How are we doing in accomplishing this work? Here are numbers reported by my weatherization sponsor, Energy Trust Of Oregon, ETO.
At 1/18/2015, belatedly note great error in this table.
The correction was mentioned in a subsequent post of 3/19/2014,
http://energyconservationhowto.blogspot.com/2014/03/fixing-up-houses-that-will-be-sold.html
Counts are of measures completed, not number of homes served! The note continues at end of this post.
The table is drawn from my PDF summary with cited references, Reports Residential Weatherization Oregon . It includes only jobs submitted for offered rebates, and only those homes heated by Metro Portland gas and electric utilities. It includes a random scatter of measure rates of return. Statewide and including homes which have oil or wood heat, say totals are times two.The sum of treatments over four years is then 77,000
At 1/18/2015, belatedly address error in the above table, reported in the 3/19/2014 post:
I had thought the pitiful achievement was of houses weatherized. In fact, numbers are annual totals for all measures completed. The number of houses treated in any year, is about one fourth of the table number, currently about 2000 homes per year. The biggest measure count is in replacement windows. With windows, on average there is probably one more measure for a house in that year. The same houses of diligence might pepper the list over several years where budgeted from available cash.
Know that the pitiful numbers do not appear in glowing annual self-reports by Energy Trust, to Oregon Public Utilities Commission. Look at any report. Here is a link to the report for 2012 . A PDF search of "homes served" finds no instances. There are no such numbers. This is conscious and ugly deception.
Absent productive residential weatherization, there can be no happiness with the $180 million per year taken by Energy Trust, from the Public Purpose Fund. If only $5 million per year is credited to fruitful management of existing home weatherization, that is $25,000 per home. This is shameful. That it is known and tolerated by regulators, is yet more shameful. What might we say about the other $175 million?
No comments:
Post a Comment