Gore’s Climate Solutions Fund Worth $683 Million

The Financial Times reports:

The investment vehicle headed by Al Gore has closed a new $683m fund to invest in early-stage environmental companies and has mounted a robust defence of green investing.

The Climate Solutions Fund will be one of the biggest in the growing market for investment funds with an environmental slant.

The fund’s co-chair, David Blood, points out the new fund was able to raise all this green despite the recent hiccups in the global economy:

Mr Blood said raising $683m for the new fund in the midst of “market disruption” showed the resilience of green investing. “The fact we were able to raise $683m was extraordinary, so our experience is that it has not really been a problem [raising funds despite what is] generally a difficult environment,” he told the Financial Times.

“A fear expressed by some is that the first thing to go in a downturn is the nice-to-have sort of investment. Some people put green investments in that category, but we think that is nonsense. This is not nice-to-have – it is fundamental finance…because the transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy is a ginormous step that is going to happen quickly,” he said.

And Al Gore has put his money where his mouth is in a “ginormous” way:

Both Mr Gore and Mr Blood had invested in the new fund to a “pretty sizeable” extent, Mr Blood said.

I wonder if any of this cash will go to financing green energy bloggers…here’s to hoping!

This Climate Change Solution Sucks (Literally)

Most methods of combating climate change focus on eliminating greenhouse gas emissions on the front end–whether it be through greater efficiency or increased use of alternative energy.

But some scientists are developing ways to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide once it’s already in the atmosphere.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Here’s a simple solution to global warming: vacuum carbon dioxide out of the air.

Klaus Lackner, a physicist at Columbia University, said placing enough carbon filters around the planet could reel the world’s atmosphere back toward the 18th century, like a climatic time machine.

After a decade of work, his shower-sized prototype whirs away inside a Tucson warehouse, each day capturing about 10 pounds of the heat-trapping greenhouse gas as air wafts through it.

Only a few billion tons to go.

Though the device works, it doesn’t sound very practical:

In the battle against global warming, technology has long been seen as the ultimate savior, but Lackner’s machine is a clunky reminder of how distant that dream is.

He estimates that sucking up the current stream of emissions would require about 67 million boxcar-sized filters at a cost of trillions of dollars a year.

The orchards of filters would have to be powered by complexes of new nuclear plants, dams, solar farms or other clean-energy sources to avoid adding more pollution to the atmosphere.

The LA Times has a nice picture to give the reader a sense of what your average 22nd century “CO2-Buster” farm might look like:

By Professor Lackner’s estimates, to eliminate the necessary amount of CO2 “would require spreading out his machines over a land area the size of Arizona.”

Getting a Tax Rebate? Home Depot Can Help

Starting this week, the federal government is sending out tax rebate checks to around 130 million households. Not surprisingly, big retailers want you to spend your check at their store, and they’re offering big discounts to do it.

But Home Depot has a novel idea:

Home Depot is urging customers to use rebates to invest in the environment and cut energy bills. It’ll offer discounts through July on compact fluorescent light bulbs and Energy Star appliances. That helps “take a short-term stimulus and turn it into a long-term investment,” spokeswoman Jean Niemi says.

The company is pushing it’s Eco Options line of products, which it launched in April 2007. Their Eco Options include:

…all-natural insect repellents, cellulose insulation, front-load washing machines, organic plant food and vegetables in biodegradable pots. The wide array of Eco Options also includes compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs, programmable thermostats and certified wood.

Sure beats just dumping your rebate into your gas tank.

The Bad (or Good?) News on Gas Prices

From the Associated Press:

Oil prices hit an all-time high near $120 a barrel Monday after a weekend refinery strike closed a pipeline system that delivers a third of Britain’s North Sea oil to refineries in the U.K. [...]

In the U.S., retail gasoline also hit a record for the 13th straight time. The average price of a gallon of regular unleaded rose to $3.603, up four-tenths of a cent from the previous day, according to auto organization AAA.

That’s bad news for the average SUV-owner, but good news for the average oil company:

And as Gristmill points out, it’s also good news for those of us that know only higher gas prices will change consumer behavior and shift us away from fossil fuels:

Only high energy prices–prices that internalize the grievous costs of energy extraction and combustion via gas taxes and revenue-neutral carbon taxes–can instill the incentives and propagate the behaviors that will move us and other nations off of oil and off of carbon in the nick of time.

It’s a tough message for a politician to sell–and don’t look for any of the ‘08 hopefuls to go beyond what Obama said in Anderson, IN: “The only way we’re going to lower gas prices over the long term is if we start using less oil.”

Ultimately, sustained higher gas prices will mean decreased demand for fuel–and that’s a good thing. We’re already seeing these kinds of effects in car purchasing, with Americans buying more hybrids and fewer trucks in March.

CO2-Belching Ohio Going Green

Nearly forty years ago, Ohio’s “chocolate-brown, oily” Cuyahoga River burned. But today, the state is stepping out in front on renewable energy usage. Now that’s what I call progress.

From Gristmill:

Ohio gets 87 percent of its electricity from coal (and the rest is mostly nukes), putting it in the upper echelon of coal-using states in the nation (No. 2 behind Texas, to be precise).

And that, friends, is about to change, because yesterday the Ohio Legislature passed a renewable energy standard requiring utilities to provide 12.5 percent of Ohio’s electricity from clean, renewable energy sources like wind and solar by 2025. This bill has a solar-specific requirement that will result in about 594 MW of solar in the Buckeye State. Not too shabby!

Live in Ohio? Click here to ask Gov. Strickland to sign the bill into law.

LA? Becoming Energy Efficient? Really?

Yes, it’s true–the city known for its wretched excess is aiming to become more energy efficient. From a story I missed in yesterday’s LA Times:

Los Angeles embarked on one of its most ambitious projects to combat global warming on Monday, becoming the biggest city in the nation to impose “green” building rules that would potentially cut millions of tons of pollution over the next decade.

In a unanimous vote, the City Council passed an ordinance requiring builders of large commercial and residential developments to adopt such measures as planting drought-resistant landscaping and using recycled materials and energy-efficient heating, cooling and lighting. [...]

The law requires new commercial buildings and high-rise residential structures with more than 50,000 square feet of floor space to meet a nationally recognized “Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” standard, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, a Washington-based nonprofit. It also would cover major renovations and low-rise developments of 50 units or more.

City officials said about 150 new and renovated buildings, or about 7.5 million square feet, would be covered by the ordinance each year.

The rules would amount to preventing about 85,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions over the next five years, the equivalent of removing 15,000 cars from the roads.

Of course, the new law isn’t only about being green–it’s also about saving green:

Experts say that costs for building to the basic Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard are no higher than regular building costs. James Atkins, developer of the Luma, said that it cost his company, the South Group, about 1% more to build to an even higher “gold” standard, but that such costs are recouped through lower operating expenses.

As energy costs continue to rise, the owners of these new, efficient buildings will be glad the investment was made up front to cut their electricity costs.

Home Efficiency’s Best Week Ever Continues

What a week it’s been for home energy efficiency, especially in the DC metro area. From The Washington Examiner:

Nearly 800 buildings in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia – including the nearly new Washington Convention Center and two professional sports stadiums in Baltimore – will be retrofitted to save at least 20 percent in energy use under a plan announced Wednesday by two public-private partnerships.

The retrofits will be completed by the end of 2009 and are expected to save $36.5 million annually in energy costs and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 545 million pounds a year – the equivalent of taking 45,000 cars off the road, project officials said.

The scheduled renovations were announced by the Energy Efficiency Partnership of Greater Washington and the Chesapeake Crescent, public-private partnerships that promote green building. The energy savings will be accomplished in a variety of ways, including more efficient heating and cooling systems, windows or roofing.

Most, but not all, of the buildings are government owned.

Better Plan Those Beach Trips Now

Scientists predict that a 2 degree increase in global temperatures would mean a sea level rise of around 5 feet (or 1.5 meters) by 2100. A 2-3 degree increase is entirely possible unless we do something now to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Architecture 2030, a non-profit whose mission is stop make our architecture part of the solution, has released a study demonstrating the effects global warming would have on coastal property. From their report:

The following study of the US coasts reveals that, beginning with just one meter of sea level rise, our nation will be physically under siege, vulnerable to catastrophic property and infrastructure loss with large population disruptions and economic hardship. We have only to look at one event in just one city, hurricane Katrina and its impact on both New Orleans and our country, to understand what may soon be upon us if firm and immediate action to reduce GHG emissions to acceptable levels is not taken.

I recently vacationed in Key West. It’s a lovely place. And after seeing this image from the study, I’m really glad I went when I did:

The blue spots are the portions of Key West that would be underwater with a 1.5 meter rise in sea levels.

Not to make light of a deadly serious situation, but unless we want to deal with hundreds of out-of-work Jimmy Buffett impersonators, it’s best we do something to prevent the destruction of our islands and coastal cities.

You can find similar maps for dozens of other locations here.

Climate Change: It Means War

For those who argue fighting climate change will be too expensive, a leading UK defense think thank reminds us that the costs of doing nothing would be catastrophic.

Via The Telegraph:

Climate change could cause global conflicts as large as the two world wars but lasting for centuries unless the problem is controlled, [Royal United Services Institute] has warned. [...]

The report said: “If climate change is not slowed and critical environmental thresholds are exceeded, then it will become a primary driver of conflicts between and within states.”

It added: “Climate impacts will force us into a radical rethink of how we identify and secure our national interests.

A Great Week for Home Energy Efficiency

Home energy use accounts for over 20 percent of our nation’s total energy consumption. The technology exists today to make houses more energy efficient, but too often the cost of upgrading is prohibitive, especially for less fortunate families.

Enter freshman Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO).

At the Center for American Progress yesterday, Perlmutter unveiled the Green Resources for Energy Efficient Neighborhoods (GREEN) Act:

People who buy energy-efficient homes or who upgrade existing ones could be rewarded with lower- interest loans under legislation from a Colorado congressman.

Rep. Ed Perlmutter, a Golden Democrat, on Tuesday unveiled a bill that he hopes will create a market for green buildings by offering incentives to lenders.

“The federal government, I think, needs to push” to ramp up energy-efficient construction, Perlmutter said.

Meanwhile, local governments are pushing for increased efficiency. Maryland’s Montgomery County is taking the lead:

New homes built in Montgomery County would have to meet federal energy efficiency standards under innovative legislation approved yesterday by the County Council…

The measure, meant to reduce energy consumption by 15 to 30 percent, is part of a far-reaching environmental initiative. It includes property tax credits for residents who switch to renewable energy, a requirement that residents disclose utility costs when they sell a home and a plan to get county officials to trade in their government-issued sport-utility vehicles.

…Montgomery officials said the county would become the first in the country to require that new single-family homes and townhouses meet Energy Star standards created by the Environmental Protection Agency to encourage the use of energy-efficient windows, tightly sealed structures and effective insulation.