Green Your Digs

Is Garbage the New Green?

2011-04-14T08:26:00.000-07:00

Is Garbage the New Green? Anybody out there want to buy “clean energy” produced by garbage incineration? Can you see any of our business customers putting up a banner at their store saying, “100% powered by garbage burning?” The answers to those questions in the real world of the free market would be “no” and “no.” But in the bizaro land that Annapolis can sometimes be, a majority of our political leaders voted FOR a bill to include garbage incineration as a clean, renewable energy resource along with wind and solar and voted AGAINST requiring the utilities to support offshore wind power. I guess in Annapolis, garbage is the new “green.”

The Maryland General Assembly’s 2011 Session is thankfully over. They can’t do any more damage. But let’s see what they did manage to accomplish in their three months of work. Check out this year’s list of bills that made it or got killed, followed by my own “Thanks” and “Spanks” for some of our elected officials. It’s a long blog, but worth the read, trust me.

Bills – Good News

Pepco… errr, “utility” reliability standards (HB 391/SB 692) The General Assembly passed a bill to require our state’s utilities to meet certain reasonable standards for service and power reliability or face penalties. The bill was a priority of the Governor’s and was supported by the Montgomery County delegation. Once implemented, this bill will hopefully put Pepco at the top of the nation in terms of service to its customers, instead of near the bottom where it appears to have been comfortably ensconced for years.

Consumer Choice Education - This bill requires that Maryland create a web site to provide consumers more information about customer electricity choice and direct them to the various options they have. It works well in other states, such as Pennsylvania, where consumers have more information available at their fingertips. An educated consumer is the best thing for the electricity market, as that will discourage some of these multi-level marketers and others who offer shady deals on “variable” pricing and make specious claims about supporting green power.

Electric Vehicles The Governor put forth several bills to start Maryland on the extremely important path of building an infrastructure for electric vehicles. As these vehicles become more available, states will be competing for the jobs associated with the industry, and building the consumer base that the market needs. Governor O’Malley’s bills put Maryland ahead of other states in starting to formulate the rules we need to build a strong electric vehicle market here.

Solar Thermal RECs This bill allows solar thermal heating systems to qualify for the state’s Solar Renewable Portfolio Standard. In plain English, it means that residents and businesses will be able to get solar thermal systems (to replace nat gas water heating, for example) at significantly reduced costs. It will lead to large growth in the solar thermal industry, bringing more green jobs and economic activity to Maryland.

Benefit LLC Last year, Maryland become one of the first state’s in the nation to legally recognized the designation of “Benefit Corp” for corporations that put sustainability and transparency into their operating documents and register with the state. It’s a way for companies that really walk the green walk to distinguish their operations from the companies that just talk green, or do it as a marketing ploy. But the legislature forgot to include LLC’s, a fairly common form of business in the state, as part of this designation. Now, they have corrected this mistake and opened the doors for “Benefit LLCs.” You can bet that a certain local green energy company you know will be the first to achieve this designation when the law goes into effect on June 1st!

Bills – Bad News

Garbage Burning - In one of the wackier moves I’ve seen in my 11 years following the Maryland General Assembly, our elected leaders reversed their 2004 vote on the state’s clean energy standard and decided that garbage burning is actually clean and renewable after all. What new information caused our legislators to wake up and change their mind? Nothing. The situation is exactly the same as it was back in 2004. Garbage is still garbage. The environmental community was uniformly opposed, as it was back in 2004. The garbage incinerators in Maryland are still operating just as they were in 2004. The only seeming difference between now and 2004 is that the leadership of the House and Senate (and the Governor’s office) all pushed hard for classifying garbage as green, whereas in 2004 they didn’t. Also, legislators saw this bill as a quick way to bilk ratepayers of some money that could be sent to counties that run these plants (ie. a tax that nobody will know about). The other difference – in 2004 all the usual good environmental champions in the legislature stood firmly against garbage burning, whereas this year some of them went over to the other side (see “garbage gang” below). So, the bill will charge us ratepayers to put money in the owners of garbage incinerators in Maryland (plants that don’t need our money). This makes any claim by lawmakers who oppose the offshore wind bill on the grounds of “protecting ratepayers” extremely specious.

Offshore Wind This bill was a top priority of Governor O’Malley, supported by environmentalists, labor, and progressive businesses like Clean Currents. Still, the legislature didn’t pass it. The big argument appeared to be concern about cost to ratepayers, certainly a legitimate issue to discuss. But even when the Governor agreed to cap the cost to ratepayers, legislators didn’t budge. When faced with putting the cost of garbage incineration on ratepayers, our elected leaders had no problem voting yes. When asked to do the same for wind, they said no. Hmmmm…..

Renewable Energy Surcharge This was a bill that would have funded the Maryland Clean Energy Center, protected people already buying clean energy, and funded our efficiency, solar, wind, and geothermal programs. It was structured in a way that would have meant most residential ratepayers would pay no surcharge at all. It was killed because our elected leaders said they were going to vote for the offshore wind bill and didn’t want to vote for two charges in one year. Yeah, that worked out just like they told us it would!

Two Year Moratorium on Fracking in the Marcellus Shale- In the irony department - the weekend the New York Times and Washington Post run stories about a new report that says natural gas fracking in the Marcellus Shale and elsewhere is actually worse from a climate change perspective than coal power, the Maryland Senate killed a bill that would have required a couple of years of study on the environmental impact of fracking in Maryland. The House had passed the measure already. It would seem that this new study would give Senators pause to think maybe a couple of years more study is warranted. Not in Annapolis world, I guess.

THANKS

Delegate Derrick Davis – this is a mild “thanks.” The Chairman of the House Economic Matters actually did kill several good clean energy bills, and pushed hard for the “garbage is green” bill, but his strong support for offshore wind outweighs that. He just needs to get a little more decisive and move quicker next time, to enable advocates to round up the votes they need in the Senate for good bills.

Delegate Tom Hucker – He was the point man on the offshore wind bill in Economic Matters and the only Montgomery County delegate on the committee with the courage to vote against the “garbage is green” bill in committee.

Governor Martin O’Malley – He showed great leadership on offshore wind and pushed hard. He also put forth several good proposals on electric vehicles, which passed.

Delegate Heather Mizeur – This Montgomery County Delegate has already been a great force for more open government and now she’s taking on important environmental issues like natural gas fracking in the Marcellus Shale. Her leadership was strong.

SPANKS

Delegate Brian McHale – Of all people, Delegate McHale should have know better than to be the chief sponsor of the “garbage is green” bill. He was there in 2004 and knew how controversial this bill was. After implying to folks that he was just going through the motions on putting the bill in, he fought hard for it and is largely responsible for its passage.

Sen. Mac Middleton – The chief sponsor of the “garbage is green” bill in the Senate, Middleton is also in the category of “should have known better.” Not only did he support the bill, he did something I never saw in my 11 years in Annapolis. He fast tracked the bill. In fact, he had his committee vote on the bill the same day it was heard and immediately brought it to the Senate floor before anyone had a time to do outreach about it. He also gave short thrift to the renewable energy surcharge.

Delegate Ben Kramer – A disappointing start to his second term as a Delegate. Ben launched his first campaign for office prominently featuring him and his family in Chesapeake Bay settings, talking about his love for the environment. Yet this session he consistently remained unsympathetic to environmentally related bills. On offshore wind, he refused to come out for the bill, despite the many emails and calls he got from his constituents (including your’s truly). He supported the “garbage is green” bill, where he didn’t seem to mind giving ratepayer money for garbage incineration. Yet on offshore wind, he dismissed facts and arguments in favor of the bill while highlighting arguments against the bill. That doesn’t sound like a champion for protecting the Chesapeake. Let’s hope next year goes a little better.

Sen. EJ Pipkin – The Wall Street trader- turned politician has been consistent in his opposition to clean energy bills and his constant attack on customer choice for electricity. He is among the most powerful anti-clean energy forces in the Senate because of his position on the Finance Committee and his single-minded doggedness in fighting clean power.

The Garbage Gang

Finally, here are some of the legislators that want to sell you on “garbage is green.” Some of these folks come from very environmentally conscious districts. Some were endorsed by enviro groups, and even had enviro advocates actively campaign for them. Yet, when the garbage hit the fan, these people were all too willing to ignore their allies and vote for garbage power. This is not a comprehensive list. Just a few of the highlighted members of the garbage gang.

The House Garbage Gang: Del. Brian Feldman, Del. Cathy Dumais, Del. Anne Kaiser, Del. Charles Barkley, Del. Aruna Miller, Del. Brian McHale

The Senate Garbage Gang: Sen. Rob Garagiola (the only Senator from Montgomery County who voted for this controversial bill), Sen. Catherine Pugh, Sen. Anthony Muse, Sen. Jim Mathias, and Sen. Ulysses Currie.

The conclusion from all this is that we cannot ever take anything for granted. Concerned citizens have to constantly keep on top of their legislators to keep them honest.

The Home Stretch in Maryland

2011-03-31T07:51:00.000-07:00

It’s down to the wire in Maryland’s General Assembly for any bills still alive in the closing week of this year’s session. Any bill not passed by Midnight on April 11th is dead for the year. This is the time that a little extra effort can sway those legislators sitting on the fence about a bill. Check out the status of a few key energy bills and then take action by contacting your local legislator (if you live in Maryland, of course!).

HB 1054/SB 861 – Offshore Wind – This bill is the top priority of the Governor’s office as well as a slew of environmental groups, labor unions, and even some businesses. It would bring offshore wind to Maryland, reducing our dependence on fossil fuel powered energy sources, bringing green jobs to our state, and reducing the amount of electricity Maryland imports. The Senate has indicated that it will wait for the House to move first on this bill. The House Economic Matters Committee is deliberating the bill now and could vote as early as today (Thursday). The vote will be close and could be decided by one Delegate’s decision to support the bill or not.

The utility (ie. Pepco) reliability bills are still alive. Two of the bills have been killed in committee, but the main bill is making progress and could pass.

HB 391/Sb 692 – passed both houses with amendments. Senator Frosh Amendment rejected.
HB 391/SB 692 – The House version (HB 391, chief sponsor is Montgomery County Delegate Brian Feldman (D-15). Most of the other MoCo legislators are on board with this and it was a O’Malley Administration priority. The bill passed the House and now awaits action in the Senate. The Senate version is sponsored by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mac Middleton (D-Charles County). Many MoCo Senators are on board as well. The bill passed the Senate, though a great Amendment to not allow rate increases to pay for downed wires, by Sen. Brian Frosh (D-MoCo) failed. This bill would require Pepco and the other utilities to achieve certain minimum performance standards or face serious penalties from the Public Service Commission. The bill would strive to put Pepco and the other utilities at the top of the class, rather than the bottom, nationally. The next step is for each chamber to pass the other chamber’s version, or alternatively go to conference and agree to compromise on any differences.

The other utility reliability bills were killed in committee.

HB 1278 – which would have prevented Pepco and others from charging customers for time when the power is out died in committee, but did get favorable votes from MoCo Delegates – Hucker, Kramer, Barkley, Feldman, and by Committee Vice Chair, David Rudolph.

HB 1171/SB 749 – The other utility reliability bill died in the Senate Finance Committee, receiving no favorable votes from any Senator.
Another bill that died recently is HB 1123/SB 715 – a bill that would have required utilities to enter into long term contracts for Solar RECs. It was supported by the solar industry and the environmental community, but the Senate Finance Committee voted it down.

Finally, a bill that would allow garbage incineration to count as clean energy like wind and solar in Maryland’s Renewable Portfolio Standard is thankfully looking almost dead. The Senate version, SB 690, passed the Senate so quickly, the environmental community didn’t even have a chance to do any outreach to Senators about the bill. But the bill is now stuck in the House, looking like it will go nowhere after the environmental community and certain clean energy businesses let legislators know about the concerns with this piece.

Support Offshore Wind Power Testimony

2011-03-02T13:53:00.000-08:00

The following is the testimony that Gary Skulnik will provide in support of Governor Martin O'Malley's bill to build offshore wind power off the Maryland coast.

On behalf of Clean Currents, a Rockville based clean energy marketer, I ask you to support HB 1054 with the attached amendments. The amendments we are offering address the following issues:

1.) Customers purchasing wind energy through electricity suppliers should be exempt from the surcharge.
2.) RECs should be sold to the voluntary market.
3.) Industrial ratepayers should share the burden with every other ratepayer.

Clean Currents is a unique energy marketer and we bring a very unique perspective to this important piece of legislation. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is exclusively focused on providing green power to our customers. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is certified as a B-Corp, a third party independent confirmation of our sustainable business operations. We are probably the only energy marketer in the state that is supporting this offshore wind energy bill. We support this bill because we know that we need to make a major energy transition in Maryland to address significant issues like clean air, climate change, in-state generation, and the creation of green jobs. The installation of offshore wind will do much to bring Maryland one step closer to a true clean energy future.

As an energy marketer, we believe in the benefit of the competitive market in Maryland. The competitive market benefits consumers and helps spur private sector growth. It also spurs innovative products and services that the traditional utilities are either too slow to adopt or unwilling to adopt. We do not believe that this bill will harm the competitive market in any meaningful way. It was written in a way that preserves the competitive market in Maryland.

We have three amendments we’d like to propose. We hope that the first two would be considered friendly amendments by the bill’s sponsors and supporters.

1. Marylanders who are purchasing wind energy through competitive electricity suppliers should be exempt from any surcharge for offshore wind.

It’s an issue of fairness, first and foremost. If a resident or business is already doing their part to support the creation of new clean energy generation, they should not be asked to pay twice. Also, if this amendment is not adopted, the bill may have the unintended consequence of depressing the voluntary clean energy market. I do not believe this is the intent of the bill’s sponsors. If consumers believe they would be paying for wind twice, they are less likely to switch to a wind energy product provided by a competitive energy supplier. Our ability to grow market share would be harmed if this amendment is not adopted.

There would be some implementation issues to resolve if this amendment is adopted, but they should not be overly difficult. Montgomery County managed to track clean energy purchases in conjunction with competitive energy suppliers and the utilities through its Clean Energy Rewards Program. The Public Service Commission could simply follow that model.

2. RECs should be allowed to be sold to whoever wants to buy them.

The current language in the bill requires the utilities to sell the RECs from the offshore wind projects to entities that will use them for compliance with the Maryland RPS. But what if a company like Clean Currents or others wants to buy additional RECs to sell to Marylanders as a “Maryland Wind” product? That should not be prohibited. In fact, if REC sales are opened up to any buyer, thus increasing the demand side, the price of these RECs is likely to go up, which will help keep the costs of the offshore wind to consumers down.

3. Industrial ratepayers should not be exempt from the surcharge at any level of usage.

The workers at large steel plants or other manufacturers stand the most to gain from the jobs associated with offshore wind production. In fact, the wind turbines used to produce offshore wind power have to be manufactured close to the place they would be used, so they cannot be made in China or India. They will almost certainly be made in Maryland or somewhere close. If the manufacturers are thus benefiting from this bill, they should share the cost of the bill with all the other ratepayers. This will help bring down the cost to the other ratepayers and would be the most fair thing to do.

In conclusion, Clean Currents has been proud to be actively supporting offshore wind for Maryland. We have helped get petitions signed, publicize events, and supported the lobbying efforts of the environmental advocacy groups. We ask you to give HB 1054 a FAVORABLE report with the amendments we are proposing.

Support Clean Energy Benefit Fund

2011-02-09T18:43:00.000-08:00

Senate Bill 304, The Clean Energy Benefit Fund, provides a much needed stable source of funding for the promotion of vital clean energy business sectors in Maryland. The bill, sponsored by Senator Roger Manno (D-19) and Senator Rob Garagiola (D-15) would direct much of the funding to the newly established Maryland Clean Energy Center (MCEC). MCEC provides an innovative, non-governmental structure where private businesses, the public, and others can come together to quickly develop programs or ideas to spark clean energy growth.

The bill is designed to encourage efficiency or on-site solar adoption. It puts a small charge on residential electric ratepayers for every kilowatt-hour above 1,000 they use in a given month. Importantly for many Clean Currents customers, if ratepayers are purchasing 100% green energy for their home, they are exempt from the charge. Thus, residents whose homes are more efficient, or who use solar, or buy green power will face no or very little charge.
The bill does not effect the Maryland budget – a very important thing to note in these tough budget times.
The bill is expected to raise $12 to $16 million a year. The money would be used to fund solar, geothermal, and small wind grants through the Maryland Energy Administration. It would also be used to fund energy efficiency programs/consumer incentives through MCEC. And it would fund other programs at MCEC, such as a technology innovation grant program.
From a clean energy business perspective, this bill will make Maryland a more attractive place to come. We already have a very good market design for green power (through customer choice), solar installations (though the state Renewable Portfolio Standard) and energy efficiency (through Empower Maryland). But we lack a stable, reliable funding source for programs and a powerful economic development catalyst like the MCEC. This bill would solve both of those problems, and bring new clean energy jobs to Maryland.
As a green power marketer and an environmentally conscious company, we firmly believe that there should be incentives for consumers to choose clean energy, whether it’s a clean energy generator on their roof such as a solar pv system, or its clean energy through efficiency measures, or clean electricity through providers like Clean Currents. Maryland and the Federal government have provided incentives for the first two options. Now it’s time to provide incentives for the clean electricity choice. Montgomery County successfully demonstrated how incentives can grow markets, create jobs and help the environment with its Clean Energy Rewards Program. Now the state can do so on a broader scale by the adoption of Senate Bill 304.
We applaud Senators Manno and Garagiola for their leadership on this bill. The hearing in the Senate Finance Committee is February 15th. If you’d like to help get it passed, please let us know! Email us at gogreen@cleancurrents.com

China at the Crossroads

2011-01-13T05:57:00.000-08:00

Over the holidays, I had the privilege to be flown to China to speak to a conference of Chinese energy industry professionals about clean energy. I was treated extremely well and enjoyed the chance to see some incredible sites in Beijing and nearby. But most importantly, I valued the chance to throw my two cents into the conversation the Chinese are having about the next five to ten years of energy development. China is about to embark on its next five year plan and people are already discussing what the country’s energy future will look like. In my short time in Beijing, I could see that the country is at a critical crossroads as it relates to its (and the world’s) energy future.

The first thing that hits you when you arrive in Beijing is the air pollution. I’ve heard talk of it, but until you actually experience it, it’s hard to fathom. The air is literally thick. It’s smoky, as if there are a thousand campfires burning in your area. The other thing that hits you pretty quickly in Beijing is the traffic. It is the worst I’ve ever experienced, and I’ve lived in New York, DC, Atlanta and Miami. The roads are clogged with all kinds of cars and trucks, many of them looking fairly new.

China’s challenge, and it’s opportunity, in the next five year plan is to minimize the traffic and air pollution problems it faces by leaping forward to a clean energy economy. Specifically, it should invest heavily in electric vehicles and the infrastructure they need, mass transit and smart growth, and clean energy production.

The first step is to build more wind, solar and other renewable energy generation plants, along with transmission capacity to deliver the power. Even with increased efficiency and better conservation, China’s energy demand is only going to go up. Meeting that new demand with clean energy resources would be a major first step towards a cleaner environment.

The opportunity for electric vehicles in China is enormous. They are just now developing their infrastructure for gas powered vehicles. It is a great time to instead build out electric charging stations. Electric vehicles obviously would greatly contribute to cleaning up the air in cities like Beijing. But because they charge up at night and can put power back on the grid during the peak demand (daylight) hours, they also reduce the need for fossil fuel based peak power generation units.

Smart growth is a concept whereby communities build in urban centers, with work, play, and amenities all in a walkable community. Instead of building cities out, you build up. In China, it seems that most urban dwellers are already used to the idea of living in apartments, but in Beijing they’ve been building the city ever more outward to the point where it spreads out for miles in each direction. Rebuilding the city’s urban core and attracting new residents there will do much to alleviate the traffic problem.

At the energy conference, I spoke about much of this. The audience seemed receptive and frankly, many in China are already thinking about these ideas. There seems to be increasing recognition that China needs to drastically change its development course. Just a few days after I left, the government announced proposals to reduce the number of cars allowed in Beijing.

China is a very fascinating country and I hope to explore it more one day. We in the west have certainly made our share of mistakes in terms of energy choices and urban development. It would be a shame for China to follow those mistakes. Instead, they can learn from what we did wrong and move directly to the solutions phase. Not only would the Chinese people be better off, but so would the rest of the world.

A New Simple Test of Green

2010-12-09T07:47:00.000-08:00

A New Simple Test for Green

Back in July, I blogged about a simple test that environmentally conscious consumers could use to separate the truly green companies from those that merely use green as a marketing ploy or green washing. I’m proud to say that Clean Currents has recently taken a step to draw an even brighter line between our actions and sustainability commitment as a company vs. those in our industry who merely talk a good green game.

Clean Currents achieved certification as a “B Corp.”

This is a huge step. B Corp certification, run by the non profit group, B Lab, is one of the most stringent sustainability certification models in the nation. We are the first company in Montgomery County, and the fourth in the entire state of Maryland to achieve this advanced certification.
Being a certified B Corp means we are subject to a third party audit to verify the sustainability of our business practice. The B Corp web site best describes what this certification means:
Certified B Corporations are a new type of corporation which uses the power of business to solve social and environmental problems. B Corps are unlike traditional businesses because they:
• Meet comprehensive and transparent social and environmental performance standards;
• Meet higher legal accountability standards;
• Build business constituency for good business

There are currently no other energy companies in Maryland, DC, Pennsylvania or Delaware that are certified as a B Corporation. Clean Currents is the only one. We are proud of that and will continue to work to live up to the expectations that come with this designation. Check out more about B Corp HERE.

2010-10-28T10:04:00.000-07:00

Competitive Markets and Wind Power are a Great Match

The American Wind Energy Association recently put out a statement supporting competitive wholesale electricity markets. It’s great to see the nation’s premier wind industry association take a positive stand on the kind of market structure we have here in the Mid Atlantic (with the exception of Virginia). Clean Currents supports the rapid deployment of wind energy in our region and the continuation (and growth) of competitive energy markets. Consumers and the environment both benefit from our open markets.

According to a joint AWEA/Compete statement, nearly 80% of U.S. installed wind capacity is located in regions with competitive energy markets, yet these areas only have 44% of U.S. wind energy potential. A competitive energy market is a market where consumers have the ability to choose their electricity supplier. The utilities don’t control the entire chain of production of electricity, from generation through distribution. The opposite, a monopoly market, is where the incumbent utility controls everything and consumers (and generators) have no choice but to go with them. In Maryland, DC, Delaware, and Pennsylvania we are fortunate to have an open, competitive market.

It’s not surprising that a competitive market is better for wind energy development. The incumbent utilities, if they are in a monopoly with no competition, are not the best vehicles to help development alternative energy. They don’t know how to sell or market it, and they are in no rush to invest in it. In short, they are not innovators.

Companies like Clean Currents are constantly thinking of new ways to expand the clean energy market. Given the right market structure, with proper government incentives, we can develop even more wind power in this region. We are excited to be working with Governor O’Malley and other leaders to craft proposals that will bring offshore wind closer to reality. That’s part of our business model – building demand for green power and working on positive environmental legislation. We are going to push a model that will promote more wind power while building on the success of the competitive energy market. The two go hand in hand.

2010-10-14T08:02:00.000-07:00

Building Demand for Green from the Ground Up

Clean Currents just wrapped up our first Green Neighborhood Challenge (GNEC) and we’re launching right into GNEC 2 without missing a beat! Our experience and the response we got in GNEC 1 has taught us that we have tapped into something powerful in the public consciousness. People are looking for connections, commitment and financial help for their communities. Clean Currents is looking to build demand for green energy solutions from the ground up. Enter GNEC, which steps into the void left by antiseptic corporate marketing, social disconnect, lack of resources, and lack of meaningful national government action on the biggest environmental challenge of our generation – global climate change. Marketing from the ground up, meeting people where they are rather than where you (the company) are, is the essence of GNEC.

Connections

The premise of GNEC is that Clean Currents provides an organizing tool (wind power for homes and solar), which allows people of various communities to connect with each other, build stronger community bonds, and strengthen community spirit. By “community,” we mean any grouping of people who share a commonality. This could be a neighborhood, a town, a faith institution, a non profit group, a school, a union, a bridge club. In simple terms, we give community leaders something to talk about. In an ideal GNEC situation, there would be multiple social events (especially parties!), outward signs of participations in the community (lawn signs, etc.) and participation by a strong, core group of volunteers. This includes online social media.

Commitment

For GNEC 2 to succeed, we need to build beyond the focus of GNEC 1. We need to continue to push the message about people switching to wind or solar power for their homes. But we also need to translate into actions our words about Clean Currents being “a front door to a sustainable lifestyle.” This means that wind power for homes or solar installation is merely the hook to get people talking about a larger conversation. That larger conversation is centered on the need to reduce our environmental impact, improve the laws in our states and this nation, and changing some of our habits as consumers. Clean Currents is committed to helping pass positive environmental legislation that puts a price on carbon emissions and mandates reductions in greenhouse gases. If you sign up your community for GNEC 2, we are committed to bringing our partners and allies to your community, to help educate people about reducing their environmental impact. This includes recycling, composting, energy efficiency, car sharing, and a host of other ways to lead a more sustainable life. Finally, Clean Currents wants to help consumers learn about the many companies out there that offer green products, and more importantly, that operate as sustainable companies. It’s vital that consumers vote with their wallets by supporting businesses that are doing the right thing.

Financial Help

The financial component of GNEC should not be under valued. Clean Currents is providing real dollars to communities to help them pursue green projects or to support green advocacy/education groups. In GNEC 1, we will be donating more than $15,000 in total. For GNEC 2, we want to double that. Individual consumers should also see financial incentives for participation. Thus, Clean Currents offers reduced prices on solar installations for customers that are already wind powered. It’s kind of like a co-op, where communities band together to achieve better pricing for individual members of the community.

Conclusion

We at Clean Currents are only just scratching the surface on community level marketing right now, but already I can tell there is something powerful there. We are not perfect, and are learning from our mistakes along the way. However, by working with community leaders and getting real feedback from people we can build a powerful community of people, businesses, and other groups working to create demand for clean energy from the ground up.

Where’s the Energy in the Elections?

2010-09-29T16:30:00.000-07:00

The recent primary elections in Maryland set a record for low voter turnout in some parts of the state. There’s a total lack of energy among voters. I hope that between now and November 2nd, things change for the better. Voter turnout will be the deciding factor in many races across the region. If the pro environment voters stays home, we may have a major post-election hangover on November 3rd. Good clean energy laws that make a real difference are not necessarily permanent. They are always at risk of being reversed.
So, how do we get the energy back in the election? First, we have to do our civic duty and become educated, informed voters. That means checking out what groups like the Maryland League of Conservation Voters have to say about candidates. They are non partisan and focus solely on environmental issues. If you see or talk to a candidate, ask him/her about clean energy and the environment. Donate money, if you can, to pro clean energy candidates. Once you’ve energized and educated yourself, get the word out to your friends and neighbors. Use Facebook. Use the phone. Volunteer to go door to door for your local candidate.
It’s so easy to fall into the cynical view that “all the bums are the same.” Yes, our system needs major reform to have our elected representatives better reflect the views of their constituents and not of the groups that fund their campaigns. But elections do matter when it comes to clean energy policy. We’ve made huge strides in Maryland and DC on clean energy and environmental legislation. Pennsylvania’s outgoing Governor has a record that matches the best of any other leader. But these gains can be easily reversed. To get to a cleaner, greener future, we need human energy from voters this November. Staying home is not an option.

Go (Green) Back to School

2010-09-01T09:22:00.000-07:00

There’s a lot riding on the shoulders of the students in Maryland, DC, Delaware, Pennsylvania and the rest of the nation who are beginning a new school year. Sure, they have the usual academic and social challenges that have beguiled students over the years. But they have an added challenge – figuring out a way to get this nation to seriously fight global climate change. Their elders have failed them. The Congress has let yet another year go by without passing any kind of cap on carbon and the other greenhouse gases that cause climate change. The general public doesn’t seem to have any burning desire to actually solve the problem. It will likely take a new generation making a push to actually get anything done at the national level. That’s where the students come in.

Recycled paper and eco friendly school supplies only get you so far. The next step for students is to join their school’s green club. If the school doesn’t have one yet, form one. Every high school in the Mid Atlantic should have a green club. The green club should push students, teachers, and the school administration to adopt practices that reduce their carbon footprints, whether it’s switching to wind power, installing solar, getting more energy efficient, or other measures. That’s step one. Step two is to bring climate education into the curriculum. Green clubs can work with the Alliance for Climate Education (ACE) or other groups to do this. Step three is to have the green club act as a driving force to push for local or national legislation to cap and cut greenhouse gases. Students may be too young to vote, but they bring something that candidates for office need almost as much – energy, time, and a megaphone. Organized campaigns by green clubs can have an impact on how local politicians vote. I’m sure of it. Finally, step three is to unite forces. High school green clubs should work together to promote a common message and share resources. It’s far more effective that way.

Clean Currents will be doing our part to help these efforts. Our Green Neighborhood Challenge Two will have a special school division, so we can focus our efforts on supporting the work of green clubs. We are also going to partner with ACE to bring more serious climate education into the schools. We also want to act as a facilatator for green clubs working together, making sure best practices and messages are shared.

Young people have made a lot of changes in our history, it's time for them to step up again.

If you are, or you know a student going to High School this year, let us know how we can help. Simply email gogreen@cleancurrents.com.

A Simple Test for Green

2010-07-21T18:32:00.000-07:00

Consumers who care about the environment are a prime target of green washing, fake "green" companies. This is no surprise. Environmentally conscious consumers are generally well educated and well off. They are a great target market and thus tempting to companies that might otherwise have no green interest (environmental "green," that is).

You have to do a little additional homework to separate the truly green companies from the green washers. I propose this simple three part test to figure out who talks "green" and who actually walks "green:"

1. Does the company only offer green products or is a green product part of a group of products, including polluting products?

Are they promoting "wind power" on the one hand, while selling massive amounts of coal or nuclear power on the other hand?

2. Are the company's operations certified as being sustainable by a legitimate third party entity, which performs an actual on-site audit?

For example, when Clean Currents got certified by Montgomery County Maryland's Department of Environmental Protection, we had auditors visit our office to ensure we are doing everything we claimed we were. Any kind of "green registry" that does not require a third party audit is worthless.

3. Does the company work with advocacy groups to support environmental legislation beyond legislation that would directly improve the company's business?

A solar company that advocates for increased solar incentives does not count. That's pure self interest. But companies like Clean Currents that push for broad legislation that reduces carbon emissions, or that cleans up the Bay make a real difference beyond their immediate self interest.

So, if a company claims they are sustainable on their web site, ask them for proof. If they say they donate money to non profits, or support planting trees or something like that, tell them that's not enough. Even Exxon Mobil donates to charities like that. The true test is what are they doing to change the laws of this nation (or of their home states or cities)? Voluntary green actions are great, and they are important in terms of making a difference. Environmental consumers have the power to change the way business is done, to ensure that every company becomes a true green minded entity instead of a green washer trying to make a quick buck on the latest fad. By purchasing products only from green companies that pass the simple green test, you are ensuring that there will be a growing industry of truly green businesses that protect the planet while protecting their bottom line.

Pennsylvania’s Future Could Be Sunny - Act Now

2010-06-10T07:10:00.000-07:00

The Pennsylvania legislature is considering a bill (HB 2405) that would dramatically increase the amount of solar in the state, plus provide new demand for clean, renewable wind power. If passed, this legislation will once again cement the Keystone state as a national clean energy leader. Clean Currents is proud to be supporting this vital bill.

The bill would increase the percentage of energy that must be produced by solar energy in the state six-fold, creating enough solar energy to power more than 400,000 homes. It would practically double the amount of energy coming from wind power or clean biomass. It would also provide additional consumer protections and extend the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS) out until 2024.

Importantly, this is a bi-partisan effort. Clean energy should not be held hostage to politics, and it’s good to see that in Pennsylvania there is support from both sides of the aisle.
The fate of the bill is uncertain, however. So, if you live in Pennsylvania, please take action immediately!

Click here to go to Penn Future’s web page and contact your legislator. Ask them to support HB 2405, for a cleaner, greener future in Pennsylvania.

Clean Currents is proud to be offering wind power for homes and businesses now in Pennsylvania. We would be even more interested in opening an office for solar energy installation if this bill passes.

Victory on Carbon in Montgomery County

2010-05-27T10:16:00.000-07:00

Victory in Montgomery County

Just as I was starting to sour on the elected leadership of Montgomery County, Maryland, they once again show that when it comes to progressive environmental laws, there's no place like it in the nation. Under the leadership of Roger Berliner, the County Council adopted the first (I believe) carbon tax in the U.S. The tax effects the one large carbon polluter in the county, the Dickerson coal fired power plant owned by Mirant. It is a modest tax, only expected to raise $7.5 to $15 million a year from Mirant. However, in this age of deficits and government spending cuts, this is a welcome piece of new revenue for the county to use to support clean energy and energy efficiency programs.

Though this is progressive Montgomery County, the vote on this bill was not easy. I was proud to come out in support of the bill and to lobby for it, but unfortunately, on the day of the hearings, Americans for Prosperity, a group funded by one of the biggest oil barons in the nation, as well as Exxon and others, showed up. And let me put this simply - they were not in a mood to discuss the pros and cons of the bill. They came to disrupt, to shout, and to scare our elected leaders into submission. I had come to politely give my support for the Carbon Tax bill and was shocked to find myself in the midst of a tea party mob of 100 people or so. The good guys only numbered a handful, among them Keith and the CCAN crew, Amanda from Clean Currents, and Fred Teal, super star Green Neighborhood leader for Clean Currents.

I almost lost my temper when they started cat-calling and disrupting the testimony of my good friend and climate hero, Mike Tidwell, Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. Luckily, Mike kept his cool as he explained how Mirant has repeatedly violated environmental rules, fights new environmental legislation, and is contributing significantly to climate change. I was never more proud.

Then, Council Members George Leventhal and Roger Berliner spoke, and they demonstrated the exact right way to handle these flat-earther tea party types. They didn't back down, apologize, or go quietly behind closed doors to express their views. Instead, they took the Mirant company official who testified out to the proverbial woodshed. They got Mirant to admit that climate change is real, is caused by man, and must be addressed (unlike the Mirant supporters and various morons in the audience who were shouting that climate change is a hoax). They got Mirant to admit that the energy that the coal plant produces doesn't even serve Montgomery County (we just get the pollution). Finally, Roger Berliner asked how Mirant could afford to pump $500 million into upgrades at the plant (forced to do so against their will, by the passage of the Healthy Air Act), but would shut down over a $7.5 to $15 million tax. The Mirant guy said that if the tax were added to the costs of the plant's operations, the plant would not be profitable (are you listening Wall Street?). Either he is stretching the truth or this is the most unprofitable coal plant in the history of the world. Most coal plants like this are gold mines for their owners.

If this Carbon Tax stands, it will serve as a model for other towns, cities, counties and places to fight climate change, promote clean energy, and bring in new revenue. Of course, a Federal effort would be better, but if we can't get a bill done with 59 or 60 Democrats in control of the Senate, we'll never get one. We need to do this from the ground up.

My hope is that the County will now fund its award winning Clean Energy Rewards program again, plus other worthy clean energy/energy efficiency programs. Way to go MoCo!

It's About the Spill, Stupid

2010-05-13T11:31:00.001-07:00

Today's blog is about as simple as it gets.

No more oil drilling off our coasts - the consequences of an accident, even just one, are too monumental.

Off to the Races - Who are the Green Candidates?

2010-04-28T12:37:00.001-07:00

With the end of the Maryland General Assembly Session, and the primaries just around the corner, politicians are scrambling in earnest to get their campaigns for office in high gear. We have many exciting races, from Cheryl Kagan and Roger Manno running for Senate in Montgomery County, to exciting races for state Delegate. The District of Columbia also will have a heated primary at the Mayoral and Council levels. We can expect the candidates to tout their environmental, or "green" credentials, whether they are first time candidates or running for re-election. It is the responsibility of each of us to fully understand the truth behind the green claims made by the candidates.

Many green-minded voters look at two things when deciding on a candidate - endorsements by green organizations (CCAN, Sierra Club, LCV), and, if they are an incumbent, their League of Conservation Voters (LCV) scorecard. Unfortunately, if you don't know the context of these items, they can possibly mislead you about the environmental credentials of a candidate.

Endorsements - I have had the honor of participating in the process of environmental endorsements in Maryland. I know it's a serious, tough process. There is a lot of weight given to incumbency. Basically, if an incumbent has a good record (ie. good LCV scorecard), he/she will likely get the endorsement, even if the challenger is an incredible grassroots environmental activist. It makes sense. You want to be able to reward people for voting the right way on environmental issues. However, as a voter, you don't have to do that. You can vote for the candidate that you think will be best on the environment, regardless of whether one is the incumbent or not.

Additionally, the issues that determine if someone is "good" on the environment or not are kind of subjective. In other words, unless someone is good on every single issue, and by the way - those issues did not have opposing viewpoints within the environmental community, the people who decide endorsements must weigh which issues count more than others. There are a host of environmental issues, from climate change, to clean energy, air pollution, stormwater management, water quality, toxins, land use, etc.

LCV Scorecard - The scorecard, like the endorsements is also somewhat subjective. Because I've walked the halls of Annapolis, I know that someone can have a 90% or even a 100% voting record and not be worth voting for. How is that? Because not all votes are the same. There are "easy" votes and "hard" votes. For example, the Democrats are a large majority in both the Maryland House and Senate. If you are a Democratic official, and your leadership in the House or Senate supports a bill, and it gets out of committee, it is not that hard of a vote to take in support of the bill. If you're from Montgomery County, it's even easier. In Maryland, the harder votes tend to come in committee, where bills live or die. Typically, if a bill gets out of committee, it passes the full chamber.

LCV does not score every environmental bill that comes up for a vote, either. It only scores the one that a handful of environmental groups have agreed are worthy of scoring. Again, if there is some disagreement about a bill, it usually will not get scored.

The point I'm making is that I support the environmental endorsement process, and I think the LCV scorecard is very useful. But to be an educated environmental voter, you need to look further in depth into the process. You need to figure out what were the truly hard votes and which were easy. You need to determine which candidate demonstrates leadership and not just voting the right way. It's a lot of work, but then again, the environment is worth it.

Clean Currents will be keeping track of the races in our neck of the woods - mainly Montgomery County. We will be happy to let you know which candidates truly support green energy and green jobs, and which ones don't. Stay tuned.

Don't Let County Executive Leggett Kill Clean Energy Program in MoCo

2010-03-18T08:48:00.001-07:00

County Executive Leggett Kills Funding for Clean Energy Rewards

Action by Council Can Still Save the Program

Montgomery County has been building an impressive green infrastructure, block by green block, these past several years, but County Executive Ike Leggett's decision to kill one of the County's most successful green programs is a significant step backwards. In his recently announced budget plan, Mr. Leggett has proposed to entirely kill the Clean Energy Rewards Program. This makes no sense, and we need to get the County Council to act to reverse Mr. Leggett's mistake.

The concept of the Clean Energy Rewards program is simple. Montgomery County electricity users get, in effect, a tax credit against the County energy tax if they buy clean energy. When the Program was created, after a bill championed by Council Member George Leventhal passed the County Council, the idea was to use some funds from the County energy tax to fund the program. Clean Currents has been a certified vendor in the program since its inception. It has worked remarkably well. People, businesses, faith institutions and others have bought clean energy for the very first time. Tons of carbon, the main greenhouse gas causing climate change, have been offset. In fact, the program is one of the most cost effective ways the county has been able to reduce or offset carbon emissions. Montgomery County is the only county in the nation with a program like this. It has won national acclaim, deservedly so, for running this program.

Last year, the program cost the County $550,000. Mr. Leggett is now proposing to raise the energy tax by an additional $50 million. Some of that tax revenue should go to fund the Clean Energy Rewards Program. It is hard to understand why the County Executive did not merely raise the energy tax another half million dollars so that he could fund this incredibly effective green program. He says he had to make "hard decisions," to balance the budget. But I would suggest that being environmentally responsible is for the good times and the bad. For the good budgets and the lean ones. Opposition to progressive environmental standards often comes in the guise of "it will hurt the economy." But here in Montgomery County, our leaders must not fall for that line of thinking. They must stand up for environmental protection in all times. The issue of tackling climate change cannot wait until some future time. We must act now to start addressing it. That's what Cong. Chris Van Hollen says, it is what other progressive leaders say, and it must be what Montgomery County says.

Let's reverse this bad decision. Please send an email immediately to Council President Nancy Floreen asking her to restore funding for Clean Energy Rewards.

Her email is councilmember.floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov

If you want to email other Council Members, please go to

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/csltmpl.asp?url=/content/council/index.asp

Back to the States

2010-03-04T07:12:00.001-08:00

In the waning days of the Bush-Cheney administration, environmental groups and concerned businesses started a dramatic shift in strategy in the effort to combat radical climate change. They shifted from a state level strategy back to a Capitol Hill strategy. With the election of Barak Obama and a super majority Democratic Congress, this choice made even more sense. For a brief moment, it seemed like the United States would adopt national legislation to promote clean energy and reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. Unfortunately, that moment may have passed. Seems like it's time to go back to the states.

The benefits of doing something at the Federal level vs. the state level are clear. We can cause a much more significant change in our fossil fuel use at the national level. The problem is that we seem to live in an era (and hopefully it's temporary) when our political system is simply broken, and unable to solve the large national questions of the day. Maybe the problem is the Senate, where tiny Wyoming, with about 1.5% of the population of California has the same number of Senators. Maybe the problem is the money in politics, the fundraising and the favors. Who knows? Bottom line - I don't expect any significant bill to come from Capitol Hill.

So, we're back to working the states. The record there is pretty impressive. Thanks to a lot of hard work in Maryland, we've got some pretty progressive environmental/clean energy laws here. Maryland is part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), committing to a ten percent reduction in greenhouse gases from power plants along with nine other states in the northeast. RGGI is on the right track and with some improvement can make some real significant cuts in greenhouse gases. California and other western states are adopting a similar plan.

The way to make these kind of efforts even more impactful is to deal with the issue of "leakage," or out-of-state emissions related to energy use in state. This can be done. California, for example, can require a large portion of power delivered to it to come from clean sources, or have a cap on greenhouse gases associated with it. That way, emissions from power plants in Nevada, Idaho, or other western states would be reduced. If we did this in the Mid Atlantic, we could reduce emissions from plants in states such as Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and elsewhere. In other words, an action in a few states could have an impact in many. We don't need to pass progressive environmental and clean energy laws in every state, just in the states where most of the people live and most of the jobs are. Luckily, those states are generally the most open to progressive legislation to combat climate change or to promote clean energy.

I hope I'm wrong about Capitol Hill. But if I'm not, let's get back to work in the states.

The Power of (Green) Community

2010-02-03T16:25:00.000-08:00

While the snow fell last Saturday and most people were in their warm homes, or out shoveling, something really special and unique was happening in Rockville. Clean Currents, led by our incredible staff (way to go Amanda and Kristi!) was hosting our very first Green Neighborhood Challenge Leadership training. More than 35 people braved the elements to attend. As far as I know, this is the first time a for- profit company hosted and led an environmental activist training event. The fact that this event took place, that people were extremely excited and interested, speaks volumes about the kind of company Clean Currents is. It is hard to imagine any other company, green or otherwise, hosting a meeting like this in our area.

Cultivating relationships with activists is part of our mission, and reflects on the unique position of Clean Currents. As a company, we understand that confronting climate change is going to take an "all of the above" approach. Voluntary actions are important, but only as far as they change people's conscience, only as far as they change the values of our society. That's where activism comes in. Once we change people's conscience we need to change our nation's laws. This will happen by people from all over the political spectrum getting active and getting things done. It's a two step process. Clean Currents offers a great, green product that is available to the general public, unlike say a Prius or other green items that come with a relatively hefty price tag. Our wind power for homes actually may save people money, yet it also opens a window to a new world for them. They get on our eNewsletter list and learn about all the other ways they can positively effect the world through voluntary actions or legislation.

That's what this past week's leadership training was about- giving citizens the tools they need to educate their neighbors about the fight to end climate change. It's not enough to sign up for wind power at home. We need to do more. Hopefully these leaders will go out and spread that message. And hopefully other companies will follow Clean Currents example and recognize that being a good green corporate citizen means much more than putting a green sticker on your window and buying recycled paper for your printers. It means engaging the public, giving the public the tools they need, and giving the public a platform to work from.

keepin' it green

Promoting Clean Energy in Good Times and Bad - Legislative Preview

2010-01-20T08:37:00.000-08:00

This will be the year we see which of our elected leaders steps up to the challenge of promoting clean energy even in tough economic times. The Maryland and Virginia General Assembly sessions are just getting started with all the talk about budget deficits, while local counties are also grappling with massive budget holes. This means that some leaders will be tempted to gut, kill or raid funding from programs designed to promote clean energy. It's already starting to happen.

Montgomery County has a unique and extremely successful program designed to promote clean energy and effectively reduce carbon emissions. It's called "Clean Energy Rewards." Clean Currents was a proud certified vendor in the program. I say "was" because County Executive Ike Leggett is considering a budget that would completely cut funding for the program for the next fiscal year (starting July 1, 2010). Yup, not a funding reduction but a complete zeroing out of the budget. This, despite the fact that the County has won national kudos for the program and has rightfully pointed out how effective it is at reducing carbon emissions. Why cut such a successful program? Tight budget, of course. The message this action would send is clear - Montgomery County only fights climate change and promotes clean energy when times are good.

In Annapolis, the picture may be brighter. There, the Governor is crafting an energy package that will continue and build upon the state's support for solar energy. It will also promote off-shore wind, and electric cars. Let's hope our state legislators have the foresight to pass the Governor's energy package, even in these tight budget times. The solar energy industry association is asking for some additional items that may not be included in the Governor's energy package, yet they are vital to the industry's growth. These include up-front payments for Solar Credits (SRECs), which would dramatically reduce the initial payment needed to install a system. Small wind installers are looking for a better framework for their industry. Maybe a legislative champion will step up to fight for this small, but growing clean energy sector. It would really help farmers on the Eastern Shore. Environmental advocates are pushing for a clean energy first bill, which would instruct the Public Service Commission to favor renewable energy for new generation in the state. Sounds like a good idea, but I'll need to see the details. Finally, Delegate Herman Taylor is crafting a bill that would help make electricity choice more widespread in Maryland. Definitely a good idea.

I'll keep tabs on Annapolis and will let you know when something worthwhile needs your attention. In the meantime, we need to start contacting Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett, to let him know that Clean Energy Rewards should be fully funded. He can bring the program back to life by putting the funding back in the County budget before he presents it March 15. The climate cannot wait. This is the time to act. Contact the County Executive at ocemail@montgomerycountymd.gov. Be sure to CC me at gary@cleancurrents.com when you send an email. Stay tuned for more in the next blog.

2009-12-21T14:31:00.000-08:00

To Really Save the Planet, Stop Just Going Green

"To really save the planet, stop going green." Those powerful words headline a recent piece by Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) and our nation's leading visionary for a cleaner, greener future. Strong, but true words, spoken at the exact right point. I believe that we've now reached a tipping point in the world of all things "green." Every business with even a hint of a consumer face now has some "green" statement, message, program or item. Businesses across the nation, including Clean Currents, are committed to some sort of voluntary environmental pledge. The greening of America's businesses is done. No, not literally done. There's still a lot to do. But the process has been started and will only continue to grow. Everybody is already, or about to, "go green." That's great, but now it's time to move to the next phase and that's where Mike Tidwell's strong words come in.

The recent news about companies leaving the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is perhaps the first battle in the next phase of our march to a secure climate, free of global warming. Apple led the charge of companies leaving the Chamber, which also included electric utilities such as Exelon. Nike resigned from the Board of the Chamber. All of this was done because of the Chamber's stance on climate change legislation. Apple and these others are showing that just 'going green' is no longer enough. That was Climate 1.0. In Climate 2.0, all of us, consumers, businesses, etc. will be judged on our greeness not just by our voluntary actions, but by our commitment to positive legislation that will dramatically cut the greenhouse gases causing climate change.

I'm proud to work together with my colleagues in the non-profit environmental advocacy world to push for this kind of legislation at both the state and national level. At Clean Currents, we incentivize our employees to get involved by providing a subsidy for membership in environmental organizations and by encouraging them to make their voices heard in the climate debate. We need to change the laws of this nation to better protect our environment. Yet, we should also continue our voluntary efforts. They make a small difference, perhaps, but they also introduce people to important environmental values. They educate the broad swath of the population that helping the environment can sometimes help protect your bottom line as well. I understand that it is a combination of voluntary actions and positive environmental legislation that will save the planet. Thus, I would tweak Mike's words to perhaps say, "to really save the planet, stop just going green."

In 2010, Clean Currents will commit to improving our environmental performance. We will work for positive environmental legislation in the nation's capital, and in our home state of Maryland. We will help our employees and customers understand the nature, and urgency, of the energy choices before us. We aim to be a leader in Climate 2.0 - to advocate for green laws as well as continue to make green choices. Our planet's future is at stake, so we can do no less.

Is a Company Green Because it Sells Green Products?

2009-12-10T06:50:00.000-08:00

Solar companies (installers, manufacturers, etc.) are generally thought of as "green" companies by the general public. But I wonder if this is true? Not just for solar - but for any company selling something green. Does selling a green product make for a green company? The answer is important, because many consumers want to "vote with their wallets" by supporting sustainably oriented companies.

Leafing through the goodie bag given out at the recent Solar Energy Focus 2009 conference, for example, I was struck by the fact that not a single piece, except for the Clean Currents piece, appeared to be printed on FSC paper (paper certified as coming from a sustainable source by the Forest Stewardship Council). This is not a knock on other solar companies, but just illustrates the point that companies selling green products are not necessarily green in all of their operations and actions.

At Clean Currents, environmental sustainability is part of our core business ethic. We are far from perfect, but we do our best to not only sell green products, but to adopt green practices and to support positive environmental advocacy. As part of our commitment to running a green business, we have recently gone through the process of getting our HQ operations certified as green by Montgomery County. An official announcement will be coming shortly. The certification process focuses on areas in which a business can effectively reduce its environmental impact. A few highlights of what Clean Currents is doing:

* We have an environmental mission statement. This is a key first step for any business that wants to be green. The statement includes our policies for purchasing green products (ie. using FSC paper for printing).
* We have a green benefits package for employees, which encourages employees to help the environment.
* We actively support positive environmental advocacy. This is crucial. We are not going to solver climate change with voluntary actions alone. We need a combination of voluntary actions and new legislation to require the use of clean energy and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
* We got our landlord to buy wind power and we offset emissions from employee travel.
* We are members and sponsors of sustainable business groups and environmental non-profit organizations.

Look at other companies in the area. Are they selling green products but not acting in a sustainable way? Are they only pushing legislation that has a direct financial benefit for them? Look around in the solar field. Do the local installers you know walk the environmental walk? Is their care for the environment solely wrapped in the package of solar panels they want to sell you or does it go a little deeper? Look at the ownership and associations of these companies. Do they share your views on the environment and sustainability?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but looking through my solar goody bag, I suspect that the public may be surprised by the variety of approaches (or lack thereof) to sustainability in the clean energy world. There are many great companies out there. But not all are committed to a cleaner environment to the same degree. It's important for environmentally conscious consumers to know who or what is standing behind those nifty green solar panels.

Time to take another look at small wind

2009-11-19T07:06:00.000-08:00

I've been in the clean energy field for close to ten years, and I've had a pretty bearish view on small wind's potential in the Maryland area. The problem was that there was a huge gap in the available technology in this area. There were tiny 2.4 kilowatt (KW) turbines, good only really for a home, and then nothing of significance until you hit the big 1.5 megawatt (MW) utility scale turbines. Now, the situation has changed.

I was at a wind energy conference in Baltimore this week, and heard about companies installing all kinds of different sized turbines. There are 10 KW, 20 KW, and even 100 KW machines that are being used commercially. This means that you can now install turbines to power farms, schools, small businesses, and large businesses. That opens up a whole new market for wind in Maryland and elsewhere. If we do things right, we could see these mid sized turbines springing up all over the state, but especially on the Eastern Shore and Southern Maryland. We can see small "Community" scale wind farms made up of these medium turbines feeding clean energy into our grid.

This is a very positive development. Not only does small wind produce clean energy, it is much easier to get built than large utility scale wind. There is much less opposition and the permitting process appears to be easier. Also, small wind provides distributed power, in parts of the region closer to our large population centers. Don't get me wrong. I am all for large wind projects in western Maryland or offshore. But I'm also for speed, for a quick conversion to clean energy. Small, community sized projects may provide us facts on the ground immediately. We don't have to wait.

Small wind needs help, however. The Maryland Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) provides incentives for energy companies to buy wind and other clean, renewable energy sources. But the incentive is not enough to bring on the level of small wind projects we need. The incentive in the RPS needs to be more like the incentive in the Solar "carve out" in the RPS. I don't have space to explain what a Renewable Energy Credit (REC) is, (check out www.cleancurrents.com), but it's the primary tool that acts as the incentive to build clean energy to meet an RPS. The REC price for wind is currently around $1 or $2, while the REC price for solar is $300. If we allowed small wind systems (say, projects under 10 MW) to be part of the solar carve-out, and hence to raise the value of the small wind REC to that of the solar REC, we'd see an explosion of new wind development in Maryland. We'd see community wind energy developers bring new jobs to the state. The current explosion in solar that's bringing new solar jobs and new solar companies to the state would happen in the small wind area. I think our elected leaders should consider adding small wind to the solar carve out. Small wind is ready for the prime time, and Maryland should welcome it with open arms.

How Green Should a Utility Be?

2009-11-05T07:20:00.000-08:00

I'm really not sure how I feel about utilities in Maryland trying to appear environmentally conscious. Sounds weird, I know. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for anything that decreases our addiction to fossil fuels and helps fight climate change. But I don't know if it's good that Maryland utilities promote their "green" agenda, when it seems that most of the "green" they are doing is simply complying with state law and is on the ratepayers dime. Let me elaborate.

The utilities in Maryland are a strange beast. They are neither a government entity, nor a truly private company in the standard sense of the word. Unlike other private companies, their maximum profits are determined by a government agency (the Public Service Commission), but in exchange they do not have to worry about losing money. They do not acquire customers like a normal for-profit business. They are assigned a given territory. If you live or your office is in that territory, you automatically become their customer. If they want to make an investment in infrastructure, to improve operations or better serve their "customers," they need to get approval from the PSC, the government board. They have certain programs (ie. efficiency) they must run because of state law, yet they get to recoup every dollar they spend from every ratepayer in their territory. Despite all this, they are considered "for profit," and actually have shareholders/investors.

Thus, the utilities have jumped on the green bandwagon and are extolling their commitment to a greener world. If you don't think their green image is important to them, just check out this report by Pepco Holdings, owner of one of the state's utilities.

Why is it important for them to brag to investors and others about being green? Because it increases the value of the brand, and thus increases the company value for shareholders.

This is where it gets weird. When a utility in Maryland offers energy efficiency incentives, is that something they should get credit for, or get to brag about as a "green measure?" When they simply comply with the law passed by the state of Maryland, is that a "green" initiative? It's not so clear. A normal company would be using its own money to pay for a program it offers, and thus get to take credit for it, but really it should be something that is above and beyond the minimum requirement of the law, no? But if a utility in Maryland is using ratepayer money to fund the program, what exactly is that utility doing to go above and beyond business as usual?

For example, if Pepco spends money to sponsor something like Bethesda Green, does that money come from their profit or does it come from the Pepco ratepayers? It's really hard to tell. Bethesda Green is a worthy group to sponsor, don't get me wrong. Clean Currents is a proud sponsor. But we don't get to automatically recoup the money we spend on the sponsorship from a captured audience. When a utility does sponsor a worthy cause, should it be allowed to put its logo on the promotional material and get the PR benefit? I don't know. If the utility is using ratepayer money to fund the donation, I think the answer should be "no."

Pepco recently put a link to a carbon calculator on its web site. Ok. Not sure what the point is, but I sort of get it. A calculator only makes sense if it leads to direct action to reduce carbon. The question is, however, did the ratepayers pay to put that calculator up or did it come from Pepco's profits? I don't know the answer.

I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of how the utilities operate. But I think that's sort of the point. There is such a huge gray, undefined area of what a utility can do as this strange beast somewhere between private and public. The best thing to do is to follow the model in DC and Delaware, where the state and district set up a separate Sustainable Energy Utility (SEU). The SEU gets to run all the green programs, using the ratepayers money instead of the utilities doing it. This way, you don't have the ratepayers funding the increased brand value of a private company. You don't have the ratepayers funding the creation of a "green" brand to compete with companies that are in fact truly green.

Public policy, or the public good, is best served by having a neutral party disseminate public funds with an equal playing field for everyone. Putting a semi-for profit company, with an agenda to increase shareholder value in charge of disbursing public funds is not the best way to approach things. If the utilities want to be green, that would be great. But they should do it on their own dime, and they should take actions that go well above and beyond the basic requirements of the law.

Green Power Choice Grows Despite the Recession, in the Right Markets

2009-09-25T11:14:00.000-07:00

Just back from the national Renewable Energy Marketing conference, held this year in Atlanta. The green industry is alive and well, and actually growing even in these tough economic times.

According to the Center for Resource Solutions, the folks who run Green-E Energy, Green-E energy sales increased a whopping 45% in 2008. They say more than 13 million megawatt-hours of certified renewable energy was purchased by 500,000 residential and 20,000 commercial consumers. That's great growth!

I've seen this kind of growth here in the DC area. Thousands of homeowners are making the choice to switch to clean energy along with hundreds of businesses. There's a real green movement in this area.

One interesting point - though 2009 is not done, there is some data to show green power sales trends this year, and it's not as good as 2008, in certain markets.

The markets where green power purchasing is down are markets that are fully "regulated," ie. markets where the only "choice" consumers have is the choice of their monopoly utility. In more open markets, such as Maryland and DC, where consumers have a real choice to buy power through competitive energy suppliers or innovative green startups, the green power market continues to rise.

This makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Utilities, by nature, are about as innovative as a slice of bread. Many, if not all, are large, quasi-government run behemoths that don't know how to market, or how to take risks, or how to think in the new economy. The green power programs they run are considered a huge success if they sign up 4% of their market. There is practically never a chance for a consumer to save money and go green at the same time. Utilities such as BGE, Pepco and others may not have bad intentions, but they simply are not green companies. Asking utilities to offer innovative new green products is like asking the U.S. Postal Service to turn a profit. They just don't think that way.

On the other hand, companies like Clean Currents can innovate, market in new ways, and offer savings to consumers who want to go green.

It's no wonder that open markets work better for promoting green power than do monopoly utility markets.

Brief Musings on the Loss of the Green Jobs Czar

2009-09-08T13:34:00.000-07:00

The White House has lost Van Jones, the Green Jobs Czar, sacrificed at the alter of the 24 hour news beast. I'm not going to wade into the controversy about Jones. You can find out more about that at other sources. I am extremely disapointed that we are losing a person who knows more about green job creation and community development than 99% of the rest of the country. On this subject, there are few, if any stronger than Van Jones. The question is - what will the Obama Adminstration do now?

Obviously, health care seems to be the top priority right now. But climate change is not going away, and there is a huge green energy/green jobs/climate bill still working its way through the Senate. The White House needs a point person on this issue. There must be somebody to focus the power of the White House bully pulpit on passing the bill. There needs to be somebody with Van Jone's weight in the progressive community to rally the grassroots. I don't know who the right person is, but I know that we need somebody and we need them now. President Obama should work with all due haste to fill these enormous shoes. The damage of delay will be immense. It will not only be a huge blow for a greener economy, but will also hurt Obama politically. He needs to show strength by appointing another fire-breating, take-no-prisoners, unapologetic green jobs warrior to take the batton from Mr. Jones. The climate cannot wait.

Going on an Energy Diet

2009-07-30T09:16:00.000-07:00

Of all the diets that one can go on, an energy diet has got to be among the easiest things to do. There are many low hanging fruit in every household, which will bring energy savings and the shedding of carbon pounds from your life. I know I'm a little bit of a zealot, but I actually look forward to seeing my electric bill every month. Why? Because I am so thrilled to see how little electricity my household uses compared to years past.

Not too long ago, my house of six people was pretty average in Maryland. We used about 1,000 KwH a month of electricity. In Summer, we would hit 1,400 or so, and in Winter, we'd drop to 600 or so. This Summer, in May, June, and July, we've been averaging 650 KwH a month! I'm not saying this to brag so much as to let you know how easy it is to go on an energy diet. Most importantly, you can do this without any loss of quality of life.

In my house, we've made investments over the years in insulation, air sealing, and energy star windows. When we've had to replace an appliance, we've purchased the most energy efficient one we could find (within our budget). We use CFL's and got rid of energy hogging halogen lights.

One of the best investments was a $45 programmable thermostat. By simply following the Energy Star guidelines, I knocked 3-5% off my energy use. Going beyond those settings (which I did), knocked off another few percent.

By doing all these great energy efficiency measures, I could now go solar and have the solar array produce 60%-80% of my Summer power. That's huge!

The point is that going on an Energy Diet is simple to do and should not be put off until tomorrow. Not sure how to get started? We at Clean Currents are proud to have partnered with ecobeco to provide Energy Efficiency and Green Energy Assesments for low cost. Have the folks from ecobeco come to your house and you'll find out how to get started on your Energy Diet today.

Checking In on the Maryland Renewable Standard

2009-07-08T08:05:00.000-07:00

Some of us fought tooth and nail for several years to get Maryland to adopt a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) in 2004. It wasn't easy. We had a reluctant legislature, a Governor opposed to us, and a large contingent of the business community expressing concerns about costs. There was a lot said in 2004 about the bill and its impact. So now that we are in 2009, it's worth checking the latest compliance reports to see what is actually happening. The results are very surprising. So far, it turns out, none of us were right.

First, a very brief background. The RPS requires any entity that sells electricity in Maryland (a "Load Serving Entity" or "LSE") to get a percentage of its power from clean, renewable sources. The percentage starts low (it is currently below 5%) and rises over time. The way electricity companies comply with the law is to submit Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) from qualified sources, to the Maryland Public Service Commission. If an LSE fails to meet the requirement, it must pay an "Alternative Compliance Payment" or "ACP" to the PSC. The ACP is meant to put a ceiling on how much an RPS would cost ratepayers, while also acting as a market setter for the cost of RECs. One of the biggest battles in the RPS war, besides the level of the ACP, was over the definition of clean, renewable energy. Solar, wind and sustainable biomass were all obvious choices to include, but industry and some politicians wanted us to include their favored sources, such as Municipal Solid Waste Incineration (MSW), or what I like to call, "burning garbage" and "black liquor," which is not moonshine, but actually a by product of making paper that can be burned to make electricity.

In the end, we compromised by making two tiers for the RPS, a Tier 1 and a Tier 2. The Tier 1 renewables are solar, wind, sustainable biomass... plus, "small" hydro, which is a hydro plant under 30 megawatts, wood chips used for co-firing with coal, captured methane from landfills (technically not renewable, but at least helping the climate by keeping methane out of the air), and yes, black liquor. This last item was inserted at the very last minute by Bill Pitcher, who was then the lobbyist for MeadWestvaco, a paper mill in western Maryland. At the time, he claimed, and the Senate Democratic leadership agreed, that including black liquor would only help MeadWestvaco meet the RPS without any hardship on them, thus avoiding the plant closing or leaving Maryland. Small hydro was including over our objections. It is clean and renewable, but there already exists many small hydro plants in the area and thus there is no need to incentivize them to get built.

Tier 2 includes burning garbage and large hydro. The good news is that Tier 2 ends in 2019.

So, now that you have the background, here is the update on what is actually happening.

In 2008, Tier 1 was met by the following sources

Black Liquor 37%

Waste Wood 30%

Small Hydro 17%

Landfill Gas 15%

Wind 1/2 of 1%

Solar too small to even count!!!

Sustainable Biomass None!

Tier 2 was met by:

Large Hydro 85%

Burning Garbage 15%

As you can see, it is not a very pretty picture.

Now let's examine claims that both sides made in 2004 and see who is right or wrong so far.

The Green Side

1. RPS will lead to development of wind power in the region.

WRONG. So far, it has done a lot for black liquor and wood waste but nothing for wind. Allowing black liquor and wood waste into the RPS has seriously crowded out wind power.

2. RPS will lead to clean energy development in Maryland.

WRONG. So far, litigation and the economy has prevented wind farm construction in Maryland. Also, allowing LSE's to meet their RPS obligation with RECs from all over the PJM electric grid and beyond has meant there was no incentive to build right here in Maryland.

3. RPS will not have a huge cost on ratepayers.

RIGHT. So far, the RECS used for compliance are so cheap to be almost worthless.

The Other Side

1. Black liquor will only be used to help MeadWestvaco.

WRONG. As we see, black liquor DOMINATES the RPS. It is a huge loophole in the law that allows ratepayer support for a source of energy that is not clean and not renewable and in no need of additional support.

2. The RPS will add 2 cents/KWh to everybody's electric bills.

DEAD WRONG. The RPS RECs in Tier 1 currently seem to go for about 4/100's of 1 cent. That is 40 times less than the opponents said it would cost.

3. The RPS will cause economic hardship for Maryland businesses.

WRONG. There has not been a single case of a Maryland business applying for an economic hardship waiver in the RPS. The costs are negligible.

CONCLUSION

Obviously, we need to do some things to fix the RPS. It was not meant to be a black liquor/waste wood incentive bill, but that's what it is right now.

Stay tuned for the next blog, exploring how the various LSE's responded to the RPS, to see how things are going in the Solar Carve-Out, and to see what we can do to fix things.

Energy Musings

2009-05-11T13:53:00.000-07:00

All the energy action is on Capitol Hill this month.

As Representatives Waxman and Markey sheppard through their climate legislation, many people of good will are debating what is the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while growing the green energy economy. The debate has crystalized to three significant points of view. There is the "cap and trade" crowd, the "carbon tax" crowd, and the "cap and dividend" crowd. All three have merit.

Personally, I love the cap and dividend concept being pushed by climate champion, Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. It makes so much sense politically and from a policy stand point as well. The idea is that the government would put a cap on emissions and polluters would have to buy permits for carbon emissions. That's just like the "cap" on the "cap and trade" bill. Where they differ is that Mr. Van Hollen's measure would take the money that's collected and distribute it to every single American as a payment. Just like Alaska share's oil revenue with its citizens, the U.S. government would be sharing carbon revenue with its citizens. Every citizen would thus have a stake in constraining carbon emissions, creating the widespread support that is desperately needed. The beauty of this approach is also in its simplicity. There would be no special interest exceptions, or extra benefits to any particular group or industry. Just like Social Security, every citizen would get a check regardless of income.

But right now, the big push is for the "cap and trade" bill. In fact, the bill could be on the House floor before Memorial Day. While the bill is not perfect, it would finally put this country on a path to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, something unthinkable during the long winter of the Bush administration. It would also establish a national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), requiring electricity providers in this country to get 15% renewable energy and reduce energy consumption 5% within a short time. This would have the effect of dramatically increasing the amount of clean, renewable energy available in many parts of the country.

Over the next few weeks and months, there will be a lot of debate within the green community about the pros and cons of the current climate bill. There will be a lot of hand wringing about concessions that are needed to get votes in Congress. But let's not lose sight of the fact that we are talking about finally cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. This is the Super Bowl of the climate movement that we've been waiting for, for so many years. We're finally here with our chance to literally save the planet. The magnitude of this moment is immense. There are climate activists who have labored in this field for years and years, with little to no results. They were ignored, belittled, and shunted aside. Now, finally the United States Congress and the President are on our side. What a moment in time!

Two Sides to Energy Legislation in Maryland

2009-04-13T06:14:00.000-07:00

Two Sides to Energy Legislation in Maryland

As I write this, another legislative session in Annapolis is drawing to a close. Two bills that emerged in this session illustrate the right way and the wrong way to handle energy related legislation. The fact that both bills were supported by Governor O'Malley is perhaps a curious case of an Administration with multiple personalities, or maybe just a case of politics trumping reason. In either event, I'm thrilled to see both the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) become law and the electricity Re-Regulation bill defeated.

The GWSA, championed by House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D - Rockville), is a progressive piece of legislation that puts Maryland at the forefront of efforts to address the very real danger of unchecked greenhouse gas emissions. The bill puts Maryland on course to dramatically reduce our carbon footprint as a state. It was crafted over the course of two years. The Department of Environment, under the leadership of Secretary Shari Wilson, led a process that brought in any interested stakeholders to come to consensus on the bill. Opponents of the bill, including labor unions and Maryland's remaining industrial manufacturers, had a fair chance to provide input on the legislation. In the end, Ms. Wilson was able to craft a compromise that change opponents into proponents while preserving the integrity of the bill. The end result is a bill that pleases the environmental community, labor unions, manufacturers and many others. Clean Currents was proud to be a supporter of this historic bill.

Contrast that with the botched attempt to end customer choice for electricity in Maryland. The so-called Re-Regulation bill (a misnomer because electricity is already regulated in our state) was hoisted upon the General Assembly in what appeared to be a hastily crafted attempt to score some political points on the anger many people feel over rising energy costs. The bill was introduced without any consultation with the solar energy industry or the major wind developers in Maryland. No environmental groups were brought on board. Instead, a bizaro world coalition of groups were brought together to support the bill. MaryPIRG, a consumer rights group, supported the bill because they said they thought it would prevent a new nuclear plant from being built, yet the chief sponsor of the bill talked about the bill being a main vehicle to build new power plants. AARP and the seemingly directionless Progressive Maryland supported the bill because they said it would lower electricity prices, yet the Chairman of the Public Service Commission said it would do no such thing. The Governor supported the bill, claiming it would be good for renewable energy. Yet the renewable energy industry came out against the bill, forcing the Governor to exempt wind power from the legislation.

Interested parties were not brought into the process until the very last moment, after the bill was already introduced. Confusion ran rampant among legislators, causing some to vote for this ill-conceived bill without really understanding it. Progressive legislators like Sen. Mike Lennet (D- Silver Spring), for example, voted for the bill despite opposition from his own constituents, clean energy companies (including Clean Currents), concern from environmental advocates, and no evidence whatsover that the bill would do anything positive for ratepayers. Others, like Sen. Rob Garagiola (D- Potomac) opposed the bill because they understood its promises did not match its reality. One of the original sponsors of the bill, Delegate Herman Taylor (D- Olney), a man on the Economic Matters Committee that would decide the fate of the bill was brushed aside by the Governor in favor of Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (D- Bethesda), a well meaning freshman Delegate who has no real experience in electricity legislation.

All this confusion, total lack of consensus, and poor handling of the issue, doomed the Re-Regulation bill. The Governor seemed to be genuinely surprised by the opposition to his bill from the clean energy sector and the serious concerns expressed by environmental activists. That's unfortunate. Because while one part of his administration showed amazing leadership and vision in bringing all stakeholders together for the Global Warming Solutions Act, another part of his administration did just the opposite with the Re-Regulation bill. The Governor should use the interim to follow the path set by Ms. Wilson and Majority Leader Barve. Bring together interested parties, discuss the goals the Governor is trying to achieve, and forge a consensus. We all want a secure energy future in Maryland, so it shouldn't be impossible to find a means to get there.

A Bad Energy Bill in Annapolis

2009-03-02T12:27:00.000-08:00

Here is my testimony against SB 795, a very bad energy bill being considered right now in Annapolis.

Testimony submitted to: Senate Finance Committee
Submitted by: Gary Skulnik
President
Clean Currents
155 Gibbs Street, Suite 425
Rockville, MD 20850
Bill: SB 795
Position: OPPOSE (UNFAVORABLE)

Here in Maryland, we have renewed activity in the competitive electricity market. Commercial customers are locking in contracts for fixed rate power, for one to five years at rates not seen in years. This is saving businesses big time at a time when they most need it. Residents are finally getting into the act as well. Thanks to C Green and other programs, homeowners can sign up for alternative supplies of energy at below market rates, and get green power at the same time. This robust electricity market has spurred the growth of Clean Currents, a Rockville based sustainably operated clean energy company. At a time when many companies are talking layoffs and downsizing, Clean Currents is actually hiring. It has grown to a staff of ten, from two just a year ago. The company plans on adding more people as the year progresses. These are exactly the kind of green jobs that's on everybody's lips these days from the President on down.

Thanks to initiatives from Governor O'Malley, there is once again a vibrant market for energy efficiency in Maryland. Homeowners and businesses are now or will be very soon able to take advantage of fantastic new rebates, special discounts and other incentives that help them lower their energy use, and thus cut their energy bill. We have a real demand side management program in place after years of neglect, thanks to Empower Maryland.

Maryland's solar energy industry is finally ready for rapid growth. The state could very well put in over 6 megawatts of solar energy in 2009, far surpassing anything that's happened in the past. This solar revolution is part and parcel of the competitive electricity market we are in, with the framework of the Renewable Portfolio Standard on top.

Some people would look at this and say we have an unmitigated success here in Maryland. We have new green jobs, green businesses, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and opportunities to lower electric bills.

Unfortunately, some look at this and call it a "total disaster."

There is a real feeling in Annapolis, it seems, to do something about energy prices, even though much of it is out of our control.

SB 795 is the wrong bill for the environment, for clean energy, and ultimately for consumers.

Wrong for the Environment

In the current deregulated market, consumers can choose green energy from different energy suppliers. Clean Currents has signed up more than 1,500 customers (commercial and residential) to green power since 2006. Passing SB 795 will take away the option of choosing green power for consumers.

The utilities will be able to build coal-fired power plants and force the ratepayers to fund them. This is exactly what happened in Virginia recently. Dominion power is building a new coal fired power plant and the ratepayers of Virginia are footing the bill with an extra charge on their electricity bill.
Utilities are historically reluctant to participate in innovate programs to fund renewable energy development. For example, the three companies that have purchased the most Solar Renewable Energy Credits are Constellation, Washington Gas Energy Services, and Pepco Energy Services, all deregulated energy suppliers, not utilities. These purchase have resulted in major solar projects in Maryland, including the McCormick installation (Baltimore) and the Kelly Electric installation (Prince George's County).

SB 795 will create more greenhouse gas emissions in Maryland.

SB 795 will encourage the building of more coal-fired power plants. This is exactly the opposite of what Maryland leaders are committing to doing (reducing greenhouse gas emissions).

Wrong for the Economy

SB 795 will cost jobs and hurt the burgeoning clean energy industry in Maryland.
Competitive Energy Suppliers will layoff staff. Small green start-ups like Clean Currents will scale back and possibly close. The bill will stifle innovation in the energy sector just at a time when it's needed most.

SB 795 Just Doesn't Work

Commercial customers in Maryland are actively shopping for electricity. Many of them are getting deals that are much better than Standard Offer Service. There is no problem here to "fix."

Commercial customers of Clean Currents have purchased green power at rates below utility standard offer rates. They have saved money and achieved significant marketing/public relations benefits for their companies. This could not happen if SB 795 passes.

Clean Currents worked with residents of Catonsville to do a buying group for clean energy. More than 300 residents participated, getting stable electric rates and creating positive community feelings. This could not happen if SB 795 passes.

SB 795 has too many problems to be easily fixed. We respectfully ask you to OPPOSE SB 795.

Energy Confusion in Maryland

2009-02-10T07:35:00.000-08:00

Marylanders have a lot to be proud of when it comes to setting a course for a clean energy future, but a lack of strong direction from the top could put a major road block in our way. The Governor and the Public Service Commission (PSC) have benefitted from a strong desire of Marylanders to change our energy path. They have been given unprecedented tools to change our energy picture. Yet, there is still a danger that they will not get it right. Here are some examples from the trenches of energy policy in Maryland:

Wasted Money and Effort. I was proud to be one of the main guys who passed a bill that forced then-Governor Ehrlich, against his will, to have Maryland join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI is a group of states from Maine to Maryland that are committed to reducing greenhouse gases from power plants. Polluters have to pay the state to get allowances to emit carbon. The state is awash in cash from this. The idea was for the state to then use this money to promote things that will reduce pollution such as clean energy and energy efficiency. Instead, the Governor has taken a huge chunk of the money and given it to ratepayers in the form of a credit on their electric bill. So, each ratepayer gets a couple of dollars a month back from the state and the Governor will claim he "lowered electric rates." This may make for great politics, but it is about the stupidest idea I've ever seen if you are trying to lower carbon emissions. In fact, it will have the opposite effect. It's like with gas prices, the lower the price, the more energy people consume. Right now, most of our energy comes from fossil fuels, so that means more carbon emissions.

Solar RECs

Legislators passed one of the most progressive policies in the nation to promote solar energy by requiring utilities and energy providers to derive a certain percentage of their power from solar energy. The law requires these entities to buy Solar Renewable Energy Credits (SRECs) from anybody in Maryland with solar panels on their roofs. In essence, it's a way for consumers to get the utilities to pay down the cost of installing solar energy. It's a great program, except for the way the PSC is implementing it. In the age of the Internet, they require homeowners to fill out a paper application and make 14 copies to mail in. Once your application is in, it could take up to six weeks to process and get approval. In one case, the PSC found a couple of sentences from old Maryland code to actually deny SRECs to a Marylander, even though the person followed the proper procedure (at that time) when he put in his solar system. There's no reason the PSC shouldn't have a one click system on a web page to register SRECs.

The Solar Grant.

Did you know you can get a grant from the state of Maryland for installing solar energy? Most people don't. But even if you do, you currently have no idea exactly how much of a grant you can get, or when you can expect to actually see the money. The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) has a wait list of several hundred, and there's no telling when/if those people will get their money. How hard is it for the Governor to set a dedicated amount of money to solar grants for the next five years and provide transparency and certainty in the application process?

Gifts to Utilities

The Governor has charged the utilities with reducing energy use (lowering rates will have the exact opposite effect!). The PSC is finalizing the programs with each utility. The general framework is that the utilities get to charge ratepayers and use the money to fund programs to reduce energy use. So now you have a situation where the utilities claim to be "green" because they are funding these programs, while not exactly promoting the fact that they are using ratepayer money to do so. And in the BGE territory, BGE is proposing to do "quicky" energy checks on households (at ratepayer expense) while keeping out the growing small business-heavy energy efficiency industry in Maryland. There are great local businesses that do real energy audits (ecobeco, for example), but the PSC could put them out of business by allowing BGE to do faux-audits at little to no direct cost (again, thanks to the ratepayers). How can a small business that does real energy audits, which lead to real energy savings compete with this? A better approach would be to use ratepayer money to significantly lower the cost of real energy audits and to make that available to all Maryland energy auditors (not the utilities only).

Summary

There are many great programs in Maryland to get us on a path towards a greener future, but there appears to be no leadership providing a unified message and direction. One policy contradicts another. Information is not shared widely. Small businesses get shut out to the benefit of the established utilities. The consumer is left confused and unsure what he/she can actually get. Meanwhile, politically popular items that actually increase carbon emissions and discourage renewable energy are getting major financial backing. These problems are not insurmountable, but we need real leadership from Annapolis to solve the issues. Right now, that's sorely lacking.

StimPack - Here's how to Really Rev the Engine

2009-01-26T06:19:00.000-08:00

StimPack. Sounds like something you'd get at the physical therapist's office or pick up at the pharmacy to get off some addiction. It's actually the short-hand name inside the beltway types are giving the new Stimulus Package that the President and Congress are preparing for the struggling (drowning?) economy.

Sounds like the basic outlines of the bill are already in place. There is a lot of good measures to promote renewable energy and energy efficiency. I applaud that whole-heartedly. Where I get the heartburn is knowing that the massive Federal financial injection is going to end up in the hands probably exclusively of large, Fortune 500 type businesses. There will be no crumbs for the little guys.

The thing that really irks me is that leaders of both parties are constantly talking about "small businesses" in America. How we are the engines of growth and innovation, the doers, the risk takers. You'd think all this lip service to small businesses would translate to real dollars when StimPack comes around. You'd be wrong.

Let's take one example. There is an excellant provision to provide loan guarentees for renewable energy projects. Sounds great. Problem is that a small business will have extreme difficulty accesing that, or any other loan guarentee. See, we don't have the paid lawyers, lobbyists, or government procurement staff that the big companies do. We don't have the ability to devote countless hours to navigating the Federal waters like the big guys do. We don't have the ready access to large capital that the Fortune 500 companies do.

Yet, I believe that money given to small businesses has a direct impact on the local economies where those businesses are located. Instead of giving billions to large companies, how about giving billions to small businesses? I know what the impact of a loan guarentee or even a direct financial infusion would have on Clean Currents. We'd immediately hire people, spend money right here in the DC area, and invest in renewable energy projects. Money wouldn't sit on our balance sheets as it would with large companies. It would be directly injected into the local economy.

So, here comes StimPack. Hopefully it will work. And if it's not too late, maybe there can be a carve out for small businesses. After all, we are the engine that drives the economy.

Let's Give Carbon Tax a Whirl

2009-01-12T17:20:00.001-08:00

With the new President and Congress getting set to (finally!) tackle climate change, the mainstream commentariat seems to be almost exclusively focusing on what is called a "cap and trade" system, whereby the overall level of greenhouse gas emissions is capped, but polluters who can't meet the cap have options to trade for credits or allowances. Very few are talking about the easiest, most direct way to change the market and lower greenhouse gas emissions - a carbon tax. Now, out of the blue, or should I say, out of the sludge and muck, comes word that Exxon Mobil has come out in favor of a carbon tax! This is, after all, the company that spent years and millions of dollars funding bogus "research" to say climate change is a myth. So, should we view this as a dastardly plot to trick people into supporting a carbon tax or should we take them at their word and try to pass legislation (with their support?).

I say give it a whirl.

Many economists believe a carbon tax is the best way to attack climate change. There is no need to create a complicated trading scheme, nor is there any room for gaming the system. It's a very straight forward approach - a tax on carbon emissions. Yes, this would impact our gas prices, and electricity prices... but that's a good thing. We need loud and clear price signals to make the market work. This is what happened earlier in 2008. When gas prices skyrocketed, sales of gas hogging SUVs dropped. Now that gas prices are lowering, sales of gas hogging SUVs are increasing. I'm not an economist, but even I can see the relationship there!

Politically, some people are afraid to death of the word, "tax." But I have more faith in the American people. They understand the need to stop climate change and know that some things must change. Setting a strong price signal will allow clean energy and green tech companies to invest in growth without fear of too-low fossil fuel prices.

And heck, maybe the folks at Exxon Mobil will actually lobby for it!

If it Can Happen in Blacksburg

2008-10-30T16:09:00.000-07:00

It's happening in Blacksburg, Virginia. That means it can happen anywhere in the country. Blacksburg is a sleepy town among rolling hills hours away from the nearest city. It's home to Virginia Tech and the folks there are mighty proud of their Hokies. But it is not a town usually associated with progressive, green minded citizens or businesses. Now that's changing. I was there for a conference hosted by the Virginia Sustainable Building Network the other day and I ran into a gentleman named Pat Bixler. Pat is the Executive Director of a group called, "Sustainable Blacksburg." As it says on their web site, "Sustainable Blacksburg is a non-profit community organization which facilitates effective environmental stewardship in the Blacksburg area to enhance the region’s livability and economic vitality by reducing its impact on the local and global environment." But it's really so much more than that. Sustainable Blacksburg represents to me the next step in the greening of the American mind. Sure, Takoma Park, Catonsville, and Arlington have been doing green for years. There is a lot to be proud of in those parts. But to get this country to turn the corner and embrace a sustainable lifestyle, free of the threat of climate change and pollution requires the mainstreaming of all things green. It can't be just for progressives in the "blue" areas. There's hope. It's happening in Blacksburg. And if it's happening in Blacksburg, why not Lexington, or Fredericksburg, or Frederick?

Montgomery County Shines Again

2008-10-20T17:49:00.000-07:00

Montgomery County, Maryland is once again offering consumers a "reward" for going green and I for one could not be happier about it. The County's Clean Energy Rewards Program has been renewed with some new improved rules voted on by the County Council. Right now, businesses, non profits, and residents who buy clean energy from certified vendors will get a reward of 1/2 cent for each kilowatt hour of clean energy purchased. This may not sound like much, but I am hard pressed to name a single county, city or state in the entire United States that is taking this kind of innovative approach to fighting climate change through clean energy solutions.

Hats off once again to County Council Members George Leventhal, Roger Berliner, Nancy Floreen and the others who supported this!

I am proud to say that I played a very direct role in changing the rules of the Program.

The initial incarnation of the Program only allowed regional clean energy sources to count, and it capped the non residential award at a mere 100,000 kWh annually. While I strongly supported the bill, I lobbied to change the rules. Now, my plan is being implemented. The new Program now allows national clean energy sources to qualify and raises the cap to 400,000 kWh annually. This means that the clean energy is cheaper and the Reward larger for small businesses. This was a victory for our Clean Currents customers in the County who now qualify for the Reward and will get real savings as a result. It will enable Clean Currents to more broadly market clean energy to the hundreds of small businesses in the County who might otherwise be priced out of the market. From a climate change perspective, of course, the changes have no impact. The environmental benefit (with regards to carbon) will be the same no matter where we get the clean energy from.

Clean Currents may be the only company in the entire state of Maryland that lobbies on behalf of environmental legislation shoulder to shoulder with the leading environmental advocacy groups. We won a victory in Montgomery County, and with your continued support can win victories elsewhere in the state.

Taking the Long Term View

2008-09-22T14:54:00.000-07:00

I am not going to try to pretend to fully understand the financial meltdown that is hitting Wall Street and the rest of the nation. I'll leave that to the pundits. But I do know that this nation seems trapped in the vice grip of short term thinking. And it is short term thinking, with an emphasis on profit or loss today(!) that appears to be at the heart of this recent calamity, plus a lot of other financial implosions. Unfortunately, it is this very same short thinking mentality that prevents us from solving our climate challenge.

Climate change is the deadliest of problems for Americans because it hits at our biggest weakness - inability to confront a challenge until it is right upon us. The build up of carbon in our atmosphere occurs slowly over time, but once it hits a certain tipping point, we are doomed to catastrophic consequences in our ecosystem and hence in our entire way of life. We can't see the carbon coming out of the tailpipes of our cars and power plants. It's hard to measure in a way that people can comprehend. Unlike the movie, "The Day After Tomorrow," there is not likely to be a single massive event that everyone can point to as evidence that the climate has passed the tipping point. So, how do we solve a problem that is long-term and not visible, or easily understood by the average person?

Long term thinking. We have to make investments in clean energy, in energy efficiency, and yes, in adaptation, today with the thought that these investments may not pay off for several years. We need to break the chains of short term thinking. Maybe the Wall Street meltdown is enough of a wake up call. Maybe our leadership will finally understand that we need policies in place that go beyond the next election cycle. We need fundamental change that will last a generation. The beauty of investments in a clean energy infrastructure are that they provide jobs today. They put this country back to work. In the short term, that will provide a needed lift. In the long term, the clean energy economy will solve climate change.

The Big Issue

2008-09-08T06:30:00.000-07:00

With less than 60 days left until the election, we are about to witness an intense barrage of political talk from both parties. At the conventions in Denver and Minneapolis, we heard hours and hours of talk about each candidate's vision for the future of this country. I am not here to take sides in the election (you can check out my facebook page to see that!), but I am taking the side of fighting climate change now, not in ten or twenty years. Now.

One could be excused for thinking that we have reached the tipping point in the United States regarding the need to fight climate change with clean energy. After all, the past four years has seen every major magazine (Time, Newsweek, etc), newspaper and broadcast news program prominently feature global climate change. Al Gore's movie won the Academy Award, was a huge hit with millions of viewers. The former VP and the international scientific group that coordinates studies on global climate change won the Nobel Peace Prize. Hurricane Katrina showed people the very real danger of climate change. The Polar Bear is being listed as a threatened species from Arctic ice loss. Executives from some of the largest corporations in the country have written and spoken repeatedly about the need to address carbon emissions.

In short, it seemed the time for action had finally arrived.

Thus, my total disappointment and frankly, shock, that global climate change apparently disappeared completely from one party's convention. There was not a single mention of the need or a plan to fight global climate change by the GOP's nominees during their acceptance speech at their convention. It's as if the last four years didn't happen and we are back to the bad old days of 2000, when global climate change was an issue way down the priority list at best. The Sunday morning talk shows and the political pundits on television seemingly don't bring up the issue of global climate change when talking to the candidates or their surrogates.

This issue is too important to have one party own it. We need all major American parties to work together now on solutions. There are Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger and others who are showing amazing leadership. We as a country need to ensure that these kinds of leaders have a seat at their own party's table, and that we all work together to solve this challenge.

Take action - write a letter to the Editor of your paper, contact both Presidential campaigns, let people know that global climate change is the biggest challenge of our generation. Let them know that you demand action, and that you want to hear their plans for how to create a cleaner, greener future. Don't let the media or the politicians off the hook. This is the big issue of our time. Silence is not an acceptable answer.

Keeping it in Perspective

2008-07-07T15:36:00.000-07:00

I just had the good fortune to travel to Rocky Mountain National Park this past week. I cannot think of a better way to celebrate this nation's birthday than to experience and appreciate the natural beauty that is our inheritance. As I stood near a lake 10,000 feet above sea level and looked at a glacier a mere 100 meters away, I thought about the fact that this glacier was around when George Washington won at Yorktown. It was around when Nero fiddled while Rome burned. It was around while the great Library of Alexandria flourished, while Plato taught, while David ruled over the Kingdom of Israel. The glacier was in existance when the first human being achieved consciousness. Our lives, our hopes and dreams are but a blink in the eye to the life of this majestic glacier. And now it is on course to completely disappear. In our lifetime possibly. That is the impact of global warming. It is not some far off problem to be handled when things are more convenient. It is a problem we created that is changing our entire eco system right now.

The Rocky Mountains are not just beautiful to look at. The glaciers and snow pack they contain are crucial to the lives of the animals, plants and yes, humans in the region. Boulder, Colorado's beautiful creek, which flows right through the town is fed by the ice melt. Without those glaciers, there is no ice melt.

Our planet is in peril. It behooves all of us to take a minute and to see first hand the damage we are causing right now through our addiction to fossil fuels. Wildfires, draughts, habitat loss - it is happening all around us, and we can see global warming up close, if we only take a moment to look.

Keep our Energy Money Home

2008-06-16T10:38:00.000-07:00

It isn't often that I find myself reading a Charles Krauthammer column in the Washington Post and actually nodding in agreement. But just the other day, he wrote a column called "At $4, Everybody Gets Rational," in which he calls for a significant increase in the gas tax. The argument really is simple, as Krauthammer puts its:

"Want to wean us off oil? Be open and honest. The British are paying $8 a gallon for petrol. Goldman Sachs is predicting we will be paying $6 by next year. Why have the
extra $2 (above the current $4) go abroad? Have it go to the U.S. Treasury as a gasoline
tax and be recycled back into lower payroll taxes. "

The problem is that when it comes to gas or energy prices, nothing is simple. We have our elected leaders to blame in a lot of ways because they constantly tell the American people that we have some kind of God given right to cheap energy. Case in point - John McCain and Hillary Clinton calling for a gas tax holiday to lower the price at the pump this summer. There are thousands of other examples. Instead of educating people about the true cost of energy, our elected leaders seem to feel much more comfortable telling people what they think they want to hear ("vote for me and I'll lower your energy bill"). Then, when the very good idea of an increased gas tax comes up, these very same politicians turn around and say, "that's not possible because the people will never accept that." Hmmm... wonder where the "people" got that idea.

Coupling an increased gas tax with a lower payroll tax makes a lot of sense. It would be a great way to help reduce our dependence on oil and lower the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. Now all we need to get this done are some elected leaders willing to do the right thing.

Take Me Out to Exxon's Ball Game

2008-05-14T11:29:00.000-07:00

The Washington Nationals should be commended for building a LEED certified green stadium for their new home in DC, but one particularly heinous sponsor threatens to harms all of the great environmental kudos the team has earned. My good friend Mike Tidwell tells me that Exxon Mobil, the number one denier of global warming, is not only an extremely prominent sponsor, but the fossil fools are the exclusive sponsor of the seventh inning stretch. Yup, all of us DC area greenies who go to the Nats games apparently will have to rise and take off our hats for the "Exxon Mobil Seventh Inning Stretch." Mike reports there were several boos throught the stadium when the Exxon name was announced. Not a surprise. After all, it would be hard to imagine a single company on the entire planet that is more responsible for contributing to global warming and funding junk science to prevent real solutions for many years. Remember how angry people were at the cigarette companies for funding reports that "proved" smoking does not cause cancer? Well, Exxon Mobil does the exact same thing with climate science. In fact, Greenpeace has done exhaustive research to show the slimy trail of Exxon Mobil money going to fund front groups and scientists in an effort to block action on global warming and create a phony debate about the science. Click HERE to see the Greenpeace site.

The Nats have the right to take sponsorship from anyone they want. But giving such a prominent display to the single worst climate denying company in the world does not fit in with the Nats green mission.

Nobody debates the green bonifides of the Nats. They are a quality organization that is trying to do the right thing and should be applauded for that. But they need to find a new sponsor for the seventh inning stretch. Environmental activists are considering protesting at the Nats games until Exxon Mobil is given the boot. The Nats should be one step ahead of the crowd and give them the boot now.

PS - we said goodbye last week to Josh Tulkin, Claire Douglass and Paul Berman, three amazing organizers with the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. They are moving on to other adventures after kicking some serious butt in Maryland, DC and Virginia for a cleaner environment. The green community will miss them, but their legacy for a better planet will live on for many, many years. Personally, I want to say thank you to each of them for fighting for the Earth. And to Josh, who I met when he was a college intern strumming the guitar one summer at Greenpeace - our paths will meet again!

Stupidity in Pursuit of Votes

2008-05-02T07:50:00.000-07:00

I am absolutely appalled that Hillary Clinton and John McCain, two people that claim to be champions of fighting climate change are touting a "gas tax holiday" for the summer. This is pure politics and it completely undermines efforts to fight climate change in the long run. There really is no fuzzy middle ground on this. Supporting the gas tax holiday makes it crystal clear - Clinton and McCain are not green.

I could go on for quite a while about this, but Thomas Friedman did a great job in the NY Times explaining how stupid these two politicians are being for the sake of picking up a few votes.

Click HERE to read his opinion piece.

Maryland Session Wrap Up

2008-04-18T12:06:00.000-07:00

Maryland General Assembly Recap
The Good, the Good, and the Ugly

Maryland's elected leaders just wrapped up their 2008 legislative session that was overall positive for progressive environmental issues. Clean Currents was proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with the environmental community as a strong advocate for manyof the bills that passed. There were several cleanenergy and global warming bills that were debated fiercely. Fortunately, Governor O'Malley and the leaders of the General Assembly put their political capital on the line to back these important measures.

Renewable Energy Solar and Geothermal Grant Program
The legislature passed a bill to increase the grant available for Maryland homeowners who put solar systems on their roofs, and added money for grants for geothermal systems as well. The new solar grant is for$2,500 a kilowatt up to a maximum of $10,000. It will help make solar more affordable for middle class Marylanders. For more information on the grant amount, or if you are interested in solar for your home or business, contact us at Clean Currents and we'll help you out!

Renewable Portfolio Standard
This one is personal for me. In 2001, I went to Annapolis to push for a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and almost nobody was willing to listen. After three years of hard work and some heart ache, I led the efforts to pass the state's first ever RPS, requiring energy companies in the state to get 7.5% clean energy. Now, the RPS has been improved a great deal. The legislature passed a bill to increase theRPS to 20% and increase the penalty for noncompliance. My what a difference a few years make!

Energy EfficiencyStrategic Energy Fund
The legislature passed a bill directing where the state can spend the proceeds from the carbon allowance auctions that are part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI is a ten state compact committing to reducing greenhouse gases from powerplants by 10% by 2019. As a member of RGGI, Maryland has agreed to use the carbon allowances from the state's fossil fuel power plants to invest in energy efficiency and clean energy. Passing the Strategic Energy Fund makes good on that promise. Now, consumers and businesses in Maryland will have access to tens of millions of dollars in aid to reduce their energy use and get powered with clean energy. Legislators fought off cynical efforts by some to divert the money to consumer payments that have nothing to do with energy efficiency. Investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy is the best long term strategy for saving consumers money, lowering our carbon output, and being more energy independent.

Empower Maryland
Governor O'Malley has challenged all Marylanders to cut our energy use. And now the state is committing to cutting per capita energy use by 15% by 2015. This is a great effort that will save consumers money, make usmore energy independent, and fight global warming.

Global Warming
The Ugly Maryland's environmental and progressive business community joined forces to make an unprecedented push for one of the nation's first ever statewide cap andreduction of global warming gases. The bill would have required Maryland to significantly cut global warming gases from all sectors of the economy. It would have created new jobs and exciting new business opportunities while upholding our moral responsibilityto protect the environment. Unfortunately, this is where "the ugly" won out. The owners of what used to be called Bethlehem Steel used their high priced lobbyists, combining with the usual array of well heeled attorneys for the polluting interests to kill the bill. The bill passed the Senate in a weakened form, but Delegate Derek Davis' Economic Matters Committee finished the bill off on the last day of session. There were some notable champions for this bill, including Senator Paul Pinsky and Delegate Kumar Barve. Unfortunately, the forces of the status-quo won out.

The Value of a REC

2008-03-24T12:54:00.000-07:00

A lot of people ask whether Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) actually make a difference or not. The media has stirred up some controversy about the subject lately and people want to be sure they are making a real change. Let me start by saying that the biggest difference you can make is to use less energy. The energy not used is the best kind of energy at all. And let me also say that RECs are not some kind of silver bullet that solves all your environmental problems with one easy shot. However, RECs do make a difference. They are responsible for a lot of new clean energy production coming online. They demonstrate a real viable market for renewable energy (and that gets the venture capital and deep pockets guys interested). They help educate the public about the impacts of energy choices.

At the end of the day, we will need a government mandate to move us quickly to a clean energy future. But voluntary purchasing or RECs will always have an important role to play, one step ahead of government action.

Green vs. Real Green

2008-03-13T12:27:00.000-07:00

I'm tired of "green" companies selling all kinds of green products and services, but refusing to stand up for the thing that will really make a difference - mandatory carbon reduction legislation.
I've often heard some green companies proclaim they are not "against" coal, etc., merely "for" wind and solar. That is bunk!

Clean Currents is proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with colleagues in the environmental, faith, labor and business community fighting for legislation to dramatically cut greenhouse gases.
We have testified on numerous bills to support the environment.
We are not going to solve global warming by voluntary green purchase alone. They are important. But to really solve the problem, we need to pass comprehensive legislation.

So, the next time a company tells you they are "green" or they want you to buy their green product, ask them what they are doing to help pass environmental legislation at the state or national level. If the answer is "nothing," than go elsewhere.