Steven Chu Announces $34 Million In Renewable Energy Grants For Colorado

Yahoo! Finance:

DENVER (AP) -- Colorado will get more than $34 million in federal stimulus money for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Wednesday.

Of the total, $9.5 million will be used to expand the Renewable Energy Rebates and Grants Program, Chu said. The other $24.6 million will go to the State Energy Program.

The projects will reduce energy consumption and carbon pollution, and create green jobs across the state, Chu said.

"This funding will allow Colorado to make major investments in energy solutions that will strengthen America's economy and create jobs at the state and local level," he said. "It will also promote some of the cheapest, cleanest and most reliable energy technologies we have -- energy efficiency and conservation -- which can be deployed immediately."

Gov. Bill Ritter said the funding will help Colorado achieve its Climate Action Plan, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent against 2005 levels by 2020, and by 80 percent by 2050.

Part of the money will be used for rebates that will reimburse homeowners for a portion of the cost of activities such as energy audits or the installation of attic insulation, air sealing, duct sealing, and high-efficiency furnace replacements.

It will also be used for incentives for residents and businesses that use onsite renewable energy technology, particularly home heating systems, and the state will also offer $400 rebates for the purchase and installation of efficient biomass-burning stoves that can make use of the state's wood-pellet resource.

The money will also be used for programs to help state agencies, including public schools, reduce their energy use and carbon emissions. The state says it will promote greater energy efficiency in new and existing homes with programs such as a "whole house tune up" that bundles efficiency incentives.

Read the whole story: Yahoo! Finance

Comments

[WillWilson]

I've posted a graph of our energy use from various sources over the last two centuries (from the US DOE's 2006 Annual Energy Review) online at:

http://www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=116

the reality of global warming and ecological consequences:

http://www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=95

and increasing sea levels:

http://www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=125

We use lots of energy, with too many emissions of greenhouse gases, and still have about 300 years worth of coal. Our concern is surviving a changing climate. We depend on the present climate for growing crops right where farms just happen to be. With climate change comes not just warming, but broader variations in things like last frost date, first frost date, and rainfall patterns. Food production depends on these climate measures. As the climate changes, insect pests and plant pathogens find new habitable areas of the globe, perhaps in these agricultural areas. Nobody can predict whether such things will happen, but if they do, and food production fails, I would call that a problem. So, what is an acceptable risk? How confident are you that no problems will arise? Humans experienced potato famines, changed eastern forests through release of the chestnut blight, and so on. Climate change brings on new risks. Are you comfortable with a 10% risk of agricultural collapse? 1%? 50%?

The sooner we find new, clean sources, the better.

Will Wilson