According to fresh data released by the Environmental Protection Agency, a record 1.1 billion gallons were produced in 2011, a milestone for the biodiesel industry in the U.S. The target required by the agency’s Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was 800 million gallons.

The National Biodiesel Board said the industry’s success is the result of an incentive policy. The $1-per-gallon tax credit reinstated by Congress in December 2010 gave the industry a boost. Without the credit, production dropped dramatically in 2010.

The industry now is urging Congress to continue with the incentive that expired on Dec. 31, 2011. It wants to see an increase to 1.28 billion gallons in 2013 under the RFS.

“We’ve been seeing a lot of stories about setbacks in the renewable energy sector recently, and I think our success in 2011 reflects the bigger picture reality, which is that strong energy policy is working to stimulate production of clean, American-made energy,” said Anne Steckel, vice president of federal affairs for the National Biodiesel Board (NBB).

Biodiesel is a commercial-scale fuel used across the U.S. to meet the Environmental Protection Agency’s definition as an Advanced Biofuel. It is a renewable, clean-burning diesel replacement that can be used in existing diesel engines and meets ASTM’s fuel specification. It can be made from various resources such as agricultural oils and recycled cooking oil, and can be produced in nearly every state in the country.

A recent economic study commissioned by NBB found that biodiesel production of 1 billion gallons supports 39,027 jobs across the country and more than $2.1 billion in household income. It said an additional 11,698 jobs could be added between 2012 and 2013 alone under continued growth in the RFS and with an extension of the biodiesel tax incentive.

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:

• The ‘B’ Factor: Use of Biodiesel Expands
• European Union Biodiesel Production Slumps in 2011
• Biodiesel Back in the Tax Credit Game
• High Tech Hydrocarbons: Neste Biodiesel Branches Out
• Thailand’s Alternative Energy Plans: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

This is the era of Big Oil. Could the next be the era of Big Efficiency?

A new report by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy suggests the possibility. Re-invented with today’s smart energy technologies, energy efficiency could displace 40 to 60 percent of our total energy needs by the year 2050, according to The Long-Term Energy Efficiency Potential: What the Evidence Suggests.

Sound far-fetched? ACEEE says history backs its assertion. Over the last 40 years we tripled the US economy, “and three-quarters of the energy needed to fuel that growth came from an amazing variety of efficiency advances—not new energy supplies,” said the report. Energy forecasters at the time predicted we would be using far more energy than we do now. The advent of the computer, the Internet, energy savings appliances and other efficiencies saved us a lot of money and a lot of oil. In 1970, our economy required 15,900 British Thermal Units of energy to support $1 of economic activity; by 2010 we needed only 7,300 Btus.

But there is a problem in repeating this feat. Today’s energy policy begins with the premise that we need to build more power plants, more refineries and more delivery systems. We do not try to first achieve greater efficiency. In other words, we build more energy infrastructure before we try to wring more work out of each unit of energy we produce. If we instead pushed efficiency first, the US could save $400 billion per year in energy costs, amounting to about $2,600 per household, according to ACEEE.

“The U.S. would prosper more if investments in new energy were not crowding out needed investments in energy efficiency,” said John A. “Skip” Laitner, ACEEE director of economic and social analysis.

In short, we are thinking small about efficiency, when we should be thinking big.

ACEEE further warns that the deck contains at least three jokers, or unwelcome wild cards, that could threaten our hand if we fail to pursue energy efficiency. These include 1) diminishing supplies of cheap and available energy; 2) a slowing rate of energy productivity and 3) climate change.

How do we keep the jokers buried? The report says it requires “a different recipe of technology investments” than we are now making.

“The question is will we choose to make those more productive investments?” says ACEEE.

ACEEE’s full report is available here.

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:

• A CleanTechies roof deck Happy Hour this Wednesday….
• Renewable Energy Monitoring Systems – The Next Big Thing?
• Major Solar Power Farm in Austin Under Construction
• Outdone by Dubai, Taiwan Tower Seeks Green Award
• Solar Power for Cell Phones

Bill Moore, editor of EVWorld.com has written a splendid article on the failure of certain of the early electric vehicle companies, in which he points out:

Breaking into the automotive business can be relatively easy; making a success of it is pretty damned near impossible, regardless of what type of propulsion system you favor: ICE-age or otherwise; and it’s especially tough if you decide to go electric. Beyond this, the reasons for individual failures are myriad and multiple: right product, wrong time, wrong product; wrong time, etc. Management missteps, unrealistic investor expectations and impatience, government responsiveness, inept marketing, unanticipated technical setbacks, product shortcomings, public resistance to change: the list is long.

I don’t dispute any of this, but let’s look at the subject from a “big picture” perspective. As a country, we’re still married to fossil fuels, and we’re doing essentially nothing about it In particular, we have no energy policy. Hell, we’re about to build an oil pipeline, the Keystone XL, right through the middle of the continent, one that may be unnecessary and that even some oil companies think is overpriced.

At the same time, we don’t have an iota of horsepower in Congress examining the big ideas. If I (or you) were there, we’d be saying:

Here’s a list of major reasons (I’ve left out the minor ones) to phase out fossil fuels aggressively:

• National security / terrorism

• Health / lung disease

• Global climate change, ocean acidification and other ecological disasters

• Skyrocketing / crippling debt

• War which we can’t afford, and leave countless dead and wounded

• Peak oil, coupled with burgeoning urban/consumer populations globally

You can argue about the relative importance of each of these, but for my money, we’ve spent enough time arguing about this garbage already. Now the time has come for action, and we’re going to take it, regardless of what the oil companies say. We have a responsibility at this time and place in history, and by God, we’re going to live up to it.

Gullible guy that I am, I still believe that someone in a position of power will ask me to draft a plan that phases fossil fuels out forcibly over the next 25 years, and eliminates them completely by 2050. As always, I’ll be happy to serve.

Related posts:

• Insight into Dell’s Sustainability Initiatives
• With oil at $65 will renewables lose steam?
• What is the Downside to Environmentalism?
• India May Make CSR Spending Mandatory
• Big Oil’s Collective Responsibility

When a form of technology becomes outdated, jobs in that industry are inevitably lost. However, this is only one side of the coin, as jobs are often created in the exact same way and, the good news is, that these jobs require previously unconsidered skill sets. It almost goes without saying that with the shift toward clean energy usage, the onus is on the clean technology sector to create green jobs.

In the down-spinning economy, clean technology has been a rock. In fact, clean technology continues to be one of the fastest growing segments of the economy. Worldwide, investments in clean technology grew 12 percent in the Q3 of 2011, even as other sectors were tanking around the world. This growth started a few years back and continues to hold strong. In fact, in 2007, the clean technology industry in the United States grew three times as fast as the country’s economy.

Of course, there are stories of failure in the clean technology segment – such as the recent demise of solar panel manufacturer Solyndra – but there are also stories of success. Consider Noveda Technologies, whose real-time, online energy monitoring technology allows users get a better understanding of both their building’s impact on the environment and how they might improve it. Oh, and they can actually see their carbon footprint reduction and utility bill savings – right before their very eyes.

With all this being said, there is no question that clean technology would get even more of a push from the federal government if more consistent clean energy requirements were enacted. In this sense President Barack Obama’s Better Buildings Initiative, which rewards the use of non-traditional energy sources, is a step in the right direction. But more such guidelines need to be brought forth.

Part of the problem is that when legislation that limits the use of old energies comes into play, the loss of jobs that inevitably occurs gets foregrounded by pundits. For example, when President Obama unveiled his sorely needed energy policy in February 2011, CNN talking heads opined that biofuels have been a “colossal failure.” The news network also focused on the bankruptcy of Solyndra as a symbolic example of what happens when people invest in clean energy.

It’s time we focus on the companies that are putting people back to work in industries that benefit every person on this planet. There will always be naysayers to seek out and discuss the “wrongs” of the world.

What if we shifted our focus to the benefits new industries are having on the economy and the world at large? Up and comers with new ideas regarding clean technology are thriving under these conditions. New industries are created in this way. Let’s be a part of the solution, not the problem.

Article by Bari Faye Siegel, a technology writer and marketing consultant at Noveda Technologies, an innovative leader in real-time, web-based energy management, solar PV monitoring and water management. Noveda also offers real-time collaboration tools that leverage social media to educate and empower stakeholder communities and make the smart grid a reality today. For more information, visit www.noveda.com.

Related posts:

• A New Window Opens on Solar Power
• Glass Window Solar Power Closer to Reality
• Saint Gobain, Lafarge Glass and Cement Plants to Install Pollution Controls
• Smart Glass Windows Could Slash Nation’s Energy Bill
• With LCD And Plasma On The Rise, Where Do Old Televisions Go?

The Production Tax Credit may not be America’s best policy tool for incentivizing clean energy development, but it’s what we’ve got — and it must be renewed

There are three letters on the minds of those in America’s renewable energy sector: PTC. The acronym stands for Production Tax Credit, a critical tax incentive that is set to expire in 2012 unless Congress takes action. Considering the PTC’s on-again, off-again status over the years — and that on matters concerning clean energy investments, Congressional Republicans seem more focused on investigating the loan guarantees issued to the solar manufacturer Solyndra, which went bankrupt in September — the proponents of renewable energy are rightfully concerned.

The PTC is the main financial assistance vehicle that renewable energy investors and developers receive from the federal government, amounting to 2.2 cents per kWh over the first 10-year period that an approved facility is in operation. The wind industry in particular relies heavily on this credit, which has been critical in driving the sector’s growth over the past seven years.[1] IHS Emerging Energy Research, an independent advisory firm based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, says that without the PTC, wind installations could plummet from a forecasted annual peak of 10.5 GW in 2012 to 1.5 GW in 2013.[2]

A Bipartisan Bill to Extend PTC
On November 2, representatives Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) and Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) introduced the bill H.R. 3307, The American Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit Extension Act of 2011, to extend the PTC.[3] But even though it has bipartisan support and would extend the federal tax credit through 2016 for installations of wind, solar and hydro, its fate is unclear. The credit has been in existence in various forms since the Energy Policy Act of 1992, but Congress has regularly flip-flopped between renewing and retiring it.

On Tuesday, 23 governors sent Congress a joint letter crafted by the Governors Wind Energy Coalition, urging both houses to “promptly pass a multi-year extension of the wind tax credit,” noting that “without policy certainty, investors, developers, and manufacturers will move projects and jobs elsewhere.” The governors also noted, “Like the oil and gas industries — which enjoy substantial tax credits that have not expired in nearly 100 years — wind energy, a domestic source of energy, needs a predictable policy for sustained economic growth and innovation.”[4]

Always Up in the Air: The Boom-Bust Cylce
“The wind industry is facing the recurrence of the boom-bust cycle it saw in previous years when the PTC was allowed to expire,” said Peter Kelley, Vice President of Public Affairs at the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), in an email. “In the years following expiration, installations dropped by between 73 and 93 percent, resulting in significant job losses.” He said that layoffs have already started and that the total job losses incurred by a lapse in the PTC would be in the thousands. The AWEA has launched a petition that American citizens can sign to urge their representative to co-sponsor the bill.

Opponents of the PTC argue that this seesaw cycle leads to a concentration of production at the end of the fiscal year, and provides little forecasting stability for developers. “Boom and bust development is no way to run a business and is certainly no way to create a dynamic and healthy renewable energy industry,” writes Paul Gipe, author of Wind Energy Basics: A Guide to Home- and Community-scale Wind Energy Systems. “Companies expand then contract, hiring and then firing in an oft-repeated cycle. When developers have been bitten by the gold fever, impacts on the environment and on nearby communities take a back seat to getting projects ‘in the ground.’”[6]

The Door is Closing, The PTC Should be Extended
Still, Kelley pointed out that the PTC helps to maintain low electricity rates, encourages clean energy project development, helps the wind industry reduce power cost by more than 90 percent, provides energy for the equivalent of 10 million homes and spurs economic development in every state, providing work at over 400 American manufacturing facilities.

In the end, the PTC may not be the ultimate federal policy tool for incentivizing investments in renewable energy, but it’s the tool that is right in front of us. And considering that Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney chooses to fly in the face of science and utter things like, “We don’t know what’s causing climate change,”[7] it’s imperative to keep alive those federal incentives that help transition the United States to a low carbon economy while we still can.

Perhaps a more substantive national discussion about global warming and our energy infrastructure will happen before it’s to late, but as Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency (IEA), recently said, “the door is closing quickly.”[8] Birol’s warning came as the IEA released the most comprehensive analysis of global energy infrastructure, finding that the world is headed for irreversible climate change within five years if mankind continues to build fossil fuel infrastructure.[9]

“Delaying action is a false economy,” according to an IEA statement issued on November 9 in London. “For every $1 of investment in cleaner technology that is avoided in the power sector before 2020, an additional $4.30 would need to be spent after 2020 to compensate for the increased emissions.”[10] Congress should take the IEA report into consideration and pass a four-year extension of the PTC. Hopefully a little more wind in America’s energy infrastructure will keep that door open a little bit longer.

Article by Reynard Loki a Justmeans staff writer, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

Related posts:

• US Wind Energy Suffers in 2010, Cost-Competitive with Natural Gas in 2011
• New Website Asks For Support For Wind Power Jobs
• Wind Industry Makes $10 Billion Case for Tax Credit
• Can We Reach 100% Renewable Power by 2030?
• France to Have 3,000 MW of Offshore Wind by 2015

The vast majority of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction when it comes to energy policy and want more leadership when it comes to dealing with future needs, according to a new poll. In survey of 3,406 Americans conducted by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin, less than 14 percent of respondents said they think the country is headed in the right direction on energy, with 76 percent saying they are worried about the nation’s lack of progress on energy efficiency and development of renewable energy sources. Eighty-four percent said they were worried about the nation’s reliance on foreign oil. More than 40 percent said they expect the situation to be even worse in 25 years. When asked to rate the performance of numerous institutions and individuals, respondents were most satisfied with their own personal performances, followed by scientists and engineers, and then research institutions. They were least satisfied with the government and business leaders; Congress ranked last with only 8 percent of respondents calling its performance satisfactory.

photo: Alternative Heat

Article appearing courtesy Yale Environment 360

Related posts:

• More Americans Believe Climate is Warming, Poll Finds
• Europeans View Climate Change as Second-Biggest Threat, Poll Finds
• Public Support Strong for CO2 Regulation and Clean Energy
• Concern About Global Warming Continues to Drop, Poll Shows
• Obama’s Energy Programs: New Polll Shows Broad Public Support

In most countries solar power is often perceived as synonymous with solar photovoltaic (PV), the classic rooftop panels that convert sunlight to electricity through solar cells. But that could be a misconception, says Environmental Protection, since solar thermal, which gets less attention than PV, actually is more efficient.

Solar thermal is cheaper and more efficient, EP points out. “PV converts 12 per cent of energy into usable electricity at a cost of 25 to 35 cents per kilowatt hour. Solar thermal, which includes solar air and solar water … offers 55 per cent efficiency at 12 to 15 cents per kilowatt hour, and solar air delivers 80 percent at 3 to 9 cents per kilowatt hour”.

If that’s the case, why does PV get more airplay than thermal? Enerconcept Technologies president Christian Vachon says it’s because PV gets most subsidies. “Governments should stop thinking that solar is expensive and needs to be heavily subsidized in order to be sustainable. With PV, we’re putting all our eggs in the longest possible payback basket. Our leaders should instead focus on an energy policy that promotes the lowest-cost energy technology”, he told EP.

Solar thermal electricity can be produced on a large scale as well. Spain recently became home to the world’s first 24/7 solar thermal plant near Seville in the south of the country and it’s expected to produce 110 GW/h per year.

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:

• Website Promotes Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion
• Tech Breakthrough: Underwater Robot Runs on Ocean Thermal Energy
• What Can SRECs Mean For the Solar Thermal Market?
• What’s the Return on Investment on Solar Thermal?
• Study Identifies Mexico as Huge Solar Resource

Solar power: it’s clean, renewable and becoming more cost-effective every day. But in a political landscape so mired by fossil fuels that our government has gifted Big Oil over $150 billion in tax breaks and subsidies since 1950, solar power’s progress has been slow-going, to say the least.

And yet, the amount of federal, state, and local incentives for solar installations have grown exponentially over the past 15 years. Where a 4-kilowatt home solar array would have cost you $600,000 in 1970, that figure has dropped dramatically to about $18,000 today.

Think about that for a second. Although there’s still a long road ahead in turning the country away from environmentally-toxic energy sources to solar panels, wind turbines and hydroelectric power, we’ve made a small but very real impact in American energy distribution.

What would it take to wean the U.S. off fossil fuels?

The short answer: a whole lot.

And ostensibly, the task looks ominously daunting. But let’s consider New York City, one of the largest cities in the world in terms of population and energy consumption.

New York City collectively uses about 50 million MW (that’s mega, as in millions of watts), or roughly enough power to blast the Earth clear across the Milky Way. However—and this will come as a surprise to many—New York City is actually one of most energy-efficient large cities worldwide, with its residents consuming around 5,000 kWh (kilowatt hours per hour) per capita, per year. Contrast that with cities like Dallas (metro population: 6.5m) and San Francisco (7.4m), which use, respectfully, 16,000kWh and 7,100 kWh per capita, per year. And those cities have fewer inhabitants than New York.

That leads to the larger point—that ubiquitous solar power on a massive scale is possible, but still years, maybe decades, away. Since solar technology is relatively expensive (though not nearly as much as only 15 years ago), we need a solution that combines the best of all worlds of renewable energies, including solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, hydro, and especially those technologies yet to be discovered.

Hurdles to overcome and initiatives to take

Switching to 100% renewable, clean energy by, say, 2030 is possible. Even most scientists and experts in the realm of engineering and energy studies will concede that. We have the resources—it’s the will of the public, the federal and state governments, and of companies (not to mention, funding) that’s severely lacking.

According to Physorg.com, Mark Delucchi and Mark Jacobson, two internationally recognized professors of science and engineering at Stanford University, adamantly maintain that universal solar power can be achieved. According to them, a grand mixture of PV panels, powerful, offshore wind turbines, geothermal pumps, and hydropower is needed.

And America has the technologies and materials. It’s the “political, social, and economic interests” that are and will be the largest obstacle in transforming the U.S., as well as the earth, into a place free of fossil fuel-powered energy (of which 80% of the world currently relies on).

Tax Incentives and Rebates in America

Although national policy has a long way to go, there are still a plethora of federal, state and local incentives to cut the costs of home solar. The largest is the federal tax credit for up to 30% off qualifying solar panel installations through 2016.

Your state may also provide cash rebates, often administered through your local utility. Los Angeles rebates, which ran out due to overwhelming demand, are currently in the process of being reinstated, and Oakland, CA still offers one of the most generous incentive packages (totaling about 60% off your solar system). Depending on where you live, your system could be largely paid for by the government, slimming your payback period on solar to 2-5 years.

Even with homeowner incentives, solar power faces an uphill battle. Oil and coal interests are deeply entrenched in our political system, but the more individuals make the switch to renewable energy on the local level, the sooner our leaders will follow suit—passing legislation that dismantles rather than perpetuates the cycle of earth-damaging energy production in the U.S.

Here’s to inspiring progress from the rooftop up.

Article by Brittany Mauriss, editor and resident solar expert at CalFinder Solar. She specializes in solar financing information, and also blogs over at GreenMarketingTV, the green entrepreneur’s source for interviews with the industry’s top thinkers.

Article appearing courtesy ecopolitology.

Related posts:

• How Fixing the Filibuster Will Help Fix Climate Change
• Where were the big STEG Players in San Diego?
• Where is Cap & Trade Legislation Now?
• Small, Portable Solar Light
• EPA Takes Historic Stand for Sustainable Business

Heidelberg, Germany has been seen as at the top of environmental protection throughout Europe as it has reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more than 15,000 tons annually in municipal buildings since the year 1993. Furthermore, the city developed a complete energy management system that has allowed for the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from a number of municipal buildings and university facilities. The goal is to completely decrease carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent by the year 2015.

1) Heidelberg’s Integrated Approach to Environmental Protection. Heidelberg has been consistently committed to the German government’s climate protection targets and all the measures that have been created to do so. Since the 1990s, Heidelberg has been worked to improve energy efficiency and the environment throughout the entire value-added chain. This includes all aspects of product manufacturing and development to machinery operation. According to Stephen Plenz, member of the management board responsible for equipment and environmental management, “We focus in particular on three points: Wherever possible, we want to reduce – or ideally avoid – resource consumption, emissions, and waste. We are committed to providing our customers with sustainable solutions designed to protect the environment for both ourselves and future generations.”

2) Heidelberg Always Seeking to Improve Energy Efficiency and Environmental Performance. Heidelberg is known for analyzing and optimizing processes for the development, production and service of renewable energy. All Heidelberg development and production sites have environmental management systems and ISO 14001 to further improve environmental performance. For instance, “Improvements introduced to the workflows and process parameters at the final approval stage for 70 x 100 press production at the Wiesloch-Walldorf site have cut paper consumption by around 30 percent in the last four years. In addition, a new method for analyzing and releasing press testing paper has also cut paper consumption for this test by 94 percent.”

3) Heidelberg Energy Saving Regulation. One of the items the city is most known for is the Heidelberg Energy Saving Regulation. This program aims toward the promotion of renewable energy and energy efficiency throughout retrofitted and new buildings. One initiative under this program created new solar thermal modules along rooftops that saved 320,000 kilowatt hours since 1993. Developers of new buildings need to ensure that all non-municipal buildings are highly energy efficient to receive their planning permits.

4) Public Participation. Rather than just letting elected officials make all the decisions, Heidelberg is known for utilizing civic forums for important decisions. The first forum about energy was established in 1997 which helped create the local energy agency in the year 2000. The forum continued to develop and was later named the Heidelberg Climate Protection and Energy Circle. This group is comprised of stakeholders from climate and energy sectors along with civic partners. In this forum, the participants discuss and then develop new projects and strategies for city energy policy.

5) Reducing Carbon Dioxide Emissions. From 1993 to 2004, carbon dioxide emissions stemming from municipal buildings decreased by 35 percent and from universities between 1999 and 2002 by 13 percent. Since 1993, Heidelberg estimates that more than 225,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year have been saved throughout private homes, industry, business, and transportation due to the activities of the city. In 2004, new regulations were set up to achieve the 20 percent cut in carbon dioxide emissions by 2015 goal.

6) Increase in Energy Efficiency. In the year 2001, Heidelberg dedicated itself to the purchase of 25 percent of all electricity supply from renewable sources of energy. KLiBA is one of the primary organizations promoting energy efficiency by offering advice to energy users that could change the energy performance of their building. For example, local bakeries were introduced to a new methodology that helped assess energy usage and then help them save between ten and 25 percent of energy.

7) The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Located in Heidelberg is the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Established in 1978, the institute is an independent center for environmental research. The expertise covered at the institute include environmental implications of transport, renewable energy sources, energy supply security, air pollution control, environmental impact assessment and management, and sustainable development. The institute has worked with some big clients including the European Union and the World Bank, as well as BMW, Daimler-Chrysler, and Deutsche Shell to assist them with all their energy efficiency needs. Projects sponsored by the institute are located all over the world, including the United States, India, China, Latin America, and Russia.

8 ) Building a Zero Emissions District. In the city of Heidelberg, a new ambitious plan has been launched to establish a large size, zero emissions city district that will be known as Bahnstadt. Bahnstadt will be centrally located in Heidelberg and cover about 116 hectares. All buildings are to be constructed in accordance with passive house standards, as well; all renewable energy is to be supplied by deep geothermics and biomass thermal power plants. It is hoped that this will become the world’s largest passive housing area. Other plans in the area include rainwater management systems, a strong public transportation infrastructure, nature protection, and new electricity saving concepts.

9) Green Electricity Supply. Since the year 2000, the public owned Heidelberg energy supplier has been providing clients with the opportunity to use renewable sources of energy for its electricity under an offer known as “FOX Energreen.” This new offer was created in an effort to cover a minimum of 25 percent of the total electricity demand. The 25 percent is enough to run all schools in the city as well as nurseries. It has also helped avoid the creation of 4,400 tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually. The projects that have helped to do this include 16 photovoltaic systems and a biogass district heating plant.

10) Social Ecological Research. The Social Ecological Research program, sponsored by the IFEU, develops strategies aimed at solving current sustainability issues within the German and international society. These strategies include improving food supply, lowering carbon dioxide emissions, and creating new viable and alternative sources of energy. the goal of the research program is, “To promote sustainable development, that is, ecological transformation of the society, without losing sight of social justice and economic concerns.”

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:

• ‘No More Nuclear’ Germany Will Maintain its Cleantech Edge
• Coming Attractions: CleanTechies Events Highlights
• Germany Unveils Bold Energy Plans
• Germany Plans Renewable Energy Superhighway
• The Bull is Bullish on CleanTech… So?

A recent debate on EU energy policy for post-2020 concluded that a 45% renewable energy target for 2030 would create the future policy-stability that is necessary for the alternative energy sector.

According to a post on European Wind Energy Association’s blog, these new energy policies must be drawn-up today and not in 2020 when current targets expire.

The post calls attention to two key facts: the Fukushima nuclear disaster and the record emissions in 2010, which reached the highest level in history. As Guardian journalist Fiona Harvey noted, recessions do not necessarily mean fewer emissions.

Renewable energy can fill the gap left by the retirement of nuclear, and there is more than enough of it, according to the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

There are threats to the transition to alternative energy, though. Cheap gas supply is one of them and, to counter that, policy makers need to fix renewable energy targets beyond 2020. There is a large enough fossil fuel supply to alter the climate beyond sustainable levels, Niels Ladefoged, a member of Connie Hedegaard’s European Commission for Climate Action cabinet, warned.

Another topic discussed during the debate was the necessary modernization of the grid to meet future energy demand. Grids need to be extended, upgraded and better connected, it was said, although there is no agreement as to how it can be done since new grid design depends on a future energy system.

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:

• Bipartisan Group of Senators Introduce Renewable Electricity Standard
• European Commission Will Not Target Tougher Carbon Measures
• US Wind Energy Suffers in 2010, Cost-Competitive with Natural Gas in 2011
• Experts Highlight Importance of Energy Efficiency
• Video: Too Dirty For College