Posted by: Mark Scott on November 26
The world had been waiting years for the U.S. and China to agree to carbon cuts. And in less than 24 hours, that's exactly what happened. On Nov. 25, U.S. officials announced carbon reduction targets that could help push through an agreement at the upcoming climate change summit in Copenhagen. The proposal -- a roughly 17% cut in CO2 output by 2020 vs. 2005 levels -- matches goals already laid out in climate change legislation currently working its way through Congress. That represents approximately a 3% reduction based on 1990 levels, a benchmark used in the Kyoto Protocol. The U.S. also plans to cut its CO2 output by 83% by 2050. China, which had previously refused to reduce its carbon output, said on Nov. 26 it would cut CO2 levels per unit of GDP by up to 45% by 2020, compared to 2005 figures. The target, though, remains voluntary.
"The U.S. commitment to specific, mid-term emission cut targets and China's commitment to specific action on energy efficiency can unlock two of the last doors to a comprehensive agreement," said Yvo de Boer, secretary general of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Continue reading "Countdown to Copenhagen: US & China Announce Carbon Reductions"
Posted by: Yoni Cohen on November 25
As Business Week recently reported, Israeli cleantech is red-hot. Need additional evidence? On Nov. 15, both authors of the House-passed cap and trade bill participated in conversations about the burgeoning Israeli cleantech sector. Congressman Henry Waxman spoke at the Saban Forum in Jerusalem while Congressman Ed Markey addressed a packed house at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government in Cambridge.
But can a tiny nation really be a global cleantech leader? Absolutely. There are several reasons to believe that Israeli cleantech is here to stay.
First, human capital. "Israel has one of the world's highest concentrations of scientists and engineers. It is similar to Boston and San Francisco. Within a fifty mile drive, you've got a half dozen of the world's top research universities, " said Jonathan Shapira, a business lawyer at Goodwin Procter and the founder of the Boston-Israel Cleantech Alliance.
Second, natural resources and lack thereof. Israel has plenty of sun, which enables it to serve as a laboratory for solar innovation. It lacks water and oil, which provides a strong and persistent incentive for the country to be a world leader in desalination and wean itself off fossil fuels.
Third, a unique entrepreneurial culture. From a young age, Israelis are direct and outspoken. Later in life, their frankness allows for vibrant debate that helps startups rethink their assumptions and retool their plans. This is an essential and underappreciated trait for new firms as they undergo substantial change from idea to commercialization. During mandatory military service, Israelis develop valuable teamwork and problem-solving skills, particularly under duress. Most importantly, they learn to take risks and to proceed with confidence. “A technology venture is three guys starting a company and going to war against… GE, Siemens or Dow Chemical, the big players who are going to dominate cleantech in 20 years," said David Anthony of cleantech venture firm 21 Ventures. “The Israeli entrepreneur is used to this metaphorical David vs. Goliath.”
Fourth, geopolitics, at least as long as the United States government and market as a critical source of capital and demand for cleantech.
Put simply, America and American investors view Israel as a more reliable ally and an easier country in which to do business than China. "It is key that we not have 'made by OPEC' substituted with 'made in China.'. We need a strategy where [cleantech] is made in the USA and Israel," said Markey. Toward that end, Markey will next year take to Israel the members of the House Select Committee on Global Warming.
Guest blogger Yoni Cohen is focusing on green business as a joint-degree student at the Yale Law School and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
Posted by: Yoni Cohen on November 24
President Barack Obama likes to talk about creating millions of green jobs. But how does a student, recent graduate, or mid-career professional actually land one of these jobs? At Massachusetts’ Fifth (Annual) Conference on Clean Energy on Nov. 13, a panel of industry experts advised a diverse group of conference attendees on what it takes to go green.
Tom Atkinson advised would-be career switchers to assume that there is a green business that needs their existing skills. After more than a decade with Goldman Sachs’ information technology department, Atkinson left his job to pursue what he hoped would be more meaningful employment. Three years of soul-searching later, he settled on energy efficiency and applied to work at Network Operations Center, where he is the director of the network operations center (NOC) at EnerNOC. NOC helps organizations efficiently reduce their energy consumption during times of peak demand. “It’s funny, but [at the time] they didn’t have a NOC employee,” said Atkinson of why he was hired.
The Brattle Group’s Judy Chang is a consultant who advises clients on financial and regulatory challenges relating to renewable energy investment and procurement decisions. Chang emphasized the core skills required in many green jobs. She urged people interested in combating climate change to familiarize themselves with energy, finance, and public policy. Recalling the many nights she spent years ago reading about wind energy – before cleantech had become fashionable – Chang also urged students and career-switchers to be patient and think long-term. “The thing that you’re passionate about may not give you a return immediately,” Chang said.
Kevin Doyle is the author of the Environmental Careers Organization’s Guide to Careers that Make a Difference. Doyle suggested that green job applicants adopt a positive attitude, educate themselves about the specific industry in which they want to work, and “network like hell.” He also advised applicants to play the percentages. “The bulk of the jobs are… in science, technology, and math,” said Doyle. “Don’t throw out from the beginning that this is ‘not me.’ We need more technicians, scientists, and engineers. Why not you?”
Guest blogger Yoni Cohen is focusing on green business as a joint-degree student at the Yale Law School and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
Posted by: Andrew Hoffman on November 18
We place too much faith in pricing as a singular mechanism for solving environmental problems in this country. The most vivid example is the call to create a price for carbon as the solution to the climate change problem. As the logic goes; if we set a price for carbon high enough, innovators will create new gadgets that emit fewer greenhouse gases, investors will invest in them, companies will adopt them and consumers will buy them.
But, not so fast. We are not like some sort of mice chasing a piece of cheese whenever it is placed in front of us. Unlike mice, we are not so singular in focus. We actually care who is placing the cheese and we may even ignore the cheese if it is not placed in the right way.
In short, pricing is never contextually or politically inert. Contrary to what many would like to think is a quick fix, a price for carbon is but one tool that must be accompanied by others to make sure that markets respond effectively and efficiently. Put too much faith in pricing as the only answer and success will be either elusive or found through sheer luck.
Consider the gasoline price spike of two summers ago. The market responded efficiently with the sales of gas-guzzlers dropping like a stone and consumers flocking to their fuel efficient neighbor. Pricing worked! But consider an alternative scenario. Imagine we faced the same price spike, but instead of its cause being the invisible hand of the market it was the very visible hand of a government gas tax.
Would consumers have been so pliable? Would auto suppliers have been so flummoxed? No, unlike our friends in Europe who accept government inflated gasoline prices, there would have been widespread revolt with defiant customers and auto execs remaining intractable.
Consider another example. In 2002, the Irish government instituted a 15 cent fee (aka tax) on plastic grocery bags. Within one year, plastic grocery bag use dropped by 94 percent. Score one for pricing-induced behavior change! Well not entirely. Unlike the experience in many US cities that are trying to institute similar initiatives (for example, San Francisco), the context in Ireland was ripe for the "plastax."
The reasons, in no particular order, include: there are no plastic bag manufacturers in Ireland to mount an organized opposition; there is no problem of leakage from neighboring countries or states that did not have a similar tax; almost all markets are parts of chains that are highly computerized with cash registers that already collect a national sales tax, so adding the bag tax involved a minimum of reprogramming; the country has a young, flexible population that has proved to be a good testing ground for innovation, from cell-phone services to nonsmoking laws.
In fact, the country was primed for change having just shifted from the Pound (or Punt) to the Euro; and people generally didn't mind paying the tax as the litter from the bags was seen as a common nuisance. All of this led up to the development of a norm that it was socially unacceptable to be seen carrying a plastic bag. In fact, it was downright rude, with violators being treated much in the same way as someone who did not curb their dog.
What does all this have to do with carbon pricing? Plenty.
Continue reading "The Limits of Carbon Pricing: Can High Prices Alone Cut Emissions?"
Posted by: Yoni Cohen on November 17
Eight long years after Energy Management Inc. (EMI) began the permitting process for Cape Wind, its proposed billion-dollar wind farm offshore from Cape Cod, the Massachusetts project may be in sight of final approval. In early November, United States Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said that he hoped his agency would make a final decision on Cape Wind by the end of the year. Then, Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey urged Salazar to further expedite the review process and approve the construction of 130 wind turbines in Nantucket Sound before next month’s international climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark.
But as has been the norm for Cape Wind, two steps forward, one step back. In short order, the Massachusetts Historical Society agreed with local Native American tribes that the Nantucket Sound is eligible to be listed as traditional cultural property on the National Register of Historic Places. Such a listing, if affirmed by the National Parks Service, would significantly delay the project by imposing additional permitting requirements. At Massachusetts’ Fifth (Annual) Conference on Clean Energy on Nov. 12, Mark Rodgers, Communications Director for Cape Wind, expressed optimism that the wind project would still be approved before the end of the year. “We think the National Park Service is going to make an expeditious decision in just a few weeks,” said Rodgers. “Never before has open ocean been declared traditional cultural property.” If the Department of Interior and the National Park Service rule in EMI’s favor, Rodgers said Cape Wind could begin construction by the end of next year and have the wind farm up and running by the end of 2012.
Guest blogger Yoni Cohen is focusing on green business as a joint-degree student at the Yale Law School and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
