Posted by jumperhead on June 27th, 2008
Hey, maybe Portugal lost out in the whole Euro 2008 thing, but you know, at least it’s got wind farms. It will always have wind farms.
Yes, after being booted out of football’s second (more like third) greatest tournament by Germany last week, Portugal will have to take succour where it can get it. And right now, Greenbang’s suggesting that looking at wind farms is an option. Maybe not the best option, but an option. It’s either that or the pasteis de nata.
So , wind farms then.
Airtricity, the renewables arm of Scottish and Southern Energy, has signed a couple of new joint ventures in the country.
Here’s just the facts, ma’am, from SSE:
The first agreement is with Riviera, one of the largest real estate and property development companies in Portugal, to jointly develop a number of wind farms totalling approximately 250MW. Under the terms of this agreement Airtricity will hold a 60% share in the joint venture company and Riviera will hold 40%. As these projects are at an early stage of development, the earliest likely date for construction of the first wind farm is around the end of next year.
Airtricity has also signed an agreement with Portugese and Spanish wind farm developer Hispano Lusa S.L. whereby a joint venture company called Airtricity Marao, will be established. The company will be 90% owned by Airtricity and 10% owned by Hispano Lusa S.L. Airtricity Marao will be responsible for development of eight potential wind farm sites with a potential capacity of 150MW in the Baiao, Amarante and Mondim de Basto areas of northern Portugal.
According to the utility, it’s all part of its plan to invest around £500 million in new markets.
Posted by RobAshwell on June 27th, 2008
Former British PM, Tony Blair and The Climate Group have published a report entitled “Breaking The Climate Deadlock - A Global deal for our low carbon future.” The report, available here, steps away from merely highlighting the problem and gives for the first time, or so the writers claim, a clear action plan outlining the 10 building blocks for an agreement that will create a prosperous low carbon climate-resilient world.
In Tokyo, this morning, Tony Blair gave a speech to launch the report targeted towards G8 + 5 leaders, policy makers, business leaders, and opinion formers from key countries. In it, the former PM highlighted that the solution must “include America and China…put the world on a path away from carbon dependence to a new and green economy…[and] be realistic”
The strategy is split into two phases, the latter of which will be given at the next G8 in 2009. Phase 1, clarify and order the agenda for the solution. Phase 2, set out what the solution might be.
As quoted in Tony Blair’s full speech, the 10 building blocks are identifying:
- The global target
- An interim target
- Developed world commitments and carbon markets
- Developing world contributions
- Sectoral action
- Financing
- Technology
- Forests
- Adaptation
- Institutions and mechanisms of action
Some of the speech’s highlights follow:
“The report warns of the danger of a yawning chasm between, on the one hand the calls for radical action from scientists, environmental groups and people rightly alarmed at the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on the planet; and on the other, the anxiety of decision makers in politics and business, who share the aims of the radical action but worry about whether that action is realistic. Long-term everyone accepts that the needs of economy and environment are in partnership. Short-term there is a clear tension. And we live in the short-term.”
…”The US emissions are still growing. So are those in Japan. In Europe they are static. China and India are set, rightly, to industrialise and move their vast hundreds of millions of poor people from subsistence agriculture to the modern economy.”
…
“We are talking of a global 2050 target of at least a 50% cut in emissions. But let’s be clear. This date is decades away and decades beyond the political life of any government. The key challenge is to describe a realistic pathway to it. That implies shorter term goals. But these are immensely demanding, asking developed economies to move from growth in emissions to significant cuts within 10-15 years.”
…
“What this report proposes, is an approach to the Copenhagen agreement at the end of 2009 that does not attempt a deal that tries to resolve all issues up to 2050 or even 2030 or 2020. But instead begins a process that will then undergo revision and adjustment as our knowledge improves and the facts become clearer.”So we propose:
“1. Set a clear direction in Copenhagen and get the action under way. Do not try to put a spurious precision on each and every aspect. Set a realistic target and get the change started. Make Copenhagen the beginning but not the end of a process that will require constant adjustment over the years.
“2. Carry on through to next year’s G8 the informal process whereby G8 and the developing world major economies continue to try to resolve core questions. Together G8+5 and MEM represent three quarters of the global emissions. A steer from them is an essential precondition to a deal. This doesn’t supplant the UN process. It supports it.
“3. There are a plethora of really tricky questions that need answering before a serious negotiation can work. We detail these in the report. It is surely wise to commission work and research on them, making full use of the enormous range of non-governmental bodies, institutes and experts, many of whom contribute to the UN’s work.
Tony Blair also discussed the need to agree a work plan through to next year, to get this work done. Specifically asking:
“How do we raise the money? Is there a place for auctioning credits? If so, how would it work? Is the CDM the right mechanism? Can it be reformed? How do carbon markets link up? Should the developing world have access to them? How do we transfer technology? Do we need a new IPR regime?”
And some of the specific steps:
“Energy efficiency would provide around one quarter of the gains necessary and, incidentally, save money. It requires special focus. The vast majority of new power stations in China and India will be coal-fired; not “may be coal-fired”; will be. So developing carbon capture and storage technology is not optional, it is literally of the essence.”
“Without at least some countries engaging in a substantial renaissance of nuclear power, it is hard to see how any global deal could work.”
…
“Deforestation amounts to around 15-20 percent of the entire emissions problem. Certain key sectors like cement, steel and of course power most of all, account for a huge percentage – almost half of all emissions. Airline and shipping emissions, though only 5 percent today, are a fast growing part of the problem.
“Done right, the costs of abatement will be manageable and probably less than predicted; and there are potentially real opportunities for the new low-carbon economy that will develop.
“In the end this is the question:
“What is it reasonable to ask countries to do on their own?
“What more could be done, if the right partnership was in place for a global deal?
“i.e. How do we, by use of global mechanisms, accelerate the process of change in individual countries?
“There may be a gap between what it is reasonable to do; and what is necessary for the climate to survive.
“The global deal is about eliminating that gap.”
Posted by jumperhead on June 27th, 2008
Greenbang’s wondering if she’s been getting George Bush wrong all these years. The man can’t really be as stupid as he appears - he’s just acting stupid so he can get away with all manner of evil genius tricks.
Like this, from the New York Times:
The White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.
Yep, if you don’t like what you’re about to read, then just don’t open it. Surely, surely no one’s that stupid?
After the Supreme Court asked the EPA to find out whether greenhouse gases could be a threat to people or the environment (yep, they were still wondering back in the heady days of 2007) the EPA responded with its conclusions.
The White House didn’t like the conclusions. Ok. So they said they wouldn’t open it. Stupid, but whatever. Guess what they did next?!
This:
Over the past five days, the officials said, the White House successfully put pressure on the E.P.A. to eliminate large sections of the original analysis that supported regulation, including a finding that tough regulation of motor vehicle emissions could produce $500 billion to $2 trillion in economic benefits over the next 32 years. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter.
Expect a wishy-washy version of the report some time this week.
Greenbang’s off to weep into her rum and coke.
Posted by RobAshwell on June 26th, 2008
What can you get for £20 these days? So far a quick web trawl has unearthed a Sony MP3 player or a cheap date - pizza and a beer - these were the only decent options.
However, a new report by McKinsey & Company, presented at the Siemens Media Summit might have just come up with a winner. Hold with me whilst I do a charity advert blurb… Just £20* and the Kyoto (12 pc by 2012), EU (20pc by 2020) and national (30pc by 2025) reduction in greenhouse gas targets will be met and bettered - bargain.
The study has been billed as the “first comprehensive analysis of costs and potentials of greenhouse gas abatement technologies in a city”. It states:
Until 2025, an incremental total investment of around €41 billion – an amount less than one percent of London’s total economic output – would be needed to implement all the identified technologies to reduce carbon emissions – enabling London to meet its Kyoto target (-12 percent by 2012), the EU goal (-20 percent by 2020) as well as national target (-30 percent by 2025). This amounts to less than €300 per inhabitant per year, around half of the average Londoner’s annual bill for gas and electricity.
Greenbang’s figures do differ slightly due to a smaller supposed populations but it’s still very close fairly close.
And it gets better.
Almost 70% of the abatement potential is made up of technology levers that would collectively provide net savings of more than €1.8bn per year by 2025 to the investors
Overall, investments of roughly €20 billion would be necessary. Nearly 90 percent of these pay off for those making the investment decisions.
So theoretically at least Londoners should be able to pay the government £20 per month now and, in return, get a less damaged climate and £2856 back in 2025. Ok, maybe it’s not quite that simple, but invested wisely it might not be that far off.
Greenbang’s extrapolation maths:
*€41 billion divided by 7.5 million inhabitants = €5466
€5466per Londoner divided by 17 years (2025) = €321
€321 divided by 12 months €26
€26 at the quoted exchange rate 0.7919 = £20.
This story is brought to you in association with Delta Simons
Posted by jumperhead on June 26th, 2008
Greenbang is wondering what’s carbon capture’s secret. Not the technological secret, more the secret of how it’s sucking in money like a back hole sucks in the Starship Enterprise and/or Doctor Who.
The last few times that Greenbang has written the words ‘carbon’ and ‘capture’ and ’storage’ she seems to have been groping for the $ key straight after. Today, my friends, is no exception - Greenbang will be writing the words ‘carbon’ and ‘capture’ and then ‘has pulled in $1.3 billion in funding.
Today’s donor is the US Department of Energy, who’s ponying up around $0.3 billion next year and $1billion the following year for research into systems that can clean up dirty, dirty coal.
Anyone who wants to get their slice of money pie (all carbon capture projects will need to be cost shared) will have to get their applications in by 8 October.
More from the DoE:
By funding multiple projects DOE expects at least to double the amount of CO2 sequestered compared to the amount under the concept announced in 2003. When these plants are operational, they will be the cleanest coal-fired power plants in the world - each capturing and storing an expected 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Subject to compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the FOA envisions commercial operation of IGCC (Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle) or other clean coal power plants equipped with CCS technology to begin as soon as the plants are commissioned by the end of 2015. The restructured FutureGen approach will focus on the challenges associated with avoiding and reducing carbon emissions through sequestration. Technical, economic, and operational results from multiple projects will inform and guide the promulgation of regulations related to wide-scale carbon sequestration activities and at the same time will help establish technologies and protocols for CO2 monitoring, mitigation and verification.
Posted by jumperhead on June 26th, 2008
Greenbang can barely contain her cackling thanks to a new report from the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts.
Apparently, you know all those ads encouraging us to think a bit more about the impact of our actions so our whole planet doesn’t wither into a plug of asthmatic black sludge and take us all with it? Well, they’re all a bit downbeat. Advertisers need to turn that frown upside down.
Here’s the summary:
• Campaigns should avoid being ‘miserable, gloomy and bleak’ (despite the potentially catastrophic consequences of not acting), instead emphasising that taking action on climate change is ‘normal’ – encouraging more people to engage with it.
• Campaigns should recognise the importance of fairness – i.e. Everyone needs to be seen to be doing their bit, including government and industry.
• Campaigns should be personally relevant. Campaigns should relate to our environment, not the environment and should use insight from commercial ads to engage emotional responses.
• Campaigns should identify the opportunities for individuals in taking action. For example, consumer research shows that millions of people desire a lower-stress, less consumption orientated lifestyle; this could form one basis for a social marketing campaign.
What next? Al Gore remakes An Inconvenient Truth as an upbeat addition to the the High School Musical franchise? We start trying to downplay the impending climatic awfulness by changing the term global warming into climate change? Oh yeah…
Posted by jumperhead on June 26th, 2008
The government has gone literally green crazy with its latest renewables plan - 15 percent renewables by 2020.
Here’s the highlight of what the government wants to ahead with:
* Extending and raising the level of the Renewables Obligation to encourage 30-35% of our electricity to come from renewable sources by 2020;
* Introducing a new financial incentive mechanism to encourage a very large increase in renewable heat, including in homes and other buildings;
* Extending more effective financial support for heat and electricity microgeneration technologies in homes and other buildings, potentially through a feed-in tariff;
* Helping the planning system to deliver, by agreeing a clear deployment strategy at regional level similar to the approach established for housing;
* Ensuring appropriate incentives for new electricity grid infrastructure and removing access to the transmission grid as a barrier to renewable deployment;
* Exploiting the full potential of energy from waste by considering further restrictions on landfilling biomass, as far as is practical;
* Requiring all biofuels to meet strict sustainability criteria to limit adverse impacts on food prices, and other social and environmental concerns;
* Encouraging the development of new renewable technologies by ensuring effective support particularly where the UK has the potential to be a market leader;
* Maximising the benefits for UK business by providing a clear long-term policy framework, working with Regional Development Agencies to tackle blockages, considering support for specific technologies and addressing skills shortages.
According to the government, this big-ass plan will create 160,000 jobs. Which is a bit of a shame - being on the dole can be a lot of fun. Very, very cheap fun. For less than a day.
Posted by jumperhead on June 26th, 2008
Greenbang’s hazy memories of Action Man was that he had more accessories - guns, knives, explosives, coils of rope - than a Sex and the City wardrobe. And he occasionally got in to bed with Barbie, but the less said about that the better.
It looks like the military man might be touting some fuel cell bearing goodies in the future, after methanol cell makers UltraCell landed an extra contract award from U.S. Army
Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC)
Army Power Division and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
The cash will be used for research and testing of UltraCell’s 25 methanol fuel cell, called XX25.
More on the cell:
UltraCell’s patented RMFC system internally generates fuel cell-ready hydrogen from a highly concentrated methanol solution. Recognized as the first commercial fuel cell system to be authorized by the U.S. Military for power portable devices, the XX25 is designed to run a ruggedized laptop computer for up to eight hours on a single 250cc fuel cell cartridge. The system can also be configured with large fuel tanks for
weeks of runtime in stationary applications such as remote video monitoring, surveillance and communications equipment.
This technology story is brought to you in association with Kyocera
Posted by jumperhead on June 26th, 2008
Greenbang just stumbled across an interesting (imagine that word in italics and you’ll see the type of interesting she means) site, top 10 myths about Canada and Canadians. Top myth number one? We live in igloos. Number two? Canadians do not have the same technology as Americans. (answer: Canadians have access to the same technology as Americans and the rest of the civilized world.)
Top ten myths? Among who? People who don’t have access to books, the internet, the TV, solid food, education or human conversation?
Greenbang is all too well aware that Canadians have access to technology, and seemingly most of it clean tech related.
Today’s first Canadian clean tech news maker, energy efficiency and emission reduction company, Thermal Energy International, which has closed a $15 million private placement financing deal.
The funds raised enable Thermal Energy to complete its acquisition of Gardner Energy Management Ltd. in the UK with the base payment of £2.7 million(approximately $5.4 million CAD). The funding also provides Thermal Energy:
• A funding base for investment in FLU-ACE® and DRY-REX™ assets under
THERMAL-AUD™ green energy supply contracts such as the $20 million, eight-year
agreement recently announced with a U.S. pulp and paper mill;
• Strong financial base to support expanded sales and marketing activities in key industrial and geographic markets;
• Capacity for additional project development and engineering resources to meet the unprecedented customer demand for the Company’s solutions.
Newsmaker number two, Western Wind (you can probably guess what they do):
Western Wind Energy Corp is pleased to announce that it has closed an oversubscribed private placement of $15 million announced on May 27, 2008. The Private Placement was led by Loewen, Ondaatje, McCutcheon Limited and included Clarus Securities Inc. […]
Western Wind intends to use the net proceeds from the offering to repay approximately $12.5 million of acquisition loan owed to Pacific Hydro and the balance will be used for working capital purposes.
Newsmaker number three, the University of Guelph:
The University of Guelph’s Ridgetown Campus is receiving $938,260 from the federal government to develop a functional, farm-scale oilseed processing and biodiesel plant on campus, […]
The funding is being provided through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Advancing Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Food program, which is delivered in Ontario by the Agricultural Adaptation Council.
Posted by RobAshwell on June 25th, 2008
Nissan has today released its 2008 sustainability report, a 140 page epic outlining all parts of the Japanese car giant’s CSR initiatives. Thankfully, it has a contents page so you can skip straight to the interesting bit on environment.
That said, there is still 32 pages to wade through with very little, aside from an only semi-accidental stapler injury, to distract you.
So, here are the highlights:
- As a global automaker, Nissan takes active steps to gauge the impact of its business on the environment and to minimize such impact. As our ultimate goal, moreover, we seek to reduce the environmental impact caused by our operations and the usage of Nissan vehicles to a level that can be absorbed naturally by the Earth.
- All companies in the Nissan Group worldwide, including production sites, sales companies and affiliate companies, have been introducing environmental management systems to promote environmental activities.
- At Nissan’s main global production plants and R&D centers, we have been introducing ISO 14001. Today 16 of 18 production companies, which include Nissan and its consolidated manufacturing affiliates, have obtained ISO 14001 certification. Our basic policy is to establish environmental management systems according to the same standards whenever we expand our business into new areas
- Nissan’s CO2 emission levels:
Production = 2,200kton; Logistics = 895kton; Use of vehicles = 155,000kton; Offices etc. 124kton
- It is not enough for environmental technology to aim for CO2 reductions alone. To be truly sustainable, technological development must also take into account such factors as basic performance and cost, and must have the potential for broad acceptance… Our goal is to turn the challenges posed by CO2 emissions into opportunities for Nissan.
- In line with the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report, we believe that if society at large can stabilize atmospheric CO2 at 550 parts per million, it will help prevent average temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius. To achieve this, we calculate that the “well-to-wheel” CO2 emissions of new vehicles in 2050 will need to be reduced by 70% from 2000 levels.
- As part of Nissan’s efforts to enhance the fuel efficiency of gasoline engines and reduce CO2 emissions, it has developed a new 1.5-liter gasoline engine and the electronically improved Xtronic continuously variable transmission (CVT) system for the Note 2WD. This gives a 6% improvement in mileage compared to the earlier models, at the same time allowing us to achieve a recoverability rate of 95%.
- Nissan is targeting the introduction of gasoline-powered cars that reduce CO2 emissions to levels equivalent to hybrid vehicles by 2010, starting in the Japanese market. The aim is a car that can run for 100 kilometers on just 3 liters of gasoline.
- To increase transportation efficiency and reduce CO2 emissions, Nissan has been promoting a modal shift from truck to maritime and rail transport.
- Nissan is working on a global basis to reduce or completely do away with certain substances in all new models launched from July 2007 onward: heavy metals including mercury, lead, cadmium and hexavalent chromium, in-cabin volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) flame retardants.
- We are reconsidering the adhesives and other substances used in the seats, door trim, floor carpets and other parts of our vehicle cabins, with the aim of reducing VOCs. In Japan, we have reduced the cabin concentrations of 13 substances in all new models from 2007 onward to levels below those permitted by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. This puts us ahead of voluntary moves within the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association to meet government guidelines.
