August 6, 2013

July 31, 2013

July 30, 2013

By John Finnigan

Source: Costco

The electric utility industry faces the risk of declining revenues as more customers install solar panels on their homes and businesses.  Solar power currently supplies 2% of the country’s electricity needs, and is projected to grow to 16% by 2020. In 2013, solar panel prices for commercial installations fell 15.6%, from $4.64/watt to $3.92/watt.  To protect their revenues, some utilities are raising electricity costs for solar panel owners – but with mixed results.  Credit ratings agencies are also expressing concern.  Is there real cause for alarm or are these companies crying wolf?  Judging by one customer segment – big-box retailers – the threat is real.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) ranks U.S. companies based on their solar energy capacity, and the top five companies on the list are big-box retailers:

• Walmart tops SEIA’s list with 65,000 kW of solar power, which is enough to supply the annual energy needs of over 10,000 homes.  They recently installed ten new solar rooftop systems in Maryland, totaling more than 13,000 panels.  Walmart is the largest retailer in the U.S. and in the world by revenue, with 4,423 U.S. stores and over 10,000 stores worldwide. Walmart and EDF have been working together since 2004 to reduce the Walmart’s environmental footprint.  With more than 200 solar installations across the country, Walmart plans to have 1,000 solar installations by 2020.  Walmart’s goal is to eventually supply 100% of its energy needs with renewable energy.

• Costco ranks second on the list with 38,900 kW of solar power.  Costco is the fifth largest U.S. retailer and seventh largest in the world, with 425 stores in the U.S.  Costco has installed solar panels in approximately 60 stores, with an average size of 500 kW per store.  Solar power supplies about 22% of each store’s energy needs.

• In third place on SEIA’s list is Kohl’s, with 36,474 kW of solar power.  Kohl’s is the 20th largest retailer in the U.S. and the 44th largest retailer in the world, with 1,127 U.S. stores.  Kohl’s has solar panels installed at 139 of its stores, and will have solar panels at 200 stores by 2015.

• IKEA is fourth with 21,495 kW of solar power.  IKEA only has 38 U.S. stores, but its buildings can accommodate larger solar installations.  By 2020, the company plans to meet 100% of its energy needs with renewable energy.

• Macy’s ranks fifth on SEIA’s list with 16,163 kW of solar power.  Macy’s is the 16th largest retailer in the U.S. and the 36th largest retailer in the world, with 840 stores.  The company is increasing its solar installations by 25-35%.

The SEIA top 20 list also includes:

• Staples, #8 / 10,776 kW of solar power / 1,583 U.S. stores;
• Walgreens, #10 / 8,163 kW of solar power / 7,651 U.S. stores;
• Bed, Bath and Beyond, #11 / 7,543 kW of solar power / 1,143 U.S. stores; and
• Toys “R” Us, #12 / 5.676 kW of solar power / 871 U.S. stores.

As a whole, the top 20 big-box retailers have over 18,000 U.S. stores, representing enormous potential for solar power growth.  These retailers are only part of a larger group of commercial customers, which in total make up about one- third of U.S. electric utility sales.  But other commercial customers are turning to solar too.  The National Renewable Energy Laboratory reports that 40% of the nation’s 86,000 supermarkets are located in areas with grid parity (the cost of power from solar panels is equal to the cost of buying power from the utility).  Commercial customers are also making impressive strides in reducing their energy usage through energy efficiency.

What does this mean for electric utilities?  We can expect to see the following changes to the electric utility business model going forward:

• Utilities will need to address the operational challenges of higher levels of solar power on their electric grids;
• Utilities will seek to limit the number of customers eligible for net metering plans, where the customer is paid for the excess energy supplied by their solar panels;
• Utilities will seek to reduce payments received for solar energy produced by net metering customers, who currently receive the full retail rate for their excess energy in many  states;
• Utilities will seek to implement new, fixed charges for customers who install solar panels on their property;
• Utilities will start new businesses providing solar installation services for customers;
• Utilities will seek approval to own solar power installations located on their customer properties; and
• Regulators and utilities will consider adopting performance-based electricity rate plans. These plans would charge for electricity on the basis of service and performance, rather than the volume of energy sold to customers.

Source: Costco

These changes present a host of legal and regulatory challenges.  As a guiding principle, utilities must have an opportunity to earn a fair return in exchange for keeping the lights on.  Similarly, electricity rates for solar panel owners should fairly reflect the full costs of serving these customers, as well as the full benefits that solar power provides to the electric utility.  These changes will be disruptive for electric utilities, but will allow customers to choose affordable clean energy and new technologies.  We’ll all benefit from cleaner energy and a reliable electric grid.

By: Kendra Karr and Valerie Miller Part III of a blog series detailing a February 2013 Research Expedition in Cuba organized by EDF Oceans’ Cuba, Science, and Shark teams and funded by the Waitt Foundation. A team of scientists from Cuba, Mexico and the U.S. along with EDF staff set sail to share knowledge, scientific [...]

Will river water save Louisiana's coast or kill the marsh?
By John Snell, FOX 8 (New Orleans). Aug. 8, 2013.
"St. Mary Parish, La. — Azure Bevington, a PhD student in coastal wetlands ecology at LSU, stands in the Wax Lake Delta, a spot that did not exist when she was born in 1980…" (read more).

Outdated Numbers on the Gulf Recovery
Letter to the Editor by Geoff Morrell, BP. U.S. News & World Report. Aug. 8, 2013.
"Kathleen Koch's recent opinion piece ["The Gulf's Suffering Continues, So Should BP's Payments," July 19] appears to have relied on certain inaccurate and outdated information…" (read more).

Interactive: BP GULF SPILL
By The Daily Astorian. Aug. 8, 2013.
"An interactive featuring a timeline of key dates related to the Gulf oil spill has been updated and is available…" (read more).

Southeast Louisiana officials urge FEMA to halt flood insurance rate increases
By Mark Schleifstein, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune (New Orleans). Aug. 8, 2013.
"Members of Louisiana's congressional delegation, led by U.S. Sens. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and David Vitter, R-La., joined with parish presidents on Thursday in attempting to explain to a senior FEMA official why dramatic increases in flood insurance rates called for by the Biggert-Waters Act should be delayed for at least a year…" (read more).

NOAA trims forecast for busy hurricane season
By Associated Press. Aug. 8, 2013.
"Federal forecasters are slightly reducing their prediction for a busy Atlantic hurricane season. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration updated its hurricane season forecast Thursday, trimming back the number of hurricanes they expect this year to between six and nine…" (read more).

Judge orders BP to pay $130M in fees to settlement administrator despite company's complaints
By Michael Kunzelman, Associated Press. Aug. 7, 2013.
"NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge on Wednesday ordered BP to pay more than $130 million in fees to the court-supervised administrator of its multibillion-dollar settlement with Gulf Coast businesses and residents after the company's 2010 oil spill…" (read more).

Video: La. leaders oppose high flood insurance rates, show FEMA levees
By Jeff Adelson, The Advocate (Baton Rouge). Aug. 9, 2013.
"As far as the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s flood insurance calculations are concerned, miles of levees protecting many of Louisiana’s coastal parishes simply don’t exist…" (read more).

Louisiana coastal damages lawsuit provokes wrath of Big Oil's political friends
By Sue Sturgis, Facing South. Aug. 8, 2013.
"After the Hurricane Katrina disaster drew scrutiny to Louisiana's flood-control efforts, voters overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the state constitution in 2006 to allow the creation of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority to ensure the region's levees would be overseen by engineering experts and not politicians' friends…" (read more).

By Jackie Roberts

GE and First Solar announced earlier this week an important step towards consolidation of the solar industry that will result in the loss of a new solar manufacturing facility  in Colorado and, potentially 350 jobs.  Clearly the announcement is frustrating for Colorado, a state we featured in EDF’s Clean Energy Economic Development Series, which highlights key road maps for maximizing economic development from clean energy markets.

But, the announcement includes lots of good news – which is probably more significant for the U.S.’s long-term solar power play as well as overall economic opportunity and job creation.  In 2009, GE purchased PrimeStar Solar, a company first seeded at the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Labs (NREL), located in Colorado.  PrimeStar Solar (renamed Arvada research center) made significant advances in the efficiency of cadmium-telluride (CdTe) thin film solar panels.  This lowered the cost of thin film solar panels overall and made them more competitive with traditional solar panels.

CdTe thin film solar panels require less material than alternative technologies – which lowers their cost – but their efficiency continues to lag behind traditional, silicon-based solar panels.  The deal gives GE a large stock position in First Solar in exchange for giving First Solar the new CdTe thin film solar technology – essentially creating a key strategic partnership between the two companies.

Source: PV-Tech

First Solar, as the U.S. leader in solar power development, offers a unique ability to bring new technologies to scale.   Deploying and further developing CdTe thin film solar technology from Arvada is critical to further advances in panel efficiency, and First Solar is well positioned to deliver these advances with continued GE research, input and support.

Leading solar experts, such as the head of NREL’s lad, Dan Arvizu, continue to believe that vast opportunities exists for improving the efficiency of solar panels, particularly CdTe thin film.  Commenting on these opportunities last spring, Zachary Shahan, Director of CleanTechnica, summarized the global challenge as: “I guess the question this leaves us with is which technology or technologies will improve their real-world efficiencies using low-cost materials quickly enough to dominate the solar power market in the coming decades?”

By jointly harnessing their expertise in research and development, industry leaders GE and First Solar have the potential to dominate the solar energy industry, a good news story for the U.S.   We hope Colorado reaps some of those long-term economic, environmental and health benefits, and we know that the prospect of having a homegrown, global powerhouse in solar power guarantees long-term benefits for the country as a whole.

By Kate Zerrenner

This post originally appeared on EDF's Energy Exchange blog.

As we’ve highlighted in previous posts, water and energy regulators often make decisions in silos, despite the inherent connection between these two sectors. Texas is no exception.

Two very important and intertwined events are happening in Texas right now.

First, the state is in the midst of an energy crunch brought on by a dysfunctional electricity market, drought, population growth and extreme summer temperatures. An energy crunch signifies that the available supply of power barely exceeds the projected need (or demand) for electricity. Texas’ insufficient power supply makes the whole electricity system vulnerable to extreme weather events. An especially hot day (with thousands of air conditioning units running at full blast) could push the state over the edge and force the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the institution charged with ensuring grid reliability, to issue rolling blackouts.

Second, Texas is still in the midst of a severe, multi-year drought, forcing state agencies to impose strict water restrictions throughout the state. The drought has already had a devastating impact on surface water and many communities are facing critical water shortages.

Although Texas has always had to deal with extreme weather events, we can anticipate even more intense weather as climate change advances. The new climate ‘normal’ makes extreme heat waves, like the historic 2011 Texas summer, 20 times more likely to occur. These extreme weather events heighten the urgency of the energy-water nexus.

As of July 31st, ten municipalities were identified as ‘emergency’ areas, meaning they could run out of water within 45 days or less. At the same time, regulators are concerned that water-intensive conventional electricity generators (i.e. coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities) may not have enough water to feed our energy needs.

The energy and water shortages go hand-in-hand, but that doesn’t mean ERCOT and the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), the state agency charged with keeping Texans’ faucets running, are talking to each other. Texas needs to move quickly to assess future energy and water ‘co-management’ plans (‘co-management’ is the key term here!).

Water’s energy needs

(Source: TCEQ)

TWDB’s water plan, Water for Texas 2012, recognizes that a significant supply of energy will be required to provide the state with enough water. Water treatment and wastewater management are extremely energy-intensive, consuming the amount of electricity used by around 100,000 people annually.  Here’s another way to think about it – drinking water systems, including waste water plants, can account for up to one-third of a city’s total energy bill. If the drought continues, Texas’ water plan estimates that annual economic losses from not meeting the state’s water needs could result in as much as $11.9 billion annually and $115.7 billion annually by 2060 – and over one million jobs lost.

Energy’s water needs

In 2009, EDF and the University of Texas published a study revealing that Texas’ power plants consumed roughly 157 billion gallons of water annually – enough to meet the needs of over three million people each year.  In 2010, fossil fuel power generation consumed roughly 4% of the state’s water supply and consumption is projected to increase to 7.4% by 2060.

As the population of Texas rises and the drought persists, meeting the energy and water needs of cities and power plants becomes harder and harder. This is an economic issue for the state that demands serious attention from its leaders in a more comprehensive way.

Solutions

What’s the solution? Well, it may be as simple as prioritizing water and energy efficient technologies.  Better coordination, and possibly integration, of energy and water planning could lessen some of the vulnerabilities we’re facing in Texas—vulnerabilities heightened by our reliance on water-intensive energy sources and our state’s largely independent electric grid.

EDF’s State of the Energy Crunch in Texas report identifies several water-free solutions to the energy supply problem. Customer, or demand-side, resources – such as demand response, energy efficiency and rooftop solar panels – can help Texas address both energy use and water consumption.

Demand response, which rewards those who reduce electricity during peak times, is a zero-water resource that addresses the energy crunch and the state’s fragile water supply. It enables customers to control their energy use and decide whether they want to reduce energy use during high, or peak, energy demand and expensive times (like 6:00 pm when everyone heads home and powers up their oven, TV, water heater, etc.).

Energy efficiency is another viable solution. By reducing the amount of energy homes, commercial buildings and industrial facilities consume, overall electricity and water use is reduced at the same time.  On top of that, energy efficiency makes our electricity more reliable, decreases our dependence on costly, and often foreign, fossil fuels and reduces the impact of harmful pollution from power plants.

In addition to implementing new technologies, ERCOT and TWDB must collaborate to co-manage Texas’ energy and water needs.

Texas electricity planners are already studying how prolonged drought might affect the state’s electric grid. Together with electricity planners from across the West, ERCOT worked with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop a report that looks at how water shortages might affect the electric system. Through its ongoing work with ERCOT and others, the DOE hopes to develop a tool that will help electricity planners understand how drought affects long-term electricity planning.

ERCOT’s work with the DOE is a great first step, but it’s a two-way street. TWDB and ERCOT’s forecasts should be developed in coordination to create plans that are inclusive of both the energy and water sectors. It’s imperative that decision-makers ensure communities and ecosystems are not deprived of adequate freshwater supplies as the drought and energy crunch persist.

Simply put, Texas has the potential to adopt technologies and policies that will significantly cut down on water use, reduce the need for fossil fuel power plants and help Texans save – and even earn – money. By lining up the incentives to enable novel energy and water savings, we can make sure Texas’ lights—and faucets—stay on through the next record-setting summer.

This is one of a group of posts that examines the energy-water nexus, Texas’ current approach to energy and water policy and what Texans can learn from other places to better manage its vital resources.

By Kate Zerrenner

As we’ve highlighted in previous posts, water and energy regulators often make decisions in silos, despite the inherent connection between these two sectors. Texas is no exception.

Two very important and intertwined events are happening in Texas right now.

First, the state is in the midst of an energy crunch brought on by a dysfunctional electricity market, drought, population growth and extreme summer temperatures. An energy crunch signifies that the available supply of power barely exceeds the projected need (or demand) for electricity. Texas’ insufficient power supply makes the whole electricity system vulnerable to extreme weather events. An especially hot day (with thousands of air conditioning units running at full blast) could push the state over the edge and force the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the institution charged with ensuring grid reliability, to issue rolling blackouts.

Second, Texas is still in the midst of a severe, multi-year drought, forcing state agencies to impose strict water restrictions throughout the state. The drought has already had a devastating impact on surface water and many communities are facing critical water shortages.

Although Texas has always had to deal with extreme weather events, we can anticipate even more intense weather as climate change advances. The new climate ‘normal’ makes extreme heat waves, like the historic 2011 Texas summer, 20 times more likely to occur. These extreme weather events heighten the urgency of the energy-water nexus.

As of July 31st, ten municipalities were identified as ‘emergency’ areas, meaning they could run out of water within 45 days or less. At the same time, regulators are concerned that water-intensive conventional electricity generators (i.e. coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities) may not have enough water to feed our energy needs.

The energy and water shortages go hand-in-hand, but that doesn’t mean ERCOT and the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), the state agency charged with keeping Texans’ faucets running, are talking to each other. Texas needs to move quickly to assess future energy and water ‘co-management’ plans (‘co-management’ is the key term here!).

Water’s energy needs

(Source: TCEQ)

TWDB’s water plan, Water for Texas 2012, recognizes that a significant supply of energy will be required to provide the state with enough water. Water treatment and wastewater management are extremely energy-intensive, consuming the amount of electricity used by around 100,000 people annually.  Here’s another way to think about it – drinking water systems, including waste water plants, can account for up to one-third of a city’s total energy bill. If the drought continues, Texas’ water plan estimates that annual economic losses from not meeting the state’s water needs could result in as much as $11.9 billion annually and $115.7 billion annually by 2060 – and over one million jobs lost.

Energy’s water needs

In 2009, EDF and the University of Texas published a study revealing that Texas’ power plants consumed roughly 157 billion gallons of water annually – enough to meet the needs of over three million people each year.  In 2010, fossil fuel power generation consumed roughly 4% of the state’s water supply and consumption is projected to increase to 7.4% by 2060.

As the population of Texas rises and the drought persists, meeting the energy and water needs of cities and power plants becomes harder and harder. This is an economic issue for the state that demands serious attention from its leaders in a more comprehensive way.

Solutions

What’s the solution? Well, it may be as simple as prioritizing water and energy efficient technologies.  Better coordination, and possibly integration, of energy and water planning could lessen some of the vulnerabilities we’re facing in Texas—vulnerabilities heightened by our reliance on water-intensive energy sources and our state’s largely independent electric grid.

EDF’s State of the Energy Crunch in Texas report identifies several water-free solutions to the energy supply problem. Customer, or demand-side, resources – such as demand response, energy efficiency and rooftop solar panels – can help Texas address both energy use and water consumption.

Demand response, which rewards those who reduce electricity during peak times, is a zero-water resource that addresses the energy crunch and the state’s fragile water supply. It enables customers to control their energy use and decide whether they want to reduce energy use during high, or peak, energy demand and expensive times (like 6:00 pm when everyone heads home and powers up their oven, TV, water heater, etc.).

Energy efficiency is another viable solution. By reducing the amount of energy homes, commercial buildings and industrial facilities consume, overall electricity and water use is reduced at the same time.  On top of that, energy efficiency makes our electricity more reliable, decreases our dependence on costly, and often foreign, fossil fuels and reduces the impact of harmful pollution from power plants.

In addition to implementing new technologies, ERCOT and TWDB must collaborate to co-manage Texas’ energy and water needs.

Texas electricity planners are already studying how prolonged drought might affect the state’s electric grid. Together with electricity planners from across the West, ERCOT worked with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop a report that looks at how water shortages might affect the electric system. Through its ongoing work with ERCOT and others, the DOE hopes to develop a tool that will help electricity planners understand how drought affects long-term electricity planning.

ERCOT’s work with the DOE is a great first step, but it’s a two-way street. TWDB and ERCOT’s forecasts should be developed in coordination to create plans that are inclusive of both the energy and water sectors. It’s imperative that decision-makers ensure communities and ecosystems are not deprived of adequate freshwater supplies as the drought and energy crunch persist.

Simply put, Texas has the potential to adopt technologies and policies that will significantly cut down on water use, reduce the need for fossil fuel power plants and help Texans save – and even earn – money. By lining up the incentives to enable novel energy and water savings, we can make sure Texas’ lights—and faucets—stay on through the next record-setting summer.

This is one of a group of posts that examines the energy-water nexus, Texas’ current approach to energy and water policy and what Texans can learn from other places to better manage its vital resources.

Two spots on a map highlight the bitter fight over how to fix Louisiana's coast
By John Snell, FOX 8 (New Orleans). Aug. 7, 2013.
"St. Mary Parish, La. – Dr. Robert Twilley, an LSU coastal scientist, grabs a handful of river sediment, the building blocks for one of the newest places on earth…" (read more)

James Gill: Coastal suit muddies waters
By James Gill, The Advocate (Baton Rouge). Aug. 8, 2013.
"The levee board that has filed suit against oil companies for destroying Louisiana’s wetlands has been accused of a blinkered view…" (read more)

BP's Robert Dudley on the Gulf Oil Spill's Legal Aftermath
By Paul M. Barrett, Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Aug. 8, 2013.
"After the April 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, BP (BP) said it wanted to clean up the mess, pay what it owed, and get on with business. Three years later, you’re at war with plaintiffs’ lawyers. What happened?…" (read more)

Lawsuit over destroyed wetlands to face first tests
By Jeff Adelson, The Advocate (Baton Rouge). Aug. 8, 2013.
"The massive suit against 97 oil and gas companies accused of destroying coastal wetlands could face its first real political tests over the coming week as lawmakers and other flood protection districts evaluate the case being brought by the New Orleans-area levee board…" (read more)

Fishermen want to see growth of oyster resource
By Theresa Schmidt, KPLC TV (Lake Charles, La.). Aug. 7, 2013.
"The Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission recently announced opening dates for the oyster season this fall…" (read more)

What Has Happened Down Here Is The Wind Have Changed
By Charles P. Pierce, The Politics Blog, Esquire. Aug. 7, 2013.
"Don't know about you, but I'm really going to miss Louisiana…" (read more)

Oil and Gas Have Laid Waste to Louisiana's Coast
By Sarah Hodgdon, Treehugger.com. Aug. 7, 2013.
"The Sierra Club's Delta Chapter has worked for more than 28 years to slow and restore the damage to Louisiana's coastal wetlands. Since the 1950s, the oil and gas industries have dredged thousands of miles of canals for drilling and pipelines — destroying the wetlands that are critical for wildlife habitat and for protecting the state from damaging storms…" (read more)

Levee authority stands up for taxpayers in coastal Louisiana: Letter
Letter to the Editor by Alfred R. Sunseri, The Times-Picayune (New Orleans). Aug. 7, 2013.
"Re: "Suit demands repairs to wetlands, " Page 1, July 24. Wow, it's only taken over 90 years for someone representing the taxpaying residents of Louisiana to ask the courts to decide if those responsible for slashing over 10,000 miles of pipeline canals through our wetlands will have to pay for their repairs…" (read more)

Video: Report says industry should do more to avoid pollution during hurricanes
By Amy Wold, The Advocate (Baton Rouge). Aug. 7, 2013.
"When a tropical storm or hurricane hits Louisiana, pollution in some form, including oil, chemicals and untreated wastewater and gas, is sure to follow, according to a report released Tuesday by the Gulf Monitoring Consortium…" (read more)

Local leaders shocked by Alexander's announcement
By Cole Avery, The News-Star (Monroe, La.). Aug. 6, 2013.
"News of Rep. Rodney Alexander’s decision to not seek re-election left local leaders shocked and disappointed — shocked because no one saw it coming and disappointed the region has lost a powerful voice in Washington…" (read more)

Louisiana black bear population grows to 500
By Janet McConnaughey, Associated Press. Aug. 6, 2013.
"NEW ORLEANS — New studies suggest the Louisiana black bear population has gradually grown to 500, but whether the subspecies that inspired teddy bears can survive without federal protection remains in question…" (read more)

By EDF Blogs

By: Matt Golden, Senior Energy Finance Consultant, Environmental Defense Fund

This week, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released a new report that will serve as a data analysis tool for the energy performance of commercial and residential buildings. By providing a standardized approach for the evaluation of energy data, the Building Energy Data Exchange Specification (BEDES) will help optimize energy efficiency efforts.

BEDES provides a common language for key data elements to help a range of stakeholders communicate more effectively. The use of established formats, terms and definitions will allow for smoother interaction between contractors, software vendors, finance companies, utilities, and Public Utility Commissions. As a result, information can be shared and aggregated without laborious scrubbing and translation, which will help more rapidly answer the key questions related to energy savings and financial performance that remain barriers to energy efficiency adoption at scale.

We are pleased that the Investor Confidence Project (ICP) was highlighted as one of five key projects aligned with BEDES goals, and prioritized for collaboration as the project moves forward.  The Executive Summary (page 4) of the report clearly expresses some of the key data issues and potential solutions that this ambitious project will attempt to solve.

ICP has defined a standard set of documentation that defines an “Investment Quality Energy Efficiency” project through its lifecycle, from baselining through commissioning and measurement and verification (M&V).  However, we have long believed that many of the key data elements would be significantly more useful if expressed as standardized XML versus the current range of formats. ICP applauds this important effort and looks forward to collaborating with fellow stakeholders and the DOE and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) team.

The beta version of BEDES and the BEDES Scoping Report are both available online.

Environmental Defense Fund applauds the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for shutting down a wastewater plant used by oil and gas companies to treat wastewater... Wed, 2013-08-07 Contact:  Lauren Whittenberg, 512-691-3437, lwhittenberg@edf.org

(Harrisburg, PA – August 7, 2013) Environmental Defense Fund applauds the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for shutting down a wastewater plant used by oil and gas companies to treat wastewater from hydraulic fracturing operations and to recycle it for reuse at well sites. Pennsylvania regulators revoked Aquatic Synthesis Unlimited’s permit this week for a facility it operated in Indiana County. DEP plans to use the company’s $1 million bond to clean up the facility’s nearly one million gallons of toxic wastewater and at least five tons of contaminated soil. The facility has operated at or near capacity since 2012, was responsible for several spills and received at least four violations from DEP over the last year. This situation highlights the concern that although recycling water used in oil and gas operations can be beneficial for conservation, proper management of waste streams is essential to ensure greater environmental harm is not caused.  

# # #

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook. See twitter.com/EDFEnergyEX and EnergyExchange.

 

By Rachel Schott, Environmental Defense Fund

In June, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a bipartisan 16-member council representing diverse ocean interests, released a new report, “Charting the Course: Securing the Future of America’s Oceans.” The report outlines important ocean reform and coastal restoration recommendations for Congress and the Obama Administration. Being an “ocean nation,” the health of the U.S. economy is closely tied to health of its oceans. For Gulf Coast residents, this specifically means the Gulf of Mexico. The report has implications for both the health the Gulf Coast environment and the economies that rely on it.

“Our oceans and coasts are vital to our nation’s economy and security, as well as to the health and quality of life of its citizens,” states the Joint Initiative in the report. No one understands this better than Louisiana and Gulf Coast residents. After the 2010 oil disaster, in 2012, Congress took an important step toward securing the future health and vitality of the region when it passed the RESTORE Act – legislation that dedicates fines from the Gulf oil disaster to the Gulf Coast states for restoration. However, project selection and final authorization of funds has yet to be determined.

The report makes recommendations that advocate for restoring the coast’s natural coastline, strengthening its ability to protect communities from storms and rebuilding natural habitats and ecosystems. These recommendations offer a valid perspective for allocating available RESTORE Act funding and BP oil spill penalties to coastal restoration projects.

In its report, the council – consisting of national, state, and local leaders from diverse government agencies, academic institutions and industries – provided a set of science-based policy recommendations that enhance the long-term security and economic priorities of the nation’s coast. Two actions that would directly affect the Mississippi River Delta and coastal Louisiana are as follows:

• “Enhance the resiliency of coastal communities and ocean ecosystems to dramatic changes underway in our oceans and on our coasts.”
• “Support state and regional ocean and coastal priorities.”

As hurricanes and super storms become more common, it will become vital that policymakers implement programs that increase coastal resiliency. National decision makers must understand the underlying issues and local community priorities to effectively select and implement coastal restoration projects.

As the report underlines, building stronger and more resilient coastlines benefits not just those living near the coast, but the entire nation that depends on healthy coasts and oceans. The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council has an unprecedented opportunity to allocate RESTORE Act funds to implementing coastal restoration projects and becoming an integral part of rebuilding the Mississippi River Delta and Gulf Coast and the economies that depend on a healthy Gulf Coast.

By Tim O'Connor

Some hope is on the horizon as more evidence shows the 12 biggest refineries in California are exploring and undertaking large energy efficiency improvements.

A recently released ARB report points out that these investments will save money, decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and reduce air pollution.  Of course, many of them come with a hefty price tag – even by oil industry standards – but they are also yielding outsized benefits.

In the report, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) identified 401 energy efficiency opportunities that are completed, ongoing, scheduled or under consideration at the state’s biggest polluters. Most of these investments have been undertaken since 2009 – the first year following the adoption of California’s AB 32 Scoping Plan, a blueprint for reducing emissions throughout the economy.

In total, these projects would reduce GHG emissions from these 12 facilities by 2.78MMT CO2e annually, about 9% of their statewide total for climate change pollution.  In addition, these improvements would create individual net savings of up to $25 million annually. What’s more, these savings estimates do not include the benefit these companies get from having to secure fewer allowances in the state’s landmark cap-and-trade market – worth another $50 million a year at a forecasted carbon price of $18 a ton.

As we wrote earlier, annual data released by CARB shows that many of these 12 refineries’ emissions have been decreasing every year from 2008-2011, and the 401 energy efficiency projects are likely part of the reason.  To support this, data on individual firms shows that almost all of the state’s facilities have either taken part in the efficiency improvement process or are in the stages of doing it soon.

Out of the 401 opportunities, nearly 80% of the emissions reductions have been completed or will be in the next few years. Another 7% are scheduled and 15% are under consideration. The majority of improvements are from equipment upgrades, adapting new technologies, and from changing processes such as reducing steam usage, improving boiler function, and changing equipment duty cycles.

Valero’s Benicia refinery, one of the 12, has identified 43 projects that are completed or currently underway, with a 7% annual GHG emission reduction. These improvements are mostly through new steam boilers or other new electric equipment. These upgrades also have a less than two year payback period, with an annual cost savings of $16 million.

Figure 1.

These findings confirm a 2010-2012 DOE Industrial Assessment Centers audit, which found that large industrial facilities had an average of 16% electricity cost savings available from energy efficiency upgrades, a 3% increase from the 2006 audit’s findings. This demonstrates that innovation and technology are constantly improving and savings opportunities continue to emerge.

Of course, refineries aren’t just giving themselves a chance save money from reduced energy or carbon credit purchases when they invest in efficiency. They’re helping reduce the poorest air quality and highest asthma rates — in communities located right next door to them.

As CARB’s report shows, improvements to cut GHGs at refineries have the double benefit of cutting the release rates of hazardous chemicals and pollutants that make people sick – since refining oil is a process that inherently causes harmful pollutants to be released.

Altogether, this new data proves AB 32 is working, not just for the health of the planet by fighting climate change, but for the public health of California.

By Kate Zerrenner

This commentary originally appeared on EDF's Energy Exchange blog.

We’ve discussed the potentially grave impacts of the Texas Energy Crunch in a number of our previous blog posts. Time and time again, we repeat that the cheapest, cleanest and most reliable energy resource is the energy we save through energy efficiency. But our energy efficiency programs in Texas are still modest compared to other states. Beyond politics, there is another key issue limiting our state’s energy savings: Texas does not treat energy efficiency as a ‘resource.’

Traditionally, energy efficiency is left ‘invisible’ to utilities and grid planners—so they lose count of its many benefits. Treating energy efficiency as a resource, instead, puts it on a level playing field with other energy resources, such as power plants. This allows utilities to realize the unique benefits energy efficiency has over other energy sources.

Energy efficiency can reduce harmful greenhouse gases, save people money and create jobs – and it is extremely competitive with other energy resources. When the energy saved through efficiency is weighed against new energy resources, efficiency upgrades to buildings and homes generally weigh in at just one-third of the cost of building a new fossil-fuel power plant. On top of that, energy efficiency upgrades can eliminate the need to install or replace other expensive electric grid equipment. This cost-savings is one of the many benefits generally overlooked by utilities and electric grid planners.

Part of what prevents electric grid planners from counting efficiency as a resource in Texas is the way that the energy market is structured. When Texas deregulated its energy market in 1999, the aim was to increase options for customers and lower prices. Efficiency programs were not included in the new market structure. Instead, they were left for transmission and distribution utilities (TDUs), the “wires” companies that deliver electricity from power plants to customers, to manage. With efficiency left out of the restructured energy market, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) and other state leaders tend to view efficiency programs as subsidies that exist outside of the market.

According to a recent report by the South-central Partnership for Energy Efficiency as a Resource (SPEER), Texas can give energy efficiency a more equal footing with conventional fossil fuel resources, such as power plants, by allowing it to bid into the state’s wholesale electricity market. The market is administered by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), which oversees the operations and planning for Texas’ electric grid. Moving energy efficiency to the domain of ERCOT would allow it to participate as a resource in ERCOT’s operation of the electric grid. This would open up more competition in the market and spur new investment to help lower energy prices.

(Source: Triple Pundit)

The notion of moving energy efficiency programs into the electricity market is an interesting idea. The Texas PUC is currently debating whether changes should be made to the state’s electricity market structure to overcome Texas’ ongoing energy crunch, or what electricity planners refer to as “resource adequacy” issue (i.e. not having enough electric supply to meet the greatest demand for energy and definitively avoid a blackout). One option is to move away from an energy-only market (our current structure) by adding a capacity market. In an energy-only market, power plants are paid only for the energy they actually produce. Adding a capacity market would also pay power plants for the maximum amount of energy they could produce, if called upon to do so.

Capacity markets put an obvious price on the cost of adding new generation resources. Because of this feature, it’s usually easier to understand the benefits of demand-side resources in a capacity market. A demand-side resource, also known as a customer-side resource, is simply a source of electric power owned and operated by an electric customer. The most common example of a demand-side resource is rooftop solar panels. Energy saved through efficiency upgrades, such as better insulation and more efficient heating and air conditioning systems, and through demand response (which rewards those who reduce electricity during peak times) both count as demand-side resources. While a capacity market makes it easier to include these resources, it can also be expensive to implement. A capacity market pays energy generators for merely existing, and these costs could potentially be passed on to customers. It’s no surprise that a switch to this market structure has seen resistance in Texas.

A third alternative is a capabilities market, which emphasizes reliability and flexibility – not just the ability to produce energy. This type of market would be able to tap into resources that are much more flexible in responding to rapid changes in energy demand. The Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP) has developed a framework that examines what a capabilities market would look like. RAP suggests that Texas will need a more flexible market structure that can incorporate demand-side resources to meet its electricity needs as the Texas Energy Crunch increases.

Working energy efficiency into the electricity market is a complicated issue, but it’s also an important one. The electric infrastructure in this country is in dire need of an upgrade. Texas, in particular, is grappling with serious resource adequacy issues in addition to a multi-year drought and extreme weather – both of which are expected to get worse due to climate change. The PUC and ERCOT have made it clear that they want to act. Now is the time to be thoughtful and bold—to prepare the state for what’s coming. Whatever market structure or changes Texas leaders decide to adopt, energy efficiency should have a seat at the table as an equal.

By Kate Zerrenner

We’ve discussed the potentially grave impacts of the Texas Energy Crunch in a number of our previous blog posts. Time and time again, we repeat that the cheapest, cleanest and most reliable energy resource is the energy we save through energy efficiency. But our energy efficiency programs in Texas are still modest compared to other states. Beyond politics, there is another key issue limiting our state’s energy savings: Texas does not treat energy efficiency as a ‘resource.’

Traditionally, energy efficiency is left ‘invisible’ to utilities and grid planners—so they lose count of its many benefits. Treating energy efficiency as a resource, instead, puts it on a level playing field with other energy resources, such as power plants. This allows utilities to realize the unique benefits energy efficiency has over other energy sources.

Energy efficiency can reduce harmful greenhouse gases, save people money and create jobs – and it is extremely competitive with other energy resources. When the energy saved through efficiency is weighed against new energy resources, efficiency upgrades to buildings and homes generally weigh in at just one-third of the cost of building a new fossil-fuel power plant. On top of that, energy efficiency upgrades can eliminate the need to install or replace other expensive electric grid equipment. This cost-savings is one of the many benefits generally overlooked by utilities and electric grid planners.

Part of what prevents electric grid planners from counting efficiency as a resource in Texas is the way that the energy market is structured. When Texas deregulated its energy market in 1999, the aim was to increase options for customers and lower prices. Efficiency programs were not included in the new market structure. Instead, they were left for transmission and distribution utilities (TDUs), the “wires” companies that deliver electricity from power plants to customers, to manage. With efficiency left out of the restructured energy market, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) and other state leaders tend to view efficiency programs as subsidies that exist outside of the market.

According to a recent report by the South-central Partnership for Energy Efficiency as a Resource (SPEER), Texas can give energy efficiency a more equal footing with conventional fossil fuel resources, such as power plants, by allowing it to bid into the state’s wholesale electricity market. The market is administered by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), which oversees the operations and planning for Texas’ electric grid. Moving energy efficiency to the domain of ERCOT would allow it to participate as a resource in ERCOT’s operation of the electric grid. This would open up more competition in the market and spur new investment to help lower energy prices.

Source: Triple Pundit

The notion of moving energy efficiency programs into the electricity market is an interesting idea. The Texas PUC is currently debating whether changes should be made to the state’s electricity market structure to overcome Texas’ ongoing energy crunch, or what electricity planners refer to as “resource adequacy” issue (i.e. not having enough electric supply to meet the greatest demand for energy and definitively avoid a blackout). One option is to move away from an energy-only market (our current structure) by adding a capacity market. In an energy-only market, power plants are paid only for the energy they actually produce. Adding a capacity market would also pay power plants for the maximum amount of energy they could produce, if called upon to do so.

Capacity markets put an obvious price on the cost of adding new generation resources. Because of this feature, it’s usually easier to understand the benefits of demand-side resources in a capacity market. A demand-side resource, also known as a customer-side resource, is simply a source of electric power owned and operated by an electric customer. The most common example of a demand-side resource is rooftop solar panels. Energy saved through efficiency upgrades, such as better insulation and more efficient heating and air conditioning systems, and through demand response (which rewards those who reduce electricity during peak times) both count as demand-side resources. While a capacity market makes it easier to include these resources, it can also be expensive to implement. A capacity market pays energy generators for merely existing, and these costs could potentially be passed on to customers. It’s no surprise that a switch to this market structure has seen resistance in Texas.

A third alternative is a capabilities market, which emphasizes reliability and flexibility – not just the ability to produce energy. This type of market would be able to tap into resources that are much more flexible in responding to rapid changes in energy demand. The Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP) has developed a framework that examines what a capabilities market would look like. RAP suggests that Texas will need a more flexible market structure that can incorporate demand-side resources to meet its electricity needs as the Texas Energy Crunch increases.

Working energy efficiency into the electricity market is a complicated issue, but it’s also an important one. The electric infrastructure in this country is in dire need of an upgrade. Texas, in particular, is grappling with serious resource adequacy issues in addition to a multi-year drought and extreme weather – both of which are expected to get worse due to climate change. The PUC and ERCOT have made it clear that they want to act. Now is the time to be thoughtful and bold—to prepare the state for what’s coming. Whatever market structure or changes Texas leaders decide to adopt, energy efficiency should have a seat at the table as an equal.

Climate change softens up already-vulnerable Louisiana
By Dan Vergano. USA Today. August 7, 2013.
"GRAND ISLE, La. — Pelicans and pickups roam the beach, where the waves roll in and return, lapping over the open water of the Gulf of Mexico.  The water covers land that was once beach, and it has devoured land that was once marsh tucked behind this 6-square-mile barrier island, a speed bump for hurricanes headed north from the Gulf…" (Read more).

Storm protection project begins
By Jacob Batte. Houma Courier (Houma, La.). August 6, 2013.
"The first loads of sand have arrived for the Caminada Headland beach restoration that will help fortify parts of Lafourche against storm surge, parish officials said Monday.  The long-awaited project aims to restore six miles of beach and dunes on Fourchon Beach from La. 3090 east to Elmer’s Island…" (Read more).

Judge orders BP to explain its refusal to pay $130 million cost of operating oil spill settlement claims center
By Mark Schleifstein. The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, La.). August 6, 2013.
"A U.S. magistrate judge has ordered BP to appear in federal court on Wednesday to explain why the company should not be directed to pay a $130 million bill it was sent to underwrite the cost of operating the center that is processing billions of dollars in economic claims covered by a settlement between BP and private claimants last year…" (Read more).

Hurricane Isaac oil and chemical releases examined by environmental groups
By Benjamin Alexander-Bloch. The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, La.).  August 6, 2013.
"In the wake of Hurricane Isaac last August, at least 341,000 gallons of oil, chemicals and untreated waste-water were released by area oil, coal, gas and petrochemical facilities, according to a report released Tuesday.  The report by the Gulf Monitoring Consortium, which examined National Response Center…" (Read more).

Letter: Lawsuit will hurt La. coast
By Gordon Wogan, President of LA Landowner's Association. The Advocate (Baton Rouge, La.). August 6, 2013.
"The Louisiana Landowners Association represents hundreds of individuals and companies who collectively own and manage over 2 million acres of land across much of southern Louisiana and its coastal marshes. Numerous restoration projects implemented by our members can be found throughout these wetlands…" (Read more).

Coast requires federal funding
Opinion by Richard Torregano. The Daily Comet (Lafourche Parish, La.). August 6, 2013
"When I ran for Congress in 2012, one of the key issues I addressed was how to pay for restoration of Louisiana's coast, which has a projected cost of $50 billion over the next few decades. Even after our share of the BP fines and increases in offshore oil revenue, we will still need federal money…" (Read more).

DuBos: Lawyers, not politicians, can hold BP accountable
By Clancy DuBos. WWLTV (New Orleans, La.). August 6, 2013.
"It didn’t take long for politics to overshadow the historic lawsuit filed by the local levee authority against 97 energy companies. The flood authority says the energy industry, which has carved up Louisiana’s coast over the past 80 years, should help pay to restore the state’s vanishing wetlands…" (Read more).

Flood Authority, suit against oil companies safe from political meddling — for now
By Bob Marshall. The Lens (New Orleans, La.). August 6, 2013.
"Seven years ago Louisiana gained national praise by overhauling its dysfunctional levee board system. Some 81 percent of voters said “yes” to a constitutional amendment allowing consolidation of local boards under regional authorities, and the Legislature passed a law setting professional standards for board members…" (Read more).

Protecting barrier islands in La. against hurricanes
By Dan Vergano. USA Today. August 6, 2013.
"Restoration Director for the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana Hilary Collis explains a project to build up defenses for a barrier island protecting New Orleans and other parts of Louisiana…" (Watch video).

When Sandy Is the Norm: Are We Prepared for Hurricanes of the Future?
By Terrell Johnson. The Weather Channel. August 6, 2013.
"Just before the turn of the last century, Diamond City was a thriving coastal town of some 500 souls along the southern edge of North Carolina's Outer Banks.  Then came the Great Hurricane of 1899. Sometimes called that era's "storm of the century," it washed away nearly everything that made life possible on the island…" (Read more).

BP's Oil Spill Settlement Is Engulfed in Fraud
By Paul Barrett. Bloomberg BusinessWeek. August 6, 2013.
"Look under rocks, and you’re likely to find worms. Dig into a multibillion-dollar legal settlement, and you’ll probably discover financial shenanigans. That’s proving the case with the BP-claims mess in the Gulf of Mexico.  Quick review: As I reported in a recent Bloomberg Businessweek…" (Read more).

By: Valerie Miller & Kendra Karr Part II of a blog series reporting on the February 2013 Research Expedition in Cuba organized by EDF Oceans’ Cuba, Science, and Shark teams and funded by the Waitt Foundation. A team of scientists from Cuba, Mexico and the U.S. along with EDF staff set sail on an exploratory [...]

New report offers strategies business, government, nonprofits and the financial community can use to boost life cycle energy efficiency EDF Business releases supply chain energy efficiency report Tue, 2013-08-06 Contact:  Monica Michaan, mmichaan@edf.org, 202-572-3261

 

MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL (August 7, 2013) – Companies that want to reduce their carbon footprint need to pay attention to the energy they use. But at least as important – and in some cases even more so – is paying attention to the energy used by links in their supply chain.

The University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment’s NorthStar Initiative for Sustainable Enterprise, along with the Environmental Defense Fund, provide valuable suggestions on why and how to do so in a new report, Supply Chain Energy Efficiency: Engaging Small & Medium Entities in Global Production Systems.

Based on a two-day workshop tapping the brains of 31 representatives of energy service companies, financers, retailers, nongovernmental organi­zations, government and academia from around the world, the report provides an intriguing look into thinking about industrial energy efficiency within the system of a supply chain, and highlights opportunities for corresponding cost-, reputation- and energy-saving improvements.

“The industrial sector consumes nearly one-third of all global primary energy and the opportunities for improving energy efficiency in the industrial sector are vast,” says symposium organizer and researcher Jennifer Schmitt.

To realize these opportunities we must manage energy across organizations, industry sectors, supply chains and regions, which will require significant new and increasingly more transparent data, common metrics and analytics. Public and private collaboration will be crucial to reduce the transaction costs of implementing supply chain energy efficiency, particularly with regard to credit enhancement, technology provider accreditation and governmental policies.

The report highlights four recommendations coming out of the symposium that span across the many actors involved in saving a kilowatt hour:

1. Engage leading companies to identify high-quality suppliers for pilot supply chain energy efficiency improvements.

2. Create one or more sector-based collaborations for improving supply chain energy efficiency by assembling groups of peer manufacturers within a supply chain and using benchmarking, process capability analysis and best practice sharing to identify and improve energy efficiency and industry competitiveness.

3. Increase transparency and standardization of energy use, audits and supply chain information.

4. Create finance and credit risk approaches and models for portfolio-level energy efficiency and energy management projects.

“These recommendations, coming out of our discussions at the symposium, provide an unprecedented ability to characterize and benchmark sector-level and facility-level energy savings opportunities, share knowledge in ways that allow for the flexible application of technological and organizational information in a supply chain environment, and coordinate resources across regions and across public and private actors,” Schmitt says. “Approaching energy efficiency through the supply chain holds great potential for both carbon and financial savings.”

View and download a copy of the report.

###

Contact:
Jennifer Schmitt, NorthStar Initiative for Sustainable Enterprise,jenniferschmitt@umn.edu, 612-626-3637
Brooke Dillon, University News Service, bdillon@umn.edu, 612-624-2801

About The University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment
The University of Minnesota’s Institute on the Environment seeks lasting solutions to Earth's biggest challenges through research, partnerships and leadership development. For more information, visit environment.umn.edu.

About The NorthStar Initiative for Sustainable Enterprise
The NorthStar Initiative for Sustainable Enterprise, a program of the Institute on the Environment at the University of Minnesota, works with private sector partners to identify and overcome systemic obstacles to achieving a truly sustainable economy. For more information, visit environment.umn.edu/northstar.

About Environmental Defense Fund
Environmental Defense Fund, a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. Connect with us on Twitter and the EDF Business Blog.

Andrew M. Hutson

By Andrew Hutson

How China can harness the power of supply chains to save costs, energy and ultimately the environment

Gearing up for the start of a new school year begins with shopping for new school supplies. Your daughter has asked for the latest princess backpack and a full set of colored pencils. While she has insisted that you buy the set of 36 and not 12, she has not specified any carbon footprint limit. And neither have you.

Turns out, your purchases hold great promise for reducing emissions. According to the International Energy Agency, the global industrial sector emits approximately one-third of energy related CO2 emissions and consumes the same amount of total primary energy supply.

Luckily, a perfect storm of consumer awareness, corporate responsibility and government incentives has ushered big US players like Walmart into the spotlight, who can use their market clout to move their suppliers away from wasteful practices. The good news is that from a technical standpoint, we know how to help companies like Walmart reduce their footprint at in a way that actually saves a lot of money.

But despite making economic sense, the average company implements less than two thirds of energy efficiency projects. We can attribute a lot of this disparity to the complexity of the marketplace in China, where most consumer goods on the shelves of US retailers are manufactured. Among these small and medium sized producers, the scale is vast. Coordination is difficult. The true numbers are obscured. The promise of financial return is hazy. There is a lot of room for improvement.

In October of last year Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) partnered with the University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment’s NorthStar Initiative for Sustainable Enterprise (NiSE) to convene 31 participants from energy service companies, finance, retail, NGOs, government and academia to brainstorm real solutions to this challenge.  This week, we’re launching The Supply Chain Coordination and Energy Efficiency Symposium report to summarize the group’s findings and outline a roadmap to close the gap between the energy efficiency opportunities that are identified and those that are implemented in the supply chain.

Once again, EDF’s commitment to “finding the ways that work” has paid off in spades. This group of unlikely partners has crafted ideas that will help guide our work moving forward. Our ideas included staging pilot programs at leading companies, engaging peer manufacturers to collaborate and compete for success, and advocating for increased industry transparency.  Finally, and most importantly, we emphasized the need to find quick and easy ways to prove to investors what we already know—that investing in energy efficiency pays back, and pays back well.

At the heart of this report lies the goodwill of unlikely partners working together to catalyze solutions. As we know, the trick is ensuring that these solutions are not only imagined, but that emission reductions are realized both in the US and in China, both among industry giants and small businesses. A purchase as simple as a backpack and colored pencils could be a powerful tool in securing a safe future for your daughter. This report is a step toward that future.

Subscribe to receive our blog updates by email, like our page on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.