If you haven’t yet worked out your carbon footprint, it’s really worth doing. Makes you think a bit differently about how you live.
There are a lot of carbon calculators out there, but today Greenbang is directing you to one made by video conferencing and telepresence company Tandberg.
Why them? Well - because they’ve been kind enough to sposnor Greenbang. But also because they’ve got their house in order. We interviewed them earlier in the year, and they’ve really looked at their carbon footprint and made plans on how to cut it.
No rocket science involved with that, but six months ago, that was quite a way ahead of the curve.
For that reason - we’re delighted to welcome them onto Greenbang.
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) - presented as a ‘cure’ for climate change by those with vested interests but viewed as a bit evil by others who argue it doesn’t encourage businesses to fundamentally change their practices and reduce emissions. A carbon landfill, if you like - bury it and the problem goes away is the utopian vision of CCS.
A new environmental audit committee report says progress on CCS in the UK has been “extremely disappointing” and that without it we risk locking the country into a high emissions trajectory.
The government has argued that coal has a vital role to play in meeting the UK’s energy demand in future, and coal fired power stations need to be built while CCS is developed. Current coal power stations can be granted a licence on the condition they will be “CCS ready” – meaning the technology can be fitted afterwards.
But the report found that “there is no guarantee that a plant approved on the basis that it would be CCS ready will actually be willing or able to retrofit CCS once the technology has been demonstrated on a commercial scale.”
The government argues that if it mandates a technology too specifically, this may restrict uptake.
A second plank of the Government’s argument for its lack of regulation on CCS is that any emissions will be offset by the third phase of the Emissions Trading Scheme – due to start in 2012.
But the report found this approach flawed.
“The Government is wrong to rely on the EU ETS cap to excuse the increase in emissions that would derive from the new unabated coal-fired power stations.
“The EU ETS is a mechanism designed to reduce emissions; using it as a cover for choosing high emissions technology goes against the purpose of the scheme.”
Government policy has made progress in some areas. The Ospar treaty, which effectively banned CO2 dumping in the North Sea has been changed.
And a competition launched recently by the department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) will fund one coal-fired powerplant with CCS which the department hopes will be finished by 2014.
But the competition only allows for one specific type of CCS technology: post combustion capture.
The Government argued this was because this was the single form of technology that was most deserving of further development.
But the audit committee report found that “this decision excluded nearly half of the CCS projects under development in the UK at the time the competition was launched.”
This meant that the number of proposed CCS projects in the UK was halved, according to a report by the think tank Policy Exchange. The report says:
“The Government must view its competition as only one part of a wider strategy; it must continue to support other CCS projects including the development and integration of the individual components and new CCS technologies.”
The Environmental Audit Committee proposes a different strategy for encouraging CCS. Rather than mandating a technology or saying a plant can be built if it is “CCS ready”, the Government should set a date by which all power stations will have to have emissions per unit of power generated below a certain limit or face closure. It says:
“This limit should be based on capturing at least 90 per cent of carbon emissions.”
The environment has, thankfully, become one of the leading issues for the candidates in the US presidential race.
The Wall Street Journal has put together a brilliant piece looking at the two major presidential candidates’ views on the environment and the climate versus cost debate. Greenbang is pleased to note that neither appear to be Bush-esque and look things look positive.
In the piece, McCain’s and Obama’s energy policy advisers outline what the environment can expect over the next four years. Here are the highlights:
John McCarrick (McCain) says:
The United States will become a leader in dealing with the global warming crisis
The senator knows this will take more than just four years
A $5,000 tax incentive for zero-emissions vehicles will be created
A $300 million prize to advance battery technology for vehicles, and promoting the use of hybrids and flex-fuel vehicles will also be made
Heather Zichal (Obama) says:
$150 billion will be invested over the next ten years in clean energy technologies
The aim is to reduce the US dependence on oil, bring energy costs down and help solve the climate crisis.
Assistance will also be made to lower energy costs - a tax credit of $500 per person or $1,000 per working family.
One of the main barriers to a serious increase in the UK’s wind power capacity is the lack of boats capable of installing off-shore wind turbines.
Believe it or not, 75 per cent of Europe’s (and thus the world’s) wind turbines, have been installed by one company. And that company does it all with just three boats.
The company is A2SEA and it has been active on most UK projects, such as Scroby Sands, Kentish Flats, with planned work ahead on Robin Rigg, Thanet and Greater Gabbard developments.
The company, formed in 2000, has one “jack up barge” and two ships.
All are equipped with large cranes and four “legs” which are deployed to the sea floor and lift the vessels out of the water – vital for gaining the stability needed to install a wind turbine.
The jack up barge is lifted completely out of the water, while the ships only lift themselves partially out of the water.
A turbine is installed in two “vessel campaigns” – one to put the foundation in and a second for the turbine itself.
The time taken to install depends on a number of factors such as weather, water depths and seabed conditions and can vary hugely – making it diffuclt for the company to plan operations exactly.
So why is there such a lack of competition when demand is rising?
Firstly, it takes four years to construct the boats necessary to do the installations. Construction is expensive and companies are unwilling to take the risk to enter what is still a young and untested market.
Secondly the unpredictability of conditions (as mentioned earlier) make it difficult to plan projects, where boats are needed, and thus profits.
For the same reasons the company has been hesitant to expand its fleet – until now.
Chief executive Jens Frederik Hansen says:
“Business is good and we’ve just chartered a fourth vessel. Construction will start this month, so it should be ready in 2012. There are some really interesting projects starting to happen and we want to be a part of them.”
Never ones to miss a hot investment opportunity, the banks are jumping all over green and sustainable technology right now.
The latest is Bank of America, which has just announced an undisclosed investment in a tech company called Field Diagnostic Services Inc (FDSI). The bank plans to use the energy management tech across its banking centres in the US to cut energy costs and carbon footprint by 50 per cent more than what it calls “traditional service methods” – not cut its total energy costs and carbon footprint by 50 per cent, as some publications have mistakenly reported.
The investment is part of Bank of America’s already public $20bn, 10-year programme to promote sustainability not only in its operations but also through its products. As well as the 50 per cent savings compared to standard building control technologies, the bank claims the tech will reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions at its 3,300 banking centres across the US by 14,000 CO2 tonnes.
Sounds impressive but that works out at a pretty modest average reduction of some four tonnes a year for each centre - but, as Tesco says, every little helps.
The blurb in the Bank of America press release says the tech includes handheld energy efficiency diagnostic tools, software and services that enable more rapid and accurate servicing of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment – cutting energy and operational costs.
But the real story is that the bank has obviously spotted a cool investment opportunity and plans to take this out to the broader market, with FDSI claiming there are some nine million commercial heating and cooling units in the US alone that could become more efficient and cheaper to run using this tech.
Richard Cohen, who leads environmental investments for Bank of America’s Strategic Investments Group, said:
“Bank of America is actively making strategic investments that reduce greenhouse gas emissions while helping spark the new environmentally sustainable economy, and our partnership with FDSI is an excellent example of this strategy. Our collaboration with the Bank’s Corporate Workplace group to make the investment in FDSI takes this new energy-saving technology out of the laboratory and to a level that can truly impact the environment as well as our bottom line.”
We at Greenbang have written many times about the US government’s unwillingness to listen to its own environmental advisors. You have to admit, the government does it with some flair, ignoring emails and hiring Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chiefs that don’t listen to its own scientists.
A letter leaked earlier this week suggests that it has gone further still. According to the letter, the EPA has ordered employees to keep schtum. They may not talk to internal auditors, Congress or the media. Well done that team.
The letter was released by the campaign group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer) with a statement citing the email as proof of a “bunker mentality” at the agency.
The extract from the email printed in the Guardian is particularly nice:
“If you are contacted directly by the [auditors'] office or [congressional investigators] requesting information of any kind … please do not respond to questions or make any statements.”
It has to be said, the level of belligerence shown to the media has become farcical. It also begs the question, why does the US EPA employ scientists?
Naturally, the EPA has gone into defence mode. Roxanne Smith, the agency’s spokeswoman, has already been pushed in front of reporters. The email was, of course, sent out to help streamline communications and definitely not to restrict conversation between EPA staff and investigators. Hmm, that’s cleared that up, then.
Oh well, Bush will be out soon.
The release from Peer and links to the gag order and the EPA’s response can be found here.
You have to love bamboo. It’s life’s little miracle material. Its strength is only matched by its pliability, which makes it a great substance for buildings in earthquake zones. It grows quickly enough to feed the panda. It even looks pretty in the garden. What more could you want?
And now bamboo has one more use - green marketing for disk drives.
Fabrik’s just released a hard disk drive which, it claims, is the “world’s most eco-friendly external hard disk.”
The company is citing performance at low power, which is great, but it is also using renewable materials to make the device’s casing; bamboo and aluminium.
According to its makers the storage device, called SimpleTech, will be available with 500GB of storage and a retail price of US$159.99 (£80).
It’s a bit cheesy, but the boys and girls at Project Better Place are asking folk to make their statement as to why we should end the dependence on oil.
Cheesy it might be, but it really sums up what’s changing in the world at the moment - the dependence on oil. So why not think about it for two minutes and give it a whizz?
The question they ask you is: “Why should we end our dependency on oil?”
Greenbang’s answer was: “It will end us if we don’t end it.”
Oooh - Hollywood.
Here is the embedded toon. It’s called a minifesto. Smoking.
The UK government has slipped out the terms for the controversial auction of European Union emissions trading permits.
The controversy around the EU Emissions Trading System is that traditional big carbon polluters will be able to buy emissions allowances to help them meet emissions reduction targets – with the government claiming this is fine because the net overall emissions target for the country isn’t affected.
Hmm.
The auction is being handled by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs – more details here.
The government is aiming to hold the first auction before the end of the year and reports estimate this emissions trading will bag the Treasury up to £2bn by 2012.
Environment minister Phil Woolas claims the auctions will create financial incentives for the big carbon emitters – who used to get their emissions permits free but will now have to pay – to reduce their emissions. He says in a Financial Timesinterview:
“This will help stimulate the development of green technology and British business can begin to realise the benefits of being leaders of the low carbon revolution.”
In this phase of the government’s ‘National Allocation Plan’ between 2008 and 2012 the UK will auction seven per cent of its emissions permits – approximately 85 million. These permits have been taken from the allocation that would have been given for free to large electricity producing sector.
Just like Greenbang’s favourite eco-friendly celeb Natalie Portman, the Smart car is small, upmarket, perfectly formed and boasts an environmental conscience. Greenbang would like a Smart Car but probably wouldn’t get its lardy ass in one.
The eco-toting car is also a relative bright spot in the badly hit car market for top end UK car retailer Inchcape, which has just reported like-for-like sales in the UK up by 1.2 per cent for the first six months of the year.
In a report in London’s Evening Standard, Inchcape’s chief executive Andre Lacroix said:
“The premium sector has been outperforming the rest of the market for four or five years because of its willingness to innovate and stimulate the market and cars like the Smart, a good example of this, are doing very well.”
Yet another sign that hard times and the spiralling price of oil is forcing people to look at greener alternatives – a good thing for sure, even if it’s only being done for selfish financial reasons.
This category is brought to you in association with Tandberg
If you haven’t yet worked out your carbon footprint, it’s really worth doing. Makes you think a bit differently about how you live.
