news20091106gdn1

[News] from [guardian.co.uk]

[News > Technology > Energy]
Forests in the desert: the answer to climate change?
Climate change could be cancelled out in a staggeringly ambitious plan to plant the Sahara desert and Australian outback with trees
David Adam
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 November 2009 18.35 GMT Article history

Some talk of hoisting mirrors into space to reflect sunlight, while others want to cloud the high atmosphere with millions of tonnes of shiny sulphur dust. Now, scientists could have dreamed up the most ambitious geoengineering plan to deal with climate change yet: converting the parched Sahara desert to a lush forest. The scale of the ambition is matched only by the promised rewards – the scientists behind the plan say it could "end global warming".

The scheme has been thought up by Leonard Ornstein, a cell biologist at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, together with Igor Aleinov and David Rind, climate modellers at Nasa. The trio have outlined their plan in a new paper published in the Journal of Climatic Change, and they modestly conclude it "probably provides the best, near-term route to complete control of greenhouse gas induced global warming".

Under the scheme, planted fields of fast growing trees such as eucalyptus would cover the deserts of the Sahara and Australian outback, watered by seawater treated by a string of coastal desalination plants and channelled through a vast irrigation network. The new blanket of tree cover would bring its own weather system and rainfall, while soaking up carbon dioxide from the world's atmosphere. The team's calculations suggest the forested deserts could draw down around 8bn tonnes of carbon a year, about the same as emitted from fossil fuels and deforestation today. Sounds expensive? The researchers say it could be more economic than planned global investment in carbon capture and storage technology (CCS).

"The costs are enormous but the scale of the problem is enormous," says Ornstein, who is best known for pioneering a cell biology technique called polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in the 1950s. "It's a serious suggestion in that I believe it is the most promising and practical option in terms of current technology to solve the biggest parts of the problem."

The scheme could cost $1.9tn a year, he says. "When that's compared to figures like estimates of $800bn per year for CCS, our plan looks like a loser. But CCS can address only about 20% of the problem at the $800bn price. Mine addresses the whole thing. And CCS would involve a network of dangerous high-pressure pipelines coursing through the most developed neighbourhoods of our civilisations, compared to relatively benign water aqueducts in what are presently virtually uninhabited deserts."

Planting trees to combat rising carbon dioxide levels is controversial on a large scale, because most places where it has been suggested, such as Canada and Siberia, are in the northern hemisphere where the resulting change in surface colour, from predominantly light snow and rock to predominantly dark trees, could soak up more sunlight and cancel out the cooling benefit. Ornstein says subtropical regions, such as the Sahara and the Australian outback, do not have this problem. The areas have only minimal "human occupation, agricultural food and fibre resources and competing natural biomes" the team says. "We must bite the bullet, global warming will not go away by itself ... solar, geothermal and wind power can make modest contributions. All of these are other parts of a fix. But the quicker a forest can be grown, the more time will be available to choose among and to implement such adjustments, and perhaps to develop more attractive substitutes."

Ornstein says several desert-heavy countries are suitable, including large chunks of Saudi Arabia and a string of African nations west of Egypt. The scheme would provide jobs and investment, he says, as well as a long-term source of sustainable wood that could be used as a biofuel to replace fossil fuels. Other plans for the desert region, such as the installation of giant arrays of mirrors and solar panels to generate electricity would not be affected, he says. Tree-planters, and the resulting clouds, would stick to the flatter regions further south.

Since the paper was published a few weeks ago, Ornstein has attempted to seed serious discussions on specialist websites, with little success. Critics have pointed out that the deserts are not total wildernesses, but rich and diverse ecosystems in their own right, which would be destroyed. Ornstein says: "If sacrifices are required to stem global warming, the almost non-existent ecosystems of the central Sahara and the outback seem like reasonable candidates compared to the alternatives."

The scheme does have some support. "It is incredibly important and definitely worth taking seriously," says Rick Anthes, president of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. "While there are many practical and political difficulties of afforestation of regions this large, the benefits could be enormous and go well beyond carbon sequestration."


[News > Technology > Energy]
Liquid Granite and the hunt for a carbon-neutral cement
Cement is responsible for 5% of the world's carbon emissions, and the race is on to find an alternative
Alok Jha
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 November 2009 22.00 GMT Article history

What do you do with a problem like cement? Around 2bn tonnes are used every year, each tonne a source of 0.4 tonnes of carbon dioxide as it is made. The cement industry is responsible for 5% of the world's carbon emissions – more than the entire aviation industry.

Standard, or Portland, cement is made by heating limestone or clay to around 1,500C. This use of energy and the decomposition of the limestone as it cooks releases copious amounts of CO2. As the carbon reduction targets from global climate agreements begin to bite, sorting out cement will become a priority.

Engineers have been working hard on the problem in recent years, with a range of approaches to cutting the environmental impact of the construction industry: some have tried synthetic polymers that would remove the need for limestone; others have fiddled with how cement is used in buildings. The latest on the block is Liquid Granite, a binding material that, according to its inventor, could almost entirely replace cement with a powder made from recycled waste materials.

Liquid Granite replaces the need for more than two-thirds of this Portland cement when making concrete, thereby saving the associated carbon emissions. "One of the biggest culprits of carbon footprint is cement, which we use in making concrete – Liquid Granite does away with most of the use of cement. The amount used is pretty small," says Prof Pal Mangat of Sheffield Hallam University, who came up with the product. "Potentially, by the time we're finished with this developmental technology, it'll be close to zero."

Mangat is cagey about the exact formulation of Liquid Granite, and with good reason: by 2020, the French bank Credit Agricole estimates, demand for cement will be 50% greater than today, and a new carbon-free building material could reap huge rewards. All that Mangat will say is that Liquid Granite is made from an inorganic powder, 30-70% of which is recycled industrial waste materials. Using the same aggregates as normal concrete, it could be used anywhere cement is but with a fraction of the carbon footprint.

"In some applications it's more suitable than concrete. For example, one of the main areas we are currently exploiting it is fire-resistant building materials," he says. "It has good fire-resistant properties, unlike concrete, which explodes upon exposure to high temperatures."

There has already been interest from the building industry, with Liquid Granite has already been used in fire-rated lintels at the Olympic Village and Stratford Shopping Centre in east London.

Others are hot on Mangat's heels. Novacem, based in London, last year created a cement that has a negative carbon footprint over its lifetime. His invention uses magnesium silicates, which emit no CO2 when heated, and the processing is carried out at a much lower temperature than that required for Portland cement. In addition, the cement absorbs CO2 as it hardens – each tonne could remove around 0.6 tonnes of the greenhouse gas over its lifetime.

Transforming a global industry as established as construction was never going to be simple. But tackling the problem of cement seems a good place to start.

news20091106gdn2

[News] from [guardian.co.uk]

[Environment > Emissions trading]
Friends of the Earth attacks carbon trading
An FoE report says 'cap and trade' carbon markets have done little to reduce emissions but have been plagued by corruption and inefficiency
Ashley Seager
The Guardian, Thursday 5 November 2009 Article history

The world's carbon trading markets growing complexity threatens another "sub-prime" style financial crisis that could again destabilise the global economy, campaigners warn today.

In a new report, Friends of the Earth says that to date "cap and trade" carbon markets have done almost nothing to reduce emissions but have been plagued by inefficiency and corruption that render them unfit for purpose.

As the world heads towards the Copenhagen climate summit, Britain and other developed countries want to see carbon trading expanded worldwide. The carbon market, mainly based in Europe, was worth $126bn in 2008 and is predicted to mushroom to $3.1tn by 2020 if a global carbon market takes off.

However, FoE fears that the area has been hijacked by speculators on the financial markets. Sarah-Jayne Clifton, the report's author, said: "The majority of the trade is carried out not between polluting industries and factories covered by carbon trading schemes, but by banks and investors who profit from speculation on the carbon markets – packaging carbon credits into increasingly complex financial products similar to the 'shadow finance' around sub-prime mortgages which triggered the recent economic crash."

The FoE claims that the first phase of the European emissions trading scheme between 2005 and 2007 failed. And the second phase, from 2008-2012, is likely to fail too, it said. FoE is calling on governments to use more reliable instruments such as carbon taxes, which are harder to avoid and can be effective at changing people's behaviour and reducing emissions.

A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: "We agree that domestic action by developed countries as well as public finance is essential to meet the challenge of climate change and … the UK is going all-out to get an ambitious, fair and effective deal.

"But carbon trading can also play a role, making it far more likely that we tackle dangerous climate change, get cost-effective emissions reductions and get money to the poorest countries of the world."


[Environment > Copenhagen climate change conference 2009]
Global climate deal at least a year away, negotiators say
Negotiators say they have abandoned hope of signing a legally binding emissions treaty in Copenhagen and are planning only for a meeting of world leaders
John Vidal in Barcelona
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 November 2009 16.38 GMT Article history

A global deal to fight climate change will take at least six months and possibly another year to finalise, according to negotiators at the heart of the UN talks.

In a series of briefings, senior British and EU diplomats said they had abandoned any hope of reaching a legally binding treaty at the Copenhagen summit next month and had now started to plan only for a meeting of world leaders. This final acknowledgement follows weeks of growing pessimism and represents a significant downgrading of the summit's original goal.

The best outcome in Copenhagen will now be a political agreement which rich countries hope will include targets and timetables for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by developed nations and major emitters like China, as well as commitments to provide money for poor countries to cope with climate change. But even that reduced goal is far from certain, with huge gaps remaining between nations on key issues such as emissions cuts and funding for poor nations.

The delay was said to be caused by a combination of time running out in the tortuous UN negotiations and Washington's inability to commit specifically to targets and timetables. The US made clear yesterday that it thought a legal treaty was impossible in Copenhagen.

In Barcelona, a British government source said: "We think it will be impossible to sign up and agree a fully worked-up political treaty."

"It is a Catch-22 situation," said Artur Runge-Metzger, the European commission's chief negotiator. People are waiting for each other so it is difficult to blame anyone. [But] the US position is significant in terms of the delay. Clearly the US has been slowing things down."

In London, Ed Miliband, the UK secretary of state for energy and climate change, gave a similar message to the House of Commons, acknowledging that only a political agreement could be hoped for. "The UN negotiations are moving too slowly and not going well," he said.

The plan now is for world leaders to come to Copenhagen next month to sign a politically binding agreement which would have all the key elements of the final deal in it. "It would be substantive. It would set timelines, and provide the figures by which rich countries would reduce emissions, as well as the money that would be made available to developing countries to adapt to climate change", said a British government official.

But she said a legally binding agreement could take up to a year. "It could [take] six months up to a year, but we would want it to be [signed] as soon as possible".

Gordon Brown, President Lula of Brazil, President Sarkozy of France and other heads of state have already said they will go to Copenhagen, and others are expected to agree in the next few weeks. It is now more likely that President Obama will go because he will not be forced to sign a legally binding agreement which the US senate could then reject. Proposed climate laws presented to the Senate have encountered fierce opposition and on Tuesday, lawmakers accepted it could not be passed before Copenhagen. The battle over US healthcare reform and the recent election defeats for Obama have seriously reduced the president's ability to force through the laws.

However, there is the real prospect that even the political deal that world leaders will be asked to sign in Copenhagen will have little or no substance. The gap between the demands of the developing countries and the offers on the table is great in some areas, and there are fewer than seven days' full negotiating time left before world leaders arrive in Copenhagen.

The news was met with resignation by developing countries and NGOs. "Politically binding agreements are worth very little. Tell me of any politician who delivers a politically binding agreement", said Lumumba Di-Aping, chair of the G77 group of 130 countries.

"The world's poorest communities can't afford to wait. The cost of any delay to a climate deal will be counted in children's lives. We estimate that 250,000 children could be killed by climate change next year," said Benedict Dempsey, Save the Children's humanitarian policy officer.

"If the EU is buying time for Obama and Congress, let them come out and say so. To remove the impetus to push as far and as as hard as possible in the timeframe is reductive beyond belief," said Sol Oyuela, climate change policy officer at Cafod.

"The assumption that developing countries will want to go into a further round of talks is dangerous," added Antonio Hill of Oxfam. "There is no guarantee that anything will emerge."

Progress in Barcelona, the last full negotiating session before Copenhagen, has been particularly slow, with two days' negotiations effectively lost after African countries walked out in frustration at the lack of progress by rich countries. Neither the US nor the G77 group of countries have made any major concessions.

The deadlock has been most serious over proposed emission cuts. Rich countries together have proposed cutting approximately 16-23% on 1990 figures, but developing countries are determined to force a 40% cut to avoid what UN scientists say could be catastrophic climate change.

While the EU has proposed cuts of 20-30% by 2020, many other rich countries have not committed more than 15%. The US, the second largest emitter in the world, has pledged the equivalent of a 7% cut on 1990 emissions, or 17% on 2005 levels.

"There is everything to play for but we should lower our ambitions and get it right. Perhaps we were always being too ambitious," said one European diplomat.

NGOs said the talks were in real danger of losing their momentum, and accused the EU of giving up trying to persuade President Obama to give .

news20091106gdn3

[News] from [guardian.co.uk]

[Environment > 10:10 climate change campaign]
Climate change ministry signs up to campaign
Karen McVeigh
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 November 2009 23.35 GMT Article history

The Department of Energy and Climate Change, responsible for promoting energy efficiency, is to sign up tomorrow to the 10:10 campaign to cut carbon emissions.

Its pledge to cut its carbon emissions by 10% in 2010 comes after it emerged that the department's headquarters in Whitehall had the worst possible energy efficiency rating on the government's own seven-point scale. It is the second government department to sign up to the campaign, which is supported by the Guardian, after the Department for International Development. The DECC's 100-year old Grade II listed building at 3 Whitehall Place was given the bottom rating of G along with the Home Office, which moved into a newly built office only a few years ago, and the Department of Health. On average, government buildings scored an F. The DECC said the new department had only moved last October into the building, which was difficult to upgrade to the standards of a new building.

About 45% of the UK's carbon emissions come from energy use in buildings. So far, 51 councils have signed up to 10:10 or passed a motion to do so.

news20091106sa1

[Environment] from [scientificamerican.com]

[Energy & Sustainability]
November 5, 2009
Can Closing the Ozone Hole Also Help Combat Climate Change?
Finding alternatives to refrigerants such as hydrofluorocarbons will help prevent the ozone hole being healed at climate's expense
By Robynne Boyd

Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse culprit in human-generated global warming, most scientists agree, but CO2 itself, and a handful of other substances, are now being promoted as good alternatives to commonly used refrigerants that threaten Earth's atmosphere and climate.

To understand this paradoxical turn of events, it helps to recall the 1980s, when the world's governments banded together to fix the Antarctic ozone hole, a continent-size gap in the atmospheric layer that protects human beings, among other living things, from the sun's damaging ultraviolet radiation. Via the international treaty that entered into force in 1989 known as the Montreal Protocol, participants agreed to phase out the chemicals that harmed ozone. Closing the hole became one of the globe's greatest and most successful environmental restoration projects. But today, there is a glitch: The touted solution for the ozone predicament could in fact exacerbate our greatest environmental challenge—climate change.

The problem is that under the Montreal Protocol, which the U.S. has signed, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were promoted as the environmental alternative to ozone-depleting hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), which had become the standard working coolant in refrigerators, air conditioners and aerosol cans. HCFCs, for their part, originally replaced the even more potent ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that were used liberally until the early 1990s. Whereas HFCs do not destroy the ozone layer, they can be thousands of times more harmful to Earth's climate than carbon dioxide, posing a significant threat should they become HCFCs' main replacement.

"HCFCs and HFCs are two chemicals designed by chemists to trap heat; the fluorinated part of the compound turns what would be a normal hydrocarbon into something that is much more durable," explains Kert Davies, director of research for Greenpeace USA. "When you combine those two properties—heat trapping and durability—in the atmosphere, it creates a greenhouse gas. We created another problem by replacing the ozone depleters with chemicals that cause global warming, and now we need to replace these because they are going to be banned."

Starting January 1, under the Montreal Protocol, the world's developed nations must cut HCFC consumption and production by 75 percent. It will then become illegal to import, produce or sell Freon (HCFC-22) and HCFC-142b, the ubiquitous refrigerants, for use in new equipment. At the same time, Europe is implementing a ban on HFC-134a (a common car air-conditioning refrigerant that can trap 3,400 times more heat in the atmosphere than CO2), beginning in 2011.

The alternatives? Natural refrigerants and a new group of fluorochemicals called hydrofluoro-olefins (HFOs).

Naturally occurring refrigerants, such as hydrocarbons (propane, isobutane and cyclopentane), ammonia and even that climate culprit carbon dioxide, can be used as cooling agents in refrigerators and air conditioners. They all have relatively low or lower global warming potentials, exist in large quantities, and do not have unknown side effects.

Ironically, CO2 seems to rise above the rest. "CO2 is an excellent refrigerant with superior thermodynamic and transport properties, compared to the HFCs in use today," says
David Hinde, manager of research and development for Conyers, Ga.–based Hill Phoenix, which recently became the first company to receive EPA approval to replace HCFCs with CO2 in supermarkets. "By using CO2, refrigeration systems will be able to reduce HFC leaks as well as dramatically reduce the HFC charge (the amount used in a system)."

Like most refrigerants, CO2 can remove heat from the air. The process starts when a refrigerator's compressor condenses CO2, raising its pressure and temperature. The gas is then transferred to a gas cooler where the heat is released cooling the refrigerant, which casts off the heat from a radiator on the back or bottom of the fridge. The CO2 (now between the liquid and vapor phases) then travels through an expansion valve, instantly reducing the liquid's pressure and causing it to rapidly expand into vapor. As the CO2 evaporates it absorbs heat, thereby cooling the air inside the refrigerator compartment. CO2 must be used at a much higher pressure than HFC refrigerants, and therefore requires stronger piping.

Already, companies such as Coca-Cola have begun using CO2 as a refrigerant in vending machines and other retail refrigerators outside of the U.S., as in China during the Olympics. And PepsiCo is now testing these vending machines in Washington, D.C., including in the Capitol.

Another potential alternative is hydrocarbon-based refrigerants, such as isobutane, which has been used in household refrigerators throughout Europe and in parts of Asia for a number of years. General Electric is currently seeking U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approval for its use in the U.S. Ben & Jerry's, a division of Unilever, has applied to the EPA to use propane as a refrigerant in ice-cream freezers. Both requests are pending approval due to fears over combustibility.

Then there are the synthetic refrigerants. In response to the ban on HFC-134a in Europe, chemical industry giants DuPont and Honeywell combined their years of fluorochemical expertise to find an alternative. HFO-1234yf was their answer. It doesn't cause ozone depletion, has an extremely low global warming potential, and is predicted to be ready for commercial use midway through 2011.

Concerns have been raised, however, over possible toxic side effects to the employees working around these chemicals as well as for automobile owners should it ignite. DuPont acknowledges that though HFO-1234yf is flammable, it is no more hazardous than the chemical it is replacing.

As most of these alternatives await approval, the possibility of HFC proliferation hangs in the air. But, not if Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environment Dan Reifsnyder has a say in the matter. Reifsnyder, as head of the U.S. delegation to the Montreal Protocol, along with Canada and Mexico, has proposed an amendment to the treaty, calling for an HFC phasedown.

"HFCs today are not yet in wide use and embedded in the world, but if you look out to 2050 without any action being taken, they will be where people go when they leave HCFCs," Reifsnyder says. "The value of this proposal is it will send a signal to the private sector for the need for alternatives that are benign in the ozone and climate sense, and give the private sector time to work on new compounds."

The amendment to the protocol will be negotiated this week in Port Ghalib, Egypt, by the United Nations. If passed, it would mark the first time that language on a greenhouse gas is incorporated into the ozone treaty. It would also mean the EPA could expand its mandate to regulate ozone-depleting substances to include a greenhouse gas, because it is the agency that implements the Montreal Protocol in the U.S.

"Before we end up with a big problem, let's avoid a big problem," Reifsnyder says.

news20091106sa2

[Environment] from [scientificamerican.com]

[Energy & Sustainability]
November 5, 2009
Being Green: 10 Earth-Friendly Habits You Can Adopt
Passive cooking, gas cap checkups, neighborhood dating and more
By Dawn Stover

A Bus with Legs
Remember the good ol’ days when kids walked to school? Those treks weren’t as rough as some people recall them—five miles through the snow, uphill both ways!—but they did burn calories instead of fossil fuels. Today kids need more opportunities for exercise, but many parents feel it’s not safe for them to walk alone. One simple solution is to organize a “walking school bus” or “bicycle train” for your neighborhood, with one or more adults supervising a group of children traveling together. It’s a good way to build muscles and communities. For details on how to get started, see www.walkingschoolbus.org.

Click Click Click
An estimated 147 million gallons of gasoline evaporates into the atmosphere in the U.S. every year because of loose, damaged or missing caps on vehicle fuel tanks. Keep gas in your tank by checking the cap occasionally for cracks. In older vehicles, you can prevent evaporation by making sure the cap is tightly secured. For most newer vehicles, turn the cap until you hear it click three times. That will not only keep gas where it belongs but will also help avoid the dreaded “check engine” warning light that appears when your vehicle’s emission sensors detect a leak.

Cancel the Catalogues
The average American household receives 88 printed catalogues a year. All that paper adds up to millions of dead trees. Recycling ensures that catalogues don’t end up in landfills, but an even better solution is to eliminate unwanted catalogues before they are printed. To do so, sign up for a free account and set your preferences at www.catalogchoice.org, an online service sponsored by the California-based Ecology Center.

Shrink Your “Cookprint”
Many foods don’t need sustained boiling to cook. For example, hard “boiled” eggs can be made by placing the eggs in a covered pot of water, bringing it to a full boil, then turning off the burner. In 20 minutes the eggs will be done. Known as passive cooking, this on-and-off technique not only saves energy but can also help avoid overcooking vegetables such as corn on the cob. For more tips see the new book Cooking Green: Reducing Your Carbon Footprint in the Kitchen by Kate Heyhoe (Da Capo Press, 2009), or visit www.globalgourmet.com.

Green Bullets
From Bambi’s perspective, there may be no such thing as an environmentally friendly bullet. But for hunters who are determined to take a shot, lead-free bullets are the “greenest” choice. They can cost twice as much as bullets containing lead but perform better because they don’t break apart on impact. That helps keep toxic metal out of forests, fields and waterways—and the digestive systems of humans who eat game animals. Last year, in an effort to protect endangered condors from lead poisoning, California banned lead bullets in areas of the state where the birds live. Most of the major ammunition manufacturers, such as Winchester and Remington, now offer copper bullets as an alternative.

Process of Elimination
Low-flow toilets can save a lot of water. They use a maximum of 1.6 gallons per flush, compared with five gallons or more for an older toilet. Another option is a dual-flush toilet operated by two buttons: Push the No. 1 button, and the toilet dispenses less than a gallon of water to whisk away liquid waste. Push No. 2 and the toilet releases the full 1.6 gallons to flush solid waste. Widely used in Europe and Australia, dual-flush toilets are catching on in the U.S.

Make Your Own Toys
Why buy Silly Putty, Chia Pets or sidewalk chalk when you can make your own toys for less than $1—and recycle a few toilet paper tubes, nylons and plastic bottles in the process? A mom and dad in Ohio, John and Danita Thomas, have created recipes for hundreds of environmentally friendly and safe toys that can be made from common household ingredients such as cornstarch, rock salt and coffee grinds. Check out The Ultimate Book of Kid Concoctions (The Kid Concoctions Company, 1998) or go to http://kidconcoctions.com.

Smart Metering
PowerMeter software from Google Foundation can be paired with “smart” electric meters to give homeowners direct access to information about their energy use. For example, PowerMeter can reveal which appliances in your home are consuming the most electricity. Google predicts that having this kind of information will prompt people to reduce energy use by 5 to 15 percent. Only 200,000 U.S. homes have smart meters now, but the Obama Administration has called for another 40 million to be installed over the next three years.

Plasma versus LCD
The energy characteristics of TVs can vary as much as picture quality. For dark scenes, energy usage may not vary much between comparably sized plasma and LCD screens. But for most of the shows people watch, LCD screens use significantly less electricity. For both technologies, size matters; the bigger the screen, the greater its energy consumption. The largest sets have gotten so gluttonous that California state legislators are planning to ban the least efficient models beginning in 2011—which they say could reduce electricity consumption by an amount equivalent to that of 86,400 homes. For screens that are 50 inches or larger, a rear-projection TV is much more energy-efficient than either an LCD or plasma TV, but the picture is not as bright.

Think Globally, Date Locally
If you’re single, think twice about a long-distance relationship. All that commuting makes for a mighty big carbon footprint, according to “loca-sexuals” who are taking a more climate-friendly approach to dating. Absence may make the heart grow fonder, but loca-sexuals say that the benefits of dating people who live nearby include a smaller travel budget, a greater sense of community, and more {sex}.

news20091106nn1

[naturenews] from [nature.com]

[naturenews]
Published online 5 November 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.1042
News
Greek research supremo promises drastic reform
Achilleas Mitsos aims to sharpen up Greek science.
By Alison Abbott

Economist Achilleas Mitsos, one of Europe's leading research policy-makers, has been tasked with a root and branch reform of the research system in his homeland, Greece.

Director general of the European Union's research commission from 2000 to 2006, Mitsos has now been appointed general secretary for research in Greece's new socialist government. He spoke to Nature about his ambitious plans to overhaul the research system of a country where money for science is scarce and cronyism is rife.

What is the research situation in Greece?

Greece has one of the lowest levels of research investment in Europe. It invests less than 0.6% of its gross domestic product (GDP) in research and development — and that's declining — whereas the EU average expenditure is 1.85%. But the problems are not just financial. There is too little competition, too little evaluation of performance, and there is a lot of dead wood. Even scientists who do very little work continue to get a share of what little money there is for research. And most scientists are civil servants, so they are guaranteed employment until retirement.

Are there good research centres in Greece?

Yes. Not only some good institutes, but in almost every university and research centre there are teams that are known internationally and that are doing great research. But there are no mechanisms to reward this research and to multiply its impact. Overall the environment they have to work in is mostly bad. We have to acknowledge this and see what can be done about it.

Is your government serious about investing in research?

Yes, it is serious. Science is one of its stated priorities. In his inaugural speech to parliament on 16 October, prime minister George Papandreou mentioned only two figures: that spending on education will rise to 5% of GDP, and research to 2% of GDP, within the next four years. Most other areas of public expenditure will be cut. Next year will already see a small increase in the budget for research.

The government has also moved responsibility for research from the ministry of industry into the ministry of education which oversees universities. It will mean better coordination between research in universities and in other research institutes.

Different governments have tried to reform the system in the past. Why has so little changed?

A large part of the academic community has always resisted the idea of quality control and evaluation, and in the past politicians have never insisted on it. Last year, the former [centre-right New Democracy] government did actually introduce a law that tried to address some of the problems, but it was overcomplicated and unworkable. This law hasn't yet been implemented, and, as a priority, we will introduce an alternative law.

On top of this, in an attempt to cut expenditure, the previous government foresaw the moving and merging of many institutes — something that created a lot of anxiety — without having done a detailed analysis of the pros and cons (see 'Greek scientists fight research shake-up').

What is your proposed law intended to achieve?

It will create for the first time a granting agency for research, which will be independent of any ministry. It will create a system for coordinating all aspects of research across different ministries with interests in research, such as health and environment, and for involving the private sector in financing industrial research. Mechanisms for evaluation will be introduced at all levels.

It will also include a plan for training researchers and ensuring a career path — a proper PhD and postdoc scheme. We have to look after our human capital. We will also make it easier for researchers to move between different research institutes and between research institutes and universities, something that is close to impossible right now.

How do you expect Greece's small industrial base to contribute to the country's research effort?

Just because it is small does not mean it should be ignored. When I was in Brussels we introduced the EU Joint Technology Initiatives in which the private sector defines the sort of research agenda it needs, and then co-funds it. This formula will now be put to work in Greece, as a new public–private partnership based on industry's medium-term research needs.

How will the public research institutes be restructured?

All future funding will be performance-based and funds will be distributed according to excellence. Institutes will in future have to draw up contracts with the government. They will have to design a multi-annual research programme, which will be peer-reviewed and agreed with the government. The programme will also be evaluated at intervals, and at its completion, to make sure commitments and objectives are being fulfilled.

How will you ensure good evaluation?

Greece is a small country, and we can't expect to find evaluators and peer reviewers for all scientific areas within Greece who are both experts and free of conflict of interests. So we will have to involve foreign scientists. That means that all grant applications and research programmes will have to be written in English — I don't see a problem with that.

How will you cope with the protest that is likely to erupt at the introduction of so much evaluation?

Those who were used to receiving their money automatically because they were active in public relations or because they had indirect contacts with the government will have to face the new reality. There are enough researchers in Greece who are going to like it. I think the government will win, not lose, political capital.

This sounds like an enormous overhaul. Can so much be achieved in the four years of the government's mandate?

Yes. We will start to get the new law, and all the new structures it implies, in motion immediately. What can't be implemented 'tomorrow' will be set out in a roadmap with a clear timetable. We don't want to leave researchers anxiously worried about what is going to happen to them.

Will your experience in Brussels as director general of the European Union's research programmes help in your new challenge?

Yes, I think it is relevant. I was lucky to have been in Brussels when European research became a respectable political aim, following the 2000 Lisbon declaration. In this declaration, EU member states recognised the central role of research for the competitiveness of the European economy and long-term economic well-being, and agreed to raise funding. I want to see Greece develop a research base as strong as that in other EU countries. I've learned enough to know that it can be done in a country like Greece.

news20091106nn2

[naturenews] from [nature.com]

[naturenews]
Published online 5 November 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.1064
News: Briefing
Lisbon Treaty could give research a boost
European Union set to take a bigger role in climate and space policy.
By Alison Abbott

{{The Lisbon Treaty is the first EU treaty to explicitly mention research.}
Ingram Publishing}

The Lisbon Treaty comes into effect on 1 December. It amends previous treaties of the European Union (EU) to account for its expansion from 15 member states in 1995 to the current 27. The treaty aims to make the EU work more democratically, efficiently and transparently — for example by establishing new voting rules — and to create a president of the European Council, who would be the 'face of Europe'. It also expands the EU's responsibilities to meet new challenges like climate change. Nature examines what the treaty will mean for science.

Does the Lisbon Treaty include research?

Yes. This is the first time that research has been specifically mentioned in an EU treaty, and this raises its status. Previously, research was considered as just a way to support EU objectives, such as to promote industrial competitiveness.

What does the treaty actually say about research?

It sets out an objective of "strengthening [the EU's] scientific and technological bases by achieving a European research area in which researchers, scientific knowledge and technology circulate freely, and encouraging it to become more competitive, including its industry, while promoting all the research activities deemed necessary by virtue of other Chapters of the Treaty".

Isn't this the old concept of the European Research Area?

Yes it is. The EU has been working towards the integration of Europe's scientific expertise in a European Research Area for more than a decade. But researchers in Europe are still confronted with the seemingly intractable problem of mobility. It is usually very difficult to transfer a grant from one national agency to an institute in another country, for example. National employment rules differ widely and can make it disadvantageous to move to an institution in a different country. And pensions are often impossible to transfer.

The Lisbon Treaty will not mean that the national laws responsible for these difficulties are going to be harmonized — most are outside the treaty's scope — but the establishment of the European Research Area will help ongoing negotiations on this front.

Will it change the EU's Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development?

No. These multi-billion-euro, multi-year programmes will still be designed to further the objectives of the European Union — to safeguard health or energy sources for its citizens, for example. But now that research is an EU objective in its own right, there will be less need to justify elements in the programmes that might seem to be basic, rather than applied, research.

What about the European Research Council?

The council was founded in 2006 as a Europe-wide agency that awards grants on the sole basis of excellence. Scientists had long been calling for such an agency to raise standards throughout the continent. The European Commission agreed, but, because basic research was not in its mandate, it had a long and bitter fight to get most EU member states to support the proposal. Had the Lisbon Treaty been ratified a few years ago, the creation of the council would gone a lot more smoothly. Now its future will be easier to defend.

What about space policy?

Over the past few years, the EU has been working together on aspects of space exploitation, such as the Galileo GPS satellite system, planned to start operation in 2013. The Lisbon Treaty foresees a greater role for the EU in space, in exploration as well as exploitation. The commission will now create a specific policy for the EU's activities in space.

What about environment and climate?

Climate change and the environment have long been cornerstones of EU policy, and they are reinforced in the Lisbon Treaty. The treaty specifies that environmental protection will be based on the precautionary principle — the idea that no action that may potentially cause harm to the public or the environment should be taken if there is no scientific consensus that harm will not ensue. The treaty also says that environmental damage must be rectified at the source, with the polluter paying. In addition, environmental policy should take account of scientific and technical data, and consider the potential benefits and costs of action or lack of action.

A directorate on climate action may be created and this would take over relevant areas now within the energy and environment directorates.


[naturenews]
Published online 5 November 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.1058
News
Oldest American artefact unearthed
Oregon caves yield evidence of continent's first inhabitants.
By Rex Dalton

{{An Oregon cave has yielded the oldest artefact ever found in the Americas.}
Tom Stafford}

Archaeologists claim to have found the oldest known artefact in the Americas, a scraper-like tool in an Oregon cave that dates back 14,230 years.

The tool shows that people were living in North America well before the widespread Clovis culture of 12,900 to 12,400 years ago, says archaeologist Dennis Jenkins of the University of Oregon in Eugene.

Studies of sediment and radiocarbon dating showed the bone's age. Jenkins presented the finding late last month in a lecture at the University of Oregon.

His team found the tool in a rock shelter overlooking a lake in south-central Oregon, one of a series of caves near the town of Paisley.

Kevin Smith, the team member who uncovered the artefact, remembers the discovery. "We had bumped into a lot of extinct horse, bison and camel bone – then I heard and felt the familiar ring and feel when trowel hits bone," says Smith, now a master's student at California State University, Los Angeles. "I switched to a brush. Soon this huge bone emerged, then I saw the serrated edge. I stepped back and said: 'Hey everybody — we got something here.'"

Coprolite controversy
Whether the cave dwellers were Clovis people or belonged to an earlier culture is uncertain. None of the Clovis people's distinct fluted spear and arrow points have been found in the cave.

"They can't yet rule out the Paisley Cave people weren't Clovis," says Jon Erlandson, an archaeologist at the University of Oregon who wasn't involved in the research.

The only other American archaeological site older than Clovis is at Monte Verde in Chile, which is about 13,900 years old.

Last year, Jenkins and colleagues reported that Paisley Cave coprolites, or fossilized human excrement, dated to 14,000 to 14,270 years ago¹. That report established the Paisley Caves as a key site for American archaeology.

Analysis of ancient DNA marked the coprolites as human. But in July, another group argued that the coprolites might be younger than the sediments that contained them².

This team, led by Hendrik Poinar of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, also questioned the 2008 report because no artefacts had been found in the crucial sediments. The Oregon team strongly disputed the criticisms³.

Laid to rest?
The dating of the bone tool, and the finding that the sediments encasing it range from 11,930 to 14,480 years old, might put these questions to rest. "You couldn't ask for better dated stratigraphy," Jenkins told the Oregon meeting.

"They have definitely made their argument even stronger," says Todd Surovell, an archaeologist at the University of Wyoming in Laramie who was not involved in the research.

Other researchers questioned whether the cave's inhabitants would have been mainly vegetarian, as the coprolites suggested⁴. In his recent lecture Jenkins noted other evidence reflecting a diet short on meat but including edible plants such as the fernleaf biscuitroot Lomatium dissectum.

In late September, a group of archaeologists who study the peopling of the Americas met with federal officials and a representative of the local Klamath tribe to review the evidence at Paisley Caves. The specialists spent two days examining sediments, checking the tool, and assessing other plant and animal evidence.

"It was an impressive presentation," says David Meltzer, an archaeologist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, who attended the meeting. "This is clearly an important site, but there are some tests that need to be done to seal the deal." One key, he says, is to better understand how the specimens got to the cave.

References
1. Gilbert, W.T.P. et al. Science 320, 786-789 (2008).
2. Poinar, H. et al. Science 325, 148 (2009).
3. Rasmussen, M. et al. Science 325, 148 (2009).
4. Goldberg, P. , Berna, F. & Macphail, R.I. Science 325, 5937, 148 (2009).

news20091106nn3

[naturenews] from [nature.com]

[naturenews]
Published online 5 November 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.1066
News
Mars rover plans its escape
Crunch time approaches for a decision on how to free Spirit from a sand trap.
By Katharine Sanderson

{{Attempts to extricate the Mars Spirit rover from soft soil are set to start soon.}
NASA/JPL-Solar System Visualization Team}

After being stuck in soft soil on Mars for six months, Spirit, one of two NASA rovers on the red planet, is about to attempt an escape.

"It's likely that this process will take months and we don't even know if we'll be successful," says John Callas, project manager for Spirit and its twin rover Opportunity at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Spirit landed on Mars in January 2004 for what was originally planned as only a three-month mission.

The attempted drive out of the soft, floury soil that Spirit drove into accidentally in May this year comes after a seven-member review panel took a close look at the recovery effort on 28 October. The panel recommended that the rover project team should try to extract Spirit as soon as possible. Time is of the essence — as winter approaches, power from Spirit's solar panels wanes. "The coming winter could pose a risk to the rover," says Callas.

Back in May, as Spirit drove across a sloping area near the planet's equator called Home Plate, the solid crust gave way to reveal soft ground beneath, and Spirit's five (out of six) functional wheels couldn't get enough grip to drive out. Instead, the rover sank deeper like a car spinning its wheels in deep snow. The sixth wheel hasn't worked since March 2006.

Caught napping

Before getting stuck, Spirit had experienced other technical problems: its flash memory — used to store data overnight while the rover is powered down — occasionally failed to record any data. This also happened earlier this year, on the rover's 1800th Martian day, or sol, in January, and again on the 1874th and 1876th sols in April. On sol 2065, on 24 October, the problem returned. Callas explains that a putative cause for the latest flash-memory problem has been identified and instructions have been sent to Spirit to reformat the flash drive, which they hope will sort it out. If not, Spirit will need to be kept awake for longer to wait for the daily data-relay pass made by an orbiting satellite, instead of taking a nap beforehand.

{{“The problem is, going in that direction is going to a point of no return, deeper into a treacherous place.”}
John Callas
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory}

Apart from recommending a rescue as soon as possible, the review panel also told the project team to reconsider their options for the rover's initial drive out. The panel suggested that the team should reassess the possibility of a turn slightly left and downhill, which would allow gravity to assist the rover's movement.

"The problem is, going in that direction is going to a point of no return, deeper into a treacherous place," says Callas. Going forwards would mean that the wheels become embedded deeper in their tracks, he says. The project team prefers the option of driving back out the way they went in.

Whichever route they choose, the manoeuvre is likely to begin as soon as 11 November. But safe ground is up to 2 metres away, and the rover will be going slowly — maybe only 1–2 centimetres a day. Each tiny movement will be scrutinized to check that the rover is not getting itself into deeper trouble. The process could take months.

Wayward weatherman

The choice on which way to drive will not be made lightly. "It's a very, very tough decision," says Anders Elfving, manager for the European Space Agency's ExoMars rover, based at ESTEC, the agency's research and technology centre in Noordwijk, the Netherlands. The ExoMars rover is set to visit Mars in 2018. Spirit might also have a rock beneath its belly, Elfving says, which could leave it almost hanging in the air, making any attempted manoeuvres risky.

If the rescue attempt fails, Callas is hopeful of at least another year of science exploration by Spirit. "This is a scientifically interesting location," he says. The ground at Home Plate is the most sulphate-rich soil seen by either rover. This could imply that the soil contains minerals churned up by a volcano, says Callas.

Mark Bullock, an expert on Martian and other planetary atmospheres at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado, agrees. "Can Spirit produce useful science if it stays stuck? The answer is a resounding 'yes' because it can be our ground meteorological station for as long as it lasts," he says. Spirit's panoramic camera and thermal-emission spectrometer can point at the sky to monitor the levels of dust and cloud over time, and to reveal how atmospheric temperatures vary, Bullock says.

If the rover does remain stationary, there's also the possibility of using Spirit's arm to analyse the soil more closely and to measure the area's seismology. Ultimately, the rover might be destined to be a weather station. Bullock says that this future for Spirit is not so bad: "Retiring its journeys to become an active meteorological station is not a bad fate for an ageing rover. It should definitely not be turned off."

news20091106nn4

[naturenews] from [nature.com]

[naturenews]
Published online 5 November 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.1067
News
Brain disease treated by gene therapy
A treatment based on HIV finds first success in humans.
By Lizzie Buchen

{{The successful treatment of a brain disease marks a big step forward for gene therapy.}
Getty}

Researchers have halted a fatal brain disease by delivering a therapeutic gene to the stem cells that mature into blood cells.

The gene was transferred using a virus derived from HIV, a technique that researchers have pursued for more than a decade but has not been successful in humans until now.

Together with his colleagues, paediatric neurologist Patrick Aubourg at INSERM — France's main biomedical research agency — and at the Saint-Vincent de Paul Hospital in Paris, developed the system to treat X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD), a neurodegenerative disease that affects young males.

ALD results in severe degeneration of the myelin sheath, a structure that is crucial for brain-cell function. The disease is caused by mutations in a gene encoding the ALD protein, which has an important role in cells that make up the myelin sheath and in microglia, the immune cells that reside in the brain. The mutations lead to a deficiency of ALD protein and a subsequent loss of myelin, which begins affecting cognitive function in boys aged 6 to 8 years; most die before reaching adolescence.

Aubourg and his colleagues removed haematopoietic stem cells from two young male patients with ALD and infected the cells with an HIV-derived virus carrying the normal, non-mutated gene for the ALD protein. The patients underwent chemotherapy to eradicate their bone marrow to stop them producing further stem cells, and then received an infusion of their own fixed stem cells carrying the normal gene.

Brain scans and cognitive tests demonstrated that the disease stopped progressing after 14–16 months and was still stabilized after a further 12 months. Neither patient showed any sign of cancer, which can be a tragic consequence of virus-delivered gene therapy. The authors report their results in Science¹.

"It's the first time that a really severe disease of the brain has been treated with success by gene therapy," says Aubourg. "My hope is it gives a boost to the gene-therapy field. A lot of trials using [other viral techniques] were stopped because there was no efficacy, but now others can use this kind of virus to treat other diseases."

Match failure

Currently, the only effective way of treating ALD is bone-marrow transplantation, which replaces a patient's haematopoietic stem cells with those from a healthy donor. These cells give rise to all blood cells, including immune cells such as microglia, which are altered in ALD. But transplants are only possible when there is a compatible donor — and even if a donor is found, there is still a high mortality rate in patients with ALD who have received a transplant.

Aubourg and his team wanted to improve the treatment by using gene therapy to correct a patient's own haematopoietic stem cells. Viruses have long been the tools of choice for delivering genetic material to cells because it's what they do naturally. But most viruses can only get their genes into a host cell's genome if that cell is actively dividing — a problem for cells that divide very slowly, such as stem cells.

Gene-therapy vectors based on lentiviruses, such as HIV, are an exception: they can integrate genes into a target cell regardless of whether the cell is dividing or not.

However, a major concern with any virus used for gene therapy is safety. Viruses can integrate their genes in unpredictable locations in the host cell's genome — including locations that may activate cancer-causing genes. To overcome this problem, Aubourg and his colleagues used a modified lentivirus that would not activate nearby genes.

Vector victory

When Aubourg and his team tested the patients' blood for cells that come from the same line as microglia, they found that about 15% of the cells had received the non-mutated gene.

They analysed the safety of the gene's insertion by searching for its positions in the genomes of targeted cells. Cancerous cells divide rapidly so a cancer-causing insertion would quickly become more common than any others. But the team found that the insertion locations were diverse and remained so, indicating that no insertion was activating cancer-causing genes.

"Leukaemia is the worst-case scenario [in gene therapy]," says Aubourg. "We're now on three years and did not observe any biological effects. We need a longer follow-up, but we are quite reassured now."

"It's a huge advance," says Mark Kay, director of the Program in Human Gene Therapy at Stanford University School of Medicine in California. "If you look in general at the vectors we use for gene therapy, we've really come a long way. This is the first successful use of lentiviral vectors, and it gives me a lot more cautious optimism moving forward."

References
1. Cartier, N. et al. Science 326, 818-823 (2009).

news20091106reut1

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
South Korea drops weakest 2020 emissions cut target
Thu Nov 5, 2009 2:43am EST
By Cho Mee-young

SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea, the OECD's fastest-growing carbon polluter, has ditched its weakest voluntary 2020 emissions target and will choose one of two stricter options ahead of a global meeting in Copenhagen.

In a statement on Thursday, the government said it had dropped an option for an 8 percent increase from 2005 emissions levels by 2020. It would finalize the 2020 target on Nov 17 at between unchanged from and 4 percent below 2005 levels.

The industrial powerhouse is one of Asia's richest nations and among the region's top greenhouse gas polluters on a per-capita basis.

While not obliged under the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol climate pact to announce binding cuts, South Korea has come under pressure to put the brakes on the rapid growth of its planet-warming emissions from industry and transport.

In response, the country took the lead among newly industrialized nations by announcing the three emissions targets in August.

President Lee Myung-bak said on Thursday a weak target would make it tougher for South Koreans to understand the need to curb greenhouse gas emissions, local media outlet eDaily quoted him as telling the presidential green growth committee.

But it needed to be set at just the right level to give powerful business groups enough of an incentive to cut emissions while not harming economic growth.

The committee said it had narrowed the target options after holding more than 70 public hearings and discussions in the past few months.

"The second option (of unchanging the level) is relatively less burdensome and the third option (at below 4 percent) will probably show our definite willingness for green growth," Hyung-kook Kim, chairman of the presidential committee on green growth, said in the statement.

The country's green investment plans already rank near the top in Asia. The government said earlier the year it would invest 107 trillion won ($90.9 billion), or 2 percent of its annual GDP, in environment-related industries over the next five years, pushing stricter fuel efficiency and emission requirements.

Lee hosts a G20 summit next year, an event that will help him showcase the country's green policies. The president will also be eyeing emissions cuts pledged by trade rival Japan.

Newly elected Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has vowed to forge ahead with a tough 25 percent cut in emissions from 1990 levels by 2020, despite growing opposition from industry, which says the target will hurt the world's No. 2 economy.

($1=1,176.8 Won)

(Editing by David Fogarty)


[Green Business]
House seeks to end biofuels paper tax breaks
Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:37am EST
By Kim Dixon

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lawmakers in the House of Representatives on Wednesday said they would close a loophole that lets paper companies claim a valuable tax credit for making biofuel that is already a byproduct of paper production.

Democrats on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee propose to close one version of an alternative fuel credit in which companies can claim about a $1 credit per gallon for producing biofuel. By limiting eligibility for the credit, the provision would raise $24 billion over a decade.

Democrats want to use the funds to help pay for healthcare reform. Bills are working their way through both houses of Congress so the provision's fate is uncertain.

The credit used by most companies now expires at the end of this year. The provision closes a more lucrative credit that companies are expected to turn to after the currently used credit expires.

The credits are intended to spur development of biofuels and are being improperly used by paper companies, critics say. So-called black liquor -- a byproduct of paper production -- is blended with a small amount of diesel fuel to claim the credit, according to Democrats.

Paper companies, for their part, say they would not qualify for the second credit, so the move is a ruse to find funds to pay for health care.

"We don't think we qualify for this and aren't pursuing it," said Scott Milburn, a spokesman for the American Forest and Paper Association.

"If policymakers are going to restrict one energy program it is important to be careful to avoid unintended consequences in other, unrelated ones," he added.

Still, analysts at the investor advisory group Concept Capital said the fact that lawmakers are making a special provision to prevent them from using the credit proves the industry could claim it.

"There are some strong signals coming from Capitol Hill that it is available," said Mark McMinimy, an analyst at the group.

If that is the case, paper companies might be able to claim it for 2009 before the potential tax break is eliminated, he said.

International Paper Co reported a $320 million extraordinary gain from the tax break in the third quarter. MeadWestvaco Corp and Domtar Corp are among other companies that have reaped gains from the tax credit.


[Green Business]
BP eyes production of new biofuel types
Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:45am EST

PARIS (Reuters) - Oil major BP may start construction next year of a cellulosic biofuel plant as part of a push toward commercial production of new types of biofuels from next year, the head of the group's biofuels division said.

BP is planning to develop commercial production of grass-based ethanol in the United States with partner Verenium, which already has a demonstration cellulosic ethanol facility, Philip New, Chief Executive of BP Biofuels, said on Tuesday.

BP is also planning to launch in 2012/13 commercial output of biobutanol at future biofuel plant in the UK, he said.

The oil company is building a wheat-based ethanol plant near Hull in eastern England in partnership with British Sugar and chemicals group Dupont that is due to come online next year, and plans subsequently to retrofit the facility to convert it to biobutanol output.

Biobutanol represented an attractive alternative to established ethanol as it allows higher blending levels without changing regulations, vehicle technology or distribution networks, New said.

"Biobutanol can provide a door through the blend wall which I would argue is the key structural barrier to the growth of this industry over the next five to 10 years," he said in a presentation at the World Ethanol 2009 conference.

Through a $200 million joint research venture in the United States, BP and Dupont are developing a chemical process to produce biobutanol and will pilot the technology at a demonstration facility next year at the Hull plant, he said.

Biobutanol production at Hull would use wheat as feedstock and would also offer similar emissions and cost levels to ethanol, he said.

As part of its biofuel investments, BP is also involved in research in using algae as feedstock and is investing some $1 billion in sugarcane-based biofuel activities in Brazil.

To compete with fossil fuels in the future, biofuels would have to live without subsidies and keep costs within $1 a gallon on a volume basis, New said.

"If you can't chin that bar you're not going to be able to compete in the long run," he said, stressing that sugarcane currently was the most cost-efficient.

(Reporting by Gus Trompiz; Editing by Keiron Henderson)


[Green Business]
China should halve CO2 emissions by 2050: U.S
Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:48am EST
By Gerard Wynn and Alister Doyle

BARCELONA, Spain (Reuters) - China should roughly halve its greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 to keep the world on a safe climate path, the head of the U.S. delegation at U.N. climate talks in Barcelona said on Thursday.

Jonathan Pershing also urged China, which has overtaken the United States as the top emitter, to clarify its goals for curbing its greenhouse gases as part of a new U.N. pact due to be agreed in December in Copenhagen.

Leading industrialized countries agreed at a summit in Italy in July that the world must halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 to avoid the worst effects of climate change, and promised to cut their own emissions by 80 percent.

China should cut by about 50 percent, which would allow for somewhat lower targets for poorer countries and give them room to grow their economies, Pershing told Reuters on the sidelines of the 175-nation talks in Barcelona from November 2-6.

"If you put China in there at a 50 percent reduction, if we're a bit higher, that gives lesser developed countries a bit lower. If they are in that middle band, plus or minus some percentage, that seems about right."

China would be on course to meet that goal if it repeated its present energy efficiency five-year plan into the future, he added.

"They're doing pretty well," he said. Beijing has not set a 2050 goal for its emissions, saying that it needs to put priority on ending poverty. The United States has not made a formal demand of China.

Pershing also said that the United States has not ruled out use of border tariffs if Washington feels that foreign exporters are getting an unfair advantage under a deal in Copenhagen under which carbon curbs push up U.S. energy costs.

"We cannot rule them out," he said. "The answer is that there is no decision."

The United States was "not opposed" to a legally binding climate treaty, under the U.N. process, Pershing added.

news20091106reut2

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
FACTBOX: European nuclear plant life extensions
Thu Nov 5, 2009 9:42am EST

(Reuters) - Most nuclear power plants have a nominal design lifetime of up to 40 years but many have been approved to operate for longer.

The possibility of component replacement and extending the lifetimes of existing plants are very attractive to utilities, given the high cost of constructing new nuclear plants and lingering public opposition to them, while some governments see them as a good way to limit carbon emissions.

But economic, regulatory and political considerations have led to the premature closure of some power reactors.

Below are details of those plants that have been granted life extensions in Europe:

BELGIUM

The Belgian government agreed in October to extend the lifetime of Belgium's three oldest nuclear power reactors by 10 years to 2025 to guard against energy shortages and help the budget.

Electrabel, the Belgian arm of GDF Suez, operates the Doel 1 & 2 nuclear reactors and the Tihange 1 reactor which were due to close in 2014-15.

CZECH REPUBLIC

A 10-year life extension to 40 years is under consideration for the Czech Republic's Dukovany power station. The four reactors at the plant began producing power from 1985-87.

FINLAND

Fortum's two units at Loviisa, which began commercial operations in 1977 and 1981, were originally licensed to run for 30 years but were given 20-year license extensions in mid 2007, which will allow them to run until 2027 and 2030, subject to safety evaluations in 2015 and 2023.

TVO's two 870 MW reactors at Olkiluoto began commercial operations in 1979 and 1982 and their lifetime has been extended to 60 years, subject to safety evaluations every 10 years, which means they will close in 2039 and 2042.

FRANCE

All 34 of France's 900 MW reactors, most of which were started in the late 1970s or early 1980s, had their lifetimes extended by another 10 years on July 7, 2009.

They were also granted 10 year extensions in 2002.

In October 2006 France's regulator cleared all 20 of the country's 1,300 MW reactors to run for another 10 years, providing some modifications are made during their 20-year outages planned for 2005-14.

GERMANY

German Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives have agreed with the Free Democrats (FDP) on extending the life of nuclear plants deemed safe but the timing is unclear, FDP and conservative politicians said in October.

Government and industry sources have told Reuters that Merkel, who is in coalition talks with the FDP after her September election win, wants to postpone a decision on the reversing a planned phase-out of Germany's 17 nuclear plants until after a key state election in May 2010.

The conservatives have said they would reverse a 9-year old deal to shut all the reactors by 2021, with no extensions to life cycles planned at the moment.

HUNGARY

In 2005 the Hungarian parliament decided on a 20-year life extension for the Paks nuclear power plant south of Budapest whose four reactors started up in 1982-87 with a capacity of 440 MW each.

The reactors which would otherwise have closed after 30 years are now expected to run until 2032-2037.

LITHUANIA

One unit at Lithuania's only nuclear power plant, Ignalina, was closed in December 2004 as a condition of the country joining the European Union and the second 1,300 MW reactor is due to close at the end of 2009.

NETHERLANDS

The 452 MW Borssele power plant, connected to the grid in 1973, is the only nuclear reactor in the Netherlands and is expected to shut in 2034 after a conditional extension of its operating life in 2006.

SLOVAKIA

An upgrade programme on Bohunice units 3 and 4, which began producing electricity in 1984 and 1985 is under way with a view to extending operational life to 40 years (2025).

SLOVENIA/CROATIA

Slovenia shares a 696 MW nuclear reactor with Croatia which was connected to the network in 1981 and was designed to run for 40 years. A 20-year extension is being sought.

SPAIN

The government has until July 5, 2009 to decide whether the 500 MW Santa Maria de Garona plant, which will be 40 years old in 2011, can run for another 10 years.

In June 2009 Spain's Nuclear Safety Council recommended that a 10-year extension to the plant's license, which runs out in 2009, be granted.

Spain's other seven nuclear reactors are licensed to operate until at least 2021.

SWEDEN

Sweden has 10 nuclear reactors at three plants -- Oskarshamn, Ringhals and Forsmark which came on line between 1972 and 1985.

Earlier plans to shut all Sweden's reactors by 2010, largely in response to the Three Mile Island accident in the United States, have been shelved as Sweden's biggest political parties warm to nuclear as climate and security of supply concerns grow.

But no extensions to their 40-year expected operating lives have been granted, so they are due to close between 2012 and 2025.

UNITED KINGDOM

Britain's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) granted permission to run Oldbury 1 for another two years in March 2009, after Oldbury 2 was approved to operate for another two years in December 2008, instead of being closed down at the end of 2008.

Approval to run the 1,000-MW Wylfa nuclear power station in Wales for at least nine months beyond its planned closure date of March 2010 was granted in June 2009.

British Energy's twin reactor Hartlepool power station, which began operations in 1984-85 and two Heysham 1 reactors, which opened in 1985-86, have been cleared by the safety regulator to run for another five years beyond their scheduled closure in 2014.

British Energy's new French owner EDF plans to decide by 2011 whether it wants to run the plants until 2019.

Sources: World Nuclear Association, Reuters research, International Atomic Energy Agency.

(Updated by Daniel Fineren)


[Green Business]
Evergreen Solar's revenue beats Street view
Thu Nov 5, 2009 10:30am EST

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - U.S. solar company Evergreen Solar Inc on Wednesday posted revenue that beat Wall Street's view, as the company increased production and sold everything it produced.

Revenue rose to $77.7 million in the third quarter, topping the $73.86 million analysts had expected, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

The company reported a third quarter net loss of $82.4 million, or 40 cents per share, compared with a net loss of $24.6 million, or 19 cents per share, a year ago.

Those results included a charge of about $70 million for a write-down in the company's Sovello joint venture.

Like other solar companies, Evergreen has been hit by a lack of financing for new projects and a glut of panels.

(Reporting by Laura Isensee; editing by Carol Bishopric)


[Green Business]
Philippines targets $2.5 billion geothermal development
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:02am EST
By Leonora Walet, Asia Green Investment Correspondent

HONG KONG (Reuters) - The Philippine government aims to approve contracts to explore and develop the country's massive geothermal energy resources, which could attract more than $2.5 billion in private investment, an official said.

The Philippines, the world's second-largest developer of geothermal energy, plans to approve 19 deals in the next five months to allow foreign and domestic companies access to geothermal projects, the division chief for geothermal energy at the Philippine Energy Department, Alejandro Oanes, told Reuters.

Philippine power producer Energy Development Corp and Envent, a unit of Geysir Green Energy, one of Iceland's biggest geothermal energy companies, were among groups vying for contracts to tap the country's geothermal resources, he said.

"Incentives for renewable projects are giving (the country's) geothermal development a much needed boost," said Oanes in a telephone interview from Manila.

Tax holidays and tariff exemptions for renewable energy projects are boosting investment in clean energy in the Philippines, with the government recently awarding 87 contracts to develop alternative energy sources.

Geothermal power accounted for 17 percent of the country's total power mix at the end of 2008, with installed capacity close to 2,000 megawatts, energy department data showed.

The government was issuing tenders for the development of 10 geothermal sites and negotiating nine more deals directly with various companies, Oanes said. Combined, the deals could harness more than 620 megawatts of geothermal energy.

Geothermal sites covered in the deals include Mount Isarog, in Camarines Sur province, where about 70 MW of geothermal power could be developed. The government is also looking at resources in Mount Labo, Camarines Norte with a potential capacity of 65 MW.

Other provinces identified with geothermal resources include Benguet, Cagayan, Palawan, Oriental Mindoro, Surigao del Norte and Laguna.

(Reporting by Leonora Walet; Editing by Chris Lewis)

news20091106reut3

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
German nuclear policy skirts a taboo
Thu Nov 5, 2009 9:46am EST
By Vera Eckert - Analysis

FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Germany's nuclear power policy of keeping old reactors open longer to bridge the gap to greener energy may also leave the door open to eventually break a major electoral taboo -- new atomic power plants.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's new center-right government last week kept nuclear energy alive but stressed that would only be until renewable energies are fully viable. Popular opposition to nuclear is strong and visceral.

A total of 17 reactors had faced closure in the coming decade but can now expect a new lease of life.

Analysts think this leaves room for opinions to change.

"There is an attempt in Germany to establish a policy comfort zone," said Lawrence Poole of IHS Global Insight.

"Once they have that in place and safe and well maintained nuclear plants continue to supply power, it makes it that much easier to progress the overall debate," he said, adding, "Whether that means new plants is another question."

Merkel's political opponents have been less circumspect in raising their own suspicions.

"The oldest scrap metal reactors remain online despite all safety problems," said Green politician and former environment minister Juergen Trittin in a comment on the coalition deal.

"The nuclear consensus is being reversed despite a clear majority against this and an out-of-date and expensive, risky technology is being continued in favor of the market power and the profits of the four big energy groups," he said.

Politicians avoid talk of new plants as they must respect public sensitivity over safety and unresolved waste issues.

A ZDF television poll last month showed that 52 percent of the population still preferred the exit deal to stay in place.

But some 41 percent were for life extensions rather than 36 percent prior to the September election.

"Longer life cycles are the declared intention of the two ruling parties and can be assumed as a given," said Matthias Heck, utility analyst at private bank Sal. Oppenheim.

"The financial and safety details of such a move could be finalized by next spring, as the coalition deal says this should happen as soon as possible."

Operators have some time to play with even in the unlikely case that discussions are postponed until after a key state election in May 2010.

Scheduled phase-outs in 2010 of RWE's Biblis A and EnBW's Neckarwestheim 1 may be stopped in courts and the political change means bids for interim operations may be nodded through.

SOFTENING OPPOSITION

The government plan had to be tempered in order to appease a skeptical public and fierce anti-nuclear lobbies.

A key element of that was the pledge for big nuclear earnings to be put to public use.

It also assured that renewable power, whose proponents prior to the election warned fresh support for nuclear would quash their fledgling industries, will be given priority over nuclear when fed into the power distribution grids.

RWE chief executive Juergen Grossmann last week said he was ready to start talks which will assess how the industry must pay some future profits from longer production times into funds for safety, research and grid efficiency.

The likely additional earnings from ongoing operations of largely written-off plants run into billions of euros.

UniCredit bank believes 7.5 billion euros ($11.08 billion) could be reasonable earnings by the four nuclear operators, RWE, E.ON, EnBW and Vattenfall Europe whose nuclear plants produce a quarter of German electricity.

The figure is based on a 20 years life extension, on top of the currently allowed 32 years, and assumes that power prices of 50 euros per megawatt hour can be achieved.

Germany's retreat from a swift nuclear shutdown has chimed in with a resurgence of atomic power across the continent.

"As Germany is Europe's biggest economy, its behavior is crucial to other energy markets," said Santiago San Antonio, the head of Brussels-based Foratom, the nuclear industry group.

"Responsible technical decisions will have to be taken but the conservative victory can only be positive for nuclear."


[Green Business]
French PM backs Areva despite nuclear safety worry
Thu Nov 5, 2009 9:49am EST

PARIS (Reuters) - French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said he had confidence in the management of Areva, the world's biggest nuclear reactor maker, which has been told by safety bodies to alter safety features on its new power plants.

Safety agencies in France, Britain and Finland this week ordered state-controlled Areva and EDF, the world's largest nuclear electricity operator, to modify safety features on new European Pressurised Reactors (EPR).

They said there was insufficient independence between the day-to-day systems and the emergency systems.

The design problems are a blow to Areva, which has staked its export growth on the EPR and is hoping it will beat American rival Westinghouse, owned by Japan's Toshiba, to become the standard-bearer for a new generation of nuclear plants.

Fillon played down the concerns, which have hit the share price of Areva's non-voting stock.

"The management has the confidence of the state. There is no Areva problem," Fillon said in an interview with the daily Le Monde that was released ahead of publication on Thursday.

"We are in the process of building new generation reactors. it is absolutely normal that there is a debate," he said.

"The EPR technology has not been called into question. There needs to be extreme rigor in terms of safety. I have no doubt that the problems raised by the Authority will be resolved and that French reactors will be among the world's best and safest."

(Writing by James Mackenzie, editing by Tim Pearce)


[Green Business]
EDF Energies Nouvelles coping well in the crisis
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:32am EST
By Muriel Boselli

PARIS (Reuters) - The current economic climate is favorable for French wind and solar power company EDF Energies Nouvelles as equipment prices remain low and banks are more prepared to lend, its chief executive said.

"It is embarrassing to say that the crisis suits us but it is true that equipment prices have fallen and that banks are still accompanying us," David Corchia told Reuters on Thursday.

Getting financing was now taking just over twice as long as before the economic crisis but "there is more appetite coming from banks since June," Corchia said in an interview.

"However, I am not looking forward to economic euphoria and easy money restarting too fast, it would not be good news."

EDF EN, 50-percent owned by French utility EDF, said 2009 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) would be in a 280-300 million euros ($416-$446 million) range, up from 216 million in 2008.

Corchia confirmed the company's target to reach 4,000 MW by 2012, including 500 MW of solar power, compared with an installed capacity of 1,796 MW at the end of September.

Corchia said while the economic downturn meant it was a good time to make acquisitions as many wind developers were finding it hard to find financing for their projects, it remained difficult to find profitable acquisitions.

"Making acquisitions to have more megawatts does not interest me," Corchia said.

"We have to wait for the situation of a company to be critical because when it is not the case there is always another operator prepared to make a bigger cheque than us," he said, adding the company would continue to focus on organic growth.

MIDDLE EAST, EASTERN EUROPE Corchia said while EDF EN would keep developing its business in the United States and western Europe, it was now eyeing the Middle East and eastern Europe.

"We have hydropower assets in Bulgaria so we are not ruling doing something there (for wind power)," Corchia said.

The company was waiting for authorities to put a regulatory framework in place before building capacity.

"We are not in the business of making bets," he said. "What we are doing is building a portfolio of sites but we are not obliged to construct fast," he said.

A possible new zone for solar power was the Middle East.

"There is a huge potential and a strong will to do renewable energy because those countries would rather keep their oil reserves as long as possible," Corchia said.

But again there was a need for a regulatory framework in those countries before being able to move ahead.

"We do not yet have contacts and negotiations under way but we are working on the right angle to propose for a lasting development and not just for one project," he said.

France, which makes up around 15 percent of EDF EN's activity, was proving disappointing because of a slowdown in granting of building permits for wind power.

France has vowed to build 20,000 MW in terrestrial wind power by 2020, a target some say will not be met because of growing political opposition.

"There is in France a number of politicians who are against wind power. At this current rhythm we will not install the 20,000 MW necessary to reach the 23 percent of renewable energy target," he said.

Numerous changes in the regulatory framework were also to blame. "Government plans to abolish the professional tax (a tax paid by businesses to local authorities), which constitutes the main incentive for towns to welcome wind power farms, would be the final blow to the industry," he said.

(Reporting by Muriel Boselli; Editing by Dan Lalor)

($1 = 0.6734 euro)

news20091106reut4

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
KBC favors wind over sun in renewable investments
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:06am EST
By Christoph Steitz

FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Investing in wind power offers safer, less volatile returns in the current market environment than the solar sector, a fund manager of KBC's asset management arm told Reuters. "We as investors like strong, steady growth, which is why we currently favor wind more than solar, which is expected to see more volatility in the short term," said Treasa Ni Chonghaile, manager of KBC's Eco Alternative Energy fund.

The solar sector is in the process of wide-ranging consolidation, triggered by cell and module oversupply that has plagued the industry and has forced some players to file for bankruptcy, while other are suffering major losses.

The wind industry, however, has seen most of its consolidation activity already, with a handful of players, such as India's Suzlon Energy Ltd, Germany's Nordex AG and Denmark's Vestas Wind Systems A/S emerging as global players, along with bigger conglomerates, notably Siemens AG and General Electric Co.

Ni Chonghaile's fund, currently about 236 million euros ($348 million), has gained 16.1 percent to October 29 from January, underperforming the FTSE clean tech index, which gained 21.4 percent in the same period.

About 35 percent of the fund is invested in companies active in the wind sector, compared with about 28 percent for the solar industry.

"The wind sector has a more mature technology, benefits from government support and is more cost-competitive versus solar," Ni Chonghaile said.

In Germany, for example, feed-in tariffs for solar companies are on average much higher than those for wind power, meaning wind energy companies produce at more competitive levels vis-a-vis their solar peers.

Top picks in Ni Chonghaile's portfolio include wind market leader Vestas, Spain's Iberdrola Renovables SA -- the world's leading renewable energy generator -- and U.S. solar cell maker First Solar Inc.

Ni Chonghaile's fund also holds shares in Novera Energy Ltd, an operator of landfill gas sites, which is trying to fend off a takeover offer by private-equity backed peer Infinis Energy, saying the bid was "wholly inadequate."

"We like the company's assets. This is one of the reasons why we, too, think that Infinis' bid is undervaluing the company," Ni Chonghaile said.

(Editing by David Holmes)


[Green Business]
Miner asks Peru to remove protesters from its site
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:56am EST

LIMA (Reuters) - Ares, a mining company run by Hochschild Mining, asked the Peruvian government on Thursday to remove protesting community members from one of its exploration projects -- the latest in a long string of conflict.

Townspeople living near the Azuca development, which is looking for silver, took control of the camp last month. The site is located in the southeast region of Cusco.

They say they are upset about potential pollution and contamination of water supplies stemming from the project.

Though the company says protesters just want the firm to leave so they would be free to mine informally.

"Ares roundly rejects the invasion is motivated by an environmental conflict ... and for that reason, it demands the intervention of the public ministry," the company said in a statement.

Residents in poor Peruvian towns often argue with foreign firms and the government over mining and energy projects. Periodically, violence erupts.

This week, three workers died in an attack on Chinese miner Zijin's controversial Rio Blanco copper project in northern Peru.

In June, three dozen people died near the town of Bagua, in Peru's northern jungle, as police broke up roadblocks set by indigenous groups opposed to oil and mining exploration on their ancestral lands.

Hochschild is the third-largest silver producer in Peru, which ranks No. 1 in the world for silver output.

(Reporting by Patricia Velez; Writing by Dana Ford; Editing by John Picinich)


[Green Business]
FACTBOX: Deciphering the jargon in the climate debate
Thu Nov 5, 2009 12:03pm EST

(Reuters) - The greenhouse gas-cutting bill passed by Democrats on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is not all the climate change debate has brought to Washington. Politicians, pundits and lobbyists alike are now speaking a new jargon as they try to tackle global warming.

Here are some terms being thrown around in the climate debate.

GLOBAL WARMING - The gradual rise in the Earth's average temperature thought to be caused by additional heat being trapped in the atmosphere by a buildup of greenhouse gases. Scientists say the change in climate brought on by global warming could cause flooding from melting ice caps, more severe storms and droughts. The theory is still hotly disputed by some groups, including some Republicans in Congress who don't believe global warming has been proven as a threat.

GREENHOUSE GASES - Chemicals that trap the sun's heat near the Earth like a blanket. These chemicals include methane and carbon dioxide. Supporters of climate change legislation blame carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels for global warming.

CARBON FOOTPRINT - A measure of the impact of human activities on the environment in terms of the amount of greenhouse gases they produce, measured in units of carbon dioxide.

CARBON OFFSETS - Paying to make up for carbon emissions. Websites are now dedicated to allowing consumers to pay to have trees planted or contribute to a wind farm to make up for the carbon dioxide emitted when they drive or take a flight. A more formal, albeit unregulated, global voluntary carbon market also exists in which companies can buy verified emissions reductions to reduce their carbon footprint. The recession hurt demand for these offsets, which currently trade between $3 and $11 a tonne, but prices and demand are starting to improve.

CAP AND TRADE - A system that sets limits on harmful emissions, giving allowances to affected industries within these limits, or caps. Companies with emissions below the cap could sell their extra allowances to bigger polluters on a new financial market exchange. The Obama administration and Democrats in Congress support the system, but Republicans argue it would push more manufacturing abroad and raise energy prices.

CARBON PERMITS - Used in a cap and trade system, they bestow on their owner the legal right to emit greenhouse gases. Climate legislation in the Senate has outlined a plan for distributing the permits.

CARBON TAX - A policy that would tax fossil fuels based on their carbon content. It would be used to encourage the use of more clean energy sources. The corporate world has shown some support for this policy tool, but it has made little progress in getting into legislation.

COPENHAGEN - Location of an international summit to be held in December on climate change. The hope is for this United Nations summit to bring about a legally binding agreement on how to reduce the world's carbon emissions. But the United Nations recently lowered expectations for a climate deal at the meeting, saying it was preparing for post-Copenhagen talks. The United States is pushing to make gains on its own climate legislation before the meeting as U.S. leadership is considered vital to global talks.

KYOTO - Short for Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement adopted in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, which sets binding targets for emissions of greenhouse gases that spur global warming. The United States never ratified the agreement, which called for developed countries to cut emissions by an average of 5.2 percent below what they were in 1990, saying it was unfair to exempt developing countries like China and India. The agreement expires in 2012. The world is looking to talks in Copenhagen to build on this agreement.

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM - A part of Kyoto that allowed developed countries to invest in projects, or offsets, that reduce emissions in developing countries as an alternative to more expensive emission reductions in their own countries. Its key point is that it allows for emission reductions that would not otherwise have been possible.

(Compiled by Jasmin Melvin in Washington, editing by Alan Elsner and Vicki Allen)

news20091106reut5

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
FACTBOX: Timeline, comparison of U.S. climate bills
Thu Nov 5, 2009 12:48pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved their version of a climate change bill as the panel's Republican lawmakers boycotted the vote.

Here is a possible legislative timeline:

* OTHER COMMITTEES: Several other Senate committees will debate, modify and vote on the bill and closed-door negotiations with the White House, Senate Republicans and moderate Democrats are being led by Senator John Kerry.

* FULL SENATE VOTE: The full Senate will then vote on the bill shaped by the committees, which will likely not happen until next year and it will probably be altered again when it is on the Senate floor.

* OVERCOMING FILIBUSTER: Sixty of the Senate's 100 members would have to support a controversial bill to block a filibuster, while the House only needs a simple majority to pass legislation.

* DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CHAMBERS: Differences between the Senate and House climate bills would have to be worked out to win over enough lawmakers in both chambers to approve a compromise climate measure.

* OBAMA SIGNATURE: Only then could a final climate bill be sent to President Barack Obama to sign into law, which again is not expected to happen until sometime next year, if the process does not bog down along the way.

* ECONOMIC WORRIES: With Americans worried about economic issues, it will be more difficult for lawmakers to vote for a climate bill in 2010, which is a congressional election year.

Here are key similarities and differences between the bills passed by the House and the Senate environment panel:

* EMISSION REDUCTIONS: The Senate shoots for a 20 percent cut in smokestack pollution by 2020. The House bill sets a 17 percent reduction from 2005 levels. Some moderates in the Senate will try to lower the goal to 14 percent. Both bills have the same long-term goals: an 83 percent cut in U.S. carbon pollution by 2050.

* CAP AND TRADE: Both the House and Senate bills envisage a system under which the government would put limits, continually declining, on the amount of carbon pollution from stationary sources like power plants, oil refineries and other factories. Companies would need an annual permit for every ton of carbon pollution they release into the atmosphere. Facilities that don't use all of their permits could trade, or sell them, to companies that need more.

* FREE POLLUTION PERMITS: Eighty-five percent of the pollution permits companies would have to obtain would initially be given away by the government, with 15 percent sold, under the House bill. In 2026, many of the free permits would begin switching to those that must be sold. The Senate bill has a 75 percent-25 percent split between free versus auctioned permits.

* ALLOCATION OF PERMITS: The Senate and House bills give 30 percent of all free permits to local electric distribution companies, 15 percent to cement, steel, glass and other big energy-using firms, 9 percent to local natural gas distributors, 3 percent for companies making electric and advanced technology vehicles and about 2 percent for oil refiners.

The free permits are designed to ease industry's burden in the early years of cap and trade and prevent large energy price increases for consumers. Electric utilities and natural gas interests are asking the Senate for more free permits.

* PRICE COLLAR: Both bills try to prevent wild fluctuations in future carbon prices by sketching out price floors and $28 ceilings. As time goes by, the Senate bill would allow the price to go higher than the House-passed bill.

* TRADE PROTECTIONS: The House bill would protect U.S. energy-intensive industries from foreign countries' exports in future years if those countries do not take certain climate-control steps. Industrial-state senators want to add similar or tougher protection language in the Senate bill.

* NUCLEAR POWER: The House bill leaves this industry out in the cold. In an attempt to broaden support in the Senate, Kerry-Boxer has a nuclear provision that includes provisions for training more workers in the industry. But Senator John McCain, a big nuclear power proponent, wants much more to help the industry build new plants.

* NATURAL GAS: The Senate bill has incentives to encourage coal-fired power plants to switch to natural gas. The House bill does not.

* RENEWABLE ENERGY: The House bill requires 20 percent of U.S. electricity to be generated by renewables like wind and solar, with 5 percent coming from improved energy efficiency standards by 2020. The Senate bill is expected to add energy legislation that sets a lower 15 percent standard by 2021.

(Reporting by Tom Doggett and Richard Cowan)


[Green Business]
Greens call Brazil oil finds a tempting trap
Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:38pm EST
By Marcelo Teixeira - Analysis

SAO PAULO (Reuters) - Brazil's huge offshore oil find, though an economic treasure chest, threatens to undermine the renewable energy industry the country has worked so hard to build.

A possible oversupply of oil products in the local market once expensive exploration, production and refining initiatives are up and running could make ethanol, biodiesel and hydroelectricity less competitive.

This possibility is feeding a vigorous debate about the country's relatively "green" energy matrix falling into a fossil fuel trap.

The government says it won't make the same mistakes that some oil-rich countries have made -- such as selling gasoline cheaply at home and neglecting other industrial sectors as oil cash flows in -- but market fundamentals can undermine the best of intentions.

"I think Brazil has to be very careful to not let the subsalt exploration take its energy matrix down a dirtier path," said Adriano Pires, director of Brazilian Infrastructure Center, a think tank and consultancy.

"The country cannot succumb to the populist temptation of subsidizing oil products, as some oil-rich countries did in the past," Pires said, echoing many comments in the local press.

Brazil's energy supply in 2008 was 36 percent renewable and 64 percent nonrenewable, according to statistics from oil producer BP. By comparison, energy supply for the combined 30-member OECD group of advanced industrial economies was 5.2 percent renewable and 94.8 percent nonrenewable.

Brazil is still in the early stages of exploring massive oil fields in the so-called subsalt layer off its coast, but analysts estimate the deposits range from 30 billion to 100 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

A big rise in oil output is still at least a decade away since the ultra-deep exploration involves tough technological challenges. But the government is earmarking enormous investments for oil extraction and refining, worrying proponents of renewable energy sources such as hydro, biofuels and biomass.

BATTLE LINES DRAWN IN CONGRESS

Ethanol officially passed gasoline as the main fuel for light vehicles in Brazil last year. Hydroelectric plants such as Itaipu, once the world's largest dam, generate almost 80 percent of Brazil's electricity.

But the government is making a big effort to pass new oil legislation in Congress that includes a capitalization plan for Petrobras which would give it enough money to fund subsalt exploration.

"It would be wrong for the country to abandon its efforts in clean energy and concentrate resources in the new oil frontier," said Luiz Pinguelli Rosa, director of the Rio de Janeiro Federal University Center for Engineering Programs (Coppe-Rio), an influential group of energy analysts.

Despite the big push to fund the oil firm, government and Petrobras representatives deny a basic change in the country's energy strategy.

"Brazil will keep investing resources in alternative sources of energy despite the efforts in exploration of new oil frontiers," Almir Barbassa, chief financial officer of Petrobras, told energy analysts last month at a seminar. "There will not be any competition with ethanol."

Brazilian Chief of Staff Dilma Rousseff, who is President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's pick to succeed him in next year's presidential election, said the country would not abandon its "vanguard" position in areas such as biofuels.

"Our next goal is second and third generation biofuels. We will preserve our clean energy matrix," she said.

THE CLIMATE CHANGE FACTOR

Such comments have not quieted the critics.

Pinguelli and others say Brazil's role as a world leader in renewable energy is under threat from oil just as world scrutiny of Brazil and climate change is intensifying.

Environmentalists have already attacked Brazil for allowing more deforestation in the Amazon, which for ages has acted as a key "sink" to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Pinguelli also said a massive shift in public investment to nonrenewables when Brazil still has huge untapped potential for hydro power and biomass is shortsighted.

Marcos Jank, president of the Brazilian Cane Industry Association (Unica), said it would be a setback to divert major funding to oil after decades of success with ethanol in Brazil, where the cane-based fuel took industrial root.

Jank also pointed to Brazil's nascent biomass energy industry, which uses leftover sugarcane as fuel for electric generation plants and is only starting to feed into the national power grid.

Brazil, the world's largest sugar producer, generates waste from almost 600 million tons of sugar cane grown every year.

"We have two Itaipus in the cane fields," he said.

(Editing by Reese Ewing and Jim Marshall)

news20091106reut6

[Top News] from [REUTERS]

[Green Business]
Senate panel approves Democratic climate bill
Thu Nov 5, 2009 12:48pm EST
By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A controversial climate change bill cleared its first hurdle in the U.S. Senate on Thursday, allowing President Barack Obama to tout progress in the run-up to next month's global warming talks in Copenhagen.

Democrats on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ignored a Republican boycott and used their majority to approve the legislation that would require U.S. industry to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases 20 percent by 2020, from 2005 levels.

"I think this is a great signal for Copenhagen that there's a will to do what it takes to advance this issue," committee Chairman Barbara Boxer told reporters after her panel voted.

The committee vote also came as international negotiators held a contentious climate change meeting in Barcelona, their final session before the Copenhagen summit starts December 7.

But Democrats are likely to fall far short of their goal of passing legislation in the full Senate before Copenhagen as Boxer's bill lacks enough support for full approval.

Senator John Kerry, who co-authored the committee-approved bill with fellow Democrat Boxer, is leading an effort with some Republicans and the White House to draft a compromise.

With all seven Republicans chairs empty, 11 Democrats voted to approve the bill. Only one Democrat, Senator Max Baucus, who chairs the powerful Senate Finance Committee that also will review climate legislation, voted no.

AREAS OF COMPROMISE

Before casting his vote, Baucus said he was committed to passing a bill to tackle global warming. But he said the goal of cutting carbon emissions from utilities, factories and oil refineries by 20 percent by 2020 was "too high."

Instead, Baucus said he would seek a 17 percent goal, with a "trigger" to hike it up to 20 percent if other countries "play by the same rules" in cutting their carbon emissions.

A climate bill that narrowly passed the U.S. House of Representatives in June sets a 17 percent target for 2020.

Baucus' vote against the bill reflected the difficulties ahead in crafting a measure that would have to attract the 60 votes needed for passage by the Senate.

Other senators from Midwestern and Southern states heavily reliant on coal will seek their own changes, which could upset liberals now supporting the bill.

There is widespread expectation in the Senate that for any climate control bill to pass, it will have to contain new government incentives for expanding U.S. nuclear power-generating capacity and offshore oil drilling, along with money to help develop clean ways to burn coal, which is in abundant supply in the United States.

Republicans complained that a detailed economic analysis of Boxer's bill had not been done -- a charge Democrats rebutted -- and that any work on the bill should await such analysis.

But Senator James Inhofe, the senior Republican on the committee, seemed to have enough information to conclude: "It is time for a different approach, one that grows, rather than shrinks our economy, creates, rather than destroys jobs, and strengthens, rather than weakens our energy security."

There were scores of amendments to Boxer's bill that environment committee members wanted to debate and vote on before approving it, but they were unable to because of the Republican boycott.

Under committee rules, at least two Republicans had to be present to debate and vote on changing the bill.

Boxer delayed work on the legislation for two days, saying she was giving Republicans the opportunity to collect more information from EPA officials and to offer their own amendments.

But Republicans did not take her up on the offer and by Thursday, Boxer had lost patience with the delay.

(Editing by Philip Barbara)

Climate treaty may need extra year
Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:34pm EST
By Gerard Wynn and Richard Cowan

BARCELONA/WASHINGTON, Reuters - A U.N. climate treaty may need an extra year beyond a December deadline to agree details, delegates at U.N. talks said on Thursday even as a U.S. Senate committee approved a carbon-capping bill.

The November 2-6 meeting of 175 nations in Spain, the last session before a U.N. accord is due in Copenhagen next month, turned gloomy about salvaging a strong deal after two years of negotiations.

World leaders have also said in recent days that Copenhagen may merely agree a politically binding deal rather than a full legally binding treaty. In Spain, negotiators suggested extensions from three months to a year or more.

Toughening a Copenhagen text if it fall short of a binding deal "should be done as early as possible ... three months, six months," said Artur Runge-Metzger, head of the European Commission delegation.

A British official said it was likely to take at least six months and "ideally no longer than a year" to agree details. After Copenhagen, the next meeting of environment ministers is in Mexico in December 2010.

Talks to agree on a U.N. pact began in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2007 with a two-year deadline to agree a pact meant to fight a rise in temperatures, more floods, droughts or rising sea levels.

But recession has hit many nations and carbon-capping legislation in the United States, the biggest emitter after China, is unlikely to be ready this year despite a vote by a Senate panel on Thursday in favor of a Democratic climate bill.

John Ashe, chairman of talks to extend the existing Kyoto Protocol, said negotiators should wrap up at the next meeting of officials in Bonn around May if Copenhagen stalls, as happened when a previous U.N. meeting was suspended in 2000.

"We did it before, we can do it again," he said.

And a Japanese official said "unless it's agreed within six months after Copenhagen it will perhaps be the following year because of the U.S. mid-term elections." About a third of the U.S. Senate is up for re-election in November 2010.

BOGGED DOWN

The Barcelona negotiations have got bogged down with disputes between rich and poor including a day-long boycott by African nations who accuse the rich of failing to set themselves deep enough 2020 goals for curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

"It seems that somewhere, someone decided 'let's shift gear, let's make sure we don't move so much'," said Bruno Sekoli of Lesotho, chair of the group of least developed nations.

Still, he said a delay was better than a "very bad deal."

In Washington, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved a Democratic bill that would require industry to cut emissions of greenhouse gases by 20 percent by 2020 from 2005 levels.

"I think this is a great signal for Copenhagen that there's a will to do what it takes to advance this issue," committee Chairman Barbara Boxer told reporters after her panel voted.

But Democrats are likely to fall far short of their goal of passing legislation in the full Senate before Copenhagen as Boxer's bill lacks enough support for full approval.

Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, has said Copenhagen should at least set 2020 greenhouse gas emissions goals for rich nations including the United States, agree actions by the poor to slow their rising emissions, ways to raise billions in funding and mechanisms to oversee funds.

Also in Barcelona, the World Bank announced $1.1 billion funding for clean energy and preparation for climate change in Africa, from a total pot of $6.3 billion pledged by donors in funds for developing nations.