The program I chose to revisit is
the Focus on Energy program, also known as the FOE. This is Wisconsin’s
statewide energy-efficiency and renewable resource program
that “encourages utility customers to reduce fossil fuel consumption by
providing incentives for customers to purchase products and services that are
energy efficient or use renewable energy sources”. The way this works is that there are three
different components that make it possible for this program to work. First of all, the program is funded by
utility customers and program administrators whom work with private firms who provide
financial incentives for the programs participants. Secondly, private contractors who supply and install energy
efficient tools administer the program. For example; wind turbines, solar
panels, energy efficient windows and many other resourceful tools that can be
used to make a residential or non-residential entity more energy efficient.
Finally the FOE program is entirely overseen by the Wisconsin Public Service Commission,
(PSC), which is a state government entity that mainly deals with the compliance
of state and federal laws and makes sure that everything this program is trying
to achieve is legitimate and sound.
The Focus on Energy
program mostly exemplifies the market mode of governance. Unlike network governance, which involves
voluntary participant partnerships between an array of diverse investors to
build an accord and the collective will and ability to act around a specific
issue, a market form of governance uses financial tools and incentives to
direct collective action. Like I said earlier this is purely market-based
approach of governance because of the financial incentives given to residential
and non-residential entities. Financial
incentives are also given to the companies who produce and manufacture these
energy efficient tools, which demonstrates that money is the key factor in
making this wheel go round. Everyone
benefits in someway or another.
The actors who are involved in the Focus on
Energy program consist of an array of diverse entities. Obviously the state government is involved in
overseeing the program as well as dealing with legal issues and complying with
state laws and ordinances.
As far as
utility groups that are involved I will just name of few out of the many
companies involved. Here are just a few of a large list; Adams-Columbia Electric, Cooperative Algoma Utilities,
Alliant Energy, Arcadia Electric Utility, Argyle Electric & Water Utility,
Bangor Municipal Utility, Barron Light & Water, Belmont Municipal Light
& Water, Benton Electric & Water Utility, Black Earth Electric Utility,
Black River Falls Municipal Utilities, Bloomer Electric & Water Utility,
Boscobel Utilities, Brodhead Water & Light, Cadott Light & Water
Department, Cashton Light & Water, Cedarburg Light & Water Centuria,
Municipal Electric Utility, Clark Electric Cooperative, Clintonville Utilities,
Columbus Water & Light Consolidated Water Power Company, Cornell Municipal
Light Department, Cuba City Light & Water, Cumberland Municipal Utility,
Dahlberg Light & Power Company, Eagle River Light & Water Utility, Eau
Claire Energy Cooperative, Elkhorn Light & Water, Elroy Electric &
Water Utility, Evansville Water & Light Fennimore, Municipal Utility
Florence Utilities and Gresham Water & Electric Plant. There are about thirty more but I think you
get the idea. As far as other non-profit or governmental agencies being
involved there are none.
https://focusonenergy.com/about/participating-utilities
https://focusonenergy.com/about/participating-utilities
I actually used to work for an independent company performing energy audits on homes. We worked with FOE for some time, but chose not to because there were many "loopholes" within the program that did not benefit the consumer (especially financially). The private contractors benefit financially from offering "professional" advice. The work I was doing took into consideration what energy upgrades would be most beneficial/efficient for for the home owner after performing a series of testing (i.e. blower door, infrared scanning, etc.) which allowed us to observe how the entire home and the appliances interacted with one another under a degree of circumstances. It would be as simple as day for an contractor with FOE to come into a home and tell someone they need air sealing or a new water heater without considering other factors. I can't tell you the number of times companies have recommended air sealing to homeowners either out of stupidity or to get their cut of the money, thus resulting in mold problems later on for individuals who thought they were getting a deal. From my experience, I know that it was quite simple to recommend (for example) new windows to someone because their rooms were drafty in the winter. However, in many cases the drafts were simply caused by convection currents or minor leakage that could easily be repaired. Replacing windows are NOT CHEAP. Companies would charge excessive amounts of money for their services as well, thus leaving the consumer to reap little or no financial benefits. There are actually plenty of legit/honest/knowledgeable contractors not associated with FOE who would end up being a cheaper/more dependable option to go with even though they do not offer incentives. Also, much of the work I did extended into low income areas where homes were extremely aged and in rough shape. The people who lived in these homes often couldn't afford to have all of the work recommended by particular companies, even with the "incentives" offered. The company I worked for would at least make prioritized lists for homeowners on serious budgets, so if anything they were able to start making the improvements needed at their own comfort level. We also didn't work specifically with other contractors, but did offer recommendations so that options were open and prices could be compared by the consumers. I am not one to say that FOE is a horrible program. I am sure in some cases people have benefited from it. The idea of FOE is clearly not a bad one. However, the fact that it is operating on such a market-based level of governance is the dangerous aspect of it, in my opinion. Also, I may be bias on the situation, but I have seen too many companies get away with ripping people off or providing less than educated advice to homeowners. They get away with this because they have associated themselves with FOE.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the PSC is basically useless in my opinion because they would allow the contractors who performed the work through FOE also come back to the same establishment they provided services for and approve their own work.
ReplyDelete