The gobs of stimulus money passed by Congress are starting to re-surface as real live projects.

Now it's time to see how much of it goes toward worthwhile pursuits. Especially relevant to me will be the funds certain to impact the cleantech arena. Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Energy announced, through a flurry of press releases, $8 billion in grants for weatherization and energy efficiency.

The first installment of $780 million will be released in the next few days, no doubt unleashing a wave of fraud and corruption.

I'm kidding of course. But the allocation of this money for spackle-ready projects is one of the first measurable fairness tests of the stimulus.

Let's analyze who got what.

Obama's weatherization money, up to $6,500 per home, will be available to households making up to $44k for a family of four. The improvements, which canl include adding insulation, fixing leaks and upgrading heating and cooling systems, are expected to pay for themselves many times over, reaping 32% savings in energy bills and saving hundreds of dollars a year for the average family.

"This energy efficiency funding for states is an important investment in making America more energy independent, creating a cleaner economy and creating more jobs for the 21st century that can’t be outsourced," said a gleamy-toothed Joe Biden. According to DOE, the spending is estimated to create 87,000 jobs in the U.S.

Energy efficiency is finally gaining the reputation it deserves, as a top-notch power source of its own. "Even as we seize the enormous potential of clean energy sources like wind and solar, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act makes a major investment in energy efficiency, which is the most cost effective route to energy independence," Chu said.

Now on to the lottery results. As you would expect, the big winners were Texas ($546m), New York ($518m), and California ($412). But some rudimentary Excel math finds some interesting results when you compare state populations* with their federal cash haul. For example, President Obama's home state of Illinois got nearly as much money as California, even though it has 1/3 of the population.

Small states pulled in the most per resident, with wind-swept North Dakota finding itself at #1 with over $77 for each Dakotan. California's 3 digit number may be impressive, but they were dead last by the money/person ratio with a paltry $11. I should also mention that I wasn't able to find any information on funds for the District of Columbia, where I currently live. Could the District really have been hosed by its guests in the White House and Congress?

States especially hard hit by the economic crisis, such as Ohio and Michigan, ended up in the middle of the per capita figures, both at around $32 a pop.

Of course, it's difficult to draw conclusions based on these figures. The funds are meant for low-income residents and it would be interesting to know how the numbers stack up when only poor households are accounted for. Overall, I can't say I'm appalled by the distribution. Mostly, I'm just glad that America is finally tapping energy efficiency as a powerful wrench in the energy independence toolbox.