turning the negawatt into marketable securities

•June 9, 2010 • Leave a Comment

finally 30 years after amory lovins introduced the idea of the negawatt and the non-use based energy resource, we have the oppty to execute that vision. 

for years we only had one model: the ESCO…which had limited adoption. last year we saw the roll-out of one of the first next gen models: PACE.  this year we see continued innovation with several new models including the eePPA.

download the new equilibrium capital report on energy efficiency market oppties, size of market, and emerging finance models.

energy efficiency: monetizing the negawatt

coming soon: the public policy white paper examining the leading energy efficiency leading legislation and states.

the challenging next 12 months

•June 8, 2010 • Leave a Comment

the fed chair\’s econ outlook…slow steady challenges

this FEB/MAR/APRIL you could feel the optimism in the air.  wall street activity & the dow “said” it was all looking good.
the on-the-street reality is somewhat different:  stubborn un-employment, continued mixed picture in housing, caution in consumer spending, continued productivity + slack in manufactiuring capacity due to 2005-7 ramp ups…and outside of the “money center banks”, we have banking instability & credit tightness.   state revenue gaps are next issue.
in pulsing CEOs, i’ve seen a few threads:
-   in manufacturing and in construction, capacity slack and desire to preserve key employee skills is driving below cost bidding.
-   gov’t related work is still a dominate source of work
-   deep concerns about access to credit in “normal projects”…banks are just now re-entering…prompting companies to think through how “they bring their own financing to projects…”
-   cash mgmt still upper most on their minds
several huge questions:
-   where & what do you invest in with “confidence”?
-   where will job growth come from?  what societal implications are there from the systematic un-employment?
-   implications of a “slow” credit economy, especially for the small biz sector and construction/infrastructure projects? 

energy efficiency as a form of generation capacity

•May 14, 2010 • Leave a Comment

equilibrium capital group just released the first of two documents on energy efficiency.

released today as part of our Sustainability Investment Reports” is “Energy Efficiency, Turning Negawatts into Marketable Securities.”

the 2nd paper co-written with a leading think tank, due end of may, will be address the public policy of ee; it looks at state by state level analysis of best practices in regulations, legislation & policy to scale energy efficiency based power resources.

info@eq-cap.com : ask for the ee white paper

america’s “dominance” in green energy

•May 14, 2010 • Leave a Comment

two good articles on energy industry policies outside the US.  they go to the issue of US competitiveness in this sector & examples of national level public policy.  we are watching our lead in green hollowed out: china in wind turbines & solar, brazil in bio-fuels (?), eV (?), low carbon transportation/rail (?)…
first article on vchina’s policies:  www.greenleapforward.com/2010/03/05/in-it-to-win-how-china-is-developing-its-clean-energy-economy-through-markets-finance-and-infrastrucuture/

second article on china, spain and germany policies:  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/03/pdf/out_of_running.pdf

REDD and the economics of tree based carbon

•May 4, 2010 • Leave a Comment

http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/about/pifs/symposia/fcfs/index.html

a great set of presentations and articles on forest based carbon.  one positive aspect of COP15 was the inclusion of forest carbon (REDD) into the carbon protocols.

one MBA at a time

•April 9, 2010 • Leave a Comment

http://www.sustainablebusinessoregon.com/columns/2010/04/tomorrows_sustainable_business_leaders_need_a_better_mba.html

china — playing possum on renewable energy and carbon

•April 6, 2010 • Leave a Comment

Who said this on September 10, 2009 ‘We should see scientific and technological innovation as an important pillar and make greater effort to develop new industries of strategic importance. Science and technology is a powerful engine of economic growth . . . We will make [our] country [one] of innovation. . . We will accelerate the development of a low-carbon economy and green economy so as to gain an advantageous position in the international industrial competition.’

lets not get confused between china’s position on “climate change & carbon” at COP 15 with what they are doing in their economy.

•While the European Union is aiming to produce 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, and the U.S. Congress considers adopting a 20 percent renewable electricity standard by the same year, China produced fully 16 percent of its electricity from hydropower and wind power alone by the end of 2009—numbers that will increase over the next decade. Nonfossil fuel sources are expected to account for as much as 30 percent of China’s overall power supply by 2020. The country expects to meet a big portion of this new market by building seven wind megabases of at least 10 GW each strategically sited across the country. Supported by a wind energy feed-in tariff of 7-9 cents per kwh, and is considering a similar program for solar energy.

•City and provincial governments are creating low-carbon development zones to catalyze clean-energy technology manufacturing. In these regions, clean-energy industries are the backbone of economic development, creating jobs through innovation, manufacturing, and assembly activities. [ Baoding in Hebei province, Tianjin municipality, Wuhan city in Hubei province, The ‘solar belt’ of cities found throughout Jiangsu province. ] The hope is that this type of cluster-based approach to economic development can lead to higher rates of innovation and entrepreneurship and better wages.

•China’s Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) targeted three technologies: 2-3 MW wind turbines; High-voltage electricity transmission technologies;& Energy savings technologies.

•China already produces a third of the world’s solar panels. It is currently the world’s leading supplier of solar PV panels and solar hot water heaters, and until recently more than 90 percent of Chinese-made solar PV panels were shipped overseas for export markets.

•China Investment Corp. (CIC), China’s sovereign wealth fund is aggressively investing in clean energy: In November 2009, it announced investments of $400 million in China Longyuan Power, China’s largest wind energy generator, and $700 million in GCL-Poly, a diversified energy company specializing in cogeneration, wind, and polysilicon production. In the same month CIC also invested $1.6 billion in AES, a U.S.-headquartered global utility with one of the largest foreign operations in China, including investments in hydro and wind power projects.

•The China Energy Conservation Investment Corporation (CECIC), China’s version of a “green bank” plans to reach total assets of ~$15 billion in energy efficiency, renewable energy & pollution controls by 2012.

•National energy efficiency plan: 20% decrease in energy intensity from 2005 to 2010. “One major national energy conservation program that sets energy efficiency standards for the top 1,000 energy consuming enterprises in China, achieved its stated goal of reducing energy use by 100 million tons of coal equivalent two years ahead of its 2010 target date. In the process of fulfilling this target, some $7.3 billion in energy efficiency technologies & measures was invested in 2007, and another $13.2 billion was invested in 2008.”

Finally, approximately $100 billion of the $586 billion economic stimulus package China implemented in 2008 is dedicated to building transmission lines and railways. China already leads the world in ultrahigh-voltage grid transmission technology—its line between Shanxi and Hubei boasts the highest capacity in the world and is able to transmit 1,000 kilovolts over 400 miles. China is also embarking on the largest railway expansion in history and plans to spend almost $300 billion expanding its railway network from 48,000 miles today to 75,000 miles in 2020. Of this, 8,000 miles will be comprised of high-speed, long-distance rail. China is poised to have the world’s largest network for intracity urban rail transit. Eleven cities currently have urban rail routes totaling 520 miles. By 2015 approximately 1,300 miles of railway lines will be laid and operational in 19 cities.

[ source: Center for American Progress white paper ]

• Net net: we see execution on all fronts

 (1) Industrial and public policy (laws, regs & gov’t) + investment strategy & industrial development (business & capital) = execution with direction

 (2) building the next generation of infrastructure & industry: Renewable energy infrastructure, renewable energy industry, low carbon transportation, & energy efficiency “culture”

(3) can “new urbanization be far behind”…in fact china is executing the concept of eco-districts

where is our answer to this: “FDR’s new deal” meets “Kennedy’s apollo man-on-moon.”

allianz research on ESG and long term portfolio risk

•March 24, 2010 • Leave a Comment

http://www.responsible-investor.com/home/article/risklab/

more data on the implications of use of ESG factors on long term risk reduction in portfolio selection/mgmt — considering social + environ in corporate performance does matter.

energy efficiency, the practical revolution

•March 22, 2010 • 1 Comment

this week, our friends at jeld wen won the EPA energy star “partner of the year” recognizing their leadership on the front lines of energy efficiency. [congrats! to them]

windows & doors aren’t sexy, but they’re practical technologies with tangible impact on ee. DoE & the secr have turned their focus to simple ee measures + innovative financial instruments (now viewed to be as important an innovation as technology) in order to scale implementation.

Financial innovation as a catalyst for scaling sustainability

•March 21, 2010 • 2 Comments

last week was 5th week and final class of my kellogg sustainable finance class. the thesis of the class is that “financial innovation” is as much a catalyst for the scaling of sustainability and impact, as the traditional notions of “innovation” (products & technology).

it’s been a thrill developing & teaching this class. we’ve introduced the students to the many many investment funds and asset classes that are employing ESG and climate change factors in their fund investment strategies…from real estate funds, to timber funds, to hedge funds, to public equities portfolios, to private equity, to the pioneers in wind/renewables project development. we exposed the students to a world of sustainability investment beyond “cleantech VC.”we’ve given the students an exposure to some of the world’s leading fund managers in their respective asset categories, many of whom pioneered their field and are now managing $100M’s in their portfolios.

one insight i got was how important it was to not only provide the students with access to these leaders, but also to capture the IP in their dialogue…it made me realize the need to embed a facebook or blog like function in the class as a medium of dialogue and “thought logging” between the students and the speakers.

the students had a final project: they developed and presented their ideas for a fund or financial instrument focused on sustainability trends, outlining the investment thesis, the returns model, the target investment returns, the targeted investor type…these 4 teams developed very real ideas that ezach had real world money manager oppty.  one team is pretty serious about taking this project and turning it into reality…a hard asset fund targeted at distributed water assets.

another one of the equilibrium capital group team members started his class last week, teaching the same thesis at U.Michigan Ross School.  one class at a time…we’re making our small dent…and maybe finding that one passionate new associate each year.

china, the dichotomy of growth & sustainability

•March 21, 2010 • Leave a Comment

our good friend, doug lawrence, a pioneer in green real estate development, ex of JP Morgan, was just in china this last week at a rutgers university conference…he sends us these thoughts on the many layers of complexity in china…the market demand to meet internal growth needs, the public policy for environmental protection, sustainability and re-use, the realities of trying to balance both, the accelerating pace, the implications for gobal competitiveness and our US sense of awareness…

 —————————

Subject: Doug Lawrence: 5SGC in China: Key Learning Points-Blog #2 Enjoy Friday March 19, 2010 Today was a look at the heavy industrialization of China and the practical application of the law in doing business as a non-citizen in China. Most of the big industries, such as steel, are state owned enterprises. Today we visited Bao Steel, the 3rd largest in the world by output. At its peak, it generated 34 million tons annually most of which was consumed for domestic use. China has used far in excess of this amount as it industrializes. The Bao Steel campus is about the size of Macao and employs 53,000 people at all of its facilities. It even has its own hotel. It produces steel for the domestic manufacture of autos, appliances and construction. There is green space everywhere. It is important to note that while the plant certainly has a huge environmental impact, the Chinese are trying to reduce its environmental footprint. The plant is located near the ocean and on a river. Its iron ore dust and shavings are everywhere. Bao Steel claims to recycle 97% of the water it uses. That claim could not be verified but it’s clear the Chinese want to reduce the plant’s environmental harm. Clearly evident are other environmental impacts in the sludge and muck on shore and the steamy air pollution hovering over the plant and district. I had to wear a face mask to reduce any impact on breathing. Policy is moving toward green. Efforts are being made, but there are impediments to adoption, primarily the speed at which the country is being industrialized. Yet, I am constantly told and can verify how the government is more concerned about the environment. It will be interesting to see how much commitment the Chinese will have in the practical implementation of Copenhagen. The scale of the plant makes you shake your head. You can’t amass this much land in the US for a steel plant’s linear production line particularly on waterfront property. Quality of the steel has also improved. Most of the raw material comes from India. What struck me is just how much business the world does WITHOUT the US’s involvement. Thyssen Krupp and other vendors ( ie Volkswagen) have a big market share in China particularly for heavy equipment and autos. As for green, while the Chinese are producing low cost solar panels and other green tech, they don’t seem to have a way yet to integrate the technologies into their commercial and residential real estate. What an enormous market to enter and advise. It is clear that once the Government finally issues the edict to go green, it will occur rapidly. By the way, their public facilities are already designing in green aspects. All of the new subway lines have beautiful green gardens, essentially they are rooftops, following the entire line preventing heat from escaping the tubes and adding oxygen to the atmosphere at the ground. Many of the stations have clear canopies to allow daylight underground and reduce energy consumption for lighting during the day. The subways themselves are extraordinarily clean, modern, quick and safe. The law firm of King & Wood gave a very good practical guide on doing business as a non-Chinese citizen. The firm gave many valuable insights which I think shortened our learning curve about doing business in China. Here are some interesting facts. According to the American-Chinese Chamber of Commerce, 62% of their members are profitable. KW thinks that while westerners think doing business in China is very difficult, that impression is wrong. That impression comes from people who fail in china. KW’s impression is that those who fail, talk about it more than those who succeed…”most failures are due to foreigners doing stupid things”. Many clients find China to be the most profitable country in the world. The market is hard fought. Laws change very, very quickly. there are thousands of regulations and compliance can be complex. The practical aspects of doing business in China revolve around: Due diligence issues ( particularly dealing with non-compliance matters), a preference for informal arrangements, maintaining operational licenses, controlling intellectual property, the cost of social contributions for the average employee ( retirement, medical, unemployment, housing insurances can be 45% of cost of an employee) and the practical vs. theoretical risks of doing business which are generally not understood by foreigners. The government definitely wants to stimulate employment. Retirement is early say 50-55 so that the country can absorb its young graduates. The government is looking to stimulate internal consumption as a bigger part of its GDP and reduce its reliance on exports as a share of GDP. The currency issues therefore are real. And, China is looking to shift its production of goods to home consumption rather than primarily export. How that policy change will reshape the cost of commodities and finished goods in the West and the US is anybody’s guess. I’m no economist, but since manufacturing has shut down in the west, and if China begins to slow its exports of goods and keep them home for domestic consumption, then I have to believe that the West will find inflation becoming an issue. In example, China’s factories are responsible for the cost of clothing and kids shoes falling. There are a lot of feet to serve in China. If that production stays more for home use, then the rest of the world has less supply. Obviously, if China continues to export, but simply increases it production capacity, there may not be as much of an impact. It is clear to me, that the West will have to offset its non-competitive manufacturing status, by reducing the cost of its inputs and becoming more productive. To match the labor advantage of China, the West will have to use better technology to drive down per unit costs,cutting the cost of material inputs. Notice, I did not say cut the cost of benefits and wages. Hence, we have even more reasons to be green. Product quality will have to be elevated while we cut the cost of utilities, recycle materials, distribute faster and better using less energy and produce less carbon and pollution. It’s our only way to become more competitive on price. Cutting U.S. salaries and benefits and retirement programs (which seems to be the only solution for some of our thought leadership) in the long-run only will impoverish our citizenry, and make the U.S. a second tier nation. If our spending power falls, we’ll have nothing left but a lot of national debt (with no way to retire it), a lower standard of living, a poorer retirement, and opportunities for our children will be reduced. I think the U.S., in order to maintain its world leadership, has to take the position that its going to have the best society on earth for its citizens. This is not the rant of a pollyanna. It is a summary statement. If we lead the world in the quality of life, we regain our world footing. Our democratic values will survive and prosper. Our economic power will not erode. We ought to stop thinking that being green is about hugging a tree…..being green is about capitalism. It’s about profitability. In fact, we believe if you don’t go green, you’re business will be in the red. Get into the 21st century, it feels pretty good. By the way, that’s what the Chinese are doing. The quality of life for their people is improving rapidly. That is why you see young people NOT upset about the Central Government. They are participating in the success of China. The Government is making a better life for their people through socialized capitalism. I’ve spoken to many young people on this visit. None, have been reflexively supportive of the government, nor critical, but you can see a sort of pride in the accomplishments of the government in the last decade. (What Tiennamen Square?) From what I can see after 10 days of a deep dive into the culture, the people, the government, the law, the manufacturers, the advertisers, the entrepreneurs, and the state owned businesses…..its working. There is a lot for U.S. to learn here. We should be open to the positive lessons and adapt them for home. And, we have to find a way to make China a friend and partner or at the very least, understand what we are really competing with because it is clear to me, the U.S. general populace does not. It’s the best thing for the world when East and West can work together harmoniously. More thoughts later Best regards from Shanghai Doug

on the forefront of CSR

•January 31, 2010 • Leave a Comment

nike just released their most recent CSR policy and report card.  there is a huge amount of content in this report including some of the state-of-commerce in social & environ metrics (having invested heavily in the development & deployment of protocols and data).  they are quietly innovating on several fronts. 

eq cap is proud to have been a part of nike’s process in developing this report.

NIKE CSR REPORT & POLICY

SEC recognizes climate change as a disclosure item

•January 27, 2010 • 2 Comments

this came out today. climate change risk is now a matter of disclosure. it’s not an issue of PC or green…it’s now about shareholder’s right to info on liabilities and risk.
—————————–

SEC Issues Ground-Breaking Guidance Requiring Corporate Disclosure of Material Climate Change Risks and Opportunities

Leading Investors Hail Today’s Landmark Decision

WASHINGTON, D.C. (January 27, 2010) – The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission today issued new interpretive guidance that clarifies what publicly-traded companies need to disclose to investors in terms of climate-related ‘material’ effects on business operations, whether from new emissions management policies, the physical impacts of changing weather or business opportunities associated with the growing clean energy economy.

The guidance, the first economy-wide climate risk disclosure requirement in the world, was approved in a formal vote at today’s SEC Commissioners meeting in Washington. The lack of specific guidance until now has resulted in weak and inconsistent climate-related disclosure by public companies.

Today’s decision comes after formal requests by leading investors for the SEC to require full corporate disclosure of wide-ranging climate-related business impacts – and strategies for addressing those impacts – in their financial filings. More than a dozen investors managing over $1 trillion in assets, plus Ceres and the Environmental Defense Fund, requested formal guidance in a petition filed with the Commission in 2007, and supported by supplemental petitions filed in 2008 and 2009.

Investors hailed today’s new guidance and said it goes a long way to meeting disclosure needs outlined in their petition.

“We’re glad the SEC is stepping up to the plate to protect investors,” said Anne Stausboll, chief executive officer of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), the nation’s largest public pension fund with more than $205 billion in assets under management. “Ensuring that investors are getting timely, material information on climate-related impacts, including regulatory and physical impacts, is absolutely essential. Investors have a fundamental right to know which companies are well positioned for the future and which are not.”

“Today’s vote is a clarion call about the vast risks and opportunities climate change poses for US companies and the urgency for integrating them into investment decision making,” said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres and director of the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a network of 80 institutional investors with $8 trillion in collective assets. “The business risks of climate change cannot be ignored. With this guidance investors can make more sound decisions based on better information – and businesses will have a level-playing field with clear standards and expectations for disclosure.”

“Companies across America are poised to prosper and create new jobs in the clean energy economy,” added Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp. “Investors have a right to know which companies are planning to be part of the clean energy future and which are lagging behind.”

Today’s decision is the latest in a series of major policy actions over the past year requiring more robust climate risk disclosure across various industry sectors. Those actions include:

n The Environmental Protection Agency’s new mandatory greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting rule, requiring some 10,000 facilities that are large sources of GHGs to report those emissions to EPA, beginning data collection on January 1, 2010.

n The National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ (NAIC), the organization of insurance regulators for the 50 states, unanimously approved a mandatory requirement for insurers with annual premiums of $500 million or more to disclose climate risks to regulators, shareholders and the public beginning in May 2010.

n A growing spate of climate disclosure related litigation, as well as subpoenas by New York’s Attorney General to five of the nation’s largest power companies regarding their climate disclosure in SEC filings. Three of those cases have been settled, including a major settlement in November, after the companies agreed to boost their disclosure.

n A record number of shareholder resolutions seeking information on companies’ contribution and responses to climate change.

The Congress has also advanced major comprehensive climate protection legislation, including first-ever House passage of strong climate and energy legislation in June that caps greenhouse gas emissions; similar legislation is under consideration in the Senate.

Under SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro’s leadership, the SEC has also been active on disclosure issues. In October, the commission decided to allow shareholder resolutions that seek information from companies on the financial risks they face from social and environmental issues, including climate change. The decision reversed a rule that prevented investors from directly asking companies about the impacts of climate change and other pressing concerns on their bottom line.

The SEC is also evaluating a formal request from investors last June that companies be required to disclose material ESG (environmental, social and governance) risks. Schapiro has asked the new SEC Investor Advisory Committee to consider the request and make recommendations to the Commission.

To Maryland State Treasurer Nancy Kopp, who attended today’s meeting, the importance of the SEC’s decision is simple.

“State Treasurers invest vital taxpayer funds. We oversee public retirement and pension systems, college savings plans and more,” she said. “As investors safeguarding the economic welfare of so many state citizens, we have to be informed about the risks of companies we invest in. Easy and understandable access to accurate, comparable information regarding these very real risks – and climate change is certainly one of them – is essential to protect the investments our states depend on.”

Last June, Ceres, EDF and The Corporate Library issued a report showing that S&P 500 companies – including those with the most at stake in responding to the risks and opportunities from climate change – are providing scant climate-related information to investors. The study was based on an analysis of 10-K and 20-F filings by 100 global companies in 2008.

Investors and other groups who were signatories to the climate disclosure petitions with the SEC include:

British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (Canada)

California Public Employees’ Retirement System

California State Controller John Chiang

California State Teachers’ Retirement System

California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer

Ceres

Connecticut State Treasurer Denise L. Nappier/Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds

Environmental Defense Fund

F&C Management

Florida Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink

Friends of the Earth

Former Kentucky State Treasurer Jonathan Miller

Laborers’ International Union of North America

Maine State Treasurer David G. Lemoine

Maryland State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp

The Nathan Cummings Foundation

New Jersey State Investment Council

Former New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr.

New York State Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

North Carolina State Treasurer Janet Cowell

Former North Carolina State Treasurer Richard Moore

Oregon State Treasurer Ben Westlund

Former Oregon State Treasurer Randall Edwards

Pax World Management Corporation

Rhode Island General Treasurer Frank T. Caprio

Vermont State Treasurer Jeb Spaulding

About Ceres

Ceres is a leading coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public interest groups working with companies to address sustainability challenges such as climate change. Ceres also directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a network of 80 institutional investors with collective assets totaling $8 trillion. For more information, visit http://www.ceres.org

About EDF

Environmental Defense Fund, a leading national nonprofit organization,

represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense

Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector

partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious

environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.

can you build a sustainable regional economy?

•January 27, 2010 • Leave a Comment

a saturday morning coffee thought…

….not to play with words…are we watching the evolution from conservation and environmentalism toward sustainability and integration — of man and nature. and here in oregon, can we build a sustainable economy on our strengths in a new, uniquely Northwest ethos that balances growth, commerce and resource stewardship, with an eye towards the long term?

securing_the_capital_for_a_sustainable_economy.html

COP 15 – a few perspectives

•January 18, 2010 • Leave a Comment

POSTED BY PEN GOODALE (director research @ eq-cap)

January 18, 2010

Notes from eco-securities  “Copenhagen COP15 – The Outcomes & Implications for Business in 2010 and Beyond

http://www.2degreesnetwork.com/networks/carbon-management/resources/webinar/

(You need to register on the site to access this & other good webinars – registration is free.)

[Pen] Good webinar on COP15.  The five speakers talked about disappointments and insufficient outcomes across the board, especially in terms of cap & trade pricing signals.

But there also was discussion of some of the positive outcomes – transparency, recognizing the significant role of developing nations, the U.S. taking a leadership role to make sure the 2020 component was there, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) guidance text, … The accord is non-binding and needs more clarity, but it’s a start.

It’s unclear if COP15 will have much impact on the Senate or House in the U.S. – cap & trade is beyond reach, with very high hurdles to getting legislation passed.   But there are encouraging signs outside of DC.   “In the U.S., states and agencies are leading the way – playing a key role for moving forward.”   Several speakers talked about the potential for energy efficiency, clean technology and renewable energy at the state & local level.  These comments underscored the importance of EqRM’s innovative eePPA model to harvest & monetize the “negawatt.”

—————————–

Chair/Moderator:

Mike Austin, Director, Carbon Markets Investor Association (CMIA)

Panelists:

Paul Kelly, CEO, EcoSecurities

Kenneth Markowitz, Senior Climate Change Consultant, Akin Gump & President Earthpace

Lisa Jacobson, Executive Director, Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE)

Ben Vitale, President, The Climate Trust.

———————–

Webinar Summary

  • Pre-COP15 background

- 1997 – Kyoto Protocol was initially adopted on 12/11/1997.

- 2005 – Kyoto commitments began in February 2005 & will expire in 2012.

- 2007 – The Bali COP took place in December 2007.  The Bali Road Map included 5 pillars:

1)       Mitigation

2)       Adaptation

3)       Technology

4)       Financing mechanism (how to leverage public & private investments)

5)       Shared vision (i.e., how developed & developing countries will come together)

  • COP15 Outcomes

- COP15 positive outcomes

w        “The accord between 20 countries is not officially approved & needs more clarity, but it’s a start.”

w        “It’s a big shift.  If the potential is realized, perhaps there may be annex emission reduction pledges in the 2020 timeframe for many nations.   What’s new is that it recognizes the significant role of emerging, developing nations.   The U.S. played an important role as a leader to make sure the 2020 component was there.  2050 is more challenging, but 2020 is what really counts for driving investments.”

w        “The comprehensive set of pledges for financial commitments was better than expected – short-term $10B by 2012 & $100B by 2020.”   (Note: ½ private sector)

w        “Transparency – a significant shift, especially for China & India who have been historically reluctant.”

w        “It was a mixed bag.  There was a glimmer of hope with something salvaged at the 11th hour.”

w        “Preservation of markets going forward – how carbon offsets will be overseen & a more transparent, open system that governs billions of assets.”

w        “Developing countries, such as Brazil, are setting goals & taking action.  That was a key achievement & effected COP15.  There is more interest in sharing with other countries.”

- COP15 disappointments

w        “Insufficient outcomes across the board.”

w        “With political timelines in the U.S., we knew the ability to conclude complex U.S. legislation before COP15 would be a challenge.”  

w        “If no underlying legislation, how do you a % out there?  It was a near impossibility this year in the U.S.”

w        “Lack of U.N. leadership to pull things together.  When negotiations were working at a rapid pace, the U.N. process didn’t work.  There were many mismanagement & logistical nightmares.”

w        “Fairly closed session — U.S., China, Brazil, India & South Africa.”

  • What were the business expectations for COP15?

- “It depends on what point in time.  Two years ago, there was lots of optimism and hope for clear price signals.  As we got closer, business expectations were significantly dampened – binding agreements were less likely.   We are looking for very clear price signals, which we can invest into.

There were some positive things about COP15, but they won’t drive investment dollars.   Until there is additional clarity, it’s not doing the market any particular favors.”

- “There also were block & tackle goals, e.g., how governments will be reviewing technology & financing opportunities.  Below cap & price signals, there is interest in trade issues.”

  • What significant is COP15 for business?

- “It’s a baby step – non-binding.   We lost some momentum, especially in the U.S.   But there are still plenty of actions, which can be taken.   In the West and Northeast there is some early action (CA, OR, MA, NY) – appetite in the 2010/2010 timeframe.  We need to find pockets where actions are clear.  In the U.S., action is in cities, farms & states – not just in DC.”

- “Politically, we are moving in the right direction.  It’s good to have some accord at the heads of state level.  But it’s problematic that there is not more clarity for private markets to move forward.  COP15 doesn’t help businesses to make decisions about investment capital.   There are various pieces, e.g., technology & forestation with some positive signals, but there will not be a lot of investment until there is more clarity.”

- “There still is not enough there.  There is a concern that if the U.S. puts a number out there, that we can’t hit it.   There is some positive movement in carbon services (e.g., lawyers, professional services, low carbon energy.”

- “There is some investment, but not the type or the amount that we need.”

  • What were the shortfalls?  What does the private sector need to see in the future, for example at Mexico COP16 at the end of the year?

- “The U.S. has not been comfortable historically with a top-down process.”

- “What is needed at the international level?  Do we buy into the pledge & review model?  It’s not going smoothly.   What’s the role for the U.N. in the process?  It’s not an effective place for all to negotiate.   We won’t get 115 leaders to come together again for a while.”

- “There’s a lot of room for bilateral & multi-lateral agreement.  There has been tremendous movement in China & Brazil recently.  The U.S. has not; a lot of work has to be done in the U.S. “

- “In the U.S., states and agencies are leading the way – playing a key role for moving forward.”

- “When you agree to a particular target, there is a huge accounting problem.  You need a way to verify.   Working through the accounting & logistics will be a huge challenge” — underscores the importance of measurement & verification.

  • What do you think of the outcome of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) guidance text?

- “This is a real win – the first real reform in 2 years with transparency, an appeals process & communication requests.  I am cautiously optimistic.  The reason for the guidance was quite clear last year.”

- “Progress was really made, but it goes back to the question – is the U.N. process working?  There are many good ideas, but they don’t resonate for political reasons.”

- “We need further overarching rules of governance for the private sector & clear delineation of duties for the Board.  There are big reforms to go – e.g., conflict of interest, need for more transparency, …”

- “I loudly agree – decouple the political process from the delivery process.  It’s a governance issue.  Private capital has to be able to move through without a political agenda.”

- “Standardized baselines are very important, e.g., in the building sectors.   Professionalism of the CDM Board didn’t move forward.  It’s hard to have self-regulation.  We have recommendations, but they are not operationalized yet.  But the fact that it got done is a victory.  It has taken years.”

- “There needs to be a further emphasis on the role of the private sector & markets.”

- “An emphasis on speeding up the process & transaction states is really important – pushing on efficiencies, standardized baselines, …”

- “I would have liked to have seen decoupling the political from the execution process.  This is the major bottleneck for commercialization now.  Money & expertise aren’t the major bottlenecks now.”

Side note:  “It’s been hard to see any meaningful movement in forestry.”

  • What are the next steps?  How is it being perceived in the United States?

- “I don’t know if COP15 has had much impact on the Senate or House.  The government applauds Obama’s effort to work a deal, but with the lack of commitments, it’s hard to move forward.  The Senate is overwhelmed with Health Care; Climate is second.  There is some fracturing in the House; Peterson said he would not support a Senate/House compromise.   Does it still have life in the House?  That’s unclear.  There aren’t enough votes in the Senate to move forward.”

- “Still there is potential for Energy Efficiency, Clean Technology & Renewable Energy standards, but Cap & Trade is beyond reach.”

- “If it doesn’t happen by June, it will be very difficult to move forward.  Some in the Senate are trying to strip the EPA of some of their powers under the Clean Air Act.  It’s not a good picture for Cap & Trade; it’s in great jeopardy.”

- “The unknown is the ability & will of the White House.  But first they have to get the Health Care & Job legislation through.  There is a lot on the table.”


  • If we don’t see legislation in 2010, when?

- “Given the retirements in the Senate, we likely are going to lose some votes in the next election.”

- “It doesn’t get any easier, but if there are a few more moderate Republicans elected, that could help.”

  • Legislation or what?

- “There could be more costly, less flexible EPA regulation.”

- “For EcoSecurities, hunker down & wait it out for carbon trading.”

- “Short term, alternative energy & technologies can help fill in some of the gaps & move the ball a little.”

-“State actions are making private business models work.”

- “Providing incentives to the private sector even in the current stimulus package – take short-term action.”

- “The one wild card is if Obama takes a leadership position.”

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.