Energy Production, Products and Conservation

Heat and Cooling

*
Solar powered (radiant) heat exchange: project design and product catalogues, professional services
o
Roof integrated solar heated hot water panels; tube insulation materials
o
Pool water heating with solar pumping; tube insulation materials
o
Solar furnaces
o
Diverted hot water/heat transfer designs
*
Wood or other burners, with water boiler exchange options
o
Combustion technology and consultants
o
Wood or manure burning stoves; convection looped water heaters
o
Central heating systems and recovery boilers designs
o
Bio-gas (composting) recovery to heat space or water
o
Geo-thermal heat recovery systems
o
On-demand, spark-ignited gas water heaters (wall mount)
*
Absorbent Cooling and Refrigeration
o
Propane and photo voltaic refrigerators
o
Air conditioning systems and ‘vapor generators’
o
Desiccant cooling systems
o
Evaporative-Photo Voltaic cooling
o
Heat engine/Vapor compression (Rankine-cycle heat exchange)
o
Alternatives to refrigerants:e.g. insulated cool rooms for fresh produce storage; Ice boxes and insulated coolers to transport perishable food

Electricity Production, Alternative Energy Products

*
Photo voltaic power generation:
o
Solar panels and charges
o
Solar kits
*
Wind Power and alternative designs:
o
Wind towers and turbines; tower kits
o
Mechanical roof-mount dumping turbines
*
Hydro-, tidal- or wave-powered designs
o
Turbines and pumps; Pelton wheels; tubing
o
Micro/macro hydro systems: Ram pumps, and components
*
Bio-gas (bi-product of composting) steam driven turbines
*
Electrical supplies, alternative products:
o
Inverter and fly wheels, battery banks and components
o
Electrical systems—12V, 120V with components; separate branch design from PV panel to breaker and switches; transformers;
o
Indoor and outdoor lighting systems and new technology with low watt fluorescent lighting
o
Water pumping windmills and components
o
Miscellaneous technology: solar battery charges for vehicles; PV-powered appliances and fences; portable PV systems; thermostats and well pumps; timers and switches; meters, log books & related components; animal or human generated electricity

Energy Conservation

*
Energy saving concepts:
*
Education materials, consultants, data and case studies
*
Organizations funding, teaching and promoting energy conservation
*
Solar energy architectural designs using natural light; low watt and fluorescent bulbs; shade trees and convection cooling
*
Alternative refrigerants; roof integrated heating and cooling systems
*
Published suggestions for changing energy use habits such as: turn off lights and other electrical equipment when not in use; hang laundry to dry, etc.

Green ideas for hotels and resorts

Saving money and reducing impact on the environment

Hotel and resort owners and operators are faced with the challenge of controlling costs, increasing productivity, and attracting customers. Waste reduction – which includes waste prevention, reuse, recycling and composting – is one method to help cut costs, achieve bottom line benefits, and satisfy customers.
Why reduce?

Lowers operating and disposal costs.
Streamlining an operation for a more efficient materials management program allows organizations to reduce costs through fewer purchase orders and garbage pick-ups. Waste reduction can help reduce expenditures on cleaning supplies, linens, equipment, office supplies and other purchases.

Enhances public image
Many companies are striving to generate cutting edge business philosophies, management and product development. Proactively engaging in environmental practices helps a company differentiate itself and gain a competitive advantage.

Improves morale
Incorporating environmentally sound practices in a business operation can help improve employee morale. Employees feel proud to be a part of a company that cares about employees, customers, the community and the environment.

Helps the environment
Waste reduction saves natural resources, reduces pollution and conserves landfill space.

Helps others
By instituting waste reduction and reuse practices, other businesses and individuals can benefit from reusable discards.
Actions to take now to save money
Reduce consumption of energy, water and resources – and satisfy customers!

Waste Reduction

* Purchase refillable soap, hair rinse and hand lotion dispensers for guest rooms.
* Donate partially-used products or allow employees to take home.
* Purchase towels and sheets made from 100% natural cotton, containing no chemicals, dyes or bleaches.
* Donate used linens to local shelters, the Salvation Army, or other charities.
* Reduce the frequency of changing and washing linens. Guests who want fresh towels can leave the used ones on the floor, while guests who are willing to reuse their towels hang them for reuse. Leave instructions on towel racks or night stands.
* Donate leftover, untouched food to local shelters or food banks.
* Purchase recycling bins for guest rooms or floors.
* Do not remove "gift amenities" from the room after a guest departs unless the seal on the package is broken. Leave unopened amenities in the room for the next guest.
* Wait to replace half-filled toilet paper rolls and tissue boxes until they are almost completely used. Leave new rolls and tissue boxes in bathrooms for guest to replace.
* Provide guest rooms with unwrapped, reusable drinking glasses and coffee cups. Check with the local health department about storing glasses upside down on trays, rather than using disposable paper covers.
* Replace single-use items with reusable items such as napkins, tablecloths, and hand towels. When they are worn, use them as cleaning rags.
* Buy cleaning products in bulk and in concentrated form. One large container of product uses less packaging per ounce than several smaller containers. Order only what can be used before the product expires.
* Fill smaller reusable containers with cleaning products from larger containers.
* Use refillable pump spray bottles rather than single-use aerosol cans.
* Buy supplies from vendors who accept returned containers used for shipping products.
* To reduce food waste, offer guests the option of ordering half-portions.

Energy Conservation

Electricity accounts for 60 to 70 percent of the utility costs of a typical hotel. Many hotels and resorts have found ways to cut down on these costs without sacrificing guest comfort. Here are some ideas:

* Cover windows, especially west- and south-facing windows, from sunlight with drapes, shades or shutters.
* Turn off all unnecessary lighting. Encourage guests to do the same with signs in the room.
* Set room thermostats to the highest comfortable temperature in summer (at or over 78 degrees) and the lowest comfortable in winter (at or below 68 degrees) – especially in empty rooms.
* Use weather stripping to close air gaps around doors and windows.
* Switch to low-watt bulbs in fixtures where strong lighting is not needed.
* Use fluorescent lighting as much as possible. They are initially more expensive, but use less energy and last longer.
* Place ice and soft drink vending machines in shaded area. Remove lamps from all vending machines.

Water Conservation

* Assuming a 50% occupancy rate, a 200-room hotel uses almost eight million gallons of water in a year. Using water efficient fixtures could save nearly 2-and-a-half million gallons of water a year.
* Retrofit fixtures in guest rooms and public rest rooms. Use low-flow showerheads, bath and sink faucet aerators, and low-flow toilets.
* Operate clothes and dishwashers only with full loads, and promptly repair all leaks.
* Wash clothes and linens in the coolest water that will do the job; hot water is usually only necessary for heavily soiled loads.
* Restrict lawn watering to evening hours to decrease evaporation and maximize effectiveness.
* Install toilet dams where possible.
* Use soaker hoses instead of sprinklers on your lawns to minimize evaporation.

Environmentally responsible purchasing

* Buy recycled products. Purchase toilet tissue, facial tissues and paper towels made from recycled paper.
* Buy cleaning products that are biodegradable.
* Use recycled paper for letterhead, guest room stationery, etc.

Good Housekeeping

* Store unused chemicals in a cool, dry and well-ventilated place.
* Dispose of chemicals according to label instructions.

what does Green Hotel like

Wood Based Materials. All lumber used for the hotel is FSC (Forest Stewardship Council). The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an international network to promote responsible management of the world's forests.

Coatings, Adhesives and Sealants. Low VOC (volatile organic compound) sealants and adhesives were used throughout the hotel for carpet, construction. Low VOC paints were used throughout the hotel. Both these strategies help improve the air quality within the hotel and have a positive effect on human health by improving the quality of air.

Carpet. Carpet with recycled content. Our carpets contain post consumer recycled material in the backing, fiber and pad.

Construction Waste Management. The contractor is committed to implementing waste diversion practices as an integral part of their operations. They provided a recycling station for paints. The contractor also provided a recycling station for cardboard. During construction, bins were placed on the property primarily for cardboard. All cardboard were recycled on the premises.

Stone. All restrooms use recycled tiles and granite.

Water. The project achieved a water use reduction of about 40%. DDLow flush toilets. All toilets produce 1 gpf (gallon per flush). Standard toilets produce 1.6 gallons per flush. All of our guestrooms are equipped with low flow showerheads. The koi pond uses recycled water from the site, which is then filtered and cleaned prior to entering the pond.

Environmental Quality. Appropriately sized and efficient HVAC units are used throughout. These units are quieter and more efficient than standard HVAC systems and use a more environmentally friendly refrigerant than is standard. Aluminum exterior grates were used in all entrances of the property. This helps to minimize dust and particulates entering the building, therefore improving air quality.

Energy. All windows used are efficient, low energy transmittable and reduce glare. Solatube tubular skylights are used throughout the hotel including our conference rooms, lobby and the hallways. These skylights magnify the sun's rays to deliver abundant light into the property interior spaces during the day. We save electricity by using these skylights. Solar panel provides 10% of our electricity. Cool reflective roof reflect heat therefore saving money in cooling costs.

Recycling. Recycling bins in rooms and around property. Newspapers are not delivered to each occupied room. Newspapers are located in the lobby available for guests who actually read them. Bulk soap and shower dispensers are used in all guest rooms. This helps to eliminate hundreds of pounds of plastic containers and packaging daily from mini shower bottles and soap. Only recycled paper products are used at the hotel.

Landscaping. Chemical free landscaping. All of the fertilizers used for landscaping are all natural and chemical free. Native and climate-adaptive plants were used so water use for irrigating is very limited.

Cleaning. Environmentally friendly cleaning products are used to clean the property.

Education. Promoting awareness of sustainability: GreenTouchscreen® kiosks show guests and visitors how much we are saving in water, electricity and how much CO2 we are emitting.

First US Greenhouse Cap-and-Trade Market Opens

NEW YORK - Ten states in the US Northeast kicked off the country's first cap-and-trade market on greenhouse gas emissions on Thursday, gaining accolades from environmentalists and many businesses but also eliciting concerns about how the states will spend the money the plan raises.


The states from Maryland to Maine formed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to limit emissions of carbon dioxide from power plants in the absence of guidance from the Bush administration on regulating planet-warming gases.
The group on Thursday conducted its first auction of permits to emit CO2 to utilities and investors who believe that their value will rise. It offered 12.5 million permits in the auction, each representing 1 ton of carbon dioxide, and will offer up to 188 million permits annually for three years.

By 2012 the region's power companies either must stabilize emissions at current levels or turn in permits they bought in the market. In the second compliance period, RGGI will lower the emissions cap 10 percent from current levels by 2019.

The states plan to spend money raised from the auctions on improving energy efficiency and alternative energy in hopes of shielding consumers from the program's costs.

But concerns have been raised about how the states will actually spend the money.

"There is a real danger that auction proceeds will be diverted to state budgets rather than used to accelerate the transition to a clean-energy economy," a New York Times editorial said on Thursday.

New York Gov. David Paterson said at the RGGI launch at the New York Mercantile Exchange that he understood the concern.

"There are times when governor types have raided incoming revenues for other purposes," he said, "and certainly this would be an economic condition that would create that temptation."

But he said he was sure New York's proceeds would be spent in the right place, because helping consumers pay power bills and potential jobs created by clean energy are integral to the state's economy. New York did not sell permits in Thursday's auction because it had not finalize rules in time. But Paterson said the state would be able offer permits in December, when RGGI will hold its second auction.

Among those watching RGGI's pioneering efforts are Western states and Canadian provinces who hope to establish a broader cap-and-trade market by 2012, Midwestern states who are considering a similar market, and US lawmakers who hope to pass regulations to cap emissions sometime after the next president comes to power in 2009.

Laurie Burt, the commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, said her state is trying to spend the money equitably. "We need to develop creative ways to make sure the benefits of energy efficiency are going to all ends of the spectrum of energy consumers, not just large consumers, but low income citizens and tenants."

Jonathan Schrag, the newly appointed RGGI executive director, said each state is ultimately responsible for how it spends the money.

RGGI will reveal on Monday how much money the initial auction raised. In futures markets contracts for the allowances were being sold for a bit more than US$4.00 per ton on Thursday.

(Editing by Gene Ramos)




Story by Timothy Gardner

GAO Faults 'Credibility' Of CO2-Offset Market

WASHINGTON -- The growing U.S. market for carbon offsets -- vouchers that let companies and individuals project an environmentally friendly image by paying others to cut their greenhouse-gas emissions -- is so opaque and loosely regulated that it offers consumers "limited assurance of credibility," according to a federal audit.

The report, expected to be published on Friday, stops short of recommending new regulations. But it suggests members of Congress think carefully before letting companies use offsets as a means of complying with legislation to control carbon-dioxide emissions, which are not currently regulated by the U.S. government.

Estimates vary on the size of the U.S. offset market, with some analysts putting the value of U.S. carbon offsets traded in 2006 at $91.6 million, an amount expected to grow sharply as more companies and individuals seek to lighten their impact on the atmosphere, or at least appear to be trying. Some companies are also betting the offsets they buy now will count toward their obligations under a future mandatory U.S. emissions-reduction system.

As purchases of voluntary offsets have soared in recent years, so have questions about whether money being spent on them funds real emissions cuts. Such offsets, which are often bought by consumers from online sellers, are supposed to represent emissions avoided through projects such as installing wind turbines or planting trees. Skeptics -- including some members of Congress -- have questioned how consumers can know in the absence of federal regulation whether such cuts are actually being implemented, or would have happened anyway.

While the findings of the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress, are generally consistent with those criticisms and don't break new ground, they could help influence the design of whatever mandatory program for curbing greenhouse-gas emissions emerges from Washington.

The report says that in purchasing offsets from 33 retail providers, the GAO "did not always obtain sufficient information to understand exactly what we received as a result of the transaction." Because there is no single registry for keeping track of offset projects -- and ensuring that projects are not counted multiple times -- "it is difficult for consumers to determine the quality of the offsets they purchase," the report says.

Some kinds of offsets also are more credible than others, the auditors added. Planting trees, for example, "may not be permanent, because disturbances such as insect outbreaks and fire can return stored carbon to the atmosphere."

The report doesn't call for specific new regulations for the voluntary U.S. market. Instead, it suggests that if lawmakers decide to allow offsets in a mandatory scheme for reducing carbon emissions, they should consider setting clear rules on the types of projects that companies can use and a registry for tracking the creation and ownership of offsets.

Some of the GAO's other findings are likely to add fuel to a long-simmering conflict between Democrats and Republicans over the way that House Democratic leaders have gone about trying to make the Capitol's operations more environmentally friendly. The report finds that because of an error, the House chief administrative officer, Daniel Beard, last year bought $24,447 more offsets than were needed under a broad effort by Democrats to reduce the House's carbon footprint.

"In our rush to demonstrate our green bona fides, we failed to remember our No. 1 mission -- to safeguard the public's money," said Rep. Tom Davis (R., Va.). A spokesman for Mr. Beard acknowledged the error but said the additional credits are in an account with the Chicago Climate Exchange, a voluntary greenhouse-gas reduction and trading system whose members commit to cutting their emissions. The extra credits, the spokesman added, will be used to reduce the House's carbon footprint in 2009.

"We regard the over-purchase as an investment in future attempts to offset our emissions," the spokesman added.

Australia carbon plan may chill investment climate

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/7829911

By Mark Bendeich

SYDNEY, Sept 26 (Reuters) - Australia's plans to protect its climate from global warming, by cutting greenhouse gases, could end up playing havoc with its investment climate instead.

The government has promised to make polluters pay for their carbon emissions within two years, but there is still confusion and controversy over how the system should work.

Even a very modest reduction target could wipe out billions of dollars in profits from listed firms, such as steel-makers and mining companies, without major compensation, according to preliminary estimates by investment bank Goldman Sachs JBWere.

But analysts and fund managers say too much state compensation could also distort the market, handing windfall profits to polluters and drawing some investors into the very industries that pose the biggest threat to climate change.

"The key issue is how that compensation issue plays out," said Andrew Gray, Melbourne-based head of environmental, social and governance research for Goldman Sachs JBWere.

His preliminary estimate, based on voluntary disclosure by just 40 listed companies, suggests at least A$3 billion ($2.50 billion) in earnings before interest tax and depreciation (EBITDA) could go up in smoke without compensation.

Australia's top steel-maker, BlueScope Steel, has the biggest exposure to carbon costs: without compensation, Goldman estimates about a third of its EBITDA is at risk. Not far behind are rival OneSteel, refiner Alumina and airline Qantas with 10 percent to 15 percent of profits at risk.

The analysis is based on 2006 earnings, the most recent period for Australian data under the Carbon Disclosure Project (http://www.cdproject.net/index.asp), and assumes a carbon price of just A$20 a tonne, 40 percent less than in Europe, which began trading carbon-emission permits in 2005.

GREEN VERSUS GREED

The government says it will cushion the blow by compensating big polluters which, if saddled with carbon-emission costs, would be overtaken by foreign rivals. Initially, the heaviest polluters would need permits for only a fraction of their emissions.
But Australian industry is fiercely lobbying government for more compensation before Canberra finalises its carbon scheme around year-end, with chief executives warning of collapses in investment and profits.

(For a graphic on Australia's carbon footprint, click on https://customers.reuters.com/d/graphics/AU_CRBNFT0908.gif)

Pressure on the government for subsidies has only increased as the Australian economy slows and a global recession beckons, raising the prospect of polluters making even fatter profits.

"That's exactly right," says Patrick Noble, senior investment specialist with Zurich Financial Services Group which has A$6.3 billion ($5.26 billion) under management in Australia.

"The key is to ensure that there is not a misallocation of resources," he said, citing Europe's experience in the first phase of its carbon-trading scheme when electricity generators made windfall profits by on-selling their free emission permits.

European generators not only pocketed the trading profits, they also used the carbon scheme to raise electricity prices.

"In Europe, generators reaped an estimated 9 billion pound ($16.51 billion) windfall gain through 100-percent free allocation whilst still passing on the cost to consumers," Australian investment bank Macquarie said in a recent report.

Australian generators, which burn coal to produce about 77 percent of the country's electricity, have been put in their own category of "strongly affected" businesses and are eligible for direct state assistance to help them adjust.

Generators are largely state-owned anyway, but listed coal-fired power businesses include Australia's AGL and a local unit of Britain's International Power.
MISSING IN ACTION

No matter whether the government takes a hard line or soft line on greenhouse gases, fund managers expect a carbon-reduction scheme to funnel money into clean-energy technologies.

The trouble is, says Zurich's Noble, there are few pure renewable-energy firms of any real size on the Australian stock market, and it will take a long time for some of the market's minnows to move to the centre of the investment radar.
There are a growing band of small and mid-cap stocks flying the green flag, from wind-power firms such as CBD Energy and Dyesol to a new breed of so-called "hot rock" companies such as Petratherm and KUTh Energy, which harness power from heat trapped inside the earth.

But Australia remains largely a destination for investment in old dirty business such as open-pit mining rather than new green technologies -- and that is not expected to change anytime soon.

(Editing by Sharon Lindores) ($1=1.198 Australian Dollar) ($1=.5450 Pound)

Emissions a headache for industry

Energy producers, their export profits already battered by the crown’s strength, are dismayed by the potential for losses of nearly 50 million Kč ($2.8 million) a year when the European Commission’s carbon credits program comes into effect in 2013.

Politicians and heads of both private and state-owned enterprises met last week at the International Industrial Fair in Brno, south Moravia, to discuss business growth and the domestic economy. Spokesmen for the Confederation of Industry showed their greatest discomfort in debate over the EU proposal on carbon credits and the dire impact the Czech currency has had on exporters’ profits.

At the crux of the debate was the European Commission’s plan for power producers, beginning in 2013, to purchase their carbon emissions rights (credits) through auction rather than through the current system, which distributes them as grants.

“In the current Czech industrial and business conditions, our companies could lose almost 50 million Kč on this matter,” said Josef Rozbořil, a board member of the Confederation of Industry and vice president of the Paper Industry Association. He added that the greatest impact will be on companies in the chemistry, steel, cement and metallurgy fields.

The concept of carbon crediting was developed under the Kyoto Protocol in response to concerns about the effects of industrial pollution on global climate change. The protocol entered into force Feb. 16, 2005, under the International Framework Convention on Climate Change with the goal of cutting the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from factories. As of this May, 182 countries have ratified the protocol, 36 of them from the European Union and the Balkans. Brazil, China and India belong to the 137 developing countries that ratified the protocol without emissions limits. The United States remains the only industrial country that has not ratified the treaty. Because the four largest polluters in the world — the United States, Russia, China and India — are not limiting their emissions, other countries have questioned the effectiveness of the treaty and the point of signing it at all.

“Europe, which wants to be the leader in decreasing carbon pollution, constitutes only 10 percent to 15 percent of world emissions. This ends up being so minor, one wonders where is the meaning of it all,” said Tomáš Bartovský, spokesman for Industry and Trade Ministry.The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), the largest multinational emissions trading mechanism in the world, monitors the amount of emissions produced by each member state. In 2006, the European Commission (EC) published a report on the emissions-trading directive that found member states have more than one competent authority to implement ETS.

In most countries, regional or local authorities issue greenhouse gas permits and monitor emissions.By 2020, the EC intends to reduce greenhouse gases 20 percent from 1990 levels through proposals and suggestions in its emission package. One way to achieve this has been a suggested change in credit trading.The current system of granting and trading credits will end in 2013, after which companies will buy them through auctions. The shift means significant added costs to companies, which may move production to countries not under EU directives, industry leaders say, both damaging EU economies and failing to reduce emissions.

“This affects not only the Czech Republic, but all countries. There is the danger that energy producers will move outside EU borders and globally there will be no reduction of carbon dioxide,” Jaroslav Míl, president of the Confederation of Industry, told the Czech News Agency.

The government advocates a slower approach to adopting the auction process that would ease companies into the added costs.“The objective is to enforce gradual entry into the credit auctions. To start with 10 percent purchase of credits, then 30, then 50 percent until we start buying them entirely,” explains Bartovský, who added that representatives from the Confederation of Industry are panicking a bit early since the free credit system does not expire for another five years.Member states are currently granted a certain amount of polluting credits, representing tons of CO2, which they can emit under the Emissions Trading Scheme.

The amount depends on the percentage of alternative energy sources a country uses and its key industrial sectors. Countries that do not exhaust their credits can trade them among each other. One credit is equal to one ton of CO2. Bartovský said the Czech Republic is not even getting a fair deal under the current system of credit grants.“The Czech Republic alone is allowed to emit 82 million tons of carbon a year and was promised 90 million tons. Before we start dealing with the new emissions package from the EC, we will attempt to gain those 8 tons we are missing,” said Bartovský.A study by the Confederation of Chemical Industry on factories with the highest amount of pollution found the potential for losses to be in the millions of crowns under credit auctioning. Under the system that would gradually increase the number of credits on auction, Czech companies could spend an additional 5.4 billion Kč initially each year, up to 11.4 billion Kč when credits on auction reach 50 percent. That number would twice exceed the profits of chemical companies.

“Consequently this means that enterprises significant to the Czech market will lose their competitiveness, or worse, some of them will be destined for extinction,” the study concluded.The EC that is currently working on proposals for Parliament will give its resolution for European credit auctioning next year, during the Czech Republic’s EU presidency.

“This will not influence anything. What might pass under the European Commission might not under Parliament. There is still a long way to go,” said Bartovský.

A Quest for an Energy-Efficient House

Preventing energy waste has become a household preoccupation in the era of nearly $4-a-gallon gas and rising prices for everything from airline tickets to milk. Whether motivated by environmental impulses or a desire to reduce utility bills, many Americans are researching ways to create a more energy-efficient home.

Statistics from a range of sources provide plenty of motivation. The U.S. Department of Energy's office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) estimates that draft reduction within a home can lower energy costs anywhere from 5% to 30% annually. Meanwhile, according to Department of Energy data provided by the U.S. Green Building Council, homes account for 21% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. And claiming a green home remodel makes for great neighborhood bragging rights.

Eager to lessen our carbon footprint and plan a responsible remodel, we undertook four so-called "energy audits" on our 1966 Seattle home, which has a finished 1,100-square-foot main floor and a partially finished 1,100-square-foot basement. We wanted to learn both how to improve the finished portion of our home and how best to add insulation and factor energy efficiency into an eventual basement remodel.

Marcellus Hall

Energy audits -- assessments of your home's energy efficiency -- run the gamut from free do-it-yourself audits offered online to paid inspections in which professionals with varying credentials spend up to three hours scrutinizing the home and determining what gestures will improve its energy efficiency and which fixes will reduce energy expenses. More sophisticated professional audits employ high-tech devices, including "blower door" fans, which lower indoor air pressure and enable technicians to measure draft levels, and infrared (thermographic) scanning, which can measure surface temperature variations and thus spot air leaks and poor insulation.

We started with two do-it-yourself energy audits offered free online, including the Home Energy Yardstick offered by Energy Star, the organization that promotes energy efficiency and endorses energy-efficient products, and Home Energy Saver, a free online audit from the Environmental Energy Technologies Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a Department of Energy lab operated by the University of California.

The free Home Energy Yardstick was disappointingly basic -- especially given how much data we had to provide from 12 months' worth of utility bills. However, it's not a bad starting point. The Yardstick calculated that we have a 1.7 efficiency score on a scale of 1 to 10 (oops). Tips for making changes were basic, such as using a programmable thermostat (already in use), energy-efficient bulbs (check), and Energy Star-endorsed appliances. Nice tips, but rather generic.

Next up, Home Energy Saver put us through more paces, asking us to answer 20 categories of questions ranging from insulation levels in attic walls to our furnace type. We had to guess at some answers, but, assuming we guessed right, the data provided were detailed: The program spat out nine pages worth of information on possible improvements, including the cost to implement each, and how much we would save in energy costs. For instance, insulating our basement to R-11 (insulation-speak for thickness levels -- the higher the better) would cost only $480 but could save us $115 per year in reduced bills. These were estimates, to be sure, but they helped us shape priorities.

The professional inspectors drilled deeper, looking more at the "building envelope" of our home and making more concrete recommendations. The Home Detective, a home-inspection company that also performs energy audits, sent an inspector who checked our exterior, climbed in our attic and perused our basement, but didn't bring out some of the higher-tech gear. The upshot? It suggested that we increase the "R" value of attic insulation to R-30 or more, insulate interior walls surrounding our non-insulated garage, and insulate the perimeter of the basement's ceiling -- an area known as the house's "rim joists." Minor fixes would include sealing ducts and any spot where pipes intersect with a floor or ceiling. The cost: $169.

Pinnacle Inspections used both a blower door test and infrared scanning to investigate how airtight our home is. The blower door test, which the technician ran twice to make sure results were solid, revealed that our home is relatively airtight for its age -- possibly due to our new windows. The technician seconded Home Detective's recommendation to insulate rim joists and walls adjacent to our garage, but also was able to use infrared scans to point out non-obvious sources of drafts on our main floor, all needing only minor fixes. These areas included the front door (which needs weather-stripping), switch plates (which need fireproof electrical insulation), window trim (which needs insulation), the attic trap door (which could use weather-stripping or other insulation), and a bathroom fan that is vented into the attic (and could be better insulated).

In the end, we felt that Pinnacle's high-tech energy audit was worth the $550 price tag, since it gave us short-term and low-cost repairs we could make now as well as guidance for future insulation projects. Now, we're ready to tackle that basement.

AUDIT/WEB SITE	TYPE AND COST	FINDINGS	COMMENT
The Home Detective, Seattle www.thehomedetective.net	Professional audit without blower door test or infrared scanning, $169	Suggested that we add blow-in attic insulation, insulate interior garage-facing walls, add insulation to the perimeter of basement ceiling (rim joists) and seal ducts with "mastic" goop.	Inspector gave us specifics to mention when contacting insulation contractors; lacking tech gear, inspector had to make some assumptions to deduce air leaks. More detailed than DIY but less certainty than full audit with scanning/blower door test.
Pinnacle Inspections, Bellingham, Wash. www.pinnacleinspection.com	Professional audit with blower door test and infrared scanning; $550	Advised us to add blow-in attic insulation, insulate interior garage-facing walls, and insulate perimeter of our basement ceiling (rim joists). Quick fixes: Add weather-stripping to exterior doors and attic trap door, insulate behind window trim and in gaps around master bathroom fan.	Inspector gave specifics on how to bolster efficiency and building tips on completing our remodel; he took extensive time to explain and share data gathered on air leaks in home.
Home Energy Saver http://hes.lbl.gov	Self-audit; free	Said we can halve energy spending from $1,250 to about $616 per year by making select investments in new appliances or working on better sealing the house. Best return on investment: Switching to natural gas dryer, replacing dishwasher, using compact fluorescent bulbs.	Homeowner must answer detailed questions about home systems. Results were specific and quantified "return on investment" for different efforts.
Energy Star Home Energy Yardstick www.energystar.gov	Self-audit; free	Told us we can cut energy costs by replacing five most-frequently used light bulbs with energy-efficient bulbs, using Energy Star-endorsed appliances, servicing heating system annually and using programmable thermostats, and sealing air leaks in home.	Information was very basic and mostly pointed to Energy Star programs, but was a good starting point. Report stated that our home energy use pollution equals that of 2.3 cars and that 17% of U.S. homes consume more energy than we do.

CARBON CREDITS: 713,000 CERs sold in São Paulo

SÃO PAULO, 9/25/08 - The Brazilian BM&FBovespa exchange held on Thursday a second auction of Carbon Emission Reduction Certificates (CERS) owned by the São Paulo's Mayor Office. 713,000 CERs wer auctioned.

Swiss company Mercuria Energy Trading bought the entire tranche for €19.20onne of carbon, to a total of €13.689 million (approximately R$37 million). The price is 35.21% lower than the €14.20 euroonne originally set. Ten institutions took part in the auction and eight made bids. (Newsroom/ DCooke - InvestNews)

Carbon goes on the auction block in Northeast

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hjn2nTv5FL2iEzbyIev3nuTHX-fAD93E08O82

NEW YORK (AP) — Greenhouse gases went on sale Thursday as 10 Northeastern states held the nation's first auction of pollution credits aimed at curbing global warming.

"It is time really to turn the tide on global warming," said New York Gov. David Paterson, who opened the auction by ringing the ceremonial bell at the New York Mercantile Exchange. "And we hope that we've done this today."

The program puts a price on carbon dioxide pollution, giving power plants a financial incentive to cut emissions.

Auction proceeds will go toward energy conservation and renewable energy programs in each of the 10 participating states: New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont.

The program aims to hold carbon dioxide emissions steady through 2014 and then gradually reduce them; it is widely viewed as a model for future programs nationally and around the globe.

"It's historic," said Lance Pierce, climate program director of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The carbon markets have arrived in the United States. And carbon markets, if designed correctly, hold the promise for development of cleaner energy ... and reductions in global warming pollution that benefit consumers, businesses and the environment, as well."

The Northeast effort, called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, limits the total amount of carbon that power plants in the 10 states can pump out of their smokestacks at the current level — 188 million tons.

Electric power generators must pay for allowances covering the amount of carbon they emit, and the initiative will provide a market-based auction and trading system in which the generators can buy, sell and trade the emissions allowances.

The initiative covers more than 200 fossil fuel power plants, requiring that the owners of those plants pay for the carbon dioxide they emit.

It will gradually reduce carbon emissions by reducing the emissions limit in a series of steps, until it is 10 percent below the current level a decade from now. The companies that don't reduce emissions can buy allowances from companies that have, thereby creating a financial incentive to reduce pollution because the more environmentally friendly plants won't have to buy as many credits and because they can sell any they don't need.

Dale Bryk, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, "This new energy plan is straightforward, highly cost-effective and creates a clean energy pathway for the rest of the country to follow. It is the shape of things to come."

Carbon dioxide trading already exists in Europe. Some carbon dioxide allowances also are being traded in the United States on a voluntary basis through the Chicago Climate Exchange. But the Northeast effort is the nation's first mandatory effort to limit carbon dioxide.

The initiative took five years to bear fruit. George Pataki, New York's governor at that time, brought together nine other governors five years ago to develop a regional strategy to limit carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

Other regional greenhouse gas coalitions, such as the Western Climate Initiative and the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Accord, are in earlier stages of development.

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, who joined Paterson at a news conference at the Mercantile Exchange, noted that both John McCain and Barack Obama support cap-and-trade programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Corzine said "there is building momentum" to enact federal legislation.

In response to critics who have argued that the limit is too high, Corzine said, "I think we need to make sure that the mechanics of the auction process and the system work." He said the limit could be lowered at subsequent auctions if the initiative's member states determine it's too high to have the intended effect.

Thursday's auction was run by World Energy, an operator of online green exchanges. Results will be released Monday, pending review by an independent monitor.

Twenty Things You Can Do to Conserve Energy

Conserving energy, by taking actions like insulating/weatherstripping your home and purchasing Energy Star certified (high efficiency) appliances, is usually the smartest, most economical and most potent environmental action you can take. Cleaner, greener energy supplies may provide the cleanest supplies of needed electricity, but minimizing the energy we need is still the first step to take before selecting the cleanest, greenest supplies.

Whenever you save energy, you not only save money, you also reduce the demand for such fossil fuels as coal, oil, and natural gas. Less burning of fossil fuels also means lower emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the primary contributor to global warming, and other pollutants.

You do not have to do without to achieve these savings. There is now an energy efficient alternative for almost every kind of appliance or light fixture. That means that consumers have a real choice and the power to change their energy use on a revolutionary scale.

The average American produces about 40,000 pounds of CO2 emissions per year. Together, we use nearly a million dollars worth of energy every minute, night and day, every day of the year. By exercising even a few of the following steps, you can cut your annual emissions by thousands of pounds and your energy bills by a significant amount!

Home improvements
Consider some of these energy-saving investments. They save money in the long run, and their CO2 savings can often be measured in tons per year. Energy savings usually have the best payback when made at the same time you are making other major home improvements.

1. Insulate your walls and ceilings. This can save 20 to 30 percent of home heating bills and reduce CO2 emissions by 140 to 2100 pounds per year. If you live in a colder climate, consider superinsulating. That can save 5.5 tons of CO2 per year for gas-heated homes, 8.8 tons per year for oil heat, or 23 tons per year for electric heat. (If you have electric heat, you might also consider switching to more efficient gas or oil.)

2. Modernize your windows. Replacing all your ordinary windows with argon filled, double-glazed windows saves 2.4 tons of CO2 per year for homes with gas heat, 3.9 tons of oil heat, and 9.8 tons for electric heat.

3. Plant shade trees and paint your house a light color if you live in a warm climate, or a dark color if you live in a cold climate. Reductions in energy use resulting from shade trees and appropriate painting can save up to 2.4 tons of CO2 emissions per year. (Each tree also directly absorbs about 25 pounds of CO2 from the air annually.)

4. Weatherize your home or apartment, using caulk and weather stripping to plug air leaks around doors and windows. Caulking costs less than $1 per window, and weather stripping is under $10 per door. These steps can save up to 1100 pounds of CO2 per year for a typical home. Ask your utility company for a home energy audit to find out where your home is poorly insulated or energy inefficient. This service may be provided free or at low cost. Make sure it includes a check of your furnace and air conditioning.

Home appliances

5. Turn your refrigerator down. Refrigerators account for about 20% of Household electricity use. Use a thermometer to set your refrigerator temperature as close to 37 degrees and your freezer as close to 3 degrees as possible. Make sure that its energy saver switch is turned on. Also, check the gaskets around your refrigerator/freezer doors to make sure they are clean and sealed tightly.

6. Set your clothes washer to the warm or cold water setting, not hot. Switching from hot to warm for two loads per week can save nearly 500 pounds of CO2 per year if you have an electric water heater, or 150 pounds for a gas heater.

7. Make sure your dishwasher is full when you run it and use the energy saving setting, if available, to allow the dishes to air dry. You can also turn off the drying cycle manually. Not using heat in the drying cycle can save 20 percent of your dishwasher's total electricity use.

8. Turn down your water heater thermostat. Thermostats are often set to 140 degrees F when 120 is usually fine. Each 10 degree reduction saves 600 pounds of CO2 per year for an electric water heater, or 440 pounds for a gas heater. If every household turned its water heater thermostat down 20 degrees, we could prevent more than 45 million tons of annual CO2 emissions - the same amount emitted by the entire nations of Kuwait or Libya.

9. Select the most energy-efficient models when you replace your old appliances. Look for the Energy Star Label - your assurance that the product saves energy and prevents pollution. Buy the product that is sized to your typical needs - not the biggest one available. Front loading washing machines will usually cut hot water use by 60 to 70% compared to typical machines. Replacing a typical 1973 refrigerator with a new energy-efficient model, saves 1.4 tons of CO2 per year. Investing in a solar water heater can save 4.9 tons of CO2 annually.


Home heating and cooling

10. Be careful not to overheat or overcool rooms. In the winter, set your thermostat at 68 degrees in daytime, and 55 degrees at night. In the summer, keep it at 78. Lowering your thermostat just two degrees during winter saves 6 percent of heating-related CO2 emissions. That's a reduction of 420 pounds of CO2 per year for a typical home.

11. Clean or replace air filters as recommended. Energy is lost when air conditioners and hot-air furnaces have to work harder to draw air through dirty filters. Cleaning a dirty air conditioner filter can save 5 percent of the energy used. That could save 175 pounds of CO2 per year.


Small investments that pay off

12. Buy energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs for your most-used lights. Although they cost more initially, they save money in the long run by using only 1/4 the energy of an ordinary incandescent bulb and lasting 8-12 times longer. They provide an equivalent amount of bright, attractive light. Only 10% of the energy consumed by a normal light bulb generates light. The rest just makes the bulb hot. If every American household replaced one of its standard light bulbs with an energy efficient compact fluorescent bulb, we would save the same amount of energy as a large nuclear power plant produces in one year. In a typical home, one compact fluorescent bulb can save 260 pounds of CO2 per year.

13. Wrap your water heater in an insulating jacket, which costs just $10 to $20. It can save 1100 lbs. of CO2 per year for an electric water heater, or 220 pounds for a gas heater.


14. Use less hot water by installing low-flow shower heads. They cost just $10 to $20 each, deliver an invigorating shower, and save 300 pounds of CO2 per year for electrically heated water, or 80 pounds for gas-heated water.



Getting around

15. Whenever possible, walk, bike, car pool, or use mass transit. Every gallon of gasoline you save avoids 22 pounds of CO2 emissions. If your car gets 25 miles per gallon, for example, and you reduce your annual driving from 12,000 to 10,000 miles, you'll save 1800 pounds of CO2.


16. When you next buy a car, choose one that gets good mileage. If your new car gets 40 miles per gallon instead of 25, and you drive 10,000 miles per year, you'll reduce your annual CO2 emissions by 3,300 pounds.


Reduce, reuse, recycle

17. Reduce the amount of waste you produce by buying minimally packaged goods, choosing reusable products over disposable ones, and recycling. For every pound of waste you eliminate or recycle, you save energy and reduce emissions of CO2 by at least 1 pound. Cutting down your garbage by half of one large trash bag per week saves at least 1100 pounds of CO2 per year. Making products with recycled materials, instead of from scratch with raw materials, uses 30 to 55% less for paper products, 33% less for glass, and a whopping 90% less for aluminum.


18. If your car has an air conditioner, make sure its coolant is recovered and recycled whenever you have it serviced. In the United States, leakage from auto air conditioners is the largest single source of emissions of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which damage the ozone layer as well as add to global warming. The CFCs from one auto air conditioner can add the equivalent of 4800 pounds of CO2 emissions per year.


Business and community

19. Work with your employer to implement these and other energy-efficiency and waste-reduction measures in your office or workplace. Form or join local citizens' groups and work with local government officials to see that these measures are taken in schools and public buildings.


20. Keep track of the environmental voting records of candidates for office. Stay abreast of environmental issues on both local and national levels, and write or call your elected officials to express your concerns about energy efficiency and global warming.

Kraft Turns Cheese Waste into Energy

GreenBiz.com, 18 September 2008 - Kraft is the latest company to turn part of its waste stream into a bigger bottom line.

Two cheese plants in New York will turn used whey into energy in a move that will supplant a third of the facilities' natural gas purchases. The company also will avoid the expense of hauling the waste away.

Digesters at the company's Lowville plant, which makes Philadelphia cream cheese, and a string cheese plant in Campbell turn the whey into biogas. It's part of the company's broader efforts to green operations in the areas of agriculture, packaging, energy, water, waste and transportation.

"Our facilities have previously used strategies such as concentrating the whey to reduce volume and finding outlets for it to be used as animal feed, or for fertilizer on environmentally approved farm fields," said Sustainability Vice President Steve Yucknut. "Both methods required transporting the whey off-site. Now, we're reducing the associated CO2 emissions that are part of transporting waste, discharging cleaner wastewater from our on-site treatment systems, and creating enough alternative energy to heat more than 2,600 homes in the Northeast."

The company's broader goals include reducing energy consumption and energy-related CO2 by 25 percent, and manufacturing plant waste by 15 percent.

Rather than sending it to landfills, companies from across several sectors are increasingly viewing waste as a commodity.

General Motors, for example, recently announced that half of its manufacturing plants worldwide would reach landfill-free status by 2010, with scrap metal sales topping $1 billion.

McDonald's successfully transformed waste into electricity earlier this year at several United Kingdom restaurants, while Chrysler is converting used paint solids from two St. Louis assembly plants into electricity. Heinz also is working on a program to transform used potato peels into energy.

New Options for Home Wind Power

Utility-scale windpower is an important and growing part of the US energy portfolio. Farms ranging in size from dozens to hundreds of turbines can produce in excess of 60 megawatts of power. Plans for gigawatts of wind power are being proposed all over the globe, and new wind farms are regularly being proposed that outstrip one another to be the largest in their respective locations, or in the world. At the far end of the scale, the largest size wind turbines have a rotor diameter of 126 meters (413 feet), and are estimated to be capable of producing 20,000,000 kilowatt hours of electricity annually (enough to power as many as 5000 European homes). Since the power generated by a turbine increases exponentially as it gets larger, new turbines will continue to grow in size.

But small-scale turbines are perhaps a more exciting realm of development. The standard, propeller-style turbine is well established, and there are many suppliers for this kind of generator in a range of sizes. In 2007, Home Power Magazine had a roundup of more than a dozen small wind turbines ranging from 8 feet to 56 feet in diameter (the latter of which is far larger than even a large, inefficient household would need for their power requirements). Green Building Elements had a review of this article last year.

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines

In theory, vertical-axis wind turbines are thought to be better suited for urban locations, where winds are more swirling and less consistently directional. With a rotor that spins around an upright axis, wind coming from any direction can turn the blades and provide power. On the downside, the power produced by a VAWT is less efficient because, during part of its rotation, the rotor is moving against the wind.

Vertical-axis turbines are also generally quieter than horizontal, propeller style turbines. Their cylindrical form also lets them go into places with less space available, which also makes them well suited for urban uses. Another benefit of vertical turbines is that they generally appear more solid, which makes them less of a hazard to birds and bats.

The Windspire is one newer VAWT that is being aimed at the home-power market. It is a very narrow cylinder only 2 feet (61 cm) wide, but 30 feet (9.1 meters) tall. Another VAWT, the HelixWind presents an even more solid-looking presence, with scoop-like solid rotors in a helical configuration. The Windspire rotor is wider and shorter - 4 feet x 8.7 feet (1.2 x 2.7 meters) than the Windspire. Helix Wind also has a taller version with twice the rated capacity.

Loopwing and Energy Ball

More than a year ago, we first learned about the Loopwing, an unusual turbine from Japan that offered extremely quiet operation and redundant safety systems to prevent overspeed in high winds. The noise reduction is due to the configuration of the blades, which return to the shaft, rather than having exposed tips. This eliminates the vortices that are produced by the tip of the blade moving through the air which is the source of much of the noise created by a turbine.

Another turbine has recently been introduced with some similar characteristics. The Energy Ball looks like a variant on the Loopwing concept, though with more blades. However, the Energy Ball is a small turbine only slightly more than one meter in diameter, with a rated power of only 100 watts (0.2 kW). Even in a very windy location, this small turbine is unlikely to do much on its own to reduce your energy bills because of its small level of output.

Other Small Turbines

Swift makes a turbine that is much like an ordinary horizontal-axis turbine, but unlike other propeller style turbines, though, its five blades are connected together with a ring. This makes it a hybrid between a propeller turbine, and a turbine like the Loopwing or the Energy Ball. The ring helps to cut down on noise, most of which comes from blade tips traveling through the air, not unlike the Loopwing or the Energy Ball.

AeroVironment has another turbine designed for direct mounting on a building parapet. The AVX1000 is designed for commercial use only. Aerovironment’s turbines can be installed with a decorative canopy that may also lessen the likelihood of bird impacts.

Both the Swift and the AeroVironment turbines are displayed in building parapet installations where they are only a short distance above a building roof. They may be taking some advantage of the increase in wind speed that occurs at a building roof. But when the wind is blowing parallel to the face of the building, these turbines are likely to be fairly ineffective.

Summary

* AeroVironment AVX1000 - 5.5 ft (1.7 m) dia - rated power 1.0 kW (@ 13.4 m/s 30mph)
* Energy Ball - 3.6 ft (1.1m) dia - rated power 0.1 kW (max 0.5 kW @17 m/s)
* HelixWind S322 - 1.21m x 2.65m (4 ft x 8.66 ft) - rated power 1.88 kW
* Loopwing - 9.4 ft (2.85 m) dia - rated power 2 kW (@12.8 m/s)
* Swift - 7 ft (2.1 m) dia - rated power 1.5 kW (@ 14m/s 31mph)
* Windspire - 0.6 x 6.1m (2 ft x 20 ft) - rated power 1.2 kW (@ 11.2 m/s 25mph)

Comparing Turbines

Evaluating and comparing wind turbines is still a difficult task. Different manufacturers list information about their turbines differently, so straightforward comparisons between units can be difficult. Some manufacturers list the output based on the maximum output, which is typically far in excess of the average wind speed a site is likely to experience.

Furthermore, how a turbine performs at different wind speeds also affects its output. Some manufacturers list an annual power output (in kilowatt hours, just like electric service is typically billed) but that is based on an estimated average annual wind speed, which may not be the same as the average wind speed a potential user’s site may experience.

Another factor is the “cut in speed”� of a particular turbine, which is the wind speed at which the turbine starts turning. Some minimal amount of power may be produced at this low speed, but it is only a tiny fraction of the turbine’s rated speed. A turbine with an especially low cut in speed will start turning in a lighter breeze, but that doesn’t mean it is going to be producing much power at those wind speeds.

Wind power has not been quite as readily accepted for home power generation for several reasons. First of all, wind power has greater requirements for open space and access to wind for efficient operation. By comparison, solar is much easier to accommodate, especially on a small site. Solar is also far less obtrusive than wind power. Solar panels located on a low slope roof or in a back yard are often almost invisible to passers-by, while wind turbines need to stick up into the air where they are able to catch the wind. Some people find this objectionable, which can sometimes make it more difficult to obtain the necessary permits for the installation of a wind turbine. Any system with moving parts is more prone to breakdown and trouble than one that is solid state, which also contributes to wind power being less desirable for homeowners who do not also want to be turbine mechanics. Wind turbines also can produce noise and vibration. This, too can be objectionable to neighbors, as well as making it less desirable to mount the unit directly on a building. However, there are cities where zoning laws are being changed to allow for wind turbines to be installed with fewer regulatory hurdles.

Home wind power is still a small niche compared with solar. Far fewer homes are suitable for personal wind turbines than homes that can accommodate solar panels. But wind is part of the renewable energy mix, and there certainly are many homes where is is a viable option. For those, the range of options is growing.

Firms warned about climate change

Companies that fail to tackle climate change could lower the value of their businesses, a report by the UK's Carbon Trust suggests.

The report said firms, together are worth £3.8 trillion ($7 trillion) globally, could boost market value by taking steps to tackle emissions.

The research covered six sectors of the economy including car manufacturing, brewing and consumer electronics.

Automotive firms stood to gain the most by adopting greener strategies.

But the car sector also risked the greatest loss by failing to take onboard changes needed to meet ambitious emission targets in the coming years.

The Carbon Trust said auto firms could reap great benefits from technological advances in the field of hybrid and electric cars.

'Ambitious targets'

Bruce Duguid, head of investor engagement at the Carbon Trust, said changes to the Kyoto protocol due next year will force many companies to take the climate change more seriously.

"There will be some ambitious targets and changes that will have to take place across industry."

"Climate change could start the next industrial revolution...its both an opportunity and a threat," he added.

The survey looked at six industries; aluminium manufacturing, automotive, oil and gas production and exploration, oil and gas refining, consumer electronics, building materials and brewing.

Tom Delay, chief executive of the Carbon Trust, said investors and industry should wake up to this "trillion dollar wake up call".

"The financial risks of inaction are just too vast to ignore," he added.

Green energy projects face heightened scrutiny as U.S. cleans up credit mess

http://www.enn.com/business/article/38245

Greenwire, 19 September 2008 - The crisis roiling Wall Street is threatening to choke financing for green energy projects.

Venture capitalists and private equity firms could fill the void as traditional financing options dry up. Indeed, private equity fund managers say the current turmoil could turn into a net positive for them: As debt markets turn their backs on green energy companies, many will look to venture capital and private equity to get backing for new projects or expansions.

But the new, highly risk-averse environment will make it that much more difficult for companies to convince investors to put money behind renewables. While the sector is still very popular, the chief worry among money managers is protecting existing portfolios and guaranteeing that any new investments will net them strong, long-term returns.

"It could be a tremendous benefit," said Greg Horn, an advisory professional with Pegasus Capital Advisors. "For some of them the economics work, and some don't. So we're able to be selective as we always are, but there's a larger universe to choose from."

If weak market conditions persist, only the strongest of proposals will survive. Many private equity fund managers say that they favor green energy projects that can stand on their own, without government help, in a very jittery environment.

That sentiment bodes ill for many wind, solar and biofuel projects. Many of them owe their existence to the federal tax credits and subsidies that Congress is now debating. While investors are more than happy to let projects earn a return thanks to tax incentives, the difficult investment climate means that cleantech companies will have to prove that their ventures can survive without them.

The tax incentives are still a very important part of the equation. The industry has warned that tens of thousands of "green jobs" are at stake if the credits are not extended.

But the gloomy investment climate suggests that clean energy needs a quick rebound in credit markets more than it needs lawmakers to renew tax credits if it is to avoid a desert of financing options for the rest of 2008 and 2009.

And institutions that are willing and able to invest can afford to be choosy.

"There are economically viable renewable energy projects that don't rely on those things," Horn said. "The general level of scrutiny is going to stay higher for a while."

Banking landscape shifts

U.S. finance has undergone a continental shift in the past few days.

The changes have come so suddenly and on such a scale that the future of existing holdings in both fossil-fuel energy and cleantech remains up in the air.

On Monday, Bank of America Corp. agreed to buy Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc., and Barclays PLC petitioned a New York bankruptcy court to acquire Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s North American investment banking and capital markets businesses.

The fire sales provided a short-term shock to the system. Skittish investors, some of whom transferred their money to safer Treasury bills and gold, sent the Dow Jones industrial average and other indexes tumbling through most of the week. But it is not clear whether the consolidation will create stronger banks with greater capacity to invest in energy projects over the long term.

The Merrill acquisition would make Bank of America the world's top securities brokerage, with more than 20,000 advisers and $2.5 billion in client assets. The deal, expected to close early next year, could also give Bank of America a greater foothold in energy equity and natural resource markets.

Merrill holds a 50 percent stake in BlackRock Inc., which as of the end of June reported more than $1.4 trillion in assets under management, including an energy equity vehicle and a natural resources hedge fund. Merrill also has established U.S. and European gas- and power-trading operations and real assets.

Ernesto Anguilla, a Bank of America spokesman, declined to say whether his bank would keep or sell any of the Merrill energy assets.

"It's really early in the process, and decisions like that haven't been made yet," Anguilla said.

Barclays on Tuesday said it would acquire Lehman's North American investment banking and capital markets operations and supporting infrastructure for $1.75 billion. The deal, subject to approval by a bankruptcy court and regulators, includes trading assets valued at $72 billion and liabilities valued at $68 billion. The deal also includes Lehman's New York head office and data centers in New Jersey.

In a statement, Barclays said the acquisition of Lehman's equity capital markets franchises would strengthen the London-based bank's investment banking products. Barclays also said Lehman's brokerage and cash equity capabilities would strengthen its hedge fund franchise.

"The acquisition happened extraordinarily quickly," said Leigh Bruce, a Barclays spokesman. "We're still trying to get a sense of how big Lehman is."

And while it wasn't the largest player in the field, Lehman is known for its sizable holdings in renewable energy. The company had bought up big positions in solar and wind companies, including stakes in JA Solar, Evergreen Solar and Clipper Windpower. Merrill Lynch was also bullish on the future of renewables.

Some of these holdings may soon be on the auction block. Both venture capital and private equity firms have reported receiving calls from Lehman and Merrill employees inquiring about their relative interest in buying up stakes. No firm offers have been made, but insiders believe the two former giants are floating trial balloons to see how easily they could offload these assets to raise capital or pay off creditors if needed.

The banking landscape may still be shifting.

Yesterday, Wachovia Corp. and Morgan Stanley were reportedly discussing a merger, and Washington Mutual Inc. was prepping itself for sale. If a Morgan Stanley-Wachovia merger were to go through, that would leave Goldman Sachs as the sole surviving investment bank on Wall Street -- down from five.

Want cash? Get in line

The financial industry is still coming to terms with the seismic changes, but most risky investments will be falling by the wayside for some time. The five big investment banks -- institutions that take no deposits -- have long been the dominant players on the Street. Their willingness to take on greater risk often reaped them huge rewards.

Now, they have been swept aside by the likes of Bank of America and Barclays, more conservative and strictly regulated lending institutions that keep a tighter lid on their investment-banking arms. Renewable energy companies will now have to contend with them to get backing for future projects.

But they may have to wait some time for the privilege. Lending has all but frozen in the markets. What loans that are available come with such high interest rates that they make project financing unviable.

And the stock market slide is making it difficult to raise capital by selling shares. Cleantech stocks fell sharply this week with the rest of the market, though they are now rallying as the traders anticipate government intervention. The WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation Index (NEX), a renewable stock tracking instrument run by New Energy Finance, was up by about 4 percent at press time today.

"They do represent somewhat riskier bets for investors, so it's not uncommon for our index ... to show a little bit more volatility than the market as a whole," said Ethan Zindler of New Energy Finance. "Some of the companies that had ties to Lehman took a particular hit."

Venture capital and private equity are some of the few remaining options they can turn to. These nontraditional sources of finance have been a big part of renewable energy's growth in the United States in recent years, and they are expected to stay active.

But the tumultuous markets mean that venture capital and private equity funds will more carefully scrutinize clean energy. The shaky business footing of many biofuels and fuel-cell ventures means these sectors are set to lose in the competition for new money, fund managers say. Energy efficiency technologies and biomass are increasingly coming into favor.

Even traditionally risk-friendly venture capitalists are expected to focus more on shoring up their existing portfolios in the short term before committing to new projects. The growing skittishness from both finance categories will be a challenge for new clean energy ventures for some time.

"Because this is a capital-intensive business, we tend to move more toward the more proven, established technologies, and that does present a little bit of a chasm between some of the new renewables that are emerging today and the capital needs that go into them," said Rahul Advani, a vice president at Energy Capital Partners.

'An uncomfortable several quarters'

Nearly everyone is assuming weak conditions moving forward.

The American Bankers Association's Economic Advisory Committee predicted yesterday that the U.S. economy will slip into a recession by the end of the year. Peter Hooper, the ABA committee's chairman, said in a conference call that recessionary catalysts include weak consumer confidence, weak U.S. industrial production, and slower growth in exports to slumping European and Asian economies.

"It is going to be an uncomfortable several quarters to go from a macroeconomic standpoint," said Hooper, who is also Deutsche Bank AG's chief economist.

Yet another key factor that could push the economy into a recession is tightening of lending conditions in the banking sector, Hooper said.

"What we are facing is a housing market continuing to decline, home prices still falling, great uncertainty still about the valuation of assets in certain parts of the banking sector as investors require more capital," Hooper added.

The ABA economists suggested that the Federal Reserve may be forced to cut interest rates further.

"If we're headed into a recession, certainly there'd be greater pressure in that direction," Hooper said.

Earlier in the day, the Fed and other central banks made almost $200 billion available to ease the liquidity problem.

The Federal Open Market Committee authorized a $180 billion expansion of its temporary reciprocal currency arrangements -- also known as swap lines -- to allow banks to borrow more dollars in money markets at lower rates. The Bank of Japan, Bank of Canada and Bank of England also authorized new swap facilities through Jan. 30, 2009.

President Bush today called the coordinated efforts "necessary and important."

"The markets are adjusting to them," Bush added. "Our financial markets continue to deal with serious challenges."

In morning trading, the Dow Jones industrial average soared more than 377 points, or 3.4 percent, from its opening mark. Both the Nasdaq and the S&P 500 indexes were up about 3 percent.

The rally followed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's ban today on short-selling 799 financial stocks. The ban is effective through Oct. 2, but it could be extended for up to 30 days, SEC officials said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the Treasury Department today established a temporary guarantee program for the U.S. money-market mutual fund industry. For the next year, the agency will insure the holdings of a publicly offered eligible money-market mutual fund -- both retail and institutional -- that pays a fee to participate in the program.

Concerns about the net asset value of money-market funds falling below $1 per share spurred the move, agency officials said. The program will be financed with up to $50 billion from the Treasury's Exchange Stabilization Fund, which was established in 1934.

In a speech today, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said U.S. policymakers and regulators must take further action to comprehensively address what he called the "underlying weakness" in the financial system -- illiquid mortgage assets that have lost value.

"These illiquid assets are choking off the flow of credit that is so vitally important to our economy," Paulson said. "When the financial system works as it should, money and capital flow to and from households and businesses."

Paulson vowed to spend the weekend working with members of Congress to examine legislative approaches to alleviate the pressure of bad loans on the financial system.

Capitol Hill connection

The U.S. unemployment rate rose to 6.1 percent in August, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' latest report. The unemployment rate is up 1.4 percent over the past year, with most of the increase occurring during the past four months.

Indeed, the ABA committee said the lack of credit is already suppressing consumer spending by about half of a percentage point.

"The United States is in an economic tailspin," said Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), whose Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming hosted a hearing yesterday entitled "The Green Road to Economic Recovery."

Markey and other Capitol Hill Democrats are touting an energy bill the House passed this week as an economic elixir.

The legislation, H.R. 6899, relaxes coastal leasing bans to allow drilling farther than 100 miles from the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and within 50 to 100 miles if coastal states agree to it. The bill also rolls back roughly $18 billion in oil industry tax breaks to fund renewable energy and conservation programs, such as tax credits for wind and solar projects, efficient homes and plug-in electric cars.

"These measures are a downpayment on building America's future economy, the critical first steps toward economic recovery," Markey said.

Not everyone sees it that way.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the committee's top Republican, said Congress should allow actions by the Treasury and Fed to take effect before putting more taxpayer dollars at risk.

He charged that the legislation relies on higher taxes as a means to pay for government-supported job programs.

"The question is whether a program to promote green jobs is the tonic our ailing economy needs," Sensenbrenner said.

The bill faces major hurdles. The White House has threatened a veto over repeal of oil industry tax breaks, a national renewable electricity mandate and other provisions.

Renewable energy investors are certainly hoping that Capitol Hill and the White House come to an agreement. The resumption of tax credits would at least bring some stability to a market climate dominated by fear and uncertainty.

Most are still upbeat about the long-term prospects for renewables. Growing electricity demand and tighter fossil fuel supplies ensure a robust role for solar, wind and biomass in future grid development, analysts say.

But in the near term, market experts are saying they expect almost all sectors of the economy to lose out, including the green economy.

"Credit is tightening everywhere," Michael Moran, vice president for global investment research at Goldman Sachs, said at a green-business panel discussion yesterday. "Is it a risk to the financing of green energy? Sure. Is it a risk for the financing of almost everything? You bet."

Burnham reported from Washington.

Burying CO2 could pay for itself by 2030: report

http://www.enn.com/business/article/38239

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Trapping and burying carbon dioxide from power plants could become viable without public funding by 2030, helping nations reduce their dependence on energy imports and meet climate goals, a report said on Monday.

But that could happen only if obstacles to the technology are removed and polluters are forced to pay more to emit CO2 in cap and trade schemes, it added.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is seen by industry as a potential silver bullet to curb emissions from coal-fired power plants, which are multiplying rapidly in India and China, threatening to heat the atmosphere to dangerous levels.

Companies are working on cutting-edge technology to trap CO2 and pump it into empty gas fields and deep underground caverns, but utilities are reluctant to use the process as it adds about 1 billion euros ($1.42 billion) to the cost of each power plant.

The European Union wants up to 12 demonstration plants by 2015 in the hope they will find ways of cutting future costs. EU sources say the bloc is close to agreeing billions of euros of public funding to kick-start the pilot projects.

Once it has built momentum and been properly developed, the cost of burying CO2 could fall to 30-45 euros per tonne by 2030, said the report by consultancy McKinsey and Co.

"Costs at these levels would make CCS installations economically self-sustaining at a carbon price of 30-48 euros per tonne," it added, referring to the price of permits to emit CO2 under the EU's flagship Emission Trading Scheme (ETS).

The ETS caps how much CO2 industries may emit and establishes a system for trading in emissions permits.

The price of carbon being traded in the scheme on Monday was around 25 euros, for December delivery, but the report cited five studies by financial institutions that forecast prices would rise significantly by 2030.

"On the one hand, (CCS) could provide greater energy security by making the burning of Europe's abundant coal more environmentally acceptable, and so reducing the dependency on imported natural gas," the report said.

"On the other, it could potentially improve the environmental impact of new energy forms such as electric cars and hydrogen, which could be produced with CCS-based electricity," it added.

(Reporting by Pete Harrison)

Top 10 ways to reduce your CO2 emissions footprint

http://bravenewclimate.com/2008/08/29/top-10-ways-to-reduce-your-co2-emissions-footprint/


Solving climate change is a huge international challenge. Only a concerted global effort, involving the governments of all nations, will be enough to avert dangerous consequences. But that said, the individual actions of everyday people are still crucial. Large and complex issues, like climate change, are usually best tackled by breaking down the problem into manageable bits.

For carbon emissions, this means reducing the CO2 contribution of each and every one of the six and a half billion people on the planet. But what can you, as an individual person or family, do that will most make a difference to the big picture? Here are my top ten action items, which are both simple to achieve and have a real effect. They are ranked by how much impact they make to ‘kicking the CO2 habit’.

1. Make climate-conscious political decisions. Some commentators said that the 2007 Australian Federal election was the first to be strongly influenced by the stance made by competing political parties on climate change. Regardless of how true this may be, it is obvious that the strong and urgent action needed to combat climate change will require a healthy dose of political will, and the courage to make tough choices. This willpower comes from voters, who consistently demand real action and can see through ‘greenwashing’ (pretend ‘solutions’ and half-measures that do not do the job). Climate change should be a totally non-partisan issue since it affects all people and all countries. If climate change is not perceived by both sides of politics as a ‘core issue’, it will inevitably be marginalised by apparently more immediate concerns. So assess policies clearly, and make your vote count towards real climate solutions - each and every election. This is the only way a global solution can be put in place, in time.

2. Eat less red meat. Traditional red meat comes from ruminant livestock such as cattle and sheep. These animals produce large amounts of methane, which is a greenhouse gas that packs 72 times the punch of CO2 over a 20 year period. Other types of meat, such as chicken, pork or kangaroo, produce far less emissions. At average levels of consumption, a family’s emissions from beef would easily outweigh the construction and running costs of a large 4WD vehicle, in less than 5 years. There is no need to cut out red meat entirely, but fewer steaks and snags mean far less CO2.

3. Purchase “green electricity“. The future of energy clearly likes in renewable sources such as solar, wind and wave power and ‘hot rocks’. Even without climate change, there are limits to available oil, natural gas and coal. ‘Green power’ is electricity that comes from these technologies, but is delivered to you in the same way as ‘dirty power’ from fossil-fuel burning. That is, down your power lines. You can buy enough to replace your entire energy usage, or some fraction (I recommend going for 100%; the cost is a few more cents per kilowatt hour of electricity). Most energy suppliers now offer this service and will purchase energy from green sources that is equivalent to what you use. As more people take up this scheme, it will drive ever greater investment in these technologies, reduce cost of delivery, and so further hasten the pace of update. It’s a feedback, and you can be the catalyst of change. [Note some problems with GreenPower here]

4. Make your home and household energy efficient. We all unthinkingly leave lights on when we are not in the room, or switch off the TV by the remote instead of at the wall, fire up the heater on when we could put on an extra layer of clothing, or turn on the air conditioner when we could open the window and turn on a fan. It’s force of habit - a bad habit we can break, with just a little thought. Behaviour change lies at the heart of most individual actions on reducing our individual carbon footprint. By being sensible about your use household energy use, and making sure your house is well insulated, you can make a huge dent in your CO2 emissions. Oh, and it will save you plenty money that you no longer spend on wasted energy, year in, year out.

5. Buy energy and water efficient appliances. Aside from behavioural change, we can invest in more sensible technologies that help us in our day to day lives. When buying new electronic appliances, air conditioners or washing machines, look at their energy and water usage. The more energy efficient they are, the more they’ll save you in the long run, and the lower their CO2 impact will be. In most cases the ‘payback period’ - the difference between the initial cost of a high versus low efficiency appliance and the long-term savings in lower electricity and water bills, is only a matter of a few months to a few years. After that, you are laughing all the way to the bank, and doing something meaningful to combat climate change at the same time.

6. Walk, cycle or take public transport. Cars are not only a slow way to get to work when you’re faced with a city gridlock - they are also a huge user of oil (which is running out globally) and cost the tax payer heft amounts in road building and maintenance. Getting people from A to B using trains, buses, bikes and on foot is much more greenhouse friendly, and often considerably cheaper. The main problem right now with public transport is that because not enough people use it, there is not enough investment by government to improve the quality of service and capacity to support large volumes of commuters. It might seem like a Catch-22, but some cities have solved the dilemma and now move most of their people about on public transport. So start patronising your public transport network, and push governments at all levels for some decent bicycle and walking trails instead of building more and more roads for cars and worrying incessantly about fuel costs. The transition to a new transport system has to start with each and every one of us.

7. Recycle, re-use and avoid useless purchases. We throw too much away and still re-cycle too little of what we must discard. Large amounts of energy and water go into producing endless amounts of ‘stuff’, much of which we don’t really need or end up using. So be sure to use your local recycling service, for plastics, metals and paper. Try to get appliances and tools fixed rather than replaced - the carbon footprint of fixing things is far lower than making them from scratch. Avoid the temptation to buy useless trinkets and knick-knacks, just because it feels good to accumulate things. There are limits to everything, including, most importantly, the ability of the planet to supply people with an ever burgeoning supply of raw materials. Think sustainability.

8. Telecommute and teleconference. Do you really need to fight your way through traffic each and every day, just to sit at your office desk and work on your computer? Do you need to fly to a business meeting in another capital city in order to talk to your colleagues? Or canyou think inventively and make best use of the benefits of the Internet to do some of this remotely? Telecommuting can be an effective way of doing ‘paperwork’ in your home office and more and more employers are seeing the benefits of this and embracing the concept. Teleconferences mean less wasted aeroplane trips, which create a huge CO2 burden. It can’t always be done, but even a few less trips, here and there, add up to make a big difference. As with the other 10 points, it is about making smart and informed choices when you have options.

9. Buy local produce. Food miles are now firmly part of the new carbon lingo. This is a way of expressing how far an item of food has travelled before it reaches your dinner table, and therefore how much CO2 has been emitted during freighting. A better concept is probably ‘embodied energy’, which takes account of all the carbon, water and energy that goes into producing any food or manufactured item. Either way, a good rule of thumb is that if you buy something that has been produced locally, it will usually have a lower CO2 tag attached to it. Your local fresh food market is a good place to start for your food shopping. Buying Australian-made manufactured and food products is another carbon-friendly option. Both will make a difference to your climate change impact, and help the local economy. Another win-win choice.

10. Offset what you can’t save. Avoiding the release of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, in the ways described above, is by far the best and most direct way or reducing our climate change impact. Yet some emissions are unavoidable. For those, offsetting is a worthwhile option. This is done by purchasing ‘carbon credits’ from accredited companies which offer this service, who will then invest those dollars in (for instance) renewable energy projects or planting trees. Carbon offsets should definitely not be seen as the solution, or as a relatively pain-free way to expel your carbon guilt. There is nowhere near enough offsetting potential in the world for this to be an option for most of the world’s population. But in conjunction with other methods of kicking the CO2 habit, offsets can help make a difference and allow you to pay a small penance.

Carbon Credits open window of opportunities - Neha Pahuja

http://machinist.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1653&Itemid=2 Written by Viswanath

Saturday, 20 September 2008

Jaipur: CII organised a Workshop on Carbon Credits yesterday "Showing the historical emission of carbon from the period 1850 " 2000, US leads with 30%, the EU-25 with 27.2%, China with 7.3% and India accounts for only 2%. Thus in the multilateral negotiations on climate change, India strongly advocates equity", said Mr Jaimni Uberoi, Convenor CII Panel on Infrastructure at Workshop on Carbon Credits organised by CII in Jaipur today. “Carbon Credits open window of opportunities”, said Ms Neha Pahuja, Consultant " Carbon Advisory Business at Emergent Ventures, India. Ms Pahuja emphasised on the vital importance of the subject as it entails fiscal incentives for the project proponents and also fulfils the societal responsibility of clean development. Ms Pahuja informed that Carbon credits are the key component of national and international emissions trading schemes. They provide a way to reduce greenhouse effect emissions on an industrial scale by capping total annual emissions and letting the market assign a monetary value to any shortfall through trading. Credits can be exchanged between businesses or bought and sold in international markets at the prevailing market price. Credits can be used to finance carbon reduction schemes between trading partners and around the world. Carbon credits as a concept was discussed and formalized in the Kyoto Protocol. In December 1997, the Third Conference of Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted the Kyoto Protocol. The protocol requires developed countries and developing to limit their Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions to individual targets. The areas covered under the workshop were Introduction to Climate Change and its effects; Global Measures and Mechanisms to Combat Climate Change; Concept of Clean Development Mechanism; Life Cycle of a CDM project; Eligibility Criteria for a CDM project and components of a CDM project; Industry-wise opportunities in CDM; Carbon Trading and Market and Voluntary Carbon Market. The workshop generated awareness about the Clean Development Mechanism (Carbon Credits) and enabled the participants to identify the in house projects with the potential to generate Carbon Credits. Earlier speaking at the Workshop, Mr Dinakar Murthy Krishna, Vice President & Plant Head, Bosch Ltd, Jaipur emphasised on the need to align growth of businesses with environment and pointed towards the importance of concept of carbon credits in this regard. Mr Jaimni Uberoi, Convenor, CII Panel on Infrastructure welcomed the participants and reaffirmed CII's commitment on sustainable clean development. Mr Uberoi informed that last year global carbon credit trading was estimated at $5 billion, with India's contribution at around $1 billion. India is one of the countries that have 'credits' for emitting less carbon. India and China have surplus credit to offer to countries that have a deficit. India has generated some 30 million carbon credits and has roughly another 140 million to push into the world market. Waste disposal units, plantation companies, chemical plants and municipal corporations can sell the carbon credits and make money. Around 50 participants from various organisations viz Vaishali Metals Pvt Ltd; Hindustan Zinc Ltd; Mahindra World City (Jaipur) Pvt Ltd; Jaipur Rugs Company Pvt Ltd; Mayur Uniquoters Ltd; Rajendra Exim Pvt Ltd; Birla Cement Works; Bosch Ltd; Sangam India Ltd; PDCOR Limited; National Engineering Industries Ltd; Jagjanani Textile Ltd; Bajrang Wire Products (I) Pvt Ltd; Associated Soapstone Dist. Co Pvt Ltd; Shree Cement Ltd; Unipatch Rubber Limited; Autolite (India) Ltd; Enercon India Ltd; Samtel Glass Ltd; Uma Polymers Ltd; Alcobex Metals Ltd; etc were benefitted from the programme.

Economic slowdown won't ease carbon emissions

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/7811710

By Gerard Wynn

LONDON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - Tumbling factory output following an economic slowdown will not be enough to curb rising industrial carbon emissions in Europe, analysts said on Friday.

That means no bright lining to a credit crisis which at the same time has pressured political commitment to fighting climate change.

And in the medium term, a combination of higher-priced debt plus investor nervousness could cut the supply of renewable energy projects in both developed and developing countries, potentially denting the response to global warming.

Carbon dioxide, the commonest greenhouse gas, is produced from burning fossil fuels to run industry. But power plants also are a big source of emissions and European demand is up this year largely because of a very mild winter in 2007.

"Electricity demand is up and I think that will outweigh the lower industrial production," UBS analyst Per Lekander said.

Carbon emissions from large installations would be 1 or 2 percent lower than expected as a result of the slowdown, but still higher than last year because of higher power demand, Lekander added.

"You'd expect a stabilisation, rather than rises, in industrial sector output and emissions over the next few years. The broader economic picture is still quite gloomy," said Merrill Lynch's global head of carbon emissions Abyd Karmali.

Industrial output in the Euro zone fell in July. Cement is a major source of carbon emissions, and the Spanish construction boom stalled earlier this year.

Pockets of strength remain -- European Union crude steel production rose 1.8 percent last month, year on year, the International Iron and Steel Institute (IISI) said.

COMMITTED?

Rising carbon emissions imply continuing demand for permits in the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS). The scheme distributes carbon allowances among industry and power generators, and accounts for about half the EU's emissions.

A surplus of such allowances would trigger a carbon price collapse, but there was no prospect of that.

"I would still expect a deficit of at least 100 million tonnes of EU allowances this year," Deutsche Bank carbon analyst Mark Lewis said.

The scheme is an example of climate policies which set legally binding targets, to underpin the climate fight and give comfort to investors.

But the credit crisis could weaken that commitment. For example, horsetrading among EU lawmakers, industry and governments over agreement on the EU's 2020 climate targets has coincided with the flaring up of financial turmoil.

An influential EU committee of lawmakers wants to ease carbon caps in the 27-nation bloc by allowing nations to pay developing countries to make emissions cuts, through carbon offsetting, a document seen by Reuters showed on Thursday.

But the credit crisis could undermine that offset market by drying up debt finance for smaller developers of projects including renewable energy, causing a "significant slowdown" in deal flow in the medium term, UBS's Lekander said.

"The credit crunch will exacerbate a slowdown already happening because of increased... policy uncertainty," Karmali said, referring to a slowdown in project development.

But Guy Turner at New Carbon Finance said debt finance was not such a major constraint.

"All project finance comes under scrutiny at these times because of cash constraints, but a lot of carbon projects are hosted on industrial sites ... and (their costs) come out of corporate budgets," Turner said.