Recently in Reweatherization Category

Many homes have moisture, combustion safety or indoor air quality problem that result from inadequate or non-functional energy systems.

• It is estimated that 40% of basements in Canada are damp and for children, the health effect of living in damp environments is equal to exposure to secondhand smoke (Fugler 2007).
• One in 15 homes in the US has elevated radon.
• 64 million homes have lead-based paint somewhere in the building.
• Over 20 million Americans have asthma and in 1990, asthma was the cause of 4500 deaths annually.  Many asthma triggers are found in indoor environments.

Energy improvements can potentially exacerbate or create new problems as well as fix existing problems.  We need a trained workforce to properly install energy efficiency projects.

Information and misinformation abounds and is often contradictory.  This can be overwhelming for home owners.

In many cases, true efficiency improvements are not the function of mere presence of a high efficiency product -- but rather, its appropriateness and correct installation.

Certification and quality assurance programs offered by organization help support a trained workforce.  These organizations offer programs:

• NATE
• BPI
• ACCA
• EPA Home Performance
• Energy Star

Three paradigms influence residential energy efficiency efforts:

1. the products
2. whole house or home performance
3. sustainability strategies

Product Rebate Programs

Products that sport rebates for high-efficiency models such as Energy Star rated appliances, CFLs, LEDs and high performance air conditioners can lower product costs and increase adoption.

Rebate programs can ramp up quickly, are easy to deploy, and fairly easy to evaluate.  While widget-based rebate programs have relatively low savings per unit, the high nuber of units and low per-unit transaction cost can yield significant and cost-effective energy reductions, particularly if the market is truly transformed after the removal of the incentive. 

One problem of rebate programs is that they usually do not address site-specific selection/application, installation, measure interaction or deal with side effects.  Because of these limitations, rebates can sometimes result in lost opportunities for more significant alternatives and create negative side effects.

Home Performance Programs
 
The whole house or home performance paradigm focuses on building system performance ith energy reduction as one part of the greater whole.  To date, whole house programs have mostly been delivered through low-income programs and are beginning to filter into for-profit energy efficiency programs. 

Typical costs range from $3-$35,000 per house; and energy reductions range from 5-35%.

A home performance job may include work and cost tht is directed to solving problems such as correcting a wet basement or crawl space, which may not generate direct energy savings.

Sustainable Paradigm
Current and long erm impact on the community and larger environment are considered in a sustainable paradigm that assesses the life cycle of building components and products consumed in house operation.  Land use, water use, and site environmental impact, as well as building durability and energy use are examined.  This is a "green building" approach.

Interest in USGBC and ASID's green guideline for existing homes, REGREEN, released in 2008 has exceeded the expectation of the developers (Yost 2008).

Deep Energy Reduction Paradigm

The deep energy reduction paradigm builds on the strengths of the previous paradigms.  The deep energy paradigm fits well in a sustainable paradigm that incorporates a design centered approach and inclusion of impacts beyond the homeowner's site.

While many strategies can be used to achieve deep energy reductions, universal principles are emerging.  To summarize them:

• A systems approach is necessary to optimize on-site and off-site benefits and interactions
• Good indoor air quality and building durability are integral elements
• Performance must be verified with a combination of diagnostic equipment and actual measurement of all benefits.
• Occupant behavior and community solutions are an integral part of the strategy
• Deep energy reductions should be viewed as an ongoing process to ensure proper maintenance and operation
• A trigger event can capture opportunities as they emerge, ie: roof, siding or HVAC system replacements.

It's important to identify and target communities or situations that offer the combination of lowest costs and/or greatest benefits, access to resources and motivated occupants.

SOURCE:  Linda Wigington, Affordable Comfort, Inc; "Deep Energy Reductions in Existing Homes; Strategies for Implementation"

Deep energy reduction is needed in the vast majority of housing stock.  To weatherize homes is to save energy and make homes more comfortable...and that saves money for the homeowner and the utility infrastructure.

• Energy use in the residential sector accounts for 21% of both the US energy use and carbon emissions, according to the Energy Information Agency.
• There are 124 million dwellings in the US and 13 million dwelings in Canada according to Community Solutions (2007). 
• It is estimated that 60% of the homes that will be present in 2050 are in existence today (NREL 2006). 
• In 2006, $228 billion was invested in US home improvements.

Those are the basic facts that homeowners and industry providers have to work with.

Motivations for weatherization -- optimizing energy use in homes stems from rising energy costs and the need to reduce GHG -- greenhouse gas emissions. 

Affordable Comfort proposes that it is possible to cut energy use in existing North American homes by 70-90%.  The benefits of weatherization, or "deep energy reduction" can deliver benefits over the life of a dwelling -- both cost savings, and comfort of residents with higher indoor air quality and durability.  

Such deep energy strategies require more than technology -- they also require behavioral choices and community-based strategies. 

An ACI Summit was held in 2007 that resulting in a sharing of strategies to promote "deep energy reductions" by 100 housing, building science and energy efficiency experts.

Building industry assumptions are being redefined based on the confluence of political, social, environmental and technical concerns being raised and examined.  Transforming the physical and institutional infrastructure to support rather than threaten community sustainability is seen as necessary...but challenging.

Weatherization and Energy Efficiency Solutions

The solutions lie in how we design, construct, finance, maintain, operate and renovate our homes that have the unrelenting habit of becoming outmoded and inefficient over their useful life spans.

Weatherization and Energy Efficiency Reality Check

We've come to accept several flawed assumptions that have resulted in choices that have been made...such as poorly insulated houses:

Flaw:  The supply and cost of energy and water are predictable.
Reality: In many regions energy and potable water supplies are becoming less certain and more costly. 

Flaw:  Climate and weather events are stable.
Reality:  The earth is a volatile, ever moving planet, and increasingly disruptive weather events (severe rain, wind, ice storms and drought) are predicted to worsen with climate change.
 
Flaw: Energy use is value neutral and our patterns of use and energy sources have no ethical or environmental consequences.
Reality:  The costs of geopolitical conquest, conflict, greenhouse gases and the environmental impact of extraction, generation and consumption are not reflected in the price we pay for energy.  Subsidies for harmful forms of energy have encouraged waste, abuse and economic impacts far beyond the sectors of the economy that focus on energy.     
 
Flaw:  New construction will save the day.
Reality:  It's easy to assume that new building codes would exceed former requirements.  However, the average energy consumption for household in new housing is greater, and growing, than the average energy use of existing homes. 

Flaw:  Energy and other resources are not connected.
Reality:  The link between water and energy has been overlooked.  In the US, one half gallon of water is used to produce each kWh of electricity and 20% of the annual stationary energy consumption is needed to pump, treat, and process potable water and waste water. 

"Saving energy saves water AND saving water saves energy."  Klein 2008)

Flaw:  Energy use can be measures on a per square foot basis.
Reality:  Trends in increasing house size, fewer people per household, and increased use of electricity rather than direct use of fuels are neutralizing the significant efficiency gains that have resulted from better codes, appliance standards, and increased use of energy efficient lighting.

Flaw:  Buildings don't last forever!
Reality:  Buildings represent 85% of the US fixed capital assets with a life expectancy of 50 to 100 years.  They hav ethe slowest turnover of any major kind of infrastructure (Lovins 2007).  Existing homes represent a huge resource and potential for reduced energy use.

Flaw:  Technology will save us!
Reality:  To succeed, a critical complex web of perceptual changes are needed.    We need many strategies that tap our capacity to envision, think, act, create, and implement solutions.  We need strategies that empower the population and industries, informs us as citizens, and provides transparency with feedback processes that make it easy to measure usage and progress against a goal.  We also need to ensure accountability of all stakeholders.   And we need flexibility to accomodate local and regional variables that result from America's vast array of weather patterns, natural resources, economies of scale...and diversity.   
 
Reference: Linda Wigington, Affordable Comfort, Inc (ACI)

Funding announced June , 2009

California ($74,324,424 awarded today) will leverage a network of over 50 non-profits, local governments, and community action associations to perform weatherization services at over 50,000 homes.

Prior to weatherizing a home, weatherization providers will use national auditing tools to conduct home energy audits that will help inform which weatherization activities should occur in a particular home.

In order to ensure quality, the state will also mandate that a third party inspect all weatherized properties, measuring performance based on the quality of work and the speed in which it is implemented.

Additionally, since the program will greatly increase the demand for jobs in the energy efficiency sector, the state will follow the recommendations of the California Green Collar Jobs Council by employing members of the

• California Conservation Corps,
• Youthbuild,
• and other youth employment groups.

Outreach for the program will be conducted through canvassing neighborhoods, local advertising, and by cooperating with landlords and property managers.

After demonstrating successful implementation of their plan, the state will receive more than $92 million in additional funding, for a total of more than $185 million.

On June 18, 2009, the Department of Energy  announced provision of more than $453 million in Recovery Act funding to expand weatherization assistance programs in 15 additional states.

These funds, along with additional funds to be disbursed after the states meet certain Recovery Act milestones, will help these states achieve their goal of weatherizing more than 165,000 homes, lowering energy costs for low-income families that need it, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and creating green jobs across the country. 

The following states will receive 40% of their total weatherization funding authorized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act today:

• California,
  
• Delaware,
  
• District of Columbia,
  
• Florida,
  
• Maryland,
  
• Montana,
  
• North Carolina,
  
• North Dakota,
  
• Nebraska,
  
• Nevada,
  
• Ohio,
  
• South Carolina,
  
• South Dakota,
  
• Utah, and
• West Virginia.
  

Under the Recovery Act, states may spend up to 20% of funds to hire and train workers.

"These awards demonstrate the Obama Administration's strong commitment to  creating jobs and doing important work for the American people--while ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly," said Secretary Chu. "Today's investments will save money for hard working families, reduce pollution, strengthen local economies and help move America toward a clean energy future."

DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program will be available to families making up to 200% of the federal poverty level--or about $44,000 a year for a family of four.

Weatherization projects allow low-income families to save money by making their homes more energy efficient, which results in average savings of 32% for heating bills and savings of hundreds of dollars per year on overall energy bills. States will spend approximately $6,500 to weatherize each home.

The funding allocations for the Weatherization Assistance Program follow a stage-gate process: on March 12, funding allocations by state were announced and the initial 10% of total funding was available to states and territories to support planning and ramp-up activities; comprehensive state applications were due on May 12; following a DOE reviews for each state, 40% allocations are awarded; and the remaining 50% of funds will be released when states meet reporting, oversight, and accountability milestones required by the Recovery Act.

This installment adds to the initial 10% of the states' funding allocations that were awarded previously for training and ramp-up activities. Following a review of their comprehensive state plans, these 15 states have now received 50% of their Recovery Act Weatherization Assistance Program funding. Arizona, Kansas, Mississippi and Oregon previously received this 40% funding allocation.

The Recovery Act includes a strong commitment to oversight and accountability, while emphasizing the necessity of rapidly awarding funds to help create new jobs and stimulate local economies.

The living standards of U.S. households are traditionally measured by income.

This report takes a different approach.

Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP)

It measures living standards in terms of extended measures of well-being of households tracked in the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to help deepen our knowledge about household conditions in ways not captured by money alone.

Some aspects of well-being, such as fear of crime or quality of local public services, may be only loosely connected with money. Other measures are more closely related to income but can also be effected by factors such as the cost of living, age, disability status, and sudden changes in circumstances.

Extended measures of well-being provide a more complete and detailed picture of household living conditions in the United States than income alone provides.

Well-being Metrics

The U.S. Census Bureau tracks extended measures of well-being in the SIPP.2.  The SIPP's "Extended Measures of Well-Being" topical module, on which this report is based, covers five broad domains:

(1) appliances and electronic goods, such as possession of refrigerators, landline and cellular telephones, and computers;

(2) housing conditions, including level of satisfaction with overall home repair, adequate living space, and sufficient privacy;

(3) neighborhood conditions and community services, such as: road conditions and the presence of abandoned buildings; satisfactory police, fire, and medical services; and attitudes towards local schools;

(4) meeting basic needs, including the ability to pay bills in full, to avoid eviction, and to have sufficient food; and

(5) the expectation of help, should need arise, from friends, family, and the community. For this report, extended measures of well-being are used to describe living conditions in the United States for the time period 1992-2003.

28 Million Eligible FIRST TIME Weatherization Homes

DOE reminds Grantees and local agencies that in selecting previously weatherized homes to revisit, there still remain more than 28 million federally eligible households that have received no Weatherization services to date.

Reweatherizing Homes

DOE's Weatherization Program Grantees and local agencies can weatherize homes previously weatherized September 30, 1993, and earlier.

Advanced Energy Audit and Health and Safety Concerns

DOE gives Grantees the flexibility to revisit those homes weatherized prior to 1993 that may not have received the full complement of Weatherization services, including the use of an advanced energy audit or addressing health and safety concerns.

Disaster Planning and Relief

Disaster Planning and Relief  allows additional work to be done on homes due to natural disasters.

Documentation of DOE Funded Projects

It is important both to DOE and the Weatherization Network that the most accurate information on how many units were completed with DOE funds are reported. This information will not only help DOE to meet its performance goals, but also help portray the Program in the best light to the Congress and other interested parties.

Meeting performance goals is paramount to the Program, attracting higher appropriations in the future and also assisting Grantees and local agencies with their leveraging efforts.

Grantees should ensure that their local agencies report all units in which DOE funds are used as DOE completions. DOE is aware that this may be difficult where multiple sources of funds are used to weatherize a unit or a complicated leveraging agreement has been reached with non- Federal partners.

To assist Grantees and local agencies in determining what a DOE weatherized unit is, DOE offers the following definition.

A DOE Weatherized unit is: A dwelling on which a DOE-approved energy audit or priority list has been applied and weatherization work has been completed.

As funds allow, the DOE measures installed on this unit have a Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR) of 1.0 or greater, but also may include any necessary energy-related health and safety measures. The use of DOE funds on this unit may include, but are not limited to auditing, testing, measure installation, inspection, or use of DOE equipment and/or vehicles, or if DOE provides the training and/or administrative funds. Therefore, a dwelling unit that meets both the definition of a DOE weatherized unit and has DOE funds used directly on it must be counted as a DOE completed unit.