Cities and buildings are getting smarter by the day about managing energy, and the leading IT companies are more than happy to help.

Cisco's new "Smart Connected Buildings" is the latest initiative that aims to create tools using IT technology (via IP, the internet networking protocol) to make buildings smart about energy. The company's Network Building Mediator will connect building management functions that were previously disjointed islands of their own, namely HVAC, lighting, security and renewable power systems.

According to Cisco, the application enables companies to "monitor, measure and act on energy systems while adding renewable technologies such as solar, wind and fuel cells as well as energy-efficiency programs such automated demand-response programs to reduce capital and operating expenditures." The focus is on taking proprietary systems and sets of data, and use web applications to enable it to be shared and acted upon. Cisco says it will use industry open-system protocols and converts the building energy data to open XML/SOAP Services so that it can be used by utilities and grid operators.

A key part of corporations and government adding intelligence to their energy management systems is that in addition to reducing a company's carbon footprint, projects are usually expected to be revenue neutral or in many cases profitable. There are concerns that connecting the grid via IP is an invitation to "cyberterrorists," but the banking system has moved online and continues to function. Similar security measures will be taken to ensure that energy data is protected.

Cisco has teamed up with Duke Energy on developing a smart grid communications infrastructure and is working on applications that enable cities to track their carbon emissions.

Cisco is only one of the many large IT organizations aggressively creating applications for integrating building management systems into the smart grid. IBM, SAP, AT&T and GE are all in the mix, as well as energy management companies EnerNoc and Echelon, which are expanding the scope.

Building automation and energy management have been niche industries, but new emphasis on carbon reductions and the financial benefits of energy efficiency are pushing them to the forefront.

It is an interesting paradox that IT is seen in some respects as a savior for energy efficiency when IT departments have paid little to no attention to energy efficiency. That is likely to change soon.

John Gartner is Editor in Chief of Matter Network and an Industry Analyst for Pike Research.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama, buoyed by a domestic victory on climate policy, faces his first foreign test on the issue next week at a forum that could boost the chances of reaching a U.N. global warming pact this year.

Obama, who has pledged U.S. leadership in the fight against climate change, chairs a meeting of the world's top greenhouse gas emitters at the G8 summit in Italy on July 9.

Known as the Major Economies Forum, the grouping includes 17 nations that account for roughly 75 percent of the world's emissions, making any agreement from its leaders a potential blueprint for U.N. talks in Copenhagen in December.

Meetings of the forum, which Obama relaunched earlier this year, have so far failed to achieve major breakthroughs.

Developing countries want their industrial counterparts to reduce emissions by 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, while rich nations want developing states to commit to boosting their economies in an environmentally friendly way.

Those debates and others will be featured at the Italy meeting, the first at a heads of state and government level, and all eyes will be on Obama, whose climate initiatives European leaders have lauded while privately pressing him for more.

Europeans "want to seize this moment to push as hard as they can on the Americans to get significant ... targeted commitments on carbon emissions reductions," said Heather Conley, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic & International Studies.

"They know that this is going to be a very careful walk along the road to Copenhagen in December and they're going to publicly praise and privately push hard."

A Democrat, Obama has reversed the environmental policies of Republican predecessor George W. Bush by pressing for U.S. greenhouse gas emission cuts and a cap-and-trade system to limit carbon dioxide (CO2) output from major industries.

The House of Representatives helped turn that vision into a potential law last week by passing a bill that would require large companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels.

CHALLENGES, LEADERSHIP

But those figures are still below what many scientists say is necessary and -- potentially more dangerous for the Copenhagen process -- the measures face obstacles to their passage through the U.S. Senate.

Washington has resisted calls to endorse the aim of limiting global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius at the G8 summit, though a European official said on Wednesday the United States was now on board for that goal.

"The politics of climate change are stuck, despite Obama coming in," said Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists. He said the United States was still on the defensive in comparison to the more progressive European Union.

Despite those challenges, White House officials said the president would carry momentum to the G8.

"Bolstered by the great progress in the House last week, the president will ... press for continued progress on energy and climate," Denis McDonough, the White House deputy national security adviser, told reporters.

Activists hope Obama's presence will pay dividends.

"This is really a chance for President Obama to bring what he's most known for here in the U.S. -- hope and change -- into the climate dialogue internationally," said Keya Chatterjee, director of international climate negotiations at environmental group WWF in Washington.

She said other industrialized nations had used the Bush administration's reluctance to sign up to major emissions curbs as an excuse to avoid making their own strong commitments.

"In the past year it's been very easy for Canada and Russia and Japan to hide behind the Bush administration, but they don't have that to hide behind anymore," she said.

A draft copy of the statement to be released by the major emitters sets a goal for the world to reduce emissions 50 percent by 2050, but it does not include a base year.

The draft also gives a nod to the "broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2 degrees C" without specifically endorsing that goal.

Reprinted with permission from Reuters (Additional reporting Alister Doyle, editing by Vicki Allen)

In recent years the legion of supporters of renewable energy has expanded to include labor unions concerned about jobs, as well as national security and energy independence experts such as George Schultz and James Woolsey.

These advocates of domestic and clean energy production strongly consider the geopolitical implications when dollars leave the country to potentially embolden individuals in unstable and unfriendly regions. While renewable energy depletes resources that could be used against U.S. citizens, it also can reduce the amount of money going to foreign governments that often have poor records in human rights.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act, would establish a National Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) provision, requiring investor owned utilities to purchase a minimum of 15% of their energy from renewable sources. This domestic energy production, combined with energy efficiency initiatives, will to a degree reduce the consumption of foreign petroleum. This will come in the form of the expansion of biofuels as a transportation and home heating fuel, as well as electricity from wind and solar to power the upcoming plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles that will slash the use of gasoline.

Since 2002, U.S. energy companies (along with the government) have increasingly looked to nations in Africa for crude oil as an alternative to Mid-East oil. While African nations pose less of an international threat, many of the governments of the leading oil exporting nations have a poor record in sharing the oil wealth and in respect for human rights.

The "curse of oil," which says that national per capita income often goes down after oil is discovered in a nation, is well documented in cases around the globe. Many nations in Africa, which have seen a boom in oil exploration during the past 5 years, simultaneously experience a decline in both human rights and financial equality as "strongmen" leaders have used the oil wealth for personal gain, and limited civil rights to remain in power.

Numerous examples of this, as documented in the book Untapped: The Scramble for Africa's Oil by John Ghazvinian, include Angola Equatorial Guinea, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Nigeria. Recently Shell paid $15.5 million to settle an action brought by the Ogani people who alleged that the company looked the other way as civil rights were being violated, culminating in the death of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa.

In these unstable regions, energy companies negotiate with powerful leaders and sometimes make undesirable concessions in order to extract oil. This creates a windfall that even in "democratic" nations often hurts rather than helps the indigenous people.

This misuse of fossil fuel revenue is yet another incentive for using renewable energy both here and aboard. Renewable energy is almost always a local and distributed resource that does not concentrate wealth. Instead of the potential to prop up tyrants, it creates jobs and encourages innovation by small businesses.

John Gartner is Editor in Chief of Matter Network and an Industry Analyst for Pike Research

By David Levitan

The Environmental Protection Agency has granted California’s waiver request that will allow the state to enforce strict greenhouse gas emissions standards on cars beginning with the present model year. California first applied for the waiver in 2005, but was denied several years later. Now, the EPA grants the waiver based on the need for California to improve its air pollution conditions.

It was clear from early on in President Obama’s tenure that he was much more friendly than his predecessor toward the idea of stricter fuel emissions standards. In January, Obama instructed the EPA to look into the waiver again, in spite of its denial only a month earlier. And in May, the President announced a national policy that will improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions beginning with 2012 car models. California will then allow the national policy to supersede its own.

EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said in a statement that “This decision puts the law and science first. After review of the scientific findings, and another comprehensive round of public engagement, I have decided this is the appropriate course under the law.” I can’t help but think this is a subtle dig at the previous incarnation of the EPA, where science didn’t exactly come to the fore all that often. This is a welcome step toward improving automobile emissions, which is an absolutely necessary step toward widespread carbon dioxide reductions.

Reprinted with permission from Red Green and Blue

The first charging station "networks" are being developed by cities and utilities that want to proudly wear the green badge. During the ramp up to when vehicles go on sale, these groups will largely determine where vehicles and recharging is available.

Actually, the term "charging station network" is a bit of a misnomer, unless you consider the competing gas stations that dot major intersections across the country as a "network." They will more realistically be islands unto themselves until smart grid technology begins to monitor and share information about vehicle charging. Also, some will be run by utilities, some by government, some by retailers, so the customer service experience and billing systems are likely to be unique.

Madison Gas and Electric is the most recent utility to announce the installation of charging stations, purchasing six Coulomb Technologies units. Utilities are kicking the tires (literally) on how EVs will connect to the grid, and as detailed in my new report for Pike Research "Electric Vehicles on the Grid," they and government agencies will lead the way as early adopters in non-residential charging station installations.

A few dozen utilities today have EV charging demonstration stations for their own vehicle or vehicles, and the next step will be to develop a limited number of vehicles that will be available to the public.

Cities that install the most charging stations and provide incentives will likely have the largest inventory of the new vehicles available to them. The big OEMS are choosing their infrastructure partners and locations carefully, and will allocate vehicles to regional dealerships party based on local support.

For example, the San Francisco Bay Area, including San Francisco, San Jose and the suburb of Walnut Creek have all begun to install charging stations, so auto makers how have been monitoring this will likely give first dibs on many of first the PHEVs and EVs shipped to Northern California.

Coulomb Technologies is working through dealers, and has resellers in all 50 states, plus extensive reach in Europe (Germany, Holland, Denmark, Spain, France) through a relationship with 365 Energy, according to CEO Richard Lowenthal. Lowenthal expects government to be 50 percent of his business this year, thanks mostly to stimulus funds. To meet the incoming orders, Coulomb has ordered $19 million in equipment CTS Corporation. He also told me that the company will expand from stand-alone charging stations to residential equipment.

John Gartner is the Editor in Chief of Matter Network and an Industry Analyst for Pike Research

A thriving chemicals industry is crucial to contemporary societal demands, but at the cost of 234 million barrels of oil a year. The first official survey of its kind found that the majority of chemical companies were engaged in sustainable processes, and nearly all continued unaffected by the economy.

Biotechnology with its "green" potential moves far beyond the genetic manipulation of food. For biotech companies, finding new replacement for plastics or refining non-fossil fuel biomass positions higher.

Genomatica performed the survey, working with the market intelligence firm ICIS, of over 900 ICIS subscribers. Chemical professionals consider sustainability a priority for long-term survivability -- even in adverse economic conditions, six in ten companies are engaged in sustainable chemical practices.

The majority of companies surveyed were based in Europe, North America and Asia, and tended to focus their priorities towards long term development. BASF was the most likely company to "spring to mind spontaneously" when thinking of a sustainable chemical company, with Dow and DuPont trailing after.

46 percent of companies considered there were economic advantages to switching to renewable feedstocks, responding to growing concerns regarding raw materials pricing. The environmental quality of the end product was most important to companies, ranking closely with concerns about carbon emissions during production.

Sustainable chemical development programs were considered to take under 10 years to implement by the majority (86 percent) of respondents, and of that number, most considered that it would take less than five years. 71 percent of companies also ranked being at the forefront of sustainable chemical as very important or important.

The greatest concerns regarding sustainable processes in the chemical world are centered around feedstock pricing and availability. Currently, most feedstocks are derived from sugars or other carbohydrates (24 percent) or plants (23 percent).

Chemical companies seem willing to reduce petroleum consumption, as 57 percent agreed that their company should reduce exposure to the petroleum-based commodity market. The weight of the automotive industry continues to affect the chemical sector, however biotechnology and adapting to evolving regulations present a unique opportunity to escape fossil fuel dependence.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama scored a major victory on Friday when the House of Representatives passed legislation to slash industrial pollution that is blamed for global warming.

The Democratic-controlled House passed the climate change bill, a top priority for Obama, by a vote of 219-212. As has become routine on major bills in Congress this year, the vote was partisan, with only eight Republicans joining Democrats for the bill. Forty-four Democrats voted against it.

Climate change legislation still must get through the Senate. Senators were expected to try to write their own version but prospects for this year were uncertain.

After the House vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he hoped the Senate can pass a bill "this fall."

Obama praised the House for taking "historic action" and urged the Senate to act. "It's a bold and necessary step that holds the promise of creating new industries and millions of new jobs, decreasing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil," Obama said.

With the House action, Obama will be able to tout significant progress toward tackling global warming after years of foreign countries criticizing Washington for not participating in international efforts.

The bill requires that large U.S. companies, including utilities, oil refiners, manufacturers and others, reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases associated with global warming by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels.

They would do so by phasing in the use of cleaner alternative energy than high-polluting oil and coal.

At the core of the bill, which is around 1,500 pages long, is a "cap and trade" program designed to achieve the emissions reductions by industry.

Under the plan, the government would issue a declining number of pollution permits to companies, which could sell those permits to each other as needed.

'BIGGEST JOB-KILLING BILL'

Republicans said the bill was a behemoth that would neither effectively help the environment nor improve an economy reeling from a deep recession.

House Republican leader John Boehner called the measure "the biggest job-killing bill that has ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives."

Representative Joe Barton, the senior Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee that played a key role in the bill, said it would set unrealistic targets for cutting carbon pollution. "You would have to reduce emissions in the United States to the level that we had in 1910," Barton said.

Both predicted higher prices for energy and other consumer goods and more U.S. jobs being shipped abroad as companies try to avoid the tough pollution-control requirements. Democrats said consumers mostly would be protected from price hikes.

During House debate, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, the chief sponsor of the bill, said, "The scientists are telling us there's an overwhelming consensus ... global warming is real and it's moving very rapidly."

Massachusetts Representative Edward Markey, who wrote the bill with Waxman, added, "When it becomes law, and it will, for the first time in the history ... of our country we will put enforceable limits on global warming pollution."

Earlier in the day, Obama said the United States also had to work with developing countries to ensure their "obligations are clear" on fighting global warming.

China and the United States are leading carbon polluters.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said in a statement, "Although this bill is not perfect, it is a significant step in the national fight against climate change and it puts the United States in a position of leadership in international climate negotiations that must produce a global solution to this global problem."

California is recognized as having the most aggressive plan to fight global warming in the United States.

Some major environmental groups rallied around the bill, while others said it will need to be strengthened.

"This bill is the most important environmental and energy legislation in the history of our country," said Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund.

Even though climate change -- with its threat to polar ice caps and animal and plant species -- is a global problem, much of the debate in Congress broke along regional geography, pitting Midwestern and Southern states heavily reliant on dirty coal against coastal areas, where cleaner energies are more available.

(Additional reporting by Susan Cornwell in Washington and Peter Henderson in San Francisco; Editing by Will Dunham). Reprinted with permission from Reuters. Photo: David Seelig

Natural gas is the Rodney Dangerfield of transportation fuels. It's cheap. It's clean. But consumers don't have much of a chance to use it it because there's only one model of natural gas car for sale.

Billionaire investor T. Boone Pickens has been beating the drum the loudest lately about the merits of natural gas as a clean(er) fuel that can also make the U.S. more energy independent. His argument was bolstered this week by the discovery that the U.S. may have 35 percent more natural gas underground than previously estimated.

Natural gas is relatively inexpensive, as the national average price was about 20 percent less than gasoline in April, according to the DOE.

Congress is waking up to the possibilities of natural gas in reducing emissions. House bill 1835, introduced in April, would extend the national excise tax credit that goes to natural gas is due to expire at the end of the year. It would also provide a tax credit for manufacturing and purchasing natural gas vehicles.

While natural gas is a carbon emitting fossil fuel, it is much cleaner than petroleum-based fuels -- even hybrids. For six years running, the road-ready passenger vehicle rated greenest has been the Honda Civic GX, a car that runs on natural gas. The Civic GX carries a $10,000 premium, but a federal tax incentive of $4,000 nearly cuts the gap in half. While there are 120,000 natural gas-powered vehicles in the U.S., nearly all are trucks, buses and fleet vehicles.

One of the reasons more automakers haven't jumped on the bandwagon is the scarcity of refueling stations. California is the only state with more than 100 natural gas refueling stations, and only 1,100 nationwide. Of course if they built the cars, they will come. This may change soon as companies may look to take advantage of federal incentives for building alternative fuel stations.

If at least one of the other big auto manufacturers doesn't jump in and make one of its fleet CNG vehicles available to consumers, you might see a startup try to draft behind Mr. Pickens plan for natural gas vehicles. The technology is already proven; it's just a matter of will.

John Gartner is Editor in Chief of Matter Network and an Industry analyst for Pike Research

One of the potentially most beneficial aspects of vehicle to grid (V2G) applications is that electric and plug-in hybrid vehicle batteries could delivery power to the grid during peak times and draw power when it is not in demand.

However, as my new report for Pike Research "Electric Vehicles on the Grid" states, V2G is likely to be limited to small pilot projects through 2015. Auto manufacturers are wary of stressing new and expensive lithium ion batteries for anything other than vehicle locomotion until they have an established track record of performance. Utilities are equally cautious about the new technologies required to control the flow of power up and down and across the grid.

One potential V2G application that could make financial sense down the road is for commuter parking lots to control the power flow of the thousands of vehicles parked during the day to load shift away from peak demand.

Andy Frank, a pioneer in plug-in hybrid development and the Professor, Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering at the University of California, Davis, ran the numbers on what would be possible if BART, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit system, were to use vehicle batteries to load balance their electricity draw.

As Dr. Frank explained, BART has to buy electricity in bulk and well in advance (2-3 years) of when it is needed. But the power needed to run its electric trains and facilities increases greatly during rush hour, requiring the organization to "oversubscribe" by buying enough power to satisfy the peak demand that occurs during just a small fraction of the day. BART pays for energy that's never used, and passes the cost onto commuters.

Frank says that by allowing EVs to plug in and having BART charge the batteries with excess power during the slow times, and then draw back a percentage of the power during peak times, BART could save up to $4 million annually. Even at a slow (level 1) speed of delivering power back to the grid, 1000 vehicles could act as a small power plant, delivering about 1.5 megawatts. The transit agency knows how many vehicles park in its lots, so they could predict how much power would be available to buffer its peak demand, and could save money by buying less power.

Even by giving away the power for free and fully charging vehicles before they depart, V2G storage would cost between 10 and 25 percent of the cost of peak power, according to Frank.

This scenario would require vehicle owners to permit their vehicles to be managed, and for two-way wireless or wired communications to relay both the status of the battery and BART's power demand.It also asks BART to morph into a power command center, and puts the agency at risk should something happen to a vehicle during charging, but the point is well taken.

Load balancing and demand management can replace or reduce electricity consumption at a much lower cost than purchasing energy. Vehicle batteries-- after the kinks have been worked out and auto makers and utilities are comfortable -- will likely be play supporting roles to the grid in providing mobile storage. But don't plan on it as being part of your early EV experience.

John Gartner is Editor in Chief of Matter Network and an Industry Analyst for Pike Research