skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Who Should Administer Energy-Efficiency Programs?

Abstract

The restructuring of the electric utility industry in the US created a crisis in the administration of ratepayer-funded energy-efficiency programs. Before restructuring, nearly all energy-efficiency programs in the US were administered by utilities and funded from utility rates. Restructuring called these arrangements into question in two ways. First, the separation of generation from transmission and distribution undermined a key rationale for utility administration. This was the Integrated Resource Planning approach in which the vertically integrated utility was given incentives to provide energy services at least cost. Second, questions were raised as to whether funding through utility rates could be sustained in a competitive environment and most states that restructured their electricity industry adopted a system benefits charge. The crisis in administration of energy-efficiency programs produced a variety of responses in the eight years since restructuring in the US began in earn est. These responses have included new rationales for energy-efficiency programs, new mechanisms for funding programs, and new mechanisms for program administration and governance. This paper focuses on issues related to program administration. It describes the administrative functions and some of the options for accomplishing them. Then it discusses criteria for choosing among the options. Examples are given that highlightmore » some of the states that have made successful transitions to new governance and/or administration structures. Attention is also given to California where large-scale energy-efficiency programs have continued to operate, despite the fact that many of the key governance/administration issues remain unresolved. The conclusion attempts to summarize lessons learned.« less

Authors:
; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE. Office of Electric Transmission and Distribution (US)
OSTI Identifier:
824633
Report Number(s):
LBNL-52979
R&D Project: 673151; TRN: US200419%%167
DOE Contract Number:  
AC03-76SF00098
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: ECEEE (European Council for an Energy Efficient Economy) 2003 Summer Study, Saint-Raphal (FR), 06/02/2003--06/07/2003; Other Information: PBD: 1 May 2003
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; CALIFORNIA; DISTRIBUTION; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; PLANNING; EFFECTS OF RESTRUCTURING PROGRAM RATIONALES PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM FUNDING MECHANISMS

Citation Formats

Blumstein, Carl, Goldman, Charles, and Barbose, Galen L. Who Should Administer Energy-Efficiency Programs?. United States: N. p., 2003. Web.
Blumstein, Carl, Goldman, Charles, & Barbose, Galen L. Who Should Administer Energy-Efficiency Programs?. United States.
Blumstein, Carl, Goldman, Charles, and Barbose, Galen L. 2003. "Who Should Administer Energy-Efficiency Programs?". United States. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/824633.
@article{osti_824633,
title = {Who Should Administer Energy-Efficiency Programs?},
author = {Blumstein, Carl and Goldman, Charles and Barbose, Galen L},
abstractNote = {The restructuring of the electric utility industry in the US created a crisis in the administration of ratepayer-funded energy-efficiency programs. Before restructuring, nearly all energy-efficiency programs in the US were administered by utilities and funded from utility rates. Restructuring called these arrangements into question in two ways. First, the separation of generation from transmission and distribution undermined a key rationale for utility administration. This was the Integrated Resource Planning approach in which the vertically integrated utility was given incentives to provide energy services at least cost. Second, questions were raised as to whether funding through utility rates could be sustained in a competitive environment and most states that restructured their electricity industry adopted a system benefits charge. The crisis in administration of energy-efficiency programs produced a variety of responses in the eight years since restructuring in the US began in earn est. These responses have included new rationales for energy-efficiency programs, new mechanisms for funding programs, and new mechanisms for program administration and governance. This paper focuses on issues related to program administration. It describes the administrative functions and some of the options for accomplishing them. Then it discusses criteria for choosing among the options. Examples are given that highlight some of the states that have made successful transitions to new governance and/or administration structures. Attention is also given to California where large-scale energy-efficiency programs have continued to operate, despite the fact that many of the key governance/administration issues remain unresolved. The conclusion attempts to summarize lessons learned.},
doi = {},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/824633}, journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu May 01 00:00:00 EDT 2003},
month = {Thu May 01 00:00:00 EDT 2003}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share: