Copyright 2001 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
June 22, 2001, Friday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1858 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE
SUBCOMMITTEE: ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY
HEADLINE: NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY
TESTIMONY-BY: MR. JORDAN CLARK, PRESIDENT
AFFILIATION: UNITED HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION
BODY: June 22, 2001
Mr. Jordan Clark,
President United Home Builders Association
National Energy Policy:
Conservation and Energy Efficiency
Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I appreciate the
opportunity to testify today on the most important subject faced by Congress,
the White House and 280 million Americans: ENERGY. I am Jordan Clark President
of the United Homeowners Association (UHA) a decade old non-profit organization
representing the interests of homeowners here in Washington. UHA has been
actively involved in energy issues for a many years. As a House Committee Staff
Member during the oil embargoes and as administrator of the Department of
Energy's Conservation and Renewable programs in the mid eighties, I have been
personally involved in energy issues for three decades. For homeowners across
the country the cost of energy is finally taking center stage. A fact which is
not missed by the 54 members of the California delegation and a growing number
of members in other states, not to mention the White House. Unfortunately,
despite the fact that, for decades, basic math and the laws of supply and demand
could demonstrate beyond any doubt that our energy situation was precarious, it
has taken a major decrease in supply and increase in cost to get the attention
needed to start down the path of problem solving. I thank the committee for
dealing with such a politically charged issue and hope that it will not rest
until short, middle and long-term solutions are put into place.
In your
letter of invitation, Mr. Chairman you asked me to address the issues of energy
efficiency and conservation: Although tempted to pursue deregulation,
generation, production, transmission, transportation, the recently released
National Energy Policy, CAFE Standards, and other energy concerns affecting
consumers, I'll resist temptation and proceed as requested.
The role of
energy efficiency and conservation in helping to meet our Nation's energy
demands.
Efficiency
Which comes first the chicken or the egg?
Energy efficiency for the most part is in the hands of the manufacturing and
transportation sectors. Consumers don't build products, they buy them. If we
want more energy efficiency from consumers, manufacturing and transportation
companies are going to have to produce more energy efficient refrigerators, air
conditioners, water heaters, washers, dryers, toasters, light bulbs, vehicles
(including SUVs), etc., etc., etc. Whether they will do this voluntarily or are
forced to by legislation and or regulation is addressed later.
The fact
that the private sector has not produced the most energy efficient appliances,
heating and air conditioning systems or vehicles, doesn't excuse consumers from
making wise energy choices. When we purchase a product, we should consider
energy efficiency. Unfortunately, for other than the working poor and those on
limited fixed income this consideration only occurs when energy prices sky
rocket and is quickly forgotten when prices recede. As much as manufacturers and
the auto industry are to blame for not producing more energy efficient products,
consumers have to share the blame for not being more energy conscious.
Conservation
There are some positive results of high-energy
prices and lack of supply, consumers are being forced to be more efficient and
more conservative in their energy use.
Will revived energy sensitive
consumers have "an effect on helping to meet our energy demands?" Not much,
unless they know how and are willing to take the necessary actions, such as,
turning down the thermostat in the winter, up in the summer, consolidating their
trips to the marketplace, carpooling, using public transportation if available,
turning out the lights and more.
As stated so well in the National
Energy Policy Report (p 4-1), "For a family or business, conserving energy means
lower energy bills."
More explicity, if a consumer's electric bill goes
from $
85 a month to $
185, that consumer will
start to think about ways to reduce consumption. Conversely, if the bill remains
around $
85, lowering the energy bill is not an issue and
conservation is forgotten. Conservation is not a voluntary consumer action; it
is produced by a substantial increase in price and/or a decrease in reliability.
The role of the Federal government in promoting conservation and
efficient use of energy.
For the first time, Americans are experiencing
simultaneous increases in their electric and heating bills, gasoline prices and
in some areas of the country reliability problems. If direct energy prices
remain high (our monthly bills from utilities and gas pump receipts) and prices
of goods and services continue to increase because of higher energy prices being
paid by manufacturers and providers, the Federal government will be forced to
address the problem. Wednesday's proposed rebate action by the FERC is a good
example of forced action because of consumer interest.
Because of its
authority and responsibility under the interstate commerce clause of the
Constitution and in light of a deregulated marketplace, the Federal Government
is the key player in not only solving our short term energy crises, but also in
insuring that long term policies are set in place which will fill our energy
needs.
Education
Helping to educate consumers about energy use
is the easiest role for the federal government to play. "The federal government
can promote energy efficiency and conservation by including the dissemination of
timely and accurate information regarding the energy use of consumers '
purchases, setting standards for more energy efficient products and encouraging
industry to develop more efficient products." This is a direct quote from the
National Energy Policy Report and a recommendation which, we hope, Congress will
act upon. However, we are not convinced that encouragement alone will be enough
to move industry.
Since 20% of our monthly energy bills goes toward
running our appliances we recommend that energy guide labels be required on all
home appliances, not just some. We also recommend that energy labels be consumer
friendly. The one accompanying my statement is not. It is from a water heater I
recently purchased. Not only is it difficult to read, it is outdated and places
the burden of comparison on the consumer. A burden which most consumers will not
accept.
Energy Standards
We are also convinced that minimum
energy efficiency standards must be revisited and revised. Manufacturers can do
this voluntarily in reaction to market demand or involuntarily as a result of
legislation and/or regulation. Unfortunately, the most effective increase in
energy standards to date has been a result of legislation and regulation, not
voluntary actions of manufacturers or the transportation industry.
I
would like to believe otherwise, but if Congress wants energy efficiency to play
a role in reducing our consumption of energy, it will have to impose greater
energy efficiency standards on manufacturers, the auto industry and, if it had
jurisdiction, the home building industry. If there are doubts about voluntary
standards versus legislated, consider this quote from the National Energy Policy
Report (p4-10) "Despite the adoption of more efficient transportation
technologies, U.S. average fuel economy has been flat for ten years. In large
part, this is due to the growth of low fuel economy pick up trucks, vans and
sport utility vehicles."
"Growth" is an interesting choice of words by
the author. Gas- guzzlers aren't grown, they are manufactured. The author also
failed to mention that CAFE (Corporate Average
Fuel Economy)
standards were circumvented and SUV's were born. The lesson being, that
revised energy standards must not have loopholes allowing either manufactures or
consumers to circumvent the intended results of the standards.
We also
recommend that Congress consider renewing the successful tax deductions/credits
programs of the seventies and eighties for the installation of energy saving
devices or materials by homeowners. However, contrary to the national Energy
Policy Report, we do not recommend giving consumers "a tax credit for
fuel-efficient vehicles." A more effective policy would be to place a
substantial tax on manufacturers and consumers whose new vehicles do not meet
fuel efficiency standards.
Just as important, Congress and the White
House have to sufficiently fund the Low Income Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP) and DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program. To its credit, the
Appropriations Committee doubled the request for LIHEAP funding and the
Administration substantially increased the budget request for Weatherization
funds. However, with energy prices at an all time high and little hope for the
immediate future, we implore Congress to consider supplemental appropriations as
needed for these programs.
The use of new and/or existing technologies
and barriers to their widespread application.
Consumers are at the mercy
of industry and government when it comes to the application of technology in the
goods and services they purchase. As taxpayers and the ones most effected by
high- energy costs, we hope that industry has enough bottom line incentive to
develop and offer us energy efficient products at reasonable prices. However,
from experience, we know that energy efficiency has not been a 'burning issue'
for either the private or public sector.
Existing technologies which
save energy and in many cases the environment are not always available to the
public. For example, the technology to run our autos on natural gas has been
available for years and has been proven by fleet use. Yet, the choice is not
available to the public. In our homes 6% of our energy is consumed by lighting.
Highly efficient bulbs are available, but most homeowners suffer sticker shock
and buy the cheaper less efficient bulbs.
Even with my background in
conservation and renewable energy, I don't pretend to know the scope of existing
technologies available, nor like most consumers am I aware of new technologies
that could be introduced. Those questions are best answered by DOE, other
agencies and the private sector.
As for barriers to the efficient use of
energy and conservation, there are many, the market place itself being one.
Except for competition, there are little if any incentives for the producers of
energy to promote efficiency or conservation. Their bottom line depends on
consumers using energy, not conserving it. Our continued dependency on fossil
fuels although we know the supply is limited, is the best example of market
control over energy policy.
We consumers will continue to be barred from
access to efficient and affordable energy use until the economic and social
costs become too great for us to bear and change is demanded in the marketplace
and political arena. A few more spikes in energy costs or rolling blackouts and
we could be at that pivotal point.
I will be happy to answer any
questions you have and appreciate the opportunity to present our views.
LOAD-DATE: June 29, 2001