Energy Efficiency
Promoting Energy Efficiency at the Federal and State Level
Making appliances and buildings more energy efficient is one of the most effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Aside from automobiles, appliances and equipment are the largest users of energy derived from fossil fuels. The federal government and California have set minimum energy efficiency standards for a number of commercial and residential appliances, including heating and cooling equipment, water heaters and refrigerators.
Enforcing the Energy Policy & Conservation Act
Under the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), the Department of Energy (DOE) is required to regularly revise and strengthen appliance efficiency standards. But DOE has a long history of foot dragging in this area, missing deadlines and setting weak standards. California and other states repeatedly have been forced to sue DOE to ensure compliance with EPCA. For example, states successfully challenged DOE's rollback of efficiency standards for air conditioners and heat pumps that took place soon after the Bush Administration took office. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Abraham, 355 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2004).
In September 2005, the California Attorney General, along with the California Energy Commission and other states, sued DOE for its failure to meet the rule-making deadlines under EPCA for over twenty categories of consumer and commercial products. For some products, revised standards were more than 10 years overdue. The states successfully negotiated a consent judgment that imposed court-enforced deadlines for the rulemakings. Read the consent decree.
[PDF 927 kb / 33 pg]
In 2007, DOE issued a decision re-examining its authority under EPCA to issue efficiency standards for certain commonly used commercial cooling and heating equipment. Through a strained reading of the statute, DOE concluded that it had no authority under the statute to adopt more stringent standards for these products, which have remained stagnant since 1992. This decision was challenged in a case filed by Massachusetts in which the Attorney General intervened. After briefing in the case had begun, Congress enacted the Energy Independence and Security Act, which corrected DOE's misreading and gave the petitioners what they requested. Read the Energy Independence and Security Act.
[PDF 292 kb / 48 pg]
In 2007, the Attorney General also filed a petition
[PDF 7.77 mb / 61 pg] in the Ninth Circuit challenging DOE’s failure to adopt a stringent efficiency standard for electricity distribution transformers. Distribution transformers, mounted on utility poles or small concrete pads, reduce the power of electric current from the high voltages used in transmission lines to the lower voltages suitable for use by residential and commercial utility customers. More efficient distribution transformers significantly reduce the amount of electricity that is lost in the transformation process, and therefore reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with power generation. The Attorney General filed its opening brief
[PDF 2.95 mb / 82 pg] in the case on June 26, 2008 and its reply brief
[PDF 90 kb / 31 pg] on October 6, 2008. Oral argument was held on March 9, 2009.
On July 31, 2008, the Attorney General submitted comments
[PDF 45 kb / 3 pg] to DOE on its Framework Document for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. In California, residential air conditioning accounts for approximately 40% of residential peak energy demand; therefore an efficiency standard for this equipment is particularly important to our State. Our comments encourage the Department to adopt stringent standards to reduce energy demand and the greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy production.
Similarly, in 2008 several states filed a petition in the Second Circuit challenging DOE’s failure to adopt adequate efficiency standards for residential furnaces and boilers. The California Energy Commission and the Attorney General jointly filed a motion to intervene in that matter and the court granted the motion on April 4, 2008. Read the motion to intervene.
[PDF 532 kb / 12 pg]
Following the briefing, DOE filed a motion for voluntary remand and government petitioners, including California, consented to the motion. On April 21, 2009, the Court granted the motion for remand, thus resolving the case and sending the rule back to DOE for further evaluation. Read the order.
[PDF 127 kb / 1 pg]
On June 12, 2009, the states of California, New York, Delaware, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Illinois, New Hampshire, Vermont, New Jersey, Washington and Ohio submitted comments to DOE regarding proposed efficiency standards for certain commonly used light bulbs. (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for General Service Fluorescent Lamps and Incadescent Reflector Lamps, 74 Fed. Reg. 16,920 (April 13, 2009)). The lighting standards are the largest potential energy saver among 25 new appliance efficiency standards that the Obama Administration must complete during the next four years. Our comments focus on two issues: 1) that in assessing whether an efficiency standard for appliances is "economically justified" under EPCA, DOE should prioritize the benefits associated with reduced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from each of the standards analyzed; and 2) specifying a particular methodology for monetizing the benefit of reduced CO2 emissions. Read the comments.
[PDF 777 kb / 42 pg]
Efforts to Promote Energy Efficiency in California
The Attorney General also is working to promote energy efficiency in California. For example, in 2007, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) required California’s investor owned utilities (IOUs) to prepare a statewide energy efficiency Strategic Plan for the period 2009-2020. The Attorney General filed comments on the preliminary plan submitted in February, 2008 by the IOUs. The Attorney General’s comments discuss a number of programs and priorities that, if included in the Strategic Plan, could potentially increase energy savings and renewable energy generation in the State, and accelerate achieving the greenhouse gas reductions required by AB 32 and Executive Order S-03-05. Read the comment letter.
[PDF 132 kb / 7 pg] The Attorney General filed a supplemental comment letter on July 31, 2008. Read the supplemental letter.
[PDF 467 kb / 3 pg]