Category Archives: Energy Consumption

United States Carbon: US states look to cut greenhouse gases

10 Replies

A growing number of American states are looking at ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of federal climate change legislation, with a northeastern scheme for trading carbon becoming a model.

The proponents of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a market-based emissions reduction scheme adopted by nine northeastern states from Maine to Maryland, are touting their programme as a way to cut greenhouse gases and boost economic growth.

“I’ve been hearing from a lot of states lately, asking: ‘How would this programme work? If we were interested in joining what would the mechanism be, how would caps be set, how would money flow?’,” says Collin O’Mara, Delaware’s environment and energy secretary and chair of RGGI (pronounced “Reggie”).

The Environmental Protection Agency has already introduced a rule to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new coal-fired power plants, although it missed its own April deadline for finalising it.

The agency is expected soon to start the process of applying the rule to the US’s 600 existing coal-fired plants, which produce more than one-quarter of the US’s emissions.

With no prospects for passing climate change legislation through Congress, the Obama administration has been using regulation to try to meet the president’s pledge to cut the US’s greenhouse gas emissions by 17 per cent compared with 2005 levels by 2020.

Opponents say that the rules will force existing coal-fired plants to close, while environmentalists contend that more aggressive regulation is needed to counteract global warming.

Regardless, the EPA will set targets for reductions but will probably leave states with a lot of flexibility on how these are met, analysts say.

That is leading some states – including Colorado and Illinois – to look closely at schemes like RGGI.

The scheme, introduced in 2009, applies only to power plants and was the first cap-and-trade type scheme in the country, auctioning emissions permits. California, another environmentally conscious state, followed suit with regulations aimed at reducing the state’s greenhouse gas emissions from all sources.

RGGI’s members say the scheme has been more successful than even they anticipated, and should serve as an example to the rest of the country.

“We’ve seen a dramatic reduction in emissions across the region, while at the same time we’ve seen an increase in productivity and an increase in energy production,” Mr O’Mara says.

“The lesson is that we can still support a healthy robust economy while improving energy efficiency,” he says.

Emissions from power plants in the RGGI area were a third lower than the limit in the first three years, while they were 45 per cent below the cap in 2012, although this was partly because the depressed economy reduced demand for electricity.

The Analysis Group, an independent Boston-based think-tank, meanwhile concluded that the scheme had given a $1.6bn boost to the regional economy and created 16,000 new jobs.

Massachusetts, which the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy has named the most energy-efficient state for the second consecutive year, has received similar inquiries directly, says Rick Sullivan, the state’s energy secretary.

“Other states that are setting their own policies see that RGGI is up and running and tried and true, and has shown good results,” Mr Sullivan says. “We would welcome new members.”

RGGI member states have also been urging the EPA to bear their system in mind while formulating the new rule for existing coal-fired power plants – to make sure the rule complies with the RGGI system, rather than the other way around.

“If the federal rule mirrors the RGGI approach, including a cap and trade system, it will make it easier for states to adopt RGGI in concert with compliance with the federal rule,” says Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton administration climate change official.

“But if the federal rule is more prescriptive, there may not be the same sort of overlap with the RGGI process, and I think the jury is still out on this,” he says.

The EPA said it was “continuing to review the more than two million comments the agency received on the carbon pollution standard for new power plants”.

To learn more about United States Carbon and our energy reduction technology that will help you become greener, cleaner, and more socially responsible please contact us at (855) 393-7555 or visit our website: www.unitedstatescarbon.com

Related articles

United States Carbon: What’s energy efficiency and how much can it help cut emissions?

10 Replies

Energy efficiency means using less energy to provide the same service. For example, a compact fluorescent bulb is more efficient than a traditional incandescent bulb as it uses much less electrical energy to produce the same amount of light. Similarly, an efficient boiler takes less fuel to heat a home to a given temperature than a less efficient model.

The phrase ‘energy efficiency’ is often used as a shorthand to describe any kind of energy-saving measure, though technically it should be distinguished from energy conservation – a broader term which can also include forgoing a service rather than changing the efficiency with which it is provided. Examples of energy conservation include turning down a thermostat in the winter or walking to the shops rather than driving there.

Increasing energy efficiency often costs money up-front but in many cases this capital outlay will be paid back in the form of reduced energy costs within a short time period. This makes efficiency improvements an attractive starting point for reducing carbon emissions.

The scope of the savings – and the techniques required – depend on the situation and location. For homes in cool countries such as the UK, the most effective measures include increasing insulation, draught proofing, installing good-quality double-glazed windows and switching to more efficient appliances and light bulbs. The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) estimates that these improvements could reduce annual CO2 emissions from British homes by around 17 million tonnes by 2020 – around a tenth of the 2008 residential total.

By contrast, increasing efficiency in non-domestic buildings often means focusing on ventilation and air-conditioning, in addition to lighting, heating and appliances. Many such buildings have achieved savings of around 25% after undergoing a refit to increase efficiency.

Energy-intensive industries, such as iron, steel and cement manufacture, have become more efficient over time due to new equipment and better re-use of waste heat. For example, a hot pipe containing a chemical that needs to be cooled can be used to heat up other chemicals (this is known as ‘heat integration’). Motors are used widely in industry for a variety of tasks, such as pumping, mixing and driving conveyor belts. The installation of efficient, correctly sized motors and drives can result in energy savings of 20–25%.

Vehicles have also become more energy efficient over the decades thanks to factors such as improved engines and lighter, more aerodynamic designs. The potential exists for further improvements and in EU the emissions of the average new car is set to decrease from 150 to 95 grams of CO2 per km by 2020. The CCC forecasts that the introduction of efficiency improvements to cars, vans and HGVs could reduce CO2 emissions in the UK by 12.3 million tonnes by 2020 – around 10% of total for surface transport in 2008.

Improving energy efficiency does not necessarily translate into reduced CO2 emissions: the savings depend on the situation. If the energy is supplied from fossil fuels – such as petrol in a car or electricity from a coal-fired plant – then improved efficiency will cut emissions. But if the energy is supplied by a low-carbon source such as electricity from nuclear or renewables, then improving efficiency may have little impact on emissions. (When comparing electric and non-electric appliances, it’s important to consider the efficiency of the power generation, too: switching from a 90% efficient gas boiler to a ‘100% efficient’ electric heater will increase energy use and emissions if the electricity comes from regular fossil fuel power plants, which themselves are highly inefficient, losing much of the energy in their fuel as waste heat.)

Energy efficiency is always a good idea. Whether it results in energy savings depends on what we do with the money we saved. In some cases, efficiency savings can be offset by changes in user behaviour – the so-called ‘rebound effect’. One example would be that insulating a home may make it more economic for the resident to maintain a higher temperature, increasing the standard of comfort but reducing the energy savings.

Nonetheless, improving energy efficiency is a key tool for reducing CO2 emissions, alongside energy conservation and low-carbon energy sources such as renewables and carbon capture and storage.

To learn more about United States Carbon and our energy reduction technology that will help you become greener, cleaner, and more socially responsible please contact us at (855) 393-7555 or visit our website: www.unitedstatescarbon.com

United States Carbon: Conscious companies can revive capitalism

1 Reply

Free markets often get the blame for such troubling outcomes as inequality, corporate scandals and economic crises. In “Conscious Capitalism,” Whole Foods co-founder and co-CEO John Mackey and business professor Raj Sisodia argue that economic liberty needs a reboot.

The authors say that the trouble with capitalism isn’t that firms have too free a rein; it’s that economists have told them to focus on the wrong thing and that government gets in the way. They suggest that companies should focus on purpose rather than profits. And they blame crony capitalism for poisoning an otherwise excellent economic system.

They’re not wrong. Corporations are too close to lawmakers, and the result is overcomplicated tax systems which don’t serve the public good. Governments end up over-regulating in the name of safety, only making it safer for big companies to trample small ones that can’t cope with higher compliance costs.

While stomping out cronyism is a fairly easy sell, Mackey and Sisodia have more work to do to persuade readers that most businesses should turn their strategies upside-down. The heart of their reform plan for capitalism is captured by a paraphrase of Richard Leider, an executive coach and author. He asks what the most important day of one’s life is, other than birth. “It is the day you realize why you were born.”

Similarly, say Mackey and Sisodia, the most important thing a company can do is understand and pursue its higher purpose. They cite Walt Disney Co, which asks employees to use their imaginations to bring happiness to millions. For Southwest Airlines, it’s to give people the freedom to fly.

If a company aims chiefly at its purpose, profits will follow, they say. While that sounds plausible, it’s pretty vague. And Wall Street analysts are unlikely to smile when higher purposes lead to lower profits for a quarter, or perhaps a decade. Investors might want to see more emphasis on the bottom line before they part with their funds. But then again, the conscious company of Mackey and Sisodia is not merely run to enrich shareholders. Instead, it must integrate the interests of all stakeholders.

That means paying your workers well and your executives relatively modestly. No gouging of suppliers to cut costs. Such corporations must be a positive force in their community. The authors would even have firms befriend their foes: “A more constructive way to think about competitors is as allies in striving for mutual excellence.”

The image of corporate leaders sitting around a campfire, joining hands and singing Kumbaya, may warm the soul. But bitter experience, not to mention thousands of runs of the “prisoner’s dilemma” game, teaches that cooperation is not guaranteed, even if it’s in everyone’s best interests. Unless people begin to exhibit and deserve greater trust and reliance, many conscious companies will end up beaten unconscious.

That may be where conscious leaders come in. The authors portray them not as the smartest and most cunning, but excelling in emotional, spiritual and systems intelligence. They say the best leaders are empathetic, not ruthless. They probably meditate. And they must successfully manage relations between all stakeholders as one.

With such leaders in place, cooperation could lead to kinder competition. And maybe they could even convince investors that their purpose matters more than analysts’ financial models. The conscious economy that Mackey and Sisodia imagine sounds perfect. But people aren’t. Until humans evolve into a race of hyper-moral, fully-actualized beings, their capitalist ideal may be too lofty an ambition.

To learn more about United States Carbon and our energy reduction technology that will help you become greener, cleaner, and more socially responsible please contact us at (855) 393-7555 or visit our website: www.unitedstatescarbon.com

Related articles

United States Carbon: Environmentally Conscious Companies Have More Productive Employees

2 Replies

If a company is trying to be better for the planet, its workers will strive to be better for the company.

Want to increase employee productivity? You could give everyone the option of working from home–or you could make your company more environmentally responsible.

A recent study from researchers at UCLA looked at how companywide “green” standards affect employee productivity and found that businesses that follow international environmental standards have employees that are 16% more productive than less sustainable companies.

Whether a company is sustainable or not is certainly subjective, so the researchers relied on certifications to help: a company was included if it was organic, Fair Trade, or conformed to the International Organization for Standardization’s ISO 14001 environmental management standard.

Information on individual companies was taken from data acquired by a French employer-employee survey of 10,600 people at 5,220 companies, while productivity was measured “as the logarithm of the firm’s value added by the number of employees,” according to the paper. The result: environmentally conscious companies are more productive.

It may not just be the sustainability of these companies that’s increasing productivity, however. “These companies have a cluster of good practices, like more training and better relationships among employees,” explained study co-author Magali Delmas in an interview with Ecomagination. “These are companies that people want to work for.” In other words, companies that are better managed may be environmentally aware as a result–the productivity boost comes from good management, not necessarily from organic or Fair Trade certification.

There is much more research to be done in this area, as the researchers acknowledge in their paper: “The literature so far has focused mostly on the impact of the adoption of corporate social responsibility practices at the macro level and our research opens the path to investigate the more micro organizational impacts of the adoption of such practices. Scholars could, for example, test the effect of environmental standards on safety, stress, or employee absenteeism.”

But for now, the news on employee productivity should give another talking point to anyone arguing for more efficient and environmentally aware companies.

To learn more about United States Carbon and our energy reduction technology that will help you become greener, cleaner, and more socially responsible please contact us at (855) 393-7555 or visit our website: www.unitedstatescarbon.com

Related articles

A United States Carbon Sustainability Plan is self-funding. Benefiting People, Planet, And Profits…at the same time.

9 Replies

United States Carbon LLC, is an energy efficiency and Business Sustainability Project Management Company. Our business clients will become more Energy Efficient, Greener, Cleaner, More Socially Responsible and more profitable – all at the same time, and for little or no capital outlay. The energy savings from United States Carbon proposed projects are what is used to fund all project costs.  Simply put, we help companies reduce their energy consumption, increase the value of their  business and improve their company’s social responsibility through our Carbon Reduction Audit, Technologies & Project Funding Process.  United States Carbon combines the best in class technology utilizing, SMART WEB, SAETEC and SHOMEL to achieve the most comprehensive approach to reduction of energy in exchange for Carbon Assets. Our software solutions measure energy consumption and create the baseline for the Carbon Assets. Our solution can be offered as software service (SaaS) to large greenhouse gas emitters for corporate social responsibility, reporting and compliance management.

A United States Carbon Sustainability Plan is self-funding.  Benefiting People, Planet, And Profits…at the same time. 

To learn more about United States Carbon and our energy reduction technology please contact us at (855) 393-7555 or visit our website: www.unitedstatescarbon.com

 

Related articles