Western MA Tornado Relief: ReBuild Western Massachusetts

Image by Tara Holmes

On June 1st, three tornadoes touched down in western Massachusetts during a surprise series of storms, leaving a wake of destruction and confusion. Massachusetts, not known for tornadoes, is now beginning to rethink state policies surrounding severe weather preparation and emergency response.

ReBuild Western Massachusetts, a program developed by the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) and administered in partnership with the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC), was announced on August 4th and will distribute more than $8 million to help building owners affected by the tornadoes rebuild using energy efficiency practices and renewable energy technologies. Eligible participants include those who can document damage caused by the June 1 storms, and who own buildings in communities in Hampden and Worcester Counties, including: Agawam, Westfield, West Springfield, Springfield, Wilbraham, Monson, Brimfield, Southbridge and Sturbridge.

The program will offer incentives for solar PV and solar thermal systems, as well as for renewable heating and hot water systems. Zero-interest loans and grants for building with energy efficient windows, doors, attic and wall insulation, and heating equipment will be offered to homeowner victims. Later this year, offerings will include energy efficiency and renewable energy assistance for other building owners, including businesses and municipalities. “There is now a package of incentives for these communities to rebuild cleaner, greener and more efficiently than ever before,” said DOER Commissioner Mark Sylvia. “For homeowners and businesses these programs bring significant reductions in energy costs and deep energy efficiency savings. These measures will also cut energy consumption, cut greenhouse gas emissions and reduce our dependence on imported energy sources.”

It is important to note that of the approximately $22 billion Massachusetts spends annually on energy, 80% – or nearly $18 billion – goes out of the state and the country to purchase coal, oil and natural gas from Canada, the Middle East and South America.  ReBuild Western Massachusetts aims to encourage building owners to rebuild using cleaner energy alternatives thereby helping to keep energy sources local while decreasing GHG emissions.

 

Cambridge Energy Alliance PSA!

Click on the title of this entry to see the video!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoY_v3mimak

Thanks to our Graphics intern Chelsea Lane, CEA is now available in cartoon form! With this short clip, our message is clearer than ever; energy efficiency is easy to get started on, and you’ll start saving money quickly. (Don’t you want a vacation somewhere tropical 😉 ?!) Get started right now.

Mt. Tom Station Cleans Up?

Separated Here Only By A Narrow Strip of Water, the Four Corners Power Plant and A Navajo Sheep Herder Represent Two Worlds by The U.S. National Archives

Mt. Tom Station in Holyoke, MA has been a thorn in the sides of local environmentalists for many years.  Sitting on one of the most pristine mountain ranges in western Massachusetts, the coal burning power plant has, according to the Conservation Law Foundation, violated clean air standards thousands of times from 2005 to 2010, despite $55 million worth of pollution-control equipment that was installed from 2007 to 2009.

Now, however, the plant plans to comply with more stringent air-quality standards, install air-monitoring equipment, and hire an outside consultant to correct air pollution problems under a settlement announced by the state Attorney General’s Office. In addition, FirstLight Power Resources, the station’s owners, and GDF Suez North America have agreed to pay a $25,000 penalty to the state of Massachusetts and $70,000 for an education program targeting owners of old wood stoves and wood-fired boilers in the greater Holyoke area.  It’s important to note however that while burning wood remains a common heating and power option for those living in remote areas, it’s not a clean energy source.

The arrangement between the state and Mt. Tom Station settles allegations that Mt. Tom violated clean air standards in 2009 and 2010, yet there is still much to be done and this story is far from unique.  Hundreds of other coal-fired power plants across the U.S. face identical concerns, namely outdated design and poor oversight. It’s thereby critical that the EPA along with local and state environmental agencies increase monitoring and random site checks on all coal-fired power stations to ensure safety and liability until they can be brought offline.

Unfortunately however, in today’s world of increasing energy demand, fossil fuels like coal remain a standard power producer. Growing sectors such as natural gas are advertised as a “clean” domestic alternative to coal, but that too comes at a large price with hydrolic fracturing, or fracking, leading to many questionable health and environmental concerns. Until the clean energy revolution makes a cheaper, mainstream splash in the U.S., stories like Mt. Tom will remain all too common.

Sink or swim? City of Cambridge Plans for Climate Adaptation

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.

Google Pushes for Solar Panels

Google, a company that continues to invest in and push for clean energy technology, has recently announced its newest, and potentially biggest, capital venture: funding a no-cost installation solar panel program for homeowners.  While already investing in other mammoth clean energy projects across the US, such as a $100 million investment in the world’s biggest wind farm, the company is now creating a $280 million fund to finance SolarCity‘s residential solar projects. Google essentially aims to erase any initial economic burden thereby moving more rapidly towards installation.  Given many homeowners today struggle with the up-front costs of putting up solar panels on their roofs, even with state-funded rebate programs and incentives, such a program comes at an opportune time.

Of course, Google also expects to make plenty of return on its investment.  Rick Needham, Google’s Director of Green Business Operations and Strategy, believes that SolarCity is “attractive enough for us to invest given the risks of the project.” Furthermore, Google will reap a 30% federal tax investment credit for installed solar systems. In addition, SolarCity’s CEO Lyndon Rive expects Google’s funding will allow the company to install between 7,000 and 9,000 new rooftop systems. “This is one of the first corporate investments into distributed solar. Historically, most of the investments have been made by the banks. These have a limited amonts of capital that they can distribute, which is a constraint for solar adoption,” says Rive.

SolarCity hopes Google investment will encourage other corporate investment in the solar panel market. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, less than 0.1% of U.S. homes have rooftop solar panels today, however, that number is expected to increase to 2.4% by 2020.  Investments like Google’s are important market drivers in the demand for clean energy and renewable technologies and it will be interesting to see how much of an impact Google continues to have in this arena.  Countries like Germany, for example, have already pioneered the rapid installation of resident solar panels through widespread government subsidies and incentives and China is not far behind.  The US, however, continues to shift between the push for cleaner energy and our continued reliance on fossil fuels.  Corporate investments, such as Google’s, may be just the message the US needs in order to help kick-start a sluggish national clean energy economy.

Freiburg’s Eco-Villages

Rieselfeld Center

Two areas of Freiburg have been developed as eco-villages — Rieselfeld and Vauban.  The eco-villages showcase integrated planning based on principles of sustainability.

Rieselfeld, the larger of the two, was built on land that was formerly used for sewage disposal.  It lies toward the western outskirts of Freiburg.  There are about 4,500 apartments in buildings of 3 to 5 stories housing around about 10,000 people.  Most of the buildings are built to a “low energy” standard for heating requirements, which we are told is about 65 kwh/square meter (in Europe they use kilowatt-hours as a basic energy metric in the way we use BTUs).

Solar panels and green roofs appear throughout the development.  The ecumenical Maria Magdelena Church has a solar PV system on its roof.  The revenue from the feed-in tariffs and electricity savings is used to support solar energy projects in Ethiopia.

Virtually all the buildings in Reiselfeld are connected to the district heating plant located in the development.  The plant runs a co-generation system to produce electricity and heat and is fueled by wood pellets produced from a forest certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.

Rieselfeld is adjacent to large areas of open space.  Also, open greenspaces have been incorporated in between buildings and arranged in a way to encourage interaction among residents.

In terms of car dependency, Rieselfeld appears to be typical of Germany, although that means there are still a lot of bicycles and walkers.  There are bicycle paths and bicycle friendly streets throughout.  A tram line comes into the development, making it easy to access the city center.

In contrast, Vauban is a little more “alternative” in feeling.  The buildings are set closer together and vegetation around and on the buildings seem more unkempt.  We also noticed a lot of children in the development.  The eco-village has about 5,500 residents.

Vauban is built on a former French military base.  When the Berlin Wall fell and it was clear the French would be leaving, citizens started thinking about the future of the area.  The citizens advocated for an affordable residential area.  We were told that citizens were much more involved in the planning of Vauban than in Rieselfeld.  Freiburg’s 1986 climate protection plan influenced the eco-friendly design. 

The plan for Vauban retained many of the large trees that were on the former military base and reused some of the buildings.

There are examples of buildings that meet Passivhaus standards (15 kwh/square meter).  Passivhaus is a private energy efficiency standard developed in Germany and used by some developers and followed by some cities.  The first multi-family building to meet Passivhaus standards in Germany is located in Vauban.

Geo-exchange heat pumps are commonly used.  All the buildings are connected to a neighborhood district heating plant, except the multi-family building that was the first to meet Passivhaus standards.  That building was intended to be connected to its own biogas plant that was to be fed by sewage from the building.  However, the biogas plant was not feasible.

Vauban Cogen

In Vauban, cars are less encouraged than in Rieselfeld.  No car parking is included at or adjacent to residences, except for visitor spaces.  Residents who own cars are obligated to purchase spaces in one of the common garages (we saw two).  The garages have large solar PV arrays.  A city tram line goes through the middle of Vauban.

Waste management practices are less conspicuous.   Recyclable and compostable materials are collected separately from trash.  We were told that there is a system whereby residents can pay lower rates for trash disposal for recycling and composting more and using worm farms.  Trash is commonly incinerated in Germany.

Across the street from Vauban is a small Plus Energy housing development, called the Freiburg Solar Settlement.  Architect Rolf Disch designed multifamily homes and small commercial buildings to produce more energy than they consume.  It’s the first and only such development in Germany, we were told.  The buildings are modular units that are mostly pre-fabricated and are finished on site with siding and details.  The roofs are completely covered with solar PV panels, which also form long eaves to provide shading in summer and allow sunlight to reach the south side windows in winter.

Plus Energyhouse

Rieselfeld and Vauban seem like large leaps for most Americans.  But for communities like Cambridge where multi-family residences are the norm, they seem possible.  But a key factor that enabled their development in Freiburg is that the City government has more land and public housing under its control.  So it is a lot easier for the projects to be planned and sited than in Cambridge.

A New Kind of Sustainability Workshop

Cross-posted from the Sustainable Business Leader Program blog.

On May 23rd the Sustainable Business Leader Program, Cambridge Local First, and the Cambridge Energy Alliance hosted a new kind of business sustainability workshop:  a business-to-business conversation featuring the Cambridge Brewing Company, a handful of business-centered sustainability services, and a score of small business representatives curious about their own green options.

By having many of the players in the room at the same time, small Cambridge businesses were able to comfortably learn how they could make their businesses more environmentally friendly while saving valuable natural resources and money.

The workshop featured a presentation by Phil “Brewdaddy” Bannatyne, owner of Cambridge Brewing Company, who highlighted the steps that his business took to “go green,” including much praise for the Sustainable Business Leader Program, and shared insights into the challenges and benefits of doing so.

After the presentations, business representatives had the opportunity to meet and hear from various organizations about the many programs and incentives that are available to them to make their own journey of sustainability and energy efficiency easy, rewarding, and fun.  Arrow Paper, New Generation Energy, Prism Consulting, Save that Stuff and ThinkLite were on-hand to showcase their services and answer questions during the networking portion.

Attendees (and organizers) enjoyed this informative and relaxed night, and folks left with a clear understanding of how and why to green their small business, after enjoying conversation, food, and free local brews.

Please browse the links throughout this article to make use of the resources presented that evening.


The Sustainable Business Leader  Program, a program of the Sustainable Business Network of Greater Boston, supports locally owned independent businesses in improving their environmental business practices, reducing their carbon footprint, and saving money. Visit http://www.sustainablebusinessleader.org to learn more.

Fostering Sustainable Behavior

Tara Holmes

This past Friday, I attended a workshop lead by Dr. Doug McKenzie-Mohr entitled “An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing: Fostering Sustainable Behavior.”  As someone who’s personally very intrigued by the oftentimes overlooked (and dare I say critical) link between our everyday psychology and environmental sustainability, I was eager to attend. What I learned was both enlightening and somewhat anticipated.

In brief, humans, at least the populations Dr. McKenzie-Mohr has studied, tend to default to the easiest common denominator of behavior when it comes to environmentalism.  Of course, this isn’t to say there aren’t outlier personalities who go above and beyond the “green” call, but overall, unless regulated to do so, or cajoled by neighbors or friends, most people will resort to the path of least resistance. Knowing this intrinsic behavior trend, Dr. McKenzie-Mohr was able to extrapolate on how to best create systems whereby these same individuals could easily do their part to create a more sustainable, healthy and balanced planet.

One interesting example is recycling.  Initially in the 1980s, recycling was seen as a confusing burden to the majority of consumers.  Today however, many people view recycling as commonplace and most US cities have recycling facilities in operation.  Now, to what extent these materials actually are recycled is another policy issue altogether (Cambridge has historically recycled at a rate of 35% and now with added single-stream recycling, that’s expected to increase by 10-25% in recycling tons). Even so, the mere act of recycling, sorting out plastic from paper and glass from cardboard is today viewed as a commonplace action that requires little thought.  So, how did this behavior change happen?  Interestingly, Dr. McKenzie-Mohr cites community influence and social norms coupled with municipality engagement.  If a person sees their neighbors, family members or friends recycling, they may begin to question their own behavior and adapt accordingly.

Energy efficiency and green energy demand is another example.  Today, consumers have a multitude of product options from CFLs via utility rebates to energy-saving Energy Star appliances, but, as Dr. McKenzie-Mohr pointed out, there remains a disconnect between awareness of the the product’s existence, where to get the rebate for said product and product installation. These barriers may seem trivial, but they can lead to significant impacts, both environmentally and programmatically.  During the workshop, Dr. McKenzie-Mohr cited an example of a user who purchased a low-flow shower head only to have it sit in a drawer due to installation confusion.  It’s thereby key to not only increase awareness of energy efficiency products, but to educate the consumer on proper follow through behavior and maintenance resources to ensure the true benefit of the product is achieved.

In brief, sustainable behavior impediments can be boiled down to the following barriers: commitment, affordability, convenience, and incentives. The Cambridge Energy Alliance, like many local and national energy efficiency organizations, strives to reach consumers and the community via outreach and education and aims to address each of the mentioned barriers, which is a key first step. The critical next step is up to the consumer: application and follow through.  Only then do they – and the planet – reap the true benefits of increased sustainable behavior.

A New Lens on Environmental Change

Climate, Mind, and Behavior Program

Bringing people together from a wide range of fields to make new strides in environmental change

While the environmental movement is nothing new, dating back almost a century, the approach of activists, organizations and policy makers is continuously evolving. The Garrison Institute is taking measures to contribute to this evolution by creating the Climate, Mind, and Behavior Program. The CMB program looks to combine a number fields to solve environmental issues.

The Garrison Institute holds a CMB Symposium where leading scientists and thinkers from the fields of environmental advocacy, neuro-economics, behavioral and evolutionary economics, psychology, social networking, policy-making, investing and social media together to focus on new approaches to reducing emissions on a large scale. The event has been held in March annually since 2010.

The program approach is to use recent developments in understanding human behavior and human nature combined with the fields of psychology, evolutionary theory and apply it to environmental and climate change issues. The goal is to come out with new tactics to tackling environmental issues across the board, from reducing emissions to clean water, and everything in between.

Another important aspect of the CMB program, in conjunction with the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), is the envisioned “behavioral wedge.” A goal for individuals to make simple behavioral changes to eliminate a giga-ton of greenhouse gas emissions. The “behavioral wedge” looks to make an early difference because regulatory changes, investment, research, and other new approaches take some time to implement. This CMB/NRDC research hopes to provide for progress to be made during the lull as other initiatives from the CMB program take shape.

By aligning climate change solutions with the way people think and behave, the Garrison Institute looks to produce much more effective and efficient solutions to solve our environmental problems. To track progress, The Garrison Institute’s website keeps a blog for updates on the CMB program, as well as a wealth of other resources and information related to the project.

LEDs on Inman & Obama’s praise for Philly

A guest blog by one of CEA’s Spring interns, Allison Simon:

Think back to your first encounter with today’s sustainability movement—what were you introduced to? For many people, including myself, I believe the answer would be the same: Compact Fluorescent Light bulbs (CFLs). These light bulbs represented everything that the sustainability leaders wanted the movement to stand for: ease, cost savings, and little difference to the previous energy guzzling options. The most important aspect about these light bulbs was that they worked—residents started to go out and buy energy efficient light bulbs and began to see a difference in their utility bills. Even though that change may have happened in your home and office years ago, light bulbs are far from passé.

With the addition of Light Emitting Diodes, or LEDs, into the marketplace there is an even more energy efficient light option available. However, LEDs do not get the visibility or attention they deserve—especially when it is undeniable that they are the future of energy efficient lighting. On March 10, Cambridge proudly announced that they were jumping on the LED train—and in a far bigger way than just living rooms and kitchens.

On March 3, the high pressure sodium light fixtures on Inman Street, between Massachusetts Avenue and Broadway, were replaced with LED fixtures. With the help of PB Americas consultant, these new light fixtures are customized for Inman’s sidewalk and street width, while minimizing light exposure on the front lawns of residents. These new lights use almost 50% less energy than their predecessors and match the City’s traffic signals, which have used LEDs since 2003.

Cambridge is onto something great. On April 6, President Obama held a town hall meeting just outside of Philadelphia at a large-scale wind turbine manufacturer to discuss this country’s energy future. Recently, the President proposed an ambitious goal of “generating 80 percent of our electricity from clean energy sources by 2035,” and went to Philadelphia to promote this goal because it is a city on the forefront of energy efficiency. Through the organization Greenworks Philadelphia, the city is in the middle of converting 58,000 yellow and green traffic signals to LEDs while replacing 27,000 LED red lights that have been in use for a number of years. This simple change will save the city approximately “$1 million in electric costs each year,” a number we can all appreciate.

With the new LED fixtures on Inman Street, and all of the other sustainable measures being put into place across the city, Cambridge might be the next stop on President Obama’s campaign to highlight cities who are taking great steps towards energy efficiency. All of this press because lights have continued to play a significant role in energy efficiency in this country—starting to make you rethink those inefficient bulbs still shining in your bedroom, no?