The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Fuel Cell Technologies Program has issued an RFI (Request for Information) seeking feedback from stakeholders regarding the commercial readiness of fuel cell and hydrogen technologies.

DOE is interested in industry information about transportation electrification using fuel cells, specifically on board refrigeration auxiliary power for heavy duty road vehicles, fuel cell rechargers for battery electric vehicles used for transporting cargo or passengers, and technology deployment opportunities for other on- or off-road transportation markets.

The governmental agency said in order for fuel cell costs become lower, we’ll need to see higher volume deployments in emerging markets. The Program collaborates with industry to overcome hurdles related to this technology and its economics, with hopes it will eventually become a commercial reality.

To help the DOE, click here. The deadline is 11:59pm EST on March 2, 2012.

Article by Antonio Pasolini, a Brazilian writer and video art curator based in London, UK. He holds a BA in journalism and an MA in film and television.

Related posts:

• Students Think Up Hydrogen Solutions; Industry Body Asks For More Official Support
• General Motors and Oahu Shake Hands in the Name of Green Transportation
• Hydrogen Fuel Cell System Closer To Market
• First Pipeline-Fed Hydrogen Refueling Station Opens in the United States
• Mercedes-Benz’s New Fuel Cell Leasing Program to Bring The F-Cell to the US

For a long time ‘clean’ and ‘green’ marked the forward trend in the energy industry. Then came the quest for ‘smart’ energy. And now ‘innovation’ is the buzzword.

It’s easy to see why. As Americans, we believe our ability to innovate sets us apart in today’s international market. Sure China can manufacture computers and cell phones more quickly and cheaply, but we came up with Google and iPhones in the first place.

The energy industry offers a lot of opportunity for US innovators, given our aging grid, quest for alternatives to fossil fuels, and our glimpse into the possibilities of a virtual, democratized grid that gives consumers more control over their energy use and production.

But will energy innovation help the US job market? Or will the products be conceived here but be manufactured elsewhere?

Siemens U.S. CEO Eric Spiegel offers some interesting thinking in a recent piece: “Where the Jobs Are: Higher Technology Manufacturing.” He takes issue with the idea that US manufacturing is doomed.

Such thinking wrongly assumes that the manufactured products of the future, like those of today, will be commodities, “the kind that could be built of equal quality, with equal technology, anywhere in the world,” Spiegel wrote. Blue jeans are his example.

He said that if innovation delivers, tomorrow’s products will be more high-end and require “skilled workers, precision assembly, intensive research, and complex technology,” the kind of thing the US does well.

Many new energy products, like smart grid technologies and wind turbines, require skilled manufacturing. Another, he points out, is the high efficiency natural gas turbine that Siemens builds in North Carolina. If the US remains an innovation leader, more of these high-end manufacturing jobs will make their way here, according to Spiegel.

But he isn’t Pollyanna about the US’ economic future. Sure, high-end energy manufacturing is occurring in the US, but it’s happening elsewhere as well: Europe, Brazil and parts of Asia. They too are innovating.

So the US has no reason to be overly confident about its innovation economy. Well aware of the intense competition, the federal government, states, universities and others are trying to create a more favorable climate for innovators. Below are a few ways that’s happening. I welcome readers to add to the list in the comments section of this blog. With the exception of the NYSERDA program, all of these were announced this week.

Elisa Wood is a long-time energy writer whose work appears in many of the industry’s top magazines and newsletters. She is publisher of the Energy Efficiency Markets podcast and newsletter.

Related posts:

• Obama, Better Buildings and the Innovators
• Water Sector Startups Innovate Efficient Use And Supply
• The ‘America’s Next Top Energy Innovator’ Challenge Begins Today
• Now Is Not the Time to Wave the White Flag on Clean Energy Jobs
• Clean Tech Event: Smart Grid Bilateral Trade and Investment Opportunities

With the passage of strict new auto emission and air pollution standards, California has again demonstrated its role as the U.S.’s environmental pacesetter. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, explains how her state is helping drive a clean-car revolution.

How likely is it that your next vehicle might be an electric car? California just increased the odds. On Jan. 27, the California Air Resources Board, a powerful state agency with a history of setting first-in-the-nation clean air and climate regulations, voted 9-0 on a package of sweeping “clean car” rules that are expected to help reshape the U.S. auto industry.

The chairman of the board, Mary Nichols, oversaw the enactment of these new rules, which require that 15 percent of all new cars sold in California by 2025 emit little or no pollution and that the state reduce emissions of smog-forming pollutants by 75 percent. The rules are expected to result in 1.4 million zero- and low-emission vehicles — electric, plug-in hybrid, and hydrogen fuel cell — reaching California auto showrooms over the next dozen years, compared to roughly 10,000 on the road there today. And it’s a near certainty that once built, those models won’t just be sold in California, but in the other 49 states, as well.

In an interview with Yale Environment 360 contributor Paul Rogers, Nichols — who has headed the board since 2007 — explains why California has consistently led the U.S. in passing the toughest air pollution and vehicle mileage standards, why Detroit automakers have decided to endorse California’s new rules, and why U.S. and international car makers are on the verge of a clean-car revolution. “Auto manufacturers have finally come to the conclusion that their future lies in very efficient, very clean vehicles,” says Nichols.

We’ve concluded that we’re going to need a fleet of vehicles that is not primarily running on conventional fuels.”

Yale Environment 360: Why did California pass these rules?

Mary Nichols: California has been working on these rules for decades. Really, this is just the latest version of a program that has been in effect since the 1960s, which began because we were the first place to discover smog and to begin to take action to deal with the problem of pollution caused by motor vehicles. But this most recent round of standards is one that reflects a real change in viewpoint about what the future of our transportation system is going to look like. Basically we have concluded that when you look at the rates of growth in travel and the even greater problems of energy use, dependence on imported petroleum, as well as global warming and our contribution to it, we’re going to need a fleet of vehicles that is not primarily running on conventional fuels. And so we’re looking for ways to help speed up the transition to a fleet of vehicles that are extremely clean and efficient. And we’re setting standards for their design that help use the power of the California marketplace to do that.

e360: And what impact do you think these rules will have on the entire auto industry in the United States?

Nichols: Well, California buys about 10 percent of all the new cars that are sold every year. But we have even more influence than that over the design of future vehicles because every car manufacturer from the largest to the most innovative start-ups uses us as a design laboratory because they know that Californians know cars and they really like them. The term “love affair with the car” might be an exaggeration, but not too much.

e360: So you see these rules as changing the way all Americans drive, not just Californians?

Nichols: Yes, clearly cars that are manufactured for the California marketplace also get sold outside of California. But we also have 13 states that followed California’s lead automatically. They’ve signed up for the California car program. Those states include all the states in the Northeast plus Oregon and New Mexico. They are going to be requiring that all the cars sold in their states meet California’s standards.

We are prepared to provide direct incentives toward the initial cost of some of these vehicles.”

e360: The standards that the air board passed are pretty far reaching. They require 15 percent of all new vehicles by 2025 to have zero emissions, which as a practical matter means all electrical, hydrogen fuel cell, or plug-in electric. Why do you think the auto industry generally supported them, when in the past it has filed lawsuits to block laws California has previously passed?

Nichols: I think that the auto manufacturers have finally — maybe a bit belatedly — come to the conclusion that their future lies in very efficient, very clean vehicles. If they are going to be able to continue to provide cars for places where the demand is really growing, like Asia and other developing parts of the world, they’re going to have to compete in an arena where gasoline is extremely expensive and, in some cases, almost impossible to obtain. They’ve also got to recognize that gasoline prices are going up and that there is a need for extremely clean fuels that can meet other demands, as well, in some of the most polluted areas on the planet, including India and China.

Alternative fuel vehicles are going to be hot sellers as soon as there are enough cars available and the fuel suppliers come along and fill the demand for whatever the future fuel is going to be. The demand in the parts of the world where people are becoming more prosperous is almost insatiable for vehicles. The first thing that people buy when they get to the point where they have a little disposable income — people want mobility. First, electric bicycles, then motorcycles, then a car — that seems to be an almost iron rule at this point. The car companies are going to have to have cars that meet that customer demand.

The political will to require cleaner cars in California goes back to the discovery of smog.”

e360: In terms of the American consumer, what would you say to critics who say that government can force suppliers to make a certain amount of vehicles, like electric vehicles, but it can’t force the public to buy them? That they might all be left sitting on lots.

Nichols: Well, we agree that there’s more to be done than simply to mandate the vehicles. We view our mandate program as giving a floor so that the manufacturers know that this is the minimum that we are going to be asking of them. But we are predicting that these cars are going to do much better than the minimum. The only way we are going to achieve that is through government taking responsibility that the changeover to new kinds of fuels is as simple as possible for the consumer — that is, making sure that there is easy access to electric charging or other ultra clean fuels. We are also prepared — as we already are doing — to provide direct incentives toward the initial cost of some of these vehicles. We know that until we’ve gotten the demand up and the volumes of production in place, that the initial cost of the new vehicles is going to be a deterrent to some. We want to be sure these cars are widely available, that people see them in the showrooms, and that they want to buy them.

e360: Sounds like the incentives you are talking about are tax credits and access to carpool lanes, things like that?

Nichols: Yes, exactly. Actually, we offer direct rebate funding thanks to a program in California called AB 118, which is a surcharge on vehicle registration fees. Some of that money goes into consumer rebates for purchasing zero-emission vehicles.

e360: How will a showroom in California or the United States look differently 10 years from now because of this rule?

Nichols: We expect that at least one out of every seven cars in that showroom is going to be a plug-in vehicle.

e360: In a wider sense, California has also passed some groundbreaking legislation on climate change with AB 32. Can you talk a little bit about how this clean car package of rules fits in with AB 32?

Nichols: AB 32, which is the state’s global warming law, was actually founded on the basis of our vehicle emissions rules for greenhouse gases. In 2002 the legislature ordered the resources board to start treating greenhouse gases as air pollutants and to set emissions standards for them. The standards were actually set in 2004. They weren’t implemented until after Obama came into office because the Bush administration held up the waiver that California needed to enforce our standards. We were already planning on addressing the problem of the contribution that our motor vehicles make to the overall problem of global warming. In California, [vehicles] are our largest contributor. In passing AB 32, the legislature told us to adopt a plan that would meet the standards of the Kyoto treaty and bring our overall emissions as a state back to 1990 levels by 2020, which meant they [included] our electricity system and our other major industrial sources of pollution, such as oil refineries. But the first step was to look at cars and see what we could do there.

e360: Finally California has a 50-year history of passing tougher air pollution regulations than the rest of the country. Can you talk a little about why that’s the case and what the effects have been?

Nichols: I think the political will to require cleaner cars in California goes back to the discovery of smog, no question about that. But that will is backed up by the fact that people are well aware that we really are breathing a lot of pollution that’s created by our desire and our need for mobility. They are willing to support the notion that we may pay a little more for a brand new car, but in return for that we get the satisfaction of knowing we are helping to move the auto industry in the direction of producing cleaner cars for everybody.

e360: So everything from the catalytic converter to unleaded gasoline and now to these electric vehicle mandates originates in California and spreads to the rest of the country after that?

Nichols: Well, that has been the history, and certainly we’re proud to have played that role as the pioneer. But we wouldn’t have been able to continue doing it if we hadn’t built up a kind of technical expertise, knowledge of what the industry actually could do and what technology might be available with enough of a push to make it happen. Year in and year out, we’ve seen the companies, after some initial fuss, competing with each other to produce very attractive, desirable vehicles that also pollute less. That gives us the confidence to keep on moving forward.

Article by Paul Rogers, appearing courtesy Yale Environment 360.

Related posts:

• California ‘Clean Car’ Rules Mandate Boost in Electric Vehicle Sales
• California’s Air Quality Plan to be Rejected by the EPA
• U.S. Government, California Merge Timelines for Auto Standards
• California Gives Green Light to Carbon Trade
• Going Further with America’s Auto Industry

As the home of some pioneering community solar projects, Maryland’s clean energy champions are seeking to establish a platform on which these renewable energy arrangements can flourish.

Recently introduced as Senate Bill 595, state lawmakers will be considering a proposal that would enable Maryland residents and small-businesses to join together in sharing the costs and benefits of renewable energy.

Most commonly conceived as a single renewable energy system in which individuals can invest in a portion of a facility’s clean generating potential, these arrangements offer a direct experience for those unable to install on-site renewable energy. For those that have a shaded roof or rent, community solar offer the promise of renewable energy access.

As an increasing number of jurisdictions look to broaden accessibility to the solar economy through this concept (e.g., here), we applaud these efforts for bringing solar into the mainstream. We look forward to this trend.

Hats off to Maryland for getting out of the gate early.

Vote Solar is a non-profit grassroots organization working to fight climate change and foster economic opportunity by bringing solar energy into the mainstream.

Related posts:

• U.S. Universities Shine at Solar Decathlon Europe
• Will You Occupy Rooftops On Community Solar Day?
• Building Partnerships, Conserving Lands
• Governor Cuomo Gets Serious about Solar
• Update on SDG&E’s Special Charge for Solar Customers

Sunny California is prime real estate for solar energy, and a number of California rebates make home solar systems highly affordable for Golden State residents. The only downside to these programs is that some have limited funding. Homeowners interested in solar panels will want to act soon to take full advantage of all the savings.

Here are five solar incentive programs that every California homeowner should know.

1. The Federal Incentive Program

The government offers the most generous program. The federal incentive program pays for up to 30 percent of the cost of installing a residential solar system in the form of a tax credit. The program is currently set to expire at the end of 2016.

2. California Solar Initiative

The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) has transitioned its residential rebate program over to your local utility companies. The CPUC oversees the program. The state still exempts renewable energy home improvements from property tax assessments, so installing a PV system won’t raise your property taxes.

The new program offers per-installed-watt rebates from the state’s three major utilities, Southern California Edison (SCE), Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E). It’s a tiered program, with rebates that step down in price as more utility customers participate in the program.

Currently, PGE and SDG&E are at the ninth step of the ten-step program, offering rebates of $.25 per watt. SCE is at the seventh step of the program, offering $.65 per watt.

Municipal utilities offer rebates as well, some of them substantially more generous than those offered by the larger utilities, although annual funds are generally limited. Of course, if you live in one of California’s top solar cities, your rebates are likely generous. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, for example, just moved to step six of their ten-step program, offering $1.62 per watt.

3. Single-family Affordable Homes (SASH) Program

Low-income Californian homeowners may be eligible to receive free or greatly-discounted home PV systems under the CPUC’s SASH program. Residents must be PG&E, SCE or SDG&E customers to qualify and must meet income requirements.

Generally, households earning less than 50 percent of the area’s median income levels may apply for a free 1-kilowatt home solar system. Households earning between 50 percent and 80 percent of median incomes may qualify for $4.75 per watt to $7.00 per watt rebates. SASH is administered by the non-profit organization GRID Alternatives.

4. New Solar Homes Partnership

The CPUC offers cash rebates to home builders who build houses with solar electrical systems built in. The New Solar Homes Partnership has been a huge success, and it’s likely the program will meet its goal of 400-megawatt capacity by 2016.

5. Thermal Rebate Program

The three major Californian utilities offer tiered rebate programs for solar water heating systems, too. Currently, all three utilities are in the first of a four-step program. Homeowners who replace a natural gas system can expect rebates of about $1,500. Those who replace electric systems can expect about $1,000.

Photo via joncallas

Related posts:

• Massachusetts Fires up Solar Hot Water Rebates
• California Exhausts Rooftop Solar Incentive Fund
• Which is Right for You? Solar Lease or PPA
• Motivating Homeowner Energy Behaviors
• Progress Energy Accepting Applications for Solar Power Rebates

2011 was a year of much political chest thumping but not much progress on the significant issues. Subsidies for wind energy are among the many unanswered questions and are likely victims of the challenging budget decisions. The industry has grown used to generous subsidies for wind generated electricity. The current subsides are going to expire at the end of 2012 without any guarantee they will be renewed. This leaves the market in an uncertain state.

Along with the government subsidies that provide wind energy producers 2.2cents per kWh, many states have passed renewable energy mandates which required that a certain amount of electricity come from renewable sources. The nascent wind industry has grown a lot recently thanks in large part to innovative insight and support by both state and federal governments. To add to the excitement, wind researchers have produced renewable electricity as cost efficiently as others produce it now from non-renewable sources.

All sources of renewable energy (including solar power and hydro, for example) are in jeopardy of further decline due to the nation’s foreboding economic outlook. It is imperative for wind technology to continue to lower production costs in order to be an important part of the U.S. electricity portfolio moving forward. The bottom line in free markets is invariably cost.

Wind generated electricity has several benefits. Wind provides clean and endless electricity. To survive, the wind industry must effectively combine environmental cleanliness with low cost. In a future with reduced government subsidies and less pressure for renewable energy mandates because of cost concerns, it has to be able to compete on cost to remain viable. In the wind industry’s favor is the fact that fossil fueled power has continually risen over time in cost. If renewables continue to go down in price the two will ultimately intersect.

However, one fossil fuel – natural gas – has made strong advancements in cost. This provides a formidable challenge for the alternative energy industry. Since 2008, new natural gas drilling technology advancements have triggered a dramatic decline in electricity rates in Texas. Texas, along with a number of other states, gets a significant percentage of its power from natural gas plants. Because of this, the wind industry faces a huge cost challenge for the near future.

A major complaint about wind energy is that it doesn’t produce electricity consistently and predictably. After all, simply building wind turbines doesn’t guarantee that the wind will blow to turn them. The result of idle equipment is zero electricity production. Because there are no effective technologies to control the wind, there is no good way to calculate just how much electricity will be generated at any given moment from a particular wind turbine. If the wind industry can develop technologies that first stores the overflow of electricity produced when the wind is active and then steadily supplies it to consumers, then renewable wind energy will grow in future importance. There are many interesting technologies on the horizon for solving this issue, but today none of them are at a stage where they could be implemented on a large-scale and to great effect.

Article by Devon Bass who has been active in the energy markets for 16 years, first as a trader then as a consultant.

He is the founder of Vault Energy Solutions and the Texas Chamber of Commerce Energy Association.

Related posts:

• Will the Japanese Wind Tower Be the Future of Wind Power?
• New Jersey to Take Lead in Offshore Wind Energy?
• Home-Grown Wind Power Takes Root
• Japanese Wind Farms Keep Spinning In The Wake Of Fukushima
• Additional Wind Generators to Arise Alongside Lake Erie

Trucking has become the most common mode for transporting goods across the land. However, all those trucks on the road burning diesel fuel can create a great deal of air pollution. Plus, higher gas prices cause increases in the prices of goods. Now is the time to consider the next era of trucking, the electric truck. At the moment, they cost about three times more than the internal combustion engine truck. However, a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) shows that a fleet of electric trucks can actually be more cost effective than the standard diesel fleet.

Researchers from MIT’s Center for Transportation and Logistics found that the operating costs of electric vehicles can be 9 to 12 percent less that standard diesel trucks. This is only when the delivery trucks are used daily in a big city.

According to co-author, Jarrod Goentzel, at this moment, an electric truck fleet is not for every company. “There has to be a good business case if there is going to be more adoption of electric vehicles. We think it’s already a viable economic model, and as battery costs continue to drop, the case will only get better.”

To conduct the study, the MIT researchers collected data from office supplier, Staples, and ISO New England, the nonprofit firm that operates New England’s power grid. They generated a model for a fleet of 250 delivery trucks. Three scenarios were examined, each with different truck engines: electric, hybrid gas-electric, and diesel engines.

According to the Staples data, their diesel engines average 10.14 miles per gallon. Hybrid gas-electric got 11.56 miles per gallon, and electric trucks average 0.8 kilowatt-hours per mile. The electric vehicles could be plugged in overnight to a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) system. The truck batteries would then be used to produce reliable power for the grid overnight, for which they could be compensated by the local utility company.

With diesel costing $4 per gallon, the MIT team ran the numbers to see where they stood. For the diesel fleet, the costs are about 75 cents per mile. For an electric fleet enabled with V2G, the costs are about 68 cents per mile. This is because each electric truck can make roughly $900 to $1,400 per year by selling their excess power to the grid.

Staples currently has 68 electric delivery trucks in its fleet. These vehicles are relatively new so it is still too early to deliver a post-deployment conclusion according to Michael Payette, director of fleet equipment at Staples. Mr. Payette commented on the performance of the electric trucks, noting there were “no real surprises from a reliability perspective, but I was surprised by the drivers’ acceptance, to the point where they do not ever want to drive a diesel [truck] again.”

The MIT team believe that almost every deliver truck in an urban fleet is a viable candidate to be electric. This is only true for urban fleets because the electric motors simply don’t have enough range to operate on the interstates or in the countryside.

The MIT report was delivered at the January 2012 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference in Washington, D.C.

Article by David A. Gabel, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• Top Ten Cleantech Trucking Companies
• U.S. Trucking Companies Making Shift to Liquid Natural Gas
• Changing the Economics and Waste of Trucking
• Department of Transportation’s Wireless Research Ties Intelligent Transport to Clean Fleets
• Electric Cars and National Security – Are They Inextricably Linked?

Gehrlicher Solar America has announced the completion of two additional commercial solar energy installations in the United States. The company completed a 151 kW ground-mounted system in North Dartmouth, intends to add another 5 MW of projects in the state over the course of 2012.

The Dartmouth system covers approximately seven acres in a semi-rural residential area and is expected to generate an average of 186,500 kilowatt-hours per year, which will provide 90 percent of the electricity used at the site. It is the first time that the Gehrtec Base, the racking system for ground-mounted systems from Gehrlicher Solar, is used in the U.S. The Gehrtec Base is suitable for a wide range of module technologies and sizes. It enables both the orientation and tilt of each module to be individually adjusted.

The second project completed is a 322 kW rooftop system in Swedesboro, NJ. The system has been acquired by a group of private investors who will sell energy under a power purchase agreement to a cold storage facility, owned by KMT brrr! LLC.

“Both projects have a strategic relevance to us”, said Dr. Stefan Parhofer, CEO of Gehrlicher Solar America Corp. “We perceive great potential in Massachusetts and are currently receiving many inquiries from there. It has a very interesting Solar Renewable Energy Certificates market, and while that of New Jersey still remains challenging, although New Jersey also remains an attractive market for Solar”, Dr. Parhofer concluded.

Article by Antonio Pasolini, a Brazilian writer and video art curator based in London, UK. He holds a BA in journalism and an MA in film and television.

Related posts:

• German Solar Company Enters U.S. Market
• Massachusetts Fires up Solar Hot Water Rebates
• Not Enough Workers with PV Training and Solar Energy Job Preparation
• Online PV Exchange Platform To Enter North American Market
• Ohio Tax Reform Clears Path For Solar

New transmission is a major issue and permitting is complex, time-consuming, and expensive. Overhead HV often takes 5-7 years to permit. HVDC lines take far less time, because they are laid underground and require only a small right-of-way, which speeds up the process to a two- to three-year average. Such lines also don’t have cooling or freezing issues and are now increasingly used under-sea.

The IPP Sea Breeze Power is completing permitting of the $750 million Juan de Fuca Cable (JFC) that will connect Port Townsend on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington state — and with it the US Pacific Northwest — with Victoria and the British Columbia power grid. The new sea floor HVDC Light line will enable a more efficient import/export handling between the Bonneville Power and BC Hydro transmission networks and provide a third bi-directional connection between western Canada and the US. This will help stabilize power on the grid and make electricity more reliable for commercial and residential users from three US states and BC.

JFC is using the latest DC transmission technology from ABB, which generates a fraction of the materials cost and carbon footprint of AC and does not require cooling for under-sea lines — the dirty, buried secret of the utilities. The cable also makes allowances for earthquake-prone fault lines by providing slack in its underground routing.

The new line will be built and used using an innovative shared revenue model between the project owners and the two utilities.

Article by Stephan Burckhardt, a cleantech, high-tech brand and marketing consultant based in British Columbia.

Related posts:

• Island of Majorca Will Get Renewable Energy from Mainland Spain
• Betting on Siemens with Offshore Wind
• Transmission Upgrades in LA Take Five Years…
• Offshore Wind Power, EWEC, Part II
• New Solar Module Plant to Create Green Jobs

Albert Arnold Gore, Jr., more commonly known as Al Gore, was the 45th Vice President of the United States from 1993 to 2001 under former President William “Bill” Clinton. While many know Al Gore for the 24 years he spent as an elected official, today he is more known for his work as an environmental activist. Al Gore has founded a number of non-governmental organizations based around the environment, and created the 2006 documentary film An Inconvenient Truth about the affects of global warming. For all his efforts, Al Gore has won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work as an activist regarding climate change.

1 ) Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield, Byers Climate Solutions Group. Al Gore heads the climate solutions group at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield, Byers (KPCB), a premier venture capital firm located in Silicon Valley, California. The Wall Street Journal has listed it as the “largest and most established” firm in the globe. KPCB has been championing investment into the clean technology sector since 1999 and has actively invested in a number of ventures that have the potential to solve a variety of urgent challenges associated with the global climate crisis. The focus includes funding technologies that are related to renewable energy, clean water, sustainable agriculture, and next-generation transportation.

2 ) Al Gore Endorses a Green Bank Bill. In 2009, when testifying right before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Al Gore endorsed a new Green Bank Bill. First introduced by Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), this bill would create a financial institution that is government-owned and would provide necessary support to qualified energy efficiency and clean energy projects.

3 ) Call to have all Energy in the United States made Renewable in Ten Years. In 2008, Al Gore decided to make the challenge to the United States to get the country to make a switch to completely renewable sources of energy in ten years time. He made the mention that the solution to the current climate crisis will also help in renewing the economy through the creation of more jobs, and it will provide an escape route for the United States when it comes to continually rising energy prices.

4 ) Global Marshall Plan. Al Gore created the Global Marshall Plan in his book “Earth in the Balance,” and provides specific ideas regarding how to save the current global environment. In his book, Gore states, “The model of the Marshall Plan can be of great help. For example, a Global Marshall Plan must focus on strategic goals and emphasize actions and programs that are likely to remove the bottlenecks presently inhibiting the healthy functioning of the global economy. The new global economy must be an inclusive system that does not leave entire regions behind. The new plan will require the wealthy nations to allocate money for transferring environmentally helpful technologies to the Third World and to help impoverished nations achieve a stable population and a new pattern of sustainable economic progress. To work, however, any such effort will also require wealthy nations to make a transition themselves that will be in some ways more wrenching than that of the Third World.” There are five strategic goals, stabilizing the global population, the quick development of technologies that are environmentally appropriate, a change in economic rules of the road in respect to the environment, new international agreements regarding the environment, and a plan to educate the world about the environment.

5 ) Supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Al Gore has been a huge supported of the Kyoto Protocol. This protocol was formed by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and is geared toward fighting the increase in global warming. This international environmental treaty has the goal of stabilizing the carbon dioxide emissions concentrations throughout the atmosphere to a level that would prevent the possibility of dangerous anthropogenic interference with the current climate system.

6 ) An Inconvenient Truth. An Inconvenient Truth is a book written by Al Gore in 2006. It is based on Gore’s lecture tour regarding the topic of global warming and further elaborates on a number of points regarding climate change. It was turned into a documentary film also in 2006 that followed Gore’s initiatives to educate the general public about climate change. The movie won an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature. Both the book and the movie have been widely credited for increasing international public awareness in regards to the climate change and helped to reenergize the global environmental movement.

7 ) The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition. The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition is the very first and most prestigious clean technology and sustainably business plan competition in Asia. It was established in 2007 and looks to increase the generation of India’s engineering, technology, science, and management students to start thinking more sustainability and creating sustainable technology solutions that will provide a positive impact on the environment.

8 ) The Climate Reality Project. The Climate Reality Project was founded and chaired by Al Gore and currently has over five million members around the world. It is a nonprofit organization that remains dedicated to providing education to the global community in regards to the importance of the implementation of a comprehensive solution to the current climate crisis. The project emphasizes the requirement to bring together a very diverse range of organizations and individuals to strengthen the global network of people looking to take action when it comes to various climate issues.

9 ) Live Earth. Live Earth was established by Kevin Wall along with Al Gore and “built upon the belief that entertainment has the power to transcend social and cultural barriers to move the world community to action…Live Earth seeks to leverage the power of entertainment through integrated events, media, and the live experience to ignite a global movement aimed at solving the most critical environmental issues.” For example, on 07/07/07, Live Earth produced “Live Earth: the Concerts for a Climate in Crisis,” which was hosted on seven continents and broadcasted in 132 countries.

10 ) Generation Investment Management LLP. Generation Investment Management LLP is a private, independent owner-managed partnership that has offices in New York, New York, London, England, and Sydney Australia and focuses on environmental and social responsibility. It was co-founded in 2004 by Al Gore and David Blood. The mission of Generation Investment Management LLP is to “Deliver superior investment performance by taking a long term investment view and integrating sustainability research within a rigorous fundamental equity analysis framework; create long term client partnerships by delivering unique investment insights and exceptional client service; [and] attract, retain, and develop the best professionals within a passionate investment culture.”

Article by Shawn Lesser, Co-founder & Managing Partner of Atlanta-based Watershed Capital Group – an investment bank assisting sustainable fund and companies raise capital, perform acquisitions, and in other strategic financial decisions. He is also a Co-founder of the GCCA Global Cleantech Cluster Association ”The Global Voice of Cleantech”. He writes for various cleantech publications and is known as the David Letterman of Cleantech for his “Top 10″ series. He can be reached at shawn@watershedcapital.com.

Related posts:

• Videos: Clean Tech to Address Triple Threats, Says Al Gore
• Insight into Dell’s Sustainability Initiatives
• Should Al Gore Profit From Global Warming? Should Any of Us?
• Where Sustainability Executives Fall in Today’s Organizational Structure
• Are Employees Investing in Business Sustainability?