About
Accounts
Members
Friends
Click here to check if anything new just came in.
March 15 2010
Geoengineering: Will Attempts to "Play God" Lead to Ruin or Salvation?
The controversial new book SuperFreakonomics has stirred vociferous and vehement responses, with many accusing authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner of "getting it all wrong" in their chapter about global warming. In that chapter, Levitt and Dubner referenced the work of climatologist Ken Caldeira's work studying the implications of geoengineering – large-scale, deliberate manipulation of Earth's climate system – as a "solution" to the climate crisis that is poised to consume the 21st century. Many see geoengineering is a dangerous and hubristic path to take, exacerbating the damage already done in our attempts to manage and manipulate nature on a global scale.
Caldeira says he was misrepresented in SupurFreakonomics, but the respected climate scientist has not been as dismissive of geoengineering as most. Through his work climate modeling has shown that such schemes may actually help reduce the risk of unmanageable climate change.
The only plausible way in which we could start the earth cooling this century is to directly intervene in the climate system," says Caldeira.
Caldeira advocates a calmer approach to the tendentious issue of geoengineering, describing as "folly" the failure to at least look at the possibilities of geoengineering. Taking a "measured look" at the "good, bad, and ugly" of geoengineering schemes is the subject of a recent panel discussion held at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco.
Caldeira is joined with Dr. David Whelan, chief scientist for Boeing Integrated Defense Systems and Albert Lin, professor of law at the University of California at Davis, who specializes in environmental law and natural resources.
Moderated by Greg Dalton, the full discussion is available at FORA.tv. The segments below focus on the idea of "playing God" with the environment positing the idea of geoengineering as "our only hope."
March 10 2010
Green Oxymorons – Coming to Grips with Being Green
America is rife with confusion and contradictions about climate change. Contrary to what some may be thinking, a green oxymoron is not a colorful appellation for climate change deniers. An oxymoron is a figure of speech that combines normally contradictory terms. A green oxymoron is a figure of speech that combines normally contradictory terms in an environmental context.
Although world leaders agree about the importance of emissions reductions, recent COP15 negotiations exposed the conflicting agendas of wealthier and developing nations. US opinion is now divided on the veracity of climate change science, due in large part to some minor climate data discrepancies and the alleged contradictions unearthed in the hacked emails of a few climate scientists.
Republicans are betting that global warming skepticism will prove politically expedient. It wasn't long ago that some of the new breed of Republicans supported climate change legislation, people like Marco Rubio and Tim Pawlenty. Now the Republicans are unanimous in their efforts to undermine Obama's environmental agenda, even John McCain has reversed his support for emissions limits. Of the early contenders for the Republican nomination, five deny or question climate science.
Environmental hypocrisy is not solely a Republican trait; even those who have bought into efficiency are sometimes guilty of inconsistencies. Those who own more efficient appliances tend to run them longer and those who have more efficient lighting tend to leave them on longer. This is known as the SnackWell effect, a name derived from the cookies with low fat and sugar content, which often leads dieters to eat more of them.
Studies indicate that people who install more energy efficient lights lose 5% to 12% of the expected savings by leaving them on longer. A 2007 report by the UK Energy Research Centre estimated that globally, this rebound effect could reduce the savings from energy efficiency by 10% or more.
Even some owners of the Toyota's Prius, one of the most successful green products in the US, buy the car for what is being called "conspicuous conservation." The term is derived from conspicuous consumption, which is defined as an extravagant and ostentatious expenditure meant to gratify the psychological craving for status or esteem. Conspicuous conservation reflects the importance of being perceived as environmentally aware, rather than a preoccupation with benefiting the planet.
Support for alternative energy production in the US comes with its own apparent paradox. Americans may be willing to pay for alternative energy, but there is a pricing perception gap, meaning they may not be prepared to pay the full cost.
Similarly, while green marketing may be booming, consumers are not always willing to pay more for a given product or service just because it is more environmentally friendly. Greenwashing is at epidemic proportions and marketing communications are awash with conflicting interests.
To further confuse the issue, one of the pillars of sustainability, know as the triple bottom line (TBL) is under assault from academics. This concept was introduced by two pioneering sustainability consulting firms in the early 1990's. Although many have adopted the notion of TBL, others are criticizing the absence of precise definitions and methodologies that lack financial rigor.
It is undeniably onerous to be an environmentally sensitive business owner or consumer. Contradictions abound where you may least expect them. Whole Foods may seem like a great company because they sell organic and vegan food. However, they are also expensive and a union breaking company. The contradictions also work in reverse; companies with questionable environmental records sell green products. Wal-Mart sells CFL light bulbs and McDonald’s uses milk that has no genetically engineered hormones.
Environmental concerns like clean air and healthy food are now mainstream issues. It would be incorrect to assume that contradictions signal the decline of the environmental movement. With so many vested interests at play, contradictions are to be expected. There will always be some who fear change and no one should expect entrenched interests like big oil to fade away quietly.
The environmental crisis is forcing us to radically and fundamentally change our ways, and while contradictions may seem like an intractable paradox, such inconsistencies are a normal part of green's emergence as the salient economic driver of our times. Green oxymorons do not signal an end to environmentalism, they are a normal part of the transition to a new economic paradigm.
______________________________________________________________
Richard Matthews is a consultant, eco-entrepreneur, sustainable investor and writer. He is the owner of THE GREEN MARKET, one of the Web’s most comprehensive resources for news, information and tools on sustainability. He is also the author of numerous articles on sustainable positioning, green investing, enviro-politics and eco-economics.
March 08 2010
New Report Offers Little Hope for International Climate Agreement, Suggests "New Thinking" in Climate Diplomacy
It's the big pink elephant in the room that few others wish to acknowledge, but a central theme in a new report by former climate negotiator Nigel Purvis: An international climate change treaty isn't likely to be signed anytime soon.
Purvis served as president Clinton's chief UN climate negotiator, and in his report released today Purvis says that the United States and Europe should "accept reality" and take immediate practical steps to deal with global warming.
The report, entitled Rethinking Climate Diplomacy: New ideas for transatlantic cooperation post-Copenhagen, co-authored by Purvis and Andrew Stevenson, a research assistant at the think tank Resources for the Future, see opportunity in their grim assessment:
While the outlook may seem bleak, the United States and Europe have a number of meaningful opportunities for ratcheting up global climate action," Purvis and Stevenson write. "Progress will depend, however, on letting go of cherished, unrealistic goals while opening up to new ways of thinking."
The report is a contribution to the Brussels Forum paper series through the German Marshall Fund, and is one part of a growing body of analysis that attempts to sort out the "mixed and messy," as Purvis calls it, outcome of the COP15 climate conference in Copenhagen that produced the Copenhagen Accord.
Purvis and Stevenson argue that two fundamental truths emerged as a consequence of COP15: America might make promises it can't keep. Conversely, China won't make promises, but will act.
Even though many saw China as a major spoiler at COP15, strongly resisting a "top-down international climate protection regime" that threatens state control and its economic self-interest, most analysts expect China to make good on its promise to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, meeting or even exceeding its stated goals.
Despite president Obama's expression of support for climate legislation, the reality is that the Senate will likely be unable to act on any climate bill this year (indeed, the Senate appears unable to act on any substantive legislation of late, but that is fodder for another post on another blog).
Even though the Copenhagen Accord is a step forward, it does not fundamentally change the political calculus in the Senate," say the authors.
As a consequence, Europe must "come to terms with the unfortunate truth" that the United States won't be a leader in the climate fight and should thus be "prepared to continue leading alone."
Working through the catch-22
The major stumbling block to an international climate treaty coming into COP15 proved the insurmountable hurdle going out: developing countries like China and India will not agree to any treaty that puts poor nations on a par with rich developed nations that carry the baggage of decades of greenhouse gas emissions. And on the other hand, rich industrialized nations like the US won't go along with an agreement that does not apply equally to rapidly emerging economies – in particular China.
Therefore, it is time, the report argues, to adopt a new way of thinking. One that does not insist on trying to convince countries the need to build a climate protection program based on international commitments.
The primary transatlantic climate strategy needs to become directly incentivizing action and penalizing inaction," the report states.
Purvis said in an interview that the new partnerships that emerged last year between the United States and developing countries like China and India are a good start, but need to be "dramatically ramped-up," with wealthy nations looking for ways to raise funds for climate finance, suggesting fees on international transport as one possible area.
Emission reductions are urgently needed and can be achieved now if funds are made available, with economic and security co-benefits for the United States, Europe and the world," Purvis and Stevenson wrote.
Further, despite the political resistance, funds should more easily flow to rapidly developing countries, like China and India, whose emissions are growing in tandem with their expanding economies.
In short, a "zero-sum" mindset, where one country's advantage comes at another's disadvantage, should be replaced with a "non zero-sum" mindset that incorporates the mutual benefits of bilateral cooperation.
Making good on financial pledges without too many conditions related to global climate talks is essential," they write. "The key here is to understand that doing so is not raising the white flag of surrender, but that helping to reduce the cost of climate action is a winning strategy for convincing developing nations to act even if those nations continue to resist international climate conditions."
Source and further reading
ClimateWire (subscription required)
Report: Rethinking Climate Diplomacy (pdf)
March 05 2010
What's Up With the Rainforest: Will Turning Vegetarian Save the Planet?
With the catastrophic earthquakes in Haiti and now Chile occurring within two months of each other, we can't help but be reminded just how powerful mother nature can be, possessing the ability to change our entire way of life in an instant. In the wake of such tragedies, the simple fact remains, there are many things in this world that we don't have the ability to change, predict or stop from happening. We must also realize the countless opportunities we are given each day to make what we can do count for something. This week the Rainforest Newsladder has reflected this notion by highlighting the ways in which some individuals, groups, and countries are seizing the moment and taking advantage of the power they do have. Along with our partner Rainforest Alliance, we encourage you become an active part of the movement.
More of us are becoming conscious of how the decisions we make in our daily lives have a much broader impact on the global community, as evident through our first group of stories that ask, "Will turning vegetarian save the planet?" Of course this wouldn't solve all our problems, but studies show that livestock agriculture produces more greenhouse gas emissions than every train, truck, car and aeroplane put together. Our food habits do have an immense impact on the earth and simply shifting towards a more vegetarian diet will unfold many benefits for the environment. Taking notice, are university campuses across the nation who are participating in the campaign "Meatless Monday" to pledge their support for an increased ecological sustainability. UCSB has recently joined the movement, agreeing to one day a week, removing all meat from one of the dining commons, and beef from the remaining three. So even if you're a dire hard meat lover, cutting out the red stuff for one day, viewing meat as more of a luxury, rather than a staple, and choosing local, sustainably produced meat will make a difference.
Even decisions as small as selecting that perfect bottle of wine to go with your dinner provides an opportunity to make an eco-friendly choice. Patrick Spencer, director of Cork ReHarvest, explains how cork is 'green' - helping to sustain forests, preserve biodiversity, and is recyclable. So the next time you reach for a bottle, make sure you pay attention to the top as much as you do to the name on the label and chose one with cork, not aluminum or plastic screwcaps.
As we have discussed before, deforestation has been detrimental to rainforests and our environment. But this week we have seen cooperation between various countries working towards creating sustainable land practices, as a group of eleven tropical rainforest countries, dubbed as F-11, have pledged to make a commitment to sustainable forest management. Indonesia and Australia have also come together, launching a $27 million project to help fight deforestation in Sumatra, hoping to help curb greenhouse gas emissions and boost a UN-backed forest-carbon trading scheme.
It is important that we each make an effort towards a healthier planet, and that starts by becoming informed on what kind of choices you can make that will help solve this crisis. So begin by checking out the Rainforest Newsladder to discover what is going on all over the world, and then post your own stories to make sure the important issues of today are being talked about. You can also continue the conversation and connect with other concerned citizens on our Facebook page.
—————-
James Boyce is the founder of Common Sense, an advertising agency supporting progressive causes like the Rainforest Alliance, Human Rights First, Natural Resources Defense Council, and others. James was one of the original contributors to The Huffington Post and is one of the top progressive bloggers in the country.
February 24 2010
Recovery Act Stimulus Report: Jobs for a Sustainable Future
President Obama's stimulus has been given mixed reviews due in large part to the current US jobless rate. With unemployment hovering just below 10 percent, these are the worst unemployment numbers in more than a quarter-century. In the past two years, 7.7 million jobs have been lost in the United States and two million jobs have disappeared since Congress passed the stimulus plan.
Despite the public's understandable preoccupation with jobs, the success of the stimulus plan, known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act), must be gauged by more than current unemployment figures.
The President's stimulus package helped rescue America from the brink of an economic abyss. "[I]t is largely thanks to the recovery act that a second depression is no longer a possibility," Obama said. Many states and local governments owe their fiscal survival to the stimulus and thousands of projects were initiated with stimulus money. "There has never been a program of this scale, moved at this speed, that has been enacted as effectively and as transparently as the recovery act," the President declared.
There is strong evidence to support the President's assessments. The economic growth in recent months lends credence to the claim that the US is on the road to recovery. The gross domestic product was sinking at an annual rate of 6.4 percent at the beginning of last year, but is now growing at a rate of 5.4 percent. Most economists agree that the infusion of federal money has contributed to the impressive growth.
Despite these historic accomplishments, the efficacy of Obama’s stimulus efforts is being obscured by critics who point to high unemployment. However, these critics fail to acknowledge that jobs are a lagging economic indicator, meaning they trail behind the overall economic cycle.
We are seeing signs of improvement on the unemployment front. Jobless rates, once above 10 percent, dipped to 9.7 percent last month. Job losses have slowed dramatically, from 779,000 in January 2009 to about 20,000 last month, and Obama's advisers are predicting job growth in the next few months.
Millions of jobs were created or preserved by the bill. “The economy would have lost closer to five million [jobs] without stimulus,” said Mark Zandi of Moody’s Economy.com
The general consensus amongst economists suggests that Obama's stimulus package was indeed effective, "The stimulus worked," without it, "the unemployment rate would probably be closer to 11 percent and the economy might not have grown at all last year.” declared Stuart Hoffman, the chief economist at PNC Bank.
The forecast for 2010 anticipates 1.1 million more jobs, many of which will be green. Cleantech investment and job creation continues to play a central role in the recovery. The stimulus plan will provide roughly $70 billion for the nation's energy economy, most of it for clean energy initiatives.
Many industries are already benefiting from stimulus spending, including those associated with the smart grid, electric vehicles and battery technology. The stimulus allotment to smart grid projects amounts to $3.4 billion in grants. They have been awarded to private companies, utilities, manufacturers and cities in 49 states. Advanced battery and electric vehicle projects have been allotted $2.4 billion in grants and and $300 million in grants will go towards the acquisition of 9,000 alternative fuel and energy efficient vehicles under the DOE's Clean Cities program.
As a jobs creator, clean tech is proving to be a lucrative investment, providing even better returns than traditional industries. About 30 percent of the jobs are going to be in construction for building retrofits and Robert Poland, Co-Director of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, says that investing in building retrofits to weatherize houses will generate many more jobs than investing in oil and gas drilling.
The stimulus is creating new employment opportunities in renewable energy. The solar industry added 18,000 new American jobs in 2009 due to the Recovery Act. "We know that clean energy is a proven job creator," Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer recently told reporters. She cited a 2009 study by researchers at the University of California Berkeley, the University of Illinois and Yale University, which concluded that the Clean Energy and Security Act that was passed last year by the House of Representatives could create between 918,000 and 1.9 million jobs over 10 years. Those jobs would contribute between $39 billion and $111 billion to the economy, the researchers said.
The Senate has yet to vote on the Clean Energy and Security Act and the government has only spent one-third of the money set aside in the Recovery Act. The program (originally estimated at $787 billion, now priced at $862 billion) will continue infusing federal money into the economy into 2011. Over the next 12 months, we could see an additional $300 billion in government stimulus investment.
Vice President Joe Biden has overseen the implementation of the Recovery Act, he recently presented his first annual progress report. Entitled "Recovery by the Numbers," (pdf) the report concludes that,
The most exciting thing about the Recovery Act is not what we've done, but what lies ahead. Many Recovery Act programs that will build the groundwork for the economy of the 21st century will be implemented in the next few months."
According to Steve Flutter, vice president of Ecomagination, a division of General Electric devoted to renewable energy, there could be 116,000 new jobs just from wind projects this year. The stimulus package also dedicates $20 billion in spending and loan guarantees for a smart electrical grid. Flutter says building a new grid could provide 80,000 new jobs over the next four years.
The Recovery Act not only staved off a second Great Depression and reversed a declining economy, it is driving efficiency initiatives and fueling the new energy economy. It is also providing green jobs while laying the foundation for a more sustainable future.
____________________________________________________
Richard Matthews is a consultant, eco-entrepreneur, sustainable investor and writer. He is the owner of THE GREEN MARKET, one of the Web’s most comprehensive resources for news, information and tools on sustainability. He is also the author of numerous articles on sustainable positioning, green investing, enviro-politics and eco-economics.
February 04 2010
An Open Letter to President Obama from the Post Carbon Institute
February 1, 2010
Dear President Obama,
Your State of the Union speech last week laudably referenced clean tech and renewable energy several times. We ask that you follow your words with action, by leading the transition to a post-carbon economy and a healthier world.
You also spoke of our need to face hard truths.
Hard truth: Our continued, willful reliance on fossil fuels is making our planet uninhabitable. We are evicting ourselves from the only paradise we’ve ever known.
Hard truth: No combination of current and anticipated renewable sources can maintain our profligate energy usage as the global supply of fossil fuels heads for terminal decline.
For the recently releasd Searching for a Miracle, Post Carbon Institute Senior Fellow Richard Heinberg conducted a “net energy” analysis of 18 different energy sources (including nuclear and “clean coal”). He concluded that the amount of energy available after accounting for the energy used in extraction and production of those sources is—at our current and anticipated rates of consumption—insufficient to get us “over the hump” to a post-carbon world.
Our 29 Post Carbon Institute Fellows—experts in the leading economic, energy, and environmental issues of the day—all agree that this "net energy" deficit is just one of many interrelated crises shaping the 21st century. Each crisis alone creates formidable challenges; in combination, their complexity admits no simple solution. But given their direness, inaction risks tragedy.
Mr. President, we respect you and your advisors and appreciate the enormity of the dilemmas you and all of us confront. When a great leader frames a great challenge, a resilient will people rise to meet the opportunity. And so we ask, Mr. President, that you tell the American people that we must:
- Face reality. In a carbon-constrained world, true prosperity comes not from heedless growth, but from shared security, community, and liberty.
- Prepare for the future. Conservation, with an emphasis on building a green economy and revitalizing struggling communities, offers cost-effective “found” energy, and the most immediate and long-term return on investment.
- Lead the way. A substantial investment in renewable energy, with an emphasis on distributed solar and wind, offers the best hope for moving to a sustainable economy and environment.
Mr. President, lead us in creating a future worth inheriting. Post Carbon Institute and our Fellows will support you and your team in whatever capacity we can. We believe that the American people, and the world’s people, will support you as well.
With hope,
Asher Miller
Executive Director
Post Carbon Institute
————
The Post Carbon Institute
The Post Carbon Institute was founded in 2003 with the mission of "leading the transition to a more resilient, equitable, and sustainable world." As this open letter states, the challenges facing our civilization in a new century do not stem from single isolated issues. It isn't climate, or biodiversity, or dependence on fossil fuels, or water and food, or over-consumption. It's about all these issues – and more – that integrate into how we choose to live our lives and provide future generations with a habitable and sustainable planet.
Post Carbon Institute provides all sectors of society, from individuals to business and government, with the resources needed to understand and respond to these interrelated challenges of economy, energy, and environment.
The vision of PCI is a world of sustainable, resilient communities based on "re-localized" economies thriving within ecological limits.
The Post Carbon Institute has gathered 28 world-renowned fellows to help light this path to a livable future led by Senior Fellow Richard Heinberg and including such figures as Bill McKibben, Wes Jackson, David Orr, and Tom Whipple.
"Like it or not we are here." We live in challenging, exciting, often frightening times. The issues we face are almost too much to fully digest and too easy to brush under the carpet and ignore – for now. PCI hopes to help lead the way out of comfortable complacency into a new world based an equality and sustainability.
The PCI Manifesto (pdf)
January 13 2010
Strategic Environmental Philanthropy
Businesses are often perceived as environmentally destructive forces, but they can also be powerful models of change. An organization that addresses societal needs can at the same time advance business interests.
Strategic philanthropy emerged in the 1980s as a management practice to support social responsibility in organizations in the United States. Strategic philanthropy is defined by Dr. Linda Ferrell as "the synergistic use of organizational core competencies and resources to address key stakeholder’s interests and to achieve both organizational and social benefits."
Through strategic environmental philanthropy, businesses can benefit the environment by increasing their efficiency and disseminating the green message. Strategic environmental philanthropy can be useful in distinguishing a business from competitors. The key is putting the economy to work for the environment.
Here are a few simple ways even small companies can help environmental causes while building their brand and bettering their bottom lines:
- Offer products to environmental groups which they in turn sell to their members for a share of profits.
- Provide coupons to environmental groups that earn a percentage of the profits.
- Offer business premises for environmental fundraisers or receptions.
The key to value return is giving (discounted purchases, a percentage of sales, or gift certificates).
Strategic environmental philanthropy is more than a transparent effort to improve a company’s image. Businesses must strive to understand and meet all needs, including those of the environment. There are a host of adverse consequences to being guided by profit alone, such as public skepticism, distrust, and employee dissatisfaction.
Former Coca-Cola CEO, Roberto Goizueta noted, “By embracing a strategic approach to philanthropy, corporations fulfill their responsibility to their shareholders, and their commitment to the community.”
Businesses are increasingly seeing the value of environmental considerations, and philanthropy is increasingly being integrated within the corporate strategic plan. Many firms have discovered the performance benefits of philanthropy, including increased customer loyalty, enhanced company reputation, strengthened employee commitment, and productivity.
There can be no environmental leadership from the business community without profit. It is vital that we explore viable business strategies for reducing our adverse impact on the planet. Strategic environmental philanthropy does not preclude profits. It enhances them to the good of all and the environment.
Strategic environmental philanthropy improves businesses and the environment, while the unbridled pursuit of pure profit actually undermines the bottom line.
___________________________________________
Richard Matthews is a consultant, eco-entrepreneur, sustainable investor and writer. He is the owner of THE GREEN MARKET, one of the Web’s most comprehensive resources for information and tools on sustainability. He is also the author of numerous articles on sustainable positioning, green investing, enviro-politics and eco-economics.
January 12 2010
"Why I Went to COP15" – My Short Contribution to Planet Positive's 2020 Vision Campaign
It was in the wee hours of Saturday December 19th that a bleary-eyed UNFCCC secretary-general Yvo de Boer was putting the best face he could on the Copenhagen Accord for the remaining press at the Bella Center in Copenhagen – the final official press conference from COP15. I was not among those remaining press, instead making my way on a dark and cold Copenhagen morning to the bus, subway, and airplane that would take me home.
Still less than a month from the experience, there remain many notes to sort through and experiences to ponder as I figure what I saw and heard throughout the Bella Center and Copenhagen those two weeks of COP15 and what it all means – both to me personally and for the world in general. My press pass sitting here amongst those notes and materials gathered over ten days are food for thought in the aftermath of COP15.
Generally considered a highly flawed process leading to an equally flawed outcome, COP15 also introduced the world – and myself – to a growing movement of citizen activism and civil society action that counters and challenges the slow-moving and largely inadequate international political process. For me, that was one of the most positive aspects of my Copenhagen experience – witnessing the growing grassroots movement ready to challenge old and unsustainable ways of thinking and living.
One such example was the brief meeting I had with Christina Wood of Planet Positive, a UK-based advocacy organization seeking to leverage the efforts of the world community to address climate change, as well as helping all of us to envision a better world in the future. How taking action now to reduce our footprint on this earth will lead to a fuller and better life in the future – focusing on the positive.
I met Christina at the Klimaforum in Copenhagen, billed as the "citizen's alternative" to the official COP15 climate conference with its tightly controlled access. Christina explained the work of Planet Positive, specifically the launch of their 2020 Vision Campaign. The campaign is a vehicle for business leaders, activists, celebrities, school children, and citizens from around the world to tell their story and express their vision for a better world – and inspirational message of hope through action.
The following video is my impromptu, unrehearsed contribution to the effort, filmed by Christina inside the Klimaforum. You can offer your 2020 Vision too, and help inspire others to envision a positive future.
————
Unlike others with press passes to COP15, nobody was paying me to be there, so what reason did I have for making the trip to Denmark?
The 2020 Vision Opportunity
Planet Positive would like you to provide your 2020 Vision. They are inviting environmentalists, scientists, business leaders, politicians, celebrities and school children to create and upload their 2020 Vision in preparation for the launch of the campaign.
- • Create and upload your 2020 Vision• Communicate your actions, innovations & aspirations
• Reach a global community
• Encourage staff and customer engagement
• Partner marketing with other 2020 Vision providers
January 05 2010
Bahrain's GPIC Launches Middle East's First Advanced Carbon Capture System
Bahrain's Gulf Petrochemical Industries Co. (GPIC) commissioned one of the world's largest and the Middle East's first carbon capture system at its Sitra petrochemical complex yesterday. The $55 million system should be able to capture as much as or more than 90%–some 450 metric tons per day–of the CO2 produced by the complex's oil refinery. Absorbed from flue gas, the captured carbon dioxide will then be used to synthesize methanol and urea, according to an Arab News report.
The project is one of the few concrete, commercial-scale applications of advanced carbon capture technology, as well as an example of international technology transfer. Known as the "KM CDR Process" (Kansai-Mitsubishi Carbon Dioxide Recovery Process), GPIC licensed the technology from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in January, 2008. Malaysia's Petronas Fertilizer was the first to make use of the process outside of Japan back in 1999 with the launch of a 200 mtpd system. The CRD technology has also been licensed to Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd. and the UAE's Ruwais Fertilizer Industries.
"This is yet another milestone towards the company’s commitment to a clean environment,” Sheikh Isa bin Ali Al-Khalifa, GPIC board chairman and an adviser to Bahrain's prime minister for oil and industrial affairs, was quoted as saying. “Such initiative confirms the company’s policy to preserve the environment by reducing human-caused global warming and the severe increases in temperatures and leading toward disastrous environmental consequences.”
Bahrain's GPIC Launches ME's First Advanced Carbon Capture System
Bahrain's Gulf Petrochemical Industries Co. (GPIC) commissioned one of the world's largest and the Middle East's first carbon capture system at its Sitra petrochemical complex yesterday. The $55 million system should be able to capture as much as or more than 90%–some 450 metric tons per day–of the CO2 produced by the complex's oil refinery. Absorbed from flue gas, the captured carbon dioxide will then be used to synthesize methanol and urea, according to an Arab News report.
The project is one of the few concrete, commercial-scale applications of advanced carbon capture technology, as well as an example of international technology transfer. Known as the "KM CDR Process" (Kansai-Mitsubishi Carbon Dioxide Recovery Process), GPIC licensed the technology from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in January, 2008. Malaysia's Petronas Fertilizer was the first to make use of the process outside of Japan back in 1999 with the launch of a 200 mtpd system. The CRD technology has also been licensed to Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd. and the UAE's Ruwais Fertilizer Industries.
"This is yet another milestone towards the company’s commitment to a clean environment,” Sheikh Isa bin Ali Al-Khalifa, GPIC board chairman and an adviser to Bahrain's prime minister for oil and industrial affairs, was quoted as saying. “Such initiative confirms the company’s policy to preserve the environment by reducing human-caused global warming and the severe increases in temperatures and leading toward disastrous environmental consequences.”
January 04 2010
Solar CITIES Water Heaters, Biogas Digesters Help Cairo Poor; Face Uphill Struggle for Adoption
Solar panels and bio-gas units made primarily from recycled materials and installed on building roofs in one of the poorest and most populous neighborhoods of Cairo are helping residents cut their energy bills, greenhouse gas emissions and waste, according to a report by IPS's Cam McGrath. One family man told McGrath that two solar panels and a biogas unit on his roof has lowered his monthly utility bill by almost 50%.
This and similar development projects led by Thomas Culhane's Solar CITIES (Connecting Community and Integrating Technologies for Industrial Ecosystems) are also unleashing innovation, creating employment and increasing self-reliance by tapping into local populations, helping them develop new skills and making use of affordable, primarily local , recycled materials and often simple but effective tools and technology.
"There is no 'one size fits all' in development and part of the problem is precisely that so-called 'experts' come in and try to promote products and designs that are inappropriate for the local community," Culhane is quoted as
saying.
Solar CITIES has built 35 solar water heaters in Egypt since 2007 and installed them on rooftops in underdeveloped areas of Cairo that frequently suffer from power and water cuts. Eight biogas digesters have been built so far. They convert organic garbage into cooking gas.
Competing Against Heavily Subsidized Gas & Electricity
Though cheap over the long run, one of the problems facing greater adopption of these alternative technologies and systems is getting enough money to pay for a solar water heater or biogas digester.
"It's hard to convince people here to invest in clean energy," one resident told McGrath. "As a household why should they invest up to 1,000 Egyptian pounds (182 dollars) in bio-gas when it costs just six or seven for a butagas cylinder, which lasts two weeks and is much easier to handle?"
With the Egyptian government subsidizing butagas and electricity heavily, it may take as many as 15 years to recoup the cost of a Solar CITIES solar heater or biogas digester, he continues. That may change sooner rather than later, however. The Egyptian government has said it plans to phase out energy subsidies in the next 4 to 7 years, according to the report.
December 31 2009
The Copenhagen Wheel – Hybrid Power Bike System Unveiled for COP15
The Copenhagen Wheel was unveiled on December 15 at the COP15 climate conference. The hybrid power kit installs on a regular bicycle and stores power through normal cycling and braking. The stored power then provides a boost when you need it. The system can be controlled through your smart phone, locking and unlocking your bike, monitoring your effort level, setting the amount of "boost" you need, and providing traffic information, routing, city destination information – even pollution levels.
The Copenhagen Wheel project was conceived and developed by the SENSEable City Lab for the Kobenhavns Kommune. Ducati Energia assisted on developing prototypes for the project, and funding was provided from Danish Ministry for the Environment. Progical Solutions LLC provided technical support for the iphone control of the bikes.
December 30 2009
Eco-Business Innovations 2009 Year End Review
Despite sinking into the deepest recession since the Great Depression, the levels of green innovation rose to historic heights in 2009. This has been a trying year marked by economic decline and the near collapse of global finance. On the environmental front, progress was hampered by an uncooperative US Senate, the ruse of climate-gate and a less than stellar result at COP15. However, the plethora of bad economic and environmental news in 2009 overshadowed the wealth of eco-innovation.
Led by renewable energy, the stock market has been a guiding ray of hope. Solar and wind have continued their meteoric rise and this year they were joined by geothermal, which is experiencing significant growth. The Geothermal Energy Association year-end review indicated that despite the recession, geothermal energy grew at a rapid pace in 2009, adding 750 full time jobs and 2,827 construction-related jobs due to a roughly $800 million investment in the technology. US geothermal power capacity rose 6 percent during the year. Currently, 144 new geothermal plants are under development in the US.
In 2009 governments encouraged eco-innovation in a variety of ways. Governments all around the world poured stimulus money into their economies with the aim of increasing research, development and implementation of greener technologies, practices and processes.
Government efforts are not restricted to spending. In the UK, the Intellectual Property Office announced that green inventions will be fast tracked through the patent process. Rather than taking 2-3 years, under the new patent guidelines green inventions can now be patented in 9 months. Expediting the patents for eco-inventions contributes to sustainable growth, enhances security, creates jobs and offers benefits to business, consumers and the wider economy.
Companies are innovating countless products that reduce emissions through greater efficiency. Energyware has developed Energyfit, an energy saving software for computer networks. This software is designed to help both small and large businesses cut electric bills and reduce CO2 emissions. Philips Electronics has developed an LED bulb that reportedly produces as much light as a 60W incandescent bulb using less than 10W, and lasting 25 times as long.
Not all great ideas come from corporate behemoths, many small ventures also benefited from eco-inventiveness in 2009. The founders of YouRenew.com launched a green business out of their dorm room at Yale University and are now moving into a new 4,000 square foot office. YouRenew.com pays for old electronic devices, which they in turn recycle. They are also launching a site for companies called CorporateRenew.com.
Throughout the last year, green business ideas have garnered attention and won contests at local fairs and international competitions. At a business idea contest hosted by the University of Michigan, there were over 2,000 submissions and four of the nine winners had Green Ideas. The winning ideas included a portable solar-powered mini-generator and an inexpensive water condenser intended for use in the third world.
In 2009, the US Department of Energy launched its L Prize competition to encourage the development of a more energy efficient light bulb. The L Prize offers the incentive of a cash award and federal purchasing agreements worth approximately $10 million.
At a recent US business idea competition, 6 College students defeated CEOs and MBAs by coming up with an idea for a portable water bottle with an inbuilt filter. Their win earned them $27,500 in start-up funds, demonstrating that even these smaller contests are driving the green agenda and providing a platform and seed money for green innovation.
Eco-innovations are not restricted to products, they are also reaching into processes. This year, Johannes Schneider and his research team at the University of Mainz developed an algorithm that can help maximize the efficient use of confined shipping spaces, this decreases transportation costs and associated emissions.
The growth of green inventiveness is mirrored by the increasing number of green degree programs. As 2009 comes to a close, the clouds of economic disarray are being pierced by glimmers of green innovation.
___________________________________________
Richard Matthews is a consultant, eco-entrepreneur, sustainable investor and writer. He is the owner of THE GREEN MARKET, one of the Web’s most comprehensive resources for information and tools on sustainability. He is also the author of numerous articles on sustainable positioning, green investing, enviro-politics and eco-economics.
December 21 2009
Wangari Maathai’s REDD Belt Movement
By Elizabeth Baker
Wangari Maathai, the first environmentalist to win a Nobel Peace Prize, was honored at last Tuesday’s COP15 opening ceremony as a United Nations Messenger of Peace with special focus on the environment and climate change, raising the stakes for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in developing Countries (REDD) within the climate change agreement by putting a human face on the efforts to fund carbon trapping forestry programs in developing countries. Talks have stalled over developed countries' reluctance to commit to a financial package for developing countries and the lack of a commitment to sufficient CO2 reduction targets.
According to the UN, “Ms. Maathai has emerged as a symbol of unity among several climate change campaigns, including Tck Tck Tck Copenhagen, Hopenhagen, and Seal the Deal.” Through the work of the Green Belt Movement, which she founded in 1977, she is responsible for planting over 40 million trees across Africa. Her forest advocacy extends beyond her native Kenya with her service as the Goodwill ambassador for the Congo Forest, the second largest tropical rainforest in the world.
Professor, as she is known by Green Belt Movement colleagues, maintained high hopes for the outcome of COP15. She called the 110 heads of state from around the world “serious leaders.” Before they arrived last week, she said, “They know all the science. I am quite sure that they are not coming here for a dance.” On Saturday, December 12, Ms. Maathai remarked, “If we are lucky, REDD+. Even better, REDD++.”
Speaking on two panels at the COP15 parallel event Forest Day 3, held on Sunday, December 13 at the Copenhagen Radisson Falconer Hotel, Professor Maathai expressed strong support for REDD+. It includes conservation, sustainable forest management, and stock enhancement—defining aspects of the Green Belt Movement’s work—and was the most popular position at the close of Forest Day 3, according to the side event’s 1600 registered participants. Among those speaking were UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer; Denmark’s Minister for the Environment; Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC; Gro Harlem Bruntland, United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Change, and Nobel Prize winner Elinor Ostrom. The timing of Forest Day 3 allowed for many delegates and Ministers of the Environment from various countries to attend, despite its location outside the Bella Center where the formal negotiations are taking place.
Forests are known to be carbon sinks that release large volumes of carbon into the atmosphere when burned or degraded, with 17% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions arising from such activity. In addition to removing carbon from the air and reducing global warming, healthy forests provide ecosystem services such as water purification, predictable rainfall, prevention of soil erosion, biodiversity, firewood, food, and income. Arguing for the inclusion of wording to support indigenous peoples’ rights and a definition of forests that would exclude monoculture plantations, she asked, “What are you going to hunt and gather in a forest of eucalyptus?”
Ms. Maathai believes REDD efforts can be funded, verified, monitored and enforced based on 40 years of community-based forestry and cooperation with international partners. Ms. Maathai attributes the Green Belt Movement’s success in poverty eradication, job creation, and aforestation to paying women growers a small amount for only the trees that survive. A grassroots example, she believes the success of the Green Belt Movement shows the potential for investment-worthy projects across forested regions of the developing world.
Flanked by the African Development Bank and Congo Basin Forest Fund co-chair Paul Martin, Ms Maathai said Monday, “Money is not the problem.” Throughout the week, she has described the problem as one of world leaders not listening. “If they don’t listen, they don’t listen at their own peril.” The Congo Basin Forest Fund was set up in 2008 by the UK and Norway to protect the world’s second largest tropical rain forest.
‘The trees cannot speak.” Ms. Maathai said over the weekend. “The frogs cannot speak. The lions cannot speak. We must speak for them.”
…
Elizabeth Baker is vice president of the Resource Renewal Institute in California and a was Green Belt Movement delegate to COP15
December 01 2009
The Story of Cap and Trade
Or why you can’t solve a problem with the thinking that created it
Last week we posted the teaser for The Story of Cap and Trade, the new video hosted by Annie Leonard, the creator of the viral hit video The Story of Stuff. Produced by Free Range Studios, the Story of Stuff Project, and Climate Justice Now!, The Story of Cap and Trade offers a clear and concise message on how carbon cap and trade schemes are, as Daphne Wysham characterized it to me, a "false solution." Wysham is a Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a co-director of IPS’ Sustainable Energy and Economy Network, and one of the principal consultants for The Story of Cap and Trade.
You may or may not agree with such an assessment or the arguments proffered in the 9-minute video, but it is worth watching. The idea is to get a conversation started on the best solutions for cutting carbon emissions and dealing with climate change. Cap and trade isn't the only choice (see below for some places to start). For a more detailed recap of my conversation with last week with Daphne Wysham and Free Range Studios founder Jonah Sachs, read my post on CleanTechnica.
The Story of Cap & Trade from Story of Stuff Project on Vimeo.
Further reading:
Grist – Cap and Dividend
Environment 360 – Putting a Price on Carbon: An Emissions Cap or a Tax
November 26 2009
EarthTalk: Living Buildings Explained
EarthTalk® is a weekly environmental column made available to our readers from the editors of E/The Environmental Magazine
Leaders in the emerging Living Building movement define a living building as "a structure that generates all of its own energy with renewable non-toxic resources, captures and treats all of its water, and operates efficiently and for maximum beauty." Pictured: the Omega Center for Sustainable Living in Rhinebeck, New York, which hopes to become a certified living building in May 2010 after it is a year old.
Dear EarthTalk: I recently heard the term “living building.” Can you explain? -Rebecca Gordon, Seattle, WA
Over the past couple of decades, architects and builders looking to green their projects turned to the addition of various piecemeal elements to save water here or cut down on electricity there. Those who added more than a few green touches could apply for and get certified by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) under its Leadership in Energy and Efficient Design (LEED) program. While these efforts have been laudable—essentially launching the green building industry as we know it today—they represent merely the infancy of what green building might someday become.
The concept of the “living building” has now emerged as a new ideal for design and construction. The Cascadia Region Green Building Council (CRGBC)—the Pacific Northwest chapter of the USGBC—defines a living building as a structure that “generates all of its own energy with renewable non-toxic resources, captures and treats all of its water, and operates efficiently and for maximum beauty.” The group has been pushing for adoption of the concept by construction industries here at home, and also helped to launch the International Living Building Institute to promote the concept internationally.
“We view our role as the organization that is meant to ask the really tough questions, to push the boundaries as far as possible,” says Jason McLennan, CEO of CRGBC. To this end, in 2006 the group launched its Living Building Challenge (LBC), a “call to the design and construction community to pursue true sustainability in the built environment.” So far 60 different projects around North America are vying to meet the high standards of the LBC, which exceed even the highest status of LEED certification.
The first building to be completed for consideration under the LBC program is the Omega Center for Sustainable Living, in Rhinebeck, NY. The 6,200 square-foot, one-level building, which serves as headquarters for the Omega Institute for Holistic Studies, features a geothermal heating and cooling system, solar panels, rain gardens that direct water run-off to irrigate plantings, a 4,500-square-foot greenhouse that helps filter wastewater for reuse, “daylighting” design that brings natural light indoor to minimize electric light usage, and eco-friendly building materials all around. It was designed—per LBC criteria—to be “net-zero,” meaning it uses no more energy than it generates itself. Once the building has been in operation for a full year next summer, CRGBC will audit it to see if its performance lives up to the green hype. Dozens of other LBC contenders around North America will be audited as well.
Of course, the costs of creating a living building today are very high. Achieving net-zero can be especially costly, and stands out as one of the biggest obstacles to greater interest in the living building concept. Another challenge is finding materials that meet LBC standards, since many common building materials—such as PVC piping for wastewater transport—off-gas chemicals and have other hazardous attributes. LBC also expects builders to source locally as many materials as possible to boost local economies and make efficient use of nearby natural resources. McLennan remains confident that costs will come down as green materials, technologies and methods become more commonplace within the general building industry.
Contacts:
USGBC
CRGBC
International Living Building Institute
Omega Institute
Image credit: Omega Center for Sustainable Living
—————-
SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO:
EarthTalk®, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk [at] emagazine.com.
Read past columns in our archives
EarthTalk® is now a book! Get details and order information
November 18 2009
Connie Hedegaard Gives Pre-COP15 Press Conference: "Half a Deal is No Deal"
Danish Minister for Climate and Energy Connie Hedegaard speaks at Pre-COP15 press conference yesterday after a meeting with 40 ministers and delegates from participating nations in the climate summit in Copenhagen. Hedegaard will serve as president of the COP15 conference.
US and China Announce Cooperation on Clean Energy Development and Climate Action
A Chinese-American plan for cooperation on clean energy development and climate change action was announced in Beijing on Tuesday by president Obama and president Hu Jintao. Writing on ClimateProgress, Andrew Light and Julian L. Wong, both policy analysts at the Center for American Progress, say the plan announced by the two leaders is "much more ambitious in scope and depth than we had anticipated."
The plan includes cooperation on clean energy technologies, capacity building, and "very important efforts on helping China build a robust, transparent and accurate inventory of the greenhouse gas emissions.
Speaking at the joint news conference the leaders from the two climate-change-800-pound-gorillas-in-the-room pledged to work toward a positive outcome at the upcoming COP15 climate summit in Copenhagen next month:
Our aim there is not a partial accord or a political declaration, but rather an accord that covers all of the issues in the negotiations, and one that has immediate operational effect," president Obama said. "This kind of agreement would be an important step forward in the effort to rally the world around a solution to our climate challenge."
One could almost hear the collective, global sigh of relief as such words were uttered.
Jin Jiamin, executive director of the Global Environmental Institute in Beijing, reflected both satisfaction and surprise at the stated commitment for action and cooperation between the two countries.
This is a very good result," Jin said. "I never expected that the two countries could come to a joint statement or an agreement in such specific areas for clean energy and technology cooperation."
After a relentless battering of expectations and hopes for a substantive breakthrough in Copenhagen – from dysfunctional Senate proceedings on climate legislation to disappointment at the lack of progress on pre-COP15 talks in Barcelona – the mood has lightened considerably.
In the beginning, we really didn't have a hope that a treaty would be reached," Jin said. "I was surprised to find out in the joint statement that the two countries both expressed an interest and willingness to work within the UNFCCC Framework as well as the Bali Road Map.
Keya Chatterjee, acting director of climate change for WWF, reinforced the positive mode, saying that the recent fashion of downplaying expectation for COP15 may be a little premature, saying in a statement:
Recently it's become fashionable to downplay expectations for Copenhagen. But as we heard today, President Obama and President Hu remain optimistic and their statements provide strong evidence that Copenhagen can still deliver all of the key elements of a legally binding agreement."
What a difference a day makes.
But as I wrote yesterday on TriplePundit, success in Copenhagen is an exercise in expectation management. Perhaps are expectation should be a bit higher than we've been told lately.
The US/China clean energy plan calls for cooperation in the following areas (from a Department of Energy press release):
- U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center. The two Presidents announced the establishment of the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center. The Center will facilitate joint research and development of clean energy technologies by teams of scientists and engineers from the United States and China, as well as serve as a clearinghouse to help researchers in each country. The Center will be supported by public and private funding of at least $150 million over five years, split evenly between the two countries. Initial research priorities will be building energy efficiency, clean coal including carbon capture and storage, and clean vehicles. The Protocol formally establishing the Center was signed in Beijing by U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Chinese Minister of Science and Technology Wan Gang, and Chinese National Energy Agency Acting Administrator Zhang Guobao.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on Clean Energy Research Center - U.S.-China Electric Vehicles Initiative. The two Presidents announced the launch of the U.S.-China Electric Vehicles Initiative. Building on the first-ever US-China Electric Vehicle Forum in September 2009, the initiative will include joint standards development, demonstration projects in more than a dozen cities, technical roadmapping and public education projects. The two leaders emphasized their countries’ strong shared interest in accelerating the deployment of electric vehicles in order to reduce oil dependence, cut greenhouse gas emissions and promote economic growth.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on Electric Vehicles Initiative - U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Action Plan. The two Presidents announced the launch of a new U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Action Plan. Under the new plan, the two countries will work together to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, industrial facilities, and consumer appliances. U.S. and Chinese officials will work together and with the private sector to develop energy efficient building codes and rating systems, benchmark industrial energy efficiency, train building inspectors and energy efficiency auditors for industrial facilities, harmonize test procedures and performance metrics for energy efficient consumer products, exchange best practices in energy efficient labeling systems, and convene a new U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Forum to be held annually, rotating between the two countries.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on Energy Efficiency Action Plan - U.S.-China Renewable Energy Partnership. The two Presidents announced the launch of a new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Partnership. Under the Partnership, the two countries will develop roadmaps for wide-spread renewable energy deployment in both countries. The Partnership will also provide technical and analytical resources to states and regions in both countries to support renewable energy deployment and will facilitate state-to-state and region-to-region partnerships to share experience and best practices. A new Advanced Grid Working Group will bring together U.S. and Chinese policymakers, regulators, industry leaders, and civil society to develop strategies for grid modernization in both countries. A new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Forum will be held annually, rotating between the two countries.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on Renewable Energy Partnership - 21st Century Coal. The two Presidents pledged to promote cooperation on cleaner uses of coal, including large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration projects. Through the new U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center, the two countries are launching a program of technical cooperation to bring teams of U.S. and Chinese scientists and engineers together in developing clean coal and CCS technologies. The two governments are also actively engaging industry, academia, and civil society in advancing clean coal and CCS solutions. The Presidents welcomed: (i) a grant from the U.S. Trade and Development Agency to the China Power Engineering and Consulting Group Corporation to support a feasibility study for an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant in China using American technology, (ii) an agreement by Missouri-based Peabody Energy to participate in GreenGen, a project of several major Chinese energy companies to develop a near-zero emissions coal-fired power plant, (iii) an agreement between GE and Shenhua Corporation to collaborate on the development and deployment of IGCC and other clean coal technologies; and (iv) an agreement between AES and Songzao Coal and Electric Company to use methane captured from a coal mine in Chongqing, China, to generate electricity and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on 21st Century Coal - Shale Gas Initiative. The two Presidents announced the launch of a new U.S.-China Shale Gas Resource Initiative. Under the Initiative, the U.S. and China will use experience gained in the United States to assess China’s shale gas potential, promote environmentally-sustainable development of shale gas resources, conduct joint technical studies to accelerate development of shale gas resources in China, and promote shale gas investment in China through the U.S.-China Oil and Gas Industry Forum, study tours, and workshops.
U.S.-China Fact Sheet on Shale Gas Initiative - U.S.-China Energy Cooperation Program. The two Presidents announced the establishment of the U.S.-China Energy Cooperation Program. The program will leverage private sector resources for project development work in China across a broad array of clean energy projects, to the benefit of both nations. More than 22 companies are founding members of the program. The ECP will include collaborative projects on renewable energy, smart grid, clean transportation, green building, clean coal, combined heat and power, and energy efficiency.
November 13 2009
Is Do It Yourself Solar Doable? Part One in a Series
Part one in a series on do-it-yourself-solar by solar energy expert Kriss Bergethon –
For homeowners around the world, the idea of reducing their power bills and helping the planet is pretty enticing. The problem now as it always has been is money. Solar can be expensive, and even with government rebates the cost can scare some people away. If you are a do-it-yourselfer you've probably wondered if you can tackle a solar project. Let's walk through a typical design and installation process and see if its right for you and your home.
Location selection basics
Well you're probably smart enough to figure out that you'll need A) a sunny region and B) a sunny place to install the system. The more sun you get, the quicker your systems will pay for itself, its that simple. There are some nice tools to determine where exactly you should put the system. The solar pathfinder is one of easiest and most affordable ways to find the best location for panels. This ingenious device works by showing you a reflection of the sky and the sun's path for all four seasons in your area. Using this you can see exactly what will shade your panels throughout the course of the year.
You also want solar panels installed fairly close to your home and power meter. Since photovoltaic power is DC, the wire that carries it grows larger and more expensive the further away it is from the inverter, meter, and power center of the house. You'll want a place close to the house but out of way of children and their errant soccer balls. Also if you are planning on installing the system on your roof, its worth it to do a roof inspection. No sense in installing a system if it will have to be removed in a couple years to replace the shingles.
Determining angle and azimuth
Generally speaking the closer you can get your panels to facing due south (or 180 degrees azimuth) the better. If you live in an urban area and are not sure which way south is exactly, use Google Maps to look up your address and click on the satellite image. You might be surprised to see that roof you thought was south facing is actually southeast facing!
The angle from horizontal is very important too. The angle should be equal to your latitude since this will mean the panels will be perpendicular to the sun for greatest amount of time. If you're not sure what latitude you're at, check out this latitude map of the US. So if you live in Portland, with a latitude of approximately 45 degrees, your panels should be set at an angle of 45 degrees from horizontal. IF your roof angle is within 10 degrees of you latitude you can mount the panels easily, if not you may have to consider a rack system that will tilt the panels.
Space considerations
The rule of 1/10 is easy to remember for solar power. You'll need 1/10 of a square foot for every watt you install. So if you want to install 2,000 watts, you will need about 200 square feet of space for panels, racking, wiring, and a little space to work around them. This will vary slightly by the type of installation and panels you get but this will serve as a guide for the time being. You'll also need about a 4'x4' area near the meter for the inverter, breakers, and power components. Keep in mind also that your power company may want to install a new meter or even an additional meter for the system.
Contacting the utility and building department
Its always a good idea to talk to your power company about installing a system. You will probably need an interconnection agreement, an inspection, and a rate schedule if you are planning to sell back power. They'll also want some information about the panels and inverter you are installing. Also, ask about additional rebates and an up to date cost per kilowatt-hour that you are paying.
You should also place a call to the local building department and ask about permits. This may seem like a pain, but really it protects you from hassles in the end. Eventually they'll probably find out about your systems anyway and you may have to pay a fine for not getting a permit. The vast majority of inspectors will allow you to install a system on your own home, they may just require you to have a master electrician sign off on the installation.
Estimate your production
You'll want to decide just what the system is going to produce over the course of a year. The National Renewable Energy Lab has a cool tool that will allow you to do this. With the information you've determined in the steps above, click on this solar map. Then find your area, and double click on it. You should see a data window open up with a link at the bottom that says "Send to PV Watts". Click on that link, then enter the information we determined in the first steps for angle, azimuth, and cost of power. Also enter the size of the system you want in kilowatts. Click on the calculate button and you'll see the production per month for a year. This can help you determine payback.
Finally: Determine a budget
Possibly the most important part is deciding how much you can spend on a system. Most complete solar power kits cost between $4 and $6 per watt, depending on the size and racking system. Be sure to take into account all state, local, and utility incentive programs, which can be found here. You may even find a supplier that will take the rebates off the price of the system, then the manufacturer goes after the rebate. Sharp has a program like this.
Next we'll determine what skills and tools are needed, and start planning the installation.
—————-
Kriss Bergethon lives off the grid with his wife in Colorado. For more information visit his website at Solar Power Kits.
November 09 2009
Building for Success on International Global Warming Cooperation in Copenhagen
The last round of global warming negotiations before the Copenhagen meeting begins wrapped up last Friday in Barcelona. Much of the actual negotiations were focused on getting the negotiating text and the underlying details contained in the text into better shape. But there were also important discussions for what can be achieved in Copenhagen and ultimately out of this international negotiations. After all, after we leave Barcelona there are only 4 weeks before negotiations begin in Copenhagen.
So there was a lot of buzz in the corridors when Africa showed that it was frustrated and when key political leaders were discussing the form of the outcome in Copenhagen (as you can see here and here). And these key players were introducing a lot of phrases that were hard to decipher what would exactly underlie their meaning (e.g., "legally binding", "politically binding", "an outcome that can start moving us down the path").
So what can we expect out of Copenhagen?
The meeting in Copenhagen is about building on the growing momentum for action that has emerged over the past year and laying a solid foundation for achieving the final legally binding agreement in months, not years. Most key countries have signaled a serious willingness to action, but without strong domestic action from the United States, other countries are not going to finalize their commitments. Progress in the U.S. is shaping what we can realistically achieve in Copenhagen.
Over this past year we've had all the major developed countries (except the US, Canada, and Russia) propose serious and firm commitments to curb their emissions. And major emerging economies have all either signaled clear steps that they'll take to reduce their emissions or provided clear signals that they will soon, as I've previously discussed. So we actually have made very serious progress on one of the most important elements of an international agreement – signs of actions by key countries to address their global warming pollution.
What exact shape this agreement will take in Copenhagen this December and in the ensuing period isn't exactly clear at this point. But it will need to contain clear signals from key countries that they are really going to take action (in some cases reaffirming commitments that they have already put forward). And it will need to ensure a structured effort to finalize the details of the legally binding agreement in a clear timeframe.
It isn't clear at this stage, if countries will agree in December to some of the technical details that will frame out that final legally binding agreement, but the negotiating text that feeds into that agreement is in a bit better shape after this week.
The negotiating text coming out of Barcelona is both shorter and clearer on the options that Governments will have to choose between. But there will be a lot of late nights and coffee injection in Copenhagen before these text look anything like an agreed outcome.
Most of principles that will guide implementation of the key elements of the agreement are contained in the draft negotiating text emerging from Barcelona. Granted they have brackets and a number of options. But each country will now have in front of them clear choices for each of the 6 core elements of the Copenhagen agreement :
- Strong leadership from developed countries with firm and aggressive emissions reduction targets in the near-term (e.g., 2020 and 2030) and strong signals that they will significantly reduce emissions in the medium-term (e.g., 2050).
- Willingness of developing countries to undertake significant emissions reductions on their own that tangibly reduce the growth of their emissions in the near-term (e.g., to 2020) and lay the foundation for even deeper cuts in the medium-term.
- Turning the corner on efforts to combat global deforestation.
- Properly designed and performance-based incentives from developed countries to encourage even greater developing country emissions reductions.
- Support for adaptation to the impacts of climate change in the least vulnerable countries.
- Strong provisions to ensure that countries "open up their books and defend them". We need to know that countries are actually achieving what they say they are doing to reduce their emissions and in providing support for countries to go further in reducing their emissions and adapting to global warming.
Copenhagen will be a critical moment for the world to decide does it want to progress international efforts to address global warming in order to wrap up the final agreement sometime next year. It won't be the final international meeting on global warming as we won't be done with this challenge in one meeting over a two week period.
And now it seems like there is some growing consensus that there will still be work to be done after Copenhagen before a final agreement is reached. But it can be reached. And it can be done in a matter of months not years. But the world will need a clear signal from the US about what it will do to address US global warming pollution. We can't wait much longer!
——-
Jake Schmidt is the International Climate Policy Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, read his blog at NRDC's Switchboard
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
