California is stepping up to extend its landmark cap and trade program, address local air pollution, and push California businesses forward toward a cleaner economy.

The post California Models Climate and Air Pollution Action with Balanced Approach appeared first on Climate 411.

California is stepping up to extend its landmark cap and trade program, address local air pollution, and push California businesses forward toward a cleaner economy.

By Quentin Foster

Air pollution visible in downtown Los Angeles | Photo by Diliff, via wikipedia comms

California is once again demonstrating its bold climate leadership. As Washington, D.C. continues to abdicate its role as a climate champion, California is stepping up to extend its landmark cap-and-trade program, address local air pollution, and push California businesses forward toward a cleaner economy.

Environmental Defense Fund strongly supports AB 398 (E. Garcia) and AB 617 (C. Garcia), as well as their authors, Legislative leadership, and the Brown Administration. We commend their vision and initiative on a bill package that addresses the growing threat from climate change and improves public health outcomes by addressing local air pollution in the most impacted neighborhoods.

AB 398: Extending the cap-and-trade program

This bill seeks to extend California’s groundbreaking cap-and-trade program until 2030, with a 2/3 vote. We support this bill for 3 key reasons:

1. This bill maintains the environmental integrity of California’s cap on emissions. By introducing a price ceiling on allowances, the Air Resources Board with the Legislature’s guidance provides greater certainty on costs. Done poorly, such a ceiling can put environmental outcomes at risk. This proposal addresses that concern by requiring that any excess emissions be made up for by high-integrity emissions reductions outside the cap. This ensures that California does not bust through its emissions cap.
2. This proposal extends the economic benefits of cap and trade. California has added over a million jobs since cap and trade launched in 2013, and this bill includes important provisions to further develop a green workforce for the 21st century economy. At the same time, cap and trade encourages investments in alternative forms of fuel. This decreases our dependence on fossil fuels, which protects consumers from volatile gas prices.
3. Extending cap and trade sets a national example for other states to follow. California is on track to meet our 2020 target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels, and the 2030 goal is even more ambitious. We are demonstrating that emissions reduction and a thriving economy can go hand-in-hand. And we will not leave our most vulnerable communities behind.

AB 617: Clean air for California’s most vulnerable communities

The second part of this essential package is an unprecedented air quality bill which seeks to address local air pollution in California’s most impacted neighborhoods. For EDF, these are the 3 main reasons we are committed to supporting this bill:

1. This measure targets neighborhoods burdened by multiple sources of air pollution. California communities like Richmond, Modesto, or Torrance aren’t polluted by just cars or one refinery – they have many different sources of air pollution. This bill identifies these neighborhoods and focuses monitoring and emissions reduction plans based on burden, rather than source.
2. Industrial facilities are required to upgrade their technology. There are many facilities that have not been upgraded in decades. This means they emit far more pollution than if current technology were used. This bill requires that industrial sources covered by cap and trade are retrofitted to a standard that reflects technological advances, but are also cost-effective.
3. This bill increases penalties for big polluters. Many air pollution penalties haven’t been adjusted since the 1970’s. This bill increases these so big polluters no longer have an advantage over facilities that follow the law. This is critically important to hold polluters accountable, especially for the residents who live nearby.

Yes, there is still compromise in politics

California can address climate change without leaving communities behind.

The ability to compromise seems absent from most political arenas these days. The zero-sum strategies of filibusters and government shutdowns are more the norm than a negotiated settlement. However, the California State Senate and Assembly Leadership, along with Governor Brown’s Administration have re-discovered the art of the possible, and isn’t that what politics is all about? They have managed to find the compromise with stakeholders that addresses the twin challenges of climate pollution and air quality.

This package is a path forward that demonstrates to the country and to the world that California can address climate change without leaving communities behind.

There is no silver bullet to accomplish this, despite what we all wish. The environmental community needs businesses to thrive so California’s economy remains strong. Business needs the environmental community to hold them accountable. The Legislature needs all of us to help continue setting the standard on climate policy. We don’t get to take our ball and go home because things aren’t going our way.

As we demonstrate how to address climate change and air pollution, let’s also demonstrate to Washington, D.C. how to compromise. We urge the Legislature to support AB 398 and AB 617.

California is stepping up to extend its landmark cap and trade program, address local air pollution, and push California businesses forward toward a cleaner economy.

California is stepping up to extend its landmark cap and trade program, address local air pollution, and push California businesses forward toward a cleaner economy.

Conservation groups say urgent action still needed to slow down continued land loss, build new land For Immediate Release (NEW ORLEANS – June 12, 2017) Today, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released updated maps depicting net land loss and land gain in Louisiana since 1932. These maps show that the rate of land loss has slowed in recent years, largely due to decreased hurricane activity and the advancement of coastal restoration projects, such as the Lake Hermitage and Bayou Dupont ...

Read The Full Story

The post Updated USGS Maps Show Decreased Rate of Louisiana Land Loss appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Conservation groups say urgent action still needed to slow down continued land loss, build new land For Immediate Release (NEW ORLEANS – June 12, 2017) Today, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released updated maps depicting net land loss and land gain in Louisiana since 1932. These maps show that the rate of land loss has slowed in recent years, largely due to decreased hurricane activity and the advancement of coastal restoration projects, such as the Lake Hermitage and Bayou Dupont ...

Read The Full Story

The post Updated USGS Maps Show Decreased Rate of Louisiana Land Loss appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Conservation groups say urgent action still needed to slow down continued land loss, build new land For Immediate Release (NEW ORLEANS – June 12, 2017) Today, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released updated maps depicting net land loss and land gain in Louisiana since 1932. These maps show that the rate of land loss has slowed in recent years, largely due to decreased hurricane activity and the advancement of coastal restoration projects, such as the Lake Hermitage and Bayou Dupont ...

Read The Full Story

The post Updated USGS Maps Show Decreased Rate of Louisiana Land Loss appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Here’s a statement that everyone can agree on, regardless of politics: Farmers benefit from making their croplands more resilient to the effects of extreme weather. Report after report, including a study this week in the journal Nature Geoscience, has shown that shifting climatic conditions will hit agriculture hard, threatening food supplies and farmers’ incomes. This […]

By Suzy Friedman

Photo Credit: Flickr user Benjamin Disinger (License)

Here’s a statement that everyone can agree on, regardless of politics: Farmers benefit from making their croplands more resilient to the effects of extreme weather.

Report after report, including a study this week in the journal Nature Geoscience, has shown that shifting climatic conditions will hit agriculture hard, threatening food supplies and farmers’ incomes. This week’s report found that in years when the Arctic was warmer than normal, the average decline in yields across the United States was as high as 4 percent – and in Texas, corn yields were as low as 20 percent of what they are in typical years.

Farmers can take steps to protect their operations from extreme weather – but they can’t do it alone.

The 2018 Farm Bill can and should play a powerful role in helping farmers adapt to changing climatic conditions by prioritizing and supporting public-private partnerships, innovation, and financial models that can accelerate deployment of conservation practices.

Collaborative conservation

By increasing the reach and sustained impact of USDA conservation programs, farmers will be better prepared to face the effects of climactic changes.

Federal policies alone are not enough to protect farmers or the natural resources on which they depend. If governments, food companies, ag retailers, and agribusinesses continue to work on parallel tracks, we will waste valuable time and resources that could be better spent directly helping farmers become more resilient.

By addressing some needed improvements to the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), we can create powerful public-private partnerships that deliver measurable results at scale – and that make the best use of taxpayer dollars. These changes include:

• Re-focusing RCPP on multi-partner, public-private projects working in high-priority watersheds. Projects should target funding to optimize climate-smart agriculture practices while also identifying specific environmental outcomes.
• Increasing overall funding levels for RCPP and allowing donor program contributions to RCPP to be used for collaborative projects.

3 ways the Farm Bill can protect croplands from extreme weather, via…
Click To Tweet

Innovation

Photo Credit: Adapt-N

USDA conservation programs, administered through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), need to keep up with the kinds of innovation that farmers have embraced for decades. These innovations – which include seeds, mapping, variable rate application of nutrients, enhanced efficiency fertilizers, and crop diversity – not only improve productivity but help farms weather intense periods of drought, rainfall and temperature abnormalities.

Unfortunately, NRCS suffers from a cumbersome and unclear decision-making processes that hinders adoption of technology and scientifically sound conservation practices.

The Farm Bill can help by:

• Redirecting NRCS to focus on its strength: providing technical assistance to private landowners to conserve natural resources on agricultural land.
• Requiring a more predictable and transparent process for NRCS to evaluate new and current conservation practice standards within a reasonable time period.

New financial models

Farmers get paid based on yield, but their balance sheets typically ignore the financial hits caused by unpredictable weather, or the benefits that stewardship efforts provide for the environment.

Federal programs aimed at helping farmers implement conservation practices do not currently assess outcomes. Without measurable results, federal programs risk paying for intentions, not for activities that will increase the resiliency of farmland across the country.

Changes to Farm Bill programs can help ensure that farmers and natural resources are benefiting from these programs; changes include:

• Directing USDA’s Risk Management Agency to implement “Practice Codes” for crop rotation, cover cropping, and conservation tillage – practices that will increase soil health and reduce erosion that often accompanies flooding events.
• Eliminating the existing Conservation Reserve Program and Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program limitations that hinder resiliency efforts, and encouraging USDA to support practices like saturated buffers and bioreactors that protect croplands.

By increasing the reach and sustained impact of USDA conservation programs, farmers will be better prepared to face the effects of climactic changes.

Related:

Conservation relies on profitability >>>

How my passion for food and history led me to the Farm Bill >>>

What does the end of the Paris deal mean for agricultural innovation? >>>

By Suzy Friedman

Photo Credit: Flickr user Benjamin Disinger (License)

Here’s a statement that everyone can agree on, regardless of politics: Farmers benefit from making their croplands more resilient to the effects of extreme weather.

Report after report, including a study this week in the journal Nature Geoscience, has shown that shifting climatic conditions will hit agriculture hard, threatening food supplies and farmers’ incomes. This week’s report found that in years when the Arctic was warmer than normal, the average decline in yields across the United States was as high as 4 percent – and in Texas, corn yields were as low as 20 percent of what they are in typical years.

Farmers can take steps to protect their operations from extreme weather – but they can’t do it alone.

The 2018 Farm Bill can and should play a powerful role in helping farmers adapt to changing climatic conditions by prioritizing and supporting public-private partnerships, innovation, and financial models that can accelerate deployment of conservation practices.

Collaborative conservation

By increasing the reach and sustained impact of USDA conservation programs, farmers will be better prepared to face the effects of climactic changes.

Federal policies alone are not enough to protect farmers or the natural resources on which they depend. If governments, food companies, ag retailers, and agribusinesses continue to work on parallel tracks, we will waste valuable time and resources that could be better spent directly helping farmers become more resilient.

By addressing some needed improvements to the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), we can create powerful public-private partnerships that deliver measurable results at scale – and that make the best use of taxpayer dollars. These changes include:

• Re-focusing RCPP on multi-partner, public-private projects working in high-priority watersheds. Projects should target funding to optimize climate-smart agriculture practices while also identifying specific environmental outcomes.
• Increasing overall funding levels for RCPP and allowing donor program contributions to RCPP to be used for collaborative projects.

3 ways the Farm Bill can protect croplands from extreme weather, via…
Click To Tweet

Innovation

Photo Credit: Adapt-N

USDA conservation programs, administered through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), need to keep up with the kinds of innovation that farmers have embraced for decades. These innovations – which include seeds, mapping, variable rate application of nutrients, enhanced efficiency fertilizers, and crop diversity – not only improve productivity but help farms weather intense periods of drought, rainfall and temperature abnormalities.

Unfortunately, NRCS suffers from a cumbersome and unclear decision-making processes that hinders adoption of technology and scientifically sound conservation practices.

The Farm Bill can help by:

• Redirecting NRCS to focus on its strength: providing technical assistance to private landowners to conserve natural resources on agricultural land.
• Requiring a more predictable and transparent process for NRCS to evaluate new and current conservation practice standards within a reasonable time period.

New financial models

Farmers get paid based on yield, but their balance sheets typically ignore the financial hits caused by unpredictable weather, or the benefits that stewardship efforts provide for the environment.

Federal programs aimed at helping farmers implement conservation practices do not currently assess outcomes. Without measurable results, federal programs risk paying for intentions, not for activities that will increase the resiliency of farmland across the country.

Changes to Farm Bill programs can help ensure that farmers and natural resources are benefiting from these programs; changes include:

• Directing USDA’s Risk Management Agency to implement “Practice Codes” for crop rotation, cover cropping, and conservation tillage – practices that will increase soil health and reduce erosion that often accompanies flooding events.
• Eliminating the existing Conservation Reserve Program and Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program limitations that hinder resiliency efforts, and encouraging USDA to support practices like saturated buffers and bioreactors that protect croplands.

By increasing the reach and sustained impact of USDA conservation programs, farmers will be better prepared to face the effects of climactic changes.

Related:

Conservation relies on profitability >>>

How my passion for food and history led me to the Farm Bill >>>

What does the end of the Paris deal mean for agricultural innovation? >>>

Huge Antarctic iceberg breaks off. Here's why it worries scientists.

This post was co-authored by Mason Fried, a Ph.D. student of glaciology at the University of Texas Institute for Geophysics.

Scientists watched with alarm this week as the fourth-largest ice shelf in Antarctica rapidly broke apart, causing an enormous, Delaware-size iceberg to float into the Southern Ocean.

Scientists had been observing the anomalous rift widening across a section of the so-called Larsen C ice shelf for the past several years. Now they’re left with some critical questions: What are this event’s broader consequences for the Antarctic ice sheet, what happens next, and – importantly – what role did climate change play here?

For now, it serves as yet another reminder that Antarctica is changing rapidly – and that action to curb rising global temperatures is critical. 

Antarctica: A frontline for climate change

So far, scientists have been hesitant to attribute the Larsen C ice shelf breakup to rising global temperatures.

Indeed, such events – known to scientists as “calving” – occur naturally and are essential for maintaining ice shelf balance. Without them, ice shelves would grow unabated to cover large swaths of the Southern Ocean.

Still, the magnitude and timing of this ice loss warrants attention.

The Antarctic Peninsula, where the Larsen ice shelves reside, has long been viewed as a frontline for climate change. Warming in the peninsula exceeds the global average, glaciers there are retreating, and two other ice shelves on the peninsula already collapsed over the past couple of decades after being stable for thousands of years.

Such changes will help raise global sea levels by 3 to 6 feet by 2100, projections show, affecting dense coastal communities along our Eastern seaboard and across the globe.

Ice breakup starts chain reaction

We do know that this latest ice separation could set in motion a string of chain reactions that further destabilize the ice shelf and surrounding glaciers, and ultimately contribute to global sea level rise.

Ice shelves are floating extensions of grounded glaciers and ice sheets that, importantly, buttress and impede inland ice flow. When an ice shelf collapses or becomes weaker, this defense disappears, allowing inland glaciers to accelerate downslope and transport more ice to the ocean, which can quickly affect sea level.

Scientists worry that the remnant Larsen C ice shelf will now be at considerable risk of further breakup.

6 climate tipping points that concern scientists

The new ice berg reduced the ice shelf area by more than 12 percent when it broke off, leaving behind an ice shelf that is inherently unstable. This can, in turn, trigger new ice cracks and rifting, and cause more icebergs to break off – further increasing the possibility of runaway ice loss amid rising global temperatures.

Whether or not this latest calving event will be attributed to climate change, it’s safe to say that it will make the region more vulnerable to the impacts of global warming.

Climate change caused 2002 ice shelf collapse

The Larsen C ice shelf, named for a Norwegian whaling vessel captain who sailed the Southern Sea in the late 1800s, has two smaller northern neighbors known as Larsen A and Larsen B – both of which collapsed in the past 23 years.

Those events taught us that ice sheets, landscapes we used to think of as stable and slow to change, can actually transform rapidly.

The Larsen B collapse was particularly dramatic, with nearly the entire ice shelf disintegrating during a three-week period in 2002 after remaining stable for at least 10,000 years.

The speed of that event was unprecedented and attributed directly to increasing atmospheric warming, although rising ocean temperatures and long-term ice loss from surrounding glaciers may also have played a role.

A hint of what’s to come?

After the Larsen B shelf collapse, researchers observed dramatic increases in glacier speed, thinning and ice transfer to the ocean.

Some researchers are already drawing parallels between this week’s Larsen C collapse and the series of events that led to the eventual collapse of Larsen B. The latter experienced a similar large calving event in 1995 that foreshadowed further retreat and widespread disintegration in 2002.

While it remains to be seen if and when Larsen C will meet the same fate, warning signs are already in place. What’s happening to the Larsen ice shelves could, in fact, be a proxy for what’s to come across even larger sections of the Antarctic ice sheet unless we take action to slow warming. 

Trump was reckless to renege on the Paris climate agreement. Make sure Congress isn’t. krives July 12, 2017 - 08:26

See comments

This article would be less scary if we had an administration that wasn't scientifically illiterate. The family of nations must take action to protect the planet, but sadly the U.S. buries its head in the sand.

Michael Veal July 14, 2017 at 12:54 pm

The government isn't so much scientifically illiterate as very protective of the corporate interests who put them in office, namely oil and banking cartels. They should all be tried for crimes against humanity.

Mark Barton October 19, 2018 at 9:29 pm Add new comment

By Guest Author

By Monica Kanojia, Consultant, U.S. Department of Energy

American cities are home to nearly 63 percent of energy use, despite only accounting for 3.5 percent of land area.  It is estimated that these cities and their buildings will account for 87 percent of domestic energy consumption by 2030.

Since its inception in late 2016, 43 cities and counties have joined the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Better Communities Alliance (BCA), a first-of-its-kind partnership between DOE experts and leaders from the public and private sectors. Through BCA, cities and counties have access to energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainable transportation solutions that support mutual goals of creating cleaner, smarter, and more prosperous communities.

Given increasing energy needs, aging infrastructure, and new challenges to ensure clean air and water, local government leaders are developing and implementing strategic solutions to enhance future livability.

BCA now represents more than 40 million Americans in over 20 states, which reflects the importance of energy innovation at the local level.

Better communities

Kicking off the Leading-Edge City Government Innovation for Energy Independence session in May at DOE’s Better Buildings Summit, BCA Partner New York City presented strategies to boost its economy and increase efficiency while improving the quality of life for its residents.

Better buildings pave the way for energy independence
Click To Tweet

New York City has approximately one million buildings that consume nearly 75 percent of its energy, and are the main drivers of the city’s pollution. It is expected that a majority of them will still be standing in 2050. Implementing new, high performance construction plans does not go far enough to reduce pollution.

That’s why New York City, supported by an Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Climate Corps fellow, explored retrofit opportunities for existing buildings between 25,000 to 50,000 square feet with an expected energy reduction of 40 to 60 percent.

This effort, called the NYC Retrofit Accelerator, was developed by the city to streamline processes for making energy efficiency improvements to existing buildings. Based on work in partnership with EDF, the program provides lighting upgrades, efficient cooling, water use reduction, and other applications of renewable energy.

New York City’s efforts fall within its holistic action plan, One City: Built to Last, aimed at achieving long-range sustainability goals.

Better buildings

DOE’s annual signature efficiency event, the Better Buildings Summit, is a gathering of leading organizations that are working to improve energy efficient building design, construction, and operations. It’s also an opportunity to discuss strategies for reaching energy savings goals and to reaffirm organizational commitments to making a substantive difference in Americans’ quality of life.

Learn more about the Better Communities Alliance here.

Inspiration was in the air at this year’s summit, amongst more than 1,000 participants discussing case studies highlighting energy-cost savings and performance, identifying creative infrastructure improvements for communities and companies, and sharing first-hand knowledge about how well private-public partnerships drive innovation.

One of several overarching themes raised at the summit was the importance of community resilience to a variety of sectors, including the proactive stance of local governments “leaning in” to achieve it.

Other cities and towns across the country are also committed to improving their local economies, boosting energy productivity, and enhancing livability. These community efforts show no signs of slowing down.

Photo source: HaizhanZhen

 

By Guest Author

By Monica Kanojia, Consultant, U.S. Department of Energy

American cities are home to nearly 63 percent of energy use, despite only accounting for 3.5 percent of land area.  It is estimated that these cities and their buildings will account for 87 percent of domestic energy consumption by 2030.

Since its inception in late 2016, 43 cities and counties have joined the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Better Communities Alliance (BCA), a first-of-its-kind partnership between DOE experts and leaders from the public and private sectors. Through BCA, cities and counties have access to energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainable transportation solutions that support mutual goals of creating cleaner, smarter, and more prosperous communities.

Given increasing energy needs, aging infrastructure, and new challenges to ensure clean air and water, local government leaders are developing and implementing strategic solutions to enhance future livability.

BCA now represents more than 40 million Americans in over 20 states, which reflects the importance of energy innovation at the local level.

Better communities

Kicking off the Leading-Edge City Government Innovation for Energy Independence session in May at DOE’s Better Buildings Summit, BCA Partner New York City presented strategies to boost its economy and increase efficiency while improving the quality of life for its residents.

Better buildings pave the way for energy independence
Click To Tweet

New York City has approximately one million buildings that consume nearly 75 percent of its energy, and are the main drivers of the city’s pollution. It is expected that a majority of them will still be standing in 2050. Implementing new, high performance construction plans does not go far enough to reduce pollution.

That’s why New York City, supported by an Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Climate Corps fellow, explored retrofit opportunities for existing buildings between 25,000 to 50,000 square feet with an expected energy reduction of 40 to 60 percent.

This effort, called the NYC Retrofit Accelerator, was developed by the city to streamline processes for making energy efficiency improvements to existing buildings. Based on work in partnership with EDF, the program provides lighting upgrades, efficient cooling, water use reduction, and other applications of renewable energy.

New York City’s efforts fall within its holistic action plan, One City: Built to Last, aimed at achieving long-range sustainability goals.

Better buildings

DOE’s annual signature efficiency event, the Better Buildings Summit, is a gathering of leading organizations that are working to improve energy efficient building design, construction, and operations. It’s also an opportunity to discuss strategies for reaching energy savings goals and to reaffirm organizational commitments to making a substantive difference in Americans’ quality of life.

Learn more about the Better Communities Alliance here.

Inspiration was in the air at this year’s summit, amongst more than 1,000 participants discussing case studies highlighting energy-cost savings and performance, identifying creative infrastructure improvements for communities and companies, and sharing first-hand knowledge about how well private-public partnerships drive innovation.

One of several overarching themes raised at the summit was the importance of community resilience to a variety of sectors, including the proactive stance of local governments “leaning in” to achieve it.

Other cities and towns across the country are also committed to improving their local economies, boosting energy productivity, and enhancing livability. These community efforts show no signs of slowing down.

Photo source: HaizhanZhen

 

By Guest Author

By Monica Kanojia, Consultant, U.S. Department of Energy

American cities are home to nearly 63 percent of energy use, despite only accounting for 3.5 percent of land area.  It is estimated that these cities and their buildings will account for 87 percent of domestic energy consumption by 2030.

Since its inception in late 2016, 43 cities and counties have joined the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Better Communities Alliance (BCA), a first-of-its-kind partnership between DOE experts and leaders from the public and private sectors. Through BCA, cities and counties have access to energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainable transportation solutions that support mutual goals of creating cleaner, smarter, and more prosperous communities.

Given increasing energy needs, aging infrastructure, and new challenges to ensure clean air and water, local government leaders are developing and implementing strategic solutions to enhance future livability.

BCA now represents more than 40 million Americans in over 20 states, which reflects the importance of energy innovation at the local level.

Better communities

Kicking off the Leading-Edge City Government Innovation for Energy Independence session in May at DOE’s Better Buildings Summit, BCA Partner New York City presented strategies to boost its economy and increase efficiency while improving the quality of life for its residents.

Better buildings pave the way for energy independence
Click To Tweet

New York City has approximately one million buildings that consume nearly 75 percent of its energy, and are the main drivers of the city’s pollution. It is expected that a majority of them will still be standing in 2050. Implementing new, high performance construction plans does not go far enough to reduce pollution.

That’s why New York City, supported by an Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Climate Corps fellow, explored retrofit opportunities for existing buildings between 25,000 to 50,000 square feet with an expected energy reduction of 40 to 60 percent.

This effort, called the NYC Retrofit Accelerator, was developed by the city to streamline processes for making energy efficiency improvements to existing buildings. Based on work in partnership with EDF, the program provides lighting upgrades, efficient cooling, water use reduction, and other applications of renewable energy.

New York City’s efforts fall within its holistic action plan, One City: Built to Last, aimed at achieving long-range sustainability goals.

Better buildings

DOE’s annual signature efficiency event, the Better Buildings Summit, is a gathering of leading organizations that are working to improve energy efficient building design, construction, and operations. It’s also an opportunity to discuss strategies for reaching energy savings goals and to reaffirm organizational commitments to making a substantive difference in Americans’ quality of life.

Learn more about the Better Communities Alliance here.

Inspiration was in the air at this year’s summit, amongst more than 1,000 participants discussing case studies highlighting energy-cost savings and performance, identifying creative infrastructure improvements for communities and companies, and sharing first-hand knowledge about how well private-public partnerships drive innovation.

One of several overarching themes raised at the summit was the importance of community resilience to a variety of sectors, including the proactive stance of local governments “leaning in” to achieve it.

Other cities and towns across the country are also committed to improving their local economies, boosting energy productivity, and enhancing livability. These community efforts show no signs of slowing down.

Photo source: HaizhanZhen

 

By Monica Kanojia, Consultant, U.S. Department of Energy American cities are home to nearly 63 percent of energy use, despite only accounting for 3.5 percent of land area.  It is estimated that these cities and their buildings will account for 87 percent of domestic energy consumption by 2030. Since its inception in late 2016, 43 […]

Institutional investors worldwide are increasingly encouraging oil and gas companies to improve and disclose their management strategies to minimize methane risk. Methane – an invisible, odorless gas and main ingredient in natural gas – is routinely emitted by the global oil and gas industry, posing a reputational and economic threat to portfolios. Natural gas is widely marketed […]

By Sean Wright

Institutional investors worldwide are increasingly encouraging oil and gas companies to improve and disclose their management strategies to minimize methane risk.

Methane – an invisible, odorless gas and main ingredient in natural gas – is routinely emitted by the global oil and gas industry, posing a reputational and economic threat to portfolios.

Natural gas is widely marketed as a low-carbon fuel because it burns roughly 50 percent cleaner than coal. But this ignores a major problem: methane. Natural gas is almost pure methane, a powerful pollutant that speeds up Earth’s warming when it escapes into the atmosphere.

Last month marked a significant milestone in investor action on the methane issue. The Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) launched a new initiative representing 35 investors and U.S. $3.8 trillion in assets that will engage with the oil and gas industry across five different continents to improve its methane management and disclosure practices. The PRI initiative complements existing methane engagement efforts focused on the U.S. led by the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility and CERES.

EDF Senior Manager Sean Wright recently sat down with Sylvia van Waveren, a Senior Engagement Specialist with Robeco Institutional Asset Management, a Dutch-based investment firm managing over $160 billion, to discuss the matter and understand why some investors are keen to affect the status quo on methane.

Wright: Why is methane a focus of your engagements? What do you see as the risks of unmanaged methane emissions?

Sylvia van Waveren, Senior Engagement Specialist, Robeco Institutional Asset Management

van Waveren: Methane is one of the most important drivers of engagement with the oil and gas industry. We invest in oil and gas companies worldwide. A year ago, we started engaging them, specifically on climate change – and within that the methane issue is included.

In the past, methane was viewed as a U.S. shale gas issue, but more recently it has become important in Europe as we learned that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas. So in that sense, we learned a lot from the U.S. discussions and we still do.

I would like to stress that we see the methane issue more as a business opportunity than a risk. What we often say to companies is that methane is a potential revenue source. It would be a waste if companies do not use it. 

Wright: The scope of PRI’s initiative is global, with investors from 3 different continents as far away as Australia and New Zealand, and a plan to engage with companies from the Latin America, Europe, North America and Asia-Pac. What does this level of global collaboration convey about methane emissions? 

van Waveren: I am happy and it is good to see that others have taken up the seriousness of this issue, as well.  Methane is no longer a U.S. only problem. The issue is being raised and discussed in all kinds of geographies.

I’m a firm believer in collective engagements. They can be a powerful force when the issue is not contained within borders. That is the case with greenhouse gases. So yes, I’m happy to see the PRI initiative taking off and I am an active believer in getting this solved and bringing attention to this subject.  

Wright: In your conversations thus far with companies about methane, what resonates best when making the business case for improving methane management and disclosure?

van Waveren: When we talk about motivation at the company level, I have to be honest, it’s still early days. The European companies are talking in general terms and just now conceptualizing methane policies. If we’re lucky, they have calculated how much methane is part of their greenhouse gas emissions. And if we’re more fortunate, they are producing regional and segregated figures from carbon, but it’s really very meager how motivated the companies are and what triggers them most.

I really feel we should emphasize more with companies to get them motivated and to really look at the seriousness of methane. One issue that is particularly bothersome is that many companies do not know how to calculate, estimate and set targets to reduce methane. It is still a mystery to many of them. That’s why we come in with engagements. We need to keep them sharp on this issue and ask them for their actions, calculations and plans. 

Wright: Who are other important allies that have a role in solving this problem, and why?

van Waveren: We always would like to have an ally in the government. For example, carbon pricing or carbon fixations are all topics that we look for from the government. But in practice, that doesn’t work. Governments sometimes need more time. So we do not always wait for the government. When companies say they will wait for government, we say, “You should take a proactive approach.”

We rely very much on our knowledge that we get from within the sector. We review data analyses and make intermediate reports of scoring. We find best practice solutions and we hold companies accountable. There are also times when we name names. So in that sense, that is how engagement works. The data providers and other organizations with good knowledge and good content on methane – and EDF is certainly one of them – are very instrumental to get the knowledge that we need.

Wright: Can you give me an example of a widespread financial risk facing an industry in the past that was proactively improved by investors leading the charge – similar to this initiative?

van Waveren: More than 20 years ago, we had a greenhouse gas issue – acid rain. Investors helped solve that problem. Because of this, I’m hopeful that investors can also play a positive role in reducing methane.

I would also say the issue of Arctic drilling. Not so long ago, this was top of mind when we talked to our portfolio companies. A lot of companies have now withdrawn from Arctic drilling, especially from offshore Arctic drilling. I think investors were quite successful in sending a clear signal to the industry in a collective way that we didn’t see Arctic drilling as a good process. Maybe profitable – if at all – to the companies, but certainly not for the environment.

Wright: Thank you, Sylvia. We really appreciate your time and your thoughtful answers showing how investors can be part of the solution on methane.