E-NEWS
Bush’s Quiet Environmental Triumph?February 3, 2009Reporting by Roddy Scheer
Some fishermen already hurt by increasing cutbacks on the amount of fish they are allowed to catch fear that this latest move might put them out of business altogether. Nevertheless, environmentalists praise the Bush move as a necessary evil to save the fisheries themselves. “Overfishing, the practice of taking fish from the ocean faster than they are capable of reproducing, has plagued U.S. fisheries for generations, and has had profound negative effects on the health of marine ecosystems and coastal communities,” said Chris Dorsett of the nonprofit Ocean Conservancy. “Everyone is in agreement that this a good road map for the Obama administration to end overfishing,” Dorsett added. “We’ve got the law, we’ve got the guidance, now it is time to put the guidance into effect.” Sources: Ocean Conservancy; MSNBC |
||||||
COMMENTARY: California Water WorriesBig Solutions are Needed to Head off a Serious Water CrisisBy Ryan Leaderman and Linda Bozung California is in the midst of a water crisis: reservoirs are currently at a fraction of their average capacity for this time of year, aquifers are dropping to new lows, State Water Project deliveries (which serve 25 million Californians) are projected to meet only fifteen percent of the amount requested by local agencies and the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta (the “Delta”) is in an environmental (and litigious) quagmire due to the need for water not only for Southern California but also for the Delta smelt, several species of salmon and steelhead. With little precipitation, inevitable population growth, and significant use by agriculture, more burdens are placed on a diminishing resource. Impacts related to global warming and the long political paralysis regarding various aspects of water rights and transfers also exacerbate the gap between supply and demand. Without new supplies, decreased consumption, or some combination of the two, the state may not be able to provide adequate water to meet existing and future needs. Both long-term and short-term solutions are necessary.
Public awareness of the water supply problems facing California is low. Compounding this problem is the fact that Water Supply Assessments (“WSAs”), Urban Water Management Plans (“UWMPs”) and other planning documents required to forecast available water may be grossly inaccurate due to the problems mentioned above. Most of these documents do not yet reflect the Delta and Colorado River cutbacks, drought, and State Water Project changes that are occurring. Current economic conditions have delayed the planning process for new projects, thus further keeping the water crisis out of public view since water supply would normally be addressed during the project approval process. Although UWMPs will be updated next in 2010, the changed water situation must be confronted well before then. For instance, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California draft Water Supply Allocation Plan (“WSAP”) includes a formula to allocate supplies to the member agencies. These agencies must likewise respond and adopt to these reductions. The shortage must thus be recognized, the recipients of water resources determined, and future supplies increased. In the interim, while these decisions are being made, short-term solutions are necessary such as a statewide regulatory plan requiring mandatory conservation for all users, including a tiered rate pricing structure that charges higher rates to customers that use more water. When customers are charged for usage that exceeds a baseline level, water districts find that price increases result in greater conservation. Yet, even conservation produces winners and losers: residents fear a tiered rate structure will significantly increase the expense of a now-relatively cheap resource and developers fear that the cost and burden of water conservation efforts will fall squarely on their shoulders even though new developments now provide extensive water efficient designs. Both new and existing development must bear the burden of reduced water use.
The gap between water supply and demand will only increase unless necessary steps are taken to ensure supply and demand balance. Conservation measures, a tiered rate structure and new regulations to address existing development must be implemented now. Solutions for the Delta must be agreed to and funded, as well as measures to augment supplies, including increased storage capacity. Decision makers must implement these short-term, long-term and regulatory changes to ensure an adequate and reliable water supply. RYAN LEADERMAN is an associate and LINDA BOZUN a partner at law firm DLA Piper US in Los Angeles, specializing in land use planning, zoning, entitlement acquisition and protection, and due diligence. |
||||||
Obama Making Good on Green PromisesFebruary 3, 2009Reporting by Roddy Scheer
“Just days into office, President Obama is showing America and the world that he will lead our country in a bold new direction to protect the environment and fight global warming,” said Frances Beinecke of the influential Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental non-profit. “These actions are a clear demonstration that President Obama recognizes the urgency of moving America to clean energy and tackling the climate crisis in 2009.” Even more promising is Congress’ willingness to tow the line on Obama’s vision of a “green” stimulus package which will not only bail out the troubled economy but launch America into a position of leadership on sustainability-oriented products, technologies and services. Last week the House of Representatives passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which includes some $100 billion to fund public transportation, energy efficiency and renewable energy development. While the Senate version may water down some of the greener aspects of the bill as passed by the House, environmentalists are siding with President Obama who hopes the bill he sees on his desk will represent a dramatic step forward for the country, the economy and the climate. Sources: NRDC; Associated Press; Grist |
||||||
GridlockReal Energy Conservation Requires a Smarter GridBy Michael Prager
The present grid has hardly changed in a century: massive amounts of power generated at behemoth plants are sent downstream via transmission wires. The system is stout and brawny, like a field hand capable of carrying any load demanded. But it was never very brainy, and don’t even talk about its communications skills. (Have you ever considered that the only way the electric company knows your power is out is if you call and tell them?) In the modern age, the flow of information—in both directions—is as important as the flow of electrons. As it stands now, 42 states and the District of Columbia require utilities to buy any excess energy generated by customers, but so far, it’s only an added utility expense. Because they can’t know in real time that power is coming in, utilities generate as much as they would have anyway. When information flows both ways, customers will be able to specify only renewable energy for their houses—which will increase the demand, increase the supply and lower its price. And they’ll be able to set the price they’re willing to pay to run certain appliances. That might mean your dishwasher runs in the middle of the night, when electricity is cheaper. Until now, the only way for utilities to ensure that they have enough power has been to build more plants. Some of those plants operate on idle to be ready for periods of peak demand, which is like keeping an extra car running in the driveway. The smart grid will increase options for those peak periods. Utilities could, for example, temporarily turn off, or rev down, an appliance or two in homes across their service areas, and then restore them almost before anyone noticed. It wouldn’t have to be Big Brother-ish; each home could designate the devices it was willing to include, or designate none and pay a higher cost. This vision may sound futuristic, but it isn’t. Companies such as EnerNOC, Inc. of Boston and North America Power Partners of Woodbury, New Jersey, are doing it already, making deals with large utility customers to reduce their consumption at peak times, and then selling the demand savings to utilities. In his book Hot, Flat, and Crowded (Farrar, Straus and Giroux), New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman writes that many of the technologies for blanket application of these ideas “already exist or are being perfected right now in garages or laboratories.” Some of the most prominent labs in the effort are under the umbrella of FREEDM, the Future Renewable Electric Energy Delivery and Management Systems Center, an initiative announced by the National Science Foundation in September 2008. It is headquartered at North Carolina State University but has affiliates in 28 states and nine countries. The center’s industry liaison, Mark Johnson, likens the smart grid effort to the development of the Internet. Desktop computers are great, he says, but they become far more useful when connected to the web. In energy terms, he says, the benefit comes “not from getting away from the power company, but by connecting with it.” This runs counter to the idea of off-grid living, but such interdependence will do as much or more than, say, swapping incandescent lightbulbs for CFLs. “It allows you to not only be a consumer but also a resource,” Johnson says. If plug-in autos become mainstream, for example, drivers could reserve what they need and sell the rest back to the grid during a peak period. Cars can recharge overnight, when demand—and prices—drop. Imagine: millions of mobile storage devices, collectively reducing the need for more power plants. This protean energy future is already being tested in Boulder, Colorado, where “SmartGridCity” has been launched by the utility Xcel Energy. By December 2008, about 35,000 homes and businesses—and small portions of the grid—were outfitted with automation and communications capabilities. By the end of 2009, more than 50,000 homes and businesses will be connected. So far, about 8,000 smart meters have been installed, but Bud and Val Peterson are among the first to have home-energy-management systems put in. Bud is also known as G.P. Peterson, chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder; Val calls herself CU-Boulder’s “first lady,” and it’s hard to imagine that the school, or the town, or Xcel Energy could have a more enthusiastic supporter. “Xcel [and its partners will have] spent $100 million on this. They’ve gone out on a limb. You don’t expect an energy company to be partnering and doing all this research,” she says. Peterson says she has been energized—thrilled, even—to take part. Though the installations of solar panels, multiple automated thermostats, connections for a plug-in hybrid vehicle, and a GridPoint connector and load manager were overwhelming, Peterson says that operating the system is easy. “A lot of it is programmed on a computer. I set my preferences and then I don’t have to think about it. That’s why I’m the poster child for this. It’s not hard.” Peterson says her husband, a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, loves all the data the system feeds back, as does she. “On my dashboard [her desktop interface], they have what I call my cheerleader—different measures of carbon savings because of our behaviors. For example, I have it set to express our energy savings in pizzas. Last month, we could have microwaved 3,295 pizzas” with the energy they saved. Tom Henley, an Xcel Energy spokesperson in Denver, says it will be early 2010 before the company knows how much is being saved—in money and in energy. Only then can it consider expanding beyond Boulder. |
||||||
Investing in PeopleMaking a Difference, One Small Loan at a TimeBy Rona Fried
Microfinance—offering loans, savings accounts and other basic financial services to the poor—has proved to be a critical lever in helping people to help themselves. A woman might borrow $50 to buy chickens so she can sell eggs at the local market. She can sell more eggs as her chickens multiply, and soon she can sell the chicks. She shares knowledge with her neighbors, creates jobs and raises the standard of living for the community. Women receive the most loans because studies have shown they are more likely to reinvest their earnings in the businesses and in their families. They also tend to take fewer risks with their business and are more careful to repay loans. Whereas only 4% of the poorest people in Bangladesh pulled themselves above the poverty line without credit services, 48% did so with loans from Grameen Bank over an eight-year period. Says Tracey Turner, founder of the online microfinance marketplace MicroPlace, “For these women, having access to money to start a small business isn’t about fulfilling a dream, it’s literally about keeping their families one step ahead of starvation and putting a roof over their heads.” The World Bank estimates there are over 7000 microfinance institutions serving some 16 million people in developing countries with $7 billion in outstanding loans—97% of which are repaid. High-profile microfinance investors include eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and Sequoia Capital, the venture capital backer of Google and YouTube. About 40 funds give institutional investors and high net worth individuals easy ways to invest. Still, with all this activity, microloans are servicing just 10% of the potential market. Everyday Investors That’s where the Internet comes in—everyday people can now invest through websites like Microplace.com and Kiva.org, where individual investors connect to borrowers looking for capital. You’ll find photos and descriptions of borrowers wanting to buy a cow to sell milk, a rickshaw or a sewing machine to mend or make garments. Launched in 2007, MicroPlace is owned by eBay, and is an online brokerage specializing in socially responsible investments that alleviate poverty. Unlike charity, investors earn a rate of return (averaging 2-3%) while empowering the poor to work their way out of poverty. In the short time MicroPlace has been operating they have enabled 30,000 loans, amounting to over $1.5 million in investments. Kiva operates similarly in that investments go to microfinance institutions. Investors, however, make zero-interest loans, so although they get their money back, they don’t earn interest. A broker-dealer license is necessary to allow people to earn interest. Says Ashwini Narayanan, the general manager of MicroPlace, “Peoples’ investment wallets are much larger than their donation wallets. You can spend a lot more money if you know you’re getting it back.” If you invest $100 on MicroPlace, you have the option to receive monthly or quarterly interest payments, or you can re-invest and compound your interest. You’ll receive notifications about how the organization you’re investing in is doing, including stories from the field and the impact of your investment over the two- or three-year term you’ve selected. Although a 2-3% return may seem small, Narayanan says investors consider both the social and financial returns. A risk-adjusted 3% rate is pretty good. But Are They Green? Investors can search for potential borrowers to support by geography and loan terms, but how would we find green investments? The microfinance model itself is a sustainable business model because it’s about people helping themselves to rise out of poverty, explains Narayanan. “In Nicaragua, where I visited recently, there are very forward-thinking microfinance organizations. They believe the country’s ability to get out of poverty is through farming. They give out many loans for agriculture and teach sustainable practices. Borrowers get better rates if they’re willing to employ green practices.” Education for many microfinance institutions is on healthcare, literacy, figuring out a business plan, helping borrowers learn how to manage money—the basics. A common theme for most is concern for the environment and education. RONA FRIED, Ph.D., is the president of www.SustainableBusiness.com. |
