Legislators to Promote Energy Conservation

As state legislators push to stabilize electricity rates and bring new power sources online, a slew of conservation proposals is quickly materializing as another way to help solve the state’s energy crisis.

The proposals, which range from replacing old air conditioners with energy-efficient new ones to instituting tiered rates that penalize voracious users, are among myriad ways that legislators believe that demand for energy in California can be brought more in line with the state’s inadequate supplies.

“Every kilowatt-hour saved is one less that has to be found,” said Sen. Byron Sher, the Stanford Democrat who heads the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.

Sher has introduced a nearly $1-billion conservation measure, SB 5X, containing 19 programs aimed at reducing consumption by 1,500 megawatts, about the amount of energy produced by a large generator.

Gov. Gray Davis, who according to a spokesman has taken to wearing a sweatsuit in his Sacramento home and lowering his thermostat to a brisk 58 degrees at night, has also emphasized conservation.

But he has committed a more modest sum--$404 million--to advance energy savings, including $75 million in rebates to people who trade in energy-guzzling appliances for efficient models and $95 million to encourage businesses to replace old equipment.

The Davis plan would essentially double state conservation spending, with the goal of cutting usage by 10%, in part by forcing retailers to slash their outdoor lighting during off hours.

In addition to Sher’s measure, Davis is reviewing a proposal by Senate Republican Leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga. The Brulte bill, SB 17X, would create a tax break to cover 75% of what it cost taxpayers to buy and install solar energy systems on their properties. Republicans would also like to give consumers who reduce their aggregate power usage by more than 10% either a tax break or a rebate.

The proposals were included in a plan floated by GOP legislators last week that tilted heavily toward creating new supplies.

“We’re not able to in fact conserve our way out of the problem,” Assemblyman Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks) said at a news conference.

The debate over supply versus demand brings to light key philosophical differences among legislators, with some conservative members of the Legislature arguing that vast sums of public money would be better spent bolstering supplies.

Republican Sen. Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks said it would be a huge mistake for conservation to be used as an excuse to not increase supply. He believes nuclear and hydroelectric power cannot be ignored.

“The state’s energy policy must be predicated on clean, abundant and cheap electricity,” McClintock said. “Conservation doesn’t achieve any of those goals; supply does.”

Not everyone shares McClintock’s approach.

“I think it’s fortunate that Mr. McClintock’s view on nuclear power is in the vast minority,” said Assemblywoman Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara).

Jackson is considering introducing legislation that would promote the use of renewable power such as solar or wind energy through tax credits, loans or other financial incentives.

“I don’t think we need to take the panicked reaction that we just need to build, build, build,” she said.

Added Barry Nelson of the Natural Resources Defense Council: “One of the lessons of the energy crisis is the reinforcing of the environmental community’s message that we should not try to simply develop new supplies to solve our energy needs. We need to meet those needs by focusing first on conservation.”

Other conservation-related proposals include:

* Legislation introduced by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) would establish a public power authority that could finance conservation efforts. The authority, for example, could establish a loan program to help consumers buy energy-efficient appliances. The bill is SB 6X.

* Homeowners and small business owners could qualify for a tax credit to recover up to 100% of the cost they incur buying energy efficient equipment if it reduces their year-over-year natural gas and electricity use by 5%, under a measure, AB 15, by Assemblyman Rod Pacheco (R-Riverside).

* A measure for low-income families that would provide them or their landlords with incentives to install energy-efficient appliances was introduced Monday by Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) and Assemblyman Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles).

The $200-million proposal would establish “exchange centers” to arrange the pickup of old refrigerators, air conditioners and clothes washers and to offer grants, loans or tax credits toward the purchase of energy-efficient replacement appliances.

The measure, AB 29X, also calls for $50 million to help consumers buy and install solar panels and $25 million for small businesses to do the same with so-called real-time meters, designed to induce customers to reduce usage at times of peak prices.

* Another so-called tiered rate proposal, AB 32X, was introduced Monday by Assemblyman Joe Nation (D-San Rafael) and Assemblywoman Dion Aroner (D-Berkeley).

The proposal calls for residents using up to 100% of the state’s “baseline” figures for energy consumption to continue to pay existing rates. Energy consumed between 100% and 200% of the base figure would rise in price by about 18%, and any power consumed beyond 200% would cost about double the rate charged in the first tier.

“The basic premise is the more you consume, the more you pay,” said Nation, an economist who believes the plan could help reduce consumption by 15%.

Using a model that assumes the user lives along the North Coast region and is served by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Nation estimated the cost per kilowatt-hour would rise from 11.43 cents in the first tier to 13.45 cents in the second and 19.5 cents or more in the third.

Real time metering would be required for the top 20% of commercial consumers, Nation said. The state Public Utilities Commission would also be directed to ensure that rate adjustments for commercial users are commensurate with any adjustments made for residential users’ bills.

Legislation by Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) that Davis signed last week includes a provision that allows rates to rise for Californians who use more than the 130% baseline figure.

More proposals are certain to materialize as legislators continue to drum up ways to solve the energy crisis that has engulfed California.

The challenge has prompted a self-examination of sorts in the Capitol. During a hearing last week of the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee, environmentalists rattled off a number of energy-saving steps the state could embrace, including relying more on the sun to light rooms and less on electricity-burning bulbs.

The fact that the hearing was being held in a shuttered room lit by no less than 49 lightbulbs--most of them in a trio of large chandeliers--was not lost on the committee’s chairwoman, Assemblywoman Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro).

After surveying her surroundings, Corbett asked the environmentalists how much energy they thought could be saved in the room.

“You could cut usage by two-thirds,” replied Peter Miller, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.