate change, electrify the economy, and incorporate public input. Currently, electric utilities are charged with the responsibility to plan for energy needs and then decide which energy projects to propose and build. Once constructed, utilities and other energy companies earn revenue from these projects. This system creates fundamental conflicts between planning and investment choices. And it fails to take a comprehensive view of all the technologies, fuels, and efficiency options available to meet the energy needs of the state and communities.
To reform the system, Acadia Center is recommending that Maine enact two fundamental changes we call Reforming Energy System Planning for Equity and Climate Transformation (RESPECT). First, RESPECT removes conflicts of interests by separating the entity that conducts energy planning from the entity that builds, owns, and earns revenue from the projects. The planning entity would have a public interest charge – not a financial one. Second, the energy planning entity would have the tools to meet energy, heating, and consumer needs while specifically addressing state climate requirements and equity goals. This will allow more focused consideration of clean, effective energy solutions, including building weatherization, heat pumps, solar, and storage.
Maine has started down this road. L.D. 1682, enacted earlier this year, requires the Maine Public Utilities Commission to consider compliance with Maine’s climate statute in all decisions. If this law had been in effect when the PUC was considering the NECEC project, the carbon emission reductions promised would have been tested in a robust, measurable, and verifiable way. With “climate” elevated on equal footing with affordability, reliability, and utility profits, future PUC decisions will help save ratepayers money, improve equity and environmental justice outcomes, and support decarbonization.
In the wake of the divisive referendum, a new framework must emerge to modernize the electricity grid with greater stakeholder engagement and the holistic planning that Maine deserves. The alternative is continued delays in building the energy future we need at great detriment to Maine’s economic, environmental, and consumer future.
Dan Sosland is president of Acadia Center, a Rockport based non-profit research and advocacy organization focused on climate change and clean energy solutions that address economic, consumer and equity needs.
Opinion: Youngkin’s withdrawal from a regional climate agreement would cost Virginians
Virginia Gov.-elect Glenn Youngkin’s recent announcement to undo Virginia’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative law via executive action is an opportunity: Richmond’s policymakers can now look with fresh eyes at that program’s major investments all across the commonwealth.
Youngkin’s stated reason to remove Virginia from the long-standing program (RGGI, pronounced “Reggie”) is to protect Virginia ratepayers from cost-of-living expenses. Focusing on pocketbook issues is always a laudable goal. And ratepayer cost concerns are real: Virginia has high electric rates that burden not just families but also our regional competitiveness. Our state’s rates are higher than not just every single one of our four regulated neighbors, but federal data shows Virginia rates are higher than nearly every single Southern state. As a result of these high rates, Virginians pay among the highest monthly electric bills in the nation. That cost will shoot up even further this winter when fossil fuel prices skyrocket.
But to protect Virginians from cost increases, Youngkin (R) should consider that RGGI does precisely that, by design: It both reduces the cost of living for our lower-income residents and funds mitigation of far costlier sea-level rise. Indeed, many of Youngkin’s own goals — to address sea-level rise, reduce emissions and lower the cost of living — are all advanced by the RGGI program. Its proven record of delivering value is why RGGI was hailed as a “real bipartisan, common-sense solution” by Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R).
Here are the facts: RGGI is the multistate, market-based “cap-and-invest” program to lower carbon emissions, the main driver of costly climate change and sea-level rise across Hampton Roads. RGGI lowers emissions by holding power plants accountable for paying for their smokestack pollution, which RGGI also requires must decline over time; states invest those proceeds in common-sense, cost-lowering infrastructure improvements across their economies, such as boosting energy efficiency to lower electric bills.
Virginia joined RGGI precisely because of the program’s proven record of decreasing energy costs and slashing air pollution: RGGI-state emissions are just half of what they were at the program’s start more than a decade ago. As for costs, RGGI-state electricity prices have fallen over time, and RGGI-funded efficiency investments lower monthly bills, delivering $1.2 billion in bill savings thus far, with $13 billion more expected. It’s not surprising, then, that RGGI-state economies have grown faster than the rest of the country.
Here in Virginia, large polluters have already paid more than $200 million in RGGI proceeds for two crucial investments. First, RGGI investment in Virginia’s Community Flood Preparedness Fund goes to tackle the worsening sea-level rise across Hampton Roads and flooding statewide. RGGI already funded Virginia Beach with $3 million to mitigate the much higher costs of sea-level rise. Del. Will Morefield (R-Tazewell) also proposed using RGGI investments to help Virginians hit by extreme-weather flooding in far Southwest Virginia. Second, RGGI investment goes to bill-lowering energy efficiency improvements for the hard-working Virginia families that need them most. In the Albemarle County region alone, RGGI investments will slash the energy costs for more than 350 extremely low-income families, with relief to hundreds more families to come. Leaving RGGI would defund these very real investments in Virginia and Virginians.
More important, doing so would overlook the ripe opportunities right at hand to deliver progress and lower the electric bills of Virginia ratepayers.
Youngkin can lead in Richmond with real, bipartisan solutions here. He could provide relief from Virginia’s high electric rates if he worked with both legislative chambers on common-sense energy measures. To name just two major cost-of-living reforms: Youngkin and the legislature can first boost our economy’s lagging energy efficiency performance by ensuring state-regulated monopolies fully unlock those proven but still-latent Virginia resources. That reform will lower bills and the need to pay for costlier new electricity generation. And they could work together to rid Virginia’s code of the slew of monopoly-friendly “rate adjustment” accounting gimmicks that raise ratepayer costs by artificially inflating, month after month, Virginia electric bills. Virginia law has so many of those “rate adjustment” gimmicks, in fact, that there is even one in Virginia’s RGGI law (the only RGGI state to include one), unnecessarily padding electric utility profits on the backs of Virginia families.
So if Youngkin strikes anything from law, it should be those kinds of unnecessary cost burdens on Virginia ratepayers. Because one thing is certain: If Youngkin works on real solutions to lower both the cost of living and emissions, his first year in office will set a problem-solving leadership example to the nation, by delivering bipartisan progress in a narrowly divided state, that further strengthens Virginia’s economic resilience.
Read the full article at The Washington Post here.
Fuel Oil Associations Issue Misleading Claims
Rockport, ME. — Oil and gas dealer associations initiated a media campaign today calling on the region’s governors to cease support for clean, consumer friendly electric heat pump options. In fact, heat pump rebates are already insulating consumers from volatile heating oil price spikes while improving indoor air quality, reducing pollution, and providing efficient, comfortable heat.
“Energy marketers misleadingly claim that concerns ISO-NE [the regional power grid operator] recently flagged about pandemic-related fuel supply constraints require this backward response, but their claim is meritless,” said Melissa Birchard, Senior Regulatory Attorney and Director, Clean Energy Program at Acadia Center. “Pandemic supply chains and fuel demands in other countries are contributing to price volatility and making fossil fuels harder to come by,” noted Birchard. “The short- and long-term answer is to help residents shift from reliance on volatile fossil fuels to electric alternatives that are cleaner, safer and equally comfortable.”
“Calls to cancel heat pump rebates are a sad example of the fossil fuel industry once again fighting the clean energy solutions that will keep our communities, safe, warm, and healthy,” said Matt Rusteika, Senior Policy Analyst at Acadia Center. “Many fuel oil dealers already recognize this and are providing a full array of heating choices to their customers, including air source heat pump conversions.”
According to press reports, ISO-NE’s Gordon van Welie has raised concerns about supplies of home heating oil, citing pandemic-related shortages of truck drivers that could affect deliveries. Given that the supply chain for heating oil, gas, and other fossil fuels has been disturbed by the pandemic, increasing reliance on those fuels makes zero sense. As European gas prices soar, U.S. gas companies are exporting gas for greater profits, leaving domestic customers exposed to even more price volatility.
“Heat pump rebates help families and businesses control costs, insulate household budgets from fossil fuel price spikes, and increase the overall efficiency of the region’s energy use,” said Rusteika. “Energy marketer attempts to sow doubt about heat pumps are sadly self-serving. Heat pump rebates are unlikely to influence fuel supply constraints either way. And many heat pumps installed each year displace electric resistance heat—which reduces strain on the grid.”
“Long-term,” says Birchard, “the region needs to expand its electric transmission grid and clean energy supply to help solve constraints and ensure reliability. Heat pumps are a key part of the solution, as controllable heat pumps can provide a flexible resource for the electric grid.”
Acadia Center calls on the governors to reject the misleading assertions and backward-looking position of the fuel dealers associations.
Media Contacts:
Melissa Birchard
Clean Energy Program Director
mbirchard@acadiacenter.org
617-742-0054 x103
Matt Rusteika
Senior Policy Analyst & Buildings Lead
mrusteika@acadiacenter.org
617-742-0054 x108
###
Acadia Center is a nonprofit research and advocacy organization committed to advancing the clean energy future. Acadia Center advocates for an equitable clean energy future for Connecticut, tackling regulatory and legislative energy policy, transportation, energy efficiency, beneficial electrification, utility innovation, and renewable energy.
Maine doesn’t have enough money to meet EV goals, a new report says
A new report from Gov. Janet Mills’ administration recommended new strategies to accelerate electric vehicle use, but it foreshadowed difficult conversations by saying Maine needs more money to meet ambitious climate goals.
The new clean transportation roadmap, required under an executive order by the Democratic governor in April, says Maine has made progress since 2019 by increasing battery and plug-in hybrid vehicles by 90 percent to 5,577 vehicles and public charging stations by 65 percent to 265 locations.
But more work needs to be done and thorny political questions about how to generate more money for the initiatives must be answered before decreasing the amount of fossil-fuel emissions in Maine’s transportation sector, which produces more than half of those emissions. The state needs 219,000 light-duty EVs on the road by 2030 to meet a goal of curbing greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent.
The roadmap comes after a national study released in February concluded that Maine needed to accelerate its plans to get more electric vehicles on the road as the state relies heavily on the emerging vehicles to meet its climate goals. That same month, President Joe Biden made electric vehicles the centerpiece of his climate plan with a goal to convert about 645,000 postal trucks and passenger vehicles to all-electric and incentivize American companies to build a network of 500,000 charging stations.
The Mills administration said the state has limited funding to reach its goals, including only $19 million to expand charging infrastructure through 2025 through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. If the state alone funded new charging stations, it would need $7.7 million next year and $17.6 million in 2025, and it falls short on having those amounts.
Meeting overall clean energy goals also requires regional cooperation, experts said, and that has been hard to come by. Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker recently pulled out of the Transportation Climate Initiative, a multi-state pact to reduce carbon emissions, citing a lack of buy-in among other states in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic, according to WBUR.
The pact is currently “frozen by political inertia throughout New England,” said Jeff Marks, Maine director of the Acadia Center, which was spearheading that project, which Mills never actively joined amid concerns that any funding solution could fall hard on rural Mainers.
“The clean transportation roadmap is a good start, but it will need political, technology and financial capital to move it forward in the right direction,” Marks said.
The Mills administration’s plan could still be controversial. The report opens the door to new funding methods that could be politically unpalatable, noting the state could generate more money to fund key initiatives by increasing the gas tax or adding a vehicle-miles-traveled tax, though it does not endorse any particular one.
Tackling transportation energy issues is important to Maine, Marks said. It is among the top 10 states in money spent per capita on energy, with the highest proportion going to transportation. The volatility in gasoline and diesel fuel prices due to global, national and regional constraints brings additional economic uncertainty to Mainers, he said.
Maine spends more than $4 billion annually to import fossil fuels, Dan Burgess, director of the governor’s energy office, said.
“The clean transportation roadmap offers options for how Maine can keep more of that money at home and create long-term climate and economic benefits to the state,” Burgess said.
Read the full article at Bangor Daily News here.
Next Generation Energy Efficiency – New PUC Order Represents a Bygone Generation Addicted to Fossil Fuels and Useless Against Climate Change
A new order by New Hampshire’s utility regulator stops the state dead in its energy efficiency tracks and shackles it to its outdated previous plan. After a year of delay and opposition by some legislators and business groups, the NH Public Utilities Commission rejected a new energy efficiency plan developed as a consensus by utilities, government entities, consumer groups, and Acadia Center and its partners. Order No. 26,553 in DE 20-092 Electric and Gas Utilities: 2021-2023 Triennial Energy Efficiency Plan, released 11/12/2021.
New Hampshire has some of the oldest and leakiest housing stock in the nation and a high dependency on fossil fuels for heating. Building heating is also one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in New Hampshire. The new plan was an opportunity to save millions of additional dollars by helping residents and businesses more aggressively reduce energy costs and pollution. The proposed consumer-friendly energy efficiency would have reduced energy costs, increased energy efficiency, decreased greenhouse gas emissions, and provided economic development opportunities. Other Northeast states are making tremendous progress in their energy efficiency programs by maximizing the use of weatherization and beneficial electrification, reducing economic insecurity from the inefficient use of fossil fuels, and creating new jobs and businesses to deliver affordable energy efficiency products and services. New Hampshire can and should do so, as well. Instead, it will remain dead last in New England on energy efficiency policy and programs.
A robust, escalating energy efficiency resource standard would have sent a clear signal to the market in residential, commercial, and industrial programs and a level of certainty that encourages more investment in cost-effective energy efficiency. Instead, the NH PUC has undercut the progress the state had made in saving consumers’ energy and growing good, green jobs in the industry by denying such certainty.
Energy efficiency represents the largest block of energy workers in New Hampshire. The 10,838 Energy Efficiency jobs in New Hampshire represent 0.5 percent of all U.S. energy efficiency jobs. The median wage for all energy workers in New Hampshire is $26.13, which is 37 percent above the national median wage of $19.14. [1] All NH counties have energy efficiency workers in more than 2000 energy-efficiency-related businesses. The future of energy efficiency in NH was looking promising, with ~ 6800 new EE construction jobs needed just to retrofit NH homes by 2030. [2] The expanded efficiency programs could have created 17,500 job-years and produced $3.5 billion in increased economic output in New Hampshire.
Given the international impetus on global climate change and renewed federal action on clean energy and efficiency investments, this was no time to move backwards on robust energy efficiency programs and projects in New Hampshire. New Hampshire deserves to reap the benefits that a more robust NHSaves program can provide. Past progress shows that investments in efficiency grow the economy, create jobs, enhance public health, improve housing, and increase access to low-carbon heating.
But the Commission’s order sends a signal to the market that additional investment in cost-effective energy efficiency is unwanted. Counter to the PUC’s findings, far more must be done to improve the efficiency of NH homes and businesses and to ensure that all overburdened and underserved communities reap the full benefits of efficiency offerings. Many consumers face unequal access to benefits under existing efficiency programs, and underserved communities that face the worst impacts of climate change and poor housing quality have not been able to take full advantage of efficiency programs. Clean electric heating and whole house electrification must be priorities to support the acceleration of clean energy resources and the transition away from fossil fuels.
Acadia Center’s Next Generation Energy Efficiency initiative seeks to tackle these challenges through a new approach – one that focuses on energy savings as a core consumer and energy system resource, but is also centered around meeting climate, environmental justice, and electrification goals. It is an approach that recognizes the interrelatedness of these efforts, which can work in concert to bring Northeast communities the future of energy efficiency. We hope New Hampshire will eventually rejoin other New England states in moving forward to all cost-effective energy efficiency to the benefit of all citizens.
[1] U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy & Employment Jobs Report, 2021, Energy Employment by State 2021.
[2] E4TheFuture, Energy Efficiency Jobs in America, October 2021.
Gov. Mills nominates attorney from Yarmouth as next public advocate
Gov. Janet Mills is nominating William Harwood, an attorney with broad experience working on utility issues, as the state’s next public advocate, the governor’s office said in a news release Wednesday.
If confirmed, Harwood, who currently serves as the senior adviser for regulatory affairs in the governor’s energy office, would represent Maine utility consumers in matters pending before the state Public Utilities Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.
“When it comes to utilities in Maine, few people are more experienced or knowledgeable than Bill Harwood – and no one is better positioned than Bill to stand up for Maine people and hold our utilities accountable to them,” Mills said in a written statement. “Bill’s deep expertise, built over his decades long career, will serve Maine well and will advance our efforts to hold our utilities accountable and deliver reliable service for Maine people.”
As former senior counsel at the Portland-based law firm Verrill Dana, Harwood has represented a wide range of interests over his 40-year career, including consumers, public utilities, renewable energy companies, technology companies, paper mills, and colleges and universities. He has also helped landowners, from blueberry growers to nursing homes, in negotiations with renewable energy developers regarding the siting and benefits of new solar projects.
Harwood, who served as an adjunct professor of law at the University of Maine School of Law, also has experience with water utilities, representing consumers in disputes involving charges, supplies and access.
“I am honored to be nominated as Maine’s Public Advocate. If confirmed, I will work hard every day to defend the interests of Maine people,” Harwood said in a written statement. “The bottom-line is that Maine ratepayers deserve reliable service at just and reasonable rates, and I will fight every day to make sure that’s what they are getting.”
The nomination was welcomed by the Acadia Center, a group advocating for a bold response to climate change in the Northeast. Jeff Marks, the group’s Maine director and senior policy advocate, noted Harwood’s experience, skills and temperament.
“The trust he’s earned during his more than four decades of legal and regulatory work will serve him well, especially as the public grows more weary of high-profile controversies in Maine’s utility sector,” Marks said. “We hope Bill will use his leverage to elevate equity concerns in environmental justice, frontline, and other vulnerable communities that are underserved or overburdened by current energy policies, programs and systems due to geography, race, income or other socioeconomic factors.”
Harwood’s nomination is subject to confirmation by the Legislature’s Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee, as well as the state Senate. It’s unclear when those proceedings would take place, although a confirmation hearing is expected before Jan. 15.
If confirmed, Harwood would replace former Public Advocate Barry Hobbins, who retired from the position in June 2021. Andrew Landry, deputy public advocate, has served as acting public advocate in the interim.
Harwood, a graduate of Harvard University and Fordham University, lives in Yarmouth with his wife, Ellen, and has five grown children.
A Mills spokesperson said Harwood, if confirmed, would earn $93,400 to $140,000 a year.
Read the full article at Press Herald here.
Want to Avoid Painful Price Spikes? End the Dependency on Fossil Fuels
Many New England electric and gas utilities will be charging customers more this winter because of sharply rising fossil fuel prices. These price spikes come when families and businesses are already facing increased costs due to historic inflation. Both inflation and rising oil and gas prices stem in large part from the impact of the global pandemic.[1] But volatile fossil fuel prices are nothing new, and the region must use the tools at hand to protect consumers from these impacts, including decoupling the economy from fossil fuels as rapidly as possible. The answer is not to double down on more gas, oil, and pipelines — which will always be volatile – but to electrify buildings and transportation and to bring more solar, wind, flexible load like electric vehicles, and storage into the region’s energy mix.
Why Are Prices Spiking?
The pandemic, extreme weather, and international instability are driving price spikes in New England and around the globe. Spikes in natural gas prices not only mean higher heating costs for those who heat with gas, but also rising electric rates because New England is over-reliant on natural gas as a fuel for electricity generation, in addition to heating. It is this reliance that the region must eliminate to decouple its utility bills from the risks and price volatility of fossil fuels.
New England is not the only region paying more. The entire country faces rising natural gas prices in part due to increased exports abroad. Because prices for gas are even higher in Europe and Asia, U.S. producers have an incentive to export large quantities of gas, further driving up domestic prices.[2] In addition, earlier in the year, U.S. natural gas production dropped by its largest monthly decline due to a record-breaking cold snap in the lower 48 states.[3] That freeze event paralyzed many states, resulting in substantial loss of life as well as economic damage. It simultaneously reduced gas production in the affected states.[4] By summer, just a few months later, parts of the U.S. were experiencing life-threatening summer heat waves that caused higher than normal air conditioning demand.[5] Already-diminished gas supplies were consumed at higher rates than normal to fuel electricity for cooling. European gas prices have also been surging because of supply issues, including threats from non-democratic Belarus to cut off gas supplies to the rest of Europe.[6] All of this has contributed to volatile pricing and constrained supply for natural gas in the U.S. and around the globe.
What Impacts Does New England Face from Price Spikes?
Here are some of the impacts New England faces right now:
- Electricity rates are rising with little notice in Maine. Starting January 1 Central Maine Power will increase its standard offer rates by 83% and Versant Power will raise its standard offer rates 88%.[7]
- Liberty Utilities plans to raise rates for natural gas customers in New Hampshire, including customers who already locked in fixed prices for the winter.[8] Liberty says it didn’t predict this level of price volatility when it originally set its fixed prices.
- Eversource has already raised rates for some heating customers in New England by about 14% and is urging customers to take advantage of weatherization and energy efficiency programs to control rising costs.[9]
- The EIA estimates that the cost of heating oil will increase by 33% this winter. Prices are already on the rise in New England.[10]
- The fuel oil often used as backup for certain power plants in case of polar vortex-like weather events is reportedly not well-supplied.[11] Although meteorologists aren’t anticipating a severe winter for the region, it’s never clear when a polar vortex might develop.[12]
In the Near Term, Is There Any Relief in Sight?
What help is there this winter to keep costs down? Here are some rays of hope:
- Weatherization and Energy Efficiency Reduce Costs. Weatherization and energy efficiency will help control costs even when prices spike. Fortunately, the region is already reaping the cost- and energy-savings of past energy efficiency investments, keeping costs and energy demand lower than they otherwise would be.[13] There are efficiency programs right now that will help more families and businesses weatherize and conserve energy to cut costs.[14] Even in New Hampshire, where state energy regulators recently made the poorly timed decision to cut funding for cost-saving weatherization investments and customer support programs, there are options to control costs.[15]
- Federal and State Relief Programs Target Middle- and Low-Income Residents. The federal government has announced a new program that will use part of the $1.9 trillion COVID relief budget to help with utility bills, directing additional funds to utility financial assistance for both low and middle-income families, as well as emergency rental assistance.[16] In addition, most New England states have state-specific relief programs such as the UniteCT program in Connecticut to help residents stay warm and safe.[17]
- Mild Weather Could Lower Costs and Relieve Pressure on Supplies. Warmer than average weather in New England or other parts of the world could reduce stress on supply, and new oil deliveries could replenish backup fuel sources. Although prices are still up over 2020, they fell in November as compared to October in response to relatively mild weather.[18] Meteorologists are now predicting that temperatures will rise 10 to 20 degrees above average for an extended time across most of the U.S. this winter, including New England.[19] If this proves true, it could provide substantial relief.
What Is the Long-Term Solution?
Fossil fuel price volatility is not new in New England and won’t be solved by more gas pipelines. Fossil fuel supply and price volatility is an old phenomenon that has raised anxiety and stoked fear mongering about New England’s winter electricity prices and reliability for decades. Sometimes, politicians and companies that stand to benefit from the expanded use of natural gas argue it means we should install more gas pipelines. But pipelines would place a massive financial burden on New England consumers and could never eliminate the volatility that comes with resource-constrained fossil fuels imported into the region. In addition, more fossil fuels would cause more extreme weather events, driving up the costs of climate change further for New England’s communities. Common sense says no to any more costly fossil fuel infrastructure. On the contrary, the long-term solution is to eliminate reliance on fossil fuels.
Acadia Center is working with decision makers and communities across the region to advance solutions to fuel price volatility and the other energy challenges that affect New England. These solutions include weatherization, energy efficiency, and rapid decarbonization of the region’s energy mix.
[1] See U.S. Energy Information Administration (“EIA”), Short-Term Energy Outlook, Winter Fuels Outlook, October 2021, available at https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/WinterFuels.php.
[2] See id. (“Despite the high U.S. natural gas prices, futures prices for Henry Hub have traded at steep discounts to prices in Asia and Europe… This price differential has led to record volumes of U.S. LNG exports, especially to destinations in Asia and Europe. In addition, high prices in Europe and Asia have contributed to upward price pressure for U.S. natural gas, as those markets import more U.S. LNG cargoes.”).
[3] EIA, Today in Energy, February 2021 weather triggers largest monthly decline in U.S. natural gas production (May 10, 2021), available at https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=47896.
[4] L. Brun Hilbert and J.F. Hallai, Natural Gas Production in Extreme Weather, Pipeline & Gas Journal, June 2021, Vol. 248, No. 6, available at https://pgjonline.com/magazine/2021/june-2021-vol-248-no-6/guest-commentary/natural-gas-production-in-extreme-weather.
[5] Suzy Khimm and Joshua Eaton, NBC News, As deadly heat waves spread, access to air conditioning becomes a lifesaving question (Aug, 20, 2021), available at https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/deadly-heat-waves-spread-access-air-conditioning-becomes-lifesaving-question-n1277213.
[6] BBC, Belarus threatens to cut off gas to EU in border row (Nov. 11, 2021) (Alexander Lukashenko: “If they impose additional sanctions on us… what if we halt natural gas supplies?”), available at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59246899.
[7] https://www.necn.com/news/local/maine-electric-bills-set-for-big-jump-amid-worldwide-crunch-in-supply-and-demand/2619580/
[8] https://www.wmur.com/article/liberty-utilities-plans-to-increase-price-for-natural-gas-fixed-rate/38295359
[9] https://www.courant.com/business/hc-biz-winter-rising-energy-prices-20211103-sh7qkz2hivcchne4e47dssnpny-story.html
[10] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50116&src=email
[11] S&P Global Platts, ISO-NE Updates Power Generators Ahead of Winter Amid Supply Chain Constraints (October 1, 2021).
[12] https://www.nbcboston.com/weather/stories-weather/noaa-winter-snow-cold-forecast-for-massachusetts-new-england/2529727/
[13] https://acadiacenter.org/next-generation-energy-efficiency/
[14] E.g., https://www.masssave.com/saving/residential-rebates/home-insulation
[15] https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2021/11/25/the-high-cost-of-home-heating-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/?fbclid=IwAR3og4gqemK_GlwJLSXcp08VPFMj9Co2E5O06BlbIHce5X2Nh-tWVUYrNFU
[16] https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/heating-costs-biden-administration/index.html
[17] https://portal.ct.gov/Office-of-the-Governor/News/Press-Releases/2021/11-2021/Governor-Lamont-Advises-Residents-of-Efforts-To-Mitigate-Impact-of-Global-Increase-in-Energy-Costs
[18] EIA, Short-Term Energy Outlook (Dec. 7, 2021), available at https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/.
[19] https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/12/07/warm-winter-weather-united-states/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2wb7RzXLEHNeOGOovtokV7c1wJx4MV_4kqqKUaNENyBKDCKq6OEbRFz7o
I-Team: Homeowners Experience Long Delays Getting Promised Mass Save Rebates For Heat Pumps
BOSTON (CBS) — John Semas is thrilled with his new energy-efficient heat pumps he installed in his Norfolk home back in 2020. “I love it. It’s a great system,” he said.
Semas says the new system saves him hundreds of dollars a month on his heating and cooling costs.
Michael Kozuch installed heat pumps in his Provincetown condo to help reduce his carbon footprint and to add air conditioning, which he didn’t have before. “It’s extremely efficient. The cooling and heating works perfectly,” Kozuch said.
Heat pumps work by pulling heat from the outside air and using that energy to heat the home. It works in reverse during the summer to pull heat out of the home, keeping the living space cool. It’s all one system and can easily be retrofitted to work with your current heating system, even if you don’t have air conditioning.
Heat pump technology has been around for a while, but in recent years, it’s been improved to pull heat out of the air in colder climates, even when temperatures dip below freezing. The systems use a small amount of electricity to operate.
“A heat pump is probably the biggest thing that consumers can do to help fight the climate crisis,” explained Amy Boyd, Director of Policy at the environmental group Acadia Center, which holds a seat on the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Advisory Council.
According to Boyd, switching a home from oil heat to full electric using heat pumps is the equivalent of taking 12 cars off the road. That’s why the state set a goal of converting 100,000 homes a year to reduce green-house gas emissions by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050.
To reach these goals, the state is depending on homeowners getting millions of dollars in rebates offered by Mass Save. It’s a program run by the utilities, but you pay for it.
“It’s money that comes from a portion of the delivery charge on all of our electric and gas bills,” Boyd explained.
But Kozuch spent more than six months trying to get his rebate of $250 for his $3,000 heat pump.
“The rebate was part of the incentive. It helped make that final decision,” said Kozuch. “It’s frustrating.”
Semas’ system was much larger (more than $25,000), so his rebate was also larger. He spent over a year trying to get his money from Mass Save.
“Just shy of $6,000,” Semas said. “It ended up being complete chaos and disorganization.”
That’s a problem, according to Boyd, who explained that Mass Save just submitted a new three-year plan to the state that includes millions in new incentives for heat pumps.
“If it’s proving difficult for people to actually receive rebates, then we need to fix that administrative system,” she said.
When the I-Team reached out to Mass Save, a spokesperson said the following:
Energy efficiency is the most valuable tool that customers have to save money and reduce energy use, and we’re committed to providing an even more robust array of solutions while helping the Commonwealth achieve its goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 through our recently filed 2022-2024 plan. This plan also reflects the Mass Save Sponsor’s ongoing effort to improve the customer experience, including significant investments to promote heat pump adoption by raising customer awareness and understanding of clean technologies, offering one-on-one technical consultations, introducing helpful heat pump resources like our Heating Comparison Calculator, and building a residential Heat Pump Installer Network that will connect customers with qualified contractors who are experienced and trained to design heat pump systems.
Semas said that his customer experience was terrible, and he didn’t get all of his money until the I-Team reached out to Mass Save. “To think a homeowner can just carry that cost until someone from the news gets involved is not realistic,” he said.
So far, Mass Save is way behind on its goal of converting 100,000 homes a year.
The Massachusetts Attorney General tells us they also received a number of complaints about the Mass Save program.
The state is expected to approve Mass Save’s new three-year plan in January.
Read the full article at CBS Boston here.
Follow us