Updated: San Francisco poised to move on green building

San Francisco is poised to pass a leading edge green building standard for a major city.

The plan affects new commercial buildings larger than 5,000 square feet, residential buildings over 75 feet in height, and renovations on buildings larger than 25,000 square feet. The standards gradually ratchet up, going from an immediate target of LEED Certified to a 2012 target of LEED Gold.

The CS Monitor has the story. Oddly, the article states that job losses are expected but it seems likely that those estimates have not factored in job gains projected for efficiency work in the ASES assessment. Additional background on the green building development process here.

The benefits are considerable. According to San Francisco's Green Building Taskforce the results include:

Some of the significant cumulative benefits this ordinance is very conservatively expected to achieve through 2012 are: reducing CO2 emissions by 60,000 tons, saving 220,000 megawatt hours of power, saving 100 million gallons of drinking water, reducing wastewater and stormwater by 90 million gallons of water, reducing construction and demolition waste by 700 million pounds, increasing the valuations of recycled materials by $200 million, reducing automobile trips by 540,000, and increasing green power generation by 37 thousand megawatt hours.

The full ordinance is here. Supervisors are planning to act in March but the date is not yet announced. And builders of course are seeing the writing on the wall and starting to move.

The board of supervisors is also taking up its challenged solar incentives this Tuesday.


Update: Turns out there are two plans under consideration by San Francisco.

Newsom's ordinance will be presented March 19 at the Building Inspection Commission, which has already forwarded Peskin's measure to he Board of Supervisors' Land Use Committee. According to Peskin's office, the two ordinances will likely be combined once supervisors decide which standard to seek.

A little break and a chance to wake up

TED2008 is ongoing at this moment. It highlights some pretty cool stuff. This is one little one.

"Frozen Grand Central", by ImprovEverywhere:


So we've been frozen on climate for a while. From an editorial in 1953:

How Industry May Change Climate
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air will double by the year 2080 and raise the temperature an average of at least 4 per cent. The burning of about two billion tons of coal and oil a year keeps the average ground temperature somewhat higher than it would otherwise be. ...

But finally, we are quickly becoming unfrozen.

Clean-tech goes global

SF Chronicle reports:

An annual conference of green companies and investors in San Francisco Tuesday illustrated the young industry's global reach.

Representatives from Abu Dhabi and Singapore pitched their cities as great places for the industry to grow. Other executives at the Cleantech Forum announced the formation of an organization to help green startups in India.

Aggressive clean-tech development in the United States and the Bay Area in particular is a global competitive advantage. California clean-tech companies secured 45 percent of the nationwide total of $3.95 billion.

San Mateo moves forward towards implementation

In December the San Mateo city council received its Sustainable Initiatives Plan and is now putting key elements into the work plan. In last night's study session the City Council reviewed the elements of the plan that the city staff recommended pursuing.

A number of key elements were in the staff recommendations and they include:

• Immediate start at voluntary green building elements
  
• Research on transportation measurement methodologies
  
• Develop pilot to evaluate existing residential housing stock on energy and water
  
• Increasing solar installations
  
• Education and outreach
  
• General plan improvements on sustainability
  
• Various improvements to city operations
  

But there were a number of things missing. Council member Brandt Grotte championed a number of key additions including: moving forward with a green building ordinance, clarifying staff ownership, incorporating additional language into 2009 vision, and staff training.

San Francisco considering congestion pricing & carbon feebate

At the Cleantech Forum in downtown San Francisco Tuesday morning, Newsom said he hopes to get authorization by the end of the year for a plan that would tax businesses’ carbon emissions. He also said his staff are working on a congestion pricing strategy (adding a toll for driving in the city center) that would rival London’s.

Earth2Tech has the story.

Sustainability leaders in San Mateo County to be honored

Roll out the red carpet for green people! The winners of the 2008 Sustainability and Green Building Awards in San Mateo County will be honored at the 9th annual awards event/dinner, which takes place at 6 p.m. on March 13 at the South San Francisco Conference Center on S. Airport Blvd. This year's Sustainability Award winners reflect exceptional examples of social and economic sustainability, in addition to environmental sustainability. The number of nominations for the Green Building Awards, which were gathered by RecycleWorks, Sustianable San Mateo County, and the AIA's San Mateo Chapter, more than doubled last year's number. Also to receive a special recognition award is the San Mateo County Community College District.

The Sustainability Award winners are:
--Care2.com, based in Redwood City, which networks 350 non-profits and has nearly 8 million members.

--Catalino Tapia, an immigrant who entered the country 40 years ago with $6 in his pocket and last year established the Bay Area Gardeners' Foundation to provide scholarships to low-income immigrants who want a college education. The Foundation has raised $140,000 since October.

--Community Gatepath in Burlingame, the county's largest organization serving people with disabilities and transitioning them into an independent lifestyle.

--Harley Farms Goat Dairy in Pescadero, the only dairy farm in the county.

The honorary mention goes to Owens Electric and Hillsdale High School, which have partnered to facilitate a program that will install solar panels for schools that otherwise can't afford them.

The Green Building Awards will honor the TAIJI House on Laurel Avenue in Menlo Park and the Nueva School Hillside Learning Complex.

The March 13 awards event will include an auction and is expected to draw hundreds of people. Click here to reserve a seat and learn more about the event. No, Jon Stewart is not the host. The emcees are County Supervisors Jerry Hill and Adrienne Tissier. It's sure to be a fun night!

Right next door: coal?

Coal trying to 'cloak itself in green' in Nevada. An informative segment from NBC:


Hat tip Think Progress. What happens in Nevada impacts us here in California - if coal plants go up they draw away investment that could go to efficiency and renewables and expose California to a variety of 'downstream' impacts like air and water pollution.

The Senate Majority Leader Harry Reed had a few things to say about coal recently.

And many thousands of miles from far away China, yes here in Nevada, the Ely Energy Center coal project is over budget and experts say it will wind up costing well over $4 billion -- if the power company even builds it at all.

Once that massive construction bill is paid, the plant would cough and sputter out dirty power that will not only pollute the earth, but cost consumers 12 or 13 cents per kilowatt-hour. More -- much more -- than they are paying now.

And that's not all. On top of the high price of coal power, studies show that there are hidden costs of $30 per megawatt hour or more -- like respiratory illness, radiation, and hazardous waste.

A UNLV study found that solar, wind, geothermal and biomass projects would create more than $20 billion in business for Nevada over the next 25 years.

Each new megawatt of geothermal power creates up to ten new jobs.

Each new megawatt of solar-thermal and wind power create at least 6 new jobs.

If just half of Nevada's potential clean energy resources were developed, 22,000 new jobs in the next decade would be created.

Does coal compare? Not even close.

The $30 per megawatt hour of hidden environmental and health costs is just the tip of the dirty iceberg.

Fossil fuels are contributing to global warming. We're experiencing severe and unpredictable weather, our ice caps are melting at a record pace, and as we are seeing in Lake Mead, our water sources are in danger all over America.

Big energy companies see these warning signs as clearly as we, but their solution -- build more coal plants.

If the current proposals for new Western coal plants are built, they would consume 114 million gallons of water per day.

That's enough water to meet the needs of 591,000 homes.

The only type of power that uses more water than coal is nuclear.

What is the daily discharge from a coal fired plant? It is waste, contaminated with unsafe levels of arsenic, lead and other toxins -- other poisons.

This foul discharge is in our lakes, streams and water tables. This is the water we drink.

This Nevada coal plan is just one example. The damage caused by fossil fuels, of course, is not limited to Nevada or the West.

Our country burns 1 billion tons of coal every year. That produces 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions.

Coal plants release sixty varieties of hazardous air pollutants, among them lead, chromium, arsenic and mercury.

Is it any wonder that tens of millions of Americans live in areas that fail to meet the EPA's air quality standards?

Is it any wonder that hundreds of thousands of Americans every year suffer from asthma attacks, respiratory problems and heart attacks, all from the dirty air caused by coal plants?

Is today -- is tomorrow -- the time to invest in new coal for electricity plants -- the answer is a resounding no.

We've all seen the advertising campaigns for a mythological substance called "clean coal." We know there's no such thing. There is no clean coal, only cleaner coal. Less dirty coal.

In Congress for more than a quarter of a century, I have supported research for a cleaner coal. After billions of our taxpayer dollars -- limited progress has been made.

I will continue my support -- but if anything good comes from this, it will be many tomorrows from this February day.

Vice President Gore said that -- "We ... need a moratorium on the construction of any new generating facility that burns coal without the capacity to safely trap and store carbon dioxide."

That means for now, no new coal plants. Let us -- in Nevada -- follow the admonition of the Nobel and Oscar-winning Vice President.

Unwelcome slithering guests

We always know that plants and animals would shift their ranges with climate change. I didn't anticipate this one - but then that's the point, things are going to change and there will be a lot of unanticipated and unpleasant ones.

As climate change warms the nation, giant Burmese pythons could colonize one-third of the USA, from San Francisco across the Southwest, Texas and the South and up north along the Virginia coast, according to U.S. Geological Survey maps released Wednesday.

Shuttling into the Hydrogen Cul-de-sac

Earlier this month the Air Resources Board announced with fanfare a new shuttle in San Mateo County running on hydrogen:

A $250,000 grant for the state's Hydrogen Highway program sponsored the shuttle that will take residents to stops between the Palo Alto Caltrain Station and East Palo Alto. The new shuttle, a Ford E-450, is powered by a supercharged 6.8-liter V-10 engine modified to run exclusively on hydrogen.

"As we continue to wean ourselves off petroleum fuels, we will see more and more hydrogen powered shuttles like this on our roadways," said Mary Nichols, Chairman of the California Air Resources Board. "This shuttle illustrates the great potential hydrogen has to power California's vehicles and subsequently its economy. Kudos to San Mateo County for taking the initiative on this important cutting-edge project."

This is all part of the Governator's Hydrogen Highway initiative. While Schwarzenegger deserves a lot of credit for a lot of things including the million solar roofs initiative, Global Warming Solutions Act, and support for the Pavley auto emission standards, his interest in hydrogen isn't among them. It's unfortunate that this $250,000 isn't being used more wisely. Perhaps the county can reconsider the investment.

This is a fuel that oil companies love. It allows them to say they're looking forward by reducing emissions and offering new technologies while proposing a fuel that has the same centralized generation and distribution needs that oil has. But the main problem is that it has no value in terms of emissions reduction if you look at the lifecycle which includes the energy to produce the hydrogen. Despite this one new shuttle, as discussed previously, it seems to be going nowhere.

The case for optimism

From Dr. Larry Brilliant of Google.org:

Planktos and a tale of two (or three) offsets

Planktos, the ill-conceived offset company based in Foster City, is folding its cards - for now.

Carbon offsets are intended to be a way of financing projects that reduce CO2 in the atmosphere. When executed well it supports renewable energy like solar and wind. There are a multitude of offset companies but among those doing a better job are Native Energy and 3 Degrees (formerly known as Three Phases Energy).

However, it turns out that there is considerable complexity to the offset market and many offset providers are in fact, useless or even terrible and counter-productive. In the former camp unfortunately are any tree planting efforts in the northern hemisphere - turns out there is no net carbon benefit. In the latter camp we have companies like Planktos.

Planktos wanted to go out and promote plankton blooms in the ocean by seeding iron. Since we got ourselves into the climate mess by broadly altering fundamental ecosystems without understanding the implications, doing more of the same, even if well-intentioned, seems more than a little risky. And whether there would even be a carbon benefit of such a project is unclear at best.

As part of a taskforce evaluating offset providers for the Sierra Club Outings program, the following criteria were established:

• Must have 3rd party certification (CCX, Green-E, or other)
• Type of offset must be renewables &/or efficiency (not carbon sinks)
• There must be transparency for the projects
• There should be transparency to the finances
• And where carbon calculators are used, they should be accurate (not a small feat)

The Sierra Club moved ahead with offering offsets from Native Energy for its outings. It is making a strong effort to educate its clients. And locally the Loma Prieta Chapter and Acterra developed Cool-It, a carbon calculator and offset project with 3Degrees.

For more on assessing offset providers studies by Tufts University and Clean-Air, Cool-Planet can help.

Water = Power = Water

A look at water and power from CNNMoney.com

Most people don't realize how closely power and water are linked.

In California, the water pumps that keep the Los Angeles area hydrated are the single largest users of power in the state, according to Gleick. Running a hot water faucet there for five minutes uses as much energy as keeping a 60-watt light bulb on for 14 hours, he said.

Gleick said that California could achieve 95% of its energy conservation goals 58% more cheaply by targeting water consumption rather than power consumption.

(my emphasis) The energy savings from water efficiency is somewhat less true for northern CA where our water supply is largely gravity fed. However, as climate change reduces our stored water we could not only see impact water supplies but also our supply of electricity.

Let's just make sure to act so we don't become Atlanta.

It's also worth catching this note:

A typical nuclear or coal energy plant could use 30-40 million gallons of water a day.

Maybe we should just skip these forms of power altogether...

Fighting change

GM CEO Rick Wagoner was in San Francisco this week. Not surprisingly he spoke against California's efforts to curb emissions

Wagoner, speaking to the National Automobile Dealers Association convention in San Francisco, said several states want to go beyond requirements passed by Congress.

If that happens and automakers must focus on state regulations, they won't be able to focus as much on alternative fuel vehicles to reduce oil consumption and pollution, he said.

"We're not going to be able to accomplish everything that we otherwise could," Wagoner said.

It's hard to take that seriously because it's pretty clear that US automakers have done virtually nothing and are only now scrambling to catch up to Toyota and Honda with hybrids.

Wagoner went on to make another problematic argument.

Because global warming is an international phenomenon not unique to California, the state doesn't need its own standards to meet "compelling and extraordinary conditions" as set out in the law, Johnson has said.

By that argument no individual in a sinking boat should bail any faster than anyone else, especially if no one is bailing. Better to sink together!

The US Chamber of Commerce similarly weighs in on the proposed national legislation with this clever piece:


But they neglect to mention that the most authoritative economic analysis has shown that inaction is far more expensive. Failure to act could risk global GDP being up to twenty percent lower than it otherwise might be.

Not only that, but there are huge economic opportunities. The opposition is more of a fight by old industries against new ones.

It's a new world when...

The following quote comes from the chair of the Republican National Committee:

Economic conservatives see the technological solutions to climate change as a way to create more wealth and jobs, and many corporate leaders have pushed for a federal limit on carbon emissions to prevent a patchwork of state laws. Religious conservatives embrace cutting carbon emissions as an aspect of human stewardship of divine creation. National security conservatives argue that reducing dependence on foreign oil would cut off funding for anti-U.S. elements in the Middle East and elsewhere.

More on climate in the presidential race from the CS Monitor.

San Mateo County implements green building

New residential and commercial buildings in San Mateo County areas have minimum LEED and Build it Green level requirements plus incentives for more.

Homeowners and developers who use green building techniques like environmentally-friendly materials in the unincorporated area will speed through the approval process faster under a new program approved by the Board of Supervisors Tuesday to encourage the practice.

The new policy, spearheaded by Supervisor Mark Church, awards points for green options used during new construction and remodels. After a minimum of 50 points is achieved, builders will receive incentives like fast-tracked application processing from 10 to 12 weeks down to four weeks when 75 to 100 points is reached. After 100 points, the county guarantees to reduce building inspection from three to four working days to two working days.

It's a good baseline ordinance. The minimum levels are modest - a good development by a train station for example would qualify even if no other green elements were present but the expedited permitting for higher levels is very good.

Hat tip to Gladwyn for the update. More at the San Mateo Daily Journal. Updated: The San Mateo County Times carries an article with additional detail.

Cool Cities: what's it all about

I appeared on the local Breath California cable access show run by our friend Terry a couple of months back to talk about Cool Cities, innovation, clean energy and related topics (25 mins).

Sea level rise & a carbon fee

Sea level rise is one of several serious prospective impacts from climate change and BCDC appears to be taking it seriously.

On Dec. 4, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors heard a lively, powerful and ominous description of the problems of rising seal levels in the Bay Area. The speaker was Will Travis, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), a regional agency created in 1965 to protect the Bay.

The good news, Mr. Travis said: "The Bay lost to filling would once again become part of the Bay. The bad news: We have all kinds of expensive stuff on that land."

Mr. Travis showed maps, prepared by BCDC, that showed what the Bay Area would look like if the sea rose by one meter — three feet. That rise could come by 2100 — or sooner, or later — according to studies by the California Climate Action Team, he said.

In San Mateo County, San Francisco Airport could be under water. In some areas of Palo Alto, water could lap beyond Bayshore Freeway; in Redwood City, it would come close to the freeway.

The article goes on to discuss impacts at specific locations. Of course everywhere municipalities are asking who is going to pay for the mitigation steps.

It's this kind of serious look at the impacts that is also driving steps towards serious action as the Bay Area appears poised to establish the first carbon fee in the nation. If this moves forward it will be a major precedent in the right direction.

We wouldn't allow it to happen to our beer…

Calpine is back and better than ever before! Calpine operates 80 power plants, including the Metcalf Energy Center in south San Jose. Once planning to be one of the biggest power suppliers in the country, Calpine ran into trouble with the energy deregulation when Enron and others gamed the system and sent costs soaring.

Now Calpine says it's in great shape and greener than most alternatives:

States like California are demanding that utilities get more power from renewable sources such as geothermal, wind and solar. And natural gas is considered a cleaner technology than coal-fired power plants.

"We're sitting here with assets we feel are as green as anybody's, and in some cases, greener," he said.

Calpine has 19 geothermal plants which is great though as usual local opposition is a problem.

But outside of the geothermal plants the reality is that we're dealing with very antiquated technologies that are extremely inefficient - only 30-40% efficiencies from the gas plants.

But as the Europeans note in the clip below - we wouldn't allow this happen to our beer. We should be shooting for double efficiency like some of the initiatives across the pond:

Bush about face begins

With McCain now the certain Republican nominee the Bush administration begins to flip its position on mandatory carbon caps. Now industry will really rush to get the best deal possible - possibly by signing the McCain-Leiberman "Climate Security Act". Is it the right bill? Depends on who you talk to: Friends of the Earth or Environmental Defense.

The risk? That passing a bill now, even well intentioned might preempt a better bill next year.

San Mateo County encourages business to go green

San Mateo County gives this a nudge:

A pilot program recognizing San Mateo County businesses that install low-flow faucets and energy-efficient light bulbs will be expanded to all 20 cities in the county.

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to ramp up the Green Business Program, which was launched last July in six cities and unincorporated areas for a six-month trial period.

Among those who signed up, one of Burlingame's first is ELM Advisors, LLC. There you can green your investments at a green business.

The solution is about action at every level.

Cars: It's back to the future

The first internal combustion engine automobile was fueled by hydrogen in 1807. Inventors tried out steam power, coal-gas, and oil fired cars. Electric cars however predominated throughout most of the 1800s until the muffler was invented shortly before the turn of the century. Three-wheel, four-wheel, rotary engines, two-stroke, four-stroke, chain-drives, drive-shaft and various types of tillers were used for steering throughout the 1800s and experimentation continued through the early 1900s.

We are once again in a similar era of creativity and invention.

Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers made a multimillion-dollar second-round investment intended to put the Fisker Karma plug-in hybrid sports sedan into production in 2009.

...General Motors and Toyota are racing to put the first plug-in hybrid - a vehicle that allows home charging of the electric portion of its electric-gasoline powerplant - into production.

...Meanwhile, Khosla Ventures has invested in EcoMotors, a Detroit company working to create a 100-plus mpg diesel engine by 2011.

The debates are raging over what type of car and fuel will best serve our needs. More from Khosla here (Part 1). And here (Khosla Part 2). And here (Khosla Part 3). And Romm 1, Romm 2, Romm 3.

And for an in-depth presentation from Khosla:


For the impatient, the short story on the debate is that Khosla says cellulosic ethanol is a better bet since there are fewer infrastructure changes required and the incremental additional cost of hybrids (several thousand dollars for parallel hybrids like the Prius) will always make them poor performers in the market especially with new entries like Tata. Romm in turn argues that cellulosic ethanol (the good ethanol) is years away and that hybrids and electrics will become cost competitive as they scale and implement newer technologies.

Meanwhile entrepreneur Shai Agassi is making his own waves mass marketing all electric vehicles as part of Project Better Place. The key is the battery replacement network.

By using lithium-ion phosphate batteries that can be lifted out of a vehicle and replaced, he extends the range of the vehicles beyond the 100 miles that they can now go on a single electrical charge. He also eliminates the time it usually takes to recharge batteries.

The plan is to set up service stations that will pull out and replace the spent batteries in about the time required to fill a conventional car's tank with gasoline.

Israel has made a major commitment to develop the network and Renault has committed to building the cars. "Today is a new age with new dangers and the greatest danger is that of oil. It is the greatest polluter of our age and oil is the greatest financier of terror," said Israeli President Shimon Peres.

Video from Project Better Place:


So in watching all of this I couldn't help but be curious when I met a well known senior advisor on climate and new technologies (who holds an office at Kleiner Perkins and advises Richard Branson on this new fuel ventures among other things) and ask what she thought of the debates. She basically said it's silly. We need everything - especially a biodiesel, plug-in hybrid.

Now, about biodiesel...

California's dot-green economy

The dot-green economy is happening - high tech and real green (both kinds). From the NY Times:

While interest in alternative energy is climbing across the United States, solar power especially is rising in California, the product of billions of dollars in investment and mountains of enthusiasm.

In recent months, the industry has added several thousand jobs in the production of solar energy cells and installation of solar panels on roofs. A spate of investment has also aimed at making solar power more efficient and less costly than natural gas and coal.

...They point to companies like SolarCity, an installer of rooftop solar cells based in Foster City. Since its founding in 2006, it has grown to 215 workers and $29 million in annual sales. “It is hard to find installers,” said Lyndon Rive, the chief executive. “We’re at the stage where if we continue to grow at this pace, we won’t be able to sustain the growth.”

The momentum is substantial and VC funds have been flowing. Does this portend a new bubble?

Janszen projects the alternative-energy bubble could outstrip both the dot-com and housing bubbles combined, generating in excess of $20 trillion in speculative wealth -- "money that will be employed to increase share prices rather than to deliver 'energy security.'" At their peaks, the tech bubble had a speculative value of $7 trillion and the housing bubble $12 trillion.

It's certainly possible that a cleantech bubble is emerging, but no one disputes that the dot-com revolution fundamentally changed commerce and how we communicate - despite the the dot-bust.

More importantly, the structural conditions pushing the development of cleantech are only going to become more pronounced:

• Peak oil and increasing cost of energy
  
• Accelerating climate change impacts
  
• Imminent regulation of carbon
  
• Accelerating new technology in key areas such as batteries and thin film solar
  

Let's hope that dot-green transforms the landscape just like the dot-com.

NeverGen

The future is not coal. The US Department of Energy pulled the plug on what was supposed to be the leading edge "clean coal" project in the country, "FutureGen". "Clean coal" is an oxymoron - even if sequestration were implemented, it would likely leak.

Here in California it's sometimes easy to think that coal doesn't touch us but the reality is more complicated. Check out where your electricity comes from. Not only does California have a couple coal plants but it imports somewhere around 20% of its power. Determining the source of that is difficult.

The good news is that more and more proposed coal plants are being denied or withdrawn (even in Kansas). To see where coal plants have gone down in flames check out this Google map. Coal's prospects in the US are dimming but Big Coal presses on. And they have the gall to claim they are after "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of a cooler planet."