|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home Energy Index |
About Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page | Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy Magazine Online September/October 1993
UTILITY PROGRAMS
Trade Allies:
Long Haul Partners
by Jeff Hammarlund
Jeff Hammarlund heads Hammarlund Energy Services in Portland, Oregon.
Trade allies can include anyone
involved in residential energy efficiency. They can make or break
a demand-side management program.
Utilities and demand-side management firms have made huge
advances in recent years as they've implemented energy conservation programs.
But some utilities have been less successful in understanding how to work with
the infrastructure of private sector trades and support industries, public
sector officials, and others whose support and cooperation is often critical to
a program's long-term success. I optimistically refer to the many groups of
individuals that comprise this infrastructure as "trade allies." However, if
not handled well, potential trade allies can quickly become neutral parties or
worse, trade adversaries. A utility must pay the piper for a long time before
they can hope to convert these groups to trade allies.
Depending on the conservation program, trade allies might include builders,
developers, product manufacturers, wholesale and retail suppliers, contractors,
lenders, appraisers, and many other groups. With support from these trade
allies, the chances for program success are greatly enhanced. Without it,
implementation can become a nightmare. To bring trade allies on board,
utilities would do well by considering the strategy that follows.
It is important for utility planners to purge themselves of any vestiges of
a "regal" mind-set. All too often, under pressure from regulators or top
management, utility staff attempt to impose their programmatic vision on the
marketplace without making an effort to understand the likely impacts of a
program on those who have worked in a particular market for many years. It
should come as no surprise when this generates suspicion and resistance among
the trades.
For example, in the Pacific Northwest many of us involved in launching the
Super Good Cents program for new residential construction initially assumed
that we could bring most of the home builders in the region on board through a
combination of incentives, marketing support, and formal builder training. We
did not fully appreciate the importance of working with home builder
associations. Skeptical leaders of this trade group concluded that the
utilities' commitment to conservation was limited to providing temporary
inducements to entice builders to give energy-efficient construction a try.
They feared that as soon as possible, the utilities would seek to codify these
new measures and practices into state building codes and walk away, leaving the
builders and code inspectors holding the bag. The early lack of communication
between the regional energy planners, utilities, and environmentalists on one
hand, and the home builders on the other, contributed to some bitter disputes
and significant delays in region-wide acceptance of energy-efficient
construction. Fortunately we learned and recovered from this and other early
mistakes and now have significant builder support.
The existing infrastructure of relationships in a particular marketplace does
not emerge by chance. It is the product of a complex set of dynamic
relationships that emerge and reemerge over time. Common influences include
economic conditions, market signals, social norms and customs within and among
the various trade groups, long-standing perceptions, regulations, and various
institutional barriers. The market infrastructure typically functions the way
it does for reasons that have little or nothing to do with a utility's latest
position on conservation. Utilities are the new kids on the block who are
treading on others' turf. They need to appreciate the complexity of this
infrastructure of potential trade allies or adversaries, much as an
anthropologist seeks to explore patterns of relationship in unfamiliar
cultures.
One approach adopted by some utility staff and other program implementors to
help them "get a handle" on the existing market infrastructure is to hire
individuals who are already experienced with and respected by critical trade
groups. Hired as staff advisors, they perform the role of "cultural
translators" who help utility staff understand what motivates each trade ally
group. They can also help with program design, and provide rapid feedback and
troubleshooting services during the program's start-up phase. The Conservation
Services Group in Boston, Massachusetts, has pursued this approach in
implementing the Energy Crafted Home program in conjunction with utilities in
New England. In Canada, B.C. Hydro has gone a step further by hiring only
highly respected members of key trade ally groups to design and implement the
Power Smart Home Improvements program.
Utilities should incorporate trade ally perspectives and concerns in the
program planning process to establish the most acceptable strategies. It is
not necessary to work with all the firms in a particular trade ally group. It
is more productive to work with opinion leaders within a given trade.
Developing a successful relationship with these leaders attracts others over
time. There will always be some complainers and nay sayers who are best left
behind. Programs should not be designed to meet the needs of the those members
of a trade group that define the lowest common denominator. Focus groups are a
valuable way to incorporate the views of representatives of key trade groups
(see "Bringing Trade Allies on Board").
Trade allies desperately need stability from the utility. Abrupt changes
in funding levels and other radical changes significantly undermine trust. One
of the most pervasive complaints from trade allies is that the utility is yet
again "jerking them around." Ideally utilities should commit program funding
and support for a few years, something that is often difficult to secure from
top management and regulators. The need for stability must be balanced by the
positive benefits of continued program innovation and enhancement. Innovation
should be encouraged, but it should be introduced carefully and deliberately.
Utilities should support ongoing training for trade allies. If the
utility wants to be on the cutting edge of the conservation field, it needs to
provide training and support to bring the trades along. Southern California
Edison has developed a strong training program for developers participating in
its Welcome Home program.
Consortiums of utilities have the opportunity to approach manufacturers to
produce new products. The "golden carrot" reward offered under the
Super-Efficient Refrigerator Program (SERP) is the most famous illustration
(see "Whirlpool Wins," p.5). Many other successful efforts of a smaller scale
abound. By guaranteeing a market, the Bonneville Power Administration and
Northwest utilities successfully convinced manufacturers to introduce
high-density insulation batts, low-air-leakage recessed lights, and
energy-efficient vented windows to meet stringent Super Good Cents program
specifications. Builders had a range of viable options to achieve energy
savings.
Utilities should make local suppliers aware of new program developments and
have all products available before launching a marketing campaign. Smaller
Northwest utilities with service areas outside the major metropolitan areas
have sometimes intervened to help local suppliers secure the appropriate
conservation measures. Some even helped facilitate the delivery of conservation
products to local suppliers.
Utilities should use the existing infrastructure whenever possible. Make
sure that long-standing groups realize that the utility wants them to continue
to play an important role in the future. For example, seek the assistance of
supportive manufacturers or trade organizations to co-sponsor training and, if
appropriate, certification programs. Show the manufacturers and other trade
allies how utility efforts can bring them customers.
A utility's trade ally strategy should focus as much--if not more--on
ensuring that conservation measures perform properly on site as on verifying
the actual installation of the measures. Utilities should not shy away from
vigorous quality control and inspection efforts, but there should be no
surprises. Trade allies need to know from the start exactly what will be
expected of them, how they can meet the standards, how their performance will
be evaluated, and what the consequences of poor performance will be. Utilities
then need to hold firm on these conditions unless there are overwhelming
reasons to modify them.
Conservation remains the most flexible of energy resources, but this
flexibility is far from unlimited. Many utilities have licked their wounds
after assuming the conservation market infrastructure could be readily turned
on and off. A more enlightened approach recognizes what motivates key trade
allies, appreciates the legitimate needs for program stability, and seeks to
uncover the many opportunities for genuine partnerships that exist between the
utility and its trade allies.
Bringing Trade Allies on Board
The recent efforts of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) to
incorporate a heat pump and duct efficiency component in the utility's
residential new construction program illustrates one strategy to encourage the
support of a critical group of trade allies. Over the past decade, LADWP had
been very successful in building a coalition of trade groups--including
builders and developers as well as heat pump suppliers and installers--to
install heat pumps for heating and cooling in new multifamily construction,
helping build new electric load.
When the utility decided to make a serious commitment to conservation several
years ago, some staff and consultants began to question whether the utility's
old marketing support and rebates for heat pumps were still appropriate. We had
heard many duct system horror stories surfacing from other parts of the
country, and wondered if similar problems existed in Los Angeles. If so, we
argued, continued utility support made sense only if it promoted the
most efficient heat pumps and included a quality control and building
commissioning component. This component would ensure that the systems were
sized and installed properly, and could be expected to operate efficiently.
LADWP faced a controversial and formidable challenge. Could the utility
preserve an excellent working relationship with an important group of trade
allies--developed so carefully over a number of years--if, at the same time, it
might be necessary to radically change existing practice? If performance tests
indicated that construction practices were no better in Los Angeles than they
appeared to be elsewhere, could LADWP commit to a program to encourage the
proper installation, operation, and maintenance of high-efficiency heat pump
and duct systems without losing trade ally support?
A baseline study by John Proctor of 78 newly constructed single- and
multifamily dwellings helped confirm substantial energy losses. The main
culprits were duct leakage, improper air flow through the inside coil, and
improper refrigerant charge. In addition, the location of some units made the
inside coil and filter inaccessible for cleaning.
Rather than imposing a predetermined solution, LADWP invited key
representatives of three trade ally groups--HVAC installers, builders, and
designers--to a dinner presentation and focus group meeting. The objectives
were to explain the reasoning behind the utility's new commitment to
conservation, describe the utility's need for quality control and rapid
feedback, and solicit ideas on how to address the problems. The audience was
initially quite skeptical. However, after viewing a slide presentation
documenting the pervasive problems, the owner of one of the largest and most
respected firms signaled his willingness to address the issue directly. Others
soon followed suit.
In the focus groups, representatives of the three trade ally groups at first
seemed to try to blame each other. Contractors pointed out that their
relationship with builders and developers was based on a low-bid, least-cost
system that did not reward quality work. Architects and builders noted that
developers and consumers placed a premium on living and storage space at the
expense of adequate room for duct systems. All agreed that there was
insufficient appreciation of HVAC and building science principles by most
parties, that a lack of coordination among building trades resulted in
dislocated or crushed ductwork, and that state and local codes and inspection
procedures focused on products and rated efficiency levels of equipment rather
than the actual performance of the system.
By the end of the evening, however, many seemed to view themselves as part of a
team that could help forge a workable solution, including training,
certification, and performance-based inspections and incentives.
Trade Allies for Residential Duct Programs
- Architects and designers
- Auditors
- Builders
- Building maintenance staff
- Building scientists
- Consultants
- Building code officials
- Electricians
- Funding sources
- Inspectors
- Manufacturers of building products
- Manufacturers of diagnostic equipment
- Marketing staff
- Mechanical contractors
- Product design engineers
- Suppliers, distributors, and retailers
- Trade publications
- Trade schools and other educators
- Utilities
- Unions
- Regulators
| Back to Contents Page |
Home Energy Index |
About Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page | Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright Notice
|