SOLAR DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE
Lighting the Way With Creation's Original Remedy
June 15, 1998
RE:
Response to Attachment A - Page Three
Questions Regarding California Energy Commission
Renewables Technology Energy Consumer Education Program (RECE)
Given the limited funds available for the task at hand, what other funding sources might the Commission tap? What other-funding requirements, if any, would you recommend the Commission establish to maximize the effectiveness of partnership opportunities?
9. How can Energy Commission ensure that materials and messages developed by other organizations are accurate, reliable and consistent with the RECE program message? What mechanisms might improve coordination (to leverage resources, avoid duplication, and ensure consistency) among RECE funding recipients and other organizations?
The best way to assure quality communications and follow-through is to document contacts. In one government office I worked in we logged every visitor and phone call. The second way to assure consistency is to write a small book to guide related contracts and activities. The third is to have one or two people manage the contract development process for activities. There is always room for err, but the good air generally presides at well-documented agreements.
10. What results can we realistically expect given the size of the State and the amount and timing of funds available? What criteria might we use to measure success? What methods might be used to evaluate results of this program? At what point(s) in program should evaluations take place?
I think there is a strong possibility of reaching 100% of the California consumer network with $5.4 million dollars using the various other resources available to partner and sponsor related activities. It would be most effective to think of this fund as a facilitator not the goal to the end. Remember to write a book for the year 2000, and publish an educational video. The $3 million spent by December 2000 will already have $1 million in returns with sales on the book and video. You are making history, and people need your guidance. These documents could really assist the rest of the nation, and the global consumer. Appearances on the Oprah Winfrey Show would provide an opportunity to tap into the national audience and share with them a panel of opinions on California deregulation and how it will lead the national energy industry to a competitive energy industry.
I have suggested consumer questionnaires every year with the first one being sent before December. Attempt to get the CPUC and/or UDC to allow you to send it in client bills or some other blanket mailing. This will then only cost you for developing and printing the questionnaire.
Criteria for success is not how many consumers we convert to renewables technology, but how ready we are to service those consumers on every facet of a level playing field in a truly competitive energy industry. The idea that people who want renewables technology must not drive or must suffer in some other way has to be dispelled. We need to be ready to serve the mainstream market with responsive cooperation across the energy industry from technology deployment to green verifications to grid-connection to net metering contracts to billing clarifications to consumer manuals for new technologies whether they are owned or the local utility leases your rooftop. This is why it is imperative to tap into and educate the Primary Energy Producers, first. When they are fully aware of the program, then, and only then is mainstream consumer education appropriate. The Vice President of Energy Efficiency at Southern California Edison and all of the call center receptionists must be our first consumer targets. They are after all, our industry partners.
Have evaluation forms made up that reflect your goals at the outset of each phase of the consumer education process. Amend these forms as needed, but do comparative analysis with the originals.
The consumer questionnaire is slated for once a year in December except for the first year. I would have an annual report printed up by the following January 31st. Matrix are an excellent way to evaluate categories and organize data to evaluate different questions. I am not in to heavy statistical language and never could understand much about it except that the processes are highly subjective. Keep your evaluation criteria and methods simple so you can understand and communicate them. If you are offering a proposal for a Commission funding allocation, what specific funding mechanism(s) (e.g. grants, contracts, etc.) are involved? What types of control mechanisms would you include to ensure accountability?
After going through this process, and talking to Vince Schwent and Sherrie Davis, I think my best offer is to provide you management consulting services whereby I would be paid a project or hourly fee to assist in organizing a viable program for consumer education that would be managed by a committee appointed by the Commission. The advantage of this alternative is that it would provide the opportunity to partner with a variety of groups while it keeps control of the funding of specific activities under Commission authority, and it would provide more flexibility to change direction where needed. I would, again, caution against taking the what appears to be an easy answer and letting a large organization of diverse interests manage $5.3 million of the RECE funding resource. Consumer Education may be the most important expenditure of the $540.
I think the first group who presented at the hearing is too complex. Secondly, they have the resources, contacts and momentum to facilitate most of their goals without Commission funding. Many of their activities are already in place. After some consideration, I am sure they will understand there is a need to focus on industry development in the consumer education process which calls for more strategic, comprehensive and functional activities that could actually replenish the Commission education funds (ie: book & video sales vs paying for PrimeTime on TV). This group could be a tremendous asset in pursuing Commission activities, however because of the substantial momentum and funding they already control. What they are doing is valuable and will coordinate with various projects the CEC pursues with a small management committee. Cooperative activities should be coordinated with this group to enhance their benefit as well as benefit of the Commission to further renewables technology.
There needs to be a managing committee appointed to assure everyone knows the process through which decisions and authority will be applied. The two Renewables Commissioners might be the best source to provide final approval or non-approval for programs or appropriations. There needs to be a comprehensive plan established in the next two months to make sure the money is not wasted. The plan could certainly change as circumstances arise, however with a clear plan of action in place, the Commission is more likely to achieve their goals. The large proposal provides very little opportunity for changing direction. No program is 100% efficient, however daily documented timesheets, goal setting and spending does provide a strong framework for following resources and accomplishments. It also provides the opportunity to redirect and problem solve before a problem is out of hand.
Several of the projects I have shared with you, I have marketed for several years. The projects I would most like to see evolve, if I was to get funding directly for my consumer education activities would be:
Illustrations are included here:
Earthrise From the Moon
Georgetown University Intercultural Center
This is an important consumer education and renewables technology industry development program. This program would primarily request participation and attendance in our already planned workshop for the 1999 American Power Conference in April with possible panel discussion on the Oprah Winfrey Show. If the Commission decides -as I have suggested to pursue Primary Energy Producers as their first consumer education focus, then we would establish a contract so I could assist in developing this program. The planning costs and facilitation for first six months including brochure design would be contracted for $50,000. The goal would be to put together other industry partners like FEMP and NREL to provide energy audits and technical information about renewables technology to the various primary energy producers in California.
These important activities would be a partnership endeavor with community leaders, Primary Energy Producers who have been educated in Phase I, Utility Distribution Companies that have also been educated in Phase I, private commerce and local builders to provide an educational event for residential and small commercial energy consumers. The event would involve technology exhibits and result in consumer transactions to both remote-site and demand-site renewables technologies. These fairs could also be an opportunity to initiate manufacturing opportunities for communities. They would most likely cost $5,000 of council funds to organize each fair utilizing $250,000 year one; $500,000 year two and $350,000 year three. That is a little over $1 million for three years and 250 Community Renewables Technology Fairs. Local news and television coverage would be facilitate by nice press kits. This program has the potential to directly reach over a million consumers. Fun educational activities, contests and other entertainment will make it a memorable community activity.
Last year, I tried for the first time to formally get funding behind my business plan to open my first ElectriCity(R) BI-PV Design Studio. Funding was very optimistic until the CPUC mailers arrived and there was not one mention of demand-site consumer technology as a choice for consumers. The more traditional term Distributed Generation was not even mentioned. I wrote a number of letters in the next two months. The Michael McNamara, Chief of Market Development in the Office of Ratepayer Advocates at the CPUC wrote on May 28th with a draft letter to President Bilas requesting an Order Instituting Rulemaking into UDC’s role in distributed generation (DG). With responsible involvement from IEEE, AIA and UPVG in this rulemaking process we may assure quality management of DG issues including BI-PV grid connect and net metering. To open my first studio would be approximately $10,000 to $250,000. The first Design Studio might serve as a spot test facility for various BI-PV products and markets. It would thereby be valuable to the Commission in determining where, to whom and what aspects to advertise their consumer education program. A commitment of $10,000 to $100,000 would assist in building investor confidence while it provides consumers an educational venue to explore a variety of renewables technology they may purchase for their home or business. We are seeking certified contractors to provide installation. Although we have some contract electrical engineers, we would be interested in learning of more experts in this field for training people as well as installing.
=$100,000 100,000 = $500,000 This book and video could be sold to schools, Primary Energy Producers and in mainstream bookstores to prime consumers. They would sell for $20 each and generate potential income of $200,000 to $2 million. If the Commission gets a book review from Oprah Winfrey -this would boost sales. The book would be contracted for publication -to provide an in-depth view of the goals and the renewables technology products and services the Commission is hoping to impact. It would include a section on consumer guidance, a resource guide for contacts and a glossary.
For 100,000 units, it would cost a minimum of $250,000 to manufacture and put into kits.
The Headrick Solar-Voltaic Dome™ Power Station was patented in 1986 by Lt. Colonel Richard T. Headrick a resident of Irvine, California in Orange County. I actually moved to the area to assist him in getting a prototype built in his hometown. The ideal structure would house a solar electric building materials manufacturing facility and serve the dual purposes of a solar power plant and an education museum. We may have a University partner that would expand its use to include research and demonstration of a variety of photovoltaic technology. If we are able to secure a support from the Commission to commit at least $50,000 in the museum aspect of the project others may sign on to assure the project is timely completed.
I hope these comments, our exhibit and presentation are guiding to the Commission. If you have questions or need further information about any aspect of these comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. At risk of seeming over enthusiastic for renewables technology, it is my pleasure to share this work, data and proposed activities to the California Energy Commission. I look forward to the possibility of working with you to realize your mission and goals.
Respectfully yours,
Eileen M. Smith, M.Arch.
Eileen M. Smith, M.Arch. Copyright © 1998 All Rights Reserved
Some Portions of Document & Programs Mentioned Herein Are
Protected By Copyright and Trademark At An Earlier Date
Georgetown Intercultural Center
Installed 1984 In Washington, DC