Earlier this week, Volvo introduced a new model that integrates a lug-in lithium battery and a diesel engine, which Volvo plans to make available by 2012. When compared to Volvo’s earlier plan to have a hybrid vehicle available in 2012, the new plug-in model represents a more aggressive move on Volvo’s behalf.

Notably, this move could position Volvo as the world’s first provider of a plug-in diesel model. Although the technical specifications are a work in progress, the company says that the new plug-in will emit less than 50 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer. When compared to the average emissions rate of roughly 90 g/km found among most European subcompacts, Volvo’s 2012 plug-in is a big leap in automotive efficiency.

Other manufacturers have touted plans for upcoming hybrid vehicles however; none have presented plans for a plug-in component to their diesel engine models. The usage of a lithium-ion battery will likely drive up the costs of Volvo’s plug-in model. Chances are that in order for this model to be a cost-effective option for consumers, a tax incentive for low-emissions vehicles will be required. With goals of offering a product that allows drivers to cover longer distances with a manageable recharge time (5 hours), Volvo believe the new model is a response to market needs.

In order to deliver the new technology, Volvo has partnered with Vattenfall, a Swedish electric utility company. The partnership has resulted in the development of an automotive battery that will provide drivers with the ability to run on battery power for up to 50 kilometers. The structure of the partnership is such that Volvo Car Corporation (a subsidiary of Ford) will manufacture the vehicles and Vattenfall will develop the charging systems that supply the cars with the necessary electricity. Touting at-home fill ups and reduced fuel costs, and reduced environmental impacts, Volvo believes that the new plug-in model is a purchase option that the market is eager for.

In addition to finalizing the technical specifications of the lithium-ion battery technology, Volvo is also finalizing the safety specifications of the vehicle in order to comply with current European safety regulations.

The company’s CEO, Stephan Odell has stated that, “I would go so far as to say that the plug-in electrical hybrid we will launch in 2012 will be a true dream car. With the innovative solution we will offer, the car owner will be able to drive a thoroughly enjoyable car packed with Volvo’s renowned high safety and genuine driving pleasure.”

A major new player in the energy management software arena named, Hara began selling their software-as-a-service offering on Monday. With a $6 million investment from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Hara has launched with a promise to enable customers to reduce the cost of doing business through monitoring and managing their consumption of natural resources.

Started by alumni of SAP and Oracle, Hara launched with a number of municipal and corporate customers already on board, including Coca Cola Co. and the city of Palo Alto. Whether it’s through a cap-and-trade regime or a direct tax, if congress passes legislation to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions, businesses will need this exact type of enterprise software for managing their carbon emissions.

Based out of Menlo Park, California, Hara’s software calculates how much energy and water a company is consuming as well as how much carbon and other waste are being generated. The customer is able to realize financial savings through acting upon the forecasting data that Hara’s software provides. Tracking progress towards goals, creating an audit trail and developing an environmental record are added benefits of Hara’s new energy management software.

The city of Palo Alto has been using all four available modules in Hara’s software and now expects to save roughly $600,000 per year through reductions in gas and electricity consumption. Although software pricing is not available at this time, the city of Palo Alto has indicated that they paid $24,000 for their annual subscription.

Through a pilot project, Coca-Cola has been working with Hara to leverage their software tools for tracking the greenhouse gas emissions for 1,000 facilities throughout the world. It is believed that the use of Hara’s software influenced Coca-Cola’s cost-driven decision to replace crude oil with natural gas at it’s facilities in South Africa. The Hara software has also been supporting Coca-Cola’s U.S. based work to revamp their lighting systems.

Although Hara has launched with an impressive offering, this is an already competitive space that is quickly gaining traction. Hara has plenty of competitors in this space including, ClearStandards, Adura Technologies and Enviance (there’s many others). Additionally, Cisco, IBM and SAP have all indicated plans to support enterprise solutions for energy and resource consumption accounting.

Despite the competition, a demanding market is growing. The likely passage of legislation, which places a price on carbon emissions, indicates that a company like Hara has an exciting future that we should all pay close attention to in the coming months.

Earlier this year, Google announced the development of a gadget called Google PowerMeter which delivers personal electricity usage data to consumers on their individual computers. This effort took a big step forward on Wednesday of this week when Google announced a list of eight initial electric utilities that will serve as partners.

United by a common interest in connecting their customers with personal consumption data, the diverse list of partners includes utilities from India, Canada and the United States. The partnering utilities range in size from small providers to ones with millions of customers.

The full list of partnering utilities is as follows:
* San Diego Gas & Electric® (California)
* TXU Energy (Texas)
* JEA (Florida)
* Reliance Energy (India)
* Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (Wisconsin)
* White River Valley Electric Cooperative (Missouri)
* Toronto Hydro–Electric System Limited (Canada)
* Glasgow EPB (Kentucky)

One of the larger utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) has been partnering with Google throughout the past year and now has plans to install over 200,000 smart meters this year. By 2011, SDG&E estimates that they will have their entire territory of 1.4 million customers equipped with smart meters. According to a New York Times post, San Diego Gas & Electric has indicated that their smart meter customers should be able to access their energy usage data via the Google PowerMeter before the end of this year.

Google is not the only tech company working hard to bring energy data to customers via the Internet. As a smart energy grid evolves, so will energy management applications the applications that deliver usage data into the hands of the customers. By doing so, it is estimated that customers can reduce their energy usage by 5% – 10%.

In addition to listing the eight utility partners, Google also announced their partnership with smart meter maker, Itron. Although Google and others in the field of home energy management have discussed whether or not they actually require partnerships with utilities and smart meters in order to deliver these data services, it certainly helps Google’s efforts to have solidified the partnerships. The Google partnership is helping Itron as well, as indicated by Itron shares being up about 3.7% on Wednesday.

There a number of players in this field and more will emerge as partnerships such as these are formed. However, as usual, Google appears to be taking the lead.

On Wednesday, The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) released a first draft of a treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol (1997) which is set to expire in 2012. This new 53 page document is considered to be the basis for the agreements to be made in the international climate talks scheduled for December 7th-18th in Copenhagen.

The key-differentiating factor between this document and the original Kyoto Protocol is that the newly proposed treaty calls for significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by both, developed and developing nations. Bridging this gap should satisfy the historical Kyoto opposition from both sides, which plagued the original framework since it’s inception. Under the Bush administration, opposition to Kyoto was founded in the notion that due to output volume of GHG emissions, developing nations should be included in the framework. Conversely, opposition from developing nations was founded in the argument that as the leaders in per capita pollution of CO2, the industrialized nations should hold the primary burden of emissions reductions.

With revised emission reductions for both developed and developing countries, the UNFCCC’s latest draft attempts to satisfy the needs of all involved parties. The head of the UNFCCC, Yvo de Boer indicates that the release of the new draft marks, “an important point on our road.” The document contains a nearly complete list of industrialized nations’ commitments to cut emissions after 2012, which allows for cross-national comparisons of reduction goals. The intent is that information sharing of this type will encourage the creation of more ambitious goals on behalf of participating nations.

According to the newly proposed treaty, emerging countries such as China and India would commit to targeting reductions of GHG emissions to 15% – 30% of 2000 levels by 2020. If agreed upon, this commitment would represent a first-ever international agreement for developing nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Under the newly proposed framework, developed nations would target carbon emissions reductions to 75% – 95% of 1990 levels by 2050.

With only 200 days remaining until the final December talks in Copenhagen, this document represents the promise of a comprehensive and shared set of agreements to sign-off on in Copenhagen. That being said, there is still more work to be done on the proposed treaty between now and December. In June, governments will meet in Bonn, Germany to debate the details of the new draft. Specifically, the Bonn talks will examine the various proposals for establishing emissions limits and the allocation of funding and penalty payments.

Currently, the draft treaty has indicated that a nation’s population trends, access to technology and economic trends will be considered. The new document also proposes that funding priorities be placed on regions with glaciers, regions affected by desertification as well as low-lying areas that are at high risk of flooding.

In addition to setting revised targets for emissions cuts, the draft document also describes detailed mechanisms for financing, technology development and capacity building initiatives in the fight against climate change.

Earlier this week, Boeing released it’s 2009 Environmental Report which highlights 2008 reductions in energy and water consumption and carbon dioxide emissions. On the more innovative side, the Boeing report describes biofuel demonstration flights held over the past year which document the technical feasibility of using biofuels in commercial jetliners. The demonstration flights represent a significant step toward a long-term vision of sustainable fuel solutions for the aviation industry.

In addition to biofuel advancements, a Boeing subsidiary, Spectrolab achieved a new solar cell world record with 40.7% efficiency in converting sunlight to electricity. The 2009 Environmental Report provides a clear indication that the company is pioneering innovative technologies that will realize even greater efficiencies in the coming year.

A true industry leader, Boeing is the world’s largest manufacturer of commercial jetliners and military aircraft combined. Boeing’s foray into sustainable fuels signals an emerging trend within the aviation industry that result in mainstream standards in a few short years.

Boeing worked a number of commercial airlines on the demonstration flights which required no modifications to the airplanes or engines.

• On Dec. 30th, 2008, Air New Zealand conducted the first sustainable biofuels flight using jatropha as a fuel source (flown with a 50/50 mix with traditional jet fuel).
• On Jan. 7th, 2009, Continental Airlines became the first U.S. carrier to conduct a biofuels test flight and also the first to use algae as a fuel source.
• On Jan. 30th, 2009, Japan Airlines became the first airline to use the energy crop camelina as a fuel source. The 90 minute flight relied upon a fuel mix of camelina, algae and jatropha mixed with conventional jet fuel.

Results from these test flights will be incorporated into Boeing’s strategy development as they work towards their target goal of a 15% improvement in fuel efficiency in each new-generation aircraft. Documentation of the demonstration flights is an encouraging signal that the possibility of non-fossil fuel flights is closer than most would imagine.

Additionally, the demonstration test flight results are intended to contribute to the effort to certify the algae-based fuels through the ASTM. The greater goal of this effort is to eventually alter the current jet fuel specification requirements which state that jet fuel must be derived from petroleum-based source material.

Driven by both, environmental and economic incentives, the widespread use of biofuels in the aviation industry represents a significant savings for airlines. With increasing fuel costs, biofuels represent a fuel source that in a matter of years will be price competitive with today’s fossil fuel costs. According to a recent article in Fast Company, jet fuel is the airlines’ largest and most volatile expense, representing 25% – 40% of total operating costs. Estimates indicate that commercial quantities of algae oil can be produced in three years and that this supply can be produced domestically. Experts agree that assuming projected increases in fuel prices takes place, algae-based biofuels will in fact, be price competitive. If not, we’ll likely see a program of government subsidies to introduce the new biofuels into the marketplace.

Until now, the aviation industry has been slow to demonstrate initiatives to reduce the environmental impact of their products and services. In addition to reductions in fuel consumptions, Boeing is now pioneering more sustainable technologies that address environmental noise pollution and reduced energy needs for their operations. In this regard, the aviation industry has begun to show greater progress on the environmental front than the shipping and cruise line industries, which contribute twice as much as the aviation industry does to climate change.

In addition to advancements in developing feasible biofuel sources, Boeing has also collaborated with leading airlines and environmental organizations to form the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Users Group. The goal of this group is to accelerate the development and commercialization of innovative sustainable aviation fuels. Outcomes from this group are expected to include reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation industry and to securie the industry’s exposure to volatile oil prices.

China’s Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Environmental Protection have requested research from a regional think-tank to develop preliminary proposals for a national carbon tax. The proposals, which are due for publication within the month, may one day become a part of the Chinese government’s strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

International governments have pressed Beijing to implement legislation to curtail their carbon dioxide emissions and the Chinese response has typically been a call for rich countries to lead by example in the development of CO2 regulation schemes. With the possibility of a US cap-and-trade regime being approved later this year, the Chinese government’s request for research on carbon tax policies may indicate that China will head off in it’s own direction.

Devising an agreement on an appropriate taxation cost for carbon is complex, as it is affected by a number of uncontrollable variables. Preliminary research by the World Bank and the Dutch and British governments has come up with a range of $70 to $280 per ton of CO2. Certainly, further research is necessary to refine the range of taxation and more importantly, to devise one that is appropriate to the practices and scale of a country as large as China.

Revenue from a carbon tax in China represents a significant financial stream when you consider that China is the world’s largest source of CO2 with roughly 80% of its electricity being generated by coal-fired power plants. China has a population of 1.3 billion people and the country produces roughly four metric tons of GHG emissions per person. Although China’s total emission count now exceeds that of the US, the US averages about 20 metric tons of GHG emissions per person.

The question remains, what is driving Chinese interest in pursuing the possibility of a carbon tax policy when for years, they have adamantly declared that developed nations who have caused the climate crisis should lead the way in mitigating climate change? It seems apparent that developed nations are now heading in the direction of a cap-and-trade regime versus a carbon tax. Perhaps, the Chinese government views a cap-and –trade system as being overly laborious on the regulation side. Or, perhaps China is making preparations in advance of the December climate talks in Copenhagen.

However, the more likely motivation is that China strives to become a leading nation in the reduction of carbon emissions.

Alaska governor Sarah Palin has rejected $28.6 million dollars in federal stimulus money for Alaska’s State Energy Program. However, Gov. Palin did accept all other federal stimulus money that her state is eligible for ($930 million). Palin’s rejection of the funds is founded in her opposition to strengthening state building codes and making energy efficiency and renewable energy top priorities when spending the money.

Although other governors have voiced opposition to the stimulus package, Gov. Palin is the only governor who has not signed a letter of reassurance to Steven Chu (US Energy Secretary) that her state intends to accept the funds and will comply with the policies associated with the money for state energy departments.

Governor Palin has argued that mandating a statewide energy building code throughout her region does not serve the interests of Alaskans due to the fact that once the federal funds are exhausted through initiating programs, state funds will be required to continue the new programs and activities. However, Palin did accept $28 million for home weatherization and home energy-efficiency programs.

Rejecting the additional $28.6 million for the State Energy Program will put Alaska behind other states in terms of adopting more stringent building codes to conserve energy. Additionally, the rejection of the federal stimulus money for energy delays progress towards state-driven initiatives to encourage utilities to develop incentives for residential and commercial customers to adopt energy efficiency practices.

Click here to read the assurance letter submitted by your state to Steven Chu.

As industry leaders closely watch the consumer response to new electric vehicles, ideas are quickly taking shape in regards to where manufacturers should target their sales and production. While North American, European and Chinese auto manufacturers race to bring a viable electric car to market, the question remains, who will arrive first and where will the manufacturing centers be located?

A recent announcement that Think, Norway’s pioneering electric carmaker is opening a manufacturing plant in the US is an indication that the US may be overtaking Europe as a more lucrative marketplace for the production of electric vehicles.

Think CEO, Richard Canny has stated, “The U.S. is quickly overtaking Europe as an attractive market for EVs and is an ideal location to engineer and build EVs” and he may be right. Think is currently in discussion with eight US states to determine where to build their new manufacturing facility which will initially employ 300 workers and will have a production capacity of 16,000 cars per year. Think’s technical center will also provide 70 additional jobs for engineers and electric drive specialists. Long term plans for this facility include employment for roughly 900 total employees and production capacity of 60,000 electric vehicles per year.

In addition to job creation and dealer sales, the migration of Think manufacturing to the US will also impact our national economy through contributing to a growing supply chain which serves the electric vehicle and plug-in hybrid car markets. Currently, Think is partnering with US battery makers Ener1, Inc. and A123 to provide compact, high-powered lithium-ion power systems for “TH!NK city” which, is Think’s flagship vehicle.

The TH!NK city is estimated at being capable of traveling 65 miles per hour and up to 112 miles per charge. Although numbers such as those are impressive in terms of what consumer options have been in the past, the question still remains as to whether or not those specs are enough to draw in US consumers. If the failure of China’s marketplace to embrace the F3DM electric car is any indication as to the possible future of the TH!NK city, the Norwegian-run company may have some more design work ahead of them before being able to capture revenue through US sales.

However, with talks underway with eight US states (including Michigan), a recent acquisition of $5.7 million in interim financing and loans available through the US Department of Energy’s Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program, the arrival of a vibrant Think presence on the streets of America seems inevitable.

The question remains, will US consumers respond to an fully electric car that can travel 112 miles with a top speed of 65mph or, will they hold out for longer range and higher speed hybrid electric vehicles?

The goal of this post is to make the point that corporations are one of our greatest assets in moving towards a sustainable future. There are two points that I propose to support this point.

1. Corporations represent a remarkable platform for the industrial capacity that is required to create the materials necessary for renewable energy systems.

2. Corporations represent a remarkable asset in terms of human knowledge and skills.

The following data points are compelling arguments that I have gathered from the recent work of Saul Griffith:

1. If an aluminum can producer redirected their production of 110 billion cans in a year to the production of solar thermal surfaces, they could create 200 GW of energy.

2. Nokia produces 9 phones every second. Again, that’s, 9 phones in a single second. Imagine if that production capacity was redirected to the manufacturing of solar panels?

3. GM manufactures one drivetrain every minute and one complete car every two minutes. Imagine if this production capacity was redirected to the production of wind turbines? This production capacity represents the ability to provide enough wind turbines to generate 2 TW of energy.

What will our future look like if the sustainability movement does not embrace corporations as partners? Where will the large-scale production capacity come from to create the materials that are required? Where will the brain-power to engineer the necessary innovations come from? Where will the financial acumen to determine how to make sustainability profitable come from?

Certainly, progress on these fronts can me made without the contributions of corporations. I feel strongly that we should look to the academic community, small business thought leaders, home garage hobbyists and inspired entrepreneurs for leadership in sustainability initiatives. However, I would argue that without embracing corporations as partners in sustainability and encouraging them to become a part of the solution, sustainability initiatives will not have the broad reaching, global impact that is required to solve the immediate environmental crisis and to build the foundation for a sustainable future to support our growing human population on Earth.

Commonly, I find that social and environmental practitioners expend too much energy arguing the faults of large corporations. Within the community of sustainability practitioners, I think the challenge lies not in articulating our thoughts on the poor practices of corporations. In fact, I find that to be an easily made argument that practitioners should move beyond. Instead, I feel that the challenge lies in finding the personal ability articulate the opportunities through which corporate assets can be leveraged to contribute meaningful solutions to our current and future environmental and social needs.

It’s been an exciting week as commentaries on the merits and shortcomings of the American Clean Energy and Security Act have taken place among the sustainability and business leadership communities. If enacted, this legislation could propel the US into an entirely new economy comprised of clean energy technologies & infrastructure, reduced greenhouse gas emissions across industries, and an innovative green jobs workforce.

If passed, this bill will certainly change the manners in which we do business and the costs of doing so. Forward thinking business leaders are staying ahead of the curve and preparing their businesses for the upcoming changes by closely following the development of this critical legislation.

The goal of this article is to provide business leaders with an overview of the American Clean Energy and Security Act and to highlight the aspects of the bill that may significantly change how you do business in the very near future. In addition to understanding the details of this proposed legislation, business leaders are encouraged to be informed of the details surrounding the debate of a carbon tax versus cap-and-trade.

Materials:
American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 Discussion Draft Full Text
American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 Discussion Draft Summary

Opening Commentary:
The focus of much debate surrounding the draft version of this bill is centered on questions of: 1) the efficacy of a cap and trade system on affecting emissions reductions and 2) the impact of a cap and trade regime on company profits and consumer prices.

A key issue that the draft does not address is how the allowances for tradable emissions will be allocated across and within industries. This issue will be refined through upcoming conversations among Committee members. Although the resolution of this issue may not affect the overall cost of implementing the cap and trade program, it will certainly affect the finances of businesses as some businesses may now be facing potentially very large fines for exceeding allowable emissions counts as early as 2012.

In addition to being quiet on the details of how the allowable emissions will be allocated, the legislation also avoids laying out the details of consumer price protection strategies that it refers to in the “transitioning” title portion of the legislation.

A final point of note is that although the bill articulates that the cap and trade regime is for businesses emitting more than 25,000 tons of GHGs, businesses that emit less are not free of regulation. Instead, the emissions reductions from these companies will be regulated directly by the EPA. Government rebates will be awarded to high energy consuming industries as a means of enabling them to remain competitive in domestic and foreign markets. However no U.S. businesses are off the hook with regards to emissions regulation through this bill.

Overview: On March 31, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act was introduced as a discussion draft into the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Also known as “The Waxman-Markey Bill”, the discussion draft was authored by Representatives Henry Waxman (California) and Edward Markey (Massachusetts).

The discussion draft represents a comprehensive piece of energy legislation that aims to create millions of new clean energy jobs, save consumers hundreds of billions of dollars in energy costs, enhance America’s energy independence and cut global warming pollution.

Goals: The draft legislation aspires to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 20% of 2005 levels by 2020. It is worth noting that this target is substantially more aggressive than President Obama’s goal of a 14% reduction by 2020.

Framework: The discussion draft is organized into four titles:

• Clean energy – Promotes of renewable sources of energy, technologies for carbon capture and sequestration, low-carbon fuels, clean electric vehicles and smart grid technologies & infrastructure.
• Energy Efficiency – Increases energy efficiency throughout activities such as buildings, appliances, transportation and industry.
• Global Warming – Places limits on the allowable amount of emissions of GHG’s.
• Transitioning – Safeguards U.S. companies and consumers and advances green jobs during the shift to a clean energy economy.

Schedule: The House Energy and Commerce Committee will complete deliberation on the legislation by May 25th. The preliminary schedule for completing the House consideration is as follows:

Week of April 20: Energy and Environment Subcommittee Hearings
Week of April 27: Energy and Environment Subcommittee Markup Period Begins
Week of May 11: Full Energy and Commerce Committee Markup Period Begins