This is really exciting news (If you can get past the jargon).  What this means is that demand response, will have the same value as peak energy production as an energy resource.  If a utility needs to meet peak demand they can buy that capacity on the ISO market either from a peaker power plant (dirty and expensive) or from a company that can reduce consumption (say turn off AC units or dim lights).

This is a huge advance toward energy efficiency as a resource.  While initially this will almost entirely impact the commercial space, there is every reason to believe that this beach head will lead in the future to other sectors.
--------------------------
ISO-NE Proposes Demand-Response Rules
Updated September 20, 2011

In compliance with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Order 745 on demand-response compensation in competitive markets, ISO New England (ISO-NE) says it has filed proposed market rules that will result in the full integration of demand resources into system operations and energy markets by June 2015.

Behind-the-meter generation will continue to be eligible to provide demand response in New England if the proposed rules are accepted by FERC. The ISO believes its proposed market rules would comply with all aspects of FERC's Order 745, Final Rule on Demand Response Compensation in Organized Wholesale Energy Markets.

The ISO proposal calls for a transition period that would allow the region to continue to offer, with some revisions, the existing programs that allow demand-response providers to participate in the region's energy markets. The transition period would end in 2015, when the proposed rules for full integration of demand resources would take effect.

The ISO's first demand-response programs were implemented in 2001, with 63 MW participating. Currently, almost 2.8 GW of all types of demand resources, including energy efficiency, are available in New England.

ISO-NE's proposal is subject to FERC approval.

Very interesting new study by ACEEE summarizing lessons learned in energy efficiency financing.  Lots of great data in one place... and it really is all about the DATA!

READ THE REPORT.

Description: 

This report is designed to summarize the results and lessons learned from energy efficiency finance programs that have moved beyond the initial start-up phase; it is written for energy efficiency program planners and implementers.

Energy efficiency loan financing is proving to be a stable, low risk investment with low default rates and large-scale potential, according to a new study.  

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) reviewed 24 energy efficiency loan programs, finding “extremely low” default rates, ranging from 0–3%, throughout the life of the average financing program.  Default rates for efficiency loan programs have also remained largely unchanged, even during the near collapse of the real estate market over the past few years.

The programs evaluated by the ACEEE report, entitled What Have We Learned from Energy Efficiency Financing Programs, have loaned out over $1.5 billion.

Through the use of subsidies and energy program funds, interest rates for borrowers averaged 3-5% annually, the study suggested.

Things just keep puttering along.  The newest housing figures are not exactly exciting... they show that the US housing market is still in the doldrums with little end in sight.  This slow down is effecting millions of unemployed construction workers as well as domestic manufacturing.    

Here is the latest Census report on NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IN AUGUST 2011.

Also see previous reports on the state of the US Construction Industry:  Construction Industry Employment Trends

Total Resource Cost test (aka TRC) is a method created in California, but used around the country, to measure the cost effectiveness of utility rate payer programs, compared to the cheapest source of power production.  This test does not account for any of the societal benefits derived from energy efficiency, nor does it account for drivers of consumer behavior such as comfort and health.

While TRC can make one's eyes glaze over, this test is killing good programs across the country.  We need to reform or (better) replace TRC with a test that is closer to what drives markets that allows energy efficiency to compete on its many merits, not just using this narrow definition.

To address this problem, the National Home Performance Council, along with a diverse set of stakeholders including utilities, government agencies, contractors, and your truly, came together to examine alternatives to TRC ranging from improvements to what we got to completely new approaches.

Get yourself a scotch (or coffee) and read this REPORT.

Our Friends at LBNL have come out with this interesting study compiling a number of the existing research out there regarding the value of energy and green labeling and certification at time of sale.  

--------------------------------------
Labels, certifications and rating systems for energy efficient performance and "green" attributes of buildings can make energy efficiency more visible, and could help spur demand for energy efficiency if these designations are shown to have a positive impact on sales or rental prices. This policy brief discusses the findings and methodologies from five recent studies on this topic, and offers recommendations for communities looking to promote adoption of energy efficiency and "green" certifications and for researchers who want to add to this body of work. 

Findings from the handful of studies in the past 10 years that have investigated these effects provide some evidence that homeowners and commercial property buyers and renters may pay more for energy efficient buildings. However given the limited number of studies, more research is needed, and collaborative efforts to promote label adoption and build larger datasets of certified buildings will be required to produce increasingly reliable study results. 

• Full text can be downloaded HERE.