Hyatt Regency New Brunswick has flipped the switch to dedicate its newly installed SunPower solar power system, marking the hotel's initial step towards generating clean, renewable solar power.
The hotel partnered with SunPower to design and install the 32,000-square-foot, 421-kilowatt system over the top floor of the hotel's garage.
At a dedication ceremony, Hyatt Regency New Brunswick celebrated the completion of the new photovoltaic (PV) solar panel system. General Manager Adrian Hughes and Director of Engineering Scott Stahl addressed a group of attendees, including New Brunswick Mayor James Cahill.
"We are thrilled to be moving forward in our efforts to conserve resources," said Hughes. "The hotel has instituted many successful energy saving programs over the past several years, and solar is the next logical step to furthering our environmental commitment."
Hyatt Regency New Brunswick's solar power system utilizes SunPower's high-efficiency solar panels with its patented PowerGuard roof tile technology. PowerGuard is a non-penetrating, wind-resistant system that lies flat on the roof and provides added thermal insulation for the building and environmental protection to the roof membrane.
The output from the system will help reduce New Jersey's CO2 emissions by 10,000 tons over the next 30 years, and will further lessen oil dependence by at least 749 barrels annually, according to conversion formulas provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
"Using SunPower technology will maximize the amount of power generated by the system, and will also maximize Hyatt Regency New Brunswick's return on investment, saving on annual electricity costs now and over the long term," said Tom Leyden, managing director, SunPower. "We commend Hyatt Regency New Brunswick for their leadership in environmental stewardship, and for helping New Jersey attain its renewable energy goals."
Hyatt Regency New Brunswick is strongly committed to shrinking its environmental footprint by reducing, reusing and recycling. Some of the steps the hotel has taken include:
+ In April, the hotel implemented food composting with a combined recycling of metals, plastic, glass, cardboard, paper and food.
+ With the installation of a kitchen exhaust hood control system in May, the hotel anticipates an average energy savings of 206,000 kWh annually and $28,000 per year on reduced heating and air-conditioning costs.
+ The hotel has converted to CFL lights wherever possible, and has also replaced the garage lighting with QL lights, resulting in energy saving of over 192,000 kWh per year. LED lighting can also be found in various locations around the hotel, reducing electricity consumption by 375,000 kWh annually.
Source - Solardaily
Showing posts with label environmental. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environmental. Show all posts
Sunday, 14 June 2009
Sunday, 12 April 2009
UK goes into ecological debt on Easter Sunday
Britain is living beyond its environmental means and is increasingly dependent on the rest of the world for its natural resources, a thinktank study has revealed.
Britain, Environmental, ecologically self-sufficient, UK
The recession may have slowed consumption but the New Economics Foundation (Nef) says we are now drawing deep on the cropland, pasture, forests and fisheries of other countries.
The research also shows that by tomorrow the country will have used the levels of resources it should consume in an entire year if it were to be ecologically self-sufficient.
Andrew Simms, Nef's policy director, said: "We are consuming more and more, and as our ecosystems become more stressed the day in the year on which we effectively go beyond our environmental means, and move into ecological debt, is moving ever earlier in the year. In 1961 it was 9 July, but this year it falls on Easter Sunday."
The UK's ecological debt and reliance on the rest of the world are revealed in our dependence on imports of food and energy, says Nef: "National food self-sufficiency is in long term decline, and we are increasingly dependent on imports at precisely the time when the guarantee of the rest of the world ability to provide for us is weakening."
A combination of global factors such as climate change, competition for energy resources, economic instability and changing consumption patterns are all now compromising Britain's economy. "The impact of our lifestyles is felt worldwide and solutions to problems like climate change are unlikely until greater changes are made here in the UK."
Nef argues Britain is part of a "bizarrely" wasteful system of world trade. "Virtually identical amounts of gingerbread, fresh boneless chicken, chocolate covered waffles, are imported and exported ... In 2007, the UK exported 1.8m tonnes of essential oils, perfumes and toilet preparations, while it imported 1.5m tonnes."
Source - The guardian
Britain, Environmental, ecologically self-sufficient, UK
The recession may have slowed consumption but the New Economics Foundation (Nef) says we are now drawing deep on the cropland, pasture, forests and fisheries of other countries.
The research also shows that by tomorrow the country will have used the levels of resources it should consume in an entire year if it were to be ecologically self-sufficient.
Andrew Simms, Nef's policy director, said: "We are consuming more and more, and as our ecosystems become more stressed the day in the year on which we effectively go beyond our environmental means, and move into ecological debt, is moving ever earlier in the year. In 1961 it was 9 July, but this year it falls on Easter Sunday."
The UK's ecological debt and reliance on the rest of the world are revealed in our dependence on imports of food and energy, says Nef: "National food self-sufficiency is in long term decline, and we are increasingly dependent on imports at precisely the time when the guarantee of the rest of the world ability to provide for us is weakening."
A combination of global factors such as climate change, competition for energy resources, economic instability and changing consumption patterns are all now compromising Britain's economy. "The impact of our lifestyles is felt worldwide and solutions to problems like climate change are unlikely until greater changes are made here in the UK."
Nef argues Britain is part of a "bizarrely" wasteful system of world trade. "Virtually identical amounts of gingerbread, fresh boneless chicken, chocolate covered waffles, are imported and exported ... In 2007, the UK exported 1.8m tonnes of essential oils, perfumes and toilet preparations, while it imported 1.5m tonnes."
Source - The guardian
Monday, 6 April 2009
G20 - George
“We, the Leaders of the Group of Twenty, will use every cent we don’t possess to rescue corporate capitalism from its contradictions and set the world economy back onto the path of unsustainable growth. We have already spent trillions of dollars of your money on bailing out the banks, so that they can be returned to their proper functions of fleecing the poor and wrecking the Earth’s living systems. Now we’re going to spend another $1.1 trillion. As an exemplary punishment for their long record of promoting crises, we will give the IMF and the World Bank even more of your money. These actions constitute the greatest mobilisation of resources to support global financial flows in modern times.
Oh - and we nearly forgot. We must do something about the environment. We don’t have any definite plans as yet, but we’ll think of something in due course.”
The G20’s strategy for solving the financial and economic crisis, in other words, is detailed, innovative, fully costed and of vast scale and ambition. Its plans for solving the environmental crisis are brief, vague and uncosted. The environmental clauses - which contradict almost everything that goes before - have been tacked onto the end of the communique as an afterthought. No new money has been set aside. No new ideas are proposed; just the usual wishful thinking: let’s call the whole package green and hope for the best.
So much for the pledge, expressed in different forms by most of the governments present at the talks, to put the environment at the heart of decision-making. Though the economy is merely a measure of our engagement with the environment; though, as most of the leaders acknowledge, continued prosperity is impossible without sustainability, the communique shows that the environment still comes last. No expense is spared in saving the banks. Every expense is spared in saving the biosphere.
This suggests to me that our leaders have learnt nothing from the financial crisis. It was caused by allowing powerful agents (the banks) to exploit a common resource (the global economy) without proper control or regulation. Governments deployed a form of magical thinking: that the boom would go on forever, that a bunch of predatory psychopaths would regulate themselves, that profits, dividends and share prices could grow indefinitely even though they bore no relation to actual value.
They treat the environmental crisis the same way. Climate breakdown, peak oil and resource depletion will all dwarf the current financial crisis, in both financial and humanitarian terms. But, just as they did with the banks, the G20 leaders appear to have decided to deal with these problems only when they have to - in other words, when it’s too late. They persuade themselves that getting the economy back to where it was - infinite growth on a finite planet - can somehow be reconciled with the pledge “to address the threat of irreversible climate change”.
Next time this magical thinking fails, there’ll be no chance of a bail-out.
Source - The Guardian
Oh - and we nearly forgot. We must do something about the environment. We don’t have any definite plans as yet, but we’ll think of something in due course.”
The G20’s strategy for solving the financial and economic crisis, in other words, is detailed, innovative, fully costed and of vast scale and ambition. Its plans for solving the environmental crisis are brief, vague and uncosted. The environmental clauses - which contradict almost everything that goes before - have been tacked onto the end of the communique as an afterthought. No new money has been set aside. No new ideas are proposed; just the usual wishful thinking: let’s call the whole package green and hope for the best.
So much for the pledge, expressed in different forms by most of the governments present at the talks, to put the environment at the heart of decision-making. Though the economy is merely a measure of our engagement with the environment; though, as most of the leaders acknowledge, continued prosperity is impossible without sustainability, the communique shows that the environment still comes last. No expense is spared in saving the banks. Every expense is spared in saving the biosphere.
This suggests to me that our leaders have learnt nothing from the financial crisis. It was caused by allowing powerful agents (the banks) to exploit a common resource (the global economy) without proper control or regulation. Governments deployed a form of magical thinking: that the boom would go on forever, that a bunch of predatory psychopaths would regulate themselves, that profits, dividends and share prices could grow indefinitely even though they bore no relation to actual value.
They treat the environmental crisis the same way. Climate breakdown, peak oil and resource depletion will all dwarf the current financial crisis, in both financial and humanitarian terms. But, just as they did with the banks, the G20 leaders appear to have decided to deal with these problems only when they have to - in other words, when it’s too late. They persuade themselves that getting the economy back to where it was - infinite growth on a finite planet - can somehow be reconciled with the pledge “to address the threat of irreversible climate change”.
Next time this magical thinking fails, there’ll be no chance of a bail-out.
Source - The Guardian
Sunday, 29 March 2009
British eco-migrants flee to New Zealand
NEW ZEALAND is seeing its first influx of British eco-migrants, environmental refugees who have quit the UK because they fear the long-term impacts of climate change.
The country’s islands, renowned for their temperate climate, clean environment and low population, have often been put forward by greens as potential “lifeboats” for a world suffering serious warming.
Recently, James Lovelock, the scientist and creator of the Gaia theory, said in his new book, The Vanishing Face of Gaia, that New Zealand could be one of the world’s last havens as climate change fundamentally changes the planet.
Such effects are expected to take years or decades to happen but some families are already trying to anticipate them.
Among them are Lizzy and Mike Larmer-Cottle who have moved their family from London to Albany, half an hour north of Auckland on North Island, surrounded by rolling hills and beaches.
Britain’s recent climate of summer droughts and warm, wet winters was becoming alarming, said Lizzy. She added: “England was just having more and more flooding — if that continues, half of it is going to be underwater.”
The couple stress there were other factors too, such as lower traffic, less pollution and cheaper property. Before moving to New Zealand their sons Milo, 10, and Theo, 12, had, for example, never been able to ride their bikes on local roads.
They are, however, part of a rising tide of Britons heading for the New Zealand. Statistics NZ, which collects data for the country’s government, said more than 18,000 British residents moved there last year alone.
Among recent arrivals was John Zamick who also believes climate change will tip Britain into long-term environmental decline.
The businessman, who now co-directs a biodiesel company in Nelson, a town on South Island, points to East Anglia, where rainfall is now so low it is classed as semi-arid, while its coasts are threatened by rising sea levels.
What such eco-migrants have in common is not so much a fear of Britain becoming warmer but that climate change could destabilise the global economy, causing shortages of food.
At the Copenhagen climate science conference earlier this month, scientists set out the latest research on how climate change could affect crops.
This showed that, as heat and water shortages took hold, many equatorial regions in Africa and Asia would become unable to grow enough food, creating global shortages of staples like wheat and rice.
Zamick said New Zealand's low population density, agricultural independence and availability of farmland were all prime attractions, along with its English-speaking population.
Americans have also spotted New Zealand’s potential. Adam Fier and his wife Misbah Sadat moved their family from Maryland in the United States to New Zealand late last month.
Fier, a computer security expert who used to work at Nasa, told the Washington Post the decision was made because of his two girls.
“I am not going to predict how the climate might change and how it might affect New Zealand,” Fier said. “But quite honestly, I feel in 100 years, one of my daughters is still going to be alive and this planet is going to be a mess.”
Scientists agree that New Zealand is likely to be more resilient to any global warming than many other countries — but that could lead to problems with immigration. Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at Britain’s Met Office, said: “A lot of countries in temperate zones could come under pressure to take eco-migrants.”
Immigration specialists say climate is an increasingly important issue for Britons trying to emigrate. Liam Clifford, a director of the British-based GlobalVisas, described how clients increasingly wanted to move to “a temperate country that will escape extreme climate.”
James Hardy shared such views. He used to live in lush Buckinghamshire but became increasingly concerned at how he and his family might cope on such a crowded island if the global climate underwent sharp changes.
Three years ago he moved to New Zealand with his wife and their three children.
“New Zealand has land, New Zealand has wind, New Zealand has a far more sustainable climate,” he said.
Source - The times
The country’s islands, renowned for their temperate climate, clean environment and low population, have often been put forward by greens as potential “lifeboats” for a world suffering serious warming.
Recently, James Lovelock, the scientist and creator of the Gaia theory, said in his new book, The Vanishing Face of Gaia, that New Zealand could be one of the world’s last havens as climate change fundamentally changes the planet.
Such effects are expected to take years or decades to happen but some families are already trying to anticipate them.
Among them are Lizzy and Mike Larmer-Cottle who have moved their family from London to Albany, half an hour north of Auckland on North Island, surrounded by rolling hills and beaches.
Britain’s recent climate of summer droughts and warm, wet winters was becoming alarming, said Lizzy. She added: “England was just having more and more flooding — if that continues, half of it is going to be underwater.”
The couple stress there were other factors too, such as lower traffic, less pollution and cheaper property. Before moving to New Zealand their sons Milo, 10, and Theo, 12, had, for example, never been able to ride their bikes on local roads.
They are, however, part of a rising tide of Britons heading for the New Zealand. Statistics NZ, which collects data for the country’s government, said more than 18,000 British residents moved there last year alone.
Among recent arrivals was John Zamick who also believes climate change will tip Britain into long-term environmental decline.
The businessman, who now co-directs a biodiesel company in Nelson, a town on South Island, points to East Anglia, where rainfall is now so low it is classed as semi-arid, while its coasts are threatened by rising sea levels.
What such eco-migrants have in common is not so much a fear of Britain becoming warmer but that climate change could destabilise the global economy, causing shortages of food.
At the Copenhagen climate science conference earlier this month, scientists set out the latest research on how climate change could affect crops.
This showed that, as heat and water shortages took hold, many equatorial regions in Africa and Asia would become unable to grow enough food, creating global shortages of staples like wheat and rice.
Zamick said New Zealand's low population density, agricultural independence and availability of farmland were all prime attractions, along with its English-speaking population.
Americans have also spotted New Zealand’s potential. Adam Fier and his wife Misbah Sadat moved their family from Maryland in the United States to New Zealand late last month.
Fier, a computer security expert who used to work at Nasa, told the Washington Post the decision was made because of his two girls.
“I am not going to predict how the climate might change and how it might affect New Zealand,” Fier said. “But quite honestly, I feel in 100 years, one of my daughters is still going to be alive and this planet is going to be a mess.”
Scientists agree that New Zealand is likely to be more resilient to any global warming than many other countries — but that could lead to problems with immigration. Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at Britain’s Met Office, said: “A lot of countries in temperate zones could come under pressure to take eco-migrants.”
Immigration specialists say climate is an increasingly important issue for Britons trying to emigrate. Liam Clifford, a director of the British-based GlobalVisas, described how clients increasingly wanted to move to “a temperate country that will escape extreme climate.”
James Hardy shared such views. He used to live in lush Buckinghamshire but became increasingly concerned at how he and his family might cope on such a crowded island if the global climate underwent sharp changes.
Three years ago he moved to New Zealand with his wife and their three children.
“New Zealand has land, New Zealand has wind, New Zealand has a far more sustainable climate,” he said.
Source - The times
Monday, 15 December 2008
Obama to present new climate change team
President-elect Barack Obama was set Monday to name his energy and environmental chiefs and vow a new dawn for US leadership against climate change after eight years of Republican "denial."
After talks with his national security team, Obama was to name more cabinet lieutenants at a news conference where he was also facing questions over Illinois's scandal-hit governor.
Obama's transition team said the press conference in Chicago would "discuss the nation's energy and environmental future."
Obama was reportedly to nominate Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Chu as his energy secretary, placing the expert in renewable energy on the frontlines of climate change policy.
Joining Chu in Obama's new team was expected to be Lisa Jackson, chief of staff to the New Jersey governor, as head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Obama was further to announce that Carol Browner, who served as EPA administrator under president Bill Clinton, would become the White House "climate czar" overseeing the battle against global warming.
And Nancy Sutley, a senior adviser to Obama's transition team, was expected to be named chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Last week, after a meeting with former vice president Al Gore, Obama said the "time for denial is over" on climate change.
"We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way," he said.
"That is what I intend my administration to do."
Despite an economic recession hitting the United States, Obama is promising to unwind the environmental policies of President George W. Bush, whose refusal to ratify the Kyoto pact on climate change disgusted green campaigners.
Chu, a scientist and Washington outsider, won his Nobel in 1997. Since 2004 he has been running the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, which has a budget of 645 million dollars and a staff of 4,000.
As energy secretary, Chu is expected to lead Obama's ambitious agenda to generate 2.5 million new jobs through "green" and new technologies aimed at making America more energy efficient and less reliant on foreign oil.
Jackson, who trained as a chemical engineer, is likely to restore teeth to the EPA, which during the Bush administration saw its funding slashed, scientific findings censored, and enforcement efforts downplayed.
In one notorious example, the EPA backed off a finding that said climate change was a risk to public welfare. The findings would have led to the nation's first mandatory global-warming regulations.
Despite the costs to industry as the US recession bites, Obama has promised to set caps on domestic emissions of greenhouse gases and reposition the United States in the vanguard of international action.
At UN climate talks in Poland last week, many delegates were delighted at the passing of the Bush administration as the international community attempts to craft a successor to the Kyoto pact.
"This climate conference will go down in history as the retirement party for the Flat Earth Society of the United States of America," said Edward Markey, the senior lawmaker on climate change issues in the House of Representatives.
But analysts also warn against over-expectations. Obama's room to manoeuvre may be limited by the US recession and also the limited time before the deadline of December 2009 for completing a new UN climate treaty.
Source - terra daily
After talks with his national security team, Obama was to name more cabinet lieutenants at a news conference where he was also facing questions over Illinois's scandal-hit governor.
Obama's transition team said the press conference in Chicago would "discuss the nation's energy and environmental future."
Obama was reportedly to nominate Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Chu as his energy secretary, placing the expert in renewable energy on the frontlines of climate change policy.
Joining Chu in Obama's new team was expected to be Lisa Jackson, chief of staff to the New Jersey governor, as head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Obama was further to announce that Carol Browner, who served as EPA administrator under president Bill Clinton, would become the White House "climate czar" overseeing the battle against global warming.
And Nancy Sutley, a senior adviser to Obama's transition team, was expected to be named chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Last week, after a meeting with former vice president Al Gore, Obama said the "time for denial is over" on climate change.
"We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way," he said.
"That is what I intend my administration to do."
Despite an economic recession hitting the United States, Obama is promising to unwind the environmental policies of President George W. Bush, whose refusal to ratify the Kyoto pact on climate change disgusted green campaigners.
Chu, a scientist and Washington outsider, won his Nobel in 1997. Since 2004 he has been running the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, which has a budget of 645 million dollars and a staff of 4,000.
As energy secretary, Chu is expected to lead Obama's ambitious agenda to generate 2.5 million new jobs through "green" and new technologies aimed at making America more energy efficient and less reliant on foreign oil.
Jackson, who trained as a chemical engineer, is likely to restore teeth to the EPA, which during the Bush administration saw its funding slashed, scientific findings censored, and enforcement efforts downplayed.
In one notorious example, the EPA backed off a finding that said climate change was a risk to public welfare. The findings would have led to the nation's first mandatory global-warming regulations.
Despite the costs to industry as the US recession bites, Obama has promised to set caps on domestic emissions of greenhouse gases and reposition the United States in the vanguard of international action.
At UN climate talks in Poland last week, many delegates were delighted at the passing of the Bush administration as the international community attempts to craft a successor to the Kyoto pact.
"This climate conference will go down in history as the retirement party for the Flat Earth Society of the United States of America," said Edward Markey, the senior lawmaker on climate change issues in the House of Representatives.
But analysts also warn against over-expectations. Obama's room to manoeuvre may be limited by the US recession and also the limited time before the deadline of December 2009 for completing a new UN climate treaty.
Source - terra daily
Australia fast-tracks renewable energy funding
Australia will bring forward millions of dollars in funding for solar and other renewable energy sources, in part to help boost the economy, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said Sunday.
solar, renewable energy sources, australia, carbon pollution, environmental
Rudd said the government's 500 million dollar (329 million US) renewable energy fund will now be spent over the next 18 months rather than spread over six years as previously planned.
"It's time for Australia to begin the solar revolution, a renewable energy revolution and we have got to fund it for the future" he told reporters in his home state of Queensland.
"It's good for jobs, it's good for stimulus, it's good for acting on climate change."
The Australian government is due to reveal Monday its targets for the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions blamed for global warming.
Environmental groups have argued that the government must ensure carbon pollution is slashed by 25 percent by 2020 but industry and business groups have contended that this will be too high.
Source - Solar daily
solar, renewable energy sources, australia, carbon pollution, environmental
Rudd said the government's 500 million dollar (329 million US) renewable energy fund will now be spent over the next 18 months rather than spread over six years as previously planned.
"It's time for Australia to begin the solar revolution, a renewable energy revolution and we have got to fund it for the future" he told reporters in his home state of Queensland.
"It's good for jobs, it's good for stimulus, it's good for acting on climate change."
The Australian government is due to reveal Monday its targets for the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions blamed for global warming.
Environmental groups have argued that the government must ensure carbon pollution is slashed by 25 percent by 2020 but industry and business groups have contended that this will be too high.
Source - Solar daily
Friday, 12 December 2008
Barack Obama's choice of energy team signals climate change intent
Barack Obama has picked an energy team that includes a Nobel Laureate obsessed with fighting global warming and an acolyte of Al Gore — a clear sign that he intends to move quickly on climate change legislation despite the dire economy.
Mr Obama has chosen as his Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who won the 1997 Nobel Prize for Physics and who in recent years has devoted himself to the cause of inventing alternative fuels.
The President-elect has also created a new post, a White House overseer of energy, environmental and climate policy — already known as an "energy tsar" — who will be responsible for driving his agenda on Capitol Hill. For this, he has picked Carol Browner, a former legislative director to Al Gore.
The choices, and the fact that Mr Obama is intent on co-ordinating environmental policy from inside the White House, underscores his intent to push ahead with his hugely ambitions and expensive plan to create alternative fuels, and reduce carbon emissions, despite the fierce resistance that will inevitably come from US industry.
Mr Obama is in fact exploiting the economic crisis as a way to justify much of his legislative agenda. He is arguing that economic recovery is tied implicitly to big reforms in areas such as healthcare, the environment and schools, and he appears to have a Democratic-controlled Congress willing to fund much of it.
Yesterday, as he announced Tom Daschle, the Democrats' former leader in the Senate, as his Health Secretary, Mr Obama said: "Now, some may ask how, at this moment of economic challenge, we can afford to invest in reforming our healthcare system. Well, I ask a different question — I ask how we can afford not to."
Mr Chu, 60, the son of Chinese immigrants, has been director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California since 2004. On his website, he says it has been his "mission" to make the facility the world leader in finding alternative and renewable energy sources. He views a shift away from fossil fuels central to fighting global warming.
On Tuesday, Mr Obama had a meeting in Chicago with Mr Gore, declaring afterwards: "The time for denial is over." He added, referring to climate change: "This is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That is what I intend my Administration to do."
Source - The times
Mr Obama has chosen as his Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who won the 1997 Nobel Prize for Physics and who in recent years has devoted himself to the cause of inventing alternative fuels.
The President-elect has also created a new post, a White House overseer of energy, environmental and climate policy — already known as an "energy tsar" — who will be responsible for driving his agenda on Capitol Hill. For this, he has picked Carol Browner, a former legislative director to Al Gore.
The choices, and the fact that Mr Obama is intent on co-ordinating environmental policy from inside the White House, underscores his intent to push ahead with his hugely ambitions and expensive plan to create alternative fuels, and reduce carbon emissions, despite the fierce resistance that will inevitably come from US industry.
Mr Obama is in fact exploiting the economic crisis as a way to justify much of his legislative agenda. He is arguing that economic recovery is tied implicitly to big reforms in areas such as healthcare, the environment and schools, and he appears to have a Democratic-controlled Congress willing to fund much of it.
Yesterday, as he announced Tom Daschle, the Democrats' former leader in the Senate, as his Health Secretary, Mr Obama said: "Now, some may ask how, at this moment of economic challenge, we can afford to invest in reforming our healthcare system. Well, I ask a different question — I ask how we can afford not to."
Mr Chu, 60, the son of Chinese immigrants, has been director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California since 2004. On his website, he says it has been his "mission" to make the facility the world leader in finding alternative and renewable energy sources. He views a shift away from fossil fuels central to fighting global warming.
On Tuesday, Mr Obama had a meeting in Chicago with Mr Gore, declaring afterwards: "The time for denial is over." He added, referring to climate change: "This is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That is what I intend my Administration to do."
Source - The times
Monday, 11 August 2008
Giant Retailers Look to Sun for Energy Savings
Retailers are typically obsessed with what to put under their roofs, not on them. Yet the nation’s biggest store chains are coming to see their immense, flat roofs as an untapped resource.
In recent months, chains including Wal-Mart Stores, Kohl’s, Safeway and Whole Foods Market have installed solar panels on roofs of their stores to generate electricity on a large scale. One reason they are racing is to beat a Dec. 31 deadline to gain tax advantages for these projects.
So far, most chains have outfitted fewer than 10 percent of their stores. Over the long run, assuming Congress renews a favorable tax provision and more states offer incentives, the chains promise a solar construction program that would ultimately put panels atop almost every big store in the country.
The trend, while not entirely new, is accelerating as the chains seize a chance to bolster their environmental credentials by cutting back on their use of electricity from coal.
“It’s very clear that green energy is now front and center in the minds of the business sector,” said Daniel M. Kammen, an energy expert at the University of California, Berkeley.
“Not only will you see panels on the roofs of your local stores, but I suspect very soon retailers will have stickers in their windows saying, ‘This is a green energy store.’ ”
In the coming months, 85 Kohl’s stores will get solar panels; 43 already have them. “We want to keep pushing as many as we possibly can,” said Ken Bonning, executive vice president for logistics at Kohl’s.
Macy’s, which has solar panels atop 18 stores, plans to install them on another 40 by the end of this year. Safeway is aiming to put panels atop 23 stores. And other chains, including Whole Foods Market, BJ’s Wholesale Club and REI, the purveyor of outdoor goods, are planning projects of their own.
Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, has 17 stores and distribution centers with solar panels in operation or in the testing phase. It plans to add them soon to five more stores. People at the chain are considering a far larger program that would put panels and other renewable technologies at hundreds of stores.
“It’s going to be the Wal-Marts of the world that will buy these things over acres and make a difference,” said Roger G. Little, chairman and chief executive of the Spire Corporation, a Boston company that provides solar equipment.
Analysts are not sure how much power the rooftop projects could ultimately produce, but they say it could be enough to help shave total electricity demand. In many communities, stores are among the biggest energy users. Depending on location and weather, the solar panels generate 10 to 40 percent of the power a store needs.
If Wal-Mart eventually covered the roofs of all its Sam’s Club and Wal-Mart locations with solar panels, figures from the company show that the resulting solar acreage would roughly equal the size of Manhattan, an island of 23 square miles.
Booming demand in recent years has driven up the price of solar panels, and analysts say it costs far more to generate electricity from solar energy than from coal.
Coal generation costs about 6 cents for a kilowatt hour, which is enough electricity to run a hair dryer for an hour. Natural gas generation costs about 9 cents a kilowatt hour, said Reese Tisdale, a senior analyst with the consulting firm Emerging Energy Research. In comparison, “best case” for power from solar panels is about 25 to 30 cents a kilowatt hour, he said.
But retailers believe that they can achieve economies of scale. With coal and electricity prices rising, they are also betting that solar power will become more competitive, especially if new policies addressing global warming limit the emissions from coal plants.
Retailers, hoping to create a bigger market and positioning themselves at the forefront of a national shift toward renewable energy, are encouraging one another to join the bandwagon.
“We’re hoping that our purchases along with some other retailers will help bring the technology costs down,” said Kathy Loftus, who is in charge of energy and other initiatives at Whole Foods Market.
Most of the efforts so far are in California, New Jersey and Connecticut, states that offer generous incentives. Executives say they would like to convert many more. How quickly they can do so depends on government policy because retailers rely on tax incentives to offset the cost.
Corporate officials describe a federal tax credit for renewable energy, one that Congress has let expire and then renewed several times, as particularly important. A Congressional deadlock over offshore oil drilling has held up legislation that would renew the credit for next year.
“Every project that starts development has to be finished by Dec. 31 or you lose tax equity advantage, and nobody’s willing to take that risk,” said George Waidelich, vice president for energy operations at Safeway. “You’re talking about millions of dollars.”
Retailers are fast becoming energy experts. They are experimenting with traditional solar panels, a new type of thin solar panel and ground-mounted tracking systems that move with the sun.
They are also combining those systems with other rooftop technologies like skylights and solar water heaters.
“Solar has become part of the kit that we think about when we open a store,” said Sharon Im-Lee, REI’s energy manager.
American retailers are following the lead of stores in Europe, which are much further along. Store-roof projects are so numerous in parts of Germany that they can be spotted in satellite photos. Government subsidies there, however, have lasted for years.
“In Germany, there are none of the concerns you find in the United States about whether support will be around next year,” said Jenny Chase, an energy analyst in London.
Retailers in the United States tend to buy their own solar-power systems, at $4 million to $6 million for a store the size of a Wal-Mart, or enter into an agreement with a utility company that pays the up-front costs and then gives the store a break on power bills — an approach that appeals to big chains.
“It really helps make it economical for the retailer,” said Kim Saylors-Laster, Wal-Mart’s vice president for energy.
Retailers are also looking at other ways to extend their use of renewable energy by testing technologies like wind turbines and reflective white roofs, which keep buildings cooler in warm weather.
Bernard Sosnick, an analyst with Gilford Securities who has examined Wal-Mart’s plans, said the day might come when people can pull their electric cars up to a store and recharge them with power from the roof or even from wind turbines in the parking lot.
“It’s not as over the horizon as it might seem,” he said.
Source - Newyork Times
In recent months, chains including Wal-Mart Stores, Kohl’s, Safeway and Whole Foods Market have installed solar panels on roofs of their stores to generate electricity on a large scale. One reason they are racing is to beat a Dec. 31 deadline to gain tax advantages for these projects.
So far, most chains have outfitted fewer than 10 percent of their stores. Over the long run, assuming Congress renews a favorable tax provision and more states offer incentives, the chains promise a solar construction program that would ultimately put panels atop almost every big store in the country.
The trend, while not entirely new, is accelerating as the chains seize a chance to bolster their environmental credentials by cutting back on their use of electricity from coal.
“It’s very clear that green energy is now front and center in the minds of the business sector,” said Daniel M. Kammen, an energy expert at the University of California, Berkeley.
“Not only will you see panels on the roofs of your local stores, but I suspect very soon retailers will have stickers in their windows saying, ‘This is a green energy store.’ ”
In the coming months, 85 Kohl’s stores will get solar panels; 43 already have them. “We want to keep pushing as many as we possibly can,” said Ken Bonning, executive vice president for logistics at Kohl’s.
Macy’s, which has solar panels atop 18 stores, plans to install them on another 40 by the end of this year. Safeway is aiming to put panels atop 23 stores. And other chains, including Whole Foods Market, BJ’s Wholesale Club and REI, the purveyor of outdoor goods, are planning projects of their own.
Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, has 17 stores and distribution centers with solar panels in operation or in the testing phase. It plans to add them soon to five more stores. People at the chain are considering a far larger program that would put panels and other renewable technologies at hundreds of stores.
“It’s going to be the Wal-Marts of the world that will buy these things over acres and make a difference,” said Roger G. Little, chairman and chief executive of the Spire Corporation, a Boston company that provides solar equipment.
Analysts are not sure how much power the rooftop projects could ultimately produce, but they say it could be enough to help shave total electricity demand. In many communities, stores are among the biggest energy users. Depending on location and weather, the solar panels generate 10 to 40 percent of the power a store needs.
If Wal-Mart eventually covered the roofs of all its Sam’s Club and Wal-Mart locations with solar panels, figures from the company show that the resulting solar acreage would roughly equal the size of Manhattan, an island of 23 square miles.
Booming demand in recent years has driven up the price of solar panels, and analysts say it costs far more to generate electricity from solar energy than from coal.
Coal generation costs about 6 cents for a kilowatt hour, which is enough electricity to run a hair dryer for an hour. Natural gas generation costs about 9 cents a kilowatt hour, said Reese Tisdale, a senior analyst with the consulting firm Emerging Energy Research. In comparison, “best case” for power from solar panels is about 25 to 30 cents a kilowatt hour, he said.
But retailers believe that they can achieve economies of scale. With coal and electricity prices rising, they are also betting that solar power will become more competitive, especially if new policies addressing global warming limit the emissions from coal plants.
Retailers, hoping to create a bigger market and positioning themselves at the forefront of a national shift toward renewable energy, are encouraging one another to join the bandwagon.
“We’re hoping that our purchases along with some other retailers will help bring the technology costs down,” said Kathy Loftus, who is in charge of energy and other initiatives at Whole Foods Market.
Most of the efforts so far are in California, New Jersey and Connecticut, states that offer generous incentives. Executives say they would like to convert many more. How quickly they can do so depends on government policy because retailers rely on tax incentives to offset the cost.
Corporate officials describe a federal tax credit for renewable energy, one that Congress has let expire and then renewed several times, as particularly important. A Congressional deadlock over offshore oil drilling has held up legislation that would renew the credit for next year.
“Every project that starts development has to be finished by Dec. 31 or you lose tax equity advantage, and nobody’s willing to take that risk,” said George Waidelich, vice president for energy operations at Safeway. “You’re talking about millions of dollars.”
Retailers are fast becoming energy experts. They are experimenting with traditional solar panels, a new type of thin solar panel and ground-mounted tracking systems that move with the sun.
They are also combining those systems with other rooftop technologies like skylights and solar water heaters.
“Solar has become part of the kit that we think about when we open a store,” said Sharon Im-Lee, REI’s energy manager.
American retailers are following the lead of stores in Europe, which are much further along. Store-roof projects are so numerous in parts of Germany that they can be spotted in satellite photos. Government subsidies there, however, have lasted for years.
“In Germany, there are none of the concerns you find in the United States about whether support will be around next year,” said Jenny Chase, an energy analyst in London.
Retailers in the United States tend to buy their own solar-power systems, at $4 million to $6 million for a store the size of a Wal-Mart, or enter into an agreement with a utility company that pays the up-front costs and then gives the store a break on power bills — an approach that appeals to big chains.
“It really helps make it economical for the retailer,” said Kim Saylors-Laster, Wal-Mart’s vice president for energy.
Retailers are also looking at other ways to extend their use of renewable energy by testing technologies like wind turbines and reflective white roofs, which keep buildings cooler in warm weather.
Bernard Sosnick, an analyst with Gilford Securities who has examined Wal-Mart’s plans, said the day might come when people can pull their electric cars up to a store and recharge them with power from the roof or even from wind turbines in the parking lot.
“It’s not as over the horizon as it might seem,” he said.
Source - Newyork Times
Monday, 26 May 2008
Solar panels become a investment paradise
Without wanting to praise those who led the argument that climate change is the most serious issue facing the human race, it also represents one of the biggest investment themes for the next 20 years.
As such, it is time investors understood how and why climate change and investing are related and how they can adjust their portfolios accordingly.
This is not just about socially responsible investing or even whether you believe the scientific evidence. As an asset manager we have a fiduciary responsibility to provide investors with the best risk-adjusted returns looking at market trends and emerging sectors. It is becoming apparent that our responsibility extends to include environmental considerations in this analysis.
To many in the industry this seems counter-intuitive, particularly alongside the conventional wisdom that sensitivity to environmental factors detracts from investment returns. The oft-stated reasons behind this thinking being that either environmental rankings in stock selection are negatively correlated with the price performance of stocks, or the environmental screening resulting from SRI diminishes the opportunity set of companies that an investor can buy.
Whatever your personal take on climate change, it is clear we have reached a tipping point in public and political opinion. This is fuelling a change in consumer and investment trends, which will not only continue but accelerate in the years to come. Investors need to understand how the companies in which they place their money are rising to the challenge.
This is driving increased demand for agricultural equipment. Most likely this will support demand for AGCO’s products for years to come. While not obviously a company benefiting from climate change directly, its business is being favourably affected by shifts in demand prompted by climate change.
Source - Heatmyhome
As such, it is time investors understood how and why climate change and investing are related and how they can adjust their portfolios accordingly.
This is not just about socially responsible investing or even whether you believe the scientific evidence. As an asset manager we have a fiduciary responsibility to provide investors with the best risk-adjusted returns looking at market trends and emerging sectors. It is becoming apparent that our responsibility extends to include environmental considerations in this analysis.
To many in the industry this seems counter-intuitive, particularly alongside the conventional wisdom that sensitivity to environmental factors detracts from investment returns. The oft-stated reasons behind this thinking being that either environmental rankings in stock selection are negatively correlated with the price performance of stocks, or the environmental screening resulting from SRI diminishes the opportunity set of companies that an investor can buy.
Whatever your personal take on climate change, it is clear we have reached a tipping point in public and political opinion. This is fuelling a change in consumer and investment trends, which will not only continue but accelerate in the years to come. Investors need to understand how the companies in which they place their money are rising to the challenge.
This is driving increased demand for agricultural equipment. Most likely this will support demand for AGCO’s products for years to come. While not obviously a company benefiting from climate change directly, its business is being favourably affected by shifts in demand prompted by climate change.
Source - Heatmyhome
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
