• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

U.S. States Ranked By Energy Efficiency In Recently Released Scorecard

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,664
Location
So. CA
U.S. States Ranked By Energy Efficiency In Recently Released Scorecard

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/23/top-energy-efficient-states_n_1025831.html

10/23/11 06:28 PM

The fifth edition of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) scorecard was recently released, and shows that even through uncertain economic times, U.S. states are generating cost savings, promoting technological innovation and stimulating growth by implementing energy efficiency as their key strategy, according to EC&M.

The Los Angeles Times reported that the ACEEE Executive Director Steven Nadel said: "Energy efficiency is America's abundant, untapped energy resource and the states continue to press forward to reap its economic and environmental benefits."

Massachusetts took the lead in energy efficiency in the U.S. this year, bumping California from its four year winning streak, according to the scorecard.

Thomas Bourgeois, Co-Director of the U.S. Department of Energy Northeast Clean Energy Application Center said: "The legislation requires electric utilities in Massachusetts to purchase all available energy efficiency improvements that cost less than it does to generate power," He added: "It has been a major boon to energy efficiency in Massachusetts over the past three years," according to Forbes Magazine.

The ACEEE report says of Massachusetts: "Massachusetts has a long record of success implementing energy efficiency programs."

"The state took a major leap forward in 2008, however," It writes, "when it passed the Green Communities Act, which established energy efficiency as the state’s 'first-priority' resource, creating an Energy Efficiency Advisory Council to collaborate with utilities to develop statewide efficiency plans in three-year cycles. The three-year plan in operation aims to achieve electric savings equal to 2.4 percent and natural gas savings equal to 1.5 percent of sales in 2012, which amounts to the most aggressive EERS target in the nation. The Green Communities Act is ultimately expected to lead to an investment of $2.2 billion in energy efficiency and demand resources between 2010 and 2012."

"Thanks to our investments in innovation and infrastructure, Massachusetts is now leading the nation in energy efficiency," said Governor Deval Patrick. "Through our Green Communities Act, we set aggressive goals and laid the foundation for greater investment in energy efficiency – and now we are proud to be a model for the nation and world," he said in a press release.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the scores analyzed states (plus District of Columbia) based on: "weighted criteria that gave more credit to states that offered utility and public benefits funds and also had the best efficiency programs and policies (20 points possible). That was followed in importance by transportation, building energy codes and state government initiatives."

Take a look at the 10 most energy-efficient states, and then the 10 least energy-efficient states

Beating California to take top place for the first time, Massachusetts now leads the way in U.S. energy efficiency after coming in second for the two previous years, according to a press release.

The state scores 45.5 points out of a possible 50.

"This ranking affirms the policy choices Massachusetts has made: prioritizing cost-effective energy efficiency as the lowest cost, cleanest energy resource, emphasizing the importance of a strong, diverse stakeholder council, and committed program administrators," said Daniel Sosland, Executive Director of Environment Northeast.

#1- Massachusetts

#2 - California

#3 - New York

#4 - Oregon

#5 - Vermont

#5 - Washington

#5 - Rhode Island

#8 - Minnesota

#8 - Connecticut

#10 - Maryland

THE LEAST ENERGY-EFFICIENT STATES

#42 - South Dakota

#43 - Alabama

#44 - Missouri

#44 - West Virginia

#46 - South Carolina

#47 - Oklahoma

#48 - Kansas

#49 - Mississippi

#50 - Wyoming

#51 - North Dakota
 
jpranch said:
Wyoming #50? We are working very hard to remedy that!
"weighted criteria that gave more credit to states that offered utility and public benefits funds and also had the best efficiency programs and policies (20 points possible). That was followed in importance by transportation, building energy codes and state government initiatives."

I wouldn't try to hard, look at the top 10. All very liberal, high tax nanny states. The bottom 10 mostly self sufficient goverments
 
I think energy efficiency is the next frontier for modern societies. We could have the ability to maintain the same productivity while spending a fraction of what we currently spend on energy. While we are busy dismissing the potential gains and benefits, China is investing heavily in energy efficiency and will soon take the lead in development and implementation. The US has traditionally gained our advantage in the world by being a leader and recognizing opportunities. Energy efficiency to me is equal to saying that we want to optimize our economy. Or, if we want to remain competitive in the world market place, we need to reduce the amount of energy going into the manufacturing process.
 
mtlogcabin, your points are well taken. The work we are doing here in Wyoming is just to establish a bare bones prescriptive minimum plus nothing. It does not matter weather the DOE mandates 2017 or 2117 for adoption of the IECC. It's just not going to happen here.
 
If I could just get the guinea pig to say ROW...ROW...ROW..I could get enough power to run this compute.......r.

pc...1
 
That list reversed would be More Freedom/Less Freedom, IMO.

Let's drink the Kool Aid and litter the landscape with wind turbines and solar panel farms...mighty scenic I'd say.
 
Ummm I thought we had added some states during the last presidential election campaign.

MAY 2008 “ Barack Obama

"It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."

You know one of those executive order type things, add a few states and give them a czar or two to keep em on the straight and narrow.
 
One thing that is certainly missing in the analysis is the cost of energy in each state. Most of the top ranked ones have very expensive energy costs thus people cannot afford to use the energy they really want to. Also if you look at the states that produce fuels, Montana, Alaska, Texas, Oklahoma, Kentucky and West Virginia they're all very low on the list I'm sure partially because they have in abundance of available energy and the energy costs (especially for electricity) are probably quite well.
 
Washington is #5 and our electrical rate for city hall is 7.5 cents a Kwh which is very cheap because we are mostly hydro. Washington State and utilities companies realize that we are at our electrical capacity and new sources of energy would be natural gas or coal at a significant cost increase. Therefor, it is cheaper to save power than to produce new power.

As for the discussion about energy savings = loss of freedom, I think the issue should be framed as a simple economics issue. If our factories use less power, they are more competitive. For example, I still see 400 watt metal halide lamps installed in factories and warehouses. Use 6 tube t-8 high bay lamps and save 33% with twice the lamp life. I see large electrical motors rebuilt at standard efficiency (85%). Considering 90% of the cost of a motor is energy, buying a Nema premium efficiency replacement motor (95.5%) would pay for itself in a couple of years with the saved energy. Would these changes jeopardize anyone's freedom? I think they would lower the operating costs of the business and help to make their products more competitive in a world market.
 
i don't rightly know off the top of my head what electricity costs in Vermont, but gas for heating was about 2.95 a gallon when I left, for your car, closer to 2.80. fuel oil was up to around 2.80 a gallon as well. the VT energy code, which strangley enough is kind of "self enforced" that is there are no "inspectors" (bnot that i've ever seen) alot of folks burn wood for back up and primary heat, when it gets to -30f in the winter, a draft free, heat holding house is important. thers a lot of drafty old farmhouses too, but they often get refit as pipes freeze and fuel gets too expensive. AC is seldom used, we don't get that hot in the winter, most electric heat was removed years ago simply due to cost (that is a bank breaker) .I think CVPS is inspectiong some new houses, I've heard of a few ICF homes that got 5star energy ratings. We also have VT Yankee (the nuke plant) in VErnon, with a contract with hydro quebec, so it keeps costs down. school districts are installing solar, GMP just built a large qind farm and theres another going up in Lowell. it's funny, every one wants "alternative power", but no one wants it their back yard. go figure
 
incognito said:
Just more green BS. Tell me what you want I and I will get the numbers to support it.
In post # 15, I mentioned saving that I found and gave the amount of savings. I could provided documentation to validate the energy savings if requested. My point is, if we can achieve the same opjectives with less energy, we are doing no harm. If more energy saving examples would be helpful, I have plenty. Is this going to be "Just say no" or "Just say know".
 
Considering 90% of the cost of a motor is energy, buying a Nema premium efficiency replacement motor (95.5%) would pay for itself in a couple of years with the saved energy.
As you stated and most bean counters would agree, there needs to be a reasonable payback period on the additional investment cost vesus the life of the equipment/product. Part of the problem with hybrid electric cars, most of the fuel savings weighed against the additional cost may payback in x amount of miles driven but is then lost when the batteries need to be replaced in about 3 years. Buildings are no different.
 
Top