An entire army, apparently.

El Presidente of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, put in big orders for energy efficiency when he commanded the country's lightbulbs get swapped for CFLs. Why the power play? A drought of hydropower has the nation in energy crisis and the military armed with efficient lightbulbs, laying waste to every wasteful incandescent in their path. The troops are battling against the highest per capita energy use on the continent, but the spoils of war will ease the shift from years of being spoiled by oil.

Viva efficiency!

Via inhabitat

Related Links:

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

How the cap-and-trade controversy could lead to good clean energy policy

Job Creation Begins at Home

Cross-posted from the Wonk Room.

As the Kerry-Graham-Lieberman triumvirate works to craft green economy legislation, they’re negotiating with industry lobbyists who deny the threat of global warming. After meeting with President Barack Obama and a dozen industry-friendly lawmakers, the trio of Senate negotiators sat down with representatives of the fossil-based economy:

A cross section of industry power players met this afternoon in the Capitol with Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman. Groups represented at the meeting included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Petroleum Institute, Edison Electric Institute, Nuclear Energy Institute, National Association of Manufacturers, Farm Bureau, American Forest and Paper Association, American Railroads, National Electric Manufacturers Association, and Portland Cement Association.

It’s perfectly reasonable for senators to meet with industry stakeholders as they work to unleash the clean energy economy. However, half of the lobbyist groups mentioned are legally challenging the threat of manmade climate change, with court petitions against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s greenhouse gas endangerment finding:

– The Portland Cement Association, which has filed suit despite supposedly recognizing the need to reduce global warming pollution

– The American Petroleum Institute, which intends to blame climate policy for higher gas prices at every gas station in America

– The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has repeatedly questioned climate science

– The National Association of Manufacturers, which claims climate legislation is “anti-jobs, anti-energy”

– The American Farm Bureau Federation, which argues there is global cooling

One has to wonder how productive it can be to negotiate with polluters who deny the scientific reality of global warming.

On the other hand, the industry lobbyists thought the talks were “extraordinarily productive.” Tom Kuhn, president of Edison Electric Institute, the lead trade group for investor-owned electric utilities, told reporters:

It was a positive, encouraging discussion. I think they want to try and find ways to make things work from the standpoint of all the participants in that room, from the standpoint of the industrials and the oil companies.

John Shaw, the senior vice president of the Portland Cement Association, said:

It was an extraordinarily productive meeting. I think it was unprecedented for three senators, arguably each from a different political background, if you will, to sit down at a table and invite leaders from all different sectors, to try to create another level of dialogue. They want to start delving into the details, and creating those details with greater industry input than we’ve seen in the past.

Related Links:

The Climate Post: Uptick in denialism halts glacier melt, lowers sea levels

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Job Creation Begins at Home

Here's object lesson No. 452 in the ongoing corrosive handover of government power to corporate interests. And no, I don't think I'm exaggerating. Over at Mother Jones, Kate Sheppard details the high-speed revolving door permanently located between the offices of Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and several top energy lobbying outfits. But Sheppard also drops in this little-noticed fact:

The door to Lincoln’s office also spins the other direction ... In December she hired Julie Anna Potts to serve as her chief counsel for the Senate Committee on Agriculture,
Nutrition and Forestry, which Lincoln chairs. Potts most recently
served as general counsel for the American Farm Bureau Federation. The farm lobby in general and AFB in particular have vehemently opposed climate legislation -- going so far as to deny that emissions are even a problem.

Sheppard puts this in the context of Lincoln's position on climate change, which I've also discussed in the past. Lincoln's decision to draw the Ag Committee's chief counsel from the group that, despite its rhetoric, acts almost exclusively in the interests of the largest corporate commodity farmers, should tell you the direction she intends to take the re-authorization of the Farm Bill, scheduled for 2012.

If there's any good news on this front, it's that Lincoln faces a primary in her 2010 re-election campaign and, should she win it, is looking at bad poll numbers against her likely GOP opponent. The better news? Next in line for the Ag Committee chairmanship is the far more progressive Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.). And with Detroit now on the cutting edge of urban agriculture, Stabenow has a whole new constituency in favor of broadening definitions of and government support for farming.

Still, for the moment, Lincoln's in charge, and she's doing what she can to douse already-dim hopes of real farm-policy reform.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Job Creation Begins at Home

NEW DELHI -- India has decided to formally back a climate change accord struck in Copenhagen last year that includes non-binding limits on global warming, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said Tuesday.

Ramesh told parliament that India, the last major emitter yet to formally endorse the agreement, would join the more than 100 other countries that have already "associated" with it.

"We participated in the negotiations on the Copenhagen Accord and we stand by the accord," Ramesh said.

The Copenhagen Accord sets a non-binding goal of limiting global warming to below 2.0 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) above pre-industrial times and a goal of $100 billion in aid from 2020.

It also lists steps by several countries, including all the top greenhouse gas emitters, to either cut or curb the growth of their emissions by 2020.

The deal was crafted amid chaos by a small group of countries, led by the United States and China, to avert an implosion of the U.N.'s December 7-18 climate summit in Copenhagen.

Some had worried that India, though publicly in support, would refuse to endorse the accord, which fell far short of the binding legal agreement to cut carbon emissions that some countries and campaigners had wanted.

In the past, India and China had publicly said they "supported" the accord and Indian officials had stressed there was a distinction between expressing support and explicitly becoming "associated."

Environment ministry officials said the decision came after other key emerging countries -- Brazil, South Africa, and China -- also associated themselves with the deal.

"We believe that our decision to be listed reflects the role India played in giving shape to the Copenhagen Accord. This will strengthen our negotiating position on climate change," Ramesh said.

Ahead of the Copenhagen climate talks, India had pledged to cut its carbon footprint by reducing the intensity of its emissions.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Where do things stand on international efforts to address global warming?

Online electric vehicleCredit: Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

SEOUL -- South Korean researchers on Tuesday launched an environmentally friendly public transport system using a "recharging road"-- with a vehicle sucking power magnetically from buried electric strips.

The Online Electric Vehicle (OLEV), towing three buses, went into service at an amusement park in southern Seoul. If the prototype proves successful, there are plans to try it out on a bus route in the capital.

The Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), which developed the system, says OLEV needs a battery only one-fifth the size of conventional electric vehicles and eliminates the need for major recharging.

It also avoids the need for overhead wires used to power conventional trams or trolley buses.

Guests including Seoul Mayor Oh Se-Hoon and KAIST President Suh Nam-Pyo were given a 1.4-mile ride Tuesday around the zoo at Seoul Grand Park.

Recharging strips have been installed in four segments totalling about a quarter of a mile along the route.

Pick-up equipment underneath OLEV collects power through non-contact magnetic charging from strips buried under the road surface. It then distributes the power either to drive the vehicle or for battery storage.

If the system is used on Seoul bus routes, underground power lines would have to be installed on only 20 percent of the route at places like bus stops, parking places, and intersections, KAIST said in a statement.

The technology was first developed in a project involving the University of California-Berkeley, but KAIST said that produced no tangible results.

The state-funded institute says it has applied for more than 120 patents in connection with OLEV, which it describes as safe, clean, and economical.

"Of all the world's electric vehicles, this is the most economical system," Suh told reporters, adding the operating cost is only about one-third of ordinary electric vehicles. "The potential for application [of this technology to public transport systems] is limitless. I dare say this is one of the most significant technical gains in the 21st century."

Suh said KAIST plans to use OLEVs to shuttle delegates at the G20 summit that Seoul will host in November.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Farm lobby’s lawyer appointed as Ag Committee’s counsel

A sage grouse.Photo: Gary Kramer of U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceWASHINGTON -- U.S. officials on Friday stopped short of giving endangered species status to the sage grouse, an iconic bird that is at the center of a dispute over oil drilling and other energy development in the western United States.

The Interior Department said the bird merits protection but will not receive it for now because of a backlog of other species which are a higher priority, a move that is expected to allow oil drilling to continue.

The agency "will expand efforts with state, local, and tribal partners to map lands that are vital to the survival of the greater sage grouse ... while guiding and managing new conventional and renewable energy projects to reduce impacts on the species," a statement from Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said.

"The sage grouse's decline reflects the extent to which open land in the West has been developed in the last century," Salazar said. "We must find common-sense ways of protecting, restoring, and reconnecting the Western lands that are most important to the species' survival while responsibly developing much-needed energy resources."

Environmentalists lamented the decision.

"These magnificent birds need Endangered Species Act protection now," said Michael Connor, California director for Western Watersheds Project. "Without this added protection, the Mona Basin sage grouse will continue to decline."

Sage grouse have dwindled to about half of their historic range due to habitat destruction, and some scientists warn that the birds could disappear within the next 100 years or less.

The Environmental Defense Fund said the decision "is a wake-up call for landowners, industry, and conservationists to work together to reverse the decline of the bird and the land it inhabits."

"An endangered species listing is no one's first choice as a tool to fix broken landscapes," said Ted Toombs, a spokesman for EDF. "It is really a last resort option to keep species from going extinct. The first, best option to protect species is for conservationists, farmers, ranchers, energy companies, the recreation industry, and other stakeholders to work together on habitat conservation and restoration, so that an endangered species listing can be avoided."

The greater sage grouse currently live in 11 western states: California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

Oil and gas companies have said a designation could freeze drilling in areas of Wyoming and other states that are also sage grouse habitat.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Farm lobby’s lawyer appointed as Ag Committee’s counsel

PARIS -- Europe's system for industrial carbon quotas has enriched the continent's biggest polluters, with 10 firms together reaping permits for 2008 alone worth $680 million, a new report revealed.

Dominated by steel and cement makers, the same "carbon fat cats" stand to collect surplus CO2 permits that -- at current market rates -- could be worth $4.3 billion by 2012, it said.

This is roughly equivalent to the entire E.U. investment in renewable energy and clean technology under its economic recovery plan, according to Sandbag, a nonprofit group in Britain that analyzes carbon market policy.

"Emissions trading is meant to be the central policy for cutting CO2 levels," said Anna Pearson, Sandbag's top policy analyst. "The fact that companies are able to make large sums of money for doing nothing highlights that the trading scheme must be reformed and E.U. climate change target strengthened."

Under the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), the European Union allocates carbon pollution allowances to member states to meet obligations laid out in the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol, for which the first commitment period runs through 2012. The states then assign quotas to the industries that belch the most CO2 into the atmosphere.

Companies that emit less than their allowance can sell the difference on the market to companies that exceed their limits, thus providing -- in theory -- a financial carrot to everyone to become greener.

But the energy, steel, and cement sectors that dominate the system, hit by the global crunch, are emitting less CO2 than forecast, which means surplus carbon permits are flooding the market.

Among the top 10 beneficiaries, steelmaker ArcelorMittal collected more than 40 percent of the 2008 excess permits, reported Sandbag. French cement giant Lafarge got about 12 percent, with Tata steel group subsidiary Corus and Swedish steel maker SSAB-Svenskt Stal each claiming about 10 percent.

Even if the permits are not directly resold for profit, the value will still remain on the companies' books, rising or falling with the market.

Most of the permits were generated simply because the companies were allocated more free permits than they wound up using, according to the report. "Little or no actual 'effort' toward emissions reductions need have taken place, yet these companies will be able to literally bank the profits," it said.

The price of a tonne of CO2 or its equivalent has fallen sharply over the last 18 months. After peaking at nearly $38 in mid-2008, CO2 is currently trading at about $18, according to BlueNext, one of several European carbon exchanges.

Viewed narrowly, the recession-driven drop in CO2 emissions helps the environment.

But low carbon prices give businesses little incentive to develop and install new technologies to slash future emissions.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Farm lobby’s lawyer appointed as Ag Committee’s counsel

Blanche Lincoln Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter (D) is mounting a primary
challenge against conservative Democrat Blanche Lincoln for the U.S. Senate
seat she's held for two terms.

Environmentalists and progressives have it in for
Lincoln, angry over her opposition to high-profile Democratic issues like a
public option in health care and cap-and-trade.
The Sierra Club is running
ads bashing her for trying to stall new fuel-economy rules on behalf of Big
Oil. (She's been the top recipient of campaign
contributions from the oil and gas sector for the past five years.) MoveOn is sending emails calling Lincoln "one
of the worst Democratic senators" and urging its members to donate to Halter.

Recently named to the League
of Conservation Voters' "Dirty Dozen," Lincoln has taken heat for working
to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse-gas emissions. She was also one of
10 Democrats who contributed to the downfall of the Lieberman-Warner Climate
Security Act in 2008. Along with other swing-vote senators, Lincoln signed
a letter [PDF] outlining the reasons she would not support the bill. (Kate
Sheppard has more
on Lincoln's climate and energy record.)

Meanwhile, Halter seems to be getting somewhat of a free
pass. MoveOn, unions, and other liberal groups have helped him amass a war chest of more
than $5 million, but he's managed to get this far with little mention of the
environment. His campaign website is
decidedly ambiguous on climate and energy, focusing instead on education and
jobs.

Bill HalterIn an interview with Talking Points Memo, Halter
glosses over environmental issues. He gives a blunt "no" when asked if he
would share Lincoln's position on blocking the EPA from regulating greenhouse
gas emissions, but remains vague about cap-and-trade, a point not lost on TPM:

On the issues,
Halter often came down on the left-hand side of the line. He told me he likes
candidates that talk specifics and in most cases he put his money where his
mouth was, offering detailed answer on a number of policy fronts. One notable
exception was cap-and-trade, where ... he didn't offer a specific policy stance,
instead talking at length about developing alternative energy resources to
better the environment and the economy. But he said "there are significant
changes that need to be made" to the House cap-and-trade bill before he
could support it. Halter ended our interview before he had a chance to elaborate
on what those "significant changes" are.

Whoever wins the nomination will face a tough
general-election race against the likely Republican nominee, U.S. Rep. John Boozman
(R), who is currently
polling well ahead of both Lincoln and Halter. 

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

A messy but practical strategy for phasing out the U.S. coal fleet

The one-seater Milieu.TOYAMA, Japan -- While auto manufacturing giants spend millions to develop environmentally friendly electric cars, one Japanese company has taken a more low-key approach, crafting hand-made "green" cars.

Takeoka Jidosha Kogei may be the antithesis of the world's Hondas and Nissans. The family-run business makes its cars from scratch in a garage workshop in the snowy foothills in the northwest of the country.

There are no industrial robots or assembly lines in sight. Instead just a dozen mechanics craft each model by hand, right up to the finishing touch of adding a set of beady headlights to their "Milieu" range.

The cars seem to owe much of their design to Japan's manga cartoon tradition -- their one-seater T-10 seems barely large enough for an adult driver, with just enough extra room left for a small pet, as requested by customers.

The box-shaped two-door car -- which is dubbed the "Eco-beagle" and comes in green, white, red, and canary yellow -- has a relatively affordable price tag of $9,600.

Company head Manabu Takeoka said he wants to change the image of minicars, which he said "are generally viewed as cars for the elderly, or for drivers who had their normal licences removed due to drunken driving."

"We've improved the shape of our latest model to make it cuter, to attract younger clients," he said.

Like other electric cars, it runs on a lithium-ion battery and can be charged from a conventional wall socket.

The latest model can drive up to 45 miles at 37 miles per hour when fully charged.

Takeoka's cars are aimed at rural households, which often have more than one car, as opposed to the cities, where more people opt for public transport to avoid the cost of parking.

The Takeoka lineup includes six models made from lightweight fiber-reinforced plastic, ranging from one- to four-seater cars. They measure less than 10 feet and weigh between 660 to 1,600 pounds.

"People who buy our cars use them primarily to run errands or go shopping a few hundred meters from their homes. They don't need to charge the cars on the road if they already did so at home," said Takeoka.

Takeoka began its business in 1981 by building minicars for the disabled.

It started developing the electric cars in the 1990s with help from the local electricity company. Nearby Toyama University has since come on board, helping design the models.

The company also makes electric minicars specially designed for railway companies to inspect tunnels.

The electric cars may be a novelty, but they are unlikely to take the world by storm anytime soon, with sales currently at around 100 vehicles per year.

Asked whether there are plans to ramp up production, Takeoka exclaimed: "The company cannot build that many!"

Related Links:

Streetfilms: Fixing the car-centric city [video]

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

WASHINGTON -- Victims of Hurricane Katrina are seeking to sue greenhouse gas-emitting multinationals for helping fuel global warming and boosting the devastating 2005 storm, legal documents showed Wednesday.

The class action suit brought by residents from southern Mississippi, which was ravaged by hurricane-force winds and driving rains, was first filed just weeks after the August 2005 storm hit.

"The plaintiffs allege that defendants' operation of energy, fossil fuels, and chemical industries in the United States caused the emission of greenhouse gasses that contributed to global warming," say the documents seen by AFP.

The increase in global surface air and water temperatures "in turn caused a rise in sea levels and added to the ferocity of Hurricane Katrina, which combined to destroy the plaintiffs' private property, as well as public property useful to them."

More than 1,200 people died in Hurricane Katrina, which lashed the area, swamping New Orleans in Louisiana when levees gave way under the weight of the waves.

The suit, claiming compensation and punitive damages from multinational companies including Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, Honeywell, and American Electric Power, has already passed several key legal hurdles, after initially being knocked back by the lowest court.

Three federal appeals court judges decided in October 2009 that the case could be heard. But in February the same court decided to re-examine whether it could be heard, this time with nine judges.

The residents charge that "the defendants' greenhouse gas emissions caused saltwater, debris, sediment, hazardous substances, and other materials to enter, remain on, and damage plaintiffs' property." They allege that companies had a duty to "avoid unreasonably endangering the environment, public health, public and private property."

The district court, which initially rejected the case, ruled that it was "a debate which simply has no place in the court." The court argued that Congress first had to enact legislation "which sets appropriate standards by which this court can measure conduct."

Mississippi residents must now wait for the appeals court to fix a new hearing, in principle within the next three months.

A decision would then be due by the end of 2010, and both sides could also then take the case to the Supreme Court.

Related Links:

How many Venezuelan soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Senators negotiate green economy bill with polluters who deny threat of global warming

Farm lobby’s lawyer appointed as Ag Committee’s counsel