Branson sails on with "Operation Rock the Boat"
Dec 6, 2010 Business Green
The Carbon War Room has today launched an online database ranking the environmental performance of most of the world's ocean-going vessels in a bid to help the shipping industry cut carbon dioxide emissions by more than half a billion tonnes a year by 2020.
The lobby group, which was founded by Richard Branson 18 months ago, said the new ShippingEfficiency.org site will list fuel efficiency data for around 60,000 ships, including the majority of the world's container ships, tankers, bulk carriers, cargo ships, cruise ships and ferries.
The site aims to help businesses and individuals make better informed decisions about the ships they use by rating vessels using a simple A to G grading system.
The group said it has used rating methodology developed by the United Nations' International Maritime Organization's under its Energy Efficiency Design Index and combined it with data from the world's largest ship registry, IHS Fairplay.
The site is the latest project from The Carbon War Room's so-called "Operation Rock the Boat" initiative, which aims to encourage shipping operators to invest in lower carbon technology to cut emissions and operating costs.
It says a new global fleet based on the most efficient available technologies could cut CO2 emissions by half a billion tonnes a year by 2020, putting it on a path to cut more than one billion tonnes of carbon annually by 2050.
Today's launch forms part of the group's five-pronged attack on shipping emissions, which also calls for the industry to update key charter contracts and accelerate the adoption and enforcement of new national shipping legislation.
In a recent interview with The Economist, Branson said the group is also trying to convince ports in the US to give preferential treatment to lower-carbon vessels when docking.
Shipping is thought to account for about three per cent of the world's carbon emissions, but because it is not covered by the Kyoto Protocol the sector currently has no mandatory targets for cutting emissions.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Energy Management
. Schneider Electric Data Center Showcases Server Consolidation and Energy Efficiency
Dec 5, 2010 Server Watch
APC (now owned by Schneider Electric) has set up a new data center outside of St. Louis, Mo. As well as consolidating two of the company's data centers, it is using a host of APC and Schneider Electric gear including its EcoStruxure architecture for intelligent energy management.
"EcoStruxure is an approach to creating intelligent energy management systems," said Kevin Brown, vice president of IT Business at Schneider. "We chose St. Louis in order to have a central location for the consolidation of the many North American data centers we previously operated."
The facility will act as a showcase of company technology in the areas of building, power, and data center infrastructure. Prospective customers will be able to view the equipment they are thinking of buying and see how well it operates in the real world. Research and development work is also part of the plan at what is known as the Schneider Electric Technology Center (SETC).
"Through efficient design, monitoring and lower cost per kilowatt hour, we have documented significant electricity cost savings over a 12 month period at the Schneider Electric Technology Center," said Jim Simonelli, CTO for Schneider Electric's IT Business.
*
Dec 5, 2010 Server Watch
APC (now owned by Schneider Electric) has set up a new data center outside of St. Louis, Mo. As well as consolidating two of the company's data centers, it is using a host of APC and Schneider Electric gear including its EcoStruxure architecture for intelligent energy management.
"EcoStruxure is an approach to creating intelligent energy management systems," said Kevin Brown, vice president of IT Business at Schneider. "We chose St. Louis in order to have a central location for the consolidation of the many North American data centers we previously operated."
The facility will act as a showcase of company technology in the areas of building, power, and data center infrastructure. Prospective customers will be able to view the equipment they are thinking of buying and see how well it operates in the real world. Research and development work is also part of the plan at what is known as the Schneider Electric Technology Center (SETC).
"Through efficient design, monitoring and lower cost per kilowatt hour, we have documented significant electricity cost savings over a 12 month period at the Schneider Electric Technology Center," said Jim Simonelli, CTO for Schneider Electric's IT Business.
*
Monday, November 29, 2010
Energy management
8 Electric-Car Myths Busted
Nov 29, 2010 MotherJones
I'm about as far from a gearhead as it gets, but even so, I was excited about the release of the nation's first two consumer plug-in electric vehicles: the Chevy Volt and the Nissan Leaf. The Volt can go 40 miles on battery power and another 310 thanks to an auxiliary gas engine, which kicked in smoothly as I floored it up a hill during a recent test drive. The Leaf is—even cooler—completely electric, with a range of about 100 miles. In 2011, Ford, Mitsubishi, and Mercedes-Benz plan to introduce their own tailpipe-free models. GE has ordered up thousands for its sales force, and the federal government has set a target for 1 million electric vehicles by 2015. (A good step, even considering the 246 million or so gas vehicles already on the road.) Are we finally ready after years of false starts? Despite widespread public jitters, the experts I polled said yes. Herewith, eight e-car worries not to spin your wheels over.
1. Our grid can't handle the added burden. While electric cars do use a great deal of juice, utilities have been working behind the scenes for years to make sure the cars don't fry the grid. Blackouts are "extremely unlikely," notes Simon Mui, a scientist who studies clean vehicles and fuels for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Advanced charging technology will help distribute power loads more evenly, and many home charging stations will operate only during off-peak hours—which is more efficient and usually cheaper. "Smart chargers," slated to hit the market in 2011, will decide when to charge based on the time and distance you commute, local rates, and electricity demand in your neighborhood.
2. My utility bill will skyrocket. Yep, you'll spend more on amperage, but your savings on gas will more than cover it. If you drive a battery-only car 12,000 miles a year at going power rates, you'll pay an extra $27 or so per month for electricity, but save about $97 on gas. Some utilities offer special rates during off-peak hours—in California, you might pay as little as $13 a month (roughly half-price) to charge up at night. The one drawback of cheaper fuel is, well, cheaper driving, which some experts worry will lure commuters away from public transit, carpools, and bikes.
3. Coal-burning utilities mean electric cars will make emissions worse. Hardly. Even in predominantly coal-burning regions, an electric car releases 35 to 60 percent less CO2 than a comparable conventional car, according to industry think tank Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). In areas with an ecofriendly power mix, the emissions are up to 75 percent lower. EPRI transportation expert Mark Duvall points out that "as the grid gets cleaner—which it almost certainly will—electric cars will get cleaner, too." Bonus: Unlike gas, which is refined largely from imported petroleum, electricity flows from domestic sources.
4. Electric cars already flopped once, so why should I believe they'll succeed? Climate worries, obviously, have gained traction since the 1990s, but the main reason to believe in a comeback is economic. Perhaps you've noticed that Detroit seems, uh, a little leaner than it was during the Clinton years. To compete with foreign automakers in places with high gas prices and tougher climate regs—think Europe and California—the industry needs to roll out efficient models. "Automakers see this as a necessity," says Mui. Technology has really improved, too; old-school e-car batteries, famous for exploding and generally sucking, have joined your wallet chains and Crash Test Dummies albums in '90s heaven.
5. Government rebates on electric cars favor the rich. To ease sticker shock (the Volt starts at $40,280; the Leaf, $32,780), the feds are offering a tax credit of up to $7,500 to the first 200,000 buyers of each model. If you still can't afford one, there's a consolation prize: As Mui points out, the reductions in emissions and pollution will benefit everyone. Plus, prices are sure to come down. The very first iPods, you may recall, set you back more than $400.
6. Electric cars handle like roller skates. I'm not the savviest driver, but I thought the Volt felt pretty much like a regular mid-size. Car and Driver writes that it "drives surprisingly well, with a reassuringly steady suspension." The Leaf gets dinged for its short range, but its transmission works so smoothly in stop-and-go traffic "that we started rationalizing our range concerns."
7. Lithium-ion auto batteries are as crappy as lithium-ion laptop batteries. Now here's something that might be worth fretting about. Although battery technology is light-years beyond where it was back when GM was peddling EV1s, it's far from perfect. Lithium-ion cells are sluggish in cold weather—and cranking the heat, AC, or stereo will reduce your range. More worrisome: No one can predict how long they'll last. "There will be degradation of the battery over its lifetime," says EPRI's Duvall. "But we don't know exactly how much." The good news: Recent breakthroughs in battery technology promise faster charging and greater reliability. In the meantime, both Volt and Leaf come with eight-year battery warranties.
8. I'll run out of juice in the sticks. This is only an issue for fully electric cars, and as long as you're within range of a socket, you'll make do. A full charge takes about 10 hours using a standard outlet, or half as long with a home 220-volt station that'll run you about $2,000. Meanwhile, the federal government plans to spend $115 million to help cities set up 15,000 pay-as-you-go chargers in public places. Electric vehicles "do require a lot of planning, but not as much as you might think," says Mark Vaughn, an AutoWeek editor who blogged last summer about his trial run with Mitsubishi's i MiEV—comparable to the Leaf. When Vaughn showed up at a hotel with a low battery, he told me, a kitchen employee offered to snake an extension cord out to the parking lot. "You really learn as much about people as you do about amps and volts and things like that."
Nov 29, 2010 MotherJones
I'm about as far from a gearhead as it gets, but even so, I was excited about the release of the nation's first two consumer plug-in electric vehicles: the Chevy Volt and the Nissan Leaf. The Volt can go 40 miles on battery power and another 310 thanks to an auxiliary gas engine, which kicked in smoothly as I floored it up a hill during a recent test drive. The Leaf is—even cooler—completely electric, with a range of about 100 miles. In 2011, Ford, Mitsubishi, and Mercedes-Benz plan to introduce their own tailpipe-free models. GE has ordered up thousands for its sales force, and the federal government has set a target for 1 million electric vehicles by 2015. (A good step, even considering the 246 million or so gas vehicles already on the road.) Are we finally ready after years of false starts? Despite widespread public jitters, the experts I polled said yes. Herewith, eight e-car worries not to spin your wheels over.
1. Our grid can't handle the added burden. While electric cars do use a great deal of juice, utilities have been working behind the scenes for years to make sure the cars don't fry the grid. Blackouts are "extremely unlikely," notes Simon Mui, a scientist who studies clean vehicles and fuels for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Advanced charging technology will help distribute power loads more evenly, and many home charging stations will operate only during off-peak hours—which is more efficient and usually cheaper. "Smart chargers," slated to hit the market in 2011, will decide when to charge based on the time and distance you commute, local rates, and electricity demand in your neighborhood.
2. My utility bill will skyrocket. Yep, you'll spend more on amperage, but your savings on gas will more than cover it. If you drive a battery-only car 12,000 miles a year at going power rates, you'll pay an extra $27 or so per month for electricity, but save about $97 on gas. Some utilities offer special rates during off-peak hours—in California, you might pay as little as $13 a month (roughly half-price) to charge up at night. The one drawback of cheaper fuel is, well, cheaper driving, which some experts worry will lure commuters away from public transit, carpools, and bikes.
3. Coal-burning utilities mean electric cars will make emissions worse. Hardly. Even in predominantly coal-burning regions, an electric car releases 35 to 60 percent less CO2 than a comparable conventional car, according to industry think tank Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). In areas with an ecofriendly power mix, the emissions are up to 75 percent lower. EPRI transportation expert Mark Duvall points out that "as the grid gets cleaner—which it almost certainly will—electric cars will get cleaner, too." Bonus: Unlike gas, which is refined largely from imported petroleum, electricity flows from domestic sources.
4. Electric cars already flopped once, so why should I believe they'll succeed? Climate worries, obviously, have gained traction since the 1990s, but the main reason to believe in a comeback is economic. Perhaps you've noticed that Detroit seems, uh, a little leaner than it was during the Clinton years. To compete with foreign automakers in places with high gas prices and tougher climate regs—think Europe and California—the industry needs to roll out efficient models. "Automakers see this as a necessity," says Mui. Technology has really improved, too; old-school e-car batteries, famous for exploding and generally sucking, have joined your wallet chains and Crash Test Dummies albums in '90s heaven.
5. Government rebates on electric cars favor the rich. To ease sticker shock (the Volt starts at $40,280; the Leaf, $32,780), the feds are offering a tax credit of up to $7,500 to the first 200,000 buyers of each model. If you still can't afford one, there's a consolation prize: As Mui points out, the reductions in emissions and pollution will benefit everyone. Plus, prices are sure to come down. The very first iPods, you may recall, set you back more than $400.
6. Electric cars handle like roller skates. I'm not the savviest driver, but I thought the Volt felt pretty much like a regular mid-size. Car and Driver writes that it "drives surprisingly well, with a reassuringly steady suspension." The Leaf gets dinged for its short range, but its transmission works so smoothly in stop-and-go traffic "that we started rationalizing our range concerns."
7. Lithium-ion auto batteries are as crappy as lithium-ion laptop batteries. Now here's something that might be worth fretting about. Although battery technology is light-years beyond where it was back when GM was peddling EV1s, it's far from perfect. Lithium-ion cells are sluggish in cold weather—and cranking the heat, AC, or stereo will reduce your range. More worrisome: No one can predict how long they'll last. "There will be degradation of the battery over its lifetime," says EPRI's Duvall. "But we don't know exactly how much." The good news: Recent breakthroughs in battery technology promise faster charging and greater reliability. In the meantime, both Volt and Leaf come with eight-year battery warranties.
8. I'll run out of juice in the sticks. This is only an issue for fully electric cars, and as long as you're within range of a socket, you'll make do. A full charge takes about 10 hours using a standard outlet, or half as long with a home 220-volt station that'll run you about $2,000. Meanwhile, the federal government plans to spend $115 million to help cities set up 15,000 pay-as-you-go chargers in public places. Electric vehicles "do require a lot of planning, but not as much as you might think," says Mark Vaughn, an AutoWeek editor who blogged last summer about his trial run with Mitsubishi's i MiEV—comparable to the Leaf. When Vaughn showed up at a hotel with a low battery, he told me, a kitchen employee offered to snake an extension cord out to the parking lot. "You really learn as much about people as you do about amps and volts and things like that."
Energy Issues
Governance problems at NERSA - shades of Eskom?
by Chris Yelland, managing director, EE Publishers
(follow EE Publishers on Twitter)
To comment and respond to this article, and/or to any of the views and positions expressed, visit EE Publishers' blog: "The best from EE Publishers..."
Once again, public sector governance issues, and battles between the CEO, the board and the responsible minister have rocked South Africa. Eskom, SAA, Transnet, the SABC... and now, in the latest saga, the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA)... (more)
On 15 November 2010, Chairperson Cecilia Khuzwayo indicated that the regulator had suspended its CEO, Smunda Mokoena, for "alleged gross transgression of NERSA's code of conduct".
Whilst official spokesman Charles Hlebela would not be drawn on the specifics, an article in The Times on 15 November went a step further, quoting a source alleging that that "quite recently he (the CEO) chaired a meeting completely drunk", and that "he had a drinking problem that was getting out of hand".
In the meantime, pending an internal investigation, Nomalanga Sithole, NERSA's executive manager for corporate services, was appointed as acting CEO.
Then, only ten days later, another bland press release issued by NERSA on 24 November stated without elaboration or explanation that the board had decided to lift the suspension and reinstate the CEO, and that the allegations against the CEO would now be investigated by the office of the minister of energy.
This immediately gave rise to perceptions of undue political interference, and that a "political" solution was being sought, rather than following an objective administrative and disciplinary process.
NERSA is a statutory body established by an act of parliament (No. 40 of 2004: The National Energy Regulator Act, 2004), to make independent regulatory decisions in the electricity, piped-gas and petroleum pipeline industries.
In terms of the Act, the minister of energy appoints the four full-time and five part-time board members of NERSA, and designates one of the part-time members as chairperson, another part-time member as deputy chairperson, one full-time member as CEO, and the other three full-time members as responsible for each of electricity, piped-gas and petroleum pipeline regulation, respectively.
Thus although in practice the board may recommend the candidate for the position of CEO to the minister of energy, the final appointment of the CEO is the prerogative of the minister.
The Act also states that the minister of energy may prematurely terminate the appointments of board members, including the CEO, but only under specified criteria. These include failing to act independently of any undue influence or instruction, and/or failing to act in a manner that is required and expected from the holder of a public office.
Whilst "undue influence" probably relates to matters of corruption or executive interference, a legal opinion indicated that "perhaps the context could be extended to the undue influence of alcohol. One would certainly expect that an appointment at this level would include the presumption that the CEO should act in a manner that is seen to be competent, which would obviously include competency of mind".
It should be noted that in this case the board did not terminate the appointment of the NERSA CEO - it merely suspended him pending an investigation, which presumably would result in a report to the minister of energy, who could then make an informed decision on termination in terms of the Act.
Former NERSA board member and head of infrastructure reform and regulation at University of Cape Town's Graduate School of Business, Prof. Anton Eberhard, does not believe that the role of the minister as detailed above necessarily prevents the independence of NERSA. "Regulatory independence is about being able to make independent regulatory decisions (licensing, tariff setting, technical standards, etc.) without these being arbitrarily overturned by any other person or agency, except through pre-specified appeal mechanisms, for example the high court. NERSA enjoys this independence", he said.
While the Act indicates that if the chairperson is unable to perform his or her functions for any reason, the deputy chairperson must perform them until the minister designates another chairperson, it is silent on procedures if the CEO is unable to perform his or her function, for example due to suspension.
A legal opinion indicated that "procedurally, this would then depend on what disciplinary code is in place, and to avoid the risk of legal exposure and litigation, NERSA would need to follow its code meticulously - they certainly won't want a legal claim against them for not following procedure and/or an unlawful termination." In the energy sector, the current case of Jacob Maroga vs. Eskom and the minister of public enterprises springs to mind!
This new saga is perhaps symptomatic of ongoing governance issues resulting from unclear lines of authority, accountability and communication between the CEO, the board and the responsible minister, in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and statutory bodies.
For companies established in terms of the Companies Act, the shareholder(s) elect and appoint the board of directors, and the directors in turn appoint (and may dismiss) the CEO. The CEO reports to the board, and the board is responsible to the shareholders.
In the case of SOEs and statutory bodies, there are a number of grey areas. As the position of the CEO is effectively an appointment by the shareholder minister, and not the board, does the board have the authority to suspend the CEO and appoint an acting CEO pending an investigation? Who is the CEO accountable to, and does the CEO report to the board or the shareholder minister? May the CEO communicate directly with the minister, and may the CEO take instructions directly from the minister? Is the regulator truly independent of the minister, government and politics in its administrative and regulatory decisions?
There may indeed be considerations other than procedural issues at play in the rapid about-face and reinstatement of the CEO by the board. NERSA spokesman, Charles Hlebela indicated to EE Publishers that "the five-year terms of the full-time regulator members, including the CEO, ended in September 2010", and that "the minister had extended their terms till March 2011".
Perhaps the reinstatement of the NERSA CEO is a pragmatic endeavor to avoid inevitably damaging and expensive litigation, extending over several years, resulting from the governance and accountability issues that have been experienced in other public entities such as Eskom. It may simply make sense to allow Smunda Mokoena to see out his contract in the next few months, and leave with his reputation intact.
But whatever the case, NERSA is undoubtedly a critical regulatory body in the South African economy, and its ongoing independence is essential. Despite the criticisms and shortcomings of NERSA, the regulator is in fact the thin line between the customer and some very powerful monopolies. Therefore, surely we should all work to strengthen and support NERSA, and not to destroy it?
Recently NERSA approved Eskom price increases of 25% per annum for three consecutive years, on top of a 32% increase the previous year. This week, NERSA will be heavily involved with the public hearings of the National Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity, IRP 2010.
One trusts and expects therefore that NERSA's deliberations are characterised by sound judgment and sober mind
by Chris Yelland, managing director, EE Publishers
(follow EE Publishers on Twitter)
To comment and respond to this article, and/or to any of the views and positions expressed, visit EE Publishers' blog: "The best from EE Publishers..."
Once again, public sector governance issues, and battles between the CEO, the board and the responsible minister have rocked South Africa. Eskom, SAA, Transnet, the SABC... and now, in the latest saga, the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA)... (more)
On 15 November 2010, Chairperson Cecilia Khuzwayo indicated that the regulator had suspended its CEO, Smunda Mokoena, for "alleged gross transgression of NERSA's code of conduct".
Whilst official spokesman Charles Hlebela would not be drawn on the specifics, an article in The Times on 15 November went a step further, quoting a source alleging that that "quite recently he (the CEO) chaired a meeting completely drunk", and that "he had a drinking problem that was getting out of hand".
In the meantime, pending an internal investigation, Nomalanga Sithole, NERSA's executive manager for corporate services, was appointed as acting CEO.
Then, only ten days later, another bland press release issued by NERSA on 24 November stated without elaboration or explanation that the board had decided to lift the suspension and reinstate the CEO, and that the allegations against the CEO would now be investigated by the office of the minister of energy.
This immediately gave rise to perceptions of undue political interference, and that a "political" solution was being sought, rather than following an objective administrative and disciplinary process.
NERSA is a statutory body established by an act of parliament (No. 40 of 2004: The National Energy Regulator Act, 2004), to make independent regulatory decisions in the electricity, piped-gas and petroleum pipeline industries.
In terms of the Act, the minister of energy appoints the four full-time and five part-time board members of NERSA, and designates one of the part-time members as chairperson, another part-time member as deputy chairperson, one full-time member as CEO, and the other three full-time members as responsible for each of electricity, piped-gas and petroleum pipeline regulation, respectively.
Thus although in practice the board may recommend the candidate for the position of CEO to the minister of energy, the final appointment of the CEO is the prerogative of the minister.
The Act also states that the minister of energy may prematurely terminate the appointments of board members, including the CEO, but only under specified criteria. These include failing to act independently of any undue influence or instruction, and/or failing to act in a manner that is required and expected from the holder of a public office.
Whilst "undue influence" probably relates to matters of corruption or executive interference, a legal opinion indicated that "perhaps the context could be extended to the undue influence of alcohol. One would certainly expect that an appointment at this level would include the presumption that the CEO should act in a manner that is seen to be competent, which would obviously include competency of mind".
It should be noted that in this case the board did not terminate the appointment of the NERSA CEO - it merely suspended him pending an investigation, which presumably would result in a report to the minister of energy, who could then make an informed decision on termination in terms of the Act.
Former NERSA board member and head of infrastructure reform and regulation at University of Cape Town's Graduate School of Business, Prof. Anton Eberhard, does not believe that the role of the minister as detailed above necessarily prevents the independence of NERSA. "Regulatory independence is about being able to make independent regulatory decisions (licensing, tariff setting, technical standards, etc.) without these being arbitrarily overturned by any other person or agency, except through pre-specified appeal mechanisms, for example the high court. NERSA enjoys this independence", he said.
While the Act indicates that if the chairperson is unable to perform his or her functions for any reason, the deputy chairperson must perform them until the minister designates another chairperson, it is silent on procedures if the CEO is unable to perform his or her function, for example due to suspension.
A legal opinion indicated that "procedurally, this would then depend on what disciplinary code is in place, and to avoid the risk of legal exposure and litigation, NERSA would need to follow its code meticulously - they certainly won't want a legal claim against them for not following procedure and/or an unlawful termination." In the energy sector, the current case of Jacob Maroga vs. Eskom and the minister of public enterprises springs to mind!
This new saga is perhaps symptomatic of ongoing governance issues resulting from unclear lines of authority, accountability and communication between the CEO, the board and the responsible minister, in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and statutory bodies.
For companies established in terms of the Companies Act, the shareholder(s) elect and appoint the board of directors, and the directors in turn appoint (and may dismiss) the CEO. The CEO reports to the board, and the board is responsible to the shareholders.
In the case of SOEs and statutory bodies, there are a number of grey areas. As the position of the CEO is effectively an appointment by the shareholder minister, and not the board, does the board have the authority to suspend the CEO and appoint an acting CEO pending an investigation? Who is the CEO accountable to, and does the CEO report to the board or the shareholder minister? May the CEO communicate directly with the minister, and may the CEO take instructions directly from the minister? Is the regulator truly independent of the minister, government and politics in its administrative and regulatory decisions?
There may indeed be considerations other than procedural issues at play in the rapid about-face and reinstatement of the CEO by the board. NERSA spokesman, Charles Hlebela indicated to EE Publishers that "the five-year terms of the full-time regulator members, including the CEO, ended in September 2010", and that "the minister had extended their terms till March 2011".
Perhaps the reinstatement of the NERSA CEO is a pragmatic endeavor to avoid inevitably damaging and expensive litigation, extending over several years, resulting from the governance and accountability issues that have been experienced in other public entities such as Eskom. It may simply make sense to allow Smunda Mokoena to see out his contract in the next few months, and leave with his reputation intact.
But whatever the case, NERSA is undoubtedly a critical regulatory body in the South African economy, and its ongoing independence is essential. Despite the criticisms and shortcomings of NERSA, the regulator is in fact the thin line between the customer and some very powerful monopolies. Therefore, surely we should all work to strengthen and support NERSA, and not to destroy it?
Recently NERSA approved Eskom price increases of 25% per annum for three consecutive years, on top of a 32% increase the previous year. This week, NERSA will be heavily involved with the public hearings of the National Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity, IRP 2010.
One trusts and expects therefore that NERSA's deliberations are characterised by sound judgment and sober mind
Monday, November 15, 2010
lighting control and BMS
CONTROLS FRIDAY: TYPICAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR USING ADVANCED LIGHTING CONTROLS
Posted on November 5, 2010, 6:31 AM, by Craig DiLouie, under Controls, Energy, Research.
How much energy is saved when a building uses lighting controls? The typical answer is the ever-present lighting term, “It depends.” Research, however, is suggestive:
Space Type Controls Type Lighting Energy Savings Demonstrated in Research or Estimated as Potential
Study Reference
Private Office Occupancy sensor 38% An Analysis of the Energy and Cost Savings Potential of Occupancy Sensors for Commercial Lighting Systems, Lighting Research Center/EPA, August 2000.
Multilevel switching 22% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Manual dimming 6-9% Occupant Use of Manual Lighting Controls in Private Offices, IESNA Paper #34, Lighting Research Center.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting) 50% (manual blinds) to 70% (optimally used manual blinds or automatic shading system) “Effect of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices”, by Reinhart, CF, National Research Council of Canada, Internal Report NRCC-45374, 2002.
Open Office Occupancy sensors 35% National Research Council study on integrated lighting controls in open office, 2007.
Multilevel switching 16% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting 40% “Effect of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices”, by Reinhart, CF, National Research Council of Canada, Internal Report NRCC-45374, 2002.
Personal dimming control 11% National Research Council study on integrated lighting controls in open office, 2007.
Classroom Occupancy sensor 55% An Analysis of the Energy and Cost Savings Potential of Occupancy Sensors for Commercial Lighting Systems, Lighting Research Center/EPA, August 2000.
Multilevel switching 8% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting) 50% Sidelighting Photocontrols Field Study, Heschong Mahone Group, 2003.
Posted on November 5, 2010, 6:31 AM, by Craig DiLouie, under Controls, Energy, Research.
How much energy is saved when a building uses lighting controls? The typical answer is the ever-present lighting term, “It depends.” Research, however, is suggestive:
Space Type Controls Type Lighting Energy Savings Demonstrated in Research or Estimated as Potential
Study Reference
Private Office Occupancy sensor 38% An Analysis of the Energy and Cost Savings Potential of Occupancy Sensors for Commercial Lighting Systems, Lighting Research Center/EPA, August 2000.
Multilevel switching 22% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Manual dimming 6-9% Occupant Use of Manual Lighting Controls in Private Offices, IESNA Paper #34, Lighting Research Center.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting) 50% (manual blinds) to 70% (optimally used manual blinds or automatic shading system) “Effect of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices”, by Reinhart, CF, National Research Council of Canada, Internal Report NRCC-45374, 2002.
Open Office Occupancy sensors 35% National Research Council study on integrated lighting controls in open office, 2007.
Multilevel switching 16% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting 40% “Effect of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices”, by Reinhart, CF, National Research Council of Canada, Internal Report NRCC-45374, 2002.
Personal dimming control 11% National Research Council study on integrated lighting controls in open office, 2007.
Classroom Occupancy sensor 55% An Analysis of the Energy and Cost Savings Potential of Occupancy Sensors for Commercial Lighting Systems, Lighting Research Center/EPA, August 2000.
Multilevel switching 8% Lighting Controls Effectiveness Assessment, ADM Associates for Heschong Mahone Group, May 2002.
Daylight harvesting (sidelighting) 50% Sidelighting Photocontrols Field Study, Heschong Mahone Group, 2003.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
Oct 29, 2010
Australia’s biggest office landlords are switching off lights and installing more efficient air conditioners ahead of rules demanding reporting of energy use in the nation with the developed world’s second-highest greenhouse gas emissions per person.
The largest property managers are ahead of legislation which comes into effect Nov. 1 requiring owners to reveal office buildings’ energy efficiency to tenants and buyers, according to Simon Wild, Sydney-based principal at sustainable design consultants Cundall. Cundall worked with the U.K. Green Building Council on a study of the nation’s sustainability rating tool, the results of which were released in August.
“The industry, particularly the tier one landlords, have been disclosing for a long time,” Wild said. “Australian companies are very much market-driven about how they can attract the big players in town to reside within their buildings.”
GPT Group, Australia’s second-biggest diversified property trust by market value, cut its buildings’ greenhouse gas emissions by 28 percent between 2005 and 2009 by installing more efficient air conditioners and recycling more waste. Morgan Stanley-backed Investa Property Group’s 21-story Ark building in North Sydney can generate electricity, recycle rainwater and recharge electric cars.
Australia boasts some of the most environmentally friendly real-estate groups in the world, a survey of global companies by Netherlands-based Maastricht University found this year. Sydney- based GPT heads the Dow Jones Sustainability Index’s 21-company real-estate leader list, a third of whose members are Australian, more than any other country.
Energy Efficiency
Australia had the second-highest carbon dioxide emissions per capita among developed nations, according to 2008 figures from the International Energy Agency, the latest data available from the group. Only Luxembourg’s emissions were higher.
The legislation requires owners of office buildings leasing or selling more than 2,000 square meters (21,528 square feet) to reveal their day-to-day energy efficiency on the five-star National Australian Built Environment Rating System. Companies pay A$770 ($752) for a rating to New South Wales state’s Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, which administers the program nationally, and about A$3,000 for an assessor to review documents including the previous year’s bills, said Yma ten Hoedt, the department’s principal program manager.
The rules will affect 10 percent of office buildings nationally every year, DECCW estimates. Companies must also disclose tenanted areas’ lighting systems’ performance and provide a statement on buildings’ efficiency from Nov. 1, 2011.
Smaller owners, who may not have ratings or necessary documents, will be most affected, said Rebecca Pearce, Sydney- based head of sustainability at CB Richard Ellis Group Inc., the world’s largest commercial property broker.
Tenants
Government agencies, which occupy about a third of offices nationally, will require buildings they lease or own to have a minimum 4.5 star energy rating by next year. The national average is 2.5 stars, with the biggest landlords targeting 4.5 over the next two to four years.
“To have a building vacant because it’s not efficient or rated so tenants don’t want to go into it, we don’t even want to go there,” said Rowan Griffin, head of sustainability at Colonial First State, the asset management arm of Commonwealth Bank of Australia. Colonial manages 34 office properties, valued at about A$4 billion.
Almost 300 tenants occupying about 1.5 million square meters, have committed to the CitySwitch Green Office program, including accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, property broker DTZ, and Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the country’s biggest bank, pledging to achieve at least a four-star tenancy rating.
Improving Performance
PricewaterhouseCoopers has spent A$800,000 replacing light switches in its Sydney office with sensors, according to the CitySwitch website. DTZ is saving A$3,500 a year on the energy bill at its Sydney headquarters by introducing steps such as installing shared printers and setting computing equipment to turn off automatically, the website said.
A one-star efficiency gain means A$2 to A$4 in annual savings per square meter, a Citi Investment Research study in January found. For a 10,000-square-meter office building, that equates to savings of as much as A$40,000 a year.
A University of California, Berkeley, study found buildings rated under a U.S. plan similar to the system used in the incoming Australian rules commanded rents of about 3.5 percent more than comparable properties, and sale prices rose as much as 16 percent. A similar Australian study is expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2011.
Building Management
Companies reach up to four stars by better timing lights and equipment use, installing more efficient systems during upgrades, and better training staff, said Craig Roussac, general manager for sustainability, safety and environment at Investa. The company improved one of its building’s performance by 1.5 stars more than expected by adjusting the way it was run by its manager, he said.
“You can have an efficient car, but you can be driving it with the handbrake on and completely stuff things up,” Roussac said. “Conversely, you can have someone who’s passionate and skilled, and see an increase in returns.”
Australia’s biggest office landlords are switching off lights and installing more efficient air conditioners ahead of rules demanding reporting of energy use in the nation with the developed world’s second-highest greenhouse gas emissions per person.
The largest property managers are ahead of legislation which comes into effect Nov. 1 requiring owners to reveal office buildings’ energy efficiency to tenants and buyers, according to Simon Wild, Sydney-based principal at sustainable design consultants Cundall. Cundall worked with the U.K. Green Building Council on a study of the nation’s sustainability rating tool, the results of which were released in August.
“The industry, particularly the tier one landlords, have been disclosing for a long time,” Wild said. “Australian companies are very much market-driven about how they can attract the big players in town to reside within their buildings.”
GPT Group, Australia’s second-biggest diversified property trust by market value, cut its buildings’ greenhouse gas emissions by 28 percent between 2005 and 2009 by installing more efficient air conditioners and recycling more waste. Morgan Stanley-backed Investa Property Group’s 21-story Ark building in North Sydney can generate electricity, recycle rainwater and recharge electric cars.
Australia boasts some of the most environmentally friendly real-estate groups in the world, a survey of global companies by Netherlands-based Maastricht University found this year. Sydney- based GPT heads the Dow Jones Sustainability Index’s 21-company real-estate leader list, a third of whose members are Australian, more than any other country.
Energy Efficiency
Australia had the second-highest carbon dioxide emissions per capita among developed nations, according to 2008 figures from the International Energy Agency, the latest data available from the group. Only Luxembourg’s emissions were higher.
The legislation requires owners of office buildings leasing or selling more than 2,000 square meters (21,528 square feet) to reveal their day-to-day energy efficiency on the five-star National Australian Built Environment Rating System. Companies pay A$770 ($752) for a rating to New South Wales state’s Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, which administers the program nationally, and about A$3,000 for an assessor to review documents including the previous year’s bills, said Yma ten Hoedt, the department’s principal program manager.
The rules will affect 10 percent of office buildings nationally every year, DECCW estimates. Companies must also disclose tenanted areas’ lighting systems’ performance and provide a statement on buildings’ efficiency from Nov. 1, 2011.
Smaller owners, who may not have ratings or necessary documents, will be most affected, said Rebecca Pearce, Sydney- based head of sustainability at CB Richard Ellis Group Inc., the world’s largest commercial property broker.
Tenants
Government agencies, which occupy about a third of offices nationally, will require buildings they lease or own to have a minimum 4.5 star energy rating by next year. The national average is 2.5 stars, with the biggest landlords targeting 4.5 over the next two to four years.
“To have a building vacant because it’s not efficient or rated so tenants don’t want to go into it, we don’t even want to go there,” said Rowan Griffin, head of sustainability at Colonial First State, the asset management arm of Commonwealth Bank of Australia. Colonial manages 34 office properties, valued at about A$4 billion.
Almost 300 tenants occupying about 1.5 million square meters, have committed to the CitySwitch Green Office program, including accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, property broker DTZ, and Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the country’s biggest bank, pledging to achieve at least a four-star tenancy rating.
Improving Performance
PricewaterhouseCoopers has spent A$800,000 replacing light switches in its Sydney office with sensors, according to the CitySwitch website. DTZ is saving A$3,500 a year on the energy bill at its Sydney headquarters by introducing steps such as installing shared printers and setting computing equipment to turn off automatically, the website said.
A one-star efficiency gain means A$2 to A$4 in annual savings per square meter, a Citi Investment Research study in January found. For a 10,000-square-meter office building, that equates to savings of as much as A$40,000 a year.
A University of California, Berkeley, study found buildings rated under a U.S. plan similar to the system used in the incoming Australian rules commanded rents of about 3.5 percent more than comparable properties, and sale prices rose as much as 16 percent. A similar Australian study is expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2011.
Building Management
Companies reach up to four stars by better timing lights and equipment use, installing more efficient systems during upgrades, and better training staff, said Craig Roussac, general manager for sustainability, safety and environment at Investa. The company improved one of its building’s performance by 1.5 stars more than expected by adjusting the way it was run by its manager, he said.
“You can have an efficient car, but you can be driving it with the handbrake on and completely stuff things up,” Roussac said. “Conversely, you can have someone who’s passionate and skilled, and see an increase in returns.”
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
Energy efficiency costs, budget to increase in Vt.
Oct 21, 2010 Bloomberg
The budget of Vermont's statewide energy efficiency program and the costs to ratepayers are going up.
Ratepayers currently pay less-than-a-penny tax per kilowatt-hour on their electric bills to support power-saving programs administered by Efficiency Vermont.
Under a Public Service Board order issued Wednesday, the tax on residential ratepayers will increase Feb. 1 from about from about seven-tenths of a cent to about nine-tenths of a cent. Put another way, for a homeowner using 600 kilowatt-hours a month, the efficiency charge will climb about 19 percent from $4.64 to about $5.51.
The money goes to support the $38.5 million that will be spent next year to encourage energy efficiency measures, with about two-thirds going to commercial and industrial applications, where the big potential energy savings are.
Blair Hamilton, policy director with the Burlington nonprofit Vermont Energy Investment Corp., which runs Efficiency Vermont under contract with the state, said ratepayers save in two ways: Families and companies using less power see smaller bills. Also, reducing the state's growth in demand for electricity causes Vermont power companies to reduce their purchase of expensive wholesale electricity for resale to their customers.
"If we weren't paying the energy efficiency charge and had not paid it for the past 10 years, rates would not be like what you're paying now, less the energy efficiency charge," Hamilton said. "We'd be paying a lot more."
Sandra Levine, a lawyer with the Conservation Law Foundation, said new power generation costs more than twice what conservation does.
"Energy efficiency continues to meet our power needs at far less than half the price of power supply, and that's particularly important with, for instance, the Hydro-Quebec deal at roughly 6 cents per kilowatt-hour," Levine said.
The state recently announced a long-term deal between Vermont power companies to buy power at a starting wholesale price of about 6 cents per kwh from the provincial utility, which has ample excess hydropower capacity.
William Driscoll, vice president of Associated Industries of Vermont, a manufacturers' group, said his group had argued that the Efficiency Vermont budget was growing too fast. The Public Service Board, which regulates utilities, said the budget would climb about 15 percent in 2011.
Businesses opting not to invest in new efficiency measures are paying to help others that make such investments, he said. Some of his group's member companies worry about "paying the efficiency charge, versus having that money for payroll investments or other business costs," he said.
Hamilton said Efficiency Vermont has begun to expand beyond conserving electricity and into helping Vermonters save on other energy sources used for heating. Other projects range from installing more efficient pumps for municipal water systems to helping grocery stores install more efficient refrigerators.
Last week, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy ranked Vermont No. 5 in the country for its energy efficiency programs. It gave the state high marks for conserving electricity, less so for heating efficiency and energy usage in transportation.
Oct 21, 2010 Bloomberg
The budget of Vermont's statewide energy efficiency program and the costs to ratepayers are going up.
Ratepayers currently pay less-than-a-penny tax per kilowatt-hour on their electric bills to support power-saving programs administered by Efficiency Vermont.
Under a Public Service Board order issued Wednesday, the tax on residential ratepayers will increase Feb. 1 from about from about seven-tenths of a cent to about nine-tenths of a cent. Put another way, for a homeowner using 600 kilowatt-hours a month, the efficiency charge will climb about 19 percent from $4.64 to about $5.51.
The money goes to support the $38.5 million that will be spent next year to encourage energy efficiency measures, with about two-thirds going to commercial and industrial applications, where the big potential energy savings are.
Blair Hamilton, policy director with the Burlington nonprofit Vermont Energy Investment Corp., which runs Efficiency Vermont under contract with the state, said ratepayers save in two ways: Families and companies using less power see smaller bills. Also, reducing the state's growth in demand for electricity causes Vermont power companies to reduce their purchase of expensive wholesale electricity for resale to their customers.
"If we weren't paying the energy efficiency charge and had not paid it for the past 10 years, rates would not be like what you're paying now, less the energy efficiency charge," Hamilton said. "We'd be paying a lot more."
Sandra Levine, a lawyer with the Conservation Law Foundation, said new power generation costs more than twice what conservation does.
"Energy efficiency continues to meet our power needs at far less than half the price of power supply, and that's particularly important with, for instance, the Hydro-Quebec deal at roughly 6 cents per kilowatt-hour," Levine said.
The state recently announced a long-term deal between Vermont power companies to buy power at a starting wholesale price of about 6 cents per kwh from the provincial utility, which has ample excess hydropower capacity.
William Driscoll, vice president of Associated Industries of Vermont, a manufacturers' group, said his group had argued that the Efficiency Vermont budget was growing too fast. The Public Service Board, which regulates utilities, said the budget would climb about 15 percent in 2011.
Businesses opting not to invest in new efficiency measures are paying to help others that make such investments, he said. Some of his group's member companies worry about "paying the efficiency charge, versus having that money for payroll investments or other business costs," he said.
Hamilton said Efficiency Vermont has begun to expand beyond conserving electricity and into helping Vermonters save on other energy sources used for heating. Other projects range from installing more efficient pumps for municipal water systems to helping grocery stores install more efficient refrigerators.
Last week, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy ranked Vermont No. 5 in the country for its energy efficiency programs. It gave the state high marks for conserving electricity, less so for heating efficiency and energy usage in transportation.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Lighting control and Energy Management
Are Performance-Based Models the Future of Commercial Building Energy Codes?
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted October 2010
Commercial building energy codes are largely prescriptive, combining mandatory requirements for lighting controls with limits on lighting loads by application. The typical lighting load metric is lighting power density (LPD) measured in watts per square foot.
This approach is intended to ensure that a building is built (or renovated) to a certain standard of efficiency, but does not require that the building operate within a target limit for ongoing energy use for the simple reason that it does not account for the operating time of the building. Additionally, as energy codes become more restrictive and continue the prescriptive LPD approach, critics charge that they limit design flexibility.
As a result, code authorities are considering approaches to energy codes that are performance based instead of mainly prescriptive. In a performance-based code, the building would be designed so that it would operate within a target limit for energy consumption—using annual kWh/sq.ft. instead of W/sq.ft. as the primary metric. The limit, in turn, might be developed from whole building monitoring, historical data that is considered the most accurate, and/or building modeling.
"The performance basis can seem like a much more straightforward and potentially more effective way to show that a building is energy efficient," says Eric Richman, senior research engineer for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. "Limiting energy use is, after all, the true goal of energy codes."
He points out that a performance-based code is more directly linked to actual or expected energy use, potentially allows maximum component tradeoff flexibility between building systems, is considered a way to achieve higher energy savings, and can more easily accommodate alternative energy features such as renewable energy.
One approach of a performance method is to compare modeled energy use for a proposed building against a predetermined energy target. In this approach, few items would actually be prescriptively required with the main goal being to comply with the energy consumption limit. This would provide maximum tradeoff flexibility between building systems, but establishing the right (and fair) target would be difficult considering the large variation in building types and uses. Another approach is to monitor the building's actual energy performance after occupancy over a period of time and compare it against the target. This would provide the most accurate measure of building energy use, but would require building departments to monitor buildings after construction, and begs the question of what happens if a given building fails to achieve its target.
These are questions that must be debated before effective solutions can be considered for policy, but Richman says there is a great deal of interest among the lighting community in a kWh approach as a way to slow down perceived excessive ratcheting down of LPD limits. If target energy savings can be realized through controls, for example, this would give breathing room for lighting power allowances. Energy advocates, meanwhile, are also interested in performance-based codes as a way to harvest missing energy savings.
Lighting sections of energy codes already consider energy consumption, however, by virtue of the fact that each generation of codes contains more extensive mandatory requirements for advanced lighting control strategies such as automatic shutoff and daylight harvesting. Because of this, significant additional energy savings accounting for time of use may not be realized by implementing a performance-based code.
"This is the very reason that it is not clear that a performance-based method will automatically save more energy than the newest energy code requirements," Richman says. "Building modeling as a compliance method does offer additional flexibility and is currently allowed in all major energy codes. However, it is not clear that setting building energy targets of future building operation as the comparison for compliance is accurate or practical and/or that it will garner additional energy savings."
As a result, policy makers may find it difficult to turn the ideal of a performance-based code into a practical reality that will be accepted by designers and building departments. But they have time: Richman says do not expect such a code anytime soon—or at least one that functions smoothly or fairly.
"There is work being done on methods to implement performance-based approaches but since changes for the two major national code standards—90.1 and IECC—are already 'in the can' for 2010 and 2012, I don't expect to see anything for a couple of years, at least."
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted October 2010
Commercial building energy codes are largely prescriptive, combining mandatory requirements for lighting controls with limits on lighting loads by application. The typical lighting load metric is lighting power density (LPD) measured in watts per square foot.
This approach is intended to ensure that a building is built (or renovated) to a certain standard of efficiency, but does not require that the building operate within a target limit for ongoing energy use for the simple reason that it does not account for the operating time of the building. Additionally, as energy codes become more restrictive and continue the prescriptive LPD approach, critics charge that they limit design flexibility.
As a result, code authorities are considering approaches to energy codes that are performance based instead of mainly prescriptive. In a performance-based code, the building would be designed so that it would operate within a target limit for energy consumption—using annual kWh/sq.ft. instead of W/sq.ft. as the primary metric. The limit, in turn, might be developed from whole building monitoring, historical data that is considered the most accurate, and/or building modeling.
"The performance basis can seem like a much more straightforward and potentially more effective way to show that a building is energy efficient," says Eric Richman, senior research engineer for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. "Limiting energy use is, after all, the true goal of energy codes."
He points out that a performance-based code is more directly linked to actual or expected energy use, potentially allows maximum component tradeoff flexibility between building systems, is considered a way to achieve higher energy savings, and can more easily accommodate alternative energy features such as renewable energy.
One approach of a performance method is to compare modeled energy use for a proposed building against a predetermined energy target. In this approach, few items would actually be prescriptively required with the main goal being to comply with the energy consumption limit. This would provide maximum tradeoff flexibility between building systems, but establishing the right (and fair) target would be difficult considering the large variation in building types and uses. Another approach is to monitor the building's actual energy performance after occupancy over a period of time and compare it against the target. This would provide the most accurate measure of building energy use, but would require building departments to monitor buildings after construction, and begs the question of what happens if a given building fails to achieve its target.
These are questions that must be debated before effective solutions can be considered for policy, but Richman says there is a great deal of interest among the lighting community in a kWh approach as a way to slow down perceived excessive ratcheting down of LPD limits. If target energy savings can be realized through controls, for example, this would give breathing room for lighting power allowances. Energy advocates, meanwhile, are also interested in performance-based codes as a way to harvest missing energy savings.
Lighting sections of energy codes already consider energy consumption, however, by virtue of the fact that each generation of codes contains more extensive mandatory requirements for advanced lighting control strategies such as automatic shutoff and daylight harvesting. Because of this, significant additional energy savings accounting for time of use may not be realized by implementing a performance-based code.
"This is the very reason that it is not clear that a performance-based method will automatically save more energy than the newest energy code requirements," Richman says. "Building modeling as a compliance method does offer additional flexibility and is currently allowed in all major energy codes. However, it is not clear that setting building energy targets of future building operation as the comparison for compliance is accurate or practical and/or that it will garner additional energy savings."
As a result, policy makers may find it difficult to turn the ideal of a performance-based code into a practical reality that will be accepted by designers and building departments. But they have time: Richman says do not expect such a code anytime soon—or at least one that functions smoothly or fairly.
"There is work being done on methods to implement performance-based approaches but since changes for the two major national code standards—90.1 and IECC—are already 'in the can' for 2010 and 2012, I don't expect to see anything for a couple of years, at least."
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Energy Management
Poor municipal service delivery is largely due to a shortage of artisans, which are not being produced in sufficient numbers to operate and maintain municipal infrastructure.
John Botha, the general manager of the Production Management Institute, a subsidiary of Adcorp, said this week: "When you scratch the surface of poor delivery, you inevitably find that the one constant factor is a lack of skills. We just don't have enough artisans to do the work. We are producing less than half the number we should be."
He was commenting on recent reports that at least R2 billion was left unspent by local government, with many municipalities plagued by poor infrastructural maintenance.
Artisans are critical for the operation and maintenance of municipal infrastructure and equipment. This includes heavy-current electricians, plumbers, fitters and turners, welders, carpenters, bricklayers and handymen.
He said the main reason for the shortage of artisans was the lack of suitably qualified candidates with qualifications in science and maths, the foundation of many artisan trades.
Prior to 1990, artisan trades were restricted to those who had passed Standard 7 (now Grade 9) - a level denied to most black people. "Currently, the school system is turning out woefully insufficient numbers of black science and maths students," said Botha.
Another reason for the shortage is that Eskom and Telkom, which used to train a large number of artisans through apprenticeships, no longer do so due to the commercialisation of their operations.
Emigration has also dented the skills base as has the fact that companies have scaled down their training as Seta learnerships have replaced company apprenticeships
John Botha, the general manager of the Production Management Institute, a subsidiary of Adcorp, said this week: "When you scratch the surface of poor delivery, you inevitably find that the one constant factor is a lack of skills. We just don't have enough artisans to do the work. We are producing less than half the number we should be."
He was commenting on recent reports that at least R2 billion was left unspent by local government, with many municipalities plagued by poor infrastructural maintenance.
Artisans are critical for the operation and maintenance of municipal infrastructure and equipment. This includes heavy-current electricians, plumbers, fitters and turners, welders, carpenters, bricklayers and handymen.
He said the main reason for the shortage of artisans was the lack of suitably qualified candidates with qualifications in science and maths, the foundation of many artisan trades.
Prior to 1990, artisan trades were restricted to those who had passed Standard 7 (now Grade 9) - a level denied to most black people. "Currently, the school system is turning out woefully insufficient numbers of black science and maths students," said Botha.
Another reason for the shortage is that Eskom and Telkom, which used to train a large number of artisans through apprenticeships, no longer do so due to the commercialisation of their operations.
Emigration has also dented the skills base as has the fact that companies have scaled down their training as Seta learnerships have replaced company apprenticeships
Lighting control and Energy Management
Energy SETA placed under administration
After many years of both the ECA(SA) and employers having to deal with the dysfunctional Energy SETA, it was placed under administration on 17 September 2010. The director general of the Department of Higher Education, Prof. Mary Metcalf, by notice in the Government Gazette has suspended all members of the board and the operation of the ESETA's constitution. Accordingly, all of its committees are also suspended. The chief executive officer was also dismissed by the accounting authority before that date.
Tsakani Matshazi has been appointed as the administrator for six months, and her appointment will be reviewed on the expiry of that period. She will have all the powers, rights and duties that previously rested with the accounting authority.
The ECA(SA) has been asked by the administrator to meet with her regarding its specific requirements, to ensure that skills and educational instruction within the sector are developed, implemented and approved. Hopefully a meeting will take place shortly, and extensive training will once again take place to address the current skills shortage
After many years of both the ECA(SA) and employers having to deal with the dysfunctional Energy SETA, it was placed under administration on 17 September 2010. The director general of the Department of Higher Education, Prof. Mary Metcalf, by notice in the Government Gazette has suspended all members of the board and the operation of the ESETA's constitution. Accordingly, all of its committees are also suspended. The chief executive officer was also dismissed by the accounting authority before that date.
Tsakani Matshazi has been appointed as the administrator for six months, and her appointment will be reviewed on the expiry of that period. She will have all the powers, rights and duties that previously rested with the accounting authority.
The ECA(SA) has been asked by the administrator to meet with her regarding its specific requirements, to ensure that skills and educational instruction within the sector are developed, implemented and approved. Hopefully a meeting will take place shortly, and extensive training will once again take place to address the current skills shortage
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Energy Management
When Selling Energy Efficiency, Don't Say 'Retrofit,' Say 'Upgrade' -- Study
Oct 5, 2010
JENNY MANDEL of
Give the people what they want. Know your customer. Make it easy to do the right thing.
These are some of the common-sense recommendations featured in a new report that highlights just how unprepared many energy program designers are when it comes to selling efficiency to the public.
In a study (pdf) of programs aimed at improving residential energy efficiency, researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found much to learn from. The results, they say, should serve as a guide to the more than 2,000 towns, cities, states and regions with stimulus funding to spend on clean energy programs and with minimal experience to draw from.
For starters, the researchers said, don't offer "audits" or "retrofits" -- customers shy away from the negative connotations. Instead try offering "energy assessments" and "upgrades," but focus messaging on health benefits, improved comfort, community pride or other benefits that consumers tend to care more about.
Other suggestions included working with trusted local partners, minimizing the paperwork and hassles that customers face, and following the marketing rule of thumb that it takes three "touches" to convince most people that something is worth buying into.
A key partner for such programs should be the contractor workforce, the authors said, because contractors know the marketplace for residential construction work and will be the "face" that customers see when they interact with the program. Ensuring that contractors are well-trained, they added, can help to avoid problems and consumer backlash.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu is fond of saying that his goal is to make people save money through energy efficiency. But the new report underscores the psychological components to energy consumption patterns that have historically proven difficult to change.
"Convincing millions of Americans to divert their time and resources into upgrading their homes to eliminate energy waste, avoid high utility bills and help stimulate the economy is one of the great challenges facing energy efficiency programs around the country," said Merrian Fuller, an author of the study and energy analyst in the Berkeley Lab's Electricity Markets and Policy group.
"Usually, when policymakers address the issue of energy efficiency benefits, they ... neglect the issue of how to motivate consumers to take advantage of home energy upgrade programs," she said. "This is often a missing element in policy discussions and a primary impetus for us in writing this report."
The study examined 14 home efficiency programs that the authors felt were successful, including one by the Bonneville Power Administration in the Pacific Northwest and efforts in Houston, Minneapolis, Kansas, Boston, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and the District of Columbia.
Click here (pdf) for the report.
Copyright 2010 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.greenwire.com.
Greenwire is published by Environment & Energy Publishing. Read More »
Oct 5, 2010
JENNY MANDEL of
Give the people what they want. Know your customer. Make it easy to do the right thing.
These are some of the common-sense recommendations featured in a new report that highlights just how unprepared many energy program designers are when it comes to selling efficiency to the public.
In a study (pdf) of programs aimed at improving residential energy efficiency, researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found much to learn from. The results, they say, should serve as a guide to the more than 2,000 towns, cities, states and regions with stimulus funding to spend on clean energy programs and with minimal experience to draw from.
For starters, the researchers said, don't offer "audits" or "retrofits" -- customers shy away from the negative connotations. Instead try offering "energy assessments" and "upgrades," but focus messaging on health benefits, improved comfort, community pride or other benefits that consumers tend to care more about.
Other suggestions included working with trusted local partners, minimizing the paperwork and hassles that customers face, and following the marketing rule of thumb that it takes three "touches" to convince most people that something is worth buying into.
A key partner for such programs should be the contractor workforce, the authors said, because contractors know the marketplace for residential construction work and will be the "face" that customers see when they interact with the program. Ensuring that contractors are well-trained, they added, can help to avoid problems and consumer backlash.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu is fond of saying that his goal is to make people save money through energy efficiency. But the new report underscores the psychological components to energy consumption patterns that have historically proven difficult to change.
"Convincing millions of Americans to divert their time and resources into upgrading their homes to eliminate energy waste, avoid high utility bills and help stimulate the economy is one of the great challenges facing energy efficiency programs around the country," said Merrian Fuller, an author of the study and energy analyst in the Berkeley Lab's Electricity Markets and Policy group.
"Usually, when policymakers address the issue of energy efficiency benefits, they ... neglect the issue of how to motivate consumers to take advantage of home energy upgrade programs," she said. "This is often a missing element in policy discussions and a primary impetus for us in writing this report."
The study examined 14 home efficiency programs that the authors felt were successful, including one by the Bonneville Power Administration in the Pacific Northwest and efforts in Houston, Minneapolis, Kansas, Boston, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and the District of Columbia.
Click here (pdf) for the report.
Copyright 2010 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.greenwire.com.
Greenwire is published by Environment & Energy Publishing. Read More »
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
SA is nearing peak coal, say scientists
27 September 2010 - South Africa has more coal than it can ever burn, right? If you think this, as many of us do, think again.
Research by international and local scientists has shown that coal, like other resources, is finite and can be expected to comply with peak resources theory.
The theory shows that production in commodities such as oil grows until a peak is reached, whereafter production declines. In the case of South African coal, the studies show production has already reached its peak, or soon will.
“It is commonly believed that South Africa has abundant coal reserves which will last 200 years or more,'' says Jeremy Wakeford, chair of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (Aspo) in South Africa, in the organisation's latest newsletter.
“But recent research [from] three scientific journals suggests that usable reserves are much smaller than previously thought, and that annual production could reach a peak and begin to decline within a decade -- or might even have peaked already.''
Wakeford says that “given the country's overwhelming dependence on coal, this issue has huge ramifications for our future development path''.
Coal provides 70% of the country's energy supply, supports 90% of electricity generation, is used to make a quarter of the country's liquid fuels using the Sasol process and is a big earner of foreign exchange through exports to foreign users.
Geologist Chris Hartnady, in a paper to be published in the SA Journal of Science, has forecast peak production in 2020 at about 285-million tonnes a year.
This compares with total production last year of 242-million tons. This was mostly used by Eskom (123-million tonnes), Sasol (40-million tonnes) and export (66-million tonnes).
Eskom's current expansion programme could use an additional 50-million tonnes, and if the Sasol Mafutha project goes ahead it will need another 20-million tonnes annually, says Wakeford.
David Rutledge, a professor at the California Institute of Technology, has meanwhile forecast South African production to peak in 2011 at about 253-million tonnes a year.
This is supported by research by two American professors, says Wakeford, Tadeusz Patzek and Gregory Croft, published this year in the journal Energy.
“They estimate that South Africa's coal production from existing coal fields, when measured in energy units, peaked in 2007.
“They further contend that future mines are unlikely to reverse the trend since the economics of mining dictates that most accessible reserves are mined earlier on, so that the net energy return from the coal mining declines while the production costs rise over time,'' says Wakeford.
Eskom chief executive Brian Dames bemoaned the poor quality of coal Eskom is receiving in a briefing to parliamentarians earlier this month. Dames said that Eskom was losing 1 000 megawatts of power each day because of the low quality of coal it was being supplied.
He warned that the utility may have to start paying higher prices to improve the quality of its coal supplies and that these costs would be passed on to consumers.
Hartnady said that between 2003 and 2004 the then department of minerals and energy downsized substantially South Africa's coal reserves from about 50-billion tonnes to 30-billion tonnes.
Reserve data is so open to interpretation and, you could say, manipulation, that peak resource theorists typically base their analyses on actual production data rather than on claims of what is mineable.
Patzek and Croft in their article, which was published in May this year, said that world energy from coal production could peak as early as next year, leading to a spike in coal prices as demand continues to outstrip supply.
They predicted that production rates of coal internationally will decline after 2011, reaching 1990 levels by the year 2037. They noted that Transnet has had difficulty in achieving the 70-million tonnes nameplate value for the Richard's Bay Coal Terminal.
They quote acting chief executive Chris Wells, who said that undersupply problems from the mines had led to rail volumes falling over a three-year period.
“Rail volumes last year fell to a very disappointing 61.9-million tonnes, capping a three-year trend in underperformance.'' Wakeford said that the implications of peak coal are stark.
“The cost of coal is almost certainly going to maintain a rising trend -- albeit with greater volatility -- resulting in increasingly expensive electricity and steel.''
“Domestic demand for coal could increasingly compete with exports, raising questions around how the country's natural resources should best be utilised and the role and rights of privately owned mining companies. This is nothing new in the global energy context.''
Wakeford said that leaving aside social and environmental concerns around carbon dioxide emissions, water scarcity, pollution and health impacts, entrenching dependence on a depleting fossil fuel is taking the country down a cul-de-sac.
He said that the solution is to embark on an aggressive drive for energy conservation and efficiency while diversifying our energy mix away from coal as an imperative.
“We should not wait until coal becomes too expensive or scarce, but invest now in renewable energy infrastructure and industries.
“Renewables have proven environmental benefits, are becoming increasingly cost-competitive with fossil fuels, generate more jobs per rand invested and are essential for South Africa's long-term sustainable development
27 September 2010 - South Africa has more coal than it can ever burn, right? If you think this, as many of us do, think again.
Research by international and local scientists has shown that coal, like other resources, is finite and can be expected to comply with peak resources theory.
The theory shows that production in commodities such as oil grows until a peak is reached, whereafter production declines. In the case of South African coal, the studies show production has already reached its peak, or soon will.
“It is commonly believed that South Africa has abundant coal reserves which will last 200 years or more,'' says Jeremy Wakeford, chair of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (Aspo) in South Africa, in the organisation's latest newsletter.
“But recent research [from] three scientific journals suggests that usable reserves are much smaller than previously thought, and that annual production could reach a peak and begin to decline within a decade -- or might even have peaked already.''
Wakeford says that “given the country's overwhelming dependence on coal, this issue has huge ramifications for our future development path''.
Coal provides 70% of the country's energy supply, supports 90% of electricity generation, is used to make a quarter of the country's liquid fuels using the Sasol process and is a big earner of foreign exchange through exports to foreign users.
Geologist Chris Hartnady, in a paper to be published in the SA Journal of Science, has forecast peak production in 2020 at about 285-million tonnes a year.
This compares with total production last year of 242-million tons. This was mostly used by Eskom (123-million tonnes), Sasol (40-million tonnes) and export (66-million tonnes).
Eskom's current expansion programme could use an additional 50-million tonnes, and if the Sasol Mafutha project goes ahead it will need another 20-million tonnes annually, says Wakeford.
David Rutledge, a professor at the California Institute of Technology, has meanwhile forecast South African production to peak in 2011 at about 253-million tonnes a year.
This is supported by research by two American professors, says Wakeford, Tadeusz Patzek and Gregory Croft, published this year in the journal Energy.
“They estimate that South Africa's coal production from existing coal fields, when measured in energy units, peaked in 2007.
“They further contend that future mines are unlikely to reverse the trend since the economics of mining dictates that most accessible reserves are mined earlier on, so that the net energy return from the coal mining declines while the production costs rise over time,'' says Wakeford.
Eskom chief executive Brian Dames bemoaned the poor quality of coal Eskom is receiving in a briefing to parliamentarians earlier this month. Dames said that Eskom was losing 1 000 megawatts of power each day because of the low quality of coal it was being supplied.
He warned that the utility may have to start paying higher prices to improve the quality of its coal supplies and that these costs would be passed on to consumers.
Hartnady said that between 2003 and 2004 the then department of minerals and energy downsized substantially South Africa's coal reserves from about 50-billion tonnes to 30-billion tonnes.
Reserve data is so open to interpretation and, you could say, manipulation, that peak resource theorists typically base their analyses on actual production data rather than on claims of what is mineable.
Patzek and Croft in their article, which was published in May this year, said that world energy from coal production could peak as early as next year, leading to a spike in coal prices as demand continues to outstrip supply.
They predicted that production rates of coal internationally will decline after 2011, reaching 1990 levels by the year 2037. They noted that Transnet has had difficulty in achieving the 70-million tonnes nameplate value for the Richard's Bay Coal Terminal.
They quote acting chief executive Chris Wells, who said that undersupply problems from the mines had led to rail volumes falling over a three-year period.
“Rail volumes last year fell to a very disappointing 61.9-million tonnes, capping a three-year trend in underperformance.'' Wakeford said that the implications of peak coal are stark.
“The cost of coal is almost certainly going to maintain a rising trend -- albeit with greater volatility -- resulting in increasingly expensive electricity and steel.''
“Domestic demand for coal could increasingly compete with exports, raising questions around how the country's natural resources should best be utilised and the role and rights of privately owned mining companies. This is nothing new in the global energy context.''
Wakeford said that leaving aside social and environmental concerns around carbon dioxide emissions, water scarcity, pollution and health impacts, entrenching dependence on a depleting fossil fuel is taking the country down a cul-de-sac.
He said that the solution is to embark on an aggressive drive for energy conservation and efficiency while diversifying our energy mix away from coal as an imperative.
“We should not wait until coal becomes too expensive or scarce, but invest now in renewable energy infrastructure and industries.
“Renewables have proven environmental benefits, are becoming increasingly cost-competitive with fossil fuels, generate more jobs per rand invested and are essential for South Africa's long-term sustainable development
Monday, September 27, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
1. High-tech tools to save energy in center city
Sep 24, 2010 Charlotte Observer
Duke Energy and corporate-government partners unveiled plans Thursday to deploy cutting-edge technology to save energy in uptown Charlotte's commercial core.
The initiative, which Duke calls the first of its kind, would apply the smart-grid devices Duke is already testing in south Charlotte homes to the energy-hungry buildings in the center city.
The goal, by 2016, is to cut energy use 20 percent in about 60 buildings, including most commercial structures inside the Interstate 277 loop.
Smart grid refers to the use of digital technology and sensors to update an electrical system that has changed little, in its basics, since Thomas Edison. It uses electricity more efficiently, in part by giving consumers more information and control over their energy use.
In uptown, digital displays in each building's lobby will track its real-time energy use. Building managers will use the information to fine-tune heating, cooling and lighting. Workers, Duke hopes, will be motivated to turn off lights.
With Thursday's announcement, Duke, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, the city of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County - which control about 12 million of the 15 million square feet of commercial space inside the loop - agreed to make it a joint effort.
Organizers hope to expand it to most other commercial buildings in the uptown loop.
"We're putting control in the hands of our major customers and we're making our city one of the most energy-efficient in the world" as energy costs rise, Duke CEO Jim Rogers said in New York, where the plan was announced at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clinton initiative promotes government-private sector partnerships.
Duke worked with Charlotte Center City Partners, the uptown development group, to design a signature test of energy efficiency. It will be the first in a series of public-private projects focused on green values under an umbrella initiative called Envision: Charlotte.
Duke and technology company Cisco will front the $5.3million cost of outfitting Charlotte's commercial buildings with energy-management equipment. Duke hopes to recover some of its costs through a small energy-efficiency rider that would be added to customer bills.
Apart from saving electricity, one of the goals is to heighten awareness of energy conservation.
"One of the biggest challenges in succeeding with smart grid is changing behavior," said Ed Carney, a Cisco vice president.
Uptown buildings might compete with each other to save power. Their total energy use will be compared with that of Raleigh, Atlanta and New York.
"The real power of smart grid lies in the power of information," said Yi Deng, dean of UNC Charlotte's College of Computing and Informatics, which will help Duke analyze the energy data that's produced.
"A substantial part is behavior and how can you better manage the buildings. Right now, we don't have the information to answer those questions."
Commercial buildings waste about 30 percent of the energy they buy, the Environmental Protection Agency says. Bank of America and Wells Fargo, which together control 10 million square feet uptown, have both set corporate energy-saving goals and erected new towers that meet high efficiency standards.
Charlotte has also staked a claim as an energy capital because of the presence of Duke, 13,000 energy-related jobs in the broader region and training programs such as UNCC's Energy Production & Infrastructure Center.
"We are the right city at the right time," said Brett Carter, president of Duke Energy North Carolina.
Sep 24, 2010 Charlotte Observer
Duke Energy and corporate-government partners unveiled plans Thursday to deploy cutting-edge technology to save energy in uptown Charlotte's commercial core.
The initiative, which Duke calls the first of its kind, would apply the smart-grid devices Duke is already testing in south Charlotte homes to the energy-hungry buildings in the center city.
The goal, by 2016, is to cut energy use 20 percent in about 60 buildings, including most commercial structures inside the Interstate 277 loop.
Smart grid refers to the use of digital technology and sensors to update an electrical system that has changed little, in its basics, since Thomas Edison. It uses electricity more efficiently, in part by giving consumers more information and control over their energy use.
In uptown, digital displays in each building's lobby will track its real-time energy use. Building managers will use the information to fine-tune heating, cooling and lighting. Workers, Duke hopes, will be motivated to turn off lights.
With Thursday's announcement, Duke, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, the city of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County - which control about 12 million of the 15 million square feet of commercial space inside the loop - agreed to make it a joint effort.
Organizers hope to expand it to most other commercial buildings in the uptown loop.
"We're putting control in the hands of our major customers and we're making our city one of the most energy-efficient in the world" as energy costs rise, Duke CEO Jim Rogers said in New York, where the plan was announced at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clinton initiative promotes government-private sector partnerships.
Duke worked with Charlotte Center City Partners, the uptown development group, to design a signature test of energy efficiency. It will be the first in a series of public-private projects focused on green values under an umbrella initiative called Envision: Charlotte.
Duke and technology company Cisco will front the $5.3million cost of outfitting Charlotte's commercial buildings with energy-management equipment. Duke hopes to recover some of its costs through a small energy-efficiency rider that would be added to customer bills.
Apart from saving electricity, one of the goals is to heighten awareness of energy conservation.
"One of the biggest challenges in succeeding with smart grid is changing behavior," said Ed Carney, a Cisco vice president.
Uptown buildings might compete with each other to save power. Their total energy use will be compared with that of Raleigh, Atlanta and New York.
"The real power of smart grid lies in the power of information," said Yi Deng, dean of UNC Charlotte's College of Computing and Informatics, which will help Duke analyze the energy data that's produced.
"A substantial part is behavior and how can you better manage the buildings. Right now, we don't have the information to answer those questions."
Commercial buildings waste about 30 percent of the energy they buy, the Environmental Protection Agency says. Bank of America and Wells Fargo, which together control 10 million square feet uptown, have both set corporate energy-saving goals and erected new towers that meet high efficiency standards.
Charlotte has also staked a claim as an energy capital because of the presence of Duke, 13,000 energy-related jobs in the broader region and training programs such as UNCC's Energy Production & Infrastructure Center.
"We are the right city at the right time," said Brett Carter, president of Duke Energy North Carolina.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
On ESI-Africa dated 29th of April 2010 - President Jacob Zuma has called on South Africans to save energy in an effort to avoid the load-shedding that plunged the country into darkness in 2007 and 2008.
“As we continue to look for other alternatives to save energy, let me remind all that we must continue to save electricity. We must switch off our appliances when they are not in use. Let us share this responsibility as citizens of this country and electricity users." said Zuma.
In the region of Gauteng in April and May large areas have suffered from further electricity blackouts, notably the East Rand in Johannesburg. It is now obvious that Eskom is still not managing to meet the high demand for electricity. As the winter weather closes in, so does higher electricity demand due to electrical heaters and warming devices, which means more electricity blackouts if we don’t do something about our electricity usage.
That said, even if electricity blackouts are not affecting you directly, the new prices definitely will. The increases announced in February 2010 will total to 75.8% from 2010 to 2013. This is without the increase of 31% last year, which will take the increases in electricity up to a staggering 106.8%.
If not the load-shedding, then the price of electricity is forcing us all consumers to start thinking of cutting down on use or at least making usage of electricity more efficient. Taking responsibility means that it is time to seriously start looking at managing our electricity consumption. To start saving we must start measuring our electricity consumption, because we can’t save something we can’t measure.
You can save 20%-40% on your electricity bill. To start saving we suggest you start measuring your electricity consumption with electricity monitors and make modifications to you consumption so that you can reduce your bills and help us all, just maybe save on having to endure winter blackouts.
“As we continue to look for other alternatives to save energy, let me remind all that we must continue to save electricity. We must switch off our appliances when they are not in use. Let us share this responsibility as citizens of this country and electricity users." said Zuma.
In the region of Gauteng in April and May large areas have suffered from further electricity blackouts, notably the East Rand in Johannesburg. It is now obvious that Eskom is still not managing to meet the high demand for electricity. As the winter weather closes in, so does higher electricity demand due to electrical heaters and warming devices, which means more electricity blackouts if we don’t do something about our electricity usage.
That said, even if electricity blackouts are not affecting you directly, the new prices definitely will. The increases announced in February 2010 will total to 75.8% from 2010 to 2013. This is without the increase of 31% last year, which will take the increases in electricity up to a staggering 106.8%.
If not the load-shedding, then the price of electricity is forcing us all consumers to start thinking of cutting down on use or at least making usage of electricity more efficient. Taking responsibility means that it is time to seriously start looking at managing our electricity consumption. To start saving we must start measuring our electricity consumption, because we can’t save something we can’t measure.
You can save 20%-40% on your electricity bill. To start saving we suggest you start measuring your electricity consumption with electricity monitors and make modifications to you consumption so that you can reduce your bills and help us all, just maybe save on having to endure winter blackouts.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Lighting control and Energy Management
Fluorescent Magnetic T12 Ballast Phaseout: It's Time to Upgrade Existing Lighting and Control Systems
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted August 2010
Last month, we covered regulations covering fluorescent ballasts that have essentially eliminated the magnetic T12 ballast with few exceptions, including F40T12, F96T12 and F96T12HO ballasts for both full-wattage and energy-saving versions of these lamps.
Two years later, in 2012, additional regulations will take effect, creating new energy standards for selected linear T5, T8 and T12 lamps. The net result, with few exceptions, is a majority of 4-ft. linear and 2-ft. U-shaped T12, many 8-ft. T12 and T12HO, and some low-color-rendering 4-ft. T8 lamps will be eliminated.
Based on these facts, one could make a simple argument that it is now time to upgrade existing lighting and control systems to improve energy efficiency and lighting quality.
Replace individually or in a planned upgrade?
A basic choice will be whether to replace the existing T12 lighting system all at once in a planned upgrade or replace individual components as they fail.
At first glance, replacing individual components as they fail appears to be the easiest path forward as it avoids the upfront cost of equipment and installation labor and potential disruption of a renovation.
However, a planned upgrade presents several major advantages:
good lighting performance, uniformity and space appearance by switching from T12 to T8 all at once, avoiding confusion resulting from maintaining two incompatibility lamp and ballast types in inventory; and most importantly:
higher energy savings and greater lighting quality resulting from reevaluating the existing lighting system and upgrading it to current best practices. Once a decision is made to upgrade the lighting system, the owner has taken control of the situation and can maximize the benefit of the new lighting.
The biggest energy-saving and lighting quality opportunities are in:
older, overlighted buildings that use older technologies such as T12 systems
where utility costs are very high; and
where lighting is uncontrolled and left ON all night.
T12 systems, for example, can be upgraded to realize energy savings as high as 50% or more in offices, classrooms and other applications, according to the National Lighting Bureau.
Retrofit or redesign?
The next basic choice facing the facility manager is whether to retrofit or redesign. In a retrofit, new lamps and ballasts are installed in existing fixtures and existing controls replaced. In a redesign, the fixtures themselves may be replaced or moved.
Good lighting quality accounts for factors such as visual comfort, glare, uniformity, color rendering, lighting on walls and ceilings, and harsh patterns, shadows and flicker. If the building’s primary spaces have been retasked to new purposes for which the existing lighting system provides insufficient lighting conditions, or uniformity is poor, or there is little light on walls and ceilings, or there are obvious, unaddressed sources of glare, and if occupants are unhappy with their lighting, then the space may benefit from a redesign.
The owner may benefit prior to the upgrade by simply asking occupants—the people who use the lighting regularly—whether they are satisfied with their lighting, what their lighting problems are, and what they want.
Lamps and ballasts
Energy-efficient lighting technologies have had decades to develop and so many good, reliable solutions are now available from manufacturers.
Regarding lamps and ballasts, consider T8 systems. There are now 23W, 25W, 28W, 32W (normal output) and 32W (high output, or “Super T8”) T8 lamps available offering a choice of power and light output.
There are also electronic ballasts available with a range of efficiencies and ballast factors enabling further tuning of light output. The most efficient ballasts carry the NEMA Premium mark on the ballast label. Dimmable ballasts are becoming more efficient, versatile and affordable, making dimmable general lighting a reality.
Regarding fixtures, consider T5 systems, direct/indirect lighting and, if recessed, volumetric-distribution fixtures that place some light on walls to eliminate the “cave effect” common with some parabolic fixtures. LED lighting offers exciting opportunities to dramatically improve efficiency but as the overall technology is still relatively new, owners should proceed with caution, particularly when confronted by options such as LED T8 lamp replacements, which have not faired well in independent product testing at the Department of Energy.
Lighting controls
According to the New Buildings Institute, advanced lighting controls can generate up to 50% lighting energy savings in existing buildings. Effective strategies include automatic shutoff, light reduction control, daylight harvesting and demand response.
The biggest challenge to incorporating advanced control strategies to an existing building is adding low-voltage control wiring, generally limiting opportunities for installation of sophisticated control systems. As a result, the simplest upgrade options involve the least amount of rewiring or simply swapping out older ballasts and controls for new controls.
The easiest controls retrofit involves replacing components with the least amount of rewiring. While this often leads to occupancy sensors and lighting panelboard upgrades, new wireless controls and the falling cost of dimming ballasts are expanding the potential role for lighting control in building upgrades. Photo courtesy of WattStopper.
The first lighting control strategy to consider is automatic shutoff. It is considered the easiest, lowest-risk path to energy savings and is relatively simple to set up and commission. If LEED (for existing buildings) is used as a model path or actual requirement for the upgrade, this will be essential, as LEED requires that buildings meet the ASHRAE 90.1 energy standard as a prerequisite to gaining points for transcending it.
Start at the lighting panel. Are there large, open spaces in the building with predictable hours of operation? Are there public spaces where the lights must stay ON even when a space is unoccupied? If so, consider upgrading the existing lighting panelboard to an intelligent lighting control panel that offers programmable scheduling. Be sure to give local users override capability with a maximum 2- to 4-hour override.
Next, consider replacing the wall switch. Are there smaller, enclosed spaces in the building that are intermittently occupied during the day and are lighted with instant-ON light sources? If so, consider replacing toggle wall switches with occupancy sensors. If there is a clear line of sight between the switch and the primary task area, PIR sensors can present a cost-effective option. If greater sensitivity is needed for small levels of motion or if there are obstacles between the wall switch and the task, consider ultrasonic. For the ultimate in reliability, consider dual-technology sensors.
If the space is a private office already circuited for bilevel switching, consider replacing the manual switches with a manual-ON/auto-OFF occupancy sensor for the highest positive energy savings and some flexibility. If the space requires an occupancy sensor be installed in a location other than at the wall switch, consider wireless occupancy sensors that run on batteries or ambient light in the space harvested using an integral solar cell. These sensors install anywhere within range of the receiver switch, which replaces the wall switch, and present no wiring requirements, although wireless technology is presently a premium option. Similarly, wireless photosensors are also available.
If the upgrade involves replacing light fixtures, consider integral controls. In a workstation-specific open office lighting layout, for example, direct/indirect fixtures can be installed that include an integral occupancy sensor and/or, if placed in a daylight zone, a photosensor and dimmable ballast, with the control wiring located inside the fixture. If the space is a hibay lighting application where metal halide is being replaced by fluorescent fixtures, consider fixture-integrated or mounted line-voltage occupancy sensors, which can be an economical addition to a new fluorescent fixture or separate add-on that is field installed. Photosensors could be similarly added for control of fixtures mounted over spaces that receive ample daylight from skylights.
Light levels can be stepped using a single ballast called a step dimming or light level switching ballast. If the existing space is already circuited for bilevel switching, step-dimming ballasts can be installed to ensure light levels are reduced uniformly, without a checkerboard pattern. These ballasts can operate without low-voltage wiring. Most products are programmed-start T8 ballasts, which may experience a loss of efficacy during light level reduction; dimming to 50%, for example, may reduce wattage by 40%. Instant-start step-dimming ballasts are available that offer proportional reductions in light output and input watts, although instant-start operation is not recommended by some manufacturers for applications with five or more ON/OFF cycles per day. Other hi/lo switching opportunities include corridors that receive a lot of daylight (with a photosensor) and stairwells (with an occupancy sensor).
Continuous-dimming ballast costs have been falling for years, putting this control method within reach of many upgrade projects. Efficiency has also improved such that dimmable ballasts are available that are as efficacious as standard instant-start fixed-output ballasts. Look for the NEMA Premium label for the most efficient ballasts.
Step-dimming ballasts provide uniform light level reduction without a checkerboard pattern. Photo courtesy of Universal Lighting Technologies.
Some dimming ballasts are available that communicate with lighting controls using existing line-voltage wiring. Two-wire phase-control dimming ballasts use existing line-voltage lines for both power and communication and are suitable for any application where greater flexibility is desired, such as conference rooms, boardrooms and private offices. A dimming range of 100-5% is available for T8 lamps and CFLs, and 100-1% for T5HO lamps. The lighting is typically controlled via local controls accessible to occupants.
Line-voltage stepped dimming (“load shedding” or “demand response”) ballasts may be combined with specialized energy management systems enabling a preset light level reduction, with a fade transition between light levels, in response to a variety of control inputs such as photosensors and schedules. The ballast may be combined with a signal transmitter that initiates load shedding in response to some type of demand response program. While demand response is still emerging as a trend, it will likely play a larger role in lighting in the future.
The ultimate control upgrade involves creating a fully realized lighting control system combining multiple strategies. In spaces where stationary tasks are performed, dimming will be preferable to switching while the space is occupied. If the ballasts will be replaced with dimmable ballasts, then multiple strategies should be enacted to make this installation more economical. When wiring a control system enacting multiple strategies around a dimmable ballast, one should consider a digital communication architecture, which eliminates multiple home runs and produces installation savings. If a digital architecture is chosen, one can consider creating a system out of DALI-compatible components, or specifying a proprietary system built around relays in distributed power packs and occupancy sensors, or digital dimming ballasts.
Finally, if the existing installation already includes automatic lighting controls that will be retained after the upgrade, ensure these controls are working properly by re-commissioning them as part of the project. The system may have been improperly designed, installed or commissioned when first put in place, or its operating parameters may have drifted out of sync with the space and how its lighting is used. Re-commissioning can therefore become a source of energy savings by itself.
The bottom line is that in most spaces, simple control strategies can be economically incorporated into lamp/ballast upgrades and fixture replacement projects, accelerating energy savings and, in some cases, improving flexibility.
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted August 2010
Last month, we covered regulations covering fluorescent ballasts that have essentially eliminated the magnetic T12 ballast with few exceptions, including F40T12, F96T12 and F96T12HO ballasts for both full-wattage and energy-saving versions of these lamps.
Two years later, in 2012, additional regulations will take effect, creating new energy standards for selected linear T5, T8 and T12 lamps. The net result, with few exceptions, is a majority of 4-ft. linear and 2-ft. U-shaped T12, many 8-ft. T12 and T12HO, and some low-color-rendering 4-ft. T8 lamps will be eliminated.
Based on these facts, one could make a simple argument that it is now time to upgrade existing lighting and control systems to improve energy efficiency and lighting quality.
Replace individually or in a planned upgrade?
A basic choice will be whether to replace the existing T12 lighting system all at once in a planned upgrade or replace individual components as they fail.
At first glance, replacing individual components as they fail appears to be the easiest path forward as it avoids the upfront cost of equipment and installation labor and potential disruption of a renovation.
However, a planned upgrade presents several major advantages:
good lighting performance, uniformity and space appearance by switching from T12 to T8 all at once, avoiding confusion resulting from maintaining two incompatibility lamp and ballast types in inventory; and most importantly:
higher energy savings and greater lighting quality resulting from reevaluating the existing lighting system and upgrading it to current best practices. Once a decision is made to upgrade the lighting system, the owner has taken control of the situation and can maximize the benefit of the new lighting.
The biggest energy-saving and lighting quality opportunities are in:
older, overlighted buildings that use older technologies such as T12 systems
where utility costs are very high; and
where lighting is uncontrolled and left ON all night.
T12 systems, for example, can be upgraded to realize energy savings as high as 50% or more in offices, classrooms and other applications, according to the National Lighting Bureau.
Retrofit or redesign?
The next basic choice facing the facility manager is whether to retrofit or redesign. In a retrofit, new lamps and ballasts are installed in existing fixtures and existing controls replaced. In a redesign, the fixtures themselves may be replaced or moved.
Good lighting quality accounts for factors such as visual comfort, glare, uniformity, color rendering, lighting on walls and ceilings, and harsh patterns, shadows and flicker. If the building’s primary spaces have been retasked to new purposes for which the existing lighting system provides insufficient lighting conditions, or uniformity is poor, or there is little light on walls and ceilings, or there are obvious, unaddressed sources of glare, and if occupants are unhappy with their lighting, then the space may benefit from a redesign.
The owner may benefit prior to the upgrade by simply asking occupants—the people who use the lighting regularly—whether they are satisfied with their lighting, what their lighting problems are, and what they want.
Lamps and ballasts
Energy-efficient lighting technologies have had decades to develop and so many good, reliable solutions are now available from manufacturers.
Regarding lamps and ballasts, consider T8 systems. There are now 23W, 25W, 28W, 32W (normal output) and 32W (high output, or “Super T8”) T8 lamps available offering a choice of power and light output.
There are also electronic ballasts available with a range of efficiencies and ballast factors enabling further tuning of light output. The most efficient ballasts carry the NEMA Premium mark on the ballast label. Dimmable ballasts are becoming more efficient, versatile and affordable, making dimmable general lighting a reality.
Regarding fixtures, consider T5 systems, direct/indirect lighting and, if recessed, volumetric-distribution fixtures that place some light on walls to eliminate the “cave effect” common with some parabolic fixtures. LED lighting offers exciting opportunities to dramatically improve efficiency but as the overall technology is still relatively new, owners should proceed with caution, particularly when confronted by options such as LED T8 lamp replacements, which have not faired well in independent product testing at the Department of Energy.
Lighting controls
According to the New Buildings Institute, advanced lighting controls can generate up to 50% lighting energy savings in existing buildings. Effective strategies include automatic shutoff, light reduction control, daylight harvesting and demand response.
The biggest challenge to incorporating advanced control strategies to an existing building is adding low-voltage control wiring, generally limiting opportunities for installation of sophisticated control systems. As a result, the simplest upgrade options involve the least amount of rewiring or simply swapping out older ballasts and controls for new controls.
The easiest controls retrofit involves replacing components with the least amount of rewiring. While this often leads to occupancy sensors and lighting panelboard upgrades, new wireless controls and the falling cost of dimming ballasts are expanding the potential role for lighting control in building upgrades. Photo courtesy of WattStopper.
The first lighting control strategy to consider is automatic shutoff. It is considered the easiest, lowest-risk path to energy savings and is relatively simple to set up and commission. If LEED (for existing buildings) is used as a model path or actual requirement for the upgrade, this will be essential, as LEED requires that buildings meet the ASHRAE 90.1 energy standard as a prerequisite to gaining points for transcending it.
Start at the lighting panel. Are there large, open spaces in the building with predictable hours of operation? Are there public spaces where the lights must stay ON even when a space is unoccupied? If so, consider upgrading the existing lighting panelboard to an intelligent lighting control panel that offers programmable scheduling. Be sure to give local users override capability with a maximum 2- to 4-hour override.
Next, consider replacing the wall switch. Are there smaller, enclosed spaces in the building that are intermittently occupied during the day and are lighted with instant-ON light sources? If so, consider replacing toggle wall switches with occupancy sensors. If there is a clear line of sight between the switch and the primary task area, PIR sensors can present a cost-effective option. If greater sensitivity is needed for small levels of motion or if there are obstacles between the wall switch and the task, consider ultrasonic. For the ultimate in reliability, consider dual-technology sensors.
If the space is a private office already circuited for bilevel switching, consider replacing the manual switches with a manual-ON/auto-OFF occupancy sensor for the highest positive energy savings and some flexibility. If the space requires an occupancy sensor be installed in a location other than at the wall switch, consider wireless occupancy sensors that run on batteries or ambient light in the space harvested using an integral solar cell. These sensors install anywhere within range of the receiver switch, which replaces the wall switch, and present no wiring requirements, although wireless technology is presently a premium option. Similarly, wireless photosensors are also available.
If the upgrade involves replacing light fixtures, consider integral controls. In a workstation-specific open office lighting layout, for example, direct/indirect fixtures can be installed that include an integral occupancy sensor and/or, if placed in a daylight zone, a photosensor and dimmable ballast, with the control wiring located inside the fixture. If the space is a hibay lighting application where metal halide is being replaced by fluorescent fixtures, consider fixture-integrated or mounted line-voltage occupancy sensors, which can be an economical addition to a new fluorescent fixture or separate add-on that is field installed. Photosensors could be similarly added for control of fixtures mounted over spaces that receive ample daylight from skylights.
Light levels can be stepped using a single ballast called a step dimming or light level switching ballast. If the existing space is already circuited for bilevel switching, step-dimming ballasts can be installed to ensure light levels are reduced uniformly, without a checkerboard pattern. These ballasts can operate without low-voltage wiring. Most products are programmed-start T8 ballasts, which may experience a loss of efficacy during light level reduction; dimming to 50%, for example, may reduce wattage by 40%. Instant-start step-dimming ballasts are available that offer proportional reductions in light output and input watts, although instant-start operation is not recommended by some manufacturers for applications with five or more ON/OFF cycles per day. Other hi/lo switching opportunities include corridors that receive a lot of daylight (with a photosensor) and stairwells (with an occupancy sensor).
Continuous-dimming ballast costs have been falling for years, putting this control method within reach of many upgrade projects. Efficiency has also improved such that dimmable ballasts are available that are as efficacious as standard instant-start fixed-output ballasts. Look for the NEMA Premium label for the most efficient ballasts.
Step-dimming ballasts provide uniform light level reduction without a checkerboard pattern. Photo courtesy of Universal Lighting Technologies.
Some dimming ballasts are available that communicate with lighting controls using existing line-voltage wiring. Two-wire phase-control dimming ballasts use existing line-voltage lines for both power and communication and are suitable for any application where greater flexibility is desired, such as conference rooms, boardrooms and private offices. A dimming range of 100-5% is available for T8 lamps and CFLs, and 100-1% for T5HO lamps. The lighting is typically controlled via local controls accessible to occupants.
Line-voltage stepped dimming (“load shedding” or “demand response”) ballasts may be combined with specialized energy management systems enabling a preset light level reduction, with a fade transition between light levels, in response to a variety of control inputs such as photosensors and schedules. The ballast may be combined with a signal transmitter that initiates load shedding in response to some type of demand response program. While demand response is still emerging as a trend, it will likely play a larger role in lighting in the future.
The ultimate control upgrade involves creating a fully realized lighting control system combining multiple strategies. In spaces where stationary tasks are performed, dimming will be preferable to switching while the space is occupied. If the ballasts will be replaced with dimmable ballasts, then multiple strategies should be enacted to make this installation more economical. When wiring a control system enacting multiple strategies around a dimmable ballast, one should consider a digital communication architecture, which eliminates multiple home runs and produces installation savings. If a digital architecture is chosen, one can consider creating a system out of DALI-compatible components, or specifying a proprietary system built around relays in distributed power packs and occupancy sensors, or digital dimming ballasts.
Finally, if the existing installation already includes automatic lighting controls that will be retained after the upgrade, ensure these controls are working properly by re-commissioning them as part of the project. The system may have been improperly designed, installed or commissioned when first put in place, or its operating parameters may have drifted out of sync with the space and how its lighting is used. Re-commissioning can therefore become a source of energy savings by itself.
The bottom line is that in most spaces, simple control strategies can be economically incorporated into lamp/ballast upgrades and fixture replacement projects, accelerating energy savings and, in some cases, improving flexibility.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
The Energy Management Standard is Coming, is Your Organization Ready?
Whether in the United States or across the world, in industrial or commercial settings, energy must be managed. End users of energy often cannot control energy prices, political events or global economic shocks, but they can manage how they use energy. The ISO Energy Management Standard (ISO 50001) offers a promising mechanism to help end users proactively assess, measure and manage their energy consumption.
The ISO 50001 Energy Management System Standard has the potential to impact up to 60 percent of global energy demand based on broad applicability across multiple sectors. Once finalized in 2011, the ISO 50001 Standard will be able to help a wide variety of organizations in multiple sectors implement an energy management system for continuous improvement. By conforming to this standard, companies and other organizations will have a methodology that will enable them to manage energy use, address carbon emissions and demonstrate corporate social responsibility.
ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard
Today, energy management is a subjective concept with an array of programs across companies and institutions. The ISO 50001 Standard addresses this very issue. As an internationally recognized standard, ISO 50001 will provide a uniform framework under which an adopter may develop its own Energy Management Plan tailored to its personnel, facilities, operations and resources. ISO 50001 also will help companies and governments achieve continuous progress toward energy efficiency gains, quantifiable energy reduction and third-party verification of energy savings.
ISO 50001 currently is available as a Draft International Standard. The standard is being developed through a project committee consisting of 41 participating countries and 10 countries with observer status and is expected to be approved and published by the middle of 2011.
The ISO 50001 Standard will establish a framework for industrial plants and commercial facilities, as well as government and institutional organizations to manage energy use by integrating energy efficiency into their management practices. This is accomplished by requiring organizations to establish, implement, maintain and improve their energy management systems, enabling systematic achievement of continual improvement in energy performance, energy efficiency and energy conservation. To this end, the ISO 50001 Standard contains requirements on energy supply and consumption, including:
•Measurement
•Documentation and reporting
•Design and procurement practices for energy-using equipment and systems
•Processes and personnel
ISO 50001 applies to all factors that can be monitored and influenced by the organization to affect energy use. In addition, the ISO 50001 Standard is designed to be used independently and to be compatible with other ISO management systems such as ISO 9001 and ISO 14001, which are widely used worldwide.
Implementation of the ISO 50001 Standard could have several significant potential impacts. By managing energy more effectively, industrial plants and commercial and institutional buildings could achieve energy-savings of between 10 and 30 percent, and even more in some cases. Because of its widespread applicability, the ISO 50001 Standard could influence up to 60 percents of the world’s energy use across many economic sectors.
Adoption of ISO 50001 will be driven by companies seeking an internationally recognized response to:
•Corporate sustainability programs
•Energy cost-reduction initiatives
•Demand created along the manufacturing supply chain
•Future national cap and trade programs; carbon or energy taxes; increasing market value of “green manufacturing” and reduced carbon footprint
•International climate agreements
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) supports the development of ISO 50001 because it will complement their efforts to reduce energy intensity in U.S. industrial facilities. The DOE views the ISO 50001 Standard as a foundational tool that any facility can use to manage energy consumption. To that end, DOE supports the industry-led Superior Energy Performance (SEP) program; a voluntary program that certifies industrial facilities for energy efficiency; a key condition of certification is conformance to ISO 50001.
Whether in the United States or across the world, in industrial or commercial settings, energy must be managed. End users of energy often cannot control energy prices, political events or global economic shocks, but they can manage how they use energy. The ISO Energy Management Standard (ISO 50001) offers a promising mechanism to help end users proactively assess, measure and manage their energy consumption.
The ISO 50001 Energy Management System Standard has the potential to impact up to 60 percent of global energy demand based on broad applicability across multiple sectors. Once finalized in 2011, the ISO 50001 Standard will be able to help a wide variety of organizations in multiple sectors implement an energy management system for continuous improvement. By conforming to this standard, companies and other organizations will have a methodology that will enable them to manage energy use, address carbon emissions and demonstrate corporate social responsibility.
ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard
Today, energy management is a subjective concept with an array of programs across companies and institutions. The ISO 50001 Standard addresses this very issue. As an internationally recognized standard, ISO 50001 will provide a uniform framework under which an adopter may develop its own Energy Management Plan tailored to its personnel, facilities, operations and resources. ISO 50001 also will help companies and governments achieve continuous progress toward energy efficiency gains, quantifiable energy reduction and third-party verification of energy savings.
ISO 50001 currently is available as a Draft International Standard. The standard is being developed through a project committee consisting of 41 participating countries and 10 countries with observer status and is expected to be approved and published by the middle of 2011.
The ISO 50001 Standard will establish a framework for industrial plants and commercial facilities, as well as government and institutional organizations to manage energy use by integrating energy efficiency into their management practices. This is accomplished by requiring organizations to establish, implement, maintain and improve their energy management systems, enabling systematic achievement of continual improvement in energy performance, energy efficiency and energy conservation. To this end, the ISO 50001 Standard contains requirements on energy supply and consumption, including:
•Measurement
•Documentation and reporting
•Design and procurement practices for energy-using equipment and systems
•Processes and personnel
ISO 50001 applies to all factors that can be monitored and influenced by the organization to affect energy use. In addition, the ISO 50001 Standard is designed to be used independently and to be compatible with other ISO management systems such as ISO 9001 and ISO 14001, which are widely used worldwide.
Implementation of the ISO 50001 Standard could have several significant potential impacts. By managing energy more effectively, industrial plants and commercial and institutional buildings could achieve energy-savings of between 10 and 30 percent, and even more in some cases. Because of its widespread applicability, the ISO 50001 Standard could influence up to 60 percents of the world’s energy use across many economic sectors.
Adoption of ISO 50001 will be driven by companies seeking an internationally recognized response to:
•Corporate sustainability programs
•Energy cost-reduction initiatives
•Demand created along the manufacturing supply chain
•Future national cap and trade programs; carbon or energy taxes; increasing market value of “green manufacturing” and reduced carbon footprint
•International climate agreements
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) supports the development of ISO 50001 because it will complement their efforts to reduce energy intensity in U.S. industrial facilities. The DOE views the ISO 50001 Standard as a foundational tool that any facility can use to manage energy consumption. To that end, DOE supports the industry-led Superior Energy Performance (SEP) program; a voluntary program that certifies industrial facilities for energy efficiency; a key condition of certification is conformance to ISO 50001.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Alternative energy
Zuma in China: Renewables high on agenda
South African
President Jacob Zuma
26 August 2010 - Suntech Power Holdings Co Ltd, China's largest maker of solar panels, said on Thursday that it has signed a deal to develop solar plants in South Africa with up to 100 megawatts in capacity as the country looks to boost clean energy output.
The signing of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), which coincided with the visit by South African President Jacob Zuma to China, was one of a dozen deals involving investments in energy, power transmission and railways between the two nations.
Zuma has urged China to invest more in infrastructure and manufacturing in his country, as his government seeks to broaden South Africa's economic appeal beyond mines and resources.
Analysts say total investment for building a 100 MW solar power plant could be between $350 million and $400 million.
"This (deal) highlights that there are so many markets that are completely off the radar screen for people who follow the sector, South Africa being one of them," said CLSA analyst Charles Yonts. "It's good for Suntech most definitely."
Suntech sells solar equipment to Australia, Germany, Japan, Peru, Spain, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and the United States.
The deal also highlights China's desire to export its infrastructure and building expertise, with Beijing offering cheap loans to countries that agree to let Chinese companies build power plants, roads and telecommunications networks.
Suntech's non-binding MOU had no financial terms, Rory Macpherson, director of investor relations, told Reuters. He declined to name the South African companies in the project.
"We're exploring development of solar projects with an unnamed solar firm," Macpherson said, declining give a timetable for the investments.
"Obviously, we are committed to developing the solar market in South Africa. We will look for solar opportunities as soon as possible," he said, adding that the total size of the photovoltaic market in South Africa could be more than $1 billion.
Suntech's agreement is the latest among Chinese renewable energy companies looking to enter South Africa.
China Longyuan Power Group Corp Ltd, the nation's biggest wind power producer, has said it is setting up wind projects in South Africa, according to media reports. Longyuan was not immediately available for comment.
Those deals included a 240 million euro loan agreement between South Africa's third-largest mobile phone operator, Cell C, and China Development Bank, and a memorandum of understanding signed between South Africa's Standard Bank Group and China Railway Group Ltd to cooperate on funding for rail and infrastructure projects in Africa.
South African
President Jacob Zuma
26 August 2010 - Suntech Power Holdings Co Ltd, China's largest maker of solar panels, said on Thursday that it has signed a deal to develop solar plants in South Africa with up to 100 megawatts in capacity as the country looks to boost clean energy output.
The signing of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), which coincided with the visit by South African President Jacob Zuma to China, was one of a dozen deals involving investments in energy, power transmission and railways between the two nations.
Zuma has urged China to invest more in infrastructure and manufacturing in his country, as his government seeks to broaden South Africa's economic appeal beyond mines and resources.
Analysts say total investment for building a 100 MW solar power plant could be between $350 million and $400 million.
"This (deal) highlights that there are so many markets that are completely off the radar screen for people who follow the sector, South Africa being one of them," said CLSA analyst Charles Yonts. "It's good for Suntech most definitely."
Suntech sells solar equipment to Australia, Germany, Japan, Peru, Spain, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and the United States.
The deal also highlights China's desire to export its infrastructure and building expertise, with Beijing offering cheap loans to countries that agree to let Chinese companies build power plants, roads and telecommunications networks.
Suntech's non-binding MOU had no financial terms, Rory Macpherson, director of investor relations, told Reuters. He declined to name the South African companies in the project.
"We're exploring development of solar projects with an unnamed solar firm," Macpherson said, declining give a timetable for the investments.
"Obviously, we are committed to developing the solar market in South Africa. We will look for solar opportunities as soon as possible," he said, adding that the total size of the photovoltaic market in South Africa could be more than $1 billion.
Suntech's agreement is the latest among Chinese renewable energy companies looking to enter South Africa.
China Longyuan Power Group Corp Ltd, the nation's biggest wind power producer, has said it is setting up wind projects in South Africa, according to media reports. Longyuan was not immediately available for comment.
Those deals included a 240 million euro loan agreement between South Africa's third-largest mobile phone operator, Cell C, and China Development Bank, and a memorandum of understanding signed between South Africa's Standard Bank Group and China Railway Group Ltd to cooperate on funding for rail and infrastructure projects in Africa.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Electrical Energy Management
Iran provides finance for Zimbabwe's energy sector
A Zimbabwean diplomat announced that Iran has opened a multi-million-euro credit line to aid the African state in financing its energy sector.
Zimbabwe's Ambassador to Iran Nicholas Kitikiti said that Iran's €40 million credit line will finance energy, banking and industrial projects in the African country.
The funds would be used to rehabilitate the country's main power station to increase electricity supplies and reduce rationing, Kitikiti has said.
"The facility is there and waiting for us to harness. I am sure this will go a long way in assisting us in our economic development programs," Nicholas Kitikiti said, referring to the Iranian credit line.
He said Zimbabwe had already opened negotiations with Iran for further lines of credit covering the agriculture, health and technology sectors.
In April 2010, Iran and Zimbabwe signed 11 documents for expansion of cooperation between the two countries in different fields.
The protocols, signed during President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the African state, envision cooperation in the fields of tourism, science, technology, youth affairs, transportation, aviation and education as well as lifting political and service visa issuance.
Furthermore, Iran's Export Guarantee Fund and Zimbabwe Finance Ministry signed a Memorandum of Understanding at the meeting as the two countries' officials agreed on formation of mutual investment companies and drawing up executive plans for scientific, cultural, and technical cooperation.
A Zimbabwean diplomat announced that Iran has opened a multi-million-euro credit line to aid the African state in financing its energy sector.
Zimbabwe's Ambassador to Iran Nicholas Kitikiti said that Iran's €40 million credit line will finance energy, banking and industrial projects in the African country.
The funds would be used to rehabilitate the country's main power station to increase electricity supplies and reduce rationing, Kitikiti has said.
"The facility is there and waiting for us to harness. I am sure this will go a long way in assisting us in our economic development programs," Nicholas Kitikiti said, referring to the Iranian credit line.
He said Zimbabwe had already opened negotiations with Iran for further lines of credit covering the agriculture, health and technology sectors.
In April 2010, Iran and Zimbabwe signed 11 documents for expansion of cooperation between the two countries in different fields.
The protocols, signed during President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the African state, envision cooperation in the fields of tourism, science, technology, youth affairs, transportation, aviation and education as well as lifting political and service visa issuance.
Furthermore, Iran's Export Guarantee Fund and Zimbabwe Finance Ministry signed a Memorandum of Understanding at the meeting as the two countries' officials agreed on formation of mutual investment companies and drawing up executive plans for scientific, cultural, and technical cooperation.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Lighting Control
Fluorescent Magnetic T12 Ballast: RIP
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted July 2010
This month, Federal efficiency standards regulating fluorescent magnetic T12 ballasts entered their final phase, effectively eliminating these ballasts from the market, with few exceptions.
Between 2005 and 2010, efficiency standards created by Department of Energy regulations became phased into effect, covering magnetic ballasts designed to operate full-wattage F40T12, F96T12 and F96T12HO lamps.
By 2006, ballast manufacturers were no longer allowed to sell them to fixture manufacturers and fixture manufacturers were no longer allowed to sell them to the public.
As of July 1, 2010, ballast manufacturers were prohibited from manufacturing even replacement ballasts that did not meet the new standards.
Between July 2009 and July 2010, additional rules created by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 went into effect that expanded the energy standards to cover energy-saving versions of these T12 lamps (e.g., 34W F40T12 lamps).
As no ballasts meet these standards, the industry's least-efficient fluorescent ballasts have been eliminated from the market, which will result in a shift to higher-efficiency ballasts (i.e., electronic) in existing installations. The market has already largely shifted to electronic ballasts in new fixtures but a significant number of magnetic ballasts are sold each year for replacement purposes in existing buildings. For example, according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), about 7% of the ballast market was magnetic ballasts.
Even as owners begin to upgrade existing buildings, magnetic ballasts will continue to be sold, however. These include recognized exceptions, including ballasts designed:
• for dimming to 50 percent or less of their maximum light output;
• for use with two F96T12HO lamps at ambient temperatures of -20ºF and for use in outdoor signs; or
• labeled for use only in residential applications and have a power factor of less than 0.90.
On July 14, 2012, recently enacted DOE regulations will take effect that will also eliminate the T12 lamps that the ballasts operate.
The new DOE rules expand on efficiency rules established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 by strengthening standards for covered lamps types while also covering 8-ft. T8 lamps, 4-ft. T5 lamps and more wattages of 4-ft. T8 and T12 lamps. The net result, with few exceptions, is a majority of 4-ft. linear and 2-ft. U-shaped T12 lamps, many 8-ft. T12 and T12HO, and some low-color-rendering 4-ft. T8 lamps will be eliminated. While no longer popular in new construction, an estimated 30 percent of fluorescent 4-ft. lamps sold every year are T12, according to NEMA market data.
For more information about the law and current product availability, consult the ballast manufacturers
by Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association
Posted July 2010
This month, Federal efficiency standards regulating fluorescent magnetic T12 ballasts entered their final phase, effectively eliminating these ballasts from the market, with few exceptions.
Between 2005 and 2010, efficiency standards created by Department of Energy regulations became phased into effect, covering magnetic ballasts designed to operate full-wattage F40T12, F96T12 and F96T12HO lamps.
By 2006, ballast manufacturers were no longer allowed to sell them to fixture manufacturers and fixture manufacturers were no longer allowed to sell them to the public.
As of July 1, 2010, ballast manufacturers were prohibited from manufacturing even replacement ballasts that did not meet the new standards.
Between July 2009 and July 2010, additional rules created by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 went into effect that expanded the energy standards to cover energy-saving versions of these T12 lamps (e.g., 34W F40T12 lamps).
As no ballasts meet these standards, the industry's least-efficient fluorescent ballasts have been eliminated from the market, which will result in a shift to higher-efficiency ballasts (i.e., electronic) in existing installations. The market has already largely shifted to electronic ballasts in new fixtures but a significant number of magnetic ballasts are sold each year for replacement purposes in existing buildings. For example, according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), about 7% of the ballast market was magnetic ballasts.
Even as owners begin to upgrade existing buildings, magnetic ballasts will continue to be sold, however. These include recognized exceptions, including ballasts designed:
• for dimming to 50 percent or less of their maximum light output;
• for use with two F96T12HO lamps at ambient temperatures of -20ºF and for use in outdoor signs; or
• labeled for use only in residential applications and have a power factor of less than 0.90.
On July 14, 2012, recently enacted DOE regulations will take effect that will also eliminate the T12 lamps that the ballasts operate.
The new DOE rules expand on efficiency rules established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 by strengthening standards for covered lamps types while also covering 8-ft. T8 lamps, 4-ft. T5 lamps and more wattages of 4-ft. T8 and T12 lamps. The net result, with few exceptions, is a majority of 4-ft. linear and 2-ft. U-shaped T12 lamps, many 8-ft. T12 and T12HO, and some low-color-rendering 4-ft. T8 lamps will be eliminated. While no longer popular in new construction, an estimated 30 percent of fluorescent 4-ft. lamps sold every year are T12, according to NEMA market data.
For more information about the law and current product availability, consult the ballast manufacturers
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Lighting control and energy management
China Fears Warming Effects of Consumer Wants
Jul 5, 2010 New York Times
GUANGZHOU, China — Premier Wen Jiabao has promised to use an “iron hand” this summer to make his nation more energy efficient. The central government has ordered cities to close inefficient factories by September, like the vast Guangzhou Steel mill here, where most of the 6,000 workers will be laid off or pushed into early retirement.
Already, in the last three years, China has shut down more than a thousand older coal-fired power plants that used technology of the sort still common in the United States. China has also surpassed the rest of the world as the biggest investor in wind turbines and other clean energy technology. And it has dictated tough new energy standards for lighting and gas mileage for cars.
But even as Beijing imposes the world’s most rigorous national energy campaign, the effort is being overwhelmed by the billionfold demands of Chinese consumers.
Chinese and Western energy experts worry that China’s energy challenge could become the world’s problem — possibly dooming any international efforts to place meaningful limits on global warming.
If China cannot meet its own energy-efficiency targets, the chances of avoiding widespread environmental damage from rising temperatures “are very close to zero,” said Fatih Birol, the chief economist of the International Energy Agency in Paris.
Aspiring to a more Western standard of living, in many cases with the government’s encouragement, China’s population, 1.3 billion strong, is clamoring for more and bigger cars, for electricity-dependent home appliances and for more creature comforts like air-conditioned shopping malls.
As a result, China is actually becoming even less energy efficient. And because most of its energy is still produced by burning fossil fuels, China’s emission of carbon dioxide — a so-called greenhouse gas — is growing worse. This past winter and spring showed the largest six-month increase in tonnage ever by a single country.
Until recently, projections by both the International Energy Agency and the Energy Information Administration in Washington had assumed that, even without an international energy agreement to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, China would achieve rapid improvements in energy efficiency through 2020.
But now China is struggling to limit emissions even to the “business as usual” levels that climate models assume if the world does little to address global warming.
“We really have an arduous task” even to reach China’s existing energy-efficiency goals, said Gao Shixian, an energy official at the National Development and Reform Commission, in a speech at the Clean Energy Expo China in late June in Beijing.
China’s goal has been to reduce energy consumption per unit of economic output by 20 percent this year compared with 2005, and to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases per unit of economic output by 40 to 45 percent in 2020 compared with 2005.
But even if China can make the promised improvements, the International Energy Agency now projects that China’s emissions of energy-related greenhouse gases will grow more than the rest of the world’s combined increase by 2020. China, with one-fifth of the world’s population, is now on track to represent more than a quarter of humanity’s energy-related greenhouse-gas emissions.
Industry by industry, energy demand in China is increasing so fast that the broader efficiency targets are becoming harder to hit.
¶Although China has passed the United States in the average efficiency of its coal-fired power plants, demand for electricity is so voracious that China last year built new coal-fired plants with a total capacity greater than all existing power plants in New York State.
¶While China has imposed lighting efficiency standards on new buildings and is drafting similar standards for household appliances, construction of apartment and office buildings proceeds at a frenzied pace. And rural sales of refrigerators, washing machines and other large household appliances more than doubled in the past year in response to government subsidies aimed at helping 700 million peasants afford modern amenities.
¶As the economy becomes more reliant on domestic demand instead of exports, growth is shifting toward energy-hungry steel and cement production and away from light industries like toys and apparel.
¶Chinese cars get 40 percent better gas mileage on average than American cars because they tend to be much smaller and have weaker engines. And China is drafting regulations that would require cars within each size category to improve their mileage by 18 percent over the next five years. But China’s auto market soared 48 percent in 2009, surpassing the American market for the first time, and car sales are rising almost as rapidly again this year.
One of the newest factors in China’s energy use has emerged beyond the planning purview of policy makers in Beijing, in the form of labor unrest at factories across the country.
An older generation of low-wage migrant workers accepted hot dormitories and factories with barely a fan to keep them cool, one of many reasons Chinese emissions per person are still a third of American emissions per person. Besides higher pay, young Chinese are now demanding their own 100-square-foot studio apartments, with air-conditioning at home and in factories. Indeed, one of the demands by workers who went on strike in May at a Honda transmission factory in Foshan was that the air-conditioning thermostats be set lower.
Chinese regulations still mandate that the air-conditioning in most places be set no cooler than 79 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer. But upscale shopping malls have long been exempt from the thermostat controls and have maintained much cooler temperatures through the summers. Now, as the consumer economy takes root, those malls are proliferating in cities across China.
Premier Wen acknowledged in a statement after a cabinet meeting in May that the efficiency gains had started to reverse and actually deteriorated by 3.2 percent in the first quarter of this year. He cited a lack of controls on energy-intensive industries, although the economic rebound from the global financial crisis may have also played a role.
Global climate discussions, in pinning hopes on China’s ability to vastly improve its efficient use of energy, have tended to cite International Energy Agency data showing that China uses twice as much energy per dollar of output as the United States and three times as much as the European Union. The implicit assumption is that China can greatly improve efficiency because it must still be relying mainly on wasteful, aging boilers and outmoded power plants.
But David Fridley, a longtime specialist in China’s energy at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, said that the comparison to the United States and the European Union was misleading.
Manufacturing makes up three times as much of the Chinese economy as it does the American economy, and it is energy-intensive. If the United States had much more manufacturing, Mr. Fridley said, it would also use considerably more energy per dollar of output.
“China has been trying to grab the low-lying fruit — to find those opportunities where increased efficiency can save money and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions,” said Ken Caldeira, a climate change specialist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Calif. “It is starting to look like it might not be that easy to find and grab this fruit.”
Jul 5, 2010 New York Times
GUANGZHOU, China — Premier Wen Jiabao has promised to use an “iron hand” this summer to make his nation more energy efficient. The central government has ordered cities to close inefficient factories by September, like the vast Guangzhou Steel mill here, where most of the 6,000 workers will be laid off or pushed into early retirement.
Already, in the last three years, China has shut down more than a thousand older coal-fired power plants that used technology of the sort still common in the United States. China has also surpassed the rest of the world as the biggest investor in wind turbines and other clean energy technology. And it has dictated tough new energy standards for lighting and gas mileage for cars.
But even as Beijing imposes the world’s most rigorous national energy campaign, the effort is being overwhelmed by the billionfold demands of Chinese consumers.
Chinese and Western energy experts worry that China’s energy challenge could become the world’s problem — possibly dooming any international efforts to place meaningful limits on global warming.
If China cannot meet its own energy-efficiency targets, the chances of avoiding widespread environmental damage from rising temperatures “are very close to zero,” said Fatih Birol, the chief economist of the International Energy Agency in Paris.
Aspiring to a more Western standard of living, in many cases with the government’s encouragement, China’s population, 1.3 billion strong, is clamoring for more and bigger cars, for electricity-dependent home appliances and for more creature comforts like air-conditioned shopping malls.
As a result, China is actually becoming even less energy efficient. And because most of its energy is still produced by burning fossil fuels, China’s emission of carbon dioxide — a so-called greenhouse gas — is growing worse. This past winter and spring showed the largest six-month increase in tonnage ever by a single country.
Until recently, projections by both the International Energy Agency and the Energy Information Administration in Washington had assumed that, even without an international energy agreement to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, China would achieve rapid improvements in energy efficiency through 2020.
But now China is struggling to limit emissions even to the “business as usual” levels that climate models assume if the world does little to address global warming.
“We really have an arduous task” even to reach China’s existing energy-efficiency goals, said Gao Shixian, an energy official at the National Development and Reform Commission, in a speech at the Clean Energy Expo China in late June in Beijing.
China’s goal has been to reduce energy consumption per unit of economic output by 20 percent this year compared with 2005, and to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases per unit of economic output by 40 to 45 percent in 2020 compared with 2005.
But even if China can make the promised improvements, the International Energy Agency now projects that China’s emissions of energy-related greenhouse gases will grow more than the rest of the world’s combined increase by 2020. China, with one-fifth of the world’s population, is now on track to represent more than a quarter of humanity’s energy-related greenhouse-gas emissions.
Industry by industry, energy demand in China is increasing so fast that the broader efficiency targets are becoming harder to hit.
¶Although China has passed the United States in the average efficiency of its coal-fired power plants, demand for electricity is so voracious that China last year built new coal-fired plants with a total capacity greater than all existing power plants in New York State.
¶While China has imposed lighting efficiency standards on new buildings and is drafting similar standards for household appliances, construction of apartment and office buildings proceeds at a frenzied pace. And rural sales of refrigerators, washing machines and other large household appliances more than doubled in the past year in response to government subsidies aimed at helping 700 million peasants afford modern amenities.
¶As the economy becomes more reliant on domestic demand instead of exports, growth is shifting toward energy-hungry steel and cement production and away from light industries like toys and apparel.
¶Chinese cars get 40 percent better gas mileage on average than American cars because they tend to be much smaller and have weaker engines. And China is drafting regulations that would require cars within each size category to improve their mileage by 18 percent over the next five years. But China’s auto market soared 48 percent in 2009, surpassing the American market for the first time, and car sales are rising almost as rapidly again this year.
One of the newest factors in China’s energy use has emerged beyond the planning purview of policy makers in Beijing, in the form of labor unrest at factories across the country.
An older generation of low-wage migrant workers accepted hot dormitories and factories with barely a fan to keep them cool, one of many reasons Chinese emissions per person are still a third of American emissions per person. Besides higher pay, young Chinese are now demanding their own 100-square-foot studio apartments, with air-conditioning at home and in factories. Indeed, one of the demands by workers who went on strike in May at a Honda transmission factory in Foshan was that the air-conditioning thermostats be set lower.
Chinese regulations still mandate that the air-conditioning in most places be set no cooler than 79 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer. But upscale shopping malls have long been exempt from the thermostat controls and have maintained much cooler temperatures through the summers. Now, as the consumer economy takes root, those malls are proliferating in cities across China.
Premier Wen acknowledged in a statement after a cabinet meeting in May that the efficiency gains had started to reverse and actually deteriorated by 3.2 percent in the first quarter of this year. He cited a lack of controls on energy-intensive industries, although the economic rebound from the global financial crisis may have also played a role.
Global climate discussions, in pinning hopes on China’s ability to vastly improve its efficient use of energy, have tended to cite International Energy Agency data showing that China uses twice as much energy per dollar of output as the United States and three times as much as the European Union. The implicit assumption is that China can greatly improve efficiency because it must still be relying mainly on wasteful, aging boilers and outmoded power plants.
But David Fridley, a longtime specialist in China’s energy at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, said that the comparison to the United States and the European Union was misleading.
Manufacturing makes up three times as much of the Chinese economy as it does the American economy, and it is energy-intensive. If the United States had much more manufacturing, Mr. Fridley said, it would also use considerably more energy per dollar of output.
“China has been trying to grab the low-lying fruit — to find those opportunities where increased efficiency can save money and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions,” said Ken Caldeira, a climate change specialist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Calif. “It is starting to look like it might not be that easy to find and grab this fruit.”
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Lighting control and automation
Take the IEEE Green Your World Challenge to Celebrate World Environment Day, 5 June 2010
Jun 1, 2010 Canada NewsWire Group
PISCATAWAY, N.J., Jun. 1, 2010 (Canada NewsWire Group delivered by Newstex) -- /CNW/ --
In celebration of the 2010 World Environment Day (WED), and the positive impact global sustainability technologies have made on the environment, IEEE, the world's largest technical professional association, initiates a call-to-action: asking citizens of the world to accept the IEEE Green Your World Challenge.
Take the Challenge! Starting 1 June 2010, and continuing throughout the week leading up to WED (5 June 2010), IEEE invites individuals from around the globe to take one or more of the five challenges, and commit to making simple, yet powerful changes in daily life that can benefit humanity and the environment:
-- Step into the (Energy Efficient) Light: Replace incandescent light
bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) or light emitting
diode (LED) light bulbs
-- Be an e-Waste Hero: Find a local electronics recycler, and
eco-consciously dispose of old computers, TVs, and mobile phones
-- Every Drop Counts: Reduce your daily in-home water usage
-- Reforest Your Community: Plant a tree or garden and create a
sustainable future
-- Stop 'Energy Vampires' from Draining Your Resources: Unplug standby
electronics
"When it comes to our environment, we must be agents of change in our daily routines and in our support for sustainable developments through advancements in technology," said Pedro Ray, 2010 IEEE president and chief executive officer. "IEEE and its members are working globally to capitalize on the impact technology plays in sustainability efforts - from implementing water conservation and irrigation systems in underserved areas, and lowering the carbon footprint of consumer devices by engineering smaller, faster semiconductors, to preserving the Earth's natural resources by exploring new alternative energy sources. I encourage every individual to take the IEEE Green Your World Challenge and do their part to better serve this planet."
Take the IEEE Green Your World Challenge and commit to an environmental change that will impact our future: http://www.ieeegreenyourworld.org.
After taking the Challenge, explore which challenges other people have taken around the globe, and check out the IEEE Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/ieeegreenyourworld and Twitter feed (@IEEEorg) - to get regular updates on the IEEE Green Your World Challenge.
The IEEE Green Your World Challenge is registered with the United Nations Environmental Programme - WED 2010, which aims to be the most widely celebrated, global day for positive, environmental action. By celebrating WED, IEEE is linking individuals around the globe in support of environmental issues.
About IEEE
IEEE, the world's largest technical professional association, is dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. Through its highly cited publications, conferences, technology standards, and professional and educational activities, IEEE is the trusted voice on a wide variety of areas ranging from aerospace systems, computers and telecommunications to biomedical engineering, electric power and consumer electronics. Learn more at http://www.ieee.org.
Newstex ID: PRN-0001-45597194
Jun 1, 2010 Canada NewsWire Group
PISCATAWAY, N.J., Jun. 1, 2010 (Canada NewsWire Group delivered by Newstex) -- /CNW/ --
In celebration of the 2010 World Environment Day (WED), and the positive impact global sustainability technologies have made on the environment, IEEE, the world's largest technical professional association, initiates a call-to-action: asking citizens of the world to accept the IEEE Green Your World Challenge.
Take the Challenge! Starting 1 June 2010, and continuing throughout the week leading up to WED (5 June 2010), IEEE invites individuals from around the globe to take one or more of the five challenges, and commit to making simple, yet powerful changes in daily life that can benefit humanity and the environment:
-- Step into the (Energy Efficient) Light: Replace incandescent light
bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) or light emitting
diode (LED) light bulbs
-- Be an e-Waste Hero: Find a local electronics recycler, and
eco-consciously dispose of old computers, TVs, and mobile phones
-- Every Drop Counts: Reduce your daily in-home water usage
-- Reforest Your Community: Plant a tree or garden and create a
sustainable future
-- Stop 'Energy Vampires' from Draining Your Resources: Unplug standby
electronics
"When it comes to our environment, we must be agents of change in our daily routines and in our support for sustainable developments through advancements in technology," said Pedro Ray, 2010 IEEE president and chief executive officer. "IEEE and its members are working globally to capitalize on the impact technology plays in sustainability efforts - from implementing water conservation and irrigation systems in underserved areas, and lowering the carbon footprint of consumer devices by engineering smaller, faster semiconductors, to preserving the Earth's natural resources by exploring new alternative energy sources. I encourage every individual to take the IEEE Green Your World Challenge and do their part to better serve this planet."
Take the IEEE Green Your World Challenge and commit to an environmental change that will impact our future: http://www.ieeegreenyourworld.org.
After taking the Challenge, explore which challenges other people have taken around the globe, and check out the IEEE Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/ieeegreenyourworld and Twitter feed (@IEEEorg) - to get regular updates on the IEEE Green Your World Challenge.
The IEEE Green Your World Challenge is registered with the United Nations Environmental Programme - WED 2010, which aims to be the most widely celebrated, global day for positive, environmental action. By celebrating WED, IEEE is linking individuals around the globe in support of environmental issues.
About IEEE
IEEE, the world's largest technical professional association, is dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. Through its highly cited publications, conferences, technology standards, and professional and educational activities, IEEE is the trusted voice on a wide variety of areas ranging from aerospace systems, computers and telecommunications to biomedical engineering, electric power and consumer electronics. Learn more at http://www.ieee.org.
Newstex ID: PRN-0001-45597194
Monday, May 24, 2010
Green Energy
6. Anti-plastic bag drive gains momentum
May 24, 2010 Bangkok Post
Pitsinee Jitpleecheep
May 24, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- Retailers of all sizes are being asked to co-operate with the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) on its new environmental programme to reduce the usage of plastic bags in Bangkok.
Porntep Techapaibul, a BMA deputy governor, said the capital generated about 10,000 tonnes of garbage per day. Of the total, up to 1,800 tonnes are plastic bags, the use of which rises by about 20% a year. The BMA has to allocate about 600 million baht to get rid of such garbage each year.
Given high concern about global warming, the BMA will encourage residents to take part in the 'Krungthep Yim Sod Sai Rai Tung Plastic' campaign, under the slogan under 'No Bag No Baht'. A pilot project started at the Chatuchak weekend market last week.
The campaign will expand to another eight markets owned by the BMA including Sanam Luang II, Prachachuen and Min Buri to test consumer response.
Under the campaign, customers who buy goods at shops at nine BMA markets will receive a one-baht discount for every 100 baht they pay if they bring fabric bags. At the same time, shoppers have to pay one baht per plastic bag. The measure will be enforced officially from Environment Day on June 5.
Proceeds from the "bag tax" will be used to help solve global warming problems or produce recycled bags.
Apart from the markets, the BMA also negotiated with leading retailers such as The Mall Group, Central Department Store, Tesco Lotus and Home Pro to join the campaign. Tesco Lotus and Home Pro are already taking part and more retailers are expected to join over the next two to three months.
"We hope the campaign will help gradually change the behaviour of Bangkokians and cap usage of plastic bags in Bangkok at 1,800 tonnes per day. However, if anything changes and the usage of plastic bags is more than 1,800 tonnes per day, we will consider some tax measures or increase household garbage collection fees to 360 baht per year from 240 baht currently," Mr Porntep said.
Newstex ID: KRTB-0199-45332329
May 24, 2010 Bangkok Post
Pitsinee Jitpleecheep
May 24, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- Retailers of all sizes are being asked to co-operate with the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) on its new environmental programme to reduce the usage of plastic bags in Bangkok.
Porntep Techapaibul, a BMA deputy governor, said the capital generated about 10,000 tonnes of garbage per day. Of the total, up to 1,800 tonnes are plastic bags, the use of which rises by about 20% a year. The BMA has to allocate about 600 million baht to get rid of such garbage each year.
Given high concern about global warming, the BMA will encourage residents to take part in the 'Krungthep Yim Sod Sai Rai Tung Plastic' campaign, under the slogan under 'No Bag No Baht'. A pilot project started at the Chatuchak weekend market last week.
The campaign will expand to another eight markets owned by the BMA including Sanam Luang II, Prachachuen and Min Buri to test consumer response.
Under the campaign, customers who buy goods at shops at nine BMA markets will receive a one-baht discount for every 100 baht they pay if they bring fabric bags. At the same time, shoppers have to pay one baht per plastic bag. The measure will be enforced officially from Environment Day on June 5.
Proceeds from the "bag tax" will be used to help solve global warming problems or produce recycled bags.
Apart from the markets, the BMA also negotiated with leading retailers such as The Mall Group, Central Department Store, Tesco Lotus and Home Pro to join the campaign. Tesco Lotus and Home Pro are already taking part and more retailers are expected to join over the next two to three months.
"We hope the campaign will help gradually change the behaviour of Bangkokians and cap usage of plastic bags in Bangkok at 1,800 tonnes per day. However, if anything changes and the usage of plastic bags is more than 1,800 tonnes per day, we will consider some tax measures or increase household garbage collection fees to 360 baht per year from 240 baht currently," Mr Porntep said.
Newstex ID: KRTB-0199-45332329
Monday, May 10, 2010
Home Automation
7. China’s Soaring Energy Use Weakens Pledge on Efficiency
May 7, 2010 New York Times
HONG KONG — Even as China has set ambitious goals for itself in clean-energy production and reduction of global warming gases, the country’s surging demand for power from oil and coal has led to the largest six-month increase in the tonnage of human generated greenhouse gases ever by a single country.
China’s leaders are so concerned about rising energy use and declining energy efficiency that the cabinet held a special meeting this week to discuss the problem, according to a statement Thursday from the ministry of industry and information technology. Coal-fired electricity and oil sales each climbed 24 percent in the first quarter from a year earlier, on the heels of similar increases in the fourth quarter
Premier Wen Jiabao promised tougher policies to enforce energy conservation, including a ban on government approval of any new projects by companies that failed to eliminate inefficient capacity, the ministry said. Mr. Wen also said that China had to find a way to meet the target in its current five-year plan of a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency.
“We can never break our pledge, stagger our resolution or weaken our efforts, no matter how difficult it is,” Mr. Wen said. Western experts say it will be hard to meet the target, but that China’s leaders seem determined.
“No country of this size has seen energy demand grow this fast before in absolute terms, and those who are most concerned about this are the Chinese themselves,” said Jonathan Sinton, the China program manager at the International Energy Agency in Paris.
China has been the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases each year since 2006, leading the United States by an ever-widening margin. A failure by China to meet its own energy efficiency targets would be a big setback for international efforts to limit such emissions.
Such a failure would also be a potential diplomatic embarrassment for the Chinese government, which promised the world just before the Copenhagen climate summit meeting in December that it would improve energy efficiency.
The issue has major economic implications for China and for global energy markets. The nation’s ravenous appetite for fossil fuels is driven by China’s shifting economic base — away from light export industries like garment and shoe production and toward energy-intensive heavy industries like steel and cement manufacturing for cars and construction for the domestic market.
Almost all urban households in China now have a washing machine, a refrigerator and an air-conditioner, according to government statistics. Rural ownership of appliances is now soaring as well because of new government subsidies for their purchase since late 2008.
Car ownership is rising rapidly in the cities, while bicycle ownership is actually falling in rural areas as more families buy motorcycles and light trucks.
General Motors announced on Thursday that its sales in China rose 41 percent in April from a year earlier, virtually all of the vehicles made in China because of high import taxes.
Zhou Xi’an, a National Energy Administration official, said in a statement last month that fossil fuel consumption was likely to increase further in the second quarter of this year because of rising car ownership, diesel use in the increasingly mechanized agricultural sector and extra jet fuel consumption for travelers to the Shanghai Expo.
The shift in the composition of China’s economic output is overwhelming the effects of China’s rapid expansion of renewable energy and its existing energy conservation program, energy experts said.
The increase in energy consumption in the first quarter was twice as fast as economic growth of about 12 percent during that period, a sign that rising energy consumption is not just the result of a rebounding economy but also of changes in the mix of industrial activity. The shift in activity is partly because of China’s economic stimulus program, which has resulted in a surge in public works construction that requires a lot of steel and cement.
Burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide, which many scientists describe as the biggest man-made contributor to global warming.
President Hu Jintao pledged in November that by 2020 the Chinese government would slow its growth in greenhouse gases by sharply improving energy efficiency. Mr. Wen went to the Copenhagen climate meeting three weeks later and opposed any international monitoring of China’s energy efficiency effort or binding limits on China’s overall energy consumption.
China’s current five-year plan, from 2006 to 2010, already sets an efficiency target that the country may now be less likely to meet.
The plan calls for the energy needed for each unit of economic output to decline by 20 percent in 2010 compared to 2005.
For a while, China seemed to be on track toward that goal. According to the ministry of industry and information technology, energy efficiency actually improved by more than 14 percent from 2005 to 2009.
But it deteriorated by 3.2 percent in the first quarter, the ministry said on Thursday.
Mr. Wen said that this deterioration would make it “particularly difficult” for China to meet the 20 percent target.
Without big policy changes, like raising fuel taxes, “they can’t possibly make it,” said Julie Beatty, principal energy economist at Wood Mackenzie, a big energy consulting firm based in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Mr. Hu promised last November that China would improve the energy efficiency of its economy by 40 to 45 percent by 2020. The ministry statement on Thursday did not mention whether Mr. Hu’s promise might still be achievable.
Complicating energy efficiency calculations is the fact that China’s National Bureau of Statistics has begun a comprehensive revision of all of the country’s energy statistics for the last 10 years, restating them with more of the details commonly available in other countries’ data. Western experts also expect the revision to show that China has been using even more energy and releasing even more greenhouse gases than previously thought.
Revising the data now runs the risk that other countries will distrust the results and demand greater international monitoring of any future pledges by China. If the National Bureau of Statistics revises up the 2005 data more than recent data, for example, then China might appear to have met its target at the end of this year for a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency.
China’s recent embrace of renewable energy has done little so far to slow the rise in emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.
Wind energy effectively doubled in this year’s first quarter compared with a year earlier, as China has emerged as the world’s largest manufacturer and installer of wind turbines. But wind still accounts for just 2 percent of China’s electricity capacity — and only 1 percent of actual output, because the wind does not blow all the time.
Meanwhile, fuel-intensive heavy industry output rose 22 percent in the first quarter in China from a year earlier, while light industry increased 14 percent.
Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations research unit, said in an e-mail message that he believed China was serious about addressing its emissions.
“There is a growing realization within Chinese society that major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would be of overall benefit to China,” he wrote after learning of the latest Chinese energy statistics. “This is important not only for global reasons, because China is now responsible for the highest emissions of greenhouse gases, but also because its per capita emissions are increasing at a rapid rate.”
To some extent, China’s energy consumption now might actually help limit its global warming emissions in the future.
China, for example, used 200 million tons of cement in building rail lines last year, while the entire American economy only used 93 million tons, said David Fridley, a China energy specialist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Although production of that cement raised energy use and emissions of global warming gases, it also expanded a rail system that is among the most energy-efficient in the world.
China currently moves only 55 percent of its coal by rail, for example, which is down from 80 percent a decade ago, as many coal users have been forced by inadequate rail capacity to haul coal in trucks instead. The trucks burn 10 or more times as much fuel per mile to haul a ton of coal, Mr. Fridley said.
But now, with new high-speed passenger lines leaving more room on older lines to haul coal and other freight, the percentages could begin shifting away from energy-inefficient trucking, he said.
May 7, 2010 New York Times
HONG KONG — Even as China has set ambitious goals for itself in clean-energy production and reduction of global warming gases, the country’s surging demand for power from oil and coal has led to the largest six-month increase in the tonnage of human generated greenhouse gases ever by a single country.
China’s leaders are so concerned about rising energy use and declining energy efficiency that the cabinet held a special meeting this week to discuss the problem, according to a statement Thursday from the ministry of industry and information technology. Coal-fired electricity and oil sales each climbed 24 percent in the first quarter from a year earlier, on the heels of similar increases in the fourth quarter
Premier Wen Jiabao promised tougher policies to enforce energy conservation, including a ban on government approval of any new projects by companies that failed to eliminate inefficient capacity, the ministry said. Mr. Wen also said that China had to find a way to meet the target in its current five-year plan of a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency.
“We can never break our pledge, stagger our resolution or weaken our efforts, no matter how difficult it is,” Mr. Wen said. Western experts say it will be hard to meet the target, but that China’s leaders seem determined.
“No country of this size has seen energy demand grow this fast before in absolute terms, and those who are most concerned about this are the Chinese themselves,” said Jonathan Sinton, the China program manager at the International Energy Agency in Paris.
China has been the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases each year since 2006, leading the United States by an ever-widening margin. A failure by China to meet its own energy efficiency targets would be a big setback for international efforts to limit such emissions.
Such a failure would also be a potential diplomatic embarrassment for the Chinese government, which promised the world just before the Copenhagen climate summit meeting in December that it would improve energy efficiency.
The issue has major economic implications for China and for global energy markets. The nation’s ravenous appetite for fossil fuels is driven by China’s shifting economic base — away from light export industries like garment and shoe production and toward energy-intensive heavy industries like steel and cement manufacturing for cars and construction for the domestic market.
Almost all urban households in China now have a washing machine, a refrigerator and an air-conditioner, according to government statistics. Rural ownership of appliances is now soaring as well because of new government subsidies for their purchase since late 2008.
Car ownership is rising rapidly in the cities, while bicycle ownership is actually falling in rural areas as more families buy motorcycles and light trucks.
General Motors announced on Thursday that its sales in China rose 41 percent in April from a year earlier, virtually all of the vehicles made in China because of high import taxes.
Zhou Xi’an, a National Energy Administration official, said in a statement last month that fossil fuel consumption was likely to increase further in the second quarter of this year because of rising car ownership, diesel use in the increasingly mechanized agricultural sector and extra jet fuel consumption for travelers to the Shanghai Expo.
The shift in the composition of China’s economic output is overwhelming the effects of China’s rapid expansion of renewable energy and its existing energy conservation program, energy experts said.
The increase in energy consumption in the first quarter was twice as fast as economic growth of about 12 percent during that period, a sign that rising energy consumption is not just the result of a rebounding economy but also of changes in the mix of industrial activity. The shift in activity is partly because of China’s economic stimulus program, which has resulted in a surge in public works construction that requires a lot of steel and cement.
Burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide, which many scientists describe as the biggest man-made contributor to global warming.
President Hu Jintao pledged in November that by 2020 the Chinese government would slow its growth in greenhouse gases by sharply improving energy efficiency. Mr. Wen went to the Copenhagen climate meeting three weeks later and opposed any international monitoring of China’s energy efficiency effort or binding limits on China’s overall energy consumption.
China’s current five-year plan, from 2006 to 2010, already sets an efficiency target that the country may now be less likely to meet.
The plan calls for the energy needed for each unit of economic output to decline by 20 percent in 2010 compared to 2005.
For a while, China seemed to be on track toward that goal. According to the ministry of industry and information technology, energy efficiency actually improved by more than 14 percent from 2005 to 2009.
But it deteriorated by 3.2 percent in the first quarter, the ministry said on Thursday.
Mr. Wen said that this deterioration would make it “particularly difficult” for China to meet the 20 percent target.
Without big policy changes, like raising fuel taxes, “they can’t possibly make it,” said Julie Beatty, principal energy economist at Wood Mackenzie, a big energy consulting firm based in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Mr. Hu promised last November that China would improve the energy efficiency of its economy by 40 to 45 percent by 2020. The ministry statement on Thursday did not mention whether Mr. Hu’s promise might still be achievable.
Complicating energy efficiency calculations is the fact that China’s National Bureau of Statistics has begun a comprehensive revision of all of the country’s energy statistics for the last 10 years, restating them with more of the details commonly available in other countries’ data. Western experts also expect the revision to show that China has been using even more energy and releasing even more greenhouse gases than previously thought.
Revising the data now runs the risk that other countries will distrust the results and demand greater international monitoring of any future pledges by China. If the National Bureau of Statistics revises up the 2005 data more than recent data, for example, then China might appear to have met its target at the end of this year for a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency.
China’s recent embrace of renewable energy has done little so far to slow the rise in emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.
Wind energy effectively doubled in this year’s first quarter compared with a year earlier, as China has emerged as the world’s largest manufacturer and installer of wind turbines. But wind still accounts for just 2 percent of China’s electricity capacity — and only 1 percent of actual output, because the wind does not blow all the time.
Meanwhile, fuel-intensive heavy industry output rose 22 percent in the first quarter in China from a year earlier, while light industry increased 14 percent.
Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations research unit, said in an e-mail message that he believed China was serious about addressing its emissions.
“There is a growing realization within Chinese society that major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would be of overall benefit to China,” he wrote after learning of the latest Chinese energy statistics. “This is important not only for global reasons, because China is now responsible for the highest emissions of greenhouse gases, but also because its per capita emissions are increasing at a rapid rate.”
To some extent, China’s energy consumption now might actually help limit its global warming emissions in the future.
China, for example, used 200 million tons of cement in building rail lines last year, while the entire American economy only used 93 million tons, said David Fridley, a China energy specialist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Although production of that cement raised energy use and emissions of global warming gases, it also expanded a rail system that is among the most energy-efficient in the world.
China currently moves only 55 percent of its coal by rail, for example, which is down from 80 percent a decade ago, as many coal users have been forced by inadequate rail capacity to haul coal in trucks instead. The trucks burn 10 or more times as much fuel per mile to haul a ton of coal, Mr. Fridley said.
But now, with new high-speed passenger lines leaving more room on older lines to haul coal and other freight, the percentages could begin shifting away from energy-inefficient trucking, he said.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
home automation
Climate bill could be harmed by Gulf spill
May 1, 2010 Associated Press Online
By MATTHEW DALY and NOAKI SCHWARTZ
WASHINGTON, May 1, 2010 (AP Online delivered by Newstex) -- A historic environmental protection bill is in danger after a massive oil spill put a new focus on the perils of offshore drilling, a feature that was supposed to win wider support for the legislation.
The bill, supported by President Barack Obama, calls for new offshore drilling -- a concession by environmentalists. But with the tragedy off the Gulf Coast growing daily, even conservationists who have waited a decade for the legislation are now saying it will fail if offshore drilling remains in the bill.
"When you're trying to resurrect a climate bill that's face-down in the mud and you want to bring it back to life and get it breathing again, I don't think you can have offshore drilling against the backdrop of what's transpiring in the Louisiana wetlands," said Richard Charter, energy adviser to Defenders of Wildlife. "I think it's flat-lined."
Some Democrats, including two of New Jersey's congressmen and both of its senators, threatened Friday to pull their support if offshore drilling is included in the bill designed to curb emissions of pollution-causing gases blamed for global warming.
Introduction of the legislation was postponed on Monday for an unrelated reason. The bill aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and it also would expand domestic production of oil, natural gas and nuclear power.
Obama called for new offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean from Delaware to central Florida, and the northern waters of Alaska. He also asked Congress to lift a drilling ban in the oil-rich eastern Gulf of Mexico, 125 miles from Florida beaches.
The images of last week's explosion and the growing, uncontrolled spill in the Gulf of Mexico made the bill's road to approval much more difficult. The accident, which threatens wildlife and fishing grounds along the Gulf Coast, will likely force many wavering lawmakers to reconsider whether they support expanded drilling.
"I think that's dead on arrival," U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat from Florida, told CNN on Friday.
But South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said Friday he has not wavered in his support. "We've had problems with car design, but you don't stop driving," he told The Greenville News. "The Challenger accident was heart-breaking but we went back to space."
A White House spokesman said this week that President Barack Obama remains committed, at least for now, to plans to expand drilling to new areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.
But David Jenkins, a spokesman for Republicans for Environmental Protection, said the politics of offshore drilling are "changing by the minute" as the spreading slick of oil threatens coastal states that traditionally support drilling.
"If this plays out, how many politicians will be jumping up and saying they won't vote for this because it doesn't include offshore drilling?" Jenkins said.
While the environmental community never embraced drilling, some muted or at least downplayed their opposition to Obama's proposal for the sake of the larger climate bill, said Steve Cochran, with the Environmental Defense Fund.
While the spill essentially kills any proposal for more drilling, he said it also demonstrates more than ever the need for a comprehensive energy bill that protects the environment.
"We need to take advantage of the opportunity of this bill to make sure we never face this situation again," he said.
Carl Pope, chairman of the Sierra Club, agreed. He said the authors of the bill will have to come up with a new formula to attract support from moderate Democrats, independents and Republicans.
"The oil industry spent 40 years building a story line that it knew what it was doing underwater and because it knew what it was doing we could allow it to turn our most sensitive coastline into oilfields," he said. "We've now been reminded once again that oil and water do not mix."
Newstex ID: AP-0001-44515662
May 1, 2010 Associated Press Online
By MATTHEW DALY and NOAKI SCHWARTZ
WASHINGTON, May 1, 2010 (AP Online delivered by Newstex) -- A historic environmental protection bill is in danger after a massive oil spill put a new focus on the perils of offshore drilling, a feature that was supposed to win wider support for the legislation.
The bill, supported by President Barack Obama, calls for new offshore drilling -- a concession by environmentalists. But with the tragedy off the Gulf Coast growing daily, even conservationists who have waited a decade for the legislation are now saying it will fail if offshore drilling remains in the bill.
"When you're trying to resurrect a climate bill that's face-down in the mud and you want to bring it back to life and get it breathing again, I don't think you can have offshore drilling against the backdrop of what's transpiring in the Louisiana wetlands," said Richard Charter, energy adviser to Defenders of Wildlife. "I think it's flat-lined."
Some Democrats, including two of New Jersey's congressmen and both of its senators, threatened Friday to pull their support if offshore drilling is included in the bill designed to curb emissions of pollution-causing gases blamed for global warming.
Introduction of the legislation was postponed on Monday for an unrelated reason. The bill aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and it also would expand domestic production of oil, natural gas and nuclear power.
Obama called for new offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean from Delaware to central Florida, and the northern waters of Alaska. He also asked Congress to lift a drilling ban in the oil-rich eastern Gulf of Mexico, 125 miles from Florida beaches.
The images of last week's explosion and the growing, uncontrolled spill in the Gulf of Mexico made the bill's road to approval much more difficult. The accident, which threatens wildlife and fishing grounds along the Gulf Coast, will likely force many wavering lawmakers to reconsider whether they support expanded drilling.
"I think that's dead on arrival," U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat from Florida, told CNN on Friday.
But South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said Friday he has not wavered in his support. "We've had problems with car design, but you don't stop driving," he told The Greenville News. "The Challenger accident was heart-breaking but we went back to space."
A White House spokesman said this week that President Barack Obama remains committed, at least for now, to plans to expand drilling to new areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.
But David Jenkins, a spokesman for Republicans for Environmental Protection, said the politics of offshore drilling are "changing by the minute" as the spreading slick of oil threatens coastal states that traditionally support drilling.
"If this plays out, how many politicians will be jumping up and saying they won't vote for this because it doesn't include offshore drilling?" Jenkins said.
While the environmental community never embraced drilling, some muted or at least downplayed their opposition to Obama's proposal for the sake of the larger climate bill, said Steve Cochran, with the Environmental Defense Fund.
While the spill essentially kills any proposal for more drilling, he said it also demonstrates more than ever the need for a comprehensive energy bill that protects the environment.
"We need to take advantage of the opportunity of this bill to make sure we never face this situation again," he said.
Carl Pope, chairman of the Sierra Club, agreed. He said the authors of the bill will have to come up with a new formula to attract support from moderate Democrats, independents and Republicans.
"The oil industry spent 40 years building a story line that it knew what it was doing underwater and because it knew what it was doing we could allow it to turn our most sensitive coastline into oilfields," he said. "We've now been reminded once again that oil and water do not mix."
Newstex ID: AP-0001-44515662
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)