Re/Action on Climate Protection

Zero carbon biodiesel calcs

Here are a few numbers that show the potential of the biodiesel production system shown here:

This system has the potential to operate with net zero carbon emissions.

Questions on efficiency

Here are some questions related to efficiency:

Can the market deal with energy efficiency in a way that slows down the growth in GHG emissions?

Is energy price alone sufficient to drive efficiency such that absolute emissions are decreased?

Is it necessary to subsidize (give away) energy efficient new technology to replace older, less efficient technology that is in place?

At what point do efficiencies backfire because reductions in emissions from improved efficiency are swamped by new growth?

Low Carbon Lifestyle - Beating Climate Change One Step at a time

What does a "zero net carbon lifestyle look like"? What do we have to do in order to achieve it? How much does it cost? What is required for government? How about community action?

In Sonoma County, the movement toward significant reductions in GHG emissions has begun. All nine of our city governments and the county government have adopted targets for reducing GHG emissions in both municipal operations and in the county as a whole. For the muni operations, most of the cities have adopted a target of 20% below 2000 emissions by 2010. One city, Sebastopol, has set 30% reduction below 2000 levels by 2008 as its target.

In addition, the target set by a community workshop has been adopted county-wide. This target, 25% below 1990 levels by 2015, is the most ambitious in the country, to date.

Setting the target is the first step. Now comes the fun part...figuring out a plan for reaching the target...and doing it! Climate Protection Campaign has produced a white paper that looks at each emissions sector, and analyzes how to remove carbon from that sector. A vision emerges from that paper. It looks something like this:

Energy Efficiency Financing

One of our commenters asked about financing for energy efficiency improvements. There are a whole range of financing options in the State of California. These include both federal programs and state programs.

Basic GHG reduction economics

One often hears the concern that GHG reduction is "too expensive" or will "wreck the economy". Are these claims true? In order to determine whether a measure is cost effective, or makes sense economically, a basic financial analysis must be done.  There are some tools available to help with this analysis. In order to use these tools, basic familiarity with spreadsheet software such as Excel is useful.

There are two types of investments in GHG reduction: 1) in measures that reduce demand for GHG generating energy, such as energy efficiency improvements; 2) in measures that replace GHG generating energy, such as solar photovoltaic panels. These measures avoid the emission of GHGs. Thus the investment in these measures can be expressed in "cost per unit weight of GHGs avoided over the life of the measure". In order to calculate the weight of the GHG avoided, a number called the "emission coefficient" is used. For example, in California, our statewide emission coefficient for electricity is 0.73 pounds of equivalent CO2 per kilowatt-hour. This just means that every kilowatt-hour of electricity that is used results in the emission of the atmospheric equivalent of 0.73 pounds of carbon dioxide from the generating power plants.

For example, suppose you replace a 100 watt incandescent lamp with a 20 watt compact fluorescent (CFL). Assume that the life of either bulb is 10,000 hours. Over the lifetime of the two lamps, the incandescent will use 1,000 kilowatt hours and the compact fluorescent will use 200 kilowatt hours. Using the emission coefficient, using the CFL in place of the incandescent will result in avoiding the emission of 387 pounds of carbon dioxide over the 10,000 hour lifetime. If the difference in cost between the two lamps is $10, the cost of the avoided carbon dioxide is approximately $50/ton. This metric can be used to compare cost-effectiveness of different measures.

In both demand side reduction measures and supply side measures, financial models are used to compare the investment in efficiency or new renewable generating capacity to other types of investments. The simplest financial model is known as "simple payback." This is a calculation of the length of time it takes for the savings from a measure to accumulate to the initial cost of the measure. For example, if a measure costs $100, and saves $10/month, it will "pay for itself" in 10 months. In our incandescent vs. CFL example, the CFL would pay for itself in approximately 1200 hours of operation if the electric rate is $0.10/kWh.

This model does not take into account two important factors: the future value of money and utility rate escalation. These to factors are critical to take into account for an accurate estimation of the financial implications of investment in GHG reduction. We will discuss financial modeling that includes these factors in another post.

Energy Efficiency is Key to Reducing Emissions

Reducing energy use by improving energy efficiency is the most cost effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In California, the state Public Utilities Commission has recognized this and has mandated the collection of a charge on every utility bill of every ratepayer in the state. This charge, known as the Public Goods Charge (PGC), that is intended to fund "public goods research, development and demonstration, and energy efficiency activities, and possibly to support low income assistance programs." This year, the state is funding energy efficiency programs that are developed and administered by the Investor Owned Utilities in the state.

Climate Protection Campaign has partnered with Quantum Consulting, an energy efficiency consulting firm based in Berkeley, CA to develop a PGC funded energy efficiency program. Beginning in 2006, this program will deliver a menu of energy efficiency services to residences, large and small business and governments in Sonoma County. These services include building tuneups, lighting retrofits, efficiency improvements to water and wastewater systems. These are direct install programs, that result in immediate energy savings. This results in greenhouse gas emissions reductions for the communities.

The Sonoma Partnership for Energy Efficiency is groundbreaking because of the focus on greenhouse gas emissions reduction. Sonoma County has set six national precedents for setting greenhouse gas reduction targets in the operations of all municipalities in the county, as well as county government and the community. This achievement was recognized as opening the door for energy efficiency improvements in both government operations and the community.

Here is a description of some of the other partnerships: http://www.pge.com/rebates/alliances/

Energy from Waste

We are excited to be working with Sonoma Compost to develop new processes that allow them to harvest energy from yard waste, and other organic waste streams. This is a step in the process that we call "closing the loop." This essentially means reducing greenhouse gas emissions by recovering energy from waste. Sonoma Compost is currently the processor for the yard waste that is picked up by Sonoma County haulers. They produce a high quality organic compost, which they offer for sale.

We are working with them to select new technologies that allow the production of biogas or a liquid fuel such as biodiesel or ethanol from organic waste streams, and also a new compost product. This energy or fuel can replace fossil-based energy sources, which results in a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Here is an example of a system that accomplishes this:

http://www.kompogas.ch/en/

Climate Protection Campaign White Paper Wiki

Please look at our white paper wiki. Here:

http://climateprotectioncampaign.jot.com

This is a living document that is updated by our authors to reflect the best thinking on local solutions to the climate change crisis.

Please send comments to dave[at]climateprotectioncampaign.org (replace [at] with @)

Zero net carbon

"Zero net carbon" or "low carbon" is a way of talking about the effect of human-caused GHG emissions on the atmospheric carbon dioxide level. If an activity is zero-net-carbon, it does not increase the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is clear that, in order to reverse the trend of increasing GHG emissions due to new demand for energy, new development must be zero net carbon. Here are some ways that this can be accomplished:

http://www.bedzed.org.uk/main.html

http://climateprotectioncampaign.jot.com/NewDevelopment

Achieving Zero Net Carbon

At Climate Protection Campaign, we have developed a strategy called "Carbon Removal". We look at each of the GHG emitting sectors: existing buildings, local energy system, transportation, water/wastewater, solid waste, agriculture, new development and forestry in the context of government, residential, commercial and industrial uses.

We then formulate what must be done to remove carbon emissions completely from each sector. Generally, these actions fall into two categories: demand side and supply side. On the demand side, we have found that energy efficiency measures top the list for fast, cost-effective GHG reductions. On the supply side, we are developing ways to transition our local energy supplies to renewable sources.

In my next few posts, I'll give some examples of the types of measures we are working on. I hope that other folks out there will share their experiences with working toward zero net carbon.