Is Counting 'Green Jobs' a Green Job or a Hazardous Undertaking?
2010-05-24 16:55:34
On a good day, Michelle Charak might haul away 300 boxes of outmoded buttons from a factory that's all too happy to lose the clutter.
At her shop in New York City, she'll hand-stitch the buttons into chic necklaces and bracelets, then sell them on her company's website, Chelcnyc.com, for hundreds of dollars a pop.
Is that a "green job"? Charak says so.
"They think it's junk. So I take their junk and I make something," she says. "It's not your typical green job, but it has probably a lower environmental impact than most of the green jobs out there."
According to the Department of Commerce, she may be right. Last month, the agency released "Measuring the Green Economy," an early attempt to take inventory of how many "green jobs" exist today -- and what should count anyway.
The report (pdf) says selling "used merchandise," including toys, books and jewelry, can be thought of as a green job.
But even by a generous count, one that adds such jobs to other, commonly cited occupations like installing solar panels and weatherizing buildings, green jobs make up only 1 to 2 percent of the workforce.
Is the job category half empty or half full?
"In some sense, it's just not very big," said Mark Doms, chief economist at Commerce's Economics and Statistics Administration and a co-author of the report. "You could look at that and be a pessimist, and say it's small, or my second point is, well, there's potential for growth here."
Doms said the size of the sector isn't surprising: For most Americans, the biggest-ticket expense is housing, but few live in energy-efficient homes. Few own hybrid cars or ride public transit. Many drink beer, but few quaff the organic kind.
Nevertheless, the report's authors said they wanted to prove that green jobs are more than a ginned-up political label. That can invite controversy because the issue and many of the job definitions were first framed by environmental groups and politicians.
"Part of the point of the report is to respond to the critics that all of this green economy stuff is rhetoric ... [that] you can claim anything you want to claim," said Rebecca Blank, Commerce's undersecretary for economic affairs.
The report fit green jobs into two categories: "broad" and "narrow." Into the "broad" category went jobs like selling bicycles, long-distance tour packages by bus and showing films at the zoo. The "narrow" category focused on more tightly defined jobs, including those like selling recycled glass, building power lines and fixing mufflers and exhaust pipes for cars.
Nuclear power and biofuels, two controversial energy sources, didn't make the "narrow" cut. Blank said "the broader category are things that there may be some disagreement on, but some people do agree may belong in the green category."
Moving hazardous waste by truck made the "broad" category but didn't meet the "narrow" criteria: The Economics and Statistics Administration said one could dispute its "greenness," since trucks usually run on fossil fuel.
And what of live performances at nature parks? These made the "narrow" category, ESA said, because these establishments focus on preserving and exhibiting natural areas, "so most performances at nature parks would probably have an environmental focus."
Blank admitted there's room for debate on what constitutes a green job, and she said the report used publicly available data, so anyone can come up with his own count.
Used-car dealers are green; miners aren't
Kate Robertson, an energy efficiency specialist for the Environmental Defense Fund, said advocates of green jobs should be careful not to define them too broadly.
She noted that Commerce's "broad" category included used-car dealers, janitorial services and snow plowers. "The danger here is that if we overreach, we may end up fueling the flame of critics who don't think green jobs exist," she said.
At the Labor Department, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has begun a similar project. In March, it released a list (pdf) of job categories it considered "green," and it has since invited public comment on the list.
Some of the broad themes echo the Commerce report: recycling, public transit, renewable energy and organic food all count as green jobs. But producing lead-free bullets, environmental films and nuclear power also count.
Not included: Mining, even for uranium; hunting; drilling for natural gas or distributing it; building machines that make semiconductors; or manufacturing gloves and mittens. Labor counts being a broker or a trader in a cap-and-trade system as a green job. Commerce doesn't.
Carol Raulston, a spokeswoman for the National Mining Association, said the association has never attempted to classify mining as a green job, though its output can turn up in decidedly green products. She noted that hybrid electric vehicles use double the copper of regular cars and a wind turbine can require over 300 tons of steel. "It seems to me, therefore, to be a silly distinction," she said.
Luke Popovich, another NMA spokesman, said "Our jobs may not be green. But color them real."
A "smart grid" is a modernized, bi-directional, electricity delivery system that regulates energy consumers' usage, whether residential, commercial or industrial, by controlling appliances and other devices. The goal of a smart grid is to reduce energy consumption (and therefore demand), save money and increase reliability. Governments also promote upgrading to smart grids as a way to achieve energy independence and fight global warming.
A smart grid can include: •A monitoring system that tracks all energy flowing through the system •Transmission lines that reduce power loss •Integration capability for alternative energy sources (e.g., wind, solar)
Smart meters are probably the most widely known parts of a smart grid system. A smart meter is a technologically advanced meter that provides more detail about energy consumption than conventional meters. These meters are generally capable of transmitting usage information back to the providing utility for monitoring and billing purposes. Smart meter manufacturers and networking/communications providers include Trilliant, SmartSynch, Alliant and Itron, Inc., the market share top-spot holder in North America and worldwide.
Although primarily used to monitor and regulate electricity distribution and usage, smart meters are increasingly providing the same function for water and natural gas consumption.
Business applications
Smart grids offer energy consumers the opportunity to identify the main sources of energy consumption and quantify energy use. From this information, users can take steps to reduce consumption, saving money and energy. Based on the information obtained from items like smart meters, consumers can replace energy-inefficient items such as appliances, electronic devices, HVAC equipment and light bulbs with more efficient alternatives. Other demand-reduction steps on the supply side include controlling consumption at the appliance or systems level by incorporating measures that switch off heavy-consumption devices during peak hours so that they operate during low-demand times of the day.
Overall, smart grids put more responsibility for energy consumption in the hands of the consumer by providing feedback about specific use. Electricity providers receive information about transmission losses that enable them to eliminate wastefulness in infrastructure. The net result is energy use reduction and conservation by way of an informed, empowered consumer base and an efficient, intelligent electricity distribution system. As the U.S. Department of Energy put it in its statement regarding smart grid stimulus awards:
“Modernizing the grid will create tens of thousands of jobs, save money for consumers and businesses, and allow for the transportation of renewable energy across the nation.”Obstacles
The biggest obstacles to large-scale implementation of smart grid technology are cost of transition and lack of public awareness of benefit. Additionally, a few highly publicized glitches in billing from smart meter providers PG&E in California and CenterPoint in Texas and privacy concerns have deepened wariness, creating suspicion that such programs are simply another way to obfuscate already complex billing processes and further erode privacy.
Legacy systems present a challenge to wider adoption of smart grid tech. Existing infrastructure cannot currently accommodate the new technology and would largely need to be replaced, although a hybridized infrastructure consisting of older, viable components and smart grid tech shows promise as a way to ease the transition and constrain cost. While corporations like GE, Verizon, and Cisco all have smart grid strategies in various stages of development, transition costs, in conjunction with current economic conditions, have slowed efforts to push smart grid initiatives forward.
In addition, a lack of awareness in the public sector about smart grid benefit potential has significantly impeded growth. Research by Parks Associates indicated that over 40 percent of consumers are unfamiliar with the phrase "smart grid." It seems logical that more people, whether household or corporate consumers, would call for initiatives in their communities if the advantages of smart grid tech over traditional systems were explained in clear terms and made widely known. But, attempts to roll out time-of-use pricing and other related initiatives have been met with reactions ranging from indifference to outright hostility.
However, outreach programs and "cash for energy-guzzler" programs have been moderately successful in educating all consumers, whether in business or in the home, about the personal and global benefits of reducing consumption using this modernized system. With the U.S. Department of Energy awarding 3.4 billion dollars in smart grid stimulus grants to fund over 100 smart grid projects, Earth2Tech.com and other smart tech watchers see evidence of the mainstreaming of smart grid tech and predict a large boost in implementation nation-wide.
Over 100 Contractors Arrive in Washington D.C. to Advocate Home Star Legislation
2010-05-21 10:37:07
Over 100 contractors arrived in Washington D.C. today to advocate for the swift passage of the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act. The contractors joined together with Efficiency First, a national non-profit trade association, and CleanEdison, a leading green job training provider, to send a clear message to the U.S. Senate -- act now, put construction workers to work and help main street America and homeowners save money.
"The Department of Labor estimates one in five workers in the building construction industry are unemployed. This legislation offers tremendous opportunity for job creation and incentives for homeowners that will help them save money," said Lauren Carson, Vice President of CleanEdison and Board Member of Efficiency First. Carson continued, "If passed, this would be a win-win for everyone involved. I'm honored to collaborate with the contractors and Efficiency First to support the Home Star legislation together."
The Home Star Energy Retrofit Act of 2010 (H.R. 5019), commonly referred to as "Cash for Caulkers," will provide homeowners with rebates for energy-efficiency upgrades -- a total of $6 billion over two years. But for thousands of American building construction professionals who have been hit hard by the recession, the proposed Home Star legislation -- which now awaits Senate approval -- represents a lifeline to good jobs with living wages in a growing 21st-century industry.
CleanEdison has quickly become a leading green job training firm, offering state-of-the-art classes in a variety of disciplines, from Energy Auditing to LEED exam preparation. As the country's largest training providers for the Building Performance Institute (BPI), CleanEdison has been selected for numerous contracts funded by local, state and federal initiatives, and anticipates additional growth as taxpayers continue to see the benefits of energy efficiency.
Senate climate legislation unveiled last week would spark a decade of multibillion-dollar investments to help overhaul how the nation produces and consumes energy, adding 200,000 jobs per year in the construction of new power plants and through greater demand for biofuels, according to a nonpartisan study (pdf) released today.
The Peterson Institute for International Economics said in its 18-page report that the bill from Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) creates the new jobs between 2011 and 2020 because of its mandatory limits on greenhouse gases, which will prompt $41.1 billion in investments per year as the nation shifts away from traditional fossil fuels like coal and oil and toward new nuclear power and renewables.
That is $22.5 billion more than what the country would otherwise be spending on new electricity sector investments. But the economic boom could be short-lived. After 2025, as energy prices increase and certain industry-friendly provisions of the legislation phase out, employment gains would be "clawed back" to their current, business-as-usual projections.
The Peterson Institute study marks the first comprehensive review of the Senate proposal since its release last week. Trevor Houser, a visiting fellow at the center and the report's lead author, said his work differs from other analysis due out next month from U.S. EPA and EIA because it factors in how the Senate legislation would affect the U.S. economy at its current 10 percent unemployment rate, and by considering investments needed for an aging U.S. power system.
According to the report, the Kerry-Lieberman bill would prompt a significant reshuffle in U.S. energy supplies thanks to its greenhouse gas caps and many other complimentary policies, including stronger vehicle efficiency and renewable energy standards.
For starters, fossil fuels would fall from 84 percent of the current U.S. energy supply down to 70 percent in 2030. By contrast, renewables and nuclear energy would soar by 2030 from their current 8 percent rates for U.S. energy consumption, to 14 percent and 16 percent, respectively.
Compared with business-as-usual scenarios, the Senate proposal would prompt 24 gigawatts of new renewable power generation over the next 20 years, with the majority in wind (58 percent), followed by biomass (23 percent) and solar (13 percent). By 2030, the report said renewables would account for 18 percent of all power generation capacity, up from 12 percent today, and 21 percent of all electricity production, up from 10 percent today.
The bill would spawn 68 gigawatts of new nuclear power production due to $36 billion in loan guarantees and a 10 percent investment tax credit for plants that are in operation by 2025. That means nuclear power would account for 15 percent of power generation capacity by 2030, compared to 10 percent today. And it also would push nuclear power to account for 30 percent of the entire country's electricity generation in 2030, up from 20 percent today.
Carbon capture and sequestration technologies also would get a boost from the Senate bill because of provisions that give the low-carbon option extra bonus allowances as industry ramps up its use. According to the report, the nation would see 72 gigawatts of new CCS capacity installed between 2008 and 2030, with 53.7 gigawatts on coal-fired power plants and 18.3 gigawatts on natural gas plants. Natural gas also would have another 40 gigawatts deployed by 2030 because it emits less carbon than coal.
Transportation, energy efficiency
On the transportation end, the Peterson Institute report said that a combination of improved efficiency upgrades and fuel switching to ethanol, biodiesel, natural gas and electricity would help reduce U.S. oil imports by 33 percent to 40 percent below current levels and 9 to 19 percent below business-as-usual levels by 2030.
U.S spending on imported oil also would fall by $51 billion to $93 billion per year, which cuts global oil prices and reduces oil producer revenues by $263 billion to $436 billion annually by 2030.
Like other studies, the Peterson Institute report found that the Senate climate bill would increase the prices of fossil fuels for energy consumers and business. Households would see an average 3 percent increase in their electricity rates and a 5 percent increase in gasoline prices (11 to 24 cents per gallon) between 2011 and 2030. Home hearing oil prices would also average about 13 cents more per gallon compared to business as usual between 2011 and 2020, and 25 cents more between 2021 and 2030.
But according to the analysis, the Senate climate bill could mitigate the higher energy prices through energy efficiency improvements and emission allowances that are recycled back to consumers. Depending on vehicle efficiency upgrades, the study found that the Senate legislation could lead to between a $136 increase and a $35 decrease in average household annual energy expenses.
The Peterson study predicts carbon prices will start at $16.47 per ton in 2013, growing to $55.44 per ton in 2030. That will reduce greenhouse gases from covered industrial sources -- power plants, transportation, major manufacturers -- by 22 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 42 percent by 2030.
Better energy efficiency and incentives for non-fossil fuel energy sources also would curb traditional air pollutants and lead to savings in water consumption. Toxic mercury emissions would fall 43 percent below business as usual by 2030, while nitrogen oxides drop 34 percent and sulfur dioxide by 6 percent. Water savings are projected at 11.7 billion gallons per year through 2030, which is nearly 2 times the nation's annual consumption of bottled water.
Prospects for the Kerry-Lieberman legislation remain unclear. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said earlier this week he will huddle next month with key committee leaders and the entire 59-member Senate Democratic caucus to determine what type of energy and climate bill has the votes to pass off the floor this year.
Kerry welcomed the Peterson Institute's findings.
"What greater incentive for action is needed than creating jobs and reducing our foreign oil dependency? This nonpartisan, hard-headed study by an institute committed to fiscal truth-telling should be an economic and security wakeup call," he said.
The Peterson Institute's study is the first it has done on any specific piece of Capitol Hill climate legislation. The group is funded in part by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. More studies are planned on the state-by-state implications of the legislation, as well as how lower oil production revenue influences the economies and politics for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and non-OPEC countries.
Energy Sleuths in Pursuit Of the Truly Green Building
2010-05-20 09:51:41
The practice of “commissioning,” in which an engineer monitors the efficiency of a building from its design through its initial operation, just may be the most effective strategy for reducing long-term energy usage, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. So why is it so seldom used?
In a different world, it could be a reality television show — “Buildings On Trial,” with a street-savvy engineer going into skyscrapers, factories, offices and other commercial buildings to find the dumb mistakes that make them waste energy and produce a disproportionate share of the nation’s global warming emissions.
And in almost every case, even new buildings proudly displaying a LEED “green building” plaque by the front door, the engineer would come back out with a list of energy hog culprits: Here’s the ventilation system fan installed backwards, so it blows full force into another fan blowing in the right direction. Here’s the control system set up so heating and cooling systems both work at once, like driving with your feet on the brakes and the accelerator at the same time. Here are the stuck dampers that prevent the building from drawing on outside air when the temperature is right.
Such mistakes are commonplace even in the best buildings — and often costly. In one case, says Dave Moser of Portland Energy Conservation, Inc., an Oregon nonprofit, it cost a building owner $5,000 to fix stuck dampers — and cut $50,000 off the annual energy bill. In a case of simultaneous heating and cooling at an 85,000-square-foot academic building, a minor programming fix cost almost nothing and saved $100,000 a year in wasted energy, according to Mark Miller of Strategic Building Solutions, a Connecticut company.
The business of finding and fixing these mistakes is called “building commissioning,” a term borrowed from the standard naval practice of commissioning a new ship with sea trials to determine whether it’s fit for service. People started doing roughly the same thing with non-residential was worse than conventional buildings.real estate in the mid-1990s, as buildings with computer-controlled systems became almost as complex as ships at sea. Commissioning frequently involves no more than a few weeks of testing out systems. But in the most complete form, the commissioning agent works with architects in the design stage, to help save money by specifying properly sized energy systems, then follows the building through construction, trains the operating staff, and tracks energy performance in different seasons through the first year of operation. Older buildings now also go through retro-commissioning, in search of improved efficiency.
But if you imagine that real estate developers must be lining up for this service — if only to save money, or determine whether they are getting the building they paid for — you would be mistaken. Even now, well under 5 percent — and probably closer to 1 percent — of new commercial buildings actually go through the process. Projects seeking certification under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (or LEED) program, managed by the U.S. Green Building Council, can earn extra points by going through “enhanced” commissioning. But they’re only required to do “fundamental” commissioning — a sort of commissioning-lite, potentially performed not by a third party, but by an “independent” employee of the construction manager whose contractors made the mistakes in the first place.
And yet building commissioning is “arguably the single-most cost-effective strategy for reducing energy, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions in buildings today,” according to a 2009 report from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. If applied to the nation’s entire non-residential building stock, including retro-commissioning of older buildings, it would yield $30 billion in potential energy savings every year by 2030, the study projects, and avoid 340 million tons of global warming emissions annually. To put the latter number in perspective, other studies project that the United States is now on a path to increase global warming emissions by more than a third, up to 9.7 billion metric tons a year by 2030. Roughly 35 percent of emissions come from heating, cooling, and providing electric power for buildings and homes, split evenly between commercial and residential. So building commissioning is hardly the only remedy required. But the potential savings ought to make it one of the most attractive.
Why isn’t it more popular? A lot of developers, and even some building efficiency experts, have simply never heard of commissioning. Others have gotten turned off, says Glenn Hansen of Portland Energy Conservation, Inc., by early experiences in which “a fairly junior engineer” would go through a building checking off boxes on a clipboard. In a 2008 study by the New Buildings Institute, the energy performance in many LEED-certified “green” buildings was actually worse than in the average conventional building, probably because inexperienced people doing “fundamental” conditioning had failed to detect problems.
“Just because you have a paper process doesn’t mean you’re going to get the desired result,” says Hansen. As the commissioning industry has matured, he says, it has gotten better at putting together “a team of people who have good in-field experience at shaking buildings out.”
But the main roadblock to building commissioning is that it can seem expensive. And the company that develops a building typically has little incentive to take on that extra upfront burden, since a different company will often end up owning and operating the building. For new buildings, full commissioning typically adds $1.16 on top of construction costs of roughly $230 a square foot, according to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study. For existing buildings, it costs 30 cents a square foot. That’s not counting the cost of changes recommended as a result of commissioning. But the bottom line still looks good, the study reports: Energy savings from commissioning typically result in a payback time of 4.5 years for new buildings and 1.1 years for existing buildings.
Several new programs attempt to address the problem of one company getting stuck with the upfront costs while another company reaps the benefits from commissioning and other energy efficiency measures. Last year, the city of Berkeley, Calif., issued the nation’s first “property assessed clean energy,” or PACE bonds, which pay the initial costs of such improvements on both commercial and residential properties, then recoup the investment over 20 years through a property tax surcharge that stays with the building even as ownership changes. Sixteen states have already approved enabling legislation for PACE bonds, and at the federal level, the Waxman-Markey climate bill also contains supporting language. On a similar model, an ESCO, or energy service company, will provide efficiency improvements in a building and sometimes guarantee the energy savings that should result; the ESCO makes its money back by pocketing some of the difference between the building’s old energy bill and the new one. About 30 U.S. utility companies also provide rebates or other incentives for commercial customers to undergo building commissioning.
Commissioning of larger commercial properties could eventually be required by building codes. A push for such a requirement recently failed in Oregon. But commissioning is currently under discussion for the 2012 version of the International Energy Conservation Code, which serves as a model for building codes in many jurisdictions.
So-called “monitoring-based commissioning” could also make building owners and operators more comfortable with the idea that the process is actually yielding bottom-line results. Even in the most successful commissionings, says Glenn Hansen, equipment can eventually go out of whack again, or the operating staff can stop paying attention, allowing energy costs to creep back up. But relatively inexpensive control systems now make it possible to monitor usage throughout the life of a building, breaking it down by energy use per degree day, or per square foot, and sending alerts if the chillers, say, start operating inefficiently, or if the whole building misses certain benchmarks.
Given the complexity that makes it prudent for buildings to be commissioned like ships, those kind of monitoring systems can provide critical reassurance. Instead of steering blindly, operators of a building will know hour by hour whether they are in fact heading in the right direction.
Green-collar jobs are the way of the future, shows a study that examined the growing number of jobs with environmental ties and the need to retrofit Calgary’s workforce.
A report titled Green Collar Jobs: New Workforce Development Opportunities, which will be released in Calgary next week, shows environmental industries are sustainable in more than one way.
The study, which began in January and wrapped up at the end of April, was funded by Alberta Employment and Immigration and jointly commissioned by the non-profit group, Momentum, and Thrive, Calgary’s community economic development network.
It looked at the potential for green-collar jobs, which are entry-level positions similar to blue-collar jobs, but which improve the quality of the environment.
Brenna Atnikov, community economic development facilitator for Momentum and Thrive, said during the recession, the number of green industry establishments declined only 0.8% in Calgary, compared with the total establishment decline of 4.5%
“Green industry establishments were more resilient to economic recession,” said Atnikov.
“A lot of jobs that are traditional blue-collar jobs will eventually have a green or environmental component.”
The Senate climate and energy bill unveiled last week now resides in a no man's land without any clear consensus on who is responsible for collecting 60 votes.
"It's a good question: Who's in charge?" said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
For starters, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) makes the decisions when it comes to what proposals reach the floor and how much time they get once they get there. But he is leaving the heaviest lifting on the climate issue to Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), lead authors of the bill (pdf) that would place a first-ever limit on greenhouse gases while also expanding domestic oil, gas and nuclear power production.
"I think it's in our hands, and our supporters, the people who stood with us and their members all over the country," Lieberman said yesterday. "We're just beginning that now."
Reid asserted his own authority yesterday when he outlined plans to meet during the week of June 7 with Democratic committee leaders, followed a week later by a larger gathering of the entire 59-member Democratic caucus. In those meetings, Reid said he hopes to get a better picture of whether to go with the Kerry-Lieberman bill or instead move toward an energy-only approach (S. 1462) approved last June by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Still, by waiting a month, Reid is also buying time for others to get engaged. The Senate's top Democrat has repeatedly blamed Republicans for not taking a more proactive role in the negotiations, starting with Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) decision last month to walk away from talks with Kerry and Lieberman because of an unrelated political battle over immigration.
"What we're trying to do is get a Republican to help us," Reid said. "You know, without a Republican, I can't do much."
Reid is also leaving the door wide open for help from President Obama, who is coming under growing pressure from environmentalists and other climate activists to bring White House muscle to the bill just like he did in the final days of last June's House debate and during the late night closing hours of the U.N. climate talks last December in Copenhagen, Denmark.
"The silence from the White House is deafening," said a former Clinton-era White House aide. "Clearly without a White House push there does not seem to be adequate political momentum."
Several environmental groups launched an ad campaign yesterday aimed at goading Obama into the fight, with actor and activist Robert Redford as narrator. "Politicians in Washington have a choice: keep bowing to the demands of Big Oil, or stand up for the American people," Redford states in the ad, which will air on cable outlets starting today around the country. "Tell President Obama to lead America toward a clean energy future."
Obama has invested some political capital in the climate issue, sending his top aides out to make the link between the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the need for a new climate and energy policy. But he has been focused on other issues from the Wall Street reform bill to the Gulf Coast spill response, sparking many to question his true interest. Last week, Obama raised eyebrows when the White House press office issued a statement mistakenly calling the Kerry-Lieberman bill by its House counterpart's name, and also when he said he looked forward to "engaging" on the issue.
Members on both sides of the aisle have criticized Obama for not being more specific on the details of his different legislative requests, from health care to energy. And one key swing-vote Senate Republican who is willing to work with Obama and the Democrats says he wants the White House to actually put its neck on the line when it comes to the global warming bill.
"If they want to do something, it's going to have to come from him," said Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.). "His leadership is going to be required on any of these issues that are left. He's not going to just be able to leave it to Congress. He's going to have to articulate what his views are, and press for them."
Beyond Kerry and Lieberman
For now, Kerry and Lieberman are taking the reins. More closed-door meetings are in the works over the next month with several moderate lawmakers from both parties.
"There are clear blocs here, like the Midwestern Democrats," Lieberman said. "I think the support from Midwestern utilities would be helpful in reassuring them their consumers won't be experiencing a big price hike. My hope is a smaller group of oil-producing states will come together and after that it's going to be one by one. It's house-to-house combat."
But it is far from clear if Kerry and Lieberman can be successful.
Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and LeMieux said they have all heard in recent weeks from Kerry and Lieberman, but they also insisted that there are no agreements in place.
"I have reservations about it," Gregg said yesterday. "I like parts of the energy title a lot. I don't think in the framework of how things are evolving relative to the calendar that it's going to go that far, but I respect the fact that they brought it forward and admire them to get the issue into a constructive dialogue."
"There are still some outstanding issues of concern to me, but paramount is of course the idea of exactly what can we do in this moment of time, given the economy and to ensure that we do not create any adverse effects ... on the cost to consumers and cost to business in the short term," Snowe said.
Moderate Republicans also say they do not like the notion that Reid may be setting them up as fall guys responsible for a climate bill not making it to the floor.
"Why would it be our responsibility?" LeMieux said. "There's 41 of us."
Brown, the Ohio Democrat, said Kerry and Lieberman are in a tough spot as they try to strike deals in order to show Reid they have momentum. But he said he does expect to be among the first to come on board once he is successful in pushing for changes on allocations for trade-exposed industries and less presidential discretion when it comes to setting border adjustments on development countries without their own strong climate policies.
"Where's the consensus now? If you don't have [Sen. Debbie] Stabenow and you don't have me, without sounding more important than I am, you don't have 10 Democrats," Brown said. "I've got to assume [Reid is] demanding of Kerry and Lieberman that they deliver something with more consensus than they're getting, including more Republicans."
Yet others see a much wider cast of players necessary in helping to collect 60 votes, starting with Reid. "Senator Reid's the one who ultimately decides what comes up in the Senate," said Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.). "He of course wants to assess in each case where the votes are before he makes that decision."
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), co-author with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) of a competing plan for pricing carbon emissions, said yesterday she would prefer that committee leaders get a bigger say in the overall legislation.
"I think there's so much of a process issue here," Cantwell said. "People really want process. They just get so concerned when you don't follow a process. I guess, the chairs, et al, will have to figure out one."
And in other eyes, Obama, Reid, Kerry and Lieberman have to shoulder the burden together. "When you're dealing with an overall energy policy for the country, everyone needs to be part of it," Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) said yesterday as he left a meeting in Kerry's Foreign Relations Committee office in the Capitol. "Republicans, Democrats, the president."
"All of the above," added Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). "Damn right. Look, this is a far reaching thing. We don't have enough believers."
Whitman students love to celebrate the merits of a liberal arts education. Unlike many other college students, we brag our educations are well-rounded. English majors must brave the science building at least a few times; physics majors are forced to write papers on Homer’s “Odyssey.” The idea is that Whitman graduates will have a broader base of knowledge upon graduation. The liberal arts education also emphasizes small class sizes, so that students can participate in lively intellectual discussion, rather than enduring lectures in massive auditoriums.
When I was searching for colleges my senior year of high school, small liberal arts schools topped my list. As a college senior about to graduate, what do I think? Has my liberal arts education lived up to the promise it held four years ago?
In many ways, I think it has. But sometimes at Whitman we focus too much on the argument and discussion, allowing some of the basics to get lost along the way. Upper-level politics classes follow the seminar format, in which students usually lead the class. Oftentimes, the discussion is lively, intellectually stimulating and allows students to reach their own meaningful conclusions about the subject at hand.
Occasionally, however, the focus on discussion in small classes becomes stifling. We can discuss the implications of a particular scholarly work or piece of legislation ad infinitum, but if we don’t have the solid foundation of knowledge to build our arguments off of, we won’t get the true benefits of a liberal arts education.
Whitman politics majors graduate with plenty of knowledge about neoliberal economic policies, but perhaps not enough about the basic workings of the political system. Before we politics students discuss the implications of neoliberalism or neocolonial economic enclaves, we need to have a solid foundational knowledge of the way the political system works. We need to be able to define terms like civil society, understand how a bill works its way from congressional subcommittee to the President’s desk, and describe important U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
As an environmental studies-politics combined major, I also think that the environmental studies department could do a better job of informing students about the workings of environmental policy. A certain unnamed chemistry professor prides himself on being the only professor to teach students the basics of important U.S. environmental laws.
Before environmental studies students ponder the meaning of deep ecology, we need to stand on firm intellectual ground. We should be able to explain the history of the environmental movement, expound on the scientific mechanisms behind climate change, and describe how important environmental laws function. All environmental studies students, whether their focus is humanities, politics or biology, should be able to explain the basic provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, know the different forcing potentials of various greenhouse gasses and explain why the environmental movement exploded during the social upheavals of the 1960s.
As Ralph Nader said in his lecture on May 5, colleges do a good job of educating students about the esoteric, but fare worse in preparing students to effectively participate in the political system. Nader suggested a dedicated civics course, but I don’t think Whitman even needs to go that far. Instead, we just need to focus a bit more on instilling the basics. If we do that, Whitman graduates will be better prepared to affect the world in positive ways.
So, four years later, am I happy with my Whitman education? Absolutely. I have learned a great deal and made lifelong friends here. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t make a good thing better.
The UBC/UW Summer Institute in Sustainability is an award-winning professional development program designed to empower those taking a leadership role in developing policy, creating plans, and managing sustainability initiatives.
Experts from corporate, academic and government sectors share their knowledge on implementing programs and developing strategies that integrate the triple bottom line perspective of people, planet and profits. Learn to develop policies, plans and procedures that are mindful of public policy, stakeholder interest, and the triple bottom line of people, planet, and profits.
Who Should Participate?
This intensive and intimate educational experience will appeal to those from a variety of job types, including consultants, managers and administrators from business and academic settings, and those working across all levels of government. The sharing of perspectives across sectors and job-types allows for the cross-pollination of ideas, strategies and practices, which has become a unique feature of our Institute.
Institute Highlights
• Keynote address by Dr. Brian Nattrass, author and sustainability advisor to numerous high profile companies • Inspiring and leading-edge speakers from academia, government and industry • Interactive format with extended Q&A sessions, opportunities for networking, and open space sessions that allow participants to address their own issues and ideas • Applied case studies and guided field excursions showcasing real-life examples of sustainability initiatives
More Information View or contact sustainability [at]cstudies.ubc.ca.
We are living very hard times, with high unemployment rates. For college graduates is very hard to find a good job. A new trend study from the University of California San Diego Extension reveals some of the hottest career options for college graduates in this challenging economy.
1. Healthcare information technology. As technology increases, so does the need for health information technicians to use and maintain patient data that is vital for quality healthcare and to keep all medical records organized and confidential. Technicians are needed for emerging jobs such as healthcare integration engineer, healthcare systems analyst, clinical IT consultant, and technology support specialist.
2. Mobile media. Cell phones and other mobile devices are now multifunction devices that enable users to surf the Web, listen to music, download podcasts, use maps, access global positioning satellites, shoot and send photos and videos, and send text messages. With the countless new software applications, the number of ways to use smart phones is exploding.
3. Data mining. Looking for a needle in a haystack is a good analogy for data mining jobs. Data mining is the technique of extracting specific types of information or patterns from large databases, such as data warehouses. Advanced statistical methods sift through large volumes of data, providing answers to questions that were once too time-consuming.
4. Embedded engineering. There are career options for software developers willing to learn some new tricks. Devices from phones, appliances and televisions, to automobiles and iPods all use processors to run. These complex digital processors, or computers, are embedded systems, often built around a microprocessor core, that are designed by software engineers.
5. Geriatric healthcare. The growing population of seniors continues to have a major impact on careers in healthcare. As the numbers of aging baby boomers increase, so does the demand for certain healthcare jobs and services, including nursing, personal care and home healthcare.
6. Occupational health and safety. More specialists are needed to cope with technological advances in safety equipment and threats, changing regulations, and increasing public expectations. Employment growth reflects overall business growth and continuing self-enforcement of government and company regulations.
7. Spanish/English translation and interpretation. For those completely bilingual in Spanish and English, these highly marketable language skills open doors to new careers. The key is to gain experience through practical internships in specialized fields such as law, medicine and business.
8. Sustainable business practices and the greening of all jobs. By the mid-21st century, all jobs will be green jobs. Organizations today must address potential regulation changes and look for business growth opportunities in the new era of sustainable environmental economics.
9. Feature writing for the Web. Technology has transformed journalism and marketing, creating new ways for how news and information are conveyed. The new medium allows for more interactivity, as readers respond via comments or blogs.
10. Teaching English as a foreign language. Interest in English teaching positions abroad has mushroomed. College graduates can find teaching jobs abroad, with travel as an added perk.
Bringing Women into the Renewable Energy Workforce
2010-05-17 14:16:12
Solar Energy International (SEI) a non-profit leader in Renewable Energy and Sustainable Building technologies since 1991, is proud to announce its 14th year of solar electric (PV) training for women. As the solar electric industry grows, it is a prime time for women to enter the solar PV field. These extremely popular workshops have been well-attended by women from all over the world looking to gain technical knowledge on how to design and install code compliant solar electric systems. The classes are taught by leading women in the field and are designed to empower and encourage women to explore the industry.
Many women have little hands-on electrical experience and are wary of attending a co-ed course with men who have grown up using power tools. Even women with hands-on experience already working in technical fields find it helpful and rewarding to network with other women interested in and/or working in renewable energy.
This summer, SEI offers two workshops geared to women seeking solar training:
PV101/201L: Solar Electric Fundamentals and Grid-Direct Design with Lab Week - Women's June 7-18, Paonia, CO This course will provide an overview of the three basic PV system applications, primarily focusing on grid-direct systems. The goal of the course is to create a fundamental understanding of the core concepts necessary to work with all PV systems, including: system components, site analysis, PV module criteria, mounting solutions, safety, and commissioning. The course will also cover the basics of sizing a residential grid-direct system, wire sizing, overcurrent protection. http://www.solarenergy.org/workshop/solar-electric-fundamentals-and-grid-direct-design-lab-week-womens-training?wid=808
About Solar Energy International Solar Energy International (SEI) is a non-profit 501(c)3 educational organization with a mission to help others to use renewable energy and natural building technology through education and technical assistance. For information about SEI's PV (solar electricity) curriculum and the 2008 workshop schedule please visit www.solarenergy.org or contact SEI at (970) 963-8855.
UC IRVINE EXTENSION Approved as a U.S. Green Building Council Education Provider
2010-05-17 12:34:36
Designation Validates University’s Dedication to High-Quality Education; Enhances Professional
The University of California, Irvine Extension announced April 26, 2010 it had been approved as a U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Education Provider. The USGBC has reviewed and approved the technical and instructional quality of 10 UC Irvine Extension Sustainability courses. As an Education Provider, UC Irvine Extension’s high-quality education programs will help to enhance the ongoing professional development of the building industry and LEED Professionals. UC Irvine’s courses are approved by USGBC for GBCI CE Hours towards the LEED Credential Maintenance Program.
“Green initiatives and sustainability jobs will only continue to grow during the next few years,” said Kirwan Rockefeller, director of Sustainability Leadership at UC Irvine Extension. “We felt it was imperative to develop high-quality courses that will help this industry and its professionals flourish. The USGBC designation marks a very exciting time for UC Irvine’s Sustainability programs and its students.”
To receive the USGBC Education Provider designation, UC Irvine Extension submitted coursework, detailed information about its sustainability certificate programs and an overview of its instructional guidelines to the USGBC. Upon completion of the rigorous review process, UC Irvine Extension has received approval for a total of 10 sustainability courses, including:
• Introduction to Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability & Green Business
• Legal Developments Concerning the Environment & Climate Change
• Framework for Strategic Vision
• Climate Protection & Environmental Sustainability: The Business of Mitigating Change
• Energy Retrofits: Saving Energy in Existing Buildings
• The Future of Energy: Cleantech
• Transforming the Built Environment: EBOM Principles
• Sustainable Practices in Senior Housing: The Boom of Our Aging
“We are very proud to list UC Irvine Extension as an Education Providers,” said Ryan Snow, Manager of Education Review Systems at the USGBC. “The institution has created a robust line-up of green building education that target professionals seeking to enrich their knowledge of green building theories, techniques and business trends”
To learn more about UC Irvine’s Sustainability Leadership Certificate Program, please visit www.extension.uci.edu. To register for courses, call 949-824-5414 or e-mail sustainability@uci.edu.
U.S. Green Building Council
The Washington, D.C.-based U.S. Green Building Council is committed to a prosperous and sustainable future for our nation through cost-efficient and energy-saving green buildings.
With a community comprising 80 local affiliates, more than 18,000 member companies and organizations, and more than 140,000 LEED Professional Credential holders, USGBC is the driving force of an industry that is projected to contribute $554 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product from 2009-2013. USGBC leads an unlikely diverse constituency of builders and environmentalists, corporations and nonprofit organizations, elected officials and concerned citizens, and teachers and students.
About UC Irvine Extension
As the continuing education arm of UCI, UC Irvine Extension is dedicated to providing a university-level learning experience for students, offering thousands of exciting courses and programs to local, regional, and global constituencies via online curriculum as well as through on campus classes. UC Irvine Extension offers a rich array of academic and community programs to support a diverse audience, from a wide selection of academic programs to numerous campus activities. For more information, please visit www.extension.uci.edu or fan the school at www.facebook.com/UCIExtension. About the University of California, Irvine
The University of California, Irvine is a top-ranked university dedicated to research, scholarship and community service. Founded in 1965, UCI is among the fastest-growing University of California campuses, with more than 24,000 undergraduate and graduate students and about 1,400 faculty members. The second-largest employer in dynamic Orange County, UCI contributes an annual economic impact of $3.3 billion. For more UCI news, visit www.today.uci.edu.
North Shore Community College students can expand their knowledge of green issues and better prepare for jobs in the field through a new academic initiative.
This fall, the college will begin offering a liberal arts associate degree in environmental studies. The program will have two tracks — environmental science and environmental awareness — both for students who want to transfer as juniors to pursue a bachelor’s degree at a four-year college or university.
Maureen S. O’Neill, North Shore’s dean of liberal studies, said a number of faculty members had been advocating for the program for some years, and the college, which has campuses in Danvers and Lynn, decided “the time is right.’’
“I think all of us are becoming more educated about the threats to the environment and also about the careers that go into preventing environmental problems and correcting bad things that happen, such as when there is an oil spill or a water main break or dangers to wetlands,’’ she said.
The environmental science track is intended for students who are interested in transferring into an engineering or environmental science bachelor’s degree program. The environmental awareness track is for students who do not have that specific career direction but want to broaden their knowledge of green issues and jobs.
About 20 are expected to enter the program in fall, but the number is likely to grow, college officials said.
The move is one of several by colleges and universities to increase green offerings in curriculums and degree programs.
UMass Lowell’ School of Health and Environment this fall is introducing a bachelor of science degree in environmental health, a branch of public health that studies the effects of the environment on human health, and of human activities on the environment, and ways to address those impacts.
Middlesex Community College, with campuses in Bedford and Lowell, is starting an associate in science degree in environmental health, intended for students who want to transfer to UMass Lowell in their junior year to pursue the new bachelor’s degree, according to Cathy Pride, associate dean for academic programs and articulation at Middlesex.
According to O’Neill, Mt. Wachusett and Berkshire community colleges have associate in arts in environmental studies degrees, while Mass Bay Community College offers an associate in science degree in environmental science and safety.
The introduction of the new degree program at North Shore is an outgrowth of the Green Curriculum Project, a three-year-old initiative in which faculty members are encouraged to integrate environmental topics into their traditional courses, in subjects ranging from English to math.
“We are trying to ‘green’ the college curriculum,’’ said English professor Joseph Modugno, who with natural sciences professor Gregory Reppucci coordinates the Green Curriculum Initiative. He said the college now has 22 “green curriculum’’ classes.
Modugno and Reppucci are spearheading creation of the degree program, with help from history professor Warren Ford and Barbara Ikalainen, an adjunct professor of environmental sciences.
Like the Green Curriculum Initiative, the degree program has an interdisciplinary approach: The emphasis is to familiarize students with the multi-faceted nature of environmental study.
“If you want to deal with sustainability, you can’t deal with sciences alone,’’ Reppucci said.
Students in both tracks will be required to take a seminar, Introduction to Sustainable Living, to expose them to that broad approach to environmental study. Other courses will include a mix of required and elective offerings.
College officials say the degree and the Green Curricular Initiative reflect an effort by North Shore to promote environmentally sound practices on campus. President Wayne Burton signaled that in 2007 when he became the 100th signatory of the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, an effort by higher education chiefs to address global climate disruption.
North Shore’s building projects are also in step with that policy. The Division of Capital Asset Management is constructing the state government’s first “zero net energy’’ building on the Danvers campus, the 58,000-square-foot Health Professions and Student Services building. It has installed a solar array on the roof of Thomas M. McGee Building in Lynn, and is doing energy upgrades on both campuses through a state program to finance such improvements with general obligation bonds.
“Higher education is finally stepping up to the plate to integrate sustainability in to their campuses, and now into their education,’’ Modugno said.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that it will phase in a policy requiring permits for stationary sources that are increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by certain thresholds.
After a long debate, the EPA decided how to handle GHG emissions from power plants and oil refineries, which release 70 percent of the greenhouse gases from stationary sources, not vehicles.
The policies will start in January 2011 with the enforcement of permitting requirements for GHG for facilities that get Clean Air Act permits for other pollutants. Permits include information on which pollutants the facilities release, how much they can release, and what must be done to reduce the company’s pollution. Plans to measure and report the air pollution emitted are mandated.
By July 2011, permitting requirements will affect all new facilities with GHG emissions that exceed 100,000 tons per year (tpy), and modifications at existing facilities that emit at least 75,000 tpy.
According to the EPA press release, “Approximately 900 additional permitting actions covering new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year.” At least 550 new sources will have to obtain permits for GHG emissions.
The policy came after what EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson called “extensive study, debate, and hundreds of thousands of public comments.” The agency held a 60-day public comment period, and got 450,000 comments.
As someone who worked for more than 20 years in Louisiana's oil fields and petrochemical industry, I am sad to say I was not surprised by the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
During my youth, I saw bayous contaminated by toxic chemicals that destroyed the fish and other wildlife that should have been living there.
As an adult, I saw the health of my fellow workers and community members jeopardized by polluted air and water.
Now, as more than 200,000 gallons of crude oil pour into the Gulf of Mexico each day, I see the jobs that will be lost, the families and communities that will suffer and the impending devastation of our $2 billion seafood industry.
Think about the fishermen, the truck drivers, the restaurant owners and so many others who depend on this industry. Think also about the fish, birds, sea turtles and other marine life whose ecosystem has just been turned on its head.
There is a better way: clean energy.
While many countries have already embraced clean energy and adopted national policies to increase energy efficiency and the use of renewables, the United States continues to suffer from a reactive, outdated energy strategy. It's been nearly a year since the U.S. House of Representatives passed its energy and climate bill (the American Clean Energy and Security Act), but the Senate has yet to begin serious debate on its own legislation.
Our policymakers are fiddling while Rome burns _ or rather, while oil rigs burn and pollute our oceans and coasts.
Not only is America's refusal to embrace clean energy endangering human health and wildlife, it is also costing us jobs, which are precious commodities in this time of economic hardship. Several energy companies, including GE and BP Solar, recently announced plans to invest millions of dollars to develop and expand clean energy facilities _ not in the United States, where such investments and the jobs they bring are desperately needed _ but in Europe and China. We need incentives for green energy jobs here at home.
Now is the time for the Senate to act. With photos of the oil spill on the front pages of newspapers across the country, Americans are starting to grasp the dangers of our country's dependence on oil and other dirty sources of energy, and this awareness is being transformed into support for a new energy direction for our country.
What is happening in the Gulf of Mexico is a tragedy, plain and simple. But it will be even more tragic if we fail to learn from the oil spill and if we refuse to adopt new energy policies that will increase public health and safety while creating a new generation of clean energy jobs.
Let's not wait for the death of another oil worker or the image of one more oil-drenched bird or the announcement of one more business shutting its doors before we commit to making the United States a clean energy leader.
US Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) released a 900-plus page "discussion draft" of a climate and energy bill yesterday, called The American Power Act.
Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who helped write the bill over the last few months, withdrew his support two weeks ago over immigration reform, and did not attend the unveiling of the bill.
However, representatives from the US power industry and oil and gas industries were on hand to show their support for the bill, which offers a laundry list of concessions in `return` for a cap-and-trade program on carbon emissions.
The bill offers little direct support for renewable power and does not include a renewable portfolio standard (RPS)(a.k.a. renewable electricity standard), which wind and solar power advocates say is needed to provide consistent, long-term support for project development.
The Waxman-Markey bill passed in the US House last summer includes a 15% RPS and an additional 5% in energy efficiency by 2020. It's possible that an RPS could be added to the Senate bill, if it moves forward--but that is far from guaranteed, as Congress has only 10 working weeks left before its August break and Wall Street reform and a Supreme Court confirmation are the highest priorities.
In-depth analysis of the bill will take time, but a breakdown of key aspects includes the following:
Emissions Reduction Target: 17% reduction in greenhouse gases emissions by 2020 and 83% by 2050 (identical to targets set in the Waxman-Markey). The bill regulates seven greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and more potent fluorinated gases.
Cap-and-Trade: A cap-and-trade program would go into effect for power plants in 2013, and large industrial factories would be included starting in 2016. Introductory floor and ceiling prices would be set for carbon emissions permits. Floor: $12 (increasing at 3% over inflation annually); and ceiling: $25 (increasing at 5% over inflation annually). Permits would be provided free by the government initially, gradually transitioning to a full auction by 2030.
The bill calls for auctions to take place within the existing Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the Western Climate Initiative and the Mid-West Governors Accord.
Clean Energy Technology Fund: The bill calls for a new fund to promote new energy technology, though it offers few details on eligibility or funding levels. The bill also calls for an additional $5 billion in funding for th 30% tax credits offered for renewable energy projects.
Nuclear incentives: The bill includes numerous expanded incentives for the nuclear power industry, including $36 billion in new loan guarantees; 10% investment tax credit (convertible into a cash grant) for new power plants. (read good coverage on nuclear incentives here)
Coal: The bill offers $2 billion annually for so-called clean coal R&D and sets a goal of 72 gigawatts of Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) deployment.
Oil and Gas: The bill attempts to deal with the controversial issue of coastal state revenue from offshore drilling, offering 37.5% of revenues to the state while the feds would collect 12.5%. The ongoing Gulf oil spill led to the inclusion of opt-out clauses for states to block drilling within 75 miles of the coastline. However, since oil in the Gulf spill has now spread as far as 130 miles, this buffer zone is no real protection.
Transportation Fuel: Producers and importers of refined fuels will not participate in the carbon market, but will purchase allowances at a fixed price from the allowance auction.
Natural Gas Vehicles: The bill includes Several provisions from the “Nat Gas Act” supported by T. Boone Pickens including extension and expansion of tax credits for purchase of natural gas vehicles, and the creation of tax credit for capital expenditures on natural gas vehicle manufacturing facilities.
Trade Tariffs: In the event that no global agreement on climate change is reached, the bill requires imports from countries that have not taken action to limit emissions to pay a comparable amount at the border to avoid carbon leakage. The devil may be in the details here, as this could be a huge issue with developing nations and a difference in opinion as to what is "action to limit."
US Farmers: Farmers are exempt from the carbon pollution compliance obligations in the bill. It calls for the establishment of a domestic offset program to provide incentives for farmers to reduce emissions.
Consumer rebate: A summary of the bill provided by Senator Kerry's office says two-thirds of revenues not dedicated to reducing our deficit will be rebated back to consumers through energy bill discounts and direct rebates. However, its not clear where revenue would be generated in the early years before the transition to a full auction system. And everyone knows the deficit is large enough to eat up a significant amount of revenue.
The next few days are likely to make or break the success of this bill. The Obama administration said they will support it, but its not clear whether or not they will expend the political capital needed to win decisive votes.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said last week he will wait to see what type of response the bill receives before deciding whether or not to bring it to the floor, or pursue a smaller energy bill.
Environmental groups seem to be split on the bill at this point, with big-name organizations praising it as a starting point for better legislation, and smaller organizations blasting it as a massive giveaway to entrenched corporate interests. Among the larger organizations are Ceres, Environment America, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
UCS said the draft needs improvement in several key areas:
-Including funding for reducing tropical deforestation, an important step for securing an international climate deal and one of the most cost-effective ways to reduce emissions. -Ensuring that a periodic review of climate science and technological advancements is enforceable and will lead to changes in policies aimed at reducing emissions if necessary. -Reducing the reliance on offsets, which would let polluters avoid cleaning up their own emissions for years. -Adding a provision to establish a national oil savings plan to reduce U.S. dependence on oil and other petroleum products by 3 million barrels per day by 2020 and 7 million barrels per day by 2030, which is more than four times what the United States imports daily from the Persian Gulf. -Including safeguards to ensure that wood, plants and agricultural residues from private lands are harvested sustainably and reduce overall carbon emissions. -Limiting the excessive subsidies for nuclear power, rejecting provisions for expedited plant approval, and removing constraints on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s ability to ensure that new plants are safe to operate. -Increasing funding for states to invest in clean, home-grown renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.
A coalition of 200 environmental, peace, consumer, religious organizations and small businesses said the bill is "a taxpayer bailout of the nuclear power industry and other dirty energy interests that would be ineffective at addressing the climate crisis."
Michael Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, which coordinated the group's statement said: "This bill is just business-as-usual: taxpayer giveaways to giant nuclear and other energy corporations wrapped in the guise of doing something about our climate crisis. To call this a climate bill is greenwashing in the extreme. We need to direct our resources to the fastest, cheapest, cleanest and safest means of reducing carbon emissions?this bill does just the opposite."
Full text and summaries of the bill are available at the link below.
A U.S. Senate measure said to make the United States a "clean-energy leader," mandates a cut in carbon emissions of 17 percent in the next 10 years.
The bill, introduced Wednesday by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joe Lieberman, Ind-Conn., also would ease regulations on offshore drilling for oil, a segment likely to face scrutiny in the wake of the oil rig explosion and resulting spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
The proposed bill includes incentives of as much as $2 billion for the development of "clean coal" technology and support for nuclear power.
"We can finally tell the world that America is ready to take back our role as the world's clean energy leader," Kerry said Wednesday.
Many other countries are waiting for Congress to move on energy legislation ahead of the U.N. climate meeting in Mexico later this year. Those sessions are seen as vital to develop a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, an international effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions and fight global climate change.
A meeting last year in Denmark failed to reach agreement on such a plan for many reasons, including U.S. legislative recalcitrance to take action on the issue. The United States is the world's No. 2 carbon emitter, behind only China.
The bill isn't likely to receive consideration until the summer and Kerry and Lieberman are still looking for Republican support. They lost a key backer when Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., backed off when the Obama administration and Senate Democratic leadership decided to act on immigration measures rather than the energy bill.
Continuing their campaign theme of “Good jobs are green jobs,” some 3,000 unionists and environmentalists descended on Washington the first week of May to strategize about and lobby for massive climate control and environmental and energy development legislation.
Delegates to two conventions in the same hotel in D.C. – the GoodJobs GreenJobs conclave run by the union-founded BlueGreen Alliance and the Steelworkers’ Rapid Response conference – spent their time honing points about how to create up to 2 million new jobs: By manufacturing green products, rewiring the nation’s electric grid, developing solar, wind and geothermal energy projects and retrofitting millions of buildings and appliances for energy conservation.
Many of those new jobs, speakers noted, would go to building trades workers, cutting into unemployment rates of up to 25% among union members and up to double that in various regions, construction crafts and states.
Green factory jobs would go to Steelworkers to make the wind turbine blades, pipe and tubing, and components of new “clean energy” plants. Still other green jobs would go to Utility Workers and Electrical Workers to retrofit buildings to increase energy efficiency and to rewire the U.S. power grid to make it less wasteful.
And bus and subway drivers, mechanics, track workers and their colleagues have green jobs, too, Amalgamated Transit Union President Warren George said. “Public transit saves 4.9 million tons annually” of imported oil, by taking cars off the road. “One motorcoach is six times more fuel-efficient than passenger cars,” he said.
All the effort was designed to push the Senate into debating and voting on the environment and energy bill. The measure is designed to both cut carbon emissions that lead to global warming while encouraging energy development -- including both traditional sources such as oil and coal and alternatives such as wind, geothermal and solar. The bill is part of labor’s 5-point platform to restore “an economy that makes things.” It’s also a top Obama administration goal.
But the measure has hit, as usual, a planned Republican filibuster in the Senate, plus strong opposition from the coal and oil industries. Its GOP co-author, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is wavering and under party pressure to drop his support. And the massive oil spill after the fatal explosion, fire and sinking of a rig in the Gulf of Mexico forced Obama to reconsider one key section of the bill, encouraging offshore oil drilling.
Those problems didn’t dissuade the union leaders or their allies.
“Working together with the BlueGreen alliance, we can rebuild America’s middle class,” said Laborers President Terry O’Sullivan, one in a parade of union speakers. Others were Steelworkers President Leo Gerard, Communications Workers President Larry Cohen, Utility Workers President Mike Langford and chief of staff Stewart Acuff and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.
All, led by Trumka, emphasized that the environment-and-energy bill now pending before Congress would also be a jobs bill. That theme was also hit by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis.
“We can create good union jobs –- not only jobs that green our environment, but jobs that put green in workers’ pockets. By investing in industries like clean coal, nuclear power, wind and solar and just as importantly, by reducing energy consumption through energy efficiency, we can create good, family supporting jobs that are green jobs,” O’Sullivan added.
O’Sullivan cited weatherization as an example. Gerard and other speakers asked delegates to dream about how many jobs would be created and how much energy would be saved if every building – not just schools – was weatherized. O’Sullivan’s answers: 500,000 new construction jobs, 100 million homes retrofitted, $500 billion in energy cost savings – and we “would save the equivalent of 500 million barrels of oil.
“Toward that end, LIUNA now has the capacity to train skilled weatherization workers in every state” to “create a brand new industry,” he stated.
Even non-union speakers noted many of the green jobs would be union jobs. Roan Resch, of the Solar Energy Industries Association, told a luncheon meeting that his industry’s member companies created 17,000 new jobs last year, despite the Great Recession. The jobs are in manufacturing, installation, plumbing, roofing and installation -- and in California and Nevada. Resch said they’re usually union jobs.
Solar jobs, however, are dependent right now on federal grants and tax credits, Resch admitted. The industry’s firms are too small for traditional Wall Street investors.
The unionists’ pro-jobs push also had another side, appealing to the workers’ environmentalist allies to help create green jobs to clean up the planet. After telling how USW started labor’s environment crusade more than 40 years ago, Gerard said: “We’ve built a movement that will be the engine to drive the change that will create good jobs for the next generation. Our generation will either leave to the next generation the worst mess in history -- or the greatest opportunity in history.”
Green usually reminds people of the environment or money, but in the case of Vice President Joe Biden’s Conservation Bloc Grants for General Innovation in Education, it should strike both tunes.
What is green economy? It is industry and jobs set on a sustainable foundation of growth.
“It is really the green and blue economy,” said Merylee Shelton, a communication studies professor and coordinator for the Community Arts and Lecture Program at SJCC. “A green economy is recognizing that some of the greatest jobs in the future will be tied to healing our Earth (green) and preserving our resources, such as water (blue).”
The goal of competitive grants is to rouse activities that move beyond public awareness campaigns, according to GSP Consulting Corporation, an organization that identifies grants at the state and federal level.
Purveyors of the grants are looking for colleges that demonstrate the ability to provide instruction that prepares students for the future of industry – green business.
“Students should look at Green For All, a nonprofit organization located in Oakland, or review the White House website,” Shelton said. “It’ll have a list of partnerships the Obama administration has with community colleges across the country.”
Money is an incentive. A total of $64 million is provided by bloc grants for innovation in education, but colleges must compete in a “race to the top” to receive these monies, according to the Department of Energy.
“SJCC is definitely reflective of innovative green technology,” Shelton said. “Green construction is a field offered on campus. Hypothetically, we have the ability to compete for federal grants, but we no longer have any grant writers on campus.”
This is a setback, but it has a solution.
Administrators should be able to raise money and write grants, Shelton added. “We should expect our administrators to lobby on their own time, at least once a week.”
Michael Blake, the deputy associate director for the White House offices of intergovernmental affairs and public engagement, reiterated Shelton’s feelings at a conference held for the SJCC College Arts and Lectures Program on April 22.
The administration needs to ensure colleges have the resources to support the grants before they can be considered, Blake said. Over the span of 10 years, $12 billion will be distributed to colleges that demonstrate resources for green workforce training.
“We will be the last to put our hands out for the money, if people are not aware of all the opportunities,” Shelton said.
There are four principles that are the criteria for applications, according to the U.S. Department of Education. A college must demonstrate the ability to:
1.Spend funds quickly to save and create jobs 2.Improve student achievement through school improvement and reform 3.Ensure transparency, reporting and accountability 4.Invest one-time American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds in a sustainable manner to minimize the “funding cliff” Looking to the horizon is important to a sustainable environment and economy.
Students who are interested in green careers can pursue a diversity of fields from MBAs in sustainable-business practices to technical jobs, operating wind turbines or green construction, Shelton said.
“Economic prosperity relies on education reform,” Blake said. “Community colleges are a key component.”
SJECCD and the South Bay Labor Council have taken steps to compete for funds with a program called Greater South Bay Green Jobs Corp, which provides training in water engineering, green construction and solar energy, according to their flier.
A partnership with Global Exchange, an education and action resource center for sustainable growth and fair trade, would be ideal, Shelton said. The organization has a partnership with City College of San Francisco, and offers sponsorship for an annual green festival and opportunities for internships.
Fair trade ensures that consumers pay equitable prices for products to help exploited producers and farmers.
“We need to look at fair trade instead of free trade,” Shelton said. “Factory farming is an area of free trade that has driven our economy the last century, but has also destroyed our environment. The future will look towards fair trade because it’s globally sustainable.”
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan led the creation of an environmental law program and clinic while dean of Harvard Law School from 2003 to 2009.
President Obama is joined Monday by Vice President Biden while introducing Solicitor General Elena Kagan as his choice to be the nation's 112th Supreme Court justice during an event in the East Room of the White House.
"The fact that she was interested in building an environmental law program when none existed, I think, speaks volumes," says Jody Freeman, an environmental policy and regulation scholar whom Kagan lured from UCLA to Harvard, according to a post by Jonathan Hiskes of the environmental website Grist.
"Harvard, when she became dean, was pretty much seen as a kind of a backwater" on environmental law, says John Leshy, an environmental law scholar at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, in the Grist post.
Kagan, 50, who President Obama introduced as his court choice Monday, has also worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee under then-Sen. Joe Biden and as counsel in the Clinton White House. For the past year, she's represented the federal government before the Supreme Court as U.S. solicitor general.
"She has an in-depth knowledge of the nuts and bolts of how issues work in the real world," Glenn Sugameli, an attorney at Defenders of Wildlife and founder of Judging the Environment, which monitors federal courts, tells Grist.
Hiskes says Kagan may be no "fire-breathing environmental crusader in the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. mold." She even got so consumed by work a couple of time that she accidentally left her car running overnight, according to an account in the New York Times.
"But if actions mean more than words," he writes, "Kagan's nomination could be good news for the environmental movement."
NYIT Hosts Fifth Annual Energy Conference, “Building a Sustainable Future”
2010-05-11 15:16:24
NYIT Hosts Fifth Annual Energy Conference, “Building a Sustainable Future”
New York, N.Y. (May 11, 2010) – New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) will host its fifth annual energy conference, “Building a Sustainable Future,” on Friday, June 4, 2010, at the NYIT Auditorium on Broadway in New York, NY.
Speakers will address sustainable initiatives in architecture, business, and engineering. Topics will also include climate models, media issues, and public perception (NIMBY).
The conference will also include a special multimedia performance by violinist Kenji Williams, who will present “Bella Gaia: A Poetic Vision of Earth from Space.” Attendees may receive five continuing education hours applicable to re-registration as a professional engineer or registered architect.
The keynote speakers include: • Gavin Schmidt, Ph.D., NASA’s Godard Institute for Space Studies and creator of RealClimate.org. • Joshua Wolfe of GHG Photos, a coalition of science, environmental, nature, and documentary photographers focused on Greenhouse Gas emissions and their effects. • Andrew Winston, founder of Winston Eco-Strategies and author of Green to Gold and Green Recovery. • Wendy Williams, author of Cape Wind. • Leslie Jabs, AIA, from Gensler Architects. • Drury Crawley, Ph.D., formerly of the Commercial Buildings Team, Office of Energy Efficiency, U.S. Department of Energy. • Louis Nowikas, director of Operations, Real Estate, and Facility Planning for Hearst Corporation. • New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) team members, who will discuss the new “Green NY” statewide program.
“NYIT has taken the responsibility of bringing together leaders in architecture, business, and engineering to explore the energy issues facing society,” said Dr. Frank Zeman, director of NYIT’s Center for Metropolitan Sustainability and associate professor of energy management. “It is important to cover a breadth of topics in order to educate attendees about how the pieces fit together. There is no silver bullet, and working together is the surest way forward.”
The conference is presented by NYIT’s Center for Metropolitan Sustainability, Office of Financial Affairs, Office of Academic Affairs, School of Engineering and Computing Sciences, School of Management, and School of Architecture and Design. The conference is sponsored by NORESCO, Metro Fuel Oil Corp., Santander Bank, New York Community Bank Foundation, U.S. Green Building of New York, the Advanced Energy Research and Technology Center (AERTC), the Association of Energy Engineers (AEE), and the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce.
The conference will be held from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the NYIT Auditorium on Broadway, located at 1871 Broadway, between 61st and 62nd Streets in New York City. Lunch will be held at O’Neals, located at 49 W. 64th St.
To register for NYIT’s energy conference, fill out the online registration form or contact events@nyit.edu. For more information about the conference, visit nyit.edu/sustainable.
About NYIT New York Institute of Technology (NYIT), founded in 1955, offers undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees in more than 90 fields of study, including architecture and interior design; arts and sciences; education; engineering and computing sciences; health professions; management; and osteopathic medicine. A non-profit independent, private institution of higher education, NYIT has more than 15,000 students attending campuses on Long Island and Manhattan, online, and at its global campuses. Led by President Edward Guiliano, NYIT is guided by its mission to provide career-oriented professional education, offer access to opportunity to all qualified students, and support applications-oriented research that benefits the larger world. To date, 81,500 students have graduated from NYIT. For more information, visit nyit.edu.
With today's announcement that President Obama has chosen Solicitor General Elena Kagan to fill the Supreme Court seat of retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, the summer confirmation battle has begun for a nominee whose legal philosophy remains largely unknown.
Kagan, 50, is a cipher on most contentious legal questions despite having gone through the Senate confirmation process last year. As solicitor general, the federal government's main legal advocate, she has had little leeway to take personal stances, and because she has never served as a lawmaker or judge, she has no history of votes or decisions to scrutinize.
Obama's selection of Kagan has generated less immediate criticism from Republicans than his nomination of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who had penned her share of controversial decisions as a judge on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Though Kagan's lack of judicial experience has helped her so far, it could ultimately become the focal point of criticism from the right.
"Kagan's lack of judicial experience and short time as solicitor general, arguing just six cases before the court, is troubling," said Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a statement today. "The public expects Supreme Court nominees to possess a mastery of the law, a sound judicial philosophy, and a demonstrated dedication to the impartial application of the law and the Constitution. With no judicial opinions to consider, it will be especially important that other aspects of her record exhibit these characteristics."
When it comes to environmental law, Kagan's positions are largely a mystery, said Daniel Farber, an environmental law professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Her writings suggest that she favors deference to presidential authority, he said -- a stance that would have different effects depending on the administration in power but could result in more expansive environmental regulation.
"We know just about nothing about her views on environmental issues," Farber said. "She's got very little paper trail."
But there are indications that Kagan is sensitive to environmental issues, mostly from her time as dean of Harvard Law School.
Kagan oversaw the creation of the school's Environmental Law Program and an environmental clinic, recruiting high-profile faculty to lead them, said Lois Schiffer, a former head of the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division. A group of alumni had spent years pushing the school to expand its environmental law offerings, but they made no headway until Kagan arrived, Schiffer said.
Schiffer, a Harvard Law School alumna who guest-taught an environmental policy course during Kagan's tenure at Harvard and occasionally worked with her in the Clinton administration, said she was impressed by Kagan's "commitment to the field of environmental law."
"I would certainly say that she was the one who really understood immediately that there was importance in having an environmental law program at the law school," Schiffer said. If that experience is any indication, Schiffer added, "she'll be very thoughtful about environmental law issues, and I'm hoping that she'll come to them with sympathy for protecting the environment."
Second time around
During her confirmation hearing for solicitor general last year, Kagan gave away little when asked questions that could have provided a glimpse of her positions on environmental issues. This time around, she will face far greater pressure to discuss her legal philosophy.
One question last year came from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who asked Kagan to address a George W. Bush-era solicitor general's decision to oppose Supreme Court review of the landmark climate change lawsuit Massachusetts v. EPA. The majority opinion in that case, written by Stevens and decided by a 5-4 margin, required the agency to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant.
Kagan demurred when asked whether she agreed with then-Solicitor General Paul Clement's position that states had no standing to sue the federal government for their failure to regulate carbon dioxide. In a filing on behalf of U.S. EPA, which had refrained from regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Clement had urged the justices not to accept the case for review.
"In that case, the solicitor general's office was representing the position of the agencies involved. And if it was right or if it was wrong was more a matter of whether the agency had decided the right thing," Kagan said. "The usual thing for the solicitor general to do is to vigorously defend that policy or practice in court. Without knowing all the ins and outs of the communications between the solicitor general and the EPA in that case, I suspect that that is the decision that the solicitor general made."
Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), then a Republican, asked Kagan whether she agreed with the Obama administration's decision to withdraw an appeal of a court ruling that vacated EPA's rules on mercury and other types of emissions. Kagan responded by saying that "when executive policy itself changes, the solicitor general's litigating decisions also may change."
Specter ultimately voted against Kagan's confirmation, and he said today that her evasive answers prompted his decision. She was confirmed by a 61-31 margin, with the support of seven Republicans.
"I voted against her for Solicitor General because she wouldn't answer basic questions about her standards for handling that job. It is a distinctly different position than that of a Supreme Court Justice," Specter said in a statement today. "I have an open mind about her nomination and hope she will address important questions related to her position on matters such as executive power, warrantless wiretapping, a woman's right to choose, voting rights and congressional power."
The court after Stevens
Though it remains unclear how Kagan would approach environmental cases differently than her predecessor, her confirmation will regardless mark a shift after the retirement of Stevens, who has served on the court since the advent of the modern environmental movement.
When Stevens joined the court in 1975, the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act were in their infancy. Climate change was not yet on the radar -- the first congressional hearings on the issue, called by then-Sen. Al Gore of Tennessee (D), did not take place until 1988.
Farber said Stevens' approach is typified by his 1984 majority opinion in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the court's most widely cited opinion. The case, which involved EPA's decision on stationary sources of air pollution, established the two-step test for deference to federal agencies.
That approach has not always yielded outcomes favored by environmentalists -- in the Chevron case, the court sided with the oil company, rejecting a challenge to the agency's decision to scale back regulations. But in the long run, Farber said, it has led Stevens to side with environmental interests.
"This philosophy of judicial restraint, which is the essence of the Chevron doctrine, has often led him to the environmental side of cases, simply because major environmental statutes tend to favor the environment more often than not," Farber wrote in a recent post on his blog, "Legal Planet." "The moral is simple. To protect the environment, we don't need environmental crusaders on the Court. We just need judges who understand that the paramount role in environmental law is played by Congress (with an assist from administrative agencies), not by the courts."
Kagan's work as solicitor general and as policy counsel during the Clinton administration could lead her to give more leeway to the executive branch than Stevens, who has typically been more deferential to Congress, Farber said. But that is just a guess, he said.
"There's no reason to think that she's going to be terribly different from Stevens," Farber said. "Not based on anything we know now, anyway."
National Clean Fuels: US Dept of Energy Announces $60 Million for Clean Energy
2010-05-11 11:14:46
National Clean Fuels (NACF) applauded the news that Under Secretary of Energy Kristina Johnson announced that $60 million in funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is available to continue supporting innovative small business research and development leading to deployment of clean energy technologies. This is a Phase II funding opportunity under the Department’s Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) program for companies that have already demonstrated successful results with new technologies and can now show potential to meet market needs.
“The Department of Energy is committed to unlocking small business innovation in the clean energy economy,” said Under Secretary Johnson. “This second funding opportunity will help innovative small businesses, create jobs and move our country forward.”
“The DOE is reflecting the federal government’s new and serious commitment for clean fuel initiatives, especially in emerging companies,” said Maurice Stone, President of National Clean Fuels. “We have placed NACF in the best position and at the perfect time to fully capitalize on the national momentum supporting the development of cleaner energy. These types of innovative companies are the types we are looking at to do business within our new business model.”
National Clean Fuels aggressively develops alternative energy projects and profitable clientele relationships in a sector that is growing to compete in the energy industry, which contains Allegheny Energy Inc. (AYE), Alliant Energy Corporation (LNT), CMS Energy Corporation (CMS) and Cimarex Energy (XEC).
Edward Guiliano, president and CEO of New York Institute of Technology (NYIT), said education - whether through its traditional role of teaching, or its role of creating knowledge through research, or simply through its role of modeling solutions - is as important as government or business in today's global discourse on sustainability and thinking green.
Speaking at a conference titled "Think Green: Energy, Education, Environmental Initiatives" - a global forum sponsored by NYIT and Nanjing University of Posts and Communications - in Nanjing in early April, Guiliano said while governments provide the necessary policy framework, bringing together business and academic communities with government "is a tested model for innovation, change, and getting things done."
Using NYIT's practice as an example, he said schools could help to stimulate and popularize new ideas by hosting energy innovation conferences, and also serving as the starting point for ideas from the classroom and the laboratory to be applied to the factory and the marketplace.
"As early as 1978, we hosted a conference on hydrogen fuel cells, which led to further development of hybrid vehicle prototypes just now coming into use. The academy, through its traditional role of teaching, scholarship and service, is particularly well positioned and compelled both by mission and compassionate imperative to play a central role in advancing solutions and policies on these vital subjects," he said.
In the battlefront against global warming, Guiliano also believes China is the right place to be.
He noted that many famous American energy and technology companies are building offices and laboratories in China, and are transferring top employees and their families here. Further, an increasing number of Chinese engineering students who studied in the U.S. are now `return`ing to promising, rewarding, and important careers here in China.
Many of the best ideas in green technology - solar wind farms, electric cars, clean coal processing - are also being tested, applied, and brought to the market here in China, he added.
Although China also faces mounting challenges - as the world's largest car market with 2,000 cars added to its streets a day, it has surpassed the United States as the largest producer of greenhouse gases - China has made strenuous efforts to tackle those challenges.
The Chinese government, he said, has been strongly committed to developing green technology since the launch of the 863 Program as far back as 1986. The 863 Program has made it possible to take innovative ideas in wind, solar, electric, and coal energy alternatives first developed in the U.S. and Europe and apply them in China.
"We are here because Chinese and American thinkers and movers must lead along the road to a sustainable future in this century," he said.
An update on UNFCCC efforts to promote technology transfer between countries.
December’s UNFCCC climate negotiations were so fraught with disagreement that success stories seem rare. However, technology transfer was one area in which definitive progress was made in Copenhagen, progress that is likely to continue this year in the UNFCCC negotiations and other venues.
What is Technology Transfer?
From Copenhagen to Cancun covers the key issues in the ongoing international climate negotiations. The series looks at where things stand after the 2009 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meeting in Copenhagen and how discussions are progressing towards COP-16 in Cancun. In the context of climate change, “technology transfer” refers to how technologies that reduce greenhouse gases and aid climate adaptation efforts are developed and shared across borders. Developing countries will need more than finance to address climate change – they will need new technology for mitigation (emissions reductions), such as wind power, and new technologies for adaptation, such as flood control technologies and drought resistant strains of corn and wheat.
Because technology transfer will facilitate global emissions reductions, it is considered key to reaching a global agreement. The Bali Action Plan, a decision made at the UNFCCC meeting in 2007 to achieve a legally binding climate agreement, called for strengthened efforts to move technologies from developed to developing countries.
Progress in Copenhagen
In the early days of December’s negotiations, country representatives made progress on the technology transfer text. By the end of the first week, negotiators appeared close to agreeing that a new international mechanism for development and transfer of technology should be created. This mechanism would have two parts – an executive committee made up of politically appointed country representatives that would provide coordination, and a climate technology center made up of technical experts that could lead capacity-building in countries that need it. This carefully negotiated plan represented a smart compromise between the need for a political body to provide guidance and coordination and a more down-to-earth mechanism with technical experts than can implement solutions. Had the negotiations advanced further, this plan could have been brought to political leaders.
Heads of state arrived late in the second week and switched gears to drafting the Copenhagen Accord. The Accord acknowledged technology’s important role, stating:
“In order to enhance action on development and transfer of technology we decide to establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology deployment and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation that will be guided by a country-driven approach and be based on national circumstances and priorities.”
While the level of detail did not come close to what was in the negotiating text, this paragraph in the Copenhagen Accord did something that hadn’t been done before – it showed strong political support for an actual technology mechanism. However, details on how such a mechanism would be implemented remain to be seen.
Ironing Out the Details: Financing and Intellectual Property Rights
While the negotiations on technology were not a barrier to a successful global agreement, country representatives did disagree on some details. First, it was unclear how a financial mechanism (which was being negotiated separately) would mesh institutionally with the technology mechanism. Would the activities undertaken within the technology mechanism automatically be funded by the financial mechanism? Would the technology mechanism have the possibility to provide input for the financial mechanism’s funding decisions related to technologies?
The second sticking point involved intellectual property rights, such as patents and copyrights. Some countries felt that technologies, particularly those that help communities adapt to changing climates, must be shared freely, while others worried that without intellectual property rights protection and thus the potential to profit, the private sector will not invest in new innovations.
As countries begin to consider implementation of a mechanism, unresolved challenges will need to be sorted out either inside or outside the UNFCCC. Key questions that countries will need to think about include:
•How will the financial mechanism address capacity building and joint research, and prioritize which technologies to support?
•How can the non-financial aspects of technology transfer, such as making sure countries have the research capacity and supportive governance structures, effectively be addressed?
•If there is significant movement on technology transfer occurring in multiple venues outside of the UNFCCC, how do we ensure a certain level of coordination?
•How can the transfer of adaptation technologies and the transfer for emissions reduction technologies be addressed with equal attention?
Next Steps for Technology Sharing
Compared to many other areas of discussion in the formal UNFCCC negotiations, finalizing the technology part of an international agreement this year could be relatively easy. However, in order to finalize the technology text, negotiators will need more clarity on the outcome of the other negotiating areas, particularly on the financial mechanism. Before a UNFCCC mechanism can facilitate technology transfer flows, a lot of work will be needed to set up the mechanism, define roles and responsibilities, and secure funding.
In the meantime, implementation can move forward in a number of non-UNFCCC forums. The progress made in the negotiations and the high-level support outlined in the Copenhagen Accord could kick-start additional action on bilateral and mutlilateral technology cooperation agreements among countries that want to take early action. Several new and existing partnerships such as the Major Economies Forum, the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas, as well as bilateral memoranda of understanding (MOUs), can encourage capacity building and technology sharing now. One key meeting to watch is an Energy and Climate Ministerial to be convened by Steven Chu in July, where the United States plans to announce a series of cooperative projects on technology transfer, such as harmonizing appliance efficiency standards among the largest markets.
These meetings could move technology transfer forward now when momentum is needed, and the lessons learned can be wrapped into an eventual UNFCCC agreement, supporting the formal climate negotiations process.
Spring is in the air, summer's around the corner, and all that sunshine is generating power all around the world. How much do you know about solar power? See how you do in this Wall Street Journal quiz.
1. Which of these locations gets the most electricity from solar power?
A. Arizona B. Denmark C. Germany D. Spain E. New Jersey
Answer: C. Thanks to generous government incentives, more electricity is generated by solar panels in Germany than anywhere else, even though it's not exactly a sunny place. In 2009 enough panels were installed there to generate about three gigawatts of electricity annually—more than half of the total capacity installed world-wide last year. In the U.S., California leads, with New Jersey second.
2. Which of these U.S. presidents installed solar panels at the White House?
A. Richard Nixon B. Jimmy Carter C. Ronald Reagan D. Bill Clinton E. George W. Bush
Answer:B and E. In 1979, President Carter's White House installed solar panels on the roof of the West Wing to heat water. They were removed in 1986 during the Reagan administration when the roof was being repaired, and were never replaced. In 2002, new solar panels were placed on the White House grounds to heat water and generate electricity.
3. How much electricity would a solar panel rated at 100 watts produce on a sunny day in Washington, D.C.?
A. 100 watts B. 85 watts C. 60 watts D. 50 watts
Answer: B. A solar panel should produce about 85% of its rated wattage in strong sunlight in the Washington area, with the rest lost to various inefficiencies, according to the Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The total will differ depending on your location. You can plug your location and rated wattage into a calculator at this website: http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/calculators/PVWATTS/version1/
4. Which famous scientist received a Nobel Prize for his work in solar energy?
A. Thomas Edison B. Albert Einstein C. Nikola Tesla D. Georg Ohm
Answer: B. In 1921 the Nobel Prize in physics went to Albert Einstein for his explanation of the photoelectric effect—the ejection of electrons from the surface of a metal in response to light. In a solar photovoltaic panel, sunlight hitting the surface causes electrons to flow, which creates an electrical current.
5. Which country or region leads in manufacturing solar panels?
A. China B. Europe C. Japan D. North America
Answer: A. In 2009 China produced about 36% of all solar panels made world-wide, according to Photon Consulting LLC. It took the lead from Europe, which had an 18% share. Japan was third at 16% and North America, primarily the U.S., fourth at 8%.
6. In the U.S., solar power is most commonly used to do what?
A. Provide electricity in the home B. Power large retail centers C: Deliver electricity to the grid D. Heat water for swimming pools E. Heat water for household use
Answer: D. As of the end of 2008, about 7,000 megawatts of solar power was installed for heating pools, compared with 1,100 megawatts for all other uses.
7. What is the approximate cost to produce electricity from solar power in the U.S.?
A. Five cents per kilowatt-hour B. 10 cents per kilowatt-hour C. 25 cents per kilowatt-hour D. 35 cents per kilowatt-hour
Answer: C. That's more than twice the cost of power generated by coal and natural gas, which come in below 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, according to "benchmark" figures from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The price of solar power depends largely on where it is produced.
Re: Canada falling behind on green jobs investment, May 4
The government of Canada understands the need for green jobs balanced with a growing economy. Note that Canada's percentage of green stimulus spending (nine per cent) was ahead of that of Japan (six per cent) and only slightly behind that of the United States (12 per cent).
Signalling its desire for green jobs, Canada invested $170 million over five years in the hydrogen and fuel cell sector. Companies in the sector responded to this policy signal by raising $1 billion of private capital and creating 3,000 innovation-based green jobs in a sunrise sector. Walmart Canada now ranks among our more prominent customers.
An economic impact study of the sector, completed in March, conservatively estimated 14,000 new hydrogen and fuel cell sector jobs by 2020. Industry Minister Tony Clement recently confirmed his vote of confidence by stating, "We also see the tremendous potential of hydrogen and fuel cell technology -technology we are already exporting to the United States, Asia, Europe and Oceania."
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and other House Democrats hold a closed economic forum to examine ongoing initiatives to create jobs and keep US economy moving toward recovery on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on May 4. (Jewel Samad/Getty Images)
Hundreds lobbied Capitol Hill Thursday to encourage congressmen to join them in support of environmentally sustainable jobs. A lobbying day on the Hill concluded the three-day Good Jobs, Green Jobs conference May 4 to 6 in Washington D.C.; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi headlined the conference.
“In Congress, we have stood strong in the drive for good, green jobs. We’ve said all along that clean energy is about four things: jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs,” said Pelosi at the conference Tuesday morning, according to a transcript of her remarks released by her office. Pelosi recognized the alliance’s belief that sustainability will be the foundation of long-term prosperity. She highlighted ways Congress helped create green and clean energy jobs through the Recovery Act.
Hosted by a partnership of labor unions and environmental groups called the BlueGreen Alliance, the conference was a showcase of ideas and success stories as well as an opportunity to connect different businesses and environmental fields. The alliance was founded in 2006 by the Sierra Club and the United Steelworkers and has grown to include several other labor unions and environmental protection groups.
Speakers at the conference included union leaders, heads of environmental groups, mayors, congressmen, senators, governors, and U.S. Department Secretaries Hilda Solis of Labor, and Steven Chu of Energy.
Energy Secretary Chu said that in recent years the United States has fallen behind other countries. Speaking Wednesday at the conference, he said the United States used to lead in battery and photovoltaic cell production, in the car industry, and in nuclear reactors but now China is leading
the world in high-tech manufacturing. Chu said he doesn’t believe the United States can survive on a service industry economy alone, “like financial services,” he said, taking a jab at the industry blamed for the recession.
We need to get back on the “path of manufacturing,” he said, then as a nation we can be “making and inventing the stuff the rest of the world will need” as other nations also move toward sustainable, energy efficient technologies. He said building these industries needs government support, committed government support to get manufacturing of sustainable technologies and complementary supply and installation industries on their feet.
Support may not take too long in coming. Speaker Pelosi said that this week the House will vote on HomeStar, a bill written to help homeowners make energy efficient upgrades to their homes. “HomeStar will rapidly create jobs in both construction and manufacturing, sectors that have seen high levels of unemployment,” said Pelosi Tuesday at the conference.
Concluding one of the sessions Wednesday afternoon, International President of the United Steelworkers and BlueGreen Alliance co-chairman Leo Gerard, said of employment and the environment, “Either we’ll have both, or we’ll have neither.”
Green renovations and energy sector jobs will stimulate the economy.
2010-05-06 11:08:31
Has anyone figured out that bailouts are not going to solve the economic problems we still face? They were temporary solutions to a much bigger problem. Still homes are sitting, not selling and buyers are still being turned down from lenders. Now we are seeing companies who feel that a good marketing program is advertising free money if you let “them” handle your transaction. Nice try until all the big companies do it. We need an injection into the real estate arena, a new industry. Something the republicans can get excited about. We need something that will gain their support. We need to stop ignoring them and pose the age old question. “Why can’t we all get along?” We need something that can create big business ideals and put even the republicans’ friends and family back to work. If you could save on your utility bills, have your family breathe better in their own home and get family and friends back to work, are you interested?
The downside with a mindset of wanting bailouts, is that we become complacent and no one will be motivated to address how we can stop unemployment applications. Extending unemployment extensions is a must, for now. Until jobs are created and we keep taking handouts, we are on a downward spiral promoting complacency. Now in our country we realize without this, we cannot exist. We are just making these problems worse, so what is the answer?
We all need to feel secure again. We need opportunity we can get excited about. We don’t believe those in decision making positions anymore because they keep making decisions and still our family and friends are going deeper and deeper. Since we all live and work in a piece of real estate, this is the place to start.
Let’s look at our situation another way. I am sure we can all agree we have identified two common denominators that need to stabilize, employment and stimulating real estate sales. No bailouts allowed. DONE. STOP. Think of the days when job security was more the norm. Mom and Dad go to work, and at night and on weekends families could afford to patronize the local businesses. It was the result of our family home as our safe haven and job security. Think on this: If we all lived and worked in tents, because of weather patterns, wouldn’t we have interest in making these structures, stronger and sustainable? Wouldn’t it create business opportunity, innovation for products and building systems, research, new business ventures and financing programs to help people? Anyone see where I am going here? Does this opportunity remind you of the old industrial revolution we studied in our history classes in middle and high school?
Embrace the many tax incentives, government and community initiatives and get Green Education so all understand this is here to stay and will cause market transformation.
Spring Cleanup Campaign Moves NYIT Further on Path to Sustainability
2010-05-05 15:05:44
Old Westbury, N.Y. (May 5, 2010) – New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) did its part for the environment during its first annual, campus-wide Spring Cleanup Campaign.
At NYIT’s campuses in Old Westbury and Manhattan, as well as its Central Islip site, all NYIT community members participated in the initiative to discard unnecessary electronic and physical documents that have accumulated over the years. During the initiative, more than 11 tons of paper were shredded and recycled, equivalent to saving 200 trees, 5,000 gallons of oil, and 100 cubic feet of landfill space, according to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials Bureau of Waste Reduction and Recycling.
“There are a great number of employees who have been working at NYIT for more 20 years, and have accumulated up to 20 years’ worth of paper, e-mails, and electronic documents,” says Kristen Panella, director of environmental health and safety at NYIT. “The Spring Cleanup Campaign not only reduced the amount of waste produced at NYIT, but also helps our employees understand how important sustainability is to maintain efficiency at work.”
Since the 1970s, NYIT has been a leading contributor to alternative energy research, innovative technology, and green initiatives. With its Green Print initiative, NYIT seeks to measure its carbon footprint across all of its campuses in New York, Canada, China, and the Middle East, through researching energy alternatives and emission solutions, and reducing energy consumption through everyday efficiencies. NYIT is a frequent host of international conferences on energy and is focused on policies and technologies that will provide for a lasting green future.
About NYIT
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) offers undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees in more than 90 fields of study, including architecture and interior design; arts and sciences; education; engineering and computing sciences; health professions; management; and osteopathic medicine. A non-profit independent, private institution of higher education, NYIT has more than 15,000 students attending campuses on Long Island and Manhattan, online, and at its global campuses. For more than 50 years, NYIT has been guided by its mission to provide career-oriented professional education, offer access to opportunity to all qualified students, and support applications-oriented research that benefits the larger world. To date, 81,500 students have graduated from NYIT. For more information, visit www.nyit.edu.
NYIT Announces Public-Private Solar Panel Initiative
2010-05-05 15:02:11
Joint Initiative with Senator Carl L. Marcellino, LIPA President and CEO Kevin Law, and the Jericho Water District
Old Westbury, N.Y. (April 22, 2010) – New York Institute of Technology (NYIT), New York State Senator Carl L. Marcellino, Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) President and CEO Kevin Law, and the Jericho Water District joinedtogether today to honor Earth Day by announcing a joint project to install solar panels at the Jericho Water District buildings.
The solar panels will be designed to provide energy for the buildings and allow excess power to be net metered with LIPA to provide offsetting revenue to the water district. The dual-purpose design will result in energy savings to the utility and ultimately to the public. The cost of the installation may be reduced through LIPA’s nationally recognized Solar Pioneer Program.
“We are proud to be working on a project with the Jericho Water District, LIPA, and Senator Marcellino that is at the forefront of two of today’s most pressing technological challenges, clean water and clean energy,” said Nada Marie Anid, Ph.D., dean of NYIT’s School of Engineering and Computing Sciences. “The project will reduce energy and water bills in the long term while also contributing to clean air on Long Island.”
“The commissioners of the Jericho Water District are pleased to have the opportunity to partner with Senator Marcellino and NYIT to install solar energy power at district facilities,” said Nicholas Bartilucci, commissioner of the Jericho Water District. “We are enthused over the prospect of reducing the district's dependence on fossil fuel-generated electrical power and are committed to conserving water and electricity.”
“As public stewards of natural resources, Jericho Water District is ever-conscious of the impact their operations have on the environment,” said Senator Marcellino. “Just as they have assumed a leadership role in promoting conservation and other sensible water activities, they have also been fiscally prudent stewards of taxpayers’ money. This is one more example of thinking ‘outside the box’ to bring to the residents of the Jericho Water District an environmental and economical benefit.”
The solar panel project will demonstrate to the public and private sector that a viable facility powered solely on renewable energy can be constructed. The actual system will be designed by NYIT engineering students and faculty with the guidance and expertise of local Long Island firms. The system’s performance will be monitored both by the water district and a team of students, creating a public-private partnership that will serve the community.
“The engineering students participating in the design of this system are contributing to making Long Island cleaner and greener, while helping to foster new clean energy jobs in our region,” said LIPA President and CEO Kevin S. Law.
“Educational partnerships, like the one announced today, instill in youth a love for their community, teach them social responsibility, enrich their classroom experiences with real application, and prepare them to be the leaders of tomorrow,” said Dean Anid.
LIPA’s Solar Pioneer and Entrepreneur Programs are part of Efficiency Long Island, a 10-year, $924 million energy efficiency program that offers a wide array of incentives, rebates, and initiatives available to LIPA’s residential and commercial customers to assist them in reducing their energy usage and thereby, lowering their bills. Efficiency Long Island is one of the most ambitious efficiency programs in the United States and will delay the construction of the next fossil-fueled power plant on Long Island.
"I applaud Senator Marcellino, NYIT, and LIPA for working together to improve energy efficiency, save Long Islanders’ money, and help New York become the nation's clean technology leader," said U.S. Representative Steve Israel (D-NY), who applauded the efforts announced today.
About NYIT
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) offers undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees in more than 90 fields of study, including architecture and interior design; arts and sciences; education; engineering and computing sciences; health professions; management; and osteopathic medicine. A non-profit independent, private institution of higher education, NYIT has more than 15,000 students attending campuses on Long Island and Manhattan, online, and at its global campuses. For more than 50 years, NYIT has been guided by its mission to provide career-oriented professional education, offer access to opportunity to all qualified students, and support applications-oriented research that benefits the larger world. To date, 81,500 students have graduated from NYIT. For more information, visit www.nyit.edu.
Universities integrate environment into education majors, minors
2010-05-05 11:47:27
College recruiters work hard to attract prospective students. They flaunt their college for its academic achievements, its alumni and often its sports. But there is a new criterion moving its way up the list -- sustainability. If a college isn't green, some students might choose a greener school. In a survey done by the Princeton Review of 10,300 college applicants, 63 percent stated a college's commitment to the environment could affect their decision to attend. Students are looking into how sustainable their prospective colleges are, and if they don't make the grade, then they don't make the cut.
Learning about the environment begins in the classroom.
Students can take classes that focus on the environment; they can even major or minor in Earth-specific classes.
The BG News decided to look at six Ohio four-year public universities -- BGSU, Kent State University, University of Toledo, University of Cincinnati, Ohio University and Ohio State University -- and their commitment to sustainability in education.
Students can choose from three specific majors for environmental studies at OU, including an undergraduate certificate program studying biophysical environments and how humans affect the environment, said Erin Sykes, sustainability staff member at OU. The school also offers a graduate certificate in environmental sustainability for non-environmental studies majors and a master's of science degree in environmental studies mixing classes and research.
UC offers a minor in sustainability at this point, but Sustainability Coordinator Shawn Tubb said already-offered classes in environmental studies, environmental health and environmental engineering provide knowledge of sustainability and environmental impact.
"Part of the action plan is to increase environmental literacy as well," he said. "Within each college and department, they've been working to integrate it."
Reaching first-year students is also key to keeping the movement's momentum, because Tubb said students are the movement's main driving force. Each should be at a certain level of literacy, he said.
"I've noticed even in the last year that more and more courses are related to the environment," Tubb said. "It's not just the usual subjects."
At BGSU, students can tailor their sustainability education toward the environment, health or sustainability.
The environmental health major at BGSU, which deals with the relationship between environmental quality and human health, has 27 accredited programs recognized by the National Environmental Health Science and Protection Accreditation Council.
The environmental policy and analysis major is geared toward students interested in the administrative, legislative and organizational problems from human contact. In this major, students can pursue career goals on sustainable management, environmental planning, outdoor recreation, environmental education and environmental law. The environmental science major focuses on the biological aspects of the environment and offers opportunities for students to specialize in sustainable management, environmental restoration, watershed management, geo-spatial analysis and environmental education.
Miriam Saas, a senior environmental policy and analysis major, chose her major because of the element of science, which she loves. She thinks it's critical to bridge the gap between government and nonprofit organizations because the funding for projects is often unavailable.
"I think it's important to share the resources if you can help because little things go a long way," Saas said.
KSU has yet to establish a major or minor in the field of sustainability, but there is a lot of interest in the idea on campus, said Cathy DuBois, chair of the academic program subcommittee of the sustainability task force at KSU. Recently, the subcommittee conducted a survey of faculty at the university, DuBois said.
"[We] found that there are 150 courses that are sustainability related or focus or faculty integrated sustainability in course content," she said.
The faculty interest in incorporating sustainability compelled the subcommittee to offer a sustainability faculty workshop. The future of sustainability majors or minors at KSU is uncertain, but DuBois said it will continue to be integrated into courses.
"I would like to see a trans-disciplinary center that helps connect people from all disciplines to learn about sustainability," DuBois said.
UT offers students the chance to major in sustainability-supported majors like environmental science and environmental engineering at the undergraduate or graduate level.
"Our graduate engineering program at UT is ranked 18th in the nation," said Harvey Vershum, UT director of energy management.
Students interested in environmental studies and sustainability can enroll in UT's environmental science program and get the chance to do field and laboratory work for valuable hands-on experience.
OSU offers numerous programs with an environmental focus for students, including four undergraduate majors in the field of environmental science. With the increase in green movements nationwide, the need for environmental programs at OSU is as important as ever, said Mark Giese, academic administrative officer for the School of Environment and Natural Resources.
"You go through an up and down cycle and trends," Giese said. "In the '60s there was a lot of interest in [environmental policy] and we are seeing a resurgence of that. There are green jobs and work at the federal and state level. It's been very prominent in political discussions and we see it increasing in our enrollment and in our policies as well."
The next big step at OSU is creating a major focused on energy and how it relates to the environment. Giese said although many majors deal with some energy topics, there is a need for courses that deal entirely with it.
"It's focused in new energy frontiers," he said. "We currently don't have a unified energy major, but a lot of different majors have started to incorporate different arenas related to energy. It's something the university is still looking for ways to define that. There are a variety of different courses offered and we will probably see something offered in the future."
“Enacting policies to incentivize and invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency can revitalize domestic industries like manufacturing and construction, and increase the production of home-grown American energy technologies to power our nation to a more secure and sustainable future,” argue Reps. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., and Steve Israel, D-NY.
Colorado Governor Bill Ritter (who is in Washington, D.C., this week for the Good Jobs, Green Jobs conference) spoke with Newsweek about how the Deepwater Horizon oil spill could affect the clean energy debate.
A new Economics and Statistics Administration report (pdf) says America’s green job growth has been slow but consistent over the past three years.
A piece at Grist argues that while vehicle efficiency is an important component of green cities, it is only one part of a system that should include high quality mass transit and dense development patterns.
The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein argues that President Obama’s failure to use the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to build support for clean energy may be more a matter of timing than indifference to the opportunity.
Local Green: Clean energy advocates in Georgia hope the Deepwater Horizon disaster will serve as a wake up call and help push plans for offshore wind projects off the state’s coast forward.
An initiative to postpone the implementation of California’s global warming bill (AB 32) has made it onto the state’s November ballot, largely due to the efforts of Texas oil companies and anti-tax groups. Former Secretary of State George Shultz sees California’s climate bill as an important part of the nation’s national security strategy and has vowed to fight its opponents.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger celebrated the completion of the first phase of the Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project - a plan that could bring renewable energy to 3 million homes.
Minneapolis, which was voted America’s best city for cycling by Bicycling Magazine, will launch the nation’s largest bike share program next month.
SoCal gets new renewable energy transmission lines
2010-05-05 11:29:21
Southern California Edison says it has completed the first part of a major project to transmit electricity from renewable energy sources in the Mojave Desert to the Los Angeles region.
The system unveiled Tuesday at a utility facility in Mojave is capable of carrying 700 megawatts.
Edison International Chairman Ted Craver says the lines are currently energized with wind power.
When the entire Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project is completed it will deliver 4,500 megawatts of electricity from wind, solar and other generation sources in the desert north of Los Angeles.
Canada is falling behind the United States when it comes to creating jobs by failing to invest in renewable energy, according to a new report from the green watchdog Environmental Defence.
The report, Falling Behind: Canada’s Lost Clean Energy Jobs, says that Canada invested 18 times less per person on renewable energy compared to the U.S. in the last budget.
“Canada risks falling behind, not only the U.S. but Europe and Asia when it comes to clean energy,” said Gillian McEachern, the report’s author. “Clean energy is going to be one of the largest industries globally over the next decade and Canada is turning a blind eye to this.”
McEachern says that over the last two budgets the feds should have dedicated an additional $11 billion towards renewable energy initiatives, and had we done so, it would have created an additional 66,000 jobs.
The report says that in the 2009 budget Canada only dedicated 8.8% of its stimulus spending to green energy while the U.S. dedicated 12%, Australia 22.6% and South Korea 78.7%.
“At every opportunity the Canadian government emphasizes that it’s harmonizing its energy and climate policies with the U.S.,” the report reads. “Yet when it comes to investing in clean energy jobs, Canada does not even come close to matching U.S. efforts.”
The report also criticized the federal government’s decision to end the ecoENERGY Retrofit program that gives homeowners a rebate if they increase the energy efficiency of their homes.
Environmental Defence wants the federal government to match U.S. funding on a per capita basis, put a price on carbon and offer tax credits and incentives to green energy producers.
But Jack Carr, an economist and environmental skeptic at the University of Toronto, says the report is nonsensical and environmental policy should not be tied to job creation.
“There are plenty of programs that would create a lot of jobs but they would be a complete waste of time for people to do it that way,” says Carr. “The greenest way may not be the most efficient way ... If it’s good to do something for the environment it should be good in good or bad times and should have nothing to do with stimulus spending.”
Carr says that borrowing money to stimulate the green energy industry could be highly wasteful because industries based on government subsidy are vulnerable to shifts in public policy.
Scoping Out the Oil Spill's Impact on Energy Policy
2010-05-04 11:44:45
It's been a long time since we've heard the old saying that politics stops at the water's edge. When it comes to the Deepwater Horizon oil-rig wreck in the Gulf of Mexico — still spewing thousands of barrels of petroleum into the open ocean, with no clear end in sight — it hasn't taken long for politics to wade offshore.
With the growing sheen of oil holding off the Gulf Coast, thanks to shifting and difficult weather, more than 70 environmental groups on Monday called on the Senate to keep any expansion of offshore oil and gas drilling out of upcoming climate and energy legislation. (See pictures of the Gulf oil spill.)
In California, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that the accident had caused him to drop his support for new offshore drilling in his state. "You turn on the television and see this enormous disaster," he told reporters. "You say to yourself, 'Why would we want to take on that kind of risk?' "
With the oil spill growing daily, that risk has become difficult to ignore. BP — the energy company financially responsible for the spill — has yet to figure out a way to stanch the flow of oil from the blown well 50 miles south of the Gulf Coast, and it's no longer clear how much crude is actually leaking into the ocean. (See pictures of an oil spill in South Korea.)
Earlier on Monday, a BP executive in Alabama said the company had succeeded in reducing the flow of oil by clamping the ruptured pipe — which would have been the first good news since the rig caught fire on April 20 — but BP told reporters later that nothing had changed. "You would see me doing cartwheels down the hallway if we've succeeded," said Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer, in an afternoon press conference. He wasn't dancing.
For now, BP is moving along with alternative methods to stop the flow of oil. The company has finished building a 70-ton containment unit that it plans to lower over one of the three leaks, where it will catch the escaping oil and pump it to a drilling ship, the Enterprise, at the surface. BP is working on another two domes for the additional leaks, and plans to install all three by the weekend — though that will depend on the weather, which has been rough over the past few days.
This method of containment has never been used in deep water, but if the plan is successful, the oil spill could be contained within a couple of weeks. If not, BP will have to drill a relief well to patch up the blown well — and that could take three months or longer. "This is where our effort is concentrating," said Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry, the federal on-scene coordinator for the accident response. "Our highest priority is to secure the source of the spill." (See pictures of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.)
Even as the massive response continues — nearly 200 ships are involved in the action — the political battle over the spill is just heating up. President Obama had already come under criticism from many environmentalists for supporting expanded offshore drilling in March, as part of what he called at the time a "broader strategy" on energy and climate. With the Gulf oil spill now threatening to become one of the biggest environmental disasters in U.S. history, greens are seizing the opportunity to push back. The progressive group MoveOn.org released a new ad using images from the Gulf accident urging Obama to reinstate the moratorium on offshore drilling. And some coastal Democrats who were already leery of offshore drilling have intensified their opposition. "This shows that the hidden cost of our addiction to oil is hidden no longer," says Jeremy Symons, senior vice president at the National Wildlife Federation, speaking from the coast of Louisiana. "We have to move forward, and we need to protect the Gulf."
In the immediate aftermath of the accident, Obama emphasized that he was still in favor of expanded offshore drilling. But as the spill has worsened, with the sheen of oil drifting closer to the sensitive Gulf coastline, the Administration has begun to back away. White House adviser David Axelrod said on Sunday that no new offshore drilling would take place before a review of the accident, and the Department of Interior is doing safety checks on existing offshore operations.
It is not clear whether the accident will prompt Obama to rule out expanded drilling altogether. "I believe that what [the review] finds will determine our next steps as it relates to offshore-oil policy," said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs on Monday.
As images of oiled birds and blackened shorelines along the Gulf Coast begin appearing, environmentalists may well succeed in preventing any new offshore drilling. They will have an even better shot if currents carry the oil around Florida and to the East Coast. And it shouldn't be hard to push through tougher regulations on existing offshore operations in the aftermath of a disastrous spill. But it's worth remembering that for the foreseeable future, the U.S. will need offshore oil — certainly from the Gulf of Mexico, which is responsible for about a third of U.S. production, but perhaps eventually from other regions as well. If we don't take that oil from our own waters, we will be buying it from abroad — potentially from countries that have much more lax environmental standards.
It's also worth remembering that expanded drilling was offered in part to sweeten climate and energy legislation for skeptical conservatives — much the way Obama's earlier support for additional aid to the nuclear industry did. "The political divide on climate and energy is already deep and wide," says Samuel Thernstrom, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. "Offshore drilling was the one sturdy bridge that might have been able to cross that divide."
If the oil spill should influence energy policy going forward, comprehensive climate and energy legislation — already a dim hope — might end up as one more casualty of the accident.
Leaders of a Midwest mechanical contracting association and its union workforce are so committed to green building, they are offering advanced sustainable technology education to contractors and workers alike.
“Green building is a topic of special concern to mechanical contractors,” said Stephen Lamb, Executive Vice President of the Mechanical Contractors (MCA) of Chicago, “since they work with the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems, which account for most of the energy usage in residential and commercial buildings.”
Lamb noted that the association has been working with United Association workforce, Pipe Fitters Local Union (LU) 597, for more than 90 years without a strike. “The success of our alliance has always depended on cooperation,” he said. “Green training at multiple levels in the construction industry is our latest collaborative effort.”
“The efficiency and operational savings of today’s green buildings have established sustainable technology as a construction industry necessity,” said Dan Bulley, Executive Director of the Green Construction Institute and a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP).
As a prime example of the energy efficiency that a green building can achieve, Bulley cited the Richard J. Klarchek Information Commons on Chicago’s Loyola University campus. “This four-story, 70,000-sq.ft. green facility currently is saving more than 50 percent annually in operational costs,” he said. “It’s a great example of peak efficiency. The University spent more upfront than usual, since it will be using significantly less energy over a long period of time. It’s all about having a timeframe in mind and knowing what you want to achieve.”
Bulley noted that green buildings are becoming more energy efficient with the advancement of sustainable technology. “New green buildings are much more efficient than those built according to the very first LEED rating system, which has been upgraded four times now,” he said. “That first LEED version started it all, so while it needed improvement, it should still be honored as a pioneering development.”
To further their green education efforts, MCA of Chicago has established a Green Construction Institute, located in their Burr Ridge, IL headquarters, which is a green building itself.
“We try to instruct our member contractors and our workforce in every applicable aspect of green building,” Bulley said. He added that he is the instructor for a ‘Green 101’ class for contractor executives entitled, “So You Want To Be A Green Contractor?” which is available as an online course.
For executives pursuing advancement through green accreditation, Bulley also teaches several LEED-related courses. “In addition to the LEED Green Associate accreditation, there are also other new LEED AP accreditations, now classified as LEED AP+” he said. “These accreditations are specific to different types of projects, such as operations and maintenance, or building design and construction. Green advances are happening with increasing frequency, and it takes regular training to keep up with them.”
Geothermal energy is a method of heating and cooling buildings which works in conjunction with the stable subsurface temperatures found underground and in large bodies of water. Geothermal energy is a clean form of energy since it creates no waste products.
To keep its members educated in clean sustainable technology LU 597 installed a geothermal system in its training center in Mokena, IL. The system is both functional and tutorial.
Their system is comprised of three geothermal wells inside the building. The system also uses a functional, interior geothermal pond: a large fiberglass tank with a window in it, so that students can see how it functions. Ken Ruesken, the LU 597 Business Agent for Service Technicians, designed the system.
This unique combination-system is being used to instruct apprentices on the different types of geothermal systems, while it helps take care of the training center’s heating and cooling needs.
“We teach green to HVAC apprentices and also to journeymen in evening classes as part of their continuing education,” said John Leen, Training Director at LU 597.
Leen added that the geothermal project exemplifies their continuing efforts to forward our green programs. “We welcome any advancement that helps the environment and saves energy,” he said. “This new system will allow contractors and customers insight into the geothermal world.”
Congressman Steve Israel Joins Ceremony to Unveil NYIT's Solar Carport-Key to NYIT's Green Print Initiative and a Major Contribution to Sustainable Energy Solutions for Long Island
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) officially introduced the first of two solar carports it is developing at a ribbon-cutting ceremony on July 27 at the Central Islip site.
Part of NYIT's "One Spot, One Car, One Commute" solar plug-in hybrid electric vehicle project (S-PHEV), the freestanding, four-car carport prototype has solar panels integrated into its structure. The carport shades parked vehicles while collecting energy from the sun and converting it into power to charge plug-in hybrid vehicles.
U.S. Congressman Steve Israel (D-Huntington) participated in the ceremony with NYIT's President Edward Guiliano and other members of NYIT's faculty and administration. The congressman was instrumental in helping NYIT secure a $500,000 federal grant that funded the solar carport research, as well as a campus-wide "green print" initiative to determine the carbon footprint of the university, to research alternative energy technologies, and to undertake broad efforts to reduce energy consumption on campus and in the community.
"I'm proud to have worked with NYIT to make this innovative project happen. This is a great example of how alternative energy technologies can help us all go 'off the grid.' I look forward to the day when we're all using solar panels to charge our cars and light our homes," said Rep. Israel.
Daniel Rapka, who received a master's degree in energy management from NYIT in 2007, is program manager for the S-PHEV project and an instructor in NYIT's Department of Mechanical Engineering, estimates that a single 200-square-foot parking space can collect enough solar energy on an annual basis to enable a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle to drive the typical daily New York metro commute.
According to Rapka, "Charging plug-in hybrid electric cars is only the first step. The solar power generated by the carports can also be diverted to the local power grid and, in the near future, with a process called Vehicle to Grid (V2G) sharing, the plug-in electric hybrid cars can be a resource for the grid."
David G. Schieren, a 2006 graduate of NYIT's energy management master's degree program and CEO of EmPower, the solar contractor that designed and installed the carport, said "Charging electric vehicles with solar energy means that we can drive without consuming any fossil fuels-that is the ultimate goal. This is a grand slam for energy security, the environment, and domestic economic growth. EmPower is proud to be partnering with NYIT on this vital project that represents significant progress toward this goal. We look forward to collaborating on making this technology a widespread reality."
The ribbon-cutting ceremony took place in the Student Activities Center (SAC) parking lot at NYIT's Central Islip site on Carleton Avenue (Country Road 17), just south of East Suffolk Avenue. In addition to the ribbon cutting, President Guiliano and Rep. Israel spoke, and NYIT experts discussed the technical aspects of the carport. NYIT's two converted hybrid Toyota Priuses, as well as several campus electric vehicles, were on hand to demonstrate how the carport works.
About NYIT New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) offers undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees in more than 90 fields of study, including architecture and interior design; arts and sciences; education; engineering and computing sciences; health professions; management; and osteopathic medicine. A non-profit independent, private institution of higher education, NYIT has more than 15,000 students attending campuses in Long Island and Manhattan, online, and at its global campuses. For more than 50 years, NYIT has been guided by its mission to provide career-oriented professional education, offer access to opportunity and access to all qualified students and support applications-oriented research that benefits the larger world. To date, 81,500 students have graduated from NYIT. For more information, visit www.nyit.edu.
Contact: Rebecca Kogan director media and public affairs, 516.749.8350 rkogan@nyit.edu.
A new college is opening up in Aurora, CO focused entirely on renewable energy and sustainable design. Education Corp., which runs for-profit colleges, is opening Ecotech Institute. The new facility, accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, will offer applied science associate degrees in subjects such as solar energy, wind energy, and sustainable interior design.
The Institute is currently accepting applications for all of its programs. Classes will begin July 7, 2010.
Once the Colorado campus is fully established, the company expects to expand its model across the United States, to help students ride the wave of attention currently being focused on jobs in the clean energy sector.
A study released in February by Navigant Consulting found that the number of renewable energy jobs would more than double by 2025 if the nation adopted a plan to require 25 percent of its electricity from renewable sources. The study was done for the Renewable Electrical Standard Alliance for Jobs, a lobby pushing for Congressional support of the plan.
"The time has come for a higher education institution that is 100 percent focused on preparing Americans for green collar jobs, not merely a department or program inside of an institution," said Tom Moore, president and CEO of Education Corp. "Having been built by and for the renewable energy and sustainable design industries in collaboration with academic leaders, Ecotech Institute delivers practical career education that can transform people into highly skilled green collar professionals."
Although classes will begin in July 2010 in a temporary facility, the Institute is transforming an existing building in Aurora into its permanent home. The company said the renovation will bring the structure up to LEED standards. That is expected to be done in early 2011 and will hold between 700 and 1,200 students.
Going green is not only good for the environment, but also for the bottom line. Going green can create new jobs in the clean energy sector-an industry with enormous growth potential. While many of Wisconsin’s manufacturers are focused on creating jobs and staying competitive in this tough market, allowing employers to save money on the cost of energy keeps Wisconsin businesses more competitive and more profitable.
Wisconsin businesses want to invest in energy efficiency. Last month I attended an event with AT&T Wisconsin where they announced the deployment of their first Compressed Natural Gas vehicles in Wisconsin. I was proud to stand with AT&T and support their effort to invest in cleaner domestic alternative fuel vehicles. The deployment of these 42 vans that service the Milwaukee area will cut down on the amount of carbon dioxide emissions and ultimately make the air we breathe healthier and reduce our reliance on foreign sources of energy.
In order to help more businesses like AT&T invest in cleaner, renewable energy, I worked to pass legislation that gives Wisconsin employers the tools they need to jumpstart these efforts. The legislation created a one-stop shop for Wisconsin manufacturers that are seeking to take advantage of state and federal green energy assistance programs and resources.
In addition to this legislation, I worked to advance the Clean Energy Jobs Act. Four years ago, Wisconsin became one of the first states to enact renewable portfolio standards, reducing our dependence on foreign fuels and creating jobs. As a result, we have seen rapid expansion in renewable energy production and major growth in clean energy jobs. The Clean Energy Jobs Act failed to pass the legislature this year; however, I will continue to fight to bring this idea to fruition.
Every year, Wisconsin sends $16 billion out of our state to power our homes and businesses and fuel our vehicles. The Clean Energy Jobs Act will help reduce our dependence on foreign fuels and make sure that Wisconsin does not miss out on the opportunity to have a piece of the emerging clean energy job market.
Last month we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Earth Day. Now is a good time to reflect on how far we have come in the fight to protect our environment. I will continue to work toward developing new and innovative ways of assisting businesses to create jobs and help keep our environment clean for generations to come.
The massive oil slick spreading over the Gulf of Mexico reminds America once again of the hazards inherent in the country's fossil fuel addiction. The oil rig disaster also makes some new developments up north seem especially refreshing. The U.S. Department of the Interior has finally blessed an unprecedented renewable-energy project off the mid-Atantic coast. Known as Cape Wind, it would be the first ever offshore wind farm in the United States.
The prospect of churning windmills in the sea has whipped up a storm of controversy, but the Nantucket Sound project seems poised to finally go forward after nine years of regulatory review. (It does still need appproval from the Federal Aviation Administration.) Clean-energy advocates around the country are watching to see if the project and the incipient wind-energy market deliver on their promises of eco-friendly power and green jobs for the local workforce.
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 103, the leading union in the coalition supporting the project, is betting high on Cape Wind:
"With Mr. Salazar giving the permit for Cape Wind," IBEW representative Marty Aikens told In These Times, "this is the new revolution of offshore renewable energy that the I.B.E.W. members will be working on from Maine to North Carolina and from Washington to California."
Anticipating career-track employment opportunities for local union members, Aikens added, "This is the new American technology job that the I.B.E.W. has been training its Members for the last eight years... We expect to see hundreds of Local 103 I.B.E.W. members working on this project and thousands on the others that will be coming on line."
Advocates say that while wind currently makes up a tiny siver of the overall energy supply, it will be a crucial ingredient in building a sustainable energy mix to replace oil's dominance.
The U.S. wind-energy industry has grown significantly over the years and provides about 85,000 domestic jobs, though much of the manufacturing of turbines takes place on other shores. Cape Wind may add momentum to other similar proposed wind farms in Maryland, Delaware, Texas, the Great Lakes and other areas.
A 2008 study published by the Apollo Alliance, Workforce Alliance and Center on Wisconsin Strategy outlines prospects for green jobs in the wind sector and concludes that the amount of wind blowing across the country could provide vast amounts of electricity, but states had not yet provided the policy framework to harness this potential. Some midwest states were rich in swift wind speeds, for instance, but had failed to capitalize on those resources.
There is a simple explanation for the disparity between wind speeds and wind projects: state policy. Market-creation policies such as renewable portfolio standards and feed-in tariffs [when the government sets the price for energy purchased by utilities] provide certainty for companies looking to move into particular states... These sorts of government programs have been critical to wind power expansion across the globe...
The report assessed wind power as a source of jobs:
If the country can muster the $62 billion investment required to expand wind capacity by 125,000 MW over the next 10 years—the amount needed to stabilize U.S. carbon emissions—the wind energy sector could create nearly 400,000 domestic manufacturing jobs. And the top 20 states that stand to benefit are some of the most populous, and hardest hit by recent manufacturing job loss. California and Texas lead the list, followed by the Great Lakes states: New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin."
In Massachussetts, Cape Wind was gridlocked for years as residents, businesses, lawmakers, labor and environmental activists sparred over the proposed project. The public debate has been portrayed as a clash between pro-renewable evangelists and high-brow NIMBY-ites, who think the turbines would be a blight on the local environment. But the real story is more complicated.
There are legitimate concerns about the cost-effectiveness of the project. Moreover, conservationists say the siting of turbines, even if several miles off the Cape Cod coastline, could damage wildlife and threaten historical properties and Native American cultural sites.
On the pro-wind side, some of Cape Wind's major backers represent high-profile green business interests, showing that despite the grassroots appeal of clean energy, the growth of the industry will be fueled by corporations--raising questions of job quality and labor equity, which unions will have to take on in the rush for green gold.
On balance, though, Washington's approval of the Cape Wind plan suggests that the project's renewable-energy potential still dwarfs the aesthetic and archeological footprints.
Ben Carmichael at OnEarth writes,
would Nantucket, Martha's Vineyard or Maine's rocky coast be the summer tourist destinations they are if they were dotted with nuclear plants, both functioning and decommissioned? Off shore wind famers -- barely visible and glimmering in the sun -- are hardly disruptive in comparison to conventional sources of power.
"After all, no one's ever complained about the impacts from an offshore wind spill," quipped David Helvarg of the Blue Frontier Campaign on HuffingtonPost.
Amid all the hype over green jobs, the road to energy sustainability will be paved with plenty of bad investments and boondoggles. But breaking the gridlock on Cape Wind at least broadens the realm of possibility as the country moves toward a cleaner, more diverse grid.
Communities seeking alternatives to big oil won't always agree on solutions, but for now, it's clear that a few eyesores dotting the Nantucket horizon would be a much fairer sight than the oily sheen now creeping toward the Louisiana shoreline.
The U.S. Department of Energy announced this week that it would award $11 million in grants to four MIT-led research projects aimed at developing technologies that could fundamentally change the way the country produces and uses energy.
The awards are part of $106 million in grants that the DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) is giving to 37 energy-research projects in 17 states. By supporting these projects, ARPA-E hopes to accelerate innovation in clean-energy technologies, increase America’s competitiveness and create jobs.
One MIT project that was selected for a $5 million grant involves designing a new type of battery that could make electric vehicles more affordable by combining the best characteristics of rechargeable batteries and fuel cells. The research on the so-called “semi-solid flow battery” is being done in collaboration with Rutgers University and A123 Systems Inc., an MIT spin-off company that develops and manufactures lithium-ion batteries and systems.
Another MIT project received $3.2 million to engineer two microbes that can convert carbon dioxide and hydrogen into oil, which could be refined into biodiesel fuel. Harvard University and the University of Delaware are collaborating on the research.
In a separate grant, MIT received $1.7 million to engineer a bacterium that can consume hydrogen and carbon dioxide to produce butanol, which could be used as motor fuel. That research is being done in collaboration with Michigan State University.
MIT also received $1 million to develop a new method known as electrochemically mediated separation (ECMS) that will lower the energy required to capture carbon dioxide and allow for simpler retrofitting to existing coal-fired power plants. Electronics conglomerate Siemens is involved in the research.
An additional research project, in which MIT is a collaborator but not the lead institution, received $3.2 million to develop an inexpensive, rechargeable magnesium-ion battery for electric and hybrid-electric vehicle applications. The research is led by Pellion Technologies Inc., an MIT spin-off company, with collaboration from Bar-Ilan University.
The ARPA-E grants announced this week represented the agency’s second round of funding; several MIT-related projects were part of the first round of ARPA-E funding, announced in October 2009. The awards were made through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a $100-billion investment intended to stimulate economic growth through innovation, science and technology.
At least $35 billion to $40 billion of annual investments will be required to link all people in the world with modern forms of energy by 2030, a goal that must be reached while reducing heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions, a U.N. advisory group recommended yesterday.
Fifteen billion dollars of this should be in the form of annual grants donated by rich nations to expand electricity access to the poor. And the world should not only achieve universal access to energy by 2030, but it should do so while increasing efficiency by 40 percent overall, or 2.5 percent per year. Such steps will be necessary to not only reduce extreme poverty but also combat climate change.
These proposals and others were put forward yesterday by the Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change (AGECC), a committee set up by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, charged with assessing the global energy picture and incorporating this into international climate change talks. Kandeh Yumkella, chairman of AGECC, insisted that his group's recommendations, while daunting, are not unprecedented.
"We call for smart private-public partnerships to do this, to spread electrification and to give access to various communities and to the energy-poor," said Yumkella.
Spending on new energy sources for the poorest may also be needed to head of future crises, Yumkella added. Most new oil and gas projects coming online today can be found in places like the Gulf of Guinea region in West Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia, where sophisticated hydrocarbon developments exist alongside pockets of extreme poverty and social unrest.
"It's not enough to just take energy out," said Yumkella.
Promoting electricity and alternative fuels
Among the five overarching recommendations outlined in their report, AGECC members are asking governments to launch a "global campaign" aimed at connecting impoverished rural and urban households to national electricity grids and distributing alternative fuel sources for cooking. The United Nations estimates that at least 2.5 billion people worldwide rely mainly on wood fuels -- charcoal or raw wood -- for cooking and other purposes, and the harvesting of wood for household or business use is one of the leading causes of deforestation.
Highlighted in their report is a call on governments to adopt a goal of universal energy access by 2020 and commitments to cough up the large sums of money that will be required to get there.
The group also recommends that each developing country adopt its own national strategy for expanding energy access while keeping overall greenhouse gas emissions levels low. Part of the strategies should include adoption of laws and policies that would encourage better private-sector investment in national energy infrastructures. Developed nations, meanwhile, should enhance their research and development efforts in energy efficiency and be willing to transfer any new technologies abroad, the group said.
The panel members pointed to precedents that suggest universal access can be achieved with the right policies put in place. China, Vietnam, South Africa and other rapidly developing nations are estimated to have linked more than 240 million of their citizens to the power grid for the first time between 1990 and 2000. If the world were to achieve that feat again, then universal access to reliable electricity supplies could be reached over the next 20 years.
"We believe the goal is achievable. It will, however, require strong commitment from national governments and the international community alike," said Helge Lund, CEO of the Norwegian energy firm Statoil and a member of the advisory group. "First, we need a robust framework of regulatory regimes to spur investment."
Connecting 25% of the world's population without power
Perhaps most controversially, the advisory group is asking that public and private sources deliver $35 billion to $40 billion each year in aid to expand access to energy, including replacing charcoal with modern fuels and extending power grids to urban slums and rural villages without. Of this, $20 billion to $25 billion should be in the form of concessional lending, while the rest should be provided as free grants, the group said.
AGECC is less clear about where this new funding could come from. Currently, total foreign aid payments by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, comprising all Western aid donors and Japan, amounts to only about $10 billion per year, for all forms of aid.
Still, experts estimate that about a quarter of the world's population has no access to electricity at all, including 80 percent of all citizens in the poorest 50 nations of the Third World. And harvesting wood for fuel has resulted in devastating consequences for the natural environments in a number of developing nations, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Massive amounts of fresh capital will be needed to fill the gap.
AGECC suggests tapping into the so-called "fast start funding," the $30 billion pool promised by developed nations over the next two years as part of the Copenhagen Accord. The $6 billion committed by the multilateral development banks for climate investment funds could also be steered toward expanding energy access.
The global carbon markets are also eyed as another potential source of revenue. Yumkella said that the United Nations' international carbon offsetting scheme, the Clean Development Mechanism, should be restructured to allow carbon credits to be awarded to charcoal substitution programs or for the provisioning of more efficient stoves, some of which can triple the efficiency of wood burning and cost as little as $15 a piece.
The private sector will also have to be compelled to invest in greater energy access for the poor, preferably through alternative energy sources but also through the development of fossil fuels as needed. Wary of the dangers of exacerbating the climate change problem along the way, AGECC says that natural gas should be prioritized over coal if alternative energy supplies are unavailable.
Long-awaited climate change legislation was put on hold by its authors Saturday when a dispute over immigration politics and Senate priorities threatened to unravel a bipartisan effort that took months of work.
Voicing regrets, Sen. John Kerry said Saturday he is postponing the much anticipated unveiling of comprehensive energy and climate change legislation scheduled for Monday. The Massachusetts Democrat made his announcement after a key partner in drafting the bill, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, threatened to withhold support if Senate Democratic leaders push ahead first with an immigration bill.
Graham is angry that Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is considering that. Legislation to overhaul immigration laws and grant legal status to millions of long term immigrants unlawfully in the country could create problems for Republicans in the midterm elections. It's a top priority for Hispanic voters — and most Republicans are opposed. Reid's idea amounts to a "cynical political ploy," Graham asserted.
Kerry tried to assure environmentalists and other backers of the climate bill that the delay will be short. The legislation aims to cut emissions of pollution-causing greenhouse gases 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. It also likely will expand domestic production of oil, natural gas and nuclear power.
"We all believe that this year is our best and perhaps last chance for Congress to pass a comprehensive approach," Kerry said in a statement. "Regrettably, external issues have arisen that force us to postpone only temporarily."
Kerry, Graham and Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman have spent more than six months working on the bill they had hoped to unveil Monday. White House energy adviser Carol Browner praised the three senators, reiterating that the Obama administration wants the energy and climate bill done this year.
Graham's threat to back away from the coalition came Saturday in a letter to Senate leaders.
He said putting immigration at the top of the legislative priority list would derail efforts to find common ground on climate change, a difficult issue involving critically important economic priorities. And he warned that Republican lawmakers would not take kindly to being put on the spot with Hispanics. Many in the Republican Party's political base are adamantly opposed to 'amnesty' for illegal immigrants.
"Moving forward on immigration — in this hurried, panicked manner — is nothing more than a cynical political ploy," Graham said. "Let's be clear, a phony, political effort on immigration today accomplishes nothing but making it exponentially more difficult to address in a serious, comprehensive manner in the future."
Kerry praised Graham's work on the climate legislation, saying the Republican "helped to build an unprecendented coalition of stakeholders from the environmental community and the industry who have been prepared to stand together behind a proposal."
Kerry said he deeply regrets that Graham "feels immigration politics have gotten in the way and for now prevent him from being engaged in the way he intended."
Lieberman also praised Graham's work, and said he's disappointed that "allegations of partisan politics will prevent us from introducing the bill on Monday as planned."
Pushing immigration ahead of climate legislation would disappoint and anger environmentalists, who see this as their best chance in recent years to pass a bill addressing global warming. But Reid told fellow Democrats this week he wants to pursue legislation that would offer legal status to many unlawful immigrants before tackling climate change.
Hispanics voted heavily Democratic in 2008, and they've been disappointed with President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats for not following up on campaign promises to reform immigration laws. Reid is up for re-election this year and trailing in polls in Nevada, where Latinos are an important constituency. With Democrats facing a tough political climate in the midterm elections, energized Hispanic voters could make a difference in several states.
In a statement Saturday that was both conciliatory and noncommittal, Reid said he is committed to passing both immigration and energy this year.
"Immigration and energy reform are equally vital to our economic and national security and have been ignored for far too long," he said.
Both measures will require bipartisan support, Reid said, "and energy could be next if it's ready." Comprehensive immigration reform requires significant committee work that has not yet begun, he noted.
Reid said he appreciates Graham's work on both issues, but added: "I will not allow him to play one issue off of another, and neither will the American people. They expect us to do both, and they will not accept the notion that trying to act on one is an excuse for not acting on the other."
A spokesman said Reid would continue to consult with Kerry on building bipartisan support for a climate bill.
The House last year narrowly passed a bill creating a system to cap emissions blamed for global warming, but has not acted on immigration. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has long said the Senate must vote before the House on an immigration bill.
The UC Irvine Extension has earned the distinction of being a U.S. Green Building Council Education Provider.
Ten sustainability courses are offered through the program, including Introduction to Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability & Green Business; Legal Developments Concerning the Environment & Climate Change; and Energy Retrofits: Saving Energy in Existing Buildings.
“Green initiatives and sustainability jobs will only continue to grow during the next few years,” says Kirwan Rockefeller, UC Irvine Extension’s director of sustainability leadership. “We felt it was imperative to develop high-quality courses that will help this industry and its professionals flourish.”
The green industry is expected to contribute roughly $554 billion to the country’s gross domestic product between now and 2013, according to the U.S. Green Building Council, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit with 80 regional chapters, more than 18,000 member businesses and organizations, and about 140,000 LEED credential holders.
UC Irvine Extension is the continuing education branch of the university and offers traditional and online classes.
When Whistler, B.C., wanted to prepare itself for the 2010 Winter Olympics, officials turned to Kelly Hawke Baxter to help them develop a sustainability plan, Whistler 2020, to transform every aspect of how the town approached its development.
Baxter is the executive director of The Natural Step Canada, a non-governmental organization (NGO) that educates and instructs individuals in private industry and the public sector how integrate to environmental considerations into their operations.
"We're moving from lip service to really looking at how we can use environmental responsibility and sustainability to drive innovation and value creation so that we can be part of the new economy," says Baxter.
The new economy is all about green jobs, she says. "It's really gone from the margins to the mainstream. It's a huge opportunity for those that want green careers to either enter the green sector or the traditional sector where there are more and more green jobs."
Sustainability departments are being established in everything from retail chains such as Walmart to the largest cellphone manufacturer in the world, Nokia.
Don Gorber is president of SENES Consultants Ltd., a company that specializes in environmental, nuclear and energy services with offices in Canada, the United States, India and South America. He has seen the industry change dramatically during his career and believes demand for highly skilled environmental workers will continue to rise.
Worthy candidates for his firm, he says, "should have a good education with some technical or social background that allows you to start here." Given the demand for good people, lack of experience isn't necessarily a critical liability. "We'll hire people with little experience and train them," he says.
The specialized nature of many environmental jobs means they are in demand in almost every industry and sector -- from private to public and NGOs to university research departments. However, job seekers eager to enter the field should be aware the term "green job" is sometimes used loosely, says Grant Trump, president of the federally funded sector council Environmental Careers Organization (ECO) Canada.
"I know that a lot of folks want to be involved in that sort of area, but artificially putting that label on it is not going to help," says Trump.
But he has no doubt legitimate opportunities for well-educated environmental professionals will increase.
"Those folks generally have very good, transferable skills, so they could work in the IT sector or a variety of sectors of the economy," says Trump. "We have to recognize that those folks are in high demand not just in Canada, but other industrialized countries around the globe."
Baxter's Natural Step won ECO Canada's 2010 Environmental Employer of the Year award in the small- to medium-sized category and she credits much of it to the initial reason people go into the field.
"People want to work for industries that are doing the right thing and that's becoming an increasing draw for employers and an increasing liability for those that aren't doing anything yet," says Baxter.
Employees in the environment want the same things as anybody else, says Gorber, and in a highly competitive, rapidly evolving and emerging field, that means competition for workers is high.
"It's providing people with enough challenging projects to work on, enough independence to work on them, enough mentoring so they're learning and getting better, enough compensation so they're not going to be challenged to go elsewhere," says Gorber.
Governments around the world are investing in green technology and major infrastructure projects as they work toward environmental solutions, while industry leaders are clamouring to be the first out of the gate with the next environmental solution for their customers.
"It's really gone from the margins to the mainstream," says Baxter.
The trend is creating a beneficial side effect for employees who specialize in environmental jobs: "Sustainability is also about taking care of your people -- social responsibility -- so that's a big priority for us," says Baxter.
Gorber advises students contemplating a career in an environmental field to weigh their options carefully. They should decide whether they want to approach it from a generalist point of view or specialize and then determine where those skills and passions fit into the economy.
"A person first has to decide they want to be in the environmental field because they like it, not just because it's the latest flavour of the week," he says.
Yesterday on the Mall in Washington, DC well over one hundred thousand gathered to show their support for clean energy legislation in the US. Musical artists Sting, John Legend, Passion Pit, The Roots, and others entertained the throngs of activists and environmentally concerned citizens.
Participants were shown videotaped messages from the President and Avatar film director James Cameron. At some point a large rubber ball was tossed around the stage, symbolizing the approximately 1,000 plastic bags used per year by each American family.
It appears however, that immigration reform could precede energy and/or climate change legislation due to the recent situation in Arizona. Some say that local development could push the political forces in Washington to focus quickly on immigration and shelve energy legislation until after the November elections when Republicans might gain power in Congress and block the efforts of Democrats to changed national energy policy.
College of the Desert has announced it will team up with First Solar to support local training for green jobs in the utility-scale solar projects that are expected to come to Riverside County.
First Solar, a manufacturer of photovoltaic solar panels, is donating solar equipment, hands-on training and curriculum development for COD's Desert Region Renewable Energy Training Program at the Desert Energy Enterprise Center in Palm Springs.
The center opened at 3301 Micro Place in January. Since its debut, it has trained workers for utility-scale solar energy plant construction in anticipation of several proposed solar projects in the desert just east of the Coachella Valley.
The COD program is reaching out to new workforce entrants, the unemployed and underemployed workers for the program.
“As the region's utility-scale solar energy industry grows, generation companies and their contractors, as well as unions, will be searching for skilled workers who understand solar installation and maintenance requirements,” said Larry McLaughlin, director of the center at COD.
Kim Oster, director of business development for First Solar, said this collaboration is a solid example of the firm's commitment on education and the local workforce.
“It will provide a much-needed boost to the local economy,” Oster said, noting that the proposed Desert Sunlight solar energy project near Desert Center has the potential to create about 430 construction jobs, along with 15 ongoing maintenance and operations jobs.
The collaborative effort will be celebrated at 3 p.m. Wednesday with students, college staff, members of First Solar and local dignitaries.
Speakers include Riverside County Supervisor John Benoit, Vice Chairman of the Riverside County workforce investment board executive committee Lee Haven;, and COD officials.
Changes in Northwestern’s approach to environmental education may be imminent as both an Associated Student Government ad hoc committee and a group of faculty examine NU’s academic offerings.
A proposal submitted April 19 by the ad hoc committee recommended integrating the department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, the environmental science, engineering and policy program and the program in environmental policy and culture into one department, outgoing ASG Academic Vice President Muhammad Safdari said.
The Weinberg senior said the recommendation “is just a basis for discussion right now.” The faculty committee, of which Safdari was a member, proposed stop-gap measures to fix “low or no-cost issues,” he said.
“Essentially, they’re operating on a shoestring budget,” Safdari said. “The University hasn’t made a huge commitment to any of the environmental programs ... In the long-term, they’re going to at least look at the potential of hiring people in environmental policy or environmental science.”
The faculty committee is still working on its report, said member and EPC Director Yael Wolinsky.
In an ideal world, Prof. Kimberly Gray, director for the ESEP program, said she would like the program to have its own department. ESEP is currently a cross-school program offering a major with classes in both the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences and the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science.
“Can you really afford to ignore the challenges posed by a rapidly changing environment?” she said. “Look at our peer institutions. Look at the problems facing the world. Read The New York Times. Need I say more?”
Today, she said the department does well with “almost no budget.”
“Northwestern is one of the few that’s been able to come up with a program that functions across schools like this,” Gray said. “We really have developed something where students can move back and forth … With very little support, I think we’ve created something that’s been unique and really rewarding to the students.”
She said when NU originally re-evaluated the ESEP program in 2003 with the help of then-Weinberg Dean Daniel Linzer, they focused on creating an interdisciplinary, cross-school program despite programming more focused on biology and technology under former University President Henry Bienen.
The ESEP program began around 1990, Gray said, and was initially developed within the geological sciences department, now the department of Earth and Planetary Sciences.
“I think that Northwestern would want to go forward in finding a new synthesis rather than reflect backward,” she said. “(The department of Earth and Planetary Sciences) is not an interdisciplinary department. It’s not a department that looks at the earth system in a highly integrated way.”
Jackie Beard, a member of the ad hoc ASG committee and an ESEP major, said she appreciates the flexibility of the ESEP program.
“It allows me to pursue a lot of different areas of science without having to major in all of them,” the Weinberg junior said. “As a result, it’s kind of unstructured, and you get a lot of classes that aren’t really geared toward environmental scientists. They’re geared toward pre-med.”
Beard said the program had few resources available for majors and was not well organized.
ESEP and economics major Chelsea Baldino said she would “fully support” more funding for the program, particularly in ecology, but said the department had been very successful in helping her pursue off-campus research opportunities.
Another interdisciplinary environmental program, the Weinberg-based program in environmental policy and culture, is drawing plenty of students, Wolinsky said.
“If you think about environmental studies as a field it is really evolving,” she said. “One of them is sciences and one of them is the social sciences and humanities and so we cover different approaches to the problems.”
EPC “gives students an opportunity to look at very important environmental issues from social sciences perspective, but without prerequisites in science,” Wolinsky said.
“We have just started to develop the program really last year,” she said. “It’s been wonderful to see the growth in the programming … We’re kind of in the beginning of the road.”
She said a major in the EPC program should be “seriously considered.”
President Morton O. Schapiro told The Daily that program-specific issues were primarily a faculty concern.
“In terms of what should be a major, I don’t think that should come from (the Rebecca) Crown (Center),” he said. “I really don’t.”
Gray said she acknowledges the difficulty in creating a new department.
“That’s really, really expensive to do,” she said. “You need a donor.”
Still, both Gray and Wolinsky said their programs are growing.
“A day doesn’t go by where I don’t get an e-mail from a student wanting to declare the major,” Gray said.
Today we celebrate the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, and later this year we will mark the 40th birthday of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and 40 years of the remarkably successful Clean Air Act. The suite of environmental protections that took shape in 1970, along with a sweeping Clean Water Act in 1972, remain some of the most effective policies in our history.
What is sometimes less noticed is that those actions were about more than environmental protection. They also represented an economic philosophy, a belief that American industries could continue to expand and innovate without jeopardizing our health and welfare. And it worked. Despite the overheated rhetoric we often hear today about runaway environmental regulations killing jobs, our history is one of healthier families, cleaner communities -- and, yes, job-creating innovation and a stronger America.
Forty years of environmental action have meant cleaner air in our cities and safe water in our homes. These changes have made our communities healthier, reducing exposure to pollution that causes cancer, heart disease and respiratory illness -- three of the top four deadliest conditions in our country. And they've made our economy stronger by giving cities and towns what they need to attract new residents and new jobs.
What also took place during those same four decades of environmental progress was the rise of a world-leading environmental technology industry. In 2007 environmental firms and small businesses in the US generated $282 billion in revenues and $40 billion in exports, and supported 1.6 million American jobs. That number doesn't include all the engineers and professional services firms that support those businesses.
This industry has also created cutting-edge innovations and technologies to meet new environmental and health standards. One powerful example is the catalytic converter. When EPA used the Clean Air Act to phase in unleaded gas and catalytic converters in the early seventies, major automakers fought it. The Chamber of Commerce claimed "entire industries might collapse" as a result. But today, lead pollution in our air is 92 percent lower than it was in 1980. Emissions of dangerous air pollutants that cause smog, acid rain, and more have been cut by more than half. And in the same period, our gross domestic product grew by 126 percent. Rather than hurting the economy, American innovators and entrepreneurs found ways to produce and sell more cars without increasing pollution that threatened our cities and caused costly and often deadly health problems for Americans.
At a time of historic economic difficulty, the Obama administration has sought out similar opportunities to improve our economy by protecting our environment. In a groundbreaking step in our work against climate change, President Obama formed an alliance with American automakers to set aggressive emissions standards for American cars and light trucks. The next generation of clean cars will protect our health and environment and keep almost a billion tons of carbon pollution out of our skies. At the same time, they will benefit American drivers and reduce our dependence on foreign oil by billions of dollars.
Notwithstanding periods of difficulty, the last 40 years have seen steady improvements in the health of both our environment and our economy. Progress on both fronts has been driven by smart environmental policies that keep us healthy, strengthen our communities, and foster industry innovation. Looking ahead to the next 40 years, it is clear we must continue on the same path. Sustainability and planetary stewardship must be part of the economic growth that is reaching more and more people around the world every day. Without protections for the water, air and land that communities depend on, our economic horizons are limited. Without innovations like clean energy and energy efficiency, the global economy will be running on empty within our lifetimes.
Our economy and our environment are inextricably linked. If we want forty more years of American leadership in the global marketplace, then there is no choosing one or the other. The first generation of Earth Day leaders understood that truth. Our generation can set in motion four more decades of prosperity by insisting today that our economic and environmental interests work hand in hand.
Answer:B and E. In 1979, President Carter's White House installed solar panels on the roof of the West Wing to heat water. They were removed in 1986 during the Reagan administration when the roof was being repaired, and were never replaced. In 2002, new solar panels were placed on the White House grounds to heat water and generate electricity. 
Quick Search Results
“Enacting policies to incentivize and invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency can revitalize domestic industries like manufacturing and construction, and increase the production of home-grown American energy technologies to power our nation to a more secure and sustainable future,” argue Reps. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., and Steve Israel, D-NY.
 "Photo: N/A")
