Aggregator

By EDF Staff

by Peter Sopher, Policy Analyst, Clean Energy

Apple and Google have changed our lives forever, both because of their technological innovations and sheer size as global corporations. Now, they’re aiming to reshape the energy landscape.

This month, Apple announced plans to spend nearly $2 billion on European data centers set to run entirely on renewable energy and invested $848 million to secure power from 130MW of First Solar’s California Flats Solar Project under a 25-year power purchase agreement. Google also agreed to replace 370 wind turbines installed in the 1980s with 24 new, more efficient and bird-friendly turbines at the Altamont Pass in the San Francisco Bay Area. Moreover, there has been recent speculation Apple may be working on an electric vehicle to challenge Tesla’s dominance in that market.

These developments are impressive on their own, but they are also part of a new trend among major corporations – whose primary focus is not energy generation – proactively pursuing clean energy projects.  So, why are they doing this?

For corporations whose businesses do not rely on fossil fuels, aligning themselves with clean power is proving a prudent move both financially and for public relations.

Clean power portfolios

Of companies whose primary operations do not focus on power generation, Google is one of the most proactive in the world in terms of generating, using, and financing clean power. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s (BNEF) database, its activities include:

• Ownership of three solar plants that amount to 412.3MW of net capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 100,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Usage of electricity from wind farms that amount to 1,603MW of capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 713,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Financing of nearly $2.9 billion in clean power projects;
• Acquisition of Nest Labs, Inc., which sells smart thermostats, primarily, and also smoke detectors;
• And, a public goal to operate on 100 percent renewable energy (Google currently powers about 35 percent of its operations with renewable energy).

Also proactive, Apple’s activity regarding clean energy includes:

• Ownership of four solar plants that amount to 77.5MW of net capacity;
• Powering all of its data centers with renewables;
• Installation of a 10MW fuel cell system – which uses a chemical reaction, rather than combustion, to produce electricity on-site – at a North Carolina-based data center;
• The launch of HomeKit, an app enabling homeowners to control appliances such as thermostats, security systems, lights, and others on Apple devices (iPhone, iPad, etc.) remotely;
• And, plans for a completely energy self-sufficient headquarters by 2016.

Outside of tech, Wal-Mart and other non-power companies are proactively pursuing clean energy. Wal-Mart owns and/or uses electricity from solar and wind plants that amount to upwards of 380MW of capacity. By 2020, the company aims to be powered 100 percent by renewable sources.

Home Energy Management Systems (HEMS)

In June 2014, Apple launched HomeKit, an app that makes people’s lives easier by enabling them to control numerous smart devices without having to manage a growing number of different apps from individual manufacturers. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF),

“An example of HomeKit’s capabilities Apple provided when describing its integration with Siri – Apple’s virtual assistant – is for ‘setting a profile for simultaneously switching off the lights, locking the doors, and turning down the thermostat, then activating this profile at bedtime by telling Siri ‘good night’.”

BNEF further posits that Apple’s launch of HomeKit “kicks off a battle for the ‘connected home’ ecosystem,” with Google as a strong competitor.

In January 2014, Google acquired Nest for $3.2 billion, the second largest deal at the time for an energy smart technology company. Through connecting to the cloud to access energy usage and weather data, Nest predicts,

“Usage patterns and behavior of its customers [will enable] deeper savings even for customers who do not program the thermostat manually. It can also interact with utility time-of-use pricing where available and integrate with local utility demand response and peak rebate programs to help manage demand.”

Beyond Apple, Google, and utilities, home automation technology has existed for decades, and companies such as iControl Networks, Control4, Vivint, and many others provide a variety of products and services. Apple’s and Google’s entry into the connected home market, however, dramatically stiffens competition and signals accelerated growth in this space.

What’s the significance?

The economics of using, investing in, and generating clean energy are sound.  Apple and Google are first and third in the world, respectively, in terms of market capitalization. These are corporate giants dominating a capitalist system that prioritizes the bottom line. These companies see financial opportunities in the budding connected home market, and they perceive clean power purchases as financially savvy.  If they didn’t, they wouldn’t do it.

More specifically, according to BNEF, the motivation behind Apple’s recent $848 million solar purchase “is not just corporate sustainability, but financial. With current incentives available to solar, the levelised cost of electricity for a plant in California could be in the range of low $70s/MWh, perhaps even lower… This cost likely undercuts the retail electricity price currently paid by Apple in the Bay Area.”

Furthermore, the positive public relations benefits of positioning a company as clean and environmentally friendly cannot be understated. This point was underscored this past fall when Google and Facebook joined Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, and Yelp as tech giants leaving the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a front group and model bill factory for many corporate interests including oil, gas, and coal. A large reason Google left ALEC, according to Chairman Eric Schmidt, was the following:

“The facts of climate change are not in question anymore. Everyone understands climate change is occurring, and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and our grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people — they’re just, they’re just literally lying.”

Exiting ALEC has not been limited to tech juggernauts. Corporations with American brands, such as Wal-Mart, General Motors, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and McDonalds have also left.

For a long time powerful people have depended on fossil fuels for making their fortunes, but affordable alternatives are changing that dynamic. For the many successful corporations whose fortunes are not tied to fossil fuels, clean energy’s increasingly favorable economics and socially responsible brand are proving to be attractive.

Google photo source: Flickr/menéame

By Maggie Monast

Precision agriculture is on its way to becoming mainstream. First, farmers need tools and technologies that make this kind of smart farming dramatically easier.

Optical sensors are one of the most promising technologies available now. This technology is very exciting because it helps farmers save money on fertilizer – and improve crop yields.

Optical sensors are devices attached to a farmer’s fertilizer applicator. As the farmer travels across the field applying fertilizer, the technology reads how green or healthy the crop is, and it applies the right amount of fertilizer in accordance with each plant’s needs.

For example, a very green corn plant would get only a little fertilizer, while a plant tinged with yellow would get more fertilizer to help it catch up with its neighbors. That's precision agriculture at its best.

Despite the benefits, farmer adoption of data-centric technology is low. One barrier appears to be cost – about $20,000 to outfit one sprayer or spreader. Farmers may also be reluctant to invest the time to learn a new technology.

Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the world, and Murphy-Brown, its hog production subsidiary, understand the importance of improving fertilizer use – and the challenges farmers face in increasing fertilizer efficiency. One reason: Murphy-Brown has 15,000 acres of its own cropland in eastern North Carolina.

Murphy-Brown purchased an optical sensor called GreenSeeker for its farms in 2012, and the equipment paid for itself in just one year. The results convinced the company to offer the technology to local grain farmers so they could test it for themselves – and help spread the word about spreading fertilizer efficiently.

In collaboration with EDF, Murphy-Brown developed an innovative plan to buy five GreenSeekers and lend them to local farmers who provide grain for the company's hog operations. Murphy-Brown also hired an agronomist to help farmers master the new technology.

The plan was a hit, and five farmers quickly signed up. The equipment is being installed now to prepare for fertilizer application to the winter wheat crop. Later this year, farmers will use their GreenSeekers on corn and other crops.

Farmers pay only $1,000 for installation, and they can use the borrowed equipment free of charge for one year. After that, they can purchase the technology from Murphy-Brown – or give it back to the company. The decision is up to the farmer.

Here's another cool thing about the program. Murphy-Brown will offer the same deal to five other farmers next year – and five new farmers every year until 2020. If a farmer likes the technology and buys it from Murphy-Brown, that's great. The company will buy more optical sensors to loan out.

Murphy-Brown will collect data on results using the technology and share it with participating farmers. EDF will also work with an independent crop consultant to test the technology and make sure it is calibrated properly.

I believe Murphy-Brown's plan will help farmers spread the word about the benefits of smart farming technologies like optical sensors. The company’s upfront investment in the equipment will pay off for local farmers and the environment for many years down the road.

By Maggie Monast

Precision agriculture is on its way to becoming mainstream. First, farmers need tools and technologies that make this kind of smart farming dramatically easier.

Optical sensors are one of the most promising technologies available now. This technology is very exciting because it helps farmers save money on fertilizer – and improve crop yields.

Optical sensors are devices attached to a farmer’s fertilizer applicator. As the farmer travels across the field applying fertilizer, the technology reads how green or healthy the crop is, and it applies the right amount of fertilizer in accordance with each plant’s needs.

For example, a very green corn plant would get only a little fertilizer, while a plant tinged with yellow would get more fertilizer to help it catch up with its neighbors. That's precision agriculture at its best.

Despite the benefits, farmer adoption of data-centric technology is low. One barrier appears to be cost – about $20,000 to outfit one sprayer or spreader. Farmers may also be reluctant to invest the time to learn a new technology.

Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the world, and Murphy-Brown, its hog production subsidiary, understand the importance of improving fertilizer use – and the challenges farmers face in increasing fertilizer efficiency. One reason: Murphy-Brown has 15,000 acres of its own cropland in eastern North Carolina.

Murphy-Brown purchased an optical sensor called GreenSeeker for its farms in 2012, and the equipment paid for itself in just one year. The results convinced the company to offer the technology to local grain farmers so they could test it for themselves – and help spread the word about spreading fertilizer efficiently.

In collaboration with EDF, Murphy-Brown developed an innovative plan to buy five GreenSeekers and lend them to local farmers who provide grain for the company's hog operations. Murphy-Brown also hired an agronomist to help farmers master the new technology.

The plan was a hit, and five farmers quickly signed up. The equipment is being installed now to prepare for fertilizer application to the winter wheat crop. Later this year, farmers will use their GreenSeekers on corn and other crops.

Farmers pay only $1,000 for installation, and they can use the borrowed equipment free of charge for one year. After that, they can purchase the technology from Murphy-Brown – or give it back to the company. The decision is up to the farmer.

Here's another cool thing about the program. Murphy-Brown will offer the same deal to five other farmers next year – and five new farmers every year until 2020. If a farmer likes the technology and buys it from Murphy-Brown, that's great. The company will buy more optical sensors to loan out.

Murphy-Brown will collect data on results using the technology and share it with participating farmers. EDF will also work with an independent crop consultant to test the technology and make sure it is calibrated properly.

I believe Murphy-Brown's plan will help farmers spread the word about the benefits of smart farming technologies like optical sensors. The company’s upfront investment in the equipment will pay off for local farmers and the environment for many years down the road.

Editor's note: China unveiled its official climate plan in June 2015. It confirmed that the country expects emissions to peak by 2030 and possibly sooner, and that non-fossil sources will make up 20 percent of China's energy mix that year. It also sets targets for carbon intensity and forest stock.

Over the past 23 years, I've seen the most populous country on Earth transform itself from a largely traditional, rural society with cities full of bicyclists to a modern nation of megacities and cars. I've seen air pollution and environmental degradation soar.

But I've also found a growing resolve among Chinese leaders to tackle these challenges.

A new, incentives-based environmental protection law just went into effect, and China is preparing to roll out the world's largest carbon market. This is a country with a can-do attitude, a society I believe is headed in the right direction.

On Jan. 1, 2015, China's first amendment to its environmental protection law in 25 years took effect. It's transformational in scope.

The law now has provisions for penalties and for public interest litigation against polluters, and it requires a nation-wide implementation of an environmental permit system, which is the basic legal instrument for control.

It’s a project we worked on for more than 10 years. It took a lot of effort and a lot of engagement with everyone from the Ministry of Environmental Protection and all the way to the top.

I even had the opportunity to sit down, face to face, with former Premier Wen Jiabao two years ago and recommend to him that the penalty provisions be changed. I made the same recommendation to Premier Li Keqiang in early 2014.

By the end of April that year, the law was changed.

We had looked at the existing law, thought about it from the standpoint of the real incentives to enterprises, and really tried to bring a modern theory of environmental enforcement to China.

Before the reform, the highest fines for violating the law were capped at $160,000 total, which was no serious deterrent for large companies, in my view. On January, 2015, penalties became cumulative, which means they run from the day of violation to the date of compliance.

Progress continued in August of this year, when China’s Air Pollution Prevention and Control law was amended for the first time in 15 years to also impose a daily penalty. Previously, the cap for air pollution fines had been $80,000. The amended air law will become effective on January 1, 2016.

For the first time in China, it's now more expensive to continue to emit beyond legal limits than to control emissions.

Our involvement with China's carbon market goes back to the first trip I took to Beijing in 1991 to discuss cap-and-trade for sulfur dioxide, and the work the United States was doing at the time to address acid rain.

We opened our first office in the city soon after - and as our work in China deepened, we found a way to partner with Chinese colleagues to do some local experiments to test out various types of emission trading strategies.

I was invited to take the results of those tests and personally brief China’s then-environment administrator, Xie Zhenhua. I thought we’d meet for 15 minutes, but it turned into an hour-long session.

Mr. Xie really got the idea; he was on fire about it. Several years later, after he took office as China's climate minister, carbon emissions trading pilots were launched in China.

One thing I’ve learned about China is that business there is intensely personal, based on relationships that are built up over time establishing mutual interests.

We conducted the first, voluntary carbon-dioxide trades in China with a multinational looking to offset all its corporate emissions, followed by a trade with a domestic Chinese company. Each time a transaction was completed, we were able to talk with Minister Xie and tell him what we had learned.

Eventually, China got to the point where it wanted to develop its own mandatory trading program. Today, Environmental Defense Fund is collaborating with China's National Development and Reform Commission to conduct training for all seven carbon market pilots operating in the country.

The next step will be China's launch of a national market in 2016. This market will be critical for China to meet its goal to have emissions peak by 2030 - a goal we believe requires the country to, at a minimum, cap carbon dioxide emissions at 2015 levels by 2020 for sources responsible for at least half of such emissions.

No doubt, China will have to make some tough decisions to bend the curve on carbon.

Today, you see many of the same forces at stake in China as you do in the United States. People are worried about jobs, competitiveness and the cost of pollution controls; and some question whether the problem is real.

But the Chinese are bullish on their ability to tackle big challenges, given what's been accomplished in modern China. With this perspective, they also think that environmental problems can be solved.

The market will be their tool to do so, and the will is now there.

By Peter Sopher

Apple and Google have changed our lives forever, both because of their technological innovations and sheer size as global corporations. Now, they’re aiming to reshape the energy landscape.

This month, Apple announced plans to spend nearly $2 billion on European data centers set to run entirely on renewable energy, and invested $848 million to secure power from 130MW of First Solar’s California Flats Solar Project under a 25-year power purchase agreement. Google also agreed to replace 370 wind turbines installed in the 1980s with 24 new, more efficient and bird-friendly turbines at the Altamont Pass in the San Francisco Bay Area. Moreover, there has been recent speculation Apple may be working on an electric vehicle to challenge Tesla’s dominance in that market.

These developments are impressive on their own, but they are also part of a new trend among major corporations – whose primary focus is not energy generation – proactively pursuing clean energy projects. So, why are they doing this?

For corporations whose businesses do not rely on fossil fuels, aligning themselves with clean power is proving a prudent move both financially and for public relations.

Clean power portfolios

Of companies whose primary operations do not focus on power generation, Google is one of the most proactive in the world in terms of generating, using, and financing clean power. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s (BNEF) database, its activities include:

• Ownership of three solar plants that amount to 412.3MW of net capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 100,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Usage of electricity from wind farms that amount to 1,603MW of capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 713,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Financing of nearly $2.9 billion in clean power projects;
• Acquisition of Nest Labs, Inc., which sells smart thermostats, primarily, and also smoke detectors;
• And, a public goal to operate on 100 percent renewable energy (Google currently powers about 35 percent of its operations with renewable energy).

Also proactive, Apple’s activity regarding clean energy includes:

• Ownership of four solar plants that amount to 77.5MW of net capacity;
• Powering all of its data centers with renewables;
• Installation of a 10MW fuel cell system – which uses a chemical reaction, rather than combustion, to produce electricity on-site – at a North Carolina-based data center;
• The launch of HomeKit, an app enabling homeowners to control appliances such as thermostats, security systems, lights, and others on Apple devices (iPhone, iPad, etc.) remotely;
• And, plans for a completely energy self-sufficient headquarters by 2016.

Outside of tech, Wal-Mart and other non-power companies are proactively pursuing clean energy. Wal-Mart owns and/or uses electricity from solar and wind plants that amount to upwards of 380MW of capacity. By 2020, the company aims to be powered 100 percent by renewable sources.

Home Energy Management Systems (HEMS)

In June 2014, Apple launched HomeKit, an app that makes people’s lives easier by enabling them to control numerous smart devices without having to manage a growing number of different apps from individual manufacturers. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF),

“An example of HomeKit’s capabilities Apple provided when describing its integration with Siri – Apple’s virtual assistant – is for ‘setting a profile for simultaneously switching off the lights, locking the doors, and turning down the thermostat, then activating this profile at bedtime by telling Siri ‘good night’.”

BNEF further posits that Apple’s launch of HomeKit “kicks off a battle for the ‘connected home’ ecosystem,” with Google as a strong competitor.

In January 2014, Google acquired Nest for $3.2 billion, the second largest deal at the time for an energy smart technology company. Through connecting to the cloud to access energy usage and weather data, Nest predicts,

“Usage patterns and behavior of its customers [will enable] deeper savings even for customers who do not program the thermostat manually. It can also interact with utility time-of-use pricing where available and integrate with local utility demand response and peak rebate programs to help manage demand.”

Beyond Apple, Google, and utilities, home automation technology has existed for decades, and companies such as iControl Networks, Control4, Vivint, and many others provide a variety of products and services. Apple’s and Google’s entry into the connected home market, however, dramatically stiffens competition and signals accelerated growth in this space.

What’s the significance?

The economics of using, investing in, and generating clean energy are sound.  Apple and Google are first and third in the world, respectively, in terms of market capitalization. These are corporate giants dominating a capitalist system that prioritizes the bottom line. These companies see financial opportunities in the budding connected home market, and they perceive clean power purchases as financially savvy.  If they didn’t, they wouldn’t do it.

More specifically, according to BNEF, the motivation behind Apple’s recent $848 million solar purchase “is not just corporate sustainability, but financial. With current incentives available to solar, the levelised cost of electricity for a plant in California could be in the range of low $70s/MWh, perhaps even lower… This cost likely undercuts the retail electricity price currently paid by Apple in the Bay Area.”

Furthermore, the positive public relations benefits of positioning a company as clean and environmentally friendly cannot be understated. This point was underscored this past fall when Google and Facebook joined Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, and Yelp as tech giants leaving the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a front group and model bill factory for many corporate interests including oil, gas, and coal. A large reason Google left ALEC, according to Chairman Eric Schmidt, was the following:

The facts of climate change are not in question anymore. Everyone understands climate change is occurring, and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and our grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people — they’re just, they’re just literally lying.”

Exiting ALEC has not been limited to tech juggernauts. Corporations with American brands, such as Wal-Mart, General Motors, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and McDonalds have also left.

For a long time powerful people have depended on fossil fuels for making their fortunes, but affordable alternatives are changing that dynamic. For the many successful corporations whose fortunes are not tied to fossil fuels, clean energy’s increasingly favorable economics and socially responsible brand are proving to be attractive.

This blog originally appeared on our Energy Exchange blog.

Google photo source: Flickr/menéame

By Elizabeth Sturcken

Like teenagers, all ground-breaking products or ideas go through an awkward adolescent phase.  And, like teenagers, the only way products or ideas can move past the clumsy stage and blossom into a sought after, form-meets-function icon is through experience.  Meaning, real consumers have to put them through their paces: does this work? How could it work better? Revise, improve, re-test, repeat… that’s how you make something truly effective; truly great.

All this is by way of acknowledging a group of sustainable-minded collaborators on the coming-out party this week for Walmart’s “Sustainability Leaders Shop”, an online shopping portal that “will allow customers to easily identify brands that are leading sustainability within a special category”.  It is, literally, the very first time a quantifiable, science-based index of various products’ sustainable provenance is being placed in the hands of consumers at the scale that only Walmart can provide.

EDF is, in some ways, a proud parent of this teenager. As an environmental group that has been working with companies for the past 25 years, we’ve walked beside Walmart on the journey to try and create better consumer products and a better world. EDF shepherded Walmart in setting an aggressive goal of reducing 20 MMT of GHG emissions from its supply chain, and we are working with them on removing chemicals of concern from everyday products, and also in sending the demand signal for optimized fertilizer use and sustainably sourced products across its supply chain. EDF has also been working for years with The Sustainability Consortium (TSC) – which provides the scientific engine behind Walmart’s Sustainability Leaders Shop. The TSC’s tools identify “hot spots” in consumer product categories.  Walmart then takes that information, and surveys and scores their suppliers’ performance through the Sustainability Index .

A lot has gone into getting us to where we are today:  years toiling away to figure out how to accurately measure product sustainability and how to make that transparent in an easily understandable way to busy consumers. For that, Walmart and its collaborators—The Sustainability Consortium and the leading group of suppliers that have been working to improve the sustainability of products — are to be congratulated. The Sustainability Leader’s Shop is a very big, very important first step because it invites consumers into the conversation.

The first step involves boldly stepping out there, not getting everything perfect, and even stumbling at times.  But that’s what’s necessary to grow.  For example, the Sustainability Leaders Shop currently designates leaders at a supplier level instead of an individual product level, which would be more ideal but simply not realistic for millions of products.  It’s also worth noting that the TSC questions used to survey suppliers about their products and performance are constantly improving to be more quantitative and usable by companies, so the sustainability ratings will change over time as these questions improve, not just as the performance itself improves.  And the data used to assess products is self-reported by companies.  Right now the Sustainability Leaders Shop is only on Walmart.com, which does not include all products, such as fresh food.  For consumers who expect “omni-channel retail” where they can get their products and information about them through many options, we think the Sustainability Leaders Shop needs to appear in real stores, too.

We've realized for a while that what’s good for business is good for the planet.  We won’t get to the place we need to be – we can’t help the teenager through to adulthood – without consumers, suppliers, environmentalists and retailers all working together to create greener consumer products. That’s why it is an invaluable opportunity and an imperative for consumers to get engaged and motivate all suppliers to act:  Vote with your wallets and reward companies who are leading on sustainability at the Sustainability Leaders Shop.

Elizabeth Sturcken is Managing Director of EDF’s Supply Chain work and is a current board member of The Sustainability Consortium.

BP appeal U.S. judge’s ruling on size of Gulf oil spill
Reuters. Feb. 23, 2015
“BP Plc on Monday appealed a federal judge's finding of the size of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, which leaves the company potentially liable to pay $13.7 billion in fines.” (Read More)
 
Scalise hails judge’s rejection of BP bid to reduce fines
Ripon Advance Reports. Feb. 24, 2015
“After nearly five years since the Deepwater Horizon disaster, it is time for the Clean Water Act fines to be settled so that RESTORE Act funds can be used to rehabilitate Louisiana’s coast from the devastating impacts of the spill,” Scalise said. “Judge Barbier’s court ruling is a victory for Louisiana’s recovery from that tragedy, as well as the rest of the Gulf Coast states. Five years is far too long for the people of Louisiana to wait to preserve and restore our coastal wetlands.” (Read More)
 
BP statement on restitution for Deepwater Horizon oil spill
MSNBC. Feb. 23, 2015
“No company has done more to respond to an industrial accident, and we are extremely proud of our economic and environmental restoration work.” (Read More)
 
 

BP appeal U.S. judge’s ruling on size of Gulf oil spill
Reuters. Feb. 23, 2015
“BP Plc on Monday appealed a federal judge's finding of the size of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, which leaves the company potentially liable to pay $13.7 billion in fines.” (Read More)
 
Scalise hails judge’s rejection of BP bid to reduce fines
Ripon Advance Reports. Feb. 24, 2015
“After nearly five years since the Deepwater Horizon disaster, it is time for the Clean Water Act fines to be settled so that RESTORE Act funds can be used to rehabilitate Louisiana’s coast from the devastating impacts of the spill,” Scalise said. “Judge Barbier’s court ruling is a victory for Louisiana’s recovery from that tragedy, as well as the rest of the Gulf Coast states. Five years is far too long for the people of Louisiana to wait to preserve and restore our coastal wetlands.” (Read More)
 
BP statement on restitution for Deepwater Horizon oil spill
MSNBC. Feb. 23, 2015
“No company has done more to respond to an industrial accident, and we are extremely proud of our economic and environmental restoration work.” (Read More)
 
 

By Erin Priddle

Market Trip, Port en Bessin. Photo: Dimitri Rogoff

Since 2012, when the increasingly hostile clash between French and UK Channel scallop fishermen made headlines; industry leaders, national administrations and a host of other stakeholders have worked to resolve the conflict and achieve positive change to protect the viability of this economically and culturally important fishery. The work of the GAP2 Project, an EU funded initiative, has been a vital force in the progress achieved so far in alleviating historic tensions and moving towards a more conciliatory approach.

In a previous post outlining the successes and challenges of the first GAP2 Channel scallop workshop in Brixham, England I spoke of the importance of bringing industry and others together to engage in participatory and collaborative dialogue on achieving greater profitability and sustainability for this valuable fishery. I also emphasised the need for a follow up workshop focused on putting dialogue into action and mapping out next steps to develop a regional management plan.

Jim Portus, Chair of the South West Producer Organisation (SWFPO) shared our optimism and desire to focus on actionable results noting that, “we can build on the progress made in Brixham and can now focus on achieving a sustainable and profitable industry in the future.”

The follow up workshop, which took place in Normandy, France earlier this month, achieved our shared goals. EDF once again teamed up with WWF-UK and the GAP2 Project to deliver an action-oriented event which focused discussion around the specific needs of this fishery and encouraged participants to put dialogue into action.

Over 55 participants from both sides of the Channel involving industry leaders, scientists, policy-makers, NGOs and others; applied their expertise, skill and passion to work through more concrete ideas for building a sustainable, profitable future for the Channel scallop fishery.

It’s clear that the conversation has moved on significantly since the Brixham event.  Participants exhibited an increased willingness to immediately engage across groups towards common goals, signalling the possibility for real change. Key themes and actions included:

• Developing an industry-led working group to govern and lead future discussions on Channel scallop management. This group might operate most effectively through a sub-group of the North Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC) where a well-functioning governance model already exists for Channel fisheries issues.
• Establishing a science and data focus group with the aim of designing regional protocols for data collection on both sides of the Channel. A more standardised approach to data collection and analysis was identified as key in securing a robust evidence-base to inform future stock management.
• Recognising the need for harmonisation without homogenisation. This means enabling fishermen and fishing representatives to respect that different segments of the fleet operate in different ways. However, while there may be managerial and cultural differences in the way people fish, it’s clear that all those accessing a shared resource must do so through a common vision.

For any process towards change it is crucial to create the right environment, bringing people together at the right time and encouraging effective partnership working. The Normandy scallop workshop brought a wide range of groups together to discuss important issues facing the Channel scallop fishery. However, it is important to recognise that while NGOs and other stakeholders can help facilitate conversations, the real change must come willingly from industry through collaboration as well as increased trust and reciprocity. The potential for this change can be illustrated best through industry reflections on the two day event:

Daniel Lefevre, Chair of the Channel Working Group of the NWWAC referred to the Channel as our “shared garden” where “managing the resource is possible only if we agree”. He further went on to say that “we cannot define a long-term      management plan without shared measures. There is still a lot of work to do, but with the will, we can achieve anything. I think a Scallop management group must be created.”

Industry has a timely opportunity to build on the momentum and positive engagement from both the Brixham and Normandy workshops to drive forward change. Next up is the NWWAC meeting in Bilbao, Spain in April where the GAP2 scallop team will have an opportunity to present the workshop ‘roadmap’ to Council members. We look forward to Mr. Lefevre putting dialogue into action when he proposes the idea for a ‘Channel scallop working group’ to the Council.

The opportunity for change has never felt so big. John Hermes, Chair of the UK Scallop Association, said it well when he spoke of the “need to embrace the four C’s: collaboration, communication, companionship….and calvados!” The GAP2 team would like to add their fifth ‘C’: courage.

By Erin Priddle

Market Trip, Port en Bessin. Photo: Dimitri Rogoff

Since 2012, when the increasingly hostile clash between French and UK Channel scallop fishermen made headlines; industry leaders, national administrations and a host of other stakeholders have worked to resolve the conflict and achieve positive change to protect the viability of this economically and culturally important fishery. The work of the GAP2 Project, an EU funded initiative, has been a vital force in the progress achieved so far in alleviating historic tensions and moving towards a more conciliatory approach.

In a previous post outlining the successes and challenges of the first GAP2 Channel scallop workshop in Brixham, England I spoke of the importance of bringing industry and others together to engage in participatory and collaborative dialogue on achieving greater profitability and sustainability for this valuable fishery. I also emphasised the need for a follow up workshop focused on putting dialogue into action and mapping out next steps to develop a regional management plan.

Jim Portus, Chair of the South West Producer Organisation (SWFPO) shared our optimism and desire to focus on actionable results noting that, “we can build on the progress made in Brixham and can now focus on achieving a sustainable and profitable industry in the future.”

The follow up workshop, which took place in Normandy, France earlier this month, achieved our shared goals. EDF once again teamed up with WWF-UK and the GAP2 Project to deliver an action-oriented event which focused discussion around the specific needs of this fishery and encouraged participants to put dialogue into action.

Over 55 participants from both sides of the Channel involving industry leaders, scientists, policy-makers, NGOs and others; applied their expertise, skill and passion to work through more concrete ideas for building a sustainable, profitable future for the Channel scallop fishery.

It’s clear that the conversation has moved on significantly since the Brixham event.  Participants exhibited an increased willingness to immediately engage across groups towards common goals, signalling the possibility for real change. Key themes and actions included:

• Developing an industry-led working group to govern and lead future discussions on Channel scallop management. This group might operate most effectively through a sub-group of the North Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC) where a well-functioning governance model already exists for Channel fisheries issues.
• Establishing a science and data focus group with the aim of designing regional protocols for data collection on both sides of the Channel. A more standardised approach to data collection and analysis was identified as key in securing a robust evidence-base to inform future stock management.
• Recognising the need for harmonisation without homogenisation. This means enabling fishermen and fishing representatives to respect that different segments of the fleet operate in different ways. However, while there may be managerial and cultural differences in the way people fish, it’s clear that all those accessing a shared resource must do so through a common vision.

For any process towards change it is crucial to create the right environment, bringing people together at the right time and encouraging effective partnership working. The Normandy scallop workshop brought a wide range of groups together to discuss important issues facing the Channel scallop fishery. However, it is important to recognise that while NGOs and other stakeholders can help facilitate conversations, the real change must come willingly from industry through collaboration as well as increased trust and reciprocity. The potential for this change can be illustrated best through industry reflections on the two day event:

Daniel Lefevre, Chair of the Channel Working Group of the NWWAC referred to the Channel as our “shared garden” where “managing the resource is possible only if we agree”. He further went on to say that “we cannot define a long-term      management plan without shared measures. There is still a lot of work to do, but with the will, we can achieve anything. I think a Scallop management group must be created.”

Industry has a timely opportunity to build on the momentum and positive engagement from both the Brixham and Normandy workshops to drive forward change. Next up is the NWWAC meeting in Bilbao, Spain in April where the GAP2 scallop team will have an opportunity to present the workshop ‘roadmap’ to Council members. We look forward to Mr. Lefevre putting dialogue into action when he proposes the idea for a ‘Channel scallop working group’ to the Council.

The opportunity for change has never felt so big. John Hermes, Chair of the UK Scallop Association, said it well when he spoke of the “need to embrace the four C’s: collaboration, communication, companionship….and calvados!” The GAP2 team would like to add their fifth ‘C’: courage.

By Erin Priddle

Market Trip, Port en Bessin. Photo: Dimitri Rogoff

Since 2012, when the increasingly hostile clash between French and UK Channel scallop fishermen made headlines; industry leaders, national administrations and a host of other stakeholders have worked to resolve the conflict and achieve positive change to protect the viability of this economically and culturally important fishery. The work of the GAP2 Project, an EU funded initiative, has been a vital force in the progress achieved so far in alleviating historic tensions and moving towards a more conciliatory approach.

In a previous post outlining the successes and challenges of the first GAP2 Channel scallop workshop in Brixham, England I spoke of the importance of bringing industry and others together to engage in participatory and collaborative dialogue on achieving greater profitability and sustainability for this valuable fishery. I also emphasised the need for a follow up workshop focused on putting dialogue into action and mapping out next steps to develop a regional management plan.

Jim Portus, Chair of the South West Producer Organisation (SWFPO) shared our optimism and desire to focus on actionable results noting that, “we can build on the progress made in Brixham and can now focus on achieving a sustainable and profitable industry in the future.”

The follow up workshop, which took place in Normandy, France earlier this month, achieved our shared goals. EDF once again teamed up with WWF-UK and the GAP2 Project to deliver an action-oriented event which focused discussion around the specific needs of this fishery and encouraged participants to put dialogue into action.

Over 55 participants from both sides of the Channel involving industry leaders, scientists, policy-makers, NGOs and others; applied their expertise, skill and passion to work through more concrete ideas for building a sustainable, profitable future for the Channel scallop fishery.

It’s clear that the conversation has moved on significantly since the Brixham event.  Participants exhibited an increased willingness to immediately engage across groups towards common goals, signalling the possibility for real change. Key themes and actions included:

• Developing an industry-led working group to govern and lead future discussions on Channel scallop management. This group might operate most effectively through a sub-group of the North Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC) where a well-functioning governance model already exists for Channel fisheries issues.
• Establishing a science and data focus group with the aim of designing regional protocols for data collection on both sides of the Channel. A more standardised approach to data collection and analysis was identified as key in securing a robust evidence-base to inform future stock management.
• Recognising the need for harmonisation without homogenisation. This means enabling fishermen and fishing representatives to respect that different segments of the fleet operate in different ways. However, while there may be managerial and cultural differences in the way people fish, it’s clear that all those accessing a shared resource must do so through a common vision.

For any process towards change it is crucial to create the right environment, bringing people together at the right time and encouraging effective partnership working. The Normandy scallop workshop brought a wide range of groups together to discuss important issues facing the Channel scallop fishery. However, it is important to recognise that while NGOs and other stakeholders can help facilitate conversations, the real change must come willingly from industry through collaboration as well as increased trust and reciprocity. The potential for this change can be illustrated best through industry reflections on the two day event:

Daniel Lefevre, Chair of the Channel Working Group of the NWWAC referred to the Channel as our “shared garden” where “managing the resource is possible only if we agree”. He further went on to say that “we cannot define a long-term      management plan without shared measures. There is still a lot of work to do, but with the will, we can achieve anything. I think a Scallop management group must be created.”

Industry has a timely opportunity to build on the momentum and positive engagement from both the Brixham and Normandy workshops to drive forward change. Next up is the NWWAC meeting in Bilbao, Spain in April where the GAP2 scallop team will have an opportunity to present the workshop ‘roadmap’ to Council members. We look forward to Mr. Lefevre putting dialogue into action when he proposes the idea for a ‘Channel scallop working group’ to the Council.

The opportunity for change has never felt so big. John Hermes, Chair of the UK Scallop Association, said it well when he spoke of the “need to embrace the four C’s: collaboration, communication, companionship….and calvados!” The GAP2 team would like to add their fifth ‘C’: courage.

Written by Marcia G. Yerman

While Moms Clean Air Force member, Julianne Moore wins the Oscar for best actress, and there’s a strange fascination with the new movie Fifty Shades of Grey, I have been focusing on a different story. It’s called Fifty Days of Nay. It’s the sad narrative of the first weeks of the new 114th Congress.

It may not be sexy, but it has a lot of the same elements you would expect in a less than savory tale. There’s big money, men who wield their power to bend others into submission, and plenty of questions about denial and morality.

Needless to say, Sen. Mitch McConnell is not going to get the leading role in any film, but he is a star player in this script. He has been practicing his lines since the November election, with rhetoric about pushing through the Keystone Pipeline and vowing to deadlock any advancement in the regulation of coal. Backing moves to reduce the carbon pollution emanating from power plants is not in his screenplay — no way, no how.

However, McConnell has creatively managed to construct a scenario for undoing two decades of environmental legislation. In his rewrite, there will be no going back to the days when safeguarding the environment and health of Americans were embraced by both parties — and were not a matter of partisan politics.

In the key role of supporting actor is climate-denier, Sen. James Inhofe, 80, who has landed the part of a lifetime. He is now the Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW). As the protagonist character, despite being “cast against type,” Inhofe will have dialogue coaches reeling as he delivers many of the off-the-cuff, improvisational remarks that have won him renown. (“Man can’t change climate.”)

Ironically, there is one scientist who Inhofe does put his faith in. His name is Wei-Hock Soon, and he is currently in the middle of a paparazzi media storm. Soon is a researcher affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. He has testified in front of Congress, disputing the findings of 97 percent of his colleagues. Soon elucidated upon his doubts on the connection between the actions of humans and the causes of global warming.

Last week Greenpeace and the Climate Investigations Center, which got hold of records through the Freedom of Information Act, released documentation showing that Hock had received in excess of $1.2 million from those in the fossil-fuel industries during the past decade. Hock neglected to mention the fact of his funding in his published papers and findings on climate change. It’s possible that the additional $230,000 bestowed upon him from the Charles G. Koch Foundation made his memory foggy.

Over in the House of Representatives there is some encouraging news. The Safe Climate Caucus is up and running under the new leadership of Rep. Alan Lowenthal. He wrote in a mid-February blog, “This caucus aims to speak the truth, even in the face of denial.”

I’m hopeful. Maybe this story will have a happy ending.


TELL YOUR SENATORS: HELP STOP CLIMATE CHANGE





By Peter Sopher

Apple and Google have changed our lives forever, both because of their technological innovations and sheer size as global corporations. Now, they’re aiming to reshape the energy landscape.

This month, Apple announced plans to spend nearly $2 billion on European data centers set to run entirely on renewable energy, and invested $848 million to secure power from 130MW of First Solar’s California Flats Solar Project under a 25-year power purchase agreement. Google also agreed to replace 370 wind turbines installed in the 1980s with 24 new, more efficient and bird-friendly turbines at the Altamont Pass in the San Francisco Bay Area. Moreover, there has been recent speculation Apple may be working on an electric vehicle to challenge Tesla’s dominance in that market.

These developments are impressive on their own, but they are also part of a new trend among major corporations – whose primary focus is not energy generation – proactively pursuing clean energy projects. So, why are they doing this?

For corporations whose businesses do not rely on fossil fuels, aligning themselves with clean power is proving a prudent move both financially and for public relations.

Clean power portfolios

Of companies whose primary operations do not focus on power generation, Google is one of the most proactive in the world in terms of generating, using, and financing clean power. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s (BNEF) database, its activities include:

• Ownership of three solar plants that amount to 412.3MW of net capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 100,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Usage of electricity from wind farms that amount to 1,603MW of capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 713,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Financing of nearly $2.9 billion in clean power projects;
• Acquisition of Nest Labs, Inc., which sells smart thermostats, primarily, and also smoke detectors;
• And, a public goal to operate on 100 percent renewable energy (Google currently powers about 35 percent of its operations with renewable energy).

Also proactive, Apple’s activity regarding clean energy includes:

• Ownership of four solar plants that amount to 77.5MW of net capacity;
• Powering all of its data centers with renewables;
• Installation of a 10MW fuel cell system – which uses a chemical reaction, rather than combustion, to produce electricity on-site – at a North Carolina-based data center;
• The launch of HomeKit, an app enabling homeowners to control appliances such as thermostats, security systems, lights, and others on Apple devices (iPhone, iPad, etc.) remotely;
• And, plans for a completely energy self-sufficient headquarters by 2016.

Outside of tech, Wal-Mart and other non-power companies are proactively pursuing clean energy. Wal-Mart owns and/or uses electricity from solar and wind plants that amount to upwards of 380MW of capacity. By 2020, the company aims to be powered 100 percent by renewable sources. 

Why are Google and Apple pursuing clean energy? It makes financial sense, and they look good doing...
Click To Tweet - Powered By CoSchedule

Home Energy Management Systems (HEMS)

In June 2014, Apple launched HomeKit, an app that makes people’s lives easier by enabling them to control numerous smart devices without having to manage a growing number of different apps from individual manufacturers. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF),

“An example of HomeKit’s capabilities Apple provided when describing its integration with Siri – Apple’s virtual assistant – is for ‘setting a profile for simultaneously switching off the lights, locking the doors, and turning down the thermostat, then activating this profile at bedtime by telling Siri ‘good night’.”

BNEF further posits that Apple’s launch of HomeKit “kicks off a battle for the ‘connected home’ ecosystem,” with Google as a strong competitor.

In January 2014, Google acquired Nest for $3.2 billion, the second largest deal at the time for an energy smart technology company. Through connecting to the cloud to access energy usage and weather data, Nest predicts,

“Usage patterns and behavior of its customers [will enable] deeper savings even for customers who do not program the thermostat manually. It can also interact with utility time-of-use pricing where available and integrate with local utility demand response and peak rebate programs to help manage demand.”

Beyond Apple, Google, and utilities, home automation technology has existed for decades, and companies such as iControl Networks, Control4, Vivint, and many others provide a variety of products and services. Apple’s and Google’s entry into the connected home market, however, dramatically stiffens competition and signals accelerated growth in this space.

What’s the significance?

The economics of using, investing in, and generating clean energy are sound.  Apple and Google are first and third in the world, respectively, in terms of market capitalization. These are corporate giants dominating a capitalist system that prioritizes the bottom line. These companies see financial opportunities in the budding connected home market, and they perceive clean power purchases as financially savvy.  If they didn’t, they wouldn’t do it.

More specifically, according to BNEF, the motivation behind Apple’s recent $848 million solar purchase “is not just corporate sustainability, but financial. With current incentives available to solar, the levelised cost of electricity for a plant in California could be in the range of low $70s/MWh, perhaps even lower… This cost likely undercuts the retail electricity price currently paid by Apple in the Bay Area.”

Furthermore, the positive public relations benefits of positioning a company as clean and environmentally friendly cannot be understated. This point was underscored this past fall when Google and Facebook joined Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, and Yelp as tech giants leaving the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a front group and model bill factory for many corporate interests including oil, gas, and coal. A large reason Google left ALEC, according to Chairman Eric Schmidt, was the following:

The facts of climate change are not in question anymore. Everyone understands climate change is occurring, and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and our grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people — they’re just, they’re just literally lying.”

Exiting ALEC has not been limited to tech juggernauts. Corporations with American brands, such as Wal-Mart, General Motors, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and McDonalds have also left.

For a long time powerful people have depended on fossil fuels for making their fortunes, but affordable alternatives are changing that dynamic. For the many successful corporations whose fortunes are not tied to fossil fuels, clean energy’s increasingly favorable economics and socially responsible brand are proving to be attractive.

Google photo source: Flickr/menéame

By Peter Sopher

Apple and Google have changed our lives forever, both because of their technological innovations and sheer size as global corporations. Now, they’re aiming to reshape the energy landscape.

This month, Apple announced plans to spend nearly $2 billion on European data centers set to run entirely on renewable energy, and invested $848 million to secure power from 130MW of First Solar’s California Flats Solar Project under a 25-year power purchase agreement. Google also agreed to replace 370 wind turbines installed in the 1980s with 24 new, more efficient and bird-friendly turbines at the Altamont Pass in the San Francisco Bay Area. Moreover, there has been recent speculation Apple may be working on an electric vehicle to challenge Tesla’s dominance in that market.

These developments are impressive on their own, but they are also part of a new trend among major corporations – whose primary focus is not energy generation – proactively pursuing clean energy projects. So, why are they doing this?

For corporations whose businesses do not rely on fossil fuels, aligning themselves with clean power is proving a prudent move both financially and for public relations.

Clean power portfolios

Of companies whose primary operations do not focus on power generation, Google is one of the most proactive in the world in terms of generating, using, and financing clean power. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s (BNEF) database, its activities include:

• Ownership of three solar plants that amount to 412.3MW of net capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 100,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Usage of electricity from wind farms that amount to 1,603MW of capacity, roughly equivalent to removing 713,000 passenger vehicles from the road for a year;
• Financing of nearly $2.9 billion in clean power projects;
• Acquisition of Nest Labs, Inc., which sells smart thermostats, primarily, and also smoke detectors;
• And, a public goal to operate on 100 percent renewable energy (Google currently powers about 35 percent of its operations with renewable energy).

Also proactive, Apple’s activity regarding clean energy includes:

• Ownership of four solar plants that amount to 77.5MW of net capacity;
• Powering all of its data centers with renewables;
• Installation of a 10MW fuel cell system – which uses a chemical reaction, rather than combustion, to produce electricity on-site – at a North Carolina-based data center;
• The launch of HomeKit, an app enabling homeowners to control appliances such as thermostats, security systems, lights, and others on Apple devices (iPhone, iPad, etc.) remotely;
• And, plans for a completely energy self-sufficient headquarters by 2016.

Outside of tech, Wal-Mart and other non-power companies are proactively pursuing clean energy. Wal-Mart owns and/or uses electricity from solar and wind plants that amount to upwards of 380MW of capacity. By 2020, the company aims to be powered 100 percent by renewable sources. 

Why are Google and Apple pursuing clean energy? It makes financial sense, and they look good doing...
Click To Tweet - Powered By CoSchedule

Home Energy Management Systems (HEMS)

In June 2014, Apple launched HomeKit, an app that makes people’s lives easier by enabling them to control numerous smart devices without having to manage a growing number of different apps from individual manufacturers. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF),

“An example of HomeKit’s capabilities Apple provided when describing its integration with Siri – Apple’s virtual assistant – is for ‘setting a profile for simultaneously switching off the lights, locking the doors, and turning down the thermostat, then activating this profile at bedtime by telling Siri ‘good night’.”

BNEF further posits that Apple’s launch of HomeKit “kicks off a battle for the ‘connected home’ ecosystem,” with Google as a strong competitor.

In January 2014, Google acquired Nest for $3.2 billion, the second largest deal at the time for an energy smart technology company. Through connecting to the cloud to access energy usage and weather data, Nest predicts,

“Usage patterns and behavior of its customers [will enable] deeper savings even for customers who do not program the thermostat manually. It can also interact with utility time-of-use pricing where available and integrate with local utility demand response and peak rebate programs to help manage demand.”

Beyond Apple, Google, and utilities, home automation technology has existed for decades, and companies such as iControl Networks, Control4, Vivint, and many others provide a variety of products and services. Apple’s and Google’s entry into the connected home market, however, dramatically stiffens competition and signals accelerated growth in this space.

What’s the significance?

The economics of using, investing in, and generating clean energy are sound.  Apple and Google are first and third in the world, respectively, in terms of market capitalization. These are corporate giants dominating a capitalist system that prioritizes the bottom line. These companies see financial opportunities in the budding connected home market, and they perceive clean power purchases as financially savvy.  If they didn’t, they wouldn’t do it.

More specifically, according to BNEF, the motivation behind Apple’s recent $848 million solar purchase “is not just corporate sustainability, but financial. With current incentives available to solar, the levelised cost of electricity for a plant in California could be in the range of low $70s/MWh, perhaps even lower… This cost likely undercuts the retail electricity price currently paid by Apple in the Bay Area.”

Furthermore, the positive public relations benefits of positioning a company as clean and environmentally friendly cannot be understated. This point was underscored this past fall when Google and Facebook joined Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, and Yelp as tech giants leaving the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a front group and model bill factory for many corporate interests including oil, gas, and coal. A large reason Google left ALEC, according to Chairman Eric Schmidt, was the following:

The facts of climate change are not in question anymore. Everyone understands climate change is occurring, and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and our grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people — they’re just, they’re just literally lying.”

Exiting ALEC has not been limited to tech juggernauts. Corporations with American brands, such as Wal-Mart, General Motors, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and McDonalds have also left.

For a long time powerful people have depended on fossil fuels for making their fortunes, but affordable alternatives are changing that dynamic. For the many successful corporations whose fortunes are not tied to fossil fuels, clean energy’s increasingly favorable economics and socially responsible brand are proving to be attractive.

Google photo source: Flickr/menéame

Written by Moms Clean Air Force

This is a Moms Clean Air Force exclusive interview with Senator Senator A. Donald McEachin:

What is unique about protecting Virginia’s resources?

Virginia has an incredible array of natural resources — majestic mountains, rivers, beautiful coastline. We owe it to all Americans and to our children and grandchildren to protect and preserve our Commonwealth.

As a parent are you worried about the effects of climate change on your children and the children of Virginia?

As a parent, I am extremely concerned about the impact of climate change. We have an absolute obligation to address this real threat to our future.

Why is a bipartisan effort so important and how can these efforts be achieved in our politically polarizing culture?

It should not be a Democratic or Republican issue. we should be working together to ensure we leave a healthier and cleaner earth. I will continue to advocate with all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Is there anything you’d like to share that is important for Moms Clean Air Force members to know?

Please know that I believe groups like yours make all the difference. When delegates and senators see their constituents who are so passionate about a cause, I believe it really makes a difference.


State Senator A. Donald McEachin is a graduate of American University and the University Of Virginia School Of Law. In May of 2008, he received his Masters of Divinity degree from Samuel Proctor Theological Seminary at Virginia Union University.  Senator McEachin is very active in the community, and is a lifetime member of Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity, the NAACP, the Virginia State Bar and the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association. He has also been appointed to several boards and commissions.

Back in 1996, Senator McEachin was first elected to public office, to the Virginia House of Delegates. In 2007, Senator McEachin was elected to the Virginia State Senate with an overwhelming victory. In the State Senate, he is proud to be a leader in non-discrimination, environmental protection, women’s rights, energy efficiency, public education and job creation.

The Senator and his lovely wife Colette are the parents of three wonderful children. They live in Henrico County. Colette is also an attorney with extensive experience, presently working in the Richmond City Commonwealth’s attorney’s office.

Written by Judith A. Ross

Freak storms, flooding in some places, devastating droughts in others are all part of climate change’s modus operandi. And this winter, it has turned some weather patterns topsy-turvy.

My hometown near Boston has experienced all-time record snowfalls within a 14-, 20-, and 30-day period. Meanwhile, in Alaska, where one would expect the mountains of snow and frigid temperatures that we are experiencing here, things have warmed up dramatically.

So much so, that planners for the annual Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race have altered its route for only the second time in its 43-year history because snow is a no-show, making conditions on the traditional trail unsafe for mushers and their dogs.

As Kevin Trenberth, an atmospheric scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, told National Geographic,

“We always experience some regions with below normal temperatures and others above normal, as comes naturally from weather patterns. But on top of that is a global warming component. Under the right circumstances it can boost snows, as in New England, but in other circumstances, the snow melts and some precipitation even falls as rain.”

Winter temperatures in Alaska have increased by an average of 6.3˚F over the past 50 years, twice as fast as the rest of the United States. In 2014, Anchorage temperatures did not drop below zero for the first time in recorded history.

This year, the starting line for the Iditarod has been moved north from its normal location in Anchorage to Fairbanks. Parts of the trail near Willow, Alaska were deemed unsafe. And this change of venue due to warming conditions is stressing Willow’s economy, depriving it of revenues from the race that it normally relies on.

Here in the Boston area, too much snow is having a similar impact. When I recently ventured from my suburban home west of Boston into Cambridge, enormous piles of plowed snow had reduced many roads to one lane and eliminated much of the on-street parking. The stores I entered seemed unusually empty — in some cases I was the only customer — and business owners admitted that things had been slow.

In his op-ed about Boston in the New York Times, contributor E.J. Graff writes that because people are unable to go out or get to work due to school closings, treacherous road conditions, and shutdowns of public transportation,

“Businesses have been hammered: Who’s going out to eat, shop or see a movie? How can businesses manufacture and deliver products or arrange deals if their workers just can’t show up?”

While global warming may mean warmer temperatures and less snow in Alaska, it won’t prevent massive snowstorms in places like Boston. Paul O’Gorman, an associate professor of atmospheric science at MIT recently told the Boston Globe,

“In some regions, fairly cold regions, you could have a decrease in the average snowfall in a year, but actually an intensification of the snowfall extremes.”

Climate change is definitely having opposing effects on Boston and Anchorage this winter. As Trenberth quipped to National Geographic,

“Perhaps, they should move it [the Iditarod] to Boston.”


TELL YOUR SENATORS: HELP STOP CLIMATE CHANGE