California Energy Commission - What's There Not to Like?

What's Not to Like?

Almost weekly the California Energy Commission gives away money, as part of its regular business meetings.  Today, $43 MM was awarded as grants or loans to cities, school districts, ports and university researchers across California for retrofits, alterative fuel job training and other energy projects.  (Less frequently new power plants are licensed, but not today.)

To get a flavor of the wide scope of projects awarded funding, here is a sampling:

- County of Marin got two hits, a $1.4 MM loan to upgrade county HVAC, insulation and lighting to reduce energy use and GHG emissions.  The County also received CEC approval to set building energy standards higher than California's own 2008 Builing Energy Efficiency Standards.

-Somis Union Elementary School District received a $254k loan to update lighting and put solar on the roof.  (Hopefully they can sell the energy when school is out.)

- UCSD received $1.3 MM to study 'black carbon' on snow which decreases snow's reflectivity, absorbs heat and increases melting, with possible signicant consequences for our snow pack and global warming.

- City of Del Ray Oaks received the smallest grant ($15,811) to retrofit lighting and install energy-efficient windows.

- $16.5 MM, the biggest grant, went to the California Rural Housing Municipal Finance Authority to establish a revolving loan program for low-to-moderate income, rural homeowners.  (A PACE financing program?)

- $6 MM went for job training in areas of alternative/renewable fuels and vechicles, to California Employment Training Panel



All the agenda items are here (http://www.energy.ca.gov/business_meetings/2010_agendas/agenda_2010-05-05.html) but I could not find the backup documentation for the projects.  There is also an mp3 file for the meeting.

The actual process at a CEC Business meeting is quick and clean, at least for the half dozen or so I have attended.   A CEC staff member gives a project summary, often with someone from the applicant organization, and the Commissioners vote 'aye' with few questions or much discussion.  The actual funding comes from a variety of sources, including ARRA or California money, many projects have several have matching funds. I've never heard a 'nay', anyone speaking in opposition, or much difficult questioning.  "What's there to not like?" one of the commissioners said about one project.

In all fairness, many of these projects have been percolating upwards for some time, so presumably issues or problems have been sorted out long before reaching a very public meeting.

But this raises a few questions about process, policy, patterns that are difficult for the public or those uninvolved to discern.    A few examples to illustrate:

-How does the public become involved much earlier in the process?

-What methodology does CEC use in reviewing funding requests?  And is there a "score" for each project?

-What are the specific policies of the CEC?   (For example, induction lighting vs. LED; CNG trucks vs. the latest diesel, using biodiesel fuels; full funding vs. requiring matching funds; 1-time projects vs. infrastructure planning, etc.)

-Which projects didn't make it for funding and why?

These were only intended as examples, but I am also aware that one problem the ver limited staff time in Sacramento and at local agencies.  Also, ARRA funding is new and short-term.   There is clear tension between "get the money out" and the niceties of a measured, consistent, balanced program to achieve society's and CEC's broader energy goals. (efficiency first, but parking light efficiency without a plan to reduce VMT?)


-So I must ask:   What are the CEC's checks and balances?  (both policy implementation as well as financial)  Who is watching?

Yet, another issue is 'transparency.'  Everything is supposed to be 'transparent',  but is it?  For example, we must be on guard for limitations of the "public-private partnerships," where the curtain can come down on 'transparency.' Most CEC is funding done though public agencies, which can  in turn 'partner' with a third-party.   But, to illustrate just one problem,  I saw first hand the County of Santa Cruz walk away from a state agency contract, unable (unwilling?) to answer questions and directing the questioner to its private 'partner.'    (http://greensc.blogspot.com/2009/11/santa-cruz-board-of-supervisors-0.html ) [And that same private organization recently won an even bigger role with the CEC!]

CEC has a very good reputation, and certainly its staff does work very hard, with abundant accumulated experience.   Greater public participation in the process, data review and overall understanding would only help.




CEC - May 5, 2010 Agenda (meeting available as mp3)
http://www.energy.ca.gov/business_meetings/2010_agendas/agenda_2010-05-05.html

(I could not find the backup documentation - 5/6/10)


CEC - Previous Commission Meetings
http://www.energy.ca.gov/business_meetings/index.html