Last month, I attended the 2009
Santa Barbara Summit on Energy Efficiency. The topics ranged from computing to
lighting to storage, with a special emphasis on the nexus between politics,
technology, and the economy. With a focus on promoting the development of energy
efficiency technologies, the summit included presentations and panel discussions
that included voices from both the private and public sectors. Much on the minds
of participants and audience was ARRA stimulus funds, and whether or not the
government could deliver on its promise of providing significant financial
support to energy-saving programs. Starting off the summit, UCSB Chancellor
Henry T. Yang began by reading from an e-mail he had recently received from the
DOE, encouraging the chancellor to pass along the names of any potential
beneficiaries of ARRA funds by May 28, 2009—a mere two weeks after the
summit.
The deadline-centric nature of
these funds will no doubt prove problematic, not just to individual investors
looking to cash-in, but on local governments as well (the deadline for block
grant applications is set for June 25). And because of the short time span
available for applications, there’s the added concern of minimal oversight, and
the possibility that hastily engineered grants will result in a misapplication
of funds. Hopefully programs like Green Boot Camp, a two-day training session
sponsored by Living Cities slated to take place at Harvard University will help,
but with additional deadlines looming for green job training, school renovation,
low-income housing weatherization, and Energy Star retrofits of old appliances,
it looks like it’ll be a mad scramble for dollars that will characterize the
initiation of the ARRA’s energy funding package.
What
do you think? Will the stimulus package hurt or help energy efficiency
innovation? Will a flawed
implementation of an ambitious funding program doom promising projects, or
simply weed out unworthy pretenders through a Darwinian-like application
process?