Carbon-Pros Analyst Blog

If you've been following my blog posts and progress on the book, "Smart Grid: The Business and Technology Landscape," you might have noticed the lack of posts since October. The book has progressed greatly and is more than half complete. Part One has been reviewed and revised. The reason for my recent silence is that I have run into a health problem and it is taking all my attention. I will be writing again as time permits but for much of this quarter I won't be posting to the blog. I look forward to talking with you soon. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 12:53 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Google refers to its architecture as a three-layer stack, most of which was developed in-house. At the top of the stack are Google software services such as search, advertising, email, maps, and many others. In the middle of the stack is their distributed system architecture. This includes the Google File System (GFS), a distributed storage system (Bigtable), and a programming model (MapReduce) to support parallel processing.

At the bottom of the stack are the hardware and OS. Google operates hundreds of thousands of machines in 30-40 data centers. Each machine uses a standard AMD/Intel x86 chipset running a customized version of Linux. Each server has its own 12-volt battery to supply power in case the main power supply goes down.

Google does not say how many servers they operate but observers have estimated that the power required for a half-million servers ranges upwards of 20 megawatts and would cost in the neighborhood of $2 million per month in electricity charges. Google has an obsessive focus on energy efficiency. Fortunately, they have recently started to share some of their knowledge with the rest of the world.

If you wonder what this has to do with smart grid, it's simple. The smart grid needs to be architected for massive scalability with millions of devices including meters that transmit readings as often as every 15 minutes. This particular note will appear in the book as a sidebar relating to our discussion of enterprise application architectures.

Sources: High Scalability, Wikipedia, and CNET
http://highscalability.com/google-architecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_platform
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10209580-92.html

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Greetings on a fine Friday afternoon! TGIF. I can now admit to being stuck in the Rocky Mountains the past week without access to the internet. My trip was part work and part vacation. The vacation activity was hiking in the wilderness around Crested Butte Colorado. That area is pristine and spectacular. It was a great way to recharge my batteries. Hitting the hot springs on the drive home was icing on the cake.

My work activity was focused on finishing Part One of my book. I will have the first five chapters ready for reviewers during the coming week. If the editing goes smoothly, I will start posting to the blog again. My topical coverage will shift toward technical architecture, covering both networks and applications. The week of Sep 21, I am attending Grid Week in Washington D.C. My interviews there will be focused on Smart Grid architecture, the subject of the next two sections of the book. My blog posts that week will be opportunistic covering both product announcements and research findings.

Let me know if you are attending Grid Week and would like to schedule a meeting. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 01:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The climate models from 15 years ago have proven relatively accurate in predicting trends in global temperatures. Almost every measure that was predicted in 1995 is in line with observed records today. Dr. Barron identified these areas as examples of the accuracy of those models:

• The stratosphere has cooled as predicted and the Earth's surface temperatures have increased as predicted.
• The “big three” of CO2, water vapor, and melting ice caps have changed in line with predictions. Water vapor has gone up, sea levels are rising, Arctic sea ice is retreating, land-based snow cover is in decline per the model, but sea ice is disappearing faster than predicted.
  
• Note that CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHGs), the sun, and land cover change are referred to as "forcings" of the climate system. Water vapor and melting ice caps are responses to these forcings that can amplify them.  Relative to GHGs and land cover, the sun appears not to play as big of a role in transient climate change.  This is not to say that the sun is unimportant, just that changes in solar output cannot explain the long term trends in climate.
  

Besides confirming the models from 15 years ago, scientists have gone back 100 years with today's models and run them forward to today. The results have shown to accurately predict our 2009 environment with and without CO2 forcing.

Dr. Barron said that there are more than one million lines of code in current models, and that they cannot be tampered with, and cannot be gamed. Many different countries have independent models with significant differences yet all are predicting temperature increases within a reasonably narrow band. He said it is nearly inconceivable that worldwide results from different groups are getting similar results due to conspiracy or collusion.

In the United States, we are looking at an increase of at least 4-6 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. Average increases could be as high as 6-12F worldwide. This will have a major impact on ecosystems. The pine beetle infestation in the Rocky Mountains is one example of the small changes taking place because winters are not as cold as in the past. Dr. Barton said that a Florida-like savanna grassland could grow all the way up into Virginia replacing much of the forest landscape in the Southeast. He concluded by saying that climate models are accurate in terms of the trend in global temperatures and getting better every year. Actual observations show that the Earth is warming much as predicted and where predictions are off, climate changes are accelerating faster than expected.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

We have been conditioned to think that flying is a major cause of greenhouse gas emissions. It's true that aviation accounts for 2% of human carbon emissions, more than 800 million metric tons annually. But most people don't realize that IT and telecom also produce about 2% of human carbon emissions. Unlike flying, IT/telecoms emissions are growing at 6% per year. Even though technology keeps getting more efficient, the rapid growth in the installed base exceeds the efficiency increases. So next time you hold off on a flight as part of your carbon reduction program, make sure you power-off your computer before leaving the office for the night. If you have any influence over your company''s IT shop, ask them how they are taking advantage of “cloud computing.” That's when the business runs some of its IT services using a remote data center connected to the Internet. The delivery of computer services over the internet on shared machines, enables computers to be run more efficiently with lower costs and lower carbon footprints.

Source: Economist, 2009
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14297036&subjectID=348924&fsrc=nwl

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:18 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Electricity is fundamental to modern life. It fuels our government, the military, our hospitals, businesses, and homes. In the future it may power significant parts of our transportation fleet. Glancing at the figure, it's hard to imagine social continuity without a reliable supply of electricity.

Concern about grid security is nothing new. There has long been a danger from terrorists blowing up key substations and taking out large blocks of electricity consumers. The US federal government admits that the legacy grid is also susceptible to electronic attacks from cyberspace. In 2009, reports surfaced that unidentified assailants had infiltrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind programs that could be used to disrupt the system.

The vulnerability of the grid represents a threat to national security and business continuity. Maintaining electrical service in the event of a crisis is crucial. Major military bases can isolate themselves from the grid and run off their own private generators and microgrids. But even the military would experience disruptions from civilian supply breakdowns in the event of regional blackouts. Businesses are the lifeblood of the economy and need to be able to continue operations. The economic impact of a grid failure can be enormous. The economic losses attributed to the 2003 blackout were at least $10 billion.

Given its reliance on digital networks, there is concern that smart grid will be even more vulnerable to cyber attack. Massive power outages caused by a cyber attack, could disrupt the economy, camouflage a military attack, or spread fear and panic. Bruce Willis' movie Die Hard 4 brought the specter of grid hijacking to the mass Hollywood audience. When designed properly, nothing like the movie will ever happen.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 directs federal agencies to support the modernization of the grid, including cyber security. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) works with the utility industry to identify and minimize grid vulnerabilities. They are also working to ensure that security is built into the smart grid as it develops. The top-level regulator, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), coordinates work across agencies. The Department of Energy (DOE) specifically requires all smart grid projects funded with stimulus dollars to include privacy and security measures in their proposals. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is working with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to set standards for smart grid development. Together, they are responsible for leading the effort to establish electronic security standards.

AMI ties together the meters on the smart grid for a given utility and a given service territory. One of the things that makes a new digital meters “smart” is the ability to transmit and receive information from its (private) digital network connection. The network connection is used to read the meter remotely. In older designs, utility meter readers would drive down the street with a digital receiver automatically recording data from each meter. In the smart grid, these readings will be sent upstream through the grid's digital overlay network for permanent recording at the utility operation center. Data capture, transmission, and recording leads to concerns about privacy.

Privacy. Smart Grid technology potentially lets your utility know who, what, when, where, how much electrical stuff you are doing inside your home. Instead of simply logging a running total for electricity usage, smart meters will log data with a date, time, and usage every 15 to 60 minutes. They will also collect power quality data such as voltage, phase, and frequency. They can also gather detailed operating information from networked thermostats, smart appliances, vehicle chargers, and anything else on the home area network.

This is all for the good. The utility can use this information to help its customers reduce their energy use and save money. Appliance manufacturers will be able to remotely diagnose problems so they can send a repair professional with the right parts. Medical device manufacturers will do the same. Over time, the scope and scale of organizations wanting access to meter data will grow (think law enforcement, public safety, social services, insurance companies, etc.). But where there is light, there is dark. And it's the bad guys we worry about.

Smart grid surveillance will be a concern to consumers wishing to maintain a high degree of privacy. But it should be a concern to anyone who might not want the bad guys to know when they are away from home. Access to meter data gives potential burglars an electronic profile of daily activities otherwise hidden inside the home. The bad guys would be able to “case the joint” remotely. In competitive electricity markets, competing utilities could try to get this data for industrial espionage to attract and retain the most profitable customers. Just as the Internet enabled new threats such as identity-theft, the future will bring new ways to exploit meter data.

Security. Going beyond privacy, the current generation of smart meters have much more functionality than old ones. Burglars, terrorists, and others with political agendas could use unauthorized access to AMI command and control systems to disrupt the delivery of services, create blackouts, disrupt load balancing commands, or create fear and panic. Crackers may be interested in breaking into command and control systems for personal satisfaction and/or bragging rights.

Some utilities will use the meter network connection to connect and disconnect electrical service. It's a money-saving extension to meter reading. This leads to speculation about the potential for “drive-by blackouts” in which a vehicle-mounted device could break into a wireless meter network and send commands to shut-off service. Since the meter network is localized at the neighborhood level, these would be relatively small-scale problems. If the attackers were to break into the network at the utility operations center, disconnect commands could (theoretically) be issued system-wide. Even still, electricity distribution is highly decentralized across thousands of utilities. So an attack on one utility will not necessarily take out other utilities.

With proper security in place, smart meter deployments and grid optimization should make the grid stronger and more resilient. Much of the grid is already automated but with older technology that may not be able to withstand new types of electronic threats. The smart grid's advanced capabilities will allow utilities to anticipate problems and mitigate its effects on the system. It will support broad use of distributed generation and storage. These will give some customers the capability to operate in island mode, isolating themselves from the public grid.

There is a lot of work to do in the area of grid security and privacy. It is crucial to confront and solve problems during the development phase. It won't be easy, but given that we successfully run our government, the military, our hospitals, and businesses on computer and communications technology, we have the intelligence and the technology to surmount similar challenges on the smart grid.

Stay tuned for continuing in-depth analysis of grid security. Carbon-Pros is pleased to announce that we are partnering with Securosis for in-depth security research on the smart grid. These guys are good! This is an exciting collaboration, details will be announced soon. Meanwhile check out their blog at securosis.com/blog.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 05:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Electric power is the rate at which electricity does work. This is measured at a single point in time so it has no time dimension. The unit of measure for electric power is a watt (W). Watts are usually billed in blocks of a thousand known as a kilowatt (kW). The maximum amount of electric power that a piece of equipment can accommodate is the capacity of that equipment. Power plants are rated based on their maximum capacity, usually in megawatts (MW) or gigawatts (GW).

Electric energy is the amount of work that can be done by electricity. The unit of measure for electric energy is a watthour (Wh) with billing usually in blocks of one thousand known as a kilowatthour (kWh = 1,000 Wh). Electric energy is measured over a period of time and therefore has both energy and time dimensions. The amount of electric energy produced or used during a specified period of time by a piece of electrical equipment is referred to as generation or consumption. Larger units of work can be expressed as megawatthours (MWh = 1,000 kWh) or gigawatthours (GWh = 1,000 MWh). A large-scale unit of work used by national reporting agencies is terawatt-year (TWyr).

Energy units can be converted from one type of energy to another. For example, the energy in electric power can be converted to the energy in heat. Utilities usually bill natural gas consumption in therms. A therm is a unit of heat equal to 100,000 British thermal units (BTU). It is approximately the energy equivalent of burning 100 cubic feet of natural gas. National reporting agencies often report total energy consumption in quadrillions of BTUs or quads.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

• http://www.gridweek.com/2009/default.asp
• Major event, don't miss it.

Smart Grid News (SGN)

• http://www.smartgridnews.com/
• Industry news, supplier and product evaluation, company background, well-staffed and written. Want product details and benchmarks? SGN has it. Want the latest news? Register with SGN.
• Noteworthy: SGN's Product Scorecard

Green Tech Media (GTM)

• http://www.greentechmedia.com/channel/gridtech/
• Well organized coverage of smart grid technologies including T&D, AMI, HAN, Storage, and applications. Want relevant news and research? GTM has it.
• Noteworthy: Hacking the Grid

GTM Research

• http://www.gtmresearch.com/
• Financial and market analyses, sector forecasts, emerging (clean tech) market reports, renewable energy coverage. Offers both free and paid reports. Very insightful.
• Noteworthy: The Smart Grid in 2010 (145 pages)

Green Biz

• http://www.greenbiz.com/browse/energy-climate
• Covers the business of energy and climate (among others). A general resource connecting smart grid with business sustainability issues. Looking for broad non-technical coverage? GreenBiz is your place.
• Noteworthy: State of Green Business

Clean Edge

• http://www.cleanedge.com/
• Broad market and company coverage including smart grid, energy efficiency, renewables, and low carbon-transportation. Want to hear the investors perspective? Visit CleanEdge.
• Noteworthy: Clean Energy Trends 2009 (links to in-depth PDF)

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)

• http://my.epri.com/
• Industry trade organization performing R&D for the electricity sector. A wealth of research on all aspects of the electrical supply chain. Need to understand the utilities perspective? This is the place.
• Noteworthy: The Green Grid
  
• and Demand Response and Energy Efficiency

National Electrical Manufacturer Association (NEMA)

• http://www.nema.org/gov/energy/smartgrid/
• Industry trade association for suppliers to the electricity value chain. Since the smart grid requires so many new products, smart grid is a hot topic at NEMA. Need the suppliers perspective? Visit NEMA.
• Noteworthy: Levels of Intelligence on the Smart Grid (overview, deep dive also available)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)

• http://www.ferc.gov/
• Want to wade into the details of the US regulatory environment? This site provides the final word.
• Noteworthy: FERC's Smart Grid Coverage

US Department of Energy (DOE)

• http://www.oe.energy.gov/smartgrid.htm
• Funding ($$$$), research, data, forecasts, publications, and tutorials. A gold mine with too many resources to mention. Spend time on the DOEs website.
• Noteworthy: DOE's Smart Grid Introduction

Energy Information Administration (EIA)

• http://www.eia.doe.gov/
• Covers all forms of energy with forecasts and data. Primarily US coverage but has some international data. Want data? And more data? EIA has it.
• Noteworthy: Electric Power Industry Overview
•  and Electric Power Industry Companies (comprehensive list)

International Energy Agency (IEA)

• http://www.iea.org/
• Like the US-based EIA, this covers all forms of energy with forecasts and data. Want international data? IEA has it.
• Noteworthy: World Energy Outlook

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)

• http://www.nrel.gov/eis/
• NREL covers much more than renewables. Coverage includes electric infrastructure systems research, distributed generation, and electricity reliability. They offer reports, data, and software models.
• Noteworthy: Energy Management and Grid Support Applications

• http://www.nist.gov/smartgrid/
• Coordinates development of standards and protocols to achieve interoperability of smart grid devices.
• Noteworthy: Smart Grid Standards (overview)
• and NIST/EPRI Standards Roadmap (270 pages)

Interested in smart grid security and privacy?
Start with these articles and reports.

• Hacking the Grid (overview)
• Thee Dangers of Meter Data (overview)
• Smart Grid Security Requirements (overview)
• AMI System Security Requirements (115 pages)
• White House Cyberspace Policy Review (76 pages)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

I don't often post articles from other sources, but this one appearing in the Washington Post, and written by John Doerr (Kleiner Perkins) and Jeff Immelt (GE) is worth repeating. These two business gurus make a compelling case that the US needs to step up its leadership in green technology. Here are their recommendations:

• Send a long-term signal that low-carbon energy is valuable. We must put a price on carbon and a cap on carbon emissions. No long-term signal means no serious innovation at scale, which means fewer American success stories.
• Get the rules of the road right for utilities. We must make our utilities a driving force for repowering America, driving efficiency through incentives, a renewable electricity standard and a national unified smart grid.
• Set energy standards that grow steadily stronger. America should strive to have the most efficient buildings, cars and appliances in the world. The savings will land in the pockets of U.S. consumers and businesses.
• Get serious about funding research, development and deployment, at scale. The federal government currently spends only $2.5 billion on clean-energy R&D a year -- 0.25 percent of our annual energy bill. Sen. Jeff Bingaman's Clean Energy Deployment Administration is a good idea that would be fast and flexible. But more such programs are needed.
• Fulfill President Obama's commitment to "become the world's leading exporter of renewable energy." We need a robust trade policy that seeks to open markets abroad -- including the Chinese market -- for U.S. clean-energy products through new trade agreements. Such policies unleash American competitiveness disciplined by market forces. This is widely endorsed by U.S. companies that compete internationally and by the broad-based President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

The article can be found at The Washington Post. Highly recommended reading.

p.s. On Monday Aug 10, we will publish a set of "starter resources" for professionals interested in delving deeper into smart grid technologies. Have a great weekend!

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:41 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

eTec as been selected for a grant of nearly $100 million to deploy the charging infrastructure for 1000s of EVs. This will be the largest EV pilot project announced to date. eTech brings its smart charging technology to the project. Nissan USA will match the DOE grant by providing 1000 vehicles. The Nissan Leaf is a 100% electric vehicle, not a hybrid (see post on low-carbon transportation).

Infrastructure testing will take place in five states including Arizona (eTec's HQ) Tennessee (Nissan USA's HQ), California (with its Clean Cars law), Oregon (a dark green state), and Washington (both green and high-tech). All are logical choices, with state governments ready to support this project and boost local business participation. The cities involved are likely to include Phoenix and Tucson (AZ), San Diego (CA), Portland, Eugene, Salem, and Corvallis (OR), Seattle (WA), Nashville, Knoxville and Chattanooga (TN). 

Here are some of the key features that make this project important:

• Large-scale footprint spread across fives states and 1000s of state-of-the-art EVs.
• Build-out of 2,500 charging stations in the selected markets.
• Deployment of 12,500 Level 2 (220V) and 250 Level 3 (fast-charge) charging systems.
• Field testing EVs in diverse topographic and climatic conditions.
• Tests the effectiveness of charge infrastructure in the real world.
• Experiments with revenue systems for commercial and public charge infrastructure.

Let's face it, if EVs are to become mainstream we need to jump start our charging infrastructure. We will track this project with great interest.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

My local utility was looking to backslide into old ways of thinking about distributed electricity such as rooftop solar. Xcel had proposed a “capacity tax” on customers with solar panels such that net-metered customers would pay additional charges for generating their own power. The new minimum charges would have been determined by the highest monthly usage during the year.

Once the Colorado solar community spread the word about the proposal, it generated a storm of protest from customers. "We made this proposal in good faith," said Karen Hyde, vice president, rates and regulatory affairs for Xcel Energy in Colorado. "However, we appreciate that the proposed rate mechanism has caused significant customer confusion."

Um, sorry. Solar owners were not the ones confused. Xcel may have been confused by thinking they could get away with this new tax on distributed solar. The proposed charges provided a clear disincentive to invest in solar.

I am a big believer in Xcel Energy. They are among the national leaders in wind and renewables. They are experimenting with grid technologies including two-way digital communication, wind-farm energy storage, grid optimization, demand response, and other energy saving features. Xcel like so many other utilities, operates in a mixed environment of regulation and deregulation. In the regulated part of their operating environment, it is easy to fall back on old ways of thinking. I am pleased that Xcel responded to customer complaints and has withdrawn their proposal.

The lesson for consumers is simple. If you want to see increased use of renewable energy sources in the United States, then keep an eye on your local utility and your state utilities commission. They will listen to you, and in time, they will change. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 12:22 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Stage four of smart grid, smart home begs a question about the reality of low-carbon transportation. There are more skeptics about electric vehicles (EVs) than about climate change. Despite this, I strongly believe that we entering a decade-long transition towards low-carbon vehicles. EVs in particular will be cleaner, quieter, and fun to drive. The technology-base for EVs will mature rapidly. They will be less expensive to operate and in time they will be less expensive to purchase. As a side-benefit, they will boost energy security and mitigate climate change. Right now, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) such as the Prius, Insight, and Focus represent the industry standard. That standard will evolve rapidly over the next 18 months. The next generation of vehicles represents a quantum leap in automotive engineering.

Today's HEVs recycle power from regenerative braking to charge a conventional battery pack. During stop-and-go traffic the batteries are engaged to increase fuel efficiency. The electric motor serves as a booster to the primary drivetrain powered by a conventional gasoline engine. By contrast, PHEVs and EVs will draw power from the grid and enable the vehicle to squeeze more miles out of each gallon of gas, *if* they use any at gas at all. These vehicles will have larger, more powerful battery packs using nickel-metal hydride and lithium-ion technology.

Among the majors, some manufacturers are taking an evolutionary approach, others are taking a revolutionary leap. Future power-train design will be different than today. Only time will tell which designs become dominant. Here are three examples representing a range of thinking about the future of low-carbon transportation:

• Toyota is taking the evolutionary path. The 2010 Toyota Prius is a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) based on the popular Prius design. Like current model, the plug-in version uses its 1.8 liter internal combustion engine as the primary drive. It has a nickel-metal hydride battery pack to store a few kWh of power from the grid (details). The gasoline engine provides 98HP while the electric motor provides 34HP. The electric motor serves as a booster to the gasoline engine, kicking in during stop-and-go traffic, on up-hills, and in reverse. The electric boost improves the Prius' gas mileage in the city, making it comparable to its highway mileage. This increases gas mileage to 50MPG (from 46MPG for non-plug-in models with 1.5kWh batteries). Due to a design favoring the gasoline engine, the Prius-10 may only have an electric range of 12-18 miles. The 3rd generation Prius is an important step forward but it remains a gasoline-based vehicle. Of the advanced designs, it is a sure bet to hit the market in 2010. Of the three cars discussed, this is the one you can order right now.
  

• General Motors is reversing Toyota's logic. The Chevy Volt is a PHEV with much more powerful batteries. The Volt uses the electric motor as its primary drive. Its small internal combustion engine serves as an on-board charging station to extend the driving range of its 16kWh lithium-ion batteries (details). With a battery-electric range of 40 miles most trips will be made on 100% electricity. For longer trips, the gas engine will kick in, adding a few hundred miles to the driving range. The Volt represents a step into the future because it is based on a battery-electric drive train. If successful, it positions GM with a platform that provides extended driving range today and can evolve into a 100% electric car in the future.
  

• Nissan is taking the revolutionary road. The Nissan Leaf is not a hybrid. It eliminates the internal combustion engine and gas tank. The Leaf is a 100% EV with an expected range of 100 miles. Its all-electric design makes the car mechanically simpler, 100s of pounds lighter, and less expensive. Nissan betting that its lithium-ion battery technology will provide a market-leading range of 100 miles (details). Just as important, they are developing a smart charging system to recharge the batteries in 15 minutes, about the same time as it takes to fill-up with a tank of gas. The battery packs 24kWh of energy storage with a maximum output of 90kW. That's enough juice to power an average US home all day long. Nissan is betting that battery technology will progress rapidly over the next few years and that mass-production will drive battery prices down. In the Leaf, Nissan is leapfrogging its competitors into the future of low-carbon transportation.
  

Let's hope that all three of these vehicles (and their competitors) stay on track for release next year. In addition to the three profiled above, Ford, Chrysler, Mercedes Smart, and dozens of small companies will hit the market by 2011. More low-carbon choices for consumers mean more ways to gain energy security and more ways to to mitigate climate change. As automotive history gets rewritten over the next decade, 2010 will go down as a very important year.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Stage four represents the long-term view. Yesterday we covered stage three, utility-scale power storage systems. Today, we cover two additional advanced components of the smart grid: 1) using electric vehicles (EVs) as part of the grid's storage infrastructure and 2) supporting energy trading markets with real-time pricing.

Globally, every major car manufacturer is developing EVs or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Next year Nissan, will bring to market an EV named "Leaf." Nissan estimates that 10% of all vehicles will be electric by 2020. Germany aims to have a million plug-ins by that time. If automotive analysts are correct, we will put tens of millions of PHEVs and EVs on the road in the next two decades. This makes the batteries in these vehicles potentially available for buffering peak electrical demand. Most EVs will be charged at night and will store enough power to let the utilities draw on battery power during peak demand.

A challenge will be the development of smart charging stations that balance the customer's need for driving range with the utility's desire to borrow power during peak periods. It may seem futuristic but in less than 18 months, Nissan's Leaf will have many of the components needed for connection to the smart grid. The car includes network connectivity so that drivers can use their smart phones to modify charging preferences, reset the air conditioning temperature, or ask Nissan to run remote diagnostics. Ideally, EVs will be topped off with power during the day, say by plugging them into solar panels in a parking lot. Theoretically, these cars can charge themselves in the morning and then sell some of the power to the utility during its afternoon peak. If you are wondering what difference a car battery can make, you may not realize the power packed into electric cars. We're not talking about today's car batteries. By 2020, EV battery packs could store 100kWh. That's enough juice to power the electrical needs of several of your neighbors' homes for 24 hours. Since the utilities will draw only to cover peak demand, the power stored in one EV can go a long ways.

The final elements in smart grid stage four are real-time pricing and energy trading. With pervasive high-speed digital communications in place and real-time pricing available, localized energy supply and demand imbalances will become more transparent. Real-time pricing includes an advanced form of demand response where consumers can "program" their electrical loads to take advantage of such things as the low cost electricity available during a wind storm. In initial testing, consumers see real-time pricing as too complicated. They more readily adapt to time-of-day pricing with the general understanding that power is cheaper at night than during the day. Energy trading markets would allow all participants, including the consumer, who may own distributed generating assets, to sell power to the highest bidder. Such markets are admittedly far off. They are impossible in our current regulatory scheme. But consider that market forces will push electricity towards a much more efficient system. Open source supply and demand will reveal many inefficiencies. The opportunity to profit will lure capital towards whatever means and methods cost effectively eliminate these inefficiencies.

Stage four is almost two decades into the future, i.e. the 2025-2030 timeframe. At this point the grid may appear to be growing into a “big brother” phenomena with tentacles reaching deep into our personal lives. Keep in mind that none of the demand-side efficiency programs will be forced on consumers. Consumers will opt-in or opt-out of these programs based on their relative merits. Utilities who effectively market the smart grid's energy-saving features will find many customers willing to accept the incentives offered and become a partner with their utility.

My own household is already in the early stages of this transition. We generate about 90% of the electricity we consume. We fully expect to become a net-producer of electricity by 2010. We will achieve that without giving up our modern lifestyle and its many conveniences. As many pioneers have done before us, we have educated ourselves and become smart electrical consumers. The smart grid will make us even more so. More important, it will enable the mass market of 100M households to do the same while requiring very little of their time or attention.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Stage one was built on a foundation of smart meters and two-way communications (AMI-advanced metering infrastructure). On top of AMI we added a limited amount of demand-response (DR) capability. We called this “DR-lite” and it allowed your utility to control a small but important part of your electrical demand. In stage two, we added many more options for DR (e.g. appliances and other grid-aware devices). Demand response is so important it has been called the “killer app” for the smart grid. Stage two also introduced grid optimization (GO) and supported better integration of distributed renewable energy sources. Stage three and represents a  fully developed view of smart grid. Stage three includes integrating utility-scale power storage systems, while stage four includes using large-scale electric vehicles (EVs) as part of the grid's storage infrastructure and supporting energy trading markets. Let's take a look at grid-attached energy storage.

The amount of storage in the legacy grid is very close to zero. This is because it is very expensive to store energy. You may have experienced this if you recently bought a new battery for your laptop. In some cases the costs approach the value of the entire computer. Because storage is one of those “silver bullets” that solves many problems, a lot of money has gone into R&D. Energy storage can simultaneously 1) reduce peak demand, 2) smooth out production from wind and solar, and 3) power a low-carbon transportation system. Today, long-term research programs are finally starting to show promise. The idea behind grid storage systems is to use the low cost energy available at night for charging and then draw on that stored power during the day to cover peak demand. Twenty years out, storage systems will eventually replace peaking power plants.

Right now, pumped hydro is our most cost-effective system. Coming up fast are compressed air energy storage (CAES) and massive batteries (flow and sodium sulfur). In CAES, night-time power is used to spin a turbine that pumps compressed air into underground caverns and porous rock strata. When power is needed, the system is reversed and compressed air is used to spin the same turbine to generate electricity. Large-scale batteries store power as chemical energy similar to the way your car battery works but on a massive scale (see picture on right). Flow batteries, for example, are the size of a small building and can release megawatt-level power with the flick of a switch. When attached to the grid, these storage systems will act like power plants to cover peak demand for a few hours per day.

Storage systems also compensate for the intermittent nature of renewables. They can absorb the energy whenever it is generated and store it until needed. On the North American plains, the wind most often blows at night when there is minimal demand for energy. If this energy can be stored until the next afternoon, it has far higher value. All utilities pay a premium for power that can be dispatched on demand, i.e. throttled up or down as needed. Thus storage systems will raise the investment value of wind and solar. Smoothing out electrical peaks and valleys may not require massive storage capacity because the highest costs are at the peaks. These peaks can be short duration. Whatever its form, there is no doubt that energy storage will be a critical component of the smart grid.

We will continue this discussion in the next post.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Even though I am traveling this week, I wanted to keep the blog moving. A couple of weeks ago, I covered the Arizona Community Power Solar Program. In response to that post, Bob Monet, a solar industry advocate, reminded me about a similar but different approach being taken in Brighton Colorado (north of Denver). The project is a cooperative solar farm dubbed Sol Partners. Here is an an excerpt from the June 15, 2009 issue of High Country News:

Last month, a new type of farm sprouted in Brighton, Colo. United Power, the rural electric cooperative that serves the town and a large swath of communities and agricultural lands on the state's northern Front Range, unveiled what's been touted as the nation's first cooperative solar farm. Customers can "rent" one or more of the 48 panels in the 10-kilowatt array for $1,050 apiece, for a 25-year period. In return, United Power credits their monthly utility bills for the power their panels generate. Other electric co-ops see this project as a possible prototype: a way to distribute local renewable energy without forcing customers to pay for the equipment or its installation. "People can even come visit their solar panels," says Troy Whitmore, United Power's director of external affairs. "And the sky's the limit as to how many modules we can have, depending on demand."

Program details:

• 25 year lease contract
• $1,050 investment per 210 watt panel
• Panels are located on United Power's property
• Receive credit on electric bill for energy generated by your panel(s)
• Monitor the farm's production via United Power's website

This is exciting because it allows all electric customers invest in solar. The customer need not own a house suitable for placement of solar panels. Many urban and rural locations have unavoidable shading that makes solar impractical. It also means that renters can invest as little as $1000 and start generating solar energy. Let's face it, homeowners with south-facing roofs are not the only people interested in reducing their carbon footprint through distributed generation. The advantage of this program over the purchase of general carbon offsets is the local, hands-on nature of the investment. Customers know their money is being plowed right back into the community. They know their investment will be managed in a sustainable way. Kudos to United Power for pioneering yet another approach for distributed solar.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 11:43 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

As we head into stage two, let say you like what was happening in stage one: (check all that apply)

• Reducing your carbon footprint.
  
• Lowering your impact on the environment.
• Lowering your monthly utility bill.
• Getting an annual check from your utility for lets say $100.

After rolling out a million smart meters and 50,000 smart thermostats, a few years has gone by and your utility has its enterprise (software) applications in place to control all these devices. Your utility is ready for stage two and offers a you a variety of devices that can be used to reduce your electrical demand. You quickly sign up, because you are keen on the idea of (see checklist above). Plus you would not be reading this if you were not an early adopter.

Here's what the utility offers:

• In-home display with readouts on your energy use
• Web interface to see the same information on your PC and smart phone
• Smart plugs that go between your larger appliances and the outlet
• A $500 rebate on smart appliances such as a fridge, dishwasher, and dryer.

At your request, the home display gets mounted on the kitchen wall where your phone used to be, back when you still had a landline. The display does not need the phone line, but it covers up the scar left from the old wall jack. Your installer inserts a chip-card into your dishwasher authorizing it to communicate with the utility. And one of the smart plugs gets inserted between your old electric dryer and its 240V outlet. The plug automatically connects to your home network, just like the new dishwasher. The installer also leaves behind a handout giving you the web address for a customized energy portal where you can monitor and control your electrical usage from any PC or smart phone.

On the dog days of summer and the icy days of winter, you are more than a customer. You have become a valued partner for your utility as it attempts to reduce both its costs and its carbon emissions. On that hot summer afternoon during a “super peak” when your utility is running out of megawatts, it sends the command to 1) raise your thermostat by two degrees, 2) delay your dryer for a couple of hours, and 3) put the dishwasher on hold. And you don't mind because 1) you barely notice the changes, 2) you are being paid for your flexibility, and 3) and on the rare occasion when these subtle changes do matter, you can push a button to override the utility's DR request. If your grandmother is at the house and you are away, you'll be able to push the override button from the convenience of your iPhone. Back at the utility, they just saved a bundle by not needing to buy super peak power on the spot market.

Our scenario focuses on the smart home, but in stages one and two, demand response may see its biggest payoff with commercial and industrial customers. Even though the long-term energy savings might be split equally between residential and commercial demand. It will be easier to implement demand response for a few hundred thousand commercial customers than it will be to implement it for a hundred million residential customers. 

Time goes by and demand response is providing your utility with better load control each year. At the same time, another revolution is sweeping across the grid. During stage one, while your utility was installing two-way meters, it was also installing sensors, relays, voltage regulators, circuit breakers, and other grid devices. And each one of these is connected to the utility's digital network. As the utility's enterprise software capabilities have matured, its operations staff now has a real-time view of where the power is flowing, at what voltages, where the bottlenecks are building, and which lines are getting overheated (and therefore in danger of sagging into nearby trees). They know where power is needed and where an excess is being generated from rooftop solar systems. This so called “grid optimization” lets your utility:

• respond to peak demand loads more efficiently
• identify outages more precisely
• restore power more quickly
• switch generation to cost-effective and low-carbon fuels
  
• re-route energy to avoid bottlenecks and unnecessary strain
• eliminate “truck-rolls” with automated disconnects, reconnects, and troubleshooting

This part of the revolution will lack fanfare, but it will make the grid more responsive and more manageable. It represents a big change from the past. On the legacy grid, a bird flying around town might have had a better idea about what was going on inside the grid than your utility. In Boulder Colorado, Xcel Energy was so bullish on the benefits of grid optimization, that it built the business case for the smart grid investments primarily on the economics of optimization (rather than demand-response). In contrast to demand-response which helps utilities get through peak periods, grid optimization benefits accrue 24 hours/day, 7/days week, 365/days per year. At scale, the resulting savings will be in the tens of billions of dollars over the life of the equipment. To the extent that blackouts and brownouts can be avoided the long term savings are greater. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) estimates power outages and disruptions cost the US more than $100B per year... that's PER YEAR.

During the several years of stage one, renewable energy generation was also growing rapidly. New wind farms were put into place, concentrating solar thermal plants are operating in sunny regions. More important, millions of homes have rooftop solar PV and thousands of commercial buildings and warehouses have rooftop wind and solar. When wind and solar represented a few percent of total generation, it was relatively easy for your utility to use this capacity whenever it became available. But with penetration pushing past 10% and needing to get to 20%, the legacy grid had no way to handle these large intermittent sources. Utilities had no way to know how much power these distributed sources were generating and little idea whether they were ramping up or down.

The smart grid's ability to let utilities absorb and use low-carbon renewable sources of power is the other big success in stage two. Only time will tell how soon this will become a major factor. A great deal depends on the declining cost curves for solar and its overall economics. But without a smart grid in place, we will be forever stuck with a low level of renewable integration. Geeks want to know a lot more about this, but most people won't care if they see their costs going down AND their electrical carbon footprint shrinking. Stage three is still a few more years down the road past stage two, but we can't wait so we'll talk about it next week. Stay tuned.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:51 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The first stage of smart grid deployment arrives when the utility installs a “smart meter” on your house. Your new meter will establish two-way communication with the utility. Depending on the technology (and this is a big decision point for utilities), meter communication could be over the power line itself, via cell phone network, via radio-frequency network, or several other alternatives. The choice matters greatly to the utility, but not much to you. The main point is that the utility will now be able to “read” your meter on a continuous basis. Instead of just monthly, data can flow hourly, daily, or on whatever schedule the utility determines. The meter will also log your electrical use by the hour of the day and the day of the week. That's because in the future, just like riding public transport, the rate you pay for a kilowatt-hour will vary depending whether use it at peak or off-peak periods.

This gigantic step toward the smart grid (your shiny new smart meter) might come and go with very little fanfare. Your bill will still come monthly and your electrical service will be the same as before. Back at the utility however, good things are happening. They will know within seconds if you have a power outage. They will also know the extent of the outage and very likely what caused it. With the other sensors and controls the utility has installed on the grid, they may not even need a truck-roll to restore your power. Smart meters, when deployed in mass and in parallel with sensors on the electric distribution network, provide the utility with a capability called grid optimization. Instead of flying blind, they will know where the power is, what the voltages are, where bottlenecks are building, and where faults are happening. Over time, this will be revolutionary for the utility... but let's get back to our smart house.

The second gigantic step toward becoming a smart home is when your utility offers, and you opt-in, to a demand-response program. Hopefully they won't call it by that name. These programs will be infinitely more marketable if they have a catchy name like eco-power-saver or super-moms-home-efficiency-program or sooper-smart-consumers or you get the idea. Marketers will do their thing. At this stage, the utility will send someone out to your home to install one or more devices. The major reason people will join these programs is because utilities will open their pocketbooks and pay you to join. They will give you a rebate, a monthly discount, or some other incentive. That's right, they will pay YOU.

At this stage, the utility might offer you several devices ranging from thermostats, to energy monitoring displays, to switches for your electric dryer or dishwasher. To keep it simple, let's say your utility only installs one device, a “smart thermostat.” Like your new meter, your new thermostat will have two-way digital communication built-in. It will send and receive signals from the utility. That means your utility will be able to “read” your thermostat. Those signals might use the same communications technology as the meter uses, or the signal might take a different path. You won't really care unless you are a geek who needs to know “how things work.” The technical term “demand-response” is appropriate because your new thermostat gives the utility a tiny bit of control over your electrical demand. On hot summer afternoons, when electrical loads are peaking and the utility needs to fire-up expensive natural gas turbines, or buy extra power on the spot market, they will instead, send a signal to your thermostat to turn it up a couple of degrees.

The utility did the heavy-lifting when it installed the smart meter and its network (AMI for advanced metering infrastructure) and the thermostat and its network link (HAN for home area network). With a robust network in place (robust is the operative term), the data flow is relatively simple as illustrated in the diagram. At 2PM on that hot summer weekday when the utility is “running out of power” they'll send a signal to their smart homes requesting a 2-degree reduction in cooling. At 6PM when other loads are dropping, they will send another signal to restore your thermostat to its initial setting.

By tweaking your thermostat, your AC unit will skip a few cycles and your house will slowly warm up to the new set point of 78º. The net effect to you will be negligible. The net effect for the utility will be huge when they can make these slight reductions in demand to millions of homes. When demand-response is implemented at scale, whole new power plants won't be needed and that will bring reductions in air pollution and carbon emissions. The real selling point: will save money for both you and your utility. That's two giant steps for the smart grid. But there's much more of course. So stay tuned.

For more information on the chart, see Smart grid ecosystem, part 4. 

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:36 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Anyway, the meter reading started me thinking about Rufus' carbon footprint. I figured it could not amount to much because he walks a lot and he never drives except for rare trips to the vet. He eats only two meals a day and never leaves the lights on. He makes minimal use of major appliances such as the refrigerator, dishwasher, clothes washer, and dryer. Being the data hound that I am, I decided to research his carbon pawprint. This was more challenging than I expected. In fact I did not find the detailed data I wanted, but I did find an estimate for dogs and cats:

An average dog causes around 1.75 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year. A cat causes around 0.50 tons. Rufus's size is smaller than most dogs and larger than most cats. My guess is that Rufus' carbon pawprint is about one ton per year. That includes the CO2 emissions to produce his food, its packaging, litter bags, occasional transport to the vet, his toys, etc. From what I learned, the largest CO2 contributor for dogs and cats may be from the meat in their foods.

Considering that the average American is responsible for about 29 tons of CO2 per year, 1 ton seems reasonable (3.5% of a person). However, considering that the average person in Malawi (Africa) is responsible for a scant 0.7 tons of carbon, Rufus is living large. Rufus is a King Charles Cavalier Spaniel. His ancestors were bred for the kings and queens of England so I guess he's used to living the high life. Since my own footprint is about 17 tons, I've decided to keep working on my own footprint and let Rufus enjoy himself. --JCB

btw, If you are interested in reducing your pet's already small carbon footprint, take a look at these articles from the Santa Barbara Independent and GreenDivaMom.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Yes. Nuclear is the big issue that divides proponents of climate mitigation. Supporting a low-carbon future, nuclear plants offer baseload power with very low operational emissions. Baseload plants are crucial because they provide power around the clock 24x7, i.e. when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. Coal, hydro, and geothermal are the other types of baseload plants. Most hydro is already developed, geothermal will help but not on a large enough scale, and coal is a carbon nightmare. As I have studied the nuclear question my position has shifted more than once. There is no good answer but we can't rewind the clock.

One of the challenges in mitigating climate change is that "time is of the essence." CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 100 years. Almost all of the CO2 we have emitted during industrial revolution is still in the atmosphere. Since annual emissions are still increasing, we can't wait another 20 years for future solutions such as “clean” coal, “low-carbon” biofuels, "large-scale" hydrogen fuel cells, and “baseload” wind and solar. We need to stop the increase of global CO2 emissions before 2020 and then reduce it by 50-85% below 2000 levels. The things we do in the next 10 years will have the greatest impact.

Nuclear is here now. It works and it is relatively safe. In fifty years of operation, no one has been killed by a nuclear power plant accident in the US. The damage at Three Mile Island was contained to the reactor itself. Chernobyl is not comparable since that plant lacked the basic safety features used everywhere outside Russia (their reactor was built inside the equivalent of a tin shed). The US already generates 20% of its electricity from nuclear, Japan generates 35%, and France generates 80%.

Solar and wind won't be capable of baseload operations until two key problems are solved. We need to implement the smart grid on a massive scale. For the first time, this will give utilities the ability to accurately monitor and manage customer electrical loads. We also need large-scale energy storage solutions such as flow batteries, fuel cells, and compressed air. This will buffer some of intermittency of wind and solar. Someday the combination of smart grid with large-scale storage will turn wind and solar into baseload power. Nuclear can get us to that “someday” without tipping the planet toward an ecological brown-out. Nuclear plants last 60 or more years. Uranium is not a renewable resource, it could run out in 100 years. Known reserves are enough to fuel a new generation of reactors that could be swapped out for renewables 50 years from now. 

Meanwhile the dark-side of nuclear continues to be storage. Yucca Mountain is dead in the water. By default, on-site “dry cask storage” is moving from an interim to a long-term solution. This method could last a century or more and eliminates the need to move radioactive waste across the highways. A reasonable objective is to use this century to build fuel-reprocessing facilities to minimize the volume of spent-fuel. In parallel, we can develop a permanent storage solution. With additional nuclear capabilities in place, we can retire coal plants and buy time for renewables.

Recent scientific evidence shows that our climate is changing faster than predicted. Since next generation of nuclear plants could take 10 years to come online, we need to get moving sooner than later. The faster we mitigate, the less chance our grandchildren will see a planetary ecological disaster. Since policy objectives include both energy security and carbon mitigation, moving nuclear forward with a few pilot projects gives us the option to build more nuclear in the future. In 2008, Japan opened 8 new nuclear plants. They are working on wind and solar too but they are moving on all low-carbon fronts. New reactor designs are safer and more efficient. Building the next generation of nuclear plants can give society a 50-year lead time to develop the technologies needed for a sustainable low-carbon future. We can't rewind the clock on the industrial revolution, but we can buy some time. Nuclear is not popular, it's not without problems, but it is a realistic part of the solution. 

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Paper bags (believe it or not) have higher carbon intensity than plastic bags, so using them increases your shopping footprint. Paper bags leave their black mark during pulp processing and manufacturing. They kill trees, use a lot of water, and pollute the air with nasty volatile sulfur compounds. Choose paper bags and you are supporting clear cutting and habitat destruction. We tend to think well of paper because unless we live next to a pulp mill, or the (formerly beautiful) forest, we don't see all the problems. The good news is that paper bags are biodegradable and have less impact during disposal. Reuse your paper bags at least once, then compost them at end-of-life. Recycling uses a lot of energy and chemicals so it's not benign. If you can't compost them, recycling (after reuse) is better than sending them to the landfill.

Plastic bags are made from oil. Need I say more? Plastic bags are not good for the environment or for energy security. But plastic has lower energy requirements than paper and a lower carbon footprint. Surprisingly, production of plastic bags creates less pollution as well. Plastic bags leave their black mark in the disposal phase. Reuse your plastic bags at least once. Recycle them if possible. Realize that recycling plastic really means downcycling it into something less functional. There is not much else you can do once you've brought the plastic bag home from the store. Almost a trillion plastic bags go to landfills every year. We can do better than that.

Reusable bags are the only eco-friendly choice. It's no contest. Use any bag at least three or four times and your average “bag footprint” goes down with each use.

Me? I try to remember to bring my reusable bags. I keep them in my car. When I forget, I ask for plastic (if available) and make sure I reuse them at least once. They become trash bags, doggie bags, lunch bags, and a dozen other things. I need to get better at remembering my reusable bags, however, because I never seem to run low on plastic bags.

Bottom line: Don't sweat this one too much. Combine your errands and drive fewer miles or ride your bike when possible. Weatherstrip your windows and doors and adjust your thermostat. Those changes will have far greater impact on bringing down your carbon footprint. But it's true that small things add up. So don't forget your reusable bags. I'll try to remember too! --JCB

If you want details, Treehugger.com has an in-depth analysis.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Arizona Public Service (APS) is the largest electric utility in Arizona, serving nearly a million customers. APS has launched a pilot project to install, own, operate, and maintain solar panels on customer rooftops at no upfront cost to qualified customers.

• Eligible customers must be served by a specific part of the APS distribution system (the Sandvig 4 feeder).

• The customer's home must meet technical requirements such as roof direction, building age, and structural integrity.

• An on-site assessment of the home will verify engineering and eligibility requirements.

• Customers will sign an easement, allowing APS access for installation and maintenance.

• After installation is complete the customer will be eligible to receive a reduced rate for the power generated on their rooftop.

Community Power programs are based on the same concept as Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) where an independent company “rents” rooftop space on commercial buildings, installs a renewable energy system, and sells the power back to the building owner (see Wiki). ESCOs typically split their profits with the building owner through revenue sharing agreements. Due to the capital-intensive nature of renewable energy investments, this approach to energy service provisioning will play a larger role in our future.

Even as renewable energy costs decline, new systems still require a large upfront investment. Let's face it, most people don't have the needed $10,000-$15,000 to prepay their electric bill for 30 years. Credit markets remain tight and few loans are available. The homeowners who do have cash might not have the optimal south-facing pitch.

Projects such as APS' will put distributed solar on the best rooftops in the most grid-accessible parts of the community. This helps utilities meet regulatory mandates. For example, Arizona’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires that 30 percent of its renewable energy be generated from distributed sources. Utilities are well positioned to make these long-term investments. Power plants, for example, can be amortized over 50 years. Plus utilities have access to the necessary capital and expertise. These projects won't solve all our problems, but they provide invaluable support for developing the renewable energy industry and educating consumers. The costs are reasonable when spread across the rate base. It's hard to see a downside for Community Solar projects. They are win-win-win: good for the homeowner, good for the community, good for the environment.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm a big fan of appropriate technology. In May, I switched my cell phone service to AT&T just so I could get an iPhone. In less than two months, it's become an indispensable part of everyday life. I knew I would like the device. It's very easy to use. I expected to be more productive given the wealth of applications. My biggest surprise is that the iPhone is on the way to replacing so many other devices. Here's my list:

• Watch/time/compass/altitude functions (replaces a $400 Suunto Wristtop Computer, AKA my watch)
• GPS for tracking workouts (replaces my $200 Garmin Forerunner that needed a factory repair)
• GPS for the car (replaces a $150 Garmin Nuvi I was planning to buy)
• City maps (replaces paper in most cases, and my $100 Garmin Mapsource City Navigator software)
• Email, web, business news, and “cloud” services (replaces a $500 NetBook I was planning to buy)
• Business news reader (replaces paper subscriptions to WSJ, NYT, and the Economist)
• Voice recorder for notes and interviews (replaces a $50 dedicated device)
• Music, podcasts, audio books (replaces need for a second iPod)
• Remote control for iTunes broadcast through my PC (replaces a $50 dedicated controller)
• Photos/slideshows (replaces need to make photo prints to show friends and family)
• Camera/videocam (replaces my camera for indoor and casual use)
  
• Language translation (potentially replaces dedicated device)
• Spelling/thesaurus (potentially replaces dedicated device)
• Calendar, address book, to-do list, calculator, scientific calculator, carbon calculator, and flashlight

In the 4Rs of “reduce, reuse, recycle, and replenish,” there is a reason REDUCE is listed first. When we reduce our use of a product, we save money and reduce our impact on the planet. In this case, my $300 phone is supplanting about $1,500 of specialized gear. It's also helping me be more productive and lightening my travel bags. The iPhone has significantly reduced my need to buy specialized electronic devices. This is a very good thing. Score one for appropriate technology. --JCB

*Does not replace my ruggedized GPS for backcountry travel
*Does not replace my waterproof camera for outdoor adventuring
*Does not include heart rate monitor (yet)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 06:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (1)

• 54 million Americans mow their lawns each weekend
• 5 percent of US air pollution comes from gas lawn mowers
• 80 pounds of CO2 is released each year by the average mower
• 800 million gallons of gas are consumed each year by lawn mowers

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 01:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 09:56 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 05:30 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

• Family vs. couple vs. single shares
• Veggies and/or Fruit
• Eggs and/or meat
• Mushrooms
• Cut flowers

Money is paid upfront (invested) for the season, meaning we may get slightly more or less food depending on the size of the harvest. Just like any other shareholder we experience both the upside and the downside of the (farming) business. CSA members are true partners in the local food system. CSA's have been gaining traction since coming over from Europe in the mid-1980s. This season, we have more than 400 CSAs across the US. There's probably one in your area. The USDA's website on sustainable agriculture offers a search tool for finding CSA's. The first weeks of our program have been wonderful. I'm looking forward to eating the freshest, local, organic foods all the way through the end of the 2009 harvest. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 05:04 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

US energy security and climate mitigation are overlapping but different issues. Whereas climate mitigation deals with reducing the carbon intensity of the entire US economy, energy security deals with reducing oil imports from the Middle East. We have a variety of paths to reduce carbon emissions but we don't have any near-term options for getting off oil imports. Solutions such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), electric vehicles (EVs), and hydrogen fuel cells are too far out into the future. With 250M cars on the road, we can't change the transportation mix fast enough. This is gnarly problem; innovation is badly needed. Recently, Robert Burgelman and Andy Grove asked their students at Stanford to solve the energy security problem (McKinsey). Their premise was that waiting 20 years for PHEVs to dominate the highway was unacceptable. So what else can be done? The class came up with an interesting idea: Spend $10 billion to retrofit part of the existing transportation fleet with hybrid-drive technology. That's right, take conventional cars and trucks and convert them to hybrids. They suggested a goal of retrofitting 1M vehicles within three years (at $10,000 per vehicle). This won't solve the energy security problem but it will accelerate development of the required technologies. With government funding in the lead, private money will quickly follow. If successful, the program would rapidly accelerate domestic battery development. With the battery problem solved at least partially inside US borders, PHEVs and EVs would penetrate the market more rapidly. That in turn will help transform the US auto industry. And the increased electric demand will help accelerate the transformation of public utilities. Put in the context of our energy security problem, $10B is not a lot of money.* As a side-effect, climate mitigation gets a boost by switching transportation to electric, while at the same time switching electric to renewable sources feeding through a smart grid. The power of innovation keeps us optimistic. On the one hand the twin problems of energy security and climate mitigation seem insoluble. But when we put bright minds together and ask them to solve the insolvable; we can generate very interesting solutions.

* Compare this $10B investment with the $100B annual spending by the US military protecting Middle East shipping channels and the $700B we paid Saudi Arabia for oil imports during the two years 2007-08.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:21 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Shortly after we installed solar PV, we bought a data monitor. Our system has a centralized inverter, typical of most installations. The inverter takes DC power generated by the solar array and converts it to AC power for use inside our home. The data monitor measures and records the kilowatt-hours (kWh) generated on the roof. The inverter a good place for monitoring because the solar power flows though it before joining the electrical service panel. Data logging occurs at frequent intervals whenever the sun is shining. Our inverter manufacturer, SMA, offered several options for receiving data feeds including direct-to-PC, wireless-to-countertop display, and Ethernet-to-Internet for capture on SMA's web portal. We chose the latter option because it was the most flexible approach. From the web portal, we can see real-time and cumulative statistics. And we can view it on any device from our PCs and Macs to our iPhones. Therefore we know what's going on whether we are at home or traveling. Data monitoring has been more valuable than we anticipated. If not for the data monitor, we'd have no idea how much power is coming off the roof. Solar PV is totally silent and because our panels are installed flat to the roof, they are virtually out of sight. The SMA web portal sends us a daily email with production statistics and provides web access to accumulated data. Last May, we had a defective breaker shut off the power feed from the roof. Fortunately, our installer receives the same daily emails, noticed that our production had dropped to zero, and quickly fixed the problem. Without monitoring, we may not have noticed the outage until our month-end utility statement. In the future, several components in the "smart grid" will perform a more complete monitoring function including energy production (if any) and energy consumption by circuit. Even though SMA's monitor only provides production data (not consumption) it has become a daily reminder of our electrical usage. This has led to an ongoing effort to reduce usage through better lighting, more efficient appliances, and reduction of phantom loads. With a year of minor tweaking behind us, we have shaved about 10% off our annual power use. This year, we estimate that our solar array will produce about 90% of our electricity. We last paid for electric usage in February 2009. With the meter running backwards every week of the summer, we don't expect to pay any more usage fees until November 2009 when the days are short and the snow is flying. Now that's a happy thought. --JCB

Start at the beginning with NZE step 1.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 09:04 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

We hired a local company, Flatiron Solar, to design and install a 5,250 watt system. It was designed to maximize production from our second-floor south-facing roof while being aesthetically beautiful. We chose an all-black system from BP Solar consisting of 30 panels along with a centralized inverter from SMA. The array blends perfectly with the house. The system was sized to provide about 80% of our electrical needs annually with the expectation that we might be able to reduce our future electrical usage through additional energy efficiency improvements. --JCB

Read about NZE Step 6 or start at the beginning with NZE step 1.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:29 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

We are fortunate to work in Colorado in a community that supports carbon reduction through energy efficiency, renewable energy, and smart grid technology. Yesterday, Rebecca Johnson from the University of Colorado, and Craig Eicher from Xcel Energy gave us an update on the the roll-out of the smart grid in Boulder. Xcel Energy, the Minneapolis-based, investor-owned utility, has been deploying smart grid infrastructure since April 2008. To date, Xcel has laid more than 200 miles of fiber-optic cable. They are ready to deploy broadband-over-power-line (BPL) communications to 40,000 households. Xcel has installed 10,000 devices on the network with real-time monitoring and are ramping up for broad deployment in 2010. Xcel and its partners will use this pilot project as a test-bed to experiment with various demand-response tools including variable pricing, incentives for load shifting, sub-metering, smart appliances, and household energy dashboards. No one really knows how consumers will change their behavior when given real-time information about their energy consumption and costs. The few studies with real data have found that consumers reduce energy use an average of 10% just by having information readily available. This may be an early-adopter effect that won't prove true for the mainstream, but most people like to save money so we will likely see energy savings just from the information feed. More important, smart grid technologies give the utility flexibility to more pro-actively manage both supply and demand. This supports the integration of renewable and distributed energy sources since wind and solar production can fluctuate unexpectedly. Integration of renewables will help reduce carbon emissions. Utilities are required to have ‘spinning’ reserve capacity of approximately 7% of anticipated load. Spinning reserve is generation that is synchronized to the system and is available to come online within minutes should demand spike, equipment fail, or wind power decrease unexpectedly. In other words, they have a regulatory requirement to overbuild. As customers, we are required to pay for that spare capacity just so we don't run out of power for a few minutes on a hot afternoon. The demand-side management tools on the smart grid give Xcel the ability to reduce its peak load. They could shut off a percentage of central air conditioners for five minutes at a time, or they could temporarily lower the temperature setting on electric hot water heaters on a hot afternoon, or they could delay the full charge of a plug-in hybrid until after midnight. This won't be an invasion of privacy. It will apply to customers who give permission and join the program. The smart grid represents the future of electricity. There are hundreds of unknowns. Therein lies the importance of city-wide pilots such the Boulder project. Soon, Xcel and its partners will be able to test the thousands of interconnections required and experiment with a wide range of technologies and incentive packages. The lessons learned will be invaluable for mass-deployment. The federal stimulus package set aside $4.5 billion for smart grid projects. That's a lot of money, but we have even more at stake considering the twin goals of energy security and carbon mitigation. Smart grid projects will pay for themselves over time. The US DOE estimates that modernizing the national electrical grid could save between 46 and 117 billion dollars over the next 20 years. It's good to see us moving on this important front.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 11:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The term “smart grid” refers to a set of related technologies based on common technical standards. It's not one specific technology but rather it's made up of many components (Wiki), most of which do not exist in the legacy transmission-distribution system. Key components include:

• Two-way digital communication network – this runs alongside existing power lines to provide detailed information about operations including the status of millions of components along with dynamic data about supply and demand.
  
• Real-time monitors – to be installed at generating plants, transmission and distribution lines, and substations to report operational status and to respond to changing conditions.
• Smart meters – to do more than just track lump-sum monthly usage; they also track usage by time of day and day of week, they automatically report outages and can monitor usage on multiple circuits.
• Home automation network – this lets the smart meter transmit control information to major load centers (such as air conditioners and plug-in hybrids) and major appliances.
• Smart appliances and thermostats – these must adhere to the same technical standards so they can receive signals requesting temporary load reductions or informing them that electrical costs are at peak levels.

It's the combination of all these (and more) that we refer to as the smart grid. It's always difficult to change existing infrastructure on a mass-scale, and the grid is truly a mass-scale infrastructure. 

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 09:10 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

My colleague, Bob Monnet, posed a great question this morning. In his newly released book, The Age of Carbon, Eric Roston gives a 300-page answer. Please buy Eric's book for the real answer. That said, let's look at a few interesting aspects of this super-atom which is essential to life.

• Carbon (C) was born from the earliest stars, “shortly” after the big bang. The creation of C from primal atomic elements was surprising due to the near-zero odds of the required three-way atomic collisions.
• By the time Earth was born (4.5 billion years ago) C was a big part its composition. Life as we know it, is built on carbon-based molecules. Amino acids feature C at their center and DNA is mostly C.
• The Earth's carbon cycle began “shortly” after the planet was born. It involves the flow of C through land surfaces and sediments, through terrestrial plants and animals, through oceans and marine life, and through the atmosphere (BioCycle).
• In the atmosphere, the combination of carbon and oxygen (CO2) protects us from extremes of hot and cold. Its steady-state concentration at 280ppm has been the cradle for human development.
• Today, we measure an ever-increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Our "industrial revolution" has helped grow CO2 concentration to 380ppm.
• Due to the greenhouse-effect, the higher the concentration of CO2, the more heat is trapped, and the warmer the planet.
• In the past 100 years, we have warmed the planet by three-quarters of one degree Celsius. That might not sound like much, but scientists say that two degrees Celsius may be a tipping point where many of Earth's natural cycles could change. Six degrees could lead to mass extinction (Mark Lynas).
• Carbon takes on widely divergent forms. Pure carbon ranges from graphite to diamonds. Graphite is soft and black whereas diamonds are hard and clear.
• Most of us consume a steady volume of carbohydrates to maintain our health and energy levels.
  
• All of the fossil fuels we use to power the economy are hydrocarbons. The vast majority of plastics are also composed of C and hydrogen.
• Running a business consumes a lot of energy. Most of it is generated by burning fossil fuels. Combustion of fossil fuel releases into the atmosphere CO2 that was previously locked inside the Earth's crust. It therefore adds to the atmospheric concentration and contributes to climate change (sources from human activity).

Business sustainability is a broad concept and C plays a growing role. A key question is asking how much C does your company produce? Reducing carbon emissions has become a key element of corporate social responsibility. Carbon legislation is now under consideration by governments around the world. Measuring and reducing carbon emissions therefore, is moving from the domain of social responsibility into the domain of legal and regulatory compliance.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:17 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

*The major sources of GHGs due to human activity are:

• Burning of fossil fuels and deforestation (carbon dioxide)
• Livestock manure and land-use changes (methane)
• CFCs and halons in refrigeration, fire suppression, and manufacturing
• Agricultural activities, including the use of fertilizers

*The major sources of CO₂ from fossil fuel combustion are:

• Solid fuels such as coal: 35%
• Liquid fuels such as gasoline: 36%
• Gaseous fuels such as natural gas: 20%
• Global shipping and air transport: 4%
• Cement production: 3%

*Excerpted from Wikipedia.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:04 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Energy Secretary Steven Chu says that making roofs and roads a lighter color could have the equivalent effect of taking every car in the world off the road for 11 years. Eleven years? That's a long time without cars spewing CO2. By replacing dark-colored roofs and pavement with lighter colored, reflective alternatives, we can offset 44 metric gigatons of GHGs annually. Massive changes to roofs and roads are not going to happen right away but it helps explains why the market for “green roofs” is a growth segment within the energy efficiency market. There are two types of green roofs. One type carries sufficient soil to grow grasses and green plants but that's not what Secretay Chu is talking about. The other type of "green roof" is white or silver. In warm climates they keep the conditioned space below from soaking up heat from the sun. If the space is air conditioned, they save electricity by reducing the cooling load. Similarly, black asphalt roads soak up 10-15% more heat than paler concrete. But more important to climate change, "green" roofs and roads reflect more of the sun's radiant heat back into space and out of our atmosphere.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 09:18 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

My wife and I completed our major remodel in 2002 without a single thought about getting to NZE. After all, we live in a 1977 home which leaked like a sieve in 1988 when we bought it. It took several years for us to realize the possibilities. In my case, three events took me to a mental tipping point: 1) the Solar Decathlon, 2) Boulder Green Building Guild workshops, and 3) the Boulder Solar Home Tour. At the 2007 Solar Decathlon in Washington D.C., I toured homes designed by the finalists of this international competition among university students. Each team of architects, engineers, and business students designs and builds a fully modern home that functions entirely off the grid and produces enough surplus energy to power an electric car. I remember being impressed by the level of systems integration in these homes. They typically employed passive solar, solar PV, solar thermal, daylighting, green walls, and lots of innovation. I loved it. On the down side, these homes were purpose-built and tiny. They did not instill confidence that I could achieve the similar results in my own home. There is a Decathlon every other year including October 2009; I highly recommend checking it out. Due to my positive experience at the Decathlon, I began attending workshops organized by the Boulder Green Building Guild. The BGBG offers bi-weekly workshops covering green building design and technologies. I learned a lot and came away with many ideas for making my home more sustainable. Finally in October 2008 at the Boulder Solar Home Tour, I got to see many of the same concepts and technologies, but they were implemented in houses I could relate to. About half the homes on the tour were net-zero and all of those used a combination of efficiency measures and renewable energy technologies. Some of these homes were million-dollar beauties, but a few were remodels of standard housing stock. The newly constructed homes were spectacular, but the remodels attracted most of my attention. Essentially, I got to walk through houses very similar to mine, whose owners had invested in and succeeded in getting to net-zero. I became convinced that getting to net-zero was not the exclusive domain of newly constructed million-dollar homes. If someone else could achieve NZE with a reasonable investment of time and money, I figured I could too. The very idea was inspiring. --JCB

Read about NZE Step 5 or start at the beginning with NZE step 1.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:26 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

It's not as sexy as adding solar panels, but caulking leaks, weatherstripping doors, and adding insulation are among the fastest, cheapest, and most important steps on the way to NZE. At our house, the three most important tasks coming out of the energy audit were 1) topping-off the cellulose attic insulation, 2) caulking the recessed lights in the cathedral ceiling, and 3) weatherstripping the attic access hatch. After some procrastination, I finally did the work myself as winter was getting underway. Much to our surprise, my wife and I immediately felt the difference, especially on windy days. And because the house was less chilly each morning, we used our gas fireplace less frequently. On cold mornings we often take our morning tea next to the gas fireplace. Maybe not doing so was a lifestyle change, but the house actually felt warmer. We're a little different than most people in winter climates because we shut off our furnace each night before going to bed and turn it back on in the morning. Therefore the morning chill depends totally on the amount of heat loss during the night. Through that winter, our natural gas consumption dropped several more percentage points. But it was the increased comfort that had the most noticeable effect. --JCB

Read about NZE Step 4 or start at the beginning with NZE step 1.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 02:19 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

On the Green Printer Blog, I came across the Harris Interactive survey of North American office workers citing their top ten environmental pet peeves:

1. Mindless printing resulting in increased waste (40%)
2. Leaving lights on (37%)
3. Lack of recycling bins (33%)
4. Excessive air conditioning in summer and heat in winter (29%)
5. Excessive use of paper products, like cups, plates, etc. (27%)
6. Coworkers not recycling (27%)
7. Coworkers not printing double-sided when they can (24%)
8. Too many cover sheets when faxing or printing (24%)
9. Having to store paper copies of existing, electronic files (24%)
10. Leaving computer on and not powering down when going home (23%)

That's not a bad list for all of us to keep in mind. Most of us have experienced these things at one time or another. By being aware and making small changes, YOU CAN HELP. The little things add up to make a BIG difference.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:50 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

A general rule of sustainability is to reduce consumption and minimize waste. In creating a sustainable home, energy efficiency is paramount. In the green mantra of reduce-reuse-recycle-replenish; REDUCE comes first for a reason. Saving a kilowatt is preferable to, and costs a lot less than generating a kilowatt from renewable sources. Therefore, even though we had tightened the building envelope several years before, a follow-up energy audit was crucial for finding the remaining energy leaks. Essential measurements in a professional energy audit include a blower-door test to measure the amount of air leakage and infrared imaging to show the location of the leaks. The Department of Energy provides a useful overview of energy audits along with suggestions for finding a qualified professional. It's worth checking to see if you are eligible for a federal tax credit. In our case, the audit gave us a top-ten list of tasks to to fine-tune our building efficiency. The results of our audit led to NZE Step 3. --JCB

Read about NZE Step 3 or start at the beginning with NZE step 1.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 01:02 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Transportation makes up a significant portion of the carbon footprint of every company and every employee (about about 22% globally, see IPCC). Making carbon-aware transportation choices can reduce your footprint and have a positive impact on your bottom line. For individual companies, the transportation footprint includes inbound and outbound shipping, business travel, and employee commuting. Carbon emissions from travel are directly related the mode of transport, the efficiency of fuel consumption, and the distance traveled. Assuming two persons in a mid-sized car, trains can be twice as efficient per passenger-mile than cars, and over short-distances cars can be twice as efficient than planes. Actual results vary because a single person driving a large SUV is less efficient than flying in a peak-loaded airplane. And because landing and take-off reduce airplane efficiency, trips shorter than 500 miles favor a car, whereas longer distances favor a plane. Peak-load buses and ferries are less efficient than trains but more efficient than cars. Peak-load is important because off-hour and rural buses (with few passengers on board) can be less efficient than a small car. Employee commuting via bus can be highly carbon-efficient since typical work hours coincide with peak-period travel. Ferries are a special case because fuel efficiencies vary all over the map. Slow moving ferries are much more efficient than high-speed ferries due to the tremendous drag involved. High-speed ferries can exceed plane travel in terms of carbon emissions per passenger-mile. We all know that car efficiencies vary greatly. Per 100 miles driven, hybrids and small cars emit about 50 pounds of CO2, mid-sized cars emit about 80 pounds, and SUVs and pickups emit about 120 pounds (EarthTrends). Van-pools and big SUVs are more carbon-efficient than small cars if fewer miles are driven and/or more passengers are on-board. In summary, trains and buses are usually less environmentally damaging than cars and planes but the best choice depends entirely on the circumstances. Living close to work, car-pooling, cycling, and telecommuting can radically reduce emissions from employee commuting. Phone, web, and video-conferencing can radically reduce emissions from business travel. Fuel-efficient fleets, ground-transport options, and reduced packaging can reduce emissions from shipping. Obviously, carbon-efficiency is only one part of business decision making about transportation. Time-to-market, employee efficiency, and customer requirements are usually more important. That said, the savings from reducing transportation requirements and making smart transport choices go directly to your bottom-line.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 10:24 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This topic is not something I expected to write about but blogs can be useful for capturing unexpected ideas. My mother-in-law passed away this week. She had a kind heart and lived a long life; we miss her deeply. In keeping with her wishes, the family is going ahead with cremation and will spread her ashes in a beautiful nearby location. In working with the funeral home, I came to realize that cremation has a significant carbon footprint. The equipment uses huge natural gas burners consuming several million BTUs. The exhaust can also degrade air quality through such things as the vaporization of mercury dental fillings. Apparently, nothing in life or even after-life is free of tradeoffs. Being in the carbon advisory business, I looked into the carbon footprint of cremation vs. burial. Note that my family's funeral decisions had already been made based on spiritual preferences and this inquiry was driven by my intellectual curiosity. I looked into three options and ranked them roughly 1-2-3 based on their environmental impacts with #1 having the lowest impact: #1 cremation, #2 green burial, and #3 traditional burial with embalming. The details can vary greatly, but options #1 and #2 generally trade off the larger carbon footprint of cremation against the larger land-use footprint of burial (and its requirement for long-term operations). Traditional burial with embalming has a larger carbon footprint due to the materials and energy used in making the casket and concrete vault. Traditional burial also has a more toxic footprint due to the energy-intensive chemicals used in formaldehyde-based embalming. So-called green burials (greenburialcouncil.org) use decomposable and recycled materials in the coffin and dispense with the concrete vault and the embalming process. "Green cemeteries" use xeriscape and native landscaping to reduce long-term energy/water consumption and fertilizer/herbicide use. This places their environmental impact somewhere between the other two options. While green burials are a new part of our vocabulary, they are anything but new. They use age-old methods and are in conformance with many religious beliefs. Whatever you do, please don't make end-of-life-ceremonial decisions using a scientific analyses. This is an area where spiritual and religious views take precedence. If you have latitude, however, it can be useful to think about the environmental tradeoffs made in putting a loved one to rest. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:50 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Can you believe it? Solar seems to be perceived as the fix for all our problems. Intuitively, it feels right. A lot of people think so, governments, media, corporations, countries, utilities, voters, and your neighbor. Solar has never been lower in cost. Rebates, tax credits, and tax waivers take us back to late-70's Carter-era incentives and better. The motivation for solar is tremendous, whether it's in your heart and you want to directly reduce your carbon footprint, or you think solar is geeky-cool and sexy, or maybe you just like the idea of investing $5-10,000 now to have 20-30 years of free electricity, immune from energy shocks and utility rate increases. The last six months have seen the cost of solar drop precipitously. Here are some of the reasons why the momentum for solar is as big and hot as the sun:

• The national Wall Street bailout included an extension to the federal tax credit (30%)
• Colorado's statewide vote on renewable energy led to rebates from the state's largest utilities
• The governor's office partners with smaller utilities to support rebates in areas not covered by the RPS
• The State passed a state sales tax waiver for solar purchases
• As of 2008, Boulder County requires a very high standard of energy efficiency in new construction, all but requiring solar for large homes and office buildings
  
• Boulder County offers financing for residential and commercial solar installations through through a 2009 bond issue
  
• United Power Rural Elecric Association (REA) customers can "buy" solar panels for about $1000 each and enjoy the financial and environmental benefits without hassle; the utility will use the money to locate and maintain a field of solar panels for their customers
• The Federal government keeps sweetening its incentives for the commercial market: allowing 50% 1st year depreciation, accelerated depreciation schedule, and a 30% tax grant
• Payback periods are declining rapidly and are well below ten years in many cases
• Carbon cap and trade legislation will further stimulate the commercial market
• National security concerns and terrorist threats are driving interest in US energy security
• The US military is investing in solar for both battlefield operations (think desert sun) and domestic use
• The LOHAS, sustainability, and “buy local” movements fit perfectly with distributed energy generation (think rooftop solar)
• The idea of being independent from the utility grid appeals to the rebellious child in many
• The data on climate change are getting worse, scientists are telling us that atmospheric temperatures are accelerating faster than anticipated

There's a lot more, but I am way over my alloted space! --Bob Monnet, Boulder CO, Flatiron Solar

Posted by Guest at 08:53 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

For carbon as a household greenhouse gas? Absolutely, yes. Up until now, carbon has gone unaccounted for by most of us. It's invisible, it's not taxed, and yet comes as a byproduct of nearly all our activities. We typically don't want carbon, we want heat, electricity, transportation, food, and other useful products. Unfortunately, all that stuff has “embodied carbon.” Meaning carbon dioxide is released at some stage of the product life cycle (production, delivery, or use). The typical American produces about 20 tons of carbon dioxide per year. That's the weight of ten SUVs! If carbon were priced at $20/ton (a typical cost for carbon offsets), the cost would be $1,600 for a family with two kids. We currently don't pay this cost directly. Economists like to say the cost is “externalized,” meaning “society” pays the cost. Someday we will pay the cost through carbon taxes on energy, gasoline, food and other carbon-intensive products. Scientists say that the environment is paying the price right now. Even if you can afford the extra cost, shrinking your carbon footprint is a good thing to do. It helps society deal with climate change and it will eventually save all of us a lot of money. You can get ideas for personal action from a variety of sources. Check out The Nature Conservancy to get started. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:39 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Sometimes it takes the strangest circumstances to trigger change in a long-standing lifestyle habit. I make a lot of good lifestyle choices but I'm nowhere near perfect. In February, I was in England for my niece's wedding. I love ale and especially British ales. My wife and I were shopping the farmers market in Oundle and came across a guy selling what they call “real ales;” handcrafted local beer. I was surprised to see any kind of beer at a farmers market so I chatted him up and bought a few bottles. When the beer man found out that I lived in Colorado, he started praising the beer made here. He told me that handcrafted beer is making a comeback in England (I had no idea it had declined) and that Brits often looked to beer-crafters in the US for best practices. He said Colorado was one of the great places for micro brewing. I went on with my day and my travels, but this conversation apparently stayed in the back of my mind. A couple weeks later, back home in Colorado, I went to the corner store to restock the fridge. As I was reaching for the Guinness, I thought about all the freight-miles imported beer travels around the world, and all the extra carbon emissions. I thought about it for two seconds and realized that I buy local food when I can get it, so why not beer? I went home that day with a sampling of beers from Fort Collins, Boulder, Breckenridge, and Durango. Now only a couple months later, I'm a confirmed local beer drinker. What was I thinking? I wasn't! I was just operating off old habits and memories of great British ales from the years I lived in Europe. My ah-ha was simply that the choices we make every day are often by habit, rather than by design. Oftentimes, making an eco-friendly choice yields a better product at a lower price. We're not used to that so we don't think of it. So the next time you have a choice between a local vs. global purchase, just give it some thought. The right choice depends totally on the circumstances, and is solely up to you, but do give it some thought. Everything we do makes a difference. Cheers! --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:38 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

One of the projects I took on during my sabbatical was a low density condo complex in northern Michigan (theBirchesCondos.com). It's by no means a LEED accredited project, but we got a lot of the details right. The project is located in a retirement community surrounded by lakes, golf courses, and open space. Our site plan emphasized open space over developed land with 15 acres developed and 22 acres untouched and permanently protected. The duplex design has a common wall to increase energy efficiency while still giving the feeling of a stand-alone home. The building envelope is tight and most of the units face south. The walls are insulated to R-24 with better than R-36 in the ceiling. We used low-E glass with fixed and casement openings, minimizing air infiltration. Every unit included a 90% efficiency gas furnace with central air conditioning, programmable thermostats, 100% Energy Star appliances, fully insulated and drywalled garages with insulated overhead doors. Perhaps most important, we used local builders who gave us great craftsmanship and tightened up the project at every step. We added many so-called “green features” at standard construction costs. We absolutely had to keep the costs down since we were targeting the $200K market for 2-4 bedroom condos. The residents absolutely love their homes. Even in the tough Michigan market, the condos are still selling. This project proved to me that if you start with a good design and get the details right, you can build a green product at or below standard construction costs. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 09:56 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

As much as I'd like to get our condo in Crested Butte Colorado to NZE (net zero energy); it's not going to happen. For starters, our roof orientation and structure is not suitable for the production of solar or wind power. Our property lines are too tight to fit ground-mount solar. And the homeowners association does not allow solar panels on our decks. The condo was built in 1980 and suffers from the weak energy efficiency requirements in building codes back in the bad old days. Luckily for me, the condo has some positives we can work with. It is situated on the ground floor with the north and east walls below grade, the west wall and ceiling are warmed by adjacent units, and the south wall is fully exposed to radiant heat from the sun. Therefore heat-loss is minimized compared to having fully exposed walls and roof. Still, this little 1200SF all-electric home consumes 16,000 kWh/year in a locale with 14,000 heating degree days. My home in Boulder is twice the size and uses half the energy (but only 6,000 heating degree days). The condo's energy situation is not good, but there are many things I have done to slash my energy usage: 1) switch most of the lighting to CFLs (cost $150), 2) weatherstrip any and all leaks including electrical outlets (cost $50), 3) insulate the crawl space (cost $100), 4) buy 100% green power from my electrical provider; 90% wind and 10% solar (incremental monthly cost $7), 5) wrap the hot water heater with insulation blanket (cost $20), 6) install a switch on the electric hot water heater so it can be turned off when the unit is vacant (electrician cost $120), 7) replace the room thermostats with digital ones with manual setbacks (cost for 9, $100), 8) put a few well-placed signs out reminding guests to conserve energy (cost $0), and eventually, the biggie I will tackle in the future 9) replace the aging windows and doors with new high-efficiency ones (cost $14,000). You might be in a similar situation, where NZE is not going to happen without moving into a new purpose-built house. But you can still make a big difference and slash your energy bills saving money, helping the planet and improving our energy security. With 100% green power, I can say I'm “carbon neutral” on electricity, but more important, I've reduced my electrical load by 25% with an investment of $550 and a modicum of time and attention. The payback period on my investment is less than two years. The feeling of making a small difference is immeasurable. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 08:35 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Back in 1977 my wife and I were living in Fairbanks. I was working on the University of Alaska campus on one of the most advanced computer networks in the world. The "UACN" linked Alaska's three universities and ten community colleges via landlines, microwave, and satellite links into a unified computer network. I was a young computer scientist and loved living in the far north and working on state-of-the-art technology. My wife and I decided to make our home in Alaska. Even though we didn't know much about building, many of our friends had “owner-built” homes and we were intrigued with the idea of building our own. We bought some south-facing acreage a few miles from campus. Our plan was to build a log cabin; it would be so charming in the woods. WRONG! I took some building classes at the university extension service, one of which covered super-insulated home construction. This was a new concept in 1977, but in Fairbanks, a climate with 14,000 heating degree days, it was compelling. I learned everything I could about passive-solar, double-wall construction, triple glazing, radiant barriers, vapor barriers, heat-exchangers, and the like. It was difficult to find green-building information back then. Working weekends and summer evenings, it took us (and our friends) two years to hand-build the 1600 SF, 3 BR house. The walls were just over a foot thick with multiple layers of insulation and barriers. We achieved approximately R-60 in the walls and R-68 in the floor and ceiling (the house was built on pilings to keep the permafrost frozen). We bought the smallest wood stove offered by Vermont Castings and heated the house in 50-below winters with 1-2 cords of elder and aspen. That house was incredibly efficient and comfortable. The home heating index (HHI), a measure of energy used in heating normalized for square footage and degree days, was 1.50 with anything below 2.00 considered highly efficient. In our sub-arctic climate, it was so comfortable sitting in the living room for hours with the temperature never varying by more than one degree. Thirty years later, I've learned so much more about green building. But one thing has not changed despite our new knowledge and advanced technologies. To get to NZE in cold climates, your best strategy is to build a super-insulated envelope and put in a very small heater. In contrast, my current home in Boulder (also built in 1977), was constructed with 2x4 walls (R-11) and minimal concern for energy-efficiency. This has left me with a real challenge in retrofitting it to NZE! --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 03:01 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 07:00 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Back in 2002 we took our first significant step in creating a net zero energy (NZE) home without even realizing that NZE was to be a future goal. We were remodeling our 1977 conventionally built home in Boulder Colorado (a location with about 6000 heating degree days and 700 cooling degree days). We simply wanted to make sure that our remodeling resulted in more comfortable living and lower utility bills. It turns out that tightening the building envelope is the best place to start your efficiency improvements. It's generally the most cost effective way to shrink your energy bills and reduce your carbon footprint. In our case, we replaced our leaky 1977 aluminum windows with low-E, wood-clad casement windows. And since our siding needed to be replaced, we added 1” foam panels between the old siding and the new. The foam added R-4 to the walls giving us a total of R-16 which gave us the performance of a 2x6 wall. Let's face it, we were not going to rebuild the house with 2x6s. The foam provides a thermal break in the 2x4 framing eliminating the “cold spots” where the framing comes through the wall. Rather than installing a separate infiltration barrier, we taped the foam panels together and taped the panels to the window frames. This cut air infiltration by 90% and increased comfort levels inside the house. Much to our delight it also cut down on outside noise. Finally, we replced our aging gas forced-air furnace with a 95% efficient model with sealed combustion, variable speed blower, and a programmable thermostat. The net effect of these changes was a tight, comfortable, and efficient home. The home heating index (an efficiency factor) is down to 2.31 which is pretty good for a 1977 home. We have saved a lot of money on energy bills since the 2002 remodel. Plus it made our house much more comfortable in winter and in summer. We thought we were done making changes. In 2006, however, we took another, this time conscious, step toward NZE. I'll cover it in an upcoming post. --JCB

Read about NZE Step 2.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 02:54 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has always “mattered” to planet Earth. And the human release of CO2 has mattered since the dawn of the industrial revolution. Unfortunately, nobody realized until recently that CO2 levels were getting out of control. Over the past decade, the science of global warming has become more established and better understood. Most scientists now agree that human activities are the root cause of skyrocketing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. More than a decade ago, the big industrialists (e.g. 3M, Dow, DuPont, and others) began reducing their carbon footprint when “air pollution” was federally monitored and eventually capped. GHG emissions were reduced as a byproduct of increased production efficiencies and decreased waste. Big companies found that becoming more efficient (releasing fewer pollutants and fewer GHGs) actually saved them $100s of millions of dollars. Today, the convergence of several factors has heightened awareness of carbon: 1) developed nations are feeling global pressure to take coordinated action, 2) governments and businesses are facing growing public opinion that they must take action soon, 3) European businesses began facing new carbon caps as of 2008, and 4) US businesses will likely see federal carbon regulation as early as 2009. In a cap and trade system, some businesses will be forced to live within a carbon cap, with the cap declining over time. Even if they are not subject to the cap, businesses within the supply chain of a capped company may be forced to make CO2 reductions. Other businesses are moving ahead of the market by cutting their carbon footprint before their hand is forced by the government or a major customer. They want the flexibility to to make cost-effective carbon reductions on their own terms. Sill other businesses see carbon as a unknown business risk and are measuring their footprint to assess that risk. And finally some businesses are measuring and reducing their footprint because they believe it's the right thing to do.

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:07 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Over the weekend, I was visiting a condo in Crested Butte Colorado. It was a nice place: ski-in, ski-out with great views. It also had a wood fireplace, which I love. So many fireplaces have been converted to natural gas that it was a pleasure to be warmed by the radiant heat of a real wood fire. Unlike natural gas, wood is a renewal resource, a source of renewable energy. Unfortunately, this particular fireplace was the typical American design where 90% of the heat goes right up the chimney. Fireplaces do not have to be built that way. Rumford fireplaces, for example, have been around for a couple of hundred years. They are built tall and shallow to reflect most of the heat into the room. They have streamlined throats to eliminate turbulence and carry away smoke with minimal loss of heated air inside the house. As a builder, I have incorporated Rumfords into several of my Colorado and California homes. The costs are usually no more than a conventional masonry fireplace; at most they might run 5% over a conventional design. If you are reducing your carbon footprint and want to get rid of your natural gas (fossil fuel) fireplace, don't eliminate wood from consideration. The Rumford is old technology but still offers beauty, renewable fuel, high efficiency and cost effectiveness. If permitted in your municipality, modern wood stoves and old fashioned Rumford's are highly efficient heating systems. They are worthy of consideration in green building projects. --JS  Jim Shugart Builders

Posted by Guest at 04:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Carbon-Pros is in the business of sustainability, but what we do at work is also our personal passion. My wife and I are trying make a difference right inside our home in Boulder, Colorado. We have been making small upgrades to our house for the past 20 years. Some changes were made for purely aesthetic reasons, but many changes were done with energy efficiency (and comfort) in mind. It turns out that a lot of small changes can really add up over time. Our house, built in 1977, used to leak cold air in the winter and suck in attic heat in the summer. The west wind blew right through every room. It was a typical build for those days; I'm sure the builder never once thought about “going green." A few years ago we decided we were going to stay in our house for a long time and therefore we decided to get serious about going green. Our goal is to make it a net zero energy (NZE) home. In other words, we are making changes that both reduce our energy loads and increase our power generation. The house eventually will produce as much power as it consumes. In our case, the most important steps include tightening the building envelop, being more efficient with lights and appliances, adding solar PV, tweaking the envelope again, and finally adding a high-efficiency geothermal system for heating and cooling. Believe me, we weren't operating our household from a top-down strategy. It's a place where we like to hang out and relax. We didn't always do things the right way or in the right order, but it's all adding up to a great result. I want to share our experience because there is never enough published information for people who want to improve their home a little at time. Where should you start? What is a cost-effective sequence? How far can you go? When should you stop? Over the next month, I will outline what we've done so far and what we've learned that might be helpful. --JCB

Posted by Carbon-Pros at 04:28 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)