Posts tagged interest
EnergySmart customers can access up to $1,000 in rebates for home energy efficiency upgrades
May 2nd
Boulder County, Colo. – Boulder County residents have a limited time to access new rebates for energy efficiency improvements in their homes.
Through its EnergySmart program, Boulder County is offering up to $1,000 per household in rebates until July 31 or until funds are exhausted. Rebates are for qualifying projects including insulation, furnace replacement, efficient windows, and Energy Star appliances such as refrigerators, dishwashers and more.
The more than $300,000 in rebates are available to EnergySmart participants only. EnergySmart provides a full suite of services to help Boulder County residents identify valuable energy-saving opportunities.
More information and registration is available at www.EnergySmartYES.com or by calling 303-544-1000. Rebate payment takes an average of 6-8 weeks and will be made to qualifying applicants upon completion of projects on a first-come, first-served basis.
The $1,000 in EnergySmart rebates are available in addition to existing utility rebates. EnergySmart also offers 2.5 percent interest “microloans” for up to $5,000 on qualifying energy efficiency projects. More than 1,200 Boulder County residents have enrolled in EnergySmart services since the program launched in early 2011.
“Rebates are generally confusing, but EnergySmart helps people find them and figure them out. We even fill out the paperwork,” said EnergySmart Advisor manager Andy Mazal. “These new $1,000 rebates are really going to get people excited. There has never been a better time or an easier way to make energy efficiency upgrades.”
EnergySmart services and large energy efficiency rebates are also available to all businesses in Boulder County.
EnergySmart is funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act through the U.S. Department of Energy’s BetterBuildings grant program and is sponsored in partnership by Boulder County, the cities of Boulder and Longmont, Xcel Energy and the Platte River Power Authority. Residential services are administered by Populus, LLC.
CU-BOULDER STUDENT SHANE BALDAUF WINS NATIONAL UDALL SCHOLARSHIP
Apr 22nd
The $5,000 scholarship from the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation is awarded to U.S. sophomores and juniors with a commitment to careers related to the environment, Native American health care or tribal public policy. He will be recognized at an August ceremony in Tucson, Ariz., attended by other recipients, policymakers and community leaders.
Since setting foot on the CU-Boulder campus with a Boettcher Scholarship, which covers tuition and living expenses for four years, Baldauf has committed to using the time he would have spent working to pay for college for volunteering. His volunteer work with Flatirons Habitat for Humanity has enriched his interest in sustainable building practices and civic engagement.
“Not only is ‘green’ construction good for the environment, but homes that perform more efficiently benefit the occupants too,” said Baldauf. “If you think about it, the people who most need affordable housing are also the ones who need the lowest utility bills, and we’re working to provide that situation through Habitat for Humanity houses.”
Baldauf co-founded the company BOULD, which implements a program called HabitatPro. The program helps integrate U.S. Green Building Council benchmarks called Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, standards into Habitat for Humanity construction. Through HabitatPro, professionals and students working and volunteering grow from experiential learning opportunities.
“Students can come out and gain unique, hands-on experience by building LEED homes, while also earning LEED professional credentials,” said Baldauf. “These Habitat houses are some of the most sustainable being built anywhere, and the experience gives participants a leg up in the building design and construction job market.”
Since 1996, eight CU-Boulder students have been recognized with a Udall Scholarship.
“Having yet another CU student recognized by the Udall Foundation is a wonderful testament to our students’ commitment to work on environmental issues and community development,” said Deborah Viles, top scholarship director at CU-Boulder. “Shane has shown exemplary skills and dedication as a student and he will undoubtedly make significant contributions to society in his career.”
An independent review committee selected this year’s class of 80 Udall Scholars. Baldauf was chosen from a pool of 510 candidates nominated by 231 colleges and universities across the country.
For a listing of all the 2011 Udall Scholars and honorable mentions, as well as more information about the Udall Foundation and its programs, visit http://www.udall.gov.
-CU-
WHO WANTS TO DELIBERATE WITH POLITICIANS? MORE THAN SOME EXPECTED, STUDY FINDS
Apr 4th
Given that, the thinking goes, it’s reasonable to conclude that citizens want less, not more, involvement in politics.
But that widely accepted theory does not survive empirical scrutiny, a team of researchers that includes a University of Colorado Boulder political scientist found.
Rather than rejecting political discourse, most people express strong interest in deliberating with real politicians, the team found. Further, when citizens are offered the chance to discuss political issues with their legislators, significant numbers do.
The view of the American public as desperate to avoid politics is “deeply misleading,” the team wrote in a recent edition of American Political Science Review. The work joins a growing number of studies applying empirical analysis to political theories of deliberative democracy.
The team was led by Michael Neblo of Ohio State University and included Kevin Esterling of the University of California, Riverside, Ryan Kennedy at the University of Houston, David Lazer of Northeastern University and Harvard University, and Anand Sokhey of CU-Boulder.
Sokhey and his colleagues suggest that some political theorists reached an erroneous conclusion because they started with the wrong question, namely, “Who actually deliberates?”
The answer, of course, is that few people engage in deliberative democracy.
But Sokhey’s team essentially posed a different question: “Who is willing to deliberate?” The team found that large majorities of citizens, even those disgusted by politics, are willing to participate—and, when given the chance, many do.
Sokhey puts it this way: “If people perceive politicians to be more responsive and less corrupt … would people be more willing to be involved?” The answer is yes. “They’re happy to be involved.”
That was surprising, he says, adding that the kinds of people who wanted to participate also was unexpected. The traditional view is that people who are older, wealthier, well-educated and white are more likely to become engaged in politics.
“We don’t find that a lot of that holds here,” Sokhey says.
The team found that younger people and non-whites were willing to join political deliberations.
The researchers set out to test two competing theories of political involvement. One theory, dubbed “stealth democracy,” holds that people are often disgusted by politics, believe politicians are generally corrupt, and that when they do join the political process, they do so largely to thwart political corruption.
If politics were less corrupt, the theory holds, citizens would happily retreat to their private lives and let government run quietly and efficiently in the background.
But the theory of stealth democracy contradicts one of the deliberative theory’s central claims: that citizen apathy is actually caused by frustration and disempowerment in the system. “If the political process could be rendered more rational and responsive in their eyes, then they would be moreinclined to engage in it robustly,” the authors write, adding:
“The disagreement between the stealth thesis and the deliberative thesis could hardly be clearer, and the stakes on which is right could hardly be higher.”
The research team began with hypothetical questions posed to 404 subjects.
For instance, they asked the following: “If politics were [less/more] influenced by self-serving officials and powerful special interests, do you think that you would be more or less interested in getting involved in politics?” Respondents indicated their interest on a 1-5 scale.
Those who would participate less if politics were less corrupt fit the stealth-democracy thesis. Those who would participate more fit the deliberative thesis.
The results were significant. Eight times more people fit the deliberative profile than the stealth profile, suggesting that the “stealth” view is not widely held.
But that was just the response to items about stealth vs. deliberative attitudes. When the researchers made a real offer to deliberate with a real member of Congress, 65 percent agreed.
The study’s participants were offered the chance to deliberate online with their congressional representative. The members of Congress came from 12 congressional districts spread across four major geographic regions. The politicians included five Republicans and seven Democrats who were ideologically diverse.
Most surprisingly, the authors note, both those holding “stealth” and “deliberative” views were eager to discuss politics with real politicians. But according to the stealth thesis, such eagerness should have been found mostly among deliberative democrats.
The explanation, the authors conclude, is that “People do not really hold stealth democracy as their first preference. Instead, they will settle for stealth democracy if the civics-textbook version of deliberative representative democracy is not achievable.”
The work of Neblo, Sokhey and the rest of the team was funded by a grant from the Digital Government Program of the National Science Foundation.
Read more on this story soon in Colorado Arts & Sciences Magazine at http://artsandsciences.colorado.edu/magazine/.
–