December 2009 Archives

It's the end of the decade 2000-2009, and there has been progress as well as potential disaster for sustainability. In chronological order, I've chosen these ten stories to show a range of relevant global and national issues and events on climate, business, government, media, design, technology, language and demographics. Some of the entries are pegged to an exact date, while others cover a time period.

The first entry, climate change is impacting all aspects of sustainability thought, planning and action.

1.       Terror of the Decade: Global Climate Change Confirmed by...Climate, IPCC, Heads of State

Time Period: 2000-2009



The evidence is overwhelmingly clear that we humans are changing the earth's climate in ways in which millions are beginning to regret. Ten of the hottest years on record globally have been recorded in the ten years since 1997. Some of the impacts: rising overall sea levels from melting polar ice are already damaging low-lying areas in Bangladesh, India, Egypt and China, and threatening the very existence of island nations. More intense hurricanes (Katrina killed more than 1,300 in 2006 and helped shut down the oil and gas refining sector in the Gulf Coast); droughts, heat (the Europe heat event of 2003 caused more than 35,000 deaths) and wildfires (Australia's Melbourne-area deadly firestorm of 2009 exploded during one of the hottest periods ever recorded Down under, dramatizing the ravishes of an ongoing 8-year drought).

So what if these are chance events, unrelated to man's impact on the globe's climate? That's a fair question and an outside possibility, but odds are that these extreme events were at least partially due to the rising global concentration of CO2, which is now at about 390 parts per million (ppm), up from 315 ppm in the late 1950s. The real threat is that things will get much worse (heat waves, droughts, floods, depletion of glaciers and water supplies, agriculture and fisheries disruption) if our global greenhouse gases continue to increase. Human-based greenhouse gas emissions increased 70% between 1970 and 2004, according to the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change, also known as the IPCC). The watershed IPCC Fourth Assessment Report of 2007 developed by 2,500 of the world's leading climate scientists, put the likelihood at more than 90 percent that the global temperature increase of .74 Celsius between 1906 and 2005 has been caused by human greenhouse gas emissions. How often have 2,500 scientists agreed on anything? The landmark 2007 "Stern Review on the Economic of Climate Change," by former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern, estimates that global climate change could negatively impact the world economy annually at 5-20 percent Gross Domestic Product, while Stern estimated that the annual costs of reducing the risks of global climate change are estimated to be about 1 percent of world GDP.

Unfortunately, the UN COP-15 conference in Copenhagen ended with a whimper, producing only a non-binding agreement to limit global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrialized temperature levels. Follow-up actions, including a potential binding treaty, will set the agenda for the next decade and beyond.  

2.       Word: Sustainability

Time Period: 2000-2009


The use of the term "sustainability" itself has been a major surprise this past decade. In 2000, only a few policy wonks and academics used the word, traditionally defined as "meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs." Now the public (maybe even more than the media) is gleaning that "sustainability" differs considerably from "environmentalism" as it is based on planning for an uncertain future based on economics, culture, resources and technology.

As the current decade closes many are searching for a term that could replace "sustainability," claimed to be almost meaningless now because it has been hijacked by greenwashing corporate marketing campaigns (I bet some such ads pop up next to this post somewhere in future digital ether!). "Resilience" is currently gaining  traction, but we'll perhaps need another decade to see if the "s-word" gets dethroned.

3.       Standards: LEED Green Buildings

Date: March 2000



The US Green Building Council formally released its Leadership in Energy and Environment Design building standards (LEED) full Green Building Rating system 2.0 in March 2000. The impact on the nation's building and construction industry over the next ten years has been wildly popular and transformational on numerous levels. The number of LEED-certified or registered buildings increased from 10,000 in 2007 to 20,000 by the beginning of 2009. Providing a system-based measurable standard of what "green" means is useful for policy, benchmarking and new market development. The LEED ratings, for instance,  were integral to my ability to develop an overall sustainability benchmarking of US cities starting in 2005 (which can found in my book How Green is Your City?). Critics have assailed LEED for providing standards in certification that do not reflect actual performance in energy efficiency. Nevertheless, LEED standards, are now being positioned for international markets (in competition with Europe's BREE-AM and China's emerging Three Star standard), and they continue to be a powerful teaching tool, not to mention an industry onto themselves. Today's savvy urban planner, construction manager or architect must possess the LEED-AP, "Accredited Professional" tagline on their business card. In addition to new commercial building construction, LEED is now being applied to homes, existing buildings, schools, neighborhoods and may even extend to cities, under the LEED for Neighborhood Development standard that was launched in 2009.

The next challenges for green building standards will be rating life-cycle impacts (carbon, water, scarce resources) of construction processes and material, while integrating measures of building performance--how much buildings actually save energy or water once they are occupied.

4.       Product: The Toyota Prius

Date: July 2000


Back in the 1990s, Toyota Motor Corporation CEO Katsuaki Watanbe helped birth the "G-21," later known as the Prius, when he decided that middle-class consumers wanted a car that used new motor innovations to be fuel-efficient. The Prius hybrid gas-electric car was introduced in the United States in July 2000. It quickly became a Hollywood status symbol after Leonardo DiCaprio bought one in 2001, and he and other stars such as Harrison Ford and Calista Flockhart (remember her?) began showing up at the 2003 Oscar ceremonies not in chauffeured limos, but behind the wheel or driven in their own Priuses. By the decade's peak sales year of 2007, the Toyota Prius had sold 180,000 units in the United States. These cars get 40-50 miles per gallon but perhaps even more importantly provide a meter showing real-time and historic fuel efficiency; self-monitoring feedback is one of the greatest ways of changing behavior to reduce energy use.

Plug-in electric models of the Prius will begin to be released on  test basis in 2010, in a challenge to the introduction of GM's Chevy Volt. Plug-ins may create fuel efficiencies that can truly reduce carbon emissions and oil dependency, getting from 51 to 100+ miles per gallon. One problem with electric cars or plug-in hybrid electrics is that their true sustainability impact depends on exactly how the electricity they use is produced at the power plant: renewables or dirty coal? In parts of the United States that continue to burn large amounts of coal to generate electricity (Southeast, lower Midwest and Plains states), driving an electric car does little or nothing to reduce a person's overall carbon footprint when compared to gas-burning cars. When you consider cars and health, social, land use and material life-cycle impacts, driving less is better for people's fitness, the environment and the planet.

5.       Corporate Story. Wal-Mart Embarks on a "Green" Path

Time Period: 2004-2005



I must admit, I was a skeptic when I first heard of Wal-Mart's plan to go green in 2004 from Jib Ellison, founder of Blue Skye Consulting, one of the major collaborative forces behind Wal-Mart's transformation. Wal-Mart, at that point the largest company in the world (it's now number 3), had been known for its ruthless management style, questionable labor practices, and for helping put locally owned stores in towns across the country out of business. Ellison had met with Wal-Mart's then-CEO Lee Scott at the behest of Conservation International's CEO Peter Seligman, and Scott decided upon a serious campaign to make the company more resource and energy efficient. Since that meeting, the company has been streamlining its transportation fleet, buildings and some products to be less environmentally destructive. The company is now targeting its supply chain, which is primarily in China, in a loosely defined, greening protocol.

The impact of Wal-Mart going green helped awaken the nation's business leaders to the potential of making their own operations and supply chains energy and resource efficient, (just sounds like good business to me). Wal-Mart announced earlier in 2009 that it would require manufacturers to calculate and disclose the full environmental costs of ingredients and processes on product labels sometime in the next five years. Suppliers, formerly isolated or little regulated, are now assessing their operations in a way they never would have without the threat of greater scrutiny from their biggest customer.

6.       Regulations: California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32)

Time Period: 2005-2006



When California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger made the declaration in June 2005 that, "I say the debate is over (on climate change),"  many were still heatedly arguing that climate change needed more studies before action was taken. The Governor and the California Legislature pressed ahead in 2006 to sign the nation's first major climate change mitigation legislation, known as AB 32 . Now AB 32 will soon be implemented across industries and even in local communities through follow-up legislation such as the regulation known as SB 375, the nation's first statewide regulatory attempt to limit suburban and exurban sprawl. Meanwhile, opponents of AB 32, are gearing up for 2010 gubernatorial elections, claiming AB 32 will cost the state $143 billion in auction taxes alone. Whatever happens next, California is being looked on by the Obama Administration and world leaders as the pace setter in climate change mitigation with its aggressive automotive fuel standards, green building standards and AB 32's goal of reducing greenhouse gases 80% over 1990 levels by 2050.

7.       Film: An Inconvenient Truth

Date: May, 2006


Released in Summer 2006 at the Sundance Film Festival, An Inconvenient Truth made the debate on climate change public. The documentary, which was actually just a series of lectures and slideshows that former Vice President Al Gore was giving around the world, hit a nerve. Despite "action scenes" that consisted of Gore either 1.) riding up elevators or 2.) riding down escalators, the film created a major public buzz and introduced the subject of climate change to popular culture. An Inconvenient Truth received an Academy Award in 2007 for Best Documentary and went on to set records for box office revenues in its category. An Inconvenient Truth offered very few solutions, suggesting compact fluorescent bulbs and little more. This critical learning opportunity was finally addressed when Gore released a follow-up book in 2009, A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis.

8.       Book: The Omnivore's Dilemma

Date: May, 2006



Michael Pollan's 2006 book The Omnivore's Dilemma made clear the benefits of sustainable agriculture and food production, and even foraging or killing your own food: it's healthier for people, animals, farmers, the land and nature. The ongoing popularity of this book has helped create a demand for sustainably raised food that has out-paced supply. The Omnivore's Dilemma patiently outlined what is wrong with industrial agriculture and livestock production, where highly subsidized ingredients such as high fructose corn syrup have become a surplus commodity to be forced upon products or animals in order to reduce the price of ingredients, without regard to health (diabetes, reduced nutrition). I had the good fortune of meeting Angelo Garro, the Italian forager, now based in Northern California who was profiled in the last half of the book. As we traded notes on wild huckleberry picking one afternoon at a friend's orchard party, he was pulling off some strips of meat from a boiled carcass. When the sun went down most were unknowingly eating a jack rabbit that Angelo had shot in the orchard a few hours before--it had made its way into a delicious bolognese pasta sauce.

9.       Design: Masdar City, First Planned Net-Zero Carbon City

Time Period: 2006-2017



Masdar will be a 50,000-person city based on applied sustainability research and technology that is being developed in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. While other cities have been planned to be net-zero carbon (Dongtan, China, which is not being developed because of local corruption and other issues), Masdar has been one of the few net-zeros that appear to be proceeding as planned. With financial partners Credit Suisse, Siemens and General Electric, Masdar is also backed by the city-state of Abu Dhabi, as well as technology partners from the UK and Spain. The complex is being used for cutting-edge research in: renewable energy (including dozens of active and passive solar and wind technologies), water conservation technologies that can distill drinking water from ambient moisture both indoors (sweat) and outdoors (dew), as well as local urban food production schemes. In fall 2009, the Masdar Institute of Technology opened, in conjunction with MIT, where students get degrees in engineering,  material sciences, IT, water and the environment, all with a relationship to the real world demonstration projects taking root in the city that in Arabic means "the source."


10.   Future Trend: Mega-growth of Unregulated Asian Cities + Mega Drought

Time Period: 2009-2030

Between now and 2027 Asian Cities will account for more than half of the world's greenhouse gas increases, according to a study by the Asian Development Bank. From Mumbai to Beijing, cities will add a projected 1.8 billion people over the next two decades; they are almost entirely unregulated in their growth, carbon management and environmental impacts, despite some new siloed attempts to manage their industries, power production and energy efficiency. The daunting challenge is that no regulatory structure exists to monitor this collection of Asian mega-cities, despite the fact that many of these cities has or will have populations of 10-20 million individuals. This megagrowth began around the beginning of the 00's, when Asian urban population was at 1.4 billion. Asia is projected to have about 3 billion urbanites by 2030.

Water is the first epic Asian city resource crisis. The Tibetan Plateau, source of most of the region's major sources of fresh water (including the Yangtze, Yellow, Mekong, Ganges, Irrawaddy and the Indus rivers) has been experiencing a seven percent loss of glaciers on an annual basis, according to a report released last week (pdf) at the Copenhagen climate conference. 

Beijing has been hit especially hard by a ten-year drought (pdf): the city of 17 million has enough water for only 14 million. Beijing has been forced to procure water from surrounding agricultural regions and rapidly diminishing groundwater, while some cities in India have completely run out of water during periods of drought over the past decade.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute


Tuvalu and its surrounding waters

The Copenhagen climate summit ended today, with a non-binding agreement signed by industrialized countries to limit global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above the temperature when industrialization began.

The island nation of Tuvalu led a revolt last week by developing nations against the 2-degree idea, asserting it wanted increases to be capped at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrialization levels.

Apisai Ielemia, the Prime Minister of the 10,000-person island chain in the south Pacific, said his people will have "no other inland to run to," when average ocean waters are expected to rise because of melting polar ice.

Developing nations also protested a pre-conference paper that was discovered to be circulating among developed nations, with suggested stipulations that have proven to be similar to today's end agreement.

China and the US, meanwhile, went head to head over what could be quantifiable and verifiable in China. There was even talk early this week of border tariffs that may be imposed by the United States on Chinese imported goods if they do not transparently demonstrate their greenhouse gas reductions.

The agreement called for the US to cut CO2 emissions between 14-17 percent by 2020 from 2025 levels. Presdient Obama called the deal "meaningful and unprecedented."

Developed countries including the United States will provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to help "most vulnerable" poor nations (Tuvalu?) cut their carbon emissions in a deal that was announced by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday. They will also pay out $30 billion to developing countries from next year through 2012.

The agreement occurred after US President Barack Obama had at-the-deadline talks with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and South African President, Jacob Zuma

No agreements have been made for emission reductions by 2050, and follow-up talks will be necessary to put binding measures into effect. A scheduled meeting in Mexico City in December 2010 may be moved up to this summer if negotiating countries decide they want to act sooner rather than later in establishing a binding treaty for global greenhouse gas reduction. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, today's uninspired Copenhagen conclusion also has made it less likely that the Senate will pass greenhouse gas cap and trade regulations during its next session.

That doubt makes the US Environmental Protection Agency's announcement earlier this month that it will begin to regulate greenhouse gases even more critical in terms of how the US will actually achieve its pledged 14-17% greenhouse gas cuts by 2020.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute.


Next10, a research organization in San Francisco, released last week an analysis of green job growth rates in California by sector and region, "Many Shades of Green". Looks like Golden State green job growth has outpaced other job growth since the mid-1990s into 2008 and the great recession.

Overall job growth in California's continuously expanding green sectors was 36% between 1995 and 2008, with traditional job growth at 13% over the same period. When the recession hit California in 2007, green jobs continued to grow into 2008 at a 5% pace while the rest of the job market actually decreased 1% in the state.

The nitty-gritty:

  • The statewide region for green job growth was the Sacramento area, with an 87% percent growth rate. Sacramento experienced the highest-level employment growth (157%) in air and environment jobs (2.5 x 1995 levels). Energy generation employment grew by 141%.

  • California's total green job growth leader is the San Francisco Bay Area with 41,674 green jobs. Bay Area trends include the largest number of energy generation jobs (roughly 7,000). Energy generation grew by 20%, with the high concentration in solar.

  • In the San Joaquin Valley, total green job growth was 48% with the highest concentration of jobs in wind energy. Concentration in alternative fuels represent three times the state average. The number of jobs in green transportation grew 211%.

  • In the Los Angeles area, energy generation jobs grew by 35% and energy efficiency jobs grew by 77%. In Orange County green transportation jobs grew 1,875% including alternative fuels and motor vehicles and equipment. Energy generation jobs grew by 176%

  • According to Next 10, The Inland Empire's energy generation jobs grew by 85% with the highest concentration in solar and wind. Energy efficiency jobs grew by 91%.
Next10 is focused on innovation arising from the intersection of environmental, economic and quality of life interests. The non-profit was founded by venture capitalist F. Noel Perry.
Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute
"Cool Globe" by Terri Spath

A San Francisco non-profit, The Carbon Collaborative, has been running a ten-day series of informative events, briefings and panels called Cafe Copenhagen in conjunction with the UN COP-15 climate negotiations.

"Glocalization" efforts such as Cafe Copenhagen plug into and also amplify international issues impacting the global climate, environment and economy. These type of approaches help local leaders to contextualize their own initiatives; by doing so they are also more likely to influence and benefit from national and international policy outcomes.

The San Francisco Carbon Collective is a partnership of government, business, and environmental organizations tying to accelerate development of effective policy and market-based responses to climate change.

For the Copenhagen Cafe series of events, the organization put together everything from panel discussions, "Ask the Expert" briefings, lunchtime coffee discussions and participant surveys on expected COP 15 results and impacts.

"A lot of this about capacity building: so much is changing so fast, and it's such a broad area. People working on these issues can never get enough," said David Pascal, president of the San Francisco Carbon Collaborative. "And then there are people new to these issues. Some have even been holiday shopping and just wanted to stop in and see what we were doing."

Copenhagen Cafe is being held in the Crocker Galleria's Green Zebra Center in San Francisco's Financial District. Tonight's program (Dec. 10) at 6-8 p.m., for instance, will center on Sustainable Food Systems in conjunction with a farmers market, while a panel discussion on Monday night Dec. 14, 6-8 p.m., that I am on is focused on Sustainable Cities. Clean technology is topic of a panel on Tuesday, December 15.

Other themed events of the Copenhagen Cafe series focus on forestry, indigenous rights and oceans.

Copenhagen Cafe also features more casual "Coffee Talks" on topics such as "Negotiating Justice" (today, December 10, at 11:30 a.m.) and "What Can I Do? How to Work Your Changespheres" (Friday, Dec. 11 at 11:30 a.m.).

Guests on the Monday, December 14 Sustainable Cities panel that I am moderating will include Jean Rogers, lead sustainability consultant for Arup Engineering, Gordon Feller, CEO of Urban Age and executive editor of Urban Age Magazine, and UC Berkeley transportation researcher Laura Schewel, formerly of the Rocky Mountain Institute.  

According to Pascal, the almost-year old organization is fostering multi-stakeholder collaboration; building sector capacity; and supporting the development public policies, while catalyzing development and deployment of environmentally friendly technologies.

The collaborative has a permanent downtown office space, separate from the Copenhagen Cafe, in which shared tenants can informally work together, including DNV (Det Norske Veritas), the world's largest Clean Development Mechanism verifier, The International Emissions Trading Association and CSRware a cloud-computing carbon footprinting software firm. These companies and the collaborative are able to bring shared expertise and opportunities to the table for clean tech and related business planning, financing and operational strategies.

An early area of focus for the collaborative in capacity building and strategy development is carbon emissions trading, according to Pascal. California is set to begin trading in 2012, with the United States and other new markets outside Europe expected to launch markets by a later date, depending on the outcomes in Copenhagen and in Congress.

"Instead of waiting for these markets to unfold and be revealed, we are going to be trying to influence their early outcomes through our networks and events," Pascal said.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute



A sustainability ranking of 30 major European cities was released today in Copenhagen, the Scandinavian city that besides hosting the UN COP15 climate talks, has been chosen as top scorer in the new European Green City Index.

The study, sponsored by Siemens AG and developed by The Economist Intelligence Unit, ranked 30 major cities across Europe relative to one another in eight categories with 30 underlying qualitative and quantitative indicators.

The top cities, in ranked order:

1. Copenhagen, Denmark
2. Stockholm, Sweden
3. Oslo, Norway
4. Vienna, Austria
5. Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Don't think that this ranking is of the "Greenest Cities" in Europe, even though it's called The Europe Green City Index. Such an assumption is made by many about city sustainability indices. The cities at the bottom of this list are the poorest overall performers out of the study universe of 30. (Many thought the sustainability ranking for 50 US cities that I created in 2004 was a list of "America's greenest cities," even though we called it the SustainLane US City Rankings; the study is also featured in the 2007 book, How Green is Your City?)

The lowest-ranking cities in the European study, out of the total of 30 cities:

26. Zagreb, Croatia
27. Belgrade, Serbia
28. Bucharest, Romania
29. Sophia, Bulgaria
30. Kiev, Ukraine

Kiev_SunnyLake.JPGKiev, Ukraine

Interestingly, all the laggard cities are located in either the former Soviet Union, or in former Soviet-controlled Eastern European nations. The difference between the overall highest ranking city, Copenhagen, at 87, and the lowest-scoring city, Kiev at 33 is substantial.

The new European city ranking analyzed cities by the following eight categories:

  • CO2
  • Buildings
  • Energy
  • Transport
  • Water
  • Waste and Land Use
  • Air Quality
  • Environmental Governance
These categories leave out food, the only large oversight. Food accounts for a significant amount of greenhouse gas and other environmental impacts in its production, processing, transportation, storage, retailing and disposal. Siemens does not have a direct interest in the food business, so such an omission is not surprising.

When I added "food" as an indicator category for the 15 SustainLane US City Rankings categories--as measured in community gardens and farmer markets per capita--many, even in the "environmental community," were baffled. It's amazing to think that just five years ago there was so little connection seen between food to sustainability, especially in urban areas.

Fortunately, times have changed and the emphasis on local food and on sustainable agriculture and food production has been significant, especially in certain US urban areas (New York, Boston, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle).  

Back to the Europe Green City Index, Copenhagen ranked high in energy use--number 2--as measured in percentage of renewable energy, and also in environmental governance, in which it tied for first with Helsinki, Stockholm and Brussels, all scoring a perfect 10 points.

Copenhagen also ranked third in transportation; it has the highest rate of commute cycling of any major European city, with 36 percent of all trips taken by bicycle. Portland, the leading US city for cycling, by comparison, has an overall bike rate of 6 percent.

City cycling in Copenhagen

There is an obvious correlation in overall scores between the more wealthy--and higher-scoring--northern European cities and their poorer Eastern European counterparts, but the study did not include criteria for any direct economic or social factors. Housing affordability was one ranking criteria I added to the SustainLane US City Rankings after teachers that couldn't afford living in pricey San Francisco asked, "How sustainable is that?"

Some of the specific underlying indicators for the European Green City Index, included quantitative data points such as recycling rate, and use of public transportation along with other qualitative indicators (e.g. CO2 reduction targets, efficiency standards for buildings).

Besides these tidbits of indicator information and the chart provided at the beginning of this post showing overall scores, the study has not yet provided adequate methodological factors such as weighting of indicator categories and a better explanation of exact scoring within the eight individual indicators for qualitative categories.

The index would also benefit by breaking out categories of analysis that are artificially grouped in a single category, such as "Water and Land Use." Water itself can and should be broken into separate categories such as "Water Supply" and "Water Quality." Land Use is also significant enough to merit a separate category of analysis, since planning and zoning can create large-scale urban sustainability impacts for many decades

Still, the results of the Europe Green City Index should be very useful, and will hopefully have the impact on European cities that other city sustainability rankings have achieved elsewhere with citizens, business, media and politicians: making urban sustainability performance more transparent, understandable within a class of peers, and subject to competition in "a race to the top."

Some of our biggest challenges in cutting carbon to reduce global climate change will be in understanding the system dynamics that cities and other complex entities such as corporations, neighborhoods or even our households comprise. We no longer have the luxury of viewing our energy sources, food, water, buildings and land as separate, unrelated systems, even if business, government and academic institutions have been formulated according to these silos.

Nor can we view our cities as separate systems from nature, the global climate and our social fabric.

Keeping score matters, or else we wouldn't know the score.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute


EPA Adminstrator Lisa Jackson and President Obama

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson announced today that EPA will regulate greenhouse gases as a dangerous pollutant, which comes as a big boost to perceived US-commitment to the kick-off of Copenhagen COP 15 climate talks.

Because the Senate was not able to pass the greenhouse gas cap-and-trade regulations in time for Copenhagen, the Obama Administration has turned to Plan B to regulate greenhouse gas emissions--having the EPA regulate greenhouse gases from major industrial sources and from tailpipes.

Greenhouse gas emission regulations are expected to be finalized by the EPA in March and would begin to go into effect by May.

Cities and local government agencies will need to closely monitor the new federal EPA development as it will have large impacts on municipal greenhouse gas sources such as power plants, transportation fleets and other large emission sources. Until now, the federal EPA only has provided guidelines and third-party resources to local governments on such issues as greenhouse gas inventories.  

While the Senate still has a few months by which to pass cap and trade before its spring sessions ends in March, the EPA regulatory approach versus Congressional legislation is likely to increase regulatory costs and be "messy," according to Tim Newell, senior adviser at private equity firm US Renewables.

"Having regulations by EPA (versus Congressionally approved cap and trade) raises the costs of high-carbon fuels and power production," said Newell.

Other non-partisan sources such as the Congressional Quarterly claim that EPA regulation of greenhouse gases under The Clean Air Act will be a "blunt instrument" that will cause court challenges and additional red tape for industry, as well as state and local government.

The move by the EPA might also force the Senate to pass cap-and-trade regulations as a less-onerous form of greenhouse gas compliance.

Most importantly, the EPA's move today demonstrates that the US "has teeth" to regulate greenhouse gases, which is more likely to tip Copenhagen toward a successful binding agreement including the US and other nations.

Passage of a successful treaty in Copenhagen would then put more even pressure on the Senate to take action, which presents a situation where the nation might have to comply with both Congressional cap-and-trade and EPA Clean Air Act greenhouse gas regulations. 

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute.


There's carbon in them thar roots!

Just as San Francisco has made commercial and residential composting mandatory and other cities are considering doing so, a worldchanging application for using compost to dramatically increase carbon sequestration in suburban grasslands has been confirmed by the Marin Carbon Project.

Soil carbon sequestration is the process of moving greenhouse-gas causing CO2 from the atmosphere into the soil. After the ocean, soil is the second largest pool of carbon on the planet, with twice the amount of carbon that is in the atmosphere, according to Whendee Silver, a biogeochemist and professor at University of California at Berkeley.

"Healthy grasslands, which make up 30% of global land and 50% of land in California, put a lot of carbon into roots to lock in nutrients," Silver said. The Marin Carbon Project's research is focused on how to increase that natural carbon sequestering process, or restore it, in the case of damaged rangelands.

Silver and others presented the results of research last night that the Marin Carbon Project has been conducting at about two dozen sites in rural West Marin County, about 45 miles north of San Francisco.


The Marin Carbon Project is a collaborative research effort between the University of California, the USDA, the Marin Agricultural Land Trust and Marin Organic (the nation's first county-wide organic label) and The Nicasio Native Grass Ranch.

The project, which is about a year into a three to five-year process, has determined that an increase of 1 metric ton of carbon sequestration per hectare on 50% of California's managed rangelands could sequester 42 million additional metric tons (MMT) of carbon. This is slightly more than 41 MMT of carbon emissions from the California commercial and residential sector's energy use. This increase in carbon sequestration would also offset the 14 MMT of greenhouse gasses produced by livestock.

In order to make our grasslands and grazing lands better carbon sinks, Silver said, "we need to add compost and manure to the soils to help it sequester."

The Marin Carbon project has tested both manure and compost applications throughout dairy ranches, and while are both are effective at soil carbon enrichment, compost is preferred because it is less likely to contaminate land or watersheds, as improperly applied manure can.

Silver said researcher found that the ability of grassland soil to sequester carbon is not correlated with climate or soil type, but rather is directly related to how grasslands and rangelands are maintained. When trees and shrubs are left in grassland areas, for instance, there is 30% extra carbon sequestration.

Adding compost or manure also greatly increases soil carbon sequestration. "The test plots we added compost to retained over 90% of carbon that was added with no significant increase of methane or nitrogen oxides (two other potent greenhouse gases)." Tilling soil, on the other hand, has a negative impact on carbon sequestration, which doesn't bode well for industrial agriculture (which also uses petroleum-based fertilizers as soils inputs) and corn-fed feedlot operations.

The test data from the Marin Carbon Project can now be applied to a more extensive life-cycle and economic analyses. This means that other factors will have to be analyzed such as the total carbon and methane produced by livestock, combined with calculating the greenhouse gases that would have been produced if compost were sent to the landfill.

Other locations performing extensive soil carbon sequestration agricultural and rangeland research include New South Wales in Australia and Barritskov, Denmark.

Despite the lack of discussion in Copenhagen on agriculture and food production in relationship to climate change, the results are encouraging for combatting global change through specific actions in organic agriculture and sustainable food production that benefit regional economies.

San Francisco and other urban areas can use their food scraps to not only enrich their region's agriculture, grazing and dairy production--which strengthens the link between urban and rural food systems--but they can directly offset their carbon footprints. 

The early results from the Marin Carbon Project show that metro-area greenbelts and farming lands now have even greater intrinsic value.

This makes the case even more compelling for containing exurban sprawl around our cities and building smarter and denser communities. By all accounts, increasing protection and stewardship of regional natural resources has benefits that are far greater than most ever knew.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute.


What will the impacts be of the Dubai credit crisis on Masdar City, the famous living sustainability lab being built in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE), with the goal of being a zero-net carbon city?

So far the UAE capital city-state of Abu Dhabi, backed by significant revenues from oil production and collateral from reserves, has escaped the financial panic that has gripped neighboring Dubai. This bodes well for Masdar City, to which Abu Dhabi pledged $15 billion in investments; some are predicting the Dubai domino effect will not stir up dust in Masdar.

Abu Dhabi is looking at Masdar as being an international crucible for renewable energy and other sustainability technologies so that the UAE can make the transition from relying exclusively on fossil fuels to exporting technologies for future low-carbon/ low-water global energy and resource needs.

Masdar, which will have about 55,000 residents when complete before 2020, is notable in that it is serving as a large-scale test bed for new technologies in renewable energy, passive wind cooling, advanced materials design, innovative car-free transportation, water conservation and local food production.

The project is financed by funds through partners such as Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse and is being developed with technology corporations such as General Electric, the anchor tenant in Masdar's Ecoimagination Center.

The Masdar Institute, which started classes this fall, is backed in a cooperative agreement with MIT (The MIT Technology Review is the source above that predicted things will be hunky dory in Masdar despite Dubai's situation).

In terms of financing, The Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company, which is the government entity behind Masdar, announced in late September that it was seeking $600 million over seven years to fund construction of Masdar, where ground was first broken earlier this year. The government reported that it was not seeking an estimated $18 billion to finance the project, a figure that was published in other media reports.

Carbon credits and trading represents another form of project financing for Masdar. Last month Masdar was required by the United Nations to resubmit four out of six its carbon credit schemes that were part of the Clean Development Mechanism program of the Kyoto Protocol under the UN, which will become active in earning credits in June of next year.

Masdar is currently engaged in a wide assortment of R&D, including working with the nation of Spain to test large-scale concentrated PV solar power production in semi-tropical desert conditions. Masdar features some 30 manufacturers of PV and thermal solar products testing more than 40 solar related technologies alone.

With GE, the city is testing smart-grid technologies, including smart appliances, for home energy monitoring and energy conservation, among other technologies.

It seems that Masdar represents a completely different mindset than the 'build it and they will come" approach taken in Dubai.

Instead of Dubai's living-for-today mentality with giant indoor ski slopes and man-made islands built in the desert for jet-setting tourists, Masdar is more about channeling global innovation for both the future of its own nation's economy and the growing demands of the world.

Still, many interested in clean technologies and sustainable cities will be watching Masdar  closely during the next few months to look for signs of how a critical sustainability innovation ecosystem will survive the stress tests of a volatile global financial ecosystem.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute

About the Author

    Warren Karlenzig
Warren Karlenzig, Common Current founder and president, has worked with the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (lead co-author United Nations Shanghai Manual: A Guide to Sustainable Urban Development in the 21st Century, 2011); United Nations Center for Regional Development (training of mayors from 13 Asian nations on city sustainable economic development and technology); provinces of Guizhou and Guangdong, China (urban sustainability master planning and green city standards); the United States White House and Environmental Protection Agency (Eco-Industrial Park planning and Industrial Ecology primer); the nation of South Korea ("New Cities Green Metrics"); The European Union ("Green and Connected Cities Initiative"); the State of California ("Comprehensive Recycling Communities" and "Sustainable Community Plans"); major cities; and the world's largest corporations developing policy, strategy, financing and critical operational capacities for 20 years.

Present and recent clients include the Guangzhou Planning Agency; the Global Forum on Human Settlements; the Shanghai 2010 World Expo Bureau; the US Department of State; the Asian Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability; the David and Lucile Packard Foundation; the non-governmental organization Ecocity Builders; a major mixed-use real estate development corporation; an educational sustainability non-profit; and global corporations. Read more here.

Follow Green Flow on Twitter

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from December 2009 listed from newest to oldest.

November 2009 is the previous archive.

January 2010 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.


Add to Technorati Favorites
Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

Locations of visitors to this page
Powered by Movable Type 4.1