Update on Reinventing Fire, TED Video

Update on Reinventing Fire by Amory Lovins of the Rockey Mountain Institute

Pay special attention at time stamp 17:50

Reinventing Fire: Amory Lovins

Those who know Amory Lovins of the Rockey Mountain Institute know that he was one of the first to speak up about climate change and challenge the existing economy. I first learned about Lovins and RMI in 2007 watching a TED video in which he claimed "The whales were saved by profit seeking capitalist and technological innovators" (perhaps he spoke too soon). He offers a unique scientific vision of how business and industry should transition to a post oil economy, a synergistic model that claims that our entire energy economy can be replace through innovative efficiency and new energy technology with minimal infrastructure investments. Download his "Oil Endgame" here.

The Eight Guiding Principles of Rocky Mountain Institute

• Advanced Resource Productivity: Using natural resources much more productively — efficiently — is both profitable and better for the environment.
• Whole-Systems Design: Whole-systems design reveals lasting, elegantly frugal solutions with multiple benefits.
• Positive Action: We don't lobby, litigate, or harass those with whom we disagree.
• Market-Oriented Solutions: We believe in working with markets, not against them.
• End-use/Least-cost Approach: "What are we trying to do, and what's the best and cheapest way to do it?"
• Biological Insight: Nature offers extraordinary design solutions honed by 3.8 billion years' rigorous testing
• Corporate Transformation: We view the corporate world, which environmental groups often dismiss as "the problem," as an essential part of the solution.
• The Pursuit of Interconnection: We believe strongly in the importance of a "vision across boundaries."

About Amory Lovins - Lovins has been a visionary leader in sustainable technologies and soft energy paths since 1976, when Foreign Affairs published his landmark essay, Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken?" As the co-founder, chairman, and chief scientist of the Rocky Mountain Institute, Lovins has briefed heads of state, consulted with CEOs, and worked with environmentalists to create an alternative energy strategy---and he contends his vision can be achieved with no new acts of Congress or government regulation, and no major shift in our lifestyles. A prolific author and entrepreneur, Lovins has received honorary doctorates and awards around the world for his inclusive and broad-based approach to creating a sustainable economy. In 2009, Time magazine named Lovins as one of the 100 most-influential people in the world.

Clean Tech San Diego and The California Center for Sustainable Energy welcome Amory to San Diego.

How Cleantech Innovation in San Diego is Lighting the Way to Economic Prosperity

Reinventing Fire:
Amory Lovins Talks Energy Strategy
Wednesday April 11, 2012,  5:00 – 7:30pm

Energy Innovation Center
4760 Clairemont Mesa Blvd.
San Diego, CA 92117

***************

Amory Lovins is reinventing fire, and CleanTECH San Diego and the California Center for Sustainable Energy are bringing him to San Diego to explain how it can be done. In his latest book, Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era, Lovins argues that it is possible to run a U.S. economy that is 2.6 times bigger by 2050---without oil, coal, or nuclear power---and in ways that will make the economy much stronger.

Named by TIME magazine as one of the “World's 100 Most Influential People” in 2009, Amory Lovins is the co-founder, chairman and chief scientist of the Rocky Mountain Institute – a nationally recognized, non-profit think-and-do tank in Colorado. He has been active at the nexus of energy and environmental resources and development in more than 50 countries for over 35 years, and is among the world's leading energy authorities.

Mr. Lovins will join CleanTECH San Diego President & CEO Jim Waring to discuss Reinventing Fire and how San Diego entrepreneurs and innovators are already applying some of his strategies for actionable solutions for the four energy-intensive sectors of the economy: transportation, buildings, industry and electricity. The event will highlight a number of clean technologies being developed in San Diego, and explore how they can be broadly applied to revolutionize markets around the world. The evening will conclude with a book signing and reception.

Reinventing Fire will be sold at the event at the discounted price of $30 (cash only). Reserve your copy here.

RSVP http://ctsdamorylovins2012.eventbrite.com

Limited seating available.
***************

About CleanTECH San Diego

CleanTECH San Diego is a private, non-profit member organization formed in 2007. As one of the nation's premier cleantech cluster organizations, its mission is to position the region as a global leader in the cleantech economy. CleanTECH San Diego serves as a catalyst for a diverse group of stakeholders to advance a common agenda.

www.cleantechsandiego.org

About California Center for Sustainable Energy

The California Center for Sustainable Energy ( CCSE) is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation that helps residents, businesses and public agencies save energy, reduce grid demand and generate their own power through a variety of rebate, technical assistance and education programs. CCSE also provides the community with objective information, research, analysis and long-term planning on energy issues and technologies. The California Center for Sustainable Energy promotes change for a clean energy future.
www.energycenter.org

Bee Hive Colony Collapse Disorder linked to Pesticide, beware of corn-syrup

Wired reports yet another tragic use for tabaco is the manufacture of neonicotinoids like Imidacloprid.  This popular toxic pesticide, imidacloprid, is a systemic insecticide which acts as an insect neurotoxin and belongs to a class of chemicals called the neonicotinoids which act on the central nervous system of insects. 

"Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health '...have re-created the mysterious Colony Collapse Disorder in several honeybee hives simply by giving them small doses of a popular pesticide, imidacloprid.' This follows recently-reported studies also linked the disorder to neonicotinoid pesticides. What is really interesting is the link to when the disorder started appearing, 2006. 'That mech...anism? High-fructose corn syrup. Many bee-keepers have turned to high-fructose corn syrup to feed their bees, which the researchers say did not imperil bees until U.S. corn began to be sprayed with imidacloprid in 2004-2005. A year later was the first outbreak of Colony Collapse Disorder.'"

Now off patent, you can buy imidacloprid under many trade names: Admire, Advantage (Advocate) (flea killer for pets), Gaucho, Merit, Nuprid, Prothor, Turfthor, Confidor, Conguard, Hachikusan, Kohinor, Optrol, Premise, Prothor, Provado, Intercept, Winner, and Xytect. 

(Note: You may want to sell your stock in Bayer, the Aspirin pharmaceutical company that created imidacloprid neurotoxin pesticides, they will likely be sued for all the damage to food crops, cooperate farms, and by starving nations for loss of production.)

The Proper Loading Order

People want the sexy new expensive technology, because it's profitable to sell, but the truth is that most of the things we can due to change our future for the better are fairly inexpensive, don't take an expert or any technical education, and you can do them yourself with a little help from your friends.

The following is a note from my friends at Sacraemento Building Performance:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Efficiency Loading Order

When contemplating improving our home’s performance it helps to have a general guideline or ordering of priorities when making the decisions that provide the most benefit for our investment.  It’s important to look at the house as a system where each part interacts and ideally works together with the rest.  If we ignore this interaction and focus our attention on single source solutions, at best we miss opportunities to leverage our decisions and in the worse case cause unintentionally negative results.

For example if we add insulation without first taking the time and effort to airseal points of unwanted infiltration, the R-value of that insulation can be reduced by over 50%.  We might be uncomfortable and think we need a new and larger HVAC system.  If we first seal the envelope and add insulation we may be able to downsize that new system, saving on first costs and subsequent utility bills.

It’s important to avoid the “silver bullet” mentality when it comes to energy efficiency.  Using the following loading order of upgrade priorities can help.   It starts with the easiest, least expensive items and progresses to increasingly complex activities.  Tightening up a home’s envelope by air sealing and adding insulation are the two most cost effective steps you can take toward affordable comfort.  It pays to put your money into simple measures first.

Envelope
1. Air sealing the envelope
2. Insulation
3. Duct sealing

Load Reduction
4. Fluorescent lighting
5. Energy efficient appliances
6. Reducing plug loads (especially phantom loads)
7. Reducing water consumption
8. Occupant behavior

Mechanical Systems
9. High efficiency HVAC
10. High efficiency water heating
11. Heat recovery ventilation

Renewables
12. Solar hot water
13. PV solar
14. Wind power
15. Rain water harvesting

Of course nothing can replace a comprehensive home performance survey performed by a competent professional to analyze our homes particular needs and to develop a cost effective strategy.

http://sacbuildingperformance.com/2010/05/26/energy-efficiency-loading-order/

---------------------------------
Bonus, went to the BLUE GREEN Jobs Conference in San Diego this week, learned a lot about the potential for collaborative solutions to seemingly catastrophic problems, but there is still a lack of public awareness and thus political will to dedicate the resources necessary to address the coming crisis.


You can download and listen to the rough audio here with QuickTime Player:
BlueGreen.3gp

Donald Sadoway: The missing link to renewable energy

Inventing inventors may be more difficult than inventing batteries, but the process is the same, find the right elements, melt-them into a solution, break the rules, and tell everyone.

This MIT solution to a chemical battery may work, it may even be produced, but its problem is not the electric charge it can hold, it's real challenge is that none of the existing power structures: government, corporate, military, utility, etc. will support it, because they depend upon waste for their position.

The PACE Lawsuit is maturing

A few years ago California and 37 other states filed a lawsuit against the US Federal Government when FHMA (Fanny May) and FRMC (Freddy Mac) convinced the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to quash Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs. Apparently a federal judge saw the light, and ruled that FHFA must do 'rulemaking' processes before crushing PACE programs. Now the Vote Solar Initiative is spearheading a letter writing campaign to help inform FHMA of the cost of their mistake.


By derailing PACE in the USA, we have lost the lead in Green Industries to other nations like China and Germany, and we have failed to create the new jobs and train the new Green workforce necessary to compete in the renewable energy economy. Please add your opinion about the future of PACE programs at the local level, click here for more.


Below is my personal letter to FHFA : Please Email: RegComments@fhfa.gov
--------------------------------------------------

Mr. Alfred Pollard

General Counsel

Federal Housing Finance Agency

400 7th St., N.W.

Washington, DC 20024

RE: RIN 2590-AA53 Mortgage Assets Affected by PACE Programs; Comments on Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and EIS Scoping Comments

Dear Mr. Pollard:

When I first learned of Property Assessed Clean Energy, I saw the genius behind the concept. Paying up front for expensive energy remodeling and renewable energy generation systems on every building is not economically feasible for most property owners, and by providing lenders with security by placing a lean against the property gives each property owner the liberty to become their own energy utility. In addition, by removing themselves from the carbon-fuel and nuclear energy consumers group, they save the environment one building at a time. Finally, PACE programs pay for this new energy infrastructure over the life of the buildings and equipment, allowing the cost of the energy to be transfered to each new owner or occupant, without unduly limiting the current owner from selling their property if necessary.

When I found out that FHMA and FRMC had put the kibosh on PACE programs by filing a federal lawsuit, it seemed counter productive, but I was willing to hear their reasoning. When I found out that they were afraid that the primary leans that PACE provides, I thought they were very short sighted, because, of course, by increasing the energy efficiency and renewable energy independence of each building, you increase the value of the property, and that translates across communities, ensuring the long term viability of the real-estate markets and guaranteeing that the outstanding loans will be paid with their interest. It also will create new jobs, and train the US construction industry to build quality efficient net-zero buildings for our future.

When it was explained to me that their short-sighted legal objection was motivated because FHMA and FRMC are NOT FEDERAL LENDERS but simply INSURE PRIVATE SECTOR LOANS on the backs of tax payers! I then concluded that this legal challenge was not coming from educated federal housing experts, but from economic power brokers who were willing to sacrifice our future for the chance to keep a broken system of energy waste, pollution, and economic crisis going in a cycle of boom and bust so that they could take advantage of the foreclosure crisis and the spikes in energy commodities.

Further, Mello-Roos type local property taxes are NOT UNDER FEDERAL JURISTICTION, under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, the Federal Government can not levy such tax within the individual States, and under the 10th Amendment such property taxes fall are clearly under State's Rights, and the power of local municipal corporations to levy such leans in order to improve the quality and independence of their individual communities should not be infringed.

Therefore, I urge you to decide in favor of PACE type programs in every state, it is in the long-term interest of our citizens, their communities, and our nation.

------------------------------

PACE was developed in 2007 to enable local communities interested in increasing energy security and electric grid reliability, creating jobs and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants to provide an affordable mechanism for homeowners to make energy efficiency or renewable energy improvements. PACE is a means by which local governments can effect these important public purposes using longstanding, widely-adopted land-secured municipal finance structures, known around the country as “improvement districts”, “special tax districts”, “assessment districts” and the like (collectively “land-secured municipal finance districts”).

PACE enables local communities to finance energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements with little or no upfront cost, at competitive interest rates and over a time period that matches the period over which energy savings associated with such improvements are realized. With PACE, assessments are made against property that benefits from energy efficiency or renewable energy improvements financed by a local government, tying the repayment obligation with the beneficiary of the financing.

Because of its unique ability to spur homeowner investment in energy efficiency and clean, on-site renewable energy, PACE legislation was passed by 27 states in just two and a half years. It has strong bi-partisan support at the local, state and Federal levels. PACE programs have been received with such overwhelming public support because they address one of the most important problems facing America, and offer an ability to scale that is unmatched by other alternatives.

We believe that FHFA’s action to unilaterally halt local government PACE programs on July 6, 2010 was unwarranted. This rulemaking provides an opportunity to establish a fact-based record and correct misinformation and misunderstandings, to the benefit of all stakeholders: local governments, mortgage lenders, homeowners, and our nation. We appreciate the opportunity, and urge FHFA to look for ways to accommodate these broadly beneficial programs. To this end, we recommend that the FHFA adopt reasonable underwriting standards that ensure local PACE programs are designed to maximize benefit and minimize risk, as described below.

1) PACE assessments are valid - and are not “loans” as asserted by FHFA

FHFA has repeatedly referred to PACE assessments as “loans.” To the contrary, they are property assessments with characteristics similar to those of more than 37,000 other land-secured special assessment districts in the United States that are rooted in hundreds of years of state and local law. Such districts are typically created at the voluntary behest of property owners who vote to allow their local governments to finance public improvements such as sewer systems, sidewalks, lighting, parks, open space acquisitions, and business improvements on their behalf. Other districts allow property owners to act voluntarily and individually to adopt municipally financed improvements to their property that are repaid with assessments. These assessments are secured by liens, just as with property tax liens, which have always been senior to privately-held liens such as the first mortgage. PACE is but an additional public purpose sought to be carried out by municipalities using an established finance structure well familiar to the real estate and mortgage industries.

2) PACE assessments present minimal risks to lenders, investors, homeowners and GSEs

FHFA asserts that PACE presents “significant safety and soundness” concerns, but there is no evidence that this is true. There is long-standing experience, borne out by studies, that energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements reduce homeowners’ energy bills and increase their property’s value, strengthening their financial position and increasing the value of a lender’s collateral. PACE financed improvements allow homeowners to hedge themselves against fuel price spikes and rising fuel costs over time. These factors lessen, if not eliminate, the safety and soundness risk than the FHFA has asserted. Local governments that established PACE programs prior to the July 6, 2010 action by FHFA developed program standards to protect lenders and consumers. The White House (October 18, 2009) and the Department of Energy (May 7, 2010) both published national PACE guidelines with clear, strong underwriting standards to ensure that homeowners are able to afford the improvements. A bi-partisan bill in the House of Representatives (HR 2599 – Hayworth R-NY19) further delineates national standards to minimize risk to lenders and consumers. Finally, the early results of PACE pilot programs in Boulder County, CO; Sonoma County and Palm Desert, CA; and Babylon, NY; show that PACE presents minimal risk: there are only a handful of known defaults out of nearly 3,200 upgraded properties, substantially fewer than the rate of default for non-PACE property-owners in the same districts.

3) Home energy improvements financed with PACE achieve important economic and environmental benefits

State and local governments have also passed PACE laws because PACE has great potential to help governments attain important economic and environmental goals. For example, according to a May 2011 Department of Energy study, the Boulder County PACE program created over 120 jobs, generated more than $20 million in overall economic activity and reduced consumers’ energy use by more than $125,000 in the first year alone. These benefits are important by themselves. In developing a rule that serves the public interest, the FHFA must weigh perceived risks against economic benefits that clearly reduce default rates.

4) Proposed Rule:

We strongly urge FHFA to reconsider its blanket opposition to PACE programs and to revise the Statement and the Directive. We recommend that FHFA’s proposed rule provide that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and any other mortgage lenders regulated by FHFA (Enterprises) be allowed to buy residential mortgages with PACE assessments that are originated by programs that conform to standards and guidelines such as those established in the Department of Energy’s “Guidelines for Pilot PACE Financing Programs” (May 7, 2010) (DOE Guidelines) or HR 2599 (The PACE Assessment Protection Act) to protect the interests of local governments, homeowners, mortgage lenders and the Enterprises.

5) EIS Scoping Comments

The Proposed Action in FHFA’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be changed to provide that the Enterprises may purchase mortgages subject to a first-lien PACE obligation or that could become subject to first-lien PACE obligations so long as the applicable PACE program conforms to standards and guidelines such as those established in HR 2599 or the DOE Guidelines. If FHFA does not alter the Proposed Action, one of the alternatives analyzed in the EIS should be revisions to the FHFA’s July 6, 2010 Statement and February 28, 2010 Directive to provide that the Enterprises are permitted to purchase mortgages subject to a first-lien PACE obligation or that could become subject to first-lien PACE obligations so long as the applicable PACE program conforms to standards and guidelines such as those established in HR 2599 or the DOE Guidelines.

Sincerely,

Michael Russell

BPI - HERS Consultant

San Diego, CA

How to corrupt the minds of the youth

A recent exposé of the corporate funded Heartland Institute's secret documents revealed an elaborate plan to purposefully manipulate K-12 curriculum, with efforts to inject doubt about climate change into young students and ensure that paralysis on clean energy technology and climate change legislation continues for another generation. This exemplifies how far international profiteering interests will go to systematically misinform the American public.

You can listen in on the conference call:
Science Denial and the Human Cost of Misinformation - Eric Byler talks to Robert Proctor, Prof. of History, Stanford University, Thursday, Mar 15, 2012 - 5:30 pm Eastern Time (2:30 pm PT), CLICK HERE to listen live or call (646) 929-2495 to join the conversation