Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Engineers and planners at utilities across the country are laboring mightily to get a handle on the technical, operational and financial requirements of Smart Grid, a vision of leveraging the power of information to provide more affordable, reliable and environmentally sustainable service to electricity customers. Creating a smarter grid, the experts at PG&E tell me, is an evolutionary process that will take years to implement.

But they'll have to hurry to keep up with the all the visionaries who are creating future road maps for the industry. Smart Grid is already in danger of becoming passe, before anyone has even built one.

This week a group of international energy and climate experts, assembled by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, unveiled a major study calling for creation of a "SuperSmart Grid" to power all of Europe and North Africa entirely by renewable energy by 2050.

Today only about 15 percent of Europe's power comes from renewable resources, mostly traditional hydropower. This plan would require decomissioning vast numbers of fossil-fuel power plants, starting around 2030, and tapping instead:

• the enormous solar potential of southern Europe and the deserts of North Africa
• the hydro capability of Scandinavia and the European alps
• onshore and offshore wind farms in the Baltic and North Sea
• the continent’s ocean tidal and wave power, and 
• biomass generation across Europe

“Climate change requires an ambitious vision and collaboration across borders and boundaries we have not previously envisaged," said Antonella Battaglini of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, one of the contributors. "If we don’t examine the art of the possible, we will never inform critical policy decisions that need to be made sooner rather than later. This study represents a major milestone in the effort of unravelling the Gordian knot of policy, and finding workable solutions to the EU’s power supply, security and carbon challenges.”

The report is a bit vague about the price tag for all this, but says reassuringly that "the short-term costs of transforming the power system may not be very large." It assumes that expansion of renewable energy technologies (particularly wind and solar thermal) will dramatically reduce their costs to become competitive with fossil fuels--a debatable proposition (in the absence of large carbon taxes).

The report also notes that a "true SuperSmart Grid" will require high-capacity transmission lines to be built between North Africa and Europe--as well as a major upgrade of transmission capacity within each region. "There are not yet any estimates available as to the system requirements and the associated investment costs," it concedes.

It's easy to produce road maps like this if you don't have to take the steering wheel. It's also easy to take potshots at such armchair visionaries, but that would miss the point. Building a SuperSmart Grid may take a lot longer and cost a lot more than these promoters acknowledge, but I'm glad someone is starting to point us in the right direction, so we can at least get started. 

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

As any watcher of cop shows knows, it takes an exceptionally powerful and sturdy police vehicle to outrun all the robbers, dope dealers and terrorists who infest our cities. To insist that our squad cars be green as well might be asking a little much.

But consider the fact that the typical police vehicle gets only 8 to 14 miles per gallon while racking up as many as 90,000 miles a year. Multiply that by more than 425,000 law enforcement vehicles in the United States, and you have a lot of burned fuel and pollution emitted in the course of safeguarding our streets.

The bottom line, according to Indiana-based startup Carbon Motors, is that “law enforcement in the United States burns through 1.5 billion gallons of gasoline annually and emits over 14 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere per year. And taxpayers are shelling out over $4 billion each year for fuel expenditures alone, a number that only increases as the cost of fuel rises.”

Fortunately, the hot market for next-generation police vehicles to replace the standard Ford Crown Victoria is beginning to include some green alternatives to the usual heavy muscle cars.

Carbon Motors, for example aims to introduce a clean but powerful diesel-engine vehicle whose acceleration, durability, suspension, brakes and crash resistance all meet the special needs of the law enforcement market. 

Last week, Carbon Motors announced a deal with BMW to buy almost a quarter million of the German automaker's high-performance diesel engines. They should provide enough torque to accelerate even a rugged, heavy squad car from 0 to 60 in six seconds. Best of all, they should help achieve Carbon Motors’ promise of “up to a 40 percent improvement in fuel economy.”

Now it looks like Carbon Motors might face some stiff competition in the green cop car market. General Motors is talking about rolling out the Vauxhall Ampera, an “electric extended range vehicle,” in the UK in 2012. A GM spokesman told an auto blog that there is “huge interest” from London’s Metropolitan Police Force in buying the plug-in hybrid vehicle for its fleet. 

Hollywood take note: the time may soon right for another remake of Bullitt, this time featuring a tough but environmentally correct detective flying over the hills of San Francisco as he chases dirty criminals in his clean electric car.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Think of some of the perks that make the best employers so special: an onsite gym, first-class child care, the 10-minute afternoon massage and, if you’re at Google, the 11 gourmet restaurants.

Now three leading British companies have announced a great new benefit for employees: subsidized home insulation. It may not be quite as enticing as a three-star Michelin cafeteria, but it will save employees money as it helps to save the environment.

Accenture, Aviva and HSBC are teaming up with EDF Energy and Sainsbury’s—a supermarket chain that has diversified into energy efficiency services—to provide the benefit to a quarter million workers. 

The companies launched the Insulate Now initiative today in support of the British government’s target of insulating all homes by 2015 and promoting 65,000 new jobs in the green home industry.

David Hall, who heads a non-profit that dreamed up the Insulate Now campaign, said,

Mobilising consumers to insulate their homes is a great opportunity to cut the nation's carbon footprint and cut our energy bills at the same time but it requires an innovative and creative delivery model. The collaborative approach of we will if you will brings together a coalition of some of the UK's biggest employers, helping us to target a massive audience through established and trusted channels of communication.

Poorly insulated British households reportedly waste about $750 million a year in lost energy. Proper retrofits could save about a third of that each year, offering an excellent investment return.

The US Department of Energy is also pursuing an ambitious home weatherization initiative. Last year, Congress authorized $5 billion in stimulus funds to support insulation, caulking and other retrofits for low-income families.

Worthy as the program is, to date it has only retrofitted about 30,000 homes, or 5 percent of the goal, and created  a small fraction of the jobs originally intended.

Perhaps, as the Brits are suggesting, it’s time to find a new delivery model.

Posted by: Kory Raftery

Several stories on the science and politics of global warming caught our attention this week:

Many climate skeptics have been pointing to polling data that suggests public support for global warming solutions is fading. But one poll asserts the opposite may be true. A recently released Pew Research study claims Americans’ support for clean energy is gaining ground. The poll data reveals 78 percent of Americans favor increased government spending on wind, solar and hydrogen energy sources. 52 percent of people surveyed supported a cap-and-trade approach to limiting carbon emissions.

A new study claims global warming could make the world a more violent place. Called the “heat hypothesis,” the study links average temperature rise with increased aggression and violence in human beings. It also claims that global warming’s detrimental effects on the world’s food availability could potentially have a direct link to increased poverty, crime, ecomigration, civil unrest, war and genocide. In reaching their conclusions, the researchers analyzed existing research - including an update on a study done in 1997 - on the effects of rising temperature on aggression and risk factors for delinquency and criminal behavior.

Global leaders are underestimating the potential dangerous impacts of man-made climate change, suggests a recent study published in the scientific journal Oceanography. The research claims that even if all man-made greenhouse gas emissions were stopped tomorrow, by the end of this century the global average temperature would increase by about 4.3 degrees Fahrenheit, which is “significantly above the level which scientists and policymakers agree is a threshold for dangerous climate change," according to the authors. The study also suggests that society as a whole should expand research into geoengineering solutions that remove and sequester greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere.

Posted by: Leonard Anderson

Several items relating to the business and technology of clean energy and the environment caught our attention this week:

The San Francisco Bay Area ranks third in the nation for commercial buildings qualified for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star label for energy efficiency. The Bay Area had 173 green buildings at the end of last year, down from 194 in 2008, and behind Los Angeles and  Washington, D.C. The number of buildings that earned the Energy Star label nationwide rose from 6,200 in 2008 to 9,000 in 2009. "Across the U.S. the numbers grew, but we want to put out a call to action," says EPA spokeswoman Maura Beard. "We're off to a good start, but we need to improve."

It's tough to find a taxi in San Francisco but if you can flag one down it's likely to be a hybrid or a compressed natural gas car. The city's taxi fleet is now 57 percent alternative fuel vehicles -- 788 cabs out of a fleet of 1,378. Mayor Gavin Newsom says the fuel-efficient cabs have reduced gasoline consumption by 2.9 million gallons per year and lowered greenhouse gas emissions by  35,000 tons annually, the equivalent of taking 4,700 cars off the streets. In 2004, San Francisco taxi companies Yellow Cab and Luxor Cab were the first in the nation to introduce hybrid cabs.

California water utilities are installing smart meters to track water use hourly or even more  frequently, according to a forthcoming report from the California Energy Commission. Facing a state deadline for California cities to cut water consumption by 20 percent by 2020, more than half of the state's water agencies have some smart meters installed in their service areas. The meters should make it  easier to detect leaks and save water and money, the Green Inc. blog says. California utility Glendale Water & Power has received a U.S. Department of Energy stimulus grant to automate 33,400 water meters to communicate over a wireless network and replace all of its electric meters, which serve 84,500 customers, with smart meters.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Sometimes it takes an outsider to state the obvious.

The CEO of British Petroleum, Tony Hayward, this week told an audience at a Washington think-tank, "It's surprising the U.S. is still building coal-fired power plants," given their huge contribution to carbon pollution. "We've got to find a better way to create jobs than preserving coal jobs," he added.

The United Mine Workers the next day called for a boycott of BP’s gas stations.

The huge cost to coal miners, their communities and consumers of low-cost coal power from transitioning to cleaner energy must be acknowledged and addressed in any comprehensive energy and climate legislation. But unless there are radical breakthroughs in mining, combustion and carbon sequestration technologies, the need to shift away from coal cannot be doubted.

In addition to emitting deadly particulates and other pollutants, coal is a notorious source of toxic mercury, an insidious element that can cause brain damage and may increase the chance of learning disabilities in hundreds of thousands of children each year. Only last week, the non-partisan Environmental Integrity Project issued a report noting that toxic mercury emissions increased from 2007 to 2008 at 27 of the top 50 mercury-emitting power plants in the United States. Five of the 10 worst offenders were in Texas, according to EPA data. Hard to believe, but no national regulation exists to control mercury pollution.

Another study, published last month by the journal Environmental Science and Technology, reported that so-called mountaintop removal, the practice in Appalachia of mining coal by blowing up the tops of mountains to bulldoze seams of coal underneath, is dramatically increasing greenhouse gas emissions by releasing carbon stored in trees and soil. Even if carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants could be trapped and stored, coal mining would contribute significantly to global warming, the scientists found. 

What scientists understand and what policy makers do about it are two different things. Bloomberg News reports that the country’s largest coal producer, Peabody Energy, is rated a “buy” by 79 percent of analysts. In contrast, one of the country’s top makers of solar panels, First Solar, is rated a “buy” by only 44 percent of analysts. That tells you all you need to know about the distance we still need to travel in search of cleaner energy.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Though it's nice to be wanted, California utilities will nonetheless have to brace themselves for an onslaught of new demand as green-minded customers begin buying electric vehicles in a serious way, according to a new industry study.

The report, “Assessment of Plug-in Electric Vehicle Integration with ISO/RTO Systems,” prepared by a group of 10 electric grid operators across the United States, estimates that a million plug-in electric vehicles will be humming along U.S. roadways in the coming decade. Collectively, if all decided to recharge at once, they could require the equivalent resources of several large nuclear power plants to juice up their batteries.

Within California, the Los Angeles metropolitan area accounted for nearly 53,000 registrations, while the Bay Area came in at 43,000. The Bay Area alone represented 8.4 percent of all U.S. sales.

Looking ahead, the report estimates that private and government purchases of electric vehicles in the Bay Area will exceed 90,000 by 2019, behind Los Angeles (119,000) but ahead of New York (54,000).

To service these new electric cars just in the San Francisco metropolitan area, if they all plug in at the same time, would require 500 megawatts of new generation, equal to a very large gas-fired power plant. That prospect will present PG&E and other utilities with a considerable challenge.

“There is huge momentum here,” PG&E’s Andrew Tang told the New York Times.

They key to making the transition run smoothly is finding ways to stagger vehicle charging and to concentrate it during off-peak hours at night.

The report proposes the adoption of dynamic pricing to give customers incentives to shift their charging time to off-peak hours, as well as emergency load curtailment – in effect, the ability to stop charging cars temporarily to prevent a system overload.

Managing a broadly distributed smart charging infrastructure will require increased communications capabilities along with traditional electric infrastructure—transformers, wires and the like. Or as PG&E’s Tang has emphasized, it will require a smart grid. That's one reason California utilities are leading the national push for smarter electric infrastructure.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Cold fusion, once a subject avoided at all costs by serious scientists, has staged an amazing resurrection from the graveyard of discredited theories. At this week’s national meeting of the American Chemical Society in San Francisco, the controversial topic is the subject of nearly 50 presentations.

Now the big question is whether cold fusion will become the source of limitless power as once hoped, or simply a source of limitless speculation.

Cold fusion rocked the scientific world in 1989 when two University of Utah scientists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, claimed they had fused hydrogen (deuterium) nuclei while electrolysing heavy water on their desktop with a palladium electrode. Electrolysis uses an electric current to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen.

The implications were staggering. Fusion, the source of the sun’s energy and the awesome destructive power of the hydrogen bomb, could meet most of the world’s energy needs if it could be tamed. As currently understood, however, it requires extremely high temperatures and pressures, making it as yet impractical for commercial use.

Within months, skeptical scientists pronounced cold fusion dead. Few mainstream researchers were able to reproduce their results or confirm their extraordinary claims. Reviews by the Department of Energy buried the corpse. Cold fusion was as cold as the grave.

No scientist who wanted to be taken seriously—or to get research funding—even uttered the words “cold” and “fusion” in the same breath. The few intrepid researchers who continued dabbling called their new field “low energy nuclear reaction” physics or “condensed matter nuclear science.”

Still, a growing number of papers on the topic have been presented since 2006 at the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society conferences. At last year’s ACS conference, researchers with the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command in San Diego reported an electrolysis experiment that left tracks from high-energy neutrons. Though the researchers claimed them as evidence of fusion, other scientists remained skeptical as to the cause. 

And over at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, a memo obtained by 60 Minutes concluded of the ongoing research being conducted at labs around the world, there is "no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments." 

One MIT professor, Peter Hagelstein, claims to have made great theoretical strides in understanding the inner workings of the cold fusion process. 

The organizer of this week’s symposium at the American Chemical Society, Dr. Jan Marwan, summed up the changing attitude reflected by his event:

Years ago, many scientists were afraid to speak about ‘cold fusion’ to a mainstream audience. Now most of the scientists are no longer afraid and most of the cold fusion researchers are attracted to the ACS meeting. I’ve also noticed that the field is gaining new researchers from universities that had previously not pursued cold fusion research. More and more people are becoming interested in it. There’s still some resistance to this field. But we just have to keep on as we have done so far, exploring cold fusion step by step, and that will make it a successful alternative energy source. With time and patience, I’m really optimistic we can do this.

Posted by: Kory Raftery

Several stories on the science and politics of global warming caught our attention this week:

Climate change critics are gaining momentum in the press and recently released Gallup polling results show the public is becoming more skeptical of man-made global warming. But the scientific consensus on the credibility and danger of the issue remains steadfast. Volumes of evidence compiled by America’s leading research agencies – including NOAA, NASA, the Pentagon and the National Science Foundation – asserts global warming over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. Their research claims “the warming of the climate is unequivocal.”

Australian researchers claim science proves man-made global warming is changing an animal’s life-cycle. A recent University of Melbourne study found that because of a rise in temperature attributed to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions by humans, the common brown butterfly now emerges from its cocoon 10 days earlier than it did 65 years ago. Scientists have previously observed that biological events are happening progressively earlier in spring over the past few decades but this study is the first time the actions man can be scientifically linked as a contributing cause.

The buzz of the neon lights may hum a little softer next weekend as Las Vegas joins many other cities around the globe in preparing for the event dubbed “Earth Hour.” The event's organizers say the goal is for “hundreds of millions of people” to turn off the lights for one hour – at the same time – to call for action on climate change. This year will mark the third consecutive campaign and events are set to take place in succession at 8:30 p.m. local time all over the world. As for the energy saved by turning off the lights of the Vegas strip, the local utility NV Energy, claims last year’s event saved 65 megawatts, roughly as much as the yearly energy consumption of 10 average homes in the PG&E service territory.
 

Posted by: Leonard Anderson

Several items relating to the business and technology of clean energy and the environment caught our attention this week:
 
Transmission companies are eying high-voltage underwater cables to carry more renewable power over long distances without having to erect unsightly towers and carve out wide corridors. Toronto-based Transmission Developers proposes to run a 370-mile cable from north of the Canadian border along the bottom of Lake Champlain and down the Hudson River to supply hydroelectricity to New York City. A 53-mile power cable has been placed under San Francisco Bay and an underwater line linking New Jersey to Long Island now carries 22 percent of Long Island's electricity. There are other plans to deliver wind energy from the Hawaiian islands of Molokai and Lanai to Oahu and from Maine along the Atlantic coast to Boston.

The global renewable energy industry gained ground in 2009 despite the recession and a revenue drop in the solar business, according to an annual report from research firm Clean Edge Inc. The overall industry spent $63.5 billion on wind farms and turbines, a 23.5 percent gain from 2008 helped by government stimulus money. The global biofuel business rose 29 percent to $44.9 billion. Solar power manufacturers fell by 20.3 percent to $30.7 billion due to a drop in the price of solar panels.

Solazyme Inc., a South San Francisco-based renewable oil and bioproducts company and a   leader in algal biotechnology, was selected No. 1 in sustainable biofuels technology at the 2nd Annual Sustainable Biofuels Market conference in Amsterdam. Solazyme is working on improving the efficiency and sustainability of biofuels production. Since the company's start in 2003, Solazyme says it has produced the world's first algae-based renewable diesel, the first 100 percent algae-based jet fuel and road-tested the first algae-derived biodiesel.  
 
Snack food giant Frito-Lay is going green with what it's calling the first compostable chips bag for its SunChips brand. The bags are made from corn and will break down within 14 weeks, the company says. "In a hot, active compost bin it will definitely compost within that time period," said Brad Rogers, Frito-Lay's North American manager of sustainable packaging. However, there's some doubt that many bags will reach a compost bin. "Few Americans compost in their backyards, and curbside pickup is typically limited to Western metropolises like the Bay Area and Seattle," says Green Inc.
 

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

When, more than two years ago, Oakland-based BrightSource Energy first submitted plans for some huge solar power projects that would help California maintain its leadership in green energy, little did it know that environmental regulations would become a much bigger challenge than proving its technology or raising capital.

The company has its solar thermal “power tower” technology in hand, with a demonstration project up and running in Israel’s Negev desert.

The company has plenty of demand, with more than 2.6 gigawatts of solar capacity under contract, including a record 1,310 MW with PG&E.

It has generous financing from investors like Chevron, and Google.org., as well as nearly $1.4 billion on loan guarantees from the U.S. Department of Energy.

And it has commitments from one of the world’s leading engineering and construction companies, Bechtel, to build its first major facility, the Ivanpah Solar Electricity Generating System in the Mohave Desert.

But for the last two and a half years, BrightSource has been unable to get regulators to approve its Ivanpah plant, despite downsizing the plans from an initial 440 MW to 392 MW to minimize its local impact on desert tortoises and various plant species.

That may finally change, with a recommendation this week by the staff of the California Energy Commission to move ahead with the project.

The staff wisely balanced the inevitable local impact any project would have against the clear gains for the global environment from cleaner energy.

“[I]t will provide critical environmental benefits by helping the state reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, and these positive attributes must be weighed against the project’s adverse impacts,” Terry O’Brien, deputy director at the CEC, wrote in a memorandum on March 16. “It is because of these benefits and the concerns regarding the adverse impacts that global warming will have upon the state and our environment, including desert ecosystems, that staff believes it would be appropriate for the commission to approve the project . . .”  

Many environmental groups still oppose the project in its current location, despite its proximity to a golf course, Interstate 15, casinos and existing power transmission lines.  BrightSource reportedly plans to pay $25 million to buy land to relocate 25 desert tortoises that could be displaced by its project. Its project still faces further reviews by the Bureau of Land Management.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

In the 1974 TV show “The FBI versus Alvin Karpis, Public Enemy Number One,” the bank robber and kidnapper, known as “Creepy Karpis,” tells his sidekick, “I’m sick and tired of everybody goin’ green . . .”

Karpis, who held the record for longest attendance as a non-paying guest at Alcatraz (1936-1962), would be really sick and tired to learn just how green his former B&B-on-the-Bay is going these days.

The National Park Service recently announced plan to use federal stimulus funds to install some 1,360 solar panels on the main prison and laundry buildings to replace much of the power now provided by two noisy and dirty diesel generators.

"There are about 1 million visitors to Alcatraz a year and we want to make it a showplace for green energy," said Michael Feinstein, a spokesman for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

Actually, it will be a showcase in concept only—and a good thing, too. In order to preserve the historic nature of the site, most of the panels will be carefully hidden from view by walls around the prison roof.

Thanks to smart contracting, the park service managed to stretch its original budget from last year, freeing up $129 million for new projects, of which the Alcatraz solar program is one.

Another of those new projects will be seven new solar installations at Point Reyes National Seashore to complement six existing photovoltaic systems at the park. Together they will “reduce its total annual electrical consumption from fossil fuels by more than 45 percent,” the facility estimates, “moving the park closer to Pacific West Region’s vision of carbon neutrality by 2016, the year the National Park Service celebrates its centennial.”

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

With all the attention paid to carbon pollution and global warming these days, it’s easy to forget the importance of traditional air pollutants like ozone smog, lead and fine particulates. They don’t threaten to disrupt ecosystems worldwide, but they still cause sickness and even death, as well as billions of dollars in damage to crops and structures.

While carbon pollution continues its inexorable rise, regulation of other air pollutants is a major, and sometimes unheralded, success story.

A new EPA report, “Our Nation’s Air: Status and Trends Through 2008,” shows marked and sometimes dramatic improvements in nationwide air quality, thanks to laws that require cleaner cars, industries and consumer products. 

Compared to 1990, air pollution in 2008 was lower in six major categories:

• Ozone (ground level): down 14 percent
• Particulates (<10 microns): down 31 percent
• Lead: down 78 percent.
• Nitrogen oxide: down 35 percent
• Carbon monoxide: down 68 percent.
• Sulfur dioxide: down 59 percent.

The decline in sulfur dioxide emissions, driven in part by the acid rain program and controls on coal-burning utilities, has improved water quality in lakes and streams and improved visibility in many scenic areas by reducing haze.

In addition, total emissions of toxic air pollutants such as benzene, xylenes and tuluene, some of which are suspected carcinogens, have fallen some 40 percent since 1990, thanks to controls on chemical plants, dry cleaners, incinerators and other sources.

There’s still plenty of room for improvement. In 2008, more than 119 million people lived in counties where ozone levels exceeded national standards, exposing their lungs and throats to irritation and inflammation. Nearly 37 million lived in areas that exceeded national standards for fine particulates, which can lodge in the lungs or bloodstream and kill people prematurely.

The EPA report also notes that annual U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases increased 17 percent from 1990 to 2007—with serious implications for local air quality as well as climate change.

In 2007, the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that “future climate change may cause significant air quality degradation by changing the dispersion rate of pollutants; the chemical environment for ozone and particle pollution generation; and the strength of emissions from the biosphere, fires, and dust.”

Bottom line: Our nation’s success in reducing local air pollutants shows that intelligent and determined regulation can work. Now’s the time to adopt equally intelligent and determined regulations to control greenhouse gas pollutants.

Posted by: Kory Raftery

Several stories on the science and politics of global warming caught our attention this week:

Global warming may be having an adverse effect of hundreds of species of migratory birds in the United States. In the latest version of the annual State of the Birds report, the Interior Department claims that climate change is one of many environmental factors threatening bird populations by destructing natural avian habitats and lessening the availability of wetlands. The report asserts that coastal birds are the most directly threatened due to rising sea levels and rapidly changing marine environments.

Debate over the economic effects of California's first-in-the-nation global warming law flared this week, as a report was released claiming the law potentially will contribute to short-term job losses. Meantime, Lisa Jackson, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency claims there is a “misconception” in regards to the relationship between economic recovery and protecting the environment – with some people feeling the need to choose one or the other. “This is about rising to meet our most urgent environmental and economic challenges - not shrinking from them with the excuse that it’s just too hard,” Jackson said.

Lower levels of oxygen are being reported in the oceans and scientists are linking the findings to global warming. They warn that the oceans' complex undersea ecosystems and fragile food chains could be disrupted. In some areas in the Pacific Northwest, the almost complete absence of oxygen has left piles of Dungeness crab carcasses littering the ocean floor and killed off 25-year-old sea stars. In other spots, such as off the Southern California coast, oxygen levels have dropped roughly 20 percent over the past 25 years. Researchers recognize that areas of low oxygen have long existed in the deep ocean but say the depletion of oxygen recently reported is “striking.”

Posted by: Leonard Anderson

Several items relating to the business and technology of clean energy and the environment caught our attention this week: 

A program to reduce lighting costs in Silicon Valley and nearby areas is paying off for small and medium-size businesses, the San Jose Business Journal reports. PG&E and nonprofit environmental  consultant Ecology Action of Santa Cruz cooperate on the RightLights program, offering free audits of  lighting consumption, plus rebates to reduce up-front costs for new lighting and installation. Fox Head Inc., a motor sports apparel designer and manufacturer, switched out high-energy metal halide lights  to  fluorescent induction lighting, slashing lighting costs by 60 percent, or $32,000 a year. Since the PG&E-Ecology Action program began in 2001, more than 5,000 PG&E commercial customers have  joined the program, with total rebates of $17 million and a $25 million savings on utility bills. Total carbon impact was the equivalent of 15,000 cars taken off the road and saving 150 million kilowatt hours.  

Internet giant Google this week added biking directions in beta to Google Maps for the U.S. and plugged in information about bicycle trails, lanes and recommended roads. Through Google's  partnership with Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, more than 12,000 miles of trails are included in directions and will add new trail information and encourage riders to provide feedback. Google says when  Maker is available in the U.S., all riders will be able to directly contribute information about  trails, bike lanes and routes. 

Aurica Motors, a Silicon Valley electric car startup, says it's trying to keep the NUMMI car plant in Fremont in business when Toyota departs at the end of March. Aurica's plan calls for converting the plant to manufacture an all-electric car and a battery swap system. The company is seeking federal  economic stimulus money and private financing to convert the plant.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Livermore, once a sleepy cow town, is today celebrated for the world-class science at its national laboratory, its thriving wine industry and . . . its record-breaking liquefied natural gas plant.

LNG in Livermore?

Yes. You won’t see any drilling rigs out in the pastures, but at Altamont Landfill, whopping amounts of methane gas are belched out by bacteria that break down organic waste. Instead of venting into the atmosphere, however, the gas is now captured by dozens of black suction tubes spread across the facility. 

Last November, Houston-based Waste Management Inc., which runs the 240-acre landfill, and Linde North America, a major engineering company, announced they had started production at the world’s largest facility to convert landfill gas to LNG.

In full production, the plant can produce up to 13,000 gallons of the super-cold methane each day. The liquid fuels 300 clean-air vehicles in Waste Management’s hauling and recyling fleet and will reduce CO2 emissions by nearly 30,000 tons a year.

The use of LNG cuts carbon emissions 85 percent compared to gasoline or diesel fuel, according to Waste Management. The company has nearly 500 vehicles powered by LNG or compressed natural gas in about 20 California communities. 

(PG&E also runs some of its heavy trucks on LNG, which fuel up at the Fremont Service Center.  Of late, however, the utility is focusing on expanding its fleet of electric-powered trucks.)

In January, EPA awarded the Altamont Landfill one of its 2009 Project of Year awards and the facility has been hailed by leaders of the California Energy Commission and other state agencies, several of which contributed financially to the project.

“It’s taking material that would otherwise go into the atmosphere and be a contributor to global warming and turning it into a useful product that is cutting emissions,” said Mary Nichols, chair of the California Air Resources Board. “This is exactly the kind of win-win situation we are looking for in trying to transform our whole energy economy away from having to extract, process, and import fuels from other parts of the world.”

Waste Management is aggressively mining its landfills for more green energy. The company runs 115 gas-to-energy facilities at its landfills and 16 solid waste-to-energy combustion generators. In all, they produce enough power for 700,000 homes.

The company’s newest investment horizon is waste-to-biofuels production, including investments in Enerkem to make ethanol and a partnership with Terrabon and Valero Energy to make “green gasoline.”

EPA recently reported that 519 landfill gas-to-energy projects were operating across the country last year, up more than 25 percent since 2005. NEXT100 profiled one such project in Half Moon Bay in December.

Converting waste methane gas to biofuel isn’t just good business. It’s especially good for the environment since methane that escapes into the atmosphere is a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. If Congress ever gets around to putting a price on carbon emissions, we’ll surely see many more companies drilling for landfill gas.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Menlo Park city officials were impressed last month when they learned from PG&E that switching nearly 500 street lights to light-emitting diodes (LEDs) could save $28,000 a year in energy bills and maintenance costs.

And across the Bay in Walnut Creek, the city slashed its energy use for 126 streetlights by more than half when it recently converted to bright LED lights. To sweeten the deal, PG&E provided the city a rebate of $17,950 to install the energy-efficient lights. Danville earned rebates as well for converting 262 of its streetlights to LEDs.

All three cities will be glad to know that experts agree they made a smart choice. Engineers at the University of Pittsburgh recently assessed four different streetlight technologies and concluded that LEDs "strike the best balance between brightness, affordability, and energy and environmental conservation when their life span--from production to disposal--is considered."

The study was commissioned by the City of Pittsburgh, which is considering replacing 40,000 of its streetlights with LEDs. The city estimates that such an investment could save $1 million annually in energy costs, $700,000 in maintenance and 6,800 tons of carbon emissions.

In addition to thrifty energy consumption, LEDs last three to five times longer than standard high-pressure sodium and metal halide lamps. And unlike its competitors, LEDs contain no mercury and fewer other toxins.

Check out PG&E's web pages for more on the utility's streetlight program and incentives.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Americans spent more than $1.2 trillion dollars on insurance premiums in 2008, or about $4,000 for every man, woman and child. Evidently, they understood that it pays to hedge your bets against small but real chances of catastrophic losses.

But when it comes to climate change, deniers cite scientific uncertainty as an excuse to do nothing. They say we can’t be certain that global warming will cause rising oceans to drown coastal communities, droughts to wither crops, new diseases to cause epidemics and fires to consume our forests—so why bother to act?

They have it exactly backwards.

Although climate scientists concede they can't say for sure how bad things will get if humanity keeps emitting greenhouses gases into the atmosphere, that's not cause for comfort. On the contrary, their uncertainty means life could easily become a lot worse for homo sapiens and other species than we’ve been led to believe.

As Harvard's Martin Weitzman noted in a recent paper, "We seem headed for a unique planetary experiment of subjecting the Earth's system to an unprecedented shock by geologically instantaneously jolting atmospheric stocks of (greenhouse gases) far above their highest level over the last several million years. We simply do not know what will happen under such extreme circumstances."

No less an authority than Dr. Robert Watson, chair of the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change from 1997 to 2002, recently conceded that the IPCC’s last major report in 2007, which sounded a strong alarm over global warming, was in many cases too conservative, leading him to warn that the world could face "unthinkable impacts."

For example, the IPCC's projections of sea level rise did not take into account the melting of Greeland’s ice sheet, which is taking place much faster than previously believed. This December, scientists writing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences forecast an increase in global sea levels of five feet by 2100 if greenhouse emissions are not strongly curbed, a finding supported by many other recent studies.

"The ramifications of a major sea level rise are massive," write ocean scientists Rob Young at Western Carolina University and Orrin Pilkey at Duke University:

Agriculture will be disrupted, water supplies will be salinized, storms and flood waters will reach ever further inland, and millions of environmental refugees will be created. . . . Miami tops the list of most endangered cities in the world, as measured by the value of property that would be threatened by a three-foot rise. This would flood all of Miami Beach and leave downtown Miami sitting as an island of water, disconnected from the rest of Florida. Other threatened U.S. cities include New York/Newark, New Orleans, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Tampa-St Petersburg, and San Francisco. Osaka/Kobe, Tokyo, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, and Nagoya are among the most threatened major cities outside of North America.

What terrifies these and other scientists is the possibility that ice caps on Greenland and Antarctica will melt much faster even than current models predict. Indeed, the last time CO2 levels were as high in the Earth's atmosphere, about 15 million years ago, seas were 75 to 120 feet higher.

Ice cap melting is just one of nine potential "tipping elements" that scientists say could lead to abrupt and disastrous shifts in climate. Others include massive die-off of the Amazon rainforest, disruption of the monsoon system, and wholesale changes in Atlantic and Pacific ocean currents.

One of the biggest longterm "tipping" risks is that global warming will unlock vast amounts of carbon and methane currently frozen in Arctic permafrost. Methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times as potent as carbon dioxide, could accelerate the warming process with dire consequences. British and German researchers reported last August evidence that warming Arctic waters were melting methane hydrates stored in seabed sediments. High rates of Arctic methane seepage were reported this January by a researcher at the University of Alaska, and confirmed in a new paper published in the journal Science.

(If you want to get really masochistic, check out the 2003 paper in Geology, "Methane-Driven Oceanic Eruptions and Mass Extinctions," which makes the case that the worst mass extinction of all time, some 251 million years ago, was caused by an explosive upwelling of methane from the ocean, which may have unleashed 10,000 times as much energy as the world's entire stockpile of nuclear weapons.)

If the worst of these climate feedback loops prove real, average temperatures over the United States could jump an unimaginable 15°F to 18°F in 50 years, according to recent projections by the prestigious Met Office Hadley Centre in the UK. And a study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration last year suggests that the catastrophic consequences would be "largely irreversible for 1,000 years."

So the question isn't whether we should buy insurance against climate change, or even whether we can afford to pay a little more for energy in order to phase out fossil fuels. The real question is, what are we waiting for?

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

If my math is correct, today marks the 100th celebration of International Women’s Day, a tradition first proposed by Clara Zetkin, leader of the “women’s office” in the German Social Democrat Party.

The theme this year is “equal rights, equal opportunities: progress for all.”   While that’s entirely worthy, the United Nations, which began officially recognizing the day in 1975, ought to consider putting the focus on “women and energy” sometime before the next 100 years are up.

The United Nations Development Programme notes that two billion people around the world still live “off the grid,” depending on fuels such as wood and dung for heating, cooking and other basic household needs. In most societies, it falls mainly to women to collect and then use these fuels—dangerous, unhealthy and time-consuming activities that sap the ability of women to improve their education or earn a living. Providing new energy resources is thus a precondition to upgrading their economic and social condition:

Access to more efficient, cleaner, environmentally sustainable and reliable energy services is mandatory and needs to be addressed as part of the energy sector development plans in order to improve women’s status, provide them with more opportunities for income-generating work, and also improve their general health and living conditions as more effective members of their communities.

Energy, therefore, can be a key input and entry point toward achieving the third Millennium Development Goal: promote gender equality and empower women.

As previously discussed in NEXT100, a project in West Africa to introduce solar-powered irrigation allowed households to dramatically increase food yields, improving diets and netting $7 to $8 from surplus crop sales each week. The investment was a huge boon to women, who traditionally tend the gardens, by cutting the time they spend watering by 50 percent and freeing them up to earn additional money.

But just as clean energy can open doors for women, so women are essential to opening doors for new energy technology in many societies, noted Elizabeth Cecelski in a key report for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in 2000.  If women’s needs are ignored or misunderstood, they may resist new technology that reduces drudgery in one target sector only to increase their required labor in another. As Cecelski noted,

women are not a special interest group in renewable energy, they are the mainstream users and often producers of energy. Without their involvement, renewable energy projects risk being inappropriate, and failing. Women are the main users of household energy in developing and industrial countries; they influence or make many family purchases related to energy; they are experienced entrepreneurs in energy-related enterprises; and women's organizations are effective promoters of new technologies and active lobbyists for environmentally benign energy sources.

Renewable energy manufacturers that do not pay attention to women's needs will be missing a huge potential market. Energy policymakers who ignore women’s needs will be failing to make use of a powerful force for renewable energy development. Energy researchers who leave women out of energy research and analysis will be failing to understand a large part of energy consumption and production.

And let's not forget the role of women in developed societies, where the problem isn't so often access to energy as using too much of it. A national survey of women and energy last year, commissioned by Women Impacting Public Policy and the Women's Council on Energy and the Environment found that 77 percent of women say they have equal or primary responsibility for paying electricity bills, and 91 percent say they have equal or primary responsibility for using less electricity at home. By a two-to-one margin, the women surveyed cited moving toward cleaner energy sources as a more important energy goal than reliability or keeping costs low.

Sounds to me like women could become a key force in helping our own country transition to a clean energy future. That would be something to celebrate soon on International Women's Day.

Posted by: Kory Raftery

Several stories on the science and politics of global warming caught our attention this week:

Climate scientists have long declared that global warming could potentially release methane previously frozen in to the Arctic permafrost, setting off significant increases in warming trends. Now researchers at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and elsewhere say this change is underway in a little-studied area under the sea, the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, west of the Bering Strait. Scientists contend that while carbon dioxide is far more abundant and persistent in the atmosphere, ton for ton, atmospheric methane traps at least 25 times as much heat.

Nearly 570 concerned scientists have signed a letter urging Congress to “oppose an imminent attack on the Clean Air Act.” The scientists' plea comes as several coalitions of lawmakers attempt to overturn the endangerment finding using the Congressional Review Act, which establishes special procedures for disapproving regulations from federal agencies. The lawmakers claim the “Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate something like carbon dioxide.”

Is your cup of Joe on the outs? Coffee producers are creating a buzz with claims that global warming is adding risk to the long term sustainability of the industry. Many growers at the World Coffee Conference held in Guatemala this week predicted that if temperatures continue to rise, supplies of the world famous bean will decline. They contend higher temperatures are forcing their industry peers to seek higher, more costly land, driving costs up from the farm to your cup. 

Posted by: Leonard Anderson

Several items relating to the business and technology of clean energy and the environment caught our attention this week:

SolarCity, a solar power system design, financing and installation company, has secured an additional $90 million fund from a unit of U.S. Bancorp to finance expansion of its solar projects in the western states. In January, Pacific Venture Capital, a subsidiary of PG&E Corp., announced $60 million in financing for SolarCity installations mainly in California with some in Arizona and Colorado. SolarCity also serves Oregon and Texas.

Former Edison International CEO John Bryson plugged some green startup companies at the U.C. Berkeley Energy Symposium on Thursday: Santa Monica-based Coda Automotive, maker of electric vehicles in China; smart-grid wireless company On-Ramp Wireless, of San Diego; and Ostendo, maker of solid state lighting displays based in Carlsbad, California. Bryson, a member of Coda's board of directors, was a co-founder of the Natural Resources Defense Council and president of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Greenest city in the world? Reykjavik, Iceland, tops a list for sustainability, according to Global Green Blog at GlobalPost. Reykjavik runs entirely on green power, including geothermal and hydroelectricity, and the city's transit system moves people around on hydrogen buses. Light-rail and bicycle leader Portland, Oregon, comes second, followed by Curitiba, Brazil, where sheep trim the parks; Malmo, Sweden, developing sustainable neighborhoods; and Vancouver, British Columbia, where 90 percent of its electricity comes from hydropower.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Americans love a good competitive challenge, from the Olympcs and Survivor on down to kiddie soccer games. So what better way to promote energy efficiency than to turn it into a contest?

The EPA’s Energy Star program has been doing just that since 2008, promoting fun but fierce competition among building owners for recognition as the top energy saver in their city.

The San Francisco Earth Hour 24x7 Energy Challenge, co-sponsored by PG&E, promises to “identify—and shower kudos upon—the most energy efficient buildings in the city, as well as the properties that make the greatest gains in performance” over the period March 2008 to February 2010. (Contestants are using PG&E’s automated benchmarking service to track their monthy energy use data.) The Kilowatt Cup for “superior achievement in energy management” is scheduled to be awarded this April.

Such contests are being held around the country by EPA in partnership with the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA), nonprofit organizations and utilities like PG&E.

And for good reason: building energy use is low-hanging fruit in the fight against climate change.

“Roughly 40 percent of all humanity's greenhouse gas emissions from energy come from the building sector," said Evan Mills of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. "I would rank it one of the very first, if not the first thing to do."

In Seattle’s Kilowatt Crackdown last year, 53 buildings fought for recognition as greenest of them all. Together they saved enough energy to serve 1,000 homes for a year, according to the local BOMA president.

The Seattle contest, now in its second year, awards a Kilowatt Cup made of recycled materials, including nails, wing nuts and brass hinges. I guess it’s the thought that counts.

In 2008, 150 school buildings entered Louisville’s contest along with more than 30 commercial buildings. Said Mayor Jerry Abramson, “The Kilowatt Crackdown is designed to show businesses that thoughtful changes in a building’s energy use can make a big difference in the budget. Improving efficiency isn’t just the right thing to do for the environment; it’s often the right thing to do for the ledger sheet.”

And not to be outdone, Central Florida’s Kilowatt Crackdown Challenge, launched late last year, hopes to slash electricity use in major buildings 30 percent by 2012, reducing carbon emissions equal to those produced by more than 400,000 typical cars.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

One of my colleagues – a guy -- the other day suggested that I write up the new Porsche 918 Hybrid concept car. Despite the fact that it accelerates from 0-60 in 3 seconds, and gets 78 mpg (presumably at a more sedate pace), I couldn’t quite bring myself to make the post a priority.

Something about the overly aggressive look of the car, and the even more aggressive price tag it’s likely to carry, put me off. Automakers are falling all over themselves to make ridiculous looking electrified sports cars--like this, this, and this--that only moguls can afford.

But now that I’ve seen Porsche’s clever video, I’m sold. It amusingly highlights the carmaker’s first electric vehicle offering--produced around the turn of the last century--before segueing into a predictably orgasmic portrayal of the new concept car. 

Apparently, this video can turn grown men into jello. Here’s what green car expert Nick Chambers had to say:

What is Porsche doing to me? I had just gotten over my teenage-like, eco-speed-lust with the 918 Spyder hybrid from yesterday’s announcement, and now Porsche has to go and release a video showing it actually driving? It’s not right. A man can only take so much.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

This article was adapted from a story by James Park in PG&E's communications department.

What're you going to do when your new high-tech electric vehicle goes on the blink? For PG&E, which is adding several hundred new hybrid and electric vehicles to its fleet, calling the Tappet brothers at Car Talk is not an option.

Instead, PG&E has gone into partnership with several community colleges to teach the utility's fleet mechanics how to safely repair and maintain the new trucks and cars. Starting this month, about 175 fleet mechanics will be trained on safety, diagnostics and routine maintenance for the new vehicles. Classes will be taught over the course of three days by 14 instructors from local community colleges. 

PG&E is adding about 250 Chevrolet Silverado light-duty trucks and Ford Escape hybrid passenger vehicles to its fleet along with some 50 electric and hybrid passenger vans and heavy-duty trucks manufactured by Altec, Eaton and Peterbilt. 

"The hybrid vehicles are entirely new technology platforms," said Mac Fernandez, PG&E master mechanic. "For example, there’s no such thing as doing just a simple brake job on these cars because they use regenerative braking technology."

Fleet mechanics will be taught about the unique aspects of the vehicles, including appropriate diagnostic technology and special safety procedures associated with using electric hybrid battery packs, which have voltages as high as 800 volts.

Citing PG&E's national leadership in alternate fuel technologies, Dave Meisel, PG&E's director of Transportation Services, said "this program will provide a mechanism to ensure that our professional technicians and our customers alike will have access to some of the most sophisticated technical training on some of the most technologically advanced vehicles in the world today. The clean vehicle training program will allow PG&E and its transportation team to maintain its commitment to environmental leadership, employee development and community involvement."

The partnership between PG&E and the community colleges is called the PowerPathway™ Clean Tech Vehicle Training Program. It's part of a broader skills development program aimed at creating a trained workforce for PG&E and the utility industry in California under the PowerPathway™ umbrella. 

The partnership with community college instructors will also help take curriculum knowledge back to California communities. Instructors will use techniques gained from teaching the utility's fleet mechanics with their own students at local community colleges, developing technical skills and creating career paths.

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

When it comes to corporate responsibility, the third time's a charm.

For the third time in three years, PG&E was named to Corporate Responsibility Magazine's annual list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens, chosen from among the Russell 1,000 largest companies based on performance on the environment, climate change, human rights, philanthropy, employee relations, financial performance and governance.

This year, PG&E was the top-ranked utility at number 25, improved from last year's ranking at 28th. And that was against tougher competition: the average composite score of the top 100 companies rose 19 percent, according to the magazine.

“The higher scores reveal a quantum leap in performance, which we attribute to the competitive dynamic of firms who understand the importance of stakeholder support from investors, customers, employees, regulators, and suppliers,” said Corporate Responsibility Magazine editor Dirk Olin. 

Earning a spot on the list reflects PG&E’s long-standing commitment to corporate responsibility, including its efforts to deliver some of the nation’s cleanest electric power and its groundbreaking programs to help customers use energy more efficiently. The ranking also recognizes the many ways in which PG&E is giving back to local communities, respecting and celebrating diversity and contributing to the quality of life in the areas where its employees live and work.

Further evidence that PG&E is on to something came last month when RiskMetrics Group named PG&E to its sixth annual Global ESG 100 list of top-rated companies worldwide. The companies were selected based on their "effective management" of environmental, social and governance issues. The list was previously managed by Innovest Strategic Value Advisors, which RiskMetrics purchased in 2009.

As previously noted in NEXT100, Corporate Knights magazine recently ranked PG&E number two on its Global 100 list of sustainable large companies, behind only GE. 

One of the great contributions of organizations that monitor corporate responsibility and sustainability is educating investors that doing good is often a precondition for doing well. In today's interdependent world, handling environmental and social issues to the satisfaction of customers, regulators and other stakeholders is a sign of attentive management. Corporate Responsibility points out that longstanding members of its 100 Best list outperformed other companies on the Russell 1000 by 26 percent over three years. And RiskMetrics notes that since its list was created in 2005, "the Global ESG 100 has outperformed the benchmark FTSE All World Developed (AWD) Index by 116 basis points per annum, as of the end of 2009." 

Posted by: Jonathan Marshall

Suppose that for every dollar you invested in the stock market, you could reap an average return of $1.40. Most likely you'd be thrilled--especially after the last decade of losses in the S&P 500.

Yet few business magazines bothered to note the California Public Utilities Commission's estimate last summer that every dollar invested by utilities to promote energy efficiency should save customers at least $1.40--a 40 percent return on investment over just a few years.

Last year, McKinsey & Co. reported even more strikingly that  economy-wide improvements in energy efficiency could save the United States $1.2 trillion--more than a thousand billion dollars--for an investment of less than half that sum. "The reduction in energy use would also result in the abatement of 1.1 gigatons of greenhouse gas emissions annually – the equivalent of taking the entire U.S. fleet of passenger vehicles and light trucks off the roads," it added.

PG&E and other major California utilities have been investing in energy efficiency programs since the mid-1970s. PG&E's programs alone have saved customers more than $24 billion. Now their counterparts nationwide are getting the message, according to a new report from the non-profit Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE).

CEE says that U.S. gas and electric utilities spent $5.3 billion last year on efficiency programs, double the amount in 2006. And the number of states with energy efficiency programs jumped from 37 in 2008 to 46 last year.

CEE member utilities reported combined savings on electricity and natural gas of $8.6 billion in 2008. The savings prevented emissions of more than 55 million tonnes of CO2, equal to the output of about 12 coal-fired power plants.

Last fall, the CPUC approved a budget of $3 billion over three years for energy efficiency programs by PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. The utilities will promote more efficient lighting, air conditioning, consumer electronics and building materials, among other things. Those programs should save the state the cost of building 1,500 megawatts of new generation--and all the carbon pollution that would go with it.