KEMA Launches Retail Clean Energy Markets Service

URLINGTON, Mass., Oct 16, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Rising prices, aggressive policy change and large scale capital investment are all signs that point to a strong shift toward cleaner, smarter energy use. The initial momentum has been focused upstream, but the adoption of cleaner, smarter energy solutions at the end user level is now emerging. In response, global energy and utility industry consulting firm KEMA ( ) has launched an advisory service to focus on the business issues and market dynamics of clean energy at the retail level.

"The retail segment of the clean energy industry is clearly poised to grow. The opportunities and risks are evolving rapidly," said Hugo van Nispen, president and managing director, KEMA Inc. "Yet many in the industry are challenged to understand the specifics. KEMA's retail clean energy advisory service will help fill the analytical gaps, providing clients with a fact base and insights to guide strategy and action."

The Retail Clean Energy Markets advisory service () centers around five core sectors categorized from a customer purchasing perspective: clean grid power, clean distributed power, energy efficiency services, demand response and carbon services. The subscriber-based service includes: Clean Energy Markets, a monthly de-brief of industry developments; Clean Energy Outlook, an annual forecast of the retail market opportunity; Sector Profiles; admission to KEMA's annual Clean Energy Summit; and ad-hoc consultancy.

KEMA's Clean Energy Markets August report (www.kemacleanenergymarkets.com) features an interview with US House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, clean energy business opportunity scorecards for the Big 3 automakers, and in-depth articles "The Smartest Meter: Who wins, consumers or utilities" and "In the LEED: Looking beyond the hype to size real 'green premium' in commercial real estate." The September issue featured "Obamanomics: Sizing the retail clean energy impact of the Obama energy policy." The recently issued October issue covers new models for utility green power marketing, scorecards for investor-owned utilities and private providers in green power delivery, and an analysis of the retail clean energy impact of the Wall Street bailout bill.

The KEMA Annual Clean Energy Summit will be held March 3 -- 5, 2009 in Houston, Texas.

About KEMA

Founded in 1927, KEMA is a global provider of business and technical consulting, operational support, measurement and inspection, testing and certification for the energy and utility industry. KEMA employs more than 1,700 professionals in 20 countries. The firm's North American consulting operations are headquartered in Burlington, Massachusetts. KEMA's global headquarters are in Arnhem, the Netherlands.

Cheng Loong Corp. is Voluntary-carbon-standard Certified

Taipei, Oct. 23, 2008 (CENS)--The Taiwan-based Cheng Loong Corp., a large paper manufacturer, recently became VCS (Voluntary Carbon Standard) certified, enabling the firm to sell about 200,000 metric tons of its voluntary carbon offsets in the New York`s OTC (Over-the-Counter) market, according to company sources. Such certification makes the firm the first in Taiwan qualified to sell its carbon dioxide emission rights.

Carrying out thermal recycling to cut carbon dioxide emission in its sewage factory in Taoyuan County, northern Taiwan, and aided by the British environmental consultancy ERM Group Inc., Cheng Loong became VCS-certified without a hitch.

ERM Taiwan indicated that Asian companies can join the voluntary carbon offset market via either CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) or VCS. CDM is an agreement under the Kyoto Protocol allowing companies in countries already committed to the greenhouse gas reduction agreement to buy carbon dioxide emission rights from others and, above all, with such trading to be supervised by the UN. Taiwanese companies are only allowed to sell their carbon offsets via VCS for not being a UN member.

Cheng Loong noted that the British Ecosystem Marketplace`s report shows the global need for voluntary carbon offsets is expected to exceed 150 million metric tons this year, 10 times the corresponding figure in 2006, suggesting that Taiwanese companies should pay more attention to carbon dioxide emissions.

To effectively control carbon dioxide emission, Cheng Loong invested in a new technology in its sewage factory, turning firedamp extracted from sewage into fuel for steam boilers to achieve thermal recycling.

Noteworthy is that Cheng Loong will earn 3% real return, valued at about US$1.2 million, on the investment, based on the current voluntary carbon offset price of about US$6 per metric tons of carbon dioxide under VCS, according to ERM Taiwan.

The GreenAsia Group launches in Singapore with innovative solutions for CO2 management in Asia

Deleted by author

Global carbon price set to soar

Study predicts new carbon markets in US, Japan and Australia will see global price of carbon increase 53 per cent by 2020
James Murray, BusinessGreen, 15 Oct 2008
Chimney

New research from analyst firm New Carbon Finance suggests that the average price of carbon on the world's carbon markets will soar to $49 (£28) a tonne over the next 12 years.

The EU is expected to lead the gains, with the price of credits in its emissions trading scheme more than doubling from an expected average of $39 during the current trading period up to 2012 to $97 by 2020.

Similarly, large-scale price hikes are also predicted for planned carbon markets in North America, Australia and Japan.

The study said that prices in North America would more than double from $12 in 2012 to $30 in 2020, prices in Australia would increase five-fold over the same period from $16 to $82, and the price of Japanese credits will treble from $22 to $66.

Credits on the voluntary carbon offset market and UN-backed CDM and JI markets are expected to experience similar levels of inflation. The price of credits in the voluntary market is expected to climb from an average of $6 a tonne now to $20 in 2020, while credits in the CDM and JI markets will see prices increase from $27 to $68 over the same period.

Douglas Higgins, analyst at New Carbon Finance, said that the price increases would be driven primarily by a tightening in the emission caps imposed upon those companies operating in emissions trading schemes.

However, he added that demand for credits would also intensify as firms found it steadily more expensive to cut their own carbon emissions.

"If the markets work properly firms should cut their own emissions up to the point where it is cheaper to do that than buy a permit," he explained. "That means that once the simple emission abatement investments such as energy efficiency have been made they will have to invest in more expensive measures or turn to permits, which should drive up demand and prices."

However, he warned that the predictions were based largely on the projected regulatory framework and as such any changes from current proposals, such as those being discussed by EU member states, would have a major impact on prices.

"The EU price is calculated on the assumption it will aim for a 20 per cent reduction in emissions targets," he said. "If, as the EU has said, that increases to a 30 per cent reduction in the event of an international climate change deal, the price will rise."

Nobody’s Buying It: Rethinking Consumer Carbon Offsets

Buyers of offsets come in two types – businesses and individual consumers. But the balance between them is far from equal. According to the Ecosystem Marketplace 2008 report, businesses are responsible for around 90% of offset volume, and consumers a measly 10%.

With all the green awareness in the street, why is this? To me, it’s obvious:

Businesses get something out of buying carbon offsets. Consumers do not.

A company which offsets its emissions can:

* Get a public relations boost by telling their customers about it.

* Increase the motivation of green-minded employees.

* Start preparing for carbon regulations expected in future.

These 3 benefits are hard to measure, and a company which spends $100,000 on offsets is unlikely to see $100,000 in extra profit as a direct result. Nonetheless, a manager thinking about going carbon neutral has many convincing reasons to do so. It doesn’t look or feel like a stupid decision. So long as the expense is reasonable, it can be justified to that manager’s boss, and to the company’s shareholders.

Contrast this with the experience of Joe the consumer. When Joe buys offsets, what does he get in return? Perhaps he feels good, but only until he next uses the air con or gets in the car. Sure, he’s sending the economy a signal that says “I, Western Consumer, am willing to pay to become carbon neutral.” But if Joe is smart, he knows that signal is drowned out by a cacophony of suburban SUVs and belching power stations.

Bottom line: Joe just donated $100 to the Earth, and Joe feels like a chump.

So should we give up on consumer carbon offsets, and focus on the business market? Can an eco-minded do-good product ever achieve consumer success?

Wait a minute. What about dolphin-friendly tuna, fair trade chocolate and free-range eggs? Do you remember when air fresheners used CFCs and cosmetics were tested on animals? I see those bright green reusable shopping bags spreading like wildfire. Not to mention recycled paper and hybrid cars.

Consumer eco products are everywhere, and they are a huge success!

What’s more, some of these products cost way more than their non-eco equivalents. Fair trade accounts for 1-20% of sales in many product categories, despite adding 25-50% to the price. Around 40% of eggs bought in the UK are free range, organic or barn-laid, yet these cost up to 50% more than the battery variety.

And yet, when British Airways invited their customers to offset their flight emissions, a grand total of 0.01% took the plunge. Only 1 in every 10,000 passengers was interested in flying carbon neutral, even though it adds just 10% to the price.

When it comes to consumers, offsets are failing where so much else has worked.

So do we really care more about chickens than the future of the planet?

Are African cocoa growers more important to us than their continent as a whole?

Or, just maybe, is there something fundamentally wrong with how consumer carbon offsets are currently packaged, marketed and sold?

Starbucks accused of wasting water

STARBUCKS was blasted by environmental experts last night after Britain's Sun newspaper accused it of pouring millions of litres of precious water down the drain at its coffee shops.

The giant coffee chain allegedly has a policy of keeping a tap running non-stop at all its 10,000 outlets worldwide, wasting millions of litres a day.

That would provide enough daily water for the entire two million-strong population of drought-hit Namibia or fill an Olympic pool every 83 minutes.

Every Starbucks branch has a cold tap behind the counter providing water for a sink, called a dipper well, used for washing spoons and utensils.

Bizarre health and safety rules are said to ban staff from turning the water off, as bosses say that a constant flow stops germs breeding in the taps.

The huge Starbucks chain proudly boasts of its work for the environment. But British water companies accused it of harming the environment by frittering away a vital natural resource.

And experts dismissed the claim that it was necessary to run taps for hygiene reasons.

Even a slow-flowing tap spurts out at least three litres of water a minute, meaning British Starbucks wastes an estimated 1.63 million litres a day, according to The Sun.

A tap running for just over three minutes wastes the amount of water one African needs to survive a day in drought conditions.

The Sun investigated after a Starbucks executive revealed the policy in a letter to a couple who complained of a tap left running at their local branch.

Lisa Woolfe, 39, of Hertfordshire, said: "I noticed a small sink behind the counter had its tap running. The assistant said the store was told to keep it running, as it cleaned the pipes.

"I could not believe it but when we contacted head office, they confirmed that the taps were left on and the water was not recycled. It is an absolutely astonishing waste of water, especially for a company which prides itself on its green credentials."

The Sun's undercover team checked Starbucks outlets across Britain and some around the world, and found some baffled staff did not use the running tap and did not even know what it was for.

On 52nd St New York, a tap ran the whole time the paper's investigators were there, although nothing was cleaned under it. It was the same in Los Angeles and in Sydney.

Staff at one of the 50 Starbucks in Beijing threatened to call police as newspaper staff photographed a running tap.

In Vienna, Starbucks staff confirmed the tap was always left running.

In Romania, also hit by a drought, a Starbucks worker said of the tap: "We don't know what it is. Nobody ever uses it."

But staff at Melbourne's Swanston St store, one of the few left in Victoria, said taps weren't left on, and denied the practice had ever been employed. "That's never happened here. We don't waste water," the store manager said.

Europe gains carbon credits with India projects

Kyoto program lets investors earn credits for renewable energy and energy efficiency projects in developing countries.

The United Nations has issued credits to three projects in India for emissions reductions from renewable energy and energy efficiency.

The Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism rewards companies or developed countries with certified emission-reduction certificates (CERs) for helping developing countries reduce emissions. Those credits can then be used to meet Kyoto standards or sold to other countries (see StatoilHydro, ONGC to look at carbon capture and storage).

A credit currently trades for about €19 ($26 USD). The market for trading in carbon emissions is estimated to be in the range of $60 billion to USD $70 billion annually (see Global carbon trading value almost doubles in 2007). 

India has generated about 30 million carbon credits and is one of the largest beneficiaries in the carbon credit trade, according to Mumbai, India-based Multi Commodity Exchange (see MCX launches carbon credit trading in India).

Across the globe, 195 million credits have been issued through the program’s 1,170 projects. About 2,800 projects are in the application or registration process, with 155 projects applying for admission in September, the most recent data available. 

A new 8-megawatt grid-connected biomass plant in state of Chhattisgarh in central India, below Uttar Pradesh, received 47,482 credits.

The biomass plant achieved an equivalent annual offset of about 21,488 metric tons of CO₂ and annual production of about 47 million kilowatt-hours in 2007, its first full year of operation.

The plant developed by ISA Power uses rice husk from less than 100 kilometers (62 miles) away in the Rice Bowl region, which is around the Raipur, Dhamtari, Durg and Kanker districts. ISA Power estimates that 1.3 metric tons (2,866 pounds) of rice husk can generate 1 MW of power. The availability of rice husk is 267,000 metric tons, while the plant’s capacity is 70,000 metric tons.

The UN also issued credits to Germany for a 4.5 MW grid-connected hydroelectric power plant in Himachal Pradesh in northern India. The Maujhi project received 7,507 credits for 2007 and had banked 21,881 credits since July 2004.

The run-of-the-river project by Dharmshala Hydro Power draws power from the Maujhi Khad, a small tributary of river Beas that drains in the Kangra District. The Rs. 265.3 million (USD $5.77 million) project generates about 20 million kWh a year for the state-owned Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, representing an offset of about 13,168 tons of CO₂.

The third set of credits went to the United Kingdom for energy-efficiency improvements at ITC Paperboards & Specialty Papers in Andhra Pradesh, about 300 km from Hyderabad. The project made efficiency improvements at its pulp-and-paper mill, which is one of the largest in India. Those upgrades have reduced energy consumption by 13.38 gigawatt-hours a year.

The UN issued 2,056 credits to the paper mill, which also generates power using steam. Additionally, black liquor solids from wood pulp, a byproduct of the paper mill, is a climate-neutral fuel, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The mill has received 13,314 credits since April 2002.

UN: Financial chills are ill wind for climate

EW YORK (AP) — The financial turmoil rippling across the globe will set back efforts to fight climate change, drying up capital that could help poorer countries upgrade to clean energy technology, the U.N. climate chief said Thursday.

"You can't pick an empty pocket," said Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the U.N. climate secretariat.

In an Associated Press interview, de Boer said a pledge of northern investment in developing countries, for "green" economic growth and for adapting to droughts, floods and other impacts of warming, would be essential to get poorer nations to sign onto a new global climate agreement.

Ongoing negotiations aim to produce such an agreement at a U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen in late 2009. Richer industrialized nations want China, India and other big Third World emitters of greenhouse gases, countries exempt under the current Kyoto Protocol, to contribute in some way to a new regime of reducing emissions.

But the credit crisis gripping the international economy changes the outlook, de Boer said.

"I think that the financial crisis is going to make it more difficult for industrialized countries to make public resources available for cooperation with developing countries," he told the AP.

"Many industrialized countries at the moment are propping up their financial sector and they're borrowing money to do it, which means to my mind that there's going to be a constraint on the capital market, and that potentially can impact the negotiations."

De Boer was in New York to confer with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and to take part in a public debate with Columbia University's Jeffrey Sachs, a leading development economist, on whether the world should pursue carbon taxes to discourage the burning of fossil fuels — source of much atmospheric warming — rather than the "carbon trading" system overseen by de Boer's U.N. agency.

In carbon trading, under the Kyoto Protocol, industries subject to emissions caps are allotted or sold emission allowances that they then can buy and sell among one another.

But such long-running economic arguments — the consensus among four debaters was that many devices will be needed — are increasingly overshadowed by scientific news that experts say points up the need for more urgent, sweeping action.

It was reported last month that worldwide man-made emissions of carbon dioxide — the leading greenhouse gas — leaped by an unexpected 3 percent in 2007. And de Boer noted that U.N. scientists who last year forecast a need for 50 percent reductions in global emissions by 2050 are now saying 60-to-80 percent cuts will be necessary to avoid the worst of climate change.

The U.N. climate chief finds encouragement in the U.S., however, where both major presidential candidates, Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama, favor a cap-and-trade system, after eight years in which the Bush administration rejected the Kyoto Protocol and mandatory emissions cuts.

De Boer said he hoped the next president could show his commitment personally at the annual U.N. climate conference in early December, in Poznan, Poland.

"If the president-elect or vice president or a bipartisan delegation of some kind could come to Poznan with the message that the U.S. takes this issue seriously, that would be a very strong signal of encouragement," he said.

FAQ

What is climate change?

Climate change is the term commonly used when talking about global warming.

The Earth is like a giant greenhouse, but instead of having glass panes which trap heat, it has gases such as methane and carbon dioxide. As the sun's rays shine on the Earth this blanket of gases traps some of the heat – which has the effect of warming the planet and keeping it at a relatively constant level. Without it the Earth would either get too hot or too cold.

When greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere by human activity like burning fossil fuels and clearing land, it's like constantly adding more glass layers to the greenhouse, ultimately raising the temperature inside. If we don’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there is a risk that the Earth will heat to a level which could seriously affect life on our planet.
Why the focus on carbon dioxide?

Greenhouse gases include methane, nitrous oxide and halocarbons but the mostly commonly referred to greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2) and it has become the standard measure of greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 is released every time we turn on the light at home, switch on our computer, take a flight or drive the car.
What does it mean to be carbon neutral?

Carbon Neutral means that an activity, a person or a business has no net CO2 emissions. By cutting the amount of CO2 we release into the atmosphere and offsetting any CO2 we do release, we can bring Intrepid's carbon emissions down to 0% - becoming a Carbon Neutral company.
What is carbon offsetting?

Carbon offsets are a way for individuals and businesses to balance out their greenhouse gas emissions by allocating funds to emission reduction programs e.g. If, for every 1 kg of CO2 emitted during your flight you save another 1 kg from being emitted through your support of programs such as tree planting or sustainable energy initiatives, you have offset your emissions.
Carbon Neutral diagram
Why is Intrepid carbon offsetting flights?

Aviation is now the fastest growing contributor to greenhouse gases and it's a sad truth that by flying to the destinations we love so much, we're actively contributing to climate change. This year alone our travellers' flights will add around 500,000 tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere. That's about the same as 116,000 cars would emit in a year. For those choosing to book flights with Intrepid from Australia, you can fly in the knowledge that your flight is offset and you have greatly reduced the impact of your holiday.
Why are flights so bad?

Not only do planes release a lot of greenhouse gases, they also release it in the delicate upper atmosphere where its impact is far greater.
Is the Carbon Offset Payment a tax?

No, it's simply a payment directed to carbon offset programs.
Is the Carbon Offset Payment compulsory?

Yes, all flights sold by Intrepid departing from Australia have a carbon offset payment included in the price. Climate change is a huge issue and to tackle it we all need to get behind the solutions. We understand that by adding a carbon offset payment to our airfares, you may find slightly cheaper flights elsewhere, but we hope you will join us and choose a greener way to fly; after all, the cost is minimal and the benefits are immense! Intrepid will soon be including carbon offset payments on all flights sold from our international sales offices.
How is the Carbon Offset Payment calculated?

The carbon offset payment is calculated according to regional zones e.g. A return flight from Melbourne to Bangkok is a flight to Zone 3 and will have a carbon offset payment of around AU$54 while a return flight from Melbourne to Paris is a flight to Zone 2 and will have a carbon offset payment of around AU$150. There are thirteen regional zones in all, including South America, Oceania and Africa.
Does Intrepid Travel profit from carbon offsetting?

No. Intrepid Travel does not add any margins onto the price of the offset. This is no a profit making exercise for us, it's part of our commitment to the future of the planet.
Why do companies charge different amounts?

Companies charge different amounts to offset depending on how they calculate greenhouse gas emissions. There are two ways that the greenhouse gas emissions can be calculated...

* Emissions based on the amount of fuel that is consumed per kilometer
* Emissions based on the burning of fuel, then multiplied for the increased global warming impact, also known as the Global Warming Potential (GWP)

The GWP takes into account that emissions in the upper atmosphere, where planes fly, trap more heat and consequently contribute more to global warming. We choose to take the added effect of GWP into consideration and offset more than just the fuel burn.
Where does my money go?

With Origin's help, your money will be invested in genuine sustainable energy projects that build a long term solution to climate change. You'll be contributing to energy efficiency projects, energy generation from micro-hydro (low impact) and tree planting to name a few.

Find out more about where your money goes
What guarantee do I have that the money is being sent to Origin and Intrepid is not keeping it?

All the projects to which your funds will be allocated are independently verified to ensure your money is used for abatement projects.. A strong auditing framework is essential so that you can be confident that your money is really making a difference. The auditors are selected on the basis that they must demonstrate a high level of experience and recognition, including being active in audit panels for other abatement schemes.
What guarantee do I have that Origin is spending the money appropriately and not just keeping it?

All the projects to which your funds will be allocated are independently verified. A strong auditing framework is essential so that you can be confident that your money is really making a difference. The auditors are selected on the basis that they must demonstrate a high level of experience and recognition, including being active in audit panels for other abatement schemes.

The author of the Government's 2006 report on climate change said that spending money on renewable and low-carbon industries could help stimulate the economy during a recession and when oil prices were high.

"We're going to have to grow out of this... and this is an area which looks as though it could well grow strongly and with the right support could be one of the major engines of growth," Lord Stern told The Guardian.

He said that the current financial crisis demonstrated the consequences of not dealing with dangerous risks early enough and with sufficient international co-operation.

Warning that there were "two kinds of danger" posed to efforts to tackle climate change by the present fear of recession, Lord Stern said: "One is people can only concentrate on a limited number of things at the same time.

"The second is people will be sensitive to cost increases, and those will have to be managed carefully... There's a danger: it needs leadership."

Lord Stern's comments came as MEPs prepared to vote on Europe's controversial climate change plans, which face a tough test in the face of the financial crisis.

The plan, which was drawn up before the present crisis struck, is for an EU commitment to cut greenhouse gases by 20 per cent by 2020 - and by 30 per cent if the rest of the developed world promises to do the same.

But some governments are now pleading on behalf of key domestic industries that the emissions cuts would be too harsh coming amid the pain for businesses caused by market turmoil.

However, following weeks of argument, the European Parliament's Environment Committee is still expected to endorse the target.

The Committee will also pass judgment on plans to step up Europe's Emissions Trading Scheme, which caps overall carbon dioxide emissions and gives industries limited annual emissions allowances.