Greenpeace in Chicago

On my walk back to my hotel after work today I ran into several members of Greenpeace's street team who were in town for the opening up of a new Greenpeace office in the windy city. I talked to one volunteer, Johnny, for several minutes on a number of topics, several from the posts on this blog, while he opened my eyes to several environmental issues I was unaware. Jonny Henderson (far left in picture), who hailed from the Los Angeles area, filled me in on the Trash Vortex that is killing wildlife and destroying the environment and beaches of the west coast. How did it get this bad?

We also touched briefly upon politics and he agreed with me that the Governor of his home state, while being a little over the top, is doing great things to lead the green movement. We also agreed on the dangers of liquid coal and how our politicians don't get it when it comes to ethanol, but I don't think Jonny was as keen on Wal-marts new environmentally bent. I told him to at least wait until we see if Wal-Mart does indeed put its money where its mouth is.

Oh, and I signed up to be a donating member of Greenpeace. Up until today I wasn't too aware of their purpose and initiatives since it seems that they are all over the place, but I was impressed with some of the big wins they've had when it comes to changing the habits and practices of big corporations like Coca-Cola, Dell Computer, Motorola, among many others. To donate please follow this link.

Save the Environment - reuse your towels!

I love how serious all of these big corporations are taking climate change but seeing this message hanging from the towel rack in my room at the Wyndham Hotel made me wonder ...are these companies genuinely interested in saving the environment or are they using the environment as an excuse to cut corners and save a few bucks - or worse - are they using it only in their marketing but not in their daily operations - like the big oil companies.

In the case of Wyndham hotels - their request for their guests to reuse their towels seems to be authentic. According to some research I did on the internet the hotel chain has had this practice in place as far back as 2002 or 2003 - long before the green "boom."

Is it possible that some financial analyst or marketer approached management and said "hey - this would be a great way to save money AND market the company as environmentally responsible!". Certainly. I myself was once a financial analyst who proposed investment in solar power at the company I worked for. Not only did I have to do the spreadsheet analysis but I had to stress to marketing how it was a "win win" since we would save millions of dollars over the years while simultaneously improving our public image. That is the reality of green business - it takes one person who is passionate to get the ball rolling - myself in this example - but it takes the selling of the idea to others who may be less passionate and who are the ones calling the shots.

So - does it matter if a business is implementing green practices because it wants to save money rather than doing it solely for the sake of saving the environment? Well, it would be nice if this was a perfect world and everyone was in it for the right reasons, but the fact is that they are doing something that will help save the environment. Regardless of their motives it is still probably more than they would have done in the past. Actually going green is better than just saying you are going green and not following through on that claim.

Summary of Corporate Climate Response Conference in London

Rohit Bhargava wrote a nice summary of the event over at the CCR blog

"Below is a wrap up of the event and some central themes that may offer a useful summary for those looking to plan or do more within their own organizations for climate response. Perhaps it will also serve as a look forward at the next Corporate Climate Response event in Chicago later this year:

1. Reinventing Waste - Several of the best ideas from the event centered around reinventing the idea of what we call “waste” and considering it more in terms of “byproducts.” This idea was echoed through a discussion of heat and power and the insight that the amount of heat generated through transport in the UK is nearly equivalent to the amount of heat required to supply for current demand. The challenge is how to get it from one place to the other.
2. Low Carbon Does Not Equal Low Fat - A spirited discussion ensued on the topic of whether consumers may believe that simply because food products are farmed, packaged and shipped in an environmentally friendly way - they are automatically healthier. This, of course, is not true - but the smart marketers may see an opportunity in this. Whether or not Grove Mill’s zero carbon wine tasted sweeter or cleaner is not the point. In marketing where you are selling the story, the low carbon story is becoming more and more appealing to consumers.
3. Carbon Credits Are Misunderstood - This was a nearly universal theme that was shared by most panelists, speakers and even attendees. Consumers do not understand carbon credits as they work today, and therefore are as likely to see them as a “get out of jail free” card for companies, as we they are to see it as a beneficial effort for funding environmentally friendly and sustainable projects. The only solution is to offer more transparency to consumers about what these carbon credits actually buy. The credits may be virtual in nature, but seeing images of a carbon farm that is funded by these credits is very real. The industry must do a better job of demonstrating these efforts to counter the skepticism from consumers (and from much of the media).
4. Budget Is Not A Barrier- Perhaps the most encouraging part of the entire discussion was the refrain repeated from many speakers about how getting approval for major capital expenditures need not be the only way to affect change. The Church of England is advocating for each parish to go through a checklist and make changes to save energy and therefore saving money. Marks & Spencer is saving millions of pounds by switching from curved fridges in certain store sections to straight fridges. BT is working to change an outdated perception about the required level of cooling in datacenters. Each of these are low cost efforts in terms of expenses, but potentially yield big savings and impact on the environment.

At the end of the entire event, one is left with a sense of hope that there is much businesses can do without the necessity of spending huge amounts of money to make a change in their current processes. Everyone is aiming for a target of reduction from 30% to 50% of current levels … which, if anything, simply demonstrates how much wastage there is in the system that we have the opportunity to change. Climate change initiatives do not have to be painful or expensive. They simply need to be made a priority"


Video clip of Andrew Slavin's summary of the CCR

Corporate Climate Response - Live

Check out Ogilvy PR's live blogging from the 3 day Corporate Climate Response conference that ends today, May 31st.

http://www.climateresponseblog.com

Presidential Candidates need to Emulate the Governator on the Environment

In an Op-Ed piece in today's Washington Post, Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jodi Rell blast the federal government for its failure to take the lead on global warming regulations and for standing in the way of states such as California and Connecticut who want emissions regulations that are more aggressive than the EPA recommendations.

This is yet another gutsy move by Gov. Schwarzenegger as he continues to be the maverick of the Republican party. He is taking heat from conservatives and those on the right for being "soft" on the environment, or should I say for believing the Global Warming "myth." Just like we say with Ron Paul's remarks on terrorism during last week's Republican debate in South Carolina, most of the candidates are out of touch with what the public. Old school partisanship is out. Standing up for what is right and bucking your party line is no longer taboo (unless you are Joe Lieberman).

Gov. Schwarzenegger's leadership on the environment is something that is severely lacking from the political debate. Is anyone else sick about Iraq and Abortion dominating these debates? What about the environment? What about energy independence? How about education? Iraq was last election. We need this election to be about our future, about the critical issues where the United States are falling behind in the global economy. Education and the Environment are two issues that have hardly been mentioned during this first phase of the presidential primaries. We need strong leadership and candidates who have done more than just play lip service to alternative energy.

This is not an endorsement but I strongly believe that Governor Bill Richardson is one of the few candidates who actually stands out when it comes to green energy initiatives. Unfortunately, money runs these elections and Richardson cannot touch the fund raising prowess of the big three democratic hopefuls. Most people do not even know who he is! Although I don't see him beating Edwards, Clinton, or Obama for the presidential nod I think Richardson would be the best VP candidate on the democratic ticket. He brings more experience to the table than the three combined. I'll have more on the Presidential candidates and their green policies (hey Iowans - McCain really does hate ethanol) down the road after the field starts to whittle down.

Potential Solar Breakthrough Could be Around the Corner

As some of you know, I am a huge fan of Solar Thermal technology, and although some companies such as Stirling Energy Systems have solar thermal plants currently under construction, the energy produced by these large scale solar plants will still be more expensive than electricity produced by coal fired plants. Last week at the Clean Energy Venture Summit in Austin Texas, Solar Thermal company Asura presented a technology it is currently testing that may be able to store the excess energy it produces from its solar thermal arrays. This could be huge!

Solar electricity is currently only feasible during peak usage periods but the capability to store energy for the hours when the sun is not shining could mean that solar electricity would finally be competitive with electricity produced by coal power plants. I am betting that electricity from coal fired plants will eventually go up due to the utilities passing on the costs of meeting emissions regulations. Unless we finally have a breakthrough in Nuclear waste storage or CO2 ground storage we are going to have to rely on coal plants for the majority of our electricity demands. This is not good. Coal plants are probably the biggest culprit for climate change, smog, and pollution; and even though they talk a big game about reducing pollution they know that there is no competition for cheap electricity, which is why there will be 30 or 40 new coal plants built over the next couple years in the US. That could change if we can see a major breakthrough such as solar thermal storage. The amount of venture capital going into clean tech and solar start-ups means that we are almost certain to see a breakthrough eventually.

My question is this, and I am kind of switching gears here:

When will our government and policy makers stop drinking the ethanol cool-aid and start backing a truly clean technology without the negative consequences of corn based ethanol.

Besides high costs there is no downside to solar energy. There are tax credits for businesses and residences for photovoltaics but that has proven to be cost effective in places such as California which has enough sun hours and incentives to make it a worthy investment. I think the key is getting the incentives to the companies and technologies that are upstream so that customers can use solar produced electricity regardless of their location. The government needs to require utilities to get more of their production from clean tech companies such as SES and Auras and they need to make the deadline to meet that threshold sooner than 2020. They should also make the threshold for clean energy production even higher for dirty coal companies.


read more at CNET | digg story

More Candor, Less Pander

This week I need to talk about something that has been greatly irritating me. In the wake of the first two debates for what looks like will be a very long road to the presidency, you can clearly start to hear the political shape shifting that candidates can't seem to stop themselves from doing. This shape shifting is the ambivalent stance they take on issues so they can't be pinned down as being pro or against a certain issue. This is normal behavior but, it can't be tolerated when it comes to pushing forward to save our planet and ourselves.

Recently when certain politicians have been asked "Do you believe in global warming?" they give the type of response that acknowledges that the planet's temperature is rising, and they want to do all they can to help but, are still not convinced that humans are causing this change. What!!!!

Here is an example, Listen to the end of this clip from a presidential candidate. He says "blaming humans for enjoying the environment is extreme"

Maybe his idea of enjoying the environment is pumping extreme amounts of carbon emissions into the atmosphere, dumping waste into our oceans, cutting down rain forests, etc... My concept of enjoyment is a little different.

There is a major problem with the argument that humans can't be blamed for our environmental problems, and we need to call politicians out on it. The problem is that if you are unwilling to identify human behavior as the cause for the environmental problems then you remove yourself of any obligation to change human behavior.

No problem can be approached or solved without identifying the cause of the problem. Yes, I know it sucks to have to change our routine of energy and resource waste that we humans are so used to but, the alternative is much worse.

Going green should not be a divisive political issue. The only reason some candidates are unwilling to blame humans for environmental change is because they are pandering to their corporate interests that may have to change the way they are doing business. That is why instead of pandering we need leaders who will speak with candor about the fact that "yes" we humans caused the problems and now we need to change them.

If we can't agree politically on this issue at least, I'm sorry to say but it is a very sad time in our country's history.

By 2020, we'll all be dead.

"A key Senate committee today adopted a fuel-efficiency plan that would require automakers' products to average 35 miles per gallon by 2020."

Instead of taking action to drastically improve their emissions I am sure the auto industry will instead spend the money on lobbyists to fight the new fuel efficiency proposal adopted by the Senate Commerce Committee today.

The problem with the proposal is that is it 13 years away. By 2020 we'll all be dead from either global warming or nuclear annihilation. Why not be more aggressive and say 2015?

By the way, big ups to Barack Obama, one of the few presidential candidates with the stones to go to Detroit and give the auto industry an earful on how they screwed up and need to change. His plan to trade their production of more fuel efficient vehicles in exchange for assistance with their health care expenses in an interesting one. The government is going to bail these guys out anyways when they go under, so why not get something in exchange for their assistance?

Allegheny County returned over $1.4 million in federal clean air grants since 2002

Now this I cannot believe - it was just reported that the Allegheny County Health Department has let $1.4 million of the $4.8 million in Federal Clean Air grant money go unused from 2002 through this past march. Allegheny County is a perennial favorite to win worst air quality - so how did this happen? Are the people at the Allegheny Health Department that incompetent or do they not really care about our health? Who is accountable? Enough is enough, its time for someone to lose their job.

Read about this inexcusable offense here at the Pittsburgh Trib.

I'm not sure how long the director Bruce W. Dixon, M.D., pictured above, has been with the ACHD, but someone needs to pay the price.

Green With Patriotism

If your not currently familiar with Thomas L. Friedman, he is a New York Times Op-Ed columnist and bestselling author. In my opinion he is constantly on the forefront of progressive ideas. He just wrote an important article that should immediately be acted upon called "Turning the Election Green".

The main theme of this article is that there should be separate presidential debate that focuses environmental topics. Even though the Iraq war is currently the most discussed topic in politics and probably will be a main focal point of the upcoming election. I think that Green issues are just as important, the reason for this is that Green issues are the only issues that permeate the outcome of other issues.

You can discuss til' your blue in the face why we are in Iraq but, a simple fact is that a large majority of terrorists originate from organizations that originate from middle eastern countries and the money to support these organizations primarily comes from oil wealth. While it is a lesser known fact that they US only gets a small percentage of their oil from the middle east, this has no bearing on the fact that if the US took a stand on becoming energy independent with green technology other countries would soon follow suit. This would eventually cut off the flow of money to middle eastern rulers, which would take away their power, and eventually force democratic change in the region. The major point is that it would force democratic change internally instead of externally which I personally believe won't work. In conclusion if you have democratic change in the region it gives people control of their own lives which in turn gives people no reason to join terrorist organizations because now their focus is on living their lives to the best of their ability, and not blaming outside influences for their problems.

I know the above paragraph is a long diatribe but, the idea is that we need to force politicians to take environmental issues seriously. While it's so easy for them to say what they think should be done in Iraq, let's force them to come up with real solutions for our world that not only has a global impact, but has a cross platform social and political impact to make our world a better place. The democratic debate last week had only 1 or 2 questions with an environmental focus. This is not good enough.

Having a separate green debate will force the legitimacy of this issue, and hopefully change some behavior in Washington.

Recently Thomas Friedman has been involved in some excellent projects promoting green ideas here are some links:

"The Power Of Green"
NYT Op-Ed Article
"The Power Of Green"
NYT Video Interview

"What's Red, White, Blue & Green all over?"
WNYC Interview with Thomas Friedman

"Tip Of The Hat / Wag Of The Finger"
Stephen Colbert Bit about Thomas Friedman (After the Shrek Bit) This is just for Fun!!

"It's All About Carbon"
Great NPR bit about carbons effect on the environment (Not Friedman related)

One way to reduce congestion tomorrow....Open the Wabash Tunnel to all vehicles

The Wabash Tunnel was opened in Pittsburgh in 2004 and was supposed to be used by 2,500 cars per day. The sad thing is - since the tunnel is HOV during peak commuting hours people in Pittsburgh will not use it. People here do not carpool - there is no incentive to which is why I have been a proponent of bringing NuRide to the region.

Now, I drive by the Wabash tunnel entrance every day I never see cars taking the ramp off of route 51 to the tunnel. The three entrances to the city in that area - Liberty and Fort Pitt tunnels, and the West End Bridge entrance - are all congested. So, my question is this, and it is self serving since I would use it - why not open up the tunnel to all vehicles? A recent report said that the Port Authority was debating closing the tunnel. Well, I say at least open it to all vehicles and charge a toll. That would still save many of us time in the morning, and, it would alleviate some of the congestion that is detrimental to the air quality in our region.

America's most livable city is once again rated.....most polluted?

Well, 2nd worst for particulate pollution, or soot. I've posted a few times that the Pittsburgh region has poor air quality. While our leaders continue to beat their chests over meaningful rankings such as "Most Livable City", other rankings such as our annual placement in the worst pollution rankings and statistics such as our poor job and population growth seem to refute that this city is in fact on the right track.

Don't get me wrong, I love Pittsburgh, but we need to get our priorities straight if we ever want to be a place that attracts and retracts young people. Redundant commissions are not enough. The new hockey arena won't do it. Casino? Come on. I've said it once I'll say it again. Pittsburgh has to create jobs if it wants young people to stay here and young people to migrate here. One way to create jobs - BE DIFFERENT!

Pittsburgh needs to strive to be unique in its regional economic policies. Clever marketing campaigns won't do it. Why not become a leading edge city for green tech and environmentally sensible regulations? Pittsburgh should build on its success with green building and become the Green city. Why not turn this city into one that replaces cars with light rails, congestion priced roads (want to drive from Monroeville to downtown? Pay up!), NON-SOOT emitting trucks and city where riding your bike to work is not only preferred but safe!

In order to do most of those things hundreds of millions must be spent on infrastructure such as light rails, new roads, personnel, etc but unfortunately there is going to be roughly $1 billion tied up in construction of a light rail tunnel from downtown to the North Shore. People think that much money to extend the 'T' 1.2 miles is ridiculous, it may be, but hopefully it is the start of something big. That rail may eventually extend further north of the city where congestion is getting worse and worse as more people move to the northern suburbs. Not all boondoggles have to be bad.

Parle-vous français?

Covoiturage et pub à la pompe !

Congestion Junction, What's Your Function?

Michael Bloomberg New York City's mayor gave an invigorating pro-environmental reform speech last Sunday on Earthday. His speech included many exciting ideas on ways that he is planning on reforming New York into the worlds "greenest" large metropolis. Among the many ideas included in his speech is one which has been in debate for quite some time now, Congestion Pricing. Congestion pricing is a flat $8 fee that will be charged for all automotive vehicles traveling in Manhattan south of 86th st during certain heavily traveled times and days. The purpose of this fee is to reduce automotive travel and force more people to use mass transit. In addition the additional revenue created from this fee will be used to increase promote many ideas included in his speech to increase availability to mass transit. This contentious idea is very interesting because it seems to be forcing sides in an rather odd fashion. Some of the pro-groups are the environmental groups and the generally more wealthy new yorkers that feel that this will reduce travel time for those who don't mind paying the additional fees. There have been some very interesting radio discussions on this subject that have given the pro & dissenting groups an opportunity to voice their opinions. To listen to the discussions click here & here.

This idea is already implemented in Singapore and London, which both have greatly reduced their congestion, smog, and increased their usage of mass transit by implementing these fees.

As somebody who would be directly affected by this fee I have strong feelings about implementing this. My against side feels that, I already live in a city that is so expensive that it makes living a middle class life tough as it is. I use mass transit 90% of the time but, the few times that I want to drive through the city why should I have to pay an additional $8 on top of the already expensive $6 I pay to use the tunnels, this on top of high gas prices makes me very annoyed. The thing that concerns me is that how long will it take for the $8 to increase to $9 and higher. New York mass transit prices have increased dramatically in the past couple years, and if I felt confident that this congestion fee would stay at $8 I could deal with it but, I know that once they start raising prices again this congestion fee will go up also.

However, my pro-green side feels that drastic problems require drastic solutions. If this congestion fee does dramatically reduce congestion, increase air quality, and also improve mass transit by properly re-investing the money into improving New York's already better than average mass transit system I don't see how I can complain.

I really feel all in all that going green is about looking forward into the future. You can no longer livefor the day but need to live for the century. I commend Michael Bloomberg on this progressive push toward making New York greener. Although I know I will be upset when I get these additional charges for driving through new york, I guess I can feel a comfort that it is going to towards a good cause, and helping a problem much bigger than me losing $8.

I just hope that in the first 3 trial years that this is implemented it is looked at carefully to actually reduce congestion and air pollution. If it does not work than please retract it, but if it does than I think eventually everyone will be on board.

What Is My Earthday Resolution?

Well... Yesterday was Earthday a holiday that's message has been getting more and more urgent with every year that goes by. This year great strides were made in educating the public on the importance of changing the way we interact with the planet. It seems like the media has generally embraced the importance of "going green" and of course there was "An Inconvenient Truth" which won an academy award for documentary of the year.

However, as an individual we should be forced to ask ourselves what are we going to change in our daily lives this upcoming year that will benefit the planet and every living being on it. In the same vein that we look to ourselves and ask what can we do to improve our own individual lives on New Years Day in the form of a New Years Resolution. I make the call that every individual should ask themselves on Earthday, What will be my Earthday resolution? This resolution is not a focus on internal improvement as much as one focused on external improvement that benefits not the individual but the entirety of the planet.

Here are my Earthday Resolutions for this year:

1. Replace all the bulbs in my apartment with CFL bulbs.
2. Join an organization that either takes action to help people learn how they can "go green" or takes action to replace old systems with green/efficient systems
3. Find people to carpool with at work and other places that I normally travel to by car.
4. Use more mass transit, try to implement at least 3 uses a week where I would normally drive.

I am curious about others Earthday resolutions, if your reading this post yours in the comment section so we can all get some more ideas of things to do!!

Happy Earth Day - thanks to all who are helping to save the planet!

As you probably know there is so much to cover on Earth Day and this past week, from corporate programs such as Home Depot's Eco Options, where they offered to give away 1,000,000 compact fluorescent light bulbs on Sunday ( I shop at Lowes!), to the special news programs on TV dedicated to the Global Warming crisis and then Yahoo!'s announcement this past week that they will become carbon neutral.

Personally, I think the carbon neutral thing is great but until we have two major changes the Global Warming crisis is not going away.

1. Shift from Coal supplied electricity to solar, wind, hydro, and even nuclear

2. Hybrid technology in every new car! There is no excuse for new vehicles to not have this technology - additionally - when is the cost of hybrids going to come down? When will plug in hybrids be available?

Okay, enough spouting off for now. So what did I do this weekend? Well, I was inspired by some debate over at Pittsblog about this article on Pittsburgh becoming more like Vermont. While I think Pittsburgh becoming Vermont (YEEAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!) is a major stretch, I do think the outdoor amenities of the Pittsburgh region are very under-appreciated. So, I was inspired by the article and debate so I finally made it over the Ohiopyle state park with my wife to check out the park and Frank Lloyd Wright's most famous building, Falling Water. The building was amazing to say the least, and the country side, river, and hills over in that part of the region were breathtaking. The beauty of the trip this Earth Day weekend is that we still have places like this where we can go to escape the smog, soot, noise and congestion that has become a part of our daily lives here in and around the city.

Another beauty of this Earth Day weekend is how all the media attention is converting non-believers and skeptics, or just your normal person who really never considered the environmental impact of their daily actions and rituals. Today, my wife, who initially thought I was crazy about this blog and environmental activism, bought some neat stackable recycling bins from Lowe's, a company I am proud to support and own stock in. We still have a lot work to do but we are finally getting on the recycling bandwagon....now I just have to hope to get her to switch all of our bulbs over to CFLs. Our next major green goal is to purchase a hybrid SUV. We drive SUVs because we have two VLDs - very large dogs (English Mastiffs). Because of these two beasts, a Prius is not an option for us, but hopefully the price of hybrids drop when we are ready to purchase a new car in the next year or two.


"GRRRRRRREEN IS GOOD!"

Notice to Corporate America: Go Green.......or else!

.........or else face a backlash from consumers, not just today's green consumers but your typical consumer who is still in the process of learning that Green = Good and Ignoring Green = Bad. According to the Marketing Green blog, brands that ignore green initiatives and environmentally responsible business practices will be labeled as socially irresponsible, a label that is hard to shake (ask GE - people still talk about them dumping PCBs into the Hudson, that happened before I was born!).

From the Marketing Green blog's post titled Green Branding Imperative:

"Emerging green consumer purchase behavior suggests this scenario:

• Despite the real threat of global warming, consumers will continue to spend on the things that they want and enjoy
• Demand for green (or greener) products will increase over time as attitudes and social norms evolve, new product choices become available and information that enables consumers to make informed purchase decisions (e.g. green labels) is introduced
• Consumers will start to shift spending to greener brands within a category
• Consumers will increasingly prefer to purchase from companies with a brand that is perceived as green, regardless of whether or not the product that they ultimately purchase is one of the company’s “green” products"

A New Perspective On Greenhouse Gases

If you ask the average person what is the greatest contributor to greenhouse gases, they will most likely say cars and other vehicles used in transit. This may also be because there is a lot of press pertaining to alternatives for the current oil burning automobiles most people use. Of course, this transition to more green and efficient transportation is a very good and necessary thing but, we can't overlook what may be the largest polluter of them all...Buildings.

A new study by the Bloomberg administration in New York says that buildings are responsible for 79% of New York City's greenhouse gas emissions. In addition even though New York is a massive polluter because of it's size it comes in much lower per ca pita at 7.1 metric tons per person compared to the national average of 24.5 metric tons per person, as mentioned in the New York Times.

This shows that greenhouse gas emissions from buildings is probably a huge problem nationwide. The fact that they get a fraction of the press that automobiles do as polluters is doing us all a huge disservice. It is also much easier to construct buildings to make them more environmentally sound, than it is to change our bad polluting habits with transportation. Everywhere you look new homes and buildings are being constructed at an alarming rate, it is easy to institute new technologies into this construction if it is a priority.

Hopefully after this study which came out today, the focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by changing heating, construction, and other habits pertaining to buildings will be greatly increased. In an article that came out last October, it mentions..
“The architecture and design profession is the only profession that can slow green house gas emissions down,” he said. “Architects have been complaining that they’re losing status . . . Well, that has changed. Now we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to change the world.”

We are hopeful that those involved in building and home construction will take this information seriously and lead the way to greener future.

Still trying to bring NuRide to Pittsburgh

Last month I posted about NuRide and the lack of action on the part of regional groups to bring a viable ride sharing program to Pittsburgh. The other day I actually met with two representatives of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission at their office in downtown Pittsburgh. The agenda of the meeting was to discuss NuRide and ideas on how we can bring them to Pittsburgh, but it quickly became apparent that is was just a meeting for the sake of having a meeting so the bureaucrats in charge could say that they lee into NuRide but couldn't "see any benefit" to bringing them here. Basically - NuRide is a new idea and bureaucrats hate anything new that threatens the establishment. Below is an excerpt of an email I sent to Mike Madison over at Pittsblog.

Subject: The Region is Doomed

I had a meeting with two individuals from the Southwestern PA Commission's transportation committee. The SPC is responsible for planning and prioritizing the use of all state and federal transportation funds allocated to the region. The topic was the current ride sharing program and the idea I had to bring NuRide to the burgh. What a disaster. The guy across the table from me was a classic Pittsburgh bureaucrat. He couldn't see any reason why we should bring an incentive based ride share program to the region. He thinks that their web based ride share program, which has approximately 250 people sharing rides, is good enough. I told him I've never heard of their program because it isn't advertised anywhere but their website. I was supposed to conference call the CEO of NuRide in on our discussion but the bureaucrat WOULD NOT LET ME CALL HIM. He wouldn't let me call the CEO! "We're here to talk to you, we'll call their CEO on our own if we want to.".

Following the meeting Rick Steele, NuRide's CEO, said the reason they have not tried to come Pittsburgh in the past is the fact that he heard dealing with the bureaucrats here is "a nightmare." We're going to focus on our energies on getting corporate sponsors for NuRide because it is obvious the SPC people feel threatened by a better ride sharing program. I might send the one guy a copy of "Who Moved My Cheese" for Christmas. Anyways, it was a good experience for me because as I try to get things to change around here I am sure this is exactly the response I'm going to get from all corners of the burgh - "It won't work", "Too risky", "I don't see the benefits". I'm going to post on it some more but first I am waiting on NuRide to send me some case studies and statistics on their initiatives in DC and a few other metros.

So, it was a tough sell for me because I did not have all the facts and statistics, which were going to be provided by NuRide's CEO had I been allowed to call him. During that meeting I was told that the SPC's commuteinfo.org has roughly 250 individuals signed up for ridesharing. 250!! The goal of incentive based ride sharing programs is to change behavior. NuRide has attributed 60% of total riders in its markets to those individuals who would not have carpooled in the first place. It also mentioned it was signing up about 500 new riders each month in some of its markets. True, Pittsburgh is no DC or New York when it comes to commuter volume but I think we can do much much better than 250 participants. More to come on this as I receive more data but I expect us to try to get some corporate sponsors involved rather than relying on an organization such as SPC.

Have an idea on how to sustainably power a city block?

Yet another bad ass competition designed to change the world. The RE:VOLT competition is all about using renewable strategies such as wind and solar to come up with the most innovative ways to power an imaginary city block. Entries will be judged on the following criteria: Sustainability and Reality of Intent - 33% Affordability and Constructability - 33% Innovation and Originality - 33% Judges discretion - 1%

The Automotive X Prize - Revolution through Competition

The folks that brought us the X Prize, the $10 million dollar competition for building private space craft, now bring us the Automotive X Prize, a race to build the most practical and most efficient production capable vehicle.

Joel Makower of Two Steps Forward is participating as an adviser to the competition and has a great post on the AXP over at his blog.

The beauty of this X-Prize is that its not just another competition where some MIT rocket scientist can design an ugly, unmarketable, and impractical "concept car" that achieves the 100 MPG floor set by the competition. We've been seeing hyped up concept cars at the auto shows for years. The competitors are judged on vehicle performance but the feasibility of mass production and the marketability of their entry are probably just as important.

The fact that a prize of several million dollars awaits the winner should motivate some of the brightest engineering minds from all over the world to enter the competition. I truly believe this could set the stage for a revolution in the automobile industry. The question is - will it be enough to wake up Detroit? Doubt it.

Latest news on my pursuit to get solar power at my (former) company

Nearly a month after my initial request for their services, I was finally contacted by the solar panel vendor SunPower. The person who called from their sales department was clueless. I told her she was about a month late since I left the company a few weeks back. Since I was no longer with that company I gave them the contact information for the other individual that was championing the project with me. Then I mentioned that there would be a need for consulting services, which they said they did not provide unless the installation was over 1 Megawatt. I said we were not sure how big of an installation we would need since we would need a consulting firm to give us that information. They also mentioned that they did not have a partner in PA that could help with the assessment.

So, while I doubt SunPower will follow through and I doubt that my former company will get their act together, I do recognize the huge business opportunity for a company that bridges the gap between solar panel, or wind energy manufacturers and the commercial marketplace. A lot of organizations recognized that "going green", as one VP my old firm said "is the thing to do these days." Unfortunately, most companies do not have the time and expertise to do the financial evaluation and cost benefit analysis for a large solar installation. Most manufacturers I have been in touch with are too busy trying to fill their large backlog of orders, and have little or no consulting services, and a very weak partner network.

For now I plan on using www.mymave.com to market my consulting services but I may eventually form an LLC and bring on a few partners to start up a consulting firm if there is indeed a very high demand for these types of services.

Entrepreneurship + Environmentalism = Enviropreneurship

Sounds like a great idea for a new business school major! From Trendhunter.com (very cool site by the way!) - "If 'Green Business' (by any other name) means business embracing the concepts of environmentalism, then Enviropreneurship (ENVP) means environmentalists learning the concepts of business. ENVP is about “bringing market principles to resolve environmental problems.”

I love it. Love live Environpreneurship! This brings me back to a few posts I made last month regarding getting my company (former company!) to adopt solar power. More on this in the next post but check out my profile at mymave.com where I am now an official "green" consultant for businesses looking to get their act together.


read more | digg story

So Simple It's Overlooked

San Francisco is currently looking to mandate the use of biodegradable plastic bags in it's local stores. This would ban the use of the regular plastic bags most people are given by retailers when the shop. Is this a good idea? The problem points to a much bigger issue with our local and federal governments. This is that legislators don't seek the input of researchers and scientists when creating environmental legislation. They are looking for voter support instead of instituting real change. On the outset this plastic bag mandate seems like a good step forward however, it's based on old information and really only a band-aid not getting at the real problems.

Here are "FACTS" that show that bio-degradable bags cause many new problems inherent in their usage. In addition the banning of plastic bags outright causes stores to go back to using the paper bags which also contain many pollutants.

The answer is buy inexpensive reusable sacks and bags when shopping. Most of the time these bags are only necessary for grocery shopping. More commonly we use plastic bags to carry the items we bought from the store to the car parked only several yards away, this is unnecessary!!

Here is one of many sites where re-usable bags can be purchased.

On another note if you are a pet owner as I am, this brings upon a whole new problem. As a pet owner you should never throw out pet waste without first putting it in a bag that is tied. If pet waste is thrown out in newspaper or with the other garbage it gets mixed into the drinking water once it dissolves from the transition from garbage to landfill. I don't know if these bags advertised here will be subject to the same problems as other bio-degradable plastic bags, but until more information is available it seems like a good idea.

Here are some more articles to read about the San Fran Bag Ban & other disposal articles:
Bag Ban
Dog Waste
San Fran Eco
Film & Bag Fed
Good Audio Discussion Link

How to get more consumers to buy Compact Fluorescent Bulbs

The cleverly titled blog post "How Many Green Marketers Does It Take to Change a Light Bulb" over at the Marketing Green blog lists a few ways that marketers of the energy efficient bulbs can overcome the consumer's resistance to changing to CFLs. While I do believe that the higher cost of CFLs is a potential hurdle for marketers, I think the folks at Marketing Green are way off in their recommendation for a solution where the consumer doesn't pay for the bulb up front but "pay later through installment payments that are tied to energy savings. " Read the rest on their blog because I think their plan is too ridiculous to even continue discussing here.

The problem with CFLs is the light quality or light brightness. The situation in our household exemplifies this point. We often leave two of the manual lights on in our basement. Noticing that these lights were on more than any other in our house it made sense to switch those two incandescent light bulbs to CFLs. The problem is that the light is not as bright as the old bulbs, and although my wife has switched out one of the CFLs for an older, brighter bulb, and I have tried to switch them back, this is not a battle that I am going to win. She prefers brighter light over cost savings and saving the polar bears, so I lose this round. We now leave only the one CFL light on and have to turn off the brighter incandescent bulb since leaving it on too long will burn it out within a month.

Yes, I know, hard knock life. But my point is that if CFLs could emit light quality at least on par with incandescents this wouldn't be an issue. CFLs would be the easy choice. I am sure a lot of people have tested a CFL or two over the past year or so and while the brightness is much better than the earlier fluorescent bulbs, their lack of penetration in most US households is proof that CFLs still have a way to go.

Hydro-Power Untapped Renewable Energy Resource

Natural running water & wave power are renewable energy resources that have been utilized by human kind since the formation of societies. However, now there is a company that has devised a way to utilize this energy in a new way. This company is called Verdant Power, they have devised a system that looks like a wind turbine (wind power) but is placed under water to capture the movement of the naturally moving water. This system is currently being tested in NY's east river which is in New York City. In addition engineering reports state that this power is not a danger to marine life because of it's slow rotation. This could bring cities and towns that have a close proximity to natural running water or coast lines one step closer to be being totally clean, green and independent of outside influences.

Why Pittsburgh's air quality Sucks

This picture was taken as I drove through Shadyside, a primarily residential neighborhood in the City of Pittsburgh's east end. I was driving two cars behind a dump truck (partially visible through the soot) on S. Aiken Ave as I witnessed it spewing black soot into the air, the same soot that causes particulate air pollution, one of the culprits behind asthma and various lung diseases. It is also to blame for Pittsburgh ranking among the worst cities for particle air pollution year after year.

Ironically, this photo was taken as I drove right passed UPMC Shadyside hospital, not to mention, I was blocks away from a school where young children were probably outside enjoying the nice weather during their lunch hour.

Mayor Luke - I know you are running unopposed in this spring's democratic primary but that doesn't mean you can tout Pittsburgh as a "green" city while we rank #1 on the list for cities with the worst pollution and we have trucks spewing soot into our residential neighborhoods. It's one thing to have these trucks emitting dirty soot on our bridges and highways, it is another that they do this where our children play and where the elderly are already suffering from lung disease. Please do more to clean up Pittsburgh than the "Redd Up" campaign started by your predecessor. Regulations need to be put in place - either these trucks burn cleaner fuels or they receive fines for polluting our neighborhoods.

Awe-stin Texas

The mayor of Austin, Texas has a ridiculously awesome plan to leverage the city's electric utility to charge the electric cars of its residents while they are plugged in at night and then, while sitting in the parking lot during the day, draw power from those same vehicles during peak hours. What?!

To top it off, the city utility would draw more power from wind farms in order to supply the electricity to charge the vehicles at night. Man, if this could work, I think I might just move to Austin.

Here is a breakdown of the proposed process:

1. Austin's peak wind production is at night, but the peak usage period is during the day. To solve this problem of mismatched supply and demand the city would make a push for its residents to purchase electric vehicles (check out plug-in partners) which would utilize the wind power while plugged in over night.

2. While the cars at parked in a parking lot and its owners are at work, the vehicles would supply excess power from their lithium ion batteries back to the grid using a proven process known as vehicle-to-grid power, or V2G. Kickass.

An audacious plan? Sure, but these are the types of initiatives, these big crazy ideas, that will push cities to become clean, healthy, and self sustainable environments. In terms of economic development, these ideas will also propel these cities ahead of the status quo, the cities who simply go along with the government and EPA minimums for alternative energy usage. So, while plug-in hybrids have yet to arrive, these "demand side" initiatives are only going to help convince the automakers that there is indeed a market for these vehicles. Bring back the EV1 !!!

View the complete story on this at The Wall Street Journal.

Special Report on Green Business

This special report, from Business Week, covers a lot of ground on green tech and green business.

Stories include ethanol, electric cars, green investing, and even green weddings, to name a few. One particular highlight for me was the story Green Growth for Entrepreneurs. The story mentions Investor's Circle, a group of angel investors who select their investments based on a target's social responsibility. If you are a green entrepreneur like myself the firm does have an application on their site for their Spring Venture fair, where, if accepted, you get a chance to rub elbows and pitch your green business idea to targeted investors. Unfortunately, the deadline has passed so I'll have to wait until next spring's fair, which is good because I'm not even close to being ready.

The mantra of the Investor's Circle reads:

"The Investors' Circle mission is to galvanize the flow of capital to entrepreneurial companies that enhance bioregional, cultural and economic health and diversity."

2007 Solar Decathlon

Probably one of the coolest uses of brain power from some of our top universities, the Solar Decathlon pits teams of college students against one another in a contest to see who has designed and built the most efficient 100% solar powered house. The team from CMU is led by green building guru and professor of architecture Stephen Lee, who recently received an award for his green leadership. The team, made up of students from several schools across campus, will be presenting its design to the community this Wedsnesday, March 21st.






From the DOE's website:

What is the Solar Decathlon?

Twenty teams have been selected by the U.S. Department of Energy to compete in the 2007 Solar Decathlon. The teams, from colleges and universities around the globe, participate in an unparalleled solar competition to design, build, and operate the most attractive and energy-efficient solar-powered home. In fall 2007, the teams transport their solar houses to the National Mall in Washington, D.C., where they form a solar village. The teams compete in 10 contests to determine an overall winner. Using only energy from the sun, the teams generate enough electricity to run a modern household. With an eye on energy efficiency, the students carefully choose the systems, products, and appliances used in their houses.

Carpooling - who carpools and how do we get more people to share rides with strangers?

How do we get more people to share rides to and from work? Some people do it, and a lot of companies offer incentives and monthly drawings to reward those employees who share rides. Two of my former employers offered monthly drawings, one being Merck & Co. who happened to offer incentives to carpoolers and even offered zero percent financing for hybrid automobile purchases (neat!).

Is that enough? I don't think so. People do not carpool for a number of reasons. People become attached to their vehicles. Some like the "thrill" of the commute, or maybe its the 1 hour of talk radio, while most of those people probably just desire the flexibility driving the car to work gives them - whether that is the ability to work late, go to the gym after work, or pick up the kids or meet friends following the daily grind. Those same employees at Merck's suburban Philadelphia offices who lived in Center City, the same who had carpool incentives AND access to a train to and from work, chose to drive themselves to work, which is nuts if you've ever commuted around Philly, especially on the Schuylkill expressway deathtrap. Whatever the reason, we can't rely on good faith and "doing the right thing" to get people to share rides more than they do today and that does not help places like Pittsburgh where the air quality is pretty poor.

I'm not an economist but these types of decisions and incentive studies are what keeps our econobloggers busy day in and day out. I'll have to forward this on to one of them to see if I can get an answer on potential solutions to the lack of carpooling in the US. Me personally, I shared a ride with a co-worker for about 18 months. Each way was close to 20 miles and while my co-worker did most of the driving I did pay my share in gas. Besides saving on gas and the mileage on my leased vehicle (my incentive at the time!), we were able to have a lot of good conversations and became good friends, but I doubt most others would be lucky enough to share the same love of music and entrepreneurship that my friend and I shared.


So what can we do? Most regions have an organization in place that offers some sort of system for car pool scheduleing, such as Pitsburgh's fine commuteinfo.org. The problem with solutions such as commuteinfo.org is A. The lack of clarity - where the heck do I go on this page and how do I use it? and B. Lack of incentives.

NuRide.com is a solution I read about two years ago and is a potential solution I asked some of our local organizations to look into. That was back in the Summer of 2005 and I came across several emails to both individuals at NuRide and also here at the groups in Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh is not on NuRide's list of operating regions so I am assuming my efforts back in 2005 were wasted. Well, I'm not giving up. I'm seeing more and more vehicles backed up on the highways leading into Pittsburgh to the North, East, and West, with the Northern parkway (route 279) being much worse than it was back when I shared a ride in 2001-2002.

The NuRide program relies on funding from regions that receive money from the federal government's Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program. Through the use of these funds, which , according to my contact at NuRide only come about when "the local governments are willing to spend some of the money on ride sharing programs," NuRide is able to serve a region and recruit its partners, which are the bread and butter of this incentive program.

If your region is using CMAQ funds to operate a ride sharing program, is that ride sharing program effective? If not, and I believe a lot of those dollars are funding bureaucracies that do little to ease the congestion and pollution problems or our cities, start reaching out to the leaders of your community action groups, start bringing up programs like NuRide to your local leaders, and let's all try a little harder to extend the offer of ride sharing with a fellow co-worker even if it does not get you a free latte at Starbucks.

The Plea for more Solar Energy

Conrad Burke wrote a nice piece on the need for more government incentives for solar power. Check it out over at one of my favorite venture capital sites, venturebeat.com



read more | digg story

Dot Watt or Watt Com - the next boom and possibly the next bubble...

With so much venture capital flowing into alternative energies and green tech I can't help but think that down the road there is going to be a green bubble. However - the more I think about it, it is also hard to imagine our alternative energy/fuel capacity being greater than demand, especially when you factor in the growth of China, India, and other other emerging economies.

Will there be a consolidation in the photovoltaics industry? You bet. As PV efficiency continues to climb, firms that sell the current standard must either reinvest or acquire a new PV technology or they risk going out of business. If I go with a higher efficiency PV manufacturer, like SunPower's latest PV cell, I need less panels compared to the lower efficiency PVs, and hence, less space on my rooftop. If you are a green investor, make sure you are careful about which solar companies you choose for your investment.

As far as alternative fuels are concerned, almost every day I read about a new biofuels plant being built, but again, its difficult to fathom us ever having too much fuel, especially fuel that is better for not only the engine but our environment.

Which sector is actually underserved in terms of VC? I would say the electricity generation segment. There is money being poured into clean coal and coal gassification technologies but I'm pretty sure its significantly less than the capital being invested into solar and biofuels. We're seeing some signs of huge potential coming out of the solar thermal developments, but those large scale plants are still years away. I'm going to try to dig up some data that breaks down VC by green category but its getting late so in the meantime this NYT article on the dot-watt boom is worth reading.

Professor: Power needs will require new models

Maintaining an adequate supply of electricity across the nation's power grid in coming decades will require new models for the generation, transmission, distribution and consumption of electricity, said professor Marija Ilic during day one of a two day conference on the Electricity industry at Carnegie Mellon's Tepper School of Business.

read more | digg story

Green is Good blog is Cover Story for this week's issue of Information Week magazine

Well, not really, but Info week's story titled "What Every Tech Pro Should Know about Green Computing" is an excellent look inside the power consumption of corporate data centers and explains why IT managers and executives need to get on board with the green movement.

Besides using more power efficient processors and energy saving methods such as virtualization, which allows each server to be used as if it were multiple servers, companies are implementing more energy efficient operational measures for their data centers. Highmark, a health insurer here in Western PA, is one of the companies mentioned that is using energy saving techniques to cool its servers, which is a process in of itself that requires as much power as it takes to run the actual server.

Gas Prices are higher - GOOD!

Thank you OPEC. Thank you for not rigging the system so we see a crash in oil prices, which would (attempt to) weaken the arguement for alternative fuels. Hugo "The Devil" Chavez, the Che Guevara wanna-be, thinks he can single handedly thwart the United States' efforts towards energy independence. News flash for a-hole dictators or those who think our latest drive towards energy independence is a flash in the pan - the energy revolution is being televised. Unlike the 1970's, today millions are reading magazines, blogs, and watching the news to witness the astounding amount of money and political capital that is being spent on alternative energy and fuels. The VCs invested millions into biofuel and solar companies years ago, and now that the politicians are finally on board there is no stopping us. The alternative energy train has left the station and there is nothing that OPEC or Hugo Chavez can do to derail it.

By the way, in case you do not already know this, avoid buying gas from Citgo. If you are on empty on the New Jersey or PA turnpike, and Citgo is the only gas station within miles, just walk to the next exit or call the state police to pick you up. They will understand why you passed up a Citgo gas station Enough of my political rant and I apologize for changing the tone on this blog. All aboard for the next stop on the green energy railway!

U.S. Department of Energy offering up to $168 million in Solar Energy grants

This is great news for young solar PV manufacturers such as NanoSolar and SunPower, but why does the US DOE have to give grants to giants such as GE, Dow Chemical, and BP??? This make no sense to me, zero sense to me. We need grants going to the startup companies developing the next wave of solar technologies, not the old multi-billion dollar conglomerates that have the cash to do the research themselves. Can someone please explain this???? Politics, ugh!

Green Products (or lack of) at the Home & Garden Show

I was initially disappointed by the absence of a Solar Power company at the Home & Garden show that ran this past week at the LEED certified David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh, however, there were some green products and service providers such as a Geo-Thermal heating company that was marketing its product to homebuilders, and there was a nice setup by the Duquesne Light Company, one of the utilities in this area, who's booth focused on energy efficiency with a demonstration of the benefits of switching from incandescent light bulbs to compact fluorescents.

The product they used to show the difference in the amount of watts used by the two different sets of bulbs is one I've been meaning to purchase for some time, the Kill-a-Watt Electricity Usage Monitor. This neat little product allows you to monitor how much electricity your cell phone and laptop adapters use even when they are not plugged into their respective devices(known as Phantom Loads).

I was annoyed at the AC and Heating salesman who laughed when I told him Solar Power was the next big thing in PA. He said "you'll never see a payback on solar." I said "what if the state offered rebates of 50% on solar installations?" After our little debate and my wife rolling her eyes at me, he finally admitted that he hadn't done any real research on solar power. Schultz 1 - ignorant know-it-all sales guy 0. I told him of the Governor's solar rebate plan and he did hear about it, which means his company is going to miss out on a huge business opportunity if they ignore solar water heating, which would be a nice complement to their current business.

Maria Energia live at the Power-Gen and Renewable Energy & Fuels conference

Fellow green blogger Maria Energia was out in Las Vegas this past week at the POWER-GEN Renewable Energy & Fuels conference. Maria's coverage starts here in part 1 of 3.

Making a difference at work - the wheels are in motion

Earlier this past week I wrote an email to my manager explaining the rationale for installing solar panels at our distribution centers. I reread it several times, unsure if he would think I was a "nut" as my wife cautioned me, and to be honest I was worried that some people at my company wouldn't look beyond the politics of alternative energy.

Well, I hit the send button. Soon after I went into my manager's office to see what he thought. He noticed the 30% federal tax credit and asked me to talk to the finance person in charge of our distribution centers. I had to write another email, so again, I wasn't sure what to expect but this individual said he would "love to talk more about this with me" and we set up a meeting to discuss the next steps. Now, I am not sure how far this will go but people are serious about working with me on this feasibility phase. Next week we'll start digging into two years of electricity bills to figure out the cost and the actual kilowatt hours. I've started looking at solar power manufacturers too. I am trying to find the most cost effective manufactuer, which means I want something that gives me the most bang for our dollar. SunPower is one I am leaning towards, their PV panels are close to 20% efficiency which is much higher than most commericial panels.

One last thing. One my way out of the office the other day I mentioned this to one of our VPs. He said "wow, thats interesting.....Going Green is the thing to do these days."

How you and I can make a difference at work

I couldn't sleep last night because my brain was busy trying to think of ways I can have an impact on my company's energy usage. We recycle paper, as does most large corporations nowadays, and we also encourage carpooling. I wanted to propose an energy initiatives that would have the biggest impact while being somewhat easy to implement, and most important, have measurable benefits. From these criteria I believe that a solar power installation would be the way to go. We have a large distribution center that runs 24/7, ditto for our data center. Both are energy hogs and while I haven't done any investigation in our annual electricity costs an increase is almost certain due to both our growth as well as an increase in electricity prices. Okay, great, now how do I sell this to VITO (Very Important Top Officer) ?

1. First things first, figure out the financial ramifications, especially if yours is a public corporation. The goal should be to figure out the Net Present Value (NPV) of the purchase of a commercial photo voltaic (PV) installation. The keys here are to figure out the total system cost after any state and/or federal tax credits or rebates, followed by the total cost savings due to the difference in energy used and the electricity you were able to sell back to the utility company.

There is a Federal Business Energy tax credit that covers up to 30% of solar installation. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 anncounced that businesses may be eligible for credits such as:

• 30 percent tax credit for the installation of qualifying solar equipment on buildings;
• Business tax credits for companies that build highly energy efficient homes;
• Credits for companies that manufacture energy-efficient appliances such as dishwashers, clothes washers and refrigerators.

So, there is a tax credit of 30% for a commercial solar installation. Sweet. The next step would be figuring out how big of a system you will need. You'll have to do some digging for electricity bills in order to get an idea of the monthly kilowatt hour usage. After you figure how much power your system would need to produce you can then get an idea of the total cost.

Using some excel skills you can do some modeling to figure out the optimal number of solar panels to maximize the NPV. There are several other inputs you need to consider, such as the average number of hours of daily sunlight in your area and also the rate at which you can sell power back to your utility company. All of this information is out on the www.

2. The second component of your pitch is to make sure to trumpet the marketability and goodwill associated with this initiative. "Going Green" could really change how your company is perceived in the marketplace. Entire marketing campaigns revolving around your green campaign can drive incremental sales through increased customer and brand loyalty.

There is much more to this but as I learn more about the benefits and incentives around solar power its hard for me to understand why more companies have not looked into implemented a renewable energy strategy. Part of it comes down to a lack of knowledge regarding renewable energies, while another component is the lack of understanding that investing some of that spare cash into solar or wind power can both help the environment while increasing shareholder value over the long run.

Traditionally, companies with strong positive free cash flow do one of the following:

Let the cash accumulate in the bank or in short term investments sit in the bank or in short term investments, use the cash to make a diversifying acquisition, which usually turns out bad, or they pay out some of the cash in dividends or return some of the cash back to the shareholders through stock repurchases.

I propose that more companies start to look into using some of that cash to improve their sustainability through investments in renewable energies, which, unlike most of the acquisitions we have seen over the past two decades, do not destroy shareholder value. I'll post my cash flow analysis as soon as I do some more research on implementing a commercial solar installation at my company. Anyone else have any ideas for green energy initiatives at work?

Governor Rendell's speech at Pittsburgh Tech Council Luncheon

"I truly believe, that over the decade from 2010 to 2020, the production of alternative energies will have an impact the equivalent of what information technology has had on our economy."

-Governor Ed Rendell at Pittsburgh Technology Council luncheon on Friday March 2nd, 2007

After attending Governor Rendell's speech today at the Sheraton at Station Square, I came away believing that the Governor is both very knowledgeable and passionate about making the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania a leading alternative energy state. Governor Rendell covered a lot of ground in the 1 hour he spoke to us, and gave us an overview of the plan while answering some tough questions from the crowd. This was my first time at an event with a government official of Rendell's stature and I was pumped after getting the opportunity to ask Governor Rendell a question regarding his solar rebates one on one.

Some other highlights for me personally - I was able to meet several "green" entrepreneurs, including an individual working on coal gasification technology, several state and local politicians, and also representatives of Western PA businesses who have a stake in the Governor's energy initiatives.

Here are some highlights from Rendell's speech:

1. The Governor is a big believer in cellulosic ethanol. One test plant is currently under development in Clearfield County while several others are in the planning stages.

2. The State has billions of tons of Waste coal which will be put to use in coal gasification and biodiesel plants across the state. There are not any of plants in the US currently utilizing the Ficher-Tropsch process, which is a process that breaks down coal or biomass into liquefied form to be used as synthetic fuels.

3. The Governor is working to get more gas stations to include E85 at the pump. The Sheetz gas station chain has been introducing several E85 pumps at their stores throughout Western PA. Governor Rendell also mentioned that E10 should be mandatory at all gas pumps throughout the state, as it is in parts of the Philadelphia area.

Well, there is a lot more but I want to close with a remark on the Energy initiatives solar incentives. The Governor's plan includes $200 million in solar installation rebates to homeowners and businesses. The plan will give a rebate of up to 50% of the cost of the installation. My question to the Governor was this:

"Assuming a typical house in PA requires a 2.5kw solar system, the cost would be $30,000. After the 50% rebate and $2,000 federal tax credit, the cost drops to $12,000 to $13,000. How is the average homeowner in PA going to afford that payment, even after the rebates and federal credit? Have you worked out an agreements with financial institutions to offer low interest rate financing for the $12k to $13k out of pocket expense for a solar system?"

Governor Rendell's reponse, after realizing I was talking about the financing of the purchase and not the program's rebates:

"I haven't thought of that but that is a great question, it's something I will have to think about."

So, I think the plan looks great on paper but how many of us can really afford to plunk down over $10k for a solar system? Without special financing programs this would be close to another car payment for some of us. I think the Governor was sincere when he said he would think about it and I hope to see an announcement of a solar financing plan for homeowners down the road. Please post any comments if there is anything specific you would like to know about the plan or Governor Rendell's speech today, there is a ton more to talk about. I could go on for several more paragraphs (I have some amusing video clips from the event too!)

Ripple effect from TXU buyout sure to impact Coal Industry

Despite the media frenzy caused by the TXU buyout last week, Coal powered electricity plants are not going away. Coal is too cheap - 3 times cheaper than Solar Power. With increasing demand for power plants and coal being an abundant natural resource, a homegrown resource no less, we will see coal continue to play a huge role in our electricity supply. That is, unless a couple things happen.

First, the nuclear waste issue has not been solved. If it is ever solved, and the public can be confident in the government's ability (ha!) to store and manage the waste safely, we could see a resurgence in Nuclear Power.

Secondly, Solar Thermal, in my opinion, has the greatest upside. Two large scale (400 to 500 MW) solar thermal plants are currently under construction in Southern California and additional plants are under consideration for Nevada. If these solar plants, which can produce as much electricity as a conventional gas or coal plant, ever achieve economies of scale great enough to encourage more investment in the construction of more plants, it is possible that the majority of our electricity could someday come from solar thermal technology.

The TXU buyout will still have a huge impact industry wide- companies will now be under greater pressure by consumers and environment groups to increase their capital spending on clean burning technologies. Utility firms better wake up - if they refuse to invest to reduce their toxic emissions and greenhouse gases they are sure to see an uprising from their customers.

5 questions for Vinod Khosla

Sun Microsystems cofounder, Carnegie Mellon Alum, and cellulosic ethanol evangelist Vinod Khosla of Khosla Ventures recently spoke to Fortune Magazine about the future of ethanol and alternative fuels.

You got on the ethanol bandwagon early. What's on tap for 2007?

This will be the year of cellulosic ethanol - fuel made from grasses, wood chips, and other underutilized biomass. New fuels like butanol will also come along. I wouldn't be surprised to see biogasoline either. We'll see biofuels move from their role as an additive to gasoline to a primary fuel for automobiles.

What still stands in ethanol's way?

You'll see critics, often funded by the petroleum interests, increase their attacks on biofuels through surreptitious PR campaigns, while publicly supporting these renewable fuels. We might even see oil prices manipulated down to thwart this transition, which is essential for our planet.
What 10 top leaders and thinkers see on their horizon

What other areas of alternative energy should we be watching?

Coal. We will continue to see a push for "clean coal," as it's a way for a few of the traditional power-generation firms to delay action. Clean coal will be in a horse race with wind and solar. I'd personally handicap solar thermal, not photovoltaic solar or clean coal to win.

How will Congress and the presidential candidates affect the equation?

The biggest leverage will come from the similar positions of the presidential candidates for 2008. Most of the rumored candidates already support an aggressive biofuels policy, as do the Democratic majorities in Congress and the Bush administration.

Where are you investing, outside of green tech?

We're excited about mobile applications and see breakthroughs in semiconductors and batteries.

A great analysis of Kholsa's stance on alternative energy and ethanol can be found at The Oil Drum blog.