Letter to the Editor:

Gas lamp conversions should be subsidized

Richard Rychtarik, Las Vegas

Saturday, Nov. 3, 2007 | 7:25 a.m.

The new LEED building energy conservation program seems to make sense. I'm all in favor of the "greening" of America. But when one probes a little deeper it seems that much of this greening is a result of greenbacks ' moving from Nevada taxpayers' wallets to already profitable corporations here in Nevada.

For the past several months I and other homeowners participating in a group called Southern Nevadans Against Gas Lamps have been trying to get Southwest Gas and the Nevada Public Utilities Commission to acknowledge that we have 17,000 natural gas street lamps operating here in Southern Nevada and they are anything but green.

Originally installed in some homeowners association neighborhoods by Southwest Gas at no charge to home builders, these gas lamps operate 24/7 and are the most energy-inefficient and ineffective lighting ever devised in modern times. There is no LEED or any subsidy available for removing these.

Corporations and homeowners alike will seek out the most cost-effective conservation methods on their own. Today the difference between Nevada's highly subsidized LEED program and homeowners without a gas lamp subsidy is a lobby.

The state is willing to pour hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money into corporate building construction while, to save money, many if not all of these corporations would have implemented conservation measures on their own.

Unlike corporations that lobbied and received LEED subsidies, 17,000 homeowners wanting to replace their gas lamps with energy-efficient, low-voltage lighting must first obtain the permission of 67 percent of their closest friends and neighbors in their homeowners association. Then they must pay Southwest Gas hundreds of dollars to "safely" disconnect these lamps from the main gas line.

Unlike all other local utilities , Southwest Gas does not offer homeowners, with or without gas lamps, any significant energy conservation rebates or subsidies. Guess they just want to keep all the "green" for themselves.