« PreviousContinue »
Tho insured values covered shall be negotiated between the
Pix the length of the next period of insurance;
Bot Loate the probable extent of claims on the Pool
during the next insurance period;
Group 2 countries sufficient to meet the estimated
forward from the preceding period.
In determining whether measures could or could not reasonably have been taken at an earlier stage, account shall be takon, amongst other things, of the availability of funds, both domestic and international, which would have enabled mitigating or preventative noasures to have been taken, and the availability of commercial insurance on reasonable torms; and If differences of opinion arise between the Authority and the participating countries, every effort shall be made to negotiate a resolution, but if this is not achievable disputer shall be submitted to (an) (tho) arbitration tribunal under la special arbitration schemej (the convention).]
Mr. SHARP. Thank you, Mr. Reinstein.
Mr. MORGENSTERN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I am pleased to be here representing EPA.
We have many activities and analyses under way at the Agency relating to global climate change. In your letter of invitation, you expressed particular interest in our voluntary programs, and Ms. Eileen Claussen is our expert and leader in this area, and she will address those issues, and I will be happy to answer questions as they come up on other topics, other than the voluntary programs. Let me turn it over to Ms. Claussen. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF EILEEN CLAUSSEN
I'm really pleased to be here this morning to describe our voluntary programs, all of which reduce greenhouse gas emissions by promoting investments in energy efficiency. The programs themselves are directed toward four interrelated paradoxes which we believe inhibit the development and use of more energy efficient products.
First, a focus on the purchase price, which prevents the selection of products with the lowest life cycle cost; second, the fact that manufacturers do not see a market for more efficient products and therefore leave their more efficient designs on the drawing board or on the shelf; third, a lack of penetration of more efficient products into the market, which keeps the prices of these products high; and, last, the fact that utility regulators in many States still do not reward investments in energy efficiency.
To deal with these issues, we have developed four strategies, and what I would like to do is tell you in a broad sense what they are and then give you a few examples in each of the areas. The first is a Government and Corporate Purchasing Program, which we believe will result in large-scale demand for efficient products; second, a Market Enhancement Program, where we work to create market for new, more efficient products; third, working to remove regulatory barriers, which the Department of Energy does as well, or other obstacles to energy efficient investments; and, last, expanding international markets for efficient U.S. products, which we hope will lower the prices for the products in the United States as well as abroad.
Let me describe first something in the Government-corporate purchasing area, and, really, the premier program we have: the Green Lights Program, which you may have heard of. It is a voluntary partnership between companies or Government entities and EPA in which partners commit to install energy efficient lighting in their facilities wherever it is profitable. EPA provides technical support, technical assistance, and some amount of public recognition.
We launched this program just over a year ago and already have over 400 participants. I could read you the list of names, it is actually a very impressive list, but just to tell you a few, they include Eli Lilly, Amoco, Arco, Honeywell, Goodyear, Phillips Petroleum, Nike, Boeing, and many, many others; and we have also gotten the
States of California, Maryland, Florida, Oregon, and Missouri to sign up as well for all of their facilities; 29 utilities are allies with us; and 144 manufacturers of energy efficient lighting products. From the 400 participants that we have already signed up
and I should tell you that more than 600 are already pending—we have commitments to retrofit 2 billion square feet of commercial space. That is more than the office space in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, and Detroit combined. So, I think in the course of a year we have done a pretty good job of getting companies to come forward and agree to make certain kinds of changes.
When we look at their reports at the end of their first year of participation, we see that they are achieving energy savings of somewhere between 40 and 75 percent. In some cases, they surpass what we thought was the maximum technical potential by putting things together in a synergistic way.
The way we look at it, Green Lights will likely comprise over half of the lighting products purchased 3 years from now. In other words, we will be creating a significant market for more efficient products, and when you realize that lighting is about 20 percent of electricity sales, if we can get this kind of reduction here, I think we are going a long way toward reducing the energy associated, and the pollution associated, with lighting.
Following in the Green Lights model, we have got a Green Commercial Buildings Program that we are about ready to launch dealing with heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning programs; we are talking about Green Energy Corporations with some of our partners where the corporation would agree across the board to buy energy efficient products; and we have also got an effort on green industrial motors. So in the corporate area I think we are moving ahead quite strongly.
When we look at the market enhancement side, I think the best example we have is something that we have called the Golden Carrot Super-Efficient Refrigerator Program. Yes, sometimes the titles help as well. A group of interested utilities already agreed to commit about $25 million in a rebate pool, and we are working with other utilities to bring in another $20 million or so.
We will be putting out an RFP for a super-efficient refrigerator which has to be at least 25 percent more efficient than the DOE 1993 standard. Manufacturers will bid on this. The winner with the most efficient refrigerator, which is at least 25 percent better than the 1993 standard, will take the entire pot and will deliver refrigerators in the service areas of the utilities that are participating. In fact, we recently heard that a couple of the manufacturers would rather not just do one refrigerator, like an 18 cubic foot, but would like to do a whole line of green refrigerators. Again, refrigeration takes, I think, 6 percent of total electricity, so if we can move this market in this kind of a way, I think we will be having a significant impact.
We also worked with a group of people to form a Consortium for Energy Efficiency. It was created in September 1991. There are now six utilities involved, and we hope to expand that quite a bit. They will identify the next Golden Carrots, and there are lots of potentials there—washing machines, dryers, ground source heat pumps, and others.
Another thing in this area is a Green Computer Program, which we are working out with IBM. We are going to have an energy labeling program for computers that are most energy efficient and hope to get some of those products on the market very soon and will be doing a memorandum of understanding with IBM, I think, in May.
We and others are working hard on regulatory outreach efforts to work with regulatory commissions in a number of different States. I think we ourselves have visited something like 20 of them over the past year to try to deal with regulatory barriers and energy investments, and we have a major program in the methane area, working on the ownership rights to the gas as well as the coal, and again I think we are making a significant amount of progress.
I guess without being more specific, I would just say that I think that voluntary programs, following the models that we have already laid out, are really about to demonstrate that they can costeffectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions well below what they otherwise would have been, and that concludes what I was going to say formally.
[Testimony resumes on p. 85.]
OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION
MARCH 3, 1992
It is a pleasure to appear before you this morning to present number of voluntary Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiatives relating to climate change that would reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and air pollutants associated with the production of
electricity by promoting private investment in energy efficiency. Greenhouse gases and air pollutants that would be affected include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH), nitrous oxide (N20), nitrogen
measures to encourage full and more rapid information dissemination and adoption of improved technologies by market leaders increase the productive use of
and lead to increased
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. These measures can help in
the following ways:
an improved understanding of purchase price and total life cycle cost in decisions for selecting products;