While hosting an international climate change summit last week, Florida’s Republican Governor Charlie Crist signed into law executive orders that include setting limits on global warming pollution, restricting emissions from cars sold in the state, requiring energy-efficient state buildings, and requiring utilities to get 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources.

But despite solar power being vastly under-represented in the Sunshine State, Governor Crist is awfully excited about nuclear power (even lumping it together as “renewable” along with wind and solar in his remarks at the Florida Summit on Global Climate Change).

Nuclear supporters argue that it would be expensive at best and impossible at worst to meet the 20 percent renewable energy goal with only solar, wind and biofuels. The President and CEO of Progress Energy Florida, Jeff Lyash, told the St. Petersburg Times the only way the Governor’s goals are achievable is with nuclear.

Others aren’t so optimistic about a nuke-rush in Florida. It would take at least 10 years and billions of dollars to get the necessary state and federal approval and construct a new plant, and that money could go much further by making energy use as efficient as possible and by developing truly clean, renewable sources of energy like solar power. Dale Bryk of the Natural Resources Defense Council explained,

"If you spend all the money that you have to develop global warming options on nuclear, you’re going to do the least you can possibly do to solve the problem by spending the most money.”

Governor Crist is doing better on the coal front. He, along with others, pressured Florida utilities to drop an 800 megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plant because of concerns over its global warming pollution. In June, the Public Service Commission (PSC) rejected a proposal by Florida Power & Light to build a 960 MW coal plant near Everglades National Park. The PSC based its 4-0 vote in part on concerns about the plant’s climate change emissions – marking the first time that global warming has ever played a role in the body’s decision.

St. Petersburg Times
Sarasota Herald-Tribune
TCPalm.com

A survey released earlier this summer found that while 82 percent of senior technology leaders from companies around the world “closely” monitor the global warming issue, most (65 percent) do not have a defined energy strategy for it.

The “Return on Environment” study included interviews of 420 senior business decision-makers from the U.S., U.K., Canada, and China who worked for companies with revenues the equivalent of US$100 million or more.

Despite over half of respondents reporting that they don’t have a defined energy strategy, 77 percent believe there is a need to create some sort of chief energy officer position to develop, implement, and manage a company’s return on investment in clean energy technology and sustainable business practices.

Joe Paluska of the international communications firm that performed the survey, Hill & Knowlton, said in a statement:

“Despite the hype, few companies are plotting a measurable action plan to drive return on environment…We expect reputation, risk and return to suffer until companies really stand up and take charge and industry as a whole sets the standard for measuring return on environment.”

Perhaps that will soon change. The New York Times recently profiled several global companies that have implemented a position solely dedicated to linking sustainability and efficiency with a better bottom line (and who are promoting it like crazy).

General Motors’ vice president for environment, energy, and safety policy, Elizabeth A. Lowery, says that ensuring credibility is a priority of her position. She explains that she “toned down” broad statements and claims that were part of GM’s “Live Green Go Yellow” campaign and added more facts (thanks – facts are good).

At DuPont, Linda Fisher is the chief sustainability officer. She says her job is to ensure that the company never overstates the “greenness” of its items. She’s helping to develop a scorecard that researchers can use to determine whether their work will actually produce products that are smarter for the environment.

Those who have been on the greener side for a longer period of time are divided over these new efforts. While greenwashing is a rightful concern, others are cautiously optimistic that corporations are finally making the connection that efficiency and sustainability can go hand-in-hand with profits.

Most importantly, consumers are making the connection too.

Hill & Knowlton
New York Times
Wikipedia

Cross posted at Maria Energia 

Animal, Vegetable, Miracle is the true-life chronicle of author Barbara Kingsolver’s decision to move to an Appalachian farm and eat locally produced, organic goods for one year. She explains that her highest shopping goal was to “get our food from so close to home that we’d know the person who grew it.” Her husband and two daughters joined her on this journey.

The family raised an astonishing array of vegetables, fruit, meat, and eggs. They did buy supplies like flour, coffee, and olive oil from the grocery store, but they were able to grow the vast majority of their food at home or buy from locals. Besides Kingsolver’s accounts of the ups and downs of pulling weeds or dodging testosterone-crazy roosters, husband Steven L. Hopp provides fascinating food facts sprinkled throughout the book. He explains that if we all ate just one meal each week made of locally raised organic meat and produce, we could reduce our country’s oil consumption by over 1.1 million barrels of oil per week. Kingsolver’s nineteen-year-old daughter Camille offers sidebars of meal plans and recipes (my looming zucchinis thank her for the zucchini chocolate chip cookie recipe).

Steven and Camille’s practical commentary provide a good balance to the author’s more subjective arguments for eating seasonally. For example, Kingsolver implies that the reader will have a greater appreciation for food if they can’t eat apples in January, or that hours spent in the kitchen canning vegetables with the family is a happy time that brings you closer. It sounds great to me, but other readers may be swayed less by a touch-feely argument, and more convinced by the scientific health arguments for organic foods and the greater energy independence local foods bring (a typical meal travels 1500 miles to a dinner table). At times, I did get a bit tired of seeing Kingsolver’s world though the rosiest of glasses. Everything appears to be perfect, lush, beautiful, the most delicious, faster, stronger, healthier. I don’t doubt the superior taste and nutrition of locally grown, organic products, but I was waiting for another side to the story – some sort of significant downside or obstacle they had to overcome. The author admits this herself when she recounts telling a friend about a tranquil summer evening spent with Amish friends on a farm. The friend remarks, “What, not even a mosquito to bother heaven?” But perhaps Kingsolver’s point is that it is easier than we think to eat locally. In spite of the endless positive spin, her humor and thorough research were inspiring enough to get me to contemplate making my own mozzarella.

A thought-provoking surprise was Kingsolver’s adamant argument for eating meat – specifically locally bred, organic meat. She aligns herself with a vegetarian position, she says, except that she eats meat. She points out that “every sack of flour and every soybean-based block of tofu came from a field where countless winged and furry lives were extinguished in the plowing, cultivating, and harvest…To believe that we can live without taking life is delusional.” She goes on to explain that the oft-repeated argument that it takes ten times as much land to make a pound of meat as a pound of grain only applies to the kind of land where rain falls abundantly on rich topsoil. Cultures that live on less productive land like the Navajo, Mongols, Lapps, and Masai would starve without their animals. The argument for eating locally produced organic meat is perhaps a more realistic option for individuals who care about where their food comes from and its environmental and energy consequences, but who aren’t going to stop eating chicken or burgers tomorrow.

In the end, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle has a little bit for everyone. For those ready to set the loftiest goals, take the Kingsolver challenge of canning all fall and making meals from home seven days a week. For someone like me who has a love of food, gardening, and cooking, but who isn’t prepared to give up Cheerios (are they local if General Mills is located 20 miles from my house?), I walked away with a renewed dedication to my farmers’ market, an intensive search for local foods at my grocery store, and the knowledge that buying food that grew up continents away is as much of an energy decision as leaving the lights on.

Last week I covered the SmartPower and YouTube Clean Energy Ad Challenge. SmartPower is a nonprofit marketing agency that promotes renewable energy, and their challenge to the YouTube community was to create a compelling public service announcement for the agency with the idea that “clean energy is real. It’s here. And it’s working.”

The winner was announced on June 18th. Dan Sheppard, age 19 and a student at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, was awarded the $10,000 top prize for his ad “Telephones.” Although it didn't fall into my top favorites (you can see the top 10 finalists here), but it was simple, well-made, and earns a chuckle. Congratulations!

The Group of Eight (G8) summit brought the planet’s most powerful economies together last week to discuss issues like foreign policy, trade, and climate change. Buzz and speculation abounded before the meeting even began when the Bush Administration came out against host country Germany’s proposal to limit global temperature rise this century to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) and to cut emissions to 50 percent below 1990 levels. Instead, President Bush proposed his own plan for a series of meetings from which nations would agree on an emissions goal and then figure out how to achieve that goal on their own. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel was quoted as saying that her proposal was “non-negotiable as far as I am concerned.”

Well, turns out her proposal was quite negotiable. Rather than agreeing on concrete cuts, the G8 agreed to “seriously consider” cutting emissions 50 percent by 2050. They plan to develop a global framework on emissions by the end of 2008, and they affirmed the importance of developing nations to limit emissions.

What happened? Where’s the hard talk, the aggressive goals, the accountability? They’re just going to “seriously consider” it?

It seems that most world leaders were so happy that the United States was even in on the talks that the rest was second fiddle. British Prime Minister Tony Blair called the agreement "a major, major step forward." Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations Climate Change Secretariat said it was "a very positive outcome." The Financial Times editorialized that "the G8 summit marks a turning point on tackling climate change." Even Chancellor Merkel said she was "very satisfied" with the meetings.

Others were less satisfied. Daniel Mittler, climate policy advisor of Greenpeace International said of the meetings, “The U.S. isolation in refusing to accept binding emission cuts has become blindingly obvious…” Likewise, Philip Clapp of the U.S. National Environmental Trust said that although Chancellor Merkel and Prime Minister Blair were portraying the agreement positively, "President Bush didn't give them an inch. The best they could get from him was a statement that their 50 percent-by-2050 emissions reduction proposal would be `seriously considered.` That's a pretty tiny landmark."

Did the G8 leaders fall to the lowest common denominator? Would it not have been better for them to move forward without the United States and commit to Merkel’s targets?

Financial Times
G-8 Summit 2007
Guardian
Taipei Times

On Sunday, the Western Governor’s Association unanimously passed a resolution titled “Transitioning the West to Clean Energy and Energy Security.” The document highlights the need for diverse energy resources (including coal), energy efficiency, and carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration. The actionable results or “management directives” include:

• Plan a workshop to determining the most expeditious way to achieve energy efficiency savings from new and existing residential and commercial/public buildings.

• Hold a forum on transmission needs to accommodate the integration of large amounts of renewable generation in the Western power system.

• Work with federal agencies to identify and mitigate the risks associated with carbon sequestration and develop a pipeline transport system that can move CO2 to enhanced oil recovery and sequestration areas.

• Work with federal agencies to secure funding for near-zero emission coal pilot facilities (i.e. coal plants) and examine accelerating the deployment of near-zero emissions coal technology.

• Determine the most effective way to use federal funds to research and develop technologies that would reduce the cost to develop solar, wind, geothermal, bio-fuel and biomass projects.

I wouldn’t use the term “clean energy” in this resolution. Perhaps cleaner is a better term, as coal should certainly not be lumped in the same category as wind, solar, and geothermal power that emit no global warming emissions.

Notably, the Western Governors Association did come out against Congressman Nick Rahall’s bill that threatens to slow and complicate the progress of wind power.

Thanks to Jon over at Loon Commons for the heads-up on this announcement.

Hog House Blog
Western Governors’ Association

Mayors from the planet’s largest cities gathered in New York last week to discuss how global warming is impacting their cities now, how it may in the future, and what immediate action needs to be taken to slow it.

The “C40 Large Cities Climate Summit” has partnered with the Clinton Climate Initiative to tackle climate change now, rather than waiting for action from national governments. At the Summit, mayors shared best practices, identified collaborative projects, and planned for future action together. The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, explained why:

"The fight to tackle climate change will be won or lost in cities…We are not going to simply talk about what we could do, while the window of opportunity for preventing catastrophic climate change disappears. Every city here today is a leader in at least one aspect of the fight to tackle climate change."

Some of the cities' intiatives include:

• New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s controversial proposal for a congestion charge for Manhattan as part of the city's multi-billion dollar Green Plan.
• Toronto Mayo David Miller explained “Zerofootprint Toronto,” which helps residents understand how every aspect of their lives impacts the environment, and creates a network for people to join with friends, neighbors, and coworkers to create a virtual eco-community to create initiatives and measure results.
• Curitiba, Brazil’s Mayor Carlos Alberto Richa described a bus rapid transit system for his city to cut down on pollution from cars.
• Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced GREEN LA, an action plan to reduce the city’s carbon footprint 35 percent below 1990 levels. Villaraigosa said it is the most ambitious goal set yet by a major American city.

Summit organizers also invited business leaders in an effort to involve the private sector. Both parties discused how to work together under the conviction that fighting global warming – through innovation, transportation, and energy efficiency – is profitable.

Peopleandplanet.net
Washington Post

A seemingly simple alteration a wind turbine blade’s traditional shape could result in huge improvements in efficiency.

WhalePower Corporation out of Toronto, Canada has designed a turbine blade with rounded, teeth-like bumps along the leading edge. The company’s name is a nod to the humpback whale, whose flipper was the inspiration for the design.

The agility of the humpback whale is astonishing, given that they can be over 50 feet long, weigh nearly 80,000 pounds, yet move quickly and tightly in the water. One of the animal's advantages, according to scientists, is the unique row of bumps or “tubercles” along the leading edge of their flippers that dramatically increase the whale’s aerodynamic efficiency. Specifically, researchers found a 32 percent lower drag and 8 percent improvement in lift from a flipper with a serrated edge compared to a smooth one.

Businessman Stephen Dewar heard about the humpback research and contacted one of the scientists involved, Professor Frank Fish of West Chester University in Pennsylvania. After a few meetings, they enlisted the help of some local engineers and formed WhalePower, taking a cue from Mother Nature and modeling their blade design after the whale’s flipper.

WhalePower claims that their turbine design can capture more wind energy at much lower speeds than traditional designs. The channels created by the teeth at the blade's edge cause separate wind streams to accelerate across the surface of the blade in rotating flows. These “energy-packed” vortexes increase the lift force on the blade. For example, Dewar told the Toronto Star that this design produces the same power at 11 miles per hour that one would expect at 18 miles per hour. Furthermore, he claimed these channels prevent airflow from moving along the span of the blade and past the tip, which can create noise, instability and a loss of energy. By keeping the air flow nicely channeled, more wind is captured and noise is reduced.

Dewar sees this “biomimicry” design – the fusion of biology and engineering – reaching beyond wind power.

“’This changes the game,’ says Dewar, adding that any system using a fan or turbine could also benefit from the new design. This includes everything from better turbines for hydroelectric generation to residential ceiling fans that use less electricity. ‘If we've got what we think we've got, then the range of applications is staggering.’”

The Ontario Centres of Excellence and the Ontario Power Authority have contributed over $60,000 USD for early research and to encourage collaboration with a wind engineering group at the University of Western Ontario. The next and arguably most crucial step to commercial production is independent, third party verification of the blade’s performance.

Toronto Star
Wikipedia

Cross posted at Maria Energia

Today the fourth and final assessment from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “Mitigation of Climate Change,” will be released. More than 400 scientists and experts from 120 countries are in Bangkok, Thailand this week to finalize the report. The summary of Mitigation of Climate Change will be posted here; go here for a live webcast around 1PM local time. The full report will be released in September.

The report will lay out ways to cut global warming emissions and prevent the worst impacts without seriously hurting the global economy. In fact, it is expected to show that the cost of doing nothing is far higher than the cost of taking action now.

On Wednesday, the Taipei Times reported that talks were stalled by China, India, and Brazil, who insisted that industrialized nations take more responsibility for their pollution contribution. The stalemate took up other time meant for discussion on how to best tackle global warming. One European delegate reported:

"Progress is slow…Brazil, India and China are trying to put on the shoulders of industrialized nations the historic responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions in order to clear their own emissions [of blame] and to protect themselves in any discussion.”

The report will assess not only the long-term options available for the next 100 years, but a range of economic, technological, and institutional solutions and covering short and medium-term timelines up until 2030, explained Dr. R.K. Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Taipei Times
World Wildlife Fund

There’s a lot of talk about China’s staggering amount of planned coal plants, and the narrowing gap between it and the U.S. for the title of Planet’s Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter. But China is examining at least one unique way to develop more sustainably.

Welcome to Dongtan, the world’s first CO2-free city. Developers are building this $1.3 billion eco-city just outside of Shanghai. Renewable energy will be used extensively, the layout of the city maximizes walking and biking rather than cars, and transport vehicles will run on batteries or hydrogen fuel cells. Other plans include recycling organic waste, green roofs, and rainwater capture.

Dongtan will cover an area about three-quarters the size of Manhattan on wetlands at the mouth of the Yangtze River. However, Peter Head of Arup, the London-based firm heading the planning, said the wetlands are not at risk from the development. From the Architectural Record:

“‘First of all, water usually discharged into the river will be collected, treated, and recycled within the city boundaries,” he says. ‘There will be a 2-mile buffer zone of eco-farm between city development and the wetlands.’ While farming is water intensive, relatively small amounts of water reach the plants themselves. Head says Dongtan ‘will capture and recycle water in the city and use recycled water to grow green vegetables hydroponically. This makes the whole water cycle much more efficient.’”

But what will the habitants do in this eco-utopia? City officials and consultants expect jobs in education like at the planned Institute for Sustainable Cities, and they anticipate attracting companies pursuing clean technologies, food research and production, and health care. Dongtan is also expected to rely heavily on ecotourism.

Designers hope CO2-free city will serve as a model for the rest of the urbanized world. Its first phase includes a marina village of 20,000 habitants that will be unveiled at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai. Nearly 80,000 people are expected to live in the city by 2020, and eventually designers hope to see 500,000 citizens living the good, green life there.

Architectural Record
Jetson Green