Over the last two decades, utility ratepayer funding for energy efficiency programs - and the associated energy savings - has seen both booms and busts. Currently, about 35 states implement ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs, with a total U.S. budget of $3.1 billion in 2008, approximately 80% of which is concentrated in just ten states (CEE 2008).2 However, a proliferation of new state-level policies enacted over the past several years suggests that the next decade may see a dramatic and sustained increase in overall funding levels, and a fundamental re-drawing of the energy efficiency map. These new state energy efficiency policies reflect a variety of concerns, including the increasing cost and siting challenges of building new generation and transmission, fuel cost and supply risks, and the potential cost of future carbon regulations. Within the past three years, for example, eleven states have adopted energy efficiency portfolio (or resource) standards (EEPS or EERS) that establish specific long-term savings targets that utilities are obligated to meet, and at least three other states are currently considering the same. A growing number of states have recently established laws requiring utilities to acquire all available cost-effective energy efficiency. Regulators in several Western states have also recently revised integrated resource planning (IRP) and demand-side management (DSM) planning rules to require more robust analysis of the resource potential and benefits of energy efficiency, which has resulted in increased savings targets for their energy efficiency portfolios (Hopper et al. 2008). Finally, regulators and utilities in many states are beginning to look more closely at regulatory incentive mechanisms to better align utility financial interests with improvements in customer energy efficiency. We examined energy efficiency policies on the books or in the pipeline in all 50 states, along with recent IRPs and DSM plans, and developed low, medium and high projections of future energy efficiency spending and savings. Depending on how aggressively and effectively states implement these policies, we estimate that spending on ratepayer-funded energy efficiency could increase from $3.1 billion in 2008 to more than $12 billion (nominal dollars) per year by 2020 in our high case, a growth rate in spending of about 12% per year. Annual electricity savings nationally could triple from an estimated 0.3% of retail electricity sales in 2008 to 0.9% of retail electricity sales in 2020. In the low and medium scenarios, ratepayer funding for electric and gas energy efficiency in the U.S. would increase to $5.4 and $7.5 billion, respectively, by 2020. What are the implications of such a scale-up of ratepayer-funded energy efficiency activity for national energy policy, such as a national EEPS or future carbon regulations? Can a ramp-up of this scale be achieved, and what practical constraints might slow these efforts? This paper addresses these questions by first providing an overview of recent trends in state policies pertaining to ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs in the U.S. The paper then presents our set of projections of future spending and savings from such programs, highlighting key themes. Projected energy savings are compared to what might be required under a future national EEPS (or broader clean energy standard that includes energy efficiency), in order to gauge the potential incremental impact of such policies. In addition, the carbon emission reductions associated with our projection of energy savings from ratepayer-funded programs is compared to the total emission reductions that might be required under the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (aka, the Waxman-Markey bill), which was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June 2009 and would establish a cap on total greenhouse gas emission for many sectors of the U.S. economy. Last, the paper discusses some of the major obstacles and challenges that states and program administrators may face over the coming decade, as they seek to dramatically ramp-up ratepayer-funded energy efficiency program activity, as projected.

The electric power industry has been transformed over the past forty years, becoming more reliable and resilient while meeting environmental goals. A big question now is how to prevent backsliding. Pollution, Politics, and Power tells the story of the remarkable transformation of the electric power industry over the last four decades. Electric power companies have morphed from highly polluting regulated monopolies into competitive, deregulated businesses that generate, transmit, and distribute cleaner electricity. Power companies are investing heavily in natural gas and utility-scale renewable resources and have stopped building new coal-fired plants. They facilitate end-use efficiency and purchase excess electricity produced by rooftop solar panels and backyard wind turbines, helping to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. But these beneficial changes have come with costs. The once-powerful coal industry is on the edge of ruin, with existing coal-fired plants closing and coal mines shutting down. As a result, communities throughout Appalachia suffer from high unemployment and reduced resources, which have exacerbated a spiraling opioid epidemic. The Trump administration’s efforts to revive the coal industry by scaling back environmental controls and reregulating electricity prices have had little effect on the coal industry’s decline. Major advances therefore come with warning signs, which we must heed in charting the continuing course of sustainable electricity. In Pollution, Politics, and Power, Thomas O. McGarity examines the progress made, details lessons learned, and looks to the future with suggestions for building a more sustainable grid while easing the economic downsides of coal’s demise.

This book provides a comprehensive overview of the practice of sustainability through a diverse range of case studies spanning across varied fields and areas of expertise. It provides a clear indication as to the contemporary state of sustainability in a time faced by issues such as global climate change, challenges of environmental justice, economic globalization and environmental contamination. The Palgrave Handbook of Sustainability explores three broad themes: Environmental Sustainability, Social Sustainability and Economic Sustainability. The authors critically explore these themes and provide insight into their linkages with one another to demonstrate the substantial efforts currently underway to address the sustainability of our planet. This handbook is an important contribution to the best practises on sustainability, drawn from many different examples across the fields of engineering, geology, anthropology, sociology, biology, chemistry and religion.

Collaboratives for energy efficiency have a long and successful history and are currently used, in some form, in more than half of the states. Historically, many state utility commissions have used some form of collaborative group process to resolve complex issues that emerge during a rate proceeding. Rather than debate the issues through the formality of a commission proceeding, disagreeing parties are sent to discuss issues in a less-formal setting and bring back resolutions to the commission. Energy efficiency collaboratives take this concept and apply it specifically to energy efficiency programs--often in anticipation of future issues as opposed to reacting to a present disagreement. Energy efficiency collaboratives can operate long term and can address the full suite of issues associated with designing, implementing, and improving energy efficiency programs. Collaboratives can be useful to gather stakeholder input on changing program budgets and program changes in response to performance or market shifts, as well as to provide continuity while regulators come and go, identify additional energy efficiency opportunities and innovations, assess the role of energy efficiency in new regulatory contexts, and draw on lessons learned and best practices from a diverse group. Details about specific collaboratives in the United States are in the appendix to this guide. Collectively, they demonstrate the value of collaborative stakeholder processes in producing successful energy efficiency programs.

Since the spring of 2009, billions of federal dollars have been allocated to state and local governments as grants for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects and programs. The scale of this American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) funding, focused on shovel-ready projects to create and retain jobs, is unprecedented. Thousands of newly funded players - cities, counties, states, and tribes - and thousands of programs and projects are entering the existing landscape of energy efficiency programs for the first time or expanding their reach. This book focuses on a selected set of ARRA-funded energy efficiency programs administered by state energy offices.

Electric industry restructuring requires state regulators and legislators to re-examine the purposes served by and the continuing need for ratepayer-funded energy-efficiency programs, as well as the mechanisms to collect funds for these programs and the institutions appropriate to administer them. This paper offers background to these issues and a series of recommendations based on analysis of recent state experiences. Our recommendations are summarized.