Author Archives: Dean Fogarasi

Meet the Interns, pt. 2: Dana

Posted on by
Reply

 

Poster child: Dana Rubin shows off her silly side at work

One of our busier interns this summer has surely been Youth Liaison Dana Rubin.  She leads an extensive effort to introduce ideas about energy efficiency to young people in Cambridge.  Dana doesn’t play teacher here though–the idea is to get the right sort of educational materials into the right hands.

Ever since May, Dana’s been researching and compiling ideas for lesson plans, which present concepts related to energy use in bite-sized and fun ways.  The lessons are geared towards kids age 9-13 and are very much hands-on or crafty.  In one deceptively simple lesson, the children build paper pinwheels and stick them outside to twirl in the wind.  At the most basic level, these toys are no different from our modern day giant wind turbines (minus the generators, of course) as a stationary device to intercept wind energy .  The connections would then be drawn in discussion between wind and wind-generated electricity and why wind is considered a “clean” source.  In a capstone lesson of sorts, kids get their detective caps on and become “energy sleuths,” applying what they’ve learned about energy efficient practices to find where improvements can be made at home or in school.

It’s through a set of connections between Dana and duly receptive local leaders that give life to her lesson plans.  She started by meeting with program directors from Cambridge’s five youth centers: Area IV, Moore, Russell, Gately and Frisoli and has also met with Robert Lightbody (Director of Programming for all the Cambridge Youth Programs) to try to coordinate the youths’ energy efficiency activities and possibly have a competition between centers on who can reduce energy use more.  Furthermore, Dana has met with Kristen Von Hoffman, Sustainability Manager of Cambridge Public Schools, to help her get a program started this fall.  Lastly, efforts are being made to reach out to youths in low-income communities through Boy Scout troops.   Dana hopes that her efforts will have a lasting effect–that, by introducing the right materials to the right people, programs to teach kids about energy efficiency will perpetuate.

Update – September 7, 2011: Download and view the final lesson plans (PDF)

Meet the Interns, pt. 1: Ilona and Ben

Posted on by
Reply

This is the first installment in a series of featurettes on our current interns’ summer projects.

Ilona Shmulevich in action!

At CEA, our overarching aim is to spread better energy efficiency to buildings in the city of Cambridge.   We target this goal with what can effectively be described in four steps:  First, we encourage residents to sign up for a free energy audit through MassSave.  Second, an auditor visit is scheduled and carried out wherein they perform a full assessment of a building’s energy usage, providing a list of recommended improvements.  Third, the residents learn about available rebates and decide what improvements they are willing to invest in.  Finally, a MassSave or independently-appointed contractor comes and does all the installations, leaving the residents with increased building performance and predictions for fuller wallets in months and years to come.

When the program *doesn’t* work as smoothly as all that is described above, we have a plan for that, too.  That’s where our research interns Ilona Shmulevich and Ben Baldwin step into the scene.

Ilona and Ben have designed and launched an online survey to gather feedback on the effectiveness of the program–both in terms of participation and realized energy cost savings.  If you’re a Cantabridgian who’s ever expressed any interest with us in getting audited, there’s a good chance you’ve been emailed about this survey!  Ilona is interested in uncovering where so-called  “service gaps” lie–that is, in what ways do CEA and MassSave need to be more helpful?  Ben is hunting for data from participating homes and businesses on their energy savings–information which has so far been hard to obtain. Ben is also seeking out information on peoples’ experiences with financing their energy efficiency improvements.

Ben and Ilona will present us with important findings by summer’s end and help us take our services to the next level!

Stay tuned for more Intern Featurettes in weeks to come.

Sink or swim? City of Cambridge Plans for Climate Adaptation

Posted on by
Reply

If you’re a habitual reader of the environmentalist news stream, as I am, you notice that much of the discussion about climate change pertains to the urgent need for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. It’s a focus that’s well-warranted given both the huge scale and urgent timing of emissions reductions that are necessary to lessen (or ‘mitigate’) the amount of warming that occurs and avoid the severest impacts.

The flip-side of the climate science picture is the undoubtedly gloomy understanding that a certain amount of future warming is unavoidable regardless of how quickly emissions are drawn down. It’s in the spirit of realism and responsibility—not defeatism—then, that people are beginning to think about how we should prepare ourselves for the coming climatic changes. In the lingo of climate policy thinkers, this type of planning is called ‘adaptation.’

Low-lying areas along the Esplanade are at risk for more storm flooding as global sea levels rise

Serious adaptation planning is starting to move from an academic exercise to one that various levels of government are undertaking. Large cities—particularly ones situated on coastlines—have led the way. New York, San Francisco, Seattle and Miami, among others, have set the adaptation wheels in motion.

The City of Boston is following in their footsteps; in their recently published climate plan, they made it a goal to “give adaptation the same priority as mitigation,” and mentioned that a comprehensive adaption study is in the works. The State of Massachusetts, under the 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act, established an Advisory Committee of experts and stakeholders to report on and make recommendations regarding adaptation to the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Kathleen Baskin, manager of this committee, informed me that their first report, provisionally entitled the Massachusetts Climate Adaptation Plan, is now under review and should be published by late summer. The report will include a qualitative assessment of the state’s vulnerability to climate change and provide strategies for response under several predicted climate scenarios.

Last week, I sat down with John Bolduc, an environmental planner for the City of Cambridge, to learn about how the city is moving forward with adaptation. When the city began climate planning in 1999 with a resolution to join ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection program, attention was squarely on the potential for reducing Cambridge’s carbon footprint—that is, mitigation. And until the past couple of years, it remained this way, whether for fear that adaptation would divert attention and resources from mitigation or hope that civilization would be on course to avert crisis by now. Last year, Cambridge (in addition to Boston) was one of the inaugural cities in ICLEI’s new Climate Resilient Communities program.

The first step in the process is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, which involves analyzing climatic threats to Cambridge in detail. The Climate Protection Action Committee (CPAC), which advises the City Manager on climate change issues, presented some general vulnerability findings to him last year in a recommendation for a full assessment. Sea level rise—which is currently expected to be 1 to 2 meters by 2100—presents a major risk to Cambridge in the form of storm surge flooding from Boston Harbor. In the present climate, the Charles River Dam protects Cambridge against coastal storms that have more than one percent chance of happening in any year. By the middle of the century, the Charles River Dam and other coastal defenses could be overwhelmed regularly by sea level rise and coastal storms. A scenario involving sea level rise of 2 feet, a moderate estimate, and a current 100 year storm would see the Charles River Dam and other coastal barriers overtopped. In addition to sea level rise, direct effects on public health are expected—more hot summer days and nights (made worse by the urban heat island), increased ground-level ozone (smog) formation, and greater risk for insect-borne diseases are just a sampling of concerns articulated by CPAC. According to Mr. Bolduc, City Manager Healy has already acted on CPAC’s recommendation and the City will be starting a vulnerability assessment this summer.

Looking forward, Mr. Bolduc emphasized that potential adaptation measures shouldn’t be looked at in isolation—that is to say, adaptation strategies are not only about protecting citizens and infrastructure from climatic hazards. For example, tree-planting and ‘green roofs,’ which can help buildings stay cool in the summer, are also helpful for air quality—a ‘co-benefit’ of action. A city must be looked at holistically for the interconnected social-ecological-economic system that it is. The bottom line is that climate change adaptation planning is really a continuation of what the City already does to reduce and manage risks to the community from a range of potential threats. In the past we could count on a relatively stable climate, but now we have to expect conditions will change. To Mr. Bolduc, the goal is to make Cambridge a more “resilient” city.

A New Way to LEED Our Communities

Posted on by
Reply

25th at Venable (circa 2005)(cropped) by john.murden What does ‘green building’ mean?  How can principles of sustainability be implemented in building design and construction and be certified as such?  These were questions that the U.S. Green Building Council (www.usgbc.org) dealt with when they rolled out their first Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) guidelines in the 1990s.  Although LEED has received criticism for not incorporating measured building performance in its accreditation service, their guidelines have evolved over the years and are regarded as the leader in the world of green building certification [1].  Warm Home Cool Planet contributor John Bolduc reports that here in Cambridge–one of the nation’s most accomplished cities in sustainable practices–64 buildings have either been registered with LEED or accredited.

But for all the usefulness a green building certification system brings with it, it still doesn’t get at the need for sustainable developments on a slightly larger scale–that of a neighborhood or development project.  After all, so much of our lives–and environmental impacts–are tied in with the nature of our neighborhoods.  Things like transportation needs, population density, recreation space, air quality, and energy use are interrelated.   This is what LEED’s newest volume of wisdom is all about.  Known as LEED-ND (for “neighborhood development”), the set of guidelines and certification scheme has come out of a collaboration between the USGBC, National Resources Defense Council and the Congress for the New Urbanism.  Sounds like a lovely idea, right?  But in practice, not all locales have the luxury of cutting-edge environmental planning and certainly not all developers want to put the time and money into comprehensively green projects.  That’s why I am so excited that NRDC just released “A Citizen’s Guide to LEED for Neighborhood Development.”

The Citizen’s Guide, which may be downloaded here, is just that–a very readable document intended to empower people to evaluate neighborhoods, whether they already exist or are only on paper.  A wide swath of sustainability principles are embodied in LEED-ND, including “smart growth,” transportation, pedestrian-friendly streets and architecture, affordable housing, protection of natural resources, and climate change considerations.  The guide includes a handy checklist so that anyone can get a rough idea of how well a neighborhood fares.  Optionally, one can also try tabulating points to estimate what its LEED-ND score would be (in the formal certification assessment).  Or, one can simply use the guide to ask better questions at a town meeting or push for more informed zoning policies–it’s all up to you!

[1] Keim, Brandon. “LEED the Way.” Stanford Social Innovation Review 8.2 (2010): 66-71.

Fast Times at Cap&Trade High

Posted on by
Reply

Governor Chris Christie

You may not know this, but “Cap and Trade” isn’t just a buzz-phrase for something many environmentalists would like to see the U.S. adopt for regulation of greenhouse gases–it’s been a reality for 10 northeastern states since 2009. With the announcement of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s plan to withdraw from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) this year, the hot-button issue of Cap and Trade has again come to the surface of environmental news sphere.  Cap and Trade, the market-based mechanism that many call for to help steer our energy production from fossil fuels to renewables, has been employed under a cooperative agreement called RGGI (“reggie”).  RGGI is a joint venture by the New England states along with New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, to limit emissions from electricity plants and collect revenues for member states through auctions and sales of CO2 emission allowances.   These revenues are intended to be re-invested by the states for things like efficiency improvements, renewable energy installations, and consumer financing, although NY, NJ, and NH have used a portion of their proceeds toward their state debts. Overall, about 80 percent of the $860 million collected so far have been strategically invested since the first auctions were held in ’08.

Here in Massachusetts, about 80% of our $123 million windfall has been put toward utility-run efficiency improvement programs, while around 20% have gone to state-run initiatives including the multi-faceted Green Communities program, which was featured here on Warm Home Cool Planet back in February.  Other states have created “Green Jobs” programs, as in New York.  According to RGGI’s own assessment report released this February, investments in efficiency and renewables have created appreciable direct and indirect economic benefits, along with expected reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.  As a minor caveat, there have not been, to my knowledge, any independent studies yet evaluating RGGI’s effect on either the economy or emissions.

So, in light of what seems like progress for RGGI member states, Christie’s decision to end his state’s participation by the year’s end has received plenty of criticism.  Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut was among those disappointed, stating “Governor Christie’s decision…reflects the kind of policymaking that must change if we are to move forward as a nation.”  Christie’s explanation for the decision does, on the face of it, take a pro-environmental stance, as he claims New Jersey will be able to achieve emission reductions progress and job creation through its own forthcoming policies, including preventing new coal-fired plants from being built.  The decision to withdraw isn’t quite final, however, as environmentalists plan to mount a legal challenge.  Whatever ends up happening with New Jersey’s RGGI saga, don’t expect regional Cap and Trade arrangements to go by the wayside, as Politico’s Darren Sammuelsohn explains.  And if the EPA sets nation-wide emissions caps for electricity plants, RGGI just might serve as a template for other regions to form their own carbon markets.