BP Speak About Why Wind Power Is Going To Boom

Despite of the current economic recession, wind power has all the reasons to boom because of improved technology, increasing demand and cheaper cost, BP's Alternative Energy business developer Nicholas Hiza said during the Wharton Energy Conference last week.

Hiza said technology has increased the amount of electricity each wind turbine generates by 21 times in the last two decades. As a result, fewer wind turbines are needed in order to generate the same amount of electricity. Generous spacing up to 1,000 feet between two turbines can be achieved now, while years ago cluttered wind turbines created a problem for blocking migration route for birds.

Technology also reduced the noise level of wind turbines down to 40-50db, quieter than the humming from a refrigerator. "If you have a chance, drive your car to a wind farm and wind down your window and listen, then you will understand how quiet it is," Hiza said.

Increasing demand for energy has driven up the appetite for investment in wind farms, too. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projected the amount of electricity generated from wind would reach seven gigawatts. The actual amount produced that year amounted to 20 gigawatts, almost three times of EIA’s projection.

Currently, only 1.1% of the US electricity is generated from wind power. That leaves an ample room for the industry to grow as the government aims to produce 20% electricity by wind in the next few years.

Another advantage for wind is the low cost to produce power after the wind plant is built. Each kilowatt of electricity generated by wind costs 40 cents, the most affordable power, Hiza said.
Despite all the great prospect that wind power boasts, Mr. Hiza failed to mention, purposefully or not, the high cost to build these wind farms is in fact an obstacle.

Hiza admitted during a conversation after his speech that there are an increasing number of landowners who require a much higher royalty fee for installing wind turbines on their lands. “I think it is fair,” Hiza said. But he didn’t want to delve into the question how the new problem has affected wind power business. Maybe in a tight economy like this, the business is after all less rosy than he claimed?

Financial Crisis Dampen Motivation For Carbon Control

Leaders around the world have grown more reluctant to slash greenhouse gas emission as the world economy gets worse.

As the governments shift their priority to economy rescue, it makes less sense to push the cap on greenhouse gas emission since such effort will increase the cost for the government.

German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, said today she wanted to keep nuclear power, build new coal-fired plants, and shield chemical, steel, manufacturing, cement and auto industries. Merkel previously promised to eliminate coal and nuclear power in Germany.

New York Times analysis said: “There is now a greater possibility that the E.U. misses a deadline it set for itself,” Yvo de Boer, the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, said on October 20. “That would call into question Europe’s willingness to back up an offer that was applauded by the whole world with specific policies.”

Such retraction in Europe, warned by some analysts, might cause a chain reaction and lower eagerness of developing countries like China and India, who have already made it very clear about their request on extra funding from developed countries in curtailing global warming.

Obama To Spend $15 Billion Each Year On Alternative Energy

Alternative energy, which has moved higher on President-elect Barack Obama's daunting to-do list, might prove to be a helper for him to achieve the top-priority task: To get the economy back on track and people back to work.

Obama said five days before the election that he “will invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy to create five million new energy jobs over the next decade.” The industry not only has a relatively stronger performance in a bleak economy, but might create the most jobs for Americans in the next 10 years as well.

That explains why alternative energy has become the second most important thing on Obama's list, beating healthcare, tax-cut and the plan on retracting troops from Iraq.

An earlier plan was to put a cap on greenhouse gases requiring industries to buy credits from the government to emit CO2. That plan would have produced large government revenue and sent energy price rocket-high at the same time.

Obama's new plan on energy has switched to spend $150 billion in the next 10 years to develop alternative energy resources including wind, solar and biofuel. The focus has dramatically switched to stimulate the industry and create new jobs.

His third to fifth priorities, according to today's New York Times front-page story, are health care, tax restructuring, and education.

China Admits Its Greenhouse Emission Surpassed the US, And Now What?

A week ago, China's environment official hinted at a press conference that the country's level of greenhouse emission has caught up with the US. Western media like Reuters and Irish Times jumped on the story: "China for the first time admitted it has surpassed the US and became the largest greenhouse emitter in the world!"

This has been a secret that everybody knows since 2006. Why "come out of the closet" now? It might be another example to show China is taking a tougher stance in defending itself on global events.

Although the US, after being pointed to the nose as the biggest greenhouse emitter in the world for the last 100 years, is able to finally say China is "the bad guy," the real question is who is going to make the bigger sacrifice in curbing the emission in the future. The power didn't shift the other way after China's announcement. On the other hand, it might even tilted towards China more.

By being number one emitter in the world, China is still able to argue that developed countries have emitted almost all the greenhouse gas that is currently in the air and therefore are obliged to shoulder more responsibilities.

As long as China maintains its developing country status, Kyoto Protocol will not require it to have a cap on the level of emission. This is exactly what the US hates. The US refused to sign the Protocol during the last round negotiation unless China promised to take more responsibilities. China didn't budge.

China now admitted itself as the biggest greenhouse gas emitter and it even went on to say that the emission level, due to the continuing effort of poverty elevation in the country, is not going to go down any time soon. It's like saying: yeah, I am the bad guy, and so what?

The 5th Wharton Energy Conference Places Stronger Emphasis On Alternative Energy

The Wharton School, the world's first business school, is planning its fifth energy conference. The school's Energy Club, an independent student organization who has held the school's first four energy conferences in Philadelphia, is going to host its fifth in two weeks (November 21, 2008). What's new this year? One thing I noticed is, compared to the previous years, this year's topics have placed more emphasis on the alternative energy than the traditional energy. You can easily see that trend from the list below: (incomplete)

• Solar Grid Parity
• Project Financing in Energy
• Future of Wind
• Private Equity Investments in Alternative Energy
• Future Prospect for Geothermal
• Carbon Capture and Storage
• Solar: Thin-film
• Nuclear: Resurgence of Civil Nuclear Power in Emerging Markets
• Unconventional Oil (e.g. tar sands, shale)

See the complete list here.

Three keynote speakers Jacob Susman, founder of OwnEnergy, Steve Chazon, president of Occidental Petroleum Corp and Vijay Valtheeswaran, award winning correspondent of The Economist will speak about alternative energy industry from aspects of entrepreneurs, investors to media critics.

Three panel discussions include topics on "Investment in Clean Technology", "Opportunities in the Global Power Industry" and "Dissecting the NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) Problem," moderated by well-known figures in each field.

For the first time, this year's Conference will introduce table discussions in order to encourage more interactive and in-depth conversations among those who share the same interest on a particular topic. One professional participant of each table will act as the "table captain" to facilitate.

The one-day conference attracted 200 attendees from students, faculty, to professionals in the industry last year. It has expanded through the years and since last year it had to move to a bigger venue outside the school.

The chairman of the Wharton Energy Club is promoting the event by promising a quality conference as well as an all-you-can-drink cocktail party after the meeting.

Zero-Emission Car of GM

General Motors' new car needs no exhaust pipes or cylinders, and it has zero emission.

As impossible as it sounds, the new hydro-powered Chevy Equinox has hit the streets in New York City, Washington D.C. and South California early this year. 100 people, from regular families to celebrities, have joined the 30-month free ride. In return, each test driver will provide feedback to GM about the car's performance and their views of the experience. A few month into the initiative, some drivers have already "thoroughly impressed."

Josh Max, a New York Daily News reporter, test drove the car in May during an interview for the car review. When he asked Stephen Marlin, driver relationship manager for GM’s test driving initiative, “Project Driveway," of how many cylinders the car has, Marlin said "there is none. The configuration of the engine eliminates the need of them."

When Josh stopped the car for a hydro-refill, Marlin asked him to touch the engine. "We open the hood and I examine the engine, a rectangular, boxy-looking thing. We’ve just driven 10 or so miles, but Marlin tells me to touch the casing. I do. It’s cool."

The Equinox Fuel Cell is powered by GM’s fourth generation fuel cell system – a major advancement in fuel cell technology that can start in sub-zero temperatures, achieve 200 miles per fill up, and travel at up to 100mph. As another test driver Ron Cogan described: "Driving it feels so normal I’m completely at ease with the drive with little thought of the processes at work behind the scenes."

“When you pass guys in Priuses, you can thumb your nose at ’em because even those cars burn fuel. This car emits nothing,” GM's Marlin said. The electric vehicle has four thin vertical slits in place of an exhaust pipe: and instead of CO2 fumes, they emit clean water vapour.

The zero-emissions nature of the vehicle attracted the EPA to the deal. In September, GM delivered a hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle to the Environmental Protection Agency as part of a market test for the technology.

Equinox is the first of its kind that has absolutely no pollution, a step further from hybrid automobiles. Hybrid automobiles are powered by both internal combustion and electricity, they still produce emissions and consume fossil fuel, albeit in smaller amounts than most conventional automobiles.

Hyundai is set to launch the commercial version of its hydrogen fuel-cell car by 2012.

3M Joins Wind Power Business

3M, a major US adhesive company, may not seem like a logical fit for wind power business. But recently it announced its new line of product, Wind Tape, that would extend the life of wind turbine blades.

The new product line, which was developed by the company's new Renewable Energy Department, puts 3M in the middle of the battle of reducing world's greenhouse gas emission.

Wind Tape is designed to protect the edge of the huge wind turbine blades. Those blades, spin at 180 miles an hour, are usually damaged in about two years after generating electricity, from the erosion of the wind.

3M's Wind Tape comes in 8-inch wide and 54-foot long. Each roll costs at least $288. But comparing to the turbines that cost $100,000 each, the tape will be the money well spent.

According to 3M's website, the tape will extend the life span of a turbine by seven to ten years.

Finance and Commerce reported: "U.S. wind turbine components and systems would be worth $60.9 billion in 2013 – more than five times the 2008 market value of $11.2 billion.

3M wants to be part of the aggressive growth forecast contained in BCC’s report, which equates to a compound annual growth rate of 40 percent."

But one concern raised from the brilliant new product line is the customer service. Since 3M has been a materials firm all along, the new Wind Tape business will force the company to beef up its after sale service pretty quickly.

Slow Economy Hurts Alternative Energy

The slow economy in the US is hurting even the growth of the hottest alternative energy industry. Investment in the sector shrunk in the past few months and stock prices slumped.

WSJ says winds shift for alternative energy when oil price sinks and money gets tight. Oil price halved to $70 a barrel in October from its peak of $147 a barrel in February. The price drop in oil has taken away the viability of alternative energy since investors are worried whether the market will be big enough for alternative energy to be profitable.

The credit crisis is not helping either. As Americans spend less and drive less, the demand for energy has decreased. The slowdown of oil consumption leads many people to believe, at least temporarily, that the clean energy investment can be put off.

In a bleak economic environment like this, alternative energy will have to compete for government funding with industries like finance. $700 billion tax payers' money have been used to inject in the ailing banking system. As Americans making less, the government is collecting less tax, and, thus, will have a hard time to fund all the projects. Even though both of the presidential candidates make clean energy an important part of their campaigns, but it's hard to say which sector the new-elected government will end up cutting if the economy doesn't pick up soon.

One silver lining is OPEC has announced a few days ago to cut oil production by 15 billion barrels a day in order to tighten supplies hoping to move the oil price higher, as NYT reported. But some analysts are worried containing the oil supply will result in a slower economic recovery. For alternative energy industry, a booming economy, instead of manipulatedly increased oil price, is the real rescue.

3TIER Remaps The World

3TIER released the world's first comprehensive and high-resolution solar map of the entire western hemisphere on October 13, 2008.

Government, solar energy developers and financiers are able to easily assess any point on the map of its solar level by clicking on the Google Map and, thus, make decisions of the potential of an area for renewable solar energy. The map covers North, Central and South America.

Like 3TIER's wind map, which assess the wind speed in the clicked area, solar map is for free but needs registration. The two maps can shift from one to the other on one interface. It is an evolution for renewable energy industry. It would be especially handy for developing countries who do not have millions of satellite photos.

On 3TIER's website, it states clearly that:

"The facts are simple and sobering. More than 1.3 billion people around the world have no access to electricity. Demands for energy are increasing, while traditional fuel sources are decreasing. Add concerns over climate change and energy security and it becomes clear that renewable energy is critical to serve the future energy needs throughout the world. It also provides a sustainable source of clean power — where the fuel is completely free."

A strong instinct says 3TIER is soon going to be pursued by sponsors, financiers or even by Google, whose platform is being used by the map system of 3TIER. 3TIER's business is also totally in line with the environmental endeavor Google has been striving to make.

Let's Party And Save The World

It's just a cool thing to do if the flashing light and the rocking music you dance to are powered by solar or yourself. Nightclubs around the world are stepping up to reduce their carbon footprint.

In two weeks, Ecco Ultra Lounge, located in Hollywood's popular Cahuenga Corridor, is going to open as the first and only eco-friendly nightclub in Hollywood. After a two-month revamp, the club features everything "green", from energy saving LED lighting system, solar-paneled roof, free valet parking for Hybrids, eco cement, to recycled steel air pressure toilets and waterless urinals. The club's indoor lighting system saves up 80% electricity and is powered by the solar-paneled roof.

On Ecco's website, I also delightedly discovered its all-organic menu. My favorite dish is Soy Cured Organic Salmon with Avocado, Pickled Ginger, and Wasabi Oil.

Netherland's WATT is a funkier environmental-friendly nightclub. The club generates its electricity by humans. When dancing crowd moves, it absorbs the energy and transfers it into electricity power to light the dancing floor. The floor comes to live and lights flash faster when the crowd gets hotter and sweatier. Its toilets flush with rainwater and drinks are served in recyclable cups.

Before WATT, London's club Surya, opened this July, generates power by the concept of piezoelectricity in which the materials rub together to create a charge. Surya was called the world's first ecological club by Times.

Savvy Land Owners Raise Royalty for Placing Wind Turbines

Right after the Federal Government passed the tax credit extension, the "fantastic news" for renewable energy industry to gain cost advantage, wind power developers are facing a new cost pressure by land owners who are starting to increase royalty for placing wind turbines on their territory.

In last week's Dow Jones story, it says in western Oklahoma and the Texas panhandle, property owners have been taking up the agreements that "resemble oil and gas leases, which typically provide for a leasing fee and a royalty payment based on the well's output."

"Many deals now reached include provisions that allow property owners to be paid a recurring fee for each turbine placed on their land and for the power each turbine generates."

As is calculated in the story, "a land owner can conservatively receive about $10,000 a year from each turbine placed on their land, and farmers often sign a deal for half a dozen turbines at a time."

That generates good profit.

The new income for property owners are directly exerting cost pressure of wind power prices and creating challenges for alternative energy to going mainstream.

the reason that caused the switch of the negotiating power is multifaceted.

The continuous slump of crude oil price in the past two weeks is one of the key factors. Crude oil prices fell from $150 a barrel in July to under $90 a barrel last week, today it closed at $82.3 a barrel. This reduced the viability for alternative energy that otherwise enjoyed a competitive edge since the resources of wind and solar power are basically free.

The other reason is many small alternative energy business owners are swiftly expanding and investing a lot more after the tax break authorized by the government in early October, along with the $700 billion bailout package. Therefore, the landowners suddenly obtained an unprecedented power in negotiating. And they are not letting it go.

On one hand, landowners want to raise the royalty as high as they can but are cautious about not to scare the developers away. On the other hand, wind power developers, with tax credit at hand renewed for another year, are taking up deals with a higher and higher royalty fees, making the increase more fierce.

The evolution is just starting and it is going to take a while for both sides to settle down on a reasonable agreements on royalties. But regardless, the nascent industry has started to experience the growing pain when it meets traditional challenges.

Revived Tax Credit A Boon To Renewable Energy Industry

Wind power and solar energy owners throughout the US should celebrate the revived tax credit extension for renewable energy industry, a plan that was almost aborted but was brought back to life bundling to the $700 billion bailout plan.

The tax credit bill, worth of $78 billion of tax relief, is an extension from an existing plan which set to expire at the end of this year. The bill will help offset the high production cost of renewable energy and bring competitive cost advantage to the industry for producing and using renewable energy.

Without it, the industry is going to suffer from high production cost and lose the edge to compete with the conventional energy.

This is how much a renewable energy company would save (example from a story by Sand Jose Mercury News):

"A typical five-kilowatt solar system costs about $8 a watt, or $40,000." "With the California rebate of $7,600 and the $2,000 federal tax credit, that's an out-of-pocket cost of about $30,400. With the removal of that $2,000 cap, the credit grows to $9,700 and the net cost falls to $22,700."

That's big savings.

That was why the owners of windmills and solar power plants were feeling "the cloud hanging over us" when the bill was in a stalemate over the past several months as Congress debated how to pay for it. The House of Representative rejected the bill on September 29 after The Senate said yes the week earlier.

Many renewable energy entrepreneurs know exactly what it means to them if they lost the tax credit. A similar tax credit bill boosted and busted the solar hot-water industry in the 1980s. A dozens of small businesses spawned under the tax rebate program all went out of business when the incentives abruptly ended.

Luckily, the renewable energy tax credit extension was revived when the government tried to pass the $700 billion bailout plan early October. After The House vetoed the first draft of the bailout plan, it had a chance to revise and bundled the tax credit bill into the new version, which was passed later that week.

The extension allows the wind power production to enjoy tax exemption for another year and solar energy companies will have another 8 years of investment tax credit for business and homeowners to install solar energy equipments. The bill also extended a $1 per gallon tax credit for biodiesel through 2009. Buyers of plug-in electric cars will receive Federal tax credit ranging from $2,500 to $7,500.

Finally, the cloud over the industry dissipated and they "had a sense of relief," said Peter Detering, chief executive of Tioga Energy, a San Francisco company that finances solar deals for commercial customers, during an interview with San Jose Mercury News.

John Berger, chief executive officer of Texas-based Standard Renewable Industry, said during an interview with Reuters (the story) that:

"We are at a critical time period in the solar industry in the country and around the world. We are just starting to see some economies of scale, some prices decreasing in the solar panels. Having the 8-year extension will absolutely cement in place getting solar to be part of conventional energy."

Clean Coal Technology, Possibly A Greenwash PR Move

Everybody talks about clean coal like it is the next multi-billion dollar industry. But it could be just a green-sheen public relations strategy put forth by the coal industry striving to stay in business.

Look at what the coal industry says: "Clean coal is a solution to climate change and global warming". This sounds exciting. As a result, Al Gore even proposed the Fed to invest $2 billion into the research in order to speed up the wide adoption.

But the exciting slogan sounds similar to drug commercials on TV: give the sneezing children this pill, all the problems will be gone and we will have a happy healthy family.

But something just doesn't add up here.

When it comes to investment, we think about reward. Since scientists project such technology will only be viable t in about 15 years, this doesn't sound like a smart investment to any rational people. On the humane side, the level of gas emission is turning the planet into an unlivable place sooner than scientists expect. We simply do not have 15 years to wait.

Besides, the best clean coal technology only reduces 2/3 of greenhouse gas emission from coal burning. Renewable energy, on the other hand, emits as much as 1-4% of that from coal burning. coal, currently generates 49% of the electricity in the US, will still rank the dirtiest fossil fuel that aggravates global warming.

No wonder environmental groups, including Greenpeace, oppose the project strongly.

As much as I don't want to doubt the good will of such proposal, the question is why we are investing if the technology won't make the coal really clean and it takes forever to happen. It leaves me wonder whether it is a greenwash move to keep the coal industry in business for the next 15 years using the government funding. The shrewd coal groups are almost saying: we were the bad guy, now give me a chance to be good. Hard to say no to that, isn't it?

Bringing Class to Trash

It is always a first for everything, such as making trash sexy. Such an image made the business attractive and profitable.

Sidney Torres, a former rock'n'roll producer and a successful real estate developer, jumped in to clean the city of New Orleans when he found out it is a profitable business to be in after Katrina. Residents didn't realize the company SDT, founded in 2005, was anything more than a socially responsible cause until they found out some "bizaare" things about it.

SDT, by no means, is a garbage company in any traditional sense. Torres commands his 75 truckers through two 57-inch flat screen TVs at home and locates any trucker anytime given by GPS. And according to NPR news, Torres dresses nothing like a garbage man. His usual working outfit is Bolle sunglasses, tight black T-shirt and vintage jeans.

Torres' truckers are required to dress in black and white, a hip outfit supplied by the company. The trucks, carrying a bear logo, are always shiny as new. A self-developed scented spray is spread to the streets everyday to make the city smell like lemon. A side benefit: people who came home from a party with a bad smell could ask for a LemonFresh spray shower, in the street, for free.

Soon enough, this self-funded garbage collecting start-up won the $9 million contract to clean up multiple areas in the city. And before Torres knew it, he has become the most eligible bachelor in town. People ask for his autographs and take pictures with him in the street.

Fame allured more businesses. New Orleans CityBusiness story reported:

"In late 2005, Torres won the parish's residential garbage contract, which pays $20 per house a month for nearly 14,000 houses."

"In 2006, Torres won the contract that launched him into stardom in New Orleans. Today, SDT has about 150 full- and part-time employees."

As the business booming, Torres said during an interview with the CityBusiness:"I had no idea I was going to be in the garbage business. Had no idea I was going to be cleaning New Orleans." But this man obviously had sound ideas of how to run a business if he knows how to make trash sexy.

What Does 3% Mean To Us?

3% sounds like a trivial number, but it is not, in terms of the annual increase of greenhouse gas emission.

International researchers announced Thursday that: "worldwide greenhouse gas emission, the principal gas that causes global warming, rose 3% from 2006 to 2007". Some scientists described it as "scary" because they expected a downturn in the emission since the slowing economy might have consumed less energy. But the result was surprising to the scientists and was worse than the worst case scenario forecast by a Nobel Prize-winning group of scientists in 2007.

LA Times article quoted Richard Moss, vice president and managing director of climate change at WWF (World Wildlife Fund): "We should be worried, really worried," because "this is happening in the context of reducing emissions."

So what does this 3% really mean?

It means in 2007, the greenhouse gas emission has reached the equivalent of almost 10 billion tonnes of carbon. This made the greenhouse gas concentration the highest in the last 650,000 years, probably during the last 20 million years.

LA Times article said the consequence of further temperature increase will be disastrous:

"The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that an increase of between 3.2 and 9.7 degrees Fahrenheit could trigger massive environmental changes, including melting of the Greenland ice sheet, the Himalayan-Tibetan glaciers and summer sea ice in the Arctic." To further understand the severity of the situation, take a look at NASA's report on Global Temperature Trend 2007.

Ironically, as the worldwide emissions growth went beyond the highest growth in fossil fuel predicted just two years ago by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the two pollution leaders, China and the US, are busy blaming each other for not taking measures.

While the US urged China, who surpassed the US in 2006 to become the world's number 1 emitter, to take responsibility, China argued developed countries were responsible for 80% of historic emissions and, therefore, bore an "unshirkable responsibility" to take the lead in cutting down the emission. China blamed US for not signing Kyoto Protocol to refrain its emission level and also argued that if listed by capita, China is the 121st biggest emitter in the world.

It is like fighting with your neighbors when the whole neighborhood is caught on fire. Instead, this might be a good time for all the countries to stop thinking about its economic growth for a minute and act together to at least slow down the worsening, before we all miss the chance to put out the fire before it spreads out of control.

Environmental-Friendly Branding: More Than Just Lip Service

As far as environmental-friendly branding goes, it has grown more imperative than ornamental in the US in the past few years. Customers have incorporated more environmental friendly lifestyle in daily lives.

I went to buy body lotion at The Body Shop on Broadway in New York last week. When I told the cashier to save the bag, she said: "I hear this so many times a day!" Before I stepped out of the store, I did a quick research, within the next 15 minutes, 8 out of 10 customers saved a bag.

An increasing environmental awareness among customers offers a great opportunity for companies to market green brands, but, on the other hand, exerts more pressure as well. Customers are looking at what companies do than what they say, because talk is cheap.

The best example is the non-green automobile manufacturer Toyota. It obviously hit the home run with it's fully hybrid Prius. (See the comparison of MPG here) As a result, Toyota goes around with a big badge of environmental-friendly brand.

Some customers bought Prius despite the fact that they didn't like Toyota. A new Prius owner eDevin commented in an online auto-forum that:

"I've never liked Toyota,"..."But, the fact of the matter is that they, at this particular moment make the best and most efficient car and sell it at a reasonable price."... "I do love driving my Prius, but I consider myself a Prius-driver instead of a Toyota-driver."

But for Toyota, whether someone is a Prius-driver or a Toyota-driver doesn't make a big difference. By producing Prius, Toyota has successfully reached out to the customers that actually "dislike" Toyota. What a great success!

Other success stories including American household brand names such as Whole Food (grocery) and Sub-Zero (Appliances). Those are the companies who have devoted years in pushing their environmental-friendly images.

Whole Food, for example, identified as the greenest brand in the US, has reaped the benefit from this trend. The grocery store speciallized in natural food started for a niche market but soon evolved into mainstream. As other food markets tried to catch up to offer organic alternatives, Whole Food still takes up 23% of the natural food category.

The less successful marketers are among travel, online technology and petroleum industries. Those industries are known for their big carbon footprint and extra effort are expected before they resonate with customers. Among them, there are Southwest Airlines, Google and BP.

A 2007 survey Green Branding 2.0 Report that done by Cohn & Wolfe, Landor Associates and Penn, Schoen and Berland, there is a detailed illustration of which American brands are doing well on marketing their environmental friendly images.

"From the brand perspective, many companies have witnessed the affects of greenwashing and recognize that being a green company is truly more than marketing or public relations," Annie Longsworth, Executive Vice President at Cohn & Wolfe, said: "It requires (companies to have) a C-level (top level) commitment, years, in some case, of system changes, and a deep exploration into every nook and cranny of the business to address its impact on the environment as well as having a relevant and differentiated product offering."

See the top 10 environmental-friendly brands in the US:

1. Whole Foods
2. Wild Oats
3. Traders Joe's
4. Toyota
5. Honda
6. Sub-Zero
7. IKEA
8. The Body Shop
9. GE
10. Aveda

Google Taps Into Renewable Energy

Last Wednesday, Google announced to get into the renewable energy business with GE. The plan is to invest in technologies for environmental solutions, build renewable energy plant and promote plug-in electricity cars.

The project, Renewable Energy cheaper than Coal, first of all, is to reduce Google's own coal footprint and energy cost. Google's massive data center, which allows Google to respond to searches speedily, contributes a lot to global warming gas emission.

By planning to produce one gigwatt of renewable energy capacity, more cheaply than electricity generated by coal, Google expects to see a significant reduction in emission, as well as its energy cost.

The amount of electricity generated is "enough to power a city the size of San Francisco," according to Google.org, the philanthropic arm of Google that is in charge of the environment projects.

Google has also been investigating the possibility to generate electricity for its headquarters in Mountain View, Ca. by using solar panels on the roof since last year.

Google's new endeavor also includes an ambition to promote low CO2 emitting cars and invest hundreds of millions into transforming the nation's electricity grid.

Some analysts questioned Google's new move as distraction to its core business and might hurt shareholders' benefit, Google's CEO Eric Schmidt responded in an NPR interview with Michele Norris:

"Understand that the energy prices drive the cost of Google. So if we can spend money now to save money in the future, that ultimately produces better long-term shareholder value."

Goolge's "Don't be evil" motto has long decided the company's idealism. An earlier NYT article cited Google's Letter From the Founders before the company’s 2004 initial public stock offering, Mr. Page and Mr. Brin wrote: “Our goal is to develop services that significantly improve the lives of as many people as possible. In pursuing this goal, we may do things that we believe have a positive impact on the world, even if the near-term financial returns are not obvious.”

Eric Schmidt stressed again in last week's radio interview:

"Is it good for the country? Absolutely. Is it good for Google and GE? Of course it is. What's wrong with that?"

Too Eager to Stand in The Right Lane

Two world leading oil giants might be too eager to change their polluting images. Within the last 5 weeks, Both Shell and Exxon Mobil both put up ads claiming their environmental-friendly projects, but were both shot down by ASA (Advertising Standard Authority), the British regulator for advertising industry.

ASA's tough stance is appreciative.

In August, Shell's advertisement in the Financial Times (above) said "the firm was investing heavily in new technology to safeguard shareholders and future generations". ASA required an immediate withdrawal because neither of the two projects cited, a massive oil sands extraction in Canada and the USA's largest refinery, was environment conscious projects. 

Shell argued that "the process involved in the Canadian sands project would produce 10 per cent fewer CO2 emissions than other methods and that the project had a voluntary green code", according to report by environment Leader website. 

After World Wildlife Fund UK refuted that either project Shell is involved in didn't help building a sustainable environment and urged it to be taken off, Shell said it a one-time ad and would not be repeated.

On September 3, ASA gunned down another ad by ExxonMobil claiming "natural gas is one of the world's cleanest fuel" and "ExxonMobil... taking on the world's toughest energy challenges." 

The ad was broadcast on British television over summer, four complaints were received from audience challenging the oil giant about the credibility of describing natural gas as the cleanest fuel. ASA said the ad was misleading and requested that "the ad must not be broadcast again in its current form."

In response, ExxonMobil said in a Reuter story: 

"We maintain that our ad was accurate and truthful, and are considering an appeal of the Council's decision."

These aren't the first time oil companies' ads to be banned. Last year, Guardian reported another Shell ad that was banned because it showed refinery chimneys emitting flowers.

Post Olympics Syndrome

August 31, 2008 should be written in the environment history of China. That day, Beijing's air quality reached level 1, the level World Health Organization (WHO) declared safe. Major publications in China praised it was the bluest sky in the city in the last ten years. But will the beautiful sky stay in Beijing after the Olympics?

Credit has to be given to China government who invested $10 billion altogether in battling the air pollution by generating alternative energy for Olympics venues, chasing away cars and closing down factories.

The air quality, especially during the later part of the Olympics, has steadily reached level 2, China's national level of "blue sky day".

Then there was August 31. For anyone who had any experience in hazy Beijing weather, the picture (shown above) seems unreal. A Beijinger said: "I can't believe how blue the sky was that day!"

It's a crucial time for China government to either grasp the opportunity to improve the air quality or act in a typical two-steps-forward-one-step-back stereotype to let people down. For a country that believes in "timing" (天时) for everything, the timing cannot be better.

Beijing citizens have quickly gotten used to the "blue sky" during the Olympics and they obviously want the beautiful days to stay. 80 per cent of the respondents of a survey done by a major Chinese portal Sina.com say they would like the government to continue the same measures, even if it means to replace cars with public transportations for a few days each month.

SEPA (Ministry of the Environmental Protection) official said shortly before the Olympics that most of the measures will be adopted in a long term, though not all of them.

Three weeks after the games, it's time for a reality check. Unfortunately, what I have heard is all the construction sites have resumed work and the sky has gone back to hazy.

Photo credit to Bug

Clean Truck Program's Unfair Game

When the Clean Truck Program was put forward in California in April last year, everyone was excited. Nearby residents were celebrating for the long-expected cleaner air, media was raving about how this "bold plan is going to reduce the local air pollution by 80% in five year," 300 truckers of Los Angeles and Long Beach gathered in the street in June expressing their support of the stricter pollution standards. 

The reason for such jubilation is obvious. A wife a Long Beach trucker told LA Times:

"It's sad to see my husband is mistreated; I cry with him," she said. "He can't breathe at night. Sometimes he shares the respirator we bought for the children." 

But atmosphere changed shortly. 

The costly Program, $2 billion in replacing 16,000 aging fleet, though partly funded by the State, is going to add extra burden on trucking companies, especially the small ones.

The extra cost of trucking companies, besides the approved extra charge of $35 levy per loaded 20-foot equivalent unit from the loaders, is also likely to hit individual truckers eventually. 

At the same time, port of LA is changing the contractor trucker system, which currently takes up 90% of truckers in the port, to employee system, for more efficient management. That means, small trucking companies now need to pay employee's medical insurances and might be soon out of business. 

A lawsuit was filed on July 28 by American Trucking Association (ATA) against the ports and opposed the program all together. A federal judge doesn't suspend the project.

But it doesn't look like a fair game. The assistant director of communication of Port of Long Beach, Art Wong, seems to share the similar opinion. 

He said in a phone interview: "It seems to be unfair to demand small truck owners to switch to a new employment system and also be burdened with financing new trucks. They are in a disadvantageous position."

Port of Long Beach recently steered to a more lenient "concession" method, that allows the trucking companies to choose between self-financing or receive financing from the port. 

Continuous lawsuit shadows the project. Federal Maritime Commission is in the process of requiring the ports to supply more information on several key points, which might delay the October 1 start. 

If I Hear the Word "Green" One More Time

What's the big deal about being "green"? It is just a trendy way of saying living a life with environmental consciousness. Isn't everybody supposed to do that? 

Adding the label "green" does more harm than good. It suggests it's cool to be environmental conscious but it's okay not to. Such misconception, ironically, defends people's behaviors that are detrimental to the nature. 

As a result, many developers have been brushing off the idea of environmental friendly buildings for its higher up-front construction cost. It is like admitting they would rather waste more energy or natural resources in order to save money on expensive materials that do less harm to the environment.

Many major publications also supported that idea. New York Times carried an article in 2003 titled "Not Going Green is a Matter of Economics".The story noted that "a compelling case demonstrating the economic rewards has not been made". 

NYT's point is misleading. An article published by AIA (the American Institute of Architects), a professional association with over 83,000 members, said last year that "a sustainable building could be achieved with little or no increase in construction costs and that a minimal 'upfront investment of less than 2 percent of construction costs yields life cycle savings of over 10 times the initial investment.'"

To put it in a more comprehensible way: Developers pay more up-front and get a return of over 10 times in a long run.

The NYT article also quoted someone saying "the financial reward are unproven" after such an environment-friendly building was built. "It is an economic thing," said a source in the article.

But is it just an economic thing?

I would like to introduce a recognized concept of triple bottom lines: people, planet, profit are the three criteria to evaluate any investment (which is social, environment and economic evaluation), including the environmental buildings.

To "go green" is not to become a hippy. For not being able to "stay green", we are suffering from polluted air, new diseases, and higher cost for buildings. Instead of embellishing it, I suggest using "going de-grey" because we are just trying to go back to the norm of how our ancestors have lived for centuries.

Play An Environment Card in the IT Business Game

Obviously IT giants are always competing their operating systems and latest applications to get ahead, but as Microsoft recently announced its promotion of a Windows specified power management software, it might be a good sign that the environment concept has heated up in gaining the new edge. 

The product, Edison, is designed to help individual PC users to save power and reduce carbon emission. The startup that developed Edison, Verdiem, has a similar product, Serveyor, only for corporate users. It charges $20 per computer a year and an extra $3 for annual maintenance. But Edison is free. 

So who is paying the bill? Though not specifically mentioned, the numerous times the name of Microsoft mentioned in the news and Verdiem's website probably suggests the leading computer company might have some investment in the game. And, this is gold well spent.

Yeah, we know the product is free, but what left unsaid is: it is free (as long as you have a PC with Windows XP or Vista operating systems). Look at the requirements for the free download on Verdiem's website, it is all about Microsoft. The "free candy" is a hook to keep users, to a certain extent, stay loyal to Microsoft's operating systems, or convert new users to not-so-popular Vista.

Microsoft's marketing department must be applauding too. There is no better advertisement to say Microsoft is environment aware and savvy, a great image boost. Many are appraising Microsoft's effort of becoming environment friendly. New York Time's article said:

"Household electricity bills could also be trimmed by $20 to $95 a year for each PC" using Edison,  

But it really is not the $20 that everyone in this game is concerned about. 

Edison also outsmarted Mac's Power Manager 3, a similar product developed by a British company DSSW. Power Manager 3 is designed for both corporate and individual users. It charges $28.95 per year. I personally think the interface of Edison looks cooler than that of PM3. 

More importantly, it carries the most attractive feature that Power Manager 3 missed. It tells you how much less carbon has been emitted from your computer and how much money you have saved from your electricity bill. That definitely gives a sense of achievement. 

Remembering the battle lost on the search engine against Google, Microsoft, doing a lot more along the environment line, deserves the thumb up in this round of the game.