The July 2005 Central Ohio Clean Energy Network Meeting was held at Burgess & Niple, and featured Sherri Hubbard, The Ohio Department of Develpment's Office of Energy Efficiency's Renewable Energy Outreach Director, as the guest speaker. The Meeting began with th standard rountable discussion, in which members describe their current renewable energy projects and other renewable energy current events.  Kurt Keljo, a winner of a distributed energy resourcegrant from the Office of Energy Efficiency, and a Pastor at Capital University, discussed his project to put a 2.5 kW solar pv system up, as well as the possibility of the August COCEN meeting being held at his home in Reynoldsburg.  Preliminary Plans include a meeting at the Bob Evans down the road for the round table, and a short tour of the Solar PV system at his house.  This should be a great way to get in the mood for the 5th Annual Solar Tour.

Sherri Hubbard Recieved GEO's 2003 Volunteer of the Year Award

Green Energy Ohio's Executive Director Bill Spartley discussed the Utility Scale Wind Seminar that took place in Cleveland on June 24, 2005, including details on GEO's agreement with Verizon for use of their towers to install wind monitoring equipment for the Tall Towers Grant from the United States Department of Energy.  The Tall Towers Grant is a project to collect wind data in Ohio in order verify wind maps that offer projected wind speed.  You can read more about the project here.

The main event was Sherri Hubbard's presentation of data collected in 10 small group focus studies that the Office of Energy Efficiency (OEE) used to try to gain a feel for what the average utility consumer thinks about renewable energy.  According to the presentation, "It is the inention fo the OEE to use this data to identify obstacles and opportunities that may impair development and initiation of a comprehnsive, statewide, promotional program with consumers."

Ten focus groups across Ohio were put together, from regions around Cleveland, Toldeo, Columbus, Cincinnati, Athens and McConnelsville.  The groups were 8-10 participants in size, and all individuals were pre-screened for qualification.  Demographically, the age ranged from 21-78, all were responsible for paying the utility bill in their home, it was a mix of men and women, 50 percent were married, 52 percent had children living at home, and income ranged between $40k and $175k.

The group participants indicated that they viewed "non-traditional energy" as anything not requiring gas oil or electricity.  1/2 of respondents mentioned a natural renewable resource like wind, water or solar as non-traditional resources.  However, "clean energy" and "nontraditional energy" were not viewed as being interchangeably.  Most consumers see energy efficiency as a financial issue versus a resource issue.  Most of the participants thought of energy efficiency when they either pay their utility bill, or see evidence of pollution, such as dark smoke coming out of a tailpipe.

As far as awareness, participants of the groups were totally unable to identify renewable energy groups without solicitation.  Once a list of organizations was presented, participants were able to recall the names of some groups, including Green Mountain Energy, SOAR, and Green Energy Ohio, though they were unable to recall where they heard the name.  Overall there was a lack of awareness of organizaitons and associations, as well as a lack of awareness of the disclosure section of the utility invoice.

Prior to meeting for the groups, participants were asked to bring pictures of graphics that represented their percpetion of nontraditional energy sources.  Many brought collages that displayed examples of nontraditional resources such as wind power, hydroelectric and solar.  Most searched for this information using the internet as a source.

In general, most had a positive perception, though they were skeptical about the implementation.  Most had a belief that in order to use a renewable energy source, it would be something they would have to do themselves.  For instance, they would be required to install their own wind turbine, or solar array.  Most were also put off by the fact that it is not possible to pick up renewable energy at the local hardware store.

The participants were not motivated by the prospect of new jobs, since they jobs as a result of renewables as a zero sum equation -- for every renewable job gained, a corresponding job would be lost in a more traditional energy industry.  However, they indicated that they would "feel good" about their utility if they found out it used some nontraditional energy sources.

When asked who should be the source of disseminating information about renewable energy, the groups could not define one source.  Walt Disney, Oprah were mentioned, as was the EPA, Sierra Club and the "government".  However, "the government" was also a source of mistrust.

Most who were interested in renewable energy expressed a desire to be off-grid, and assumed they would have to build or create their own system.  The motivating factors were rarely altruism, rather out of a desire to do what benefits them.

When given a choice about how much the average participant would be willing to pay to use renewable energy, most indicated that it would lie somewhere between $5 - $15 dollars a month, or about 10 to 15 percent of the monthly total.  Willingness to pay more was based on the concept that it would be investment spending, and the price would come down in the future.

The report concludes that there were several key audiences: producers, politicians and consumers.  Each audience has unique motivations and obstacles, though consumers are generally positive about adoption, though further quantitative study is required further substantiate the insights from these groups and provide valid projections.  Coordinated deliberation among key stakeholdres about next steps is needed.

You may download the full report here.