While CA is held up as a shining example of progressive energy policy, this new study that shows we are slipping is not a surprise to many who operate in the State.  A combination of wrong headed policies focused on regulatory approaches that are simply not working in the market, combined with very uncertain politics, makes CA a very hard place to do business.

With State goals in just the residential sector that will cost consumers well over $150 Billion (yes that is a "B") to implement.  Regulations to force underwater homeowners to put tens of thousands into their home's with uncertain returns is doomed to fail.  

Maybe this will help wake CA up to the changing realities of our times.  However the realist in me doubts that will happen.

----------------------
ACEEE: MASSACHUSETTS OVERTAKES CALIFORNIA AS #1 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STATE, MICHIGAN AND ILLINOIS AMONG THE MOST IMPROVED

 2011 Energy Scorecard Top 10 Also Includes NY, OR, VT, WA, RI, MN, CT, MD; States Most in Need of Improvement Are: ND, WY, MS, KS, OK, SC, WV, MO, AL, and SD ... While MI, IL, NE, TN, AL and MD Are Six Most Improved States.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (October 20, 2011): A sour U.S. economy, tight state budgets, and a failure by Congress to adopt a comprehensive energy strategy have not slowed the growing momentum among U.S. states toward increased energy efficiency, according to the fifth edition of the annual ACEEE State Energy Efficiency Scorecard released today by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) during a National Press Club news conference.

Available online at http://aceee.org/research-report/e115, the ACEEE Scorecard shows that the top 10 states are: Massachusetts (taking the #1 position for the first time); California (slipping from the top spot it held for the first four editions of the ACEEE Scorecard); New York State; Oregon; Vermont; Washington State; Rhode Island; Minnesota, Connecticut; and Maryland (making its first appearance in the top 10 and also one of the six most improved states in the 2011 ACEEE Scorecard).

The 10 states most in need of improvement (from dead last to #42) are: North Dakota; Wyoming; Mississippi; Kansas; Oklahoma; South Carolina; West Virginia; Missouri; Alabama (also one of the top six most improved states); and South Dakota.

The six most improved states include Michigan, Illinois, Nebraska, Alabama, Maryland, and Tennessee.

"Energy efficiency is America's abundant, untapped energy resource and the states continue to press forward to reap its economic and environmental benefits," said ACEEE Executive Director Steven Nadel. "The message here is that energy efficiency is a pragmatic, bipartisan solution that political leaders from both sides of the aisle can support. As they have over the past decades, states continue to provide the leadership needed to forge an energy-efficient economy, which reduces energy costs, spurs job growth, and benefits the environment."

"Thanks to our investments in innovation and infrastructure, Massachusetts is now leading the nation in energy efficiency," said Massachusetts 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."

"I am thrilled that Maryland is being recognized as one of the top ten states and one of the most improved states for energy efficiency," said Malcolm Woolf, director of the Maryland Energy Administration. "As a result of Governor O'Malley's vision in establishing one of the nation's most aggressive energy efficiency goals, Marylanders have already saved over 700,000 MWh of electricity and over $91 million dollars since 2009, and our peak demand program has helped us avoid major blackouts during our record-setting summer heat wave."

"Illinois is a purposeful leader in the area of sustainability, investing more than $600 million in energy efficiency projects over the last four years alone," Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity Director Warren Ribley said. "By supporting aggressive policies including the state's energy efficiency portfolio standard and advanced building industry training and education, we are creating jobs, building more sustainable communities and securing our place in the new energy economy."

"We are excited that Michigan's positive action on energy efficiency is being recognized nationally," said Valerie Brader, the chief energy policy officer for the Michigan Economic Development Corporation. The ACEEE report observed that Michigan's improvement is particularly due to the implementation of energy efficiency programs advanced in state legislation P.A. 295.

 The fifth edition of the ACEEE State Energy Efficiency Scorecard presents a comprehensive ranking of the states based on an array of metrics that capture best practices and recognize leadership in energy efficiency policy and program implementation. The Scorecard benchmarks progress and provides a roadmap for states to advance energy efficiency in the residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors. A new, diverse set of states has followed a group of leading states by adopting significant energy efficiency policies, which will lead to innovative and effective programs. Tremendous potential remains for energy efficiency savings in all of the states should motivate decision-makers to advance energy efficiency.

"Clearly, 2011 has not been kind to our economy, but energy efficiency remains a growth sector that attracts investment and creates jobs," said Michael Sciortino, ACEEE senior policy analyst and the report's lead author. "With even higher energy savings possible, we expect leading states to continue pushing the envelope next year and inspire those at the bottom of the rankings to embrace energy efficiency as a core strategy to gain a competitive advantage by generating cost-savings, promoting technological innovation, and stimulating growth."

OTHER KEY FINDINGSFacing uncertain economic times, states are continuing to use energy efficiency as a key strategy to generate cost-savings, promote technological innovation, and stimulate growth. The ACEEE Scorecard documents the following trends:

• Total budgets for electricity efficiency programs increased to $4.5 billion in 2010, up from $3.4 billion in 2009. Combined with natural gas program budgets of about $1 billion, total energy efficiency budgets in 2010 equal about $5.5 billion. Given the increasing regulatory commitments to energy efficiency, this growth will likely continue over the next decade.
• Twenty-nine (29) states have either adopted or have made significant progress toward the adoption of the latest energy-saving building codes for homes and commercial properties - up from twenty in 2010 and ten in 2009.
• Twenty-four (24) states have adopted an Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS), which sets long-term energy savings targets and drives utility-sector investments in energy efficiency programs. States that adopted EERS policies in 2007 and 2008 are now realizing significant energy savings and moving ahead in the Scorecard rankings.
• States continue to improve policies to reduce financial, technical, and regulatory barriers to adoption and deployment of combined heat and power (CHP) systems, which generate electricity and thermal energy in an integrated system. Tremendous potential remains for CHP, particularly in states with heavy industrial and manufacturing bases.
• A group of leading states remains ahead of the curve in adopting policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote the purchase and manufacture of efficient vehicles. A major gap exists, however, as over half the states have minimal or no policies to encourage efficiency in the transportation sector.

Methodology
This ACEEE Scorecard provides a comprehensive assessment of policy and programs that improve energy efficiency in our homes, businesses, industry, and transportation sectors. The Scorecard examines six state energy efficiency policy areas and presents these results in six chapters: (1) utility and public benefits programs and policies; (2) transportation policies; (3) building energy codes; (4) combined heat and power; (5) state government initiatives; and (6) appliance efficiency standards. States can earn up to 50 possible points in these six policy areas combined, with the maximum possible points in each area weighted by the magnitude of its potential energy savings impact.

WALL STREET JOURNAL
By VAUHINI VARA

While Solyndra LLC's flameout has fueled criticism of federal initiatives to encourage alternative power sources, the solar-panel maker is hardly the only disappointment among U.S.-backed energy programs.

Jason Henry for The Wall Street JournalJim Criscione, shown at home near San Francisco, remains out of work after learning to install solar panels.

That's evident in California, which was awarded $4.6 billion by the Energy Department as part of the 2009 Recovery Act—far more than any other state—to fund programs in energy efficiency and other areas.

A program to install insulation and other energy-saving improvements in homes that received $185.8 million has been hobbled by delays, and a plan to remodel buildings to be more energy-efficient, which received $113 million, has struggled to persuade enough home and building owners to upgrade, according to California officials.

Meanwhile, $15 million went to train workers in skills such as solar-panel installation, but 62% of that program's alumni remain jobless, according to the state Employment Development Department. Solyndra, which declared bankruptcy in August and is now embroiled in a criminal investigation over whether it defrauded the federal government, got $535 million, nearly 12% of California's total under the energy program.

What all of these programs have in common is that they tried to scale up very quickly in the midst of regulatory uncertainty and a sluggish economic recovery that hurt demand for energy-efficient products, said Mark Muro, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Such factors "definitely negatively affected" some of California's clean-energy programs, said Panama Bartholomy, a deputy director at the California Clean Energy Commission.

California's experience isn't unusual, and some states have fared worse. The Energy Department found in August and September that the building-weatherization programs it helped fund in Missouri and Tennessee had quality problems and other issues that it said "could pose health and safety risks to residents, hinder production, and increase program costs."

Jen Stutsman, a spokeswoman for the Energy Department, said the 2009 Recovery Act "helped to create tens of thousands of clean-energy jobs in California and across the country."

Other investments in California appear to be more successful. BrightSource Energy Inc., which received a $1.6 billion loan guarantee, says it remains on track to build a project expected to nearly double the amount of solar-thermal energy in the U.S. and create 1,400 jobs. An $18.8 million EnergySmart Jobs program, which trains people to install electricity-saving features in grocery stores while giving rebates to those stores for their investment, has resulted in 2,070 upgrades. Jerry McLaughlin, vice president of operations at Spencer's Fresh Markets, a small California grocery chain, said an energy monitor installed under the program in one store's freezers should save $500 to $900 a month.

The Energy Department handed out $35.2 billion from the Recovery Act for energy efficiency and other initiatives. At the time, clean energy was seen as a potentially powerful industry for job creation.

But the industry has yet to provide the boost many had hoped for. Nationwide, jobs related to energy efficiency rose to 2.7 million people last year, up 27% from 2003, compared with overall job growth of 33%, according to the Brookings Institution. The figures exclude jobs lost because of establishments closing.

In California, the weatherization program ran into challenges because of a federal government delay in issuing prevailing-wage rates for the workers involved and inexperience of those administering the program. In July, state auditor Elaine Howle wrote that the program "faces challenges" in weatherizing enough homes by a deadline next year.

Rachel Arrezola, a spokeswoman for California's Department of Community Services, said the program is on track to use all but $18 million to $22 million of the total $185.8 million in funds. As of Sept. 30, California had weatherized nearly 37,000 homes and expects to reach its target of 43,150 homes before the program ends.

Meanwhile, the program to remodel houses and commercial buildings to use energy more efficiently was hurt after the Federal Housing Finance Agency warned in 2010 of "significant safety and soundness concerns" over a financing method the program planned to use, said the California Energy Commission. While the program had hoped to upgrade 15,000 buildings, only 6,342 are finished or in progress.

The sluggishness of the overall economy and slow adoptions of energy upgrades also have hurt training program for clean-energy workers, which combined recovery funds with state money to train 4,719 people in skills such as building energy-efficient houses since January 2010. Of the 2,931 who exited the program as of mid-September, only 1,104 found work, according to the state Employment Development Department.

Among those who remain unemployed is Jim Criscione. The 61-year-old, who lives near San Francisco, worked in construction for decades before he was let go in late 2009. In January, he signed up for free classes to learn skills such as installing solar panels.

But after Mr. Criscione finished his classes and applied for work, he struck out repeatedly. With unemployment benefits set to expire, he wonders if his time was wasted. "I'm down to almost anything to make a living," he said.

Write to Vauhini Vara at [email protected]

Finally!  The Appraisal Institute has release guidelines for including EE and Solar at time of sale.  This includes green rating systems as well.  This has long been a missing link in the value chain as energy efficiency improvements were simply not in the data that drove appraisers numbers, so they did not have any factual way to factor in the value of energy savings, and how that relates to the value of a home.

This has meant that often homes with green features would appraise out at similar levels to homes that performed much worse... meaning people might not be able to qualify for larger loans to cover the value of EE or RE improvements.

The simple form below, is a huge leap forward!

US commodity brokers expect the energy efficiency certificate or ‘white tag’ market to grow dramatically in the 
next few years as more states begin to treat efficiency as a tradable commodity.

Read the Article:  http://www.nexant.com/cem/docs/Nexant_EE_EnvRisk_Spring_2008.pdf

It really is happening.  We are on the way to EE as a Resource!

AMAZING!  It truly is business as usual on Wall Street post bailout.  In fact, based on this graphic and timeline, it seems like things may in fact be getting worse.