When you think of New York, you can’t help but think of the Empire State Building.  But what doesn’t pop into your head is the iconic building’s inefficient insulation or its $11 million annual utility bill.
Luckily, the building’s windows (all 6,514 of them) are being refurbished with the goal of reducing the Empire State Building’s energy use by 38%. An innovative company called Serious Materials is doing the work (we had a chance to meet one of their reps at a CCX meeting). They have a $20 million budget that should pay for itself within a decade or so.
This is a big step for New York City, which was recently named one of the greener cities in the US by the Natural Resources Defense Council.  The effort, along with investments in wind power and an outreach program for business owners, should help the city reach its goal of a 30% reduction in emissions by 2030. Even more importantly, this renovation is proof that our country can retain its history and lifestyle without sacrificing the environment.

A recent scientific journal article examined the general public’s perception of individual energy consumption. Overall, the 505 participants of the online survey reported that efforts to conserve energy—such as turning off lights at home—were a more effective strategy than investing in energy-saving technology: an incorrect perception, according to experts. In addition, the majority of participants grossly underestimated how much energy was requires for high-energy activities, like using a washing machine.
This study uncovers a sad fact about our country: Americans do not know the energy consumption associated with the products around them.  We can’t tell how much energy—and therefore, carbon—goes into making an aluminum can versus a plastic bottle, or the environmental cost of recycling either of them.  But the good news is that making energy-related information clear and readily available could have a huge impact in our daily lives. People do want to reduce their energy use, at the very least in an effort to lower their monthly bill, so a simple educational program that outlines low-cost and efficient ways to lower a household’s draw on the power grid would be well received. Maybe we can follow some Europeans countries that have made carbon footprint labeling of packaged foods mandatory, or perhaps have concise charts comparing the environmental costs of different categories (for example, transportation, packaging or building material).

Whenever you see the electricity generation of a solar panel, there is usually a sharp peak around 2 pm, when the sun is directly overhead the panel. Although it costs more, mounting solar panels on pivoting bases that can track the sun can greatly increase the total energy harnessed. The company Envision Solar has designed “solar trees” that can move in four directions, turning that sharp peak into a plateau of maximum energy harvesting.  These trees, and other solar panel contraptions, are designed with parking garages in mind, since the panels can offer shade for the cars on previously undesirable surface.
Envision Solar has also developed the LifeVillage, a so-called “solar city in a box.” LifeVillage is an entire solar-powered, portable living area, ideal for providing electricity and shelter for hundreds of families in emergency situations.  Its combination of solar panels and light steel infrastructure allow it to be self-sustaining and easily transportable and buildable, with a smaller impact on the environment than typical energy sources or emergency bunkers. 
And with other solar panel companies introducing technology that can create rooftop photovoltaic systems and more efficient solar power converters, solar panels will still be considered a leader in alternative energy options in the future.

China has acted with an “iron hand” towards climate change.  As the largest inventor of wind turbines, the country has some of the most stringent energy campaigns and technology standards.  The nation’s goals include reducing carbon emissions per unit economic output by 40 to 45% by 2020, and a main way of reaching this goal has been cutting fossil fuels out of energy production.  Already, coal-fired power plants in China are more energy efficient than those in the US, and the country has shut down over one thousand in the last three years to make room for new power technology.  Also, China has ordered the shut-down of other inefficient industry factories, such as the Guangshou Steel mill which employs thousands of workers.
Despite these efforts, China is projected to soon emit over a quarter of the world’s greenhouse gases. Raising emissions levels are due to population growth and higher demand for a Westernized lifestyle, which includes bigger cars and better apartments.
The Chinese government has tried to mitigate emissions from the “low-hanging fruit:” namely, industrial sources.  But it is much harder to effect change on an individual level. The emissions from Chinese citizens are still less than 50% of emissions from an average American’s lifestyle. Both countries, as well as other global leaders in population size, economy and technology, need to control the environmental impacts of their industries and their people.

There has been a surge in investments in Light-Emitting Diodes (LED).  As we’ve blogged about before, LED lights are initially more expensive than CFLs, but do not offer any toxins or complications with disposal.  LEDs also have lower long-term costs in electricity and need to be replaced less frequently than their incandescent and fluorescent competitors.
Supermarkets like BJ’s Wholesale Club and Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Markets have invested in LED lighting for their refrigerated systems in dozens of locations.  This is seen as both an environmentally and economically conscious decision, as using LED lights in place of fluorescents reduces the store’s carbon footprint, hazardous chemical disposal expenses, and energy bill.
The famous Louvre Museum in Paris is also switching to LED lighting, with no expense spared for maintaining an artistic ambiance.  Toshiba will install LED lighting in the outdoor courtyard, entrance and underground lobby by 2012. Special attention will be given to the new hue of the Louvre Pyramid, which has been tinged orange with low-voltage 100W halogen lamps and, more recently, white with metal halide lamps.
LED lights will become more accessible in home and offices, too.  Brand Neue Corporation is set to release a LED task and desk lamp that features low heat, no flickering, low cost and a life expectancy of 30 years.  This will eliminate the possible health risks associated with CFL use, including skin damage to UV-sensitive people and environmental contamination form improper mercury disposal.

You pay your utility bills – water, electricity, gas – every month or so, but do you know what is specifically using up those resources and your money? Google released its PowerMeter a few years ago to encourage people to track their energy consumption.  If you get your energy from a company who has partnered with Google PowerMeter, you can track your energy use daily, compare it to previous use, and see which appliances require the most power for free.  If your energy comes from a non-partnered source (Georgia Power or DTE, for example), then purchasing the separate electricity monitor may now be worthwhile; Google is lobbying for the release of TV White Spaces.  These are empty channels left from the national switch from analog to digital television, and are perfect for inexpensively transmitting information like personal electricity use in real time. In addition, Google PowerMeter is set up so that in the future, it could monitor the consumption of water and gas in the home. Although there have been some malfunctions with Google PowerMeter, such as higher energy costs in California homes after installation, wide-spread at-home monitoring of utility use is on the horizon, and will allow for less demand at peak hours and a decrease in fossil fuel consumption.

The two main topics on everyone’s mind are a person’s budget and the environment – specifically, how to cut down on damage to both.  Recently, many technological advancements have helped address both of these issues.
For example, “smart meters” have been developed by a variety of energy companies to track when consumers use energy.  They will be in widespread use once utility companies switch to block pricing for high and low demand times. This option gives consumers more control over their electricity bills and helps to reduce demands on the electricity grid. This, in turn, allows power plants to rely on a steady stream of electricity from the most efficient generators, instead of using high pollution power sources at peak times.
There have also been developments in home energy monitors.   Investments can range from individual outlet monitors to a whole-house power monitor, which shows outlet use, money spent per hour and high-use appliances and tracks improvements in efficiency and money savings.
The wave of the future seems to be in “smart homes.” Although expensive now, these systems allow full monitoring of electricity use throughout the house, with the ability to check if an appliance is in use via internet or remote control.   They also use motion sensors and keypads that allow the homeowner to increase energy efficiency and home security.
Many governments are also pushing for smart electricity grids, which allow consumers and suppliers to track energy use.  Besides reducing electricity use, these grids will link local grids into a larger national system, which will allow independent functionality and decrease power outages.
With all of these advancements, there’s no longer an excuse to keep using low-efficiency power.

Reuters recently reported that American GHG emissions related to energy fell 7% in 2009, which is the largest drop since emission recording started 60 years ago.The huge drop is credited to the recession, as well as more efficient fuel use.
But what does this mean for the environment? Environmental experts estimate that worldwide emissions need to drop by as much as 85% by 2050, which is currently an unreachable goal, given the political climate. However, there have been smaller steps towards reducing emissions. Effective on January 1, 2010, the EPA mandated monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions by major industries under the Clean Air Act, as a result of the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. In addition, the Kerry-Lieberman Cap and Trade Bill will be discussed on the floor as early as next week, assuming it gets close to 60 supporters.  Although we trail the EU’s efforts (which include a two-phase cap and trade system and the signing and ratification of the Kyoto Protocol), maybe continued domestic emissions reductions in the future is a possibility.

Recently, the federal government has provided incentives for individuals to go green: for example, the tax rebate for energy efficient appliances or the 30% tax credit on private home installation of solar panels. But given the  economy, there have been portions of both federal and state budgets dedicated to helping make businesses greener, too.
For example, the EPA provides rewards to small companies that provide cutting-edge R&D and runs the Energy Star for Small Businesses program, which facilitates remodeling and maximization of energy and cost savings. The federal government also provides tax deductions for energy savings by real estate developers and business owners who invest in smart energy grid equipment.
Additionally, non-profit organizations like Georgia Green Loans and the majority of state energy departments provide loans or grants to allow for the greening of local businesses. So despite some dissenting voices saying that the environment should take a back seat to the economy right now, the government is providing the means for businesses to take care of the earth and their bottom line.

We all know that the incandescent light bulb is on its way out; with 90% of its electricity turned into infrared energy (heat instead of visible light), energy use four times that of a compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL) and a lifetime that’s 10% of a CFL, it is hard to economically or environmentally argue in favor of the incandescent.

But CFLs aren’t necessarily the best option. The bulbs work by exciting mercury atoms, and although there is a very low amount of mercury per bulb, this toxic chemical still is a potential hazard. These bulbs should be recycled, but 75% are disposed of in a landfill, leading to mercury contamination of the surrounding soil and water. Aesthetically, CFLs do not light rooms as comfortably as other light sources because of their bluish tinge and occasional flickering.

LEDs – light emitting diodes – are initially more expensive than fluorescent lights, but last more than twice as long, are more energy efficient, and emit more lumens per watt. LEDs do not contain harmful chemicals and are an economically better choice after 8 years relative to fluorescents.

However, consumers are skeptical towards allowing LEDs to become mainstream. A recent survey from Software Advice showed that while some consumers have tried lighting their homes with LED tubes (which are the LED replacement for T8 fluorescents), many are sticking with fluorescents. 46% of respondents felt that LEDs were not ready for commercial use, citing reasons such as the initial cost differential and lower lumens per watt (which is not true). Nevertheless, the majority thought that eventually, LED tubes will replace fluorescent tubes mainly because of cost and efficiency.