Monday, June 29, 2009

NYT Article "Betraying the Planet" by Paul Krugman

Share/Save/Bookmark

The House passed the Waxman Markey Bill on Friday yet there were a number of people in the House who fiercely argued that climate change was not a threat, and offered dissenting remarks against the majority. It's quite comical that there are still a number of people who really think that climate change has no adverse or negative effects on our planet. How much more proof do these guys need? And I realize that these politicians have to protect the fossil fuel producing interests within their respective States, but they arent fooling anyone at this point. There is an overwhelming amount of eveidence from scientists, researchers, and analysts who have actual proof that climate change is a huge threat to our planet. In fact, I think any person whether educated or not, can get access to this proof. Do we have to constantly showcase the number of risks and destructive results of climate change or can we just all come to an agreement that this is reality.
In response to those arguing against Waxman Markey on cap and trade, we should still be wary of the allowance permits that can be given to historically dirty fossil fuel producers. We dont want to make the same mistake as the EU ETS.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Cornell Club Event: “The Ramifications of Carbon Mitigation Paradigms: Can the Public Win when Politics Overshadow the Science of Engineering?”

Share/Save/Bookmark

As an alumn of Cornell University, I get access to all speaking events at the Cornell Club, and recently there has been a lot of talk about green energy/environmental issues. Yesterday, I attended the talk "The Ramifications of Carbon Mitigation Paradigms: Can the Public Win when Politics Overshadow the Science of Engineering?” by a Cornell Engineer (who has worked as a Power Plant Developer) named Adam Victor. Adam Victor currently is the President of TransGas Energy Systems, LLC.
He spoke in length about the possible threats that can occur from the failed US evironmental policies and the past Administration's inability to act on their enviornmental agendas towards curbing climate change. In particular, he spoke about New York City as the place where possible catastrophic events can and will occur, if we dont make REAL changes in our legislation. He touched on the point that we have become a country that argues against building any sort of power plants (iindistrial plants/power plant production/carbon sequestration plants) close to areas where we work, live, eat or breathe. He identified several key projects in the city that were passed up because of community protest. His response makes sense. What difference does the opinion of a residential community make when it comes to the larger national and even global community towards creating new plants that use energy waste and recycle it as renewable power, or creating power plants that capturing carbon.

You can learn more about Adam Victor's ideas by reading the latest New Yorker article about his endeavors: http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/12346/

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

2009 Top Sustainable Stocks

Share/Save/Bookmark

The following list of companies are leading the way towards a future of sustainable energy either by gmaking their internal operations "green" or by growing their business based on innovative green technologies.

The 2009 SB20 List
Company Name Ticker Sector Country First Solar Nasdaq: FSLR Solar USA Vestas VWS.CO; VWDRY.PK Wind Denmark Gamesa GAM.MC; GCTAF.PK Wind Spain Ormat NYSE: ORA Geothermal USA/Israel WaterFurnace WFI.TO; WFIFF.PK Geothermal USA
Renewable Energy Telvent Git, SA. Nasdaq: TLVT
Smart Grid Spain
Novozymes NZYM.CO; NVZMY.PK Industrial/Ethanol Denmark
Westport Innovations Nasdaq: WPRT;
Transport Canada WPT.TO
Pure Technologies PUR.V Water Canada
Chipotle Mexican Grill NYSE: CMG Corporate USA
Naturex SA NRX.PA Food France
United Natural Nasdaq: UNFI Food USA
Plant Health Care PHC.L; PLHCF.PK Agriculture UK
Bendigo and BEN.ASX Corporate Pioneer/ Australia Adelaide Bank Finance
Novo Nordisk NYSE: NVO Corporate Pioneer/ Denmark Pharmaceuticals Google Nasdaq: GOOG Corporate Pioneer/ USA Technology IBM NYSE: IBM Corporate Pioneer/ USA Technology
Herman Miller Nasdaq: Corporate USA
MLHR Green Building Philips NYSE: PHG
Green Building
Timberland NYSE: TBL Corporate Pioneer/ USA

Investing in Green Energy: What the Industry Experts are Saying

Share/Save/Bookmark

In the link: http://news.zdnet.com/2422-13748_22-302503.html, you can listen to some industry experts discuss their ideas about investing in green technology, carbon management, and smart grids.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Carbon Tax vs. Cap and Trade vs. Plan C

Share/Save/Bookmark

Since this is the most hotly debated climate change topic both globally and here in the United States, I decided to dive a bit deeper into the cap and trade vs. carbon tax debate. While I am a huge advocate of creating some sort of cap and trading scheme (cap and auction in particular), there are a lot of critics that point out the obvious problems with such a market. Before dissecting the multitude of cons, let me first speak briefly about the argument for cap and trade. The pros of the cap and trading scheme are numerous: creating a market, making carbon caps transparent, creating new jobs, etc. But the strongest claim is that it favors a long term solution as opposed to a short term fix politically, as opposed to a tax that has to be politically renewed with every new Administration. A carbon tax is not a long term promise, but only a promise for Now. Although there will be new laws and regulations that will have to keep controls on this scheme, the main point is that its not as easy to dissolve as lets say a carbon tax. The Clean Air Act worked well for the cap and trade scheme for Sulfur Dioxide (http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1085), so as long as we dont make the same mistakes as the EU (granting mega allowances to big time pollutants), we can really make a difference in carbon emissions in this country.

In opposition are those who propose that a cap and scheme is costly and almost impossible to administer given the amount of players and regulations that are needed in order for the scheme to work.

One author from Yale360 proposes another answer to the carbon emission problem -- making renewable energy cheaper than fossil fuels. Although this idea has a lot of loopholes, its still a good idea. We need to start thinking out of the box - maybe these two options are not the only answers to this global problem.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

NYT Article: in 2008, we spent more money investing in renewable energy generation than on fossil fuel generation.

Share/Save/Bookmark

In the NYT article, "Clean Energy Funding Trumps Fossil Fuels", the author states that global investors spent 56% on renewable energy generation in 2008. The Kyoto Protocol, and the cap and trade scheme developed in the EU and other countries abroad have created the necessary enthusiasm and urgency for investors to start thinking about renewable energy as the new primary source of energy. Although this was the first year that renewable energy generation investment surpassed fossil fuel generation investment, this phenomenon predicts that similar trends will follow in the coming years. It will take a long time before fossil fuel sources are phased out of the marketplace so renewable energy sources have a long way to go in terms of replacing fossil fuel generation. Yet overall, this is great news for green activists. A change in generation source investment strategy means that a plethora of changes are in store for the global green energy community.

Friday, May 1, 2009

Recently read the NYT article: "Pipe Leak at Nuclear Plant Raises Concerns"

Share/Save/Bookmark

In yesterday's posting, I spoke about the recent speaking engagement at Columbia University with Peter Lyons, one of the Commissioners at the NRC. He talked in great detail about the advantages of nuclear energy, so this article today grabbed my attention. There has been a lot of attention given to the "carbon neutrality" of nuclear power, but the focus should really be on the safety of a nuclear plant. One disaster could lead to a destruction of immense proportion, so we must focus on this issue with the utmost concern.

The NYT article talks about a leak in the pipes at one of the nuclear plants in upstate N (Buchanan, N.Y.).

Thursday, April 30, 2009

My brothers recent article: "Resurrecting a Green Babylon: How Solar Energy Can Help Build Iraq" by Rami Turayhi

Share/Save/Bookmark

Please read this op-ed piece written by my brother, another energy enthusiast.

Discussion at Columbia: "Examining A Carbon-Free Alternative" - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner, Dr. Peter Lyons - April 29th

Share/Save/Bookmark
Yesterday I attended a discussion by Peter Lyons, one of the four Commissioners of the NRC. Peter Lyons focused his discussion on the NRC's role as a regulatory agency for nuclear power reactors at the commercial and civilian level. According to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the NRC's duties include being able to "assure adequate protection of public health and safety in operation of nuclear generation". Other legislation, such as the National Environmental Policy Act is important in recognizing the duties of the NRC. The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) is another agency that helps "promote excellence in the power of nuclear generation". Unlike the NRC, which has the authority to pull licenses and stop a nuclear plant from operating, the INPO has other ways of enforcing its rules. For instance, the INPO is the sole authority that decides the rates of insurance numbers for all operating plants, so complying within their guidelines is beneficial to the bottom line for all plants.

As most of you can imagine, building new nuclear plants is a daunting task. We have not seen a lot of new plant construction in the United States, and the last permit was issued decades ago in 1978. There are 104 plants operating in the US currently, and 120 plant orders have been canceled. So there are MORE plants canceled than even operating in existence in the US. Given the difficult process and approval schemes with regulatory, legal, and financing nuclear plants, it is extremely difficult to actually complete a nuclear plant and bring it online. In the nuclear generation community, it is well known that the process is extremely rigid and the chance of plants withdrawing midway through a project is the almost generally expected.

Many critics of nuclear energy say that the issues of safety, and nuclear waste are not worth the benefits of this carbon free energy source. However, in France and other countries, many of the nuclear plants reprocess their nuclear waste. This issue is yet to be decided in the United States. Other issues that come up are capital costs, project finance, and investments. Is there cash available to build these plants? And lastly, nuclear plants face Regulatory enforcements that they must comply with.

Renewable energy has become a popular topic in the Untied States and abroad. A lot of people are asking about nuclear power as an alternative energy source. We all know that France is a huge nuclear player and considering nuclear generation is carbon neutral (it does not produce any carbon emissions), many energy companies are fighting for the right to promote nuclear power as a renewable energy source. Other energy sources have a high carbon footprint, and given the cap and trade scheme that may possibly play out this next year in the United States, this could be a huge selling point. Peter Lyons talks about a possible nuclear Renaissance emerging worldwide as the public tries to understand the pros and cons of nuclear power when comparing it to other types of power generation.

The challenges in the future of nuclear power are 1) technology (both current and digital), 2) Communications, and 3) Workforce. In the Technology department, we have very few digital monitors, and the government is very cautious in allowing digital control systems which introduces a new set of failures. In regards to Communications, we have several security issues with nuclear power and its challenging to inform the public without giving away some information that may be problematic for national security. The question remains, "how do we communicate to the topics of risk management, risk analysis, and radiation risks" in a world of potential international threats? And the third topic of discussion, is the workforce. The nuclear engineers in the world today are aging, and we are going to need a lot of new and enthusiastic talent to help lead the nuclear generation field. Our current system in the US is outdated and inefficient. The power plants were built in an earlier time and era and we face several challenges and difficulties as we try to reform legislation and technologies in preparing to build new plants.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

The latest response from Congress: Waxman-Markey Climate Bill

The House has been trailing the Senate in talks of the cap and trade emissions scheme thus far, so it's refreshing to see the debate heat up in the House of Representatives in 2009 with Congressman Waxman. 218 members of the House have to pass in favor of the bill for it to move forward. It seems very likely that such a bill will pass with the support of Nancy Pelosi, the President, and the overwhelming Democratic House of Representatives. The negative effects of climate change and the need for a cap and trade scheme are important matters in our nation and we must lead the world towards containing carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases. I cannot wait to see what happens this year.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Videos from the Wall Street Green Trading Summit

Share/Save/Bookmark

Please check this link: http://www.global-change.com/content/videos-2009-wall-street-green-trading-summit

I recently interviewed some of the attendees at the Wall Street Green Trading Summit in NYC, and their responses can be heard when clicking on the video link above.

Interviews are with the following:

David Kirkpatrick, Partner, SJF Ventures
Arthur O'Donnell, Executive Director of the Center for Resource Solutions
Josh Margolis, Co-CEO, CantorCO2e
James Rhodes, Chief Operating Officer. GE/AES GHG Services, LLC

Friday, April 17, 2009

Deforestation - The Amazon Rainforest



I spent the last week in Buenos Aires, Argentina and came back with the realization that I may never get a chance to see some of the most beautiful historic landsites in South America. I've read a lot about Peru's Machu Picchu and Brazil's Amazon ranforest and I always planned to make a trip to visit these two sites, but with work and a lack of vacation time, my dream may never be realized for two reasons. One, I heard that Machu Picchu may close down because of all the tourists that are slowly destroying its landscape. And two, deforestation in the Amazon rainforest is rampant, which is disconcerting for a variety of reasons. The rainforest is one of the top free sources that captures carbon emissions throughout the world, and destroying it would mean that there would be an exponential increase in carbon emissions worldwide. Further, the act of deforestation emits carbon into the atmosphere, so in essence destroying the rainforest by deforestation is like winding a clock backwards.
According to the Huffington Post, new satellite dishes will keep track of the deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest so environmental agents and government officials will have a better way to deal with this type of destruction.

http://www.mongabay.com/brazil.html