Energy Exchange

Latino Support Surges for the Environment

By Jorge Madrid / Published: October 12, 2012

Wind turbine - renewable energy sourceCalifornia lawmakers take notice: Latino voters want a strong economy AND a clean environment, two things they believe are not mutually exclusive.

A new poll released by the California League of Conservation Voters finds that an overwhelming 90 percent of Latino voters believe that the state can “protect the environment and create jobs at the same time.”  This number mirrors national trends among Latino voters, including a recent national poll by the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) and the Sierra Club, which found that 90 percent of surveyed voters believe that protecting land and water resources is “critical to the economy.” Read More »

Also posted in California, Clean Energy, General, Renewable Energy, State / Comments are closed

Electric Utilities – An Industry In Transition

By Greg Andeck / Published: July 11, 2012

The recent merger of Duke Energy and Progress Energy represents yet another turning point for the electric utility sector, with significant implications for public health and the environment.  Duke’s six-state footprint – Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, North Carolina and South Carolina – offers it an opportunity to lead the way on clean energy deployment.  The question is: Will the new Duke Energy – now the largest utility in the country – harness its size and scale to accelerate investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy, or stay anchored to the past?  EDF’s partnerships with Wal-Mart, FedEx and McDonalds have shown that when large companies are motivated, they are a powerful force for change.  But change doesn’t come easily.  It requires vision, leadership and a constant willingness to innovate.

This is true not just for Duke Energy, but for electric utilities around the country.  Over the past two years, four of the five largest investor-owned utilities have experienced a merger or change in the CEO role – AEP, Duke, Exelon and Southern Co.  The steps taken by these companies and their leadership will have a profound impact on our antiquated electric utility grid, human health and the environment.  The most visionary utility companies will do three things exceedingly well: 

1.       Get out ahead of environmental regulation

In 2002, Duke Energy supported efforts to tackle power plant pollution in North Carolina by supporting the “Clean Smokestacks Act.”  Xcel Energy followed a similar model in Colorado and endorsed the “Clean Air Clean Jobs Act.”  These landmark laws significantly accelerated clean-up of the dirtiest power plants in those two states and made it possible for the utilities to recover the costs of their investments.  It also enabled Duke and Excel to take early steps to modernize their fleets and prepare for future federal clean air requirements.  As a result of early actions, both companies are well-positioned for EPA’s recent Clean Air Rules – unlike the utility giant AEP, which continues to delay critical human health protections.  The world’s most successful companies skate to where the puck is headed, not to where it is, and are more competitive as a result.

2.       Treat efficiency and smart grid investments as new revenue centers, not side projects

The fact is that most electric utilities still see energy efficiency investments as side projects separate from their core business – generating power.  Without state building codes or energy efficiency standards in place, utility investment in energy efficiency remains low.  The reason is simple.  Even in states with decoupled rate structures in place, building nuclear plants is more profitable than energy efficiency projects.  Large generating plants require a large investment with a guaranteed rate of return over a long project lifetime.  In comparison, energy efficiency projects are generally small, often have an uncertain return and a short project life.  EDF is working with leading energy companies and regulators to craft new incentive models that make efficiency investments attractive, but utility companies must be willing to fundamentally alter their business models.      

3.       See competition as opportunity

Even in highly regulated markets, new market entrants and competitors are beginning to change the face of utilities with strong monopoly power.  The costs of solar panels have dropped by over a third in the past few years, making solar energy cost competitive with retail electricity prices in many parts of the country.  Companies like SolarCity are even financing and then leasing solar systems to home owners, enabling cash-strapped customers to reduce their dependence on the grid.  Hundreds of companies now exist to help all kinds of customers reduce their energy bills and dependence on electric utilities.  (I should know – I just insulated my attic and crawl space – and am already benefitting from lower electric bills.) 

Utility companies that help bring energy efficiency and renewable energy to market can retain ownership of environmental attributes (like renewable energy credits) and earn new revenue streams.  Otherwise, those benefits are likely to go to third parties or customers.  Smart utilities recognize the threat that this small, yet growing base of companies provides to their business model, and aim to bring technologies and services to market faster than new competitors.  Rather than trying to delay the inevitable, savvy utility leaders make their companies part of the solution – and profit from doing so.  Companies like San Antonio’s CPS Energy are making this idea a reality through partnerships with a wide range of service providers.

The next generation of electric utilities and their leaders must run their businesses differently than their predecessors or risk being left behind.  Just like the once monopoly-oriented telecom industry, those companies that are willing to adapt and transition to this new energy paradigm will prosper and be well rewarded.

Also posted in Energy Efficiency, Grid Modernization, North Carolina, Utility Business Models / Read 1 Response

Do Shale Gas Activities Play A Role In Rising Ozone Levels?

By Elena Craft, PhD / Published: July 10, 2012

This commentary was originally posted on the EDF Texas Clean Air Matters Blog.

Source: AFP

As we continue seeking relief from rising temperatures this month, it’s also time to be on the watch for ozone alerts. The annual Texas smog season – April 1 through October – already appears to be in full swing this year with numerous counties around the state exceeding health-based ozone concentrations many times since March.

Just last week, the Houston Chronicle highlighted the magnitude of ozone exceedances that the area hasn’t seen since 2003. Additionally, the month of May was the nation’s “smoggiest” in the past five years according to a recent report released by Clean Air Watch. Texas ranked second, surpassed only by California, for the most Code Red and Code Orange days so far in 2012, with 18 days and 27 days respectively.

Ozone-forming pollution is emitted by cars, refineries and various industrial plants. As more Texans begin to see shale gas drilling rigs pop up around them, many are asking the question: Could emissions from natural gas and oil operations significantly contribute to ground-level ozone? The answer is an unequivocal yes.

The Role of Natural Gas and Oil in Rising Ozone Levels

While burning natural gas produces less smog-forming pollution than coal combustion but more than renewable energy generation, much of the equipment used in the drilling, production, processing and transporting of natural gas and oil produces significant amounts of such pollution. This equipment releases volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which combine in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone or “smog.” According to the state of Colorado, natural gas and oil operations were the largest source of ozone-forming pollution, VOCs and NOx in 2008.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has reported that storage tanks used in the exploration and production of natural gas and oil are the largest source of VOCs in the Barnett Shale. Recently, there have been additional concerns that San Antonio may not meet federal ozone standards due to Eagle Ford Shale development. Peter Bella, natural resources director at the Alamo Area Council of Governments, told the Houston Chronicle that the city is “right on the edge of nonattainment.”

Ozone concentrations comparable to those recorded in some of the most heavily polluted U.S. cities have been measured in rural parts of Wyoming and Utah, where little other industrial activity occurs:

It’s important to note, however, that ozone monitoring does not exist in many oil and gas development areas, so we don’t know the full extent of the potential problem. For instance, though the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has committed to start monitoring in the Eagle Ford, there is not currently sufficient monitoring to characterize ozone problems in the area.

Protection of Human Health

As natural gas and oil development expands into new regions, adverse air impacts are likely to follow, absent sufficient emissions controls. It is crucial for states to have strong standards in place, especially for a state such as Texas, which experienced exponential production increases in a short period time. The Eagle Ford Shale alone saw a 432 percent increase in natural gas production from 2010 to 2011.

We are happy to report that EPA recently finalized clean air measures that will serve as an important first step in reducing harmful pollution discharged from a variety of oil and natural gas activities. In fact, last month, EDF President Fred Krupp testified before the U.S. Senate in support of these new clean air standards, which will result in significant reductions in smog-forming pollutants and hazardous air pollutants like benzene, a known carcinogen. As a co-benefit, the standards will also reduce methane, a potent climate forcer.

In his testimony, he said “these common sense measures are a win-win: they reduce pollution, conserve valuable domestic energy resources, and in some cases, actually save producers money.” He added that it was “critical that we build on these clean air measures if our nation is to fulfill the President’s promise in his State of the Union to develop natural gas without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.”

While mounting evidence continues to link natural gas drilling with rising ozone levels, it is important to remember why we should care in the first place:

  • Ozone has been linked to a host of maladies, including premature mortality, heart failure, increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits for respiratory causes among children and adults with pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma and inflammation of the lung, and possible long-term damage to the lungs.
  • Children, the elderly, and people with existing respiratory conditions are the most at risk from ozone pollution.
  • Ozone also damages crops and ecosystems. Ozone is one of the most phytotoxic air pollutants – causing damage to vegetation in national parks and wilderness areas, especially in mountain regions and to valuable crops.
  • Ozone pollution also contributes to climate change. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), ozone is the third-largest contributor to climate change after carbon dioxide and methane.

In the end, we’re talking about the protection of human health as well as our entire planet. Continue to visit this blog for updates on rising ozone levels in our state, as well as other vital information related to Texas air quality.

Also posted in Natural Gas, Texas / Tagged | Read 2 Responses

Saving Lives By Upgrading Buildings

By Andy Darrell / Published: June 13, 2012

NYC Government, Private Sector and Civic Groups Collaborate to Cut NYC’s Soot Pollution from Heating Oil 50% by 2013

At a press conference in the Bronx today, EDF stood with leaders in government, finance and real estate to launch an unprecedented partnership to upgrade thousands of buildings in New York City to clean heating fuel and greater efficiency, with the goal of cutting soot pollution in the most polluted neighborhoods.

EDF President Fred Krupp said “The heating oils used in one percent of New York City buildings create more soot pollution than all the cars and trucks in the City combined – that’s why upgrading these buildings to cleaner heating fuel is the single largest step New Yorkers can take to solve local air pollution.”

This project can only set such ambitious goals – and win – because the right stakeholders are at the table to get it done.  Everyone is doing their part: 

  • Government is setting background regulations in a way that gives buildings flexibility on how to achieve the pollution reductions;
  • Real estate leaders (from supers to landlords and managers) are “doing the math” for their buildings to find the most cost-effective path to solutions that both cut heating costs and reduce pollution;
  • Utilities and fuel providers are expanding their services to deliver a wider range of cleaner fuels — from low-sulfur oil to biodiesel and natural gas to energy efficiency upgrades; 
  • Banks , entrepreneurs and local government are stepping up to provide financing to buildings that need it in order to swap equipment that can handle the cleaner fuels; and
  • EDF (and other non-profits) are organizing reams of data to be actionable by government and the private sector, doing outreach at the community level and making the health and business case.

In fact, today’s announcement puts almost $100 million on the table to help buildings take advantage of clean fuels and technologies.  This financing, made possible by  JP Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, Hudson Valley Bank, the New York City Energy Efficiency Corporation, and the Community Preservation Corporation, will target low- and moderate- income buildings.

Leading up to this announcement, this teamwork has already resulted in 450 buildings upgraded, even before the launch.  It’s one of the largest clean energy projects for buildings anywhere.  We expect over a thousand more by the end of the year; and by targeting the most polluting buildings, we will cut pollution from heating oil in half by the end of next year.

Buildings from the legendary Beresford on Central Park West, to St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx are on track.  I believe that this collaboration is a powerful model for cities around the world.  By bringing together government, real estate, finance, utilities, advocates and community leaders, we’re finding practical solutions that work for health, for the planet and for today’s economy.

As New Yorkers, 80% of our carbon footprint is the result of the energy used in our buildings.  Mega-cities around the world are huge ecosystems of buildings: imagine if we could take this model of collaboration to scale, across the U.S. and the world.  Next week, leaders are gathering in Rio to work on global solutions to help save the planet.  I hope they look to what we’ve accomplished, by working together, here in New York City.

For more information about Clean Heat, see NYC Clean Heat’s webpage and EDF’s website describing the background and progress so far.

Also posted in Energy Efficiency, New York / Tagged | Comments are closed

Guest Blog: The Devil In The Design – Energy And Climate Policy Design Matters More Than You Might Think

By EDF Blogs / Published: April 23, 2012

By: Guest Blogger Joe Indvik, ICF International

Policy design matters. But all too often, this notion is ignored by political pundits and belittled by policymakers in favor of flashy claims about the morality of a policy type. Like the latest sports car, a policy is usually touted as either a gem or a dud based on its superficial image, with only marginal public interest in looking at what’s actually under the hood. On the contrary, data-driven analysis of the inner workings of policy design will be the key to smart solutions on the road ahead for climate and energy policy the U.S.

The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill of 2009 is a prime example. Claims about this former centerpiece of the American climate policy debate ran the gamut of dramatic generalization. They ranged from accusations of a job-killing socialist scheme that “would hurt families, business and farmers—basically anyone who drives a car and flips a light switch” to claims from hopeful environmentalists that any cap would be better than nothing.  Discussion on the actual design of the bill was all but absent from the limelight.  Energy policy discourse is often dominated by these combative back-and-forths, which focus on oversimplified notions of whether a policy would be good for the country while glossing over the practical nuances that make all the difference. Read More »

Also posted in Renewable Energy / Tagged , , , , , , , | Read 4 Responses

General Motors Reposts EDF, Revokes The Heartland Institute

By Marita Mirzatuny / Published: April 9, 2012

(Source: www.inhabitat.com)

Did EDF’s own Jamie Fine and Colin Meehan have a little influence on General Motors (GM)? Perhaps? Just a few days after GM reposted on their website a blog written by Jamie and Colin on the EDF Energy Exchange explaining the Chevy Volt’s brief production suspension and emphasizing it is not a reason to worry about the future of electric vehicles (EVs), GM decides to change course on climate change. Whereas once they were a denier by proxy, they have now seen the light. On Friday, GM announced they are pulling funding from the climate-denial group the Heartland Institute, an industry front group with contributors like Charles Koch and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

This announcement came after GM’s CEO Dan Akerson gave a speech last month stating that they are operating under the assumption that climate change is happening. This new messaging for GM is now consistent with their advances in alternative auto technologies such as the Volt. It would be difficult for many consumers to choose the Volt while wondering why GM takes those dollars – $45,000 over the last 3 years including 2012 – and funds active climate deniers like the Heartland Institute.

As we told you a few weeks ago, the recent pause in production of the Volt is not a reason to worry. Despite not reaching their rather optimistic sales projections, the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf are actually beating the sales history of their hybrid cousins. When the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight were offered as the first commercially available hybrids in 2000, only 9,350 cars were sold. The Prius is now among the best selling cars in the U.S. with over 2 million vehicles on the road. Meanwhile just last Friday, GM announced that record Volt sales in March are reportedly leading them to consider ramping up production. Change takes time and if the Volt is already outpacing its hybrid competitors, we can potentially expect millions of Volts on the road in the next decade. But you wouldn’t believe that if you listened to the naysayers.

Maybe after being on the receiving end of faux alarmists – who are all too excited to write the obituary for “Government Motors” and a fossil free future – GM is rethinking its support for groups that ignore the truth and distort facts just the same.

Also posted in Electric Vehicles / Comments are closed