Aggregator

By Peter Zalzal

Scientists David Lyon and Ramón Alvarez contributed to this post

Two studies released today in the journal of Environmental Science and Technology provide new insights into methane emissions from significant sources in the oil and natural gas sector and underscore the urgency of taking action to address pollution from these sources. The studies—focusing on the gathering and processing segment and the transmission and storage segment—were led by researchers at Colorado State and Carnegie Mellon universities and Aerodyne Research, and included collaboration with EDF and companies in each of these segments.

In the gathering and processing study, researchers measured 130 gathering and processing facilities, finding emissions at gathering facilities ranging from 0.6 to 600 standard cubic feet of methane leaking per minute (scf/m). For the transmission and storage study, a different team led by CSU also collected extensive on-site and downwind measurements of methane at 45 transmission and storage sites. Site-level methane measurements ranged from 2 to 880 scf/m, with an average measurement of 70 scf/m. Of all the facilities measured for these studies, data suggests the natural gas emitted was worth about $25 million and had the 20-year climate impact equal to the emissions of 2 million passenger vehicles.

The Administration has recently announced a goal of reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40-45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025—actions that will help prevent this needless waste. The announcement indicates that new standards will build on the technologies EPA evaluated in a set of five peer-reviewed, technical white papers (including technologies to find and fix leaks and to address emissions from compressors).

The studies released today underscore the importance of strong federal actions to reduce emissions from sources in the gathering and processing and transmission and storage segments.  In particular, measurements from both of the studies show that equipment leaks are an important source of emissions that can be addressed.  Here are some of the findings:

• The gathering and processing study found substantial venting from liquids storage tanks at approximately 20 percent of sampled gathering facilities. Emission rates at these facilities were on average four times higher than rates observed at other facilities, and at some of these sites with substantial emissions, the authors found that company representatives made adjustments resulting in immediate reductions in emissions.

• Researchers found that processing plants leaked at much lower rates than gathering facilities, attributing this discrepancy in part to regulations requiring comprehensive leak detection and repair at processing plants.  Moreover, the authors found that 19 of the 25 facilities with the lowest average emission rate were staffed by full time operators.

• In the transmission and storage study, the two sites with very significant emissions were both due to leaks or venting at isolation valves. The study also found that leaks were a major source of emissions across sources, concluding that measured emissions are larger than would be estimated by the emission factors used in EPA’s reporting program.

All of these findings suggest that equipment leaks are an important source of emission and that strong, comprehensive leak detection and repair requirements could help to find and fix these leaks.

The studies also underscore the importance of EPA’s proposed action to strengthen methane reporting requirements for the oil and gas sector (known as Subpart W).  In particular, EPA has proposed to require reporting from sources in the gathering and boosting sector, which is critical because there are thousands of these sources across the country and they are not currently required to measure and report their emissions data to EPA.

It is critical that we address methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, and the two studies released today provide additional insights on several important emission sources. As the administration has announced it will take actions to begin to address methane emissions, we must begin working together to deploy commonsense, highly-cost effective technologies to reduce this pollution and minimize waste—solutions that leading states and companies have deployed and that are urgently needed to ensure a level playing field and protect communities across the country.

By Peter Zalzal

Scientists David Lyon and Ramón Alvarez contributed to this post

Two studies released today in the journal of Environmental Science and Technology provide new insights into methane emissions from significant sources in the oil and natural gas sector and underscore the urgency of taking action to address pollution from these sources. The studies—focusing on the gathering and processing segment and the transmission and storage segment—were led by researchers at Colorado State and Carnegie Mellon universities and Aerodyne Research, and included collaboration with EDF and companies in each of these segments.

In the gathering and processing study, researchers measured 130 gathering and processing facilities, finding emissions at gathering facilities ranging from 0.6 to 600 standard cubic feet of methane leaking per minute (scf/m). For the transmission and storage study, a different team led by CSU also collected extensive on-site and downwind measurements of methane at 45 transmission and storage sites. Site-level methane measurements ranged from 2 to 880 scf/m, with an average measurement of 70 scf/m. Of all the facilities measured for these studies, data suggests the natural gas emitted was worth about $25 million and had the 20-year climate impact equal to the emissions of 2 million passenger vehicles.

The Administration has recently announced a goal of reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40-45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025—actions that will help prevent this needless waste. The announcement indicates that new standards will build on the technologies EPA evaluated in a set of five peer-reviewed, technical white papers (including technologies to find and fix leaks and to address emissions from compressors).

The studies released today underscore the importance of strong federal actions to reduce emissions from sources in the gathering and processing and transmission and storage segments.  In particular, measurements from both of the studies show that equipment leaks are an important source of emissions that can be addressed.  Here are some of the findings:

• The gathering and processing study found substantial venting from liquids storage tanks at approximately 20 percent of sampled gathering facilities. Emission rates at these facilities were on average four times higher than rates observed at other facilities, and at some of these sites with substantial emissions, the authors found that company representatives made adjustments resulting in immediate reductions in emissions.

• Researchers found that processing plants leaked at much lower rates than gathering facilities, attributing this discrepancy in part to regulations requiring comprehensive leak detection and repair at processing plants.  Moreover, the authors found that 19 of the 25 facilities with the lowest average emission rate were staffed by full time operators.

• In the transmission and storage study, the two sites with very significant emissions were both due to leaks or venting at isolation valves. The study also found that leaks were a major source of emissions across sources, concluding that measured emissions are larger than would be estimated by the emission factors used in EPA’s reporting program.

All of these findings suggest that equipment leaks are an important source of emission and that strong, comprehensive leak detection and repair requirements could help to find and fix these leaks.

The studies also underscore the importance of EPA’s proposed action to strengthen methane reporting requirements for the oil and gas sector (known as Subpart W).  In particular, EPA has proposed to require reporting from sources in the gathering and boosting sector, which is critical because there are thousands of these sources across the country and they are not currently required to measure and report their emissions data to EPA.

It is critical that we address methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, and the two studies released today provide additional insights on several important emission sources. As the administration has announced it will take actions to begin to address methane emissions, we must begin working together to deploy commonsense, highly-cost effective technologies to reduce this pollution and minimize waste—solutions that leading states and companies have deployed and that are urgently needed to ensure a level playing field and protect communities across the country.

By Peter Zalzal

Scientists David Lyon and Ramón Alvarez contributed to this post

Two studies released today in the journal of Environmental Science and Technology provide new insights into methane emissions from significant sources in the oil and natural gas sector and underscore the urgency of taking action to address pollution from these sources. The studies—focusing on the gathering and processing segment and the transmission and storage segment—were led by researchers at Colorado State and Carnegie Mellon universities and Aerodyne Research, and included collaboration with EDF and companies in each of these segments.

In the gathering and processing study, researchers measured 130 gathering and processing facilities, finding emissions at gathering facilities ranging from 0.6 to 600 standard cubic feet of methane leaking per minute (scf/m). For the transmission and storage study, a different team led by CSU also collected extensive on-site and downwind measurements of methane at 45 transmission and storage sites. Site-level methane measurements ranged from 2 to 880 scf/m, with an average measurement of 70 scf/m. Of all the facilities measured for these studies, data suggests the natural gas emitted was worth about $25 million and had the 20-year climate impact equal to the emissions of 2 million passenger vehicles.

The Administration has recently announced a goal of reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40-45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025—actions that will help prevent this needless waste. The announcement indicates that new standards will build on the technologies EPA evaluated in a set of five peer-reviewed, technical white papers (including technologies to find and fix leaks and to address emissions from compressors).

The studies released today underscore the importance of strong federal actions to reduce emissions from sources in the gathering and processing and transmission and storage segments.  In particular, measurements from both of the studies show that equipment leaks are an important source of emissions that can be addressed.  Here are some of the findings:

• The gathering and processing study found substantial venting from liquids storage tanks at approximately 20 percent of sampled gathering facilities. Emission rates at these facilities were on average four times higher than rates observed at other facilities, and at some of these sites with substantial emissions, the authors found that company representatives made adjustments resulting in immediate reductions in emissions.

• Researchers found that processing plants leaked at much lower rates than gathering facilities, attributing this discrepancy in part to regulations requiring comprehensive leak detection and repair at processing plants.  Moreover, the authors found that 19 of the 25 facilities with the lowest average emission rate were staffed by full time operators.

• In the transmission and storage study, the two sites with very significant emissions were both due to leaks or venting at isolation valves. The study also found that leaks were a major source of emissions across sources, concluding that measured emissions are larger than would be estimated by the emission factors used in EPA’s reporting program.

All of these findings suggest that equipment leaks are an important source of emission and that strong, comprehensive leak detection and repair requirements could help to find and fix these leaks.

The studies also underscore the importance of EPA’s proposed action to strengthen methane reporting requirements for the oil and gas sector (known as Subpart W).  In particular, EPA has proposed to require reporting from sources in the gathering and boosting sector, which is critical because there are thousands of these sources across the country and they are not currently required to measure and report their emissions data to EPA.

It is critical that we address methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, and the two studies released today provide additional insights on several important emission sources. As the administration has announced it will take actions to begin to address methane emissions, we must begin working together to deploy commonsense, highly-cost effective technologies to reduce this pollution and minimize waste—solutions that leading states and companies have deployed and that are urgently needed to ensure a level playing field and protect communities across the country.

Written by Marcia G. Yerman

“The canary in the coal mine.” That phrase has become part of the lexicon as a warning for danger.

Now birds are cautioning humans about the imminent threat of climate change — and the news is not good. This from a report based on seven years of research by the National Audubon Society. I checked out their website, which featured material on environmental events — both national and international. I learned that the Baltimore Oriole may no longer be in Maryland by the end of the century and that coastal species, like the sandpiper, were imperiled by rising sea levels.

I reached out to Gary Langham, Audubon’s “chief scientist,” to learn more. Langham has a Ph.D. in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from Cornell University. We discussed a wide range of topics, and he passionately delivered his insights and concerns.

Langham explained that at Audubon, “Activism is part of the story.” The organization was founded 105 years ago by people alarmed by the slaughter of egrets being killed in order to supply women’s hats with “plumes.” Audubon spearheaded the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the first American law to protect birds from indiscriminate hunting. “Concerned citizen interface has always be part of the Audubon agenda,” Langham related. “All our conservation work to protect birds and nature is based on science, policy, advocacy, and education.” He paused, “So is standing up and doing the right thing.”

Walking me through the top points of the study, Langham detailed that 588 species were examined within the context of how climate change would impact them in 2020, 2050, and 2080. Taking into account the consequences of greenhouse gases, 314 species are going to be highly impacted unless, as Langham emphasized, “we recalibrate how we consume and generate energy.”

Having the longest running animal census in the world (since 1900), Audubon is strategically positioned to contribute to the conversation. Langham discussed “habitat shifts” that evolved as a result of a changed landscape over the past century and a half — an outcome of humans “converting land use to their own ends.” Alarmingly, in the past forty years, “even common birds have declined by 40 to 70 percent due to habitat shift.”

Langham underscored, “Birds have an urgent message.” The reason they are on the move is due to climate change. In the past two decades, more than 200 species of birds have moved their “habitat range” substantially north in order to achieve comparable living conditions. This migration then impacts the ecosystem where they resettle. Langham stressed, “All this disruption is not good. Birds are an excellent indicator of nature overall. What impacts them will impact us. As the birds go, so do we.”

On the bright side Langham assured me, “When you give nature half a chance, it can respond in a positive way.” The bottom line is, “Restorative measures are the key. If we take concerted actions, the birds can recover.” He gave the example of the country’s national emblem, the Bald Eagle, which was brought back from the brink after being devastated by the effects of DDT.

Commenting on the newly elected representatives in Congress, Langham observed that the “fingerprints of big oil and gas” were clearly evident. “Climate change shouldn’t be a partisan issue,” he insisted. “It’s about doing the right thing for future generations. It’s about protecting nature and our children.”

When I asked Langham about the XL Pipeline, he was unequivocal in his response. Audubon is officially opposed to it because of the inherent risks and disruptions from spills. Regarding fracking, Langham pointed to the challenges facing birds that nest in the Bakken Shale area of North Dakota. He said succinctly, “Unregulated chemicals used in fracking are the wild card. What’s being pumped into the ground cannot be good for birds or people.”

Langham was clear. “Most of the opposition comes from the extractive industries. They just use nature for their own purposes. They cut it, burn it, or extract it. They want the fewest regulations with the most profits.” For Audubon, supporting renewable energy is a core belief, as is reducing emissions via legislation and public policy.

When I asked Langham how he would convey his concern to the average citizen, he said, “Birds often represent or symbolize places in ways that are meaningful to people. The Common Loon is a familiar bird for people out fishing or swimming in the 10,000 lakes of Minnesota. Our Climate Report suggests that loons may no longer be in Minnesota by the end of the century. The idea that one cannot share the call of the loon with kids or grandkids is troubling because it foreshadows not just the loss of the loon, but of one’s sense of place.”

Langham concluded, “Climate change threatens everyone’s sense of place by introducing ecological disruption on a scale never seen before.”


TELL EPA TO PROTECT OUR FAMILIES FROM FRACKING POLLUTION





By Pam Ruiter

Photo: Pseudopanax at English Wikipedia

By: Raul Garcia Rodriguez, WWF Spain, and Pam Ruiter, EDF EU Oceans

Raul Garcia is WWF Spain’s Fisheries Officer and Pam Ruiter is a Project Manager for EDF’s EU Oceans team based in Spain, where EDF and WWF are collaborating on a project working with coastal fisheries.

Shared by fishermen from Spain and Portugal, the octopus fishery in the waters off the coast of the Iberian Peninsula is economically important and complex. In late January, we attended the International Forum on Octopus Management in the Iberian Peninsula held in Santiago de Compostela, Spain to discuss management challenges in the fishery.

The forum was organised by WWF Spain, WWF UK and the EU GAP2 project, and included a group of 70 stakeholders including members of the fishing sector, management and civil society from across Spain, as well as representatives from Portugal.

Contributing to the complexity of managing the fishery, biologically octopuses are a short lived species – living only 1-2 years – which already makes scientifically estimating their status challenging. Additionally, information gaps regarding early life phases and recruitment, as well as the fact that its annual abundance is also affected by different climatological or oceanographic factors, make the species particularly challenging to manage. The fishery is also highly important to the local economy; it is fished by one third of the small scale vessels in Galicia.

Octopus traps and fishing gear. Cofradía de Bueu, Spain.

A key element in the design of this forum was the facilitation of participative and constructive dialogue. Stakeholders worked together to construct a shared vision of the current status of the Octopus fishery and recommendations for the future. Participants split into three smaller working groups in order to rotate and share experiences and knowledge centered on three topics: Management, Science and Research and Commercialisation of Markets.

After working through ideas within the three topics over the course of the two days, we came together as a larger group to find consensus on our main recommendations. A few ideas from each group include:

 

 

 

Management:

• There should be a multiannual joint benchmark for Octopus management in the region that takes the localised reality for the fleet into account, while allowing for more coordination amongst neighboring authorities.
• The plan should incorporate elements to monitor, enforce, and evaluate its implementation; while looking at both biological and socioeconomic factors and including all stakeholders– fishing sector, administration, scientific bodies, and civil society.
• Sector participation and dialogue in between various actors should be improved and strengthened.
• The biological assessment of the resource must be improved to facilitate more effective management.

Science and research:

• We need to design management systems that are more proactive, dynamic, and based on scientific criteria, sector participation and co-management.
• Work needs to be done to further identify and protect areas that are important for the biological cycle of the octopus. We identified several lines of research that need expansion such as population genetics of the stocks and the identification of essential habitats.
• Multidirectional communication between stakeholders should be improved, namely between the science and fishing sector. Examples include: Fishermen participation in the development of research plans and incorporation of traditional knowledge. Results should be communicated to fishermen in an effective way.
• Simple technology to assist in georeferenced data collection should be employed.

Marketing and Commercialisation:

• We should create groups that meet periodically to continue the work done within the forum and further the work to incorporate the commercialisation dimension of the fishery.
• A strategic marketing plan that considers the current value chain, the end consumer, and dimensions that allow for the responsible consumption of Octopus should be developed.
• We should guarantee clear information for the consumer by incorporating elements of traceability.

One major conclusion that came through from every group was a strongly felt need to improve and strengthen the dialogue between actors from the fishing sector, management, and scientific bodies.

 

We have facilitated many workshops with the fishing sector and other stakeholders in Spain; but this one was the most challenging so far given the number of participants, participatory approach, size and importance of the fishery and potential high tensions between octopus fishers and the Administration in Galicia. We know that these types of fora are essential and participants really appreciate the opportunity to share their knowledge, experiences and aspirations towards the common goals of environmental and socio-economic sustainability.

Perhaps the most rewarding part of holding this kind of forum is seeing boundaries break down amongst groups who typically do not have the opportunity to communicate about shared challenges and collaborative solutions. Fishermen, scientists, academics and government officials had honest conversations about what hasn’t worked in the past and what could be done better in the future. One fisherman expressed the view that he had never taken part in an inter-sector discussion quite like this, where he felt that the industry perspective was truly listened to and his input valued. It’s conversations like these that lay the foundations for real change.

We especially value the fact that the fishing sector recognises the need for avoiding individualistic behavior, and ensuring coordination and cooperation for shared benefits. Further, the Administration recognizes the need for true participation from the fishing sector, not just their representatives, in discussions and agreements. The new EU Common Fisheries Policy and European Maritime Fisheries Fund encourage multi-stakeholder participation, transparency and accountability and therefore the legal and financial basis exists to support participatory design and implementation of Multiannual Plans.

This kind of forum is also important for achieving conservation goals. Although there is some annual fluctuation due to factors outside of fishing, octopus fishermen saw their captures decrease by 50% in 2013 which rang alarm bells for stakeholders invested in this iconic species. Establishing a solid base of information to understand why these fluctuations happen, clear lines of communication between stakeholders, and dynamic management systems will ensure its sustainability both environmentally and for the communities dependent on the species.

Overall, the forum was a success. Participants seemed energised and eager to find opportunities to continue to participate in dialogue about fisheries management, to tackle the challenges head on and put their recommendations into action. In addition, lines of communication between Portuguese and Spanish stakeholders were identified to ensure coherence in management between both countries. This forum was an example of stakeholder engagement at its best and of the type of discussions needed to help drive a shift towards sustainable fisheries for coastal fisheries in Spain. The timing could not be better as it is essential that we take collective action now to help the long term sustainability of the fishery.

By: Raul Garcia Rodriguez, WWF Spain, and Pam Ruiter, EDF EU Oceans Raul Garcia is WWF Spain’s Fisheries Officer and Pam Ruiter is a Project Manager for EDF’s EU Oceans team based in Spain, where EDF and WWF are collaborating on a project working with coastal fisheries. Shared by fishermen from Spain and Portugal, the […]

By Pam Ruiter

Photo: Pseudopanax at English Wikipedia

By: Raul Garcia Rodriguez, WWF Spain, and Pam Ruiter, EDF EU Oceans

Raul Garcia is WWF Spain’s Fisheries Officer and Pam Ruiter is a Project Manager for EDF’s EU Oceans team based in Spain, where EDF and WWF are collaborating on a project working with coastal fisheries.

Shared by fishermen from Spain and Portugal, the octopus fishery in the waters off the coast of the Iberian Peninsula is economically important and complex. In late January, we attended the International Forum on Octopus Management in the Iberian Peninsula held in Santiago de Compostela, Spain to discuss management challenges in the fishery.

The forum was organised by WWF Spain, WWF UK and the EU GAP2 project, and included a group of 70 stakeholders including members of the fishing sector, management and civil society from across Spain, as well as representatives from Portugal.

Contributing to the complexity of managing the fishery, biologically octopuses are a short lived species – living only 1-2 years – which already makes scientifically estimating their status challenging. Additionally, information gaps regarding early life phases and recruitment, as well as the fact that its annual abundance is also affected by different climatological or oceanographic factors, make the species particularly challenging to manage. The fishery is also highly important to the local economy; it is fished by one third of the small scale vessels in Galicia.

Octopus traps and fishing gear. Cofradía de Bueu, Spain.

A key element in the design of this forum was the facilitation of participative and constructive dialogue. Stakeholders worked together to construct a shared vision of the current status of the Octopus fishery and recommendations for the future. Participants split into three smaller working groups in order to rotate and share experiences and knowledge centered on three topics: Management, Science and Research and Commercialisation of Markets.

After working through ideas within the three topics over the course of the two days, we came together as a larger group to find consensus on our main recommendations. A few ideas from each group include:

 

 

 

Management:

• There should be a multiannual joint benchmark for Octopus management in the region that takes the localised reality for the fleet into account, while allowing for more coordination amongst neighboring authorities.
• The plan should incorporate elements to monitor, enforce, and evaluate its implementation; while looking at both biological and socioeconomic factors and including all stakeholders– fishing sector, administration, scientific bodies, and civil society.
• Sector participation and dialogue in between various actors should be improved and strengthened.
• The biological assessment of the resource must be improved to facilitate more effective management.

Science and research:

• We need to design management systems that are more proactive, dynamic, and based on scientific criteria, sector participation and co-management.
• Work needs to be done to further identify and protect areas that are important for the biological cycle of the octopus. We identified several lines of research that need expansion such as population genetics of the stocks and the identification of essential habitats.
• Multidirectional communication between stakeholders should be improved, namely between the science and fishing sector. Examples include: Fishermen participation in the development of research plans and incorporation of traditional knowledge. Results should be communicated to fishermen in an effective way.
• Simple technology to assist in georeferenced data collection should be employed.

Marketing and Commercialisation:

• We should create groups that meet periodically to continue the work done within the forum and further the work to incorporate the commercialisation dimension of the fishery.
• A strategic marketing plan that considers the current value chain, the end consumer, and dimensions that allow for the responsible consumption of Octopus should be developed.
• We should guarantee clear information for the consumer by incorporating elements of traceability.

One major conclusion that came through from every group was a strongly felt need to improve and strengthen the dialogue between actors from the fishing sector, management, and scientific bodies.

 

We have facilitated many workshops with the fishing sector and other stakeholders in Spain; but this one was the most challenging so far given the number of participants, participatory approach, size and importance of the fishery and potential high tensions between octopus fishers and the Administration in Galicia. We know that these types of fora are essential and participants really appreciate the opportunity to share their knowledge, experiences and aspirations towards the common goals of environmental and socio-economic sustainability.

Perhaps the most rewarding part of holding this kind of forum is seeing boundaries break down amongst groups who typically do not have the opportunity to communicate about shared challenges and collaborative solutions. Fishermen, scientists, academics and government officials had honest conversations about what hasn’t worked in the past and what could be done better in the future. One fisherman expressed the view that he had never taken part in an inter-sector discussion quite like this, where he felt that the industry perspective was truly listened to and his input valued. It’s conversations like these that lay the foundations for real change.

We especially value the fact that the fishing sector recognises the need for avoiding individualistic behavior, and ensuring coordination and cooperation for shared benefits. Further, the Administration recognizes the need for true participation from the fishing sector, not just their representatives, in discussions and agreements. The new EU Common Fisheries Policy and European Maritime Fisheries Fund encourage multi-stakeholder participation, transparency and accountability and therefore the legal and financial basis exists to support participatory design and implementation of Multiannual Plans.

Overall, the forum was a success. Participants seemed energised and eager to find opportunities to continue to participate in dialogue about fisheries management, to tackle the challenges head on and put their recommendations into action. In addition, lines of communication between Portuguese and Spanish stakeholders were identified to ensure coherence in management between both countries. This forum was an example of stakeholder engagement at its best and of the type of discussions needed to help drive a shift towards sustainable fisheries for coastal fisheries in Spain. The timing could not be better as it is essential that we take collective action now to help the long term sustainability of the fishery.

By: Raul Garcia Rodriguez, WWF Spain, and Pam Ruiter, EDF EU Oceans Raul Garcia is WWF Spain’s Fisheries Officer and Pam Ruiter is a Project Manager for EDF’s EU Oceans team based in Spain, where EDF and WWF are collaborating on a project working with coastal fisheries. Shared by fishermen from Spain and Portugal, the […]

By Pam Ruiter

Photo: Pseudopanax at English Wikipedia

By: Raul Garcia Rodriguez, WWF Spain, and Pam Ruiter, EDF EU Oceans

Raul Garcia is WWF Spain’s Fisheries Officer and Pam Ruiter is a Project Manager for EDF’s EU Oceans team based in Spain, where EDF and WWF are collaborating on a project working with coastal fisheries.

Shared by fishermen from Spain and Portugal, the octopus fishery in the waters off the coast of the Iberian Peninsula is economically important and complex. In late January, we attended the International Forum on Octopus Management in the Iberian Peninsula held in Santiago de Compostela, Spain to discuss management challenges in the fishery.

The forum was organised by WWF Spain, WWF UK and the EU GAP2 project, and included a group of 70 stakeholders including members of the fishing sector, management and civil society from across Spain, as well as representatives from Portugal.

Contributing to the complexity of managing the fishery, biologically octopuses are a short lived species – living only 1-2 years – which already makes scientifically estimating their status challenging. Additionally, information gaps regarding early life phases and recruitment, as well as the fact that its annual abundance is also affected by different climatological or oceanographic factors, make the species particularly challenging to manage. The fishery is also highly important to the local economy; it is fished by one third of the small scale vessels in Galicia.

Octopus traps and fishing gear. Cofradía de Bueu, Spain.

A key element in the design of this forum was the facilitation of participative and constructive dialogue. Stakeholders worked together to construct a shared vision of the current status of the Octopus fishery and recommendations for the future. Participants split into three smaller working groups in order to rotate and share experiences and knowledge centered on three topics: Management, Science and Research and Commercialisation of Markets.

After working through ideas within the three topics over the course of the two days, we came together as a larger group to find consensus on our main recommendations. A few ideas from each group include:

 

 

 

Management:

• There should be a multiannual joint benchmark for Octopus management in the region that takes the localised reality for the fleet into account, while allowing for more coordination amongst neighboring authorities.
• The plan should incorporate elements to monitor, enforce, and evaluate its implementation; while looking at both biological and socioeconomic factors and including all stakeholders– fishing sector, administration, scientific bodies, and civil society.
• Sector participation and dialogue in between various actors should be improved and strengthened.
• The biological assessment of the resource must be improved to facilitate more effective management.

Science and research:

• We need to design management systems that are more proactive, dynamic, and based on scientific criteria, sector participation and co-management.
• Work needs to be done to further identify and protect areas that are important for the biological cycle of the octopus. We identified several lines of research that need expansion such as population genetics of the stocks and the identification of essential habitats.
• Multidirectional communication between stakeholders should be improved, namely between the science and fishing sector. Examples include: Fishermen participation in the development of research plans and incorporation of traditional knowledge. Results should be communicated to fishermen in an effective way.
• Simple technology to assist in georeferenced data collection should be employed.

Marketing and Commercialisation:

• We should create groups that meet periodically to continue the work done within the forum and further the work to incorporate the commercialisation dimension of the fishery.
• A strategic marketing plan that considers the current value chain, the end consumer, and dimensions that allow for the responsible consumption of Octopus should be developed.
• We should guarantee clear information for the consumer by incorporating elements of traceability.

One major conclusion that came through from every group was a strongly felt need to improve and strengthen the dialogue between actors from the fishing sector, management, and scientific bodies.

 

We have facilitated many workshops with the fishing sector and other stakeholders in Spain; but this one was the most challenging so far given the number of participants, participatory approach, size and importance of the fishery and potential high tensions between octopus fishers and the Administration in Galicia. We know that these types of fora are essential and participants really appreciate the opportunity to share their knowledge, experiences and aspirations towards the common goals of environmental and socio-economic sustainability.

Perhaps the most rewarding part of holding this kind of forum is seeing boundaries break down amongst groups who typically do not have the opportunity to communicate about shared challenges and collaborative solutions. Fishermen, scientists, academics and government officials had honest conversations about what hasn’t worked in the past and what could be done better in the future. One fisherman expressed the view that he had never taken part in an inter-sector discussion quite like this, where he felt that the industry perspective was truly listened to and his input valued. It’s conversations like these that lay the foundations for real change.

We especially value the fact that the fishing sector recognises the need for avoiding individualistic behavior, and ensuring coordination and cooperation for shared benefits. Further, the Administration recognizes the need for true participation from the fishing sector, not just their representatives, in discussions and agreements. The new EU Common Fisheries Policy and European Maritime Fisheries Fund encourage multi-stakeholder participation, transparency and accountability and therefore the legal and financial basis exists to support participatory design and implementation of Multiannual Plans.

Overall, the forum was a success. Participants seemed energised and eager to find opportunities to continue to participate in dialogue about fisheries management, to tackle the challenges head on and put their recommendations into action. In addition, lines of communication between Portuguese and Spanish stakeholders were identified to ensure coherence in management between both countries. This forum was an example of stakeholder engagement at its best and of the type of discussions needed to help drive a shift towards sustainable fisheries for coastal fisheries in Spain. The timing could not be better as it is essential that we take collective action now to help the long term sustainability of the fishery.

When it comes to climate action, it’s a good thing that smart people keep building scenarios for cleaning up global energy production. Those visions of the future are necessary – but they tend to lack an essential ingredient.

One team of researchers recently reviewed 11 such studies, all of them offering plans for “50 to 90 percent reductions in global CO2 emissions by mid-century.” But as the writer David Roberts observed last month in Grist, “most decarbonization scenarios are thought experiments, not practical roadmaps…We need to start thinking in practical terms about how to get the technologies we need ready.”

I couldn’t agree more. In fact, for the past, year Environmental Defense Fund has been drawing up a short-term blueprint for climate action, part of new strategic plan that will guide all of our work for the next five years.

We came up with a program to accomplish something audacious: stopping once and for all the centuries-long rise in global greenhouse gas emissions and seeing them peak, level off and begin to decline within the next five years. We call it turning the corner toward a stable climate.

WATCH: Getting to climate stability

Of course it won’t be easy and EDF can’t do it alone – it will take hard work by people all over the world. But the window of opportunity is open. Though global CO2 emissions from energy use are still going up, in recent years their rate of increase has been cut in half.

To capitalize on that and turn the corner once and for all, here are four of the big levers we need to pull now:

1. Focus on the biggest emitters: The U.S., China and Europe.

For the United States, turning the corner by 2020 means seeing through the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed limits on carbon pollution from power plants – our single biggest source of carbon pollution – while making sure the billions of dollars that will be spent on upgrading our electric grid are invested wisely.

In the U.S. and Europe alike, it means sweeping aside outdated regulations that are getting in the way of clean energy and energy efficiency – which is why our fastest-growing program at EDF is devoted to doing just that. 

And for China, where EDF has been working for 20 years, it means, by 2020, capping half of the nation’s carbon emissions, improving energy efficiency by 25 percent and shifting the country’s energy mix to one-third renewable energy, natural gas and nuclear – up from 15 percent in 2013.

In November, the U.S. and China made a historic announcement about cutting global warming pollution and committing themselves to the clean energy path. Now we’re going pedal to the metal down that road.

2. Reduce short-lived climate pollutants such as methane.

Methane is 84 times more dangerous to our climate than carbon dioxide in the short term, and it accounts for about 25 percent of the warming we’re experiencing today. Any serious plan to combat global warming must address methane, which is is vented and leaked from wellheads, compressors, and pipelines all across the natural gas system. (Natural gas is mostly methane.)

A few years ago, when EDF began sounding the alarm about methane, almost no one was talking about it. Now we’re starting to make genuine progress. The federal government has proposed rules to control emissions and set a target of achieving a 40-45-percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2020 –something we can do at bargain prices.

According to a study by consultant ICF International, if we stopped 40 percent of methane emissions, the cost of a thousand cubic feet of natural gas would increase by an average of just one penny. It’s the biggest environmental bargain I know.

3. Halt deforestation in the Amazon.

Global deforestation is responsible for about 15 percent of the world’s carbon emissions, and clearing will go on until we make forests more valuable alive than dead. A global carbon marketplace where rainforest nations are rewarded for preserving their forests is a key strategy.

EDF has been working with the Kayapo and other Amazonian tribes while encouraging carbon markets in California and elsewhere to allow capital to flow to the forest defenders. Already, there are encouraging signs: Brazil has reduced its rate of deforestation by 70 percent over the past decade.

Our goal by 2020 is to see zero net emissions of greenhouse gases from Amazon deforestation.

4. Tackle the market failure that caused this problem in the first place.

The president and the EPA have used many, though not all, of the options they have to cut carbon pollution under existing law. Turning the corner by 2020 doesn’t depend on Congressional action – but we cannot solve the climate crisis without action in Washington.

Accelerating the clean energy technology we need for long-term decarbonization requires a price and limit on carbon, a trigger for a worldwide market correction that benefits clean energy.

It’s Economics 101: When putting carbon pollution into our common atmosphere is no longer free, industry will have a bottom-line incentive to find clean alternatives – and investors, inventors and entrepreneurs will join the race.

Making climate pollution a cost of doing business is the path many governments are already taking, from California to Brussels to Beijing. It’s time for Washington to follow their example.

These and other ideas for turning the corner are laid out in detail in EDF’s new strategic plan. Please let me know what you think – and even more important, please join us as we take on the hard work of turning this blueprint into reality.

See my earlier post for the climate breakthroughs in 2014 that give me hope for 2015 and beyond.

Support us today

With your help, we can reach our goal of turning the corner toward a stable climate.

Donate today

Olearys Blog Category for Navigation: Climate

Written by Moms Clean Air Force

On February 2, 2015 EPA held a public hearing in Sacramento, CA on proposed smog standards. Moms Clean Air Force was represented by both moms testifying in the hearing room, and moms testifying remotely via video.

Smog hearing testimony from mom and MCAF member Emily Reyna:

 

Smog hearing testimony from mom and MCAF member Vanessa Warheit:

 

Smog hearing testimony from mom and MCAF member Caroly Norr:


TELL EPA TO PROTECT LITTLE LUNGS FROM SMOG





By Will Lindsey 

The third and final phase of the BP trial ended on Monday, February 2, 2015. Based on the evidence presented in this phase, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier will decide the Clean Water Act civil penalty that both BP and Anadarko, a 25 percent non-operator in the Macando well, will pay. The United States is seeking the maximum Clean Water Act penalty of up to $13.7 billion from BP and an amount more than $1 billion from Anadarko.

Throughout the trial, Judge Barbier was relatively quiet, occasionally inserting questions or points of clarification. Towards the end of the trial, however, Judge Barbier suggested on numerous occasions that some of the testimony BP was presenting was duplicative. This was especially true during the testimony of a BP exploration & production executive, Richard Morrison. As Mr. Morrison was testifying about the extent of BP’s response efforts after the spill, Judge Barbier interrupted at least twice to suggest that it was testimony that he had already heard from previous witnesses.

Judge Barbier also interrupted during the testimony of one of Anadarko’s witnesses. For its second witness, Anadarko called Kenneth Arnold, an expert in the field of safety in drilling operations. Mr. Arnold testified that requiring additional duties of non-operators, such as Clean Water Act civil penalties, could lead to confusion and ultimately a lower level of safety in drilling operations. This argument aligns with Anadarko’s overall theme – that there was no act committed by Anadarko as a non-operator, and thus assessing a Clean Water Act civil penalty against the company would not serve to deter future behavior. Judge Barbier stepped in here, however, suggesting that a policy argument such as this should be made before Congress and not in the courtroom. Despite allowing Anadarko to proceed with Mr. Arnold’s testimony, Judge Barbier noted that Congress had already clearly decided to make an “owner or operator” liable for discharges under the Clean Water Act.

The United States has several strong arguments weighing in favor of a high Clean Water Act civil penalty. The first is that there were numerous stakeholders involved in the spill response, including the U.S. Coast Guard and a number of federal agencies. Each of these entities expended time, resources and expertise in responding to the spill. Given that one of the factors that Judge Barbier will consider in assessing the civil penalty is the success of efforts to minimize or mitigate the effects of the discharge is, it is important that BP not get credit for the entirety of the spill response actions that were taken, as indeed BP was not responding to the spill in isolation. The second big point weighing in favor of a higher penalty is that lowering the civil penalty based on previously paid penalties, such as criminal penalty assessed against BP, would ultimately dilute the effect of these penalties.

During opening statements, Judge Barbier asked the parties if there was any precedent for requiring that a Clean Water Act civil penalty be paid over a specified amount of time rather than as a single lump sum. The United States indicated that there was at least one such instance in a Clean Water Act suit. This indicates, at least to some degree, that Judge Barbier is considering the option of assessing a high civil penalty against the company.

Due to the enactment of the RESTORE Act, 80 percent of the penalties resulting from this phase will go to the Gulf Coast for restoration. This funding cannot come soon enough given the high price tag that many coastal restoration projects carry with them. Ultimately, the funding stemming from this trial could mean the difference in reversing the trend of coastal wetland loss that has been impacting the gulf coast for decades.

It is unclear when exactly Judge Barbier will come out with a penalty ruling. But recent polling indicates that 70 percent of Americans believe BP should pay the maximum allowed under the Clean Water Act for its role in one of the largest oil spills in American history. It is imperative to both the Gulf and the nation that BP be held fully accountable.

By Will Lindsey 

The third and final phase of the BP trial ended on Monday, February 2, 2015. Based on the evidence presented in this phase, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier will decide the Clean Water Act civil penalty that both BP and Anadarko, a 25 percent non-operator in the Macando well, will pay. The United States is seeking the maximum Clean Water Act penalty of up to $13.7 billion from BP and an amount more than $1 billion from Anadarko.

Throughout the trial, Judge Barbier was relatively quiet, occasionally inserting questions or points of clarification. Towards the end of the trial, however, Judge Barbier suggested on numerous occasions that some of the testimony BP was presenting was duplicative. This was especially true during the testimony of a BP exploration & production executive, Richard Morrison. As Mr. Morrison was testifying about the extent of BP’s response efforts after the spill, Judge Barbier interrupted at least twice to suggest that it was testimony that he had already heard from previous witnesses.

Judge Barbier also interrupted during the testimony of one of Anadarko’s witnesses. For its second witness, Anadarko called Kenneth Arnold, an expert in the field of safety in drilling operations. Mr. Arnold testified that requiring additional duties of non-operators, such as Clean Water Act civil penalties, could lead to confusion and ultimately a lower level of safety in drilling operations. This argument aligns with Anadarko’s overall theme – that there was no act committed by Anadarko as a non-operator, and thus assessing a Clean Water Act civil penalty against the company would not serve to deter future behavior. Judge Barbier stepped in here, however, suggesting that a policy argument such as this should be made before Congress and not in the courtroom. Despite allowing Anadarko to proceed with Mr. Arnold’s testimony, Judge Barbier noted that Congress had already clearly decided to make an “owner or operator” liable for discharges under the Clean Water Act.

The United States has several strong arguments weighing in favor of a high Clean Water Act civil penalty. The first is that there were numerous stakeholders involved in the spill response, including the U.S. Coast Guard and a number of federal agencies. Each of these entities expended time, resources and expertise in responding to the spill. Given that one of the factors that Judge Barbier will consider in assessing the civil penalty is the success of efforts to minimize or mitigate the effects of the discharge is, it is important that BP not get credit for the entirety of the spill response actions that were taken, as indeed BP was not responding to the spill in isolation. The second big point weighing in favor of a higher penalty is that lowering the civil penalty based on previously paid penalties, such as criminal penalty assessed against BP, would ultimately dilute the effect of these penalties.

During opening statements, Judge Barbier asked the parties if there was any precedent for requiring that a Clean Water Act civil penalty be paid over a specified amount of time rather than as a single lump sum. The United States indicated that there was at least one such instance in a Clean Water Act suit. This indicates, at least to some degree, that Judge Barbier is considering the option of assessing a high civil penalty against the company.

Due to the enactment of the RESTORE Act, 80 percent of the penalties resulting from this phase will go to the Gulf Coast for restoration. This funding cannot come soon enough given the high price tag that many coastal restoration projects carry with them. Ultimately, the funding stemming from this trial could mean the difference in reversing the trend of coastal wetland loss that has been impacting the gulf coast for decades.

It is unclear when exactly Judge Barbier will come out with a penalty ruling. But recent polling indicates that 70 percent of Americans believe BP should pay the maximum allowed under the Clean Water Act for its role in one of the largest oil spills in American history. It is imperative to both the Gulf and the nation that BP be held fully accountable.

Does BP deserve mercy in setting Deepwater Horizon penalty?
By Tom Zeller Jr., Forbes. Feb. 08, 2015
“While it will likely be decades before we fully comprehend the extent of damage to wildlife, we do know that nearly five years after the explosion, dolphins are dying in high numbers, sea turtles are failing to nest, and oyster production remains low,” said Collin O’Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, as testimony in the penalty phase of the trial got underway last month. “It is our obligation as a nation to hold BP accountable.” (Read More)
 
Florida Everglades would be a winner, Louisiana coast a loser under proposed Obama budget
By John Snell, WVUE-Fox8. Feb. 09, 2015
“The state's estimated $170 million annual take represents one-third to one-half of the anticipated funding for the state's Coastal Master Plan, Zeringue said, and the largest continuing source of revenue.” (Read More)

Missing oil from Deepwater Horizon found on sea floor
By Tessa Stuart, Audubon Magazine. Feb. 09, 2015
“A recent survey shows that 70 percent of Americans think BP should pay the maximum fine allowed under the Act.  But ultimately a judge will decide after hearing arguments in the third and final portion of BP’s trial, which got underway last month.” (Read More)

Does BP deserve mercy in setting Deepwater Horizon penalty?
By Tom Zeller Jr., Forbes. Feb. 08, 2015
“While it will likely be decades before we fully comprehend the extent of damage to wildlife, we do know that nearly five years after the explosion, dolphins are dying in high numbers, sea turtles are failing to nest, and oyster production remains low,” said Collin O’Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, as testimony in the penalty phase of the trial got underway last month. “It is our obligation as a nation to hold BP accountable.” (Read More)
 
Florida Everglades would be a winner, Louisiana coast a loser under proposed Obama budget
By John Snell, WVUE-Fox8. Feb. 09, 2015
“The state's estimated $170 million annual take represents one-third to one-half of the anticipated funding for the state's Coastal Master Plan, Zeringue said, and the largest continuing source of revenue.” (Read More)

Missing oil from Deepwater Horizon found on sea floor
By Tessa Stuart, Audubon Magazine. Feb. 09, 2015
“A recent survey shows that 70 percent of Americans think BP should pay the maximum fine allowed under the Act.  But ultimately a judge will decide after hearing arguments in the third and final portion of BP’s trial, which got underway last month.” (Read More)

By EDF Blogs

By: Matt Golden, Senior Energy Finance Consultant

The Investor Confidence Project (ICP), an EDF initiative designed to unlock investment in energy efficiency, is making progress toward completing a credentialing system that would provide third-party validation of an energy efficiency project. The latest development is the Project Developer Credential, the second of three in the ICP credentialing system.

ICP is accelerating the development of a global energy efficiency market by standardizing how projects are developed and energy savings are calculated. The ICP system includes a set of protocols for developing energy efficiency projects as well as a credentialing system.

The Project Developer Credential is given to those developers who are able to properly deploy the ICP protocols when undertaking an energy efficiency retrofit. This latest development is an important step forward for investors of all types, especially building owners, who can now select developers from a growing list of credentialed providers.

Already, ICP has signed up 11 developers who’ve met the basic requirements and been trained in the ICP protocols: Johnson Controls, Trane, Pepco Energy Services, SCI Energy, Performance Systems Development, TRC, Association for Energy Affordability, Environmental Building Strategies, Swinerton Builders, H.T. Lyons, and L&S Energy Services, Inc.

Those firms who have received the Project Developer Credential enjoy enhanced credibility, additional brand awareness, and preferred status with an increasing number of programs and investors who are partnering with ICP to increase deal flow.

Under the ICP credentialing system, credentialed project developers originate projects and proposals, credentialed software providers offer standard documentation, and credentialed quality assurance providers conduct a third-party review. Projects conforming to this process then receive the Investor Ready Energy Efficiency™ (IREE) certification.

The process is akin to audited financials, in which certified IREE projects provide investors and building owners with a new level of confidence in project engineering, performance, and returns.

Last year, ICP released the Software Provider Credential, which is standardizing the process of developing and documenting energy efficiency projects. To receive the ICP Software Provider Credential, software providers must enable facilitated access to all of the required documentation as well as support the ICP workflow for creating IREE projects.

In the coming months, the Investor Confidence Project plans to release the last of its three credentials, the Quality Assurance Credential, which will add the very important step of allowing third parties to verify projects conform to the ICP protocols.

We believe the release of this latest credential for project developers will expand the demand for energy efficiency projects since building owners will know they are dealing with highly trained developers. This credential, combined with the rollout of the IREE certification later this year, will create a robust, active market in energy efficiency across the country.

By EDF Blogs

By: Matt Golden, Senior Energy Finance Consultant

The Investor Confidence Project (ICP), an EDF initiative designed to unlock investment in energy efficiency, is making progress toward completing a credentialing system that would provide third-party validation of an energy efficiency project. The latest development is the Project Developer Credential, the second of three in the ICP credentialing system.

ICP is accelerating the development of a global energy efficiency market by standardizing how projects are developed and energy savings are calculated. The ICP system includes a set of protocols for developing energy efficiency projects as well as a credentialing system.

The Project Developer Credential is given to those developers who are able to properly deploy the ICP protocols when undertaking an energy efficiency retrofit. This latest development is an important step forward for investors of all types, especially building owners, who can now select developers from a growing list of credentialed providers.

Already, ICP has signed up 11 developers who’ve met the basic requirements and been trained in the ICP protocols: Johnson Controls, Trane, Pepco Energy Services, SCI Energy, Performance Systems Development, TRC, Association for Energy Affordability, Environmental Building Strategies, Swinerton Builders, H.T. Lyons, and L&S Energy Services, Inc.

Those firms who have received the Project Developer Credential enjoy enhanced credibility, additional brand awareness, and preferred status with an increasing number of programs and investors who are partnering with ICP to increase deal flow.

Under the ICP credentialing system, credentialed project developers originate projects and proposals, credentialed software providers offer standard documentation, and credentialed quality assurance providers conduct a third-party review. Projects conforming to this process then receive the Investor Ready Energy Efficiency™ (IREE) certification.

The process is akin to audited financials, in which certified IREE projects provide investors and building owners with a new level of confidence in project engineering, performance, and returns.

Last year, ICP released the Software Provider Credential, which is standardizing the process of developing and documenting energy efficiency projects. To receive the ICP Software Provider Credential, software providers must enable facilitated access to all of the required documentation as well as support the ICP workflow for creating IREE projects.

In the coming months, the Investor Confidence Project plans to release the last of its three credentials, the Quality Assurance Credential, which will add the very important step of allowing third parties to verify projects conform to the ICP protocols.

We believe the release of this latest credential for project developers will expand the demand for energy efficiency projects since building owners will know they are dealing with highly trained developers. This credential, combined with the rollout of the IREE certification later this year, will create a robust, active market in energy efficiency across the country.

By EDF Blogs

By: Matt Golden, Senior Energy Finance Consultant

The Investor Confidence Project (ICP), an EDF initiative designed to unlock investment in energy efficiency, is making progress toward completing a credentialing system that would provide third-party validation of an energy efficiency project. The latest development is the Project Developer Credential, the second of three in the ICP credentialing system.

ICP is accelerating the development of a global energy efficiency market by standardizing how projects are developed and energy savings are calculated. The ICP system includes a set of protocols for developing energy efficiency projects as well as a credentialing system.

The Project Developer Credential is given to those developers who are able to properly deploy the ICP protocols when undertaking an energy efficiency retrofit. This latest development is an important step forward for investors of all types, especially building owners, who can now select developers from a growing list of credentialed providers.

Already, ICP has signed up 11 developers who’ve met the basic requirements and been trained in the ICP protocols: Johnson Controls, Trane, Pepco Energy Services, SCI Energy, Performance Systems Development, TRC, Association for Energy Affordability, Environmental Building Strategies, Swinerton Builders, H.T. Lyons, and L&S Energy Services, Inc.

Those firms who have received the Project Developer Credential enjoy enhanced credibility, additional brand awareness, and preferred status with an increasing number of programs and investors who are partnering with ICP to increase deal flow.

Under the ICP credentialing system, credentialed project developers originate projects and proposals, credentialed software providers offer standard documentation, and credentialed quality assurance providers conduct a third-party review. Projects conforming to this process then receive the Investor Ready Energy Efficiency™ (IREE) certification.

The process is akin to audited financials, in which certified IREE projects provide investors and building owners with a new level of confidence in project engineering, performance, and returns.

Last year, ICP released the Software Provider Credential, which is standardizing the process of developing and documenting energy efficiency projects. To receive the ICP Software Provider Credential, software providers must enable facilitated access to all of the required documentation as well as support the ICP workflow for creating IREE projects.

In the coming months, the Investor Confidence Project plans to release the last of its three credentials, the Quality Assurance Credential, which will add the very important step of allowing third parties to verify projects conform to the ICP protocols.

We believe the release of this latest credential for project developers will expand the demand for energy efficiency projects since building owners will know they are dealing with highly trained developers. This credential, combined with the rollout of the IREE certification later this year, will create a robust, active market in energy efficiency across the country.

By EDF Blogs

By: Matt Golden, Senior Energy Finance Consultant

The Investor Confidence Project (ICP), an EDF initiative designed to unlock investment in energy efficiency, is making progress toward completing a credentialing system that would provide third-party validation of an energy efficiency project. The latest development is the Project Developer Credential, the second of three in the ICP credentialing system.

ICP is accelerating the development of a global energy efficiency market by standardizing how projects are developed and energy savings are calculated. The ICP system includes a set of protocols for developing energy efficiency projects as well as a credentialing system.

The Project Developer Credential is given to those developers who are able to properly deploy the ICP protocols when undertaking an energy efficiency retrofit. This latest development is an important step forward for investors of all types, especially building owners, who can now select developers from a growing list of credentialed providers.

Already, ICP has signed up 11 developers who’ve met the basic requirements and been trained in the ICP protocols: Johnson Controls, Trane, Pepco Energy Services, SCI Energy, Performance Systems Development, TRC, Association for Energy Affordability, Environmental Building Strategies, Swinerton Builders, H.T. Lyons, and L&S Energy Services, Inc.

Those firms who have received the Project Developer Credential enjoy enhanced credibility, additional brand awareness, and preferred status with an increasing number of programs and investors who are partnering with ICP to increase deal flow.

Under the ICP credentialing system, credentialed project developers originate projects and proposals, credentialed software providers offer standard documentation, and credentialed quality assurance providers conduct a third-party review. Projects conforming to this process then receive the Investor Ready Energy Efficiency™ (IREE) certification.

The process is akin to audited financials, in which certified IREE projects provide investors and building owners with a new level of confidence in project engineering, performance, and returns.

Last year, ICP released the Software Provider Credential, which is standardizing the process of developing and documenting energy efficiency projects. To receive the ICP Software Provider Credential, software providers must enable facilitated access to all of the required documentation as well as support the ICP workflow for creating IREE projects.

In the coming months, the Investor Confidence Project plans to release the last of its three credentials, the Quality Assurance Credential, which will add the very important step of allowing third parties to verify projects conform to the ICP protocols.

We believe the release of this latest credential for project developers will expand the demand for energy efficiency projects since building owners will know they are dealing with highly trained developers. This credential, combined with the rollout of the IREE certification later this year, will create a robust, active market in energy efficiency across the country.

Written by Bridget James

 

My eldest son has already had many “firsts” this 2014-2015 school year. He began the first grade, enjoying new knowledge and new friendships. He lost his first three teeth, and proudly speaks with the awkwardness of having them missing. He now knows how to operate a telephone without our help, calling his Dad frequently to find out when he’ll be home from work. And when our air quality is bad, he refuses to go outdoors without wearing his facemask, because he knows the bad air is “dangerous” for his health. As he reaches each milestone, I reflect upon how far he has come and how grateful we are for his health, despite being born into an area that suffers greatly from poor air quality.

In Utah, January is a terrible month for air quality. A number of cities suffer from inversion periods and those mountainous areas with large-scale industry emitting pollutants into the air suffer. According to the Utah Division of Air Quality, the small oil town of Vernal, Utah in the Uintah Basin, has a high number of particulate matter and ozone. Accumulating like soup in a bowl, this can affect birth outcomes and the health and development of children. Every year around this time, I’m reminded that I was pregnant with my first son during a bad inversion period. I wonder if the toxic air was the cause for his developmental delays. And I’m not alone.

It was May of 2013, when Donna Young, a midwife in Vernal, attended a funeral for a baby who she delivered stillborn, her first ever as a midwife. As she proceeded through the cemetery grounds, she noticed a tragic pattern: an unusually large number of infants laid to rest that same year — totaling 13 in all. These stillborn deaths are a high number of dead infants for a population of this size. In fact, in 2010, 1 out of every 95 plots buried in this cemetery held a baby. In 2013, the number rose to 1 in 14. What was causing the spike in infant deaths? Concerned about the tragic losses, she alerted authorities. A health care provider by trade, Young focused on determining why they lost their lives…with one possibility looming — dirty air.

Vernal, Utah is a gas and oil boomtown located in the eastern part of the state. Its oil rich reserves have created a town largely supported by, and dependent on, big oil. The of the oil industry has caused a steep decline in Vernal’s air quality. And the effect of these infant deaths cast a dark shadow over this tiny town.

Vernal has an unusually high number of both particulate matter and ozone, and studies show that poor air quality can affect birth outcomes. Because Vernal thrives off the oil and gas industry, Young’s findings sparked a large controversy including vandalism and threats to Young, who says, “I just really, really want to find out what is going on.” I would also like to know what’s going on.

In order to protect the future of health our children, there must be stronger regulation of the power industry. Currently, the Tri-County Health Department in Vernal is working with the Utah Department of Health to see if the number of dead babies in 2013 is correct.

I look forward to getting to the heart of the matter and uncovering the sad truth. Meanwhile, I hope my young family will continue to discover new “firsts” – we’ll just be doing it wearing facemasks.


TELL EPA TO PROTECT LITTLE LUNGS FROM SMOG