I'm a member of the Institute of Engineering & Technology - back when I was appointed a member it was the Institute of Electrical Engineers (IEE). These engineering institutes have been around for a long time and they're very prestigious - you can't just turn up and pay your fees, you have to demonstrate a wide range of competencies gained through structured training, fulfil professional criteria and undergo a tough interview.
I joined as a student/graduate member during my sandwich course and later became an associate member. When I was deciding whether to apply for full membership, I had just completed 3 years in the environment/sustainability field and I was wondering if it was really for me. Just at that time, the IEE created the "Engineering for a Sustainable Future" network, so I thought "Yes! This is my spiritual home". But what a furore erupted in the letters page of the monthly news! The term "political correctness" featured heavily - "it is not the role of the engineer to get involved in a political agenda, harumph, grumble etc". One letter even blamed climate change on wind turbines slowing the prevailing winds, I kid you not.
What a difference eight years makes! The IET's journal now features a clutch of sustainability news stories and articles every issue and every third or fourth issue seems to be a special on some aspect of the field - the last but one being on "fuels for the future". And of course they should. Look at the issues - renewable energy systems, energy storage, grid connections, energy efficiency, industrial control systems, replacing goods with data, future fuels, intelligent grids, monitoring systems (including smart meters), building design, vehicle design, lightweight materials - the list is endless. Engineers are at the core of sustainability and they now see it as an exciting, fast moving and cutting edge ride to get on.
So well done to the IEE/IET for facing down the old duffers - onwards and upwards!
While the last year has seen Barack Obama hogging the limelight of US politics, his new Energy Secretary Steven Chu, a Nobel prize-winning physicist, has been emerging as a refreshingly honest and practical voice to combat climate change. Unlike most politicos in his position, Chu is more concerned with results than process.
His calls for flat roofs to be painted white (to reflect more solar energy back into space without contributing to climate change), his embracing of ideas such as 'negawatts' - energy you don't use, and his energetic participation in bike-to-work day have really endeared him to me, but green groups are not so sure. He has been attacked for changing his mind on permitting coal fired powerstations and has slashed funding for the hydrogen economy. His focus instead has been on energy efficiency and biofuels.
But his biggest challenge will be to win over his fellow US politicians in Congress - resistance to carbon reductions is fierce and entrenched, with Rep Joe Barton declaring recently "Carbon dioxide is natural - you can't regulate God". Quite.
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the Green Business Bible e-book:
Motors are responsible for a 64% of industrial electricity demand (source Carbon Trust) so they should form a key priority of any manufacturers' energy efficiency campaign:
Implement an upgrade plan for motors, and always buy the most efficient model as any additional cost will be paid back very quickly in most cases.
Install Variable Speed Drive motors where appropriate eg rather than constantly pumping a fluid against a valve.
Until March, Terra Infirma carried out environmental healthchecks on behalf of Envirowise, looking at waste, water and energy. We've just been reviewing the files of the two dozen or so visits we carried out under this scheme - in sectors as diverse as steel stockholding, pharmaceuticals and catering - and the average savings were a whopping £175 000pa.
Imagine what that means to a medium sized manufacturing company in these tight financial times - they could keep 4 members of staff on for that money, making them even more competitive as things start to pick up. Makes you think, doesn't it?
I love these TED talks and found this one by US Energy Guru, Amory Lovins on energy efficiency and oil. It claims to be three and a half years old, but the Wall-E reference would suggest it was much more recent.
Weekly Tip #22: How many of your staff know how a thermostat works?
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the forthcoming Green Business Bible e-book*:
If you're reading this, you probably know that a room thermostat sets the target temperature for a room and that turning it up doesn't heat the room any quicker. But do your staff know this? I bet they don't - teach 'em!
Outside my office window, a team of builders is working on an eco-house. They are running a petrol generator to produce power for an electric cement mixer. That little system is converting chemical energy into rotary energy into electrical energy into rotary energy. That's at least two conversions (and losses) that don't need to be there.
Years ago I walked into a meeting room where the radiator and air-conditioning unit (installed one above the other) were blazing away - one producing hot air from hot water from gas (and electricity to pump it) and the other trying to cancel that out with cool air from electricity from gas/coal/nuclear. I switched both off and the temperature was just fine.
I've been in food companies where the cool rooms were next to the ovens. I've seen many examples of air compressors sucking their own heat into their 'cool' air intake. Stories abound of air conditioning intakes being downwind of hot air vents. The list goes on...
Things have settled down here a little at Terra Infirma Towers after the most busy (and it has to be said lucrative) month in our history. I've said before that with companies feeling the pinch from falling orders and soaring oil prices, this is not a bad time to be offering cost-cutting services. The great thing about cutting material resource use, as opposed to human resources (hate that term), is that it doesn't cut your capacity to deliver products and/or services so as the economy recovers you're not floundering behind.
Of course companies can go beyond simply reducing environmental costs and start exploiting environmental business opportunities. Now you might think that this is a risky time to do so, but both the Guardian and the Times are reporting a surge in green investment and I hear the same from contacts in the banking industry.
Just don't think you can stick a green label on a duff product and expect it to succeed. Plenty have tried and failed. And I keep meeting more of them.
This is the thirteenth in a series of tips extracted from the forthcoming Green Business Bible e-book:
Toilets/washrooms are a big contributors to your environmental footprint. Lights get left on, taps drip and urinals flush through the night. Install efficient lighting with timer controls, low flow toilets, waterfree or 'intelligent' urinals, and put push taps on your sinks.
New Energy Finance is reporting that "Clean" energy investment almost hit $150bn last year - up 60% on the year before.
Their press release states:
Among the key factors pushing this numbers sharply upwards in 2007 were government policies around the world to promote renewable power and cleaner fuels, oil prices approaching $100-a barrel and rising corporate and investor awareness of the opportunities in clean energy.
One of the themes of 2007 was geographic diversification. Western Europe and North America continued to enjoy sharp increases... but the momentum spread out to include other developed economic regions such as Eastern Europe and Australia.
Even more significant was the pick-up in activity in emerging economies, with China moving strongly ahead with projects in wind, biomass and energy efficiency, Brazil seeing huge investment interest in its sugar based ethanol sector, and Africa starting to see renewable energy and efficiency as partial answers to its power shortages.
Interesting stuff. Obviously the Low Carbon Economy is still in its infancy, but if investment continues to rise at this scale, markets will stabilise and the uptake of renewables and energy efficient technologies will start to become the norm, rather than the exception.
The Guardian is reporting that the trading price of oil on the futures market has tipped $100 a barrel - the first time since trading began in 1983. This is obviously going to put further upward pressure on energy prices to the consumer and industry.
It is well understood that energy efficiency is the most cost effective way of cutting bills. Certain UK organisations can get a free visit from the Carbon Trust who will identify some quick wins. However, I recommend setting up a staff committee to brainstorm solutions and filter suggestions from other employees will deliver you a wide range of low or no-cost measures and better motivated staff to boot.
I'm at the Local Government Association Climate Change conference today and the Government's Communities Secretary Hazel Blears stated quite categorically that the Merton Rule was not under threat despite rumours she'd been backtracking on it under pressure from developers.
The Merton Rule, developed by the titular London Borough, requires all new developments over a certain size to source a certain amount of their energy on site, say 10%. This has the double whammy of driving down energy consumption first so the 10% renewable figure becomes technically viable.
However, Blears added a couple of vague caveats about 'one size fits all' and ducked a request from an audience member to clarify whether the rule would be applied site by site or not. We will have to wait and see how it comes out in the wash...
The BBC is reporting that a consortium of big IT industry names: Google, Microsoft, Intel, HP, Sun, Dell and Yahoo, is working to radically reduce the amount of energy consumed in PCs and servers - "enough to cut [carbon dioxide] emissions by 54 million tonnes a year - equal to 11 million cars or 20 coal-fired power plants". The initiative is an extension of the WWF's Climate Saver's programme.
One worry about this is the "rebound effect" - the tendency for efficiency gains to get lost in favour of other benefits. For example, microprocessors' speed is limited by the amount of heat they generate. If the energy efficiency measures reduce the amount of heat given off by the chips, then the commercial pressure will be to increase processor speed rather than reduce overall energy consumption.
On the other hand, the involvement of so many software companies in the consortium, suggests that the focus may be on energy consumption during 'sleep' or standby modes. This approach would be less likely to be affected by the rebound effect.
Whichever way it goes, it will interesting to see what the actual energy benefits are.