Yesterday the government delivered its long awaited response to the consultation period on the draft climate change bill.

It may have disappointed some environmentalists, but business leaders were on the most part welcoming towards the new proposals, despite environment secretary Hilary Benn's clear indication that the bill is to be toughened up.

Under the latest proposals, the bill the independent committee on climate change will be given the power to publish its recommendations to government and force it to adhere to its guidance or publicly explain why it has been rejected. It is one of those rare pieces of legislation that brings with it almost inevitable embarrassment and condemnation, not to mention potential legal action, for politicians.

Moreover, it now seems increasingly likely that the bill will include more stringent targets of 80 per cent emission cuts by 2050 and could even spark one almighty international legal conflagration by forcing the aviation and shipping industries to be included in the targets.

As if that wasn't enough the government also hinted it would toughen up its biofuel legislation to ensure biofuels are coming from sustainable sources and confirmed that thousands of organisations, including banks, hotels, supermarkets, government departments and local authority buildings, will be included in a new emissions trading scheme, potentially increasing their costs but also providing them with the opportunity to generate income by cutting emissions.

So what did BBC Breakfast News lead on this morning?

That councils have been given the power to pilot pay-as-you-throw waste management schemes.

Cue countless emails from outraged of Tunbridge Wells about rotting rubbish and council tax bills, not to mention Kate Silverton asking a slightly bemused Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth why the government kept changing its position on pay-as-you-throw, when there were reports last week that while the government was to shelve national plans it was considering still giving councils the chance to pursue the strategy.

There is, of course, a legitimate debate to be had about the merits or otherwise of pay-as-you-throw, as well as polluter pays schemes in general (although it is a debate not helped by the government's failure to reassure people that such schemes could and should save most people money). But how on earth can this be the biggest piece of news to come out of the revised climate change bill?

As regular readers will know I am no fan of the government's climate change policy, or complete lack thereof, but you still have to feel a little sorry for them when they do announce something genuinely world-leading and innovative, show willing to toughen up legislation in line with the latest science, and then see the whole thing overshadowed by some nimbys moaning about their bins.

Given the BBC News seems to spend every week reporting on either the government's lack of action on climate change or how people aren't really aware of the bigger issues surrounding global warming, it really should be taking a more detailed look at a piece of major legislation that has the potential to dominate the way we live and do business for years to come.

Posted by James Murray on October 30, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Well, it looks like we're all screwed.

The week began with a report claiming that oil supplies have already peaked and we face a future of soaring energy prices and economic depression, and ended with the UN telling us that "humanity is at risk" due to climate change, the devastation of biodiversity and serious resource shortages. Just the kind of cheery stuff you want to read on a Friday afternoon.

Not to make light of these serious predictions of impending doom, but thankfully many within the green business movement remain remarkably upbeat about our chances of tackling this crisis.

One such figure is Dale Vince, chief executive and founder of green energy provider Ecotricity, who joined us for BusinessGreen's inaugural Eco-Entrepreneur podcast. Vince is hardly a conventional businessman, but that has not stopped him building one of the UK's most successful green companies. You can find out how he did it, what he plans for the future and why he holds consultants in such low regard by listening in.

Thankfully Vince is not alone in his ambitious expansion plans and this week saw a raft of announcements underlining the rapid acceleration of the green business movement.

At one end of the scale the gargantuan GE pledged to plough $1.5bn into the development of green products, French president Nicolas Sarkozy unveiled plans for a massive green overhaul of the entire French economy, and the US said it was seriously considering putting a solar farm in space.

Meanwhile, at the other end of the scale vegetable box company Abel & Cole outlined plans for a big expansion drive, Cambridge company CamSemi detailed its ambitions for taking its innovative power saving technology into the consumer electronics mainstream, and Via Post explained how a combination of the internet and clever processes could green the humble letter.

Those companies not at the cutting edge of environmental best practices were also provided with yet more evidence as to why they should get on board with one study insisting strong CSR practices are an indicator of good financial performance and another insisting green credentials help you hang on to your best staff (If you are keen to use green initiatives to keep staff happy Amy Sims has got some tips on how to do it).

Despite the government's best efforts, perhaps we're not done for just yet.

Cheers,

James

Posted by James Murray on October 26, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

So it looks like the rumours were true. If The Guardian's leaked documents are to be believed several Ministers are genuinely committed to watering down renewable energy targets to the point at which they are effectively abolished.

Senior officials within the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) have apparently made their mind up that nuclear power with its massive subsidies, fears over waste disposal and concerns about the carbon footprint of related mining activities still represents the best means of developing a low carbon economy and are advising Gordon Brown to lobby against proposed EU targets that 20 per cent of energy must come from renewable sources by 2020 on the grounds that meeting them would prove too costly. It really is as if the Stern Review never happened.

Now it would be easy (and entirely justified) to join the environmentalists and the renewable energy industry in ranting long and loud about the crass stupidity and rank hypocrisy of a government that constantly brags about its leadership on climate change and then seriously countenances a move to undermine a central foundation of Europe's climate change policy. A move that would send out a clear signal that the government is not serious about renewables and force cleantech investment overseas into the arms of governments that understand the role clear and ambitious target play in driving the development of a low carbon economy.

It would be equally tempting to point out that Business Secretary John Hutton, the man reportedly poised to advise the prime minister to abandon any pretence that the government desires a genuinely rapid expansion of the UK's renewable energy industry, is the same John Hutton who earlier this month declared (with a straight face) that government policy meant the "UK is fast becoming a magnet for renewable energy investment".

However, what is interesting about the whole sorry saga is not so much that the government is considering watering down the targets, but how on earth it managed to get itself into such a hypocritical situation in the first place.

I've posted on this before, but almost every environmental policy announcement currently coming out of Whitehall bears the hallmarks of one almighty ministerial turf war.

According to The Guardian, one of the many sobering admissions in the leaked document is that there are "different priorities across government departments about how to get renewables to 20 per cent of the electricity mix". It is an assessment that could be applied to almost every environmental target the government has set.

The government's ever handy policy of not commenting on leaks means it is unclear what is being made of this morning's reports, but it is reasonable to speculate that many Defra and Foreign Office officials must be absolutely furious to see much of their hard work to establish the UK as a perceived leader in the fight against climate change being so carelessly thrown away by proposals from their counterparts at BERR.

But if they are furious they shouldn't be surprised.

The fact is that the preposterously-titled BERR (what is the difference between business and enterprise and what happens if, heaven forbid, the government gets one of its regulatory frameworks right? Does it keep reforming regulations because that is what it says above the door?) simply has a different remit than Defra and other departments and as a result it will inevitably propose a different environmental strategy that suits its goals.

BERR's job is to create a positive environment for UK business and given that core remit it is hardly surprising that it has decided that an expansion of a proven if controversial technology in the form of nuclear power combined with a continuation of fossil fuel-based power plants is a lower risk and more cost effective means of guaranteeing the nation's energy supply than massive investment in an embryonic renewable energy sector. It is quite right in its assessment that EU targets for renewables would prove costly and difficult to meet, and with its primary goal being the delivery of short term GDP growth it is within its rights to propose that investing to meet these targets is a risk the government should not take.

In contrast, those departments that see cutting carbon emissions and promoting international action on climate change as their top priorities will inevitably argue that while meeting these target will prove costly the long term benefits in terms of reducing emissions, stimulating clean tech investment and cementing European leadership in the development of the low carbon economy are well worth the short term costs.

Such conflicting prioirties are becoming an all too frequent challenge for Defra, which only this weekend was reported to be pushing a reluctant Treasury to exempt carbon offsetting from VAT. No decision has yet been made but it seems highly likely the Treasury, with its remit of maximising tax revenues, will rule that carbon offsetting represents a service and under EU law must face the VAT levy.

The government's climate change policy is fast becoming a case study on how not to run green corporate initiative. Admittedly it is far more complex to run a country than a business but the government has set up a management structure where each and every department appears to have conflicting goals and priorities.

In the business realm, the solution would be to develop an environmental strategy at board level that incorporates all major departments and makes all managers directly accountable to the chief executive for their environmental performance. It may need to happen on a much larger scale but exactly the same principles hold true for governments.

The only way for Gordon Brown to end the ministerial conflicts currently dogging environmental policy and develop a coherent climate change strategy is to make it abundantly clear that the transition to a low carbon economy is his top priority and that the finance (The Treasury), operations (BERR, Home Office and Foreign Office), and environment (Defra) departments must work together to deliver on his goals.

If ministers were sure that they were being judged as much on their ability to deliver a low carbon economy as on their traditional targets then John Hutton would not be grumbling about the cost of accelerating the development of renewable energy capacity and would instead be working out how best to hit the EU's targets.

Hopefully the climate change bill and its legally binding emission reduction targets will make this priority clear, but until it does we can expect much more ministerial wrangling over the government's environmental initiatives.

Posted by James Murray on October 23, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

It's been a week or so now and we hope you are getting used to BusinessGreen's new surroundings.

But just in case you missed anything on your journeys round the new site we're introducing a new Friday afternoon round up of the week's most interesting, important or just plain bizarre green business stories.

Let us know if there are any stories you see during the week that deserve a mention, but here is our pick of this week's content:

The UK wind energy sector had a great week which began with experts predicting the UK will soon lead the world in offshore wind and ended with a major new player entering the market in the unexpected form of BT.

Meanwhile, Apple had a week to forget after Greenpeace revealed the iPhone contains some toxic nasties and a US group said it was launching legal action as a result. It seems that Steve Jobs' plan to deliver a green apple has quite a way to go.

It could also learn a thing or two from the European solar industry which gave a master class in how to head off an environmental problem before one arrives. The sector's green credentials may have meant that it has faced little or no criticism about some of the hazardous substances used in its products, but that has not stopped some leading manufacturers clubbing together to head off any future criticism, and more importantly legislation, by launching a recycling scheme

Tesco also received plaudits for a bit of lateral thinking as it shifted a chunk of its supply chain onto a Manchester canal. It could also become something of a trend if the EU gets its way with its new freight action plan.

In our in-depth section, Doug Richard voiced his frustration with Europe's lack of support for cleantech entrepreneurs, Peter Ainsworth MP called for a green industrial revolution, and Lem Bingley took a spin in the Mega City electric car.

Finally, it might be sometime before anyone uses it as a verb, but we're loving Greenback and its offsetting search engine.

See you next week,

James

Posted by James Murray on October 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Have you got a green business idea but don't know what to do with it?

Well, communications specialist Lewis PR might just have the answer.

On the 19th of November the company's Sustainable Technology Group is to host a "Green Dragon's Den meets X Factor" competition at its London Media Centre for budding eco-entrepreneurs.

The panel of "dragons" will be made up of venture capitalists Jon Edington from 3i and Alex Starling from Strata Partners, Dr John Blewitt of Exeter University’s sustainable development department, the secretive editor of the greenbang blog, and Clive Booth, head of Green PR at Lewis.

To further tempt those interested in running the gauntlet of the assorted green dragons the winning candidate will receive a month of free PR and marketing from Lewis, office technology from Lexmark, consultancy advice from Exeter University, and, perhaps most importantly, the chance to impress those VCs and their deep pockets.

Applications to showcase your big green idea close on October 31 and meanwhile if you are interested but are out of big ideas at the moment you can also register to be in the audience at the SusTech Forum site.

Hopefully we'll see you there.

Posted by James Murray on October 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (2)

So Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize, and you've got to say he deserves it.

His fellow winners at the IPCC may have done much of the spade work, but it is Gore who has in eighteen short months done more than anyone to turn climate change from a fringe issue into the defining concern of the age.

His film may have contained a few minor errors, as helpfully pointed out by some mining industry-funded critics with too much time on their hands (BTW - in the interests of balance when we do we get a court case on The Great Global Warming Swindle? That I'd like to see). But the crux of his argument remained so strong that he was able to almost single-handedly shift global public opinion.

He has mobilised the global left around a threat that always had more to do with social justice than drowning polar bears and, perhaps more impressively, reached out to many of his erstwhile opponents on the right and made them realise there is an impregnable economic and security case for tackling global warming.

In short, Gore deserves all the plaudits currently heading his way and if any pedants wish to question whether campaigning against climate change is worthy of a peace prize they should assess the latest global warming predictions and ask if droughts in the subcontinent will do anything to ease tensions between nuclear India and Pakistan, if the US can ever secure the Mexican border as water shortages begin to bite, and if the European Union can hold itself together as people migrate North to avoid a sweltering Med.

If such imaginative feats remain beyond them, they could always get a firsthand glimpse of the future and parachute themselves into Darfur and the world's first climate change war.

And yet, just as Gore's profile and influence reaches yet another peak there are worrying signs that his strategy for addressing climate change is beginning to look both overly simplistic and almost alarmingly misguided.

Ever since the release of An Inconvenient Truth Gore has consistently argued that climate change is principally a moral issue; that we have an ethical responsibility to both future generations and the developing countries that will bear the brunt of the damage to tackle the problem.

This argument was crystallised in Gore's response to his new award, which saw him proclaim that, "The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level."

Now maybe I'm being unfair; maybe I'm reading too much into what is meant to be little more than an oratorical flourish, but to me this sounds like a load of meaningless New Age nonsense.

There is undoubtedly a moral case for not destroying the planet but Gore's position sounds like the very embodiment of the treehugging school of thought that has done both him and the environmental movement so much harm.

If you just analyse the logic of Gore's statement for a moment it quickly falls apart.

First up it is easy to understand why Gore is a bit disillusioned with conventional politics, but to declare the "climate crisis is not a political issue" is still truly bizarre. My dictionary defines politics as "the complex or aggregate of relationships of people in society, especially those relationships involving authority or power", and if that hasn't got plenty to do with the climate crisis I'm not sure what has.

Of course, Gore is talking about politics in the narrower sense - "of or relating to the state, government, the body politic, public administration, policy making, etc" - but again this surely has everything to do with the climate crisis. It is after all governments, politicians and policy makers that for so long ignored the warnings about climate change and are even now failing to deliver the legislation and tax frameworks that would correct the economic externalities associated with carbon emissions and enable the transition to a low carbon economy.

But Gore ignores all this, ignores the capacity of governments and politicians to drive change and create the environment in which low carbon businesses, technologies and lifestyles can prosper (something he once must have believed in), and instead argues climate change is a "moral and spiritual" issue to be laid at the feet of everyone.

Like so many politicians' statements this idea, that climate change is a moral struggle for the individual to face, is partially true and apparently reassuring - until you try to work out what it means.

The premise that climate change can be tackled if we all do our bit, if we were all just the little bit more moral, is easy to succumb too as it implies that all is required is a slight shift in our internal ethical equations to solve the problem. But when you think about it the idea that all that is required for those in the developed world to live a low carbon lifestyle is a "moral" desire to be better people is simply absurd.

The other problem with Gore's analysis is that the flip side of his statement is that it would be immoral not to attempt to cut your carbon footprint, and as soon as you get into questions of immorality you are opening up a whole can of philosophical worms. 

How for instance do you work out the morality of working in the oil industry when you have a family to support? What about the morality of commuting to work, or the morality of keeping the heating on for an elderly relative? Is it good or evil to try and ensure your kids have the same foreign holidays as their classmates, or come to think of it is it right or wrong to fly around the world to raise awareness of climate change?

In a low carbon world all these things are wrong and arguably immoral, but in the current economic and social framework you could argue it is also immoral not to do these things.

There are moral issues surrounding climate change, but these are at the macro-economic level of whether it is right that the developed world's current prosperity will cause untold harm to developing world countries and future generations. To try and argue climate change is a moral issue at the individual level, to imply people are being immoral by doing the same things as everyone else does and failing to act, is only going to alienate everyone bar the hairshirt environmentalists.

Of course, everyone can and should do their bit to help tackle climate change, but without any of the enabling technologies, infrastructure and legislation in place individual action alone will never be enough.

Disaster can only be avoided with massive changes at the economic and infrastructure levels of society and these are things that can only be achieved by politicians and business leaders. They may make these decisions quicker under pressure from the rest of the population, but this pressure is unlikely to be felt until it is already too late - just witness Australians' attitude to climate change shifting only as drought bites. Consequently, climate change is, and will remain a political issue.

Climate change will not be defeated by us all being a bit nicer and more moral, it will only be curbed by the realisation that cutting carbon is an economic necessity, by people realising there is money to be made in providing the necessary products and infrastructure, and by politicians legislating to protect the long term national interest rather than their own political skins.

I don't mean to be pessimistic, but if as Gore suggests climate change can only be curbed if we are able to "lift global consciousness to a higher level", then history indicates that we are pretty much screwed.

Posted by James Murray on October 17, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

C'mon in, feel free to take a look around, make yourself comfortable and all that.

After almost a year of life as blog BusinessGreen was beginning to feel a bit cramped and has decided to move to a shiny new abode.

As you can see everything is a good deal more spacious than before allowing us to bring you a whole lot more green business news, analysis, interviews, opinion and best practice advice.

We've also got several new features in the form of video Q&As and seminars and a monthly Eco-Entrepreneur podcast that will see us interview the UK's leading green business entrepreneurs. Keep an eye (or should that be an ear) out for our inaugural interview with Dale Vince, OBE and chief executive of green energy supplier Ecotricity, later this month.

On top of that a range of new forums should make it easier for you to have your say and share your green business experiences and opinions with your peers, while our evolving resources page should provide a window on some of the best green business advice on the web.

And don't worry, we haven't abandoned blogging altogether – the BusinessGreen blog will remain and become the home for our frequent musings and enraged rants on all things green.

To help launch the new look site we've drafted in some high profile figures to give their views on the green business movement. Both Conservative and Lib Dem shadow environment secretaries, Peter Ainsworth and Chris Huhne, will offer their opinions on the role business can play in driving the low carbon economy in the next week, while serial entrepreneur and star of TV's Dragon's Den Doug Richards will give his take on the current climate for green investment.

Finally, and most importantly, I'd like to thank all our readers for their continued support throughout the last year and say feel free to let us know what you think of the new site and any of its content. We'll do our best to respond and resolve any teething problems we encounter as quickly as possible.

The green business agenda has never been more important or more complicated, and the only way to tackle those complications and begin to develop the best practices and standards required to drive the transition towards an environmentally sustainable economy is through open and honest debate. One of the many beauties of the web is its ability to enable that debate and as such if you have a view on any of the material at BusinessGreen just let us know.

Equally, if there is an exciting green technology or trend you think others need to know about, just go ahead and post in our forums or let us know directly by emailing businessgreen.letters@incisivemedia.com.

Thanks again and see you soon,

James Murray
BusinessGreen Editor

Posted by James Murray on October 12, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yesterday’s edition of the You and Yours programme on BBC Radio 4 included a 15-minute section on the UK’s efforts to generate electricity from waves and tides. You can download the 53-minute episode from the BBC’s web site - the relevant segment begins at 24 min 40 seconds in.

As the programme highlights, Britain’s status as an island nation makes it ideally suited to wave and tidal generation, and yet efforts to extract useful energy from the seas are still in their infancy. The programme is well worth a listen.

Lem Bingley

Posted by Editor on October 12, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

So that's that then. The election campaign that never was has drawn to an embarrassing ramshackle halt after the prime minister declared a false start and called the race off before the competitors had even reached the first corner.

But if the whole sorry saga achieved anything besides giving the opposition parties enough political ammo to keep their armouries stocked up well into next year, it is that it has given the rest of us an insight into the key topics the next election will be fought over. Sadly for green business execs environmental policy looks set to be a long way behind the front lines.

For several months there have been indications that the environment might finally take the central position in political debates that environmentalists, scientists, and green business leaders have been demanding. Both the Tories and the Lib Dems delivered thorough, serious-minded reports on the kind of policies required to deliver a low carbon economy, while the government continued to busy itself with the proposed Climate Change Bill and even appeared to be making progress in improving the UK's currently miniscule renewable energy capacity.

It seemed that the rhetoric all the political parties had indulged in identifying climate change as one of the greatest threats to humanity would finally be followed with the bold policies required to mitigate that risk.

And yet as soon as Brown's lieutenants started laying the ground work for their abortive election campaign both the major parties resorted to their comfort zones.

Brown's conference speech delivered a few more Eco-towns and hinted that he would toughen up the climate change bill, but offered little detail on how the bill's emission reduction targets would be met. His stance on the climate change remained akin to that of a football manager who insists his target for the year is to win the league but offers little information on how this admirable ambition will ever be achieved.

Instead he focused on his traditional electoral strengths, focusing on the stability of the economy and Labour's increased investment in public sector services.

Yesterday's Pre Budget Review was no better, offering more money for flood defences and tweaking aviation taxes, but again offering no clear signal on how emission targets will be met.

Similarly, the Tory Conference and their subsequent poll bounce saw them push environmental issues to the sidelines. Sure, they announced plans to increase green taxes, reform the energy sector and introduce feed in tariffs for renewable energy, but the announcements were, if not exactly sneaked out, completely overshadowed by the focus on planned cuts in inheritance tax and a full blown assault on Brown's record.

It seemed that Cameron and co had listened to the economist Erwin Seltzer's warning that the green agenda would not play well with the majority of voters and begun gradually extricating themselves from their recent pro-green positions.

In fact, the most memorable declaration on the environment from the whole conference season came when Shadow Chancellor George Osborne openly mocked the work of his colleagues in the Tories' Quality of Life Group, John Gummer and Zac Goldsmith, by declaring he'd be "off his trolley" to back their calls for parking charges at supermarkets.

Observers of the election that wasn't were left in little doubt that when the race proper begins, most likely next year, the campaigns will remain focused on the traditional topics of tax, security, public services, immigration and the economy, stupid.

But in sidelining the green debate and returning to their familiar hunting grounds the leading political parties have again illustrated their utter failure to comprehend the truly pervasive nature of climate change and the low carbon economy.

Labour may wish to fight the election on the economy, but in that case where is the understanding that low carbon technologies could provide perhaps the biggest driver for economic growth in recent history?  Where are the clear and generous subsidies and tax cuts required to stimulate these embryonic clean tech sectors, help make them globally competitive and ensure the government's carbon emission targets are met? Where is the explanation to voters that while some industries will suffer as a result of the legislation needed to deliver a low carbon economy, new globally competitive sectors will take their place; that ultimately a technology transition fuels rather than stifles economic growth and opportunity?

Equally, the Conservatives have set out a tax-cutting stall, but again they are failing to explain how emission reduction targets will only be achieved when green taxes become a critical component of the tax system. They could make the case that green taxes, when offset against cuts in areas such as income and inheritance taxes, are not only fair but would also deliver major tax cuts for those who make an effort to reduce their carbon emissions. They could, but with a few notably exceptions they have failed to do so.

This dynamic plays itself out across almost every sector of government. In terms of defence, the military are already undertaking threat studies and identifying climate change as not just one of the largest security threats we will face but also one of the major contributors to global conflicts today. In terms of public services, all of the reforms and increased spending planned by Labour must be informed by the urgent need to slash emissions and climate proof essential infrastructure and services. In terms of immigration, some of the Daily Mail's worst nightmares will become inevitable as people attempt to flee climate change droughts and conflicts for more temperate climates.

But instead of explaining and planning for climate change's pervasive impacts the political parties continue to siphon environmental debates and policies off to an individual department, while similarly keeping economic, security and public service policies largely separate from one another.

Once again the politicians could learn a lot from the best green businesses. Those taking climate change seriously have realised a fragmented approach to the environment simply doesn't work – in the case of government it is a recipe for announcing emission reduction targets while expanding roads and airports – and are attempting to drive environmental sustainability into every aspect of their organisations. They understand that if you want to cut emissions it needs to be the responsibility of not just the facilities manager, but also the financial manager, the operational manager, the supply chain manager, and pretty much everyone from the CEO down. Meanwhile, almost every business decision and new strategy needs to include carbon impact assessments to ensure it fits in with the overarching goal of cutting emissions.

But sadly our political leaders seem unwilling or unable to grasp this principle of interconnected environmental management. Unfortunately, until they accept that the demands of the low carbon economy must inform and dominate almost everything they do the chance of attaining that low impact economic model, deemed little short of essential by climate scientists, remains negligible.

Now there is something for Gordon Brown to chew on next time he thinks about calling an election.

Posted by James Murray on October 10, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

For too long water technologies have been the poor relation of the clean tech sector. But, argues Laura Shenkar, climate change fears are finally making investors take water scarcity seriously

A few weeks ago, a different kind of venture investment conference took place in Davis, California. Rather than focusing upon the full range of renewable energy technologies, GoingGreen addressed the whole system: just about every facet of the new world brought about by climate change and resource limitations.

GoingGreen addressed everything from green automobiles to green buildings, mega-projects to nanotech, renewable energy and water. Surprisingly, including water in the growing green conversation has been an enduring challenge. About a year ago, I finally found a conference editor, Ed Ring, who enthusiastically shared my belief that water absolutely should be included as one of the topics.

Could water technologies stand on their own as true venture investment opportunities? Innovative technology had not dramatically influenced the water industry in decades. Was water scarcity simply part of the energy challenge? Putting together the water investor panel and the water company panels became as much of a contrarian exercise as putting together a new technology company.

But after 20 years of working in early-stage companies, the more people I encountered who doubted that there were enough experienced water investors and innovative water companies to fill a panel -- not to mention prescient investors who see water as an emerging opportunity -- the more confident I felt.

And this past summer, several US states announced formal drought restrictions, including not only the usual suspects of Florida, California and Texas, but also municipalities in Vermont and North Carolina. Water scarcity in China and Australia reached the levels of national crises.

With water in the headlines repeatedly, and with it the possibilities for research and venture investment in water security, when GoingGreen's water investor panel took the stage on the first day of the conference, opportunities in water technology were ripe for discussion.

Among the water investors, most of the discussion focused upon whether innovative solutions to water scarcity and water purification would sell: historically, a small number of enormous corporate giants have dominated the sales to slow-moving bureaucracies. And they were cautious in discussing the opportunities that growing water scarcity, the impact of water pollution and the crumbling water infrastructure offer. There was little mention of the promise that advanced membrane materials and innovative designs such as advanced oxidation offer for water recycling and groundwater remediation.

But the company panel took the opposite tack. Several companies, including NanoH2O and GeoPure, highlighted their innovative technologies to create new sources of water. The Abtech SmartSponge addresses the threat of pollution from stormwater by absorbing pathogens as they flow off parking lots and roofs. And Derceto discussed how optimising water infrastructure can save an impressive 15 per cent in electricity usage.

I imagine that the agenda of GoingGreen 2007 will look a bit odd in years to come: Only one company panel on water? Where is the on-site wastewater solutions panel? Where is the "smart water grid" panel? Where is the innovative desalination and water purification panel?

In a year, investors may not yet have reaped huge gains from investments in innovative water technologies, but the potential for new giants to grow rapidly and lead new market segments will be clear. Water, as simple as it is to drink, will be an obvious opportunity for investment.

More importantly, you will see new paradigms for water management. Among the most promising technologies are home purification tools to identify and eliminate chemical pollutants like perchlorates and MTBE, as well as bacteria and viruses, from the tap, and can provide a "personalised" taste for each user in a household.

Other ideas include small-scale, comprehensive water management solutions for remote hospitals, schools and resorts that also include waste water recycling; and real-time sensors to provide a comprehensive and highly accurate measure of the specific chemicals and pathogens in water supplies and monitor water management.

Complete on-site water management "appliances" will be one of the strongest investments for the savvy early-stage investor. For a home, office or commercial establishment, recycling water to toilets and irrigation will save 50 to 90 per cent of their water use, while significantly reducing energy and emissions. In places that use significant amounts of energy to distribute water, like Los Angeles and San Diego, on-site waste water recycling saves up to 80 percent of the energy.

These systems might look like very different boxes, but they will share a range of features:

• Self-operating, self-healing: comparable to a PC as compared with a mainframe computer. These appliances will automatically transmit key data about water quality directly to the utility.
• Multi-Process: combining some set of biological, ozone-based, ultrafiltration, electrocoagulation, electrolysis or chemical solutions to provide for "gold standard" efficiency and variable levels of purity for different applications.
• Modular: to accommodate the latest innovations in membranes and other water-purification solutions.
• Highly subsidised: Within the next few years, water scarcity coupled with the cost of maintaining the water distribution network will bring many localities to remove customers from the edges of their delivery grid.

Experts estimate that 70 percent of the costs of running a water utility are in the water transport network. According to the EPA, the US will need up to $1 trillion to upgrade its water and waste water infrastructure over the next 20 years to maintain regulatory standards.

Water might be free, but it will cost more and more to ensure a pure, ready supply. Right now, you pay your municipality for water infrastructure. In the future, some ground-breaking innovation will be necessary to get that water to your kitchen sink. Can you imagine getting "house calls" from your water company?

Laura Shenkar is an entrepreneur who has been working with leading-edge technologies for over 20 years in the US, Europe and Israel. She holds a B.A. from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. She coordinated the water panels at AlwaysOn's GoingGreen panel in Davis.

This article first appeared at Greenbiz.com

Posted by James Murray on October 10, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

It is not often you find yourself feeling a bit sorry for one of Europe's largest energy giants, but as the rain poured down on EDF's Site de Renardieres research and development (R&D) centre south of Paris it was hard not to feel a twinge of sympathy for the executives responsible for promoting the company's new energy efficiency consultancy services.

That is not to suggest there is anything wrong with EDF's push to get business customers to embrace energy efficiency measures. Far from it. In fact, the technologies and best practices EDF is working on at its energy efficiency R &D facilities near Fontainebleau are almost universally impressive.

It is more that despite investing a fair chunk of its €375m annual R&D budget in improving energy efficiency, recently launching a new energy efficiency-focused research programme and offering energy efficiency consultancy services to businesses since 2002, the company is still facing an uphill struggle to get customers to embrace even the simplest efficiency measures.

"Only a few customers have strong energy efficiency programmes in place," complained Pascal Terrien, director of the new European Centres and Laboratories for Energy Efficiency Research (ECLEER) initiative the company has launched in conjunction with several French universities. "Even though energy efficiency measures lead to increased productivity and lower costs, they are just not focused on it."

EDF estimates that businesses can typically reduce their energy use by 15 to 20 per cent by implementing existing technologies and improved energy management processes, but despite these potential savings energy efficiency remains a low priority for most firms.

Terrien laid the blame for the situation on a number of "cultural, technical and economic barriers" that hamper any attempts to promote energy efficiency. The most persistent problem, according to Terrien, remains firms' unwillingness to assess the lifetime running cost of new technologies when making purchasing decisions.

"With a few exceptions, energy performance criteria are not being included in specifications for new equipment," he observed. "It's a pity, because it is often cost effective to find out that data and for the most energy efficient option."

This failure to demand more energy efficient products is justified by many organisations on the grounds that despite increasing energy prices, energy bills remain a small proportion of costs.

"Energy costs are usually no more than five per cent of operational costs," explained Magali Saint-Donat, head of the utilities group for EDF's R&D division. "Even if a company's total energy bill is huge, it is a small proportion of operational costs so it is easy to ignore."

She added that where energy costs accounted for a higher proportion of costs – such as in the chemicals and steel industry – interest in energy efficiency had been more pronounced, but such sectors remained relatively rare.

Cultural barriers are also stopping some firms from exploiting EDF's energy efficiency services, according to Terrien.

"We are often talking to managers who should focus on energy efficiency but don't," he explained. "It means they can oppose the idea of changing things as they believe it could show that they were not doing their job as well as they could have been."

Furthermore, even where firms do show an interest in enhancing the energy efficiency of their operations they are unwilling to assign the management resources required to ensure best practices are followed.

"Improving energy efficiency requires constant management," continues Terrien. "We can give advice on how to optimise a furnace and when we go back two years later we need to give the same advice because over time the set up has changed."

The net result of these various barriers is that EDF has just over 100 business customers signed up to its energy efficiency consultancy service, which helps firms optimise the energy efficiency of a wide range of different facilities and industrial equipment – a surprisingly low number given the service has been running since 2002 in France and since 2005 in the UK, Germany and Italy.

This slow progress would be bad enough for EDF given its internal goals to cut customer's energy consumption and CO2 emissions by 20 per cent by 2020, but the situation is made worse still when you consider it faces fines of up to €600m from the French government if it fails to meet similarly demanding targets to reduce customers' energy use.

However, despite the looming threat of many of EDF's execs remain convinced that the tide is turning and interest in energy efficiency among corporate customers is finally beginning grow.

"We had a period of energy prices falling throughout the 1990s and we saw all the corporate energy managers laid off and a decrease in energy efficiency," explained Colin Warne, director of marketing for major business at EDF. "But in the past few years in the UK the Climate Change Levy woke a few companies up and then two years ago energy prices began to rise, fuelling more interest. This year we've seen a real surge in interest in climate change and that has sparked more interest. We are definitely seeing interest in energy efficiency services increase."

This interest is being further fuelled by EDF's growing number of successful customer case studies – such as a car manufacturer that cut €1.8m off its energy bills simply by optimising its compressed air and boiler systems and a chocolate manufacturer that cut its bill by 20 per cent by optimising its systems – and the company's policy of virtually guaranteeing cost savings through its consultancy services.

"We either include the cost of the service in the supply price or offer it through a shared savings contract," explained Saint-Donat. "That means the customer pays us based on the size of the energy cost savings they achieve."

From the outside it seems rather perverse for a company to offer a service designed to encourage customers to buy less of its product. But Warne insisted the service has a commercial value beyond simply helping EDF hit its legally imposed energy efficiency targets.

"We really do see it as a customer retention initiative," he explained. " Providing this type of service is a great way of building a long relationship with customers."

And despite the relatively small number of customers that are currently working to improve the energy efficiency of their facilities, EDF's execs remain confident efficiency rates at commercial customers will improve rapidly once many of the next generation technologies that it is currently working on through ECLEER and its R&D division hit the market. The company predicts that imminent improvements in the energy efficiency of induction heaters, furnaces, cooling technologies and heat pumps could all deliver rapid cuts in corporate energy use.

"Many customers are not focused on energy efficiency at the moment," explained Terrien. "But when you consider five to six per cent of industrial equipment is replaced each year, energy efficiency has the potential to improve really rapidly as the new technologies emerge."

Posted by James Murray on October 9, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Norwegian energy company Statkraft has announced plans to harness usable energy from sea water by building the world's first osmotic power plant.

Osmotic power is a form of renewable energy based on the principle of osmosis where water passes from a region of high concentration to a region of lower concentration through a semi-permeable membrane. Statkraft plans to harness energy from this phenomenon by passing fresh water through a membrane into salt water and using the ensuing pressure difference to drive a turbine.

"You need a continual flow of fresh and sea water coming into the system and a continual outflow of brackish water that runs the turbine," explained Torbjørn Steen, vice president of communications at Statkraft.

The company, which has invested £9m in developing the technology, said the prototype plant will be completed by the end of 2008 and it expects to have a commercially viable technology ready by 2015.

Statkraft estimates that globally osmotic power could generate 1,600TWh of power, including 200TWh in Norway accounting for 10 per cent of the country's current energy use.

However, Steen said that the company will need to continue to improve the efficiency of the technology in order to make it commercially viable.

"Improving the efficiency of output per square metre of membrane is the main challenge for the prototype plant," he explained. "When we started the project we were generating less than one watt per square metre of membrane and now we are up to three watts per square metre. We estimate we need five watts per square metre to make it commercially viable, but we are heading in the right direction."

Posted by James Murray on October 9, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

US wind turbine manufacturer Clipper Windpower yesterday opened a new Centre of Excellence for Offshore Wind at Blyth in North East England, where it plans to begin work on the world's largest offshore wind turbine.

Clipper's "Britannia Project" to develop a 7.5Mw turbine will be undertaken with support from the Blyth-based New and Renewable Energy Centre (NaREC). It has secured £5m in funding from the One NorthEast development agency.

Business and enterprise secretary John Hutton said that the project was further evidence of the UK's emergence as a key player in the burgeoning renewable energy technology market.

"A recent report from Ernst & Young showed that the UK has moved up from fifth to second in the world for attractiveness in new renewable investment," he said. "Behind this is the Government's determination to bring down planning barriers and target support at marine and emerging renewables."

James G P Dehlsen, chairman and chief executive of Clipper, said that the decision to locate in the North East had been informed by the government's long-term commitment to generating 20 per cent of energy from renewables by 2020, as well as the UK's position as potentially the largest source of offshore wind energy in Europe.

The One NorthEast development agency said that the region was rapidly emerging as a major hub for renewable energy companies. It added that the NaREC would provide the Britannia Project with a support package including access to engineering expertise and test laboratories, while engineering work will be shared between Clipper's US sites and its operations in Blyth.

Funding provided by One NorthEast will also support the development of Clipper's turbine supply chain and related manufacturing facilities, it added.

"The potential for collaboration with the local companies with skills and capacity for turbine component production will be a significant advantage as turbine manufacturing gets underway," said Dehlsen. "We have seen excellent regional university resources specialised in offshore energy, particularly through the Marine Design Centre's expertise in marine technology and science."

The announcement comes days after final approval was granted for the Thames Array offshore wind farm, which is expected to provide enough energy to power a quarter of London's homes.

Posted by James Murray on October 9, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

A coalition of leading UK businesses, environmental charities and MPs have today written to environment secretary, Hilary Benn, and business and enterprise secretary, John Hutton, calling for standardised rules for corporate on carbon emissions.

The coalition, known as The Aldersgate Group and including BT and United Utilities, argues that the value to companies in disclosing their carbon footprint is being undermined by the lack of a recognised standard for measuring emissions, and urges the government to introduce a "common protocol" for all firms to follow.

"Current reporting levels are still too low, and what is disclosed is not comparable because of the use of different calculation methods," says the letter. "The lack of transparency… undermines the comparative advantage that should accrue to companies with good carbon reporting and control."

Previous attempts to encourage companies to report on their environmental impacts were killed by the government last year when the then-Chancellor Gordon Brown scrapped plans for Operating and Financial Review legislation that would have forced them to report annually on non-financial impacts to their business.

The release of the letter was timed to coincide with today's UK launch of research from the US-based Carbon Disclosure Project showing that many firms are still failing to publish data on their carbon emissions.

The report, which was released in the US last month, found that while 95 per cent of FT500 companies had implemented emissions reductions programmes, less than half of FTSE350 were publishing carbon emissions data.

Speaking at the launch event earlier today, climate change minister Joan Ruddock said investors had a responsibility to increase pressure on firms to report on their environmental impacts.

"Investors have a particularly key role to play in this," she said. "They should give consideration to environmental and social credentials, sending out signals to the financial markets to say that carbon disclosure is vital and show companies that it will affect their investment decisions."

Posted by James Murray on October 9, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Electrical appliances manufacturer Domia is set to launch a new version of its energy saving Bye Bye Standby device, boasting enhanced security designed to make it more suited for office use.

Launched earlier this year, the original Bye Bye Standby plug-in device was aimed at consumers and allowed users to turn off always-on appliances such as TVs, monitors and DVD players at the wall using a wireless remote control.

Sarah Frankel, marketing manager for Bye Bye Standby, said the new version – which will be unveiled at the E2 Energy Solutions Expo in London tomorrow – would similarly allow office workers to turn off appliances such as printers and monitors, as well as larger appliances such as coffee machines and water coolers where it is often difficult to switch off the power.

She added that the new device also boasted improved security, designed to ensure only the assigned remote control could be used to turn appliances on and off.

Domia claims that with The Carbon Trust estimating that firms could cut their office equipment running costs by 60 per cent by turning off appliances when not in use, the new Bye Bye Standby technology can help slash carbon emissions and save firms an average of £32 per employee per year on their energy bills.

The company said that it has already seen considerable interest for the new Office Edition, which will be available from £49.99 for four sockets and a remote control.

Frankel admitted that despite the security improvements the device was still best suited for small- and medium-sized offices and lacked the sophistication required by larger firms.

However, she added that the company was currently working on a range of more advanced office energy management solutions that were scheduled to be launched in the next few months.

"We are working on new solutions that can monitor energy use throughout the office and make the information available over the internet," she said. "We're also working on functionality that will allow users to automatically turn off devices using the software solution."

The new products are likely to take Domia into direct competition with established PC power management software providers such as 1E and Verdiem.

Posted by James Murray on October 9, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The viability of electric cars is set to take a giant leap forward after energy giant EDF announced it is to install 250 recharging stations across the UK by April 2008.

The company is to join forces with recharging station manufacturer Elektromotive to provide the recharging stations, which it claims will make electric cars such as the G-Wiz and MEGA City more attractive propositions for urban commuters.

Calvey Taylor-Haw, managing director of Elektromotive, said the provision of a network of recharging stations would allow commuters without off-street parking to consider purchasing electric vehicles and also extend the cars' range.

"Electric cars already do about 40 miles per charge, so they are more than adequate for most urban journeys," said Taylor-Haw. "But this will introduce a real comfort factor for people as they know they will be able to recharge away from home. We see the stations as a way of extending the car's range into the suburbs, allowing people without off-street parking to recharge overnight and also allowing people with longer commutes to recharge while they're at work."

He added that around 200 of the charging stations, which provide a standard 240V charge, are expected to be deployed in London with a further 50 planned for other cities including Brighton and Sheffield.

Payment plans for the recharging stations are likely to vary from council to council with some planning to offer the service for free and others expected to charge. However, Taylor-Haw said that with most electric cars costing 1.3p to 1.5p per mile to run, costs would be minimal.

While the goal of the project is to kickstart a nationwide electric vehicle recharging infrastructure, Taylor-Haw accepted that "fast-charging" technologies that would allow recharging stations to deliver the convenience of petrol stations remain "a long way off".

However, he noted that the latest batteries could recharge up to 60 per cent of their capacity within two to three hours, making recharging while at work, the cinema or the supermarket viable.

The news comes as new research from EDF suggests the market for electric and hybrid cars is continuing to expand. The study from ICM Research predicted that Londoners alone will spend £1.2bn on green vehicles in the next year.

Posted by James Murray on October 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (2)

Firms investing in green initiatives are likely to attain competitive advantage through improved customer and employee retention, according to a major new global survey of almost 17,000 people.

The survey from polling organisation Ipsos MORI questioned members of the public across 15 major markets found that over half said they prefer to buy products and services from companies with good environmental reputations, while almost eight out of 10 claim they want to work for "environmentally ethical" organisations.

Rick Snyder, Americas president at video conferencing technology specialist Tandberg, which commissioned the survey, said the results proved that firms that invest in greener business models can gain a competitive advantage.

"It is clear that a company’s green credentials impact employee and customer retention," he said. "And in the long term that can help determine competitive advantage."

The survey also found limited variation in attitudes towards green brands across different economic groups, countries and age groups.

"We expected attitudes to vary a lot, but while there were some differences across different countries, overall support for greener business models was fairly constant across all groups," said Snyder. "It means that customers for green products are everywhere and anywhere."

The report did not assess the extent to which a preference for green suppliers and employers is translating directly into improved retention rates, but Snyder maintained that there was little doubt people's positive attitude towards green brands was informing their purchasing and employment decisions.

"Because the idea of green brands is still relatively new we don’t have quantitive evidence that shows how much financial value you get from green initiatives," he explained. "However, those companies that are running green campaigns are seeing huge engagement from employees and in the coming years they will begin to more clearly see competitive advantage in the form of improved staff and customer retention rates."

Posted by James Murray on October 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Marks & Spencer last week became the latest supermarket to tout its green credentials with the opening of its first "eco" store in Bournemouth.

The store, which is the first of four planned pilot stores to be re-fitted as part of the company’s high-profile £200m Plan A environmental sustainability initiative, will be powered using electricity from renewable sources and is expected to deliver energy savings of 25 per cent compared with before the refit.

The company said that overall carbon emissions at the 51,000 square foot store had been slashed by 92 per cent as a result of its green energy procurement policy and the installation of more energy efficient refrigerator, air con and lighting technologies.

It added that the deployment of new water saving technologies, such as dual flush toilets, would cut the store's water use by 15 per cent, while new construction policies had allowed 80 per cent of waste generated during the refit to be recycled or reused.

Furthermore, the store is to pioneer a new green travel plan for suppliers, staff and customers, including the provision of cycle racks and a notice board to highlight green travel opportunities.

The move was welcomed by Dax Lovegrove, head of business and industry relations at environmental charity WWF, which has been working with M&S on its Plan A initiative. "It's clear that M&S is tackling some of the toughest 'eco' challenges facing retailers," he said. "[For example], it is reducing green house gas emissions by using different types of fridges and encouraging alternative ways in which customers travel to and from stores."

The launch comes as rival retailer Sainsbury's last week announced it was to move its headquarters to a new green building development in Kings Cross, in a move designed to cut its energy bills and carbon emissions.

Posted by James Murray on October 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

They might have plenty of other things on their plate, but as Mark Samuels argues IT chiefs who ignore the environmental impact of their departments are toying with their job security

Being green is all well and good, but where do you find the time? Chief information officers (CIOs) are busy - there's complex service-oriented architectures to set up and intricate people management issues to unravel.

Against the backdrop of such strategic developments, it might seem slightly trivial for a CIO to start concentrating on the wasteful people in accounts who print too much paper and users who fail to turn off computing equipment at night.

So, you're a time-pressured CIO, exasperated by the need to over-manage the small details.

Maybe you even think that green computing is a cynical strategy that is being used to sway public relations?

It is time to drop the suspicion and make time for environmentalism. A couple of years of media and consumer pressure have left the CIO with a stark choice: be seen to care about the environment or risk losing business, or even your job.

Partners and clients will increasingly make purchasing choices on a firm's green credentials. And with the IT department being one of the business’s most wasteful departments, the CIO is likely to be a crucial strategy setter.

The finance-obsessed chief executive, driven by a desire for increased value and a limited knowledge of IT, is likely to be appalled by waste in the technology sector.

Analyst Gartner estimates the IT industry has a carbon footprint as big as the airline industry, and accounts for two per cent of all global carbon emissions.

With the boss watching you, the best advice is to think quickly and to think big. Cutting printing and energy costs is just the start. Trade association Intellect suggests technology leaders should find out exactly what they are spending, not only in a financial sense but also in carbon and energy terms.

Such figures will help CIOs establish return on investment figures from IT that are essential for helping to create a green computing strategy for the organisation. Their strategy should then call on a range of technologies and policies, including virtualisation and component reuse, to cut energy use.

Demonstrating business benefits can help convert even the most cynical of IT leaders and help impress the chief executive.

And that kind of strategy has to be worth as much of your time as possible in your monthly schedule.

Mark Samuels is editor of Computing Business magazine.

A version of this article first appeared at Mark's The Knowledge Blog.

Posted by James Murray on October 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Outsourcing IT and datacentre functions to third party providers can deliver energy savings of up to 40 percent and help reduce firms' exposure to green legislation, according to a new whitepaper from IT analyst firm IDC.

The study, which was commissioned by managed IT services provider Rackspace, argues that specialist IT outsourcing providers can exploit economies of scale by sharing the same datacentre infrastructure across large numbers of customers, allowing them to reduce overall energy use.

James Eibisch, research director at IDC's European telecoms and networking group said that outsourcing IT work to third parties also reduces the risk of increased compliance pressures for IT directors.

"Although today the EU would like the IT industry to regulate itself, this won't be the case forever," he predicted. "Today, legislation is concentrated on areas such as materials and recycling, but discussions are going on within the EU and NGOs to extend environmental regulation to IT and communications, and companies must consider the future implications of this for their business."

Fabio Torlini, marketing director at Rackspace, said firms could sidestep many of these imminent regulations by handing IT functions to specialist providers.

He also argued that IT outsourcing firms also had greater freedom to invest in the latest energy efficient IT kit and renewable energy technologies. "Installing these new technologies is a massive investment, but when as a service provider you split that investment out per customer it becomes manageable," he explained. "Individual IT departments don't have that luxury and find it harder to justify these investments."

He added that Rackspace had recently authorised just such an investment and was preparing to unveil a new datacentre facility next year that will be powered using a biomass-fuelled power plant and will incorporate the latest energy efficient server and cooling technologies.

Posted by James Murray on October 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Sainsbury's yesterday announced it is to relocate its central London HQ from Holborn to the new King's Cross Central development as part of a move designed to slash its carbon footprint.

Planned for early 2011, the new office will significantly reduce Sainsbury’s office costs and give the company free reign to incorporate a wide range of green technologies into its headquarters.

Roof-mounted wind turbines, photovoltaic solar panels, ground source heat pumps, combined heat and power energy generation systems, and solar thermal systems for heating water will all feature in the new development. When combined, the company said that these measures are likely to cut site carbon emissions by 40 percent compared with similar-sized facilities.

Chief executive Justin King said that the company had been attracted to the site by its "outstanding environmental credentials", adding that the move would deliver both improved energy efficiency and cost savings to the business.

A spokeswoman for the company added that the new headquarters formed part of on-going campaign to limit the supermarket's environmental impact.

She said that all various green technologies planned for the new site had already been trialled or installed at its existing stores and said that the company would also work with Kings Cross Central developer Argent to open a new supermarket on the site that will similarly embrace environmental best practices.

Posted by James Murray on October 5, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Thames Array project for the world's largest offshore wind farm has today been given the green light and should be up and running by 2010.

The proposals for a 341 turbine wind farm capable of providing green energy for a quarter of London's homes, had faced opposition from the local Swale borough council that had delayed work starting on the project by 18 months.

However, a planning inspector overturned their objections towards an electricity substation and the project has finally been approved after a six week deadline for appeals against the decision expired this week.

Friends of the Earth welcomed the news claiming the scale of a project capable of delivering one percent of the UK's electricity needs indicated that it is possible for the UK to significantly increase its renewable energy generation.

"This is a landmark day for wind power in the UK," Tony Juniper, executive director at Friends of the Earth. "London Array really shows that dramatic cuts in carbon dioxide emissions are possible if we encourage investment in clean technologies."

But despite the last regulatory hurdle being overcome, celebrations at the consortium behind the scheme, which includes energy giants Shell and E.ON, are likely to be muted after reports revealed the 18 month delay has resulted in a massive legal bill and seen an increase in the cost of wind turbine technologies as global demand for parts has begun to outstrip supply.

According to reports in The Guardian the scheme is now likely to cost £2bn compared to an original estimate of £1.5bn.

The project is the latest in a spate of large scale clean energy schemes to receive positive news from the planning authorities in recent weeks. Last month plans for a £28m "wave farm" off the coats of Cornwall was given the green light, while the Scottish government also approved proposals from ScottishPower for a £10m wave farm designed to generate enough energy for 3,000 homes.

Keith Anderson, ScottishPower Renewables managing director, said the project underlined Scotland's potential as a "world leader in marine technology". But he warned that such technologies would only prove successful with continued support from government. "If we, as a nation, are to realise our renewables potential, and achieve our challenging renewable targets of 6GW by 2020, then the UK and Scottish Governments must continue to provide real commitment in terms of infrastructure, investment and political leadership," he said.

Meanwhile, long-standing plans for a barrage across the Severn Estuary designed to harness tidal power also took a step forward after a report from the Sustainable Development Commission signalled strong support for a project that could generate up to five percent of the UK's energy.

The recent developments were welcomed by Leonie Greene of the Renewable Energy Association, but she warned that despite the run of new project approvals many renewable energy investments were continuing to encounter a planning bottleneck.

"There are still long-term problems and these recent projects do not represent a sea change for the industry," she said. "The government is investigating streamlining planning processes, but currently there are still fundamental problems with planning and a lack of joined up thinking between different government departments on renewables."

She added that the focus on high-profile projects such as the Thames Array while welcome was also distracting from other forms of more localised renewable energy generation. "When you look at the potential for biomass, on site renewables and community scale projects the regulatory and planning framework is just not in place to encourage their adoption," she said.

Posted by James Murray on October 5, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Energy giant E.ON has today launched a new nationwide competition for engineers, technologists and entrepreneurs working on new ideas to improve products' energy efficiency.

Run in conjunction with technology start up consultancy LIFE-IC the new award aims to recognise engineers developing new energy efficient technologies. The winner will receive a cash prize of £5,000 plus consultancy and support from LIFE-IC to help them commercialise their idea.

A spokeswoman for E.ON said the competition was aimed at engineering students, professionals and start up entrepreneurs keen to gain backing and support for their energy efficient innovations.

The competition will be run alongside E.ON's EnergyLab award, which was launched last year and is open to anyone with an idea on how to improve energy efficiency.

Last year, the £10,000 prize was won by a housewife and teaching assistant from Leicester who thought up a technology for reducing water and energy use in the bath.

Ideas for both competitions need to be submitted before November 30th and will be considered by a panel of experts, including TV presenter Philippa Forrester and Dave Clarke, head of low carbon strategy at E.ON UK's Technology Centre.

"Those that make the short list get one-on-one sessions with the judges where they get feedback and advice on how to make their ideas more technically viable and business friendly," said a spokeswoman for E.ON.

Posted by James Murray on October 5, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Carbon Trust yesterday announced it is to invest £5m as part of a new research and development programme designed to make solar photovoltaic (pv) cells cost effective within the next decade.

The project, which will be run by the University of Cambridge and technology development firm The Technology Partnership, aims to improve the efficiency and manufacturing processes for organic solar PV technologies – a potentially highly efficient and light weight variety of solar cell that relies on organic dyes to absorb light.

"We believe this exciting new organic PV technology is our best shot at dramatically reducing the cost of solar PV to the point that, in the next ten years, it could become as cheap as the power currently delivered to our homes," said Tom Delay, chief executive of The Carbon Trust. "It is because the carbon savings and commercial potential for this technology are so vast that we have acted now to take a good, but expensive idea and turn it into a cost effective, easily available reality."

While advocates of solar power argue that it represents the largest available renewable energy source, the high cost of manufacturing and installing solar panels has stifled the market's development. Some firms that have installed solar panels have complained that they have had to replace the panels just as they have begun to cover their initial investment.

The main focus of the new research will be on improving the cost effectiveness of the technology by attaining five percent conversion efficiency levels, extending the lifetime for panels to over five years, and developing cheaper manufacturing processes.

The development of sheets of PV film, made from a polymer base, will also extend the number of potential sites for solar panels, making it easier for firms to install the technology on roofs and even windows.

The Carbon Trust said the project should also help bolster the UK's position in the global solar energy market and add further impetus to the alternative energy hub currently developing around the Cambridge area.

Sir Richard Friend, Cavendish Professor of Physics in the University of Cambridge, welcomed the investment claiming it would help "capitalise on the local Cambridge strengths in taking science to manufacturing."

Posted by James Murray on October 5, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

IBM is poised to launch a new Green Sigma service based on the popular Six Sigma process improvement methodology and designed to help firms cut the carbon intensity of their business processes.

Speaking to BusinessGreen, Peter Williams CTO of IBM's Big Green Innovations division, said the company had trade marked the term Green Sigma and will soon adopt the new best practice guidelines as part of an internal pilot sceme.

He added that the service builds on the Six Sigma lean manufacturing and process management methodologies and "will focus on ways to develop processes to bring down the carbon intensity of products and processes and create a lean green business".

"We plan to pilot it inside IBM and with some external customers, and then refine it and take it to market," he added.

The company will be hoping that the high profile of the Six Sigma methodologies will give the new Green Sigma service a high level of recognition in a consultancy market increasingly overrun by new green services.

John Madden of analyst firm Ovum agreed the service would enjoy a high level of name recognition and predicted that it should provoke considerable customer interest. "There are a lot of customers out there looking for help on how to improve their green credentials and they will welcome a standardised approach that allows them to meaure their performance," he said. "However, IBM is not alone in trying to provide these types of services and firms such as HP are also offering a growing number of green services."

The planned Green Sigma service is the latest in a line of initiatives from the company designed to position it as a provider of green technologies and services. Williams said IBM was also now offering a range of carbon management services designed to help firms undertake the complex assessments required to help them reduce their carbon footprint.

"Most carbon footprinting calculations are pretty rubbish and miss out large amounts of information," he said. "We've developed complex management diagnostic models that assess the relationship between carbon emissions and other business factors."

He cited plans to reduce packaging around products as an example of a process where failure to consider all the complex variables impacting carbon emissions can lead to unexpected results. "Firms may decide to reduce the amount of cardboard packaging around a product and that will seemingly reduce its carbon footprint," he explained. "But what if that leads to more breakages? The product has to be remade and that can actually lead to an increase in its carbon footprint."

The new consultancy services represent one component of IBM's Big Green Innovations initiative, which was launched last year with the goal of uniting the company's various environmentally-focused R&D projects.

Williams said the division was also making good progress in developing intelligent water management and smart energy grid systems and was also working on exploiting its expertise in nano-technology and semi conductor manufacturing to improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of desalination technologies and photovoltaic solar panels.

Posted by James Murray on October 4, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1)

The European Commission is continuing on its collision course with the aviation industry after the Environment Committee this week called for plans to include airlines in the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to be pulled forward to 2010.

The Commission had originally planned to include flights within the EU in the scheme from 2011 with flights in and out of the EU included from 2012. However, the environment committee has called for all flights to be included in the scheme from 2010 as separate rules for different flights would lead distort competition between airlines.

"It is difficult to explain that a flight from the UK to Morocco is not covered by the scheme while a flight from the UK to the Canary Islands [would] be covered," commented the committee's rapporteur Peter Liese.

The Committee, which voted 50 votes to none in favour of the proposals, also called for much stricter emission reduction targets for airlines under the scheme.

The Commission had proposed assigning credits or allowances equivalent to 100 percent of airlines' average emissions between 2004 and 2006 – a move that would mean airlines would have to pay for extra credits if their emissions increased further. But, mindful of the failure of the first phase of the ETS when many industrial sites received more credits than they required leading to a collapse in the market for credits, the Committee called for allowances for airlines to be cut to 75 percent of current emissions.

Assigning emission allowances to cover just three quarters of current emissions would add significant costs to airlines and likely lead to increased ticket prices as carriers would be forced to buy in large numbers of credits to cover their current emission levels. However, the Commission hopes the mechanism would also provide a major financial incentive for airlines to invest in technologies and processes that allow them to cut emissions. Those that reduce their emissions to less than three quarters of current levels could even generate revenue from the scheme by selling on their excess credits. 

However, the plans will face staunch opposition from many within the airline industry after the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) last week passed a resolution opposing plans to include foreign airlines in the scheme.

In a statement the UN-backed body said that while it recognised "market-based options are valuable tools for addressing aircraft emissions. A majority of the delegations felt, however, that States should not apply emissions trading systems to the airlines of other States except pursuant to mutual agreement".

ICAO director general Giovanni Bisgnani went further still, reportedly branding the EC's plans as "disappointing and irresponsible".

Several airlines such as easyJet have pledged tentative support for the scheme, but with US airlines already planning legal action against the EU over the plans and Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary vowing to boycott the scheme the ICAO's position all but confirms that the EC will face a major legal battle if it is to force flights into and out of the EU into the scheme.

Posted by James Murray on October 4, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tory proposals for an increase in green taxation have secured significant public support, according to a survey this week from Ipsos MORI undertaken ahead of the Party's annual conference in Blackpool.

The survey of over 2,000 people found widespread backing for several of the green taxation proposals included in the recent Quality of Life report developed by John Gummer and Zac Goldsmith.

The poll found that 64 percent were in favour of higher taxes for gas guzzling vehicles, while 62 percent backed Tory plans for financial incentives for people who cut the carbon footprint of their homes. Meanwhile, supporters of a freeze on airport expansion outnumber detractors with 49 percent supporting a moratorium and only 20 percent opposing the move.

However, shadow chancellor George Osborne's speech confirming that he would not endorse the Quality of Life report's calls for parking charges at out of town shopping centres and a significant increase in air taxes is likely to be welcomed with the survey finding limited support for both ideas.

Phil Downing, Head of Environmental Research at Ipsos MORI, said the poll suggested that the public is broadly in favour of the concept of green taxation.

"Not everything is palatable to the public, and out of town parking charges in particular face widespread opposition," he said. "However, they back, in principle, Polluter Pays and the idea that the environmental agenda is more than just pain free, easy wins."

Speaking at the conference, shadow environment secretary Peter Ainsworth confirmed that alongside support for some of the report's green taxation proposals the Tories would also endorse its plans for major reforms in the energy sector designed to deliver "a revolution in the way that our energy is generated and supplied".

He said that the party would back the review's proposals for a waste heat levy on power stations designed to encourage them to invest in systems for capturing and reusing waste heat and would also undertake an overhaul of the government's controversial Renewables Obligation legislation in order to "adjust distorting subsidies for on-shore wind farms and ensure proper competitive tariffs for emerging renewable technologies".

Ainsworth added that feed-in tariff that guarantee that householders generating energy using on-site renewable technologies can sell it back to the grid at attractive rates, may be "a terrible bit of jargon", but would also prove hugely successful in increasing adoption of on-site renewable energy technologies.

He also insisted that many of the reviews recommendations could be embraced without the need for reams red tape and an overall increase in taxation. "It is absolutely not, as some commentators suggested, all about increasing bureaucracy and taxation," he said. "Far from it. Bureaucracy and taxation are the last things we need in the fight to improve Quality of Life."

Posted by James Murray on October 4, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Globally the number of green banking services is soaring, but, asks Joel Makower, is the US being left behind  in the race to develop green financial services?

Markets for environmental products and services tend to cluster in categories. Makers of computers and other electronics, for example, have almost unanimously embraced energy efficiency, product take back, and the like, as demands accelerated from customers, activists, shareholders, and regulators. Energy and environmental considerations are also becoming commonplace in appliances and most other energy-consuming goods - with the notable exception of automobiles. It's hard to find a dishwasher, for instance, that doesn't boast about its energy-saving features.

We seem to be on the cusp of a cluster of green financial services - everything from energy-efficiency mortgages to green consumer banks to climate-friendly credit cards. It's hardly approaching a tipping point, but financial services companies seem increasingly interested, almost eager, to cater to green-minded consumers and companies.

A new report from the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative has nicely documented the trend, showing what's happening and where, and what it might take for such services to garner even greater interest.

The report (Download -- PDF) looks at the current crop of green products and services, in North America, Europe, Australia, and Japan. It notes that "Relative to their North American counterparts, banks in other developed regions have traditionally been more proactive and innovative with respect to 'green' product and service development." As usual, we Americans are green laggards.

One reason is that US banks have gone through a wave of consolidation in recent years, leaving fewer, larger banks. As a result, says UNEP:

"it becomes more challenging to integrate innovative banking products, including 'gree'" products and services, into their respective portfolios. In a less competitive environment, banks are not given a high incentive to innovate and thus differentiate themselves from peers with state-of-the-art offerings, such as 'green' financial products and services."

When they do offer green products and services, it's usually because of one of two drivers, says UNEP: they are either "board-driven" (when a bank's leadership recognises the opportunities or risks of an environmental issue, then responds by defining one or more optimal products or services) or "client-driven" (where a bank recognises a considerable demand and fills a niche).

For example, in the area of emissions trading, the board of Paris-based BNP Paribas made an executive-level decision to enter the climate change market long before clients expressed the need for such a service. Conversely, Italy's Banca Intesa waited to establish an emissions trading desk until a considerable number of corporate clients requested the service, which over time became highly profitable.

Of course, activists have played a role, too, with environmental and shareholder organisations demanding that financial institutions adopt sustainable banking policies and practices, such as the Equator Principles, which govern project financing, especially in the developing world. Some groups, such as BankTrack, also provide advice on improving bank sustainability policies. Last year, for example, BankTrack engaged with several European banks, including ABN, AMRO, Citigroup, HSBC, and Rabobank, to review their environmental initiatives.

What impressed me most about the UNEP report was its exhaustive catalogue of green banking products and services, including examples from around the world. Considering the world of retail banking - the kinds of services typically available to individuals and small businesses - this is just a sampling of green offerings:

• Home mortgages - reduced interest rates for loans that meet environmental criteria (several Dutch banks); free home energy rating and carbon offsets during the life of the loan (Cooperative Financial Services, UK); Generation Green Home Loans, which allow existing mortgage holders to take advantage of discounted rates by doing energy retrofits (Bendigo Bank, Australia).
• Commercial building loans - Condominium loans, in which the developer repays loan with funds that would otherwise be spent on operating costs using conventional equipment and material (TAF, Canada); Loans and refinancing for LEED-certified commercial buildings, in which developers don't have to pay an initial premium for green features, due to lower operating costs and higher performance (Wells Fargo, U.S.).
• Home-equity loans - One-stop solar financing, with a 25-year amortisation, equal to the same period of time as the solar panel warranty (New Resource Bank, US); Environmental Home Equity Program for customers using a line of Visa access credit, for which the bank will donate to an environmental NGO (Bank of America, US).
• Auto loans - Clean Air Auto Loan with preferential rates for hybrids (VanCity, Canada); goGreen Auto Loan, offsetting 100 percent of a car's greenhouse gas emissions for the life of the loan (mecu, Australia).
• Deposits - Landcare Term Deposit, in which for every dollar spent, the bank lends an equivalent amount to support sustainable agriculture practices (Westpac, Australia); EcoDeposits, fully-insured deposits earmarked for lending to local energy-efficient companies aiming to reduce waste and pollution, or conserve natural resources (Shorebank Pacific, U.S.).

That doesn't include any of several green credit cards that, variously, donate a portion of sales to environmental groups, offset emissions associated with purchases, or reduce interest rates for green products and services, among other schemes.

Such products seem to be paying off for some banks. For example, the goGreen car loan offered by Australia's mecu - in which the bank provides low interest rates to cars based on their greenhouse gas rating, the offsets the car's carbon emissions during the life of the loan - has led to a 45 percent climb in car loans at the bank. Meanwhile, Barclays has issued nearly 11 million of its Breathe carbon neutral debit and credit cards.

And then there's the corporate and investment-grade banking category, featuring another wide spectrum of offerings, involving project finance, securitisation, bonds, technology leasing, carbon finance and emissions trading, and other products and services. The UNEP report offers examples of each.

There's more to come, says UNEP, including green commercial real estate, carbon markets, clean technology, and climate-related insurance, to name four broad markets expected to gain traction in coming years.

For all the promise, however, UNEP remains sceptical about the US:

"There continues to be minimal environmental leadership, or at least awareness, in North America's retail banking sector. The popular perception is that the consumer and [small and midsized company] banking space remains relatively neutral in terms of environmental impact; a stance that overlooks the formidable influence, positive and negative, that clients wield over the use and management of natural resources."

Moreover, UNEP acknowledges that most green financial products and services remain either in the nascent stage of development or haven't yet proven themselves in the marketplace. As a result, "any rigorous measurement or ranking of these designs would be overly speculative and risk misrepresenting some designs over others".

Still, the growth of green finance seems inevitable, as banks and other financial institutions recognise the pressing environmental need and the growing customer demand for more socially responsible financial services.

And that, at the end of the day, money is the r