ShareThisCalifornia's plan to implement a "cash for appliances" program with federal stimulus funds focuses on three meat-and-potatoes appliances used by millions of residents.
The state has been allocated $35.2 million in federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to participate in the State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program. California's program will be administered by the California Energy Commission.
Under a proposal recently submitted by the commission to the U.S. Department of Energy -- which is overseeing the program nationally -- three appliance categories will receive rebates: clothes washers, a $100 rebate; refrigerators, a $75 rebate; and room air conditioners, a $50 rebate.
The rebates would be in addition to existing rebates offered by California utilities or appliance manufacturers, a process called "piggybacking."
For example, if you buy an energy-efficient refrigerator that qualifies for a $100 rebate from the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, you'd get that on top of the federal rebate under the proposal.
To qualify for rebates, appliances purchased by consumers must bear the Energy Star label and be certified to the Energy Commission as meeting all state and federal appliance efficiency standards.
The Energy Star conservation program was created in 1992 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and evolved into an international standard for energy-efficient consumer products. Products with the Energy Star seal -- from buildings to central air conditioners to computers -- typically are 10 percent to 30 percent more energy efficient than comparable products.
Energy Commission officials stressed that its proposal is subject to U.S. DOE approval and could be altered through a process that includes guideline reviews and public workshops. DOE is expected to respond to the state's application by Nov. 30.
The statewide appliance rebate program likely won't take effect until early spring 2010, but Energy Commission officials said they were determined in their proposal to focus on appliances used by many Californians.
"These are appliances that most people buy and need," said Energy Commission spokeswoman Susanne Garfield. "They also use a good portion of the energy. ... Besides benefiting consumers, we wanted to reduce peak load (energy) demand.
"This (proposal) with the DOE is tentative right now, but as we go forward, we'll be releasing more information on guidelines and how to qualify for a rebate."
She said California's massive population likely will go through the allotted $35.2 million -- expected to be received before the close of this year -- in quick order, especially since the appliances earmarked for rebates are so common.
Local appliance stores seemed pleased with the state's proposal.
"That's very impressive," said Christopher Zajic, owner and manager of Zajic Appliance Sales & Service in Sacramento. "(The rebates) are more than I expected. It could be very helpful to business."
Asked if he was disappointed that rebates would not be in place for the upcoming holiday shopping season, Zajic said: "That's OK. Spring 2010, that's a good time for it."
The appliance rebate program was a part of the economic stimulus package approved by Congress earlier this year. Nationwide, it provides $300 million in rebates to buyers of more energy-efficient appliances and other Energy Star-labeled products.
Like the federal "Cash for Clunkers" program that boosted new-car sales in late July and August, the appliance rebate program is designed to boost the economy through consumer spending and take less energy-efficient products out of circulation.
However, it differs from Cash for Clunkers on key points. Individual states will run their own appliance rebate programs, and consumers won't have to haul their bulky appliances to a store in exchange for new ones.
DOE insisted that individual states tailor appliance rebate programs for their jurisdictions, noting that different states have varying existing state/utility rebate programs.
DOE also noted that climate matters. Room air conditioners, for example, would likely generate little consumer traffic in Minnesota or Maine, as opposed to California or Arizona.
(E-mail reporter Mark Glover at mglover(at)sacbee.com.)
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.)
Must credit Sacramento Bee
