Building Retrofits Could Save $1 Trillion in Energy Costs Over 10 Years
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Steve Seuser
Mar 16, 2012, 1:55:14 PM3/16/12
to Sustainable DC Energy
According to a new study by Deutsche Bank and the Rockefeller Foundation estimate that a $279 billion investment in energy efficient retrofits could:
Read a brief article about the study at http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/cities/energy-efficient-retrofits-could-save-the-us-1-trillion/2345?tag=nl.e660
Or read the full study, “United States Building Energy Efficiency Retrofits: Market Sizing and Financing Models.”
We need affordable financing to make these retrofits happen.
Steve Seuser
Matthew Slavin
Mar 16, 2012, 6:28:11 PM3/16/12
to Steve Seuser, Sustainable DC Energy, Sustainable DC Climate
Steve,
Thanks for bringing this to every one's attention – re: the need for an effective financing vehicle.
I had an opportunity to sit in on a webinar on the Connecticut Clean Energy Investment and Finance Authority today. This may be the first state sponsored green bank in the country dedicated to specifically providing capital for clean energy investments. I've received requests to share the webinar's material, and this is attached.
From what I understand, there are been three different schemes circulating for funding sustainable energy and business development. One is a People's Bank, under which funds that the District currently deposits in commercial banks would be redirected to be deposited in a DC taxpayer owned bank. This idea is modeled after the Bank of North Dakota. The concept is that such a bank would funnel investment towards more socially beneficial uses than the current system of depositing the District's funds in commercial banks.
As I've written before, I think this approach is unlikely. For one thing the District has been under supervision of a financial control board in the past and I think this approach would be very suspect and lead to a downgrade in the District's credit rating. Also, it needs to be understood that such a People's Bank would necessitate that District taxpayers, as opposed to the FDIC, insure a People's Bank against failure. I think that this is unlikely.
Another approach suggested is for the powers of the SEU to be expanded to enable to SEU to engage in debt financing to increase it's available capital. However the SEU's mandate is focused upon energy efficiency. It dos not address renewables and making capital available, in particular, for investments in clean transportation, a significant issue that needs to be addressed. For example, infrastructure to expand the market for natural gas vehicles, which produce significantly fewer emissions than petroleum fueled vehicles. Or for expanding infrastructure to expand use of electric vehicles.
The Connecticut Green Bank model can provide investment capital for the clean transportation sector and renewables. This is why I have argued that the Green Bank model is both the most feasible and advantageous.
If we are to make progress in expanding the capital needed needed to grow DC's green energy economy, I think we need to coalesce around a single model. Otherwise I fear we will spin our wheels. I suggest that if others are interested, we arrange a meeting to discuss the issues and work toward a consensus on the best path forward for a financing model.
Best,
Mtt adv
Thanks for bringing this to every one's attention – re: the need for an effective financing vehicle.
I had an opportunity to sit in on a webinar on the Connecticut Clean Energy Investment and Finance Authority today. This may be the first state sponsored green bank in the country dedicated to specifically providing capital for clean energy investments. I've received requests to share the webinar's material, and this is attached.
From what I understand, there are been three different schemes circulating for funding sustainable energy and business development. One is a People's Bank, under which funds that the District currently deposits in commercial banks would be redirected to be deposited in a DC taxpayer owned bank. This idea is modeled after the Bank of North Dakota. The concept is that such a bank would funnel investment towards more socially beneficial uses than the current system of depositing the District's funds in commercial banks.
As I've written before, I think this approach is unlikely. For one thing the District has been under supervision of a financial control board in the past and I think this approach would be very suspect and lead to a downgrade in the District's credit rating. Also, it needs to be understood that such a People's Bank would necessitate that District taxpayers, as opposed to the FDIC, insure a People's Bank against failure. I think that this is unlikely.
Another approach suggested is for the powers of the SEU to be expanded to enable to SEU to engage in debt financing to increase it's available capital. However the SEU's mandate is focused upon energy efficiency. It dos not address renewables and making capital available, in particular, for investments in clean transportation, a significant issue that needs to be addressed. For example, infrastructure to expand the market for natural gas vehicles, which produce significantly fewer emissions than petroleum fueled vehicles. Or for expanding infrastructure to expand use of electric vehicles.
The Connecticut Green Bank model can provide investment capital for the clean transportation sector and renewables. This is why I have argued that the Green Bank model is both the most feasible and advantageous.
If we are to make progress in expanding the capital needed needed to grow DC's green energy economy, I think we need to coalesce around a single model. Otherwise I fear we will spin our wheels. I suggest that if others are interested, we arrange a meeting to discuss the issues and work toward a consensus on the best path forward for a financing model.
Best,
Mtt adv
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sustainable DC Energy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sustainabl...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sustainable-dc-e...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sustainable-dc-energy?hl=en.
larry martin
Mar 16, 2012, 6:49:09 PM3/16/12
to Matthew Slavin, Steve Seuser, Sustainable DC Energy, Sustainable DC Climate
Matt, point of clarification regarding the SEU - DC is of course authorized to bond in support of SEU investments. The CAEA statute includes as the second among 6 requirements for the SEU the following: (2) Increase renewable energy generating capacity in the District of Columbia; so, it does include provisions to promote renewables. Although is not engaged in addressing transporation, the statute allows for it. Initial thinking in the RFP was to not take on too much too fast. However, the SEU in concept and law is enabled to address all the issues you have identified. The basic flaw in the SEU structure is that it only exists as a year to year renewable contract and thus lacks the institutional permanence necessary for many of its possible functions (such as longer term financing of projects). The SEU advisory board hopes to be fixing that in time.
Larry Martin
Matthew Slavin
Mar 16, 2012, 6:59:53 PM3/16/12
to larry martin, Steve Seuser, Sustainable DC Energy, Sustainable DC Climate
Larry,
Thanks for the clarification. I met with the SEU recently and came away with the distinct impression that the focus was upon efficiency, and my prior exchanges did not point to transportation as being a part of the SEU mandate, or at least SEU authority.
I do think it would be useful if there is interest to get together and develop a single model to advocate. I don't have the time to take the lead on this but I'm hoping someone else does, although I would be interested in being involved.
Best,
Matt
Thanks for the clarification. I met with the SEU recently and came away with the distinct impression that the focus was upon efficiency, and my prior exchanges did not point to transportation as being a part of the SEU mandate, or at least SEU authority.
I do think it would be useful if there is interest to get together and develop a single model to advocate. I don't have the time to take the lead on this but I'm hoping someone else does, although I would be interested in being involved.
Best,
Matt
larry martin
Mar 16, 2012, 9:12:43 PM3/16/12
to Matthew Slavin, Steve Seuser, Sustainable DC Energy, Sustainable DC Climate
No dispute with your impressions of current activity at the SEU. Although they supported incentive grants for solar installations last year, they have no plans to this year. The REIP remains in the hands of DDOE, and we'll see how that goes. They are focused on efficiency, but they have yet to receive their full funding which statutorily comes into effect next year. The SEU Advisory Board discussed the role of the SEU in advancing energy efficient transportation - particularly with regard to electric vehicles, and it was decided to not advance an active program in this area initially - though the stature allows for this eventuality.
If this string of discussion is exploring a single model to advocate for, I for one favor the SEU. In its current formulation, its less than ideal. However, it has the capacity to incorporate best practices and to evolve in the face of a evolving market. I'm particularly encouraged by the involvement of organizations such as the Inst. for Market Transformation who bring savvy insights to just what they say they're about - not to mention the Vermont Energy Investment Corp - in my opinion among the brightest stars on the progressive energy stage. I agree, we need to pump up the renewables component of their program.
Larry Martin
Marina Rota
Mar 22, 2012, 9:27:08 PM3/22/12
to Steve Seuser, Matthew Slavin, Sustainable DC Energy, Sustainable DC Climate
This is a must-read paper for those wondering what's going on in EE financing around the country. See page 17 for summary of EE financing market players, both commercial and mission-based. --- On Fri, 3/16/12, Matthew Slavin <matti...@gmail.com> wrote: |
|
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages