“We face a series of energy challenges,” said the speaker, economist Severin Borenstein of the Haas School of Business at U.C. Berkeley. The occasion was the Monday night plenary talk at the biannual meeting of the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) on energy use in building, held in late August at Asilomar Conference Grounds in Pacific Grove. Borenstein is often called to speak to groups about the economics of energy when energy prices are high, and he is less popular as a speaker when prices go down. To individuals, high energy prices are a problem, but this doesn’t represent a market failure according to him. Market failures exist when the price of oil does not reflect the real macroeconomic, geopolitical, and environmental costs associated with its purchase and use.

?

In the United States, we import two-thirds of our oil from other countries, many that are not interested in our mutual wellbeing, and many whose leaders use oil revenue to enrich themselves and oppress their people. We sometimes go to war with these countries. And our dependence on fossil fuels such as oil is degrading our environment.

?

So what is a government to do? The best choice according to Borenstein, Bill Gates, and others, is to tax “brown” energy, energy that costs us too much environmentally and in the other ways mentioned above. But people want their oil and gas cheap, and there is no political will to initiate carbon taxes right now in the United States or elsewhere. So the second best choice, which is the best choice in these circumstances, is to use information, regulation, and subsidies for green energy and green jobs. The trick is to know in what circumstances to apply what solution, and how to apply that solution.

?

Information can empower consumers to make better choices, but in some situations limiting consumer choice through regulation and standards is the better choice. Borenstein used the example of baby food. No one wants to choose between baby food certified fit for human consumption and the other kind. And subsidies can be good, but not subsidies that artificially favor one technology over another. Subsidies that attempt to pick a winner would only work if at the stage of research and development some government official could reliably know which technologies will survive the “valley of death” and make it successfully to the market. But government support of certain research and development that could have broad application in the market is good. Borenstein used the example of PV. The technology has matured through its infancy as part of the NASA space program, and through advances in integrated circuit, or “chip” design that took place largely through private companies in Silicon Valley.

Borenstein calls himself cynical. Maybe it is better to call him a realist—a very knowledgeable and articulate realist who people in charge of government energy policy should listen to, even though the winds of popular opinion make it hard for them to do the right thing.

Go here to see the original:
Berkeley Economist on Taking Economics Seriously In U.S. Energy Policy

I am writing on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regarding efforts to enhance the testing and verification program for all ENERGY STAR product categories, including appliances. This effort is focused on maintaining the value of the ENERGY STAR brand by ensuring labeled products deliver on their promises to the consumer.
?
To transition the ENERGY STAR labeling program away from self-certification, EPA will now require third-party certification of all qualifying product information. This will include qualification testing prior to product labeling conducted in an EPA-recognized lab, as well as post-market verification testing to ensure the product continues to meet program requirements. Test data will be reviewed and certified by third-party certification bodies (CBs).
?
Manufacturer-owned, unaccredited laboratories can conduct testing in the new program if they participate in a witnessed or supervised manufacturer testing program run by a CB. In that case, personnel from the CB witness the test and certify to EPA that the laboratory meets our requirements and the data is reliable.
?
In June, EPA finalized requirements for accreditation bodies and laboratories that seek recognition by the ENERGY STAR program. In late July, EPA released final draft requirements for certification bodies; those requirements will be final in mid-August. These documents require that organizations operate according to the relevant International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards, with some additional requirements specific to the ENERGY STAR program.
?
Accreditation bodies, laboratories, and certification bodies will be required to apply for EPA recognition to participate in the program. EPA is currently reviewing and accepting applications from accreditation bodies, and will begin reviewing applications from laboratories soon. Certification bodies represent the final group of organizations EPA anticipates recognizing as participants in the testing and verification scheme.
?
EPA continues to coordinate with a range of organizations seeking to establish certification programs for different product categories. The Agency is also currently in the? process of refining the eligibility criteria and partner commitments across all 60 product categories to reflect the new certification requirements.
?
For additional information, please visit: www.energystar.gov/testingandverification.
?
Keri Shoemaker
For EPA’s ENERGY STAR program
Office: 202.298.2174
Cell: 703.627.3634
kshoemaker@prrbiz.com
?

Originally posted here:
Enhancing the Testing and Verification of Energy Star Products

The Montana Weatherization Training Center would like to inform you of this week's episodes of WxTV, online and ready for viewing.
We'll be continuing with our 'Boiler Basics' series.
?
This week's episodes:
?
1.? Boiler Basics: Part 2 – Clean, Test, & Tune
?????????????? In Part 2 of this series, Mike will test the boiler's fuel gas delivery, efficiency and carbon monoxide level as well as giving cleaning recommendations.
?
2.? Boiler Basics: Part 3 – External Components? ?
?????????????? In the final segment of our boiler series, Mike will break down the external components of this two zone baseboard system and the things you need to look out for.
?
Click here to see them at:? http://weatherization.org/wxtv
?

Original post:
This Week’s Episode of WxTV: Boiler Basics Parts 2 and 3

By Tom Rooney
For the Home Energy Blog

Conservatives,? let's talk about energy. And why so many conservatives are so
wrong — so liberal, even — on wind and solar energy.

Let's start with a recent editorial from the home of 'free markets and free people,”
the Wall Street Journal. Photovoltaic solar energy, quoth the mavens, is a “speculative
and immature technology that costs far more than ordinary power.”

So few words, so many misconceptions. It pains me to say that because, like many
business leaders, I grew up on the Wall Street Journal and still depend on it.

But I cannot figure out why people who call themselves “conservatives” would
say solar or wind power is “speculative.” Conservatives know that word is usually
reserved to criticize free-market activity that is not approved by well, you
know who.

Today, around the world, more than a million people work in the wind and solar
business. Many more receive their power from solar.

Solar is not a cause, it is a business with real benefits for its customers.

Just ask anyone who installed their solar systems five years ago. Today, many
of their systems are paid off and they are getting free energy. Better still,
ask the owners of one of the oldest and most respected companies in America who
recently announced plans to build one of the largest solar facilities in the
country.

That would be Dow Jones, owners of the Wall Street Journal.

Now we come to “immature.” Again, the meaning is fuzzy. But in Germany, a country
1/3 our size in area and population, they have more solar than the United States.
This year, Germans will build enough solar to equal the output of three nuclear
power plants.

What they call immaturity our clients call profit-making leadership.

But let's get to the real boogie man: The one that “costs far more than ordinary
power.”

I've been working in energy infrastructure for 25 years and I have no idea what
the WSJ means by the words “ordinary power.” But, after spending some time with
Milton Friedman whom I met on many occasions while studying for an MBA at the
University of Chicago, I did learn about costs.

And here is what every freshman at the University of Chicago knows: There is
a difference between cost and price.

Solar relies on price supports from the government. Fair enough — though its
price is falling even faster than fossil fuels are rising.

But if Friedman were going to compare the costs of competing forms of energy,
he also would have wanted to know the cost of “ordinary energy.” Figured on the
same basis. This is something the self-proclaimed conservative opponents of solar
refuse to do.

But huge companies including Wall Mart, IBM, Target and Los Gatos Tomatoes figured
it out. And last year so did the National Academy of Sciences. It produced a
report on the Hidden Costs of Energy that documented how coal was making people
sick to the tune of $63 billion a year.

And that oil and natural gas had so many tax breaks and subsidies that were so
interwoven for so long, it was hard to say exactly how many tens of billions
these energy producers received courtesy of the U.S. Taxpayer.

Just a few weeks ago, the International Energy Agency said worldwide, fossil
fuels receive $550 billion in subsidies a year — 12 times what alternatives
such as wind and solar get.

Neither report factored in Global Warming or the cost of sending our best and
bravest into harm's way to protect our energy supply lines.

Whatever that costs, you know it starts with a T.

All this without hockey stick graphs, purloined emails or junk science.

When you compare the real costs of solar with the fully loaded real costs of
coal and oil and natural gas and nuclear power, apples to apples, solar is cheaper.

That's not conservative. Or liberal. That comes from an ideology older and more
reliable than both of those put together: Arithmetic.

Read the original here:
Why Conservatives Are Bad on Energy: It’s All About the Costs

WxTV is focusing once again on heating system servicing with our new 'Boiler Basics' series. This 3 part series will cover the information and techniques an HVAC technician should know for a routine home visit.
?
This week's episode is:
?
Boiler Basics: Part 1 – Combustion Air & Drafting
?
WxTV's master plumber Mike Campbell is back at it again, this time giving us the low-down on boiler systems. In Part 1 of this series, we'll see how he tests for, and proposes to resolve, a backdrafting problem.
?
Click here to see it:? http://weatherization.org/wxtv
?
If you would like to be removed from this list, please reply to this email with “REMOVE ME” typed in the subject line.
?
Lisa Daly
Montana Weatherization Training Center
Extension Housing and Environmental Health Program
Montana State University
406-586-0070 (office)
dalylisa@montana.edu

See the original post here:
Tune Into Wx TV—This week’s focus is Boiler Basics