German Chancellor Angela Merkel visits China again this week, marking her second official visit to the nation. While she traveled with a delegation of business interests eager to make headway into the burgeoning Asian economy, Merkel’s trip also included some serious talk about climate change solutions.

On Monday, she urged Chinese leaders to do more to cut heat-trapping emissions. That led to the Chinese rebuttal that the West has been polluting the planet much longer than the Chinese have been. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said that although his people want “blue skies, green hills, and clear water,” it’s much harder for China to cut emissions that it is for other, more developed nations like Germany. A rapidly growing economy and a much larger population have put it on the fast-track towards development, but China is wary of climate change policies that would slow its development.

Nonetheless, Wen did promise Merkel that China would work hard to slow global warming in its next five-year plan on the environment that begins in 2011 – that’s in addition to the 20 percent increase in energy efficiency, and a 10 percent cut in emissions planned by 2010.

Merkel noted that industrialized nations should make clean technology available to developing countries, and that China should also develop its own technology or adopt it from abroad. China’s expected annual economic growth of 10 percent is not sustainable with improvements in efficiencies, she noted.

Back in June, G8 leaders agreed to pursue unspecified cuts in global warming emissions and to work with the UN on a post-Kyoto Protocol plan (under Kyoto, China has no emissions gargets because it’s a developing nation). In December, world environment ministers will meet in Bali to begin planning a course of action after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.

Reuters
DPA News, via EarthTimes

The cost of doing green business in Silicon Valley could soon be increasing. The demand for renewable energy credits (RECs) is outpacing the amount of land needed to provide clean energy, and so prices for RECs may be on the rise.

The purchase of a renewable energy credit generally represents one megawatt hour of renewable energy. Although the clean electricity can’t be routed from the wind turbine directly to the business, the investment allows for more renewable energy to built and displace the energy needed from dirty fossil fuels. Many companies and individuals buy RECs in order to make up for, or “offset,” their unavoidable pollution (driving, manufacturing, etc).

In Silicon Valley, the big buyers of RECs include Cisco Systems, Applied Materials, and Yahoo!. The latter just signed up for 1.6 million kilowatt hours of green power costing $24,000 and meeting about 6.5 percent of Yahoo’s Santa Clara energy requirement. The RECs are purchased from Silicon Valley Power, the city-owned utility of Santa Clara.

The increase in REC purchases across the country – the most recent data from the Department of Energy shows sales doubling in 2005 – may affect places like Silicon Valley in the near future. Renewable energy producers will need to get more creative in their search for land for the solar power and wind power systems. Dan Kalafatas, president and Chief Operating Officer of 3 Degrees, the San Francisco-based energy marketing company from which Silicon Valley Power buys its renewable energy credits, noted, “The best sites have been tapped. The long-term fundamental demand will raise prices."

California law says that utilities have to increase their renewable energy use by 2010, so this problem isn’t going away. Efficiency will be key here: while it’s exciting that the demand for green power is increasing, running efficient businesses and households must be the first step, and will help cut the need for energy across the board.

Green Options’ Green Life Guide
San Jose Business Journal

This week a senior U.S. environment official met with Chinese representatives in Beijing to discuss cooperation between the two nations in the fight against global warming.

China and the U.S. are the two largest emitters of global warming pollution, with China recently surpassing the U.S. as the world leader in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions – a major contributor to global warming.

James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, praised China’s “very aggressive measures in recognition of challenges of reducing air pollution.”

Last December, the Asian nation announced it would emit at a slower rate than previously planned, cutting pollution per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) by 20 percent by 2010. As their impressive economy continues to grow, so too will their pollution.

Connaughton also discussed President George W. Bush’s proposals to cut climate change emissions with the Chinese, noting "It is an exciting time in the relations between China and the United States in the areas of environmental quality and economic prosperity."

While the U.S. is facing pressure from the rest of the world to make real, measurable cuts in emissions, it’s admittedly smart politics to align itself with a rapidly growing nation that is also slow to commit to real emissions reductions. A strong political and economic partnership means more muscle to negotiate at the global climate change meetings President Bush has planned for the end of September, as well as the continued negotiations beyond the expiration the Kyoto Protocol’s first phase in 2012.

While China has shown progress in emissions reductions - stronger vehicle fuel efficiency standards than the U.S., for example - I’m still cautious about a U.S.-China partnership to tackle climate change, especially while the Bush administration running the show. A partnership that involves real cuts in emissions, strengthens a global clean energy economy, and facilitates the exchange of cutting-edge technology is the only way these two nations can show real leadership in a cleantech era.

China View
World Watch

A recent study found that the clean energy industry is the fastest-growing sector in Massachusetts, easily beating out behemoths like financial services, healthcare, and communications.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Census was published by the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, a quasi-public agency that runs a renewable energy trust fund of green power projects. The study found that clean energy industry had a 26 percent increase in jobs and now accounts for more than 14,000 jobs in the state. Those jobs are expected to grow three times faster than any other major industry, adding about 3,000 jobs in 2007. The next biggest increase was in the scientific, technical, and management services sector with an increase of 5.4 percent.

Three hundred and two companies, government agencies, and university research centers responded to the survey. Those in the renewable energy category said they will increase staff by an average of 30 percent in the next 12 months, while the energy efficiency sector will add an average of 25 percent more employees.

High fossil fuels costs and venture capital funding are contributing to the strong clean energy performance, as well as politicians and a public wanting action on global warming emissions.

However, the report also points out that the industry is still very young: of the 255 companies surveyed, 103 had annual revenues of less than $1 million. Most companies focus on selling their products to other companies within New England to speed up sales cycles. But this may result in limited growth if companies are passing up opportunities in faster growing and larger markets.

Governor Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray, and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi agreed last month that by 2010, Massachusetts should offset all of its growth in electricity demand with increased efficiency.

The survey defined “renewable energy” as including solar power, biofuels, wind power, wave systems, solar-assisted fuel cells, and all fuel cell companies, although the study recognizes that fuel cell production may be powered by fossil fuels.

Business Journals
Climate Ark
Massachusetts Clean Energy Census

Today the U.S. House is likely to vote on the Udall-Platts Amendment to the energy bill. This legislation would require 15 percent of our nation’s electricity to come from renewable sources by the year 2020. It’s high time the federal government catch up to so many states that already have implemented 21st century policies like this one.

But in addition to broad state and federal programs, consumers can also do some renewable energy good for themselves, even if they don’t own a wind turbine or live in a sunny area. They can buy green power.

“Green power” is a term for clean, renewable energy. More than 600 utilities in 36 states give their customers the option to buy their power from renewable energy sources (depending on the state, they normally include solar power, wind, biomass, hydropower, or geothermal) rather than traditional ones (likely to be coal). Although the transmission system can’t guarantee that particular energy from a wind farm makes it to your refrigerator, the total amount of green electricity that travels over the entire system is increased because (ideally) the utility is taking all of the extra revenue and investing in more renewable energy sources.

My fellow blogger Philip Proefrock just covered a green power program he is considering in his homestate of Michigan. Green power programs do vary, whether it’s the location from which the renewable energy is coming (in state or out of state) or the source (I know of one municipal provider that promotes destructive Canadian hydropower as an eco-friendly option, so make sure you know where the energy is coming from).

Here in Minnesota, I purchase wind power through Xcel Energy’s Windsource program. The initial cost is a little more than $3.50 per 100 kWh block, but I also get a credit on my bill for the avoided fuel costs of conventional (i.e. coal) power. The credit varies each month, but my cost last month was less than $11. Windsource was also audited by the Green-e program to ensure that ratepayers’ money is going to build new renewable energy sources, and it passed with flying colors: Windsource funds the costs associated with Xcel purchasing wind power from private owners of wind turbines and new wind generation facilities across the state, so I feel good about my investment.

Find out whether you can buy green power in your state at the U.S. Department of Energy. If you can’t buy green power locally, consider investing in renewable energy credits (RECs) to offset your emissions.

Sierra Club, North Star Chapter
Union of Concerned Scientists
Xcel Energy

Global warming concerns, government policies, and money-saving efficiency benefits have spurred clean energy systems to spring up all over the world. But a giant wind farm in the middle-of-nowhere North Dakota doesn’t do much good if there aren’t transmission lines to connect the power with the more populated areas that need it.

Europeans are facing similar distribution and reliability issues with their burgeoning renewable energy growth, and some see a continent-wide grid as the solution. Dr. Jurgen Schimd of ISET, a renewable-energy institute at the University of Kassel in Germany, says a transmission system that stretches across Europe is the answer. It could, for example, move electricity generated from a Spanish wind farm to the Netherlands where the wind is not blowing.

Norway is key to Dr. Schmid’s plans, as the Scandinavian nation is well-supplied with hydroelectric plants that can store energy from sources like the wind. For instance, the wind power is used to pump water up into the reservoirs that feed the hydroelectric turbines, so the power is “on tap” when needed. According to Dr. Schmid, even if the wind died and wind farms shut down all across Europe, Norway’s hydropower would leap to action and fill in the gap for up to four weeks.

This continent-wide transmission system for renewable energy has also sparked a renewed interest in direct current (DC). Over 100 years ago, when power grids covered shorter distances, alternating current (AC) transmission was favored because it loses less electricity than DC. However, as transmission lines have grown longer, high-voltage DC lines now suffer lower loses than AC. So using a DC transmission system would allow electric grids to be restructured more efficiently, losing less energy while transmitting it from Point A to Point B.

Some nations have already started work on a DC transmission system. A group of Norgwegian companies have begun building high-voltage DC lines between Scandinavia, the Netherlands, and Germany. An Irish wind power company called Airtricity proposes what it calls a Supergrid that would link offshore wind farms in the Atlantic Ocean with customers in northern Europe.

The electric grid in the U.S. is in sore need of an upgrade, and we should consider ideas that utilize the different forms of renewable energy abundant across the country (like hydroelectric in the Northeast, wind in the Midwest, solar in the Southwest). It’s a combination of these renewable sources – along with crucial upgrades in efficiency – that will provide a clean, reliable network of distribution in the 21st century.

Thanks to Working Dad at Housekept for the tip.

The Economist
Wikipedia

Image Source: Graphic / MIT School of Architecture and Planning

You’ve probably never considered crowds to be a renewable source of energy. Lucky for us, two smarty-pants grad students at MIT’s School of Architecture and Planning are trying to figure it out.

James Graham and Thaddeus Jusczyk envision harvesting the mechanical energy from human movement – like commuters in a train station or fans at a rock concert – for electricity. This “crowd farm” would be a responsive sub-flooring system and made up of blocks that depress slightly when people step on them. When the blocks slip against each other they would generate power through the principle of the dynamo, a device that converts the energy of motion into that of an electric current.

Crowds of people at a train station aren’t going to be enough to power the train itself: Graham and Jusczyk explain that thousands of people would be needed to make up the 28,527 steps needed to power a moving train for one second. But for smaller, very energy-efficient devices, the students’ idea could lead to something bigger: Their test case included a prototype stool that used the act of sitting to generate power. The weight of the body on the seat causes a flywheel to spin, which powers a dynamo that lights four LEDs (super-efficient lightbulbs).

The architecture students ultimately want an energy supply that’s integrated into a new sort of building system, one that harnesses the active power of humans to power a cleaner, more efficient lifestyle in the 21st century.

MIT News

When the National Association of Governors met last weekend in Traverse City, MI, global warming policy was on the agenda. In the absence of a federal commitment to renewable energy or cutting global warming emissions, they stressed the importance of states to keep leading the way.

The Chairman of the governors association, Tim Pawlenty (R-MN), began his one-year term this week. He noted that the Republican Party has some “catching up to do” on global warming policy, although he pointed out that some of the most outspoken governors on the issue are Republicans, like Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Crist of Florida. Pawlenty told the Associated Press that states should redouble their efforts to limit climate change emissions and develop renewable sources of energy: "The false premise of some of the critics is that you’ll wreck the economy. I suggest if you do this correctly, it will be a boost to the economy."

Several governors pointed out that the federal government will eventually follow if enough states take the lead and prove the clean energy technologies increase energy security, create jobs, and slow global warming. Governor Ed Rendell (D-PA) explained “With the states taking action, even if you don’t have 100 percent of America, you can have 40 or 50 percent or more, and that’s a good start. We can’t just wait around for the federal government."

Several governors were more cautious in their assessment of how global warming policy would play out in their state’s economy. Governor Jennifer Granholm (D-MI, home to automakers that are battling congressional efforts to toughen fuel efficiency) said success would only come when all nations, like China, are committed to the same goals and are playing by the same rules. Governor Joe Manchin III (D-WV) said that the U.S. couldn’t afford to stop using his state’s coal, even though it’s a leading source of global warming emissions.

Associated Press, via International Herald Tribune
Forbes

According to the American Wind Energy Association, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) recently told wind power supporters that a House vote on a national renewable portfolio standard (RPS) was likely to happen the week of July 30.

A renewable portfolio standard – also called a renewable energy standard – is a measure requiring utilities to get a certain amount of their power from renewable sources by a particular time.

Last month in the Senate, Senator Jeff Bingaman’s (D-NM) RPS amendment to the energy bill was killed before a vote could be held. Although the current House version of the energy bill does not have an RPS provision, Representatives Tom Udall (D-NM) and Todd Platts (R-PA) are expected to offer an amendment requiring utilities to get 20 percent of their energy from renewables by 2020. This amendment is based on H.R. 969, which calls for an RPS and is also authored by Udall and Platts. (Make sure your Representative is one of the 120 co-sponsors here).

In her meeting with wind power supporters, Pelosi underscored the critical role an RPS would play in moving the nation towards global warming solutions.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a 20 percent by 2020 RPS would save consumers nearly $11 billion on energy bills by 2030 and save nearly 2 billion short tons of coal from being burned up into the atmosphere. Similarly, the American Solar Energy Society found that an RPS could help create nearly 40 million new jobs in the U.S. by 2030 in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors.

It’s Getting Hot in Here
Union of Concerned Scientists
Wind Energy Weekly

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy recently released an energy efficiency scorecard for the states. In it, the ACEEE considered state-level policies, programs, and technologies and ranked the 50 states and the District of Columbia in eight categories:

1. Spending on Utility and Public Benefits Energy Efficiency Programs
2. Energy Efficiency Resource Standards
3. Combined Heat and Power
4. Building Energy Codes
5. Transportation Policies
6. Appliance and Equipment Efficiency Standards
7. Tax Incentives
8. State Lead by Example and Research & Development

The “State Energy Efficiency Scorecard for 2006” found that states are spending three times as much money on energy efficiency programs as the federal government. They’re also far ahead on appliance standards and building codes.

By documentng best practices and leadership across the county, a roadmap is created for states and other entities to learn from each other and work off of each other. Not to mention encouraging (perhaps) the federal government to catch up. The researchers at ACEEE found these states to have the best investment and policies on energy efficiency programs, codes, and standards in 2006:

1. Vermont, Connecticut, and California (tie)
2. Massachusetts
3. Oregon
4. Washington
5. New York
6. New Jersey
7. Rhode Island, Minnesota (tie)

ACEEE Acting Executive Director, Bill Prindle, described energy efficiency as a “first fuel” in the transition towards a clean energy economy. That is, the cheapest and cleanest energy is the energy we never have to use:

“Unless we accelerate the pace of efficiency investment, no clean energy strategy will work.”

Maybe Congress is taking some small steps: On Tuesday, the U.S. House voted 312-111 to increase programs that make cars and buildings more energy efficient, along with boosting research and development of clean energy. The vote count would in theory be large enough to overturn the promised veto by President Bush, who wants 4 percent less for the programs covered by the bill. The extra money in the bill would go towards research in wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower power, as well as ethanol and biodiesel. It doesn’t include anything about the new, sturdier nuclear warhead Bush wanted included.

ACEEE
Associated Press, via Yahoo! News