Why isn't there a Building Efficiency Trade Association

Is it time for a real trade association for the Building Efficiency industry?

I was thinking about this today. For those of you that have been a part of the efficiency industry for a long time, you know that it is like a greyhound race. Companies running as fast as they can to realize the dream only to come up short on actually catching the rabbit. Energy Efficiency in the US alone is estimated to have $440B of potential by LBNL and over $3 Trillion when calculating the ultimate economic potential by 2030. As the costs of new electricity, water, and natural gas capacity continues to rise, saving electricity, water, and natural gas becomes a far more cost-effective option – important during a recession. The challenge is that from energy efficiency financing to building codes – there is no coherent industry voice.

That's why we need a real trade organization. Yes, there's the Alliance to Save Energy; American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy; US Green Building Council and many others. And, yes, these organizations have worked on standards, financing, and regulations that would help the industry.

All that's well and good, but we need an organization willing to do the hard work in the industry to establish and prioritize efforts to tackle the biggest obstacles to our growth. This is not easily done by a non-profit – we need a trade association. Currently, there is no widely recognized leader for energy efficiency financing, standards, and other issues. Leaving this to non-profits will leave us in the slow lane. A pathway for incremental change and more stop/start efforts.

An industry-wide trade association dedicated to energy efficiency financing, building codes, and other important areas make sense.

Gray Power

by Richard T. Stuebi

The distinction between "green power" -- electricity without any carbon emissions, usually from renewable energy sources such as solar and wind -- has been clearly drawn vs. "brown power" -- electricity generated from fossil fuels.

In a recent article in The Nation, author Lisa Margonelli writes about "The Case for 'Gray Power'". "Gray power" is the term that Ms. Margonelli uses for a concept called "energy recycling", wherein electricity is generated from capturing waste heat from burning fossil fuels. So, gray power is not as "green" as renewables, but given that the fuel is being burned anyway, generating more electricity from the same amount of fuel burn is surely a good thing.

Ms. Margonelli makes the point that there are huge untapped opportunities for capturing waste heat to generate electricity in the U.S. -- especially in the Midwest and South, with the plethora of coal-fired powerplants in the region. This message has been pounded home loudly and frequently by such people as Thomas Casten of Recycled Energy Development.

So what's preventing this opportunity from being captured? Ms. Margonelli argues that there are two main impediments. First, various electric utility and state regulatory practices impair the economics of those who might pursue gray power opportunities. Second, the U.S. Clean Air Act is written in such a way to discourage major modifications of powerplants -- even if they are modifications that improve economic and environmental performance.

Her proposed remedy is the creation of a federal Clean Power Authority, analogous to an organization like the Tennessee Valley Authority or Bonneville Power Administration, whose mission would be to recycle wasted energy from powerplants in the South and Midwest.

While I agree that the two issues she identified are in fact real impediments to recycled energy, Ms. Margonelli misses a third critical one.

In Europe, waste heat recapture is much more prevalent than in the U.S. Why? Because the waste heat often can't be economically converted into electricity, but must remain as heat -- and Europe's infrastructure is much more optimally configured to economically use this heat.

Given that Europe is so compact and densely populated, pretty much every powerplant is within 20-30 miles of a sizable town, and many of these towns have central district heating systems that can make direct use of the waste heat piped in from the powerplant. In contrast, most major powerplants in the U.S. heartland are situated hundreds of miles away from any city center with a district heating system that can use waste heat. Lacking an economically proximate market for waste heat, it just goes up the stack -- poof!

No question that opportunities to capture gray power in American urban centers are non-trivial, and they should be diligently pursued. But what's needed to make gray power in the U.S. more of a widespread reality is not so much a federal Clean Power Authority, but technology that can economically convert low-grade (and low-value) waste heat into higher-value electricity. And that is exactly what firms like Akron-based ReXorce Thermionics are working to develop.


Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.

U.S. Wind Energy Breaks Record with 10 GW added in 2009

By John Addison

The U.S. wind industry broke all previous records by installing 9,922 MW installed last year. This expanded the nation’s wind fleet by 39% and bring total wind power generating capacity in the U.S to over 35,000 MW. The five-year average annual growth rate for the industry is also 39%. U.S. wind projects today generate enough to power the equivalent of 9.7 million homes, protecting consumers from fuel price volatility and strengthening our energy security.

Wind power and natural gas are the leading sources of new electricity generation for the United States, generating 80% of new capacity, as most utilities avoid the risks of adding coal and nuclear power plants.

The 39% expansion of wind power is remarkable because many projects required hundreds of millions in long-term financing during the sever recession and time when many banks stopped lending. Also, many lenders who previously wanted production tax credits (PTC), lost money in 2009 and had no need for PTC.

There is mixed optimism about wind power’s continued growth will continue in 2010. Three GW of new wind are under construction with more projects that will be added during the year. TVA added 815 MW is a good example.

Improved price-performance of equipment is one driver. 1603 Treasury Grants (Excel spreadsheet of 240 Funded Projects), Investment Tax Credit, and other tax credit with completion deadlines will also fuel growth in 2010. RPS in 30 states is another driver.
Without new energy or climate legislation we may not see added growth of wind and other renewables. Uncertainty is a deal killer. Lack of new high-speed electricity transmission is the biggest obstacle to growth of renewables. NIMBY activism and lack of appropriate cost sharing are challenges for high-speed transmission.

Natural gas growth may surge ahead if wind growth stalls in 2010. Utilities also prefer natural gas power plants for baseload power. In the decade ahead, large-scale grid storage may make the variability of wind power less of an issue. Report about 32 new grid storage and smart grid projects.

“The U.S. wind energy industry shattered all installation records in 2009, chalking up the Recovery Act as a historic success in creating jobs, avoiding carbon, and protecting consumers,” said AWEA CEO Denise Bode. “But U.S. wind turbine manufacturing – the canary in the mine — is down compared to last year’s levels, and needs long-term policy certainty and market pull in order to grow. We need to set hard targets, in the form of a national Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), in order to provide the necessary stability for manufacturers to expand their U.S. operations and to seize the historic opportunity we have today to build up a thriving renewable energy industry.”

Early last year, before the Recovery Act (ARRA), the industry anticipated that in 2009 wind power development might drop by as much as 50% from 2008 levels, with equivalent job losses. The clear commitment by the President to create clean energy jobs and the swift implementation of ARRA incentives by the Administration in mid-summer reversed the situation.

Recovery Act incentives spurred the growth of construction, operations and maintenance, and management jobs, helping the industry to save and create jobs in those sectors and shine as a bright spot in the economy. Some 50 U.S. facilities are planning expansion, including turbine manufacturers headquartered outside the U.S., although some will need financing and greater market certainty to expand. The United States competes with Europe and Asia for wind industry job growth. In 2009, most U.S. wind projects were divided among a dozen turbine manufacturers such as General Electric, Vestas, Suzlon, Siemens, and Mitsubishi.

America’s wind power fleet will avoid an estimated 62 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, equivalent to taking 10.5 million cars off the road, and will conserve approximately 20 billion gallons of water annually, which would otherwise be withdrawn for steam or cooling in conventional power plants.

Texas extended its lead benefiting from strong winds and fewer regulatory hurdles than many states in the nation. Fourteen U.S. states now have over 1 GW of installed wind. The top five states by wind power installed (in MW):

Texas 9,410
Iowa 3,670
California 2,794
Washington 1,980
Minnesota 1,809
AWAE Market Report

Can wind power continue to grow? Yes. The November 2009 feature article in Scientific American reported how wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world’s energy, eliminating all fossil fuels by 2030. Recommended reading is “A Plan to Power 100 Percent of the Planet with Renewables“ by Mark Z. Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and presents at conference.

Getting the LEDs Out

by Richard T. Stuebi



Keith Scott, VP of Business Development at Bridgelux, recently posted on GreenTech Media an interesting take on the state of LED lighting markets. Mr. Scott claims that "we are in the middle of the LED lighting revolution", and sees big expansion ahead in for the sector.

Read more »

Impact of Energy Efficiency on the System

by Jigar Shah, Founder SunEdison and CEO of the Carbon War Room

I was looking at the new Homestar program on the Efficiency First website here: http://www.efficiencyfirst.org/home-star/

To start, it would be an amazing effort on the part of the Federal government. This comes on the heels of a huge effort on the part of the government to weatherize homes across this country. As many of you who know me, this is right up my alley. The problem with this program is that Homestar doesn't really fundamentally shift our priorities as a nation. Assuming there is $23B of money available over 2 years available, here are some options:

1) PACE - property tax financing. This money could be used as a first loss guarantee available to the first $230B of non-recourse financing by cities. This would NOT be a Federal loan guarantee. As many of you know I find the Federal loan guarantee generally allows banks to be lazy and cuts out small contractors that can't afford to do the paperwork

2) Utility on bill payment mechanisms - with the threat of PACE above, you might finally see utilities offer this program in a large enough quantity to offset the need for new generation facilities period. The beauty of this method is that it protects utility profits with decoupling or other half measures that really do not scale fully. The utility can use this method to carefully roll out energy efficiency in the best interests of its shareholders. Physical equipment like ice storage: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/coming-to-so-cal-53-megawatts-of-ice would be my first choice. It shift peak power to off-peak power and reduces overall air conditioning by making ice at night when it is cooler. This technology by itself could reduce demand charges for customers by over 30% while make the utility more profitable by smoothing out generation usage. In this case the $23B would be used as a 20% subsidy to be matched by 80% utility money for energy efficiency. The 20% would pay for the "utility profits" and usher in a new way of thinking.

The reason this is better than Homestar can be best summed up by the article below. When the utility sells less electricity, it needs to raise rates to cover its fixed costs. The Federal government would spend its $23B in energy efficiency only to see almost 50% of that be charged back to rate payers in bill increases . . not catalytic.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/florida/story/1325051.html

``It's a balance,'' said Mayco Villafana, FPL spokesman. ``If you do too much energy efficiency, a la what the conservationists are asking for, you are going to increase electric rates. You are reducing consumption but you still have to pay for existing power plants, transmission lines plus any new
construction.''

It's a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma for the utility regulators. They've let the companies start charging customers for new nuclear power and natural
gas-powered generators based on the companies' predictions that Florida needs to double it electricity capacity by 2050. But if conservation reduces demand, will existing customers be forced to pay more?

``How outrageous is that?'' asked Kristin Jacobs, a Broward County commissioner and chairman of the county's Climate Change Task Force. ``We should just continue to stumble along in our wasteful excessive ways?''

You can find out more about Jigar Shah and how the Carbon War Room is fixing market failures to create Climate Wealth at www.carbonwarroom.com

Renewable Energy Reaches over 60% of new capacity additions in 2009

by Jigar Shah, Founder SunEdison and CEO of the Carbon War Room

As wind come out at a robust 9.9GW in 2009, Solar at maybe 600MW, etc, it looks like the zero-emissions folks will again install a majority of incremental MWs. The balance is mostly natural gas a little bit of Coal. Getting this number of 100% by 2012 and then above 100% by 2015 will be critical to achieving emissions reductions in our electricity sector. So what are the barriers:

1) Project Finance -- we have to acknowledge that the arms race that we have on the tax credit side has to be reversed. Natural gas, coal, wind, solar, etc will have to agree to eliminate their Federal Tax Credits. If we can take all fossil fuel credits a phase them out over a few years and allow the wind and solar credit to expire when they are due, project finance would get a lot easier and you could go offshore for the money.

2) Respect -- we are still looking to build new Nuclear, Coal, and other resources when we can show on paper that distributed energy combined with aggressive energy efficiency, smart grid, and storage can compete favorably while creating more jobs. This means that we need the DOE and other credible bodies to start publishing research in this area at an accelerating pace.

3) Liquidity support -- many renewables projects can cost less than $10MM. For these project, efficient access to capital markets are difficult. Using a Fannie Mae like body to buy these projects under fixed rate of return formulas and selling them to Wall Street would help bring liquidity to the system

The technology is ready to meet the price points of the electricity industry, but integration and scaling takes a level of cooperation that we have here-to-for not seen. This can be done without more money from the Federal budget and at a cost that is less than new Coal, new Nuclear, and new Transmission.

Watching this play out will be fun. For more information this is a good report from Black and Veatch.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/175616-rooftop-solar-generation-ready-for-prime-time?source=yahoo

You can find out more about Jigar Shah and the work of this new organization at www.carbonwarroom.com

Obama State of the Union: Clean Energy: 15; God: 2

Today, reading back through President Obama's 2010 State of the Union address I went looking for his discussion of energy and cleantech. I counted Energy with 15 mentions, crushing Healthcare at 7, and losing out to Jobs at 26. Of course, God only got 2 mentions in the final line (1 more than George W. Bush's last state of the union address).

So what exactly did he say?

"To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil.

Read more »

What is Your Water Really Worth?

Hydrocommerce Corner-Where Water & Money Meet

Brought to Investors by http://www.investorideas.com/ and its water investing portal, http://www.water-stocks.com/

January 26, 2010 Edition
By William S. Brennan
Bio and more info: http://www.water-stocks.com/Bill_Brennan/

What is Your Water Really Worth?

A typical day for most adults in the western hemisphere begins with a cup of coffee, a shower and a brush of the teeth before we head of to work for the rest of the day. Most never even give water a second thought as we move about our daily routine since every time we turn the faucet, out gushes a commodity that never seems to end. But what would happen one day if you went to turn the shower on and nothing came out? Or worse the color was dark brown or something unrecognizable that reeked and was visually unappealing? What would you be willing to pay for uninterrupted clean water in the developed world? From an investment perspective, water prices are based on user expectations, failing to reflect the costs of infrastructure and maintenance. A prime example is the Metropolitan Board in Southern California where a 14% price increase did not cover the cost of delivering water, triggering the utility to access its reserves for $182 million. We bring this to light because this is not a one off situation. Water utilities get paid based on usage fees, giving them perverse disincentives to conservation and limiting their ability to invest in new technologies should water stress occur.

Read more »

TVA Expands Renewable Energy and Solar Charging

The smart grid charging of electric cars with renewable energy advances. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory Friday (ORNL) announced that they will deploy solar-assisted charging stations for electric vehicles across the state of Tennessee as part of one of the largest electric transportation projects in U.S. history.

Read more »

Momentum Building for REDD+ Global Market for Forest Carbon

By David Niebauer

Whatever else happened or didn’t happen as a result of the recent Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen, the Global community did take action on slowing the destruction of the world’s tropical forests. Certainly one can argue that we are not doing enough, but getting the “global community” to agree on anything is always a daunting prospect. Consensus does appear to have crystallized around the UNFCCC’s REDD program (Reduced Emissions from the Destruction and Deforestation of the world’s tropical forests). Now termed REDD+, with the addition of sustainable forest management and afforestation/reforestation, momentum continues to build for the use of market mechanisms to slow the destruction of the world’s rainforests.

Read more »

Reach Out and Green Touch Someone

by Richard T. Stuebi

A few weeks ago, the legendary Bell Labs, now the R&D engine behind Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE: ALU), announced the launch of a new global initiative called Green Touch.

The goal of Green Touch is to "create the technologies needed to make communications networks 1000 times more energy efficient than they are today." To put that in perspective, the Green Touch roll-out press release noted that a thousand-fold reduction in energy consumption would power the world's communication networks for three years with the amount of energy now consumed in one day.

Given the likely continuance of exponential demand increases for bandwidth around the globe, the need to make communications technologies radically more energy efficient will be critical -- or else.

The founding members of Green Touch are a who's who of high-technology, including enormous telecoms like AT&T (NYSE: T) and China Mobile, academic research labs such as MIT's Research Laboratory for Electronics and Stanford University's Wireless Systems Labs, and industrial labs (not only Bell Labs but Samsung's Advanced Institute of Technology).

Green Touch is seeking additional collaboration partners, so if you're interested and can contribute materially, it should be a fascinating table at which to sit.

Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.

Is Solar Cheaper than Nuclear?

by Jigar Shah, Founder SunEdison and CEO of the Carbon War Room

This is an interesting article from Greentech Media. It basically is saying that if we are aiming to decarbonize our electricity grid we cannot do it without Nuclear energy. 

Read more »

Investors can watch for the following green stocks coming to market in 2010: CDXS, JKS, DQ, SOLY

Green IPO Watch at Renewableenergystocks.com Reports on Announced IPO’s in Biofuel and Solar


www.RenewableEnergyStocks.com, a leading investor news and research portal for the renewable energy sector within www.Investorideas.com, reports on recent green IPO’s announced in biofuel and solar markets.

Investors can watch for the following green stock listings in 2010: CDXS, JKS, DQ, SOLY.

Read more »

Transitioning the Solar Industry away from Subsidies

By Jigar Shah

What a difference a couple of years make. Two years ago, the solar industry was over subsidized and doing well. Last year, the solar industry fell victim to the financial crisis, but emerged victorious through skill and determination to achieve another year of positive growth -- after many predictions to the contrary. With today's announcement that Germany will likely cut its solar subsidy substantially, many are asking, "what will this mean?"

The answer is that this means that the solar industry is growing up. As the subsidies in Germany are reduced, Germany's global marketshare will also come down. This is a good thing. There are many countries that are looking at solar as a source of growth from South Africa to India to the United States. So, how do we increase demand for solar PV?

Read more »

Ford’s Clean Sweep with Ford Fusion Hybrid and Transit Connect

Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) made a clean sweep by capturing both the North American Car of the Year and North American Truck of the Year awards for the 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid and 2010 Ford Transit Connect, respectively, at the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS). It is only the third time in 17 years that one manufacturer has won both titles. The awards demonstrate Ford’s leadership in hybrid cars and in fuel economy.

The North American Car and Truck of the Year awards recognize vehicles based on factors including innovation, design, safety, handling, driver satisfaction and value for the dollar. A jury of 49 automotive journalists in the United States and Canada vote for the vehicles.
The Fusion Hybrid edged out finalists including the Buick LaCrosse and Volkswagen Golf/GTI to win the North American Car of the Year award. The Fusion Hybrid is also winner of MOTOR TREND Car of the Year. The Fusion Hybrid is #4 on Clean Fleet Report’s Top 10 Hybrids for 2010.

The Transit Connect bested finalists including the Chevrolet Equinox and Subaru Outback to win the North American Truck of the Year award. It also is the second year in a row that Ford has captured the title. Last year, top honors went to the 2009 Ford F-150.

Ford Fusion Hybrid Delivers 39 MPG

The Fusion Hybrid is appealing to those who want a made in America midsized sedan. This roomy 5-seater delivers 39 mpg and 4.7 tons of CO2e per year. The Fusion Hybrid and its first cousin the Mercury Milan Hybrid may travel up to 47 miles per hour in pure electric mode. The Advanced Intake Variable Cam Timing allows for more seamlessly transition between gas and electric modes, making for a smooth and quiet ride. Read about Clean Fleet Report’s Fusion Hybrid test drive.

The Fusion Hybrid also offers drivers a way to be more connected to the hybrid driving experience thanks to Ford’s SmartGauge™ with EcoGuide, a unique instrument cluster execution that helps coach them on how to optimize the performance of their hybrid. The Fusion Hybrid includes Blind Spot Information System (BLIS®), Ford SYNC®, SIRIUS Travel Link™ and more total passenger and luggage capacity than the Toyota Camry.

Despite the slump in overall industry sales, 2009 was a record-breaking year for the Ford Fusion. Sales are at an all-time high, with the Fusion Hybrid accounting for almost 20 percent of total Fusion retail sales. Perhaps even more significant, more than 60 percent of Fusion Hybrid sales have been to customers coming from import brands – mostly Toyota and Honda.

Transit Connect Saves Small Business Money

The Transit Connect was brought to the U.S. to fulfill the unmet needs of small business owners and entrepreneurs, offering them a new vehicle choice with significantly improved fuel economy, generous and accessible cargo space, and the agility and maneuverability to operate in crowded urban areas.

Powered by a 2.0-liter I-4 engine with a four-speed automatic overdrive transmission, the Transit Connect offers double the fuel economy of full-size vans, delivering an EPA-estimated 22 mpg city and 25 mpg highway.

The Transit Connect also has more than double the cargo-carrying capacity of the Chevrolet HHR Panel, making it suitable for a broader range of commercial-use applications. And it offers commercial users a cargo payload of up to 1,600 pounds.

The Transit Connect also is available with the industry-exclusive Ford Work Solutions™, a suite of affordable technologies that provides customers with connectivity, flexibility, visibility and security to better run key aspects of their business. On Transit Connect, Ford Work Solutions delivers three innovative features:
•A wireless in-dash computer that provides full high-speed Internet access, Bluetooth-enabled hands-free calling and navigation. The system also allows customers to print invoices, check inventories and access documents stored on their home or office computer networks right on the job site.
•Tool Link™, a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) asset tracking system that enables customers to maintain detailed real-time inventory of the tools or equipment.
•Crew Chief™, a fleet tracking, telematics and diagnostics system that provides dynamic location and performance data fleet owners need to more efficiently manage their vehicles, quickly dispatch workers to job sites, monitor driver performance for safety and economy, and keep detailed vehicle maintenance records.

Ford is the first major automaker to offer a pure electric with the 2010 Transit Connect battery-electric commercial vehicle. Businesses and governments can deliver and haul goods all day long without ever needing a drop of gasoline.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.

Hope for Haiti - Solar Powered Rural Health Hospitals Saving Lives Now

I was pleasantly surprised by the work that Solar Electric Light Fund has been doing with Paul Farmer and Partners in Health. With over 75% of Haitians unelectrified pre-earthquake, it seems that the central command and control utility hasn't worked too well in the past. With diesel fuel hard to come by, it looks the the solar powered rural health hospital is up and running.

Further, with solar systems able to be up and running almost immediately and at a lower cost today than just 4 years ago, many are buzzing about Haiti being the first country to the repaired using 21st century technologies.

Best Green Tech Innovations of 2009

by Richard T. Stuebi

Last week, E/The Environmental Magazine announced its Best Green Tech Innovations of 2009.

It's unclear what criteria were used to select the winners, but I was impressed by the fact that I had not previously heard of any of these products or technologies. Since they were all news to me, I don't know enough about any of them to have a favorite.

I'm also struck by the observation that the list represents innovation involving large corporations like Ford (NYSE: F) and Sony (NYSE: SNE) as well as tiny start-ups and individual inventors.

I used to pride myself on being pretty well-informed about the cleantech arena, but being unable to remain abreast of developments on so many fronts is a vivid illustration of how robust the cleantech space is becoming. I'll gladly sacrifice the comprehensiveness of my awareness and understanding for increasing velocity from an exploding number of innovators -- including industrial powerhouses -- in the cleantech marketplace.

Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.

The 21st Century will be the Cleantech Century

Dear Friends,

We know 2009 has been a rough year up and down, but we are proud to have had some great highlights to share. And as always, after 9 years in business as one of the leading merchant banks and advisors to the cleantech sector, Jane Capital is looking forward to our 10th Spring and the end of the first decade of the 21st Century (and another year of cleantech blogging!)

And yes, we do eat, sleep and breathe energy, and we do believe that the last century was the century of massive, cheap, available energy, and this one is shaping up to be all about cleantech: better, faster, cleaner energy. It will “take a village”, from natural gas, clean coal, nuclear, and better use of fossil fuels, to IT, carbon, wind, solar, superconductors et al driving us to a new and more efficient future.

A Few Highlights:

Read more »

President Obama Awards $2.3 Billion Tax Credits for Cleantech Jobs

Recovery Act Tax Credits enable $7 Billion in New Manufacturing Projects

President Obama announced on January 8 the award of $2.3 billion in Recovery Act Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credits for clean energy manufacturing projects across the United States. 183 projects in 43 states will create tens of thousands of high quality clean energy jobs and the domestic manufacturing of electric cars, solar, wind, and energy efficiency.

“Building a robust clean energy sector is how we will create the jobs of the future,” said President Obama. “The Recovery Act awards I am announcing today will help close the clean energy gap that has grown between America and other nations while creating good jobs, reducing our carbon emissions and increasing our energy security.” These credits are also an important step towards meeting the President’s goal of doubling the amount of renewable energy the country uses in the next three years with wind turbines and solar panels built right here in the United States.

Read more »

National Cut Your Energy Costs Day

by Richard T. Stuebi

Did you know that yesterday, January 10, was "National Cut Your Energy Costs Day"? Until a couple days ago, I didn't. That is, until the folks at SunRun, a provider of residential solar energy systems, promoted the day by sending out the following blast email:

"Five quick tips on how cut costs and save energy this new year.

1. Power Strips: Plug your TV, computer, and other home electronics into power strips and flip the switch when they’re not in use. Even when appliances are turned off, they’re still running on phantom energy. If you don’t use power strips, remember to unplug your appliances when you’re done with them.

Read more »

Renewables Supply 10 Percent of U.S. Energy

According to the most recent issue of the “Monthly Energy Review” by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), renewable energy (i.e., biofuels, biomass, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, wind) provided 10.51% of domestic U.S. energy production during the first nine months of 2009 – the latest time-frame for which data has been published.

Read more »

Dot's Nice

by Richard T. Stuebi

One of the virtues touted for the so-called "smart grid" of the future is the ability to help customers manage their appliance usage better, and thereby reduce unnecessary energy consumption. However, since people are heavily influenced by economic considerations, fully capturing this opportunity presupposes that customers understand how much money (= energy) they could save by reducing consumption at any moment in time.
As profiled in the January/February 2010 issue of Technology Review, a company called Talon Communications has developed a neat little product called the "edot" to address this issue.

Read more »

Top Electric Car Makers for the United States Market

By John Addison (original post at Clean Fleet Report)

By 2011 year end, competition will be intense for electric car leadership. The Clean Fleet Report Top 10 Electric Car Makers describes our best guess about the market share leaders for delivered plug-in vehicles on the United States roads in 2011, although not necessarily in order of 2011 installed market share.

Read more »

EcoCAR’s Top 10 Green Resolutions of 2010

by Richard T. Stuebi
 
I've been crunched for time over the holiday season, so I've dropped the ball on writing original content. Sorry about that. To fill the gap, I received the following email from Katy Rohlicek representing EcoCAR, which I'm posting verbatim:

"When it comes to making a fresh start at the beginning of the year, we usually listen to 'experts' – leaders, celebrities, doctors, coaches, therapists, etc. In 2010, we say, let’s listen to our youth. Better yet, how about a group of young engineers from 16 universities across North America who are part of a competition to design and build a greener car of the future. They’re part of the EcoCAR Challenge, which means they think about green automotive engineering 24/7. But that wasn’t quite enough – they wanted sustainability to touch all aspects of their lives. So, EcoCAR students from Victoria, Canada to Daytona Beach developed the following list of ten green resolutions to help them, and others, live a more sustainable, eco-friendly life in 2010:

1. Drive smart. We appropriately begin with a no-brainer resolution for the EcoCAR teams. There are many small changes you can make to green your time behind the wheel. Planning trips to avoid traffic and stop lights, maintaining steady and legal speeds, slowly accelerating, limiting use of air conditioning, heated seats, and rear window defoggers, and avoiding unnecessary heavy loads can all improve fuel economy.

Read more »

Personal Rapid Transit

By John Addison (original post at Clean Fleet Report)

Your heart sinks as you watch your missed plane fly away while you are trapped in gridlock. Parking lots are full. More parking lots attract more cars. Streets jam and more gridlock. Public transit, airport buses, shuttles, and taxis can all help.

The best ground transportation solution that I encountered was when I attended a meeting in Chicago. We landed at O’Hare International Airport, walked to our meeting at the Airport Hilton, and then flew back to our homes after the meeting. The next best solution was at Atlanta’s Hartsfield Airport where I took the escalator up from baggage claim, boarded the Marta rail system, and returned to my home in the suburbs. Actually, the best solution was the web conference and collaboration that eliminated the need to fly.

London Heathrow Podcar PRT

People are continuing to fly in record numbers so better ground transportation is a necessity. As London readies for record travelers during the 2012 Olympic Games, Heathrow airport is installing a personal rapid transit in the form of six seat cars that take you from terminal to parking garage on dedicated pathways. Heathrow’s podcars are like horizontal elevators – no driver needed; just push the button.
David Holdcroft, BAA’s (formerly British Airports Authority) PRT Manager states, “This innovative system forms part of BAA’s plan to transform Heathrow, improve the passenger experience and reduce the environmental impact of our operation through the development of cutting edge, green transport solutions.” The Heathrow system is scheduled to start running in spring 2010 and expand to 18 pod cars with 3 stops over a 2.4 mile path.

Read more »

An Evening With Ernest Moniz

by Richard T. Stuebi

Last week, the MIT Club of Northeast Ohio hosted a talk at the Great Lakes Science Center in Cleveland by Professor Ernest Moniz, the Director of the MIT Energy Initiative, and a member of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Over the course of about an hour of spirited commentary and responses to questions, Prof. Moniz made a number of interesting points. A few highlights:

1. Arguably the key challenge facing the energy sector is the virtual monopoly that petroleum has on the transportation sector. Producing more non-petroleum options/alternatives for transportation will be pivotal to a better future. By virtue of its considerable domestic resource and lower carbon intensity, natural gas is an attractive option -- either as a transportation fuel directly (e.g., CNG), or in generating electricity to support electrified vehicles.

Read more »

From Japan: Eco Products Exhibition 2009

It’s that time of the year again where the world gets together to see what we can do about solving energy and climate problems. That’s right, I’m reporting from Tokyo! This is bigger than that thing going on in Denmark.

This year’s Eco Products Exhibition (Dec 10 to 12) was well attended by over 180,000 from all over the world and representative from over 1500 companies, NGOs, and other organizations (note: only 40,000 showed up in Copenhagen, so you know where the party really is!). Eco Products is the largest fair of its kind in Asia and features the most energy efficient technologies for homes, offices, and industries. Here are couple of the highlights.

Ecotwaza
Bringing back the old is the way to go. In pre-industrialized Japan, people were able to live off the resources that were available to them. Instead of the non-stick Teflon pans that are used in the modern kitchen, traditional cast iron (nambu tetsu) was used. Even today, these pans still have numerous advantages over high tech kitchenware. They are extremely durable, conduct heat quickly and evenly, and are completely benign to the environment.

This product and many others are now being marketed by Ecotwaza. I was able to catch up with Reina Otsuka and Nanao Sonobe from this novel company based in Tokyo. They kindly took some time from their busy schedule to talk about their work and their hopes for a sustainable future.

Ms. Otsuka, the president, says the idea of Ecotwaza came while she was studying at the University of California at Berkeley when she realized the number of great environmentally friendly technologies that Japan had to offer but had not been able to market well due to various barriers.

A full version of this interview will be up in a couple weeks.

Zephyr
Can dolphins fly? Apparently Zephyr thinks so. They are developers of the Air Dolphin, a small wind turbine with a tail shaped like that of a dolphin.

In contrast to the big megawatt size turbines that we hear about in the media, these small sized devices are ideal for residences and rural regions that do not have good access to the grid. It has a rated power output of 1 kW with a maximum output of 3.2 kW. Much like the residential solar PV, these generators also require power inverters. In their demonstration, the Sunny Boy was used.

Ricoh
How many times can you reprint paper? According to Ricoh, about a thousand times. They have a developed a plastic sheet that is printed using a thermal printer. With exposure to some heat, the printed sheet becomes blank again. Ideal for applications like ticketing and office documents, this technology is claimed to save paper and energy. It would still be interesting to do a life cycle analysis on the equipment and supplies needed to keep it going.

More Greenbacks for Greentech

By John Addison - original post at Clean Fleet Report

Investments Grow for Electric Cars, Energy Storage, Smart Grid

More venture capital will be invested in innovative greentech firms and more IPOs will happen in 2010 predict some of the world’s smartest venture capitalists and investment bankers at the Venture Summit Silicon Valley. In most circles, greentech is called cleantech, but with the 2009 IPO of A123 leading to a billion dollar valuation, venture capitalists are seeing green.

Cleantech encompasses the growing array of technology, services, and corporations that provide for a future with lower greenhouse gas emissions: energy efficiency, renewable energy, electric cars, smart grids, pure water, and even next generation building materials.

Continued investment is needed to bring us the next generation of batteries, solid state lighting, smart grid components, electric cars, lighter and stronger materials, and solar power so efficient that it makes no sense to build another coal power plant. Greentech is now 25 percent of venture capital investment reported Eric Wesoff, Senior Analyst, Greentech Media. Greentech has become the third major area of investing for the venture capital community that has focused on information technology and life sciences.

2010 IPO and M&A Growth

Forty IPOs of venture-backed firms were predicted for 2010, up from less than ten in 2009. More importantly, 600 venture-backed firms are likely to be purchased in 2010 through mergers and acquisitions (M&A) by large companies eager to expand their total offerings. The AlwaysOn Venture Summit included top private equity executives from Google, Qualcomm, Motorola, and dozens of companies with a history of acquisition. Hallways and lunch tables overflowed with investors, entrepreneurs, and corporate giants pitching, listening, and networking.

The severity of the recent recession has left brilliant ideas unfunded, lithium battery plants delayed, and gigawatts of renewable energy plants without project financing. Innovators at early stages depend of private equity. Venture capitalist raise billions in funds from large university endowments and pension plans who in turn suffered lost billions in the stock market and real estate downturn. Successful 2010 IPOs plus M&A will generate cash for VCs and bring new endowment and pension funds.

Lithium battery maker A123 Systems (AONE) is a poster-child of cleantech IPO success. This year it raised $391 million with an IPO priced higher than expected. A123 has never made money, only had $68 million of revenue last year, and will have less than $90 million revenue this year. Its stock still trades above the offering price with over a billion in market capitalization, even though Chrysler cancelled electric vehicle plans that include A123 batteries. Investors continue to be optimistic about A123 in markets like power tools, grid storage, and automotive.

A123 CFO Mike Rubin explained that the IPO provided important credibility with the battery maker’s major customers. It also gives A123 a strong balance sheet and the ability to fund more R&D and weather difficulties.

Yes, government funding and loans are also critical to American leadership in cleantech. Headquartered in Massachusetts and founded in 2001, A123 was funded initially with a $100,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Energy.

In 2010, it may be IPO offerings like Tesla or Silver Springs Networks that get cleantech investors excited. Stay tuned.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.

SPG Solar CEO vs Bill O'Reilly on Solar

Bill O, the Art of Journalism and Me.
By Tom Rooney, CEO of SPG Solar

Journalism, says the wag, is the art of speaking with absolute authority about something you know nothing about.

Earlier this week, America's most dominant cable TV news host, Bill O'Reilly, of course, took that definition to a new level when he went on a jag about solar power.

Solar power is just too expensive and too complicated for Bill O.

"I'd like to put solar panels on my house," said Bill O . "And heat my house through the sun. I would like to do that for a reasonable amount of money. I don't want to buy the oil every month. They can't do it for a reasonable amount of money, number one.

"And its so complicated ... I can't do it. ... So don't tell me about my grandchildren. If they can figure out the solar panels, they can have them. But its all bunk. It's all bull at this point for a guy like me. ...I want a clean planet. But I'd like the stuff to work."

But in meeting the definition of journalism, Bill O also broke its first rule: If your mother says she loves you, check it out.

Bill O did not.

His curiously uninformed comments came just hours after the Irvine Unified School District selected my company, SPG Solar, to install solar panels on each of its 21 solar panels on 21 of its schools -- the most comprehensive school solar project of its kind.

The district will soon be getting about 45 percent of its energy from solar, as well as a 10 percent reduction in its energy bills.

And all for no money.

People in the business know this works because the cost of buying and installing panels has gone down so much, and the incentives are so strong, that the energy savings from Irvine basically financed the deal.

That's it, Bill O. Nothing expensive or complicated about it.

You want complicated? Go to one of our solar installations at the Far Niente winery in Napa Valley, one of the finest in the world, where we built a solar energy array on top of a pond of water. The panels actually float. The first such project ever built in the world.

Maybe it was a bit challenging to build. But that is what we do.

But as far as running it, all the winery has to do is watch the sun shine and enjoy paying less for energy.

That's it, Bill O.

You want complicated? How about building five acres of solar panels in one of the most desolate -- and beautiful places on earth: Furnace Creek Hotel and Resort in the middle of Death Valley.

Same in Livermore, California, where we installed the largest solar array ever on a movie theater. The movie patrons never even knew we were there.

Whether you are in Death Valley or Napa Valley or anywhere in between, all you have to do is pretty much the same: Just sit back and watch the sun shine.

If the sun doesn't shine, your other power takes over and you don't do anything. You would not even notice, Bill O.

All Bill O has to do with his solar energy system is ask his accountant how much money he would save every month.

Then sit back and smile.

Bill O is fond of telling us that bloviating is his job. So is being informed about how more and more Americans tare taking charge of their energy future with easy, and inexpensive, and simple solar energy systems.

See the O'Reilly video here, about 3:23 into this six minute clip.


Tom Rooney is the President and CEO of SPG Solar, one of the largest solar integrators in the US. You can find SPG at www.SPGSolar.com. Tom Rooney is a guest blogger on CleantechBlog.com, and the opinions stated here are his own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the team at Cleantech Blog.

On Climate-Gate

as posted to Huffington Post


While thousands of climate change scientists, policy-makers and thought-leaders gather in Copenhagen to consider what to do about the future of our planet, most climate change skeptics are stuck on dissecting a scandalous incident that occured in the virtual world last month.


This so-called "Climate-Gate" stems from the efforts of a hacker who accessed a number of files and emails at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, one of the most respected institutions in the world conducting climate science analysis.

The information obtained from the CRU includes a variety of commentary by leading climate scientists that personally disparages high-profile climate skeptics, and includes attempts to coordinate efforts to retaliate against them in various ways. I suppose the bitterness is a natural human reaction to criticism, which has become very personal and nasty in recent years, but it's petty and reflects badly on the scientists: they should be above the fray and mentally/emotionally strong enough to withstand sometimes insulting challenges from others by the virtue of the unquestioned quality of their work.

Of more consequence are the allegations that data was fudged to produce results that misleadingly suggest that the climate is worsening far more than it is in actuality. To the extent there is one, the "smoking gun" of Climate-Gate -- which some skeptics are comparing to the publishing of the formerly-secret Pentagon Papers as a watershed turning the tide against the Vietnam War -- is the following passage in a confirmed email from Prof. Phil Jones, Director of the CRU:

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." (emphases added)

Of course, the climate skeptic community has jumped on this trove of emails with glee. The conspiracy-theorists smell blood. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), who has long dimissed the climate change issue as a hoax, called for hearings on the matter. A variety of anti-climate-change blogs have wondered why mainstream media haven't given sufficient (in their view) coverage to Climate-Gate (see example posting).

Referring back to Prof. Jones' damning email, I personally have no problem with the use of the word "trick". I've used it, and heard it used many times in many contexts, to colloquially describe a series of analytical steps that are completely legitimate but novel and clever to compress what would be a lot of work requiring a lot of time to a little bit of work that can be done quickly and efficiently.

However, I am more troubled by Prof. Jones' use of the highly dubious and damaging phrase "hide the decline", and it's not so easy to completely wash this away. It appears that certain temperature data in question were considered spurious and were dismissed by many as somehow in fundamental error, so another set of data were used as a proxy in its place -- producing a result that showed a greater increase in planetary temperatures.

To be clear, I think there's a lot of science and a lot of data that show -- and still show compellingly -- that something is happening to the climate that is likely to be human-induced. In other words, I don't think that Climate-Gate brings down the entire edifice of climate science -- a stance well-articulated by a recent article in The Economist. But, this particular episode involving Prof. Jones doesn't smell right -- and in fact, as of December 1, Prof. Jones has stepped down as Director of the CRU, pending an investigation. Whether or not the analytic approach and data assumptions were/are valid, it sure gives an appearance that the results were jury-rigged to produce an answer more desirable to the authors.

And this is the point of John Tierney's excellent article in the December 1 New York Times: that the scientists were "oblivious to one of the greatest dangers in the climate-change debate: smug groupthink. These researchers...seem so focused on winning the public-relations war that they exaggerate their certitude -- and ultimately undermine their own cause."

It is inaccurate to claim, as some have, that climate science is "settled". I have long said that climate science is far from certain, and that there are lots of unknowns that merit further study to gain better understanding. I have also said that there probably is enough known about climate change that we should do something about it -- because we'll never have perfect information, just as we never have perfect information about important issues requiring tough choices that we must nevertheless decide upon, such as battle plans (or even going to war in the first place) or rescuing the financial system.

Unfortunately, both sides of the climate debate -- passionate scientists and policy advocates vs. heated skeptics and supporters of the status quo at any cost -- have moved beyond rational debate into the mystical. Indeed, as reported by The Telegraph in the U.K., a British judge has recently ruled that "a belief in man-made climate change ... is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations". In other words, belief in climate change can be considered a religion.

Is this what we've come to: holy wars about the climate?

Let's bring things back to some basic precepts about which no rational person can argue. First, carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas. Second, the human race is pumping roughly 25 billion tons per year of that stuff into our atmosphere -- 25 billion tons per year that wouldn't otherwise be in our atmosphere. Third, the Earth is the only known planet we can plausibly inhabit.

The truth is we really don't know how the carbon dioxide we artificially introduce into the atmosphere will manifest itself in climatic impact. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to conduct this thought-experiment and conclude that such emissions could have an important impact, and might even have a serious and damaging impact, on the long-term well-being of our planet.

Do we really want to keep conducting a global experiment with the only place in the universe where we can live for the foreseeable future? Especially if we can mitigate the experiment at modest economic costs? (By modest, I mean modest relative to the size of expenditures on discretionary human phenomena such as wars and bailouts.)

I take encouragement from hearing a voice of sanity emerge from an unlikely source, cutting through the din of the irrational diatribes in the wake of Climate-Gate. Last week, James Murdoch, the Chairman and CEO of Europe and Asia for News Corporation -- the parent company of Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, two outlets not generally sympathetic to the climate change issue -- wrote a very thoughtful editorial that was published in The Washington Post. His punchline:

"You do not need to believe that all climate science is settled or every prediction or model is perfect to understand the benefits of limiting pollution and transforming our energy policies -- as a gradually declining cap on carbon pollution would do. This is the moment to champion policies that yield new industries, healthy competition, cleaner air and water, freedom from petroleum politics and reduced costs for businesses."

With a simple statement like this, maybe Murdoch can achieve what the climate scientists at CRU and elsewhere have been unable to accomplish with attempts at sophisticated analysis. Given Murdoch's credentials, perhaps some segments of the climate skeptic community can begin to see more clearly the need to adopt energy policies that can improve our economy and our environment, even while acknowledging the limitations of our understanding of climate science.

Let's not waste time investigating the crimes of the robbers behind Climate-Gate, as Richard Graves has suggested on The Huffington Post. Let's move on past Climate-Gate, and take action towards building a better future for ourselves.

Cleantech 2010 Top 10 Predictions

My good friends over at Cleantech Group put out their 10 for 2010 cleantech predictions after Thanskgiving, and after our usual "webside" chats on the future of the sector, chastened me into responding with a set of counter predictions. What's in store for cleantech 2010?

1. Private capital recovers. Nick Parker predicts that private capital will recover and we'll see global cleantech fundraising set records. I like this prediction, and hopefully for more than just projecting the results I'd like to see. But it does feel like a lot of cash on the sidelines, a lot of policy beginning to bite and drive demand, and few other exciting places to put cash. And according to the Cleantech Group who has more data on it than anyone else, the fundraisings are gearing up.

2. Carbon Rules - One of the Cleantech Group's longtime theses has been on the increasing interaction between different commodities (like water and energy and carbon), and they predict 2010 is the year the "non carbon" commodities come to the forefront and the commodity tradeoff debate intensifies. I call this one a bust. It's all about carbon. 2010-2013 is the start of 4 years of carbon mashup. We'll spend it dealing with fallout from Copenhagen, wringing the last drops from Kyoto, beginning in the US to commence planning to handle the EPA reporting rules and the to be finalized in 2010 CARB rules in California, and new EPA regulations and maybe, just maybe, our own private cap and trade scheme. Water still won't yet matter. But we may finally get a picture on how much the carbon overlay on energy will end up biting. And part of the reason I'm calling this a bust is we'll still be in a viciously flat to weak economy in 2010, which means definitely energy, along with most commodity prices, are more likely to be deflationary not inflationary. And when commodity demand is weak, the interactions bite less.

3. Energy efficiency eclipses solar. This is a fascinating prediction on Nick's part, and made me stop and think for a moment. I'm going to cry cautious bust on this one. Solar has carried cleantech almost by itself so far. And I don't think the run is over. And if my prediction above on weak demand growth for energy holds, it feels like it's a bit early to start passing the mantle to energy efficiency, which is traditionally late to the party.

4. I will, however, make a call on solar. I will call solar's emergence into real scale power (RSP) starts in 2010. Real plants, 5MW-100 MW, big enough to produce more than a thimbleful of power. We'll start to get enough of them globally to get real data on costs and issues at scale. And while RSP for solar is still lilliputianland in real energy, 2010 will be the first year solar starts to run with the big dogs. With the massive demand void left by Spain to fill, and the industry learning how to take costs out like a real manufacturing sector does, now we find out if solar's got game. And I think we'll find it will, but it's going to end the year feeling a little battered and bruised on 2010 playground.

5. And I'll make another call on smart grid. Real business, M&A, and maybe even an IPO or two by 3Q or 4Q. Ignore energy efficiency, smart grid will matter in 2010.

6. Biofuels bust. The last petal of the last bloom off the biofuel rose falls by the anniversary of Pearl Harbor in 2010. The cleantech investment community will finally figure out that small scale experiments in pretty labs do not a business make, and that they don't have the horsepower, expertise, or balance sheet to play this big boy game.

In short, I believe that 2010 does mark a watershed year in cleantech. The blue norther of the GFC, as the Australians all refer to the global financial crisis, has slammed straight into a rising warm air mass of cleantech and renewable energy policy, and forced cleantech to grow up. So maybe, just maybe to quote Winston Churchill, for cleantech it's not the end, and not even the beginning of the end, but it is perhaps, the end of the beginning.

Neal Dikeman is a partner at merchant bank Jane Capital Partners, and is Chairman of Carbonflow and Cleantech.org.

Toyota and GM Fight for Plug-in Market

By John Addison, original report at Clean Fleet Report

Electric cars and hybrid cars are prominent here at the LA Auto Show. GM highlighted big plans for the Chevy Volt. Toyota, owning some 65 percent of the U.S. hybrid market, displayed the Prius Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle (PHV) along with a growing family Toyota and Lexus hybrids. The Volt will have triple the electric range of the PHV. Toyota may have a $10,000 price advantage over the Volt.

For extended driving, the Toyota plug-in will normally blend power from the 1.8L gasoline engine and from the 60kW electric motor, just as the Prius does now. The Volt, however, is powered purely with its electric drive system, with a one liter gasoline engine configured in series to act as a generator. Although series designs have been used for years, GM insists that the Volt is in a unique category – the extended range electric vehicle (EREV). What may be unique is consumer confusion. Clean Fleet Report refers to both the Volt and Prius Plug-in as plug-in hybrids.

In 2010, Toyota will put 500 PHV into fleet tests with car sharing services, corporate and government fleets, and some individuals; 150 will be in the United States. At first glance, these PHV look identical to the 2010 Prius. The Prius Plug-in however use lithium-ion batteries instead of the NiMH batteries of the Prius. The PHV can travel 13 miles in electric range at up to 60 miles per hour. The PHV’S 5kWh Panasonic lithium-ion batteries can be recharged in 1.5 hours with 220 three different pack configurations will be tested.

The Volt will have a 40 mile electric range; triple that of the Prius Plug-in. The Volt has a 16kWh battery pack being jointly developed by GM with LG Chem. A 220 volt recharge may take 4 hours. GM 16 kWh hours may add $10,000 to the vehicle cost over Toyota’s 5 kWh hours. Neither automaker has announced sale prices or lease rates.

Both automakers will first emphasize the California market. Most of the nation’s 40,000 electric vehicles are now on the road in California, a state with zero-emission vehicle mandates and greenhouse gas cap-and-trade being implemented.

GM has produced 80 Volt prototypes so far. In late 2010, Chevrolet starts taking orders for the Volt. In his keynote speech, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz estimated 2011 Volt deliveries at 8,000. Early in 2011, 400 Volts will be put into 2 year tests similar to GM’s successful Project Driveway that placed 100 Equinox Fuel Cell vehicles. Four utility partners will deploy 100 Volts each: Southern California Edison, Sacramento Public Utility District, Pacific Gas and Electric, and the Electric Power Research Institute. In parallel with these tests will be dealer sales to consumers and fleets.

These utilities and EPRI have worked closely with automakers to establish the new smart charging standard J1772. They have tested V2G, which will someday allow customers to sell power from the vehicle batteries at peak hours. All utilities have expressed interest in repurposing the lithium batteries in utility applications after 10 years of use in autos.

Plug-in hybrids will more aggressively use batteries than hybrids. Bob Lutz expressed confidence in a 10 year life for Volt batteries; he said the will use an 80/30 charge discharge cycle.

Premium Hybrids

The initial plug-in market share battle will extend up and down the product line of both automakers. Lexus currently offers four hybrid models; two have such good fuel economy that they are part of the Clean Fleet Report Top 10 Hybrids.

In the luxury model, GM may offer the Cadillac Converj plug-in hybrid to leapfrog Lexus. Converj is a concept car with breathtaking design; it has attracted cars at auto shows. The roomy luxury coupe would utilize the Volt drive system.

As competition gets interesting between Toyota and GM, they will have dozens of competitors to worry about. Nissan is actively promoting its battery-electric Leaf. Ford will be offering several models of battery-electric and plug-in hybrid.

What is Next?

Jim Lentz, TMS president, said, “Toyota’s hybrid leadership will continue to expand in the U.S. and around the globe. With 10 new hybrid models between now and 2012 in various global markets, we plan to sell one million gas-electric hybrids per year, worldwide, sometime early in the next decade.”

Toyota has announced that it wants all of its cars to have a hybrid option by 2020. Ford wants the hybrid option for 90 percent of its cars much sooner. Competition will force Toyota to keep moving forward.

Toyota will start volume manufacturing of the Plug-in Prius in 2012 according to Reuters. 2012 manufacturing of 20,000 to 30,000 Prius Plug-ins are expected. Toyota has not yet finalized 2012 pricing. With only a 5kWh battery, Toyota could under price the Chevy Volt, price near the Volt and enjoy profit margins, or offer a PHV with a larger battery. Competition will keep both companies on alert.

In 2012, Toyota will also start selling the less expensive 2-door FT-EV, a pure battery electric vehicle. This little car will probably be similar to the IQ concept car that it has shown for a few years. In the U.S. in 2012 Toyota will face intense EV competition with Nissan, Ford, and dozens of innovative younger companies such as Tesla.

The customer will be the winner in the battle for electric car market share.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.

Cracking the Codes

by Richard T. Stuebi


One of the big line-items in the energy-related provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was energy efficiency. Over $3 billion was allocated to efficiency investments, with the expectation of a 7:1 economic return, based on previous results of the DOE's State Energy Program since its inception in the late 1970's.


Alas, it's becoming evident to some observers (see article) that results will not be so good this time around. Part of this is almost certainly due to declining marginal returns: the $3.1 billion in ARRA efficiency investments is fully 70 times the normal annual investment by DOE in efficiency. Thus, it should be no surprise that returns will be diluted with such a huge one-time spike in funding.


But one of the big, and highly unfortunate, impediments to good returns on these ARRA energy efficiency investments is the obsolescence of building codes around the country. As building professionals know so well, building codes tend to be difficult to change, often due to resistance from builders and trades who prefer to maintain the status quo because...well, just because they're more comfortable with and accustomed to the status quo.

While retrofit opportunities represent a large portion of the potential energy and emissions savings afforded by increased efficiency -- and many of these, as analysis by McKinsey suggests, can be done at negative societal costs -- it will be important to surmount this inertia and opposition to establish new and more stringent baselines for our new building stock, if we're going to tackle our energy and environmental challenges in a permanent fashion.

Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.

United States Half Way to 2020 CO2 Goal

By John Addison (original post in Clean Fleet Report)

For the fifth consecutive year, EPA is reporting an increase in fuel efficiency with a corresponding decrease in average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions for new cars and light duty trucks. Average CO2 emissions have decreased by 39 grams per mile, or 8 percent, and average fuel economy has increased by 1.8 mpg, or 9 percent, since 2004.

“American drivers are increasingly looking for cars that burn cleaner, burn less gas and won’t burn a hole in their wallets,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “We’re working to help accelerate this trend with strong investments in clean energy technology – particularly for the cars and trucks that account for almost 60 percent of greenhouse gases from transportation sources. Cleaner, more efficient vehicles can help reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil, cut harmful pollution, and save people money — and it’s clear that’s what the American car buyer wants.”

Progress surprisingly slowed during the recession. For 2008, the last year for which EPA has final data from automakers, the average fuel economy value was 21.0 miles per gallon (mpg). EPA projects a small improvement in 2009, based on pre-model year sales estimates provided to EPA by automakers, to 21.1 mpg. When the tax payers handed GM and Chrysler $70 billion weren’t we promised more progress than that?

The 10 Best 2010 Hybrids achieve 30 to 50 miles per gallon.

The EPA report confirms that average CO2 emissions have decreased and fuel economy has increased each year beginning in 2005. This positive trend beginning in 2005 reverses a long period of increasing CO2 emissions and decreasing fuel economy from 1987 through 2004, and returns CO2 emissions and fuel economy to levels of the early 1980s.

While the Senate debates if it is possible to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. by 17 percent by 2020 from the 2005 level, Americans already have us half the way there in the transportation sector. Americans are cutting car use with flexwork, car pooling, and transit. Gas guzzlers are being replaced with fuel misers and even electric cars.

In addition, new buildings use much less electricity and heat due to better insulation, HVAC systems, and even LED lighting. Emissions will really dip if we stop subsidizing oil and coal, and put a price on carbon emissions.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.

The Immutable Principles of Energy

by Richard T. Stuebi



Jim Halloran, a financial analyst of the oil/gas industry now with Russell Energy Advisors at Financial America Securities, recently sent along to his various contacts something he came up with called "The Immutable Principles of Energy". I liked it, and thought it was worth passing on verbatim to readers of my blog:



1. Never confuse reserves with production.

2. The biggest, best fields are discovered first.

3. Commodities are priced at the margin – the last 1% dictates the price.

4. E&P companies are serial destroyers of capital. Any appearance to the contrary is a temporary aberration, usually due to hoped-for, unsustainable pricing gains.

5. More than any other sector, time is money with respect to Energy.

6. The more efficient we become in our use of energy, the more we will use (Jevons’ Paradox).

7. The more society expands and demands greater access to energy, the more it will create roadblocks to its delivery.

8. We desire six qualities in our energy sources: 1) Affordability (cheap); 2) Abundance; 3) Reliability; 4) Purity; 5) Universal access; 6) Environmentally friendly. There is no set of circumstances under which all of these can exist simultaneously.

9. There exists at least a “$2 differential” between crude oil and competing sources of energy, regardless of the price of crude oil.

10. In dealing with OPEC, pay attention to what its members do, and give little heed to what they say.

11. Governments look at energy fields as sources of revenue, not as sources of energy:
· Governments have a disincentive to promote efficiency/conservation
· Income streams will be protected as to magnitude
· Long-term energy planning is incompatible with political realities

12. Once a field goes into decline, it will not increase production beyond this peak in the future without capex infusions that will prove to be uneconomic.

13. Crude oil is universal. The price you pay for gasoline is determined more by the small producer in Colombia than by the Wal*Mart on the corner

14. Natural gas is local. The price will continue to be set by continental production even after the lawyers have given up fighting the LNG terminals.

15. The media know nothing about the oil business. The more strident the published predictions of a price extension above (below) extreme levels, the closer the oil market is to a temporary top (bottom)

16. “It’s always something” - Roseanne Roseannadanna



Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.

Electric Cars Facilitate Smart Grid 2.0

By John Addison (original post Clean Fleet Report)

The electric car will facilitate the smart grid and a renewable energy charging infrastructure. The electric car will help make the smart grid relevant to consumers. Right now most cars use inefficient engines fueled with gasoline or diesel. In the coming decades, many cars will use electricity. With a smart grid, renewable energy will do much of the charging.

New electric cars from Nissan, Toyota, GM, Ford and others will use a charging standard J1772. The new charging units at home and work will include a smart meter chip. When a driver plugs-in, charging will follow preferences pre-established by the car owner. Many will prefer to save money and charge at night when rates are cheaper.

States with the earliest adopters of electric cars are also states where utilities face big renewable portfolio standards (RPS). The lowest cost renewable per megawatt is wind, but much of the wind turbine power is delivered at night when winds are most constant. With a smart grid and price incentives, electric cars will be charged off-peak using renewables.

The promise of smart grid electric vehicle charging was discussed at the GreenBeat 2009 conference last week by technology leaders such as Google and Cisco, and utility leaders such as Duke Energy and Southern California Edison. Al Gore presented smart grid and super grid findings from his comprehensive new book about climate solutions – Our Choice.

The current Smart Grid 1.0 is frankly boring. Smart Grid 2.0 promises to make our life better with less use of damaging coal power emissions.

With Smart Grid 1.0, new electric meters are being installed. Utilities save because they no longer need to send people out to read meters. Services can start and stop without rolling trucks to make manual connects and disconnects. Utilities are saving while the consumers pay for the new meters with rate hikes.

Electric utility industry has shifted from years of falling costs to rising costs. Utilities need to shift energy use and vehicle charging off-peak to avoid unnecessary investments in expensive peaking power plants. A smart grid is needed to fully utilize renewable energy and moderate fossil fuel emissions.

Smart Grid 2.0 could help some people over $1,000 per year by automating their preferences in heating, cooling, running smart appliances, and even doing jobs like running the dishwasher when excess renewable energy is available. Energy efficiency and demand management is already saving some enterprises millions per year. Most state public utility commissions (PUC) are afraid of implementing consumer time-of-use (TOU) pricing to give people the incentive to use energy when it is plentiful not scarce. The latest class action lawsuit hardly encourages PUCs to act more boldly.

Public utility commissions are more willing to allow pricing incentives for vehicle charging. Electric cars will help move us to Smart Grid 2.0. Through web browsers, smartphones, and vehicle displays, drivers will select smart charging preferences and get feedback on how to use less electricity and save money. Early electric cars will cost more than their gasoline counterparts, but their electric charging will cost a fraction of the cost of gasoline fill-ups.

Currently, there are only 40,000 electric cars running in the United States. As exciting new offerings are being tested and sold, 1.5 million electric cars are expected in the U.S. by 2015 presented Sharon Allan, the Senior Executive, North American Smart Grid Practice, for Accenture.

Charging these electric cars will help transform the promise of a smart grid into a convenient cost-saving reality.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.

Mercury Rising

by Richard T. Stuebi


Unlike some other environmental issues, there is virtually no controversy or skepticism about the perils of mercury in the environment. Not only has mercury been known for centuries to be highly poisonous, it’s also increasingly linked to other physiological ills, including some speculation in recent years that mercury is related to certain neurological disorders.

Despite the breadth of constituencies concerned about mercury pollution, it’s evident that we have a long way to go. A report just issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that mercury concentrations exceeded safe levels at 49% of U.S. lakes and reservoirs sampled during 2000-2003.

Where does all this mercury in our water come from? Sources can be classified into two groups. One is legacy industrial facilities from days of yore, in which mercury was either used in or generated as a by-product of the core production process. Although many of these facilities are now shut down, the mercury often lingers at these sites, even after remediation approaches and efforts have been pursued. Over time, the mercury finds its way into aquifers underground or nearby rivers and streams.

The other group of sources is related to coal use. Mercury is a trace element in most hydrocarbons, but especially in coal. Thus, where it is mined or stored in a pile, rainfall leaches mercury from the coal on the ground. And, when it is burned – mainly, at powerplants – mercury emissions come out the smokestack into the air, only to fall somewhere else downwind in a future rainstorm. Inevitably, the mercury ends up in the water – somewhere, someway, somehow.

Related to coal burning, the EPA is cracking down, via its upcoming Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), which aims to drive a 70% reduction in mercury air emissions from large point sources. Several mercury emission control technologies are under development, including those by companies such as Albemarle and Amended Silicates.

But, there’s a problem: much of the rest of the world won’t be subject to strict mercury emissions limits, so U.S. water supplies will still be fed new sources of mercury from elsewhere (such as China, which is adding new coal powerplants weekly absent any mercury control technologies), since mercury emissions can stay airborne for a long time. In any event, we’re still exposed to mercury run-off from coal mines and coal piles – plus all of those legacy industrial sites.

Historically, the main approach for dealing with mercury in water streams has not actually involved taking mercury out of the water, but rather introducing large volumes of clean water to reduce overall concentration levels. To employ an old adage from the water industry: “the solution to pollution is dilution”.

In mathematical terms, instead of reducing the numerator, dilution involves massively increasing the denominator. But that approach can only go so far. For example, current EPA limits stipulate that all natural or manmade water streams feeding into the Great Lakes can have mercury concentration levels no higher than 1.3 parts per trillion (ppt). Given some of the nasty sources in the old industrial heartland, enormous volumes of clean water would need to be introduced to reduce concentrations of some of the polluted sources to permitted levels. So, let’s just say that something less than 100% of the water streams flowing into the Great Lakes are in mercury compliance.

Why not just extract the mercury from water? Until recently, only activated carbon has been known to be effective as an agent for removing mercury – but it leeches too, so once the carbon has adsorbed the mercury, it must be dealt with as a hazardous waste, implying expensive disposal procedures. And, carbon quickly saturates with mercury, so lots of carbon is required. All told, a very expensive process.

Because mercury remediation in water has generally been unsatisfactory from an economic (and sometimes also from an environmental) perspective, regulators have often been rather lenient in addressing water streams where mercury levels are above desirable (or even required) levels. Regulators rarely seek to be “bad guys”, so they tend to refrain from forcing corporations to undertake compliance actions that risk putting industrial facilities out of business, thereby eliminating major employers and tax bases – often in poor rural areas. Instead, variances and waivers are often issued, allowing non-compliance to continue.

A good solution for cost-effective removal of mercury from water may now finally be at hand. A Cleveland-area company named MAR Systems has developed a proprietary material of abundant and low-cost supply to use in lieu of activated carbon that almost instantaneously achieves very high (95+%) mercury capture and binds the mercury so that it can be disposed as ordinary waste. The fundamental intellectual property of MAR Systems is based on research undertaken by the EPA itself.

(Full disclosure: Early Stage Partners, the venture capital firm that I work with, was sufficiently impressed with the MAR Systems technology that it recently made an equity investment in the company, and I represent ESP on the Board of MAR Systems.)

Perhaps now the rising concern about mercury can be matched by a corresponding increase of remedial action, driving towards full compliance with the rules and regulations that are already on the books.





Richard T. Stuebi is a founding principal of the advanced energy initiative at NorTech, where he is on loan from The Cleveland Foundation as its Fellow of Energy and Environmental Advancement. He is also a Managing Director in charge of cleantech investment activities at Early Stage Partners, a Cleveland-based venture capital firm.