Get Energy Smart! NOW!

This guest post from Barath reviews key pitfalls and hurdles to deployment of clean energy systems

As gas prices remain high and climate chaos becomes ever more apparent, people and institutions are right to argue ever more insistently for a shift to alternative energy sources that are likely to be available for the long haul and that are less harmful to our environment.

However, these options are unlikely to deliver what we might expect – that is, they face generally ignored pitfalls.

[Read more →]

What are the Three Rs?  Reduce, reuse, recycle.

Right now, I am wondering, when it comes to clothing that makes a political statement, whether the choice is reduced to recycling for reuse a now 20-year old t-shirt.

This Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) t-shirt dates from (I believe) the 1990 Earth Day amid efforts to goad President George H.W. Bush and his Administration to take a leading role in addressing human activities driving change in the planetary system.   Part of the challenge, the White House rhetoric and language about their actions exaggerated just how much they were doing to address an issue driving mounting concern in the specialist scientific community.

• The front of the t-shirt:  a melting planet with the words “The Greenhouse Effect”
• The back of the t-shirt: a melting planet with a smiley face with the words “the White House Effect”

Bill McKibben captured President George H.W. Bush’s attitude as follows:

no one has defined the issue as squarely as George Bush the elder when he said, prior to the Rio summit in 1992, that “the American way of life is not up for negotiation.” That way of life (already quaint and humble to us SUV-piloting descendants a decade later) stands somewhere near the center of this debate. So far, we’re willing to entertain the possibility — and indeed the fact — of things like massive polar melting and the spread of tropical diseases to a temperate climate, but aren’t really even willing to discuss what we might need to do to bring climate change under control.

Thus, for the (first) Bush Administration, the t-shirt remained relevant.

Sadly, this t-shirt remained relevant through the Clinton Administration where there was some action. There was the signing of Kyoto. Efforts went on to raise awareness (within and external to the government). Etc … On the other hand, the Clinton Administration (even with Al Gore as Vice President) did not manage to drive through measures like increases in automobile efficiency (CAFE standards), huge leaps forward in energy efficiency, major increases in renewable energy deployment, or even replacing the solar panels on the White House roof that Ronald Reagan had removed.   Thus, amid the critical issues such as Travelgate and debates over the devilish stains on a blue dress and …, the t-shirt had some continued relevancy even if it wasn’t the first thing out of the closet (and actual spent much of this time essentially in storage).

Obviously and sadly, the three Rs came into play with President George W Bush and the Cheney Administration which undertook a campaign to distort and downplay climate science’s increasingly urgent highlighting of humanity’s impact on the planetary climate system and the serious implications that this already had and would have for human civilization (and American security and prosperity).  This shirt moved from gathering dust to top of the pile, ready to pull on for a bike ride to the store or time in a national park or …  The message well, if anything, had even greater truth during the son’s Administration.

With President Barack Obama’s election, however, this shirt went from the pile to (what was hoped to be) long-term storage … hopefully something to be recycled into cleaning rags or into a museum piece.  After all, Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama had talked seriously about the importance of addressing climate change as a top priority (and the power of energy efficiency) and President-elect Barack Obama’s second policy statement focused directly on climate change:

The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear

Climate change and our dependence on foreign oil, if left unaddressed, will continue to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.

… too often, Washington has failed to show the same kind of leadership. That will change when I take office. My presidency will mark a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process.

That will start with a federal cap and trade system.

These were far from isolated words.

Those were heady times for those knowledgeable about Global Warming’s threats to America’s prosperity and future prospects.  Candidate and President-Elect Obama had committed, forcefully and repeatedly, that addressing climate change would be core to his Presidency.

Since then, however, one might say that reality has intervened. To be clear, the Administration (and President Obama) have done many things to help move clean energy and climate change mitigation forward:  significant funding in the Stimulus Package; a serious Executive Order mandating reduced resource waste, increased clean energy use, and inclusion of sustainability in departmental planning; etc …  (There have, as well, been many steps that foster continued dirty energy practices.)  The Administration understands, at least at some level, climate disruption, has many top-notch people in critical jobs, and certainly represents a rejection of the Bush Administration’s embrace (leadership) of The Republican War on Science.

When it comes to “a federal cap and trade system”, promised by President-Elect Obama as where his Administration would start its leadership, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act and, then, crickets … The Senate went nowhere.  And, as for serious White House engagement, this seems to have been an issue relegated to back of the pack behind Health Care and, well, so many other issues.  There is much literature on this but this line from Climate Bill, RIP captures the situation well.

Obama, so far, has shown no urgency on the issue, and little willingness to lead – despite a June poll showing that 76 percent of Americans believe the government should limit climate pollution.

“Little willingness to lead” is certainly the impression of those heavily engaged in the fight for climate legislation.

In the face of the actual record,White House communications Dan Pfeiffer recently claimed: that

“the president obviously pushed very hard” to convince the U.S. Congress to pass climate legislation.

What’s the expression?  Putting lipstick on a pig (or, per Sarah Palin, a pit bull)?

Pfeiffer’s comment simply doesn’t seem to comport with reality.

• When were the late-night Presidential huddles with Congressional leadership to try to push through legislation?
• When did the President address a Joint Session of Congress on the serious risks from climate disruption and the huge opportunities to enrich America via climate mitigation?
• What threats did the President give to Democratic members of Congress who didn’t support climate legislation?

As Vice President Al Gore put it,

But in spite of these and other achievements, President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change. After successfully passing his green stimulus package, he did nothing to defend it when Congress decimated its funding.

… without presidential leadership that focuses intensely on making the public aware of the reality we face, nothing will change. The real power of any president, as Richard Neustadt wrote, is “the power to persuade.” Yet President Obama has never presented to the American people the magnitude of the climate crisis. He has simply not made the case for action. He has not defended the science against the ongoing, withering and dishonest attacks. Nor has he provided a presidential venue for the scientific community — including our own National Academy — to bring the reality of the science before the public.

Here is the core of it: we are destroying the climate balance that is essential to the survival of our civilization. This is not a distant or abstract threat; it is happening now. The United States is the only nation that can rally a global effort to save our future. And the president is the only person who can rally the United States.

Simply put, it is rather hard for any observer to see where “the president pushed very hard” to drive climate legislation through the Congress.

And, when Dan Pfeiffer’s statement is so clearly at odds with reality, it makes one wonder whether the situation when it comes to climate mitigation policy has been reduced to recycling this old t-shirt for reuse.

NOTE: To be clear, the most serious problems to establishing meaningful action to foster a prosperous and secure American future are not in the Oval Office, the West Wing, or any Obama Administration Office.  Attacks on climate science and disinformation about the value of a clean-energy future from fossil-foolish interests and Anti-Science Syndrome suffering Haters Of a Livable Economic System are root causes.  Frustration with (many) Obama Administration policies and statements does not translate into putting the onus for inaction solely — or even primarily — on the Administration.  Pfeiffer’s comment, however, does not pass the most basic laugh test and should not stand unchallenged.  Instead, it is time to help President Obama understand the fundamental truth that Gore laid out:

the President has reality on his side. The scientific consensus is far stronger today than at any time in the past. Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act.

Our building is 16 floors with 230 efficiency, one bedroom, two bedroom and three bedroom units. The laundry room on each floor is accessed through a room that includes the trash chute and two large recycling containers …one for paper and one for mixed  recyclables (jars, milk containers, cans etc.)   which are emptied daily.

Montgomery County’s Department of Environment Protection (DEP) provided large, colorful, durable posters explaining what can be recycled (a big “Yes”, with a check mark and easily understood photo)  and what can’t (a NO, an X,  and a photo) be recycled. The posters were placed near the recycling bins and  could not be missed. Nonetheless, foam “clamshell” boxes, dirty pizza boxes, wire coat hangers and other “no no” items are regularly placed in the bins. Are people over-zealous? Don’t read? Don’t care? Who knows?

[Read more →]

A guest post from Warren S that merits reading … and thinking …  For a somewhat related piece, see Sourcing Skepticism … what factors drive questioning of Global Warming?

Facing growing and increasingly prominent calls to restore solar panels to the White House roof, roughly 30 years after Ronald Reagan pulled off the panels President Jimmy Carter put up, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu made an exciting announcement at Green Gov last October:

As we move toward a clean energy economy, the White House will lead by example.

I’m pleased to announce that, by the end of this spring, there will be solar panels that convert solar light into electricity and a solar hot water heater on the roof of the White House.

As Secretary Chu put it,

It’s been a long time since we’ve had them up there.”
…

Around the world, the White House is a symbol of freedom and democracy. It should also be a symbol of our commitment to a clean energy future.

“By the end of this spring …”

Last I checked, despite Global Warming’s disruptive impacts on our weather, 21 June 2011 marks “the end of this spring” and, well, President Barack Obama has not (yet?) mirrored President Carter’s mounting on top the White House to demonstrate to the world that solar power can contribute to answering our economic, energy, and environmental challenges (and opportunities).

And, the Administration’s almost certain failure to meet its self-imposed deadline began to get some public notice in the past few weeks. As Bill McKibben put it,

That was nine months ago. With one week left until the end of spring, can you guess the next part of the story?

We still have faith. A week’s a long time. In the last few days, 20,000 Americans have written to ask the president to keep his promise. The White House is a can-do bunch (they bailed out the banks in a matter of hours!). Hope springs eternal. Sort of.

We’ll be watching the roof.

A White House reaction

Facing this public scolding, the Administration chose to respond today with an affirmation of its commitment to solar power. While An Update on White House Solar Panels and Our Solar Program appeared at the DOE energy blog, White House public communications staff pushed out the material.

We cannot win the future without winning the clean energy race, which is why President Obama laid out a clear goal to increase our nation’s clean energy share and continue to build a 21st century clean energy economy. Last fall, to underscore the Obama Administration’s commitment to clean and renewable energy, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and CEQ Chair Nancy Sutley announced that the Energy Department would lead a project to install American solar photovoltaic panels and a solar hot water heater on the roof of the White House.

Do you note something missing from this? How about that they promised that the panels would be up “before the end of spring”? In, of course, an item posted on the last full day of spring 2011.

The Energy Department remains on the path to complete the White House solar demonstration project, in keeping with our commitment,

Secretary Chu was quite clear in his commitment to have this done by a specific date. “The Energy Department” (sic, note that the Department of Energy blog used the wrong title) is absolutely not “on the path … in keeping with [its] commitment”.

I would be furious with a contractor who promised to have work done by a date certain who arrived on the eve of the deadline with a proud statement that he/she was “on the path to complete [the work] in keeping with [their] commitment” when the work wasn’t done as promised.

As one acquaintance put it to me in an email, “I wished I’d realize that this is what I should have done when I was in school. This is what I should have told the professors about late assignments:

“Handing in my homework is key to winning the future. I have done a lot of other homework in the past, and I assure you, I remain on the path to completing my homework. I look forward to sharing with you the exact date when I deem it appropriate.”

With the deadline passing, the pressure will only grow …

Bill McKibben has vowed to keep up the pressure on the Administration to lead by example.

Barack Obama told his supporters after the election that he needed constant pressure–from now on we’ll do our best to provide it, and on issues even more significant than this.

Let’s be clear … the public wants this …

A new Yale survey shows that shows that support for clean energy is almost unanimous with 91 percent of Americans saying that “developing sources of clean energy should be a very high (32%), high (35%), or medium (24%) priority for the president and Congress.”

Yes … symbolic … but symbols matter

What might happen if President Obama got his hands dirty helping put solar panels on his (and our) White House roof? (And, well, also conduct a White House barnraising weatherization event?)

• Would this inspire people to do energy efficiency in their own homes?
• Would that inspires Americans to put solar on their roofs?
• Would this help bring visibility to the fact that global warming is real and a serious risk … and that real solutions and opportunities exist?
• Would this help build a movement to pressure politicians toward action?
• Would that enable President Obama to move renewable energy legislation through the Congress to help put insulation in our walls and solar on our roofs?

A path forward?

As opposed to White House staffer (a key one on energy, sigh …) who stated that she wasn’t into “stunts”, Secretary Chu understands the power of symbols.

This fall, the bi-annual Solar Decathlon will be held (as always, phew) in Washington, DC (sadly, in Potomac Park rather than on the Mall).

Why not have the White House solar panels go up and active during The Solar Decathlon?

Why not have a representative from the 20 teams join President Obama (and his family) in a ceremony to turn these panels on?

Want to have the symbol reverberate with impact? That, imo, would do so …

Sunday, Brendan Smith and Jeremy Brecher asked Are Progressives in Denial About Climate Change?

If you listen to right wing commentators, you might think American progressives are leading the charge to protect our planet from climate change. Would that it were so!

Smith and Brecher lay out a series of challenges and issues that coalesce to keep this from being so … and this is a true travesty because far too many progressives fail to understand the situation.

Every Progressive should recognize and incorporate, deep in their soul, the plain fact: Global Warming is the single most serious threat to Progressive ideals, concepts, policies, and aspirations through the 21st century … AND today.
This is not just a let’s wait until tomorrow issue, that should be put in the back of the line to deal with after other issues, we must address it with urgency today if we hope for a progressive world tomorrow.
[Read more →]

One of the more interesting energy events in DC each and every year (for 14 years running), the Congressional Renewable Enegy & Energy Efficiency EXPO exposes Congressional staff and (some) members to a range of intriguing (and potentially explosive) technologies, companies, and associations as well as truly top-notch thinkers meriting serious attention.

This session is on, right now, in the Cannon Office Building (right by the Capitol South Metro) and this post is rather short as I am about to head over there (after completing a morning meeting).

If you’re in the DC area, this is worth your time.

See Sustainable Energy Coalition announcement. Press release is below the fold.

[Read more →]

Sometimes, your kids tell you great things.

We have the coolest house on the street.

Wow.

We’re cool — according to the kids.

Certainly isn’t the non-existent slide for the pool that isn’t there.

Our lack of a huge media room and the glaring absence of a gym didn’t contribute.

And, while I’ve always thought it cool that we live on the white house of the street, that isn’t it either.

My fourth-grader son explained to me why it’s cool:

Because we know where our electricity comes from.

Last fall, facing a bit of pressure (mainly from 350.org) about the absence of solar from the White House roof since the Reagan Administration took off the panels President Carter put it, the Administration promised that the White House would have solar panels up on the roof “before the end of spring”.

As of today, 15 June 2011, the White House still doesn’t have solar panels on it.

The clock is ticking as even with climate disruption messing up our seasons, spring still ends 20 June …

[Read more →]

This guest post is from Bill McKibben who is the co-founder of the grassroots climate group 350.org, and Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College.

Nothing tests a relationship like home renovation (well, maybe twittering crotch shots, but I mean for ordinary folks). Fixing the kitchen, putting in a new bathroom: “It can bring up core issues in communication and highlight power struggles and inherent weaknesses in the marriage,” Rick Heil, a marital therapist, told the Chicago Tribune. Indeed, Google reveals a Palo Alto counselor whose entire practice involves “providing individuals and couples the tools and skills they need to make home renovations a positive and rewarding experience for everyone involved.”

Her expertise might be needed this week, because it’s beginning to look like the White House has dropped the ball,  gotten a little lazy, “not done what it said it would do when it said it would do it, goddamnit” (see what I mean?) The relationship between environmentalists and President Obama has always been a trifle fraught.

[Read more →]

I’ve been writing about the trials and tribulations of energy conservation in a master metered condo high rise (see More Musing on Master Metering).

Montgomery County, Maryland offered $1.7 million ( from federal economic stimulus funds) for energy conservation projects in commercial buildings and high rise apartments. My condo board agreed to apply. We were recently awarded $35,000 to match conservation incentives offered by our local electric power company,  PEPCO.

If all goes well (Board signs the contract in time, management company locates qualified  vendors, work gets done within require time frame, correct reports are provided), our condo should save about $25,000 a year on our utility bills by:

• repairing the common area air handler system to enable proper building pressurization and efficient use of outside air;
• using variable frequency drives (VFD) drives for the hydronic loop pumps, condenser loop pump and cooling tower fans (hydronic: uses water as the medium for heating and cooling systems) and
• upgrading the chiller system.

These are all improvements to common elements in the building. I am struggling to “get a handle on”  what percentage of the utility  bills is for common area usage and what percentage is for individual unit usage. Certainly, improving energy efficiency of the common elements is key if we are to increase energy efficiency, but changing resident behavior an essential element if we are to realize a significant reduction in the building’s energy consumption.

Our condo’s electric bill has more than doubled since 2003 when 2,287,581 KWHs were used at a cost of $128,095. The bill for 2010 was $291,311 for 2,364, 408 KWHs. Over that time, rates have gone from 0.0560 to 0.1232 and average KWH per unit increased from 9,946 to 10,282 (going in the wrong direction) and the average cost per unit, spread over our 230 units went from $557 to $1226. Clearly, it is in the interest of every resident to conserve on the use of electricity. Helping my neighbors understand this and care about this shared problem is a daunting task.

[Read more →]