Dave.  Sorry, but "Green" has become partisan.  In many cases it is used as a bludgeon to prop up industries that aren't yet economically viable.  And, shooting the stimulus at that small of a target would create more problems and solve very few.  It certainly wouldn't lead to a wide market economic recovery. 

As for the stimulus package itself, it isn't a good idea.  If the government wants to accomplish something, they need to step out of the way instead of trying to take a larger role in the economy.  At the least, making the Bush tax cut permanent would be a good step.  It would be better to scrap the current byzantine tax code and adopt something like the FairTax to replace it.  We need to do things that are going to stimulate long term growth. 

Lane,

I wanted to frame this as a non-partisan issue just so we wouldn't get bogged down in a discussion of the tax code. Fair minded people have differing ideas about what works best to stimulate the economy. Just as an example and without trying to get you steamed, the US economy was running a surplus and had high employment during the late nineties. It's hard to say that the Bush tax cuts improved on that economic performance.  But that's not the point of this post and I would urge you to start your own post about taxes if that's what you want to talk about.

There are a series of small, quickly implemented, labor-intensive improvements that can be done to every structure in the United States. These include insulation, weatherstripping,  caulking, water heater blankets, energy efficient lighting, etc. Moving along the cost effectiveness chart you have more effiicent HVAC systems, more modern and efficient appliances, set-back thermostats, etc. These are proven technologies that don't fall into the "prop up industries" group you described. I agree completely with you that things like hydrogen fuel cells, clean coal, and even nuclear power have had too many subsidies and show no near term promise. Instead, I am urging that only proven and labor intensive improvements be undertaken with the stimulus. Most major utilities around the country already have "public good" programs in place to help with conservation measures like this. Ramping up these existing nationally available programs would be a very straightforward way to manage both the economic stimulus and energy savings parts of my proposal.

Most people didn't pay close attention to the California energy crisis, but it was clear that the manipulation of supply and demand was only possible when demand was almost at peak levels. The same thing is true today with oil prices at $100 a barrel. If we can collectively slow our demand by only five or ten percent, we can have a dramatic effect on demand and possibly prices. I don't mind cooperating with my fellow citizens if it will help slow the rise in energy prices.

Hi Dave - I am in agreement that Green is Non-Partisan. I like the way you have a scale for cost effectiveness. With so many existing homes that are inefficient ideas like yours can help reduce the demand for energy across the board. I agree that tax credits would help. Everyone needs to increase their energy consciousness. Tax credits will serve to increase consumer awareness. Good post!

Dave,  fantastic idea and I'm in total agreement.  I guess it couldn't hurt to send my representative yet another email.  ;)

LOL! Stephanie! I think my reps are going to black list me soon!

Stephanie and Mary,

I know I'm on the "roll my eyes" list when they get another letter from me. Still, if we're not bending their ear they're just going to go off and do something dumb, so we have to keep at it. A legislator with idle hands is a dangerous thing.

excellent blog - spending the money to actually make improvements which would in effect cause more savings and at the same time improve our environment - I love it!

Bill and Barbara, you have captured the part of this that most people miss. It's an investment in conservation that pays both energy savings dividends and environmental dividends. Compare that to buying more knick-knacks or just using the money to pay for low income heating bills. I'm all for helping people with their heating bills, but I'd much rather pay to insulate their house for long term savings than to give them a few hundred bucks to pass to OPEC. In particular, energy conservation investments benefit all of us, so I'd love to see the stimulus in the form of low or no interest loans so landlords and homeowners alike could find the capital investment needed to invest.

Dave, good post. I believe that the green economy of this country is about to flourish big time. Rarely though do i hear of rooftop resources (rainwater harvesting, green roofs etc.) as a means to increase the eco energy conservation movement. Places like Portland, Chicago and even New York , to an extent, is far ahead of the curve when it comes to granting tax credits to modern urban rooftop resources. What you find here in California is way behind the eight-ball when it comes down to this new and exciting green movement. I would like to see legislators in Sacramento catch up to the curve of these other cities n states and start offering green tax incentives to people and organizations here in California to invest in the future of green roofing.

Big Daddy, I believe in rooftops so much that I am in the beginning stages of developing a new web site devoted exclusively to all the good things you can do with a roof. It's not just shedding the weather anymore, but a way to capture energy, conserve water, provide beautiful lighting, maintain comfortable interior temperatures, provide outdoor living space, etc. I've got my Joomla installation started, but haven't written the first speck of content yet, so I won't mention the URL yet. I'd love to have your ideas and contributions for this roof-flavored site.

Dave